משנה: שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים שֶׁעָשׂוּ שְׁינֵי קַבִּין וְנָֽגְעוּ זֶה בַזֶּה אֲפִילוּ הֵן מִמִּין אֶחָד פְּטוּרִין. וּבִזְמָן שֶׁהֵן שֶׁלְאִשָּׁה אַחַת מִין בְּמִינוֹ חַייָב וּשְׁלֹא בְמִינוֹ פָּטוּר. אֵי זֶהוּ מִין בְּמִינוֹ הַחִטִּים אֵינָן מִצְטָֽרְפוֹת עִם הַכֹּל אֶלָּא עִם הַכּוּסְמִין. הַשְּׂעוֹרִין מִצְטָֽרְפִין עִם הַכֹּל חוּץ מִן הַחִטִּין. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי אוֹמֵר שְׁאָר הַמִּינִין מִצְטָֽרְפִין זֶה עִם זֶה. MISHNAH: If two women each made a qab1They separately made bread dough and now are baking it together in the same oven. Separately, the doughs are exempt but both together are obligated since 2 > 5/4. and they touched one another, even if they are of the same kind they are exempt. But if both belong to the same woman and are of the same kind they are obligated2If the doughs touch or are on the same baking sheet., different kinds3This is defined in Mishnah 4:2. are exempt.
What is the same kind? Wheat combines18Cf. Chapter 1, Notes 40 ff. with nothing but spelt. Barley combines with everything except wheat. Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri said, the remaining kinds all combine with one another.
הלכה: שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים שֶׁעָשׂוּ שְׁינֵי כול׳. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן סְתָם אִשָּׁה אַחַת אֵינָהּ מַקְפֶּדֶת שְׁתַּיִם מַקְפִּידוֹת הֵן. אִשָּׁה אַחַת שֶׁהִיא מַקְפֶּדֶת עָשׂוּ אוֹתָהּ כִּשְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים. שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים שֶׁאֵינָן מַקְפִּידוֹת עָשׂוּ אוֹתָם כְּאִשָּׁה אַחַת. אִם אֵינָהּ מַקְפֶּדֶת לָמָּה הִוא עוֹשָׂה אוֹתָהּ כִּשְׁנֵי מְקוֹמוֹת. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹנָה בְּשֶׁאֵין לָהּ מָקוֹם לָלוּשׁ. מִילְתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹנָה אָמַר הָיָה לָהּ מָקוֹם הֵיכָן לָלוּשׁ וְהִוא עוֹשָׂה אוֹתָן כִּשְׁנֵי מְקוֹמוֹת מַקְפֶּדֶת הִיא. נָקִי וְקֵיבָר מַקְפֶּדֶת הִיא. אָמַר רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר שְׁתֵּי דֵיעוֹת עָשׂוּ אוֹתָן כִּשְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים. שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר אַבָּא בָּעֵי אֲפִילוּ רוֹצוֹת. HALAKHAH: “Two women who each made,” etc. Rebbi Joḥanan said, usually for women, one does not mind, two do mind4According to Maimonides (Bikkurim 7:1), followed by the later law codes, there is no difference between men and women in this matter. According to R. M. Margalit, the Mishnah specifies women because women are neat and insist that their bread be separate from that of others while men usually do not care. The later statement of R. Lazar seems to support R. M. Margalit but the uncertain gender in the text of the Halakhah might support Maimonides.. They gave to one woman who minds5If for some reason she insists on keeping the two loaves strictly separated. the status of two women, to two women who do not mind the status of one woman. If she does not mind, why does she make it at two different places? Rebbi Jonah said, because she has not enough space to knead. The word of Rebbi Jonah implies that if she had enough space to knead but she6This may be read as “he”. makes it in two portions, she does mind. Clean and coarse [flour]7One loaf of white flour, the other one of whole wheat. This is counted as two different kinds., she does mind. Rebbi Lazar said, they gave two different habits the status of two women8According to R. M. Margalit, this now speaks of two men. As R. Meïr notes (Sotah 1:7, fol. 17a; Babli Giṭṭin 90a) men have different standards of cleanliness. Some men will not drink any more from a cup of wine in which they found a fly, others will take the fly out and drink the remainder. A man adhering to a higher standard of cleanliness will insist to keep his bread as separate as women do.. Samuel bar Abba asked, even if they come to agree9What is the status of the bread if the women kneaded their doughs separately but at baking time they decide to have them together? The answer depends on one’s position regarding R. Aqiba’s opinion in Halakhah 3:5.?
יֵשׁ דְּבָרִים שֶׁהֵן חִיבּוּר בַּחַלָּה וְאֵינָן חִיבּוּר בִּטְבוּל יוֹם. חִיבּוּר בִּטְבוּל יוֹם וְאֵינָן חִיבּוּר בְּחַלָּה. חִיבּוּר בְּחַלָּה דְּתַנִּינָן בִּזְמָן שֶׁהֵן שֶׁלְאִשָּׁה אַחַת מִין בְּמִינוֹ חַייָב וּשְׁלֹא בְמִינוֹ פָּטוּר. וְאֵין חִיבּוּר בִּטְבוּל יוֹם דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן הַמְּכַנִּיס חַלּוֹת עַל מְנָת לְהַפְרִישׁ וְנָֽשְׁכוּ בֵּית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים חִיבּוּר בִּטְבוּל יוֹם. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים אֵינָן חִיבּוּר. בִּטְבוּל יוֹם דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן בָּשָׂר הַקֹּדֶּשׁ שֶׁקָּרַם עָלָיו הַקּוּפָה. הָא שְׁאָר כָּל־הַקּוּפָה חִיבּוּר וְאֵין סוֹפוֹ לְחֹתְכוֹ. וְאֵינָן חִיבּוּר בְּחַלָּה דְּאָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן הָעוֹשֶׂה עִיסָּה עַל מְנָת לְחַלְּקָהּ בָּצֵק פְטוּרָה מִן הַחַלָּה. Certain situations are connections for ḥallah but not for a ṭevul yom12The touch of a ṭevul yom makes heave (including ḥallah) unusable and sacrifices impure (Demay 6:6, Notes 138,140). But since the ṭevul yom has been purified, only his immediate touch is damaging, not the touch by an intermediary object. Therefore, if the ṭevul yom touches a loaf of ḥallah, he makes the ḥallah inedible, including everything connected with it. It is now stated that the rules of connection regarding the obligation of ḥallah are not identical with the rules governing an eventual disqualification of the ḥallah taken., [others] for a ṭevul yom but not for ḥallah. A connection for ḥallah as we have stated: “But if they belong to the same woman the same kind are obligated, different kinds are exempt.” They are not obligated for a ṭevul yom as we have stated there13Mishnah Ṭevul Yom 1:1, dealing with a Cohen who collects ḥallah from several households to carry home in one basket but does not intend to eat the different morsels together.: “If somebody collects pieces of ḥallah in order to separate them again, the House of Shammai say it is a connection for a ṭevul yom, but the House of Hillel say it is no connection for a ṭevul yom.” We also stated there14If the ṭevul yom touches one piece of ḥallah, that piece is unusable but all the others are unimpaired.: “Sanctified meat on which the sediment15Mishnah Ṭevul Yom 2:5: “Sanctified meat on which the sediment congealed; if a ṭevul yom touched the sediment, the pieces are permitted. If he touched a piece, it and all that clings to it are connected. Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri says both are connected to one another.” “Sediment” are the remainders of spices, single fibers from the meat, and assorted matrer which usually clings to the sides of the cooking pot. Since any such sediment will be scraped or washed off before the meat is eaten, it is considered separate. congealed.” Therefore, in all other cases congealed sediment is a connection16Separate pieces of sediment on one piece of meat are considered as one; in the case of ḥallah they would not be considered one as indicated by the next statement by R. Joḥanan. even if at the end one will remove it. But one is not obligated for ḥallah; as Rebbi Joḥanan said17Chapter 1:8, first paragraph., if somebody makes dough in order to distribute it, the dough is exempt from ḥallah.
מַהוּ שִׁייֵרְתָא רַב הוּנָא אָמַר אִם אָמַר אַתְּ הַשִּׁיפוֹן מִין כּוּסְמִין מִצְטָרֵף עִם הַחִיטִּים. שִׁיבּוֹלֶת שׁוּעַל מִין שְׂעוֹרִין אֵינוֹ מִצְטָרֵף עִם הַחִיטִּים. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי אוֹמֵר שְׁאָר הַמִּינִין מִצְטָֽרְפִין זֶה עִם זֶה. אִית תַּנָּיֵי תַנֵּי כָּל־הַמִּינִין מִצְטָֽרְפִין זֶה עִם זֶה. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּהַךְ תַּנָּייָא בָּֽרְיָא מַה בֵּין נָשׁוּךְ מַה בֵּין בָּלוּל. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָן אָבוּהּ דְּרִבִּי מַתַּנְיָה בְּשֶׁחִלְּקָן וְהוֹסִיף עֲלֵיהֶן. נְשׁוּכִין חַייָבִין. בְּלוּלִין פְּטוּרִין. Was is left19What is left in the statement of the anonymous Tanna that R. Joḥanan ben Nuri could disagree with? It was stated in Halakhah 1:1 (Note 39) that oats are a kind of spelt, foxtail a kind of barley. Since the Mishnah here, in contrast to Mishnah Kilaim 1:1, combines spelt and wheat, there are only two kinds as far as the rules of ḥallah are concerned and the statement of R. Joḥanan ben Nuri seems to be meaningless.? Rav Huna said, if you say that oats are a kind of spelt, they combine with wheat; foxtail is a kind of barley which does not combine with wheat! “Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri said, the remaining kinds all combine with one another.” There are Tannaїm who state: “All kinds combine with one another.20In this formulation, the difference bentween the anonymous Tanna and R. Joḥanan ben Nuri is clear but then one has to ask what is the difference between Mishnaiot 1:1 and 4:2.” In the opinion of that outside Tanna, what is the difference between bitten and mixed? Rebbi Yudan, the father of Rebbi Mattaniah said, when he split and then added; it is obligated when biting21Since by Mishnah 1 the doughs of two different owners never were obligated, if one of them increases his dough to 5/4 qab the obligation of ḥallah is new and valid. The exemption of the mixed dough is explained in Chapter 3, Note 72., exempt when mixed.