לִכְפּוֹל – יִכְפּוֹל; לִפְשׁוֹט – יִפְשׁוֹט; לְבָרֵךְ אַחֲרָיו – יְבָרֵךְ, הַכֹּל כְּמִנְהַג הַמְּדִינָה. אָמַר אַבַּיֵי: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא לְאַחֲרָיו, אֲבָל לְפָנָיו – [מִצְוָה] לְבָרֵךְ. דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: כָּל הַמִּצְוֹת מְבָרֵךְ עֲלֵיהֶן עוֹבֵר לַעֲשִׂיָּיתָן.

to double certain verses in hallel , one doubles them and reads them twice. In a place where the custom is to recite them simply, i.e., only once, one recites them simply. In a place where it is customary to recite a blessing after hallel , one should recite a blessing. Everything is in accordance with the regional custom. Abaye said: They taught that it depends on the local custom only with regard to the blessing after hallel ; however, in all places it is a mitzva to recite a blessing before hallel . As Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: With regard to all the mitzvot, one recites a blessing over them prior to their performance.

מַאי מַשְׁמַע דְּהַאי ״עוֹבֵר״ לִישָּׁנָא דְּאַקְדּוֹמִי הוּא? אָמַר רַבִּי נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק, דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיָּרָץ אֲחִימַעַץ דֶּרֶךְ הַכִּכָּר וַיַּעֲבוֹר אֶת הַכּוּשִׁי״. אַבַּיֵי אָמַר, מֵהָכָא: ״וְהוּא עָבַר לִפְנֵיהֶם״. אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי, מֵהָכָא: ״וַיַּעֲבוֹר מַלְכָּם לִפְנֵיהֶם וַה׳ בְּרֹאשָׁם״.

The Gemara asks: From where may it be inferred that the word over is a formulation that means before an action is performed? Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said that this is as it is written: “And Ahimaaz ran by way of the square and he passed [ vaya’avor ] the Kushite” (II Samuel 18:23), i.e., Ahimaaz overtook the Kushite. Abaye said that it is derived from here: “And he passed [ avar ] before them” (Genesis 33:3). Some say that the proof is from here: “And their king shall pass on [ vaya’avor ] before them, and God at their head” (Micah 2:13).

תַּנְיָא: רַבִּי כּוֹפֵל בָּהּ דְּבָרִים; רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן פְּרָטָא מוֹסִיף בָּהּ דְּבָרִים. מַאי מוֹסִיף? אָמַר אַבַּיֵי: מוֹסִיף לִכְפּוֹל מֵ״אוֹדְךָ״ לְמַטָּה.

It was taught in a baraita : Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi doubles certain matters in hallel . Rabbi Elazar ben Perata added matters to hallel . The Gemara asks: What did he add? Certainly this cannot mean that Rabbi Elazar ben Perata added statements of his own to hallel . Abaye said: He added repetitions, i.e., he repeated other verses, from “I will give thanks to You” and onward. From that point on, he repeated each verse.

דָּרַשׁ רַב עֲוִירָא, זִימְנִין אֲמַר לֵיהּ מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב אַמִי, וְזִימְנִין אֲמַר לֵיהּ מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב אַסִי, מַאי דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיִּגְדַּל הַיֶּלֶד וַיִּגָּמַל״ עָתִיד הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לַעֲשׂוֹת סְעוּדָּה לַצַּדִּיקִים בְּיוֹם שֶׁיִּגְמֹל חַסְדּוֹ לְזַרְעוֹ שֶׁל יִצְחָק. לְאַחַר שֶׁאוֹכְלִין וְשׁוֹתִין נוֹתְנִין לוֹ לְאַבְרָהָם אָבִינוּ כּוֹס שֶׁל בְּרָכָה לְבָרֵךְ,

In connection to its discussion of hallel , the Gemara cites a statement that Rav Avira taught. Sometimes he said this exposition citing Rav Ami, and sometimes he said it citing Rav Asi: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And the child grew and was weaned [ vayiggamal ], and Abraham made a great feast on the day that Isaac was weaned” (Genesis 21:8)? In the future, the Holy One, Blessed be He, will prepare a feast for the righteous on the day that He extends [ sheyigmol ] His mercy to the descendants of Isaac. After they eat and drink, the celebrants will give Abraham our father a cup of blessing to recite the blessing, as he is the first of our forefathers.

וְאוֹמֵר לָהֶן: אֵינִי מְבָרֵךְ, שֶׁיָּצָא מִמֶּנִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. אוֹמֵר לוֹ לְיִצְחָק: טוֹל וּבָרֵךְ! אוֹמֵר לָהֶן: אֵינִי מְבָרֵךְ, שֶׁיָּצָא מִמֶּנִּי עֵשָׂו. אוֹמֵר לוֹ לְיַעֲקֹב: טוֹל וּבָרֵךְ! אוֹמֵר לָהֶם: אֵינִי מְבָרֵךְ, שֶׁנָּשָׂאתִי שְׁתֵּי אֲחָיוֹת בְּחַיֵּיהֶן, שֶׁעֲתִידָה תּוֹרָה לְאוֹסְרָן עָלַי.

And Abraham will say to them: I will not recite the blessing, as I am blemished, for the wicked Ishmael came from me. Abraham will say to Isaac: Take the cup and recite the blessing. Isaac will say to them: I will not recite the blessing, as the wicked Esau came from me. Isaac will say to Jacob: Take the cup and recite the blessing. Jacob will say to them: I will not recite the blessing, as I married two sisters, Rachel and Leah, in their lifetimes, and in the future the Torah forbade them to me. Although at the time it was not prohibited to wed two sisters, this practice would eventually be considered a serious transgression.

אוֹמֵר לוֹ לְמֹשֶׁה: טוֹל וּבָרֵךְ. אוֹמֵר לָהֶם: אֵינִי מְבָרֵךְ, שֶׁלֹּא זָכִיתִי לִיכָּנֵס לְאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא בְּחַיַּי וְלֹא בְּמוֹתִי. אוֹמֵר לוֹ לִיהוֹשֻׁעַ: טוֹל וּבָרֵךְ! אוֹמֵר לָהֶן: אֵינִי מְבָרֵךְ, שֶׁלֹּא זָכִיתִי לְבֵן, דִּכְתִיב: ״יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן נוּן״ – נוּן בְּנוֹ, יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בְּנוֹ.

Jacob will say to Moses: Take the cup and recite the blessing. Moses will say to them: I will not recite the blessing, as I did not merit to enter Eretz Yisrael, neither in my life nor in my death. Moses will say to Joshua: Take the cup and recite the blessing. Joshua will say to them: I will not recite the blessing, as I did not merit to have a son. The proof for this is that it is written: “Joshua the son of Nun” (Numbers 14:6), and in the genealogical list of Ephraim it states: “Nun his son, Joshua his son” (I Chronicles 7:27). Since the verse does not mention any children of Joshua, evidently he had no sons.

אוֹמֵר לוֹ לְדָוִד: טוֹל וּבָרֵךְ! אוֹמֵר לָהֶן: אֲנִי אֲבָרֵךְ, וְלִי נָאֶה לְבָרֵךְ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כּוֹס יְשׁוּעוֹת אֶשָּׂא וּבְשֵׁם ה׳ אֶקְרָא״.

Joshua will say to David: Take the cup and recite the blessing. David will say to them: I will recite the blessing, and it is fitting for me to recite the blessing, as it is stated: “I will lift up the cup of salvation, and I will call upon the name of the Lord” (Psalms 116:13).

מתני׳ אֵין מַפְטִירִין אַחַר הַפֶּסַח אֲפִיקוֹמָן.

One does not conclude after the Paschal lamb with an afikoman .

גמ׳ מַאי אֲפִיקוֹמָן? אָמַר רַב: שֶׁלֹּא יַעַקְרוּ מֵחֲבוּרָה לַחֲבוּרָה.

The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of afikoman ? Rav said: It means that a member of a group that ate the Paschal lamb together should not leave that group to join another group. One who joined one group for the Paschal lamb may not leave and take food with him. According to this interpretation, afikoman is derived from the phrase afiku mani , take out the vessels. The reason for this prohibition is that people might remove the Paschal lamb to another location after they had begun to eat it elsewhere. This is prohibited, as the Paschal lamb must be eaten in a single location by one group.

וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: כְּגוֹן אוּרְדִילָאֵי לִי וְגוֹזַלַיָּיא לְאַבָּא. וְרַב חֲנִינָא בַּר שֵׁילָא וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן (אָמַר:) כְּגוֹן תְּמָרִים קְלָיוֹת וֶאֱגוֹזִים. תַּנְיָא כְּוָותֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אֵין מַפְטִירִין אַחַר הַפֶּסַח, כְּגוֹן תְּמָרִים קְלָיוֹת וֶאֱגוֹזִים.

And Shmuel said: It means that one may not eat dessert after the meal, like mushrooms [ urdila’ei ] for me, and chicks for Abba, Rav. It was customary for them to eat delicacies after the meal. And Rav Ḥanina bar Sheila and Rabbi Yoḥanan say: Afikoman refers to foods such as dates, roasted grains, and nuts, which are eaten during the meal. It was taught in a baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan: One does not conclude by eating after the Paschal lamb foods such as dates, roasted grains, and nuts.

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: אֵין מַפְטִירִין אַחַר מַצָּה אֲפִיקוֹמָן. תְּנַן: אֵין מַפְטִירִין אַחַר הַפֶּסַח אֲפִיקוֹמָן. אַחַר הַפֶּסַח – הוּא דְּלָא, אֲבָל לְאַחַר מַצָּה – מַפְטִירִין!

Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said an additional halakha: Nowadays, when we have no Paschal lamb, one does not conclude after matza with an afikoman . The Gemara asks: We learned in the mishna that one does not conclude after the Paschal lamb with an afikoman . The Gemara infers from the mishna: It is after the Paschal lamb that one may not conclude with an afikoman ; however, after matza one may conclude with an afikoman . This statement of the mishna apparently contradicts Shmuel’s ruling.

לָא מִיבָּעֲיָא קָאָמַר; לָא מִיבָּעֲיָא אַחַר מַצָּה – דְּלָא נָפֵישׁ טַעְמַיְיהוּ, אֲבָל לְאַחַר הַפֶּסַח דְּנָפֵישׁ טַעְמֵיהּ, וְלָא מָצֵי עֲבוּרֵיהּ – לֵית לָן בָּהּ, קָמַשְׁמַע לָן.

The Gemara rejects this contention: That is an incorrect inference, as the mishna is stated in the style of: Needless to say. The mishna should be understood as follows: Needless to say that one may not conclude with an afikoman after eating matza , as the taste of matza is slight. If one eats anything else afterward, the taste of the matza will dissipate. However, after the Paschal lamb, which has a strong taste that is not easily removed, one might think that we have no problem with it. Therefore, the mishna teaches us that it is prohibited to conclude with an afikoman after the Paschal lamb as well.

נֵימָא מְסַיַּיע לֵיהּ: הַסּוּפְגָּנִין וְהַדּוּבְשָׁנִין וְהָאֶיסְקְרִיטִין – אָדָם מְמַלֵּא כְּרֵיסוֹ מֵהֶן, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁיֹּאכַל כַּזַּיִת מַצָּה בָּאַחֲרוֹנָה. בָּאַחֲרוֹנָה – אִין,

The Gemara proposes: Let us say that the Tosefta supports Shmuel’s ruling: With regard to unleavened sponge cakes, cakes fried in oil and honey, and honey cakes, a person may fill his stomach with them on Passover night, provided that he eats an olive-bulk of matza after all that food. The Gemara infers from here that if he eats the matza after those cakes, yes, this is acceptable, as the matza is eaten last.