Commentaire sur Halla 2:11

פירות חוצה לארץ שנכנסו לארץ חייבין בחלה – as it is written (Numbers 15:18): “…the land to which I am taking you.” "שמה" /there – you are liable whether with the produce of the land or the produce of outside the Land [for Hallah].

Introduction Our mishnah deals with whether one is liable to separate hallah from produce that is grown outside the land of Israel.

מכאן לשם – from the land of Israel to outside the Land of Israel.

Produce [grown] outside the land [of Israel] that came into the land is subject to Hallah. Outside the land of Israel, one is not obligated to separate hallah from dough. However, if the produce, in this case grain, was grown outside the land, and then brought in, it is liable for hallah, because the flour was mixed with water inside the land of Israel. As we have seen, when it comes to separating hallah, the critical moment is when the flour is mixed with dough.

ר"א מחייב – As it is written (Numbers 15:19): “And you eat of the bread of the land…,” whether you eat it in the Land [of Israel] whether you eat it outside the Land [of Israel], for since it is the bread of the Land [of Israel], it is liable for Hallah [to be separated].

[If it] went out from here to there: Rabbi Eliezer makes it liable, But Rabbi Akiva makes it exempt. If the produce was grown in the land of Israel, but then brought outside the land and there it was made into dough, Rabbi Eliezer says that it is still liable for hallah. This seems to be based on a midrash of Numbers 15:19 which states, “from the bread of the land” and bread made from the produce of the land is still “bread of the land” no matter where it is made. Rabbi Akiva says he is exempt, because the very same verse states, “When you enter the land to which I am taking you…” The implication is that when you are not in the land, you are not liable for hallah.

ור"ע פוטר – that [the word] "שמה" /”there” implies a limitation. “There” you are obligated, but you are not obligated outside the Land., even though you eat from the bread of the Land. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Akiva.

עפר חו"ל הבא מספינה לארץ – we are speaking about a perforated ship, and clods of earth close up the perforation so that water cannot enter in it.

Earth from outside the land has come to the land [of Israel] in a boat, [the produce grown in it] is subject to tithes and to the [law relating to] the seventh year. In yesterday’s mishnah we learned that if grain from outside the land of Israel is brought into Israel, it becomes liable for hallah. Today’s mishnah teaches that if a boat comes close to the land of Israel and there is produce in the boat, the produce is liable for tithes and it is subject to the laws governing produce grown in the seventh year, just as if the produce was grown in Israel itself.

חייבת במעשרות – if he sowed and grew seeds in the dust/mud that is in the ship, and even though that is dust/mud from outside of the Land of Israel, for since it is perforated, the seed absorbs from the moistness of the dust/mud of the Land of Israel.

Rabbi Judah: when does this apply? When the boat touches [the ground]. Rabbi Judah says that this applies only if the boat is actually touching the ground. This is interpreted as meaning that the boat is ten handbreadths from the bottom of the sea. That makes it as if the earth on the boat is attached to the ground. But if the boat was floating high on the water, its produce is exempt from these laws.

אימתי בזמן שהספינה גוששת – it comes in contact with clumps of dust/mud, that is to say, that it is cleaves to the earth.

Dough which has been kneaded with fruit-juice is subject to hallah, and may be eaten with unclean hands. Dough which is kneaded with fruit-juice instead of water is still liable for hallah. However, it cannot receive impurity because fruit-juice is not one of the seven liquids that makes produce susceptible to impurity. Therefore, the hallah separated from this dough can be eaten with unclean hands, without fear that the hallah will become impure and forbidden for consumption.

עיסה שנילושה במי פירות חייבת בחלה – In the Jerusalem Talmud it proves a bit that the Halakha is not like the anonymous Mishnah. Dough that was kneaded in fruit juice is exempt from Hallah. Therefore, we should not knead dough that has in it the measurement for Hallah in the juice of eggs or in fruit juice alone without a combination of water, since the Halakah is not made clear if it is liable for Hallah or exempt.

ונאכלת בידים מסואבות – for food does not become susceptible to becoming ritually impure until water comes upon it, or one of the seven liquids, and [just as] it does not become susceptible to becoming ritually impure, unclean hands do not defile it.

וקוצה חלתה ערומה – she separates the Hallah and makes the blessing on its separation, while the facing of the bed is downwards fastened to the ground and all of her nakedness is covered. But the contact of her posterior (i.e., buttocks) does not come into the class of indecency regarding the [recitation of the] blessing. But a man cannot recite the blessing while naked, for it is impossible for him to cover his nakedness as the sacks and the membrum virile project.

Introduction This mishnah deals with two topics. The first is separating hallah while naked perhaps there was a nudist colony? The second is how to make dough while ritually impure. This is a problem because ritually impure hallah cannot be eaten it must be burned.

מי שאינו יכול לעשות עיסתו בטהרה – like the case when he is ritually impure, and there isn’t [water] of forty Seah in which he can immerse [himself].

A woman may sit and separate hallah while she is naked, since she can cover herself but a man may not. A person’s whose nakedness, meaning genitalia, are showing cannot separate hallah from dough because doing so requires the recitation of a blessing, and it is forbidden to recite a blessing while naked. A woman can separate hallah while sitting naked because she can hide her nakedness with her legs. However a man cannot hide his nakedness while sitting, therefore he cannot separate hallah. I realize that some of you men reading this may be saying to yourselves, “I can cover my nakedness while I sit.” I implore you don’t try this at home!

יעשנה קבין – He should make all of his dough into individual Kabs, in order that they would not become liable for Hallah and then need to separate them while ritually impure.

If one is not able to make one's dough in cleanness he should make it [in separate] kavs, rather than make it in uncleanness. Dough is liable for hallah only if there are 1 ¼ kavs. One who kneads a lesser quantity is not liable to separate hallah. According to the first opinion in this mishnah, if one is unable to separate dough in a state of purity, she should knead it in quantities smaller than 1 ¼ kavs, and this way she can avoid becoming liable for hallah.

יעשנה בטומאה – for this is more preferable than from what [he must do] so that he can be exempt his dough from Hallah, and there would be no part to be [designated] by name. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Akiva.

But Rabbi Akiva says: let him make it in uncleanness rather than make it [in separate] kavs, just as he calls the clean, so too he calls the unclean; this one he cals hallah with the Name, and the other he also calls hallah with the Name, but [separate] kavs have no portion [devoted] to the Name. Rabbi Akiva says that it would be better for him to knead the dough in a state of impurity, rather than making it in separate kavs. For when he kneads it in impurity, he will separate hallah and recite a blessing over it using God’s name, even though the hallah is impure. Rabbi Akiva says that the most important thing is that the blessing is recited because this is what sanctifies God’s name. In contrast, when he kneads each kav separately in order to avoid separating hallah, no blessing is recited and God’s name is not sancitified. I find this debate fascinating. According to Rabbi Akiva, God’s name is sanctified, even over impure hallah. It seems that sanctity and impurity are not polar opposites, at least not in this case. In contrast, the first opinion wishes to avoid a situation where one will be forced to create impure hallah. While one might still have to recite a blessing over this hallah, it seems to be more problematic in the eyes of the author of this section.

קבים – Kab by Kab on its own

Introduction Our mishnah deals with the topic of how kavs of dough that were kneaded separately can join to constitute the necessary amount of dough to be liable for hallah.

ונגעו זה בזה – their coming into contact does not combine them to be liable for Hallah.

One who makes his dough [in separate] kavs, and they touch one another, they are exempt from hallah unless they stick together. If one makes separate batches of dough and they merely touch one another, they are still exempt from hallah. Touching does not turn them into one batch. However, if they stick together, then they are considered one batch and they are liable for hallah. They are considered to be “sticking together” if when they are pulled apart, some of one batch sticks to the other batch.

עד שישוכו – that they would stick one to the other so much that if one comes to separate them, they would be detached from this one to [become attached] to that one.

Rabbi Eliezer says: also if one takes out [loaves from an oven] and puts [them] into a basket, the basket joins them together for [the purposes of] hallah. If one takes loaves out of an oven and puts them all into one basket, the loaves, which were not originally liable for hallah, join together to constitute an amount liable for hallah. Even though hallah is usually taken out from the dough, according to Rabbi Eliezer they can still be joined together by the basket even after they have been baked.

אף הרודה ונותן לסל – He who detaches Hallot from [where they stick on] the oven after they have baked and places them in the basket.

הסל מצרפן לחלה – and even though they don’t stick together, and the Halakha is according to Rabbi Eliezer. But the fact that the Rabbis require sticking together and Rabbi Eliezer [requires] coming into contact/touching, these words are to combine two pieces of dough together, for each one is not according to the [required] measure [for Hallah]. But regarding the matter of devoting for sacred purposes from that which is near, even contact is not required, but they must be near one to the other. And at the end of the chapter (Mishnah 8) when Rabbi Eliezer that one puts less than an egg’s [bulk] in the middle in order to dedicate sacred gifts from that which is near, so we see, that we require contact for the purpose of being near, pure and impure is different because it is a matter which one is strict with its mixture, but the utensil does not combine.

אינו חלה – for it is written (Numbers 15:20): “as the first yield of our baking…”

Introduction This mishnah deals with someone who separates his hallah before the flour has been mixed with water to become dough. The Torah says that you are supposed to give the first of “your dough” to the kohen, not the flour before it becomes dough. Our mishnah rules that the flour that he calls “hallah” does not actually become hallah.

וגזל ביד כהן – and he must return it to their owners, for if it remains in his hand, he would think that his dough is exempt.

If one separates his hallah [while it is still] flour, it is not hallah, and in the hand of a priest it is considered stolen property. As stated above, if he separates his hallah before he mixes it with water to become dough, that which he calls hallah does not have the status of hallah. Therefore, if he gives it to a kohen, the kohen must return it to him. If the kohen does not return it, it is as it is a stolen thing in the kohen’s possession.

העיסה עצמה – that which he separated its Hallah as flour, is liable for Hallah.

The dough is still subject to hallah; The dough made from the remaining flour is still subject to hallah, because the hallah that he did take out does not count.

והקמח – that comes into the hand of the Kohen with the designation of Hallah.

And the flour, if there is the minimum quantity, it [also is] subject to hallah. The flour that he took out and called hallah, if there is a minimum amount (1 ¼ kavs) then hallah must be taken from this dough as well.

אם יש בו כשיעור – five-fourths of flour which is liable for Hallah.

And it is prohibited to non-priests, the words of Rabbi Joshua. Despite the fact that this flour does not have the status of hallah, Rabbi Joshua says that it is prohibited to non-priests. According to Rabbi Joshua, since he called it hallah, it can only be eaten by priests, even though it is not actually hallah.

ואסורה לזרים – all the flour that comes in to the hand of the Kohen, and this is a mere stringency, because they saw that it comes into the land of a Kohen, that they won’t say that we saw a foreigner eating Hallot.

They said to him: It happened that a non-priest sage seized it [for himself]. The other sages respond that it happened that a non-priest who was a sage grabbed a loaf made from this flour in order to eat it. This proves, to the sages, that this flour is permitted to non-priests.

וקפשה זקן זר – an old man who is a foreigner snatched it and ate it.

He said to them: He did something damaging to himself, but he benefited others. Rabbi Joshua responds that what the sage did was indeed forbidden. But in a roundabout way, he helped others. Other non-priests will now eat this bread thinking that it is permitted to them as well. Since they don’t know that it is actually prohibited, they are not considered to be sinning. So it turns out that this sage knowingly erred, in order to aid others. While this is a strange concept, we should remember that the only reason that Rabbi Joshua considers this bread prohibited to non-priests is that he called it hallah it is not actually hallah. The transgression of a non-priest eating it is certainly not from the Torah.

קלקל לעצמו – that he ate it and was punished.

ותיקן לאחרים – that others eat and leave it in doubt, for they find an opening to permit, since they saw that he ate it.

חמשת רבעים – of Kab are liable for Hallah, as it is written (Numbers 15:20): “As the first yield [of your baking, you shall set aside a loaf as a gift…],” and the flour of the wilderness was the quantity of grain in a sheaf as a capitation tax, and the Omer is one-tenth of an Ephah. The Ephah is three Seah, and the Seah is six Kabim; hence we have eighteen Kabim in an Ephah, and the Kab is four Logs; which are seventy-two Logs. A tenth of seventy is seen Logim and the tenth of two Logim is an egg’s bulk and one-fifth of an egg, for the Log is [equivalent to] six eggs. When they came to Jerusalem and they added one-sixth on the measurements, it was found that six Logim were five, and the seenth Log was five eggs. For every six became five, and an egg and the fifth of an egg became an egg. It was found that the Omer that was in the wilderness was seven Logim and an egg and one-fifth of an egg. But in Jerusalem it became six logim. When they came to Sephhoris, and they added one-sixth on he measurements of Jerusalem, so that the six Logim became five, and that is equal to the five-fourths of flour. And the Logim were called fourths, because the Log was one-fourth of a Kab, for a Kab was four Logim.

Introduction This mishnah teaches the basic law that we have encountered several times 1 ¼ kav of flour is liable for hallah. If there is less, one need not remove hallah.

הן ושאורן – the leaven that they put into it.

Five-fourths [of a kav] of flour are subject to hallah. This is the basic law, to which we have made reference on several occasions.

וסובן – which is thin

If their leaven, their light bran and their coarse bran [make up the] five-fourths, they are subject. When measuring the flour, one includes the leaven (the starter dough used to leaven the bread), and all of the bran.

מורסנן – that is thick – all of which combines with the flour to complete the measurement, for a poor person who eats his bread combined with flour combined with bran flour and coarse flour.

If their coarse bran had been removed from them and returned to them, they are exempt. If the coarse bran was removed, which is typical in the processing of better quality flour, and then it was added back in, the flour is not subject to hallah. This is because putting back the course bran is unusual.

ניטל מורסנן מתוכן חוזר לתוכו הרי אלו פטורין – for it is not the manner of dough to restore the coarse bran into it after he took it from there.

אחד מעשרים וארבעה – for every house owner, his dough was thin, and less than one twenty-fourth, it lacks what can be a gift, and the Torah stated that it should be given, that it should have within it in order to be given.

Introduction This mishnah teaches the minimum measure of hallah that a person must separate from his dough. We should note that this measure is not set by the Torah. According to Torah law, even the tiniest amount would exempt the dough. However, as we saw in the case of terumah, the rabbis set a minimum amount. The fact that this amount is not considered to be from the Torah, also allowed them the ability to make the amount variable depending on the circumstance.

והעושה למשתה בנו – even though that he makes a great amount of dough, he does not separate with the dough of the owner.

The [minimum] measure of hallah is one twenty-fourth [part of the dough]. In general, one must give 1/24 of one’s dough to a kohen as hallah.

נחתום העושה למכור בשוק – his dough is greater, and with one in forty- eight, there is where with to give as a gift.

If he makes dough for himself, or if he makes it for his son’s [wedding] banquet, it is one twenty-fourth. The above is true for a person who makes dough for own personal use, or for use at a family celebration.

וכן האשה העושה למכור – even though her dough is thin, he does not separate with the bread that is made to sell.

If a baker makes to sell in the market, and so [also] if a woman makes to sell in the market, it is one forty-eighth. The rabbis were lenient when it came to a baker or a woman making dough to sell in the market. Since these people tend to make larger quantities, even 1/48 will be sufficient enough to give something substantial to the kohen.

נטמאה – since it stands to be burned one out of forty-eight

If dough is made unclean either unwittingly or by an unforeseeable circumstance, it is one forty-eighth. When one has dough that was made impure either unwittingly, or by some unforeseeable circumstance, s/he only has to give 1/48 as hallah. Since this hallah won’t be able to be eaten anyway, only a minimal measurement is required.

If it was made unclean intentionally, it is one twenty-fourth, in order that a sinner should not profit. However, if he intentionally makes it unclean in order to get away with giving less hallah, he must give the larger measure. Clearly, we don’t want a person to make his dough unclean so that he can get away with giving less hallah. Remember, the part of the dough that is not hallah can still be eaten, so if he were to get away with giving the lesser amount, a “sinner would profit.”

נטלת מן הטהור על הטמא – and we do not suspect lest they come in contact with each other.

Introduction In this mishnah Rabbi Eliezer finds a way to give hallah from pure dough in order to exempt a separate batch of impure dough.

נוטל כדי חלה – the measure of Hallah that one needs to take from the pure and the impure, he takes from that pure dough whose Hallah had not been ritually dedicated.

Rabbi Eliezer says: Hallah may be taken from [dough] that is clean, [in order to exempt] that which is unclean. How [may this be done]? [If one has] clean dough and unclean dough, he takes sufficient hallah out of the [clean] dough whose hallah has not yet been taken, and puts [dough] less than the size of an egg in the middle, in order that he may take off [the hallah] from what is close together. The problem in this situation is how to join the two batches of dough together so that one hallah can be taken from both, without causing the pure dough to become impure. He cannot just take from one to exempt the other because hallah taken from one batch of dough cannot exempt a separate batch of dough. This is how Rabbi Eliezer suggests it may be done. First, he takes a sufficient measure of hallah from the clean dough in order to exempt both batches of dough. He does this at the outset lest the clean dough is made impure at least he now has enough clean hallah to exempt both batches. Then in between the two batches he puts an amount of dough less than the size of an egg. This serves to attach the two batches, but because it is less than an egg’s worth in volume, the impurity is not conveyed across to the pure dough. Now, the hallah that he took from the pure dough counts to exempt the impure dough.

ונותן פחות מכביצה באמצע – whether ritually impure or pure, for less than an egg’s bulk does not defile, and they set aside the Hallah on that which is less than an egg’s bulk which connects between the impure anad the pure, for the Hallah does not receive ritual impurity in this.

But the sages prohibit. The other rabbis prohibit one from separating hallah from pure dough for impure dough, lest he unwittingly causes the pure dough to become impure. Rather he should take pure hallah from the pure dough and impure hallah from the impure dough.

כדי שיטול מן המוקף – that the ritually impure is attached to the ritually pure on that which is less than an egg’s bulk, and it is as if the ritually impure and the pure [are found] in one [piece of] dough.

וחכמים אוסרין – to take from the ritually pure on that which is impure, and we are suspect lest they come in contact with each other, but he should take from the ritually pure to itself, and from the ritually impure to itself. And the Halakha is according to the Sages.