Abraham Cohen Footnotes to the English Translation of Masechet Berakhot

Produce from which it is uncertain whether the tithe has been given. For the law of the tithe, see Lev. xxvii. 30 ff.

Due to the Levites; cf. Num. xviii. 21.

The Levite had to give a tenth of his tithe to the priest, known as the Terumah of the tithe ; cf. Num. xviii. 26.

Cf. Deut. xiv. 22 ff. This was a tithe of the produce after the Levite had received his tithe, and had to be eaten in Jerusalem or redeemed by its equivalent in money being spent there.

The original reading was probably "heathen" and altered to "idolator" to satisfy the Censor.

That three who eat together should say Grace with Zimmun.

The unspecified plural "ye" denotes two and "me" the third.

"I" is one and "ye" two, making a total of three.

M.: Raba.

I.e. with a voice equal to mine.

In the ancient Synagogues, the Scriptural lesson read in Hebrew was followed by a translation in the Aramaic vernacular; cf. Oesterley and Box, pp. 46 ff.

This contradicts the opinion that two may, if they wish it.

But if two may arrange Zimmun, why may not one leave ?

Whereas if they separate, it would be only voluntary with two.

The minimum quantity of food which necessitates the saying of Grace.

In order to make a third for Zimmun.

By the attendant joining with them, even uninvited.

Edd. read here "And lo, even a hundred women," which should probably be omitted. See D. S. ad loc.

In that there is no obligation for Zimmun, but it is purely voluntary.

This speaks as though it were obligatory for women ; and if a hundred women are equal to two men in this respect, then it should be obligatory for two men !

There are at least three women so that the number required by Pb. xxziv. 4 is forthcoming, which is not the case with two men.

I.e. two.

And accordingly Rab teaches that two men may not arrange Zimmun.

By being three originally, the obligation remains ; but if there were only two, they could voluntarily arrange Zimmun. Hence Rab cannot be the author of the statement in question.

M.: Rabbah said to Rab Huna.

Who was a Palestinian teacher, whereas Rab was a Babylonian.

I.e. he is within hearing distance.

When ten or more dine together, "our God" is added in the introduction to the Grace ; see Singer, p. 279.

The absence of one is not so noticeable in the former case.

So that each may say Grace for himself.

Lit. scribes.

M. adds : In the West [i.e. Palestine].

Who have finished and wish to say Grace with Zimmun.

I.e. he did more than was necessary to pay honour to his son.

See p. 48 n. 2.

This is the reading of certain commentators. Edd. : They sat on and were asked.

To lead in the Grace; cf. fol. 47a, p. 302.

cf. Singer, p. 280, top.

See Singer, p. 282, and note that the formula ends with "Amen."

To return to their work, not waiting for the remainder of the Grace.

The benediction in Singer, p. 283.

Which only requires three benedictions, Singer, pp. 280-282.

By omitting it.

A nickname of R. Zera, perhaps because he was very short. See Rashi to Bab. Mesia' 85a. The Talmud (loc, cit.) narrates an incident wherein R. Zera's legs were scorched during an act of self-immolation. See A. P. A. III. p. 7 n. 2 where it is suggested that the truer reading is to be found in Sanh. 37 a, viz. "The scorched one (i.e. dark complexioned) with short legs."

By saying Grace before meals and breaking the bread.

Lit. with a fine eye.

I.e. landed property. There is a variant "in all his works" which Bacher prefers ; ct A. T. ii. p. 464 n. 4.

In which he dwells, so that he can keep constantly in touch with them and it be unnecessary for him to face the perils of a journey.

If one interrupts his meal to enable the other two to say Grace with Zimmun, at what point may he resume ? So explain Tosafot. According to Rashi it means : How much has to be said in addition to the usual Grace because of the Zimmun?

I.e. "We will bless Him of Whose bounty we have partaken," to which the response is made "Blessed be He of Whose bounty" etc., Singer, p. 279.

The end of the first benediction, ibid. p. 280. Tosafot object to Rashi's explanation (see note 5 above) that this benediction is an essential part of the Grace even for an individual, so how could it be only included when there is Zimmun?

This is the translation required by the explanation of Tosafot ; viz., Grace can be said by two or three, in the case where one of the diners is acquainted with one benediction and the other person or persons with the

I.e. the fourth benediction in Singer, p. 283, which is not to be considered in this connection.

They compress the second and third benedictions into one ; thus, when two labourers say Grace, they say two benedictions, and when three, they say three.

This fourth benediction is accordingly an essential part of the Grace, and gives something to a fourth man to say, even though the Zimmun formula includes the first benediction.

But they cannot ignore an ordinance of the Torah.

M. reverses the authors of this and the preceding sentences.

If it were ordained by the Torah, it would be connected with what precedes, and would not require "Blessed" as its opening word.

See, e.g., the benedictions to be said before putting on the Tallit and Tefillin; Singer, pp. 14, 16.

But they cannot ignore an ordinance of the Torah.

M.: In the benediction of a mourner.

See Singer, pp. 282 f., bottom of the pages.

M. adds : through his son.

Cf. Singer, p. 283, bot.

According to Rashi, the question refers to the man who stopped his meal in order to be included for Zimmun with two others. Since, in Rab Sheshet's view, be joins with them up to the end of the first benediction, where should be resume his Grace? According to Tosafot, it refers to the man who is leading the Grace with Zimmun. After the others have responded "Blessed be He of Whose bounty we have partaken, and through Whose goodness we live," where does he go on ?

On Rashi's interpretation, to the beginning of the first benediction ; but on that of Tosafot, he repeats his own formula with an addition, viz. "We will bless Him of Whose bounty we have partaken and through Whose goodness we live."

According to Rashi, he starts the second benediction ; according to Tosafot, he resumes the response of the others : "Blessed be He of Whose bounty" etc. Cf. Singer, p. 280, line 2 of Hebrew.

Rashi omits the word "old."

It is apparently to be understood that Persian etiquette forbade speaking at table; cf. T.A. in. p. 7. Jews also observed silence during a meal; see ibid. p. 267 n. 400.

I.e. do nothing.

Not literally, but a large number.

Of these five.

See fol. 43 a, p. 279 n. 3; and on "Son of princes," p. 86 n. 8.

By making way for him.

By giving him the opportunity to wash first.

He had studied under R. Johanan in Palestine.

So far Rabin had not made way for him.

The Synagogue, not being a fixed abode, did not require a Mezuzah.

Cf. above, fol. 33 b, p. 224.

To pick his portion from the dish. On the Oriental mode of dining, cf. Lane, p. 148, T. A. III. pp. 26ff.

M. adds : "in wisdom," i.e. by waiving his right to the first choice.

M.: Daniel.

The regulations connected with the breaking of the bread, since the honour was given to a bridegroom.

The response is considered part of the benediction.

I.e. if he allows much time to elapse between saying the benediction and breaking the bread ; therefore Rab Hisda is satisfied if the majority say "Amen."

I.e. "'men."

I.e. "Ame-."

I.e. saying "Amen" without having heard the benediction to which it is the response.

As though it were something he was glad to be rid of.

Meaning, he will die suddenly.

Before Rab Shimi entered, and therefore he could not join in Grace with them.

Rab's name. The Talmud mentions here their favourite dishes.

Therefore the meal cannot be considered as ended, and Rab Shimi may be included for Grace.

Some edd. read "Rab Aha" incorrectly.

And he obtains the privilege of joining with Zimmun by means of something that is forbidden.

I.e. billeted troops.

But the Halakah is not in agreement with Bet Shammai.

Since the first tithe from which Terumah has been taken is allowable, it is obvious that one who has eaten it may be included for Zimmun. Why does the Mishnah mention it?

This great Terumah was due to the priest ; cf. Num. xviii. 8 ff., and should be separated from the produce before the tithe is taken. If, however, the order had been reversed, it would not invalidate a man from being included for Zimmun.

Before the corn is ground.