Yerushalmi Challah 1:3 ירושלמי חלה א׳:ג׳

MISHNAH: The following are subject to ḥallah but exempt from tithes: Gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and peah¹¹³Cf. Peah 4, Note 97. Since the poor may sell the grain collected as gleanings, etc., the flour from these grains is subject to all rules of regularly harvested grain. The detailed arguments for exemption are in Ma‘serot 1, Notes 18–23., as well as abandoned property¹¹⁴Cf. Peah 6, Note 1, for the exemption from heave and tithes., First tithe of which its heave had been taken¹¹⁵This is purely profane; there is no reason why it should not be subject to ḥallah. The statement which is needed is that flour made from first tithe taken before the great heave becomes profane upon separation of the heave of the tithe (its heave, in the language of the Mishnah) without any great heave., second tithe and dedicated [grain] that were redeemed¹¹⁶But unredeemed second tithe in Jerusalem is free from ḥallah for R. Meïr who holds that it is Heaven’s property; cf. Ma‘aser Šeni 4, Note 67., the excess of the ‘omer¹¹⁷The flour from the barley cut for the ‘omer presentation which was not needed in the Temple. This was redeemed and sold by the Temple as profane., and grain not yet one-third ripe¹¹⁸According to the majority opinion, dough made from flour of green kernels, not yet one-third ripe, can become leavened and therefore is subject to ḥallah.; cf. Notes 15–20.. Rebbi Eleazar said, grain not yet one-third ripe is exempt from ḥallah.
The following are obligated for tithes but free from ḥallah: Rice, millet, poppies, sesame, legumes¹⁵¹Anything from which a kind of flour can be extracted, other than grasses. The main examples are peas and beans., and less than five quarter [qab] of grain¹⁵²A dough made with more than this volume of flour is subject to ḥallah; Mishnah and Halakhah 2:6.. Bismarcks¹⁵³The traditional spelling pronunciation is הַסּוּפְגָּנִים but better Mishnah sources write the word without ו, derived from Greek σπόγγος, Armenian and Syriac spung “ sponge”. According to Arukh, they are what in Arabic is called إسْفُنْج isfunj, spherical spongy cakes fried in oil. In modern Hebrew, the word is used in the feminine: סופגניות., honey cakes¹⁵⁴Defined in the Halakhah as “milk and honey”. The readings of the Kaufmann ms. of the Mishnah, הדיבשנים, or of the Munich ms. of the Babli, הדבשנים, are preferable., roasted cakes¹⁵⁵Greek, [ἄρτος] ἐσχαρίτης, ὁ, “[bread] baked over the fire”., pancakes¹⁵⁶Cf. 2S. 13:9., and dema‘¹⁵⁷Profane and heave mixed together, forbidden to all but Cohanim. are free from ḥallah.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Hoshaiah asked Cahana: From where that these are subject to ḥallah but exempt from tithes? He said to him, do not tell me (Num. 15:19): “you shall lift”; (v. 20) “so you shall lift.”¹¹⁹“It shall be when you eat from the bread of the Land, you shall lift a heave for the Eternal. The first of your doughs, ḥallah you shall lift as heave, as the heave of the threshing floor so you shall lift it.” At first glance, the second verse seems to imply that anything exempt from great heave should be exempt from ḥallah. Cahana assumes that R. Hoshaiah’s question was, why should the items enumerated in the Mishnah ever be subject to ḥallah? He came back and said, from 14 [years]¹²⁰The years of conquest and distribution under Joshua, when they ate from the bread of the Land but did not harvest themselves. Cf. Seder Olam11 [in the author’s edition (Northvale NJ 1998), pp. 116–117, Note 2]; ‘Orlah1:2, Note 55.. Just as in the 14 years they were subject to ḥallah but exempt from tithes, so these are subject to ḥallah but exempt from tithes.

¹²¹Terumot 1, Note 159. Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Yannai: This is one of three well-explained verses in the Torah (Deut. 14:27): “The Levite shall come, for he has neither part nor inheritance with you.” You must give him from what you have but he has not. This excludes ownerless property where your and his hands are equal. There is no difference between gleanings, forgotten sheaves, peah¹²²All poor are entitled to these, irrespective of their tribal affiliation., and abandoned property.

“First tithe of which its heave had been taken;” since its heave was taken, is it not like profane? Explain it if he gave it early, from ears, as Rebbi Abbahu said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: First tithe given early, from ears, is free from [the obligation of] great heave¹²³Babli Berakhot47a,Šabbat 127b, Eruvin 31b, Pesaḥim 35b, Beẓah13b, in the name of R. Simeon ben Laqish; Yerushalmi Bikkurim 2:3, 2:4 (fol. 65a).. Rebbi Yose said, it is written¹²⁴The two verses quoted are written about heave of the tithe. The MT of 18:28 reads מִכָּל־חֶלְבּוֹ. (Num. 18:29): “From all its best, the holy part from it;” not its best and the best of another person. Rebbi Yose said, it is written (Num. 18:26): “You shall lift from it the heave of the Eternal, tithe of the tithe,” but not heave and tithe from the tithe. When he¹²⁵The Levite who threshed the ears given to him as tithe. made a heap and then gave its heave of the tithe. But if he gave heave of the tithe and then made a heap¹²⁶This starts the obligation of heave which then must be given. In the Babli, this is an observation ascribed to Abbaye. this does not apply. When he gave from itself for it, but if he gave from another place¹²⁷This is permitted but then it is not “from it”; the verses do not apply. this does not apply.

“Second Tithe and dedicated [grain] that were redeemed¹¹⁶But unredeemed second tithe in Jerusalem is free from ḥallah for R. Meïr who holds that it is Heaven’s property; cf. Ma‘aser Šeni 4, Note 67.”. Rebbi Zeïra, Rebbi Assi, Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba, Rebbi Hillel ben Vales¹²⁸The name appears as הליס, אליס, ולס. argued in the name of Rebbi Jehudah from the following: “First tithe given early, from ears,
is free from [the obligation of] great heave”¹²⁹The Mishnah states that redeemed second tithe is obligated for ḥallah but free from tithe. How can tithe be free from tithe? It must be that it is not free from tithe but from heave which is subsumed under the name of tithes..

Rebbi Jonah asked: Following him who holds that it is not like his property¹¹⁶But unredeemed second tithe in Jerusalem is free from ḥallah for R. Meïr who holds that it is Heaven’s property; cf. Ma‘aser Šeni 4, Note 67.; but following him who holds it is like his property he must be obligated¹³⁰If second tithe is the farmer’s property even before redemption, then redemption should make no difference in the obligation of ḥallah. This means that the Mishnah is R. Meïr’s; it cannot follow R. Jehudah.. He¹³¹An unidentified person; probably it is R. Jonah’s usual partner R. Yose. said to him, I also am of this opinion. For second tithe, since everybody agrees that it is like his property, he is obligated, there is a disagreement. For him who holds it is obligated¹³²While everybody agrees that early first tithe preempts heave, nothing has been said about second tithe given early. If early second tithe is subject to heave, any dough made from it is subject to ḥallah, including what still has to be given as heave., even its heave is obligated. For him who holds it is free¹³³The only second tithe that possibly is free is unredeemed second tithe consumed in Jerusalem. For him who holds it is Heaven’s property, any second tithe dough in Jerusalem is exempt from ḥallah., even its profane part is free.

For him who holds it is obligated¹³⁴Early Second Tithe obligated for heave. It was established in Terumot 2:1 that heave of the tithe may be given from one batch for an unrelated batch., if he used it as heave of the tithe for some other produce, how do you treat it? Like a heap of sheaves which became dema‘¹³⁵Profane mixed with heave; cf. Terumot 3:2. or like a dough which became dema‘¹³⁶Which is exempt from ḥallah, cf. Mishnah 4.? A heap of sheaves which became dema‘ you say is obligated, a dough which became dema‘ you say is free! Rebbi Tanḥuma in the name of Rebbi Ḥuna: Concerning a heap of sheaves which became dema‘ if he transgressed and gave heave before it became obligated, is it not heave¹³⁷The Constantinople print (Benvenist) has this as a declarative sentence: “It is heave.” The heap of sheaves is not processed but if heave is given, automatically all tithes are also due.? A dough which became dema‘ if he transgressed and gave ḥallah from it before it became obligated¹³⁸A (sufficiently large) bread dough is potentially obligated for ḥallah the moment it is no longer dry flour. is not ḥallah as we have stated there¹³⁹Mishnah 2:5.: “If somebody gives ḥallah from flour it is not ḥallah and will be robbery in the hand if the Cohen.¹⁴⁰The two cases have been explained but the original question was not answered.”

“The excess of the ‘omer.” The Mishnah is not Rebbi Aqiba’s since Rebbi Aqiba makes it liable for heave and tithes¹⁴¹Mishnah Menaḥot 10(6):4; Babli Menaḥot 66b–67a..

“And grain not yet one-third ripe”. What is the rabbis’ reason? “Bread” is mentioned in connection with Passover and “bread” is mentioned in connection with ḥallah. “Bread” mentioned in connection with Passover includes all that may be maẓẓah or leavened, [therefore] also “bread” mentioned in connection with ḥallah includes all that may be maẓẓah or leavened^15–18118According to the majority opinion, dough made from flour of green kernels, not yet one-third ripe, can become leavened and therefore is subject to ḥallah.; cf. Notes 15–20.. What is Rebbi Eleazar’s reasoning? (Num. 15:20) “You shall lift it like heave from the threshing floor.” Since heave from the threshing floor is only from produce at least one-third ripe¹⁴²Cf. Ma‘serot 1:3, Note 78., that also is only from produce at least one-third ripe. Does Rebbi Eleazar not have “bread, bread¹⁴³If there is an established tradition that the word “bread” means the same in both cases, R. Eleazar also must agree that the same standard applies in both cases.”? It was found stated in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: It¹⁴⁴Bread or dough made from flour milled from grain not yet one-third ripe. is not subject to ḥallah and nobody can use it to fulfill his duty on Passover.

¹⁴⁵This formulation is exactly the inverse of the same argument in Halakhah 1, Note 23. Is one guilty for bread from it because of new grain? Rebbi Yudan said, it is written (Lev. 23:14): “Bread, parched or fresh grain you should not eat.” Anything for whose parched grain you would be guilty because of new grain you are guilty for bread because of new grain; but anything for whose parched grain you would not be guilty because of new grain you are not guilty for bread because of new grain.

¹⁴⁶Ma‘serot 1:3, Note 78. Rebbi Zeïra said: It is written (Deut 14:22): “You shall certainly tithe all your seed-yield.” Anything which will grow when sown; this excludes seeds less than one-third ripe which when sown will not grow.

It is obvious: For the rabbis, that “less than a third” is not dragged in concerning the matter of tithes. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Josef asked: According to Rebbi Eleazar, is it dragged in in the matter of ḥallah like a rice dough¹⁴⁷Since grain less than one-third ripe is not subject to tithes, if such grain is mixed with ripe grain, only the ripe grain is subject to heave and tithes. The green kernels cannot become subject to tithes. Cf. Note 22. On the other hand, it is stated in Mishnah 3:6 that if a dough made from rice and grain tastes of grain, the entire dough is obligated for ḥallah and the bread baked from it is acceptable for Passover.? Samuel bar Abba asked: How does one treat old and new for ḥallah¹⁴⁸It is forbidden to give heave from the new harvest for last year’s. Since ḥallah is called heave, how does one treat dough made from flour which is a mixture of last year’s and this year’s grain? No answer is given; it seems obvious that one does not have to investigate the origin of the flour one buys on the market.? Two fields, one one-third ripe, one less than one-third ripe, are one for ḥallah¹⁴⁹According to the rabbis, flour from both fields is subject to ḥallah when made into a dough but only the riper one is subject to heave and tithes. and two for tithes. One less than one-third ripe and one of grasses¹⁵⁰The grain seeds are somehow used to make flour. That flour cannot be measured in the minimal amount needed for ḥallah (Mishnah 2:6). But as human food it is subject to (rabbinic) tithes. are two for ḥallah and one for tithes. One one-third ripe and one of grasses are two both for ḥallah and tithes.

What are the rules “in between”¹⁵⁸In between obligations, if dough is made from flour that is not totally profane.? Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “In between” follows the rules of the first state¹⁵⁹All prior obligations also fall on the ḥallah taken from the dough.. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “In between” follows the rules of the final state. What means “in between”? ¹⁶⁰Cf. Demay 5:1, Notes 23 ff.; Tosephta Terumot 4:10. If somebody makes dough from ṭevel, its ḥallah is obligated for heave and its heave for ḥallah. From where that ḥallah is obligated for heave? Rebbi Isaac in the name of Rebbi Samuel ben Martha in the name of Rav: (Num. 15:20) “Ḥallah you shall lift heave,” from ḥallah you shall lift heave. From where that heave is subject to ḥallah? From our difficulty to explain that verse, the one where it is written: “Beginning … you shall lift ḥallah”¹⁶¹The full verses read: “The beginning of your doughs, ḥallah you shall lift heave; like heave of the barn, so you shall lift it. From the beginning of your doughs you shall give a heave to the Eternal, for your generations.” The second verse states that ḥallah is due as a heave from the moment the kneading of the dough starts. But then the first “beginning” is redundant; it is taken to refer to actual heave which is called “beginning” in Num. 18:12. Then the second clause of the first verse is read not “ḥallah you shall lift [as] heave” but “[from] ḥallah you shall lift heave.”.

Bismarcks are tracta¹⁶²Latin tractum, tracta, Greek τρακτόν, τό, “long piece of dough drawn out in making pastry” (Liddell & Scott). Mentioned in Apicius (De re coquinaria, Ed. M. E. Milham, Leipzig 1969) Bk. IV iii as used in serving fish, Bk. Vil using “three small tracta balls” for pultes tractogalatae.. Honey cakes μελίγαλα¹⁶³“Honey-milk” baked goods.. Ὲσχαρίτης are bake-meats¹⁶⁴The root of חליטה seems to be Arabic ח̇לט “to mix”, from which Arabic מַח̇לוּטָא “baked from a mixture of lentils, peas, and farina.” The Babli, Pesaḥim37a, defines חַלַּת מַסְרֵת as “non-commercial חָלוּט”; a better opposite to “commercial חלוּט” of the Yerushalmi.
The Babli, Pesaḥim 37b, also defines חלוּט as “dough cooked by pouring boiling water over it” in contrast to מעיסה “dumpling” made by dropping lumps of dough into boiling water but the Yerushalmi (Halakhah 7) switches the meanings of both terms. of the market, pancakes dumplings in water.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, tracta is subject to ḥallah¹⁶⁵The obvious contradiction to the Mishnah is resolved in the next paragraph., one recites for it “He Who produces bread from the earth,¹⁶⁶The benediction required for bread and bread alone; Berakhot 6:1.” and one may satisfy one’s Passover obligation with it¹⁶⁷To eat maẓẓah defined as unleavened bread; cf. Note 15.. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, tracta is not subject to ḥallah, one may not recite for it “He Who produces bread from the earth,” and one may not satisfy one’s Passover obligation with it. Rebbi Yose said both together: Rebbi Joḥanan said, tracta is subject to ḥallah, one recites for it “He Who produces bread from the earth,” and one may satisfy one’s Passover obligation with it; Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, tracta is not subject to ḥallah, one may not recite for it “He Who produces bread from the earth,” and one may not satisfy one’s Passover obligation with it. Rebbi Yose said another [statement] (Rebbi Yose): Rebbi Joḥanan said, everything¹⁶⁸Every dough baked in an oven. Their ovens were shaped as conical frustums, where the dough was clinging to the inclined wall directly over the fire. under which the fire burns is subject to ḥallah, one recites for it “He Who produces bread from the earth,” and one may satisfy one’s Passover obligation with it. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, anything under which the fire burns is not subject to ḥallah, one may not recite for it “He Who produces bread from the earth,” and one may not satisfy one’s Passover obligation with it. Rebbi Joḥanan said, only in a fluid¹⁶⁹Dough baked in a pan whose bottom is filled with liquid (including oil) cannot become bread..

The Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Johanan: “Bismarcks, honey cakes, roasted cakes, pancakes, and dema‘ are free from ḥallah!” He explains it for Bismarcks made on the fire: One does not fulfill one’s obligation with Bismarcks baked by the sun¹⁷⁰He restricts the Mishnah to that unlikely case; this is accepted in the Babli, Pesaḥim 37a.
A Genizah text has a more complete version: פתר לה בסופגנים שנעשו בחמה. ותני כן יוצאים בסופגנים שנעשו באור ואין וצאים בסופגנים שנעשו בחמה “He explains it for Bismarcks baked by the sun. It was stated thus (Tosephta Pisḥa 2:19): One may fulfill one’s obligation with Bismarcks baked on fire but one may not fulfill one’s obligation by Bismarcks baked in the sun.”; one may fulfill one’s obligation with Bismarcks baked on the fire. Does this not disagree with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish? He explains it if the fire extends to the sides¹⁷¹Since the oven is much larger at the botton than in the upper part where the bread is baked, the heat comes from all sides. R. Simeon considers baking with heat coming just from one direction as cooking, not baking. In the Babli, Pesaḥim 37b, R. Simeon defines as cooking anything prepared in a vessel in the oven; he accepts as baking only what is in the oven without any vessel. This may be the same as his opinion explained here..

¹⁷²This paragraph appears, with minor spelling differences, in Terumot 4 and was explained there, Notes 76–81. The words of the rabbis disagree. Cahana asked Samuel: Is it not reasonable that the dema‘ which we stated here contains mostly heave? He said to him, that is also my opinion, but when you go to the Land of Israel do ask about this. When he went, he heard what Rebbi Assi said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, even one seah that fell into 99 [which were] profane. Rebbi Abbahu said, thus did Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish answer Rebbi Joḥanan: That one seah frees everything? Is a fig cake among fig cakes such a sure thing that heave came up in his hand? But you must say it is [to be taken] lightly; here also it is [to be taken] lightly. Could he not have objected: Is it different with fig cakes which already are disregarded? Rebbi Jonah and Rebbi Yose, both in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: Even wheat and wheat he may grind and lift.

“Less than five quarter [qab] of grain.” Rebbi Abina said, this you said if it was less than five quarter [qab] of grain. But if it were exactly five quarters, this does not apply¹⁷³This is implied by the Mishnah which exempts only volumes strictly less that ⁵/₄ qab, against the opinion of R. Yose (Mishnah Idiut 1:2) who requires strictly more than ⁵/₄ qab.. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Abuna, it was not said on that but on the following: Rebbi Joḥanan said, dema‘ is free from ḥallah but ḥallah is obligated for what is possible dema‘¹⁷⁴If there were two boxes and heave fell into one of them but it is not known into which, the contents of both must be eaten by Cohanim but are not exempt from ḥallah. and is eaten because of dema‘¹⁷⁵It seems that in the text one should read סָפֵק מְדוּמָע נֶאֱכַל מִשּׁוּם דִּימּוּעַ חַייָב בַּחַלָּה as in Tosephta Ḥallah 1:5, Terumot 7:8.. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Abuna, when has this been said? For more than five quarter [qab], but for exactly five quarters it is exempt from ḥallah.