Berakhot

, not being a kind of corn or which belongs to one of the kinds of corn but has not been made into bread, R. Gamaliel says that three blessings are to be said, while the Sages say, only one blessing [which includes three]. [After] anything which belongs neither to the seven species nor to any kind of corn, for instance bread of rice or millet, R. Gamaliel says that one blessing which includes three is to be said, while the Sages say, no grace at all. To which authority do you then assign this statement?  To R. Gamaliel. Look now at the latter half of the first statement  viz., 'if the pieces are no longer whole, he says before partaking "who createst various kinds of foods", and after partaking one blessing which includes three'. Whose view does this express? Shall I say that of R. Gamaliel? Seeing that R. Gamaliel requires a grace of three blessings after dates and pounded grain,  is there any question that he should require it if the pieces are no longer whole?  Hence, obviously, it must be the view of the Rabbis.  If that is the case, there is a contradiction between two statements of the Rabbis?  — No; I still say, it is the view of the Rabbis; and in connection with rice you should read, 'after partaking he does not say any blessing'. Raba said: Over the rihata  of the field workers, in which there is a large quantity of flour, the blessing said is 'who createst various kinds of foods'. What is the reason? The flour is the main ingredient. Over the rihata of the townspeople in which there is not so much flour, the blessing said is 'by whose word all things exist'. What is the reason? The main ingredient is the honey. Raba, however, corrected himself and said: Over both the blessing is 'who createst various kinds of foods'. For Rab and Samuel both laid down that over anything containing one of the five species as an ingredient, the blessing to be said is 'who createst various kinds of foods'. R. Joseph said: If in a habiz there are pieces of bread  as big as an olive, the blessing said before it is 'who bringest forth bread from the earth', and after it a grace of three blessings is said. If there are no pieces as big as an olive in it, the blessing said before it is 'who createst various kinds of foods', and after it one blessing which includes three. Said R. Joseph: Whence do I derive this? Because it has been taught: If one  is in the act of offering meal-offerings in Jerusalem, he says, 'Blessed be He that hath kept us alive and preserved us and brought us to this season'. When he  takes them up in order to eat them, he says the blessing, 'Who bringest forth bread from the earth', and it was taught in this connection. They are all  broken into fragments of the size of an olive.  Said Abaye to him: If that is so, then similarly according to the Tanna of the school of R. Ishmael who says that he crushes them until he reduces them to flour, he should not require to say who bringest forth bread from the earth'? And should you reply that that is indeed the case, has it not been taught: If he scraped together as much as an olive from all of them  and ate [all of] it, if it is leaven he is punished with kareth,  and if it is unleaven a man may perform his obligation with it on Passover?  — With what case are we dealing here?  If he re-kneaded the crumbs.  If so, look at the next clause: This is only if he ate them within the time which it takes to eat half [a roll].  Now if they are re-kneaded, instead of saying 'to eat them', it should say, 'to eat it'? [Rather] with what case are we here dealing? When it comes from a large loaf.  Now what do we decide upon this matter? R. Shesheth said: If the crumbs of bread in a habiz are even less than an olive, the benediction 'who bringest forth bread from the earth' is said over it. Raba added: This is only if they still have the appearance of bread. Troknin  is subject to the law of hallah. When Rabin came, he said in the name of R. Johanan: Troknin is not subject to the law of hallah. What is Troknin? — Abaye said: [Dough baked] in a cavity made in the ground. Abaye also said: Tarita is exempt from the obligation of hallah. What is tarita? — Some say, dough just lightly baked;  others say, bread baked on a spit;  others again, bread used for kuttah.  R. Hiyya said: Bread used for kuttah is not liable to hallah. But it has been taught that it is liable for hallah? — There the reason is stated: Rab Judah says that the way it is made shows what it is; if it is made