Pesachim 48a, b

We continue the examination of cases where many punishments follow one action.  First, the rabbis remind us about some rules regarding offerings -- different amounts of wine are offered with different animal sacrifices; libations must already be tithed, and offerings must be permitted and not 'set aside'.

Abaye challenges Rabba's interpretation of the earlier baraita.  He suggest that there is no dividing labour into many actions on Festivals, and thus the result of transgressions should be singular punishments.  Other rabbis chime in to suggest the removal of some prohibitions and the addition of others.

The rabbis continue to debate about the principle of using "Since, etc.".  They seem to be saying that clauses that begin with "since" may be flawed.  It is difficult to understand whether they are arguing that these clauses are flawed in their nature, or whether these clauses are flawed in these particular examples.

But, back to their earlier discussion, how much dough can be kneaded for Passover to ensure that the bread does not leaven?  This has to do with how much flour is produced by different sources of grain, and whether the grain is high- or low-quality.  The halacha, we are told in a note, is taken from Torah and mishna: we must separate challa from bread made from 43.2 egg bulks of flour.

In daf (b), again we are reminded that women usually prepare matzot, as Rav Yosef tells us that the women in his family make matzah one small loaf at a time, separating challa once all matzot were in a basket together.  This ensures that challa is taken even when the individual loaves are too small to require that offering.

A new mishna introduces Rabban Gamliel's thoughts: when three women knead dough together and bake them one after the other, there is no need to worry about leavening while waiting to be baked.  The rabbis explain: one kneads her dough while one arranges her dough (into the form of matzah) while one bakes her dough.  Rabbi Akiva notes that women, wood, and ovens differ. Thus if the dough begins to rise, a woman should use cold water from her hands to halt the leavening.

When the Gemara attempts to further describe the work of these women to allow for such a leniency, Rabbi Akiva speaks.  In fact, Rabban Gamliel referred only to the rule of using cold water to slow the leavening process.  However, the halacha states that the dough can never be left idle.

Another mishna tells us that dough at the start of leavening (Gemara: "siur" dough -- pale as though it is the face of a scared person) must be burned but there is no punishment for eating siur dough before it has become fully leavened.  However, if the eating takes place after the dough looks cracked, like the antennae of locusts, eating it results in karet as it was an intentional breach of halacha.  They deepen this discussion by questioning where and how many cracks are necessary in such a situation.

I am not clear why today's daf was less of a challenge for me than yesterday's daf -- was the material less challenging? was something different about my focus? did I misread something, creating more or less difficulty?  It is truly difficult to judge.  What I take from today's daf is that women (both then and now) were surely affected by strict laws governing their work in the kitchen.  I wonder if their husbands were 'overseers', watching for mistakes, or whether there was any area of life that was fully directed by the women themselves.