Commento su Hallah 3:10
הַנּוֹטֵל שְׂאֹר מֵעִסַּת חִטִּים וְנוֹתֵן לְתוֹךְ עִסַּת אֹרֶז, אִם יֶשׁ בָּהּ טַעַם דָּגָן חַיֶּבֶת בַּחַלָּה. וְאִם לָאו, פְּטוּרָה. אִם כֵּן, לָמָּה אָמְרוּ הַטֶּבֶל אוֹסֵר כָּל שֶׁהוּא, מִין בְּמִינוֹ. וְשֶׁלֹּא בְמִינוֹ, בְּנוֹתֵן טָעַם:
Uno che prende il lievito dall'impasto di grano [farina] e lo mette nell'impasto di riso [farina]: se ha il sapore del grano, è obbligato a Challah ; in caso contrario, è esente. In tal caso, perché hanno detto: "I prodotti non protetti di qualsiasi importo rendono vietato il cibo"? Cioè [per quanto riguarda una miscela di] un tipo con la sua specie, ma [per quanto riguarda una miscela di un tipo] non con la sua specie, [piuttosto] solo quando impartisce gusto.
Bartenura on Mishnah Challah
הנוטל שאור מעיסת חיטין – which had not separated/consecrated its Hallah.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Challah
Introduction
This mishnah returns us to the subject that was first raised in mishnah seven above dough from wheat flour that is mixed in with dough from rice flour. As a reminder, wheat flour is subject to the laws of hallah whereas rice flour is not.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Challah
ואם לאו פטורה – for the eatables forbidden pending separation of sacred gifts does not prohibit it, since it lacks taste.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Challah
One who takes leaven from a dough of wheat [flour] and puts [it] into dough of rice [flour], [then] if it has the taste of grain, it is subject to hallah, [but] if not, it is exempt. Leaven is the sour dough used to make new batches of bread rise. If leaven is taken from wheat flour dough and put into rice flour dough, the batch is liable for hallah only if one can still taste the wheat flour.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Challah
If so, why did they say: “Untithed produce of any amount renders food prohibited”? This section raises a difficulty on the law presented in the previous section. According to the quote in this section, “untithed produce of any amount renders food prohibited,” if even a small amount of untithed produce falls into a large amount of tithed produce, then one cannot eat the produce until he removes tithes and terumah. Why then did they say in section one that the mixture becomes prohibited only if it imparts taste?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Challah
א"כ למה אמרו הטל אוסר בכל שהוא – as we said above (Mishnah 9), if he lacks the means to do so, that he brings Hallah for everything. These words refer to [Hallah] from the same species, but if it is not from the same species, such as the case of wheat with rice, that provides a flavor, for the reason that [we require taking Hallah] from eatables forbidden pending separation of sacred gifts for any amount, because when they permitted that of one wheat [batch], it exempts the entire pile; so too its prohibition, and for that reason it does not belong other than one species with another of the same species.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Challah
That is [with regard to a mixture of] a species with its own species, but [with regard to a mixture of a species] not with its own species, only when it imparts taste. The answer is that there is a difference between cases in which one species becomes mixed up in the same species and cases where different species are mixed. So, for instance, if a tiny bit of wheat dough from which hallah had not been removed became mixed up with a large batch of wheat dough from which hallah had been removed, it would be forbidden to eat of it until he removes hallah. There can be no concept of “imparting taste” here because it all has the same taste. In contrast, if there are two different species, then the species that has not had its terumah removed (or that is liable for hallah, as in section one) must impart taste to the species that has had its terumah removed (or is liable for hallah). If there is no taste, then the mixture is not prohibited.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy