Question: Sholom Alaichem !!!! THANK YOU !!! You are doing wonderful work being m'zake es horabim b'torah. Please keep it coming.
I had some questions on the following gemoras:
1) Daf 32b: The gemora mentions that 4 need CHIZUK (Rashi - that a person should always strengthen himself in these things with all his strength) a) Torah b) Ma'asim Tovim c) T'filah d) Derech Eretz (Rashi - Whatever livelihood or profession or a person does)
What is the significance of the order mentioned and does one require or take precedent over the other ?
2) 38a-38b In regard to the "Odom Godol" and the one who is a "Boki" in Berachos: What is the final P'shat in the gemoro ? Is this person still considered or regarded as an "Odom Godol" and "Boki" in Berachos or not? Do we say like Reb Zairo (38a) that he is not such and "Odom Godol" and "Boki" in Berachos because he said "Moitze" instead of "HaMoitze" (which is OK but not the best loshon to use); Or Do we say that the gemoro's (38b) response to this individual's reasoning and logic of "Removing himself from a machlokas or controversy" is correct or better AND he is still regarded as an "Odom Godol" and "Boki" in Berachos ?
3) 45a Rashi d"h MH"M - d'shlosho ra-uyim l'brochos tziruf. The loshon of "ra-uyim" is very difficult. Rashi seems to imply that without this reason then 3 would not be "ra-uyim". If that in fact is the case, What is the whole gemora's question of whether 2 can bench zimun ? We have a posuk that clearly tells us that 3 IS "ra-uyim" and less then that is NOT "ra-uyim" !!!!
Simcha Blatter
The gemoroh discusses if one can make Zimun before Bentching with two people. Why should the Gemoro think it should be allowed if the Misnah mentions specifically three people are required?
1) (a) It seems that the Gemara begins with the most simple (that is, the ones which -- we would have more easily assumed by ourselves -- require Chizuk), and proceeds to the ones that we would not have thought need Chizuk.
(b) The Gemara does not intend to say that one takes precedence over the other.
2) Your second approach seems to be the correct one. Bar Rav Z'vid did not lose his status as a result of Rav Zeira's argument on the blessing he chose to recite.
Tosfos points out that, l'Halachah, we recite "ha'Motzi" (see the reason that Tosfos gives, and Insight 38:2). It could be that this was the reason why Bar Rav Z'vid chose to recite "ha'Motzi."
3) The P'nei Yehoshua, who addresses a different question, answers your question. The P'nei Yehoshua says that the Gemara initially thought that it is necessary to have ten for a Zimun, because it is a "Davar she'b'Kedushah." If so, the Gemara proves from the verse that three are permitted to make a Zimun, as well as obligated . True, although there is no proof from the verse that two are permitted to make a Zimun, once the verse reveals to us that ten are not necessary, we could have a Hava Amina that two could also make a Zimun.
All the best!