(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

Pesachim 101

PESACHIM 101 - dedicated by Uri Wolfson in honor of his Chavrusa, Rav Mordechai Rabin of Har Nof.



(a) According to Rav, those who heard Kidush in Shul do not need to hear it again at home - Rav does not hold of the Halachah that Kidush must be recited in the location of the Shabbos-meal.

(b) Initially, all the participants should drink some of the Kidush-wine; failing that, any of the participants may do so, though it is preferable for the person who recited Kidush to drink it.

(c) When Rav says 'Yedei Yayin Lo Yatza' - he means that even though they may have drunk wine in Shul, they are not exempt from reciting a fresh Berachah when they drink wine again at home during the meal. This is because, going from one house (or even room) to another is considered a 'Hesech ha'Da'as' (having taken his mind off it, thereby creating a new obligation to recite a Berachah).

(d) Someone who makes Kidush at home and wishes to drinks another cup of wine during the meal - does not require a fresh Berachah, because he has not changed his location, so it is not considered a Hesech ha'Da'as, as Shinuy Makom is.

(a) According to Rav, one recites Kidush again at home - in order to render Yotze the members of his family who were not in Shul.

(b) According to Shmuel, one recites Kidush in Shul - for the sake of guests who had nowhere to eat, and who would eat in one of the side-rooms adjoining the Shul (see Tosfos DH 'de'Achlu') - in spite of the fact that for the person reciting Kidush, it was not the place where he ate.

(a) When the light went out one Friday night, after Rav Huna had made Kidush but before he had begun eating - he took his food to the room where his son Rabah was celebrating his recent marriage (where there *were* lights), and recited Kidush again.

(b) Rabah instructed Abaye to wash and eat bread when he made Kidush, even though it had not been his (Abaye's) intention to do so - because he was afraid that, by the time Abaye arrived in his apartment (where he intended to make Kidush and eat), the lights might have gone out, in which case he could not be Yotze Kidush *there*; neither could Abaye be Yotze with the Kidush that he (Rabah) was about to make - unless he ate bread.

(c) The Gemara proves from the two above episodes that Rav Huna and Rabah both hold 'Ein Kidush Ela be'Makom Se'udah'.

(d) Someone who does *not* intend to eat where he is reciting Kidush, is nevertheless permitted to make Kidush for someone who *does* - as we saw above (in 2b).

(a) Abaye specifically taught that, with the exception of three cases, Rabah always ruled like Rav - le'Chumra. Consequently, in our case, where he rules like Shmuel - le'Chumra, there is no discrepancy at all.

(b) The principle that one either sides with Beis Shamai or with Beis Hillel, but not once like one, and once like the other - is only applicable by two rulings that are interdependent, so that to rule like one in one case, and like the other, in the other, is contradictory, It does not apply when the two rulings are independent.

5) Rabah follows the opinion of Shmuel concerning Tzitzis - 'Ein Matirin mi'Beged le'Beged'; with regard to Chanukah - 'Ein Madlikin mi'Ner le'Ner', and with regard to Shabbos - 'Halachah ke'Rebbi Shimon bi'Gereirah' (that 'Davar she'Ein Miskaven, Mutar').


(a) Rebbi Yochanan says with regard to ...
  1. ... Shinuy Yayin - 'Ein Tzarich le'Varech'.
  2. ... Shinuy Makom - 'Ein Tzarich le'Varech'.
(b) Even Rebbi Yochanan agrees however, that if better wine is brought to the table, one recites 'Baruch ha'Tov ve'ha'Meitiv'.

(c) He is disproved from a Beraisa, which says '*Shinuy Makom, Tzarich Levarech*, Shinuy Yayin Ein Tzarich Levarech'.




(a) Rav Huna says that changing one's location from one part of the room to another is not considered Shinuy Makom and does not require a fresh Berachah.

(b) the Gemara asks on Rav Huna from a Beraisa, which says that changing one's location from one part of the room to another is not considered Shinuy Makom and does not require a fresh Berachah. Then what is his Chidush?

(c) In fact, Rav Huna was not aware of this Beraisa.

(d) The Rashbam dismisses this Kashya as an error - because it is common for an Amora to make a statement that concurs with a Beraisa, which was not always known to all the Amora'im.

(a) 'Something that requires a Berachah Acharonah in its place' - refers to anything which requires a long Berachah Acharonah (i.e. bread, cake, wine and grapes, figs, pomegranates, olives and dates (see Tosfos DH 'Ela').

(b) According to Rav Chisda, it is only for foods over which one recites 'Borei Nefashos' that Shinuy Makom requires a new Berachah, because, due to their relative insignificance, the moment one gets up from one's place, one's fixture is broken; whereas with regard to food which (due its importance) requires a Berachah Acharonah in its place, getting up does break one's fixture, as a result of which they do not require a new Berachah in one's new location.

(c) When the Gemara asked earlier (at the end of the previous Amud) on Rebbi Yochanan, it could not answer that the Beraisa speaks about things that do *not* require a Berachah in that place, whereas Rebbi Yochanan speaks about things that *do* - because whereas Tana'im speak briefly, often making it necessary for the Amora'im to qualify their statements, Amora'im are expected to be precise in what they say. Consequently, if Rebbi Yochanan makes an unqualified statement, it is not up to us to qualify it. (Note: according to the Rashbam, who includes wine among the things that require a Berachah Acharonah in their place, the Kashya on Rebbi Yochanan is nevertheless automatically answered, since *he* is talking specifically about wine - see Tosfos DH 'Ela', who poses this Kashya, and who learns that it is only bread and possibly cake that fall under this category, but not wine. See also how they re-word the Beraisa of 'B'nei Chaburah'.)

(d) Rav Sheshes does not differentiate between one type of Berachah and another. According to him, Shinuy Makom *always* requires a fresh Berachah.

(a) The group who sat down together to drink, and who broke up to go and greet a Chasan and Kalah - must have been drinking *wine*, because the Beraisa says 'Akru Ragleihem', a Lashon that is confined to important things that require a Berachah Acharonah in their place - and wine is the only beverage in that category.

(b) The Beraisa concludes that even with regard to wine, it is only if they left an old or sick person in their original location that they are Patur from reciting a fresh Berachah, but that if nobody remained, a fresh Berachah is required - even by wine.

(c) According to Rav Chisda, no fresh Berachah should be required over wine - even if nobody was left in the original location?

(d) The Gemara answers that the author of the Beraisa in question is Rebbi Yehudah, who follows his own reasoning in another Beraisa, but that the Chachamim, who argue with him in that Beraisa, exempt Shinuy Makom from a second Berachah by all cases of things that require a Berachah Acharonah in their place - corroborating Rav Chisda.

10) Rav Chisda does not differentiate between whether one continues to eat in a new location, or whether he returns to his original one; in neither case, do things that require a Berachah Acharonah in their place, require a fresh Berachah.

Next daf


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