Parallel
פסחים 48
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
out of the two hundred,[i.e.,] out of the residue of the two hundred which was left in the vault, whence we learn that ‘orlah is nullified in [an excess of] two hundred; from the well-watered pastures of Israel: from that which is permitted to Israel. Hence it was said, One may not bring drink-offerings from tebel. You might think, he must not bring [them] from mukzeh [either], then say: Just as tebel is distinguished in that its intrinsic prohibition causes it, so everything whose intrinsic prohibition causes it [may not be used], thus mukzeh is excluded, because not its intrinsic prohibition causes it, but a prohibition of something else causes it. Now if you say that the prohibition of mukzeh is Scriptural, what does it matter whether it is an intrinsic prohibition or a prohibition through something else? Moreover, it was you who said, There is separation of labours on the Sabbath, but there is not separation of labours on a Festival! — Rather, delete lighting and substitute the wood of the asherah, while its ‘warning’ [injunction] is [learnt] from here, [viz.,] And there shall cleave nought of the accursed thing to thy hand. R. Aha son of Raba said to Abaye, Then let him be flagellated on account of, And thou shalt not bring an abomination into thy house too? — Rather, delete lighting and substitute the wood of hekdesh, while the ‘warning’ is [learnt] from here, [viz.,] and ye shall burn their Asherim with fire . . . ye shall not do so unto the Lord your God. Rami b. Hama said: This [controversy] of R. Hisda and Rabbah is the controversy of R. Eliezer and R. Joshua. For R. Eliezer holds, We say, ‘since’, while R. Joshua holds, We do not say since’. Said R. Papa: Yet perhaps R. Eliezer rules that we say ‘since’, there only, because when they go into the oven, each one is fit for himself; but here that it is fit for visitors only, but it is not fit for himself, perhaps it is indeed [the fact] that we do not say ‘since’? R. Shisha son of R. Idi said: Yet perhaps it is not so: R. Joshua may rule that we do not say, ‘since’, only there, where there is one [mazzah] that is not fit either for himself or for visitors; but here that it is at least fit for visitors, perhaps it is indeed [the fact] that we say ‘since’? The Rabbis reported this [Rami b. Hama's statement] before R. Jeremiah and R. Zera. R. Jeremiah accepted it: R. Zera did not accept it. Said R. Jeremiah to R. Zera: A matter which has been a continual difficulty to us for many years, [viz.,] wherein do R. Eliezer and R. Joshua differ, now [that] it has been explained in the name of a great man, shall we then not accept it? Said he to him, How can I accept it? For it was taught, R. Joshua said to him: According to your words, he transgresses on account of thou shalt not do any manner of work, and he was silent before him. But if this is correct, let him answer him, My reason is on account of ‘since’? — Then on your view, replied he, as to what was taught in a Baraitha, R. Eliezer said to him: According to your words, behold, he violates, ‘it shall not be seen’ and ‘it shall not be found’, and he was silent before him; could he indeed not answer him; surely he answers him in the Mishnah, for we learned: NOT THIS IS LEAVEN ABOUT WHICH WE ARE WARNED, IT SHALL NOT BE SEEN’, AND ‘IT SHALL NOT BE FOUND’. But [what we must say is that] he was silent before him in the Baraitha, yet he answered him in our Mishnah. So here too, say that he was silent before him in a teaching, yet he answered him in another collection [of Baraithas]. It was taught, Rabbi said: The halachah is as R. Eliezer; while R. Isaac said: The halachah is as the Son of Bathyra. And what is the standard of dough? — R. Ishmael the son of R. Johanan b. Berokah said: In the case of wheat, two kabs; in the case of barley, three kabs. R. Nathan said on R. Eleazar's authority: The rulings are [to be] reversed. But it was taught, R. Ishmael son of R. Johanan b. Berokah said: In the case of wheat, three labs, and in the case of barley, four kabs? — There is no difficulty: One refers to inferior [corn]; the other to superior corn. R. Papa observed: This proves, Poor wheat is more inferior to good wheat than poor barley is inferior to good barley, for whereas there [there is a difference of] a third, here [there is a difference of] a quarter. Rab said: A kab of Meloga [is the standard] for Passover, and it is likewise in respect of hallah. But we learned:
—
Slightly more than five quarters of flour are subject to hallah? — This is what he says: A kab of Meloga too is the equivalent of this quantity. R. Joseph said: Our women are accustomed to bake a kapiza at a time on Passover. Said Abaye to him, What is your intention? To be stricter! [But] it is strictness which leads to [unwarranted] leniency, as [the woman] exempts it from hallah? — Said he: They do as R. Eliezer. For we learned, R. Eliezer said: If he removes [loaves from the oven] and places [them] in a basket, the basket combines them in respect of hallah; whereon Rab Judah said in Samuel's name: The halachah is as R. Eliezer. Said he to him, But it was stated thereon, R. Joshua b. Levi said: They taught this only of Babylonian loaves, which cleave to each other, but not [of] cracknels? — Surely it was stated thereon, R. Hanina said: Even cracknels. R. Jeremiah asked: What of a board which has no ledges? Do we require the inside of a vessel, which is absent here; or perhaps we require the air space of a vessel, which is present? The question stands. It was taught: R. Eliezer said: The basket [only] combines them; R. Joshua said: The oven combines them; R. Simeon b. Gamaliel said: Babylonian loaves which cleave to each other combine. MISHNAH. R. GAMALIEL SAID: THREE WOMEN MAY KNEAD AT THE SAME TIME AND BAKE IN ONE OVEN, ONE AFTER THE OTHER. BUT THE SAGES RULE: THREE WOMEN MAY BE ENGAGED ON DOUGH AT THE SAME TIME, ONE KNEADING, ANOTHER SHAPING AND A THIRD BAKING. R. AKIBA SAID: NOT ALL WOMEN AND NOT ALL KINDS OF WOOD AND NOT ALL OVENS ARE ALIKE. THIS IS THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE: IF IT [THE DOUGH] RISES, LET HER WET IT WITH COLD WATER. GEMARA. Our Rabbis taught: Having kneaded [the dough] she forms it [in shape], while her companion kneads in her place; having formed [the dough] she bakes it, and her companion shapes [the dough] in her place, while the third [woman] kneads. [The first] having baked, she kneads [again], and her companion bakes in her place, while the third shapes [her dough]. And thus the round revolves. As long as they are engaged [in working] on the dough, it does not come to fermentation. R. AKIBA SAID: NOT ALL WOMEN etc. It was taught, R. Akiba said: I discussed [the matter] before R. Gamaliel: Let our Master teach us: Does this refer to energetic women or to women who are not energetic; to damp wood or to dry wood; to a hot oven or to a cool oven? Said he to me, You have nought else save what the Sages learned: IF IT RISES, LET HER WET IT WITH COLD WATER. MISHNAH. SI'UR MUST BE BURNT, WHILE HE WHO EATS IT IS NOT CULPABLE; SIDDUK MUST BE BURNT, WHILE HE WHO EATS IT [ON PASSOVER] IS LIABLE TO KARETH. WHAT IS SI'UR? [WHEN THERE ARE LINES ON THE SURFACE] LIKE LOCUSTS’ HORNS; SIDDUK IS WHEN THE CRACKS HAVE INTERMINGLED WITH EACH OTHER: THIS IS THE VIEW OF R. JUDAH. BUT THE SAGES MAINTAIN: REGARDING THE ONE AND THE OTHER, HE WHO EATS IT IS LIABLE TO KARETH. AND WHAT IS SI'UR? WHEN ITS SURFACE IS BLANCHED, LIKE [THE FACE OF] A MAN WHOSE HAIR IS STANDING [ON END]. GEMARA. Our Rabbis taught: What is si'ur.P Whenever its surface is blanched, like [the face of] a man whose hair is standing on end; sidduk is [when there are lines on the surface] like locusts’ horns: this is R. Meir's view. But the Sages maintain: What is si'ur? [When the lines on its surface are] like locusts’ horns; sidduk is when the cracks have intermingled with each other; and in both cases, he who eats it is liable to kareth. But we learned: SI'UR MUST BE BURNT, WHILE HE WHO EATS IT IS NOT CULPABLE . . THIS IS THE VIEW OF R. JUDAH? Say according to R. Meir, in both cases, he who eats it incurs kareth. Raba said: What is R. Meir's reason? There is not a single crack on the surface for which there are not many cracks below [the surface]. 27
—