Talk:Berakhot (tractate)

Shorter Summaries

I think that this page is going into much to much depth regarding Berakhot. Someone coming to this article does not expect or want to read (the equivalent of) the entire book of Berakhot. I feel that the following would be more appropriate:

Summary

Shema

The first two chapters of Berakhot address the subject of the recital of the Shema.

First Chapter

The first chapter discusses how and when say to say the Shema in accordance with Deuteronomy 6:7. That verse indicates that the Shema is to be said "when you lie down and when you arise." The mishnah interprets this as refering to a certain time of day, and not necessarily at the exact time one lies down or wakes up.

The first two mishnayot (subsections) address the definition of the time period for recital of the evening Shema and the morning Shema, respectively (Berakhot 1:1, 1:2). The third mishnah discusses the proper posture for reciting the Shema. It addresses the question of whether the verse's instruction to recite the Shema "when you lie down" means that a person must be literally lying down, or only that one must say the Shema during the general time at which one lies down. (Berakhot 1:3)

The fourth mishnah states that the Shema is to be both preceded and followed by other, additional blessings. In the morning, there are two blessings that must be said before the Shema (Yotzer Or and Ahavah Rabbah / Ahavat Olam) and one after it (Emet V'Yatziv). In the evening, there are two blessings before (Ma'ariv Aravim and Ahavat Olam) and two after (Emet Ve-Emunah and Hashkivenu). (Berakhot 1:4)

The fifth mishnah states that the Exodus from Egypt must be remembered every day, in accordance with Deuteronomy 16:3. (This is accomplished in the first blessing following the recital of Shema.) (Berakhot 1:5)

I write this here because I see that Karimarie has gone to a great deal of trouble to write an in-depth summary of Berakhot, which is probably unnecessary and inappropriate for this venue.

Some other points:

An article should only be linked to the first time the linked term appears in the article.
English words should be used wherever possible (chapter instead of perek), or else the Hebrew term should be introduced so that the reader will understand what it means.

--Eliyak T·C 05:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I currently have a substantially different version of the article in my workshop (User:Karimarie/Workshop/Berakhot (Talmud)) that takes a form similar to a Parshah or an article on a book of the Bible, just summarising the individual mishnayot into one or two sentences. The problem I see with your summary style is it doesn't really contain any of the actual decisions so much as summarising where they were discussed... I think an article on the Mishnah should incorporate the decisions that were reached instead.

Nontheless, I'm going to reorganise the text of the version in my workshop to something that flows a bit better for the average reader and remove some of the excesses. The current form is Seder > Masekhet > Perek > Mishnah, but I think Seder > Masekhet > Topic > Mishnayot reads easier rather than just rattling off Jewish legal decisions. Kari Hazzard (T | C) 03:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Although the comment was made a long time ago about the need for shorter summary of the content of the subject matter, it seems that this was never done. I agree that there is too much detail (in some places almost a verbatim recapitulation of the content of the Mishna) so I am going to restructure and summarize the material as best I can. --Chefallen (talk) 03:27, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested merge shown in template (Bekhorot)

These are two completely different tractates (masechtot) found in two different orders (sedarim) of the Talmud, with two completely different subjects. I intend to remove the merge template if I hear nothing within seven days. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:41, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done StevenJ81 (talk) 02:58, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Berakhot (Talmud). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://archive.is/20130125055009/http://www.hadadbros.com/shop/category/kiddush/kiddush-cup/ to http://www.hadadbros.com/shop/category/kiddush/kiddush-cup/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:33, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Length of tractate

The sentence "Tractate Berakhot in the Babylonian Talmud has the most amount of words per daf" is incorrect on two counts: it implies every page (daf) has more words on it than other tractates; this is false - some pages clearly have fewer words on them than other pages in other tractates. 2. Even if the foregoing were true, it is ungrammatical; correctly it would read "...has more words per page" or "the largest number of words per page" and this again makes it obvious that this is not a correct statement. The fact is that the tractate has the highest word count in total (regardless of how many words are on any given page) and is reflected accurately in the statement "...is the longest in the Talmud by word count" --Chefallen (talk) 14:09, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]