Commentary: On the Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Pesaḥim

If one swallows bitter herbs, he has not fulfilled his obligation. [b. Pesaḥim 115b]

[This is because] we require the taste of the bitter herbs, and he did not get it. The reason why the Merciful One insisted that the one who is eating must introduce a bitter taste into his mouth is in memory of: And they made their lives bitter [with hard service] (Exodus 1:14).

This is how I found it written in all the books. But R. Ḥananel and our master [Rashi] explained [a different version of the text] as follows:

“If one swallows bitter herbs, he has fulfilled his obligation.

[This is because] it is impossible for him not to have tasted the bitter herbs at all. If he swallows matzah and bitter herbs together, when he has not yet partaken of either of them, he has fulfilled the obligation of matzah, but he has not fulfilled the obligation of bitter herbs. The reason is that since he did not chew it, and he ate matzah with it, he did not get any of the taste.”

According to the version of the text that is written in the books, it must likewise be explained that if one swallows matzah and bitter herbs together, he has at least fulfilled the obligation of matzah. It cannot be argued that he has not even fulfilled the obligation of matzah due to two aggravating factors, that he did not get the taste of matzah, and also that it did not come into contact with his throat because the bitter herbs interposed. [ . . . ]

When R. Ishmael ben R. Yosi fell ill, R. Judah the Prince sent to him: [tell us two or three things that you said to us in the name of your father]. [b. Pesaḥim 118b]

We find in several places in the Talmud that R. Judah the Prince sent this [same] message to R. Ishmael ben R. Yosi when he was sick, but the response [R. Ishmael] gives here is not the same as the answer he sent in those other accounts! It is possible that R. Ishmael ben R. Yosi was ill numerous times, and on each and every occasion R. Judah the Prince sent him that message, and he responded differently each time. Alternatively, he sent him all the different answers at the same time, and the Talmud arranged them in the appropriate places in the various tractates. [ . . . ]

One may not conclude [maftirin] after the paschal lamb with an afikoman. [m. Pesaḥim 10:8]

This is similar in meaning to “one who takes leave [ha-niftar] from his friend.” In other words, when one takes leave of the meal, he should not conclude it with an afikoman, a term that will be explained by the Gemara.

Rav said: [afikoman means] that they should not leave one group for another group. [b. Pesaḥim 119b]

After eating the paschal lamb in one group, they may not go off as another group, whether to eat [unleavened] bread or anything else. This is a decree, lest they come to eat the paschal lamb in two places, and we learned an unattributed mishnah in accordance with the opinion of R. Judah in chapter 7 [86a], that a paschal lamb may be eaten in two groups, but as for one who eats it, he may not eat the paschal lamb in two places.

Now this statement of Rav, as established by the Gemara there, is referring to the time of eating, whereas after they have finished eating, they may leave and recite Hallel with another group. Rav is only particular about eating in two places, but he permits them to eat other foods in their first place, provided that they do not leave to go and eat with another group. It is in this regard that Samuel and R. Yoḥanan disagree with him, as they maintain that it is prohibited to eat anything, even in one’s original group [referring to the explanations of Samuel and R. Yoḥanan for the afikoman: Samuel said: One may not eat delicacies after the meal, such as mushrooms for me, and young birds for Rav; R. Yoḥanan said: Such as dates, roasted grains, and nuts].

It is incorrect to explain that Rav means that they should not leave one group for another group to partake of the paschal lamb with another group after they have eaten some of it. The reason is that this has already been taught in an unattributed mishnah in chapter 7 [86a]: “And when the attendant arises to pour, he closes his mouth until he reaches his group.” Why, then, would two unattributed teachings be necessary?

Rav interprets afikoman as “afiku manaikhu,” remove your vessels from here, and let us go and eat elsewhere.

Such as mushrooms for me and young birds for Abba. [b. Pesaḥim 119b]

That is, R. Samuel would typically eat truffles and mushrooms for his desserts, whereas Rav was accustomed to eating young birds after his meals. Accordingly, the term afikoman means “go out and bring types of sweet foods.” Samuel claims that it is not necessary to say that one may not leave his group for another group; rather, even in one’s own group it is prohibited to eat anything after the paschal lamb, so that he should not lose the taste of the paschal lamb, which is meant to be consumed at the end of the meal, on a full stomach. The same applies to all the offerings, as it is written: By the anointing (Numbers 18:8), which is interpreted to mean “as a mark of eminence,” that they should be eaten in the manner that kings eat [b. Sotah 15a].

Abba. [b. Pesaḥim 119b]

This was Rav’s actual name, but out of respect they would call him “Rav” in Babylonia, just as R. Judah the Prince was known as “Rabbenu” in the land of Israel. There is proof for this from tractate Ḥullin chapter 11 [137b], which states: “Who is the head of the yeshiva in Babylonia? Abba the Tall.” This is referring to Rav, since Rav was the tallest in his generation, as mentioned in tractate Niddah [24b].

One may not conclude after the matzah with an afikoman. [b. Pesaḥim 119b]

That is, one must eat matzah at the end of the meal, in memory of the matzah that was eaten wrapped together with the paschal lamb. This is the broken matzah that we consume at the conclusion of the meal in fulfillment of the obligation. Even so, we have no choice but to recite the blessing “over the eating of matzah” for the first portion, though it is not performed in fulfillment of the obligation. This is in accordance with the statement of R. Ḥisda above, regarding bitter herbs: “After one fills his belly with it, how can he then go back and recite a blessing over it?” Consequently, one recites a blessing over both of them at the initial stage, and later eats matzah at the conclusion of the meal. One may not take leave of that matzah by eating anything else, so that its taste is not forgotten.

This statement is referring to matzah nowadays, which is not accompanied by the paschal lamb. It cannot be speaking of those times when there was a paschal lamb, as the Mishnah itself explicitly teaches: “One may not conclude after the paschal lamb with an afikoman,” which means after the paschal lamb and the matzah that is eaten together with it.