Pesachim 102a

מַאן תַּנָּא עֲקִירוֹת,

Who is the tanna that taught that even in cases of uprooting oneself from a meal that requires a blessing of significance afterward, one nevertheless is required to recite a new blessing before resuming his meal?

רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, דְּתַנְיָא: חֲבֵרִים שֶׁהָיוּ מְסוּבִּין, וְעָקְרוּ רַגְלֵיהֶם לֵילֵךְ לְבֵית הַכְּנֶסֶת אוֹ לְבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ, כְּשֶׁהֵן יוֹצְאִין — אֵין טְעוּנִין בְּרָכָה לְמַפְרֵעַ, וּכְשֶׁהֵן חוֹזְרִין — אֵין טְעוּנִין בְּרָכָה לְכַתְּחִלָּה. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה: בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים — בִּזְמַן שֶׁהִנִּיחוּ שָׁם מִקְצָת חֲבֵרִים, אֲבָל לֹא הִנִּיחוּ שָׁם מִקְצָת חֲבֵרִים, כְּשֶׁהֵן יוֹצְאִין — טְעוּנִין בְּרָכָה לְמַפְרֵעַ, וּכְשֶׁהֵן חוֹזְרִין — טְעוּנִין בְּרָכָה לְכַתְּחִלָּה.

It is Rabbi Yehuda, as it was taught in a baraita : With regard to friends who were reclining and eating a meal and uprooted themselves to go to the synagogue or to the study hall, when they exit, these foods do not require a blessing to be recited afterward, and when they return, these foods do not require an introductory blessing before resuming eating. Rabbi Yehuda said: In what case is this statement said? When they left some of the friends there, at the meal. However, if they did not leave some of the friends there, when they exit, these foods require a blessing to be recited afterward, and when they return, these foods require an introductory blessing. According to Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak, the baraita that served as the basis of the Gemara’s objection to the explanation of Rav Ḥisda actually represents the minority opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, whereas Rav Ḥisda holds in accordance with the majority opinion of the Rabbis.

אֶלָּא טַעְמָא דְּבִדְבָרִים הַטְּעוּנִין בְּרָכָה לְאַחֲרֵיהֶן בִּמְקוֹמָן, דִּכְשֶׁהֵן יוֹצְאִין — אֵין טְעוּנִין בְּרָכָה לְמַפְרֵעַ, וּכְשֶׁהֵן חוֹזְרִין — אֵין טְעוּנִין בְּרָכָה לְכַתְּחִלָּה. אֲבָל דְּבָרִים שֶׁאֵין טְעוּנִין בְּרָכָה לְאַחֲרֵיהֶן בִּמְקוֹמָן, אֲפִילּוּ לְרַבָּנַן, כְּשֶׁהֵן יוֹצְאִין — טְעוּנִין בְּרָכָה לְמַפְרֵעַ, וּכְשֶׁהֵן חוֹזְרִין — טְעוּנִין בְּרָכָה לְכַתְּחִילָּה,

The Gemara infers from the above baraita : The reason for this halakha is that it is only with regard to items of food that require a blessing after them in their place, that when the people eating them exit, these foods do not require a blessing to be recited afterward, and when they return, these foods do not require an introductory blessing. However, if they ate items of food that do not require a blessing that must be recited specifically in their place, even according to the opinion of the Rabbis, who disagree with Rabbi Yehuda, when these people exit, these foods require a blessing to be recited afterward, and when they return these foods require an introductory blessing.

לֵימָא תֶּיהְוֵי תְּיוּבְתָּא דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן! וְלָאו מִי אוֹתְבִינֵּיהּ חֲדָא זִימְנָא! נֵימָא מֵהָא נָמֵי תֶּיהְוֵי תְּיוּבְתָּא!

The Gemara suggests: Shall we say that this is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan, who holds that a change of location never obligates one to recite a new blessing? The Gemara expresses surprise at this proposition: But didn’t we already refute Rabbi Yoḥanan’s opinion once? Why is it necessary to refute his ruling yet again? The Gemara admits that this is true but adds: Nevertheless, let us say that this baraita is also a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan.

אָמַר לָךְ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הוּא הַדִּין דַּאֲפִילּוּ דְּבָרִים שֶׁאֵין טְעוּנִין בְּרָכָה לְאַחֲרֵיהֶם בִּמְקוֹמָן נָמֵי אֵין צְרִיכִין לְבָרֵךְ, וְהָא דְּקָתָנֵי ״עָקְרוּ רַגְלֵיהֶן״, לְהוֹדִיעֲךָ כֹּחוֹ דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה,

The Gemara responds that Rabbi Yoḥanan’s ruling cannot be definitively refuted from this baraita , as Rabbi Yoḥanan could have said to you: The same is true that even with regard to items of food that do not require a blessing afterward in their place, the people who ate them are also not required to recite a new blessing. And with regard to that which the baraita teaches: They uprooted themselves, from which it was inferred that the people were eating foods that require a blessing afterward in the place of eating, this phrase serves to convey the far-reaching nature of Rabbi Yehuda’s stringent opinion.

דַּאֲפִילּוּ דְּבָרִים שֶׁטְּעוּנִין בְּרָכָה לְאַחֲרֵיהֶן בִּמְקוֹמָן, טַעְמָא דְּהִנִּיחוּ מִקְצָת חֲבֵרִים, אֲבָל לֹא הִנִּיחוּ מִקְצָת חֲבֵרִים, כְּשֶׁהֵן יוֹצְאִין — טְעוּנִין בְּרָכָה לְמַפְרֵעַ, וּכְשֶׁהֵן חוֹזְרִין — טְעוּנִין בְּרָכָה לְכַתְּחִלָּה.

The Gemara explains the previous statement: According to Rabbi Yehuda, even if they were eating items of food that require a blessing after them in their place, and they will definitely return to the meal, the reason that these foods do not require a new blessing is that they left some of their friends at the meal. However, if they did not leave some of their friends, when they exit, these foods require a blessing to be recited afterward, and when they return, these foods require an introductory blessing. Nevertheless, it is possible that the Rabbis are lenient and do not obligate them to recite a new blessing, even if they are eating food that does not require a blessing afterward in the place in which they ate.

תַּנְיָא כְּווֹתֵיהּ דְּרַב חִסְדָּא: חֲבֵרִים שֶׁהָיוּ מְסוּבִּין לִשְׁתּוֹת יַיִן, וְעָקְרוּ רַגְלֵיהֶן וְחָזְרוּ — אֵין צְרִיכִין לְבָרֵךְ.

The Gemara points out that it was taught in a baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rav Ḥisda: With regard to friends who were reclining to drink wine together and uprooted themselves from their place and subsequently returned to their original location, they need not recite a new blessing. Wine is considered an important beverage that requires a concluding blessing in the place where it was consumed. This baraita explicitly supports the opinion of Rav Ḥisda, who rules with regard to items of this kind that if one left the place where he was drinking and later returned, no new blessing is necessary.

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: בְּנֵי חֲבוּרָה שֶׁהָיוּ מְסוּבִּין וְקִדֵּשׁ עֲלֵיהֶן הַיּוֹם — מְבִיאִין לוֹ כּוֹס שֶׁל יַיִן וְאוֹמֵר עָלָיו קְדוּשַּׁת הַיּוֹם, וְשֵׁנִי אוֹמֵר עָלָיו בִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: אוֹכֵל וְהוֹלֵךְ עַד שֶׁתֶּחְשַׁךְ.

The Gemara returns to the subject of interrupting one’s meal to recite kiddush . The Sages taught: With regard to members of a group who were reclining and eating a meal, and the day of Shabbat was sanctified, they bring one of the diners a cup of wine and he recites over it the sanctification of the day, i.e., kiddush , and a second cup over which he recites Grace after Meals; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yosei says: One may continue eating the rest of his meal, even until dark.