In the previous shiur, we discussed in depth the question asked by the amoraim about the beracha to be made before eating wheat flour (or some form of ground wheat), and the two opposing rulings given, by Rav Yehuda and by Rav Nahman. We then studied the argument of Rava against Rav Nahman’s ruling. On all of the above we also studied Rashi’s comments. At the very end of the shiur we discussed Rav Nahman’s counter-argument against Rava, but we still need to read the Rashi comment on this. Please review this material and if there are questions we will deal with them at the beginning of this shiur.
In this shiur, we will begin with studying Rashi’s explanation of Rav Nahman’s counter-argument against Rava. Then we will move on in the gemara to Rava’s attempt to disprove Rav Nahman’s counter-argument, and Rav Nahman’s dismissal of that attempted proof, which concludes this sugya about halfway down the page at Berachot 36a. And we will learn the comments of Rashi on this exchange.