Tractate Berachot, Chapter 5, Tosefta 2 – 10

Notes:

1. The Tosefta continues with a story regarding the second argument between Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Yossi mentioned in the previous Tosefta.
2. Akko is a port city in Northern Israel on the coast of the Mediterranean Sea.
3. Since Rebbi Yehudah was there it must be that they began their meal on Friday morning and continued eating the whole day. See the previous Tosefta, note 4.
4. In accordance with the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah that when Shabbat starts a person must pause his meal in order to say Kiddush. See Note 5 on the previous Tosefta.
5. The verse in Esther was said by King Achashverosh in anger when he saw that Haman jumped on Esther’s bed and started pleading with her for his life. Rebbi Yossi said it here to imply that Rabban Shimon Ben Gamliel is embarrassing him by saying in front of him that they should follow Rebbi Yehudah’s view.
6. Rabban Gamliel agreed that the Halacha should be like Rebbi Yossi and therefore he agreed to follow his view, but not because of Rebbi Yossi’s embarrassment, but rather because the students may see them doing like Rebbi Yehudah and concluding from that he Halacha follows Rebbi Yehudah and not Rebbi Yossi. Originally Rabban Shimon Ben Gamliel wanted to do like Rebbi Yehudah in this particular case, before Rebbi Yossi’s remark. Since Rebbi Yehudah’s view is more stringent Rabban Gamliel did not mind following him and he did not think that it would somehow offend Rebbi Yossi, since Rebbi Yossi does not require continuing the Friday meal into Shabbat, he merely says that one may if he wants to. So figured that for the sake of the honor of Rebbi Yehudah, Rebbi Yossi would not mind in this particular case doing like him.
7. Apparently Rebbi Yehudah started to argue back that the Halacha should be like him and not like Rebbi Yossi. So they kept on arguing until Rebbi Yehudah finally gave up and agreed that he Halacha should be like Rebbi Yossi and not like him.

Notes:

1. The Tosefta continues from the previous Tosefta with the discussion of the argument between Rebbi Yossi and Rebbi Yehudah.
2. In this Tosefta the word עקרו is used to signify that they have completely stopped their Friday afternoon meal and said Birkat Hamazon, before they went to the Bet Midrash. It is not clear why the Tosefta says Bet Midrash (Study Hall) instead of Bet Knesset (Synagogue), since it seems that they went to pray the evening prayer of Maariv there and not simply to just study Torah, but it does not really matter since people prayed in the Bet Midrash as much as they prayed in the Bet Knesset.
3. Once they come back to the house from praying Maariv in the Bet Midrash the first thing that they need to do is make Kiddush before they can continue eating.
4. I have modified the text of the Tosefta to read משתחשך (from when it gets dark) according to the reading quoted by the Meiri (Pesachim 102b, Benei Chabura) and by the Raavad (Tamim Deim, Hasagot Reish Arvei Pesachim), and not like the reading in the Vienna and Erfurt manuscripts which says עד שתחשך (until it gets dark), since that seems to be the correct reading and is confirmed by Prof. Saul Lieberman in Tosefet Harishonim.
5. On the surface it appears that this Tosefta does not add anything to the argument between Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Yossi that we do not already know from the previous two Toseftot. However it seems that this Tosefta clarifies when the person should make Kiddush which was not said explicitly in the previous Toseftot. It was only my notes that added that in. Rebbi Yehudah says that even though he does not have to make Kiddush as soon as Shabbat begins, because he may go to pray instead, he still must make Kiddush before he eats his Shabbat meal and he cannot eat anything on Shabbat without making Kiddush first. The reason that Rebbi Yehudah says in this case that the people should say Birkat Hamazon before making Kiddush is because they were leaving to go to the Bet Midrash, which is a complete interruption of the meal. However if they were not going anywhere, then Rebbi Yehudah simply requires them to pause their meal, say Kiddush and then they can continue eating and say Birkat Hamazon in the end, as was explained previously in Tosefta 1, note 5. Rebbi Yossi however says that he does not have to make Kiddush in order to finish his Friday Afternoon meal, he can simply continue eating from the moment that it gets dark and until whenever he wants to finish it, and only after that he needs to make Kiddush and eat the Shabbat meal.

Notes:

1. The Tosefta continues on the subject mentioned in the previous Tosefta. It clarifies that the person first says Birkat Hamazon and only then he says Kiddush.
2. It was customary in Talmudic times to say every Birkat Hamazon over a cup of wine and make a Beracha over the wine (Hagafen) after Birkat Hamazon has been completed. See Mishna Berachot 8:8.
3. Even though the meal over which he is saying Birkat Hamazon really belongs to Friday afternoon and not to Shabbat, since he is saying Birkat Hamazon on Shabbat, he mentions Shabbat in it. This Tosefta holds that we go after the time during which Birkat Hamazon is said and not after the time to which it really belongs to.
4. The reason that he says Kiddush on a separate cup of wine and not on the same cup of wine as Birkat Hamazon is because we do not want to do two separate mitzvot in a bundle out of respect for each mitzvah. See Talmud Bavli (Pesachim 102b).
5. It is clear that this Tosefta goes like the opinion of Rebbi Yossi and does not go like the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah who holds that you cannot eat or drink anything on Shabbat until Kiddush is made. Hence Rebbi Yehudah would require him to say Kiddush first and only then say Birkat Hamazon over a cup of wine and drink the wine from that cup. Or he could say Birkat Hamazon without a cup of wine and then make Kiddush, as was mentioned in the previous Tosefta. But he would not be able to drink the wine from Birkat Hamazon before he makes Kiddush. The version of the Tosefta quoted in Talmud Bavli (Pesachim 102a) mentions their argument regarding which cup should be drunk first explicitly. For a detailed explanation of their argument see above Tosefta 1, note 5.

Notes:

1. The Tosefta states a new rule regarding the etiquette of the meal. It is not related to any Mishna.
2. Since each person reclined while eating on a separate sofa the beds were order in a particular fashion, similarly to the way in our time at large banquet people are seated in a particular order at a long table.
3. Meaning that there are only two people eating together.
4. Meaning a person who deserves more respect due to either his social status, his age or his knowledge of Torah.
5. Literally, “at the head of”, since a person would lean on his side and recline on the top of the bed which was tilted upwards or had pillows on it so it would be more comfortable for him to recline.
6. The reason that the most senior person reclines on the bed above is so that when he wants to talk to the person next to him he does not have to turn his head around. It is unclear why the beds could not be placed facing each other so that neither one of them had to turn his head.
7. Meaning there are three people eating together, each one on his own bed.
8. The reason they were order this way is again, so that it would more convenient for the most senior person to talk to the other two. The senior person can talk to the other two either straight on or by turning his head. It was more respectful for the person in the middle to turn his head towards the second person than to the third person, hence the second one was placed above him and the third below him. See Talmud Bavli 46b.
9. If there were more than three people then they would get ordered in groups of three with the most senior person of that group in the middle and the other two above and below. Obviously if the number of people was not divisible by three the remaining one or two people would be seated in a separate group of just one or two.

Notes:

1. The Tosefta states a new rule regarding the etiquette of the meal. It is not related to any Mishna. It should be noted that I have chosen the text of the Tosefta according to the way it appears in both the Vienna and the Erfurt manuscripts, and not the way it appears in the printed editions. This version seems to be more correct as can be seen from the way it is quoted in Talmud Yerushalmi (Berachot 8:2, Daf 59a). The version in the printed edition is written in a way that it conforms to the Beraita quoted in Talmud Bavli (Berachot 46b), but I am convinced that the Beraita quoted by the Bavli is not this Tosefta, but rather a different Beraita.
2. The Tosefta is talking about the washing of the hands before the meal (known as Mayim Rishonim) and not after the meal (known as Mayim Acharonim). This is apparent from Talmud Yerushalmi (Berachot 8:2, Daf 59a). See there the commentary of Baal Sefer Chareidim (ibid., Veim Hayu) who is correct in his assertion that the Tosefta is talking about Mayim Rishonim. The commentary of Pnei Moshe (ibid., Matnita) there explains that the Tosefta is talking about Mayim Acharonim which is not correct as apparent from the Yerushalmi’s quote. The reason that the Pnei Moshe got confused is because he assumed that the Yerushlami is quoting the same Beraita as the Bavli, which it does not. It is also apparent from the fact that the next Tosefta continues with the rules of the etiquette during a meal and discusses the pouring of the wine in the middle of the meal. Since the Tosefta is written in order it must be that our Tosefta is talking about the beginning of the meal and not about the end.
3. When a few people were eating together one person would make the Beracha of Hamotzi on bread for everybody after all of them have finished washing. Since the wait for four people to wash is not very long the most senior person gets to wash first. For types of seniority see above Tosefta 5, note 4.
4. However if there are five or more people then the wait for the Beracha is long enough that it is disrespectful to the most senior person who now has to sit around idle until he eats the bread. So in this situation they began washing from the most junior person instead. The reason they started in the reverse order is so not to disrespect other people who are more senior than others by selecting some of them before others. For example, let us say that there were 6 people in the order of seniority Reuven, Shimon, Levi, Yehudah, Yissachar and Zevulun. If they would start washing from the middle senior person, in the following order, Yehudah, Yissachar, Zevulun, and then Reuven, Shimon and Levi, it would be disrespectful to Levi who was the more senior than the first three and still he got the long wait. So due to this problem they washed in the reverse order, so that this way no one got priority. It is similar to the way people get listed in credits for some event or show in alphabetical order, so not to give priority to anyone.

It is apparent from this Tosefta that even though they were served by servants, everyone was served the same bowl of water and the same cup which had to be passed around, since technically the servants could have brought each person an individual bowl and cup to wash, so that all of them could wash simultaneously.

Notes:

1. The Tosefta continues with the discussion of the meal etiquette. Since the previous Tosefta discussed washing of hands in the beginning of the meal, our Tosefta continues with the wine that is served in the middle and at the end of the meal.
2. It was customary in Talmudic times to serve wine in the middle of the meal. Each participant was poured his own cup of wine and everyone drank the cups together. At the end of the meal each participant was poured another cup of wine which was drunk by everyone at the end of Birkat Hamazon.
3. The wine is poured to people in the order of seniority regardless of how many participants there are. The reason they get poured the wine in order of seniority is out of respect to the more senior people. For types of seniority see above Tosefta 5, note 4.
4. One person leads everyone in saying a special blessing before Birkat Hamazon called the Zimun. See Mishna Berachot 7:1 and 7:3. After that he says the endings of each blessing of Birkat Hamazon out loud and everyone answers Amen. After all of them have finished saying Birkat Hamazon the leader says the Beracha over the wine out loud for everybody and they all drink the wine that was poured for them at the end of the meal, right before Birkat Hamazon. We still have this custom nowadays where everyone drinks the wine after Birkat Hamazon during the Pesach Seder.

After the leader was poured his wine, the rest of the people get their wine poured in order of seniority as in the middle of the meal. The leader is specially honored in this case that he was chosen to lead everyone in Birkat Hamazon, so he is also honored by having his cup of wine poured first. The criterion for choosing the leader is complicated. Talmud Bavli (Berachot 47a) says that the most senior person should be chosen to be the leader; however the most senior person can give up his honor to some one less senior than him if he wants to. See Talmud Bavli (Berachot 43a and 46b). Also if there are guests present the host can chose one of the guests to lead everyone in Birkat Hamazon regardless of his greatness. See in Talmud Bavli (Berachot 46b), the story of Rebbi, Rav and Rebbi Chiya, in which Rebbi chose Rav to lead the Birkat Hamazon since he was the guest, even though Rebbi Chiya was greater than him.

1. The leader is allowed to forfeit his honor and have a more senior person or his teacher poured their cup first. However he is not allowed to forfeit his honor of being the leader in Birkat Hamazon and give that to someone else. See Talmud Bavli (Berachot 55a). Two reasons are given for this. Either it is, because in Birkat Hamazon the leader said a special blessing for the host and in this case he refused to do so. See Rashi (ibid. Veavarcha). Or it is because it appears arrogant of him to decline an opportunity to cause everyone else to bless God in the Zimun. See Meiri (ibid., Mi Shemezamnim).

Notes:

1. The Tosefta continues with the discussion of the meal etiquette. It is not related to any Mishna.
2. I have explained this Tosefta based on the way the Rambam (Hilchot Berachot 7:6) seems to understand it. See the commentary of Rabeinu Manoach on the Rambam. (ibid. Frankel edition, Shnaim) The etiquette required that when two people were eating together they must keep eating at the same time out of respect for each other. If one of them had to stop eating for whatever reason, if for example he started talking to someone else, or he had to leave the table to go to the bathroom, the second person had to sit and wait for him to resume eating before he could continue eating himself.
3. However if there are three or more people they do not have to wait for one person who has paused eating for whatever reason. Since they are the majority it is not considered proper for many people to wait for one person. It is unclear what the etiquette required if two people paused eating together, if the third person had to wait for them to resume or not. It is possible to say that two people would not pause for the same reason, hence we treat each of them as an individual against the majority and the third person does not have to wait for them. On the other hand, it would also make sense for him to wait out of respect. There is simply not enough information in the Tosefta to figure it out.
4. This is a new case and is not related to the previous statement in the Tosefta. A person who makes the Beracha on the bread for everyone, makes it on a whole loaf. Then he cuts the loaf into pieces, and puts each piece of bread on the table of each person who is eating with him in the dining room. See Rambam (Hilchot Berachot 7:5). We have to remember that each person had a separate table so the person who made the Beracha had to somehow walk around or may be have one of the servants walk around and place a piece of bread on the table in front of each person. Then each person took the piece of bread into his hand and waits for the person that made the Beracha to eat his piece first. Our Tosefta tells us that after all of the pieces have been passed around and placed on each individual table, the one that made the Beracha gets to be the first one to pick up his piece and hold it in his hand, before eating it. It is his right since he is the one that made the Beracha.
5. However, he is allowed to forfeit his right to take the first piece and honor someone else instead. It should be pointed out that the Tosefta is only talking about taking the piece of bread into his hand. However the person who made the Beracha must be the first one to eat his piece of bread. He is not allowed to let someone else eat a piece of bread before him, because none of the people present are allowed to eat anything until the person who made the Beracha over the bread takes a bite of his piece of bread. See Talmud Bavli (Berachot 47a) and Talmud Yerushalmi (Berachot 6:1, Daf 44a). The reason for this is unclear. Talmud Yerushalmi (ibid.) says that this does not apply to drinks or if each person had a whole load of bread in front of them. In both of these cases they can eat their bread or drink before the person that made the Beracha for everyone ate or drank. This implies that this was a matter of pure etiquette and had nothing to do with interruptions between him saying the Beracha and tasting the food over which he made it.

Tractate Berachot, Chapter 5 Tosefta 91 A person should not take a bite from a piece [of bread] and then put it back into the [common] dish [with bread], because of danger.2

מסכת ברכות פרק ה תוספתא ט לא ישוך אדם מן הפרוסה ויחזירנה בקערה מפני סכנה.

Notes:

1. The Tosefta continues with the discussion of the meal etiquette. It is not related to any Mishna.
2. It is not clear what danger the Tosefta is referring to. One possible explanation is that other people will be disgusted by the site of a bitten piece of bread and will stop eating because of it, thus staying hungry and causing themselves some harm. However it is not really clear what kind of harm would it cause to them if they simply stay hungry. It is possible that the Tosefta is referring to a farfetched case where someone might be starving already and since he would be disgusted by the site of a bitten piece of bread, he would not eat at this meal and he would simply die from starvation. Talmud Bavli (Tamid 27b) actually quotes a similar story where a student refused to drink from a cup that his Rebbi drank from and died from thirst.  Another possible explanation is that the reason that it is dangerous to eat a bitten piece of bread is because of spreading germs and decease. However it is not clear if the Sages at the time of the Tosefta (i.e. 3^rd century CE) were aware of such things such as spread of germs. It is possible however, because the earliest reference that we know of about spread of germs in the book On Agriculture by Marcus Terentius Varro, published in 36 BCE, where there is a warning about living in the proximity of swamps: “… and because there are bred certain minute creatures which cannot be seen by the eyes, which float in the air and enter the body through the mouth and nose and there cause serious diseases.” (Marcus Terentius Varro, On Agriculture 1,xii, Loeb edition) However it would seem that the Sages were not aware of this, because the next Tosefta states that drinking from a cup from which another person drank is disgusting to some people, but it does not say that it is dangerous. If the reason for the danger here would be due to the spread of germs then it should be equally dangerous to drink from someone else’s cup. It should be noted that in Masechta Derech Eretz Rabbah (9:2-3) the statements of this and the next Toseftot are quoted, but the reasons are reversed. There it says that people will be disgusted by the bitten piece of bread, but drinking from someone else’s cup is dangerous. See note 2 on the next Tosefta.

Notes:

1. The Tosefta continues with the discussion of the meal etiquette. It is not related to any Mishna.
2. Our Tosefta states that some people may be disgusted by the fact that someone already drank out of the cup and therefore it will be rude to give to drink from the same cup. However, in Derech Eretz Rabbah (9:2-3) the statements of the previous and this Toseftot are quoted, but the reasons are reversed. There it says that it is dangerous for someone to drink out of a cup that someone else already drank from. It is possible that the reason for the danger is that someone who is already dying from thirst will refuse to drink from such a cup and will actually die from thirst. Talmud Bavli (Tamid 27b) actually quotes such a story where a student refused to drink from a cup that his Rebbi drank from and died from thirst. Another possibility is that it is dangerous, because it spreads germs; however it is not clear if the Sages in Talmudic times were aware of germs at all. See note 2 on the previous Tosefta.