MISHNA: They mix for him the leader of the seder the first cup. The house of Shammai say: he blesses on the day, and after that he blesses on the wine. But the house of Hillel say: He blesses on the wine, and after that he blesses on the day.
GEMARA: The rabbis taught: There are matters in which the house of Shammai and the house of Hillel differ in th e subject of the meal. The house of Shammai say: one blesses on the day and after that one blesses on the wine, because the special nature of the day causes that the wine should be brought. Also, the day has already become holy since it is after sunset and the wine is still not here.
And the house of Hillel say: one blesses on the wine and after that one blesses on the day, because the wine causes that kiddush can be said.
Another point: The blessing over wine is frequent, and the blessing of the day is infrequent; and we have the general principle: “When frequent and infrequent combine, the frequent one precedes.”
And the halacha is like the words of the house of Hillel.
Why did we need “another point”? Because you could say that there the house of Shammai brings two reasons and here the house of Hillel brings one, here also there are two: “Frequent and infrequent – frequent precedes.”
A moment ago, the Gemara said, “And the halacha is like the words of the house of Hillel” — obviously! Because there was heard the daughter-of-a-voice a Bat Kol, a heavenly pronouncement. If you wish, I could say that this was written before the daughter-of-a-voice. And if you wish, I could even say that this was after the daughter-of-a-voice, and it is the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua, who said: We do not follow the opinion of a daughter-of-a-voice.
MISHNA: They bring the following before him. He dips the lettuce; he should keep the lettuce in mind until it is combined later with the bread. They bring before him matzah and lettuce and charoset and two cooked foods, even though the charoset is not a mitzvah. (Rabbi Eliezer ben Tzadok says it is in fact a mitzvah.) And in the Holy Place they would bring before him the body of the Pesach offering.
104b GEMARA: Reish Lakish said: This Mishna of ours says i.e., establishes that mitzvot require kavannah. Because it is not his intention to fulfil the obligation of maror when he eats it the lettuce – what we now know as karpas, he eats it with the blessing “… Who has created the fruits of the ground.” And perhaps he does not have the intent of fulfilling maror at that point, later he must dip it in the charoset to designate it as maror.
And if it entered your mind that mitzvah does not require kavannah, why do I need two dippings? Let him dip a single time!
Why? Perhaps it’s actually the case that mitzvot do not require kavannah, and why do I say “two dippings”? Because this will act as something unusual for inspiring questions from the children.
So let’s say, if so, let’s hear about using other vegetables for karpas.
No, because if I hear about using other vegetables, I would say here, where there are other vegetables, it requires two dippings to distinguish which is karpas and which is maror, but if I am using lettuce alone, I would erroneously conclude that I don’t need two dippings. So learn from that, that even lettuce requires two dippings, because that makes it something unusual for the children.
And it was also taught: If he ate demai produce of uncertain status vis-a-vis tithing, he has fulfilled his obligation. if he ate without kavanah, he has fulfilled his obligation. If he ate half at a time, he has fulfilled his obligation, but only if he did not delay between halves longer than the time it takes to eat a half-loaf.
This is the subject of a dispute between tanaim, for it was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yosei says, even if his dips lettuce, it is a mitzvah to bring before him lettuce and charoset and two cooked dishes.
Why? Perhaps Rabbi Yosei reasons that mitzvot do not require kavannah, and thus requires two dippings, because they will act as something unusual for the children.
If so, why is it a mitzvah?
What are the two cooked dishes? Rav Huna says: Beet and rice are the minimum. Rava was careful about using beet and rice, because it emanated from the mouth of Rav Huna.
Rav Ashi said: Learn from this ruling of Rav Huna, that there is no one who follows the ruling of Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri; for it was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri says: rice is a kind of grain, and one who allows it to become chametz is obligated for the punishment of karet, and a person fulfils the obligation in his hand on Pesach with it.
Chizkiyah said: Even fish and an egg on it even if cooked together, they count as two cooked foods.
Rav Yosef said: It is required to have two kinds of meat: one to recall the Pesach offering and one to recall the Festival offering.
Ravina said: Even a bone and its cooking-liquid suffice.
It’s obvious, in the case where there are other vegetables, he blesses on the other vegetables “… Who creates the fruits of the land” and eats, and later blesses “… on the eating of maror” and eats. In the case where there is nothing but lettuce, what is the ruling?
Rav Huna said: he blesses initially on the maror “… Who creates the fruits of the land” and eats, and at the end he blesses upon it “… on the eating of maror” and he eats