Commentaire sur Oktzim 3:14

צריכים הכשר (that require preparation) – water, as it is written (Leviticus 11:38): “But if water is put on the seed [and any part of a carcass falls upon it, it shall be unclean for you].” (see also Tractate Makhshirin, Chapter 6, Mishnah 4 for the listing of the seven liquids).

Some things need to be rendered susceptible [to uncleanness] but they do not need intention,
[Other things need] intention and to be rendered susceptible.
[Other things] need intention, but do not need to be rendered susceptible,
[And other things] need neither to be rendered susceptible nor intention.
Any food that is meant for people need to be rendered susceptible, but does not need intention.
The first four sections of this mishnah divide foods into four categories depending on two factors. First of all, whether they need to have been in contact with water in order to be susceptible to impurity (the topic of Makhshirin). Second, whether a person needs to be think about using them for human food in order for them to be susceptible. Our mishnah introduces these issues and then subsequent mishnayot explain and illustrate them. Sections 1-4 are the introduction, section five is explained below.
Section five: This illustrates the rule in section one. Foods that are clearly intended for human use, let's say expensive fruits, need to have been in contact with water to be susceptible. But since they are clearly meant for human consumption, they do not need intention. One doesn't need to actively decide that the food will be used by a human for it to be susceptible.

ואין צריכין מחשבה – to consider them as food, and all of our Mishnah is explained further on (see Mishnah 2 of this chapter).

החותך מן האדם מן הבהמה מן החיה ומן העופות – all of them are speaking about cutting off flesh from the living creatures, and even though that they were separated from the living, they do not defile, for only a limb a living creature defiles but not the flesh that was separated from a living being, therefore we require intention that he should have in mind upon them for consumption, and if not, they don’t defile.

Introduction This mishnah lists things that are not human food and therefore are not susceptible to impurity unless someone decides that they are going to eat them (some of these are a bit gross, so beware). They also require contact with water to become susceptible.

החלב בכפרים (from fat in the villages) – for the people of villages do not consume fat. Therefore, they require intention. Bu tin the marketplaces, where most of the people come to the market, there are many that eat fats, and they don’t require intention.

That which has been severed from a human, beast, wild animal, bird, or from the carrion of an unclean bird, and the fat in villages. Pieces of flesh cut off of a living human, beast, wild animal or bird are not impure. If one decides to eat them (this is not allowed, but someone might do it) and they come into contact with water, they become susceptible to impurity. The carrion of an unclean bird is not impure (see Toharot 1:3). Therefore, a piece of flesh cut off from it has the same status as the other meat.

ושאר כל ירקות שדה – that are not sown in gardens, are not special/specific for human consumption and require intention.

And all kinds of wild vegetables, except for truffles and mushrooms; Rabbi Judah says, except for field-leeks, purslane and ornithagolum. And Rabbi Shimon says: except for cynara sycaria. Rabbi Yose says: except for muscari comusum. Wild vegetables generally are not eaten. There are however some exceptions. The first opinion and various other rabbis cite some exceptions. I don't know what some of these are and the translations are mostly from Albeck. Suffice it to say that these are wild grown vegetables that seem to have been eaten.

חוץ משמרקעים (except for truffles/a species of very acrid onions) – a species of pungent onions.

Behold all these need both intention and to be rendered susceptible [to uncleanness]. This is the summary of category two from yesterday's mishnah. In order to be susceptible to impurity these things need to come into contact with liquids and one needs to actively decide that they are going to be eaten.

ופטריות (truffles/fungus, morils) – a species of plant that doesn’t have a root. FUNGI in the foreign language.

חוץ מכרישי שדה (except for wild leeks/field leeks) – PUROSH in the foreign language and PORAT in Arabic. That these, even though we don’t plant them in gardens , do not require intention.

והרגילה (purslane) – such is its name in Arabic. And in the foreign language, PORKAKLAH.

נץ חלב (Ornithogalum, star of Bethlehem, a bulbous plant) – white flowers like milk. And there are those who say, grass when they cut it that milk comes out from it.

עכביות (a species of edible thistles, cardoon) – grass filled with thorns, and it is the דרדר/thistle in the language of Scripture, and in the foreign language KARDOSH.

כלוסין (a species of figs) – Maimonides states that we call it in Arabic ANAV ALDIB. But Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Yossi hold that these do not require intention because they are specific for human consumption. But the Halakha is not like any of them, but rather all of them require intention, and if not, they do not defile.

נבלת בהמה טמאה בכל מקום – whether in the villages or whether in the marketplaces.

The carrion of an unclean beast at all places, and of a clean bird in villages, need intention but do not need to be rendered susceptible. The foods listed in this section are not generally eaten, at least according the first opinion. Therefore, to defile one would need to think about them as food. However, since they are already impure they don't need to be rendered susceptible to impurity. Carrion of an unclean beast, for instance horse carrion, defiles. This mishnah really didn't need to teach this, because it is stated clearly in the Torah. In order to find an innovation in the mishnah the talmud notes that generally less than an olive's worth does not defile because it is too small of an amount. The mishnah is understood as innovating that if 1/2 of an olive's worth of carrion from an unclean beast joins together with a 1/2 of an olive's worth of other unclean food, the two halves join together to defile in the same was as would impure food. If one doesn't think about eating this carrion, it's not considered food because most people don't consider unclean beasts to be food. The carrion of a clean bird is forbidden to eat but it doesn't defile except when in the gullet (see Toharot 1:1). In the villages where there aren't a lot of people evidently most people wouldn't bother eating bird carrion. Therefore, one would specifically have to think about eating it for it to defile.

צריכין מחשבה – for undefined they are not for consumption.

The carrion of a clean beast in all places, and that of a clean bird and also fat in the market places, require neither intention nor to be rendered susceptible. Carrion of a clean beast is forbidden but since most people do eat such animals, it causes food impurity even if one doesn't specifically think about using it for food. It also doesn't need to be made susceptible because carrion is already impure. In market places people will be found to buy carrion of clean birds and forbidden fat. Therefore, they don't need to be thought of as food to defile. And since they are already impure, they don't need contact with liquid to become susceptible.

ואינן צריכין הכשר (and they don’t require preparation) – neither preparation of water nor preparation of a creeping animal/insect [for susceptibility to ritual defilement], for there is no need to have something impure to touch them to defile them, for ultimately they will be impure on their own a grave defilement. And if you should say, it is all right that the carron of a pure/clean fowl and it doesn’t defile other than in the esophagus, it is satisfactory that it requires intention to defile a light defilement. But the carrion of a beast that defiles through contact and through lifting, why do I need intention, for a light defilement, it is an impure body. This manner is answered in the Gemara in the chapter דם שחיטה/The Blood of Slaughter (Chapter 5, Tractate Keritot, folio 21a), as for example, that there is less than an olive’s bulk of carrion, and he attached it to less than an egg’s bulk of food, for whether this one or that one’s an egg’s bulk, and for this reason it requires intention. But nevertheless, it is considered ultimately to defile a grave defilement and doesn’t require preparation, for since it was possible to combine it to be an olive’s bulk.

Rabbi Shimon says: also [the carrion of] the camel, rabbit, hare or pig. Rabbi Shiomon says that people eat camel, hare, rabbit and pig. Therefore, the same rules that apply to carrion of clean meat (cow, sheep, goats) apply to them.

בשווקים – that there is a majority of the people that come to the marketplace, there are many that eat the carrion of a clean fowl, and consume fats.

אינן צריכין לא מחשבה – for they standing for eating.

ולא הכשר – for the carrion of clean fowl ultimately will defile a grave defilement, that will defile clothing in the esophagus, and regarding fat we are speaking of impure fat, that fat defiles like meat, as we learn further on in our chapter (see Mishnah 9), therefore we don’t require preparation.

רבי שמעון אומר אף הגמל וכו' – they (i.e., the carrion of a camel, a rabbit, a hare and a pig) – do not require intention in the marketplaces, for there are many people who consume them, and this is not like the first Tanna/teacher who stated that the carrion of an unclean beast in every place and didn’t exclude these. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon.

השבת (dill stalk) – a species of vegetable/green, and such is name in Arabic. And in the foreign language ANITO.

Introduction Today's mishnah discusses what constitutes food such that if it was originally terumah it is still considered terumah and it would still be subject to the laws of food impurity. We should note that the identity of some of these spices is speculative. Nevertheless, the principles are clear.

משנתן טעמו בקדירה (having given its taste to a dish) – if it was dill of heave-offering, once it gave its taste/flavor to a dish and he removed it from there, a “foreigner” (i.e., non-Kohen) who eats it is not liable, for it is a mere piece of wood.

The aneth stalk after having given its taste to a dish is no longer subject to the laws of terumah, and also no longer imparts food uncleanness. Once a stalk of aneth has given away its taste into a dish, it is no longer considered to be food. It's just a stalk. Therefore, if it was terumah, the stalk can now be eaten by a non-priest. And it is no longer subject to the laws of food impurity.

ואינו מטמא טומאת אוכלים (and does not receive uncleanness as food) – for since it was cooked, its strength and taste have departed and what remains is like a mere piece of wood, and furthermore it is not considered food.

The young sprouts of hawthorn, of lapidum, or leaves of the wild arum, do not impart food uncleanness until they are sweetened. These sprouts or other agricultural products are not considered human food in their raw form. They are "food" only once they've been "sweetened" by soaking them in wine, vinegar or salt water, sort of pickling them. There are many foods we eat today that would probably have the same rule for instance raw coffee or chocolate. These are inedible in their raw form and wouldn't be considered food until they've been processed.

לולבי זרדים (young sprouts of the service-tree – the interior of which is eaten as a relish) – soft branches that come out at the time when the trees blossom. And they pickle them in wine or in vinegar or in water and salt, and consume them.

Rabbi Shimon says: also [the leaves of] the colocynth are like them. Some say that the vegetable referred to here is a type of wild vine while some say it is a wild melon. In any case, the leaves are not edible until sweetened.

והעדל (garden-cress, summer-savory) – a species of vegetable similar to the radish.

ועלי לוף (and leaves of wild LOF/a plant similar to Colocasia with edible leaves and root, and bearing beans – classified with onions and garlic) – from the species of onions. And there are of if a species that we call it the לוף שוטה/the wild LOF, LOF trained for the leaves.

עד שימתוקו – for they are not considered edible food other than until after that they pick them and their bitterness leaves them.

פקועות (Bitter-Apple, a gourd) – similar to small watermelons, and they are bitter. But my Rabbis explained, a desert gourd. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon.

הקושט (name of a fragrant root or shrub, putchuck) – such is its name in the foreign language and in Arabic. And it is numbered among the spices of frankincense.

Costus, amomum, principal spices, [roots of] crowfoot, asafoetida, pepper and lozenges made of saffron may be bought with tithe money, but they do not convey food uncleanness, the words of Rabbi Akiva. According to Rabbi Akiva these spices and other plant derivatives (some of them are also mentioned in Tevul Yom 1:5) are considered food in that one can use second tithe money to purchase them. As a reminder, second tithe money is supposed to be brought to Jerusalem and used to buy food there (see Deuteronomy 14:26). However, they do not convey food uncleanness, so in this aspect they are considered food. Evidently the reasoning is that these foods aren't foods but they do improve the taste of other foods. Since they improve taste, one can use second tithe money to buy them. But since they are not eaten on their own, they cannot convey food impurity.

והחמס (amomum, an Indian spice/חמם )- there are those who explained it as an Arabic spice plant/ginger and there are those who explain it as cinnamon.

Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri to him: if they may be bought with [second] tithe money, then why should they not impart food uncleanness? And if they do not impart food uncleanness, then they should also not be bought with [second] tithe money? Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri doesn't like this inconsistency. In his opinion, a plant is either considered a food, in which case it can be bought with second tithe money and it would convey food uncleanness. Or it is not a food in which case it can't be bought with second tithe money and it doesn't convey uncleanness.

וראשי בשמים (and the principal spices) – as for example Moscato nut, Nard (aromatic herb, Valerian) and things similar to them, that provide a pleasant smell.

התיאה (root of crawfoot -used as a spice, but poisonous for beasts) – a species of assas foetida (an umbelliferous plant used, as a resin or in leaves, for a spice and for medicinal purposes).

וחלתית (assa foetida) – this is its name in Arabic. But even though its aroma is bad, they regularly put from it in foods.

חלות חריע (lozenges made of bastard saffron) – forest crocus/saffron (one of the ingredients of frankincense). And we call it ALKARTOM in Arabic.

אף הן לא ילקחו בכסף מעשר – For the All-Merciful stated (Deuteronomy 14:26): “and you shall spend the money [on anything you want -cattle, sheep, wine, or other intoxicant, or anything that you may desire.] And you shall feast there [in the presence of the LORD your God and rejoice with your household],” a thing that is consumed as it is you purchase with the money of [Second] Tithe, that which is not consumed as it is, you do not purchase with the money of [Second] Tithe. And this is the Halakha, that if it does not receive defilement as food, they are not purchased with the monies of [Second] Tithe.

הפגין (hard/unripe figs)- figs that are not ripe, as it is written (Song of Songs 2:13): “The green figs form on the fig tree.” And all the rest of the produce/fruits also which are not ripe are called פגין.

Unripe figs or grapes: Rabbi Akiva says: they convey food uncleanness; Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri says: [this is only] when they have reached the season when they are liable to tithes. According to Rabbi Akiva, although they are not yet ready to eat, unripe grapes and figs are already considered food and therefore they convey food uncleanness. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri says that this is so only when they become liable to tithes. Their liability to tithes is discussed in Sheviit 4:7-8.

והבוסר (half-ripe fruit, esp. grapes) – grapes that did not ripen. And when they arrived to become like a white bean, they are called בוסר. And פגין are worse than בוסר.

Olives and grapes that have hardened: Bet Shammai says: they are susceptible to uncleanness, Bet Hillel says: they are insusceptible. The mishnah now moves to the opposite scenario olives and grapes that have hardened. Bet Shammai says that they are nevertheless still considered food. Bet Hillel says that since they are generally no longer eaten, they are no longer considered food.

משיבואו לעונות המעשרות – each and every fruit according to the established time for it to be obligated in tithing, as is taught in the Mishnah in the first chapter of [Tractate] Maaserot (see Mishnah 32). But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri

Black cumin: Bet Shammai says: is not susceptible, Bet Hillel says: it is susceptible. Bet Shammai says that black cumin which is not eaten but just put on the top of bread is not considered food and therefore is not susceptible to impurity. Bet Hillel says that since it is eaten, it is considered food.

פריצי זיתים וענבים (the proud among the olives and grapes) – that became hard prior to their ripening, and they are not peeled in the olive press. It is the language of (Daniel 11:14): “and the lawless sons of your people [will assert themselves to confirm the vision, but they will fail],” hard and wicked people. Such are these olives and grapes, hard and they are not peeled nor trodden/pressed.

Similarly [they dispute with regard to their liability to] tithes. The same dispute occurs with regard to tithing black cumin. Bet Shammai says it is not food and therefore need not be tithed. Bet Hillel says it is liable for tithes because it is food.

בית שמאין מטמאין – for they are considered edible/food.

ובית הלל מטהרין – for they are not considered edible/food.

הקצח (black cumin) – NEEL in the foreign language. And it is a black seed, and it is customary to put it on bread, for those who are accustomed to it do not come to have heart pain.

וכן למעשרות – just as they disagreed regarding defilement, so too they argued with regard to tithing, for those who declare them as susceptible to uncleanness as food obligated it for tithing.

קור (white heart or terminal bud of a palm – cabbage tree – used as food) – it is soft wood that is added at the top of a palm. And people consume it, and in the rainy season it becomes bard.

The heart of a palm is like wood in every respect, except that it may be bought for [second] tithe money. Heart of palm is not generally considered food and therefore it is not susceptible to food impurity. This is probably because often it wouldn't be eaten, since the palm grew before the heart could be harvested. However, since it is edible when the palm is still young, one can use second tithe money to buy it.

כעץ לכל דבר – and is not susceptible to uncleanness as food.

Unripened dates are considered food, but are exempt from tithes. Unripened dates are almost an opposite case. Whereas the heart of palm begins as food but then becomes inedible, unripened dates are currently inedible but will become edible later. They are considered food as far as impurity goes, but if one eats them before they are ripe, he need not tithe them.

נלקח בכסף מעשר (and it is purchased through Second Tithe monies)- of the fruit [from fruit] and it grows in the ground.

כפניות (date-berries in their early stage/inflorescence of palms) – palms that did not ripen all the way.

כאוכלים – and they are susceptible to uncleanness as food.

דגים מאימתי מקבלים טומאה – and whenever they are living they are not susceptible to receive defilement.

When do fish become susceptible to uncleanness? Bet Shammai say: after they have been caught. Bet Hillel say: only after they are dead. Rabbi Akiva says: if they can still live. Fish can be eaten without first being slaughtered. Indeed, theoretically one could catch a fish from the sea and immediately eat it even while it's still alive (there definitely are cultures that do this). Therefore, Bet Shammai says that fish are immediately susceptible to impurity, once they have been caught, for they are immediately considered food. Bet Hillel says they are not food until they are dead, because that's when they are generally eaten. Rabbi Akiva takes a position somewhere between the two houses. If the fish is still currently alive but will die even if it were thrown back into the water, then it is already considered food and is susceptible to impurity. But if the fish has been caught but could still be thrown back into the water and live, then it is not susceptible.

משיצודו (from when they are caught) – they are considered as dead.

If a branch of a fig tree was broken off, but it was still attached by its bark: Rabbi Judah says: [the fruit] is still not susceptible to uncleanness. But the sages say: [it all depends] whether they could still live. A similar case is brought with regard to branches that have been cut off a tree but are still hanging by their bark. Fruit on a tree is not susceptible to impurity but once it has been cut off it is. Rabbi Judah says that as long as the fruit is hanging by its bark, meaning it is still attached, it is not susceptible. The other sages say that it all depends on whether the fruit is attached enough such that it could live. Like the fish, if the fruit could still live, it is not susceptible to impurity.

אם יכולים לחיות – that if he would return them to the water they would live, they don’t defile. But if they are not able to live when they return them to the water, even though they still had not died, they are susceptible to receive ritual defilement. And the Halakha is according to the School of Hillel.

Grain that had been uprooted, but is still attached to the soil even by the smallest of roots, is not susceptible to uncleanness. Grain is not susceptible to impurity until it has completely been severed from the soil

יחור של תאנה שנפשח (a young shoot of a fig tree that was stripped/split) – a branch of the a fig tree and there are figs on it, that had been detached and separated from the place of their connection, but that there remained from its skin and it is attached with the husk/skin/bark of the tree alone.

ר' יהודה מטהר – those figs that are on the branch, if the defilement came in contact with them, they are considered as attached, since the branch is attached slightly, and even though it is not attached other than with a skin/husk.

וחכמים אומרים אם יכול לחיות – if they will tie and attach the branch with the tree, the branch will live and produce fruit, and it is considered as attached and pure. But if it will not live when they retie it with the tree, the figs that are on the branch are considered like they are detached and are susceptible to receive defilement. And the Halakha is according to the Sages.

חלב בהמה טהורה – that became ritually forbidden by unskillful slaughtering,

Introduction Today's mishnah returns to the topic of whether a food needs to first be made susceptible to impurity or whether it needs "intention" in order to be considered food.

is pure from the defilement of carrion, as it is written (Leviticus 7:24): “Fat from animals that died or were torn by beasts may be put to any use, [but you must not eat it],” which implies even Holy Service.

The fat [of the carcass] of a clean beast is not regarded as unclean with carrion uncleanness; for this reason it must first be made susceptible. "Helev," a certain type of fat, from a clean animal, cow, goat or sheep, that died without being properly slaughtered, is not impure. Only the "helev" of an unclean animal (camel, rabbit, pig, etc.) is impure (as is the whole animal, after it has died). So if one has "helev" from an clean animal it must first come into contact with water to be even susceptible to impurity. We should note that such fat is forbidden to eat, even if the animal was properly slaughtered.

לפיכך הוא צריך הכשר – and since that it will not ultimately become a heavy defilement, for this, we hold in the first chapter of [Tractate] Taharot [Mishnah 3), for everything that ultimately doesn’t defile in a grave manner, that is to defile a person and vessels, requires preparation.

The fat of an unclean beast, however, is regarded as unclean with carrion uncleanness; for this reason it need not be made at first susceptible. As stated above, "helev" from an unclean animal is already impure. Indeed, the entire animal is impure (see mishnah three). Therefore, even the helev need not come into contact with water for it to be impure.

חלב בהמה טומאת נבלות – for the Torah did not purify other than the fat of a ritually pure animal that became forbidden by unskillful slaughtering, which excludes the fat of an unclean animal which lacks being torn apart [by a beast of prey], because its being torn and its slaughter are equivalent.

As for unclean fish and unclean locusts, intention is required in villages. In the villages people don't seem to eat unclean fish and locusts. Therefore, in such places, for the fish or locust to be susceptible to food impurity the person must have the intention to eat it. In contrast, in larger marketplaces people will eat such food. If this food is sold there, it will not require intention for it to be susceptible to impurity. In all places, the fish and locusts are not susceptible to impurity until they have had contact with liquids.

ואין צריך הכשר – for defilement of food if he combined less than an olive’s bulk with less than an egg’s bulk, as explained above (Mishnah 3), but intention is certainly required, for something regarding meat requires intention as is taught in the Mishnah above (Mishnah 3).

וצריך מחשבה בכפרים - but not in the marketplaces [for unclean fish and locusts]. But preparation is required in every place.

כוורת דברים וכו' – if it (i.e., the beehive) is attached with plaster, everyone admits/agrees that it is like land/real estate (i.e., the ground) for all things, but if it was placed on pegs, everyone admits that is like vessels. But they didn’t disagree other than when it is placed on the ground and is not attached with plaster.

Introduction Today's mishnah deals with the halakhic status of a bee-hive. Specifically, the sages debate whether it is considered to have the status of land because it is attached to the land.

ר' אליעזר אומר הרי היא כקרקע – and it is acquired by money, a document or a claim of undisturbed possession like land/real estate (i.e., the ground) .

A bee-hive: Rabbi Eliezer says: it is treated as if it were land; and one can write a prozbul on it security, it is also not susceptible to uncleanness as long as it remains in its own place, and the one who scrapes honey from it on Shabbat is liable to a sin-offering. According to Rabbi Eliezer, the beehive has the status of land. The mishnah lists three consequences to this determination. a) If the debtor owns a beehive, a prozbul may be written using just the beehive as security, even though he owns no actual land. This is a topic that we covered in yesterday’s mishnah. A prozbul was a document written by the creditor to avoid loan remission in the Sabbatical year (see chapter 10 of Tractate Sheviit). In order to write a prozbul one must own land (see Sheviit 10:6-7). b) Land and anything that is considered attached to it (such as plants or houses) is not susceptible to impurity. Thus, according to Rabbi Eliezer, the beehive cannot become impure. However, this is only true while it remains in its place. If the beehive was picked up and moved elsewhere, it can become susceptible to impurity. c) One who plucks something from the land is liable for having transgressed Shabbat. Hence, according to Rabbi Eliezer, one who removes honey from a beehive on Shabbat is liable.

וכותבין עליה פרוזבול – a document that the Jewish court writes to the lender/creditor that transferred to them every debt that he has [to collect’ – so that the Seventh Year would not cause a cancellation of the debt, and we don’t write a Prozbul (i.e., a declaration made in court, before the execution of a loan, to the effect that the law of limitation by the entrance to the Sabbatical Year shall not apply to the loan to be transacted) other than on land/real estate, meaning to say, that when the borrower has real estate/land and he has a beehive, it is similar to land/real estate, and we write upon it a Prozbul [document] to the creditor.

But the sages say: it is not to be treated as if it were land, and one many not write a prozbul on its security; it is susceptible even if it remains in its own place; and the one who scrapes honey from it on Shabbat is exempt [from a sin-offering]. The rabbis do not consider the beehive to be “land” and therefore, in all three of these halakhot, they rule opposite of Rabbi Eliezer.

ואינה מקבלת טומאה במקומה – for it is like it would be attached and is not susceptible to receive ritual defilement.

והרודה – from the honeycombs that are within it on the Sabbath, he is liable for a sin-offering, like someone who detaches something from the place where it is attached, as it is written (I Samuel 14:27): “And he (I.e., Jonathan) dipped it into the beehive of honey [and brought his hand back to his mouth and his eyes lit up], but what connection has the forest with honey, but rather just as the forest, he who plucks/detaches from it on the Sabbath is liable for a sin-offering, even honey that one removes [from the beehive]] on the Sabbath is liable for a sin-offering. (This Bartenura to Tractate Shevi’it, Chapter 10, Mishnah 7 adds that the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Eliezer).

מאימתי ממיטמאות משום משקה – for that which is undefined exists for consumption, and from when does it become susceptible for ritual defilement for liquids to become first-degree of ritual defilement. (See also Tractate Makhshirin, Chapter 6, Mishnah 4 which defines the seven liquids that make foods susceptible for ritual impurity – and Tractate Bava Batra 9b where a Baraitha is brought indicating the honey in a beehive becomes susceptible for ritual impurity without intention – and that as long as the honey is in the beehive, it is considered as food and not liquid. There is a dispute between the Schools of Shammai and Hillel in this Mishnah about when the transition takes place.)

Introduction Honey is one of the seven liquids that causes food to become susceptible to impurity (see Makhshirin 6:4). Today's mishnah discusses when honey from a honeycomb begins to count as honey.

משיחרחר (he sets the twigs on fire for driving out the bees/smokes the bees out) – when he brings smoke and smokes it out to drive away the bees. It is the language of לחרחר ריב/to stir up strife. That it appears as if he wants to stir up strife with the bees. Another explanation of מישחרחר, that he heats them up in order to remove their honey, even though they honey has not yet left. It is the language of (Jeremiah 6:29): “The bellows puff.” And there are those who have the reading "מיהרהר"/from when he will conceive in his mind, meaning to say, that he will conceive an intention/thought in his heart to take the honey out of the beehive.

When do honeycombs become susceptible to uncleanness on account of their being regarded as liquids? As long as the honey is still totally connected to the honeycombs it is still part of its source and liquids that are still part of their source do not cause susceptibility to impurity. Therefore the mishnah asks at what point the honey begins to be considered a "liquid" such that it would cause susceptibility.

מירסק (from the time you break the honeycomb – to take it out of the hive) – when they want to take the honey out of the beehive, they cut it with a knife and remove the honeycombs and that is ריסוק/crushing.

Bet Shammai says: from the moment he begins to smoke the bees out. Bet Shammai says that as soon as someone begins to smoke the bees out of the honeycomb, the honey counts as liquid. Once the bees are gone, the honey can be eaten.

But Bet Hillel says: once he breaks up the honeycomb. Bet Hillel says he has to actually break up the honeycomb to get the honey out.

עתיד הקב"ה להנחיל לכל צדיק וצדיק – he (i.e., Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi) joined this statement to here to inform/announce at the conclusion of the Mishnah of the reward for righteous people who study and fulfill all what is written in the Mishnah.

Introduction The last mishnah in the entire Mishnah is actually not originally a mishnah! It was a late addition to the Mishnah so that the book could end with a word of peace.

שלש מאות ועשרה עולמות שנאמר להנחיל אוהיב יש – there is in this Gematria/use of letters for their numerical value/homiletical interpretation based upon the numerical value the following (for the word יש) which is 310, meaning to say that the benefit and satisfaction/contentment that each and every righteous person will have in the World-to-Come will be three-hundred and ten times [greater] corresponding to This World, for this entire world is [at best] only a piece of the three-hundred and ten than what each righteous person will have as an inheritance in the World-to-Come.

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: In the world to come the Holy One, Blessed be He, will make each righteous person inherit three hundred and ten worlds, for it is written: "That I may cause those that love me to inherit yesh (numerical value of 310); and that I may fill their treasuries" (Proverbs 8:2. The first derashah is based on the word "yesh" which in Hebrew has the gematria (numerical) value of 310 (yod is 10, shin is 300). Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi understands the word "yesh" to mean that tzadikim, the righteous, will inherit 310 worlds. I hope they're good ones!

Rabbi Shimon ben Halafta said: the Holy One, Blessed be He, found no vessel that could contain blessing for Israel save that of peace, as it is written: "The Lord will give strength unto his people; the Lord will bless his people with peace." Shalom, peace, wellbeing, or perhaps completeness, is the vehicle by which God brings berakhah into the world. It is the reason that the last berakhah of the Amidah is "peace" and it is the reason that the Mishnah, which has been one of the greatest berakhot the Jews have ever created or received, ends with the same word. Completeness is also an appropriate way of completing the Mishnah, which after more than 12 years, you and I have now done. Congratulations! We have completed Tractate Oktzim, Seder Toharot and the Entire Mishnah!! Usually I write, "It is a tradition at this point to thank God for helping us finish learning the tractate and to commit ourselves to going back and relearning it, so that we may not forget it and so that its lessons will stay with us for all of our lives." But today, I think I might need to write a bit more. For the past 12 years I have been writing my commentary on the Mishnah and you have been reading and studying it. And now, we've actually reached that moment. We've finished learning the whole Mishnah. So grab yourself a beer, a glass of wine, a shot of whiskey, raise a l'haim, say a berakhah (shehakol over beer and whiskey, hagafen over wine) and drink up. It's been a true privilege to serve as your teacher and it's been an amazing opportunity for me as well. I should say that my feeling is one of utter humility. My commentary was based on the work of others, whose work was based on their predecessors, going all the way back to the Talmud. I hope I have brought to you just a small taste of the amazing rabbinic tradition. The Mishnah is, after all, one of the shortest of rabbinic works. There is much learning to be done, and shortly we will begin Daf Shevui. But for now, one moment of congratulations is in order. I will be reciting the Hebrew siyyum (words of completion) on Sunday at the Conservative Yeshiva. Hopefully, it will be on the internet so that you can see it as well. Congratulations on an amazing amount of learning. And finally thank you to all of the people who've made this possible. Thanks to all of you who have donated money to subsidize the project. Thanks to the many people at USCJ in New York, Dr. Morton Siegel and Rabbi Paul Drazen, and others over the years who've made sure the Mishnah was properly sent out. Thanks to the people at the Conservative Yeshiva, including Rabbi Gail Diamond, who took over the project in recent years. And "aharon aharon haviv" I want to extend my warmest gratitude to Rabbi Jerome Epstein who approached me about 12 years ago and asked whether I would be interested and willing to start this project. Without Rabbi Epstein's commitment Mishnah Yomit would never have begun and it would not have been completed. For twelve years he has been my most consistent learner, and without his careful eye, the text would have been full of even more typos than there probably are. I have benefited tremendously from his dedication and I hope it continues for many years.