Good morning and blessings to all our thousands of members of Bikim Bahalacha throughout the world. May God grant you success, and may we all merit to serve Him with happiness, pleasantness, and goodness.
This project has been sponsored in memory of Chaim ben Mazal, Mr. Vico Mizrahi, of blessed memory. He recently passed away, and his sons made the dedication while he was still alive; Vico himself was also part of the dedication. May his soul have an elevation. Bikim Bahalacha 7 is also in memory of Dania Koeh, of blessed memory.
We are doubling up today, as they say. This should bring a complete recovery to Ezra ben Salcha and Avraham ben Aliza, in connection with the laws of Hatov Vehametiv.
Some of our members are becoming frustrated because there are so many conditions regarding Hatov Vehametiv. One of our members, Mr. Leo David Esses—a great guy—recently sent me a chart that he prepared, a spreadsheet listing the rules: when one recites Hatov Vehametiv and when one does not. One day, we are going to check whether he got everything right.
For example, he writes that there must be a group of at least two people. I got that right. Everyone must still be interested in drinking when the second wine arrives. They must be drinking the wines in the proper order, as we discussed with the first and second wines. The people drinking must jointly own the wine, which we also discussed.
Then he writes that it must be part of a meal. Let us stop there. Yesterday I asked a question, and our great Rabbi Bitan heard it. He sent me a responsum from Hacham Ovadia. It must be a meal with bread—a meal of bread.
There was one young rabbi—I am not going to say his name; I will tell you privately afterward—who wrote a responsum arguing that it did not have to be a meal with bread. Rabbi Amar challenged him, and Hacham Ovadia attacked that position in his book. They demonstrated that he was incorrect. Therefore, in practice, this is a very important condition: when we say “a meal,” it means an actual meal with bread.
That would include Friday night, Shabbat meals, meals connected with a mitzvah, Yom Tov, Purim, and similar occasions. We will have to discuss those cases. I am thinking now that this could create an unbelievable case on the night of Pesach, because there are four cups. You are going to tell me that we drink the first cup, and then you go to somebody’s house—a sommelier who has many wines. Even though we have enough of the first wine, for the second cup we go to France, to the Bordeaux region, and drink a second wine.
Now, do we say that the second cup is connected to the meal? We do not recite the blessing over the grape wine again, but perhaps we must recite Hatov Vehametiv. It would be a good question and perhaps a new item for our list.
One time, before the holiday, I went to the wine store on Avenue J to buy wine. I selected the wines myself and chose only French wines. The fellow asked me, “You are buying the wine; what about wine from the Land of Israel?” I said, “I got my etrog from the Land of Israel. Do not tell me that I did not get my etrog from the Land of Israel. You are a businessman—what do you care? Do you make a little more money from wine from the Land of Israel?” He was trying to give me some moral instruction. I told him, “I know where my etrog came from.”
Now, what happens if they bring a person a second wine, but he forgets to recite Hatov Vehametiv and begins drinking? There is still more wine in front of him, and he wants to continue drinking. Some authorities say that he can no longer recite the blessing. I say that he missed it. Others say that he may still recite it. This is one of those questions: some say yes and some say no.
The person wants to recite another blessing because he needs to reach his one hundred blessings. Can he still do so? He cannot simply remove himself from the question. One might say that on the third cup, if all the rules apply, he certainly recites it. But even regarding the second cup, although he already tasted the wine and missed the blessing, some say that he is still in the running.
Let us now look at the next section and read the notes. I was going to read them yesterday, but I saved them for today. Suppose a person is sitting and drinking wine, and then he decides that he is finished. He is no longer drinking. They then bring him another wine, and he recites the blessing over grape wine because his mind had been made up that he was finished drinking.
For example, he drinks one cup and says, “I am done.” His wife tells him, “No more wine. Enough wine for you.” He agrees, puts the wine away, and decides that he is finished for the meal. Then, all of a sudden, somebody comes to visit and brings another wine. Although the person had already decided that he would not drink any more, he now recites the blessing over grape wine again. He may also recite Hatov Vehametiv, because the meal is still continuing. This is not the same as the case where the meal has ended and he has already decided that he is finished.
There is a phenomenal note here. If people recited Kiddush on the night of Pesach using one type of wine and afterward wish to drink a second type of wine for the second cup, after the blessing of Ga'al Yisrael they must recite Hatov Vehametiv. What a beautiful ruling.
Hacham Ovadia, the Hida, and the Chatam Sofer ruled that if people did not like the flavor of the wine they used for Kiddush, and a better wine was brought for the second cup, they recite Hatov Vehametiv. First one says Ga'al Yisrael, and then one recites Hatov Vehametiv before drinking the wine.
Someone asked whether Hatov Vehametiv should be recited first. Before drinking, yes. One should recite Hatov Vehametiv first, although both blessings are connected. At first I thought that perhaps Ga'al Yisrael should come first, but on Pesach it is connected to the meal. It is not worse than Kiddush. There are two Kiddush-related cups before the meal: the Kiddush cup and the second cup.
This was Charlie’s question, and he was asking it very well: although both cups of wine are drunk before the meal, are they both considered part of the meal? We have just learned that they are. They are both considered part of the meal, especially because the second cup is covered by the blessing after the meal. Since that blessing covers the second cup, the drink is connected to the meal.
This applies only to Sephardic Jews, who normally do not recite another blessing over grape wine on the second cup. Ashkenazic Jews, however, recite the blessing over grape wine on the second cup, which means that it is considered separate from the first cup. They therefore may not recite Hatov Vehametiv.
The Mishnah Berurah ruled that they should recite both blessings together. If they are given Hatov Vehametiv, however, the Mishnah Berurah pointed out another point. If one is going to recite both, he says Ga'al Yisrael first and then recites the blessing over the wine. He then recites Hatov Vehametiv before drinking.
This is an unusual case, but it can happen. Sometimes people change wines. Most people use the same wine throughout, but sometimes, for Kiddush, they like to use a special wine and then switch to another wine. Or, during the meal itself, they may take out another wine. As long as all the rules apply, they recite Hatov Vehametiv.
It is permissible to drink additional cups of wine during the meal of the Seder. If a person wants to drink more than four cups on the same night, however, he may need an intervention. You might have to call Alcoholics Anonymous. Anybody who wants to drink a fifth cup may need some help. If somebody chooses to bring a second type of wine, the people must recite Hatov Vehametiv. I doubt that such a person will make it to Shir Hashirim. By the time he reaches “One Who knows,” he will be finished and will not know what is happening.
Any change of wine qualifies even if you do not know that the second wine is better, as long as you know that it is not worse. That is the Sephardic rule. You do not need to say, “This one is definitely better.” It is enough that it is not inferior.
For example, suppose you have a 1999 wine and they now bring you a 2002. The newer wine may not be better than the first one, but it may still be a good wine. The question is whether it is a different type of wine. If it is the same bottle and merely a different year, one might say that it is the same item. The question is whether a different vintage makes it a different wine.
The ruling states that if one wine is old and the other is new, one recites Hatov Vehametiv. Perhaps the older wine is better, but even though they are the same type of wine, wines from different years are considered different in this regard. Of course, they must be consumed in the proper order. If you drink the older one first and then the newer one, the newer one may be inferior. But if you drink them in the proper order, it can qualify.
Let me tell you a secret: it does not simply depend on whether the wine is old or young. It depends on the year. 2004 was a great year, while 2003 may have been a terrible year. It depends on the sun, the moon, the earth, and a million other factors—perhaps somebody sneezed in the vineyard. People think that older is always better, but that is not true. A younger wine can come from a better harvest than an older wine. Those who know wines know the different years. They will say, “2017,” and they know exactly what that means.
Who determines which wine is better? It is relative to the person drinking it. Some people say that it is relative to the majority, but you are the one deciding which wine you prefer. You do not need to survey the entire room. The person drinking the wine determines which one he considers better.
Some people cannot drink dry wine. They will tell you, “This dry wine—I cannot drink it.” They want sweet Malaga, which is practically syrup. Do you remember the old Malaga? It guaranteed a stomachache. It was like drinking syrup. The Kedem Malaga would pour out thickly, like sap or molasses. One glass and you were guaranteed a stomachache. Ralph has twenty cases in his basement and is still trying to finish them.
Now, even if the wines come from the same crop, they can still be considered different. This means that even if they are from the same harvest, they may be considered separate wines if they come from different fields or different wineries. As long as the two wines were produced by two different companies, they are considered two wines, even if they were produced from the same harvest and the same grapes. One might be from Kedem and the other from Herzog. Therefore, if people drink one type and then wish to drink another, they recite Hatov Vehametiv, as long as they know that the second wine is not worse.
Someone once told me that one of the companies produced two wines: a simpler wine and a more distinguished wine from the same general crop. Naturally, they could charge more for the better-looking one, so they put on a different label and used nicer packaging. You would not believe how many people would come in and say, “No, I drink only this one. I drink only the second one.” If we told them that we did not have it and had only the other wine, they would refuse to buy it, even though it was the exact same wine.
It is psychosomatic. The person thinks he is drinking a better wine because he paid more, and he really tastes a difference because, in his mind, he is tasting something different. The less expensive one was made for the yeshiva students and people in the kollel who could not afford the more expensive bottle. They simply packaged it differently and sold it at a lower price.
Then the wealthy person comes in and says, “I am a distinguished person. Give me the other one.” You tell him, “This one is good.” He insists, and you give him the bottle. He walks out and tells somebody else, “Do me a favor—take this one. It is much better.” Meanwhile, he is exchanging one identical item for another. It is the same wine, but he thinks he is a distinguished person and believes that he is tasting a difference. A lot of this is a matter of perception.
Even if one has the same kind of wine in two different bottles, it can be considered like two wines if the circumstances establish that they are separate. If two people were sitting there, each drinking from a different wine, the distinction could likewise be relevant.
Now suppose someone produces two barrels of identical wine. The two barrels were sealed before the forty days had passed from the time the grapes were harvested and the juice was extracted. The two barrels are considered two different types of wine.
How would you know this? People may drink from one barrel and then from the second barrel, and Hatov Vehametiv certainly applies. If the wine was divided into two barrels after the forty-day period, however, it is considered one type of wine. Once the wine has fermented and assumed its properties, splitting it into a second barrel does not change it.
The Shulchan Aruch ruled that if wine is sealed in two barrels before it ferments, each barrel is considered a different type of wine. The Mishnah Berurah explained that since each barrel ferments separately, it is likely that the two wines will not have identical flavors. After forty days, however, the wine has already assumed its properties and will no longer change. If it is sealed into two barrels at that stage, both barrels are considered the same wine.
Therefore, one would have to know whether the wine was placed into the barrels before or after forty days. Before forty days, transferring the wine to another barrel can affect it, because it is still fermenting. The oak barrel, or whatever type of barrel is used, can influence the wine during that period.
Accordingly, a bottle of Cabernet Sauvignon and a bottle of Merlot are considered two types of wine even if they were produced from the same harvest during the same year. Likewise, two bottles of Cabernet Sauvignon produced in different years are considered two types of wine. If people drink the newer bottle first and then wish to drink the older bottle, they recite Hatov Vehametiv, even if they are not certain that the older bottle is better. Even two bottles from the same harvest and the same year are considered different if it is known that they were fermented in separate barrels.
A person would have to know how to read the codes in order to determine whether the wine was placed in the barrel before forty days. If it was, the wines are considered separate. If the wine was transferred to another barrel within the first forty days, that can have an effect because the wine is still fermenting. After forty days, however, transferring it to another barrel does not create a new type of wine.
Today there are some very good kosher wines. There is a market for them, and they are being produced in France and throughout the world. Even wines from Israel are now beginning to rival French wines. Despite all the antisemitism, the critics have no choice but to give them good ratings. They may not want to rate Israeli wines highly, but some are receiving ratings in the nineties. They will never rate them higher than the established French wines, but the time is coming when this will change.
We were told that the Land of Israel is a land of wheat, barley, vines, figs, and pomegranates, a land flowing with milk and honey. The Land of Israel is known for its vineyards. I once saw an explanation of the verse describing it as a land whose stones are iron. The simple meaning is that the stones are like metal. Have you ever seen the stones of the Kotel? They have stood there for two thousand years and remain solid.
Rabbi Shimon Schwab explained that the verse refers to a land filled with minerals. The “stones of iron” refer to iron in the ground, and the other expression refers to copper. The land is fortified with many minerals. When one plants in such richly fortified earth, it begins to produce an exceptionally premium product.
It was not always this way. When the Jews were in exile, the non-Jews planted there and nothing grew. The Ramban says that the land was on strike: it produces only for the Jewish people. We have seen this in our own time.
As I told you, when I went to the Shomron, a man gave me a bottle of wine. He had graduated from a yeshiva and was a regular fellow, but I asked him, “What do you know about making wine? What do you know about planting vineyards?” I knew that he understood wine, but I was asking what he knew about growing it. He told me that the earth was so rich that you had to be an expert to ruin the wine. Almost anybody could drop seeds into the ground and produce good wine.
The place was Har Berachah, and on the bottle he had written a verse from the prophet: the time will come when vineyards will again be planted in the mountains of the Shomron. When that verse was written, the area was desolate. For two thousand years it was desolate. You would not have bet a penny that this prophecy would come true; it would have seemed like an easy bet. The land was destroyed, so why would this happen? Yet we are seeing the miracle of vineyards being planted there. The verse says that when this happens, the Messiah is on the way.
Therefore, with Israeli wine today, one can recite Hatov Vehametiv. It does not have to be an Israeli bottle. If you switch from Israeli wine to French wine, that has nothing to do with where the wine was produced. It depends on the quality of the wine, based on the rules we have established.
Let me see what else Leo wrote. He says that the second wine should not be on the table when the blessing over the first wine is recited. That is preferable, but even if the second wine was on the table, we said that, according to Maran, one may still recite the blessing. The second wine must be different from the first, as we discussed. Leo also wrote that the second wine must be superior to the first. That is a mistake. According to our ruling, it does not have to be superior; it simply cannot be worse.
How do you establish that the people are drinking together, especially when they are drinking from their own wine? The host sets the bottle on the table. That is sufficient. It is preferable that the second wine not be on the table, but even if it was there when the blessing over the first wine was recited, it is still acceptable according to Maran.
Leo corrects himself in the middle paragraph. He gives the preferable arrangement and then the arrangement that is still acceptable. In the acceptable section, he says that the second wine must not be obviously worse. Therefore, we do not need to call him; he is correct on that point.
One should not be drinking alone. The drinking should indicate that the people are finished with the first wine and are now moving to the second. One person may have drunk from the first wine but not from the second, or they may have reversed the order. The host may pour one cup without leaving the bottle available for the person to take more. These are all details that affect the question.
If the first bottle is empty and another bottle of the same wine is brought, Hatov Vehametiv does not apply. They are simply duplicate bottles of the same wine. If a different year is brought, however, we said that it can qualify.
If the second wine is definitely inferior to the first, such as when somebody wants sparkling grape juice during the meal and you bring out Kedem sparkling grape juice, you do not recite Hatov Vehametiv. But if someone brings a prestigious kosher champagne, that may be different. Champagne is also made from grapes, and even though it has bubbles, it may be considered a distinguished wine. Therefore, it is possible that one would recite Hatov Vehametiv in that case.
We will stop here. Enjoy your meal, and Shabbat Shalom.