Why a Level 4 devoted to the Alter Rebbe ? The Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Aruch is not a commentary on the Mehaber (מחבר) — it is a complete, self-standing Shulchan Aruch, written by the Alter Rebbe (Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, founder of Habad, disciple of the Maggid (מגיד) of Mezeritch). Its singularity : it combines halakha (הלכה) + טעמי המצוות + inner dimension in one work, and rules with a unique Talmudic rigor.
For Habad, the Alter Rebbe is הפוסק האחרון — his psak is the deciding authority. This page gathers the Rav’s way on siman ק״צ — שְׁתִיַּת הַיַּיִן אַחַר הַבְּרָכָה וְדִינָיו (drinking the wine after the blessing and its laws), which unfolds in the Rav over ח׳ סְעִיפִים (eight seifim) : from the blessing “boré peri hagafen” said over the cup after birkat hamazon — and not before it, unlike everything else that requires a cup — to the essence of the mitzvah of the cup (drinking, not merely holding), to the measure of “kimlo lugmav,” to the requirement that the wine be before him at the time of the saying, to the case where another — or a child — tastes, to the “pagum” cup and the participants’ cups, to the revi’it one drinks to escape the doubt of the final blessing, up to the question of interruption at a large meal.
שולחן ערוך הרב — סימן ק״צ — שְׁתִיַּת הַיַּיִן אַחַר הַבְּרָכָה וְדִינָיו
The full text of the Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Aruch
שולחן ערוך הרב, סימן ק״צ — שְׁתִיַּת הַיַּיִן אַחַר הַבְּרָכָה וְדִינָיו — וּבוֹ ח׳ סְעִיפִים
The Alter Rebbe’s own text (Sefaria source Shulchan_Arukh_HaRav,_Orach_Chayim.190), followed by our English translation. The siman comprises eight seifim (ח׳ סְעִיפִים ; seif k → .190.k).
סעיף א אַחַר בִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן מְבָרֵךְ "בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הַגָּפֶן" עַל הַכּוֹס.
שְׁתִיַּת הַיַּיִן אַחַר הַבְּרָכָה וְדִינָיו, וּבוֹ ח׳ סְעִיפִים:
אַחֵר שֶׁסִּיֵּם בִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן צָרִיךְ לְבָרֵךְ "בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הַגָּפֶן" עַל הַכּוֹס שֶׁל בִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן אֲפִלּוּ אִם כְּבָר בֵּרַךְ עַל הַיַּיִן שֶׁבְּתוֹךְ הַסְּעוּדָה, שֶׁכָּל מַה שֶּׁאוֹכֵל וְשׁוֹתֶה אַחַר בִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן — סְעוּדָה אַחֶרֶת הִיא, לְפִי שֶׁבִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן הִיא סִלּוּק וְהֶסַּח הַדַּעַת לְמַה שֶּׁלְּפָנֶיהָ, וְגַם אִי אֶפְשָׁר לִשְׁתּוֹת וְלֶאֱכֹל בְּעוֹדוֹ מְבָרֵךְ.
וּמִפְּנֵי זֶה נִשְׁתַּנָּה בִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן מִכָּל דְּבָרִים הַטְּעוּנִים כּוֹס, כְּגוֹן קִדּוּשׁ וְהַבְדָּלָה, בִּרְכַּת חֲתָנִים וּמִילָה, שֶׁבְּכֻלָּם בִּרְכַּת הַיַּיִן קוֹדֶמֶת, וְכָאן מְבָרֵךְ "בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הַגָּפֶן" אַחַר בִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן וְלֹא לְפָנֶיהָ, אֲפִלּוּ אִם לֹא בֵּרַךְ עַל הַיַּיִן בְּתוֹךְ הַסְּעוּדָה, וַאֲפִלּוּ בֵּרַךְ, הֲרֵי כְּשֶׁנָּטַל הַכּוֹס בְּיָדוֹ לְבָרֵךְ בִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן הִסִּיחַ דַּעְתּוֹ מִלִּשְׁתּוֹת קֹדֶם בִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן, וְאִם הָיָה נִמְלַךְ לִשְׁתּוֹת הָיָה צָרִיךְ לַחֲזֹר וּלְבָרֵךְ, וְכֵיוָן שֶׁכֵּן, לָמָּה אֵינוֹ מְבָרֵךְ "בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הַגָּפֶן" קֹדֶם בִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן? אֶלָּא לְפִי שֶׁבְּבִרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן הוּא מוֹדֶה וּמְשַׁבֵּחַ לְבוֹרְאוֹ עַל מַה שֶּׁאָכַל וְשָׁתָה — הוּא סִלּוּק וְהֶסַּח הַדַּעַת עַל מַה שֶּׁעָשָׂה, וַאֲפִלּוּ עַל בִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן שֶׁמְּבָרֵךְ וְהַכּוֹס בְּיָדוֹ, לְכָךְ צָרִיךְ לְבָרֵךְ תֵּכֶף לִשְׁתִיָּתוֹ:
Drinking the wine after the blessing and its laws, and it contains eight seifim. After one has completed birkat hamazon, he must say “boré peri hagafen” over the cup of birkat hamazon, even if he already blessed over wine during the meal — for whatever one eats and drinks after birkat hamazon is a separate meal, since birkat hamazon is a conclusion and a diversion of attention (hesech hadaat) from what preceded it; and moreover it is impossible to drink and eat while one is blessing.
For this reason birkat hamazon differs from all the matters that require a cup — such as kiddush and havdalah, the blessing of the bridegrooms and circumcision — in all of which the blessing over the wine comes first, whereas here one says “boré peri hagafen” after birkat hamazon and not before it, even if he did not bless over wine during the meal. And even if he did bless: once he took the cup in his hand to say birkat hamazon he diverted his attention from drinking before birkat hamazon, and were he to change his mind and drink he would have to bless again. Since that is so, why does he not say “boré peri hagafen” before birkat hamazon? Rather, because in birkat hamazon he thanks and praises his Creator for what he ate and drank — that itself is a conclusion and a diversion of attention regarding what he has done, and this holds even for the birkat hamazon that he recites with the cup in his hand; therefore he must bless immediately before drinking.
סעיף ב עִקַּר מִצְוַת הַכּוֹס — לִשְׁתּוֹת מִמֶּנּוּ כִּמְלֹא לֻגְמָיו.
כָּל דָּבָר הַטָּעוּן כּוֹס לֹא דַּי בַּאֲחִיזַת הַכּוֹס לְבַדָּהּ בִּשְׁעַת אֲמִירַת אוֹתוֹ דָּבָר, שֶׁזֶּה אֵינוֹ מְעַכֵּב כְּלָל בְּדִיעֲבַד, אֶלָּא עִקַּר מַה שֶּׁהִטְעִינוּ כּוֹס הוּא לִשְׁתּוֹת מִמֶּנּוּ אַחַר אֲמִירַת אוֹתוֹ דָּבָר, שֶׁתְּהֵא אוֹתָהּ אֲמִירָה כְּעֵין שִׁירָה הַנֶּאֱמֶרֶת עַל הַיַּיִן שֶׁמְּנַסְּכִין עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, שֶׁהִיא שְׁתִיַּת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, אַף כָּאן תְּהֵא נֶאֱמֶרֶת שִׁירָה עַל שְׁתִיַּת הַיַּיִן.
וְאֵין שְׁתִיָּה חֲשׁוּבָה לוֹמַר שִׁירָה אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן שׁוֹתֶה שִׁעוּר הָרָאוּי לְיַשֵּׁב דַּעְתּוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם, שֶׁהוּא כִּמְלֹא לֻגְמָיו, שֶׁהִיא שְׁתִיָּה שֶׁל הֲנָאָה, וּבְפָחוֹת מִשִּׁעוּר זֶה לֹא קִיֵּם מִצְוַת הַכּוֹס כְּלָל.
וְכָל דָּבָר שֶׁהַכּוֹס מְעַכֵּב בּוֹ אֲפִלּוּ בְּדִיעֲבַד, שֶׁאִם אָמַר בְּלֹא כּוֹס צָרִיךְ לַחֲזֹר וְלוֹמַר עַל הַכּוֹס, כְּגוֹן קִדּוּשׁ וְהַבְדָּלָה, הוּא הַדִּין אִם אָמַר עַל הַכּוֹס וְלֹא שָׁתָה מִמֶּנּוּ כִּמְלֹא לֻגְמָיו מִיָּד קֹדֶם שֶׁעָקַר מִמְּקוֹמוֹ וּבְלֹא הֶסַּח הַדַּעַת בֵּינְתַיִם — צָרִיךְ לַחֲזֹר וּלְקַדֵּשׁ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִימָן רע״א. וְכֵן בְּבִרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן לֹא קִיֵּם מִצְוַת הַכּוֹס כְּלָל:
For every matter that requires a cup, it is not enough to hold the cup alone while saying that matter — for that is not indispensable at all after the fact — rather the essence of their requiring a cup is that one drink from it after saying that matter, so that the saying should be like a song uttered over the wine that is poured as a libation upon the altar, which is the altar’s drinking; so too here the song should be uttered over the drinking of the wine.
And drinking is not deemed significant enough for a song to be said over it unless one drinks the measure fit to settle a man’s mind, which is “kimlo lugmav” (a mouthful), that being a drinking of enjoyment; and with less than this measure he has not fulfilled the mitzvah of the cup at all.
And every matter for which the cup is indispensable even after the fact — such that if he said it without a cup he must repeat it over a cup, like kiddush and havdalah — likewise if he said it over the cup but did not drink from it “kimlo lugmav” immediately, before he moved from his place and without a diversion of attention in between, he must repeat the kiddush, as will be explained in siman 271. And so too with birkat hamazon: he has not fulfilled the mitzvah of the cup at all.
סעיף ג צָרִיךְ שֶׁיִּהְיֶה הַיַּיִן לְפָנָיו בִּשְׁעַת הָאֲמִירָה.
וְצָרִיךְ גַּם כֵּן שֶׁיִּהְיֶה הַיַּיִן בִּשְׁעַת הָאֲמִירָה אֶצְלוֹ עַל הַשֻּׁלְחָן אוֹ עַל גַּבֵּי דָּבָר אַחֵר בְּאוֹתוֹ חֶדֶר מוּכָן לִשְׁתִיָּה, וְזֶהוּ גַּם כֵּן מְעַכֵּב אֲפִלּוּ בְּדִיעֲבַד, שֶׁאִם אֵין הַיַּיִן לְפָנָיו בִּשְׁעַת הָאֲמִירָה גַּם כֵּן — אֵינוֹ נִקְרָא אוֹמֵר שִׁירָה עַל הַיַּיִן, מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן אֲחִיזַת הַכּוֹס בְּיָדוֹ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא מֵעֲשָׂרָה דְּבָרִים שֶׁנֶּאֶמְרוּ בְּכוֹס לְמִצְוָה וְלֹא לְעַכֵּב, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִימָן קפ״ג:
It is likewise necessary that at the time of the saying the wine be beside him on the table, or upon something else in that same room, ready for drinking; and this too is indispensable even after the fact, for if the wine is not before him at the time of the saying he is likewise not called one who says a song over the wine. Holding the cup in his hand, by contrast, is only one of the ten things stated regarding the cup — for the mitzvah and not as an indispensable condition, as was explained in siman 183.
סעיף ד אֵין מְעַכֵּב שֶׁיִּשְׁתֶּה הַמְבָרֵךְ בְּעַצְמוֹ — דַּי בִּשְׁתִיַּת אַחֵר.
אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁשְּׁתִיַּת כּוֹס שֶׁל בְּרָכָה מְעַכֶּבֶת, אֵין מְעַכֵּב שֶׁיִּשְׁתֶּה הַמְבָרֵךְ בְּעַצְמוֹ, אֶלָּא דַּי בִּשְׁתִיַּת אַחֵר, וַאֲפִלּוּ מַטְעִים מִמֶּנּוּ לְתִינוֹק (כִּמְלֹא לֻגְמָיו שֶׁל תִּינוֹק) — יָצָא יְדֵי חוֹבָה (שֶׁשִּׁעוּר מְלֹא לֻגְמָיו הוּא בְּכָל אָדָם לְפִי מַה שֶּׁהוּא, הַגָּדוֹל לְפִי גָּדְלוֹ, וְהַקָּטָן לְפִי קָטְנוֹ). אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהַתִּינוֹק אֵינוֹ מְחֻיָּב בַּדָּבָר — אֵין בְּכָךְ כְּלוּם, לְפִי שֶׁגַּם עַל הַמְבָרֵךְ לֹא חָל הַחִיּוּב כְּלָל, שֶׁלֹּא חִיְּבוּהוּ אֶלָּא לוֹמַר שִׁירָה עַל הַיַּיִן, שֶׁיִּשְׁתֶּה מִמֶּנּוּ אֵיזֶה אָדָם מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁיִּהְיֶה שְׁתִיָּה שֶׁהִיא חֲשׁוּבָה הֲנָאָה לוֹ (וַאֲפִלּוּ תִּינוֹק בֶּן יוֹמוֹ).
וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם, לְכַתְּחִלָּה צָרִיךְ לְהַטְעִים לְתִינוֹק גָּדוֹל קְצָת שֶׁהִגִּיעַ לִכְלַל חִנּוּךְ בִּרְכַּת הַנֶּהֱנִין, כְּדֵי שֶׁיּוּכַל לְבָרֵךְ בִּרְכַּת הַיַּיִן וְלֹא תְּהֵא בִּרְכָתוֹ לְבַטָּלָה, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַתִּינוֹק שׁוֹמְעָהּ מִמֶּנּוּ וּמְבָרֵךְ וְשׁוֹתֶה, מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן אִם יַטְעִים לְקָטָן שֶׁלֹּא הִגִּיעַ לְחִנּוּךְ — יַפְסִיד בִּרְכַּת הַיַּיִן, שֶׁלֹּא יוּכַל לְאָמְרָהּ, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינָהּ מְעַכֶּבֶת.
(אֲבָל רַשַּׁאי הוּא לְהַטְעִים לְגָדוֹל, שֶׁיְּבָרֵךְ בְּעַצְמוֹ בִּרְכַּת הַיַּיִן, אִם הוּא אֵינוֹ שׁוֹתֶה יַיִן מִפְּנֵי שֶׁשּׂוֹנֵא אוֹתוֹ אוֹ מִשּׁוּם נֶדֶר. אֲבָל מִי שֶׁהוּא שׁוֹתֶה יַיִן — מִצְוָה מִן הַמֻּבְחָר שֶׁיִּטְעֹם בְּעַצְמוֹ, וְכֵן לְכָל הַמְסֻבִּים שֶׁזִּמֵּן עֲלֵיהֶם, אַךְ אֵין צָרִיךְ לְכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד כִּמְלֹא לֻגְמָיו, אֶלָּא דַּי בִּטְעִימָה כָּל שֶׁהוּא).
וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים שֶׁכָּל דָּבָר הַטָּעוּן כּוֹס, חוּץ מִקִּדּוּשׁ - לֹא הִצְרִיכוּ לִטְעֹם מִמֶּנּוּ אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא גְּנַאי לְבִרְכַּת הַיַּיִן, שֶׁיֹּאמְרוּ שֶׁלֹּא לְצֹרֶךְ הוּא בְּרָכָה זוֹ, וְנִרְאֵית כִּבְרָכָה לְבַטָּלָה, אֲבָל בֶּאֱמֶת הוּא לְצֹרֶךְ, שֶׁכָּךְ תִּקְנוּ חֲכָמִים בְּכָל שִׁירָה הַנֶּאֱמֶרֶת עַל הַיַּיִן שֶׁיְּסַדְּרוּ אוֹתָהּ אֵצֶל בִּרְכַּת הַיַּיִן, שֶׁהוּא עִקַּר שִׁירָה הַמְּיֻחֶדֶת לַיַּיִן, לְפִיכָךְ רַשַּׁאי לְבָרֵךְ בִּרְכַּת הַיַּיִן וּלְהַטְעִים לְקָטָן אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא הִגִּיעַ לְחִנּוּךְ בְּרָכוֹת, וַאֲפִלּוּ אֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ לְדַבֵּר, שֶׁכֵּיוָן שֶׁהַטְּעִימָה אֵינָהּ אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם גְּנַאי — דַּיָּהּ בְּתִינוֹק קָטָן כָּזֶה.
וְכֵן נוֹהֲגִין בְּמִילָה שֶׁבְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, הוֹאִיל וְאִי אֶפְשָׁר בְּעִנְיַן אַחֵר, כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִימָן תרכ״א. אֲבָל בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁאֶפְשָׁר, כְּגוֹן קִדּוּשׁ שֶׁבְּבֵית הַכְּנֶסֶת בְּשַׁבָּת וְיוֹם טוֹב — יֵשׁ לָחֹש לַסְּבָרָא הָרִאשׁוֹנָה לְהַטְעִים לְקָטָן שֶׁהִגִּיעַ לְחִנּוּךְ בְּרָכָה, כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִימָן רס״ט.
(אֲבָל קִדּוּשׁ שֶׁבַּבַּיִת, שֶׁאָדָם יוֹצֵא בּוֹ יְדֵי חוֹבָתוֹ, יֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים, אֲפִלּוּ לְפִי סְבָרָא הָאַחֲרוֹנָה, שֶׁלֹּא דַּי בְּמַה שֶּׁיַּטְעִים לְתִינוֹק, וְלֹא אֲפִלּוּ שֶׁיַּטְעִים לְגָדוֹל, אֶלָּא הַמְקַדֵּשׁ בְּעַצְמוֹ צָרִיךְ לִטְעֹם כִּמְלֹא לֻגְמָיו, וְאִם לָאו — לֹא יָצָא, מִשּׁוּם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר "זָכוֹר אֶת יוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת לְקַדְּשׁוֹ", וְאָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים: זָכְרֵהוּ עַל הַיַּיִן, כְּלוֹמַר עַל שְׁתִיַּת הַיַּיִן לִכְבוֹד הַיּוֹם, לְפִיכָךְ הַמַּזְכִּירוֹ עַל הַיַּיִן, הוּא הַמְקַדֵּשׁ — שׁוֹתֶה מִמֶּנּוּ בְּעַצְמוֹ. וְרָאוּי לָחֹש לָזֶה לְכַתְּחִלָּה, כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִימָן רע״א).
וּלְפִי סְבָרָא זוֹ שֶׁתַּקָּנַת חֲכָמִים הוּא בְּכָל דָּבָר הַטָּעוּן כּוֹס שֶׁיְּסַדְּרוּ אוֹתוֹ עַל בִּרְכַּת הַיַּיִן, אִם כֵּן מִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ שׁוֹתֶה יַיִן — אִי אֶפְשָׁר לוֹ לְבָרֵךְ בִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן עַל הַכּוֹס אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן יַטְעִים מִמֶּנּוּ לְקָטָן שֶׁהִגִּיעַ לְחִנּוּךְ, אֲבָל לֹא לְגָדוֹל שֶׁיְּבָרֵךְ בְּעַצְמוֹ, לְפִי שֶׁהַמְבָרֵךְ בִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן הוּא בְּעַצְמוֹ צָרִיךְ לְבָרֵךְ בִּרְכַּת הַיַּיִן לְפִי סְבָרָא זוֹ, וְהוּא אֵינוֹ רַשַּׁאי לְבָרֵךְ בִּרְכַּת הַיַּיִן לַחֲבֵרוֹ, אַף לְהָאוֹמְרִים שֶׁבִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן טְעוּנָה כּוֹס, שֶׁלְּדִבְרֵיהֶם בִּרְכַּת הַיַּיִן הִיא חוֹבָה כְּבִרְכַּת הַמִּצְוֹת שֶׁאָדָם יָכוֹל לְהוֹצִיא חֲבֵרוֹ יְדֵי חוֹבָתוֹ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִימָן קס״ז, מִכָּל מָקוֹם, כֵּיוָן שֶׁחֲבֵרוֹ יָכוֹל לְבָרֵךְ בְּעַצְמוֹ — אֵין לְאַחֵר לְבָרֵךְ לוֹ.
(אֲבָל בְּקִדּוּשׁ וְהַבְדָּלָה רַשַּׁאי, שֶׁכֵּיוָן שֶׁצָּרִיךְ לְבָרֵךְ בִּרְכַּת קִדּוּשׁ וְהַבְדָּלָה בִּשְׁבִיל עַצְמוֹ — יָכוֹל לוֹמַר גַּם בִּרְכַּת הַיַּיִן שֶׁנִּתְקְנָה קֹדֶם בִּרְכַּת קִדּוּשׁ וְהַבְדָּלָה, כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִימָן ער״ב).
(וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם, מִי שֶׁבְּמִצְוֹתָיו חָפֵץ מְאֹד לְבָרֵךְ בִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן בְּזִמּוּן עַל הַכּוֹס — יוּכַל לִסְמֹךְ עַל סְבָרָא הָרִאשׁוֹנָה לְהָקֵל בְּדִבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים.
וְכֵן בְּהַבְדָּלָה, אִם לֹא טָעַם כִּמְלֹא לֻגְמָיו — אֵין צָרִיךְ לַחֲזֹר וּלְהַבְדִּיל, שֶׁסְּפֵק בְּרָכוֹת שֶׁל דִּבְרֵיהֶם לְהָקֵל, כַּסְּבָרָא הָאַחֲרוֹנָה):
Although drinking the cup of blessing is indispensable, it is not indispensable that the one who blesses drink himself: it suffices that another drink; and even if he gives a child to taste from it (the child’s own mouthful) — he has fulfilled his obligation (for the measure of “melo lugmav” is in every person according to what he is: the large according to his size and the small according to his). And although the child is not obligated in the matter, this is of no consequence, for upon the one who blesses too no obligation rests at all: they obligated him only to say a song over the wine, namely that some Jew drink from it a drinking that is a genuine enjoyment for him (and even a child one day old).
Nevertheless, a priori he should give to taste to a child somewhat older, one who has reached the age of chinuch for birkot hanehenin, so that he may himself say the blessing over the wine and his blessing not be in vain — since the child hears it from him, blesses and drinks; whereas if he gives to taste to a minor who has not reached chinuch he will forfeit the blessing over the wine, for the child will not be able to say it, even though it is not indispensable.
(But he is permitted to give an adult to taste, who will himself say the blessing over the wine, if he himself does not drink wine because he detests it or on account of a vow. But one who does drink wine — the choicest fulfillment of the mitzvah is that he taste himself, and so too all the participants for whom he made the zimun; yet each one need not have “kimlo lugmav”: any tasting whatsoever suffices.)
And some say that for every matter requiring a cup, except kiddush, they required tasting from it only so that there be no slight to the blessing over the wine — lest people say that this blessing is unnecessary and it appear as a blessing in vain; whereas in truth it is necessary, for so the Sages instituted: every song said over wine is to be arranged alongside the blessing over the wine, which is the essential song particular to wine. Therefore one is permitted to say the blessing over the wine and give a minor to taste, even though he has not reached chinuch for blessings and even if he does not know how to speak: since the tasting is only on account of the slight, so small a child suffices.
And so is the practice at a circumcision on Yom Kippur, since it is impossible otherwise, as will be explained in siman 621. But where it is possible — such as the kiddush recited in the synagogue on Shabbat and Yom Tov — one should take the first opinion into account and give to taste to a child who has reached chinuch for blessings, as will be explained in siman 269.
(But regarding the kiddush at home, by which a person fulfills his obligation, some say — even according to the latter opinion — that it does not suffice to give a child to taste, nor even an adult, but the one making kiddush must himself taste “kimlo lugmav”; and if not, he has not fulfilled his obligation, for it is stated “remember the Shabbat day to sanctify it,” and the Sages said: remember it over wine — that is, over the drinking of wine in honor of the day; therefore the one who mentions it over the wine, namely the one making kiddush, drinks from it himself. And it is fitting to take this into account a priori, as will be explained in siman 271.)
And according to this opinion — that the Sages’ enactment is that every matter requiring a cup be arranged upon the blessing over the wine — it follows that one who does not drink wine cannot say birkat hamazon over the cup unless he gives a minor who has reached chinuch to taste from it, but not an adult who would bless himself; for according to this opinion the one who says birkat hamazon must himself say the blessing over the wine, and he is not permitted to say the blessing over the wine for his fellow. Even according to those who say that birkat hamazon requires a cup — in whose view the blessing over the wine is an obligation like the birkot hamitzvot, whereby a person may discharge his fellow’s obligation, as was explained in siman 167 — nevertheless, since his fellow can bless himself, another should not bless for him.
(But with kiddush and havdalah it is permitted, for since he must say the blessing of kiddush and havdalah for himself, he may also say the blessing over the wine that was instituted before the blessing of kiddush and havdalah, as will be explained in siman 272.)
(And nevertheless, one who greatly desires His commandments, to say birkat hamazon with zimun over the cup, may rely on the first opinion, to be lenient in a matter of rabbinic law.
And so too with havdalah: if he did not taste “kimlo lugmav,” he need not repeat the havdalah, for a doubt regarding rabbinic blessings is resolved leniently, in accordance with the latter opinion.)
סעיף ה כָּל אֶחָד יָכוֹל לִתֵּן כּוֹסוֹ לְפָנָיו — כּוֹס הַמְבָרֵךְ פָּגוּם.
אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמִּצְוָה מִן הַמֻּבְחָר שֶׁכָּל הַמְסֻבִּים יִטְעֲמוּ מִכּוֹס שֶׁל בְּרָכָה — אֵין צָרִיךְ לִטְעֹם מִכּוֹס הַמְבָרֵךְ, אֶלָּא יָכוֹל כָּל אֶחָד לִתֵּן כּוֹסוֹ לְפָנָיו. וְיוֹתֵר טוֹב לַעֲשׂוֹת כֵּן אִם אֶפְשָׁר, לְפִי שֶׁכּוֹס הַמְבָרֵךְ הוּא פָּגוּם לְאַחַר שֶׁשָּׁתָה מִמֶּנּוּ הַמְבָרֵךְ.
וְאַף שֶׁאֶפְשָׁר לְתַקְּנוֹ עַל יְדֵי שֶׁיּוֹסִיפוּ בּוֹ יַיִן לִשְׁתּוֹת כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מֵהַמְסֻבִּין, מִכָּל מָקוֹם, יוֹתֵר טוֹב שֶׁיִּטְעֲמוּ מִיַּיִן שֶׁל בְּרָכָה, שֶׁכְּשֶׁיֵּשׁ לִפְנֵי כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד כּוֹסוֹ בִּשְׁעַת בִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן — הֲרֵי כֻּלָּם הֵן כּוֹסוֹת שֶׁל בְּרָכָה כְּמוֹ כּוֹס הַמְבָרֵךְ.
וְאִם לִפְנֵי הַמְסֻבִּין הֵן כּוֹסוֹת רֵיקָנִים, יָכוֹל לִתֵּן מִכּוֹס הַבְּרָכָה מְעַט לְכָל כּוֹס וְכוֹס שֶׁלָּהֶם אַחַר שֶׁבֵּרַךְ "בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הַגָּפֶן" קֹדֶם שְׁתִיָּתוֹ, כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּטְעֲמוּ מִכּוֹס שֶׁאֵינוֹ פָּגוּם. וְאֵין בָּזֶה מִשּׁוּם הֶפְסֵק בֵּין בְּרָכָה לִשְׁתִיָּה, כֵּיוָן שֶׁהוּא לְצֹרֶךְ שְׁתִיַּת הַמְסֻבִּים, וּמַה שֶּׁהוּא מְבָרֵךְ — הוּא כְּאִלּוּ הֵם מְבָרְכִים, שֶׁהֲרֵי הֵם יוֹצְאִים בְּבִרְכָתוֹ. וְכֵן אִם כּוֹסוֹת שֶׁלִּפְנֵיהֶם מְלֵאִים, אֶלָּא שֶׁהֵם פְּגוּמִים — יָכוֹל לִשְׁפֹּךְ מִכּוֹס שֶׁלּוֹ לְתַקְּנָם קֹדֶם שֶׁיִּשְׁתֶּה.
וְכֵיוָן שֶׁהֵם זְקוּקִים לְכוֹסוֹ, אֵין לָהֶם לִטְעֹם עַד שֶׁיִּטְעֹם הוּא, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִימָן קס״ז. אֲבָל אִם אֵינָם זְקוּקִים לְכוֹסוֹ, שֶׁכּוֹסוֹת שֶׁלָּהֶם מְלֵאִים וְאֵינָן פְּגוּמִים — יְכוֹלִים לִטְעֹם קֹדֶם שֶׁיִּטְעֹם הוּא:
Although it is the choicest fulfillment of the mitzvah that all the participants taste from the cup of blessing, they need not taste from the cup of the one who blesses: each may set his own cup before him. And it is even better to do so when possible, since the cup of the one who blesses becomes “pagum” (diminished) after he has drunk from it.
And although it can be repaired by adding wine to it for each of the participants to drink, it is nevertheless better that they taste of the wine of the blessing: for when each one has his cup before him at the time of birkat hamazon, they are all cups of blessing like the cup of the one who blesses.
And if the cups before the participants are empty, he may pour a little from the cup of blessing into each of their cups after he has said “boré peri hagafen” and before his drinking, so that they taste from a cup that is not pagum. And there is in this no interruption between the blessing and the drinking, since it is for the need of the participants’ drinking, and what he blesses is as though they were blessing, for they fulfill their obligation with his blessing. Likewise, if the cups before them are full but pagum, he may pour from his own cup to repair them before he drinks.
And since they are dependent upon his cup, they should not taste until he tastes, as was explained in siman 167. But if they are not dependent upon his cup — their cups being full and not pagum — they may taste before he does.
סעיף ו בְּכוֹס בִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן טוֹב לִשְׁתּוֹת רְבִיעִית.
אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁטְּעִימַת כּוֹס שֶׁל בְּרָכָה דַּי בְּכִמְלֹא לֻגְמָיו, בְּכוֹס שֶׁל בִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן טוֹב לִשְׁתּוֹת רְבִיעִית, לָצֵאת מִידֵי סְפֵק בְּרָכָה אַחֲרוֹנָה, שֶׁכִּמְלֹא לֻגְמָיו בְּאָדָם בֵּינוֹנִי הוּא רֹב רְבִיעִית, שֶׁהוּא יוֹתֵר מִכְּזַיִת, וּמִכְּזַיִת עַד רְבִיעִית יֵשׁ מִסְתַּפְּקִים אִם צָרִיךְ לְבָרֵךְ בְּרָכָה אַחֲרוֹנָה, כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִימָן ר״[י] .
וְיוֹתֵר מֵרְבִיעִית אֵין צָרִיךְ לִשְׁתּוֹת אַף אִם הוּא אָדָם גָּדוֹל, שֶׁכִּמְלֹא לֻגְמָיו הוּא יוֹתֵר מֵרְבִיעִית.
וּמִצְוָה לִגְמֹעַ גְמִיעוֹת גַּסּוֹת, מִשּׁוּם חִבּוּב מִצְוָה:
Although for tasting the cup of blessing “kimlo lugmav” suffices, with the cup of birkat hamazon it is good to drink a revi’it, so as to remove oneself from the doubt concerning the final blessing: for “kimlo lugmav” in an average man is the greater part of a revi’it, which is more than a kazayit; and between a kazayit and a revi’it some are in doubt whether a final blessing must be said, as will be explained in siman 210.
And one need not drink more than a revi’it, even if he is a large man whose “melo lugmav” is more than a revi’it.
And it is a mitzvah to swallow in large gulps, out of affection for the mitzvah.
סעיף ז דַּעְתּוֹ לִשְׁתּוֹת עוֹד — לֹא יְבָרֵךְ בְּרָכָה אַחֲרוֹנָה עַד לְבַסּוֹף.
אִם דַּעְתּוֹ לִשְׁתּוֹת עוֹד — לֹא יְבָרֵךְ בְּרָכָה אַחֲרוֹנָה עַד לְבַסּוֹף. וְהוּא שֶׁדַּעְתּוֹ לִשְׁתּוֹת עוֹד מִיָּד, שֶׁאִם לֹא כֵן יֵשׁ לָחֹש שֶׁמָּא יִתְעַכֵּל מַה שֶּׁשָּׁתָה, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִימָן קפ״ד. וְאִם הָיָה בְּדַעְתּוֹ לִשְׁתּוֹת מִיָּד וְטָעָה וּבֵרַךְ בְּרָכָה אַחֲרוֹנָה — אֵין צָרִיךְ לְבָרֵךְ בְּרָכָה רִאשׁוֹנָה, כֵּיוָן שֶׁהָיָה בְּדַעְתּוֹ לִשְׁתּוֹת עוֹד וּבֵרַךְ בְּטָעוּת. אֲבָל אִם בֵּרַךְ בְּמִתְכַּוֵּן, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁדַּעְתּוֹ לִשְׁתּוֹת עוֹד — צָרִיךְ לְבָרֵךְ בְּרָכָה רִאשׁוֹנָה, שֶׁכָּל בְּרָכָה אַחֲרוֹנָה הִיא סִלּוּק וְהֶסַּח הַדַּעַת לְמַה שֶּׁלְּפָנֶיהָ וּמַפְסֶקֶת, הוֹאִיל וְאִי אֶפְשָׁר לִשְׁתּוֹת בְּעוֹדוֹ מְבָרֵךְ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר לְמַעְלָה:
If he intends to drink more, he should not say the final blessing until the end. And that is provided he intends to drink more immediately, for otherwise there is reason to fear that what he drank will be digested, as was explained in siman 184. And if he did intend to drink immediately and erred and said the final blessing, he need not say an initial blessing, since he intended to drink more and blessed in error. But if he blessed deliberately, even though he intends to drink more, he must say an initial blessing — for every final blessing is a conclusion and a diversion of attention regarding what precedes it and it interrupts, since it is impossible to drink while one is blessing, as was explained above.
סעיף ח בִּסְעוּדָה גְּדוֹלָה — הַמְסֻפָּק אִם יַגִּיעַ לוֹ חוֹזֵר וּמְבָרֵךְ.
אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁכָּל הַמְסֻבִּים יוֹצְאִים בְּבִרְכַּת הַיַּיִן שֶׁבֵּרַךְ הַמְבָרֵךְ בִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן, שֶׁהוּא מִתְכַּוֵּן לְהוֹצִיאָם יְדֵי חוֹבָתָן, וְאַף שֶׁיֵּשׁ אֵיזֶה שְׁהוּת עַד שֶׁיַּגִּיעַ הַכּוֹס לְכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד — אֵין בָּזֶה מִשּׁוּם הֶפְסֵק כָּל שֶׁלֹּא הִפְסִיק בְּדִבּוּר, מִכָּל מָקוֹם, בִּסְעוּדָה גְּדוֹלָה שֶׁהַמְסֻבִּים רַבִּים וְאֵין יוֹדְעִים עַד הֵיכָן יַגִּיעַ כּוֹס שֶׁל בִּרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן, הֲרֵי כָּל אֶחָד מֵהַמְסֻפָּקִים אִם יַגִּיעַ לוֹ — צָרִיךְ לַחֲזֹר וּלְבָרֵךְ "בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הַגָּפֶן" לְעַצְמוֹ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא כְּנִמְלָךְ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁבִּשְׁעַת שְׁמִיעָתוֹ בִּרְכַּת הַמְבָרֵךְ לֹא יָדַע אִם יַגִּיעַ לוֹ. וְאִם נִתְכַּוֵּן בִּשְׁמִיעָתוֹ שֶׁאִם יַגִּיעַ לוֹ שֶׁיֵּצֵא יְדֵי חוֹבָתוֹ בִּשְׁמִיעָה זוֹ - יָצָא, וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לַחֲזֹר וּלְבָרֵךְ לְעַצְמוֹ:
Although all the participants fulfill their obligation with the blessing over the wine said by the one who recites birkat hamazon — since he intends to discharge their obligation — and although some time elapses before the cup reaches each one of them, which is no interruption so long as one has not interrupted with speech, nevertheless, at a large meal where the participants are many and it is not known how far the cup of birkat hamazon will reach, each of those who are in doubt whether it will reach him must say “boré peri hagafen” again for himself, because he is like one who has changed his mind (“nimlach”): at the time he heard the blessing of the one blessing he did not know whether it would reach him. And if, while listening, he intended that should it reach him he would fulfill his obligation with this hearing — he has fulfilled it, and he need not bless again for himself.
הלכה למעשה — מנהג חב״ד
The practical Habad conduct
Points of conduct that follow directly from siman ק״צ in the sensibility of the Alter Rebbe and Habad — presented at the level of principle, referring to the Rav for the detail of cases.
For the Habad Hassid — Siman ק״צ (שְׁתִיַּת הַיַּיִן אַחַר הַבְּרָכָה וְדִינָיו)
- ① Seif א. After birkat hamazon one says “boré peri hagafen” over the cup — even if he already blessed over wine during the meal: birkat hamazon is a conclusion and a hesech hadaat from what preceded. Here, unlike kiddush, havdalah, the blessing of the bridegrooms and circumcision, the blessing over the wine comes after and not before.
- ② Seif ב. The essence of the cup is not holding it (not indispensable after the fact) but drinking from it after the saying, “kimlo lugmav” (a mouthful); with less, the mitzvah of the cup is not fulfilled at all. For kiddush and havdalah, failing to drink that measure requires repeating (siman 271).
- ③ Seif ג. The wine must be before him, ready for drinking, at the time of the saying — this too is indispensable after the fact. Holding the cup in hand is one of the ten things stated regarding the cup: for the mitzvah, not as a condition (siman 183).
- ④ Seif ד. It is not indispensable that the one blessing drink himself: another may drink, even a child. A priori, give to taste to a child who has reached chinuch, so that he may say the blessing over the wine himself. According to a second opinion the tasting is required only to avoid a slight to the blessing — hence the practice at a circumcision on Yom Kippur (siman 621); where possible (kiddush in the synagogue) one takes the first opinion into account (siman 269).
- ⑤ Seif ה. Mitzvah min hamuvchar: that all the participants taste — but each may have his own cup before him, which is preferable, since the cup of the one blessing is “pagum.” One may pour from the cup of blessing into the participants’ cups after the blessing and before drinking: this is no interruption. They do not taste before him if they depend on his cup (siman 167).
- ⑥ Seif ו. For the cup of birkat hamazon it is good to drink a revi’it, to remove the doubt of the final blessing; no more than a revi’it, even for a large man. And one swallows in large gulps, out of affection for the mitzvah.
- ⑦ Seif ז. If he intends to drink more immediately, he does not say the final blessing until the end. A final blessing said in error → no new initial blessing; said deliberately → he must bless again, for every final blessing is a conclusion that interrupts (siman 184).
- ⑧ Seif ח. At a large meal, one who doubts that the cup will reach him says “boré peri hagafen” again for himself (he is like “nimlach”) — unless, while listening, he intended to fulfill his obligation should it reach him.
⚠ This section presents the Habad conduct grounded in the Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Aruch, siman ק״צ (the real text reproduced in §1). It does not replace a rabbinic decision for a particular case. For any concrete question — the blessing over the cup, the measure of kimlo lugmav, the pagum cup, the revi’it — consult your Rav, and for Habad, a Habad Rav.