משנה: בָּצָל שֶׁנְּתָנוֹ לְתוֹךְ עֲדָשִׁים אִם שָׁלֵם מוּתָּר. אִם חִיתְּכוֹ בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם. וּשְׁאָר כָּל־הַתַּבְשִׁיל בֵּין שָׁלֵם בֵּין מְחוּתָּךְ בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה מַתִּיר בְּצַחֲנָה שֶׁאֵינוֹ אֶלָּא לִיטּוֹל אֶת הַזּוֹהֲמָה. תַּפּוּחַ שֶׁרִיסְּקוֹ וּנְתָנוֹ לְתוֹךְ עִיסָּה וְחִימִיצָהּ הֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה. שְׂעוֹרִים שֶׁנָּֽפְלוּ לְתוֹךְ הַבּוֹר שֶׁל מַיִם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִבְאִישׁוּ מֵימָיו מוּתָּרִין. MISHNAH: An onion which one added to lentils, if whole it is permitted, if cut up it depends on transferring taste1Profane onion in cooked but cold heave lentils; if the heave changes the taste of the profane food everything has to be eaten by a Cohen under the rules of heave. Otherwise, the profane remains profane and permitted to everybody.. Any other cooked food, whether whole or cut up, depends on transferring taste. Rebbi Jehudah permits in anchovies2In translation and interpretation, one has the choice between biblical “stinking dish” (Joel 2:20) or mishnaic “small salted fish in brine” (Mishnah Nedarim 5:5), Arabic צחן. Maimonides chooses the first alternative, R. Simson the second. One has to wonder that the medical doctor Maimonides would think of saving spoiled food.
If an entire onion of heave is put into the brine to absorb impurities, the anchovies remain profane according to R. Jehudah. where it only serves to remove pollutants.
If a mashed apple13The heave apple’s influence makes the entire profane dough change nature; even if the amount of apple is negligible, its action is not and it cannot be disregarded. is added to dough and it soured, [the dough] is forbidden4In that case, the lentils have to be eaten by a Cohen in purity. In all these discussions, “forbidden” means forbidden to the layman and the impure.. But if barley grains fell into a cistern of water, even though they made it stink, [the water] is permitted14Since anything that destroys the taste does not make forbidden..
הלכה: בָּצָל שֶׁנְּתָנוֹ לְתוֹךְ עֲדָשִׁים כו׳. רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה רַב אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי בָּא בַּר מָמָל מַתְנִיתִין בְּשֶׁהוֹצִיאוּ עֲדָשִׁים מֵימֵיהֶן שֶׁעֲדָשִׁים צוֹפְדּוֹת אוֹתוֹ שֶׁלֹּא יִבְלַע. וּכְמַה דְאַתְּ אָמַר עֲדָשִׁים צוֹפְדוֹת אוֹתוֹ שֶׁלֹּא יִבְלַע. וְדִכְװָתָהּ עֲדָשִׁים צוֹפְדוֹת אוֹתוֹ שֶׁלֹּא יִתֵּן. HALAKHAH: “An onion which one added to lentils,” etc. Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rav Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Abba bar Mamal3This paragraph is a shortened version of the discussion in Chapter 9, Halakhah 4, Notes 41–46. The sentence in parentheses is superfluous. Its text follows the Rome ms. Venice and Leyden read: אמר אמר. said, our Mishnah [in case] after the lentils lost their sap; [then] the lentils shrink it so it will not absorb [any taste]. (As you say, lentils shrink it so it will not absorb.) Similarly, lentils shrink it so it will not give.
מַתְנִיתִין בְּבָצָל שֶׁל חוּלִין שֶׁנְּתָנוֹ לְתוֹךְ עֲדָשִׁין שֶׁל תְּרוּמָה. אֲבָל בְּבָצָל שֶׁל תְּרוּמָה שֶׁנְּתָנוֹ לְתוֹךְ עֲדָשִׁין שֶׁל חוּלִין לֹא בְדָא. בְּיָבֵשׁ אֲבָל בְּלַח אָסוּר. בְּבָצָל אֲבָל בְּקֵפַלּוֹטוֹת בֵּין לַח בֵּין יָבֵשׁ בֵּין שָׁלֵם בֵּין מְחוּתָּךְ אָסוּר. The Mishnah speaks about a profane onion which he put into heave lentils; but not the case of a heave onion put into profane lentils4In that case, the lentils have to be eaten by a Cohen in purity. In all these discussions, “forbidden” means forbidden to the layman and the impure.. If it is dry, but moist is forbidden. An onion, but leeks are forbidden moist or dry, entire or cut up.
הֶעֱבִיר פְּטוּמָתוֹ כִמְחוּתָּךְ הוּא. הָיוּ שְׁנַיִם שְלֹשָׁה קְטַנִּים כִּמְחוּתָּכִין הֵן. הָדָא דְתֵימַר בְּשֶׁאֵין קְלִיפָתוֹ הַחִיצוֹנָה כְּדֵי לִיתֵּן טַעַם. אֲבָל אִם יֵשׁ בִּקְלִיפָה הַחִיצוֹנָה כְּדֵי לִיתֵּן טַעַם אָסוּר. If he removed the tip5Of the onion. it is as if cut up. If there were two or three small ones, they are as if cut up. Only if the outer shell does not transmit taste6The onion mentioned in the Mishnah is dry, with an inert brown outer skin. Green onions are like leeks.. But if the outer shell transmits taste, it is forbidden.
תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן דָּגִים שֶׁנִּתְבַּשְּׁלוּ עִם הַקֵּפַלּוֹטוֹת שֶׁל מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי וְהִשְׁבִיחוּ הַשֶּׁבַח לְפִי חֶשְׁבּוֹן. אָמַר רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה מַתְנִיתִין דְּלֹא כְרִבִּי יוּדָה דְּתַנִּינָן רִבִּי יוּדָה מַתִּיר בְּצַחֲנָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ אֶלָּא לִיטּוֹל אֶת הַזּוֹהֲמָה. There7Mishnah Ma‘aser Šeni 2:1., we have stated: “If fish improved in value when cooked with leeks of second tithe, the increase is proportional8If the leeks were worth a and the fish b before cooking but now the whole is worth c>a+b, then some of the proceeds of the dish, ac/(a+b), has to be used to buy food to be consumed according to the rules of second tithe..” Rebbi Hoshaia said, that Mishnah does not follow Rebbi Jehudah, since we have stated: “Rebbi Jehudah permits in anchovies where it only serves to remove pollutants9Even though cleaned anchovies in brine fetch more on the market than uncleaned ones..”
רַבָּנִין דְּקַיְסָרִין בְּעָייָן. וְהָדָא דְאָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן כָּל־הָאִיסּוּרִין מְשַׁעֲרִין אוֹתָן כִּילּוּ בָּצָל כִּילוּ קֵפַלּוֹט דְּלֹא כְרִבִּי יוּדָה. מוֹדֵי רִבִּי יוּדָה בְּבָצָל שֶׁל הֶקְדֵּשׁ וּמוֹדֵה רִבִּי יוּדָה בְּבָצָל שֶׁל עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. The rabbis of Caesarea asked: The saying of Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan10This Yerushalmi standard is quoted in Ma‘aser Šeni 2:1 (fol. 53b), Orlah 1:4 (fol. 61a), 2:6 (fol. 62b), Nazir 6:1 (fol. 54d), 6:10 (fol. 55b). It is quoted in Babli Ḥulin 97b where the more lenient standard of 1 part forbidden in 61 permitted is established., that all forbidden [food] is estimated as if it were onion, as if it were leeks11Forbidden food that fell into permitted is permitted if the taste of the forbidden food could not be tasted in the permitted, assuming the forbidden items were onion or leeks., does this contradict Rebbi Jehudah12Since R. Jehudah allows the use of heave onion to improve non-heave fish.? Rebbi Jehudah will agree regarding an onion of the Temple or an onion of idol worship.
תַּפּוּחַ שֶׁרִיסְּקוֹ וּנְתָנוֹ לְתוֹךְ עִיסָּה וְחִימִיצָהּ הֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי מַתִּיר. רִבִּי אָחָא רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶן חֲנִינָה מַה פְלִיגִין בִּמְחַמֵּץ בְּמֵימָיו אֲבָל בִּמְחַמֵּץ בְּגוּפוֹ מוּתָּר. כְּמַה דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי אָמַר תַּמָּן אֵין חִימּוּצוֹ חִימּוּץ בָּרוּר. כֵּן הוּא אוֹמֵר הָכָא אֵין תַּבְשִׁילוֹ תַּבְשִׁיל בָּרוּר. 15The main place of the paragraph is in Šabbat 3, fol. 5d. The text is also in Ḥallah 1:1 (fol. 57a), Pesaḥim2:4 (fol. 29b).“If a mashed apple is added to dough which soured, [the dough] is forbidden” It was stated16In Tosephta 8:9, the language is: “Rebbi Yose says, what is induced by [the apple] is not souring.” This is the position of the Babli in Pesaḥim 36a/b. According to the Yerushalmi it is not clear whether what is induced by fruit juice falls under the legal category of “to turn sour;” this is the position of the Babli in Menaḥot 54a. In any case, the quote here cannot be from the Tosephta.: Rebbi Yose permits it. Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: They disagree when it becomes sour from the juice [of the apple]. But if it becomes sour from its solid substance it is permitted17Even the anonymous Sages admit that dry mixing of a mashed apple with flour will not induce souring.. Just as Rebbi Yose says there18Here in Terumot. R. Yose will not agree that what happens if a dough is kneaded with pure apple juice is souring; therefore he holds that mixing dough with apple juice can have no legal consequences., its souring is not clearly souring, so he says here19Mishnah Šabbat 3:3: “One may not put an egg next to the samowar [that it should become a soft-boiled egg on the Sabbath] and one may not break it on [hot, exposed to the sun] towels [to make a fried egg on the Sabbath], but Rebbi Yose permits it.”, its cooking is not clearly cooking.
כָּל־נוֹתְנֵי טַעַם בֵּין לִשְׁבָח בֵּין לִפְגָּם אָסוּר דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי מֵאִיר. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר לִשְׁבָח אָסוּר לִפְגָּם מוּתָּר. אָמָר רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ מַה פְלִיגִין בְּשֶׁהִשְׁבִּיחַ וְאַחַר כָּךְ פָּגַם. אֲבָל פָּגַם וְאַחַר כָּךְ הִשְׁבִּיחַ אַף רִבִּי מֵאִיר מוֹדֶה. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר לֹא שַׁנְייָה הִיא פָגַם הִיא הִשְׁבִּיחַ. הִיא הִשְׁבִּיחַ הִיא פָגַם הִיא הַמַּחְלוֹקֶת. תַּמָּן תַּנִינָן שְׂעוֹרִים שֶׁנָּֽפְלוּ לְתוֹךְ בּוֹר שֶׁל מַיִם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִבְאִישׁוּ מֵימָיו מֵימָיו מוּתָּרִין. הָדָא מַתְנִיתִין מַה הִיא. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר בְמַחְלוֹקֶת. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּי רִבִּי בּוּן אָמַר אִילֵּין שְׁמוּעָתָא הָכָא. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְמַחְלוֹקֶת. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל. “20Tosephta 8:9, in slightly different wording. The main source of this paragraph is Orlah 2:5 (fol. 62a); a slightly shortened version is in Avodah Zarah 5:3 (fol. 44d); Babli Avodah Zarah 67b/68a.Everything that can be smelled is forbidden21If forbidden food is mixed with permitted food, the mixture is forbidden as long as the forbidden substance changes the taste of the food. According to R. Simeon, whose opinion is the majority opinion in the Babli, this holds only if the admixture does not spoil the taste of the permitted food., whether it improves or spoils, the words of Rebbi Meїr. Rebbi Simeon says, if it improves it is forbidden, if it spoils it is permitted.” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish22In the Babli, that author is Ulla (Rebbi La). said, in what do they disagree? If it first improved but then spoiled. But if it spoiled and later improved, even Rebbi Meїr will agree. Rebbi Joḥanan said, there is no difference whether it spoiled and improved or improved and spoiled, it is a disagreement. There23Here, in Terumot., we have stated: “If barley grains fell into a cistern of water, even though they made it stink, the water is permitted.” What is the status of that Mishnah? Rebbi Joḥanan said it is a disagreement; Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said it is the opinion of everybody. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said this tradition here24He refers to the Mishnah, not the Tosephta.: Rebbi Joḥanan said it is a disagreement; Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said it is the opinion of everybody.