Pesachim 36b — the Talmud in English

Therefore,

I would exclude wheat and barley

, with which one does not fulfill the obligation of matza, because

they

are among the Seven Species, and

there are first fruits of their species.

That is not so. For

the Torah says: “

In the evening you shall eat

matzot

”. Even

matzot

of wheat and barley

it included.

And we question this:

If “matzot” includes [all kinds of] matza,

let us say that

even

with

first fruits as well

he fulfills his obligation! And why do we include specifically a species that has first fruits?

And we conclude: Rather,

Rabbi Akiva retracted

from this exposition. And he returned to excluding first fruits because they are not eaten in all settlements, in accordance with Rabbi Yosei the Galilean.

For it was taught: Could a person fulfill his obligation with

matza

of first fruits?

— The Torah says: “In all your settlements you shall eat matzot.”

Matza that is eaten

in all settlements

is one with which they fulfill the obligation.

First fruits are excluded

, because

they are not eaten in all settlements, but only in Jerusalem

; with them one does not fulfill the obligation.

Could I exclude

for this reason

even

matza of

second tithe

in Jerusalem? For it too is not eaten in all settlements, but only in Jerusalem. And once it entered Jerusalem, it can no longer be redeemed, and there is no permission to eat it outside Jerusalem. For once the city walls have received the second tithe, according to the Rabbis it can no longer be redeemed. And if so, one would not fulfill the obligation with it — that is not so.

For

the Torah says: “matzot”

in the plural, even

matzot

of second tithe

it included.

And we examine this:

What did you see that led you to include

matza of

second tithe

from “matzot,”

and to exclude

matza of

first fruits

from “your settlements”? Let us say the opposite: second tithe should be excluded from “your settlements,” and first fruits should be included from “matzot.”

And we answer:

I include second tithe

, because

it

sometimes

has permission

to be eaten

in all settlements

through redemption, even after it entered Jerusalem. And this is

in accordance with Rabbi Elazar

cited nearby.

And I exclude first fruits, which have no permission

to be eaten

in all settlements

outside Jerusalem, under any circumstances, for first fruits cannot be redeemed.

For Rabbi Elazar said: From where [do we know] that second tithe that became impure

and was forbidden as food

may be redeemed even

when it is already

in Jerusalem?

—

The Torah says

concerning it: “For you are unable to carry it

and so on, and you shall give the money, and bind up the money in your hand, and you shall go to the place that the Lord your God will choose.”

And

“carrying”

means nothing other than eating

, as

it is said

concerning Joseph and his brothers:

“And he carried portions from before him

to them,” meaning that he brought foods before them.

And this is how we expound the verse: If the tithe became impure and you can no longer eat it, redeem it with money. And the money shall become sanctified with the sanctity of second tithe. And afterward redeem the money in Jerusalem for food, and eat it with the sanctity of second tithe.

However, the plain meaning of the verse does not concern this. Rather, it concerns one who is far from Jerusalem and cannot carry the tithe itself to Jerusalem: he redeems it for money and brings the money to Jerusalem.

And since we find concerning second tithe that became impure that it can be redeemed even in Jerusalem, we can again call it “having permission in the settlements,” even when it is pure. Therefore, in Jerusalem one fulfills the obligation of matza with it.

And the Gemara concludes the proof that Rabbi Akiva retracted what he had excluded first fruits from the comparison of matza to bitter herbs:

It is explained in the aforementioned beraita that specifically first fruits are excluded from “in all your settlements.” But with matza of second tithe one fulfills the obligation. And

who is the one whom you hear saying concerning second tithe that one fulfills [the obligation] with it

of matza? — It is

Rabbi Akiva

, who said so. For Rabbi Yosei the Galilean excludes even second tithe, as stated above. Thus, this beraita follows Rabbi Akiva, and it excludes first fruits from “in all your settlements,” and not from the comparison of matza to bitter herbs.

Conclude from it: he retracted

— Rabbi Akiva — from that comparison.

We further examine:

And Rabbi Yosei the Galilean

, why does he need to exclude first fruits from “in all your settlements”?

Let him derive it from “bread of affliction.”

For from this verse he excluded second tithe above, since specifically

one that is eaten in “affliction”

[mourning] is one with which one fulfills the obligation of matza.

This one

— second tithe —

is not eaten

in mourning,

but only in joy.

And likewise he should exclude first fruits, since they are not eaten in mourning.

And we answer: Rabbi Yosei the Galilean

holds like Rabbi Shimon

, and permits eating first fruits in mourning.

And this is

as it was taught: First fruits are forbidden to a mourner

. And Rabbi Shimon permits.

And we examine this:

What is the reason of the Rabbis

, who forbid a mourner to eat first fruits?

And we answer: Because

it is written: “You may not eat within your gates

the tithe of your grain, your wine, and your oil, and the firstborn of your cattle and your flocks, and all your vows that you vow, and your freewill offerings, and the offering of your hand.” And the beginning of the verse speaks of second tithe, which is eaten only in Jerusalem.

And the Master said: “The offering of your hand”

, which is written at the end of the verse,

these are first fruits

. For “hand” is written concerning them, as it is stated: “And the priest shall take the basket from your hand.” This teaches that they too are eaten only in Jerusalem. Thus,

first fruits were compared to second tithe

.

Just as second

tithe

is forbidden to a mourner

, as it is written concerning it, “I have not eaten of it in my mourning,”

so too, first fruits are forbidden to a mourner

to eat them.

And Rabbi Shimon

permits a mourner to eat first fruits, because

“an offering”

the Merciful One called them

in this verse, as it is written, “the offering of your hand.”

Just as an offering is permitted to a mourner

[as we expound from “No unauthorized person shall eat holy things”: I told you of unauthorized persons, but not of mourning],

so too, first fruits are permitted to a mourner.

We further examine:

And Rabbi Shimon, granted that he does not have the comparison

of first fruits to second tithe,

he does not hold of it

, nevertheless, they should be forbidden to a mourner because

“joy”

at least is explicitly written concerning them

, as it is written at the end of the passage of first fruits:

“And you shall rejoice in all the good

that the Lord your God has given you and your household”! And let us derive from this that a mourner is forbidden first fruits, since he is not in a state of joy.

And we answer:

That

“and you shall rejoice”

comes for the time of joy!

For one who brings first fruits to the Temple courtyard recites the passage “An Aramean sought to destroy my father,” as it is written: “And you shall respond and say before the Lord your God: An Aramean sought to destroy my father, and so on.” And from the fact that “and you shall rejoice” is written, we learn that the mitzva of recitation applies only at a time when a person rejoices in his produce.

As

we learned: From Shavuot until Sukkot

[from Shavuot until Sukkot],

he brings

first fruits

and recites

the passage “An Aramean sought to destroy my father”! For Shavuot is the time of harvesting the grain, and Sukkot is the time of gathering and collecting the produce. During this period his heart rejoices in his produce.

From Sukkot until Hanukkah, he brings

first fruits. But

he does not recite

the passage “An Aramean sought to destroy my father” at the time of bringing them, because it is no longer a time of joy.

And from Hanukkah until Shavuot, it is not the time for bringing first fruits at all. For we expound in the Sifrei, “which you shall bring from your land”: as long as the fruits are found upon your land, while they have not yet been exhausted for the wild animal from the field, you bring first fruits. And from Hanukkah onward the fruits are no longer found in the field.

The Sages taught

: It is written concerning matza,

“bread of affliction.”

And we exclude

specifically a boiled dough

[in boiling water ].

And

specifically matza made in the form of an

ashisha

[a large loaf], with which one does not fulfill the obligation, because they are significant and are not “bread of affliction.”

Could it be that a person fulfills the obligation only with coarse bread

[dark bread, from which all its beauty has been removed, and it is bread made of bran ], since only it is called “bread of affliction,” but he does not fulfill the obligation with fine bread?

The Torah says: “matzot”

in the plural; other

matzot as well it included. And even like the matzot of Solomon

, the king, which were made from fine flour.

If so, what does the Torah say

“bread of affliction”

for? — Specifically boiled dough and an ashisha.

And we examine this:

And what

[from where]

indicates that this

“ashisha” is an expression of significance?

And we answer:

From what is written

concerning David [on the day the Ark of the Lord returned to the City of David],

“And he distributed to all the people, to the entire multitude of Israel, to man and to woman, to each person one loaf of bread, one portion of meat, and one ashisha

, and all the people went, each to his house.”

And Rav Hanan bar Abba said: “Ashpar”

is

one-sixth

of an

ox!

That is to say, a piece of meat that is one-sixth of an ox.

“Ashisha”

is a large loaf whose measure is

one-sixth

of

an ephah!

And Rav Hanan

disputes

Shmuel. For Shmuel said: An ashisha

is not food at all, but it is

a jar of wine

[an ephah of wine]. And this is

as it is written

“And the lovers of ashishot of grapes.”

The Lord said this to Hosea concerning Israel, that they turn to other gods and love ashishot of grapes. Thus, “ashisha” is a measure of wine.

The Sages taught: One may not bake thick bread on Passover!

For because it is thick, it is impossible to guard it from leavening —

the statement of Beit Shammai.