משנה: פֵּירוֹת חוּצָה לָאָרֶץ שֶׁנִּכְנְסוּ לָאָרֶץ חַייָבִין בְּחַלָּה. יָֽצְאוּ מִכָּאן לְשָׁם רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר מְחַייֵב וְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה פּוֹטֵר. עָפָר חוּצָה לָאָרֶץ הַבָּא בִסְפִינָה לָאָרֶץ חַייָב בְּמַעְשְׂרוֹת וּבִשְׁבִיעִית. אָמַר רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אֵימָתַי בִּזְמַן שֶׁהַסְּפִינָה גוֹשֶׁשֶׁת. עִיסָּה שֶׁנִּילוֹשָׁה בְּמֵי פֵירוֹת חַייֶבֶת בְּחַלָּה וְנֶאֱכֶלֶת בְּיָדַיִם מְסוֹאֲבוֹת. הָאִשָּׁה יוֹשֶׁבֶת וְקוֹצָה חַלָּתָהּ עֲרוּמָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא יְכוֹלָה לְכַסּוֹת עַצְמָהּ אֲבָל לֹא הָאִישׁ. MISHNAH: Foreign produce imported into the Land is obligated for ḥallah. If it was exported, Rebbi Eliezer declares it obligated but Rebbi Aqiba declares it free. [Growth of] earth from outside the Land which came to the Land in a ship is under the obligation of tithes and Sabbatical. Rebbi Jehudah said, when is this? When the ship touches the ground. Dough kneaded with fruit juice is subject to hallah which can be eaten with unclean hands15Pure fruit juice, without addition of water, does not make food susceptible to impurity (cf. Demay 2, Notes 136-137.) Therefore, hallah from such a dough cannot become impure and may be eaten by a pure Cohen without washing of his hands (cf. Berakhot 8, Note 46). A woman may sit down naked and separate her hallah15And pronounce the benediction needed; cf. Berakhot 8:2, Note 60. because she can cover herself, but a man may not.
הלכה: פֵּירוֹת חוּצָה לָאָרֶץ כול׳. כְּתִיב אֶל הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מֵבִיא אֶתְכֶם שָׁמָּה. שָׁמָּה אַתֶּם חַייָבִין. אֵין אַתֶּם חַייָבִין חוּץ לָאָרֶץ. תַּנֵּי זוֹ דִבְרֵי רִבִּי מֵאִיר. אֲבָל דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי יְהוּדָה פֵּירוֹת חוּץ לָאָרֶץ שֶׁנִּכְנְסוּ לָאָרֶץ רִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר פּוֹטֵר וְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה מְחַייֵב. מַה טַעֲמָא דְּרִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר לֶחֶם הָאָרֶץ. לֹא לֶחֶם חוּץ לָאָרֶץ. מָה טַעֲמָא דְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אֶל הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מֵבִיא אֶתְכֶם שָׁמָּה. שָׁמָּה אַתֶּם חַייָבִין בֵּין בְּפֵירוֹת הָאָרֶץ בֵּין בְּפֵירוֹת חוּץ לָאָרֶץ. HALAKHAH: “Foreign produce,” etc. It is written (Num. 15:17) “To the Land into which I am bringing you.1“When you come into the Land into which I am bringing you, (v. 18) it shall be that on the occasion of your eating from the bread of the Land you shall lift a heave for the Eternal.”” There you are obligated, you are not obligated outside the Land. It was stated: These are the words of Rebbi Meïr. But the words of Rebbi Jehudah2Who is a better authority than R. Meïr. The same statement in Sifry Num. 110. In Ma‘serot 5:4 (Note 83), R. Jehudah’s interpretation of the position of R. Aqiba is presented as genuine. are: Foreign produce imported into the Land, Rebbi Eliezer declares it free but Rebbi Aqiba declares it obligated. What is the reason of Rebbi Eliezer? (Num. 15:18) “From the Land’s bread,” not foreign bread. What is the reason of Rebbi Aqiba? (Num. 15:17) “To the Land into which I am bringing you.” There you are obligated, both for produce of the Land and foreign produce.”
מָה מְקַייֵם רִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר טַעֲמָא דְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אֶל הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מֵבִיא אֶתְכֶם שָׁמָּה. חֲבֵרַייָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר רִבִּי בָּא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר. רִבִּי הִילָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. כָּךְ מֵשִׁיב רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אֶת רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר אֵין אַתְּ מוֹדֵי לִי בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁנִּכְנְסוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל לָאָרֶץ וּמָֽצְאוּ קְמָחִין וּסְלָתוֹת שֶׁהֵן חַייָבִין בְּחַלָּה. וְלָאו גִּידּוּלֵי פְטוֹר הֵן וְהוּא מְקַבֵּל מִינֵיהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי תְּמִיהָנִי אֵיךְ רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה מוֹתִיב אֶת רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר וְהוּא מְקַבֵּל מִינֵּיהּ. תַּמָּן עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִכְנְסוּ לָהּ לְמַפְרֵיעָה יָֽרְשׁוּ דְּאָמַר רִבִּי הוּנָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן לְזַרְעֲךָ אֵתֶּן אֶין כְּתִיב כָּאן אֶלָּא לְזַרְעֲךָ נָתַתִּי כְּבָר נָתַתִּי. How does Rebbi Eliezer explain the reason of Rebbi Aqiba, (Num. 15:17) “To the Land into which I am bringing you?” The colleagues in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, Rebbi Hila in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: So did Rebbi Aqiba object to Rebbi Eliezer: Do you not agree that when Israel entered the Land and found there coarse and fine flour3R. Simson and R. Solomon ben Adrat read: “(coarse) flour and doughs”. This is from a textual tradition different from our mss.; it is very likely a late change since (a) in talmudic Hebrew, קמח means only “coarse flour”; the re-emergence of the biblical meaning “flour” (irrespective of quality) is definitely Medieval rabbinic; (b) only R. Aqiba (later in this Halakhah and in Mishnah 3:5) moves the obligation of ḥallah from kneading the dough to baking it. It is unreasonable to expect R. Eliezer to accept this position. that this was subject to ḥallah? Did it not grow while exempt? He accepted that4As seen later, without giving up his interpretation of the verses for current practice.. Rebbi Yose said, I am wondering how could Rebbi Aqiba object to Rebbi Eliezer and how could the latter accept it? There, before they entered they had inherited it retroactively, as Rebbi Huna said in the name of Rebbi Samuel ben Naḥman: It is not written “to your posterity I shall give” but (Gen. 15:18): “to your posterity I gave”, I already gave it.
מָה מְקַייֵם רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה טַעֲמָא דְּרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר לֶחֶם הָאָרֶץ. בִּסְפִינָה שֶׁנִּכְנְסָה לָאָרֶץ. אִם קִירְמוּ פָנֶיהָ מִן הַחוּט וְלִפְנִים חַייֶבֶת. מִן הַחוּט וְלַחוּץ פְּטוּרָה. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי עֵקִיבָה הִיא סְפִינְתָא הִיא עִיסַּת הַגּוֹי הִיא הַכְנָסָתָן שֶׁהַכֹּל הוֹלֵךְ אַחַר קְרִימָה בַתַּנּוּר. מוֹדִין חֲכָמִים לְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה בְּהַכְנָסָתָן לָאָרֶץ שֶׁהַכֹּל הוֹלֵךְ אַחַר קְרִימָה בַּתַּנּוּר. מִן מָה דְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה מָתִיב לְרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר וְהוּא מְקַבֵּל מִינֵּיהּ. How does Rebbi Aqiba explain the reason of Rebbi Eliezer, (Num. 15:18) “From the Land’s bread?” About a ship which entered the Land. If it made a crust in the oven inside the line5The imaginary line drawn from the Northernmost point on the coast of the Biblical Land of Israel to the Southernmost, which defines the territorial waters of the Land according to the majority opinion; cf. Ševi‘it 6:2, Notes 92–94; Ḥallah 4:8. For the role of baking in determining the obligation cf. Halakhah 3:5. it is obligated, outside the line it is exempt. In the opinion of Rebbi Aqiba, the same rule applies to a ship, Gentile’s dough6Which is exempt if baked by a Gentile, obligated if baked by a Jew., and their entry; everything depends on forming the crust in the oven. The Sages agree with Rebbi Aqiba when it enters the Land that everything depends on forming the crust in the oven. This is implied by what Rebbi Aqiba objected to Rebbi Eliezer and the latter accepted it.
רִבִּי יוֹנָה בָּעֵא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁנִּכְנְסוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל לָאָרֶץ וּמָצָא קָמָה לֵחָה מַהוּ שֶׁתְּהֵא אֲסוּרָה מִשּׁוּם חָדָשׁ. אָמַר לֵיהּ לָמָּה לֹא. עַד כְּדוֹן לֵחָה אֲפִילוּ יְבֵישָׁה. אָמַר לֵיהּ אֲפִילוּ יְבֵישָׁה אֲפִילוּ קְצוּרָה. מֵעַתָּה אֲפִילוּ חִטִּין בָּעֲלִייָה. כָּךְ אֲנִי אוֹמֵר לֹא יֹאכְלוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל מַצָּה בְּלֵילֵי הַפֶּסַח. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹנָה מִן דְּנַפְקוֹת תָּהִית דְּלֹא אָֽמְרָת לֵיהּ שַׁנְייָה הִיא שֶׁמִּצְװַת עֲשֵׂה דוֹחָה לְמִצְװַת לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹנָה דּוּ אָמַר מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה דוֹחָה בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינָהּ כְּתוּבָה בְצִידָּהּ נִיחָא. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי דּוּ אָמַר אֵין מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה דוֹחָה לְמִצְוַה בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הָֽיְתָה כְתוּבָה בְצִידָּהּ מַה שֶׁיִהְיוּ תַגָּרֵי גּוֹיִם מוֹכְרִין לָהֶ[ם] וּכְרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. דְּרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אָמַר כָּל־בִּיאוֹת שֶׁנֶּאֶמְרוּ בַתּוֹרָה לְאַחַר אַרְבַּע עֶשְׂרֶה שָׁנָה נֶאֶמְרוּ שֶׁבַע שֶׁכִּיבְּשׁוּ וְשֶׁבַע שֶׁחִילְּקוּ. הָתִיב רִבִּי בּוּן בַּר כַּהֲנָא וְהָֽכְתִיב וַיֹּאכְלוּ מֵעֲבוּר הָאָרֶץ מִמָּחֳרַת הַפֶּסַח. לֹא בְּשִׁשָּׁה עָשָׂר. הָתִיב רִבִּי לָעְזָר בֵּירִבִּי יוֹסֵי קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי וְהָֽכְתִיב מִמָּחֳרַת הַפֶּסַח יָֽצְאוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּיַד רָמָה לְעֵינַי כָל־מִצְרַיִם. לֹא בַחֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר. Rebbi Jonah asked before Rebbi Jeremiah: When Israel entered the Land and found there green grain standing, would that have been forbidden as new7Before the ‘omer, cf. Chapter 1, Notes 3–5.? He said to him, why not? So far green, even dry? He said to him, even dry, even cut. Then even grain in storage! So I am saying, Israel should not have eaten maẓẓot in the Passover nights8But they observed Pesaḥ on the 14th (Jos. 5:10); how could they have fulfilled the commandment to eat the meat “with maẓẓot and bitter herbs” when all grain was forbidden as new since the preceding year there could not have been any ‘omer and, according to the argument of the preceding paragraph, the laws were applicable retroactively?! Rebbi Jonah said, after I left there, I wondered that I did not say to him, it is different because a positive commandment overrides a prohibition9This is the position accepted everywhere in the Babli where, however, the principle is severely restricted (Yebamot 3b/4a).. In the opinion of Rebbi Jonah who said, a positive commandment overrides a prohibition even if it is not written next to it, it is understood. But according to Rebbi Yose who said, a positive commandment overrides a prohibition only if it is written next to it10The disagreement between Rebbis Jonah and Yose is also discussed Yom Ṭov 1:3 (fol. 60b, bottom) and commented upon by Or Zarua‘ vol. 2, #234. The position of R. Yose is not mentioned in the Babli. As Tosaphot note in Qiddušin 38a (an opinion attributed by Or Zarua‘ to R. Jacob ben Meїr of Provins), the argument of R. Jonah is weak since even according to him, only the first bite of maẓẓah would be permitted as a positive commandment; all further consumption of new bread would have been sinful.? What Gentile traders sold them, or following Rebbi Ismael, since Rebbi Ismael said, any “coming”11Any commandment introduced with the remark: “When you come to the Land.” mentioned in the Torah means after 14 years, seven of their conquest, seven of the distribution12Cf. Ševi‘it 6, Note 10. The statement of R. Ismael is discussed at length in Babli Qiddušin 37a–38a; it is quoted in Yerushalmi ‘Orlah 1:2 (fol. 60d), Soṭah 7:4 (fol. 21c), 9:1 (fol. 23c).. Rebbi Abun bar Cahana objected: Is it not written (Jos. 5:11): “They ate from the produce of the Land the day after the Pesaḥ,” on the sixteenth! Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Yose objected before Rebbi Yose: Is it not written (Num. 33:3): “The day after the Pesaḥ, the Children of Israel left with raised hand before the eyes of all of Egypt.” Not on the fifteenth13Pesaḥ in Biblical texts is only the sacrifice of the afternoon of the 14th of Nisan. Only in rabbinic texts does Pesaḥ stand for the holiday of unleavened bread, usually called Passover, starting on the 15th. The objection of R. Abun bar Cahana is anachronistic.?
יָֽצְאוּ מִכָּאן לְשָׁם רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר מְחַייֵב וְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה פּוֹטֵר. אָֽמְרוּ רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר מִן אַתְרֵהּ וְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה מִן אַתְרֵהּ. רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר מִן אַתְרֵיהּ מַאי טַעֲמָא דְּרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר לֶחֶם הָאָרֶץ בְּכָל־מָקוֹם שֶׁהוּא. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה מִן אַתְרֵיהּ מָה טַעֲמָא דְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אֶל הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מֵבִיא אֶתְכֶם שָׁמָּה. שָׁמָּה אַתֶּם חַייָבִין. וְאֵין אַתֶּם חַייָבִין חוּץ לָאָרֶץ. “If it was exported14Outside the Land of Israel., Rebbi Eliezer declares it obligated but Rebbi Aqiba declares it free.” They said, Rebbi Eliezer [is explained] from his quote, Rebbi Aqiba from his quote. Rebbi Eliezer from his quote; what is the reason of Rebbi Eliezer? (Num. 15:18) “From the Land’s bread,” wherever it may be. Rebbi Aqiba from his quote; What is the reason of Rebbi Aqiba? (Num. 15:17) “To the Land into which I am bringing you;” there you are obligated; you are not obligated outside the Land.
רַבָּנִין דְּקַיְסָרִין בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי חֲנִינָה בְּמַחְלוֹקֶת. כָּל־מָקוֹם אֲשֶׁר תִּדְרֹךְ כַּף רַגְלֵיכֶם בּוֹ לָכֶם יִהְיֶה. אֵין בִּכְלָל אֶלָּא מַה שֶׁבִּפְרָט וּכְרִבִּי יוּדָה. מֵתִיבִין לְרִבִּי יוּדָה אִם בִּסְפָרֵי אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל וְהָֽכְתִיב מֵהַמִּדְבָּר וְהַלְּבָנוֹן הַזֶּה וְעַד הַנָּהָר הַגָּדוֹל נְהַר פְּרָת כָּל־אֶרֶץ הַחִתִּים וְעַד הַיָּם הַגָּדוֹל מְבוֹא הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ יִהְיֶה גְּבוּלְכֶם. אֶלָּא אִם אֵינוֹ עִנְייָן לִסְפָרֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל תְּנֵיהוּ עִנְייָן לִסְפָרֵי חוּץ לָאָרֶץ. מֵעַתָּה מַה שֶׁהָיָה דָוִד הוֹלֵךְ וּמְכַבֵּשׁ בַּאֲרָם נַהֲרַיִם וּבַאֲרָם צוֹבָה יְהוּ חַייָבִין בְּחַלָּה. שַׁנְייָא הִיא שֶׁהָיָה דָּוִד מַנִּיחַ סְפָרֵי אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל וּמְכַבֵּשׁ סְפָרֵי חוּץ לָאָרֶץ. The rabbis of Caesarea in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: The disagreement: (Deut. 11:24) “Any place16In the masoretic text: כל המקום. כל מקום is in the parallel Jos. 1:3 which cannot be the verse quoted here. your foot will tread on shall be yours,” the general statement contains only the detail17The full verse reads: Any place your foot will tread on shall be yours, from the prairie and the Lebanon, from the river Euphrates to the Western Sea shall be your border region. It is a hermeneutic principle (Sifra, Introduction, 7) that a general statement followed immediately by a clarification means only what is intended in the clarification. Therefore, “Any place” means only the region described here in general terms and in detail in Num. 34:1–12; “river Euphrates” here can only mean the region of Dura Europos, nearest to the Mediterranean., and following Rebbi Jehudah18Who defines the Western Sea as the Atlantic Ocean (at the Straits of Gibraltar) rather than the Mediterranean; cf. Ševi‘it 6, Note 93.. They object to Rebbi Jehudah: If this is about the boundaries of the Land of Israel, is there not written: (Jos. 1:4) “From the prairie and this Lebanon up to the great river, the Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites19The Hittite settlement in the region after the disappearance of the Hittite empire in central Anatolia. and to the great ocean at sunset shall be your borders.” If it20The general statement “any place”. cannot deal with the border regions of the Land of Israel, consider it for the border regions outside the Land21That, if conquered, would become part of the Land of Israel.. Then, what David was conquering in Aram of the rivers and Aram Ẓova should be subject to ḥallah! There is a difference, because David was neglecting the border regions of the Land of Israel and conquering the border regions outside the Land22The Northern part of the Land, the region of Phoenicia, as described in Num. 34:1–12 never was part of David’s empire. Therefore, he was not authorized to conquer the regions East of the promised Land. The argument appears in greater detail in Sifry Deut. 51..
הֲווֹ בָּעֵיי מֵימַר מָה דְאָמַר תַּמָּן חַייָב אוֹף הָכָא חַייָב. מָה דְאָמַר תַּמָּן פָּטוּר אוֹף הָכָא פָטוּר. אֲפִילוּ כְּמָאן דְּאָמַר תַּמָּן פָּטוּר הָכָא חַייָב. כֵּיוָן שֶׁנִּכְנְסוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל נִתְחַייְבוּ. כְּתִיב הוּא הֵשִׁיב אֶת גְּבוּל יִשְׂרָאֵל מִלְּבוֹא חֲמָת עַד יָם הָעֲרָבָה כִּדְבַר יי֨ אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר בְּיַד עַבְדּוֹ יוֹנָה בֶּן אֲמִתַּי הַנָּבִיא אֲשֶׁר מִגַּת הַחֵפֶר. רִבִּי חֲנַנְיָה וְרִבִּי מָנָא חַד אָמַר כָּל־מָה שֶׁכִּיבֵּשׁ יְהוֹשֻׁעַ כִּיבֵּשׁ זֶה. וְחָרָנָה אָמַר יוֹתֵר מִמָּה שֶׁכִּיבֵּשׁ יְהוֹשֻׁעַ כִּיבֵּשׁ זֶה. תַּנָּא רִבִּי סִידוֹר מְסַיֵיעַ לְרִבִּי מָנָא יָמִים קַלִּים עָשׂוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּאוֹתָהּ הָאָרֶץ. They wanted to say, according to him23Rebbi Ḥananiah (?, probably Ḥaninah), who later in the paragraph holds that all the land conquered by Jeroboam II has the status of land conquered by Joshua. who said, there it is obligated, also here it is obligated; according to him24Rebbi Mana I, later in this paragraph. who said, there it is exempt, also here it is exempt. Even according to him who says, there it is exempt, here it is obligated for when Israel entered they became obligated25Even R. Mana will agree that under Joshua, the Land became obligated immediately upon being taken.. It is written (2K. 14:25): “He reëstablished the borders of Israel from Lebo-Ḥamat26Lebweh in the Beqaa valley in Lebanon, the Northernmost city in Solomon’s kingdom. to the sea of the Arabah, following the word of the Eternal, the God of Israel, which He had said through Jonah ben Amittai, the prophet from Gat-Ḥepher.” Rebbi Ḥananiah and Rebbi Mana, one said that all that Joshua had conquered this one conquered. The other said, more than Joshua had conquered this one conquered. Rebbi Sidor27An early Galilean Amora, perhaps called Isidor, possibly a student of Jehudah, the son of the elder R. Ḥiyya. stated, in support of Rebbi Mana: Few days only did Israel hold on to this land28Which, therefore, did not acquire the status of “Land of Israel.” Since R. Mana is identified as “the other”, R. Ḥananiah (Ḥaninah) must be the author of the first opinion..
עָפָר חוּץ לָאָרֶץ שֶׁבָּא לְסוּרִיָּא נַעֲשֶׂה כְסוּרִיָּא. יָצָא מִשָּׁם לְכָאן נִתְחַייֵב. Earth from outside the Land which came into Syria29The land temporarily conquered by David outside the biblical borders; cf. Peah 7, Note 119. Since most agricultural rules of the Land held in Syria by rabbinic decree, Syria is not “outside the Land.” But it is not part of the Land either. becomes like Syria. Coming from there to here it becomes obligated.
אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָה אֵימָתַי בִּזְמַן שֶׁהַסְּפִינָה גוֹשֶׁשֶׁת. אָמַר רִבִּי חַגַּיי רִבִּי יוּדָה כְדַעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה פוֹטֵר בְּמַיִם לְפִי שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶן מַמָּשׁ. אָמַר רִבִּי אָבִין לֹא מִסְתַּבְּרָא דְלֹא מִחְלְפָא שִׁיטָּתֵיהּ. לֹא הָֽיְתָה אֶת הַסְּפִינָה גוֹשֶׁשֶׁת כְּמִי שֶׁהַסְּפִינָה גוֹשֶׁשֶׁת. לֹא הָֽיְתָה סְפִינָה גוֹשֶׁשֶׁת מַעְשְׂרוֹתֶיהָ מֵהֲלָכָה תּוֹרְמִין מִמֶּנָּה עַל עָצִיץ שֶׁאֵין נָקוּב וּמֵעָצִיץ שֶׁאֵין נָקוּב עָלֶיהָ. כְּהָדָא דְתַנֵּי עָצִיץ שֶׁאֵינוֹ נָקוּב מַעְשְׂרוֹתָיו מֵהֲלָכָה וּתְרוּמָתוֹ אֵינָהּ מְדַמָּעַת וְאֵין חַייָבִין עָלָיו חוֹמֶשׁ. רִבִּי הִילָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר הַקּוֹנֶה עָצִיץ נָקוּב בְּסוּרִיָּא אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא קָנָה עָפָר שֶׁתַּחְתָּיו וְקַרְקַע שֶׁעַל גַּבָּיו קָנָה לְחַייְבוֹ לְמַעְשְׂרוֹת וְלַשְּׁבִיעִית אֲפִילוּ נָתוּן עַל גַּבֵּי שְׁתֵּי יְתֵידוֹת. אַף רִבִּי יוּדָה מוֹדֵי בָהּ. מָה בֵינוֹ לְבֵין הַסְּפִינָה. סְפִינָה עוֹלָה וְיוֹרֶדֶת וְזֶה בִמְקוֹמוֹ הוּא. “Rebbi Jehudah said, when is this? When the ship touches ground.” Rebbi Ḥaggai said, Rebbi Jehudah follows his opinion30In the Babli it is held that if R. Jehudah asks in the Mishnah, when is this?, he does not disagree with the anonymous Tanna but explains the latter’s position (Eruvin 81a–82b, Sanhedrin 24b). This is not the position of the Yerushalmi; cf. Ševi‘it 7, Note 90. since Rebbi Jehudah exempts water31Mishnah Beẓah 5:4: “If somebody borrows vessels before the holiday, they follow the feet of the borrower, on the holiday, the feet of the lender. Similarly, if a woman borrowed from another spices, water, or salt, they follow the feet of both of them. Rebbi Jehudah exempts water, for water has no consistency.” If both the borrower and the lender made an eruv (cf. Peah 8, Note 56), the borrowed things can only be moved inside the territory accessible to both of them. R. Jehudah exempts water since it is permitted on a holiday to drink water from a brook; that water was outside the permitted domain when the holiday started., as it has no consistency32In this interpretation, the water is disregarded and the wooden ship is considered as lying on the gound.. Rebbi Abin said, it is more reasonable to assume his opinion changed; if the ship does not touch ground, would it not be as if the ship touched ground33According to R. Ḥaggai, the condition that the boat touch ground seems unintelligible.? If the ship does not touch ground, its tithes are of practice; one tithes from it for a flower pot without hole and from a flower pot without hole for it, as it was stated34Kilaim 7:6, Note 84.: “The tithes from a flower pot without hole are of practice35Without any biblical basis. The flower pot is of clay which may be impermeable. Plants growing in a flower pot are considered growing on the ground only if the flower pot has a hole letting the earth in the pot absorb moisture from the ground. A wooden ship touching ground can always be said to be connected to the earth under it; it might only be compared to a flower pot with a hole., its heave does not create dema‘ and one does not owe a fifth for it.” Rebbi Hila in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: If somebody acquires a flower pot with a hole in Syria, even if he did not acquire the earth under it or the ground on which it stands, he acquired it to be obligated for tithes and the Sabbatical, even if it sits on two pegs. Even Rebbi Jehudah will agree with this. What is the difference between this case36The flower pot with a hole permanently fixed on pegs above ground is obligated, the ship anchored but not touching ground is exempt. and that of a ship? A ship rises and falls, this [flower pot] rests in its place.
רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי חֲנִינָה אָמַר דְּרִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן יְהוּדָה אִישׁ בִּירְתוֹתָא הִיא דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר בֶּן יְהוּדָה אִישׁ בִּירְתוֹתָא אוֹמֵר מִשֵּׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ פָּסַל אֶת כּוּלָּהּ. וְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר מִשְּׁמוֹ לֹא פָסַל אֶלָּא מְקוֹם מַגָּעוֹ. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר מָה פְלִיגִין. בְּשֶׁהוּכְשְׁרָה וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִילּוֹשָׁה שֶׁמֵּי פֵירוֹת מְחוּוָרִין לְהַכְשִׁיר. אֲבָל אִם נִילּוֹשָׁה וְאַחַר כָּךְ הוּכְשְׁרָה אֵין מֵי פֵירוֹת מְחוּוָרִין לְהַכְשִׁיר. רִבִּי חִייָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל הִיא. אַף עַל גַּב דְּרִבִּי עְקִיבָה אָמַר תַּמָּן אֵין מֵי פֵירוֹת מְחוּוָרִין לְטוּמְאָה מוֹדֵי הוּא הָכָא שֶׁמֵּי פֵירוֹת מְחוּוָרִין לַַחַלָּה. 37The Halakhah discusses the statement of the Mishnah: “Dough kneaded with fruit juice is subject to ḥallah which can be eaten with unclean hands”.: Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina said, this is the opinion of Rebbi Eleazar ben Jehudah from Birtota, as we have stated there38Ṭevul Yom 3:6: “Dough which was prepared by fluids and kneaded with fruit juice, if a ṭevul yom touches it, Rebbi Eleazar ben Jehudah from Birtota …” The Mishnah deals with heave in case the grain or the flour was prepared for impurity by contact with one of the fluids that activate impurity (cf. Demay 2, Notes 136–137). The ṭevul yom (cf. Terumot 5, Note 68) makes heave unusable by his touch; he has no influence on the purity status of profane food.: “Rebbi Eleazar ben Jehudah from Birtota says in the name of Rebbi Joshua, he made everything unusable. But Rebbi Aqiba says in the latter’s name, he made unusable only the place where he touched.” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, when do they disagree? When it was prepared for impurity and after that was kneaded, when fruit juices clearly do prepare. But if it was kneaded and after that only prepared, fruit juices are not clear to prepare39Fruit juice clearly does not prepare for impurity according to everybody. According to R. Simeon ben Laqish, R. Eleazar ben Jehudah holds that fruit juice keeps the dough together and it becomes unusable if part of it is unusable. R. Aqiba holds that fruit juices cannot have any influence on the status of purity; one disregards the fact that the dough now forms a solid mass.. Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: It is everybody’s opinion. Even though Rebbi Aqiba says there that fruit juices have no clear connection with impurity, he agrees here that fruit juices are clearly for ḥallah40For ḥallah, R. Aqiba holds that anything used as bread falls under the rules of bread..
רִבִּי בָּא רִבִּי חִייָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי אֵין לָךְ מְחוּוָר אֶלָּא שִׁבְעַת הַמַּשְׁקִין בִּלְבַד. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בָּעֵי מָה אִיתְאֲמָרַת לַחַלָּה לְטוּמְאָה. אִין תֵּימַר לַחַלָּה כָּל־שֶׁכֵּן לְטוּמְאָה. אִין תֵּימַר לְטוּמְאָה הָא לַחַלָּה לֹא. רִבִּי יוֹנָה פְּשִׁיטָא לֵיהּ לַחַלָּה כָּל־שֶׁכֵּן לְטוּמְאָה. רִבִּי יוֹנָה כְדַעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹנָה תַּנֵּי דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי. רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי תַּנֵּי דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי דְּתַנֵּי רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן אוֹמֵר נֶאֱמַר כָּאן חַלָּה. וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן חַלַּת לֶחֶם שֶׁמֶן. מָה חַלָּה שֶׁנֶּאֶמְרָה לְהַלָּן עֲשׂוּיָה בְשֶׁמֶן. אַף חַלָּה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר כָּאן עֲשׂוּיָה בְשֶׁמֶן. וְשֶׁמֶן אֶחָד מִשִּׁבְעַת הַמַּשְׁקִין הוּא. Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Nothing is clear except the seven fluids41The 7 fluids enumerated in Mishnah Makhširin 6:4: Dew, water, wine, oil, blood, milk, bee’s honey.. Rebbi Yose asked: Was this said for ḥallah42Does R. Joshua ben Levi disagree with the Mishnah and hold that only dough kneaded with one of the 7 fluids is subject to ḥallah? or for impurity? If you say for ḥallah, so much more for impurity. If you say for impurity, then not for ḥallah. It is obvious for Rebbi Jonah that it had been said for ḥallah, so much more for impurity. Rebbi Jonah sticks to his opinion, for Rebbi Jonah stated from Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai; Rebbi Joshua ben Levi stated in Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai’s name, as Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai stated: Rebbi Ṭarphon said, it is stated here43Num. 15:20. ḥallah, and it is stated there44Lev. 8:26. About the theory of invariable meaning of words, cf. Kilaim8, Note 4., a ḥallah of oil cake. Since the ḥallah mentioned there is prepared with oil, so the ḥallah prepared here must be prepared with oil. And oil is one of the seven fluids.
רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שַׁבָּתַי רִבִּי חִייָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ לַחַלָּה וְלִנְטִילַת יָדַיִם אָדָם מְהַלֵּךְ אַרְבָעַת מִילִין. רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן חֲנִינָה הֲדָא דַתֵימַר לְפָנָיו אֲבָל לַאֲחָרָיו אֵין מַטְרִיחִין עָלָיו. 45From here to the end of the Halakhah, the text is from Berakhot 8:2; explained there in Notes 52–71. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Sabbatai and Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: For ḥallah and for washing one’s hands, he has to walk up to four mil. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina: That is, going forward; but one does not bother him to return on his way.
שׁוֹמְרֵי גַּנּוֹת וּפַרְדֵּיסִין מַה אַתְּ עֲבַד לוֹן כְּלִפְנֵיהֶן כִּלְאַחֲרֵיהֶן. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הֲדָא הָאִשָּׁה יוֹשֶׁבֶת וְקוֹצָה חַלָּתָהּ עֲרוּמָה. וַהֲדָא אִשָּׁה לֹא בְתוֹךְ בֵּיתָהּ יוֹשֶׁבֶת וְתֵימַר אֵין מַטְרִיחִין עָלָיו. וְהָכָא אֵין מַטְרִיחִין עָלָיו. How does one treat watchmen in gardens and orchards, as before them, as after them? Let us hear it from this (Mishnah Ḥallah 2:3): “A woman may sit down naked and separate her ḥallah” Is that woman not sitting inside her house and you say that one does not bother her? Also here, one does not bother him.
תַּנִּי הַמַּיִם שֶׁלִּפְנֵי הַמָּזוֹן רְשׁוּת וְשֶׁלְּאַחַר הַמָּזוֹן חוֹבָה. אֶלָּא שֶׁבָּרִאשוֹנִים נוֹטֵל וּמַפְסִיק. וּבַשְּׁנִיִיִּם נוֹטֵל וְאֵינוֹ מַפְסִיק. מַהוּ מַפְסִיק. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא אָמַר נוֹטֵל וְשׁוֹנֶה. רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק בָּעֵי נוֹטֵל וְשׁוֹנֶה וְאַתְּ אָמַרְתָּ רְשׁוּת. אִין דְּבָעֵי מֵימַר אַרְבָּעַת מִילִין וְאַתְּ אָמַרְתָּ רְשׁוּת. It has been stated: “Water before the meal is conditional, after the meal it is obligatory. Only that for the first one he takes and interrupts; for the second he takes and may not interrupt.” What does he interrupt? Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, he takes and repeats. Rebbi Samuel bar Isaac asked: “He takes and interrupts” and you say it is conditional? One requires four mil and you say it is conditional?
אָמַר רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אִידִי עַל הָרִאשׁוֹנִים נֶאֱכַל בְּשַׂר חֲזִיר. וְעַל הַשְּׁנִיִּים יָֽצְאָת אִשָּׁה מִבֵּיתָהּ. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים שֶׁנֶּהֶרְגּוּ עָלֶיהָ שָׁלֹשׁ נְפָשׁוֹת. Rebbi Jacob bar Idi said: Because of the first, pork was eaten. Because of the second, a woman had to leave her house; some say, three persons were killed because of it.
הָדָא אָֽמְרָה עֲגָבוֹת אֵין בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם עֶרְוָה. הָדָא דְאַתְּ אָמַר לִבְרָכָה אֲבָל לְהַבִּיט אֲפִילוּ כָּל־שֶׁהוּא אָסוּר. כְּהָדָא דְתַנֵּי הַמִּסְתַּכֵּל בַּעֲקֵיבָהּ שֶׁלְּאִשָּׁה כְּמִסְתַּכֵּל בְּבֵית הָרֶחֶם. וְהַמִּסְתַּכֵּל בְּבֵית הָרֶחֶם כִּילּוּ בָּא עָלֶיהָ. שְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר קוֹל בְּאִשָּׁה עֶרְוָה מַה טַעַם וְהָיָה מִקּוֹל זְנוּתָהּ וַתֶּחֱנַף הָאָרֶץ וְגוֹ׳. 50Similar statements in Babli Berakhot 24a. This means that buttocks are no sex organs. That is, for benedictions51Benedictions and prayers may not be said in an indecent state. But since a woman may sit down flat on the ground with her legs tightly together, she may recite the benediction for ḥallah while naked. There is nowhere a prohibition for a woman to nurse her baby while others are present., but to look at them52Except one’s own wife. in any way is forbidden. As it was stated: He who looks at a woman’s heel is as if he looked at her genitals and he who looks at her genitals is as if he had intercourse with her. Samuel said, a woman’s voice is a sex organ. What is the reason53The Babli quotes here Cant. 2:14: “For your voice is sweet and your looks refreshing.” Neither of the verses prove what is required.? (Jer. 3:9) “From the sound of her whoring the land became polluted, etc.”
רַב הוּנָא אָמַר עוֹמֵד הוּא אָדָם עַל הַצּוֹאָה וּמִתְפַּלֵּל וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא בְשָׂרוֹ נוֹגֵעַ בַּצּוֹאָה. יָשַׁב וְלֹא קִינַּח אָסוּר. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא אַף עַל גַּב דְּלֹא אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי הָדָא מִילְתָא אָמַר דִּכְװָתָהּ דְּרַב הוּנָא אָמַר עוֹמֵד הוּא אָדָם עַל גַּבֵּי צוֹאָה וּמִתְפַּלֵּל וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא בְשָׂרוֹ נוֹגֵעַ בַּצּוֹאָה. יָשַׁב וְלֹא קִינַּח הֲרֵי בְשָׂרוֹ נוֹגֵעַ בַצּוֹאָה. Rav Huna said: A person may stand near excrement and pray54In Berakhot (Babli 25a/b, Yerushalmi 3:5) it is stated that the Šema‘ may not be recited within 4 cubits of any excrement. There are no separate rules there for prayer., on condition that his flesh not touch the excrement. If he sat down55To defecate. and did not cleanse himself, it is forbidden. Rebbi Mana said, even though Rebbi Yose did not say this, he said something equivalent. As Rav Huna said: A person may stand near excrement and pray, on condition that his flesh not touch the excrement. If he sat down and did not cleanse himself, his flesh touches the excrement.