מנחות דף סז ע"א

The rolling of dough while it belongs to hekdesh exempts [it from challah].^[1]

גלגול הקדש - Regarding challah.

פוטר - Exempts from challah, if the dough was rolled while in the hands of hekdesh and was redeemed afterwards.

As we learned in a Mishnah: "If a woman consecrated her dough before she rolled it, and redeemed it, she is obligated. If [she consecrated it] after she rolled it, and redeemed it, she is obligated. If she consecrated it before she rolled it, and the treasurer rolled it, and afterwards she redeemed it, it is exempt, for at the time of its obligation it was exempt."^[2]

ופדאתה חייבת - For it was rolled in the hands of an ordinary person.

שבשעת חובתה - That is, the rolling.

Rava asked: Rolling by a gentile - what is the law?^[3]

It was taught in a Mishnah: "A convert who converted and had dough: if it was made before he converted, he is exempt; if after he converted, he is obligated; if it is in doubt, he is obligated."^[4]

פטור - From challah, since it was rolled while he was an idolater.

ספק - Whether he rolled it after he converted or while he was an idolater.

חייב - For we follow the stringent side. And now he asks about this ruling, that rolling by an idolater exempts: who teaches it?

Who teaches this?

It is the opinion of all; even Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehudah, who obligate there, exempt here.

ואפי' ר"מ ורבי יהודה דמחייבי התם - Regarding smoothing - do they exempt here?

There, it is because it is written "your grain," "your grain" - a superfluous one.

התם - This is the reason that smoothing by an idolater does not exempt: because "your grain" is written twice. For it is written (Devarim 12) "You may not eat within your gates the tithe of your grain," and it is written (ibid. 14) "And you shall eat before [Hashem] ... the tithe of your grain," and it is written (ibid. 18) "the first of your grain." One teaches "your smoothing" and not the smoothing of hekdesh; two "your grain"s remain superfluous to exclude the smoothing of an idolater. So the smoothing of an idolater is an exclusion after an exclusion, since two verses exclude it.

It is an exclusion after an exclusion,^[5] and an exclusion after an exclusion serves only to include - even a gentile.

ואין מיעוט אחר מיעוט אלא לרבות - [It includes] the smoothing of an idolater, which is obligated. And if you ask: What did you see to include the smoothing of an idolater? Include hekdesh! Answer: It is more reasonable to include the idolater, since [his produce] is eaten without redemption, like that of a Jew.

But here, "your doughs" is written twice: one "your doughs" [teaches] the measure of your dough, and one "your doughs" - and not the dough of a gentile, and not the dough of hekdesh.^[6]

Or perhaps it is Rabbi Yosi and Rabbi Shimon who teach it, for they exempt; but Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehudah learn "first," "first" from there.^[7]

ראשית ראשית - "The first of your grain" (ibid.), "the first of your doughs" (Bamidbar 15): just as there, smoothing by an idolater does not exempt, since we include it from an exclusion after an exclusion, so too rolling by an idolater does not exempt.

Rava said: May it be [Heaven's] will that I see it in a dream.

Rava then said: The one who says smoothing by a gentile exempts [holds that] rolling by a gentile exempts; the one who says smoothing by a gentile does not exempt [holds that] rolling by a gentile does not exempt.

Rav Pappa raised an objection to Rava: "A gentile who set aside a firstborn donkey and challah - we inform him that he is exempt, and his challah may be eaten by non-kohanim; and the firstborn donkey - he may shear it and work with it."^[8]

שהפריש פטר חמור - Who set aside a lamb for the redemption of a firstborn donkey that was born to him while he was an idolater.

וחלה - From dough that he rolled while he was an idolater.

This implies that his terumah is forbidden.

הא תרומתו אסורה - Since his smoothing does not exempt, as we included above from an exclusion after an exclusion.

Yet this Tanna holds that smoothing by a gentile does not exempt, while rolling by a gentile exempts!

And furthermore, Ravina raised an objection to Rava: "The challah of a gentile in the Land, and his terumah outside the Land - we inform him that he is exempt; his challah may be eaten by non-kohanim, and his terumah does not make a forbidden mixture."^[9]

חלת עובד כוכבים בארץ - That is, even from grain that grew in the Land.

ותרומתו - From grain of outside the Land, which even for a Jew is only rabbinic.

This implies that his terumah in the Land is forbidden and makes a forbidden mixture.

[הא תרומתו בארץ] - That is, by implication his terumah in the Land makes a forbidden mixture, for smoothing by an idolater does not exempt, even though his rolling exempts from challah. And this is difficult for Rava, who said that whoever obligates in terumah obligates in challah.

Yet this Tanna holds that smoothing by a gentile does not exempt, while rolling by a gentile exempts!

[His terumah is forbidden only] by rabbinic law - a decree because of the owners of purses.^[10]

מדרבנן - That is, in truth this ruling that rolling exempts regarding challah follows those Tannaim who exempt above regarding smoothing; and what was inferred above, "this implies that his terumah is forbidden" - it is forbidden by rabbinic law.

גזירה משום בעלי כיסין - Rich people who buy grain from donkey-drivers. If you permitted one who buys from an idolater not to tithe, because smoothing by an idolater exempts, people would come to say that one who buys from a Jewish donkey-driver is also exempt. Another explanation: because of the owners of purses, who have much land and begrudge the large tithes; they will transfer it to idolaters, the idolaters will smooth it, and it will escape the tithe.

דכתיב דגנך דגנך יתירא - The Kuntres^[11] explained that it is written twice, once in [parashas] Re'eh and once in Shoftim. But it seems this is not necessary, for "your wine" and "your oil" are like "your grain" and count as an exclusion after an exclusion, as is evident in perek Reishis Hagez (Chullin 135a): Rabbi Il'ai excludes a partnership from what is written "your flock," and the Rabbanan apply it to a partnership with an idolater; Rabbi Il'ai derives it from "the first of your grain," and the Rabbanan [hold that] "the first" interrupted the matter. This shows that had it not been interrupted by "the first," I would say that "your grain" refers to "the shearing of your flock," even though it is not written in its context - all the more so that it refers to "your wine" and "your oil," which are all written with tithes. But the Kuntres's explanation is primary.

חד עריסותיכם ולא עיסת עובד כוכבים וחד עריסותיכם ולא עיסת הקדש - [The Gemara] was not precise, for it should have excluded the dough of hekdesh first, which is more reasonable. And although we also exclude the dough of maaser sheni according to Rabbi Meir in perek Kol Sha'ah (Pesachim 38a) and in perek Lulav Hagazul (Sukkah 35b), that is because it is like the dough of hekdesh, for he holds it is property of the Most High. But it is somewhat difficult, for there it concludes that it is because "your doughs" is written twice; and further, it is expounded in perek Reishis Hagez (Chullin 135b) for "the measure of your doughs," meaning the measure of the dough of the wilderness, and it expounds [this] from "your doughs" since it first needs to apply it to include dough of partners. Perhaps all of these can be learned from it. And if you ask: here two verses are needed, one for an idolater and one for hekdesh, and likewise regarding smoothing, as the Kuntres explained; and likewise in the second perek of Bechoros (13b), regarding overcharging, two "your fellow"s are needed, one to exclude an idolater and one to exclude hekdesh; yet in the first perek of Pesachim (5b) we exclude from a single "to you" that of others and that of the Most High, and regarding damages too we expound in Bava Kamma (37b) "his fellow" - and not an idolater or hekdesh. One can answer: since it revealed to us here regarding challah that hekdesh and an idolater are equal, the same applies everywhere. And as for needing two verses regarding overcharging, there it is different, for I might have thought that since one adds a fifth for hekdesh, all the more so overcharging applies to it - even though hekdesh worth a maneh that one redeemed onto something worth a perutah is redeemed. And some books read here "one, for the measure of your doughs," as we expound in Reishis Hagez (Chullin 135b), and do not read "and not the dough of an idolater"; according to this reading, hekdesh and an idolater are derived from one verse.

עובד כוכבים שהפריש פטר חמור - The Kuntres explained "who set aside a lamb." But this is difficult: even for a Jew there is no sanctity in it, for it is entirely chullin, and we learned in the first perek of Bechoros (9a): "and if it died, one may benefit from it." Rather, it surely speaks of the firstborn donkey itself, according to Rabbi Yehudah, as it was taught in the first perek of Bechoros (also there, 9b): "A firstborn donkey is forbidden in benefit; these are the words of Rabbi Yehudah."

ותרומתו אינה מדמעת - This implies that terumah of outside the Land belonging to a Jew does make a forbidden mixture. And what is said in perek Ad Kamah (Bechoros 27a) regarding terumah of outside the Land, that Rabbah would nullify it in a majority and eat it in the days of his impurity, is not as Rashi explained, that once nullified in a majority it is permitted even to a non-kohen; for here it clearly implies that it makes a forbidden mixture and is forbidden. Rather, it is permitted only to a kohen in the days of his impurity, for Rabbah was a kohen, descended from the house of Eli. However, those two challos that one makes, one for the fire and one for the kohen, as we learned in tractate Challah, last perek (Mishnah 8) - if the kohen's one became mixed, it does not make a forbidden mixture and is permitted even to a non-kohen, as is evident in the Yerushalmi [Challah ch. 4], which says on it: Rabbi Abahu ruled in Batzrah that it requires a majority. Rabbi Yonah said: This teaches that it is nullified in less than a hundred and does not become forbidden [at one in a hundred and one]. Rabbi Ze'iri said: The Mishnah says so - even one in one, for it teaches "and it is eaten with the non-kohen at the table." And he understands, according to the conclusion, that even one in one is permitted. And perhaps where the challah that was the kohen's was a large loaf that became mixed, one should not be lenient, as we find (Beitzah 3b) regarding "something that is usually counted," where Rabbi Akiva adds also the loaves of a householder, which are significant and are not nullified. However, since they were so lenient that the Yerushalmi concludes that even one in one is permitted, it is reasonable that there is no difference.

גזירה משום בעלי כיסין - According to Rabbi Shimon, who exempted above the smoothing of an idolater, we conclude thus: that he is obligated by rabbinic law and [his terumah] makes a forbidden mixture in the Land. And it is astonishing, for we say at the beginning of the second perek of Kiddushin (41b): "The terumah of an idolater makes a forbidden mixture, and one is liable to a fifth for it; and Rabbi Shimon exempts." One can answer that there they dispute on the Torah level; alternatively, he disputes only about the fifth, and agrees that it makes a forbidden mixture. And if you ask: according to Rav Pappa and Ravina, who did not understand that he is obligated by rabbinic law, there should be a contradiction between Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Shimon at the end of the first perek of Bechoros (11b), where it brings the Mishnah we learned in tractate Demai, third perek (Mishnah 4): "One who deposits his produce with a Kuti or with an am ha'aretz - it keeps its presumption regarding tithes and shemittah; with an idolater - like his own produce; Rabbi Shimon says: demai" - this shows that if the idolater certainly exchanged them, it is obligated according to Rabbi Shimon. One can answer that these [Amoraim] here understood it to be on the Torah level, because if it were rabbinic, even challah too [would be obligated]; for they did not think of these answers. And if you ask: at the end of the first perek of Bechoros (11b) we say, "One who buys smoothed untithed produce from an idolater tithes it, and it is his," and it asks: Who smoothed them? If you say the idolater smoothed them - "your grain," said the Merciful One, and not the grain of an idolater. But what is the question? We conclude that he is obligated by rabbinic law, a decree because of the owners of purses! And one cannot say that this applies when it was originally a Jew's and he sold it to an idolater and the idolater smoothed it, that it is not exempt, but where it was originally an idolater's the decree because of the owners of purses does not apply - this is nothing, for even with a convert we conclude this decree, that what he smoothed before he converted is not exempt. And one cannot say that if it were a rabbinic decree because of the owners of purses, it would not say "and it is his," for this very reason; if so, what Rabbi Elazar said there - "here he certainly exchanged them, for all agree he must give them to a kohen" - and it asks on it from "he tithes them and it is his": what is the question? Rabbi Elazar's ruling is rabbinic.

Notes

1. 1. Challah is the portion of dough given to a kohen (Bamidbar 15:20). The obligation takes effect at gilgul, the rolling (final kneading) of the dough. If at that moment the dough belonged to hekdesh (Temple property), it is exempt even after it is redeemed.
2. 2. Mishnah Challah 3:3. The gizbar is the treasurer of hekdesh. Everything turns on who owned the dough at the moment it was rolled.
3. 3. On 66b the Gemara discussed meiruach, the smoothing of the grain pile at the end of threshing, the moment the obligation of terumah and tithes takes effect. Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehudah hold that a gentile's smoothing does not exempt; Rabbi Yosi and Rabbi Shimon hold that it does. Rava asks whether rolling by a gentile exempts dough from challah.
4. 4. Mishnah Challah 3:6. Since the dough was made while he was still a gentile, it is exempt; a doubt is treated stringently.
5. 5. A rule of exegesis: when the Torah excludes something twice, the second exclusion cancels the first, and the case is included.
6. 6. Bamidbar 15:20-21 says "your doughs" twice. One teaches the minimum measure, the dough of the generation of the wilderness (an omer of flour); only the other is an exclusion, and it excludes both the gentile and hekdesh. So there is no exclusion after an exclusion here.
7. 7. A gezeirah shavah: "the first of your grain" is said of terumah (Devarim 18:4), and "the first of your doughs" of challah (Bamidbar 15:20). Through the shared word, challah follows terumah: as a gentile's smoothing does not exempt from terumah, so his rolling does not exempt from challah.
8. 8. A firstborn donkey (peter chamor) must be redeemed with a lamb given to a kohen (Shemos 13:13); until then it may not be shorn or worked. A gentile's is exempt. Challah may normally be eaten only by kohanim; "eaten by non-kohanim" means it has no sanctity of challah at all.
9. 9. Terumah that falls into ordinary produce forbids the mixture to non-kohanim unless there is a hundred times as much (dimu'a). Terumah outside Eretz Yisrael is only rabbinic; from this Ravina infers that a gentile's terumah in the Land does make such a mixture, though his challah is exempt.
10. 10. That is, by Torah law a gentile's smoothing does exempt (as Rabbi Yosi and Rabbi Shimon hold), and his terumah is forbidden only by rabbinic decree. Rashi gives two explanations of "the owners of purses": wealthy buyers who would confuse buying from a gentile with buying from a Jew, or landowners who would pass their grain to gentiles to escape the tithes.
11. 11. Tosfos call Rashi's commentary the "Kuntres" (the booklet). Re'eh and Shoftim are the parshiyos in Devarim where the verses stand.