Berakhot 145

1:
This mishnah returns us to the theme of this chapter: some of the differences between Bet Hillel and Bet Shammai. This mishnah, too, may be divided into two sections, Reisha [first section] and Seifa [last section]. We turn our attention first to the Reisha.

2:
In principle the halakhah discussed in the Reisha of this mishnah is according to Bet Shammai, even though in most practical instances it follows the opinion of Bet Hillel. The Gemara [Berakhot 53b] points out that the mishnah specifically uses the verb "forgotten", which indicates that the halakhah would follow the opinion of Bet Shammai where the omission was deliberate. The Gemara also brings an interesting altercation between the two schools in this matter – an altercation which once again might well indicate that from the point of view of sheer logic Bet Shammai's view has more to commend it that the view of Bet Hillel (as Ed Frankel has already pointed out to us).

3:
Accepted halakhah in this matter is complicated because it is not clear from the discussion in the Gemara which of the two opinions is the preferred one. Rabbi Yosef Karo, in his Shulĥan Arukh [Oraĥ Ĥayyim 184:1-2], states as follows:

Rabbi Moshe Isserles writes the following gloss at this point:

Rabbi Karo continues:

4:
The Seifa [last section] of the mishnah answers the question that Ron Kaminsky asked a few weeks ago: how long after eating do we have to recite Grace? (This is particularly important at large banquets when speeches can go on interminably!) The mishnah answers this question by citing digestion time. This time, is however, very subjective, and the Gemara [Berakhot 53b] gives two main indications. Where the food eaten was substantial Grace may be recited any time up to the next feeling of hunger. Where the food eaten was less than that seventy-five minutes is the limit.

In our last shiur I wrote that We do not recite a benediction over a candle unless we can use its light. Jim Feldman writes:

I find the candle rule strange. Are we not told not to use the light of the Hannukah lights? – Ain lanu rashut l'histamesh b'hem. [We do not have leave to make use of them] That is right in the middle of a benediction.

I respond:

The Ĥanukah candles are singular in this regard, because their purpose is singular. The purpose of all the other candles that we have the custom of lighting – Shabbat, Yom Tov, Havdalah – is to illuminate, to shed light so that we shall not be in the dark. The purpose of the Ĥanukah candles is "to publicize the miracle" and their only purpose is to be looked at. (That is why we add a "shammash" to the Ĥanukah candles; thus, if we do inadvertently benefit from their light – in a power outing, say – we can attribute that light to the shammash.) The candles we light on Shabbat and Yom Tov are for the express purpose of being used: the rabbis (not the Torah) commanded all Jews to have a candle burning in their home on Shabbat and Yom Tov so that there will be light to see by, to live by comfortably, and so that we shall not spend a dismal evening in darkness. Therefore, in theory, these candles may be used; except that on Shabbat there is very little use that they can be put to except for using them for illumination; on Yom Tov (when it falls on a weekday), when it is permissible to transfer a light from an existent flame to a different wick, one may certainly utilize the candles to light other candles, and so forth.