Mishnah Berachot 7:1
Three people who ate a meal together are bound to form a zimmun and to recite the blessing after meals.
If, among those who ate them, there was someone who ate products damai (products decimated so dubious), or the first tithe from which he split his teruma, or the second tithe, or consecrated food that were redeemed and, therefore, were permitted for consumption; and even the waiter who served the food to the diners and ate at least a olive of the food, and the good samaritan (kuti) you ate along with two other people in a meal, all of them are between the three and require those who ate with them to form a zimmun.However, those who ate products are not decimated (tevel), or the first tithe, which was not separated your teruma, or the second tithes and the consecrated food that were not redeemed, and the waiter not ate an amount equivalent to the volume of an olive, and the gentile who ate along with two jews, none of them is among the three to force those who ate with them to form a zimmun.
1) Core of the Mishnah: what creates and why it matters
Berachot 7:1 defines the minimum threshold and the conditions for the zimún: the “invitation” formal recite together Birkat Hammazón after a shared meal.
The central idea is twofold:
- The food creates a drive halachic: three who ate “together” to acquire a status group that requires a formula community.
- Not every person qualifies to constitute that group: it depends on the legitimacy halachic consumption and certain parameters of membership identity (religious-legal, shiur minimum consumed, the status of the food).
This mishnah is not just a “tag liturgical”, but who can represent a “we” halachic in the act of thanking.
Sources framework: Talmud Berachot 45a–47b, Rambam, Hilchot Berachot 5, Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 193-199.
2) Definition halachic of “zimún”: obligation, levels and formula
2.1 basic Obligation
- Three they ate: obligation of zimún. (Tractate Berachot 7:1; Talmud Berachot 45a)
- With ten, is explicitly mentioned the Name: “Nevarej Eloheinu...” (Tractate Berachot 7:3; Talmud Berachot 49b in the development of the language; coding in OJ 193)
2.2 What creates the “ate together”
There are two planes:
- Flat factual: ate in the same framework of food.
- Legal level: it is considered that participated in a se udá with a sense of “comensalidad” (not mere bites isolated).
The Poskim discuss practical details (same table, same place, simultaneous launch, the intention of eating together), but the point of Berachot 7:1 is prior: who are countableeven if you shared a table.
Sources: Talmud Berachot 45b–46a, Rambam Berachot 5:1-3, Shulchan Aruch OJ 193.
3) The structural criterion of the Mishnah: “food valid” and “community integration”
The Mishnah list two groups:
- People/food yes you have to get to three.
- People/food no counted.
The implicit rule: the zimún requires that the participants have eaten a food halájicamente edible (or at least not prohibited so that deslegitime your integration), and that the person belongs to the framework of obligation.
This point is more thin than it seems: the Mishnah includes cases “bordering” (as demai, or the kuti), and excludes cases “swiss” (as tevel or consecrated not redeemed).
4) cases that YES feature: analysis one by one
4.1 Demai (דמאי): “uncertain” but allowed under the rules
Demai these products are acquired at a ‘am ha'aretz about which there is doubt if they separated the tithe correctly.
The halachah rabbinic breaks “by no doubt”, but, under certain conditions, the power consumption is allowed (this is not a biblical prohibition against categorical).
That's why, who-ate - demai yes be aware: your dietary intake is considered to be within the domain of the mutate (enabled), even though it will require precautions rabbinical.
Sources: Mishnah Demai, Talmud Berachot 47a, encoding Rambam (Ma aserot / Demai) and general application in Rambam Berachot 5.
4.2 First tithe (ma asher rishón) which is already separated terumá
The ma asher rishón arriving at the levi may have a problem: if the levi received before the kohén take your part, must be separated terumat ma asher (the portion of the kohén from the tithe).
If you already separated the terumá, the food is allowed. By this account.
Here the Mishnah teaches a technical principle: it is not enough that it is “tithe”, 't matter if you are regularized component of terumá.
Sources: Berachot 47a, Rambam Terumot / Ma aserot, Shulchan Aruch OJ 196 (concept of eating allowed to zimún in the structure of zimún).
4.3 Second tithe (ma asher shení) redeemed (and net revai redeemed, in the parallel reading)
The ma asher shení should be eaten in purity in Jerusalem, or redeem (transfer holiness to a coin) and then eat the product in the state profane.
If it was redeemed successfully, it is allowed and account.
This case is crucial because it shows that even food with status of holiness have to zimún if you have been halájicamente “unlocked”.
Sources: Berachot 47a, Rambam Ma asher Shení, principles reflected in Shulchan Aruch.
4.4 Hekdesh (enshrined) that he was redeemed
What is enshrined at the Temple (hekdesh) is prohibited until his pidyón (redemption).
Redeemed, it is permissible, therefore, account.
The pattern is repeated: ban removed by a valid procedure = integration in the zimún.
Sources: Berachot 47a, Rambam Arakhin/Me ila, and general framework Rambam Berachot 5.
4.5 The waiter who ate at least a kezáit (an “olive”)
The Mishnah includes the shamash (bartender/server) if you ate at least a kezáit.
Here is a principle quantitative:
- To be integrated into the zimún, not enough “test”; it requires a minimum halachic consumption.
In the halachic practice, the kezáit it is the standard threshold for considering that someone “ate” in a meaningful way in respect of blessings later. There are discussions of exact measurement (volume vs. weight; estimates), but the legal framework is clear: without shiur minimum, there is no integration.
Sources: Berachot 47a, Shulchan Aruch OJ 197, discussions shiurim in Mishnah Berurah and literature of measures halájicas.
4.6 The kuti (כּוּתִי): the samaritan as a case-limit membership
The Mishnah includes the kuti (samaritan) as an accountant for zimún. This is one of the most loaded historically.
At the time tanaítica, there were stages in the kutim were treated, in certain areas, such as close to Israel in the enforcement of certain mitzvot, although with disputes strong on your status.
In the ensuing discussion, the Talmud and Poskim restrict and, in the halachic rules later, no account to a non-jew to zimún, and the status of the kutim changes by historical considerations and halájicas (fidelity to the Oral Torah, etc). This is a classic example of how a Mishnah may reflect a legal reality historical that is then reconfigured by the Beit Din, and the talmudic tradition.
Sources: Berachot 47b (and parallel on kutim in Shas), encoding general of “who counts” in Shulchan Aruch OJ 199.
5) The cases that don'T count: analysis and guiding principle
5.1 Tevel (טבל): not decimated — ban severe
Tevel it is a product which was not separated terumá and tithes: its use implies a serious transgression.
Therefore, anyone who ate tevel no be aware: your food is not “food” illegal to be a communal act of gratitude policy.
This case is the “counterpoint” of demai:
- Demai = doubt rabbinic allowed use with safeguards.
- Tevel = ban clara, consumption is not legalised.
Sources: Berachot 47a, in Rambam Terumot.
5.2 Ma asher rishón without terumat ma asher separate
Although “looks decimated” the missing component that enables the consumer.
The Mishnah teaches accuracy: in partial fulfillment does not makes the forbidden permissible.
5.3 Ma asher shení and hekdesh does not redeemed
While it is not redeemed, the consumption is improper. The pattern is conserved:
holiness is not resolved = non-integration.
5.4 Waiter who did not eat a kezáit
Without shiur minimum, there is no “eat” halachic. Point.
5.5 The gentile (non-jewish) does not account for zimún
The Mishnah thus explicitly excludes: a non-jew does not integrate the minimum of three, which creates the obligation of zimún.
Here the foundation is not “human value”, but framework of obligation: zimún is an institution within a system of mitzvot and of belonging to the covenant-legal-religious that defines who is obligated in Birkat Hammazón and who may represent a “we” in that obligation.
Sources: Berachot 47b, Shulchan Aruch OJ 199.
6) Discussions talmudic key (Berachot 45a–47b)
6.1 what Zimún is de oraita or derabanán?
The Talmud links Birkat Hammazón to the obligation biblical (“Ve ajalta looks-savata uverajta”, Devarim 8:10), but the zimún as the format of the community is treated as development rabbinical on the practice of blessing together.
Encoding: Rambam Berachot 5 it presents as a regulatory structure required to carry out a time that was given the framework of “three”.
6.2 What happens if one ate in transgression: shogeg vs mezid?
The Rishonim discuss whether someone ate something forbidden by mistake (shogeg) is counted the same as one that did deliberately (mezid).
The Mishnah does not distinguish explicitly, but the analysis talmud and poskim tend to consider the degree of “legitimacy of the act of eating” to integrate the zimún.
In practice, halachic, the criterion is formulated as follows: the zimún requires a food that is not an act that the Torah or the Jajamim defined as fundacionalmente invalid to be the basis of a blessing to the community. There are nuances depending on the type of ban and intentionality.
Sources: discussions Berachot 47a and treatment by Rishonim (line of analysis, which is then collected Mishnah Berurah to systematize cases modern).
6.3 What counts as “eating together”?
The Talmud discusses whether it is sufficient that they have eaten in a same place although not simultaneous, or if it requires “kviut” (fixing a meal). Halachic practice: searching for a framework of shared food, and ordering practice for the avoidance of doubt (OJ 193-197).
7) Coding halachic: Rambam Maimonides and the Shulchan Aruch
7.1 Rambam (Hilchot Berachot cap 5)
- Defines the obligation of zimún with three.
- Lands what it means to “eat” and shiurim.
- Structure the practice as a community standard.
7.2 Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 193-199)
- Fixed practice: who leads, how to respond, when there is mention of “Eloheinu”, etc
- Determines criteria for inclusion: jews required, minimum consumption, food permitted.
Mishnah Berurah and Poskim contemporary detailing scenarios modern: meals, events, restaurants, trips, buffets, and cases of doubt.
8) Dimension conceptual: zimún as the creation of “collective person”
The zimún makes a statement of philosophical halachic:
Eating is not a private act, when there is a shared table, creates mutual accountability in the recognition.
Three is the minimum, so that there is “edá” (group) in multiple areas of rabbinical language: not as a court, but as social unit you can speak as “we”.
For this reason, the Mishnah is obsessed with “who qualifies”: is not a minor technicality, is the limit of the legal identity of the collective.
9) Reading kabalistic: unification of divine name and elevation of the food
In the literature, kabbalistic, the zimún is understood as an act of yijud (unification): several diners raise together the “sparks” of the food with a common intention.
Axes common:
- Three as the structure of balance (lines/attributes) and stability of the spiritual act.
- Ten as the structure of fullness (relationship with the language of “Eloheinu” and the community dimension enlarged).
Sources concept: lines present in Zóhar on the table as a place of presence, and developments in traditions of kavanot (intentions) associated to Birkat Hammazón.
Technical note: the Kabbalah does not replace the halachah; the deeper. The inclusion criterion remains the halachic.
10) Halacha applied today: typical scenarios and operational criteria
10.1 Restaurants, and events
- If three jews ate bread and reached shiur, must make zimún.
- The fact that there are other people (non-jewish) in the table does not prevent the zimún; simply not counted for the minimum.
10.2 The “waiter” modern
- A worker who “posts” without getting to a kezáit: no account.
- If you ate a kezáit of bread or other framework that integrates the se udá, yes that can be counted (according to terms of the shared meal).
10.3 Doubts of kashrut or separations
- In contemporary practice, outside of Eretz Israel, the majority does not separate terumot/ma asrot in fruits/vegetables common because it doesn't apply the same; in Israel itself there is the issue (certifications, “hafrashá”, doubts).
- The parallel conceptual demai today is the consumer “under doubt managed by systems rabbinical check. When the consumption is halájicamente allowed, the integration of the zimún applicable.
10.4 People who ate in transgression
Case sensitive: someone ate something non-kosher deliberately. In strict terms, query psak local to the specific case (sort of prohibition, intention, context). The Mishnah mark the following criteria: tevel and are the equivalent of severe don't count; allowed under the rule, or doubt regulated yes account.
11) “The rules teachers” of Berachot 7:1
- Zimún is not optional: with three, it is the obligation. (Berachot 45a)
- It requires “eat” with shiur minimum (kezáit as a threshold key). (Berachot 47a)
- The group is defined by food halájicamente valid: allowed or regulated; not forbidden structurally.
- The Mishnah contrasts demai (doubt allowed) with tevel (prohibition franca) to teach the criterion.
- There is a dimension of membership rules: the non-jew does not account for the minimum.
- The case kuti evidence historical evolution of legal status; the halachah rules later set more restrictive criteria.
