Pesachim 35a — the Talmud in English

Rather, it is an elevation that the Sages made as a matter of rabbinic stringency regarding the water of the red heifer, that its vitality should be in a vessel. And this is not מן התורה. And it is not a complete derivation, but merely an asmachta.

that the Sages instituted concerning the water used for the purification ritual, so that its vitality must remain in a vessel. This is not a requirement of Torah law. It is not a complete derivation, but merely a supporting indication for the law.

And

here too, regarding

impure saplings that were planted,

it is an elevation regarding teruma, for planting does not purify them.

concerning teruma: planting does not purify them.

Rav Shimi bar Ashi said: We too have likewise learned that there is an elevation regarding consecrated things even מן התורה. For we learned: One who was impure, who

that there is an added stringency concerning consecrated offerings even by Torah law. As we learned: An impure person who

immersed and emerged

from his impurity,

may eat second tithe immediately! But he still may not eat teruma. For until nightfall he is called one who immersed that day. And we derive this from a woman who gave birth during the days of her purification, who may not eat teruma. And likewise she disqualifies teruma through her touch, as it is written: “She shall not touch any holy thing.” And she too is comparable to one who immersed for a long day.

immediately, but he may still not eat teruma. Until nightfall he is called one who has immersed that day. This is derived from a woman who has given birth during the days of her purification, who may not eat teruma. She also disqualifies teruma through contact, as it is written: “She shall not touch any sacred thing.” She too is comparable to one who has immersed on that day for an extended period.

Once

Once the sun has set

permitted to eat

may eat

also

teruma!

And we infer precisely:

teruma, yes [he may eat]. And even an impure person who is obligated to bring atonement, such as a man with a flux or a woman who gave birth, may eat it after sunset.

[he may not eat it before sunset]. Even an impure person who is obligated to bring an atonement offering, such as a man with a flux or a woman who has given birth, may eat teruma once the sun has set.

But

regarding consecrated things, no: he may not eat even at night, until he brings his offerings.

he may not eat them even at night, until he brings his offerings.

And

Why?

But

he is pure even before bringing his offerings.

even before he brings his offerings.

Rather, the Torah made an elevation regarding consecrated things, that one lacking atonement may not eat them. And

that the Torah instituted concerning consecrated offerings: one who lacks atonement may not eat them.

And

here too,

with regard to impure teruma that was planted, the Sages instituted

an added stringency and prohibited eating it.

Rav Ashi said: We too have learned this in a Mishna

that the Torah instituted an added stringency concerning consecrated offerings. As it is taught in a beraita, a tannaitic source not included in the Mishna: It is written concerning consecrated offerings: “And the flesh that touches anything impure shall not be eaten; it shall be burned in fire,”

and the flesh

“that is pure may eat flesh.” We derive from the extra letter vav in “and the flesh”

to include wood and frankincense

of consecrated offerings: they too can contract the ritual impurity of food.

And we raise the following difficulty: Can

wood and frankincense become impure?

They are not subject to the laws of food.

Rather, there is an added stringency

concerning consecrated offerings. Even though they are not food, they can contract impurity because of the special regard accorded to sacred property.

And

here too, regarding impure teruma that was planted, the Sages made

with regard to teruma,

an elevation and prohibited it for eating.

Rav Ashi said: We too have likewise learned that the Torah made an elevation regarding consecrated things. For it was taught: It is written regarding consecrated things: “And the flesh that touches any impure thing shall not be eaten; it shall be burned in fire,” “and the flesh that is pure shall eat flesh.” And we expound from the superfluous vav of “and the flesh” to include wood and frankincense of consecrated things! For even they contract food impurity. And we raised an objection to this: And are wood and frankincense capable of becoming impure? But they do not have the status of food. Rather, there is an elevation regarding consecrated things. Even if they are not food, they nevertheless contract impurity, because of the affection for consecrated things. Here too, regarding teruma, the Sages made an elevation, that planting does not purify it.

Mishna:

On the first night of Passover there is a positive-command obligation to eat matza, as it is written: “In the evening you shall eat matzot.” And the matza must be made from flour of one of the five species of grain. And it proceeds to explain which these are.

.

These are the things with which a person fulfills

the obligation through matza made from their flour,

his obligation, on

the first night of

Passover: with wheat; with barley; with spelt; with rye; and with oats!

And in the Gemara the reason will be explained.

b. And one fulfills the obligation only with matza that is permitted for eating. But with matza that is prohibited for eating, one does not fulfill the obligation through it. As we will derive below from what is written: “You shall not eat leavened bread with it; for seven days you shall eat matzot with it.” With something for whose leavening one is liable because of the prohibition of leaven, one fulfills the obligation of matza. But with something that is prohibited because of another prohibition, one does not fulfill the obligation of matza .

And one fulfills

the obligation to eat matza with matza made from

the obligation of eating matza with matza of demai!

And grain purchased from an am ha-aretz is called “demai.” For it is an acronym for “what is this?” That is, it is uncertain whether it has been tithed, and uncertain whether it has not been tithed. And מן התורה it is not obligated in tithe, because we rely on the fact that most ammei ha-aretz tithe. And the Sages obligated one to separate tithe from it because of the uncertainty.

And the Mishna teaches us that if one ate matza of demai without separating tithe from it, he fulfilled the obligation.

And

everyone likewise fulfills the obligation of matza,

with

matza of

first tithe

of the Levite,

for

already

its teruma has been taken

[his teruma of the tithe]! For the Levite separates a tithe from the tithe and gives it to a priest. And until he separates it, the tithe is prohibited, in the status of untithed produce. But once he has separated it, the tithe is permitted even to non-priests.

And

everyone likewise fulfills the obligation

with

matza of

second tithe and consecrated property that were redeemed!

For second tithe is prohibited for eating outside Jerusalem. And likewise consecrated property is prohibited for eating. But by redeeming them onto another object, their sanctity is transferred, and it takes hold upon that object.

And since they are already completely ordinary property, one fulfills the obligation through them on Passover.

And priests

also fulfill the obligation

with

matza of

dough-offering and with

matza of

teruma!

And specifically priests, since it was given to them for eating. But an Israelite, for whom eating it is prohibited, does not fulfill the obligation through it.

.

But one does not

fulfill the obligation

with

matza of

untithed produce!

For it is prohibited for eating.

And

And one does not fulfill the obligation

with

matza of

first tithe whose teruma has not been taken!

For it is completely untithed produce, and is prohibited for everyone to eat.

And

one does not fulfill the obligation

with second tithe

outside Jerusalem,

or

with

with consecrated property ,

as long as

they have not been redeemed!

For they are prohibited for eating.

d. One who offers a thanksgiving-offering brings with it forty loaves of four types, ten of each type. Three types are matza: loaves, wafers, and boiled loaves. And the fourth type is leavened bread.

And likewise a nazirite, on the day his days of naziriteship are completed, brings with his peace-offering thirty loaves of three types: matzot, loaves, and wafers. Ten of each type. And all of them are made as matza, without leavening.

The loaves of the thanksgiving-offering and the wafers of the nazirite—

if

he made them for himself,

for the sake of the obligation of his offering,

he does not

he

fulfill through them

the obligation of matza on Passover! And even if he has not yet designated them as the loaves of the thanksgiving-offering, and has not slaughtered the sacrifice for them, he does not fulfill the obligation through them.

But if

he made them

in order

to sell

them in the marketplace to others who became obligated in a thanksgiving-offering or in nazirite-offerings,

one fulfills through them

the obligation on Passover! And the reason will be explained in the Gemara.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: These are the things through which a person fulfills his obligation on Passover: with wheat; with barley; with spelt; with rye; and with oats!

The tanna taught: Spelt

they are

a species of wheat. Oats and rye

they are

a species of barley !

And the practical difference is with regard to teruma , for we hold: one may not separate teruma from one species for another species . But one may separate teruma from spelt for wheat, and from oats and rye for barley, since they are of its species .

And we explain:

“Spelt”

means

“gulba.”

“Rye”

means

“dishra.”

“Oats”

means

“the paths of the fox”!

For its ear is made like the tail of a fox. And “ta'ala” is the translation of “fox.”

And we infer precisely:

these

five species,

if

yes [one fulfills the obligation through them on Passover]. But

rice and millet, no:

they are not of the grain species, and one does not fulfill the obligation through them.

And we raised a difficulty:

from where are these words,

that specifically with these one fulfills the obligation of matza?

Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said, and likewise the school of Rabbi Ishmael taught, and likewise the school of Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov taught: The verse says, “You shall not eat leavened bread with it; for seven days you shall eat matzot with it.”

And we expound:

with things that can come to leavening, a person fulfills his obligation through

the eating of

matza.

matza. And this is specifically the five species of grain.

These are excluded [rice and millet],

[rice and millet],

for they do not

come

ever

to leavening. Rather,

if they are left for some time, they come

to putrefaction .

The Mishna is not in accordance with Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri.

The Mishna is not in accordance with Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri.

is the one

who says: Rice is a species of grain, and one is liable for

eating it on Passover because of

its leavening, on Passover, with excision. And

therefore,

therefore, a person fulfills his obligation through it

by eating matza

on Passover!

For everything that can come to leavening may be used to fulfill the obligation of matza, as stated.

As it is taught in a beraita: Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri prohibits on

For it was taught: Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri prohibits on Passover a dish of

rice and millet, because it is close to becoming leavened!

It follows that rice and millet come to leavening. Therefore, one also fulfills the obligation of matza through them.

They raised a question before them:

When Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri says, “because it is

when Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri says, “because it is close to becoming leavened,”

does he mean

does he mean that it leavens earlier?

That it hastens to become leavened even more than the five species of grain.

Or perhaps, “close to becoming leavened”

it is.

that it is close to being leaven, but

That is, it is close to being leaven, but it is not complete leaven!

And therefore one is not liable to excision for eating it intentionally, nor to an offering for eating it unwittingly.

And we resolve it:

Come and hear, for it was taught: Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri said: Rice is a species of grain, and one is liable to excision for its leavening. And

therefore,

a person fulfills his obligation through it on Passover!

It follows that it hastens to become leavened, and it is complete leaven; and one is liable for it to excision and an offering.

And Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri would likewise say: Karmit [מין זרע] [a species of seed]

[a type of seed]

is obligated in Hallah!

Because it is a species of grain.

For the obligation of Hallah applies only to a species of grain. For it is written concerning it, “from the bread of the land.” And we derive through a gzera shava, “bread” from “bread,” from matza, concerning which it is written, “bread of affliction.” And just as one fulfills the obligation of matza only with species of grain that can come to leavening, so too the obligation of Hallah applies only to grain. And he says that karmit too is included among grain.

And we raised a difficulty:

What is

“karmit”?

Abaye said: It is the seed called

Abaye said: This is the seed called “shitzanita.”

And again we raised a difficulty:

What is

“shitzanita”?

Rav Pappa said:

Shitzanita

is a seed

that is found [המצוי] [the one that is found]

[that is commonly found]

among anemones!

And this is black cumin [caraway], which is round like millet and black in color.

Rabba bar bar Hana said that Resh Lakish said: Dough that was kneaded with wine, oil, and honey,

and one did not put water into it ,

one is not liable to excision for its leavening!

And the reason will be explained shortly.

Rav Pappa and Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, were sitting before Rav Idi bar Avin. And Rav Idi bar Avin was sitting and dozing.

Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said to Rav Pappa

in his presence:

What is the reason of Resh Lakish,

that he exempts this dough from excision?

He said to him, Rav Pappa:

the verse states, “You shall not eat leavened bread with it;

because the verse says, “You shall not eat leavened bread with it

for seven days you shall eat matzot with it.” Specifically,

things through which a person fulfills his obligation with matza,

when they have not leavened—if they leaven,

one is liable to excision for their leavening. And this

dough that was kneaded with fruit juices,

since a person does not fulfill his obligation through it

with matza [when it has not leavened], because

it is rich matza,

and we require matza that is “bread of affliction”—therefore also

one is not liable to excision for its leavening.

Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, raised an objection to Rav Pappa:

And was it not taught:

If one liquefied it [המיס את הלחם] [melted the bread]

and made it into a liquid,

and swallowed it

on Passover—

if

the bread

it is leavened bread,

he is

he is liable to excision!

For the Torah imposed liability for prohibited foods even by way of drinking. And we include this from what is written concerning forbidden fat: “The soul that eats it shall be cut off from its people.” “Soul”—to include one who drinks!

But

if

the bread

it is matza bread, a person does not fulfill his obligation through it on Passover

when he drinks it! Because he did not eat it in the normal manner of eating . And regarding matza, eating is required, as it is written: “You shall eat matzot.”

And Rav Huna concluded his objection:

But here, a person does not fulfill his obligation on Passover

by way of drinking,

and

nevertheless

one is liable for

drinking the bread because of

the leavening of the bread, for drinking it, with excision !

It follows that even for things through which one does not fulfill the obligation of matza, one is liable for their leavening with excision .

Meanwhile,

he awoke among them

[he awoke from his dozing]

Rav Idi bar Avin said to them: Boys,

[young men who had not reached reasoning]! It was not because of this juxtaposition that Reish Lakish exempted the dough kneaded with wine and oil from karet. Rather, this is the reason of Reish Lakish:

because they had

wine, oil, and honey,