Opinion #1: It seems from our Gemara that the time for eating Shalosh Seudos on Shabbos is after (the time of) Minchah.

Opinion #2: This is unlike those who split their morning meal into two meals, and say Birkas ha'Mazon in between them.

Implied Question: However, there is no proof from the Gemara in Pesachim (13a) that says that when the fourteenth of Nisan falls on Shabbos one can leave over food for two meals (of Chametz for Shabbos). One cannot say that since it did not say three meals can be left over, it implies that one only saves two meals because they cannot make the morning meal into two meals (and they cannot eat a third meal of Chametz in the afternoon because they cannot eat Chametz at that time). (Why isn't this a valid proof?)

Answer: Since he eats both meals in the morning, it is considered an amount of food for one meal.

Question: The Ri says that splitting up the morning meal into two causes one to recite a Berachah she'Ainah Tzerichah (unnecessary blessing).

Question (cont.): This prohibition is apparent from the Gemara's discussion in Yoma (9a, should read 70a) regarding the Parshah of Yom Kippur in Bamidbar that starts with the word, "u'b'Esor." The Gemara asks, why don't we bring another Sefer Torah and read? (Why is this read by memory?) Rebbi Shimon ben Lakish answers, this is because it would cause a Berachah she'Ainah Tzerichah.

Explanation: This is according to Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah who considers the amount of a large loaf bought with a Pundyon at a time when the price of flour is four Sa'ah per Sela an amount equal to two meals of an Eiruv. He argues in Eiruvin (82b) on Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Yehudah who say a different amount.

Implied Question: The Ri says that one should not explain that, "we give the poor person enough for three Shabbos meals" means only if he comes to us on Erev Shabbos at meal time, as he probably will stay there for Shabbos at this point since people do not normally travel out of the city so close to Shabbos. According to this train of thought, we give him one extra meal than a regular day because it is Shabbos. (Why isn't this a valid explanation?)

Answer: If so, how is this understandable according to the Rabbanan? This would mean that he only has four meals, the meal that he brought with him and the three that were given to him. When he eats one of them before Shabbos, he will be left with three meals that he will eat on Shabbos. If so, the Gemara's question, "When he leaves does he leave empty handed?" should also be a question on the Rabbanan!

Implied Question: However, it is possible to say that this question (regarding leaving empty handed) is also a question on the Rabbanan.

Answer: This is difficult, as when the Gemara answers that he had a meal he brought with him, it did not give an answer according to Rav Chidka. This is because he would only have three meals on Shabbos, and Rav Chidka understands he must have four meals.

Explanation: The Ri understands that when a poor person asks for food at mealtime on Erev Shabbos, we give him food for two meals as we do on other days. If he says he is staying here for Shabbos, we give him another three meals.

Explanation (cont.): The Gemara therefore asks, perhaps this is according to the Rabbanan and not Rav Chidka? According to the Rabbanan it is understandable as he has five meals at the beginning of Shabbos. He eats whatever he brought with him on Erev Shabbos. Out of the remaining five meals he will eat three on Shabbos, one on Motzei Shabbos, and he will take one with him.

Explanation (cont.): However, according to Rebbi Chidka, if he eats four meals on Shabbos and he needs one to take with him on his journey, what does he have to eat on Motzei Shabbos?

Implied Question: One cannot say that we tell him that what you wanted to eat on Motzei Shabbos you should have eaten on Shabbos, as we say earlier. (Why not?)

Answer: There we say this in order that he should not be supported from charity. However, in this case he is already being supported from charity, and he therefore can take whatever he needs.

Explanation (cont.): The Gemara answers that he has a meal with him. The one who answered understood that it was obvious to the one who asked that we give him the meal he will take with him on Sunday. Although we would give him a meal to take on his journey along with the other meals he receives if it was during the week, when he receives food on Erev Shabbos we only give him this meal when he actually leaves after Shabbos, as he does not leave immediately after Shabbos.

Explanation (cont.): This is why the one who gave the answer thought that the questioner did not know that he brought a meal with him, and that he only had four meals at the beginning of Shabbos. This is why he answers that he had another meal he brought with him (for a total of five).

Explanation (cont.): The questioner answered that this was obvious. However, since you answered that he ate all of his meals, do we make him leave empty handed? Just as he came here with his own meal, so too he should leave with his own meal! The Gemara answers, we give him another meal etc.

Question: If so, why do we give him two meals? Since he brings one with him, he should be given one meal (in addition to the one he has) in order that he can eat one and take one!

Answer: We do not distribute from the food collection at night. Rather, we distribute from it during the day during mealtime. This is why we give him two meals (in addition to what he has), so that he can eat one right away, one at night wherever he is going to be, and one to take with him the next day.

Opinion #1: We see from here that when one is planning to fast the next day and he has already eaten at night, even though he can no longer eat that night if he did not explicitly make a condition that he will continue to eat, as when one recites Birkas ha'Mazon after eating at night he has presumably decided not to eat anymore, we assume that he certainly did not decide to refrain from drinking.

Opinion #1 (cont.): This is as stated here that there is no set time for drinking. In a place where they do not commonly drink wine, even if it is as if he decided not to drink wine, he did not decide not to drink water.

Opinion #2: However, the Ri says that perhaps this rule only applied in their days when they used to sit and drink after eating, and therefore it does not apply to us.

Opinion #3: The Riva explained in his commentary on a Gemara in Tanis (12a) that even after one goes to sleep (not just after the meal) he can still drink.

Question: The Ri did not want to be this lenient, since this leniency is not mentioned explicitly in our Gemara [see Tosfos in Tanis 12b, DH "Nim"].

Explanation #1: Rashi explains that this is to take away (atone for) their sins.

Explanation #2: The Ri says that the Medrash states that this takes away what was eaten from the intestines in order that they should be clean and pure like the angels.

Observation: The Yerushalmi answers that these were Yevamos. He did not want to fulfill the Mitzvah of Onah with them (by having relations with them on a regular basis, as there is an opinion that if one has relations with a Yevamah because she is beautiful, and not because of the Mitzvah, that the relations are forbidden, see Ritva here), and only had these relations with them to fulfill the Mitvzah of Yibum. This only required having relations with them once.

Explanation: The Ri does not know what prohibition a non-Kohen transgresses if he does Duchan aside for saying a blessing in vain as Hash-m only commanded the Kohanim to bless Bnei Yisrael.

Explanation: This refers to a person having proper intent while praying.

Explanation (cont.): Similarly, when the Mishnah says that there are things that a person receives reward for in this world (see Gemara later 127a quoting the Mishnah in Pe'ah 1:1), it counts Iyun Tefilah.

Explanation (cont.): However, when the Gemara in Berachos (32b, 55a) say that someone who does Iyun Tefilah ends up with a heartache, it refers to someone who is actively looking forward to Hash-m fulfilling his prayers, as he thinks his prayer must have been accepted. This is as stated there that prolonged anticipation causes the heart to become sick.

Explanation (cont.): Similarly, when Rav Yosef says that three things cause a person's sins to be remembered: a wall that is falling over (and he walks under it), Iyun Tefilah, [and one who asks Hash-m to punish someone who has wronged him], this is referring to this negative definition of Iyun Tefilah.

Implied Question: When the Gemara in Bava Basra (164b) says that a person is not saved from three sins every day: Lashon Hara, evil thoughts, and Iyun Tefilah, one should not say it means he is sitting and waiting for Hash-m to fulfill is prayers, as many people do not do so (and therefore it cannot be the intent of this Gemara). (What does it mean?)

Answer: Rather, it is similar to our Gemara (referring to proper intent, but with the opposite meaning), meaning he does not have proper intent while praying, as it is difficult to have proper intent while praying every day. This is as the Yerushalmi states, "I appreciate my head, as when I reach Modim it bows down on its own (without my thinking it should do so)."