Talmud sobre Números 15:20

HALAKHAH: ⁶This and the next paragraphs are also in Pesaḥim 2:4 (fol. 29b).“Five kinds are subject to ḥallah”, etc. It is written (Num. 15:19): “It shall be when you eat of the bread of the Land you shall lift a heave⁷This is ḥallah which follows the rules of heave. for the Eternal.” I could think that everything⁸Since לחם can also mean “food”, cf. Gen. 47:12. is subject to ḥallah; the verse says “of the bread” and not all bread. If “of the bread” and not all bread, that might be only wheat and barley⁹Since bread is usually made from these.. From where spelt, foxtail, and oats? The verse says (Num. 15:20,21) “the first of your dough,¹⁰The expression is emphasized by repetition. One has to include every grain usable for making dough.” this includes. Does it include everything¹¹According to this argument, rice and millet for example should also be included.? Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Simeon¹²This must be R. Simeon ben Laqish. R. Yose asserts that R. Ismael accepted the inference as valid; “dough” includes every bread-dough made from grains similar to the bread grains wheat and barley.: Rebbi Ismael stated this.

It was stated: Rebbi Jehudah ben Bathyra says after it was made into separate cuttings¹⁴Tosephta 1:12, speaking of a convert who accepts Judaism while making a dough.. What is Rebbi Jehudah ben Bathyra’s reason? (Num. 15:20) “You shall lift it like the heave of the threshing floor.” Since heave of the threshing floor is taken after the end of processing, so this also is taken after the end of processing. Then after it was baked? Rebbi Mattaniah: It is compared to heave only for doughmaking¹⁵Since Num. 15:20 defines ḥallah as “start of your doughs” and not “start of your breads”..

Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is everybody’s opinion since when she starts pouring the water it is (Num. 15:20) “the beginnining of your doughs,” as it was stated²⁰The Rome ms. reads תני instead of דתני. In that case, the Tosephta is not quoted by R. Joḥanan to bolster his case but by the editors in order to question his argument. Then one should read “… your doughs.” It was stated …: ²¹Tosephta Terumot5:15, quoted in Demay 7:9, Note 137.Ṭevel tithe that was mixed with profane food makes it forbidden²²To laymen. in the minutest amount. If it can be taken care of from another place, one gives in proportion²³Since heave of the tithe does not have to be earmarked, if the Levite has other tithe from which heave of the tithe was not yet taken, he can include the heave for the mixed tithe in the heave he gives from his other tithe and make the mixture profane.. Otherwise, Rebbi Eleazar ben Arakh says he should give a name to the heave of the tithe and lift it by 101²⁴Heave cannot be removed unless declared as such, even if only implicitly by saying, for example: Heave shall be in the Northern part of the grain heap. “Lifting” a replacement of the impure heave was explained in Terumot 4, Note 62..” Rebbi Jacob from Jabul²⁵An Amora of the second generation, living near Bet Shean. in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: Practice follows Rebbi Eleazar ben Arakh. Rebbi Joḥanan said, what they taught the Cohanot²⁶Wives or unmarried daughters of Cohanim. Since they had to watch over purity in their homes, they were called to take ḥallah in purity for lay wives. implies that practice does not follow Rebbi Eleazar ben Arakh. What did they teach the Cohanot? “This is ḥallah for this dough, and the sour dough in it, for the flour contained in it, and for the flat bread under it²⁷From the text of the declaration it is clear that ḥallah is taken at the very first moment, when there still is some flour not moistened, the sour dough not thoroughly worked in, and some pieces being separated. Flatbread in Arabic is قُرص.. If all these are counted together the amount in my hand shall be dedicated as ḥallah except what might be impure in it²⁸If practice would follow R. Eleazar ben Arakh, the Cohenet should lift an amount corresponding to the impurity and then take pure ḥallah..” She says, except what might be impure! Could it not be lifted by 101? Rebbi Jonah said, Rebbi Samuel from Cappadocia and one of the rabbis²⁹He said the same as R. Samuel from Cappadocia but did not mention the latter’s name., one said in one case there is enough to lift³⁰Then one follows R. Eleazar ben Arakh., in the other case there is not enough to lift³¹Then one formulates the declaration following the Cohanot.; since it would have been expected to be lifted it is as if care might be taken of it from another place³²One has to follow the Cohanot since in this case even R. Eleazar ben Arakh would not permit taking from the dough without their special declaration..