Комментарий к Твуль йом 1:1
הַמְכַנֵּס חַלּוֹת עַל מְנָת לְהַפְרִישׁ, וְנָשְׁכוּ, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, חִבּוּר בִּטְבוּל יוֹם. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, אֵינוֹ חִבּוּר. מִקְרָצוֹת נוֹשְׁכוֹת זוֹ בָזוֹ, וְכִכָּרוֹת נוֹשְׁכוֹת זוֹ בָזוֹ, הָאוֹפֶה חֲמִיטָה עַל גַּבֵּי חֲמִיטָה עַד שֶׁלֹּא קָרְמוּ בַתַּנּוּר, וְקוֹלִית שֶׁל מַיִם הַמְחֻלְחֶלֶת, וּרְתִיחַת גְּרִיסִין שֶׁל פּוֹל רִאשׁוֹנָה, וּרְתִיחַת יַיִן חָדָשׁ, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אַף שֶׁל אֹרֶז, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, חִבּוּר בִּטְבוּל יוֹם. בֵּית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, אֵינוֹ חִבּוּר. וּמוֹדִים בִּשְׁאָר כָּל הַטֻּמְאוֹת, בֵּין קַלּוֹת בֵּין חֲמוּרוֹת:
Если один [то есть священник] собрал порции халы [порцию теста для хлеба, подаренного коэну, который становится святым при разлуке и может быть употреблен только коанимами или их домохозяйством] с намерением разлучить их, и они Бейт-Шаммай говорит, что застревают вместе: это [считается] связью [для нечистоты, если прикоснуться к какой-либо их части] относительно тевул йом [того, кто погрузил этот день в микву , но должен ждать до наступления темноты, чтобы полностью стать чистым и до тех пор нечистым второй степени]. Бейт Гилель говорит: это не [считается] связь. Относительно кусков теста [ terumah ], которые застряли друг с другом, или буханки, которые застряли друг с другом, [или] если один печет один плоский кекс на вершине другого, и они еще не покрываются коркой в печь, или пена на воде, которая пузырится, или первая пена, которая поднимается при варке крупы из бобов, или пена от кипячения нового вина, и рабби Иегуда говорит: также рис, Бейт Шаммай, говорит: они [считаются] связь [для нечистоты] в отношении тевулом ; Бейт Гилель говорит: они не [считаются] связями. И они [оба] признают в отношении всех других примесей, как малых, так и больших степеней [что они считаются связями].
Bartenura on Mishnah Tevul Yom
המכנס חלות - that they set aside from the started dough, and placed from them a lot, this on top of that, until they became attached to each other, and his intention was from the outset to separate them one from the other.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Tevul Yom
Introduction
The first mishnah in Tevul Yom deals with the issue of whether things that are loosely connected to each other are considered to be one thing, such that if a tevul yom touches one side the whole thing is impure, or many independent things, such that the other side is pure. The issue of "connectives" is something we saw several other times in the Mishnah, including chapters 18-21 of Kelim.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Tevul Yom
ונשכו (and they stuck together)- that they became so attached/stuck together until that when he came to separate them, they adhere one to the other, meaning to say, that when a part was detached from one of them and [the rest] goes up with its neighbor.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Tevul Yom
If one had collected hallah [portions] with the intention of keeping them separate, but in the meantime they had become stuck together: Bet Shammai say: they are connected in the case of a tevul yom. But Bet Hillel say: they are not connected. A priest collects pieces of hallah that he has been given by other people. He intends to keep them separate and bake them separately. However, they end up getting stuck together. According to Bet Shammai, since they are stuck together, if one of them is touched by a tevul yom, then they are all impure. Bet Shammai looks at the situation purely by what is going on physically. Since the pieces of hallah are touching each other, they count as one piece of dough. If the tevul yom touches one of them, they are all disqualified. Bet Hillel, in contrast, takes the person's intention into account. Since he intended to bake them separately, the fact that they temporarily made contact with each other does not mean they count as being connected. Only the piece that the tevul yom actually touched is impure.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Tevul Yom
בית שמאי אומרים חיבור בטבול יום -if a Tevul Yom/one who immersed himself that day [in a Mikveh] came in contact with one of them, all of them are made invalid as if they are one body. For a person who immersed himself that day [in a Mikveh] invalidates priest’s due/heave-offering, and the priest’s share of the dough (i.e., Hallah) has the law of Terumah/heave-offering/priest’s due.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Tevul Yom
Pieces of dough [of terumah] that had become stuck together, Or loaves that had become joined, or one who bakes a batter-cake on top of another batter-cake before it could form a crust in the oven, or the froth on the water that was bubbling, or the first scum that rises when boiling groats of beans, or the scum of new wine (r. Judah says: also that of: Bet Shammai say: they are connected in the case of a tevul yom. But Bet Hillel say: they are not connected. In all of the cases described here there are two or more things that could be looked at as connected or not. In all of these cases, the substance is of terumah and the question is if part was touched by the tevul yom, is it all impure? Some of these require a bit more explanation: Or one who bakes a batter-cake on top of another batter-cake before it could form a crust in the oven: This person will definitely separate the cakes because they will form a crust better when they are separate. Or if there was froth on the water that was bubbling: This refers to a case of a watery dish which is boiling and has bubbles rising from it. Since the dish is watery, the bubbles don't count as being attached to the dish, at least according to Bet Hillel. Or the first froth that rises when boiling groats of beans: the beans were crushed and made into groats. When they are boiled for the first time, a froth comes up. Rabbi Judah says: also that of rice: Boiled terumah rice. In all of these cases Bet Shammai says that all of the parts are considered to be connected. If a tevul yom touches one part, for instance the froth, the whole thing is disqualified. Bet Hillel says that they are considered separate and therefore the part that wasn't touched remains valid terumah.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Tevul Yom
ובית הלל אומרים אינו חיבור – since it is his intention to separate them, and that [piece] that the person who immersed himself that day [in a Mikveh] touched is invalid, but the rest are ritually pure.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Tevul Yom
They agree [that they serve as connectives] if they come into contact with other kinds of uncleanness, whether they be of minor or major grades. The disagreement between Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel is with regard to the tevul yom. As I stated in the introduction, the rabbis (at least Bet Hillel) treated a tevul yom somewhat leniently, since he had already been to the mikveh. However, when it comes to other forms of impurity, both serious and lenient forms, all of the things listed in this mishnah are considered to be connected. Bet Hillel was lenient only with regard to the tevul yom.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Tevul Yom
מקרצות (pieces of dough, separated from the main dough in the trough) – pieces of started dough that were cut into and detached from large pieces/clumps of started dough, are called מקרצות. It is the [Biblical] language (Jeremiah 46:20): “A ‘gadfly’ (i.e., a pinch – from BDB Dictionary) from the north is coming.” And all of these that are considered here. They are established/stand for the dispute of the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel of the concluding clause [of the Mishnah], for that which is not considered the priest’s share of the dough explicitly, because according to the School of Hillel, the priest’s share of the dough is not deemed connected, neither for a person who immersed himself that day in a Mikveh (i.e., a Tevul Yom) and not for other defilements, but these regarding a person who immersed himself that day in a Mikveh, they (i.e., the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel) are explicitly in dispute, but concerning the rest of the defilements, they agree, as is taught in the concluding clause [of the Mishnah].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Tevul Yom
חמיטה (a batter of which flat cakes are made) – a thin cake.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Tevul Yom
עד שלא קרמו בתנור – for since that they became stuck together/attached when they were started dough, their form has been lost if you place them when attached, therefore, they certainly will be separated in the future.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Tevul Yom
וקולית של מים (a hollow ball/globule of water) – the foam/froth and effervescence that comes up in the water is called קולית, and if a person who immersed himself that day [in the Mikveh] came in contact with that effervescence, according to the School of Hillel, it is not a connection/junction and the waters were not made unfit.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Tevul Yom
מחולחלת (loosely put in, hollow, blown up)- when the effervescence/froth/scum is hollow from underneath it, and it doesn’t touch the water other than its edges.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Tevul Yom
הראשונות – that the first boiling/effervescence of pounded beans are not attached on to the beans.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Tevul Yom
ר' יהודה אומר אף ברתיחה של אורז – The School of Shammai and the School of Hillel also dispute if it is an attachment/connection for a person who immersed himself that day [in the Mikveh] (i.e., Tevul Yom), and if he came in contact with/touched the effervescence, if is as if he came in contact with the rice.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Tevul Yom
ומודים – the School of Hillel [agrees].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Tevul Yom
בשאר כל הטומאות – that it is an attachment/connection.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Tevul Yom
בין קלות בין חמורות – in [cases of] minor [sources of uncleanness], he is first degree of ritual uncleanness; in major [sources of uncleanness] he is a primary source of ritual defilement. And specifically, they dispute concerning a person who immersed himself that day [in a Mikveh], because he had already ascended from his defilement and is not lacking anything other than his sunset [arriving].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy