Berakhot 84
If wine is set for them in the course of the meal, each one says the benediction for himself; after the meal, one may say it for all. The same one says the benediction over the perfume, although they do not bring the perfume until after the meal.
It has been similarly reported : Rabbah b. Mari said in the name of R. Joshua b. Levi : The teaching applies only to Sabbaths and Festivals and the time when one comes from the bath-house and the meal after blood-letting, for then a man arranges his meal with wine; but on the other days of the year, a benediction is to be said over each cup of wine.
Rab Isaac b. Joseph visited the house of Abbai on a Festival and noticed that he pronounced the benediction over each cup. He said to him, "Does not the master agree with the opinion of R. Joshua b. Levi ?" He replied, "It only just occurred to me."
The question was asked : How is it if wine is brought in the course of the meal — does it make the benediction over the wine after the meal unnecessary? Shouldest thou wish to quote our Mishnah : If a man said the benediction over wine before the meal, he is exempt from saying it over the wine after the meal — this is because both of them are for drinking ; but here, since one is for steeping and the other for drinking, it is not so ; or perhaps that makes no difference ?
Rab said : He is exempt [from repeating the benediction] ; but Rab Kahana said : He is not. Rab Nahman said: He is exempt; but Rab Sheshet said : He is not. Rab Huna, Rab Judah and all the pupils of Rab say : He is not. Raba quoted against Rab Nahman : If wine is set for them in the course of the meal, each one says the benediction for himself ; after the meal, one may say it for all! He replied : This is what he means to say, If no wine was set for them in the course of the meal, only after it, then one may say the benediction for all.
The question was asked : Are Bet Shammai in disagreement with the first clause of this teaching, or is it perhaps with the second clause? They are in disagreement with the first clause; for the first Tanna declares : If he said it over the bread, he is exempt from saying it over the dainty, so how much more [is it unnecessary for him to say a benediction] over a cooked dish ; then Bet Shammai come to declare that not only does [the benediction over] the bread not exempt that over the dainty, but it does not even exempt that over a cooked dish ! Or is it perhaps with the second clause that Bet Shammai disagree? For it teaches : [Having said the benediction] over the dainty, he is not exempt from saying it over the bread ; it is [the benediction over] the bread from which he is not exempt, but he is exempt from that over the cooked dish ; and then Bet Shammai come to say : He is not even exempt from that over the cooked dish!
If men were sitting [at the meal], each one says Grace for himself. If they were reclining, then yes; but if they were not reclining. no ! Against this I quote the following : If ten were journeying by the way, although they all partake of one loaf, each of them says Grace for himself ; should they sit down to eat, although each eats of his own loaf, one may say Grace for all. Note that he here states "they sit," i.e. although they are not reclining !
When Rab died, his disciples followed his cortege. On their return they said, "Let us go and have our meal by the River Danak." After they had eaten, they sat on and the question was asked : Does our Mishnah intend that only when they recline [does one say the benediction for all] and not if they sit ; or is it perhaps that where people say, "Let us go and eat our meal in a certain place" this is to be regarded the same as reclining? They were unable [to answer the question].