Pesachim 37a — the Talmud in English

And Beit Hillel permit.

And we raised it:

And how much

is the measure of

thick bread?

Rav Huna said:

the thickness of a

handbreadth!

And in this [case] Beit Shammai prohibited. And Beit Hillel permitted,

for

indeed

we find such a thing in the showbread,

whose thickness was

a handbreadth!

For it was called “showbread” because it had faces. And no face is less than a handbreadth. And it too did not come from leavened dough. As it is written: “Every meal-offering that you offer to the Lord, you shall not make leavened.” And we expound: “Every meal-offering”—to include the showbread! It follows that even at a thickness of a handbreadth it does not become leavened.

But if it is thicker than a handbreadth, even Beit Hillel prohibit it, because of concern for becoming leavened.

Rav Yosef challenged this:

And what proof is there from the showbread, whose making was by priests, who are vigilant? And

if they said this concerning the vigilant,

that they can guard it from becoming leavened even at a thickness of a handbreadth, would they

say

this even

concerning

matza entrusted to everyone, and even to those who

are not vigilant?!

Furthermore: in the making of the showbread they labored a great deal, as is the law with all meal-offerings. For we learned: all meal-offerings require three hundred rubbings [rubbing the wheat between his hand and the vessel], and three hundred blows [for they struck the wheat with a fist]! And because of the great labor that they expended on them, they did not quickly become leavened.

And if they said concerning

the showbread, which is

laborious bread,

that it does not become leavened at a thickness of a handbreadth, would they

say

this

concerning

ordinary

bread, which is not laborious?!

Furthermore: they would cut wood for the Temple only in the summertime, until the fifteenth of Av, so that it would be thoroughly dry. And bread baked on this wood does not quickly become leavened. Therefore,

if they said

concerning the showbread that was baked

with dry wood,

that it does not become leavened even at a thickness of a handbreadth, would they

say

this concerning ordinary matzot baked

with damp wood?!

Furthermore: they would heat the oven in the Temple every day without interruption, for baking meal-offerings and thanksgiving loaves. Consequently, it was very hot. Therefore,

if they said

concerning the showbread that it does not become leavened at a thickness of a handbreadth, is this not because it was baked

in a

hot oven? And would they

say

this even concerning ordinary matza baked

in a cold oven?!

Furthermore: the showbread was baked in a metal oven. And

if they said this concerning a metal oven

in which the bread does not become leavened, would they

say

this even concerning matza baked

in an earthenware oven?!

Rav Yirmeya bar Abba said: I asked Rabbi privately

[I asked Rabbi privately] what is thick bread?—

And who was he?

He was Rav Yirmeya’s teacher—

Rav

he was.

And some say: Rav Yirmeya bar Abba said in the name of Rav:

This question

I asked Rabbi privately—

And who was he?

He was Rav’s teacher—

Rabbi

he was.

And he said to me:

What is thick bread?—

It is

bread

[dough]

in a large quantity!

For each matza in itself is not thick. Rather, he kneads the dough of many matzot at once. And it was not because of concern for becoming leavened that Beit Shammai prohibited it. Rather, because there is much labor in kneading it. And on a Festival it is prohibited to undertake unnecessary labor .

And why did they call it

“thick bread”?—

Because there is much [dough] in the kneading!

For when they knead all the dough together, it is thick.

And if you wish, say: In the place of this tanna

[in the place of the tanna of that beraita],

for a large quantity of bread,

they called it “thick bread”

!

For the meaning of the expression “thick” among them was “large in quantity.”

And we raised it:

What is the reason

that Beit Shammai prohibited kneading bread in a large quantity?

If it is because

its labor is extensive, and

he is undertaking unnecessary labor

on a Festival [for he can knead a small amount of bread, which does not involve labor], if so,

why specifically on Passover

alone? Is it not that

even on another Festival

as well,

also

unnecessary labor is prohibited?

And we answer:

Yes, indeed,

and it is not specifically on Passover that doing so is prohibited.

And this tanna, on the Festival of Passover

was

standing

when he taught this law, and therefore he mentioned Passover. And the same law applies to the other Festivals.

It was taught likewise: One may not bake thick bread on a Festival—

the words of Beit Shammai.

And Beit Hillel permit !

It follows that they do not disagree specifically on the Festival of Passover.

The Sages taught: One fulfills

the obligation of matza, both

with fine bread and

with

coarse bread [coarse bread]! And as it was stated above, “matzot, matzot” includes [all types of matza].

And

so one fulfills

with decorated serikin [matzot made in the form of various designs]

on Passover!

And

even though they said, one does not make

initially

decorated serikin on Passover,

after the fact one fulfills [the obligation] with them.

Rav Yehuda said: Beitus ben Zunin asked the Sages this matter: Why does one not make decorated serikin on Passover?

They said to him: Because if

we permit making them,

the woman will

delay over it

[over the dough] in order to decorate it, and will not hurry to place it in the oven.

And

in the meantime, she will

cause it to become leavened.

He said to them

Beitus: If that is the reason they prohibited it,

it is

possible

to make them in a manner in which there is no concern for this. For example, that he

make it

in this shape

with a mold, and affix it

[the form of the shape]

at once

[quickly, with one push] onto the dough! In such a case he does not linger in making the shape, and there is no concern for becoming leavened.

They said to him:

Even with a mold it is prohibited to do so. For most bakers do not have such a mold. And if we permit it,

they will say: All decorated serikin

are

prohibited

to make,

but the serikin of Beitus

ben Zunin are

permitted!

Therefore, they prohibited making them in every manner, because of the principle of not distinguishing between cases.

Rabbi Elazar bar Tzadok said: Once I entered after my father into the house of Rabban Gamliel. And they brought before him decorated serikin on Passover.

I said to him: Father,

is it not that

the Sages said so: One does not make decorated serikin on Passover?!

He said to me: My son, they did not

say this concerning the serikin

of every person,

but

rather

they prohibited only the serikin

of bakers,

for because they make them to sell them, they are particular about their beauty and linger a great deal in making their shapes. But a householder who makes them for himself is not so particular to beautify them, and does not leave them outside the oven.

Some say: This is what he said to him

Rabbi Tzadok to his son:

They did not

say to prohibit the serikin

of bakers,

but

rather

the serikin

of every person!

For the bakers are expert and accustomed to the matter, and they also have molds. Therefore, there is no concern that they will leave them [to stand] before baking them. And those serikin in Rabban Gamliel’s house were made by bakers.

Rabbi Yose said: One makes

on Passover

decorated serikin

when they are thin

like wafers!

For since they are thin and insubstantial [sparse], they do not quickly become leavened.

But

one does not make decorated serikin

when they are thick

like thick loaves!

For because of their thickness they become leavened even after a short delay.

We learned there: The sufganin

[dough that is thin like a sponge],

and the dובshanin

[doughs fried in honey],

and the iskritin

[doughs made like a honey-cake, whose dough is very soft],

and the pan-cake

[the pan, that is, dough made in a pan]

and

bread

mixed with teruma

[in which flour of teruma is mixed]—all these types of bread are

exempt from challa!

Bread mixed with teruma is exempt from challa, because it is written concerning challa: “You shall raise a teruma.” And we exclude [from this]: not bread that already has teruma in it .

And all the rest are exempt because they are not “bread.” And the obligation of challa applies only to bread. As it is written: “When you eat from the bread of the land.”

And we raised it:

What

is “the pan-cake”?

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: This

is dough that is

scalded

[that was placed into boiling water in a pan]

belonging to householders!

For it was not made in the proper manner of bread .

Reish Lakish said:

All the types

of bread

mentioned in this Mishna

are pan-preparations!

For they were cooked in a vessel standing over the fire. Therefore, they are not “bread,” for bread is only something baked in an oven.

And Rabbi Yohanan said:

Even

pan-preparations

are “bread,” and

they are liable

for challa.

And these

mentioned in the Mishna are exempt from challa because

he made them

[cooked them]

with

the heat of the

sun .

It was raised as an objection:

It was taught:

The sufganin, the dubshanin, and the iskritin—if

they

made them in a pan,

then they are

liable.

And if they made them

in the sun,

then they are

exempt!

It is explicit that “pan-preparations are liable.”

And it is a refutation

of

Reish Lakish.

Ulla said: Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish can say to you:

This that it teaches, “pan-preparations are liable,”

with what are we dealing here—

when

he

first

heated

the pan over the fire,

and ultimately stuck

the bread into it. And since the walls of the pan are boiling, this is similar to bread baked in an oven. Therefore, it is liable for challa.

And Reish Lakish exempted pan-preparations only when he stuck the bread into the pan while it was still cold. And great heat does not reach the bread all at once, as it does in an oven; rather, its heat gradually increases little by little. Therefore, it is not similar to bread baked in an oven, and it is exempt from challa.

And we question:

But

if he

stuck

the bread into the pan

and ultimately heated

it,

what

is its law? If you say that

in fact they are exempt,

the latter clause of the beraita becomes difficult.

For instead of

teaching

in the

latter clause

“If he made them in the sun, they are exempt,” let it distinguish and teach the distinction in that case itself

[in the case of the pan-preparation itself]. And let it say as follows:

In what circumstances

are pan-preparations liable?

When he heated

the pan

and ultimately stuck

the bread into it.

But

if he

stuck

the bread

and ultimately heated

the pan, they are not like bread baked in an oven,

and are exempt

from challa!

And we answer: Yes, the beraita indeed said this. Rather,

it is deficient, and this is what it teaches:

Pan-preparations are liable.

In what circumstances? When he heated it and ultimately stuck it. But if he stuck it and ultimately heated it,

it is not like bread baked in an oven, and

it becomes like something made in the sun. And

therefore, they are

exempt!

And we challenge:

Come and hear: One fulfills

the obligation of matza

with matza that is hina

[not baked to its full extent, from the expression “raw”].

And

so one fulfills

with matza made in a pan!

And this is difficult for Reish Lakish, who says that it is not included in “bread.” But even concerning matza we require bread, as it is written: “bread of affliction.”

And we answer:

Here too

it is discussing [a case]

where he heated

the pan

and ultimately stuck

the matza into it! For in such a case, even according to Reish Lakish it is called “bread.”

We learned above: One fulfills [the obligation] with matza that is hina!

And we raised it:

What

is the measure of baking through which the matza is considered

“hina matza”?

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel: Any

that was baked to such an extent

that

if he

breaks it

[breaks it] again,

no threads are drawn out from it,

it is called bread, and one fulfills [the obligation] with it.

Rava said: And likewise

is the law of

thanksgiving loaves!

For the slaughtering of the thanksgiving offering sanctifies the bread that comes with it. And the slaughtering sanctifies it only once its surface has crusted in the oven, and it is already called “bread.” And this is the same measure of “he breaks it and no threads are drawn out from it” stated here.

And we question:

Obviously,

the law of matza and the law of thanksgiving loaves are the same. For

here,

concerning matza,

“bread

of affliction”

is written.

And

also

here,

concerning the thanksgiving offering, “a cake of

bread”

is written.