Mishneh Torah — First Fruits & Priestly Gifts הלכות ביכורים ושאר מתנות כהונה שבגבולין, Chapter 8

הַמַּפְרִישׁ חַלָּתוֹ קֶמַח אֵינָהּ חַלָּה וְגֵזֶל בְּיַד כֹּהֵן. וּשְׁאָר הָעִסָּה חַיֶּבֶת בְּחַלָּה. וְאוֹתוֹ הַקֶּמַח שֶׁהִפְרִישׁ לְשֵׁם חַלָּה אִם יֵשׁ בּוֹ עֹמֶר וְעוֹשֵׂהוּ עִסָּה הֲרֵי זֶה מַפְרִישׁ מִמֶּנּוּ חַלָּה כִּשְׁאָר כָּל קֶמַח חֻלִּין:

When a person separates challah from flour, it is not challah. 46b) explains that the rationale for this law is that the prooftext requiring the separation of challah mentions "your dough," i.e., the obligation is incurred only when dough is made.The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 327:1) clarify that this law applies when the person desires that the flour be considered as challah while it is still flour. If, however, he stipulates: "May it be considered challah when a dough is made from it," when it is made into a dough, his statement takes effect. [The flour given] the priest is like stolen property in his possession. Although one could assume that he was giving the flour to the priest as a gift, it must be returned lest the priest think that it was challah and not separate challah from the dough he makes from it (Kiddushin 46b; Turei Zahav 327:1). and there is an obligation [to separate] challah from a dough [made from] the remainder [of the flour]. If the flour set aside [mistakenly] as challah is an omer in measure. and a dough was made from it, one must separate challah from it as [is necessary with regard to doughs made] from any ordinary flour.

אֵימָתַי מַפְרִישִׁין חַלָּה. כְּשֶׁיִּתֵּן אֶת הַמַּיִם וְיִתְעָרֵב הַקֶּמַח בְּמַיִם מַפְרִישׁ הַחַלָּה מִתְּחִלַּת דָּבָר שֶׁנִּלּוֹשׁ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר טו כ) "רֵאשִׁית עֲרִסֹתֵכֶם". וְהוּא שֶׁלֹּא יִשָּׁאֵר שָׁם בָּעֲרֵבָה קֶמַח שֶׁלֹּא נִתְעָרֵב בַּמַּיִם שִׁעוּר עֹמֶר. וְאִם אָמַר הֲרֵי זֶה חַלָּה עַל הָעִסָּה וְעַל הַשְּׂאוֹר וְעַל הַקֶּמַח שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּיֵּר וְלִכְשֶׁתֵּעָשֶׂה כֻּלָּהּ עִסָּה אַחַת תִּתְקַדֵּשׁ זוֹ שֶׁבְּיָדוֹ לְשֵׁם חַלָּה הֲרֵי זֶה מֻתָּר:

When should challah be set aside? When one adds water and mixes the flour with the water, he should set aside [a portion as] challah from the first portion that is kneaded, as [indicated by Numbers 15:20:] "From the first of your dough." in this manner, for as indicated by Halachah 4, the obligation to separate challah has not taken effect yet. Based on the Jerusalem Talmud (Pesachim 3:3), the Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh explain that the statements in this halachah are a safeguard against the dough becoming ritually impure. From the time the water is mixed with the flour, it is permitted to separate the challah and one may do so if he is worried that the dough will become ritually impure. It is, however, preferable to wait until the dough is thoroughly mixed as stated in Halachah 4. Certainly, this applies in the present era when there is no need to take safeguards against ritual impurity [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 327:3)][The above applies] provided a measure of flour equal to an omer. that has not become mixed with water does not remain in the kneading trough. If he stipulates: "This is challah for the dough, for the yeast, and for the flour that remains. When it all becomes one dough, the portion set aside will become sanctified as challah," it is permitted. of flour remains. Since he can easily mix the dough, he can make a stipulation that will take effect when he actually mixes it together. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 327:2) states that it is desirable to teach women who separate challah to make this stipulation.

הִנִּיחַ הָעִסָּה עַד שֶׁלָּשׁ הַכּל וְעֵרְבָהּ וְאַחַר כָּךְ הִפְרִישׁ אֵין בְּכָךְ כְּלוּם. וְאִם לֹא הִפְרִישׁ הַחַלָּה בָּצֵק אֶלָּא אָפָה הַכּל הֲרֵי זֶה מַפְרִישׁ מִן הַפַּת כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:

If the person left the dough [intact] until it was all kneaded and mixed together and separated [the challah] afterwards, [the delay] is of no consequence. If he does not separate challah while the mixture is a dough, but bakes the entire dough, he should separate [challah] from the loaf, as we explained.

מֵאֵימָתַי תִּתְחַיֵּב הָעִסָּה בְּחַלָּה מִשֶּׁתִּגַּלְגֵּל בְּחִטִּים וְיִתְעָרֵב הַקֶּמַח בְּמַיִם. אוֹ שֶׁתִּטַּמְטֵם בִּשְׂעוֹרִים וְתֵעָשֶׂה כֻּלָּהּ גּוּף אֶחָד. וְאוֹכְלִין עַרְאַי מִן הָעִסָּה עַד שֶׁתִּתְגַּלְגֵּל בְּחִטִּים וְתִטַּמְטֵם בִּשְׂעוֹרִים. וְהַכֻּסְּמִין כְּחִטִּים וְשִׁבּלֶת שׁוּעָל וְהַשִּׁיפוֹן כִּשְׂעוֹרִים:

When does the obligation [to separate] challah from dough take effect? When the wheat [flour] was rolled into a ball and [all of] the flour becomes mixed with it or when the barley [flour] was made into a single mass and formed one block. One may snack from the dough until the wheat [flour] was rolled into a ball or the barley [flour] was made into a single mass. takes effect, however, it is forbidden to snack from the dough. It is considered as tevel and one is liable as stated in the following halachah. The laws pertaining to wheat [flour] pertain to spelt [flour] and those pertaining to barley [flour] pertain to oat and rye [flour].

נִתְגַּלְגְּלָה בְּחִטִּים וְנִטַּמְטְמָה בִּשְׂעוֹרִים הָאוֹכֵל מִמֶּנָּה קֹדֶם הַפְרָשַׁת חַלָּה חַיָּב מִיתָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא טֶבֶל. לְפִיכָךְ אִם הָיְתָה הָעִסָּה חַיֶּבֶת בְּחַלָּה מִן הַתּוֹרָה הָאוֹכֵל מִמֶּנָּה לוֹקֶה כְּכָל אוֹכֵל טֶבֶל. וְאִם הָיְתָה חַיֶּבֶת מִדִּבְרֵיהֶם מַכִּין אוֹתוֹ מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת:

Once the wheat [flour] was rolled into a ball or the barley [flour] was made into a single mass, one who partakes of it before challah was separated is liable for death [at the hand of heaven], because it is tevel. 10:19; Hilchot Ma'aser 1:5; 9:2. Therefore, if there is a Scriptural obligation [to separate] challah from the dough, a person who partakes of it is liable for lashes, as is anyone who partakes of tevel. 18:1. This applies when he is given a warning before transgressing. If the obligation is Rabbinic in origin, [a person who partakes of the dough] is liable for stripes for rebellious conduct.

עִסָּה שֶׁנִּדְמְעָה עַד שֶׁלֹּא תִּתְגַּלְגֵּל פְּטוּרָה. מִשֶּׁתִּגַּלְגֵּל חַיֶּבֶת. וְכֵן הַמַּקְדִּישׁ עִסָּתוֹ אוֹ הַמַּפְקִיר אוֹתָהּ קֹדֶם שֶׁנִּתְגַּלְגְּלָה וּפְדָאָהּ אוֹ זָכָה בָּהּ וְאַחַר כָּךְ גִּלְגְּלָהּ אוֹ הִקְדִּישָׁהּ אוֹ הִפְקִיר אוֹתָהּ אַחַר שֶׁנִּתְגַּלְגְּלָה וּפְדָאָהּ אוֹ זָכָה בָּהּ הֲרֵי זוֹ חַיֶּבֶת בְּחַלָּה:

When a dough from ordinary flour becomes mixed with flour that is terumah need not be separated from it. before [all the flour] was rolled into a ball, it is exempt [from the obligation of challah]. is Rabbinic in origin (Radbaz). When it becomes mixed with it after it was rolled into a ball, there is an obligation [to separate challah]. from the dough had already taken effect.Similarly, if a person consecrates a dough or declares it ownerless from dough that is consecrated. Once, however, the consecrated dough is redeemed, challah must be separated. When a person makes dough from flour that was ownerless which he acquired, he must separate challah from it. See Chapter 6, Halachot 3 and 5. before it was rolled into a ball and then redeemed it or took possession of it and rolled it into a ball - alternatively, he consecrated it or declared it ownerless after it was rolled into a ball had already taken effect before it was consecrated or declared ownerless. - there is an obligation [to separate] challah.

הִקְדִּישָׁהּ קֹדֶם שֶׁתִּתְגַּלְגֵּל וְנִתְגַּלְגְּלָה בְּיַד הַהֶקְדֵּשׁ וְאַחַר כָּךְ פְּדָאָהּ פְּטוּרָה שֶׁבִּשְׁעַת חוֹבָתָהּ הָיְתָה פְּטוּרָה:

If he consecrated it before he rolled it and it was rolled in the possession of the Temple treasury and afterwards, he redeemed it, it is exempt. For at the time the obligation would have taken effect, [the dough] was exempt.

וְכֵן עַכּוּ"ם שֶׁנָּתַן לְיִשְׂרָאֵל לַעֲשׂוֹת לוֹ עִסָּה וּנְתָנָהּ לוֹ בְּמַתָּנָה עַד שֶׁלֹּא גִּלְגְּלָהּ חַיֶּבֶת וּמְשֶּׁגִּלְגְּלָהּ פְּטוּרָה:

Similarly, if a gentile gave [flour] to a Jew to make a dough for him and then gave him [the dough] as a present. If he gave it to him [as a present] before it was rolled into a ball, he is liable. took effect when the dough belonged to the Jew. [If he gave it to him] after it was rolled into a ball, it is exempt. was to take effect, the dough belonged to the gentile and was exempt.

גֵּר שֶׁנִּתְגַּיֵּר וְהָיְתָה לוֹ עִסָּה. נִתְגַּלְגְּלָה עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִתְגַּיֵּר פְּטוּרָה. וְאִם מִשֶּׁנִּתְגַּיֵּר חַיֶּבֶת. וְאִם סָפֵק חַיֶּבֶת בְּחַלָּה לְפִי שֶׁהוּא עֲוֹן מִיתָה. וְזָר שֶׁאָכַל חַלַּת סָפֵק זוֹ וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהּ אֵין חַיָּב עָלֶיהָ חֹמֶשׁ:

[The following laws apply when] a convert joins the Jewish faith. If he had a dough that was rolled into a ball before he converted, it is exempt. was to take effect, the convert had not converted and was not obligated to separate challah. If it was rolled afterwards, there is an obligation [to separate challah]. If there is a doubt [concerning the matter], there is an obligation, [because eating bread from which challah was not separated] is a transgression punishable by death [at the hand of heaven]. 134a), because generally, we would follow the principle: "When one desires to expropriate property from a colleague, the burden of proof is on him" (see Chapter 9, Halachah 13). Nevertheless, in this instance, because of the severity of the transgression, challah should be separated. The Turei Zahav 330:3 and the Siftei Cohen 330:8 note that in the present age, when there is a question whether of not challah has been separated, one is exempt, for at present the observance of the mitzvah of challah is Rabbinic in origin. On this basis, the Sifei Cohen questions why this law is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 330:5), If a non-priest [unknowingly] partook of this challah that was separated due to such a doubt or the like, he is not liable to add a fifth [when making restitution]., because whenever there is a question with regard to Scriptural Law, we rule stringency and require him to make restitution so that he can gain atonement. There is, however, no such obligation with regard to the additional fifth, because it was never definitely established that he was liable.

עִסָּה שֶׁנּוֹלַד בָּהּ סְפֵק טֻמְאָה קֹדֶם שֶׁתִּתְגַּלְגֵּל יַעֲשֶׂנָּה בְּטֻמְאָה לְפִי שֶׁמֻּתָּר לְטַמֵּא חֻלִּין שֶׁבְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל וְתִשָּׂרֵף חַלָּתָהּ. נוֹלַד לָהּ אַחַר שֶׁנִּתְגַּלְגְּלָה סְפֵק טֻמְאָה שֶׁוַּדָּאָהּ מְטַמֵּא אֶת הַחֻלִּין מִן הַתּוֹרָה יִגְמְרֶנָּה בְּטָהֳרָה. שֶׁכָּל שֶׁוַּדָּאָהּ מְטַמֵּא אֶת הַחֻלִּין גָּזְרוּ עַל סְפֵקוֹ בְּחֻלִּין הַטְּבוּלִים לְחַלָּה שֶׁלֹּא יְטַמְּאוּ אוֹתָן הוֹאִיל וְנִטְבְּלוּ לְחַלָּה. וְתִהְיֶה הַחַלָּה תְּלוּיָה לֹא נֶאֱכֶלֶת וְלֹא נִשְׂרֶפֶת:

When a question arises concerning the ritual purity of a dough before it was rolled together as a ball, has not been established. Hence, the principle that we are allowed to cause ordinary produce to become impure is applied. he should prepare [the dough] in a state of ritual impurity.. For it is permitted to make ordinary produce impure in Eretz Yisrael. The challah should then be burnt.If, after a dough was rolled into a ball, a doubtful situation arose concerning its ritual purity which, were it to be ascertained that it was definitely impure, would convey ritual impurity of Scriptural origin, its [preparation] should be completed in a state of ritual purity. [The rationale is that with regard to] any circumstance where impurity would be imparted to ordinary produce were one certain that it transpired, our Sages decreed that if there is a doubt that it transpired, a dough upon which the obligation to separate challah already fell should not intentionally be made impure, for that obligation has already taken effect. mandated by Scriptural Law to contract ritual impurity (Hilchot Terumah 12:1). In this instance, since the challah has not been separated, that prohibition would not be violated. Nevertheless, since the obligation to separate challah has been established, it is preferable to be stringent. Instead, the challah [separated] is a tentative state; it is not eaten, 7:3. nor is it burnt. 12:3.

לֹא יַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם עִסָּתוֹ בְּטֻמְאָה לְכַתְּחִלָּה אֶלָּא יִזָּהֵר וְיִשְׁתַּדֵּל וְיִטְהַר הוּא וְכֵלָיו כְּדֵי לְהַפְרִישׁ חַלָּה טְהוֹרָה. הָיָה בֵּינוֹ וּבֵין הַמַּיִם יֶתֶר עַל אַרְבָּעָה מִילִין יַעֲשֶׂנָּה בְּטֻמְאָה וְיַפְרִישׁ חַלָּה טְמֵאָה:

As an initial preference, a person should not prepare his dough in a state of ritual impurity. when the obligation to separate challah was of Scriptural origin. See Hilchot Terumah 12:1. See also Radbaz. Instead, he should be careful and endeavor to purify himself and his utensils so that he can separate challah in a state of ritual purity. If he is more than four mil from water [fit for an immersion], or stream in which he can purge himself from impurity. Compare to Hilchot Tefilah 4:2-3 which makes a distinction whether the water is before him or behind him. See Kessef Mishneh. he should prepare [the dough] in a state of ritual impurity and separate impure challah.

אֵין עוֹשִׂים חַלַּת עַם הָאָרֶץ בְּטָהֳרָה. אֲבָל עוֹשִׂים עִסַּת חֻלִּין בְּטָהֳרָה. כֵּיצַד. מְגַבֵּל הָעִסָּה זֶה הֶחָבֵר וּמַפְרֵשׁ מִמֶּנָּה כְּדֵי חַלָּתָהּ וּמַנִּיחָהּ בִּכְלֵי גְּלָלִים אוֹ כְּלֵי אֲבָנִים אוֹ בִּכְלֵי אֲדָמָה שֶׁאֵין מְקַבְּלִין טֻמְאָה וּכְשֶׁיָּבוֹא עַם הָאָרֶץ נוֹטֵל אֶת שְׁתֵּיהֶן אֶת הָעִסָּה וְאֶת הַחַלָּה וְאוֹמְרִים לוֹ הִזָּהֵר שֶׁלֹּא תִּגַּע בַּחַלָּה שֶׁמָּא תַּחְזֹר לְטִבְלָהּ. וּמִפְּנֵי מָה הִתִּירוּ לוֹ זֶה מִשּׁוּם כְּדֵי חַיָּיו שֶׁל גַּבָּל:

A loaf to serve as challah for loaves to be baked in the future. should not be prepared in a state of ritual purity for a common person. impure. A loaf of ordinary produce may, however, be made in ritual purity [for him]. in a state of ritual impurity. That is problematic, because the common person may cause it to become ritually impure. Nevertheless, as will be explained, certain provisions are enacted to allow such a dough to be made.What is implied? A chaver may mix the dough and separate an appropriate measure of challah from it. He then places [the challah] in a utensil made from dung, stone, or clay, which do not contract ritual impurity. 6:2, Hilchot Keilim 1:6, et al. Thus even if the common person would touch the utensil, it would not become impure. When the common person comes, he should take both of them, the dough and the challah. We tell him: "Be careful not to touch the challah, lest it become tevel again." is separated, a dough never becomes tevel again. Nevertheless, we assume that the common person will not know the law and will be careful not to touch the dough, because of this warning. We are not concerned about the dough itself, because one is permitted to cause ordinary produce to contract ritual impurity, as stated in Chapter 7, Halachah 12. Why is this allowed? will become impure. So that the person making the dough could earn his livelihood.

אֵשֶׁת חָבֵר מְרַקֶּדֶת וּבוֹרֶרֶת עִם אֵשֶׁת עַם הָאָרֶץ. אֲבָל מִשֶּׁתַּטִּיל מַיִם בָּעִסָּה לֹא תְּסַיֵּעַ אוֹתָהּ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא עוֹשָׂה עִסָּתָהּ בְּטֻמְאָה. וְכֵן הַנַּחְתּוֹם שֶׁעוֹשֶׂה בְּטֻמְאָה לֹא לָשִׁין וְלֹא עוֹרְכִין עִמּוֹ שֶׁאֵין מַחֲזִיקִין יְדֵי עוֹבְרֵי עֲבֵרָה אֶלָּא מוֹלִיכִין עִמּוֹ פַּת לְפַלְטֵר:

The wife of a chaver may sift and strain [flour] together with the wife of a common person. 5:9)]. This leniency is allowed only as an expression of "the ways of piece" (Sh'vi'it, loc. cit.). Once water has been mixed with the dough, however, she should not help her, because [the wife of the common person] makes her dough while ritually impure. should not let the wife of the common person help her, for her dough would become ritually impure. She should not even help the wife of the common person for the reason stated by the Rambam. Similarly, one should not knead or array dough with a baker who bakes his dough in a state of ritual impurity. [The rationale is that] one should not reinforce the hands of transgressors. One may, however, transport bread with him to a bakery.

הַלּוֹקֵחַ מִנַּחְתּוֹם עַם הָאָרֶץ בְּסוּרְיָא וְאָמַר לוֹ הִפְרַשְׁתִּי חַלָּה אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְהַפְרִישׁ חַלָּה מִסָּפֵק. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁלֹּא נֶחְשְׁדוּ כָּל יִשְׂרָאֵל בָּאָרֶץ עַל תְּרוּמָה גְּדוֹלָה כָּךְ לֹא נֶחְשְׁדוּ בְּסוּרְיָא עַל הַחַלָּה:

When a person purchases bread from a baker who is a common person in Syria and the Diaspora with regard to many of the agricultural laws. With regard to its status for challah, see Chapter 5, Halachah 8.Certainly, this law applies in Eretz Yisrael where eating bread from which challah was not separated is punishable by death at the hand of heaven. We do not suspect a baker of being willing to cause a fellow Jew to violate such a transgression. Nevertheless, the above applies only when the baker says that he has separated the challah. If he does not make such a statement and he is a common person, even in Eretz Yisrael, the purchaser must separate challah as stated in Chapter 6, Halachah 1 (Radbaz). and [the baker] tells him: "I separated challah," [the purchaser] does not need to separate challah because of the doubt. Just as the entire Jewish people in Eretz Yisrael were not suspect [to ignore the separation of] the great terumah, so too, in Syria, they were not suspect [to ignore the separation of] challah.

הַלּוֹקֵחַ בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ מִן הַנַּחְתּוֹם צָרִיךְ לְהַפְרִישׁ חַלָּה מִסָּפֵק. אֲבָל הַלּוֹקֵחַ מִבַּעַל הַבַּיִת וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר הַמִּתְאָרֵחַ אֶצְלוֹ אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְהַפְרִישׁ חַלָּה מִסָּפֵק:

When a person purchases [bread] from a baker in the Diaspora, he must separate challah because of the doubt involved., his word is not accepted (Radbaz). If, however, he purchases from a private person - and needless to say, if he enjoys his hospitality - he is not required to separate challah because of the doubt.