(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Berachos 46



(a) Rebbi Avahu made a party for the Rabbanan as a mark of thanks to Hashem, when Rebbi Zeira recovered from his illness.

(b) Rebbi Zeira declined to make a Berachah Rishonah on behalf of the guests, because Rebbi Yochanan said that it is the Ba'al ha'Bayis who ought to make 'ha'Motzi'. He then declined to Bensch because of Rav Huna, who said that the person who makes 'ha'Motzi' is the person who ought to Bensch.

(c) Rebbi Avahu however, followed the opinion of Rebbi Yochanan, who held that the Ba'al ha'Bayis makes 'ha'Motzi', because, since he is the owner of the Se'udah, he will do so with a generous heart; whereas it is the (most prominent) guest who Bensches, in order to bless the Ba'al ha'Bayis (by means of the special Berachah near the end of Bensching).

(d) 'Nechasav Kerovin la'Ir' is one of the points mentioned in that Berachah, and its significance is that if the owner is near his property, he can easily keep an eye on it, and maintain it in good shape.

(a) According to Rav Nachman, in whose opinion Birchas ha'Zimun goes only till 'Nevarech', when there is no Mezuman, Birchas ha'Mazon begins with Birchas ha'Zan; but according to Rav Sheishes, who holds that Birchas ha'Zimun extends until ha'Zan es ha'Kol, then when there is no Mezuman, Birchas ha'Mazon begins with 'Nodeh Lecha'. (See Tosfos, d.h. 'Ad Heichan', who disagrees with Rashi in this point, and who therefore learns a different Peshat in the Sugya.)

(b) The Gemara initially thinks that the Machlokes Tena'im is equivalent to the Machlokes Amora'im (something that the Gemara always presents in the form of a Kashya, since it is considered presumptuous for Amora'im to repeat a Machlokes Tena'im without specifically quoting them).
The Beraisa which says 'Birchas ha'Zimun, Shetayim ve'Shalosh, holds that Mezuman extends until ha'Zan es ha'Kol (like Rav Sheishes) - when there is a Mezuman, there are three Berachos, and when there is not, there are two. And the Beraisa which says 'Shalosh ve'Arba', holds like Rav Nachman, that Mezuman goes only as far as 'Nevarech she'Achalnu mi'Shelo', which it calls a Berachah.

(c) Rav Nachman maintains that according to both Beraisos, Birchas ha'Zimun goes only as far as 'Nevarech', and the Beraisa which says 'three and four' is therefore fine and needs no interpretation. The Beraisa however, which says 'two and three', is referring to the workers, whom the Chachamim permitted to incorporate the Berachah of Yerushalayim in that of ha'Aretz, in order to return to work as soon as possible.
And Rav Sheishes maintains that both Beraisos agree with him, that Birchas ha'Zimun extends until 'ha'Zan es ha'Kol', so that the Beraisa which says 'two or three' is self-explanatory.
As for the Beraisa which says three or four, it is of the opinion that Birchas 'ha'Tov ve'ha'Meitiv' is d'Oraysa. Consequently, when there is a Mezuman, there are *four* Berachos, when there is not, there are only *three*.
(According to all opinions, both Beraisos only include those Berachos which are d'Oraysa.)

(a) From the fact that the workers are exempt from saying 'ha'Tov ve'ha'Meitiv', and that it begins with a Berachah - despite its being a 'Berachah ha'Semuchah la'Chaverta', it is evident that it is only de'Rabbanan.

(b) A further proof is from Rebbi Akiva, who maintains that in Bensching in the house of an Aveil, they say 'Baruch Dayan ha'Emes' instead of 'ha'Tov ve'ha'Meitiv' (according to the Chachamim, they would incorporate both in the fourth Berachah).

(c) Chazal instituted 'ha'Tov ve'ha'Meitiv' when the Romans ultimately permitted the corpses from Beitar to be buried, and they were still found to be whole.

(a) A Berachah only needs to begin with a Berachah and to end with one, when it deals with a number of topics, but not when it deals with only *one*, as short Berachos inevitably do.

(b) 'Emes ve'Yatziv' is a 'Berachah ha'Semuchah la'Chaverta' - it is Semuchah to 'Ahavah Raba' (which in turn, is Semuchah to the Berachah of 'Yotzer Or'); nor is the Shema considered a Hefsek in between them. That is why it ('Emes ve'Yatziv') does not begin with a Berachah.

(c) According to Rav Sheishes, someone who interrupts his meal to answer Mezuman, will resume from 'Nodeh Lecha' when he finishes his meal.




(a) If the most distinguished person reclines below the second most distinguished one (with his back to him), how will he be able to converse with him?

(b) The Chief Rabbi pointed out to Rav Sheishes that the Persians used to gesticulate with their hands, so it was so necessary for for the most distinguished person to face the person to whom he was speaking, because he could make himself understood by means of his hand movements.

(c) It was customary in Persia, the Chief Rabbi answered, to give everyone their own tables. Consequently, as soon as the most distinguished person had washed, they brought him his table with food on it, so that he did not need to wait for anybody.

(d) If the least prominent would wash Mayim Acharonim first, then the more prominent person would be forced to wait with dirty hands.
But the Chief Rabbi again defended the custom on the grounds that they did not remove his table until the others had finished washing Mayim Acharonim. In this way, he did not have to wait with dirty hands, but could carry on eating.

(a) According to the Beraisa, when there are only two people, the more prominent one reclines on top, with the second in importance below him.

(b) When there are three, the most distinguished person reclines first, but in the middle (like the Persians), second to him reclines above him, and the third, below him.
In this way, he will be able to converse naturally with the third in prominence. This is better than placing them in the reverse order; i.e. the third above the first, and the second below him (thus enabling the first in prominence to talk to the second naturally), becauseplacing the third in prominence higher than the second in prominence, would be a slight to his honor.

(c) In any gathering of more than five people, it is the least important who begin washing first, until they reach the last five, when the most prominent person present will then wash first.

(d) The first person to wash out of the last five will be the one to Bensch.

(a) It is not necessary to honor a great person (by allowing him to go in front) whilst traveling or whilst crossing a bridge.

(b) Ravin used to travel regularly from Eretz Yisrael to Bavel in order to publicize Rebbi Yochanan's statements and opinions.

(c) Abaye was not impressed, when Ravin let his donkey go ahead of his own (though *he* was the more prominent of the two). (In spite of what we have only just learnt - that 'Ein Mechabdin bi'Derachim' - see Tosfos d.h. 'Ein').

(d) One is obligated to show deference to a greater person when arriving at any doorway which is *fit* for a Mezuzah (even though it does not actually have one). Rashi explains this to mean that one is obligated to show deference by *all* doorways, and it only comes to exclude travelers on the road or whilst crossing a bridge.

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,