פסחים מ

פסחים מ

תְּרֵי חִיטֵּי בַּהֲדֵי הֲדָדֵי, דִּילְמָא אָזְלָא חֲדָא וְיָתְבָה בְּצִירְיָא דַחֲבֶרְתַּהּ, וְלָא סָלֵיק לְהוּ דִּיקּוּלָא דְמַיָּא מֵאַרְבַּע רוּחָתָא, וְאָתֵי לִידֵי חִימּוּץ.

two wheat grains in boiling water at the same time, lest one move and rest in the slit [tzirya] of the other, thereby preventing the column [dikkula] of boiling water from entering all four sides of the grain, and the grain will come to a state of leavening.

וְאָמַר אַבָּיֵי: לָא לִיחְרוֹךְ אִינִישׁ תְּרֵי שֻׁבְלֵי בַּהֲדֵי הֲדָדֵי, דִּילְמָא נָפְקִי מַיָּא מֵהַאי וּבָלַע אִידַּךְ, וְאָתְיָא לִידֵי חִימּוּץ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבָא: אִי הָכִי, אֲפִילּוּ חֲדָא נָמֵי, דִּילְמָא נָפֵיק מֵהַאי רֵישָׁא וּבָלַע אִידַּךְ רֵישָׁא! אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא: מֵי פֵירוֹת נִינְהוּ, וּמֵי פֵירוֹת אֵינָן מַחְמִיצִין.

And Abaye said: A person may not roast two stalks together, lest water leave one and be absorbed by the other, and it come to be leavened. Rava said to him: If so, one should not even roast one stalk, lest the liquid leave one end of the stalk and be absorbed by its other end. Rather, Rava said: One need not be concerned about this possibility, as it is considered fruit juice, and fruit juice does not leaven grain.

וַהֲדַר בֵּיהּ אַבָּיֵי מֵהַהִיא, דְּכׇל אַגַּב מֵדָלַיְיהוּ לָא מַחְמְצִי. דְּאָמַר אַבָּיֵי: הַאי חַצְבָּא דַאֲבִישֻׁנָא, סְחִיפָא — שְׁרֵי, זְקִיפָא — אָסוּר. רָבָא אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ זְקִיפָא — נָמֵי שְׁרֵי, מֵי פֵירוֹת נִינְהוּ, וּמֵי פֵירוֹת אֵינָן מַחְמִיצִין.

The Gemara adds: And Abaye retracted his opinion with regard to that halakha of stalks, as he maintains that anything that is absorbing liquid will not become leavened unless it is fully soaked in water. As Abaye said: With regard to this jug used for drying the stalks by means of roasting, if it is inverted it is permitted, as the liquid that is discharged from one stalk will not be absorbed by the other stalks. However, if the vessel is upright it is prohibited, as the liquid retained in the vessel might be absorbed by the other stalks and leaven them. Rava said: Even if the jug is upright, it is also permitted. This liquid is considered fruit juice, and fruit juice does not leaven grain.

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: אֵין לוֹתְתִין שְׂעוֹרִין בַּפֶּסַח. וְאִם לָתַת, נִתְבַּקְּעוּ — אֲסוּרוֹת, לֹא נִתְבַּקְּעוּ — מוּתָּרוֹת.

The Sages taught: One may not soak barley in water on Passover to make it easier to remove the chaff from the grain. And if one did soak barley grain and it split, it is prohibited. If it did not split, it is permitted.

רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: שׁוֹרָן בְּחוֹמֶץ, וְחוֹמֶץ צוֹמְתָן. אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: אֵין הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי.

Rabbi Yosei says: If one sees that the grain is expanding, he should soak it in vinegar, and the vinegar will cause the grain to contract, thereby preventing leavening. However, Shmuel said: The halakha in not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei.

אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא אָמַר מָר עוּקְבָא: לֹא נִתְבַּקְּעוּ מַמָּשׁ, אֶלָּא כׇּל שֶׁאִילּוּ מַנִּיחָן עַל פִּי חָבִית וְהֵן נִתְבַּקְּעוֹת מֵאֵילֵיהֶן, וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: נִתְבַּקְּעוּ מַמָּשׁ. עֲבַד שְׁמוּאֵל עוֹבָדָא בְּדוּרָא דְּבֵי בַּר חָשׁוּ נִתְבַּקְּעוּ מַמָּשׁ.

Rav Ḥisda said that Mar Ukva said: When the Sages were referring to a case where the barley grain split, the prohibition does not apply only if it actually split and a crack is visible. Rather, this is referring even to a case where if the barley grains were placed on a barrel of wine they would split by themselves, due to the effect of the wine. And by contrast, Shmuel said: This halakha applies only if it actually split. The Gemara relates: Shmuel took action in accordance with his ruling, when he was in the village of bar Ḥashu’s house. He prohibited only barley grains that had actually split, but permitted those that were about to split.

אָמַר רַבָּה: בַּעַל נֶפֶשׁ לֹא יִלְתּוֹת. מַאי אִירְיָא בַּעַל נֶפֶשׁ? אֲפִילּוּ כּוּלֵּי עָלְמָא נָמֵי, דְּהָא תַּנְיָא: אֵין לוֹתְתִין שְׂעוֹרִין בַּפֶּסַח! הָכִי קָאָמַר: בַּעַל נֶפֶשׁ — אֲפִילּוּ חִיטִּין דִּשְׁרִירִי לֹא יִלְתּוֹת.

Rabba said: A pious person will not soak wheat at all during Passover. The Gemara asks: Why discuss particularly a pious person? This halakha should apply to everyone as well, as it was expressly taught in a baraita: One may not soak barley on Passover. The Gemara answers that this is what Rabba is saying: A pious person will not even soak wheat, which is firmer than barley and less likely to split, due to the concern that it might become leavened.

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב נַחְמָן: מַאן דְּצָיֵית לֵיהּ לְאַבָּא — אָכֵיל נַהֲמָא דְעִיפּוּשָׁא. דְּהָא בֵּי רַב הוּנָא לָתְתִי, וּבֵי רָבָא בַּר אָבִין לָתְתִי. וְרָבָא אָמַר: אָסוּר לִלְתּוֹת.

Rav Naḥman said to Rabba: Anyone who listens to Abba, Rabba’s first name, will eat moldy bread during Passover, as flour cannot be properly prepared without soaking, and therefore matza should not be prepared from this flour. As in Rav Huna’s house they would soak the grain, and in Rava bar Avin’s house they would likewise soak their grain. But Rava said: Soaking grain should not be avoided merely for reasons of piety; rather, it is absolutely prohibited to soak grain.

אֶלָּא הָא דְּתַנְיָא: אֵין לוֹתְתִין שְׂעוֹרִין בַּפֶּסַח. שְׂעוֹרִין הוּא דְּלָא, הָא חִיטֵּי — שְׁרֵי. לָא מִיבַּעְיָא קָאָמַר. לָא מִיבַּעְיָא חִיטִּין, כֵּיוָן דְּאִית בֵּיהּ צִירְיָא — עָיְילִי בְּהוּ מַיָּא, אֲבָל שְׂעָרֵי דְּשִׁיעִי — אֵימָא שַׁפִּיר דָּמֵי, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

The Gemara asks: Rather, that which is taught in a baraita: One may not soak barley on Passover, indicates that it is barley that one may not soak; however, it is permitted to soak wheat, how will Rava explain this baraita? The Gemara explains: The baraita is speaking employing the didactic style of: Needless to say. It should be understood as follows: Needless to say, wheat may not be soaked, since wheat grains have a slit through which water will enter, and the wheat will therefore expand quickly when left to soak. However, in the case of barley, which is smooth and no water will enter the grain, one might say that this seems well, i.e., it is permitted, to soak barley. Therefore, the baraita teaches us that it is prohibited to soak even barley.

הֲדַר אָמַר רָבָא: מוּתָּר לִלְתּוֹת. דְּתַנְיָא: יוֹצְאִין בְּפַת נְקִיָּה וְהַדְרָאָה, וְאִי אֶפְשָׁר נְקִיָּה בְּלֹא לְתִיתָה.

Rava reconsidered and then said: This is not the case. Rather, it is permitted to soak grain, as it was taught in a baraita: One can fulfill his obligation with a matza loaf prepared from refined flour and with matza baked from coarse flour. And it is impossible to produce refined matza without soaking the grain, as this is the only way to remove the chaff completely from the grain.

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רַב פָּפָּא לְרָבָא: הַקְּמָחִין וְהַסְּלָתוֹת שֶׁל גּוֹיִם, שֶׁל כְּפָרִים — טְהוֹרִים, וְשֶׁל כְּרַכִּין — טְמֵאִין.

Rav Pappa raised an objection to the opinion of Rava from a baraita: With regard to flour and refined flour that belong to gentiles, in villages they are ritually pure, and in cities they are ritually impure. It is assumed that grain in cities is soaked before it is ground into flour. Once water comes in contact with this grain, it becomes susceptible to ritual impurity, and it subsequently becomes impure when touched by gentiles.

דִּכְפָרִים מַאי טַעְמָא? לָאו מִשּׁוּם דְּלָא לָתְתִי, וְקָא קָרֵי לֵיהּ סוֹלֶת!

As for flour in villages, what is the reason that it is ritually pure? Is it not due to the fact that they do not soak the flour, and therefore it does not become liable to ritual impurity? And yet their flour is nonetheless called refined flour. It can be inferred from this that it is possible to prepare refined flour without soaking the grain.

תַּרְגּוּמָא אַקִּמְחָא. בָּתַר דְּנָפֵיק אָמַר: מַאי טַעְמָא לָא אֵימָא לֵיהּ מֵהָא דְּאָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא אָמַר רַב יִרְמְיָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: חִיטִּין שֶׁל מְנָחוֹת אֵין לוֹתְתִין אוֹתָם, וְקָא קָרֵי לְהוּ סוֹלֶת.

Rava answered: You should interpret the distinction of the baraita as referring only to ordinary flour, not refined flour, which is invariably susceptible to ritual impurity due to the soaking. After Rava left, Rav Pappa said: What is the reason that he did not say a proof from this statement that Rabbi Zeira said that Rav Yirmeya said that Shmuel said: With regard to wheat that will be used for meal-offerings, one may not soak it, and yet it is nonetheless called refined flour? The Torah insists that the flour used for meal-offerings be prepared from refined flour.

הֲדַר אָמַר רָבָא: מִצְוָה לִלְתּוֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם אֶת הַמַּצּוֹת״ — אִי לָא דְּבָעֵי לְתִיתָה שִׁימּוּר לְמַאי? אִי שִׁימּוּר דְּלִישָׁה — שִׁימּוּר דְּלִישָׁה לָאו שִׁימּוּר הוּא.

Rava reconsidered and then said: It is not only permitted to soak the grains; it is actually a mitzva to soak them, as it is stated: “And you shall guard the matzot” (Exodus 12:17). The Gemara explains this statement: If it is not the case that grain requires soaking, for what purpose is guarding necessary? If you claim that this verse is referring to guarding when kneading, that cannot be the case, as guarding grain while kneading is not considered guarding. If one failed to protect the wheat from becoming leavened up to that point, it is of no use to be careful while kneading it. Consequently, this mitzva to guard the dough cannot be referring to the kneading stage.

דְּאָמַר רַב הוּנָא: בְּצֵקוֹת שֶׁל גּוֹיִם — אָדָם מְמַלֵּא כְּרֵיסוֹ מֵהֶן, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁיֹּאכַל כְּזַיִת מַצָּה בָּאַחֲרוֹנָה. בָּאַחֲרוֹנָה — אִין, בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה — לָא,

As Rav Huna said: In the case of dough prepared by gentiles, if one knows that it has not become leavened, a person may fill his stomach with them on Passover night, provided that he eats an olive-bulk of matza in the end, to fulfill the obligation to eat matza. The Gemara infers from this statement: With regard to the matza that he eats in the end, yes, he fulfills his obligation with this matza. But with regard to the matza he ate in the beginning, no, he does not fulfill the mitzva with dough prepared by gentiles.

מַאי טַעְמָא? מִשּׁוּם דְּלָא עֲבַד בְּהוּ שִׁימּוּר. וְלַעְבֵּיד לֵיהּ שִׁימּוּר מֵאֲפִיָּה וְאֵילָךְ! אֶלָּא לָאו שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ, שִׁימּוּר מֵעִיקָּרָא בָּעֵינַן.

What is the reason that one cannot fulfill his obligation to eat matza with dough prepared by gentiles? It is because he did not perform his duty to guard this dough. But one can perform his duty to guard it from the time of baking and onward. Rather, isn’t it correct to conclude from this baraita that the grain must be guarded from the beginning, i.e., from the time it is soaked, which proves that soaking the grain is part of the process of preparing matza?

ומִמַּאי? דִּילְמָא שָׁאנֵי הָתָם, דִּבְעִידָּנָא דְּנָחֵית לְשִׁימּוּר — לָא עָבֵד לַהּ שִׁימּוּר. אֲבָל הֵיכָא דִּבְעִידָּנָא דְּנָחֵית לְשִׁימּוּר — עָבֵיד לַהּ שִׁימּוּר, הָכִי נָמֵי דְּשִׁימּוּר דְּלִישָׁה הָוֵי שִׁימּוּר.

The Gemara rejects this: And from where do we know that this conclusion is correct? Perhaps it is different there, as at the time when guarding is required, i.e., when water was added to the flour, he did not perform his duty to guard it properly. However, in a case where at the time when guarding is required, when water is added the flour, he properly performed his duty to guard it, so too, it is possible that guarding flour at the time of kneading is considered proper guarding. Therefore, this question cannot be resolved based on the case of dough prepared by gentiles.

וַאֲפִילּוּ הָכִי לָא הֲדַר בֵּיהּ רָבָא. דְּאָמַר לְהוּ לְהָנְהוּ דִּמְהַפְּכִי כֵּיפֵי: כִּי מְהַפְּכִיתוּ — הַפִּיכוּ לְשׁוּם מִצְוָה, אַלְמָא קָסָבַר: שִׁימּוּר מֵעִיקָּרָא מִתְּחִלָּתוֹ וְעַד סוֹפוֹ בָּעֵינַן.

And although this proof was rejected, Rava did not retract his statement that guarding grain must begin before kneading. For he would say to those who cut and tied the stalks [kifei] of grain in the field: When you cut the grain, cut it for the purpose of the mitzva. Apparently, Rava maintains that it is necessary to guard the grain from the outset, i.e., from the beginning of its preparation until its end.

מָר בְּרֵיהּ דְּרָבִינָא

The Gemara relates with regard to Mar, son of Ravina,

מְנַקְּטָא לֵיהּ אִימֵּיהּ בְּאַרְבֵי.

that his mother would bring him wheat in a trough. In other words, she would guard the wheat grains from when they were harvested by placing them in vessels and guarding them until Passover.

הָהוּא אַרְבָּא דְחִיטֵּי דִּטְבַעָא בְּחִישְׁתָּא, שַׁרְיָא רָבָא לְזַבּוֹנֵי לְגוֹיִם.

The Gemara relates that there was a certain boat carrying wheat, which capsized before Passover in the Ḥishta River. Rava permitted its owners to sell the recovered grain to gentiles before Passover.

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רַבָּה בַּר לֵיוַאי לְרָבָא: בֶּגֶד שֶׁאָבַד בּוֹ כִּלְאַיִם — הֲרֵי זֶה לֹא יִמְכְּרֶנּוּ לְגוֹי, וְלֹא יַעֲשֶׂה בּוֹ מַרְדַּעַת לַחֲמוֹר. אֲבָל עוֹשִׂין אוֹתוֹ תַּכְרִיכִין לְמֵת.

Rabba bar Levai raised an objection to the opinion of Rava from a baraita: With regard to a garment in which diverse kinds, a prohibited mixture of wool and linen, has been lost, i.e., a wool garment into which a linen thread was sewn or vice versa, one may not sell it to a gentile; and one may not even fashion it into a saddlecloth for a donkey. It is prohibited to do so lest one remove a piece of this garment and sew it onto his own clothing. However, one may fashion it into a shroud for a dead body, as there is no concern that he will remove it from the dead.

לְגוֹי מַאי טַעְמָא לָא — לָאו מִשּׁוּם דַּהֲדַר מְזַבֵּין לְיִשְׂרָאֵל?

The Gemara clarifies this issue: What is the reason that one may not sell it to a gentile? Is it not due to the concern that the gentile will resell it to a Jew? Since the mixture of wool and linen is not visible, it is possible for a Jew to use this cloth unawares. The same concern applies to grain: It is not apparent that the grain that capsized in the river is prohibited. It should therefore be prohibited to sell this wheat to gentiles, lest they resell it to Jews.

הֲדַר אָמַר רָבָא: לְזַבִּינְהוּ קַבָּא קַבָּא לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, כִּי הֵיכִי דְּכָלְיָא קַמֵּי פִּיסְחָא.

Rava reconsidered and then said: He should sell this wheat one kav at a time, i.e., in small measures, each to a different Jew, but not to any one Jew in large quantities, so that all of this wheat will be used before Passover. By selling it in this manner, all the grain will be used quickly and no one will unwittingly eat these leavened grains on Passover.

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: אֵין מוֹלְלִין אֶת הַקְּדֵירָה בַּפֶּסַח. וְהָרוֹצֶה שֶׁיִּמְלוֹל — נוֹתֵן אֶת הַקֶּמַח וְאַחַר כָּךְ נוֹתֵן אֶת הַחוֹמֶץ. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים: אַף נוֹתֵן אֶת הַחוֹמֶץ וְאַחַר כָּךְ נוֹתֵן אֶת הַקֶּמַח.

The Sages taught: One may not stir flour into a pot of food on Passover to absorb the foam that has accumulated during the cooking process. And one who wishes to stir flour should add the flour and afterward add vinegar, which will prevent the flour from becoming leavened. And some say: One may even add vinegar and afterward add the flour, as vinegar prevents flour from becoming leavened even after the flour is diluted in water.

מַאן יֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים?

The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna whose opinion is introduced by the phrase some say?

אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: רַבִּי יְהוּדָה הִיא, דִּתְנַן: הָאִילְפָּס וְהַקְּדֵירָה שֶׁהֶעֱבִירָן מְרוּתָּחִין — לֹא יִתֵּן לְתוֹכָן תַּבְלִין, אֲבָל נוֹתֵן לְתוֹךְ הַקְּעָרָה אוֹ לְתוֹךְ הַתַּמְחוּי. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: לַכֹּל הוּא נוֹתֵן, חוּץ מִדָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ חוֹמֶץ וָצִיר.

Rav Ḥisda said: It is the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, as we learned in a mishna: With regard to a stew pot or a pot of food that one removed from the fire when it was seething, one may not add spices to them on Shabbat. However, one may add spices to a dish or to the large plate into which the food is poured from the pot. Rabbi Yehuda says: One may add spices to any food that has been removed from the fire, except to a dish that contains vinegar or brine, as this food is considered as though it were still seething, due to the pungency of the vinegar or brine. Since Rabbi Yehuda maintains that vinegar has the same effect as boiling, he would agree that vinegar, like boiling water, prevents flour from becoming leavened.

וְנוֹקְמַהּ כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, (דִּתְנַן) רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: שׁוֹרָן בְּחוֹמֶץ, וְחוֹמֶץ צוֹמְתָן!

The Gemara asks: And let us establish the opinion of: Some say, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei. As we learned in a mishna: Rabbi Yosei says, with regard to wheat grains that were soaked in water: One should soak them in vinegar, and this vinegar will cause the wheat to contract and prevent it from becoming leavened.

כִּי אַשְׁמְעִינַן לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, הָנֵי מִילֵּי דְּאִיתֵיהּ בְּעֵינֵיהּ, אֲבָל עַל יְדֵי תַּעֲרוֹבֶת — לָא.

The Gemara answers: When we learn the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, this applies only to a situation where the vinegar is in its pure, unadulterated form, in which case its pungency prevents the wheat from becoming leavened. However, if the vinegar is added by means of a mixture, no, Rabbi Yosei’s statement does not apply to a case of this kind.

עוּלָּא אָמַר: אֶחָד זֶה וְאֶחָד זֶה — אָסוּר, מִשּׁוּם: ״לֵךְ לֵךְ אָמְרִינַן נְזִירָא, סְחוֹר סְחוֹר, לְכַרְמָא לָא תִּקְרַב״.

Ulla said: In both of these cases, whether the vinegar is added first or afterward, its use is prohibited, as one must avoid scenarios that might lead to a prohibition, as per the well-known adage: Go around, go around, and do not approach the vineyard, they say to the nazirite. Since a nazirite is prohibited from drinking wine and eating grapes, it is preferable for him to avoid a vineyard entirely. A similar principle applies to other prohibitions.

רַב פַּפִּי שָׁרֵי לֵיהּ לְבוּרְדִּיקִי דְּבֵי רֵישׁ גָּלוּתָא לְמִמְחֵה קְדֵירָה בַּחֲסִיסֵי. אָמַר רָבָא: אִיכָּא דְּשָׁרֵי כִּי הַאי מִילְּתָא בְּדוּכְתָּא דִּשְׁכִיחִי עָבְדִי? אִיכָּא דְאָמְרִי: רָבָא גּוּפָא מָחֵי לֵהּ קִידְרָא בַּחֲסִיסֵי.

The Gemara relates: Rav Pappi permitted the cooks [burdikei] of the household of the Exilarch to mash roasted grains into a pot of food, to dissolve the accumulated foam. Rava said: Is there anyone who permits this matter in a place where servants are found? Servants are unlikely to be careful with regard to these prohibitions. They will use raw flour for this purpose, which will lead to a violation of the prohibition against leavened bread on Passover. Some say that Rava himself would add roasted grains into his own pot.

מַתְנִי׳ אֵין נוֹתְנִין קֶמַח לְתוֹךְ חֲרוֹסֶת אוֹ לְתוֹךְ הַחַרְדָּל. וְאִם נָתַן — יֵאָכֵל מִיָּד, וְרַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹסֵר.

MISHNA: One may not add flour to ḥaroset, a seasoned, pungent food, or to mustard, to dull the sharp taste. In both cases, the pungency of these foods might accelerate the leavening of the flour. And if one added flour to either of these, the mixture may be eaten immediately before it is leavened; and Rabbi Meir prohibits this, lest the food be leavened immediately.

אֵין מְבַשְּׁלִין אֶת הַפֶּסַח לֹא בְּמַשְׁקִין וְלֹא בְּמֵי פֵירוֹת, אֲבָל סָכִין וּמַטְבִּילִין אוֹתוֹ בָּהֶן.

The mishna continues: One may not boil the Paschal lamb in ordinary liquids or in fruit juices, as the Torah explicitly states that it must be roasted. However, one may baste it while it is roasting and dip it into liquid while eating it.

מֵי תַשְׁמִישׁוֹ שֶׁל נַחְתּוֹם — יִשָּׁפְכוּ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן מַחְמִיצִין.

The tanna further states: Water that has been used by a baker for cooling his hands or washing dishes should be poured out, because this water leavens the dough, as the water probably contains a small quantity of flour and dough.

גְּמָ׳ אָמַר רַב כָּהֲנָא: מַחֲלוֹקֶת לְתוֹךְ הַחַרְדָּל, אֲבָל לְתוֹךְ חֲרוֹסֶת — דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל יִשָּׂרֵף מִיָּד.

GEMARA: Rav Kahana said: The dispute between Rabbi Meir and the Rabbis concerns a case where one adds flour to mustard, which is extremely pungent and will not leaven the flour immediately. But in a case where flour is added to the less pungent ḥaroset, which will leaven the flour quickly, everyone agrees that the mixture must be burned immediately.

וְתַנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: אֵין נוֹתְנִין קֶמַח לְתוֹךְ הַחֲרוֹסֶת, וְאִם נָתַן — יִשָּׂרֵף מִיָּד. לְתוֹךְ הַחַרְדָּל, רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: יִשָּׂרֵף מִיָּד, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: יֵאָכֵל מִיָּד. אָמַר רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: הֲלָכָה כְּדִבְרֵי חֲכָמִים. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק לְרַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוּדָה:

And that opinion was also taught in a baraita: One may not add flour to ḥaroset, and if one did add flour it should be burned immediately. With regard to flour that was added to mustard, Rabbi Meir says: It should be burned immediately, and the Rabbis say: It should be eaten immediately, before it is leavened. Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehuda, said that Rav Naḥman said that Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis concerning this issue. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said to Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehuda: