Arvei Pesachim #3: 99b-100b

  • Rav Yair Kahn

Gemora Pesachim

Yeshivat Har Etzion


GEMARA ARVEI PESACHIM

SHIUR ARVEI PESACHIM #3: 99b-100b 

by Rav Yair Kahn

 

Lo Yokhal Adam be-Arvei Shabbatot ve-Yamim Tovim

 

Our mishna discusses the prohibition which bans eating during the afternoon of erev Pesach. The gemara deals with the more general case of eating on any erev Shabbat or Yom Tov. Regarding this issue, the gemara quotes a disagreement between R. Yossi who permits eating and R. Yehuda who forbids it.

 

The Rashbam maintains that the accepted halakhic ruling is in accordance with the lenient position of R. Yossi. His ruling is based on the simple reading of our mishna which implies that eating is prohibited during the afternoon of erev Pesach only. The uniqueness of erev Pesach results from the anticipation of the Seder, or more specifically the obligation to eat matza.

 

However, Tosafot (s.v. Ein) quote the opinion of R. Yechiel who maintains that eating is prohibited throughout the afternoon of ANY erev Shabbat or Yom Tov - consistent with the opinion of R. Yehuda. His argument is as follows: The gemara rules explicitly in accordance with R. Yossi only with respect to his rejection of the need to TERMINATE a meal that was begun (see next section). This indicates that regarding the possibility to BEGIN a meal, the ruling of R. Yehuda was adopted. After all, if one is allowed to begin his meal, there is no reason to force him to terminate it. The question of forced termination arises only if the meal was begun improperly. (See R. Yeshaya quoted by the Rosh.)

 

The Rosh argues that there is no connection between these two issues. The question of beginning a meal during the afternoon depends upon whether or not there is halakhic ban legislated in order to ensure one's appetite for the meal on Shabbat or Yom Tov. However, allowing a meal to run into Shabbat and Yom Tov itself may be a violation of kavod Shabbat and Yom Tov. Therefore, even if it is permissible to begin a meal during the afternoon, it is possible to demand its termination. (R. Yechiel and R. Yeshaya apparently felt that the two issues are interrelated.)

 

The ruling of the Rambam (Hilkhot Shabbat 30:4) is complex. He accepts the opinion of R. Yossi permitting one to eat during the afternoon. Nevertheless, he claims that although not prohibited, one should refrain from an actual meal. Furthermore, a feast (large meal including drinks) is prohibited the entire day as a violation of kavod Shabbat. The Maggid Mishneh explains that the prohibition banning feasts is not derived from our gemara but from a gemara in Gittin (38b) which blames the destruction of a Jerusalem family on their habit of feasting on Erev Shabbat. Based upon the distinction forwarded by the Rosh, we can further suggest that the Rambam only codified the prohibition derived from the gemara in Gittin, since it deals with a violation of kavod Shabbat. However, our sugya which bans eating in order to protect one's appetite is treated as a suggestion and not a halakhic ban. (Therefore, he distinguishes between a light meal and a snack.) The ruling of the Shulchan Arukh (OC 249:2) corresponds to that of the Rambam.

Mafsikin le-Shabbatot

 

If one is in the middle of a meal when Shabbat or Yom Tov begins, according to R. Yehuda he must immediately terminate the meal, while according to R. Yossi he may continue. Rav Soloveitchik zt"l explained that both tannaim agree that the role of kiddush is in order to establish the ensuing meal as a "se'udat shabbat." Therefore, if one ate on Shabbat without reciting kiddush, he undermines the purpose and fulfillment of the mitzva of kiddush. Nevertheless, R. Yossi allows one to continue eating a meal that was started on Friday afternoon, since as a continuation of the meal begun prior to Shabbat it is defined as a se'udat chol, and therefore it does not need kiddush. R. Yehuda however, argues that once Shabbat begins, one is obligated to transform his se'udat chol into a fulfillment of "oneg shabbat." Therefore, he must terminate the se'udat chol, and begin a se'udat shabbat preceded by kiddush. (See Shiurim le-Zecher Abba Mari vol. 2 pp. 110-112)

 

Tosafot (s.v. Rebbi Yossi) explain that R. Yosi as well as R. Yehuda prohibit continuing a se'udat chol once Shabbat begins. Nevertheless, R. Yossi does not demand that one terminate his meal. Tosafot explain that by reciting kiddush immediately following the meal, R. Yossi maintains that the se'uda can be transformed retroactively into a se'udat Shabbat. In support of this interpretation, Tosafot quote a Tosefta which states that R. Yossi demands that "ritzei" (which is specific to Shabbat) be inserted into birkat hamazon upon completing the meal. Tosafot assume this to be an indication that the meal is defined as a se'udat Shabbat. However, if "ritzei" is recited on Shabbat, even if the meal is considered a se'dat chol, this proof fades.

According to Tosafot's interpretation of R. Yossi, if the meal is followed by kiddush, the obligation to eat a Shabbat meal is retroactively fulfilled by the meal just completed. However, according to the approach adopted by Rav Soloveitchik, after completing the continued meal, one would be obligated to eat another meal "lekhavod Shabbat".

The gemara quotes a beraita which relates a story that clearly indicates that the opinion of R. Yossi was accepted. This ruling is consistent with R. Yochanan's statement that we accept R. Yossi on Erev Shabbat but R. Yehuda on Erev Pesach.

 

Nevertheless, the gemara brings the ruling of Shmuel that one should neither continue nor absolutely terminate the meal. Rather, one should temporarily interrupt his meal, cover the food with a cloth, recite kiddush, and then remove the cloth and continue.

 

The Rashbam interprets Shmuel as basically being in line with R. Yossi who allows one to continue. Nevertheless, Shmuel opted for a more stringent version preferring to recite kiddush immediately with the commencement of Shabbat.

 

The Ra'avad, more or less in agreement with the Rashbam, concludes that on Erev Pesach one must terminate his meal. After all, since the ruling of Erev Pesach is in accordance with R. Yehuda, it is not sufficient to merely spread a cloth and recite kiddush.

 

Tosafot (s.v. Ela) argue that the suggestion to spread a tablecloth over the food is not a stringent variation of R. Yossi, but is a third opinion. According to the Talmud Yerushalmi, it is the opinion of the Chakhamim. Therefore, if this opinion is accepted as halakha, it can be applied to Erev Pesach as well. (See Ba'al Ha-ma'or.)

 

According to Rav Soloveitchik's interpretation, both R. Yossi and R. Yehuda agree that the continuation of the meal begun prior to Shabbat is considered a se'udat chol. [While R. Yossi allows one to continue this seudat chol, R. Yehuda obligates its termination, and demands a new seuda which is considered a seudat Shabbat.] Shmuel's option of spreading a tablecloth, challenges this assumption, and accepts the possibility of establishing a "se'udat Shabbat" without actually terminating the previous meal. This understanding of Shmuel, is consistent with Tosafot's opinion that Shmuel's ruling reflects a third opinion.

 

 

Pores Mapa u-Mekadesh

 

If one is in the middle of a meal when Shabbat begins, Shmuel maintains that it is possible to recite kiddush without terminating the meal. In other words, one does not have to recite birkat ha-mazon (grace after the meal) on what was already eaten.

 

Nevertheless, the Rif requires that one repeat ha-motzi (the benediction preceding the meal) following the kiddush before continuing the meal. Apparently, he feels that kiddush constitutes a hefsek (interruption) such that the initial ha-motzi is no longer effective.

 

The Ba'al Ha-ma'or argues that if kiddush is considered a hefsek, not only would it be necessary to repeat ha-motzi but to recite birkat ha-mazon as well. This is clearly inconsistent with the opinion of Shmuel. Therefore, the Ba'alHa-ma'or concludes that there is no hefsek according to Shmuel and consequently no need to repeat ha-motzi.

 

The Ramban explains that according to the Rif, there are two types of hefsek. There is one level which terminates the meal, and therefore necessitates a birkat ha-mazon. However, there is another type of hefsek which breaks the relationship of the initial ha-motzi with the food that one eats, while not constituting a termination of the meal. Therefore, one needs only to repeat ha-motzi. The birkat ha-mazon recited at the end will cover both halves of the meal.

 

Sources for next week: Kiddush bemakom seuda:

1. Gemara 100b "Otam benei adam ...lo havei avid" (101a)

2. Rosh (end of siman 5) "U'mehashta ..."

3. Rashbam 101a s.v. Af.

4. Tosafot 101a s.v. Aval.

[5. Tosafot 100b s.v. "Yedei" (the first one)].

 

Questions:

1. Does the Torah demand that kiddush be recited be-makom seuda, or is it a rabbinic requirement?

2. What two sources does the Rashbam offer for the halakha "ein kiddush ela be-makom seuda? What is the inherent difference between these two options?

 


 

 

 

To receive this Gemorah shiur every week, write to:

With the message:

 [email protected]

Subscribe yhe-Pesachim

 


This shiur is provided courtesy of the Virtual Beit Midrash, the premier source of online courses on Torah and Judaism - 14 different courses on all levels, for all backgrounds.

Make Jewish learning part of your week on a regular basis - enroll in the
Virtual Beit Midrash


(c) Yeshivat Har Etzion2002 All rights reserved to Yeshivat Har Etzion

Yeshivat Har Etzion
Alon Shvut, Israel, 90433
[email protected]