Mishnah 8 of Maseches Challah. In the previous mishnah we dealt with the principle that challah is separated outside Eretz Yisrael as well, and although by Torah law the obligation of challah applies only in Eretz Yisrael, outside the Land two challos are separated. Our mishnah details various regions bordering Eretz Yisrael which have the status of outside the Land, but whose levels differ from one another. Along the way the mishnah also deals with the geography of the region north of Eretz Yisrael; we will not go into the precise location of these places - there is discussion and uncertainty about it - but will treat them in general terms.
Three lands with regard to challah - the words of Rabban Gamliel:
Rabban Gamliel lists three regions, three different lands with regard to the obligation of challah, and the law of each one differs from that of the others.
The first region - from Eretz Yisrael until Keziv:
From Eretz Yisrael itself until Keziv in the north of the Land, only one challah is separated, since this is the basic obligation of challah in Eretz Yisrael. There is no concern of tumah here, because the tumah of the lands of the nations that the Sages decreed was imposed only on lands outside Eretz Yisrael and not on Eretz Yisrael itself. Therefore the challah is pure, it is given to a kohen, and the kohen eats it.
The second region - from Keziv until the river and until Amanon:
From Keziv, which is the border of Eretz Yisrael, until the river and until the place called Amanon - a region that was conquered in the first conquest, when Israel left Egypt and entered the Land, but which those who returned from Babylonia did not conquer upon their return. And the halachah is that the first sanctification sanctified the Land for its own time but did not sanctify it for the future. Therefore this region does not have the status of Eretz Yisrael, and two challos are separated in it: one to be burned and one for the kohen. As for their amounts:
The challah that is burned: it has a fixed amount - one forty-eighth, like the amount we learned in the second chapter regarding an impure challah. Its status is like that of an impure challah in Eretz Yisrael, and therefore an amount was fixed for it.
The challah given to the kohen: it has no fixed amount, and any quantity suffices, even a minimal one, since it is taken only by rabbinic enactment.
The commentators explain the reason for separating an additional challah and giving it to a kohen: there is concern for people who do not know that this region is considered outside the Land, and who do not understand that the challah is impure with the tumah of the lands of the nations; they think it is a pure challah - and yet it is being burned. Therefore an additional challah is separated and given to a kohen, so that they will see this, investigate, and come to understand the reason for the halachah.
The third region - from the river and from Amanon inward:
This region is understood to be still further north, and it is considered fully outside the Land, since it was not conquered even in the first entry, when Israel came up from Egypt. There too two challos are separated, "achas la'or v'achas lakohen" - one for the fire and one for the kohen - one is burned and one is given to a kohen - except that here the amounts are reversed:
The one for the fire: this is the one that is burned - it has no fixed amount, and even a minute quantity may be separated.
The one for the kohen: this is the one given to the kohen - it has a fixed amount of one forty-eighth.
The Yerushalmi explains the reason: since both challos are only by rabbinic enactment, for by law there is no challah outside Eretz Yisrael at all, it is fitting that precisely the one that is to be eaten should be the one for which an amount was fixed.
Leniencies in the laws of tumah regarding challah outside Eretz Yisrael:
Since we are dealing with challah taken outside Eretz Yisrael, several leniencies were stated concerning it in matters of tumah. "U'tevul yom ochlah" - a tevul yom, one who was impure and immersed in a mikvah but whose sun has not yet set, is permitted to eat it, even though ordinarily a tevul yom may eat only second tithe and may not eat challah or Terumah. With this challah they were lenient, since it is only by rabbinic law. The commentators disagree as to whether the reference is to the challah given to the kohen, which a tevul yom is permitted to eat, or to the challah designated for burning, that even though its law is to be burned, a tevul yom may still eat it.
"Rabbi Yosei omer eino tzarich tevilah" - in Rabbi Yosei's view even immersion is not required, and even before he goes down to the mikvah, while he is still impure, he is permitted to eat the challah of outside the Land - provided that his tumah is not a severe form of tumah, as will be explained immediately.
"V'asur lezavim v'lezavos lenidos v'leyoldos" - nevertheless, this challah is forbidden to be eaten by a zav, a zavah, a niddah and a woman after childbirth. All of these are impure on account of a discharge issuing from their bodies, which is considered a more severe type of tumah, and therefore they may not eat it.
"V'ne'echeles im hazar al hashulchan" - an additional leniency: it is permitted to eat this challah of outside the Land together with a non-kohen at one table, and there is no concern that the non-kohen might eat from it as well.
"V'niteneres lechol kohen" - it may be given to any kohen, even to a kohen who is an am ha'aretz and is not careful about maintaining purity, whereas the challah of Eretz Yisrael is given only to a kohen who is a chaver, who is not an am ha'aretz and is scrupulous about maintaining purity. And some of the commentators understood that the distinction is not between a kohen who is an am ha'aretz and a kohen who is a chaver, but between a kohen who is accustomed to eating his ordinary food in purity and one who does not conduct himself this way: ordinarily the gifts of the priesthood are not given to one who does not keep his ordinary food in purity, and here it is permitted, because this is challah of outside the Land. But to a kohen who is an am ha'aretz the gifts of the priesthood are not given at all, and therefore that case is not under discussion.