WHAT INTERRUPTS TO PREVENT JOINING? (Yerushalmi Chalah Perek 4 Halachah 2 Daf 23b)
çöé ÷á çèéí åçöé ÷á ùòåøéï åçöé ÷á ëåñîéï ðåèì îï äëåñîéï ìôé îä ùäï.
A half Kav of wheat, a half Kav of barley, and a half Kav of spelt - he takes from the spelt for the entire amount (i.e. one part in 24 or one part in 48 of one and a half Kavim, for only it joins with both others, and without it there is not a Shi'ur for Chalah);
÷á çèéí å÷á ùòåøéï å÷á ëåñîéï úåøí îëì àçã åàçã ìôé îä ùäåà.
A Kav of wheat, a Kav of barley, and a Kav of spelt - he takes from each according to its amount (for each can join with an adjacent species to a Shi'ur for Chalah);
ìà àîø àìà ÷á çéèéï ÷á ùòåøéï ÷á ëåñîéï äà ÷á çèéí å÷á ëåñîéï (îàîöò) [ö"ì áàîöò - ø"ù ñéøéìéå, îéëì äîéí] ìà áãà.
Limitation: This is only for a Kav of wheat, a Kav of barley, and a Kav of spelt (at the end), but a Kav of wheat, and a Kav of spelt is in the middle (between the wheat and the barley) no (then one may take from the spelt alone).
øáé áåï áø çééà à"ø çðéð' çáøåï ãøáðéï áòé îä áéï ëåñîéï áàîöò îä áéï ùòåøéï áàîöò.
Question (R. Bun bar Chiyah citing R. Chanina, the colleague of Rabanan): What is the difference whether spelt in the middle or barley is in the middle?
[ãó î òîåã à (òåæ åäãø)] øáé ëäï áùí øáðéï ã÷éñøéï àéï äëåñîéï îöèøôéï òí äçéèéí îôðé ùäåà (áîéðå) [ö"ì îéðå - øùá"à, ôñ÷é çìä] àìà ùäå' îãîä ìå îëéåï ùäåà øçå÷ îîðå àéðå îãî' ìå.
Answer (R. Kohen citing Rabanan of Kisarin): Spelt does not join with wheat because it is its species, rather, because it resembles it. Since it is far from it, it does not resemble it. (One may take spelt to exempt wheat only when they are adjacent and are like one species. However, they join to obligate Chalah even when they are not adjacent. We explained this like R. SHLOMO SIRILIYO, MEICHAL HA'MAYIM.)
ø' éåðä áòé àó ìòðééï îòù' áäîä ëï
Question (R. Yonah): Do we say so even for Ma'aser Behemah? (Animals join if they are at most 16 Mil apart);
ëîä ãúéîø úîï äéå ìå çîù [ö"ì áäîåú - äâø"à] çéåá áëôø çððéà åçîù çéåá áëôø (áðåúðé) [ö"ì òåúðé - úåñôúà áëåøåú æ:â] åçîù ôèåø áöéôåøéï. ëîä ãúéîø úîï ãáø [ãó ëã òîåã à] ùðéèìä çìúå îàîöò îöøó àåó äëà ëï.
Just like you say there, if he had five animals obligated [to tithe them] in Kefar Chananyah, five obligated in Kefar Osnai (32 Mil away), and five exempt in Tziporin (in the middle) - just like you say there, if something whose Chalah was taken is in the middle, it joins (what is on both sides of it), also here so!
àéï úéîø ùðééä äéà çìä ùäéà (ëðùåê) [ö"ì áðùåê - îäøé"è àìâàæé äìëåú çìä ìã:à]
Suggestion: Perhaps you will say that Chalah is different, for they are Nashuch.
åääï ùùä òùø îéì ìà ëðùåê äåà.
Rejection: Is the case [of animals] 16 Mil away not like Nashuch?! (All the more so, the land connects them more than doughs that stick together!)
(îöéðå çìä îäìëä ìà îöéðå îòùø áäî' îäìëä) [ö"ì ìà îöéðå çìä îäìëú åîöéðå îòùø áäî' îäìëú - äâø"à]
Answer: We find Chalah due to Halachah (a stringency mid'Rabanan, when in the middle is something that was once obligated). We do not find Ma'aser Behemah due to Halachah (a stringency mid'Rabanan. We explained this like GILYONEI HA'SHAS, MEICHAL HA'MAYIM.)
Note: Surely Chachamim would not decree to separate and offer Ma'aser Behemah, for this is Chulin b'Azarah. One cannot stipulate that if it is not Ma'aser, it is Shelamim, for the Matanos of blood are different. They would not decree to separate it, and eat it only after it gets a Mum, lest one offer it. (They did decree to separate Chalas Chutz la'Aretz and burn it, for even if one would eat it, it is permitted mid'Oraisa.)