Tevul Yom, Chapter Two, Mishnah Three

 

Mishnah Three

1)      If the porridge was of terumah and the garlic or oil [it contained] was of hullin, and a tevul yom touched part of them, he has disqualified the whole thing;  

2)      But if the porridge was of hullin and the garlic or oil it contained was of terumah, and a tevul yom touched part of them, he disqualifies only the part he has touched.  

3)      If the greater part was garlic then they go after the majority.  

4)     Rabbi Judah said: When is this so? When it formed one cohesive mass in the pot, but if it was scattered small in the mortar, then it is clean, since he wishes that it should be scattered.  

5)      [Similarly] with all other mashed foods which were mashed with liquids. But those which are usually mashed with liquids and yet were mashed without liquids, though they formed one cohesive mass in the pot, are regarded as a cake of preserved figs.

 

Explanation

Section one: There is a thick soup, a porridge, made of terumah that has in it hullin (non-sacred) garlic and oil. If a tevul yom touches part of the garlic or oil, all of it is disqualified because the porridge is the main thing. We look at the porridge as if it was all one dish of terumah and the whole thing is disqualified.

Section two: However, if the porridge itself is of hullin and the garlic and oil are terumah, then the garlic or oil are looked at is if they are not connected. If a tevul yom touches part of the garlic or oil, only the part he touches is disqualified.

Section three: If there is more garlic than oil, then we look at the oil as if it is secondary to the garlic. If he touches the garlic, the oil will also be disqualified.

Section four: Rabbi Judah says we follow the majority of the garlic or oil only if the garlic has not been mashed and it sticks to the oil and becomes one lump.

However, if the garlic has been mashed up and scattered in the pot, then the garlic pieces are not connected to the other pieces.  The part of the garlic he touches is impure, but the rest remains clean.

Section five: This section is a bit confusing. According to Albeck two different versions of this mishnah have been combined. I will explain according to his commentary.

The first version should read thusly:

But with all other mashed foods which were mashed with liquids or those which are usually mashed with liquids and yet were mashed without liquids, though they formed one cohesive mass in the pot, are regarded as a cake of preserved figs.

The explanation is that if there was a food that people don’t usually mash up with liquids but he nevertheless did mash it up with liquid or if there was a food which is normally mashed up with liquids but he didn’t mash it up with liquids, even if they form one cohesive lump in the pot, they are treated like a cake of preserved figs. Only the part he touched is impure.

The other version should read:

[Similarly] with all other mashed foods which were mashed with liquids. But those which are usually mashed with liquids and yet were mashed without liquids, though they formed one cohesive mass in the pot, are regarded as a cake of preserved figs.

The explanation is that other mashed foods that he mashed with liquids are also treated like garlic mashed with oil. If they make a cohesive mass, they are treated as connected. But if they are normally mashed with liquids and he mashed them without liquids, even if they form a cohesive mass, they are not treated as if they are connected.

 

  

 

image_print