When thick dough is prepared for foods such as sufganiyot, noodles, ptitim, kreplach, or soup croutons, and these foods will be prepared by boiling in water or deep-frying in oil, one does not separate ḥalla from them. Although the dough is thick and could be baked as bread, its intended preparation is cooking rather than baking, and it is therefore not considered bread.
Rabbenu Tam, however, disagrees. In his view, the obligation of ḥalla begins at the time of kneading; since at that moment the dough is thick and fit to be baked as bread, one must separate ḥalla even if one intends to cook it. In practice, the halakha follows the majority of poskim, who maintain that one does not separate ḥalla from these doughs because they are intended for cooking. Accordingly, even if one establishes a meal on them, he recites mezonot and al ha-miḥya. Nevertheless, to account for Rabbenu Tam’s view, the accepted practice is to separate ḥalla from them without a berakha.[12]
If one bakes even a small portion of dough that was otherwise intended for cooking – even the size of a small cookie – all agree that one must separate ḥalla from it with a berakha. Therefore, one who wishes to avoid the uncertainty should decide from the outset to bake a small portion of the dough, either in an oven or in a pan (Maharam of Rothenburg; SA YD 329:4).[13]
[12]. According to Rabbenu Tam, the decisive moment for ḥalla is the kneading of the dough. Therefore, one must separate ḥalla from any thick dough that could be baked into bread, even if one intends to cook it afterward. In his view, the dispute between R. Yoḥanan and Reish Lakish regarding ma’aseh ilpas concerns only a thin batter that is poured into a pan or pot and baked, like sponge cake. From thick dough, however, one must still separate ḥalla even if it is later cooked. This is also the view of Roke’aḥ, Yere’im, Rabbenu Peretz, Kol Bo, and Ha-shlama.
There is, however, disagreement about how far Rabbenu Tam’s view extends. Some authorities maintain that even according to Rabbenu Tam, one separates ḥalla only from dough whose final product will still have a bread-like form, such as sufganiyot or fricassee. One would therefore not separate ḥalla from dough intended for noodles and similar foods, since the finished product does not resemble bread (Talmidei Rabbenu Yona; Maharit Algazi). Others maintain that even when dough is intended to be made into noodles, one must separate ḥalla from it, since at the time of kneading it was a thick dough (Mordekhai; Or Zaru’a; Panim Me’irot).
The overwhelming majority of Rishonim disagree with Rabbenu Tam. In their view, one separates ḥalla only from dough intended for baking, because only such dough is considered bread. If the dough is intended for cooking or deep-frying, it will not become bread, and one does not separate ḥalla from it (Rash; Rid; Ramban; Rambam; Ra’avya; Rashba; Meiri; Maharam Ḥalawa; Rabbenu Yeroḥam; Sefer ha-Ḥinukh). This is also the ruling of SA YD 329:3, Vilna Gaon, and SAH. Nevertheless, Shakh 329:4 writes that one should take Rabbenu Tam’s view into account, and many Aḥaronim write similarly, including Ben Ish Ḥai and Da’at Kedoshim. Although most poskim do not require separating ḥalla from such dough, and ḥalla in the present era is rabbinic, the accepted practice is to be stringent from the outset, since separating without a berakha involves no real burden or loss.
A similar issue arises when the dough undergoes more than one process – for example, when it is first scalded in boiling water and only afterward baked. In such cases, its status depends on which stage makes it edible. If the scalding does not make it edible, as with cream puffs or large pretzels, then the later baking gives it the status of a baked good, and one separates ḥalla with a berakha (SA YD 329:8; see Mishpetei Eretz 1:9; Divrei David IV YD 49). If, however, the dough already became edible through cooking, most poskim maintain that later baking does not give it the status of bread for ḥalla. One therefore does not separate ḥalla from noodle kugel: the noodles are already edible after being cooked, even though baking them afterward in a pot improves their taste. Consequently, even if one establishes a meal on kugel, he does not recite ha-motzi or Birkat Ha-mazon (based on Ramban and R. David, Pesaḥim 37a; Minḥat Shlomo III 158:16, unlike R. Elyashiv, Kovetz Teshuvot III 30; see Mishpetei Eretz 1, note 27).
One likewise does not separate ḥalla from kubeh dough: it is prepared by cooking, and since bulgur is mixed into the dough, its preparation is not considered ordinary kneading (Binyan Av IV 60). If, however, sufganiyot are baked in an oven rather than deep-fried in oil, then all agree that one separates ḥalla from the dough with a berakha.
[13]. When one intends to bake even a small portion of the dough, there is concern that he may ultimately decide to bake enough of it to require separating ḥalla. Therefore, if a small portion was baked, one must separate ḥalla from the entire dough with a berakha (Taz YD 329:5; Shakh YD 329:6). Maharam of Rothenburg followed this practice in order to avoid the uncertainty.
Once one plans to bake a small portion of the dough, the question is whether ḥalla may already be separated from the dough as it is, or only after that portion has actually been baked. Baḥ maintains that one may separate ḥalla with a berakha while the dough is still unbaked, since part of it is intended for baking. According to Beit Yosef, however, one should separate only after that portion has been baked. Because of this uncertainty, the practical ruling is to separate after baking.
If one kneaded thick dough with the intention of baking it, and only afterward changed his mind and decided to cook or deep-fry it, all agree that he must separate ḥalla with a berakha, because at the time of kneading it was intended for baking. The reverse is certainly true: if one kneaded the dough intending to cook it and later changed his mind and baked it, he must separate ḥalla with a berakha, because the dough ultimately became bread (SA YD 329:3).
