Parallel
פסחים 114
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
R. Isaac b. Aha mentioned in legal discussions is the same as R. Isaac b. Phineas mentioned in homilies, and the token is ‘Hear ‘me [shema'uni], — my brethren [ahay] , and my people.’ Rabbah b. Bar Hanah said in R. Johanan's name in the name of R. Judah b. R. Il'ai: Eat onions [bazel] and dwell in the protection [bezel] [of your house], and do not eat geese and fowls lest your heart pursue you; reduce your food and drink and increase [expenditure] on your house. When ‘Ulla came, he said: In the West [Palestine] a proverb is current: he who eats the fat tail [allitha] must hide in the loft [‘alitha], but he who eats cress [kakule] may lie by the dunghill [kikle] of the town. M I S H N A H. THEY FILLED THE FIRST CUP FOR HIM; BETH SHAMMAI MAINTAIN: HE RECITES A BLESSING FOR THE DAY [FIRST], AND THEN RECITES A BLESSING OVER THE WINE; WHILE BETH HILLEL RULE: HE RECITES A BLESSING OVER THE WINE [FIRST], AND THEN RECITES A BLESSING FOR THE DAY. G E M A R A. Our Rabbis taught: [These are] the matters which are disputed by Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel in respect to the meal: Beth Shammai maintain: He recites a blessing for the day [first] and then recites a blessing over the wine, because the day is responsible for the presence of the wine; moreover, the day has already become sanctified while the wine has not yet come. But Beth Hillel maintain: He recites a blessing over the wine and then recites a blessing for the day, because the wine enables the kiddush to be recited. Another reason: the blessing for wine is constant, while the blessing for the day is not constant , [and of] that which is constant and that which is not constant, that which is constant comes first. Now the law is as the ruling of Beth Hillel. Why state [another reason]? — [This:] for should you argue: there we have two [reasons], whereas here there is [only] one, [I answer that] here also there are two, [for of] that which is constant and that which is not constant, that which is constant comes first. ‘Now the law is as the ruling of Beth Hillel’: that is obvious, since there issued a Bath Kol? — If you wish I can answer that this was before the Bath Kol. Alternatively, it was after the Bath Kol, and this is [in accordance with] R. Joshua who maintained We disregard a Bath Kol. MISHNAH. THEY THEN SET [IT] BEFORE HIM. HE DIPS THE LETTUCE BEFORE YET HE HAS REACHED THE AFTERCOURSE OF THE BREAD. THEY SET BEFORE HIM MAZZAH, LETTUCE [HAZERETH], AND HAROSETH AND TWO DISHES, THOUGH THE HAROSETH IS NOT COMPULSORY. R. ELEAZAR SON OF R. ZADOK SAID: IT IS COMPULSORY. AND IN THE TEMPLE THEY USED TO BRING THE BODY OF THE PASSOVER-OFFERING BEFORE HIM. G E M A R A.
—
Resh Lakish said: This proves that precepts require intention, [for] since he does not eat it the stage when bitter herbs are compulsory, he eats it with [the blessing,] ‘Who createst the fruit of the ground,’ and perhaps he did not intend [to fulfil the obligation of] bitter herbs; therefore he must dip it again with the express purpose of [eating] bitter herbs. For if you should think [that] precepts do not require intention, why two dippings: surely he has [already] dipped it once? But whence [does this food]? Perhaps after a precepts do not require intention, and as to what you argue, why two dippings, [the answer is,] that there may be a distinction for [the sake of] the children. And should you say, if so, we should be informed about other vegetables: If we were informed about other vegetables I would say: Only where other vegetables [are eaten first] do we require two dippings, but lettuce alone does not require two dippings: hence he informs us that even lettuce [alone] requires two dippings, so that there may be a distinction [shown] therewith for the children. Moreover, it was taught: If he ate them [the bitter herbs] while demai, he has discharged [his duty]; if he ate them without intention, he has discharged [his duty]; if he ate them, in half quantities, he has discharged [his duty], providing that he does not wait between one eating and the next more than is required for the eating of half [a loaf]? -it is [dependent on] Tannaim. For it was taught, R. Jose said: Though he has [already] dipped the lettuce [hazereth], it is a religious requirement to bring lettuce and haroseth and two dishes before him. Yet still, whence [does this food]: perhaps R. Jose holds [that] precepts do not require intention and the reason that we require two dippings is that there may be a distinction [shown] for the children?- If so, what is the ‘religious requirement?’ What are the two dishes?-Said R. Huna: Beet and rice. Raba used to be particular for beet and rice, since it had [thus] issued from the mouth of R. Huna. R. Ashi said: From R. Huna you may infer that none pay heed to the following [ruling] of R. Johanan b. Nuri. For it was taught, R. Johanan b. Nuri said: Rice is a species of corn and kareth is incurred for [eating it in] its leavened state, and a man discharges his duty with it on Passover. Hezekiah said: Even a fish and the egg on it. R. Joseph said: Two kinds of meat are necessary, one in memory of the Passover-offering and the second in memory of the hagigah. Rabina said: Even a bone and [its] broth. It is obvious that where other vegetables are present, he recites the blessing, ‘who createst the fruit of the ground’ over the other vegetables and eats, and then recites the blessing, ‘[Who hast commanded us] concerning the eating of bitter herbs,’ and eats. But what if he has lettuce only? Said R. Huna: First he recites a blessing over the bitter herbs, ‘Who createst the fruit of the ground,’ and eats, and then [later] he recites over it ‘concerning the eating of bitter herbs’ and eats.
—