047a – יוצא דופן – פרק חמישי – נדה, מז ע”א

[Dough of meduma] is obligated in challah,^[1] and is not disqualified by a tevul yom,^[2]

חייבת בחלה - And we do not say that the terumah exempts it. Even though terumah itself is not obligated in challah, a meduma mixture is obligated in challah. What is the reason? Because dimua is Rabbinic, for by Torah law one is nullified in two, as it is written (Shemos 23), “to incline after the majority,” and it is the Rabbis who required one in a hundred.^[3] Therefore Rabbinic dimua does not come and cancel challah, even nowadays, for Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehudah hold that challah nowadays is a Torah obligation.

— the words of Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehudah.

Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon exempt it from challah.”

פוטרין מן החלה - As is explained below: they hold that challah nowadays is Rabbinic, so Rabbinic dimua comes and cancels Rabbinic challah. And this is what we said above, “he taught it but does not hold it,” for we see that according to Rabbi Yosei challah nowadays is Rabbinic; and those Rabbis who bring a proof from here assumed that just as Rabbi Yosei says challah nowadays is Rabbinic, the same is true of terumah.

They assumed: whoever says terumah [nowadays] is a Torah obligation holds that challah is a Torah obligation;^[4]

whoever says terumah is Rabbinic holds that challah is Rabbinic.

Granted, if you say that Rabbi Yosei holds challah nowadays is Rabbinic — Rabbinic dimua comes and cancels Rabbinic challah.

But if you say challah is a Torah obligation, would Rabbinic dimua come and cancel Torah challah?!

But perhaps Rabbi Yosei holds that terumah nowadays is a Torah obligation,

ודלמא - Even though you see from here that for Rabbi Yosei challah is Rabbinic, he may nevertheless hold that terumah is a Torah obligation; so there is no “so too it stands to reason” that you sought to bring.

and challah is Rabbinic?

And [this is] as Rav Huna the son of Rav Yehoshua answered.

For Rav Huna the son of Rav Yehoshua said: I found the Rabbis of the academy sitting and saying:

Even according to the one who says terumah nowadays is Rabbinic, challah is a Torah obligation,

for during the seven years in which they conquered and the seven years in which they divided [the Land], they became obligated in challah,^[5]

נתחייבו בחלה - For about challah it is written (Bamidbar 15), “when you come into the land,” and they had come.

but they did not become obligated in maaser.

ולא נתחייבו במעשר - For about maaser it is written (Devarim 14), “the produce of your seed,” [which applies only] once each one brings in his own [crop].

And I said to them: Even according to the one who says terumah nowadays is a Torah obligation, challah is Rabbinic.

As it was taught: “Since it says ‘upon your coming,’ might it be from when two or three spies entered it?

The verse says ‘upon your coming’ — I said at the coming of all of you, and not at the coming of some of you.”

And when Ezra brought them up, not all of them went up.^[6]

MISHNAH

The Sages gave a parable about a woman:^[7]

paggah [an unripe fig],

פגה - A budding fruit; so a woman while still a child is called paggah, as long as she has no sign, neither in the breasts nor in the hairs.

bochal [a ripening fig],

בוחל - When the fruit has grown a little, as is taught in the Gemara, “figs, from when they bochal.” So when she has some sign in the breasts, it is known that she has grown two hairs, and she is a na’arah.

and tzemel [a fully ripe fig].

צמל - In the Gemara it is explained as an acronym: “she went out full,” that she has a clear sign in her breasts. Further on the Mishnah explains the signs; and she is a bogeres.

Paggah — she is still a child.

Bochal — these are the days of her youth.

In both of these [stages] they said: her father is entitled to what she finds, to her handiwork, and to the annulment of her vows.^[8]

בזו ובזו - Even when she is a na’arah her father is entitled etc., as it is written (Bamidbar 30), “in her youth, in her father’s house” — all the advantage of her youth belongs to her father.

Tzemel — once she has matured, her father no longer has authority over her.

What are the signs?

איזו היא סימנין - This refers to tzemel.

Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says: From when the fold appears beneath the breast.

קמט - פרונצ"ש [in Old French]. Her breasts have grown until they fold over a little on the chest, and it looks like a fold.

Rabbi Akiva says: From when the breasts hang down.

משיטו - They are larger.

Ben Azzai says: From when the pitomes darkens.

הפיטומת - The head of the breast, as in (Sukkah 34) “its pitom was removed.”

Rabbi Yosei says: When one puts his hand on the oketz and it sinks in and is slow to return.

עוקץ - As in “the stems of pears” (Uktzin 1:7). פוכיצ"ש in the vernacular. The point of the breast, which the infant sucks; and the pitomes is the area around the oketz.

GEMARA

“Paggah” — she is still a child.

As it is written (Shir HaShirim 2), “The fig tree has put forth its green figs.”

“Bochal” — these are the days of youth.

As we learned: “Figs, from when they bochal.”^[9]

משיבחלו - They are obligated in maaser.

And Rabbah bar bar Chanah said in the name of Rav: From when their tops turn white.

משילבין ראשיהן - They change as they grow; here too, from when the breast changes and shows a sign that it is growing.

Or if you like, [learn it] from here (Zechariah 11): “My soul became impatient with them, and their soul also loathed me.”

בחלה בי - Grew [too] big for me: a person who is weary of a thing, it seems big to him. אנקיישנ"ץ in the vernacular.

“Tzemel” — as the one who says, “she went out full.”^[10]

And what are the signs? Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says: From when the fold appears.^[11] Shmuel said: Not when the fold actually appears, but when she puts her hands behind her and it looks as though the fold has appeared beneath the breast.

Shmuel examined his maidservant, and gave her four zuz as compensation for her embarrassment.^[12]

Shmuel follows his reasoning,

for Shmuel said: “‘You shall have them serve you forever’ — for work I gave them, and not for degradation.^[13]

Shmuel would assign them [to particular slaves].^[14]

מייחד להו - He would assign his maidservants to his male slaves, and did not leave them ownerless, because of the degradation.

Rav Nachman would switch them.

מחליף להן - Those of this one with that one, and he was not particular about their degradation.

Rav Sheshes handed them over to Arabs, and said to them: Beware of Jews.

לערבי - He left his maidservants to the Arabs, and treated them as ownerless.

Rabbi Yosei says etc.:^[15] What is “oketz”?

Shmuel said: The point of the breast.

The Rabbis taught: “These are the signs of bagrus. Rabbi Elazar the son of Rabbi Tzadok says: From when the breasts knock [against each other].^[16]

משיתקשקשו - As in (Sotah 9) “it knocks before him like a bell.” בטנ"ט in the vernacular. That is, they are much larger.

Rabbi Yochanan ben Berokah says: From when the tip of the chotem whitens.”

חוטם - Uncertain.

“From when it whitens” — would you make her old?!^[17]

Rather, Rav Ashi said: From when the tip of the chotem splits.

משיפציל - Uncertain.

“Rabbi Yosei says: From when the ring encircles [it].

משתקיף עטרה - The oketz is large and thick and is surrounded by a ring. And this is the same measure that Rabbi Yosei gave in the Mishnah too: that one puts his hand on the oketz and it sinks in and is slow to return.

Rabbi Shimon says: From when it is pressed down…

Tosafos

ואינה נפסלת בטבול יום - And if you ask: in Eilu Ovrin (Pesachim 44a), regarding a porridge of chullin with garlic and oil of terumah, it says that if a tevul yom touched part of it he disqualified all of it by his touch? One may answer that there it speaks of where it was made into one mass in a bowl.

אתי דימוע דרבנן ומפקע חלה דרבנן - From here the Riva brings a proof that terumah is nullified in a majority by Torah law; and what we expound in the Sifra, “from it, its hallowed part” — that it is raised in one hundred and one — is a mere support. So too what it says there, that orlah and kilai hakerem, whose prohibition is double in that they are forbidden for benefit, have a double measure for being raised, requiring one in two hundred. However, the proof from here can be deflected: in truth, by Torah law everything is forbidden to non-kohanim because of the admixture of terumah, which cannot be recognized; but that the chullin too is treated as terumah, to be exempt from challah as if it were all terumah — that is only Rabbinic. However, a proof can be brought from the case of nuts that fell and were cracked, in HaNizakin (Gittin 54b), where some texts read: “But here, by Torah law it is nullified in its majority”; and from the end of HaArel (Yevamos 82a), regarding two baskets, one of chullin and one of terumah, with two se’ahs before them etc., where Rabbi Yochanan said “and provided the chullin exceeds the terumah” — meaning it is permitted by Torah law, and that is why he says “for I say.” And at the beginning of that perek (73b) too it says terumah is stricter than maaser in that one is liable for it death and a fifth and it is forbidden to non-kohanim, and it does not list one in a hundred.

ל"ג אילו נאמר כי תבואו הייתי אומר משנכנסו ב' או ג' מרגלים - We do not read: “Had it said ‘when you come’ (ki savo’u), I would have said from when two or three spies entered.” For the beginning of this beraisa reads so in the Sifrei (Parashas Shelach) (and it is cited at the end of the first perek of Kiddushin): “This coming of challah differs: elsewhere it is written ‘when you come,’ ‘when He brings you,’ but here it is written ‘upon your coming,’ to say: immediately when they entered, before the conquest and division.” Evidently ‘when you come’ implies a significant coming, that is, after the conquest and division — so how could it say “even two or three spies”? Rather, read: “Since it says ‘upon your coming,’ might it be even two or three spies?” — and it refers back to what precedes it.

לא כולהו סלוק - And if you ask: but regarding Yovel^[18] we do apply “all its inhabitants upon it,” since some of all the tribes went up — according to Rabbeinu Tam, who says that Yovel was observed in the Second Temple for this reason? One may answer that “upon your coming” implies more strongly the coming of all of you. And if you ask: how could we have thought at first that for Rabbi Yosei terumah nowadays is a Torah obligation, which would support Reish Lakish above, when Reish Lakish himself holds that for Rabbi Yosei terumah nowadays is Rabbinic, in Perek HaArel (Yevamos 81a)? One may answer that he could have said “and according to your reasoning.”

איזהו סימניה - Rashi explained: the signs of bagrus; and what Rabbi Yosei says in the Gemara, “from when the ring encircles,” is the same as what he says here, “when one puts his hand on the oketz.” But it is difficult: if it is one measure, why did Rabbi Yosei change his wording? Further, none of the Tannaim in the Gemara mentions the measure given in the Mishnah. Further, if so, no sign at all is given for bochal — and in the Gemara it says “bochal above, it is known that she has grown two hairs” — yet we have not heard the signs of bochal. Therefore Rabbeinu Tam explains that “what are its signs” said here refers to bochal. And according to this explanation, what the Gemara says fits well: “the halachah follows all of them, to be stringent” — regarding mi’un.

בדק באמתיה ויהיב ד' זוזי דמי בושתה - He would give it to her to save himself from punishment, for Rabbi Yehudah said in HaChovel (Bava Kamma 87a), “slaves have no compensation for embarrassment”; and even according to the one who says slaves do have compensation for embarrassment, it belongs to the master.

מסר להו לערבי - This shows that a Canaanite maidservant is permitted to a gentile, and likewise a Canaanite slave is permitted to a gentile woman, and they did not decree upon him because of nashgaz,^[19] even though the prohibitions of niddah and a married woman, which are Torah prohibitions, apply properly to a slave. If so, at the end of Avodah Zarah (76b), where King Shapur said to Bati, “Remember what you did that night” — that he accepted a gentile harlot whom his host gave him, while (Rav) Yehudah did not accept a gentile harlot — Bati did nothing forbidden, for she was permitted to him, since he was a slave, as it says in Asarah Yuchsin (Kiddushin 70b) that Bati bar Tuvi, in his haughtiness, did not accept a writ of freedom.

ראש החוטם - Rashi explained: uncertain, for it is not explained. And in Lulav HaGazul (Sukkah 35b), regarding an esrog, it mentions pitma, oketz and chotem; and from this it appears that all three on an esrog are toward its head and none of them toward its tail, like the breast — for regarding the breast one cannot explain it in the way he explained regarding the esrog.

Notes

1. 1. Meduma (dimua): when terumah falls into chullin and there is not a hundred times as much chullin, the whole mixture takes on the status of terumah and is forbidden to a non-kohen. The beraisa, begun on the previous amud, rules that dough kneaded from such a mixture is still obligated in challah.
2. 2. A tevul yom is one who has immersed from tumah but must wait for nightfall to become fully tahor; until then his touch disqualifies terumah. The beraisa rules that his touch does not disqualify this dough (see Tosafos).
3. 3. By Torah law a forbidden item is nullified in a majority of permitted ones (“one in two”). For terumah the Rabbis required a hundred parts of chullin, so the status of meduma in a smaller mixture is only Rabbinic.
4. 4. The question is whether terumah and challah are Torah obligations “nowadays” — since the return under Ezra, when not all of Israel lives in the Land. The Gemara is seeking proof of Rabbi Yosei’s view, and assumes here that terumah and challah go together.
5. 5. After entering the Land under Yehoshua, Israel spent seven years conquering it and seven years dividing it among the tribes.
6. 6. When the exiles returned from Bavel with Ezra, only part of the people went up. Since challah depends on “the coming of all of you,” from then on it is only a Rabbinic obligation.
7. 7. A girl passes through three stages: ketanah (a minor); na’arah, from twelve years old with two hairs; and bogeres, about six months later. The Mishnah compares them to the three stages of a fig: unripe, ripening and fully ripe.
8. 8. The Torah gives a father rights over his daughter while she is a minor or a na’arah: what she finds, what she earns, and the power to annul her vows. Once she becomes a bogeres these rights end.
9. 9. This Mishnah (Maasros 1:2) gives the stage at which each fruit becomes subject to maaser; for figs, it is from when they bochal — when they begin to ripen.
10. 10. The Gemara reads tzemel as a contraction of “she went out full” — she has reached full maturity.
11. 11. The Gemara returns to the Mishnah’s first sign. Rabbi Yosei HaGelili’s “fold” is the crease beneath the breast once it has grown and rests on the chest.
12. 12. Boshes is compensation for embarrassment, one of the five payments owed by one who injures another. Shmuel examined her to learn the signs, and paid her for the embarrassment it caused her.
13. 13. The verse (Vayikra 25:46) concerns Canaanite slaves, who may be kept in permanent service. Shmuel learns from it that they are given for work, not to be shamed.
14. 14. This concerns Canaanite maidservants: Shmuel assigned each to one particular slave, Rav Nachman switched them between slaves, and Rav Sheshes left them to Arabs while warning them to keep away from Jews.
15. 15. The Gemara takes up Rabbi Yosei’s sign in the Mishnah: one presses the oketz and it sinks in and is slow to spring back, which happens only once the breast has developed.
16. 16. Bagrus is a woman’s full maturity, when she is a bogeres. This beraisa brings further signs of it.
17. 17. “Whitens” would describe old age, not maturity, so Rav Ashi reads “splits” instead.
18. 18. Yovel, the fiftieth year, frees slaves and returns fields to their owners; it applies only when “all its inhabitants are upon it” — when all the tribes live in the Land.
19. 19. Nashgaz stands for niddah, shifchah, goyah, zonah — the decree of the Chashmona’im court against relations with a gentile woman on each of these counts.