Siman 291

And one should be very careful to fulfill the third seudah, and our sages, of blessed memory, said (118b): Anyone who fulfills the third seudah is saved from three tribulations: from the birth pangs of the Messiah, from the judgment of Gehinnom, and from the war of Gog and Magog. And Rabbi Yose said: May my portion be with those who fulfill three seudot on Shabbat. And the Levush wrote that they are from the Torah, as it is written "today" three times; see there. And if it is possible that they are not literally from the Torah—nevertheless, they are certainly from the enactment of Moses our teacher, as he received from Sinai. And they hint toward the three patriarchs, toward the Torah, Prophets, and Writings, and at the time the manna was given to them—it was given to them for three seudot, as it is found in the Mechilta which the Tur brought here, and we brought it above in siman 274; see there. And great and awesome matters depend upon these three seudot, and they are explained in the Zohar in several places.

Therefore, one should be careful in this, and thus the sages said: A person is obligated to eat three meals on Shabbat, and even if he is full—it is sufficient that he eat bread the size of a kebeitzah and a bit more, for a kebeitzah is considered a casual eating. And even though in the Gemara (119b) it implies that a kezayit is sufficient, and for this reason there are those who truly disagree with this (Eliyah Rabbah in the name of Ma'adanei Yom Tov)—nevertheless, we have already written at the end of siman 274 that this is in a case of exigency and he certainly fulfills the obligation with a kezayit, but ab initio one needs more than a kebeitzah, see there. And if it is impossible for him to eat at all—he is not obligated to distress himself, and the wise man has his eyes in his head and will not fill his stomach during the morning meal, in order to leave room for the third meal, and Heaven forbid one should cancel this great mitzvah. And one who did not eat on the night of Shabbat—shall eat the three meals during the day, and so too on Yom Tov: one who did not eat at night—shall eat two meals during the day, and shall also say the kiddush of the night (Magen Avraham, subsection 2).

And its time is from when the time of mincha arrives, that is, from six and a half hours and onwards. And if he made it prior to this—he has not fulfilled the mitzvah of seuda shelishit, and the reason we explained in siman 288, section 2, see there. And know, that from the words of all our teachers it is clarified that seuda shelishit is not dependent on the mincha prayer, and even before he has prayed mincha he may eat the seuda shelishit. And one of the great ones among our teachers forbids eating after mincha, as is clarified in the Tosafot Pesachim (105a in the name of Rabbeinu Tam), because it is found in the Midrash that it is forbidden to drink water between mincha and maariv on Shabbat.

And behold, according to the system of the Rif and the Rambam in siman 232, that even a small meal is forbidden even near mincha gedola—it is obvious that one is compelled to pray mincha beforehand, unless one began before midday and it extended until after midday, as will be explained. However, according to the system of those who disagree there—one may eat beforehand. And the scholars of Kabbalah wrote that it must specifically be after mincha, for every meal was established after the prayer that pertains to that meal. It emerges that there are three opinions in this matter: the first, that it must specifically be before mincha; the second, that there is no concern and as one wishes so shall he do, and this is the opinion of the majority of the poskim who did not speak of this—infer from this that there is no concern; and the third, that it must specifically be after mincha. And our custom is according to the third opinion, but if there is a reason that he is unable after mincha or if it is difficult for him after mincha—he may fulfill it before mincha, and such is the custom. And it is simple that women are also obligated in seuda shlishit, for in all matters of Shabbat women are cautioned like men, and there are many who do not know of this, and one must inform them and caution them that they should be careful to fulfill the mitzvah of seuda shlishit.

This is the wording of our teacher, the Rema: "Some say that it is forbidden to drink water between Mincha and Maariv on Shabbat, for then the souls return to Gehenna. Therefore, one should not eat seuda shlishit between Mincha and Maariv, but rather should eat it before Mincha. And some say that it is better to pray Mincha first, and so they practice ab initio in all these provinces. Nevertheless, one should not drink water from the rivers, but in the house—it is permitted, and all the more so other drinks which are permitted. And some say that it is only forbidden within twelve months for one's father and mother, and some say that this prohibition of drinking water is only on Erev Shabbat." Thus far his words. The explanation of his words: The first opinion holds to eat it before Mincha because of the prohibition of drinking water, for for the most part one drinks during the meal. And the latter opinion holds that it is better after Mincha, because of the prohibition to eat before Mincha (see Magen Avraham, subsection 5). And if because of the prohibition of drinking water—this is only in rivers, and furthermore other drinks are permitted and he should drink other drinks, and furthermore this is only during the twelve months of mourning, and besides this some say that the intent of the Midrash is regarding Erev Shabbat. And the first opinion was not concerned with the prohibition of eating before Mincha, for it follows its reasoning in siman 232 that regarding a small meal there is no concern at all, see there.

There is one who wrote that if he began the third seudah before midday and it extended until after midday—he has fulfilled his obligation, for in any event he ate after midday. But if he knows that his seudah will extend until after midday—it is forbidden (Magen Avraham, subsection 3). And there is no reason for this, and on the contrary, the opposite stands to reason: for if he knew it would extend until after midday and his intention from the beginning was for the third seudah—why should he not fulfill his obligation? And if he did not know it would extend until after midday and it extended on its own and he did not intend it for the third seudah—it appears that he has not fulfilled his obligation. And even if we say that even in such a case he has fulfilled his obligation if he already fulfilled the second seudah, as we do not require intent specifically for the sake of the third seudah, nevertheless when he knew it would extend and intended for this—it is obvious that he has fulfilled his obligation, and there is no reason to say that he has not fulfilled his obligation in such a case, and such is the primary ruling. (Also the Tosefot Shabbat wondered at him, and wrote that certainly there is a printing error, see there; and the Pri Megadim and the Machatzit HaShekel inclined his intention because of the prohibition of eating before Mincha, see there. And these are puzzling matters, for the halacha was already decided in siman 232 not like the Rif and the Rambam, and furthermore what is its relevance here? And the Eliyah Rabbah wishes to say that even if it extended—he has not fulfilled his obligation, for we follow the beginning, but they did not agree with his words, and in this the primary view is like the Magen Avraham, and delve into this.)

Our teacher, the Beit Yosef, wrote in section 3: If the morning meal extended until the time of Mincha arrived—he should interrupt the meal and recite Birkat HaMazon, and wash his hands and recite the blessing of HaMotzi and dine. And the matter is correct, for if he did not do so, since the morning meal extended until that hour—he would not be able to eat afterward except as an excessive eating. Thus far his words. Because as long as one is eating, the stomach is open and able to receive, which is not the case afterward (Taz and Magen Avraham). However, it is good to interrupt a little with words of Torah or with a stroll (ibid.).

And it appears clear to me that this is merely for enhancement, but ex post facto, even if one did not pause a little but rather washed his hands immediately after birkat hamazon - he has also fulfilled his obligation. And there is one who wrote that those who remain in their places - have not fulfilled their obligation, as it is like one meal. (Magen Avraham subsection 6 in the name of the Maharil) And in my humble opinion it is not so, except according to the opinion of the Tosafot in Shabbat (118a, s.v. 'be-mincha'), who forbid dividing the morning meal into two, and they were concerned about a blessing that is not necessary, see there. But we hold like the Rosh and his teacher Maharam of Rothenburg, who wrote that it is proper to do so, for since he does it for the sake of seuda shelishit - there is no concern here of increasing blessings, and they themselves did so in practice. And in the Tashbetz he wrote that the Maharam in the winter, when the days are short, would perform seuda shelishit at the table immediately after birkat hamazon (Beit Yosef), and the Tur wrote that so his father the Rosh, of blessed memory, would do, and they did not mention at all to pause, except that in the Mordechai he wrote that it is good to pause, see there, and not as a requirement. And so it is implied from all the poskim, and so is the primary ruling.

And all this is for one for whom it is difficult to eat after mincha or for another reason, but one who knows that it is possible for him to eat after he prays mincha with the tzibur—he should not initially make seuda shlishit before mincha. However, if he made it—he has fulfilled his obligation, and even on a Shabbat that is the eve of a Yom Tov, if he is able to eat before the tenth hour—he should not initially divide the morning meal into two. (Magen Avraham, subsection 8) And the general rule from this: not all natures are equal, provided that his intention is for the sake of Heaven, meaning that according to his nature it is proper for him to eat in this way or that way, as has been explained.

The Rambam wrote in chapter 30, law 9: "A person is obligated to eat three meals on Shabbat: one in the evening, one in the morning, and one at Mincha. And one must be careful regarding these three meals not to diminish them at all (and to add is permitted), and even a poor person who is supported by charity—he eats three meals. And if he was ill from excessive eating, or if he was fasting constantly—he is exempt from the three meals. And one must establish each meal of the three of them over wine, and break bread over two loaves, and likewise on Yom Tov." Thus far his words. And it implies that he requires a cup for kiddush also at the third meal, and they wondered about him, for we have not found in the Gemara but kiddush one time during the day as at night. And for this they wrote that his intention is not regarding kiddush, but rather that he should drink wine during the meal in the manner of an important meal (Kessef Mishneh). However, the opinion of the Kabbalists is that also at the third meal one requires a cup of wine for kiddush, and in our days we have not heard of anyone who did so. (And this is the wording of the Shelah in his siddur: "He takes the cup in his hand, and even though he is not obligated... according to the sages of truth one must also recite kiddush at the third meal etc." see there. But in Peri Etz Chaim, Sha'ar HaShabbat, end of chapter 23, he wrote and this is his wording: "And behold, it is not proper to recite kiddush over wine at this meal... in the middle of the meal one must drink wine etc." thus far his words, and this is exactly like the words of the Rambam according to the explanation of the Kessef Mishneh, and so he wrote in Mishnat Chasidim page 99. And whether so or whether so—the Rambam, of blessed memory, aimed for the words of the Kabbalists, and it is a wonder. And it is not our custom to cover the bread at the third meal, and see siman 299, section 14.)

And this which the Rambam wrote, that one requires two loaves, and several of our teachers wrote likewise. However, the Tur and the Mordekhai cited from the Mekhilta that for seuda shelishit one is sufficient, for so it was at the time they ate the manna, see there, and we cited this at the beginning of siman 274, see there. And based on this, there are those who are lenient regarding seuda shelishit to break bread over one challah, but it is not proper to do so unless it is impossible to obtain a second one, for such is the opinion of most of the poskim. And also from the language of the Shas (117b): "A person is obligated to break bread over two loaves on Shabbat" — it is clear that it refers to all the meals. Therefore, some say that if one eats more than three meals — he also requires lechem mishneh (Maggid Mishneh there in the name of a Gaon, see there). And this which he wrote "and likewise on Yom Tov" — refers to lechem mishneh and not to seuda shelishit.

The Tur wrote: "Some say that one may fulfill seuda shelishit with types of dessert, food made from the five types of grain… and Ri would say that since we derive the three meals from the three times 'today' is written regarding the manna—it must be performed with bread." Thus far his words. It appears clear that this is the conclusion of the Tur, that it must specifically be bread (Bach), and it must necessarily be so, for with the manna they left one loaf for the third meal (ibid.). This is the wording of our teachers, the authors of the Shulchan Aruch, in section 5: "It must be performed with bread, and some say that one may perform it with one of the five types of grain (over which one recites mezonot), and some say that one may perform it with things that accompany bread, such as meat and fish, but not with fruit, and some say that one may perform it even with fruit. The first opinion is primary, that it must be performed with bread, unless one is extremely full, or in a situation where it is impossible for him to eat bread, such as on Erev Pesach that falls on Shabbat." Thus far their words. Behold, the opinion of the authors of the Shulchan Aruch is also that the primary ruling is that bread is required, and since the opinion of the Rif, the Rambam, the Rosh, the Tur, and the Shulchan Aruch is that specifically bread is required—Heaven forbid one should be lenient in this, and a great transgression is in the hand of those who are lenient in this to fulfill their obligation with types of dessert. One must warn about this very, very much, and there is no permission except for a sick person, and those who treat seuda shelishit lightly to fulfill their obligation without bread—are destined to give an accounting. (See Magen Avraham at the beginning of this siman and it is a wonderous thing, and what of it, let him leave a little bread for seuda shelishit, see there and delve into it.)