פסחים דף מ

תרי חיטי בהדי הדדי, דילמא אזלא חדא ויתבה בציריא דחברתה, ולא סליק להו דיקולא דמיא מארבע רוחתא, ואתי לידי חימוץ.

two wheat grains in boiling water at the same time, lest one move and rest in the slit [tzirya] of the other, thereby preventing the column [dikkula] of boiling water from entering all four sides of the grain, and the grain will come to a state of leavening.

ואמר אביי: לא ליחרוך איניש תרי שבלי בהדי הדדי, דילמא נפקי מיא מהאי ובלע אידך, ואתיא לידי חימוץ. אמר ליה רבא: אי הכי, אפילו חדא נמי,

And Abaye said: A person may not roast two stalks together, lest water leave one and be absorbed by the other, and it come to be leavened. Rava said to him: If so, one should not even roast one stalk, lest the liquid leave one end of the stalk and be absorbed by its other end. Rather, Rava said: One need not be concerned about this possibility, as it is considered fruit juice, and fruit juice does not leaven grain.

דילמא נפיק מהאי רישא ובלע אידך רישא! אלא אמר רבא: מי פירות נינהו, ומי פירות אינן מחמיצין.

והדר ביה אביי מההיא, דכל אגב מדלייהו לא מחמצי. דאמר אביי: האי חצבא דאבישנא, סחיפא — שרי, זקיפא — אסור. רבא אמר: אפילו זקיפא — נמי שרי,

The Gemara adds: And Abaye retracted his opinion with regard to that halakha of stalks, as he maintains that anything that is absorbing liquid will not become leavened unless it is fully soaked in water. As Abaye said: With regard to this jug used for drying the stalks by means of roasting, if it is inverted it is permitted, as the liquid that is discharged from one stalk will not be absorbed by the other stalks. However, if the vessel is upright it is prohibited, as the liquid retained in the vessel might be absorbed by the other stalks and leaven them. Rava said: Even if the jug is upright, it is also permitted. This liquid is considered fruit juice, and fruit juice does not leaven grain.

מי פירות נינהו, ומי פירות אינן מחמיצין.

תנו רבנן: אין לותתין שעורין בפסח. ואם לתת, נתבקעו — אסורות, לא נתבקעו — מותרות.

The Sages taught: One may not soak barley in water on Passover to make it easier to remove the chaff from the grain. And if one did soak barley grain and it split, it is prohibited. If it did not split, it is permitted.

רבי יוסי אומר: שורן בחומץ, וחומץ צומתן. אמר שמואל: אין הלכה כרבי יוסי.

Rabbi Yosei says: If one sees that the grain is expanding, he should soak it in vinegar, and the vinegar will cause the grain to contract, thereby preventing leavening. However, Shmuel said: The halakha in not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei.

אמר רב חסדא אמר מר עוקבא: לא נתבקעו ממש, אלא כל שאילו מניחן על פי חבית והן נתבקעות מאיליהן, ושמואל אמר: נתבקעו ממש.

Rav Ḥisda said that Mar Ukva said: When the Sages were referring to a case where the barley grain split, the prohibition does not apply only if it actually split and a crack is visible. Rather, this is referring even to a case where if the barley grains were placed on a barrel of wine they would split by themselves, due to the effect of the wine. And by contrast, Shmuel said: This halakha applies only if it actually split. The Gemara relates: Shmuel took action in accordance with his ruling, when he was in the village of bar Ḥashu’s house. He prohibited only barley grains that had actually split, but permitted those that were about to split.

עבד שמואל עובדא בדורא דבי בר חשו נתבקעו ממש.

אמר רבה: בעל נפש לא ילתות. מאי איריא בעל נפש? אפילו כולי עלמא נמי, דהא תניא: אין לותתין שעורין בפסח! הכי קאמר:

Rabba said: A pious person will not soak wheat at all during Passover. The Gemara asks: Why discuss particularly a pious person? This halakha should apply to everyone as well, as it was expressly taught in a baraita: One may not soak barley on Passover. The Gemara answers that this is what Rabba is saying: A pious person will not even soak wheat, which is firmer than barley and less likely to split, due to the concern that it might become leavened.

בעל נפש — אפילו חיטין דשרירי לא ילתות.

אמר ליה רב נחמן: מאן דציית ליה לאבא — אכיל נהמא דעיפושא. דהא בי רב הונא לתתי, ובי רבא בר אבין לתתי. ורבא אמר: אסור ללתות.

Rav Naḥman said to Rabba: Anyone who listens to Abba, Rabba’s first name, will eat moldy bread during Passover, as flour cannot be properly prepared without soaking, and therefore matza should not be prepared from this flour. As in Rav Huna’s house they would soak the grain, and in Rava bar Avin’s house they would likewise soak their grain. But Rava said: Soaking grain should not be avoided merely for reasons of piety; rather, it is absolutely prohibited to soak grain.

אלא הא דתניא: אין לותתין שעורין בפסח. שעורין הוא דלא, הא חיטי — שרי. לא מיבעיא קאמר. לא מיבעיא חיטין, כיון דאית ביה ציריא — עיילי בהו מיא,

The Gemara asks: Rather, that which is taught in a baraita: One may not soak barley on Passover, indicates that it is barley that one may not soak; however, it is permitted to soak wheat, how will Rava explain this baraita? The Gemara explains: The baraita is speaking employing the didactic style of: Needless to say. It should be understood as follows: Needless to say, wheat may not be soaked, since wheat grains have a slit through which water will enter, and the wheat will therefore expand quickly when left to soak. However, in the case of barley, which is smooth and no water will enter the grain, one might say that this seems well, i.e., it is permitted, to soak barley. Therefore, the baraita teaches us that it is prohibited to soak even barley.

אבל שערי דשיעי — אימא שפיר דמי, קא משמע לן.

הדר אמר רבא: מותר ללתות. דתניא: יוצאין בפת נקיה והדראה, ואי אפשר נקיה בלא לתיתה.

Rava reconsidered and then said: This is not the case. Rather, it is permitted to soak grain, as it was taught in a baraita: One can fulfill his obligation with a matza loaf prepared from refined flour and with matza baked from coarse flour. And it is impossible to produce refined matza without soaking the grain, as this is the only way to remove the chaff completely from the grain.

איתיביה רב פפא לרבא: הקמחין והסלתות של גוים, של כפרים — טהורים, ושל כרכין — טמאין.

Rav Pappa raised an objection to the opinion of Rava from a baraita: With regard to flour and refined flour that belong to gentiles, in villages they are ritually pure, and in cities they are ritually impure. It is assumed that grain in cities is soaked before it is ground into flour. Once water comes in contact with this grain, it becomes susceptible to ritual impurity, and it subsequently becomes impure when touched by gentiles.

דכפרים מאי טעמא? לאו משום דלא לתתי, וקא קרי ליה סולת!

As for flour in villages, what is the reason that it is ritually pure? Is it not due to the fact that they do not soak the flour, and therefore it does not become liable to ritual impurity? And yet their flour is nonetheless called refined flour. It can be inferred from this that it is possible to prepare refined flour without soaking the grain.

תרגומא אקמחא. בתר דנפיק אמר: מאי טעמא לא אימא ליה מהא דאמר רבי זירא אמר רב ירמיה אמר שמואל: חיטין של מנחות אין לותתין אותם,

Rava answered: You should interpret the distinction of the baraita as referring only to ordinary flour, not refined flour, which is invariably susceptible to ritual impurity due to the soaking. After Rava left, Rav Pappa said: What is the reason that he did not say a proof from this statement that Rabbi Zeira said that Rav Yirmeya said that Shmuel said: With regard to wheat that will be used for meal-offerings, one may not soak it, and yet it is nonetheless called refined flour? The Torah insists that the flour used for meal-offerings be prepared from refined flour.

וקא קרי להו סולת.

הדר אמר רבא: מצוה ללתות, שנאמר ״ושמרתם את המצות״ — אי לא דבעי לתיתה שימור למאי? אי שימור דלישה — שימור דלישה לאו שימור הוא.

Rava reconsidered and then said: It is not only permitted to soak the grains; it is actually a mitzva to soak them, as it is stated: “And you shall guard the matzot” (Exodus 12:17). The Gemara explains this statement: If it is not the case that grain requires soaking, for what purpose is guarding necessary? If you claim that this verse is referring to guarding when kneading, that cannot be the case, as guarding grain while kneading is not considered guarding. If one failed to protect the wheat from becoming leavened up to that point, it is of no use to be careful while kneading it. Consequently, this mitzva to guard the dough cannot be referring to the kneading stage.

דאמר רב הונא: בצקות של גוים — אדם ממלא כריסו מהן, ובלבד שיאכל כזית מצה באחרונה. באחרונה — אין, בראשונה — לא,

As Rav Huna said: In the case of dough prepared by gentiles, if one knows that it has not become leavened, a person may fill his stomach with them on Passover night, provided that he eats an olive-bulk of matza in the end, to fulfill the obligation to eat matza. The Gemara infers from this statement: With regard to the matza that he eats in the end, yes, he fulfills his obligation with this matza. But with regard to the matza he ate in the beginning, no, he does not fulfill the mitzva with dough prepared by gentiles.

מאי טעמא? משום דלא עבד בהו שימור. ולעביד ליה שימור מאפיה ואילך! אלא לאו שמע מינה, שימור מעיקרא בעינן.

What is the reason that one cannot fulfill his obligation to eat matza with dough prepared by gentiles? It is because he did not perform his duty to guard this dough. But one can perform his duty to guard it from the time of baking and onward. Rather, isn’t it correct to conclude from this baraita that the grain must be guarded from the beginning, i.e., from the time it is soaked, which proves that soaking the grain is part of the process of preparing matza?

וממאי? דילמא שאני התם, דבעידנא דנחית לשימור — לא עבד לה שימור. אבל היכא דבעידנא דנחית לשימור — עביד לה שימור, הכי נמי דשימור דלישה הוי שימור.

The Gemara rejects this: And from where do we know that this conclusion is correct? Perhaps it is different there, as at the time when guarding is required, i.e., when water was added to the flour, he did not perform his duty to guard it properly. However, in a case where at the time when guarding is required, when water is added the flour, he properly performed his duty to guard it, so too, it is possible that guarding flour at the time of kneading is considered proper guarding. Therefore, this question cannot be resolved based on the case of dough prepared by gentiles.

ואפילו הכי לא הדר ביה רבא. דאמר להו להנהו דמהפכי כיפי: כי מהפכיתו — הפיכו לשום מצוה, אלמא קסבר: שימור מעיקרא מתחלתו ועד סופו בעינן.

And although this proof was rejected, Rava did not retract his statement that guarding grain must begin before kneading. For he would say to those who cut and tied the stalks [kifei] of grain in the field: When you cut the grain, cut it for the purpose of the mitzva. Apparently, Rava maintains that it is necessary to guard the grain from the outset, i.e., from the beginning of its preparation until its end.

מר בריה דרבינא

The Gemara relates with regard to Mar, son of Ravina,

מנקטא ליה אימיה בארבי.

that his mother would bring him wheat in a trough. In other words, she would guard the wheat grains from when they were harvested by placing them in vessels and guarding them until Passover.

ההוא ארבא דחיטי דטבעא בחישתא, שריא רבא לזבוני לגוים.

The Gemara relates that there was a certain boat carrying wheat, which capsized before Passover in the Ḥishta River. Rava permitted its owners to sell the recovered grain to gentiles before Passover.

איתיביה רבה בר ליואי לרבא: בגד שאבד בו כלאים — הרי זה לא ימכרנו לגוי, ולא יעשה בו מרדעת לחמור. אבל עושין אותו תכריכין למת.

Rabba bar Levai raised an objection to the opinion of Rava from a baraita: With regard to a garment in which diverse kinds, a prohibited mixture of wool and linen, has been lost, i.e., a wool garment into which a linen thread was sewn or vice versa, one may not sell it to a gentile; and one may not even fashion it into a saddlecloth for a donkey. It is prohibited to do so lest one remove a piece of this garment and sew it onto his own clothing. However, one may fashion it into a shroud for a dead body, as there is no concern that he will remove it from the dead.

לגוי מאי טעמא לא — לאו משום דהדר מזבין לישראל?

The Gemara clarifies this issue: What is the reason that one may not sell it to a gentile? Is it not due to the concern that the gentile will resell it to a Jew? Since the mixture of wool and linen is not visible, it is possible for a Jew to use this cloth unawares. The same concern applies to grain: It is not apparent that the grain that capsized in the river is prohibited. It should therefore be prohibited to sell this wheat to gentiles, lest they resell it to Jews.

הדר אמר רבא: לזבינהו קבא קבא לישראל, כי היכי דכליא קמי פיסחא.

Rava reconsidered and then said: He should sell this wheat one kav at a time, i.e., in small measures, each to a different Jew, but not to any one Jew in large quantities, so that all of this wheat will be used before Passover. By selling it in this manner, all the grain will be used quickly and no one will unwittingly eat these leavened grains on Passover.

תנו רבנן: אין מוללין את הקדירה בפסח. והרוצה שימלול — נותן את הקמח ואחר כך נותן את החומץ. ויש אומרים:

The Sages taught: One may not stir flour into a pot of food on Passover to absorb the foam that has accumulated during the cooking process. And one who wishes to stir flour should add the flour and afterward add vinegar, which will prevent the flour from becoming leavened. And some say: One may even add vinegar and afterward add the flour, as vinegar prevents flour from becoming leavened even after the flour is diluted in water.

אף נותן את החומץ ואחר כך נותן את הקמח.

מאן יש אומרים?

The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna whose opinion is introduced by the phrase some say?

אמר רב חסדא: רבי יהודה היא, דתנן: האילפס והקדירה שהעבירן מרותחין — לא יתן לתוכן תבלין, אבל נותן לתוך הקערה או לתוך התמחוי. רבי יהודה אומר:

Rav Ḥisda said: It is the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, as we learned in a mishna: With regard to a stew pot or a pot of food that one removed from the fire when it was seething, one may not add spices to them on Shabbat. However, one may add spices to a dish or to the large plate into which the food is poured from the pot. Rabbi Yehuda says: One may add spices to any food that has been removed from the fire, except to a dish that contains vinegar or brine, as this food is considered as though it were still seething, due to the pungency of the vinegar or brine. Since Rabbi Yehuda maintains that vinegar has the same effect as boiling, he would agree that vinegar, like boiling water, prevents flour from becoming leavened.

לכל הוא נותן, חוץ מדבר שיש בו חומץ וציר.

ונוקמה כרבי יוסי, (דתנן) רבי יוסי אומר: שורן בחומץ, וחומץ צומתן!

The Gemara asks: And let us establish the opinion of: Some say, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei. As we learned in a mishna: Rabbi Yosei says, with regard to wheat grains that were soaked in water: One should soak them in vinegar, and this vinegar will cause the wheat to contract and prevent it from becoming leavened.

כי אשמעינן ליה לרבי יוסי, הני מילי דאיתיה בעיניה, אבל על ידי תערובת — לא.

The Gemara answers: When we learn the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, this applies only to a situation where the vinegar is in its pure, unadulterated form, in which case its pungency prevents the wheat from becoming leavened. However, if the vinegar is added by means of a mixture, no, Rabbi Yosei’s statement does not apply to a case of this kind.

עולא אמר: אחד זה ואחד זה — אסור, משום: ״לך לך אמרינן נזירא, סחור סחור, לכרמא לא תקרב״.

Ulla said: In both of these cases, whether the vinegar is added first or afterward, its use is prohibited, as one must avoid scenarios that might lead to a prohibition, as per the well-known adage: Go around, go around, and do not approach the vineyard, they say to the nazirite. Since a nazirite is prohibited from drinking wine and eating grapes, it is preferable for him to avoid a vineyard entirely. A similar principle applies to other prohibitions.

רב פפי שרי ליה לבורדיקי דבי ריש גלותא לממחה קדירה בחסיסי. אמר רבא: איכא דשרי כי האי מילתא בדוכתא דשכיחי עבדי? איכא דאמרי:

The Gemara relates: Rav Pappi permitted the cooks [burdikei] of the household of the Exilarch to mash roasted grains into a pot of food, to dissolve the accumulated foam. Rava said: Is there anyone who permits this matter in a place where servants are found? Servants are unlikely to be careful with regard to these prohibitions. They will use raw flour for this purpose, which will lead to a violation of the prohibition against leavened bread on Passover. Some say that Rava himself would add roasted grains into his own pot.

רבא גופא מחי לה קידרא בחסיסי.

מתני׳ אין נותנין קמח לתוך חרוסת או לתוך החרדל. ואם נתן — יאכל מיד, ורבי מאיר אוסר.

MISHNA: One may not add flour to ḥaroset, a seasoned, pungent food, or to mustard, to dull the sharp taste. In both cases, the pungency of these foods might accelerate the leavening of the flour. And if one added flour to either of these, the mixture may be eaten immediately before it is leavened; and Rabbi Meir prohibits this, lest the food be leavened immediately.

אין מבשלין את הפסח לא במשקין ולא במי פירות, אבל סכין ומטבילין אותו בהן.

The mishna continues: One may not boil the Paschal lamb in ordinary liquids or in fruit juices, as the Torah explicitly states that it must be roasted. However, one may baste it while it is roasting and dip it into liquid while eating it.

מי תשמישו של נחתום — ישפכו, מפני שהן מחמיצין.

The tanna further states: Water that has been used by a baker for cooling his hands or washing dishes should be poured out, because this water leavens the dough, as the water probably contains a small quantity of flour and dough.

גמ׳ אמר רב כהנא: מחלוקת לתוך החרדל, אבל לתוך חרוסת — דברי הכל ישרף מיד.

GEMARA: Rav Kahana said: The dispute between Rabbi Meir and the Rabbis concerns a case where one adds flour to mustard, which is extremely pungent and will not leaven the flour immediately. But in a case where flour is added to the less pungent ḥaroset, which will leaven the flour quickly, everyone agrees that the mixture must be burned immediately.

ותניא נמי הכי: אין נותנין קמח לתוך החרוסת, ואם נתן — ישרף מיד. לתוך החרדל, רבי מאיר אומר: ישרף מיד, וחכמים אומרים: יאכל מיד.

And that opinion was also taught in a baraita: One may not add flour to ḥaroset, and if one did add flour it should be burned immediately. With regard to flour that was added to mustard, Rabbi Meir says: It should be burned immediately, and the Rabbis say: It should be eaten immediately, before it is leavened. Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehuda, said that Rav Naḥman said that Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis concerning this issue. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said to Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehuda:

אמר רב הונא בריה דרב יהודה אמר רב נחמן אמר שמואל: הלכה כדברי חכמים. אמר ליה רב נחמן בר יצחק לרב הונא בריה דרב יהודה: