Yoma 79

ככותבת שאמרו בגרעינתה או בלא גרעינתה בעי רב אשי עצם כשעורה בקליפתה או בלא קליפתה בלחה או ביבשה רב אשי לא מבעיא ליה הא דרב פפא גסה איתמר כל כמה דגסה רב פפא לא מבעיא ליה הא דרב אשי לחה שבולת מיקרי שלא בקליפתה אושלא מיקרי

The large date-bulk that they said is the measure that determines liability for eating on Yom Kippur, does this refer to the volume of a large date with its pit or without its pit? Rav Ashi asked a similar question: The mishna that states that a bone that is a barley-grain-bulk imparts ritual impurity, does this refer to the volume of a barley grain with its husk or without its husk? And is that referring to a wet kernel or a dry one? The Gemara clarifies: Rav Ashi did not ask the question that Rav Pappa asked, regarding the size of the date-bulk on Yom Kippur because the answer was clear to him. Since it is stated in the mishna: Large, it means as large as possible, which must include the pit. Conversely, Rav Pappa did not ask the question that Rav Ashi asked regarding the size of the barley-grain-bulk because the answer was clear to him. Wet barley is called shibbolet and not barley; without its shell it is no longer called barley but is called ushla. Therefore, the mishna must be referring to dry barley within its shell.

אמר (רבא) אמר רב יהודה כותבת הגסה שאמרו יתירה מכביצה וקים להו לרבנן דבהכי מיתבא דעתיה בציר מהכי לא מיתבא דעתיה מיתיבי מעשה והביאו לרבן יוחנן בן זכאי לטעום את התבשיל ולרבן גמליאל שתי כותבות ודלי של מים ואמרו העלום לסוכה ותני עלה לא מפני שהלכה כך אלא שרצו להחמיר על עצמן

Rava said that Rav Yehuda said: The volume of a large date that they said is larger than an egg-bulk. The Sages have an accepted tradition that with this amount of food, the mind of the one who eats is settled, and he is not afflicted. Less than this amount, the mind is not settled. The Gemara raises an objection from what we have learned: An incident happened on the festival of Sukkot. They brought a cooked dish to Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai to taste, and they brought to Rabban Gamliel two dates and a tankard of water. Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai and Rabban Gamliel said to them: Bring them up to the sukka, and we will eat there. And a baraita was taught in that regard: They did not act this way because that is the halakha, that such food must be eaten in the sukka. Rather, they wished to be stringent upon themselves and not eat anything outside of the sukka.

וכשנתנו לו לרבי צדוק אוכל פחות מכביצה נטלו במפה ואכלו חוץ לסוכה ולא בירך אחריו

On the other hand, the Gemara reports: And when they gave Rabbi Tzadok food that was less than an egg-bulk to eat, he held it in a cloth and did not wash his hands. And he ate it outside of the sukka and did not recite Grace after Meals afterward.

הא כביצה בעי סוכה ואי סלקא דעתך כותבת הגסה שאמרו יתירה מכביצה השתא שתי כותבות בלא גרעינן לא הוו כביצה כותבת הגסה וגרעינתה מי הוי יתירה מכביצה אמר רבי ירמיה אין שתי כותבות בלא גרעינתן לא הוו כביצה כותבת הגסה וגרעינתה הוי יתירה מכביצה אמר רב פפא היינו דאמרי אינשי תרי קבי דתמרי חד קבא דקשייתא וסריח

The Gemara clarifies: Food that has the volume of an egg-bulk is required to be eaten in a sukka. If it should enter your mind to say that the volume of the large date that they spoke of is larger than the volume of an egg-bulk, there is a contradiction. Now, comparing the two episodes, it seems that two dates without their pits are not the volume of an egg. If so, can the volume of a large date and its pit be greater than that of an egg-bulk? Rav Yirmeya said: Yes, although two dates without their pits are not equal to an egg-bulk, the volume of a large date and its pit are larger than an egg-bulk, since date pits are very large. Rav Pappa said: This explains the folk saying that people say: In two kav of dates there is one kav and more of pits, meaning that the volume of the pit is larger than that of the fruit itself.

רבא אמר התם היינו טעמא משום דהוו ליה פירי ופירי לא בעו סוכה מיתיבי אמר רבי כשהיינו לומדים תורה אצל רבי אלעזר בן שמוע הביאו לפנינו תאנים וענבים ואכלנום אכילת עראי חוץ לסוכה אכילת עראי אין אכילת קבע לא אימא אכלנום כאכילת עראי חוץ לסוכה

Rava said: This entire line of questioning has no basis: There, in the incident of the sukka, this is the reasoning that the halakha permits eating the dates outside of the sukka, due to the fact that dates are fruit, and fruit need not be eaten in a sukka but may be eaten outside of a sukka. The Gemara raises an objection. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: When we would learn Torah with Rabbi Elazar ben Shamua, they brought before us figs and grapes, and we ate them as a casual meal outside of the sukka. The Gemara analyzes this: This implies that in the case of a casual meal, yes, it may be eaten outside of a sukka; but a fixed meal may not be eaten outside of a sukka. Therefore, a meal consisting of fruit must be eaten in a sukka. The Gemara rejects this: That is the wrong inference. Instead, say we ate them as if they were a casual meal, which may be eaten outside of the sukka, meaning that eating fruit is always considered a snack.

אי בעית אימא אכלנום אכילת קבע ואכלנו פת אכילת עראי בהדייהו חוץ לסוכה

If you wish, say instead that it can be understood in this way: We ate that fruit as a fixed meal, and we ate bread as a casual meal with the fruit, to temper their sweetness, outside of the sukka.

לימא מסייע ליה לפיכך אם השלים במיני תרגימא יצא ואי סלקא דעתך פירי בעו סוכה ליתני פירות מאי מיני תרגימא פירות ואיבעית אימא באתרא דלא שכיחי פירי

The Gemara suggests: Let us say that this baraita supports Rava. It teaches: Therefore, if one completed consuming the amount that one is required to eat in the sukka with types of sweets, he has fulfilled his obligation of sitting in the sukka. If it should enter your mind to say that fruit is required to be eaten in a sukka, then it should not say sweets; let it teach fruit. The Gemara rejects this proof: What do the words types of sweets mean? It means fruit. Therefore, this baraita is not a support for Rava’s opinion. And if you wish, say that this baraita is referring to a place where fruits are uncommon, and therefore other sweet foods are eaten, but fruit can similarly complete the requirement. Consequently, no support can be brought from here.

רב זביד אמר כותבת הגסה שאמרו חסרה מכביצה דתנן בית שמאי אומרים שאור בכזית חמץ בככותבת

Until now, the Gemara has assumed that the volume of a large date is more than that of an egg. Rav Zevid disagreed with what was mentioned earlier and said: This is not so. Rather, the volume of a large date that they spoke of is less than an egg-bulk, as we learned in a mishna: Beit Shammai say: With regard to leaven, the sourdough used to make dough rise, ownership of the volume of an olive-bulk violates the prohibitions in the following verses stated regarding Passover: “And no leavened bread shall be seen with you” (Exodus 13:7) and “Seven days shall there be no leaven found in your houses” (Exodus 12:19). However, the amount of leavened bread that must be owned to violate the prohibition is the volume of a large date.

והוינן בה מאי טעמא דבית שמאי נכתוב רחמנא חמץ ולא בעי שאור ואנא אמינא ומה חמץ שאין חמוצו קשה אסור בכזית שאור שחמוצו קשה לא כל שכן מדפלגינהו רחמנא לימדה לך שיעורו של זה לא כשיעורו של זה שאור בכזית וחמץ בככותבת

The Gemara continues. And we discussed it: What is the reason for the opinion of Beit Shammai? If both leaven and leavened bread had the same measure that determines liability, let the Merciful One write only: “Leavened bread,” and He would not need to write: “Leaven.” I would say, based on logic: If leavened bread, whose leavening ability is not as strong, is prohibited at an olive-bulk, all the more so should not leaven, whose leavening ability is strong because it causes dough to rise, be also prohibited at an olive-bulk? Since the Merciful One distinguishes between them and states both “leaven” and “leavened bread,” this taught you that the measure for one is not the same as the measure for the other. The measure that determines liability for leaven is an olive-bulk, like in the case of most prohibitions from the Torah, and the measure that determines liability for leavened bread, whose leavening ability is weaker, is the volume of a large date.

ואי סלקא דעתך כותבת הגסה שאמרו יתירה מכביצה מכדי בית שמאי אשיעורא דנפיש מכזית קא מהדרי ליתני כביצה ואי נמי כי הדדי נינהו ניתני כביצה אלא לאו שמע מינה כותבת פחותה מכביצה

The Gemara clarifies: And if it should enter your mind to say: The volume of the large date that they spoke of is greater than an egg-bulk, since Beit Shammai are searching for the measure one size larger than an olive-bulk, as they proved that leavened bread must have a larger measure than an olive-bulk, and if the measure one size larger than an olive-bulk is an egg-bulk, then let them teach an egg-bulk and not a date. Alternatively, if they are exactly the same volume, and the volume of a large date has the same volume as an egg-bulk, they should have taught an egg-bulk, which is the more commonly used measure. Rather, must one not conclude from here that the volume of a large date is less than an egg-bulk?

ממאי דילמא לעולם אימא לך כותבת הגסה שאמרו יתירה מכביצה הא סתמא כביצה ואי נמי כי הדדי נינהו וחדא מינייהו נקט

The Gemara rejects this: From where is your proof? Perhaps I could actually say to you that the measure of the volume of a large date that they said is larger than an egg-bulk; however, the volume of a date of normal size is the same as an egg-bulk, and Beit Shammai were referring to a normal-sized date. Alternatively, say that the volume of a large date and an egg-bulk are equal, and the mishna chose to use one of them. Either way, there is no proof from here that the volume of a large date is greater than an egg-bulk.

אלא מהכא עד כמה מזמנין עד כזית דברי רבי מאיר רבי יהודה אומר עד כביצה במאי קא מיפלגי רבי מאיר סבר ואכלת זו אכילה ושבעת זו שתיה ואכילה בכזית ורבי יהודה סבר ואכלת ושבעת אכילה שיש בה שביעה ואי זה זה כביצה

Rather, it cannot be proven from here. Proof can be found from here: How much must one eat to obligate those with whom he ate in an invitation [zimmun] for Grace After Meals? An olive-bulk of food suffices to obligate those with whom they ate in a zimmun; these are the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: An egg-bulk is the minimum measure to obligate those with whom they ate in a zimmun. The Gemara clarifies: With regard to what do they disagree? Rabbi Meir holds that the verse “And you shall eat and be satisfied and bless the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 8:10) should be understood as follows: “And you shall eat”; this is referring to eating. “And be satisfied”; this is referring to drinking. The definition of eating throughout the Torah is consuming an olive-bulk. Rabbi Yehuda holds: “And you shall eat and be satisfied” is referring to eating that causes satisfaction, and what is that? The volume of an egg-bulk. Less than that amount of food is not satisfying.

ואי סלקא דעתך כותבת הגסה שאמרו יתירה מכביצה השתא כביצה שבועי משבעא דעתא לא מיתבא אלא לאו שמע מינה כותבת הגסה שאמרו פחות מכביצה כביצה משבעא ככותבת מיתבא דעתיה

And if it should enter your mind to say that the volume of the large date that they spoke of is larger than an egg-bulk, the following question can be asked: Now that we have said that the volume of an egg-bulk satisfies, can we say that it does not settle the mind, and thereby remove the affliction of Yom Kippur? Rather, must one not conclude from this that the volume of a large date that they said is less than the size of an egg-bulk? Eating the larger amount of an egg-bulk satisfies a person, but eating the volume of a large date only settles his mind.

תניא רבי אומר

It was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: