Part 11 · Chapter 27

The Ari's Text

And corresponding to these two phases, which are two kabin, the House of Hillel ruled that it is then obligated in Challah, since there is already in them the first kav of carobs, and the second, pure kav is added to it — hence it is obligated in Challah. But the House of Shammai held that since there is one kav, there is already in it a hint of the pure kav, and that suffices. This, too, is the secret of the Mishnah in Tractate Challah (Chapter 4, Mishnah 4): “an old kav and a new kav that bit one another,” etc. And they are two kabin: one old, from the days of the carobs, and one new, in their fullness now, in the days of the pregnancy.

Inner Light

This commentary hasn't been matched to individual seifim yet — items are shown in reading order, and the number beside each one counts the notes themselves, not the seifim of the Ari's text.

Not matched to a seif

1The first kav of carobs, and the second, pure kav is added to it — hence it is obligated in Challah; but the House of Shammai held that since there is one kav, there is already in it a hint of the pure kav, and that suffices: Meaning, that this Kav HaCharuvin, which includes all the ZAT of Nekudim and is the phases of ZA, whose correction now, in the Ibur [impregnation], has reached only the secret of one Kav, which is the phase of Nefesh, is, in relation to Kav HaCharuvin, only one part in a hundred. For the whole NRNHY of Atzilut is one Kav out of ten, as above, and now that it has only the part of the Nefesh alone, it is found to be one part in a hundred, which is the secret of Challah, as the ARI writes concerning Adam HaRishon, that he is the Challah of the world. See there. And likewise ZA, in the Ibur, is also reckoned to the phase of Challah for this same reason, as the ARI writes in Mevo Shearim, Gate 5, Part 1, Chapter 10. Therefore the House of Hillel held that it is necessary to allude to both of them — namely, to Kav HaCharuvin, which receives this correction of Challah, and to the pure Kav, which is the Challah itself. For indeed the dough alludes to Kav HaCharuvin, of which one part in a hundred is the Challah that is separated. And therefore they held: from two kabin, to Challah. But the House of Shammai held that there is no need to allude to Kav HaCharuvin at all, but only to the pure Kav alone, which was corrected in the Ibur of ZA; and therefore they say: from one kav, to Challah.