Pt2 ‘Leḥem Oni’ vs. Luxury: ‘The Bread of Affliction’ and the Halakhic Boundaries of Passover Matza (Pesachim 35b-37b)

This is the second part of a three-part series. Part 1 is here; the outline of the series can be found there. The series is in honor of Passover. Chag Sameach!

Defining “Poor Man’s Bread” and the Status of Ashisha (Deuteronomy 16:3): Exclusions from “Poor Man’s Bread”; Inclusion of Fine Flour Matzot

A baraita states that “poor man’s bread” (“leḥem oni”) excludes matza that was boiled (חלוט), as well as baked in the form of large cakes.¹

However, the baraita goes on to say that this does not mean matza must be “coarse” (הדראה):

The repeated term “matzot” in the Torah broadens the definition of matza,² allowing even “Solomon’s matzas”³ to be valid.

תנו רבנן:

״לחם עני״ —

פרט לחלוט ולאשישה.

יכול לא יצא אדם ידי חובתו אלא בפת הדראה?

תלמוד לומר: ״מצות״ ״מצות״ ריבה,

ואפילו כמצות של שלמה.

אם כן, מה תלמוד לומר ״לחם עוני״?

פרט לחלוט ולאשישה.

The Sages taught that

the phrase poor man’s bread [leḥem oni]

excludes matza that was boiled [ḥalut] in hot water after it was baked, which is considered to be a relative delicacy; and this expression also excludes matza that was baked as a large cake [ashisha].

I might have thought that a person fulfills his obligation to eat matza only with coarse [hadra’a] bread;

therefore, the verse states: “Matzot,” “matzot,” which serves to amplify and include matza prepared with fine-grade flour.

And in fact, one could fulfill his obligation even with matzot like those of King Solomon, which were prepared from the finest sifted flour.

If so, what is the meaning when the verse states: “Poor man’s bread”?

This phrase comes to exclude boiled matza and large cakes, but it does not exclude matza prepared from refined flour.

Ashisha as a Sign of Luxury; Dispute Over the Meaning of Ashisha (II Samuel 6:19, Hosea 3:1)

The Talmud justifies the exclusion of “ashisha” by showing it connotes importance (חשיבותא), citing the verse about King David’s lavish feast upon bringing the Ark.

Rav Ḥanan bar Abba interprets as follows:

• “Ashisha”: (a cake made from) ⅙ of an eipha (איפה - of flour)

• “Eshpar” (אשפר): (a meat portion of) ⅙ of an ox⁴

Shmuel disagrees with Rav Ḥanan and argues that “ashisha” means a jug (גרבא) of wine, based on Hosea 3:1, where the phrase "jugs (אשישי) of grapes" appears.

ומאי משמע דהאי אשישה לישנא דחשיבותא?

דכתיב:

״ויחלק

1. לכל העם

2. לכל המון ישראל

3. למאיש ועד אשה

לאיש

1. חלת לחם -- אחת

2. ואשפר -- אחד

3. ואשישה -- אחת וגו׳״.

ואמר רב חנן בר אבא:

״אשפר״ — אחד מששה בפר,

״אשישה״ — אחד מששה באיפה.

ופליגא דשמואל,

דאמר שמואל:

״אשישה״ — גרבא דחמרא,

דכתיב: ״ואהבי אשישי ענבים״.

The Gemara asks: From where may it be inferred that ashisha is an expression that indicates importance?

As it is written with regard to King David’s celebration after he brought the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem: “

And he dealt

1. among all the people,

2. among the whole multitude of Israel,

3. both to men and women,

to every one

1. a cake of bread,

2. and an eshpar,

3. and an ashisha,

and all the people departed, every one to his house” (II Samuel 6:19).

And Rav Ḥanan bar Abba said:

The word eshpar refers to a portion of meat equivalent to one-sixth of an ox,

and the word ashisha refers to a cake prepared from one-sixth of an eipha of flour.

And this interpretation disputes the opinion of Shmuel,

as Shmuel said:

Ashisha means a jug of wine,

as it is written: “And those who love the jug [ashishei] of grapes” (Hosea 3:1).

Dispute About “Thick Bread” on Passover

Beit Shammai forbid baking thick (עבה) matza⁵ on Passover due to the risk of leavening; Beit Hillel permit it.

תנו רבנן:

אין אופין פת עבה (ביום טוב) בפסח,

דברי בית שמאי

ובית הלל מתירין.

The Sages taught:

One may not bake thick bread on the Festival, on Passover, as it might be leavened before it has a chance to bake;

this is the statement of Beit Shammai.

And Beit Hillel permit one to bake bread in this manner.

Definition of “Thick Bread”: Rav Huna’s Definition of Thick Matza; Rav Yosef’s Challenge Based on Practical Differences; Rejection of the Analogy to Shewbread

Rav Huna defines “thick matza” as matza that is 1 handbreadth (טפח) thick.

He supports this by drawing a parallel to the Temple showbread.⁶

Rav Yosef objects that the shewbread was made under exceptional conditions—by meticulous priests, with well-kneaded dough, in a hot metal oven using dry wood in summer. Rav Yosef rhetorically asks if (ordinary) people have such control over their materials and process.

List of Rav Yosef’s arguments against comparing ordinary matza to the showbread:⁷

1. Diligence of Bakers: The showbread was prepared by diligent (זריזין) priests who ensured it did not become leavened. Ordinary people are not as meticulous.

2. Quality of Kneading: The showbread dough was well-kneaded (פת עמילה). Ordinary matza dough presumably isn’t.

3. Type of Fuel: The showbread was baked with dry wood.⁸ Regular people may use moist (לחים) wood (that produces less heat).

4. Oven Temperature: The showbread was baked in a hot oven (תנור). Ordinary ovens might not be as hot.

5. Material of Oven: The showbread was baked in a metal oven (that heats quickly). Ordinary matza is baked in clay (חרס) ovens (that heat more slowly).

וכמה פת עבה?

אמר רב הונא:

טפח,

שכן מצינו בלחם הפנים טפח.

מתקיף לה רב יוסף:

1. 1. אם אמרו בזריזין —

   2. יאמרו בשאינן זריזין?!

2. 1. אם אמרו בפת עמילה —

   2. יאמרו בפת שאינה עמילה?!

3. 1. אם אמרו בעצים יבשין —

   2. יאמרו בעצים לחים?!

4. 1. אם אמרו בתנור חם —

   2. יאמרו בתנור צונן?!

5. 1. אם אמרו בתנור של מתכת —

   2. יאמרו בתנור של חרס?!

The Gemara asks: And how much thickness is required for the matza to be considered thick bread?

Rav Huna said:

This category includes matza that is a handbreadth thick.

The proof is as we found by the shewbread, which could not be leavened and which was a handbreadth thick.

Rav Yosef strongly objects to this explanation:

1. 1. If the Sages said that it is permitted to bake bread a handbreadth thick for the shewbread, which was prepared by diligent priests who ensured that the dough did not become leavened,

   2. will they say the same with regard to other people who are not as diligent?!

2. 1. If they said this with regard to well-kneaded bread,

   2. will they say the same with regard to bread that is not well kneaded?!

3. 1. If they said that bread a handbreadth thick is permitted in a case where the bread was cooked with dry wood, which was brought to the Temple during the dry summer months, as the heat generated from this type of wood would cause the bread to bake quickly before it leavened,

   2. will they say the same with regard to ordinary people who cook with moist wood?!

4. 1. If they said this with regard to a hot oven in the Temple,

   2. will they also say it is permitted with regard to a cool oven?!

5. 1. If they said so with regard to the shewbread, which was baked in a metal oven that could be heated quickly,

   2. will they say the same with regard to a clay oven?!

Clearly, these two cases are different, and no comparison can be drawn between the shewbread and ordinary matza.

The Definition of “thick bread” (Pat Ava)

Chain of Attribution

R' Yirmeya bar Abba states that asked his “special master”⁹—either Rav or R' Yehuda HaNasi, depending on the version—about the meaning of the term “pat ava” (“thick bread/matza”).

אמר רב ירמיה בר אבא:

שאילית את רבי ביחוד,

ומנו?

רב.

איכא דאמרי:

רב ירמיה בר אבא, אמר רב:

שאילית את רבי ביחוד,

ומנו?

רבינו הקדוש.

מאי פת עבה?

R' Yirmeya bar Abba said:

I asked my special Rabbi,

and who is this?

Rav.

Some say that

R' Yirmeya bar Abba said that Rav said:

I asked my special Rabbi,

and who is this?

Our holy Rabbi, R' Yehuda HaNasi:

What is the meaning of the expression: Pat ava?

Definition of the Term; Etymology and Regional Usage

The answer given: “Pat ava” means a large quantity (מרובה) of bread (i.e. a substantial batch of dough prepared in a single kneading session).

Two explanations are offered for why the term “thick bread” is used to refer to a large quantity of bread:

1. such dough requires extensive kneading (לישה)

2. in the local dialect of the tanna's region, this was the standard term for a large loaf or batch

פת מרובה.

ואמאי קרו ליה פת עבה?

משום דנפישא בלישה.

ואי בעית אימא:

באתריה דהאי תנא

לפת מרובה —

פת עבה קרו ליה.

[...]

He explained that it means: A large quantity of bread, a large batch of dough prepared in one session.

And why did they call it: Pat ava, thick bread?

It is referred to by this name due to the fact that it requires a large amount of kneading.

And if you wish, say instead that

in the place where this tanna lived,

a large quantity of bread

was simply called pat ava, thick bread.

[...]

Debating Shaped Matza and Leavening Risks

Permissibility of Different Types of Matza

A baraita states that one fulfills the obligation (to eat matza on Passover) with either fine (נקיה) or coarse (הדראה) bread, and even with matza shaped into figures (סריקין המצויירין).

However, shaped matza should not be made on Passover.

תנו רבנן:

יוצאין

1. בפת נקיה,

2. ובהדראה,

3. ובסריקין המצויירין בפסח,

אף על פי שאמרו:

אין עושין סריקין המצויירין בפסח.

The Sages taught:

One fulfills the obligation to eat matza on Passover

1. with fine bread,

2. with coarse bread,

3. and after the fact with matza shaped in figures,

although they said that

one should not bake matza shaped in figures on Passover ab initio.

Baitos ben Zonin’s Challenge

Rav Yehuda recounts that Baitos ben Zonin questioned why figure-shaped matza should not be made on Passover..

The Sages responded that shaping delays baking,¹⁰ which leads to leavening (מחמצתה).

Baitos suggested using molds¹¹ to avoid delay, but the Sages rejected this solution to prevent confusion and maintain a clear communal standard.¹²

אמר רב יהודה:

דבר זה שאל בייתוס בן זונין לחכמים:

מפני מה אמרו אין עושין סריקין המצויירין בפסח?

אמרו לו:

מפני שהאשה שוהה עליה

ומחמצתה.

אמר להם:

אפשר יעשנה בדפוס

ויקבענה כיון!

אמרו לו:

יאמרו:

כל הסריקין — אסורין,

וסריקי בייתוס — מותרין

Rav Yehuda said that

Baitos ben Zonin asked the Sages about this matter:

Why did the Sages say that one may not prepare matza shaped in figures on Passover ab initio?

They said to him:

The reason is because a woman will tarry over it as she prepares the bread, so that she can form the figure before it is baked,

and she will thereby cause it to become leavened.

He said to them:

It is possible for a woman to prepare this matza with a mold,

and she could set it immediately, without delaying the baking process.

They said to him:

People would fail to understand the distinction, and they would say that

all shaped matza is prohibited,

and yet Baitos’ shaped matza is permitted.

Consequently, the Sages rejected this distinction, and prohibited all forms of matza shaped in figures on Passover.

Rabban Gamliel’s Practice and R' Tzadok’s Explanation

R' Elazar bar Tzadok—as a child—observed figure-shaped matza in Rabban Gamliel’s home and questioned the halachic propriety of it (based on the prohibition discussed in previous sections above).

His father explained that the prohibition was said specifically regarding bread from professional bakers.¹³

אמר רבי אלעזר בר צדוק:

פעם אחת

נכנסתי אחר אבא לבית רבן גמליאל,

והביאו לפניו סריקין המצויירין בפסח.

אמרתי:

אבא!

לא כך אמרו חכמים:

אין עושין סריקין המצויירין בפסח?!

אמר לי:

בני!

לא של כל אדם אמרו,

אלא של נחתומין אמרו.

R' Elazar bar Tzadok said:

Once

I followed my father, R' Tzadok, into Rabban Gamliel’s home,

and they brought before him matza shaped in figures on Passover.

I said:

Father!

didn’t the Sages say that one may not prepare matza shaped in figures on Passover?!

He said to me:

My son!

they did not say this prohibition for the matza of all ordinary people;

rather, they said so in regard to the matza of bakers, who are under pressure to enhance the appearance of their products in order to increase sales. The dough could leaven, since bakers might take too much time to ensure that the shape of their matza is exactly right.

Alternative Version of R' Tzadok’s View

A different version states that R' Tzadok claimed the opposite: that the Sages permitted bread from professional bakers (due to their speed and expertise), but prohibited shaped matza made by non-professionals.

איכא דאמרי:

הכי קאמר ליה:

לא של נחתומין אמרו,

אלא של כל אדם.

Some say that

this is what R' Tzadok said to his son:

The Sages did not say that this practice is prohibited with regard to the matza of bakers, who are expert and efficient in their work and will do it quickly,

but rather this prohibition applies to the matza of all ordinary people.

According to both versions of this exchange, it is permitted to eat this matza after the fact.

R' Yosei’s Ruling on Matza Thickness

R' Yosei allowed thin (רקיקין) matzot but prohibited thick ones.¹⁴

אמר רבי יוסי:

עושין סריקין כמין רקיקין,

ואין עושין סריקין כמין גלוסקאות.

R' Yosei said:

One may prepare matzot shaped as thin wafers,

but one may not prepare matzot shaped as thick loaves, as the latter is more likely to be leavened.

1. אשישה - “ashisha”; both of these are considered relatively luxurious.

See in the continuation of this sugya for the etymology of this word.

2. ״מצות״ ״מצות״ ריבה - the same phrase and drash used a few times earlier in the sugya by R’ Akiva.

3. מצות של שלמה.

Compare the Talmudic idiom “like Solomon’s feast in his time (i.e. ”prime, heyday”]” (כסעודת שלמה בשעתו), to denote a lavish, almost mythically extravagant meal.

This is based on the verse in 1 Kings 5:2‑3 (as is essentially stated in Bava_Metzia.86b.1-2), which describes Solomon’s extravagant daily provisions:

ויהי לחם־שלמה ליום אחד:

1. שלשים כר סלת

2. וששים כר קמח

3. עשרה בקר בראים

4. ועשרים בקר רעי

5. ומאה צאן

לבד מ

1. איל

2. וצבי

3. ויחמור

4. וברברים אבוסים

Solomon’s daily provisions consisted of:

1. 30 kors (כר) of semolina (סלת),

2. and 60 kors of [ordinary] flour (קמח),

3. 10 fattened (בראים) oxen (בקר),

4. 20 pasture-fed (רעי) oxen,

5. and 100 sheep (צאן),

besides

1. deer (איל)

2. and gazelles (צבי),

3. roebucks (יחמור)

4. and fatted (אבוסים) geese (ברברים)

In this context, “matzot of Solomon” implies matza made with the finest flour, yet still valid for fulfilling the obligation, thus limiting the meaning of ‘leḥem oni’ (poor man’s bread) to exclude only certain forms of preparation—not quality of ingredients per se.

4. פר.

Rav Ḥanan bar Abba interprets these two obscure biblical terms via folk/intuitive etymologies:

• Eshpar (אשפר) = Echad mi-shisha b-par (אחד מששה בפר) → “one-sixth of an ox.” The word eshpar is treated as a contraction of shisha-par.

• Ashisha (אשישה) = Echad mi-shisha b-eipha (אחד מששה באיפה) → “one-sixth of an eipha of flour.” The word is read as a contraction of shisha-eipha.

This analysis treats both terms not as vague food items but as precise, generous portions—fitting the festive context of David’s celebration.

Compare my piece ““Asking Anything in the Entire World”: A Talmudic Sugya of Zoological Questions and Intuitive Etymologies of Aramaic Words (Shabbat 77b)“, section “Folk Etymologies of Aramaic words - Twenty-Two etymologies“, which shows a similar pattern:

Obscure Aramaic terms are reinterpreted as contractions or acronyms of two-word phrases.

Examples:

• דשא = דרך שם (door (דשא) = “way (דרך) [to] there (שם)”)

• דרגא = דרך גג (stair/ladder (דרגא) = “way [to the] roof (גג)”)

This style treats rare words as if they transparently contain their own definitions through sound-based interpretation.

For other explanations of these two rare biblical words discussed in our sugya, see Hebrew Wiktionary, “אשפר“, section “גיזרון“, my translation:

The word [=Eshpar] appears twice in the Bible. Its meaning and etymology are unclear.

The Talmud (Pesachim 36b; our sugya) interpreted it as a notarikon (acronym): “one-sixth of an ox” (אחד מששה בפר).

Others derive it based on phonetics, as a compound: אש + פר (fire + ox), meaning roasted meat.

In the Septuagint, it's translated as escharitēn (ἐσχαρίτην) — toasted bread, likely based on contextual inference that it refers to baked goods.

Menaḥem ben Saruq derived it from the root ש־פ־ר, meaning a fine portion, and this was followed by other commentators.

Targum Jonathan translates it as “pelug” — “portion, cut”, and the Peshitta renders it as “niksa” — “piece of meat”.

This may be related to the Syriac ܐܲܫܦܵܪܵܐ (ashpara) — “scissors”, possibly linked to the root ס־פ־ר ("to cut/count".

And see Hebrew Wiktionary, “אשישה“, section “גיזרון“, my translation:

Prof. Moshe Weinfeld found that the word ashisha is a Hebraized loanword from the region of Asia Minor […] The origin of the word ashisha is Hittite-Hurrian.

There is an Aramaic parallel: ashishayin bi-dvash (“cakes in honey”)—Targum Jonathan on Exodus 16:31—used as the translation for tzappihit b’dvash (“wafer with honey”).

Some have derived the word from esh (fire), suggesting it originally referred to a cake baked over fire, and from there it was extended to various baked goods.

It may also derive from the Persian word شیشه (šiše), which means “bottle, flask, jar, jug, vial, or small container”—originally made from glass or šayiš (“alabaster; marble”).

5. פת - literally: “bread”.

6. לחם הפנים - which was likewise a handbreadth thick and prohibited from becoming leavened.

7. This passage exemplifies parallelistic argumentation via rhetorical anaphora (repetition of a fixed phrase at the start of each clause). Specifically:

Literary Formula:

"If they said it regarding X — will they say it regarding Y?!"

This is repeated five times, contrasting between the ideal case (X) and the less ideal or ordinary case (Y).

The X-cases refer to priestly Temple practice (controlled, expert, high-quality), and the Y-cases refer to ordinary practice (less control, inferior materials).

Structural Notes:

1. Parallelism – Each line follows identical syntactic structure.

2. Antithetical Pairs – Each X vs. Y pair contrasts:

   1. a positive condition:

      1. זריזין

      2. פת עמילה

      3. עצים יבשים

      4. תנור חם

      5. תנור מתכת

   2. with a lesser condition (e.g., שאינן זריזין, etc.).

3. Accumulation – The rhetorical force builds through repetition.

4. Rhetorical Question – The repeated question implies a negative answer (“of course not!”), but leaves the reader to infer it, without stating it explicitly.

On this latter aspect (Rhetorical Question) as a major stylistic aspect of the Talmud, see my piece “Answering Questions with Questions: On The Frequent Use of Rhetorical Questions in the Talmud“.

8. עצים יבשין - which produce intense heat.

9. רבי ביחוד. This idiom appears in no other context in the Talmud (it’s cited in a another two places).

On the word ביחוד, compare the Talmudic idiom: ידעו ביחוד, where it means “definitively”.

10. “a woman will tarry (שוהה) over it”.

The implicit assumption is that women are the ones doing the baking. This is notable, as in modern times, traditionally men are the ones who bake matza, or at least run the operation.

11. דפוס - from Greek tŭ́pos. In Greek, the word “a blow,” “mark,” or “impression”—something formed by pressure. In Greek, it evolved to mean “mold,” “form,” or “type,” in both the physical and abstract senses (see Wiktionary ibid. especially sense #3: “mark, figure, image, outline“).

As an aside, this word is cognate with English “type”, originally meaning a figure, impression, or model, and later expanding to mean a kind or category (“type of animal”), and the physical letters used in printing (“movable type”).

With the advent of movable type printing in the 15th-16th centuries, the Talmudic loanword “defus” was repurposed in early modern Hebrew to mean “print” and developed verbal forms (=verbing). For example:

• בית דפוס – a print shop or press

• נדפס – “was printed” (past participle)

12. It’s likely that this should be read as rhetorical question, referring to the sages (contra ed. Steinsaltz, who interprets as a mistaken statement by commoners in this counterfactual):

“They [=the Sages] should say [that] all shaped (סריקין) [matza] is prohibited, and Baitos’ shaped [matza] is permitted?!“

13. נחתומין - whose concern with aesthetics might cause delays and lead to leavening. Alternatively, it was assumed that bakers were on average less particular about halacha in general.

14. גלוסקאות - as thicker dough is more prone to becoming leavened.