גלגל עיסה מערב יום טוב, מפריש ממנה חלתה ביום טוב. אבוה דשמואל אמר: אפילו גלגל עיסה מערב יום טוב, אין מפריש ממנה חלתה ביום טוב. לימא פליגא דשמואל אדאבוה [דשמואל]? דאמר שמואל: חלת חוצה לארץ אוכל והולך ואחר כך מפריש. אמר רבא: מי לא מודה שמואל שאם קרא עליה שם שאסורה לזרים?
If one prepared dough on the eve of the festival, s/he may separate from it hallah on the festival day. The father of Shmu’el says: Even if one prepared dough on the eve of the festival, s/he may not separate from it hallah on the festival day. Shall it be said that Shmu’el disputes with his father? For Shmu’el said: With respect to hallah outside the Land [of Israel], one may go on eating [the dough] and separate the priestly portion at the end. Answered Rava: Does Shmu’el then not agree that if one designated [a portion of dough or bread as hallah] that it becomes prohibited to foreigners?
@Manuscript evidence
אבות דשמואל
Shmu’el’s father: Vatican 109 reads: אשה דשמא' (the wife of Shmu’el).
מפריש
s/he may separate: Vatican 109 and München 95 read the plural verb form: מפרישין (they may separate).
@General observations
It is rabbinically forbidden to separate terumah and ma‘aser on a festival day. The reason for this rabbinic ban is that the separation of these portions is considered an act of מתקן ,making something usable, since it is forbidden to eat produce until these portions have been separated. According to Shmu’el, there is no prohibition against separating hallah on a festival day outside the Land of Israel. Since in any case it is permitted to consume the dough, the separation of hallah is not what makes the dough edible. Shmu’el’s ruling nevertheless contradicts the teaching of his “father,” for the latter stated that it is forbidden.
@Feminst observations
The issue of separating hallah and the involvement of women in it has already been discussed within this commentary (see Mishnah 2. mBetsah 1:6). In contrast to the Bible, the rabbis ascribed the separation of hallah to women, issuing a decree that hallah was obligatory both inside and outside of the Land of Israel. The rabbinic concept of assigning the responsibility of separating hallah to women was adopted as common practice in the Bavli, which transmits many stories of women who separated hallah (for instance, bPes 48b). In bBer 24a, it discusses the question of whether a woman is allowed to separate hallah naked.
In bBer 27a even a niddah is allowed to separate hallah and bMen 67b tells us about a woman who dedicates her dough to the Temple. Nevertheless, in the above-cited sugya once again, as throughout Massekhet Betsah, the masculine singular verb-form is used. Although in the rabbinic mind women were undoubtedly responsible for the separation of hallah, they were linguistically ignored and thus silenced by not being mentioned, even when standing at the center of the discussed sphere of action. A clear indication of this phenomenon that supports my thesis is the explicit statement in MS Vatican 109 that Shmu’el discussed this issue with his wife and not with his father. His wife is thus said to adhere to a more stringent interpretation of the halakhic rule and to be an expert in festival laws and regulations.