Pesachim 101a — the Talmud in English

And Shmuel said: ![](pamud.bmp "

Exact page location")

my hands too did not fulfill [the obligation of] kiddush,

as he explains below, for kiddush is only in the place of a meal.

And we raised it:

But according to Rav, why does he need

the prayer leader

to recite kiddush in his house?

For he has already fulfilled the obligation of kiddush in the synagogue.

And we answer:

In order to exempt

the

members of his household

from the obligation of kiddush. And we raised it:

And according to Shmuel, why does he need

the prayer leader

to recite kiddush in the synagogue,

in the synagogue, since he does not fulfill the obligation of kiddush through this, because he does not eat there? And we answer: In order

to take out

—to exempt the

guests from their obligation.

For with regard to them, kiddush is in the place of a meal, because

they eat, drink, and sleep

—lodge

in the synagogue.

And Shmuel proceeded according to his own reasoning, for Shmuel said: Kiddush is only in the place of a meal!

And one who recites kiddush not in the place of a meal has not fulfilled his obligation.

They supposed

the members of the academy supposed that

these words

that kiddush is only in the place of a meal apply specifically

from house to house.

If he recited kiddush in this house and went to eat in another house, he must recite kiddush there again.

But from place to place within one house,

for example, if he recited kiddush in the house and eats in the upper room,

not,

Shmuel did not say that he must return and recite kiddush, but this is considered kiddush in the place of a meal.

Rav Anan bar Taḥlifa said to them: Many times

—many times—

I would be standing before Shmuel,

I was with him,

and he would descend from the roof to the ground,

he descended from the upper room to another house after he had recited kiddush,

and then recite kiddush

in the house! For this too is considered not in the place of a meal.

And Rav Huna too held

that

kiddush is only in the place of a meal!

For Rav Huna recited kiddush, and his lamp was extinguished,

his lamp was extinguished before the meal,

and they brought his belongings

they transported all his belongings

to the wedding house of Rabbah his son,

to the house of the wedding canopy of Rabbah his son,

where there was

there

a lamp. And he recited kiddush

there a second time,

and tasted something.

Apparently, he held that kiddush is only in the place of a meal,

and therefore he did not fulfill [his obligation] through the first kiddush, since he did not eat there.

And Rabbah too held: Kiddush is only in the place of a meal!

For Abaye said: When I was at the house of my master,

when I studied with Rabbah,

when he would recite kiddush, he would say to us: Taste something

here in my house,

lest, while you are going to the lodging place,

until you reach your lodging place,

your lamp be extinguished,

the lamp there be extinguished,

and you not recite kiddush for us in the house where you eat,

you will not be able to perform kiddush there and eat.

And through the kiddush here you will not fulfill [the obligation]—

for kiddush is only in the place of a meal.

And therefore, eat here, so that the kiddush you heard from me will be in the place of a meal, and you will be able to fulfill through it the obligation of kiddush.

And we raise a difficulty concerning that which we said, that Rabbah held that kiddush is only in the place of a meal:

Is that so?

For Abaye said: In all the matters of my master,

in all of Rabbah’s actions,

he would act according to Rav.

In every dispute between Rav and Shmuel, Rabbah conducted himself according to Rav and not according to Shmuel, according to the principle that the halakha follows Rav in matters of prohibition.

Except

apart from

these three

laws,

he acted

in them

according to Shmuel,

even though Rav disagreed with Shmuel concerning them. And these are they:

a.

They permit

the tzitzit

from a garment

an old garment, in order to tie it

to a garment

a new garment [while Rav forbade it, because one may not annul the mitzva of tzitzit from the first garment].

b.

And they light from a lamp

a Hanukkah lamp that is burning

to a lamp

another Hanukkah lamp [while Rav forbade it because of degradation of the mitzva of the first lamp; rather, one should light from a lamp that is not a Hanukkah lamp].

c.

And the halakha follows Rabbi Shimon concerning dragging.

For it was taught in a beraita: Rabbi Shimon says: A person may drag a bed, a chair, or a bench

on the ground

on Shabbat, provided that he does not intend to make a furrow [which is a derivative of the labor of plowing in a field, or a derivative of the labor of building in a house]. For Rabbi Shimon holds that an unintentional act is permitted [while Rav ruled according to Rabbi Yehuda, who disagreed with Rabbi Shimon and forbade an act that one does not intend].

Since Rabbah conducted himself in accordance with Rav in every matter, why did he rule in accordance with Shmuel that kiddush must be recited where the meal is eaten, rather than in accordance with Rav, who held that kiddush need not be recited where the meal is eaten?

And since Rabbah would conduct himself according to Rav in every matter, why did he rule according to Shmuel, that kiddush must be in the place of a meal, and not according to Rav, who holds that kiddush need not be in the place of a meal?

And we resolve: Only

according to the stringencies of Rav would he act,

only where Rav was stringent would Rabbah conduct himself according to him. But

according to the leniencies of Rav,

where Rav was lenient, such as in our matter, where Rav is lenient that kiddush need not be in the place of a meal,

he would not act

according to him.

And Rabbi Yoḥanan said:

Those people who recite kiddush in the synagogue

also fulfilled the obligation of wine,

and they do not need to recite the blessing “Who creates the fruit of the vine” over the wine they drink in their homes, since they did not divert their attention from the time they recited the blessing in the synagogue over the wine, for their intention was to eat and drink in their homes.

And Rabbi Yoḥanan proceeded according to his own reasoning.

For we find that he holds that a change of place alone does not require a new blessing.