Komentarz do Pesachim 3:11

אלו עוברין – these are removed from the world, for even though these do not violate on (Exodus 13:7): “no leaven shall be found (literally – “seen”) [in all your territory,, from the Rabbis however, it requires removal. And that which is taught further on (see Mishnah 5) that “dough beginning to ferment is to be burned,” and even though “that the one who eats it is exempt.”

Introduction This mishnah provides two lists: one of food items which have small amounts of chametz mixed into them, and the other a list of non-food items which are made from dough. It is forbidden to eat or to possess any of the things on this list. However, one who does so is not subject to the full punishment of “karet” (extirpation), the punishment given for eating plain, non-mixed and edible chametz on Pesah (see Exodus 12:15). The reason that the punishment is less is that these are either not fully chametz but rather mixtures, or if they are fully chametz they are not generally edible or considered to be food.

Babylonian kutah - it's made from moldy bread and milk. They would dip foods into it.

These must be removed on Pesah:
Babylonian kutah, Medean beer, Idumean vinegar, Egyptian zitom, Babylonian kutah is a mixture of curds, crumbs and salt. Medean beer (the word in Hebrew for beer just means a strong drink) has barley in it, as does Idumean vinegar and Egyptian zitom (another strong drink). All of these things are foods which must be removed from one’s possession before Pesach because they contain in them grains which have turned into chametz. It is curious to me that the mishnah lists only foreign products. Indeed, these are four of the empires that ruled over Israel: Babylonia, Medea (Persia), Edom (Rome) and Egypt. However, Greece usually appears in this list and Egypt does not.

שכר המדי – liquor that they would make in Media from wheat or barley steeped in water.

The dyer’s pulp, cook’s dough, and the scribes’ paste. Dyer’s broth has bran in it, probably as a thickener. Cook’s dough is dough that is used to soak up the extra, dirty liquid from cooking pots. Scribe’s paste was used to glue parts of parchments together. None of these three things is intended to be used as food and indeed they all probably taste terrible. Nevertheless, since they all do have chametz in them they must be removed before Pesach.

וחומץ האדומי – vinegar that is made in the land of Edom, where they put barley [in wine] and let them stand until they ferment.

Rabbi Eliezer says: women’s ornaments too. Rabbi Eliezer adds women’s ornaments, which are made with mixtures of chametz. The Talmud understands this as referring to various salves and not to jewelry.

וזיתום המצרי – one-third barley and one third (of the mixture) of safflower which is the desert saffron and it is called in Arabic “Kartom” and one third salt and it is made for medicinal purposes. Until here, it is leaven that is fit for eating via a mixture. From here and onwards it is a spoiled leavened substance in its natural condition unfit for food (Pesahim 43a).

This is the general rule: whatever is of a species of grain must be removed on Pesah. These are subject to a warning but they do not involve karet. The mishnah now provides two general rules, rules which I explained in my introduction. The first is that anything that has in it grain, even if that grain is only in a mixture with other non-grain items, must be removed from one’s possession on Pesah. The second one is that one is not liable for karet for eating or possessing things that are not fully chametz i.e. foods which are not in a mixture with other things. However, they are still prohibited.

וזומן של צבעים – water which one puts into it bran-flour/four of the the second course. And we use the dye for their work.

ועמילן של טבחים – [bread] which we make from flour of grain that did not bring up one-third of its ripening process , and with it we cover the pot to absorb the evil smell.

וקולן של סופרים – the dust of the millstone which we knead with water and the scribes glue their papers to it.

רבי אליעזר – adds, for the first Tanna whereas does not have this other than completely grain leavened products via a mixture or a spoiled leavened substance in its natural condition [which is unfit for food]. But Rabbi Eliezer adds even women’s makeup which is a spoiled leavened substance in its natural condition [which is unfit for food] via a mixture of ingredients of frankincense (or artist’s materials). And in the Gemara (Pesahim 43a), Do you think that women’s makeup [only]? But rather, I would say, even women’s plaster, sifted fine flour that women attach and combine on their skin with other artist’s materials/frankincense to remove the hair or to whiten it and to make the skin finer. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Eliezer.

כל שהוא מן דגן – from the five species [of grain], and they have water mixed in, for if there is not water in them but only fruit juice, we hold that fruit juices do not ferment.

הרי אל באזהרה – if he at them, he violates a negative commandment.

ואין בהם כרת – for on complete leaven he is punished by extirpation, fur he is not punished with extirpation on a mixture. But he is flogged on eating it if he ate an olive’s bulk of leaven in the mixture in order to eat within a certain time a piece of wheat bread (see Mishnah Negaim, Chapter 8, Mishnah 9 – roughly equivalent to a half-a-loaf -see Tosefta Negaim Chapter 7, Halakha 10). But if he at an olive’s worth of leaven without a mixture in the time that it takes to eat piece of wheat bread is not flogged according to the Torah. However, at least, there is a prohibition for Hametz on Passover is forbidden in a mixture in any amount.

בצק שבסידקי עריבה – and it is made to strengthen its breaks and cracks. If there is the equivalent of an olive’s bulk in one place, he liable to remove it; less than this, it is made void in its minority. But if it is not made to strengthen, even less than an olive’s bulk must be removed because it is not made void there and it is impossible that he will decide to take it from there.

Introduction Most of this mishnah deals with dough which is found in the crevices of a kneading trough and whether or not one must remove this dough on Pesach. The final clause of the mishnah deals with dough that may or not have already begun to become chametz.

וכן לענין הטומאה – If an unclean reptile came in contract with this dough on Passover, for its prohibition is considered, if it has the equivalent of an olive’s bulk separating from before the impurity, and there isn’t something like a trough and the impurity does not go down to the trough, and with less than an olive’s bulk, if he is not strict upon it, it is null in regard to the trough and it is as if the unclean reptile had come in contact with the trough itself, and it is impure.

[With regard to] the dough in the cracks of the kneading trough: if there is as much as an olive in one place, he must remove [it]; but if not, it is nullified through the smallness of its quantity. With regard to removing the dough from the cracks of the kneading trough, it all depends on whether or not there is an olive’s worth of dough in one place. If there is, then he must remove it; but if not the dough is considered as if it doesn’t exist and he need not bother removing it.

אם מקפיד עליו חוצץ – this is how it should be read: And in the rest of the days of the year when it’s prohibition is not considered, the matter is not dependent upon the measurement if there is an olive’s bulk or not, but rather matter is dependent upon the stringency/fastidiousness. If he is fastidious about it and will eventually take it from there, it interposes in the face of the impurity, whether there is within it an olive’s bulk or not and the impurity does not descend into the trough. But if he is not fastidious about it and wishes for its existence, even if there are in it several olives it is considered as if it is in the trough. And when the unclean reptile comes in contract with the dough, it is as if it has come in contact with the actual trough.

And it is likewise in the matter of uncleanness: if he objects to it, it makes a break; but if he desires its preservation, it is like the kneading-trough. There is a similar rule with regard to uncleanness, but the rule is actually different. With regard to uncleanness the issue is whether or not the dough is an essential and desired part of the kneading trough. If the dough is an essential part of the trough, then if a sheretz (an impure creeping thing) touches the dough the entire trough is impure, even if though the sheretz didn’t touch the trough itself. If the dough is not an essential part of the trough, then only the dough is impure and the rest of the trough remains pure. The mishnah says that the dough’s being an essential part of the trough hinges on the desire of its owner. If the owner wishes the dough to remain there because it is helping to fill a gap in the trough (functioning like plaster), then it is part of the trough and does not stop the uncleanness from spreading. If the owner wants it to be removed, it does break the uncleanness; only the dough is impure and not the trough.

בצק החרש – that we strike it with a hand and it does emit a sound and it is similar to a deaf-mute that when we call it, it does not respond. Another commentary: dough of the earthenware which is hard like earthenware and it is not known if it has fermented.

[With regard to] “deaf” dough, if there is [a dough] similar to it which has become chametz, it is forbidden. Dough is here compared to a deaf person. When one talks to a deaf person (they didn’t have sign language back then) the deaf person doesn’t get up to respond. So too, this “deaf” dough does not seem to be “getting up” meaning it doesn’t seem to be rising. The mishnah says that if other dough that was kneaded with it is rising, then the deaf dough must also be chametz and it needs to be removed. If not, then the deaf dough is not chametz and need not be removed before Pesah.

אם יש כיוצא בו שהחמיץ – if there is another started dough that was to be kneaded at the at the same time that this one is being kneaded and has already fermented, it is considered prohibited. And if there isn’t there something similar, its measure is as long as it takes an average man to walk a mile, and this measure is like the time of two-fifths of an hour.

חלה בטומטה – the starter-dough that became impure and furthermore, Hallah that is appropriate for the Kohen to eat is not taken from it, how then would we separate it (i.e., the Hallah) on the holiday of Passover? WE are not able to bake it on Passover after it is not worthy of being eaten, and to keep it around and then burn it in the evening is impossible, lest it ferment. And to feed it to dogs is impossible for we do not get rid of holy things on Holy Days.

Introduction This mishnah discusses a halakhic quandary. In order to understand it we need to first mention some background halakhot. 1) When one prepares dough there is a mitzvah to separate some dough. This separated dough is called hallah (Numbers 15:20). If the dough is ritually clean it is given to a Kohen; if it is ritually unclean it cannot be eaten and must be burned. 2) On Pesah all dough needs to be baked immediately lest it become chametz. 3) On festivals one is allowed to cook food, but one is not allowed to cook food which cannot be eaten. 4) One is not allowed to burn sacred things in order to remove them on a festival. This includes challah, which is considered sacred. The problem then is what to do with baking unclean hallah on one of the festival days of Pesah. If she bakes it then she may be transgressing the laws of the festival which allows one to cook only food which can be eaten. The unclean hallah cannot be eaten so it can’t be baked. She can’t burn it either. If she just leaves it, it will ferment and become chametz. In our mishnah the rabbis debate what to do with this dough.

רבי אליעזר אומר לא יקרא לה שם חלה עד שתאפה – and still each and every is appropriate [for separating out Hallah] and from each and every one we separate a small amount, and after baking it, if he wanted, he can separate a complete Hallah on the entire thing. For Rabbi Eliezer holds that he who detaches bread from where it sticks to the oven and puts it in a basket, the basket combines [the pieces] for Hallah.

How do they separate hallah on the festival [from dough which is] in [a state of] uncleanness?
Rabbi Eliezer says: she should not call it [hallah] until it is baked. Rabbi Eliezer tries to find a means to avoid the problem. Usually, one separates and designates dough as hallah while it is still dough, before it is baked. In this case, to avoid the problem, what the woman baking the dough should do is not designate which piece will be hallah until after it has been baked. In this way, while the loaves are being baked, we could point to each loaf and say, “this one will not be hallah.” After it has already been cooked we need not be concerned about it becoming chametz. In the evening, she may burn the unclean hallah.

לא זהו חמץ שמוזהרים עליו – for it is not his after he has designated it (literally ‘called it by name’) and it is written in Scripture (Exodus 13:7): “no leaven shall be found [in your territory].” Yours you cannot see but you can see that of others and of “On High” (i.e., God). And this is not yours nor of your friends, for yet it has not reached the hand of the Kohen. But Rabbi Eliezer holds that since if he desires, he may bring up a case for decision [from a Sage] that is dedicated [to the Temple] in error and that is not something dedicated and it is appropriate for eating. It is found that it is his and it is the leaven of an Israelite. But Rabbi Yehoshua holds that we don’t say, ‘Since.” But the Halakha is according to Rabbi Eliezer.

Rabbi Judah ben Batera says: she should put [the dough] into cold water. Rabbi Judah ben Batera comes up with a different solution. Separate the hallah when it is still dough, but instead of baking it put it in cold water. The cold water will arrest the fermentation process.

Rabbi Joshua said: this is not the chametz concerning which we are warned with, “It shall not be seen”, and “It shall not be found”. Rather she separates it and leaves it until the evening, and if it ferments it ferments. Rabbi Joshua rejects both of the previous solutions and rather says that she should separate the dough and if it becomes chametz then it becomes chametz. There is no need to be concerned that this is a transgression. The Torah’s prohibitions “It (chametz) shall not be seen” (Exodus 13:7) and “It shall not be found” (Exodus 12:19) do not apply to this chametz because it doesn’t belong to its owners anymore. From the minute she separates it to make it challah it already belongs to the kohen.

שלש נשים לשות כאחת – Each one [all together] in a full oven, and there is no fermentation, even though [that one of them] is waiting until the other two make it.

Introduction This mishnah deals with how people should bake matzot on Pesah to avoid them becoming chametz. The mishnah reflects a reality in which several women shared one oven for baking bread/matzah. We should note that today no one bakes matzah on Pesah. All matzah is baked before Pesah in order to avoid the risk of the dough becoming chametz.

וחכ"א – one does not have to be so liberal that they would kneading all together, but three women are engaged, each one on her piece of dough.

Rabban Gamaliel says: three women may knead at the same time and bake in one oven, one after the other. Rabban Gamaliel says that three women may knead dough simultaneously and then use the same oven, even though the dough of one woman will have to wait while the dough of the other two women is baking. Rabban Gamaliel does not think that the dough will turn into chametz in this short amount of time.

אחת לשה – the concluding one kneads while her middle neighbor forms the dough and smoothens its surfaces while the third one that kneads first bakes. It is found that all three of them are engaged at the same time – each one with her own dough, one kneads hers, another forms the dough and smoothens its surfaces and one bakes hers.

But the sages say: three women may be engaged with the dough at the same time: one kneads, one shapes and one bakes. The sages disagree and think that if one batch of dough has to wait while the other two bake, it is likely that it will turn into chametz. What the women should do is set up an assembly line, one woman will knead, one woman will shape the dough and one woman will bake. If they time it correctly then no one will have to wait to bake their bread.

לא כל הנשים – Rabbi Akiva [is reacting] to the words of Rabban Gamaliel when he returns and says that it is inappropriate to follow his words. Because there are lazy women which will cause fermenting with such a delay, and there is an oven that does not get hot in a hurry and there is wood that is not burned quickly, but rather, according to the words of the Sages, it is appropriate to follow – to engage at all times with the dough , for all the time that they are engaged with the dough, it does not come to fermentation. And such is the Halakha.

Rabbi Akiba says: not all women and not all kinds of wood and not all ovens are alike. Rabbi Akiva says it is impossible to a hard and fast rule since some women prepare bread faster than others, some wood makes ovens hotter than others and some ovens cook faster than others.

זה הכלל תפח – the dough that is in her hands that she sees that it wants to swell.

This is the general principle: if it [the dough] rises, she should slap it with [hands dipped in] cold water. Some commentators explain that this section is a continuation of Rabbi Akiva’s statement but I believe that it is an independent statement. All of the rabbis agree that if the woman begins to see signs of the dough turning into chametz what she should do is slap it with cold water to arrest the fermentation process.

תלטוש – her hand in cold water and form the dough and smoothen its surface and it will become cold.

שיאור – that did not ferment all the way: [cracks] it is the manner of dough that rfermits that it makes many cracks.

Introduction This mishnah deals with how one can tell when a piece of dough has started to become chametz.

כקני חגבים – a crack to this side and a crack on the other side.

Si’ur must be burnt, while he who eats it is exempt; sidduk must be burnt, while he who eats it is liable to kareth. The halakhah in this section seems to be an old halakhah, one which Rabbi Judah and the other sages debate in the remainder of this mishnah. The halakhah is that “si’ur” dough must be burnt, meaning it must be removed before Pesah, but that one who eats it is not liable for karet as he would be were he to have eaten chametz. “Si’ur” comes from the word for hair (se’ar) and we will see in the remainder of the mishnah that both Rabbi Judah and the sages explain it so that it has some connection with hair. “Sidduk” means “cracked” and it is already chametz and therefore one who eats it is liable for karet.

זה וזה האוכלו חייב כרת – for the locust’s horns also are a crack. And what is a fermentation that would be exempt? This which has no crack, but if the dough became pale and wrinkled like a person whose stair stood up out of fright [that his face grows pale]. And the Halakha is according to the Sages.

What is si'ur? [When there are lines on the surface] like locusts’ horns. Sidduk is when the cracks have intermingled with each other, the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Judah and the sages now debate the definition of si’ur and sidduk. According to Rabbi Judah si’ur dough already shows some signs of cracking on the surface and the lines look like locusts’ horns. These horns are similar enough to hair that the dough is called si’ur. The lines on sidduk dough are more numerous and have already begun to intermingle with each other. One who eats dough with this many cracks is liable for karet for having eaten chametz.

But the sages say: regarding the one and the other, he who eats it is liable for karet. And what is si'ur? When its surface is blanched, like [the face of] a man whose hair is standing [on end]. The sages say that what Rabbi Judah called si’ur is actually sidduk and therefore one who eats it is liable for karet. They redefine si’ur as dough that has begun to turn white, like the face of a person who is frightened. Note again the connection with hair to the sages this dough is called si’ur because when a person is frightened not only does his face turn white but his hair stands on end.

מבערים את הכל – whether it is sacred or not sacred, except for enough for him to eat for the Savbbath.

Introduction Chametz is usually removed the day before Pesah, on the fourteenth of the month of Nisan. This potentially becomes a problem when the day before Pesah is Shabbat because chametz is usually removed by being burnt and one cannot burn chametz on Shabbat. In our mishnah the sages debate how to handle this problem.

תרומה מלפני השבת – because he cannot feed it neither to foreigners (i.e., non-Kohanim) nor to his cattle and to have it lay around, it is impossible. But non-sacred [leaven] he doesn’t have to remove it until its [appropriate] time for he can find for them much food. And the Halakah is according to Rabbi Elazar b’Rabbi Tzadok.

If the fourteenth [of Nisan] falls on Shabbat, they remove everything before Shabbat, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Meir says that all of the chametz is to be burned before Shabbat. Most commentators add, based on a talmudic source, that he may leave enough chametz to eat two meals, one on Friday night and one on Shabbat morning. This is because halakhah forbids the eating of matzah on the day before Pesah. However, the custom not to eat matzah on the day before Pesah may not yet have developed in the time of the Mishnah. It is likely that Rabbi Meir assumes that one will eat matzah for Friday night dinner and for the first meal on Shabbat itself. In any case, today when this occurs, many people destroy all of their chametz on Friday, but some people leave enough bread to eat for Friday night dinner and a very early Shabbat morning lunch. This meal must be eaten before the fourth hour of the day, by which time all chametz must be removed.

The sages say: at its [usual] time. The sages say that all of the chametz is removed at its usual time, meaning on Shabbat itself. The sages assume that they will remove the chametz by eating it or by giving it to his animals. If it can’t be eaten, then it may crumbled up and thrown into the wind (see above 2:1).

Rabbi Eleazar bar Zadok says: terumah before Shabbat, and non-sacred [chametz] at its [usual] time. The problem with waiting until Shabbat to remove the terumah is that far fewer people can eat terumah only kohanim and their families may eat it. Therefore, he should burn the terumah the day before Pesah. However, regular chametz may be eaten by anyone, and therefore they can wait to remove it until Shabbat itself. On this point he agrees with the sages.

ההולך – it is referring to the fourteen [of Nisan].

Introduction This mishnah discusses a person who starts on a journey and once he has already left he remembers that he forgot to remove his chametz. The question is whether or not he must return home to remove the chametz or whether he may continue on his way.

אם יכול – that there is time during the day.

He who is on his way to slaughter his Pesah sacrifice or to circumcise his son or to dine at a betrothal feast at the house of his father-in-law, and remembers that he has chametz at home: if he is able to go back, remove [it], and [then] return to his religious duty, he must go back and remove [it]; but if not, he annuls it in his heart. In the first section, the person is on his way to perform a commandment when he remembers that he forgot to remove his chametz. The first two commandments are extremely significant and time-bound. The commandment to participate in the Pesah sacrifice and the commandment to circumcise are the only two positive commandments which carry with them the punishment of karet for lack of fulfillment. Furthermore, the Pesah must be sacrificed on the fourteenth of Nisan and if the eighth day of a boy’s life falls out on the fourteenth of Nisan then it must take place then. It is not surprising that the halakhah allows him to continue on his way to perform these weighty commandments. What is perhaps more surprising is that participating in a betrothal feast is placed in the same category. This perhaps can be read as a rabbinic statement concerning the importance of marriage. In any case, if a person sets off to engage in one of these activities and realizes that he has not burned his chametz, if he can still return home, burn the chametz and get to where he needs to be on time, then he must do so. However, if there is not sufficient time for this, then he need not return. Rather, in his heart he annuls the chametz, that it should be to him as is the dust of the earth.

להציל מן הגייס – Israelites being pursued.

[If he is on his way] to save from an invasion or from a river or from brigands or from a fire or from a collapse [of a building], he annuls it in his heart. In this section he is on his way to save someone’s life. In such a case, even if he could return to remove his chametz and still make it to where he needs to go on time, he need not do so. Since these are matters of life or death, he shouldn’t hesitate or take a risk by returning to remove his chametz. Life takes precedent over all commandments. Therefore, all he should do is annul the chametz in his heart.

יבטל בלבו – and he should not go back, even if there is time, since according to the Torah, mere nullification is sufficient.

[But if] to rest for pleasure, he must return immediately. If he sets out just for pleasure, for instance on a vacation, without there being any commandment that he is going to perform, then he must return and remove his chametz even if this will cause him to not be able to get to where he needs to go. In such a case, the mishnah does not allow him to annul the chametz in his heart.

לשבות שביתה הרשות – that he was walking to wait for the nightfall on the Sabbath limit and to purchase something for the Sabbath/Holy Day to walk from there and further two thousand cubits for a matter that is for pleasure/permissible, he must return immediately [and get rid of his Hametz at home]. But if it is to purchase something for the performance of a commandment such if he needs to go tomorrow to the house of mourning or the house of rejoicing, that is like his doing to slaughter his Passover sacrifice.

שיש בידו בשר קדש – that becomes invalidated when he lives, for the wall of Jerusalem is the separator of [lighter] holy things.

Introduction This mishnah is a direct continuation of yesterday’s mishnah.

אם עבר צופים – the name of a place that from there one sees the Temple.

Similarly, he who went out of Jerusalem and remembered that he had holy meat with him: If he has passed Scopus, he burns it where he is; but if not, he returns and burns it in front of the Temple with the wood of the [altar] pile. Certain sacrifices, such as a thanksgiving offering, may be eaten anywhere in Jerusalem but may not be brought outside. If they are brought outside of Jerusalem they must be burnt. The person in this mishnah is leaving Jerusalem when he discovers that he has with him “holy meat” some sacrificial meat that he didn’t eat. According to the Mishnah, if he has passed Mt. Scopus, a mountain from which the Temple Mount can be seen (this is where Hebrew University is today), then he need not go back to the Temple and burn the meat there. However, if he still has not yet reached that point, he must return to the Temple and burn the sacrifice with the wood of the altar pile.

שורפו במקומו – and they don’t trouble him to return [to burn the Hametz or holy meat]

And for what [quantity] must they return? Rabbi Meir says: for both when there is as much as an egg; Rabbi Judah says: for both, when there is as much as an olive; But the sages say: holy meat, when there is as much as an olive and chametz, when there is as much as an egg. The mishnah now asks about the two cases we have discussed in today’s and yesterday’s mishnah: sacrifices and chametz for the sake of what quantity must one return to burn/remove them? According to Rabbi Meir, the amount is the same for both a measure the size of an egg. The Talmud says that Rabbi Meir learns this from the laws of uncleanness just as food that is less than the size of an egg cannot become unclean, so too he need return only for this measure of sacrifice or chametz. Rabbi Judah disagrees (these guys do seem to always disagree) and holds that in both cases he need return for an amount the size of an olive, a smaller amount than an egg. The Talmud explains that Rabbi Judah learns this from the amount that is prohibited an amount the size of an olive is prohibited and therefore this is the minimum amount for which one must return. Finally, the sages differentiate between the two for sacred meat he must return for the smaller amount of an olive but for chametz he need only return for an egg’s amount.

ולאם לאו חוזר ושורפו – As it is written (Leviticus 6:23): “ [but no purification offering may be eaten from which any blood is brought into the Tent of Meeting for expiation] in the sanctuary; any such shall be consumed in fire.” In the place where he eats it, he burns it.

זה וזה – leaven as we have said above and mention that he has leaven in his house, etc., and Holy meat that is with him.

כבחתה – but less than this (i.e., an egg’s bulk), he annuls it in his heart, and Holy meat he burns in his place. And Rabbi Meir holds that his return is like his defilement. Just as defilement through eatables is like that of an egg, for food cannot defile with less than an egg’s worth, so too, he does not return on something that is less than an egg’s worth.

רבי יהודה אומר זה וזה בכזית – He holds that his return is like its prohibition. Just as its prohibition is an olive’s bulk-worth, for an a olive’s worth of leaven or of Holy meat, he is liable, so too, for a olive’s bulk, he returns.

בשר קודש – because of the stringency of Holy meat, he returns even for an olive bulk’s worth. Leaven of non-sacred produce he does not go back other than on an egg’s bulk. And the Halakha is according to the Sages.