Berakhot 125

1:
Our mishnah discusses the circumstances in which berakhot made over certain foods exempt other foods during the same meal.

2:
The first item discussed in our mishnah is wine. We have already established that wine was drunk regularly at all meals – both for gourmet reasons, as we might do today, and also for what we might call health reasons – to assist in the digestion of the fatty food. The Gemara [Berakhot 42b], in its discussion, limits the statement of our mishnah concerning wine to Shabbat and Yom Tov only. For on these days we may assume that everyone takes wine before the meal in the form of Kiddush – which halakhically is considered an integral part of the meal. (Let me add parenthetically that when one takes part in a Kiddush that is not part of a meal, the Kiddush should be repeated when one comes to the actual meal, since eyn kiddush ella bi-mekom se'udah [Kiddush should be recited where the meal is eaten].) Thus everybody may be presumed to take wine with their meal on Shabbat and Yom Tov, and therefore one berakhah (over Kiddush before the meal) exempts any more wine that one might elect to take during or after the meal.

3:
However, on ordinary days we must assume that each person drinks wine as part of the meal for personal reasons – pleasure or health as the case may be. Furthermore, when taking one glass of wine during the meal we might have no intention of taking any more – and then subsequently change our minds. Therefore, states the Gemara, on ordinary days each glass of wine taken during the meal requires its own separate berakhah. There is another difference too. On Shabbat and Yom Tov, when we assume that everybody is taking wine, the berakhah that one person recites serves all the other diners answering Amen, and they don't have to make their own berakhah. On weekdays, when even the individuals can not be expected to know if they will take wine at all and if they do how much more they might take by the end of the meal – under such circumstances, states the Gemara, each diner must make his or her own berakhot on an individual basis.

4:
The side dish referred to in our mishnah is a kind of appetizer that consisted of small pieces of bread in some kind of piquant sauce. It is the bread content of the appetizer that explains the connection the mishnah makes between the side dish and the bread. The berakhah over bread recited before the meal exempts the bread that is in the appetizer. Since the relatively small amount of bread in the appetizer indicates that it cannot be considered a staple part of the meal, its independent berakhah would be mezonot, and this berakhah cannot exempt any "real" bread taken after it, whose berakhah must be ha-Motzi.

5:
The main dish referred to in our mishnah would be something cooked from the five grain species; thus the independent berakhah of such a main dish [ma'aseh kedeyrah] would be mezonot. Logically, therefore, the the berakhah over the appetizer (mezonot) should exempt a berakhah over a later ma'aseh kedeyrah (also mezonot) – and this must be the opinion of Tanna Kamma, with whom the opinion of Bet Shammai is in conflict. However, as the Gemara points out, it could be that Bet Shammai are objecting to a different assumption of Tanna Kamma: that the berakhah over bread does not exempt a later ma'aseh kedeyrah in their opinion. The Gemara leaves the matter open as being unresolvable. However, Rambam in his Mishnah commentary decides in favour of Tanna Kamma and the first option we raised: the appetizer exempts the ma'aseh kedeyrah and vice-versa.

To be continued.