Shulchan Aruch: Chapter 479 - The Recitation of the Grace after Meals over the Third Cup [of Wine]

The Alter Rebbe is borrowing, with slight emendation, the wording of the mishnah, Pesachim 117b.

The Alter Rebbe uses the word mozeig, which is often translated as “pour”. However, we have translated it here as “blend,” which is a more literal translation. As stated in sec. 472:17 and footnotes, in the Talmudic era, the wine was very strong and had to be diluted with water. At present, however, it is not necessary to blend wine.

See sec. 182:1, where the Alter Rebbe states:

There are authorities who maintain that even when a person recites the Grace after Meals alone, Grace must be recited over a cup [of wine]…. Other authorities maintain that the recitation of Grace over a cup [of wine] is only required when one is reciting [Grace] with a zimun. Still others maintain that even when three – or [even] ten – [join together in Grace], there is no obligation [to recite Grace over] a cup [of wine]. Instead, it is merely the optimum way of performing this mitzvah…There is, however, no need to seek out wine…. (This is the current practice.)

In that source, the Alter Rebbe concludes thatit is not necessary to recite Grace over a cup of wine, and indeed, this is the common practice aside from the night of the Seder.

Pesachim, loc. cit. See also sec. 472:25, where the Alter Rebbe explains which of the mitzvos of the Seder are connected to each of the four cups of wine.

See also sec. 473:39.

See sec. 182:1, as quoted in footnote 2, above. See also sec. 477:8-9, where this point is mentioned.

See Pesachim 117b.See also Talmud Yerushalmi, Pesachim 10:6. See also sec. 473:11, where the Alter Rebbe mentions this prohibition.

In that source, the Alter Rebbe explains that one should refrain from drinking so that the taste of the afikoman will remain in the person’s mouth.

In his notes to the Haggadah, the Rebbe states that Lubavitch custom is not even to drink water at this time.

See sec. 472:19, which states that as an initial preference, it is a mitzvah to drink the entire cup. This is the Lubavitch practice (see Sefer HaMinhagim Chabad, p. 39).

See sec. 472:17 and footnote 71 there, where the term reviis is explained.

See sec. 472:20 and footnotes there for a definition of this measure of time. As mentioned in that source, a person should not tarry more than k’dei achilas p’ras before completing drinking a reviis. Afterwards, he may continue drinking even if he delays.

The person must, however, drink the majority of a reviis within k’dei achilas p’ras in order to fulfill his obligation to drink this cup of wine.

The Alter Rebbe specifies that the person drank at least the greater part of a reviis, because this is the amount of wine one must drink in order to fulfill his obligation to drink the third cup of wine.

See sec. 271:24, where the Alter Rebbe rules: “One who recites Kiddush must drink a cheekful of [the wine] from the cup. [The intent is] not an actual cheekful, but an amount sufficient that were one to shift it to one side of his mouth, his cheek would appear full. For an average person, this is the greater portion of a reviis.” Similar laws apply regarding all mitzvos associated with drinking.

See also sec. 472:19.

See sec. 473:7, 12, where it can be understood from the Alter Rebbe’s words that it is undesirable to add to the number of cups of wine ordained by our Sages.

The Alter Rebbe uses the term chamar medinah, which we have translated as, “the wine of the region.” See sec. 472:28-29 and notes, where this term is defined.

See sec. 473:13, where the Alter Rebbe rules that the prohibition against adding to the number of cups ordained by our Sages also applies when drinking such beverages.

A zimun is a halachic term for a quorum of three men. See sec. 192.

See Midrash Tehillim 113:3, where the concept of reciting these verses with at least a quorum of three is mentioned. See also sec. 488:3, where the Alter Rebbe mentions similar concepts regarding the recitation of Hallel with a congregation, as part of the communal prayers.

Sukkah 38b. In his Haggadah, the Rebbe includes the following instructions:

The one of greatest staturebegins by reciting the verse beginning, Hodu la’A-donai (“Thankfully acknowledge G‑d...”) and the others respond, Hodu la’A-donai... Yomar na Yisrael... (“Let Yisrael proclaim…”). The leader having repeated the verse, Hodu la’A-donai... together with the others, then recites the second verse, Yomar na Yisrael.... The others again respond by saying, Hodu la’A-donai... and proceed,Yomru na Beis Aharon... (“Let the House of Aharon proclaim….”)

Each of the four phrases beginning with the word Ana are recited responsively, with the members of the quorum repeating each line after the leader. See Sukkah 38b.

This section is not extant in the Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Aruch. See Rama (Orach Chayim 422:2). See also Magen Avraham 422:7. Magen Avraham explains that since one is reciting Hallel as a song of praise, it is appropriate that it contain choral responses so that its recitation will resemble the song sung by Moshe and the Jewish people after the crossing of the Sea of Reeds. That song was sung as a series of choral responses, with Moshe leading the song and the others responding. See Sotah 30b.

See sec. 480:2, where the Alter Rebbe states this law in greater detail.

See sec. 343:3, where the Alter Rebbe explains what is meant by an “educable age.” See also sec. 472:25, where the Alter Rebbe mentions the obligation of a minor of this age to listen to the recitation of Hallel.

The Alter Rebbe is paraphrasing Sukkah 38a. It should be noted that although an adult who allows a child to lead the verse beginning Hodu is conducting himself in an undesirable manner, he nonetheless fulfills his obligation to recite this verse. The rationale is that since the response to that verse is the same verse, the adult recited the verse himself as well. As the Alter Rebbe proceeds to explain, a different ruling applies with regard to the subsequent verses.

In several sources (sec. 53:13, sec. 186:3, sec. 271:7, et al.), the Alter Rebbe states the principle that a child cannot fulfill a mitzvah for an adult by serving as his agent.

The Alter Rebbe enclosed the words “Rabbinic Law” in parentheses. As explained in She’eris Yehudah, Responsum 6, and Shaar HaKollel 1:2, parentheses in the Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Aruch possibly indicate a matter which the Alter Rebbe desired to reconsider and perhaps revise this ruling at a later date.

Divrei Shalom explains that in this instance, the Alter Rebbe may have been in doubt regarding this ruling because of the following principle: Although a minor may not fulfill a mitzvah mandated by Scriptural Law on behalf of an adult, when an adult is obligated in a mitzvah according to Rabbinic Law, a minor may fulfill the mitzvah on his behalf. Thus, Berachos 20b states that when an adult did not eat bread to the point of satiation, but ate an olive-sized portion, and thus, he is obligated to recite Grace only according to Rabbinic Law, he may fulfill his obligation by listening to the blessings recited by his son, because his son is also obligated to recite Grace according to Rabbinic Law.

Similarly, in the instance presented in this subsection, the recitation of Hallel was ordained by Rabbinic Law. Hence, adults and minors alike are obligated to recite Hallel due to a Rabbinic command. It would therefore seem that a father may fulfill his obligation to recite Hallel by listening to a minor read those verses.

Why then does the Alter Rebbe rule stringently in the main text? His ruling is based on the gloss of Tosafos to Megilah 19b. Tosafos maintain that the passage in Berachos, loc. cit., is only referring to a situation where the minor ate to the point of satiation. In that instance, were the minor to be an adult, his obligation to recite Grace would be Scripturally mandated. Accordingly, the minor may fulfill the obligation to recite Grace on behalf of an adult whose obligation is Rabbinically mandated. If, however, the minor did not eat to the point of satiation, then were he to be an adult, his obligation to recite Grace would merely be Rabbinically ordained. Hence, as a minor, his obligation to recite Grace can be considered a “second-degree” Rabbinic obligation. Tosafos maintain that in such an instance, a minor cannot fulfill the mitzvah on behalf of an adult, because the adult’s obligation is a first-degree Rabbinic obligation.

Similarly, in the instance at hand, the obligation to recite Hallel is Rabbinic in origin. Thus, an adult’s obligation is a first-degree Rabbinic obligation. A child, by contrast, is only required to recite Hallel due to a second-degree Rabbinic obligation, i.e., the Sages ordained that he be trained to observe the mitzvos, and in this instance he is being trained to fulfill a Rabbinic ordinance. In this subsection, the Alter Rebbe follows the logic of Tosafos, and rules that a minor may not fulfill an adult’s obligation to recite Hallel.

However, although the Alter Rebbe ruled stringently in accordance with Tosafos’ logic, it is possible that he wished to review this ruling at a later date, perhaps because Tosafos’ logic requires explanation.

It should be noted that the Laws of Pesach was the first portion of the Shulchan Aruch that the Alter Rebbe composed. As his sons write in their preface to this work (see Vol. 1 of the Bi-Centennial Edition, p. xlii): “[Our father] began [this task] while residing in the learned abode of his holy mentor, [the Maggid]… [commencing] with the laws of tzitzis and the laws of Pesach.” Hence, in his later writings, the Alter Rebbe sometimes rethought and changed his rulings in these sections. The question of a minor fulfilling a Rabbinic obligation on behalf of an adult is a case in point. In sec. 186:3, the Alter Rebbe issues a more lenient ruling than the one issued here, stating:

[A minor] may, however, fulfill the obligation [of reciting Grace] for someone – even a man – who did not eat to the point of satiation, since that person [– like the minor –] is not obligated according to Scriptural Law, only according to Rabbinic decree. [This ruling applies] even if the minor also did not eat to the point of satiation, for he is obligated according to Rabbinic Law as the adult is.

However, despite this ruling, the Alter Rebbe did not differ with Tosafos’ ruling with regard to having a minor recite Hallel on behalf of an adult, as is evident from the continuation of sec. 186:3:

[The rationale:] The Grace after Meals is not comparable to [the reading of the] Megillah, Hallel, the blessings of the Shema,and other mitzvosthat are fundamentally Rabbinic institutions. [In such instances,] a minor who has reached the age when he is being educated [in the observance of mitzvos] cannot fulfill an obligation on behalf of an adult, because he, individually, is entirely exempt [from this mitzvahuntil he reaches the age of majority]. He is being trained so that he will be accustomed to [the observance of] this mitzvahand habituated to its practice when he reaches maturity, [i.e., the age of Bar-Mitzvah]. Therefore, he does not have the power to fulfill the obligation of one who has already attained maturity, even though that person’s obligation is only Rabbinic in origin.

The Alter Rebbe proceeds to explain why he rules leniently with regard to reciting Grace, and stringently in other instances:

With regard to Grace, by contrast, the minor is being trained so that when he attains maturity, he will recite Grace after eating to the point of satiation, [thereby fulfilling] a Scriptural obligation. Therefore, just as a minor who ate to the point of satiation may fulfill the obligation of an adult who did not eat to the point of satiation, so too, [even] if the minor did not eat to the point of satiation, he may fulfill the obligation of [such an adult]. For the training process he undergoes when he did not eat to the point of satiation is equally effective in habituating him [to recite Grace] as it would be, had he eaten more.

Thus, it seems that the Alter Rebbe continued to follow Tosafos’ logic, and merely differentiated between the recitation of Grace and that of Megillah, Hallel, and the like. As the Alter Rebbe explains in sec. 186:3, this is because a minor only recites Graceso that he will know how to recite it correctly when he is required to do so by a Scriptural command, and this goal can be accomplished even when he recites Grace after eating less than to the point of satiation. Thus, when a minor recites Grace after eating less than to the point of satiation, his obligation is not considered a second-degree Rabbinic obligation. This is in contrast with the obligations to recite Hallel and Megillah, which are always Rabbinic obligations. Hence, there is never a Scriptural aspect to fulfilling these mitzvos, and the minor’s obligation is always considered a second-degree Rabbinic obligation.

Nevertheless, the Rebbe (Likkutei Sichos, Vol. 17, p. 235ff.) distinguishes between the Alter Rebbe’s approach and that of Tosafos. The Rebbe notes that in sec. 186:3, the Alter Rebbe emphasizes that with regard to a command of which every aspect is Rabbinic in nature, a minor “is entirely exempt.” Thus, a minor is totally exempt from the mitzvos of reciting Hallel and Megillah. In contrast to this, with regard to commands which have a Scriptural dimension, when the Scriptural dimension is not present, the minor “is obligated according to Rabbinic Law as the adult is.” For example, the mitzvah to recite Grace is Scriptural in nature, provided the person ate to satiation. However, if a person does not eat to satiation, his obligation to recite Grace is Rabbinic in origin. In this instance, a minor who does not eat to satiation and an adult who does not eat to satiation are both obligated by the same Rabbinic ordinance.

The distinction can be explained on the basis of the ruling of the Tzemach Tzedek with regard to Torah study (see Tzemach Tzedek, Piskei Dinim al HaRambam, p. 1a). In this source, the Tzemach Tzedek writes that since a father is obligated to teach his son to study Torah, there is somewhat of an obligation on the son to learn Torah. The same principle applies with regard to the recitation of Grace. Since the father is obligated to train his son in the observance of this Scriptural commandment, there is somewhat of an obligation that devolves on the son. Accordingly, In consideration of all the above, when the Alter Rebbe originally composed the Laws of Pesach, he may have felt the need for further deliberation concerning this ruling in this complex matter.

The Alter Rebbe mentions this concept in several sources, including sec. 17:4 and sec. 186:3.

The rationale for this statement is that Hallel is a time-oriented positive commandment, and women are not obligated to observe any such mitzvos. This general rule includes those time-oriented positive commandments that were ordained by Rabbinic decree (see sec. 106:2).

This section is not extant in the Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Aruch. See Magen Avraham 422:5, which rules that women are exempt from the obligation to recite Hallel and hence, cannot fulfill the obligation on behalf of others.

The Alter Rebbe is referring to the obligation to recite Hodu responsively.

See sec. 480:1 and footnotes. As the Alter Rebbe explains in that source, there is a difference of opinion as to whether the term “great Hallel” refers to Psalm 136 or to Psalms 135 and 136. Pesachim 118a explains that this reading is given that name because it emphasizes how G‑d “sits on high and yet dispenses nourishment to every created being.” See the footnotes to sec. 480:1, for more details regarding this name.

See sec. 478:1, where the Alter Rebbe explains that it is forbidden to eat anything after eating the afikoman.

See sec. 184:1, where this law is stated.

See sec. 478:2-3, where this law is stated.

See sec. 178:4, 6, where the Alter Rebbe mentions the option of completing one’s meal in another place and reciting Grace there. In that source, the Alter Rebbe emphasizes that the person must intend to complete his meal in the second location when he begins eating. See also sec. 484:6, where these points are mentioned.

See sec. 480:2, where the Alter Rebbe rules that it is not necessary to recite Hallel in the place where one held the first part of the Seder and ate the festive meal.

In the Talmudic era, and for some time afterwards, it was customary for one person to recite Grace and for all the others participating in the meal to fulfill their obligation by listening to his blessings and responding Amen (see sec. 183:10 and footnotes; see also sec. 197:8). Even according to the present custom that every person recites Grace individually, leading the zimun (i.e., the quorum of three) is considered a significant honor.

Generally, a guest should be given the honor of leading Grace so that he can bless the host (see sec. 201:4).

Mishlei 22:9.

Sotah 38b.

This declaration is made in the passage Hei lachma anya, which is recited at the beginning of the Seder (see sec. 473:36-37).