Berakhot 53a (נג.) — the Talmud in English

If we say

that

“it did not rest” because

work was performed with it,

and

the intention is that one does not recite a blessing over it

even

if it did not rest

from permitted work,

such as when it was kindled for the needs of a dangerously ill person,

then

it is impossible to say this, since

it was taught in a beraita: “One recites a blessing over the light of a midwife

that was kindled on Shabbat for the needs of a woman giving birth,

and over that

of a dangerously ill person

“one recites a blessing over it”?

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: What is the meaning of “rest”? —

That it rested from prohibited work,

and even if permitted work was performed with it, one recites a blessing over it.

It was taught likewise

A lantern in which

a lamp was kindled before Shabbat, and

it remained burning continuously

in a Jew’s house

throughout the entire day; at the conclusion of Shabbat

one recites a blessing over it,

because no transgression was committed with it.

The Sages taught: If a gentile kindled

his lamp at the conclusion of Shabbat

from

a Jew’s

lamp,

and

likewise

if a Jew kindled

his lamp

from

a gentile’s

lamp, one recites a blessing over it.

But

if a gentile

kindled his lamp at the conclusion of Shabbat

from

a gentile’s

lamp, one does not recite a blessing over it.

The Gemara clarifies:

What is different about a gentile

who kindled

from a gentile, that one does not

recite a blessing over his lamp? — If it is

because

he kindled his lamp from a lamp that

“did not rest,” then likewise, a Jew

who kindled

from a gentile’s lamp

why does one recite a blessing over his lamp?

It did not rest!

And if you would say that this prohibition has gone away,

because the fire is renewed at every moment, so that the fire kindled from the gentile’s lamp is no longer present,

but

the flame before us

is something else, and

no prohibition was committed with it, since

it is generated by the hand of a Jew,

then there is a difficulty:

But this is contradicted by that which was taught in a beraita: “One who carries out a flame

from a private domain

to a public domain is liable,”

and if a different fire is created at every moment,

why is he liable

for carrying an object out of one domain and placing it in another? After all,

what he uprooted he did not place, and what he placed he did not uproot.

Rather, actually,

there is

also prohibited fire

in the lamp kindled from the gentile’s lamp, but additional permitted fire is added to it.

And when he recites a blessing

over a lamp that a Jew kindled from a gentile’s lamp —

he recites the blessing over

the additional

permitted fire.

The Gemara raises a difficulty:

If so,

if one recites a blessing over the additional permitted fire,

a gentile

who kindled his lamp

from

a

gentile’s lamp should likewise

be able to recite a blessing over the permitted additional fire in it? —

The Gemara answers:

Yes, indeed,

as a matter of strict law he could recite a blessing over the additional fire. But they enacted

a decree

prohibiting one from reciting a blessing over a lamp kindled by a gentile from his fellow’s lamp,

because

they were concerned that he might come to recite a blessing over the lamp of the

first gentile

who

had

not yet had permitted fire added to it; that is, over the

“first component,”

which is the first flame burning immediately at the conclusion of Shabbat.

The Sages taught: If one was walking

at the conclusion of Shabbat

outside a city and saw a light, if the majority

of the city’s inhabitants are

gentiles, he does not recite “Who creates the lights of fire” over this light, because it may be that it “did not rest.”

And if the majority

of the city’s inhabitants are

Jews, he recites a blessing.

The Gemara is puzzled:

This itself is difficult: You stated

at the beginning

“if the majority are gentiles, he does not recite a blessing,”

which implies:

if it is half-and-half, he recites a blessing. And

yet

you then taught

at the end

“if the majority are Jews, he recites a blessing,”

which implies:

if it is half-and-half, he does not recite a blessing?

The Gemara explains:

As a matter of law, even if

the city’s inhabitants are

half-and-half

Jews and gentiles,

he likewise recites a blessing.

But since the first clause taught “the majority are gentiles,” the latter clause taught “the majority are Jews.”

The Sages taught: If one was walking

at the conclusion of Shabbat

outside a city and saw a child with a torch in his hand, he investigates him: If he is a Jew, he recites a blessing; if he is a gentile,

he does not recite a blessing.

The Gemara asks:

Why specifically “a child”?

After all,

even

if the one holding the torch is

an adult, too,

should the same law not apply?

Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: Here we are dealing

with the beginning of the night,

close to

after

sunset.

Therefore, if they saw that the torch was in the hand of

an adult, it is evident that he is certainly a gentile,

because an adult Jew would not be holding a torch so close to the conclusion of Shabbat. Only when it is in the hand of

a child

is it necessary to investigate him, because

perhaps he is a Jew who happened to take it [it is possible that an unusual circumstance occurred and he took a torch at such a time].

that is, perhaps an unusual incident occurred and he took a torch at such a time].

The Sages taught: If one was walking

at the conclusion of Shabbat

outside a city and saw a light, if

the light was

as thick as

a furnace, he recites a blessing over it,

because a light of this size is kindled for illumination.

But if not, he does not recite a blessing over it,

because it was certainly not kindled for illumination, but for cooking with it, and one recites a blessing only over a fire kindled for illumination.

The Gemara raises a contradiction between the beraitot that present this law:

One beraita taught: One recites a blessing over the light of a furnace.

And another beraita taught: One does not recite a blessing over it?

The Gemara explains:

It is not difficult.

For

this

the beraita stating that “one does not recite a blessing over it” deals with a light of the size used in a furnace

at the beginning [at the beginning of the process of burning limestone in the furnace].

of the process of burning limestone in the furnace.

Whereas

this

the beraita stating that “one recites a blessing over it” deals with a light of the size used in a furnace

at the end [at the completion of the process of burning the stones], when a large fire is kindled above

and it is also used for illumination.

The Gemara raises another contradiction between the baraitot:

One baraita teaches: “One recites a blessing over the light of an oven and a stove,” while another teaches: “One does not recite a blessing over it”?

The Gemara answers:

It is not difficult:

for

this—the baraita that says, “One does not recite a blessing over it”—deals with light that is kindled in an oven or stove

the beraita that says, “One does not recite a blessing over it,” deals with the light that one kindles in an oven and a stove

at the beginning

[at the beginning of the kindling], whereas

this—the baraita that says, “One recites a blessing over it”—deals with light kindled in them

the baraita that says, “One recites a blessing over it”—refers to a light kindled in them

at the end

[after the kindling, when thin pieces of wood are added at the mouth of the oven, both to preserve its heat and to provide light with them]. The Gemara raises another contradiction between the baraitot:

One baraita teaches: “One recites a blessing over the light of a synagogue and a beit-midrash,” while another teaches: “One does not recite a blessing over it”?

The Gemara answers:

It is not difficult:

for

this—the baraita that says, “One does not recite a blessing over it”—deals with a synagogue

the beraita that says, “One does not recite a blessing over it,” deals with a synagogue

in which there is

a distinguished person,

and the candles were kindled in his honor and not for illumination, whereas

and the candles were kindled in his honor and not in order to provide light, whereas

this—the baraita that says, “One recites a blessing over it”—deals with a situation

the baraita that says, “One recites a blessing over it”—refers to a situation

in which there is no distinguished person, and the candles are burning in the synagogue for illumination.

and the candles are burning in the synagogue in order to provide light.

And if you wish, say: Both this and that

the two baraitot deal with a place

in which there is a distinguished person, and

nevertheless

it is not difficult,

for

this—the baraita that says, “One recites a blessing over it”—deals with a situation

the beraita that says, “One recites a blessing over it,” deals with a case

in which there is a ḥazzan

[a synagogue attendant] who eats in the synagogue , and the lamp also serves the light he requires, whereas

this—the baraita that says, “One does not recite a blessing over it”—deals with a synagogue

the beraita that says, “One does not recite a blessing over it,” deals with a synagogue

in which there is no ḥazzan, and the lamp kindled in honor of the distinguished person is not intended for illumination.

and the lamp that was kindled in honor of the prominent person is not intended to provide light.

And if you wish, say: Both this and that

the two baraitot deal with a place

in which there is a ḥazzan, and

nevertheless

it is not difficult,

for

this—the baraita that says, “One does not recite a blessing over it”—deals with a situation

the beraita that says, “One does not recite a blessing over it,” deals with a case

in which there is moonlight

[and it illuminates the attendant who is eating in the synagogue], and he has no need for the lamp kindled in honor of the distinguished person, whereas

this—the baraita that says, “One recites a blessing over it”—deals with a situation

the beraita that says, “One recites a blessing over it,” deals with a case

in which there is no moonlight, and then the lamp is also needed to provide light for the attendant.

and then the lamp is also needed in order to provide light for the attendant.

The Sages taught: If they were sitting in the beit-midrash

on the conclusion of Shabbat,

and they brought a light before them, Beit Shammai say: Each and every one recites a blessing for himself; and Beit Hillel say: One recites a blessing for them all,

because it is stated

[Proverbs 14:28]:

“In the multitude of the people is the king’s glory.”

The Gemara discusses:

Granted,

the position of

Beit Hillel

is understandable, since they

explain the reason; but what is the reason of Beit Shammai? They

hold

that it is preferable for each person to recite a blessing for himself,

because of the interruption of the beit-midrash, since if one person recites the blessing and exempts them all, all the students must stop their study in order to concentrate on fulfilling their obligation through his blessing and to answer Amen.

for if one person recites the blessing and exempts all of them, all the students must interrupt their study in order to concentrate on fulfilling their obligation through his blessing and to answer Amen.

It was likewise taught:

The students

of Rabban Gamliel did not say, “Health,”

to a person who sneezed

in the beit-midrash, because of the interruption of the beit-midrash.

We learned in the Mishna:

One does not recite a blessing either over the lamp or over the spices of the dead.

The Gemara discusses:

What is the reason? The

lamp

placed beside the deceased

is for the honor

of the deceased

that it is made, and one recites a blessing only over a lamp kindled for illumination. Likewise, the

and one recites a blessing only over a lamp that was kindled in order to provide light. And likewise

spices

placed beside the deceased

are made to remove

the unpleasant odor from the deceased

that they are made, whereas the blessing over spices was instituted only when one takes them in order to smell them.

whereas the blessing over spices was instituted only when one takes them in order to smell them.

Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: Any

dead person

who

because of his importance they would

bring out before him

a lamp both

by day and

by

night, if they brought out a lamp before him on the conclusion of Shabbat,

if they brought out a lamp before him at the conclusion of Shabbat,

one does not recite a blessing over it,

because it was not kindled for illumination, but only in honor of the deceased.

And any

dead person

before whom they do not bring out

a lamp

except at night,

in order to illuminate the way, if they brought out a lamp before him on the conclusion of Shabbat,

one recites a blessing over it.

Rav Huna said: Spices

that an aesthete takes with him in order to remove the odor

of a lavatory,

and perfumed oil

that is perfumed

made

to apply to the hands after the meal, in order

to remove

with it

the filth, one does not

recite a blessing over it

“Who creates varieties of spices.”

The Gemara infers:

Does this mean that wherever

the spices

are not made for fragrance, one does not recite a blessing over them? And concerning this it

And concerning this,

raises an objection

from a baraita:

“One who enters the shop of a perfumer

and smells a fragrance—even if he remains there the entire day, he recites a blessing only once. If he enters and leaves, enters and leaves, he recites a blessing each and every time”

And here

in the shop of a perfumer,

it is not made for fragrance,

but in order to sell it,

and

nevertheless

he recites a blessing?

The Gemara answers:

Yes,

the spices in the perfumer’s shop

are also made for fragrance,

since he places them there

so that people will smell them and come and purchase them from him.

The Sages taught: One who was walking outside a city and smelled a fragrance—if the majority

of the city’s inhabitants

are idolaters, he does not recite a blessing,

because the fragrance may have come from spices used for idolatry;

but if the majority are Jews, he recites a blessing.

Rabbi

Yosei says: Even if the majority are Jews, he likewise does not recite a blessing, because the daughters of Israel burn incense to

remove

witchcraft

[evil spirits] from their homes, and these spices are not intended to be smelled. The Gemara is astonished:

Do all of them burn incense for witchcraft?

Surely only a minority do so, and most of the spices should still be fit for a blessing. The Gemara explains:

There was a minority for witchcraft, and another minority

additional

also

was unfit for a blessing, since it was made

to perfume vessels. It emerges

that the two minorities together constitute

a majority that is not made for fragrance, and whenever a majority is not made for fragrance, he does not recite a blessing.

one does not recite a blessing.

Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: One who walks on the eve of Shabbat in Tiberias or on the conclusion of Shabbat in Sepphoris and smells a fragrance does not recite a blessing, because it is presumed to have been made only to perfume vessels,

since in Tiberias they perfumed garments on the eve of Shabbat so that they would smell good on Shabbat, whereas in Sepphoris they did so on the conclusion of Shabbat in order to console themselves over the departure of the additional soul.

The Sages taught: One who was walking in the marketplace of idolaters,

if

he desired to smell the fragrance, he is a sinner,

because he willingly derives benefit from idolatry.