for it is pleasing

<<to them

<<to fix

<<themselves

<<in an obligation

<<from the start.

Come and hear:

<<Women

<<join to bless

<<by themselves,

<<and slaves

<<join to bless

<<by themselves;

<<women,

<<slaves,

<<and minors —

<<if

<<they wished

<<to join to bless,

<<not

<<do they join to bless.

<<But surely

<<women —

<<even

<<a hundred;

<<and surely

<<a hundred

<<women

<<like two

<<men

<<are considered,

<<and yet it teaches:

<<women

<<join to bless

<<by themselves,

<<and slaves

<<join to bless

<<by themselves!

It is different

<<there,

<<for there are

<<minds.

If so,

<<say

<<the latter clause:

<<Women

<<and slaves,

<<if

<<they wished

<<to join to bless,

<<not

<<do they join to bless.

<<Why

<<not?

<<But surely

<<there are

<<minds!

It is different

<<there

<<because of

<<licentiousness.

Let it be concluded

<<that Rav

<<is the one who says:

<<If

<<they wished

<<to join to bless,

<<not

<<do they join to bless.

<<For Rav Dimi bar Yosef said in the name of Rav:

<<Three

<<who ate

<<together,

<<and went out

<<one

<<of them

<<to the marketplace —

<<they call

<<to him

<<and join to bless

<<with him.

<<The reason is

<<that they call

<<to him;

<<but

<<[if] not

<<do they call

<<to him,

<<no!

It is different

<<there,

<<for they were fixed

<<for themselves

<<in an obligation

<<from the start.

Rather,

<<let it be concluded

<<that Rabbi Yochanan

<<it is

<<who says:

<<If

<<they wished

<<to join to bless,

<<not

<<do they join to bless.

<<For Rabbah bar bar Chana said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan:

<<Two

<<who ate

<<together —

<<one

<<of them

<<fulfills his obligation

<<with the blessing of

<<his fellow.

And we discussed

<<it:

<<What

<<does it teach us?

<<We have learned it:

<<“[If] he heard

<<and did not

<<answer,

<<he has fulfilled [his obligation]!”

<<And Rabbi Zeira said:

<<To say

<<that there is not

<<the blessing of

<<the invitation [to bless]

<<between them.

<<Let it be concluded!

Rava bar Rav Huna said to Rav Huna:

<<But surely

<<the Rabbis

<<who came

<<from the West

<<say:

<<If

<<they wished

<<to join to bless,

<<they join to bless.

<<What,

<<is it not

<<that they heard

<<it

<<from Rabbi Yochanan?

<<No;

<<they heard

<<it

<<from Rav,

<<before

<<he went down

<<to Bavel.

The matter itself:

<<Rav Dimi bar Yosef said in the name of Rav:

<<Three

<<who ate

<<together,

<<and went out

<<one

<<of them

<<to the marketplace —

<<they call

<<to him

<<and join to bless

<<with him.

<<Abaye said:

<<And that is

<<when they call

<<to him

<<and he answers.

Mar Zutra said:

<<And not

<<did we say this

<<except

<<with three;

<<but

<<with ten —

<<until

<<he comes.

Objected

<<to it

<<Rav Ashi:

<<On the contrary,

<<the reverse

<<is reasonable:

<<nine

<<appear

<<like ten;

<<two

<<do not

<<appear

<<like three.

And the halachah

<<is like Mar Zutra.

<<What is the reason?

<<Since

<<they need

<<to mention

<<the name of

<<Heaven,

<<with less

<<than ten

<<it is not

<<proper conduct.

Abaye said:

<<We hold [a tradition]:

<<Two

<<who ate

<<together —

<<it is a mitzvah

<<to separate.

<<It is taught

<<also

<<so:

<<Two

<<who ate

<<together —

<<it is a mitzvah

<<to separate.

<<In what case are these words said?

<<When both of them

<<are scholars;

<<but

<<one

<<a scholar

<<and one

<<an ignoramus —

<<the scholar

<<blesses,

<<and the ignoramus

<<fulfills his obligation.

Rava said:

<<This

<<matter

<<I said it

<<myself,

<<and it was stated

<<in the name

<<of Rabbi Zeira

<<like me:

<<Three

<<who ate

<<together —

<<one

<<interrupts [his meal]

<<for the two,

<<but not

<<do two

<<interrupt

<<for the one.

And not?

<<But surely

<<Rav Pappa

<<interrupted [his meal]

<<for him,

<<for Abba Mar

<<his son,

<<he

<<and one other!

<<Different is

<<Rav Pappa,

<<for beyond

<<the line of

<<the law

<<it was

<<that he acted.

Yehuda bar Mareimar

<<and Mar bar Rav Ashi

<<and Rav Acha of Difti

<<were wrapping [i.e., eating]

<<bread

<<with each other;

<<not

<<was there

<<among them

<<one

<<who was

<<distinguished

<<above his fellow

<<to bless

<<for them.

<<They sat

<<and it was a question

<<to them:

<<This

<<that we learned:

<<“Three

<<who ate

<<together

<<are obligated

<<to join to bless” —

<<that applies

<<where

<<there is

<<a person

<<great;

<<but

<<where

<<like

<<each other

<<they are,

<<separate

<<blessings

<<are preferable?

Blessed

<<each person

<<for himself.

<<They came

<<before

<<Mareimar.

<<He said to them:

<<The obligation of

<<blessing

<<you have fulfilled;

<<the obligation of

<<invitation [to bless]

<<not

<<have you fulfilled.

<<And if

<<you say:

<<“Let us go back

<<and join to bless,”

<<there is no

<<invitation [to bless]

<<retroactively.

[If] he came

<<and found them

<<as they

<<were blessing,

<<what

<<does he say

<<after them?

<<Rav Zevid

<<said:

<<“Blessed

<<and being blessed.”

<<Rav Pappa

<<said:

<<He answers

<<“Amen.”

And not

<<do they disagree:

<<this

<<is where he found them

<<as they

<<were saying

<<“Let us bless”;

<<and this

<<where he found them

<<as they

<<were saying

<<“Blessed.”

<<[If] he found them

<<as they

<<were saying

<<“Let us bless,”

<<he says

<<“Blessed

<<and being blessed”;

<<[if] he found them

<<as they

<<were saying

<<“Blessed,”

<<he answers

<<“Amen.”

It is taught

<<one [baraisa]:

<<One who answers

<<“Amen”

<<after

<<his own blessings —

<<this one

<<is praiseworthy.

<<And it is taught

<<another:

<<this one

<<is disgraceful.

It is not difficult:

<<this

<<is with “Who builds

<<Jerusalem”;

<<that

<<is with other

<<blessings.

Abaye

<<would answer

<<it

<<aloud,

<<so that

<<would hear

<<the workers

<<and get up,

<<for “Who is good

<<and does good”

<<is not

<<from the Torah.

<<Rav Ashi

<<would answer

<<it

<<in a whisper,

<<so that

<<not

<<would they treat lightly

<<“Who is good

<<and does good.”