anina

It was stated: “Heave of the tithe from demay that returned to its origin makes dema‘, not to its origin does not make dema‘. Rebbi Simeon from Shezur said, both at its origin and not at its origin it does not make dema‘.” Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked before Rebbi Zeïra: For one who says, it makes dema‘, it makes dema‘; for one who says, it does not make dema‘, it does not make dema‘; this is reasonable. But if one says, in its origin it makes dema‘, not in its origin it does not make dema‘; what is the difference between in its origin and not in its origin? Rebbi Ḥaggai came up. They said, this one will say, “by Moses, I shall explain the reason.” He said, by Moses, I shall explain the reason: He who says, it makes dema‘, because it permits the rest to be eaten. He who says, it does not make dema‘, because it does not permit the rest to be eaten. Rebbi La taught according to that of Rebbi Ḥaggai. Rebbi Zeïra said: A case came before Rebbi Ḥanina and he taught according to Rebbi Simeon from Shezur. Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: Practice does not follow Rebbi Simeon from Shezur.

“In addition, Rebbi Simeon from Shezur said: If he separated the heave of the tithe and it was burned, he asks the seller and eats on his information.” Did Rebbi Zeïra not say that a similar case came before Rebbi Ḥanina and he taught according to Rebbi Simeon from Shezur? Rebbi Avin said, this question does not compare to the first question. There it was, not that I suspect you, but since I bought wheat from you yesterday and I saw a multitude with you, I said maybe you forgot to put them in order. Were they put in order? But here, because I suspected you, I put them in order but they went up in fire. Were they put in order? Rebbi Samuel, the son of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said that Bar Kappara stated: The fear of dema‘ is on him and he will tell the truth.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Yannai ben Rebbi Ismaël in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: On the Sabbath of a protogamia they permitted because of hatred. Rebbi Avin said, here they permitted ṭevel because of human relations. Rebbi Ḥanina said, Rebbi Jeremiah asked: If it is because of human relations, why is it only on condition that the host tell him that it was tithed? If he invited him on the first Sabbath but he did not come, can the second Sabbath become the first? Rav Ḥisda said, here we have learned that a ḥaver may not eat at a meal that has no name.

HALAKHAH: Also ḥallah? Is ḥallah due for demay? Did we not state: “Ḥallah of the unobservant and food containing heave are free from demay.” Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya, in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: This is from the House of Shammai. We have stated accordingly: “Rebbi Simeon ben Jehudah says in the name of Rebbi Simeon that the House of Shammai obligate for ḥallah and the House of Hillel exempt it.” Did the House of Shammai include seed goods? But he who buys for sowing or animal feed, flour for tanning or oil for lighting, is he not free from demay? But it must be for somebody who kneads his dough with fruit juice. Did not Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina say that this follows Rebbi Eleazar ben Jehudah from Bartota, hence it does not follow the rabbis. But it agrees with Rebbi Joḥanan, since Rebbi Joḥanan said, one case for him who works in purity and one case for him who works in impurity. But what following Rebbi Eleazar, since Rebbi Eleazar said, in both cases if he works in purity? It must be that he is a guest. Was it not stated: “He who is trustworthy for purities is trustworthy for tithes?” Rebbi Yannai ben Rebbi Ismaël stated and said: That is, if one is his guest, but for the public he is not trustworthy unless he accepts it publicly. And here we deal with the public.

HALAKHAH: Also ḥallah? Is ḥallah due for demay? Did we not state: “Ḥallah of the unobservant and food containing heave are free from demay.” Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya, in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: This is from the House of Shammai. We have stated accordingly: “Rebbi Simeon ben Jehudah says in the name of Rebbi Simeon that the House of Shammai obligate for ḥallah and the House of Hillel exempt it.” Did the House of Shammai include seed goods? But he who buys for sowing or animal feed, flour for tanning or oil for lighting, is he not free from demay? But it must be for somebody who kneads his dough with fruit juice. Did not Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina say that this follows Rebbi Eleazar ben Jehudah from Bartota, hence it does not follow the rabbis. But it agrees with Rebbi Joḥanan, since Rebbi Joḥanan said, one case for him who works in purity and one case for him who works in impurity. But what following Rebbi Eleazar, since Rebbi Eleazar said, in both cases if he works in purity? It must be that he is a guest. Was it not stated: “He who is trustworthy for purities is trustworthy for tithes?” Rebbi Yannai ben Rebbi Ismaël stated and said: That is, if one is his guest, but for the public he is not trustworthy unless he accepts it publicly. And here we deal with the public.

The Great Rebbi Ḥuna from Sepphoris said, Rebbi Ḥanina instituted in Sepphoris following Rebbi Simeon. Rebbi Zeïra said, Rebbi Ḥanina instituted in Sepphoris following Rebbi Simeon.

The Great Rebbi Ḥuna from Sepphoris said, Rebbi Ḥanina instituted in Sepphoris following Rebbi Simeon. Rebbi Zeïra said, Rebbi Ḥanina instituted in Sepphoris following Rebbi Simeon.

So far a Gentile; a Samaritan? Let us hear from the following: “He who gives a field to a Gentile sharecropper, a Samaritan, or somebody who is not trusted with tithes, before they come to the time of tithes he does not have to tithe for him; after they come to the time of tithes he has to tithe for him.” That is, at a place where Jews are present. At a place where no Jews are available? Let us hear from the following: Rebbi Simon had fields at King’s Mountain. He asked Rebbi Joḥanan, who told him: Let them lie fallow, but do not lease them to a Gentile. He asked Rebbi Joshua ben Levi who permitted it to him. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi is of the opinion that a place where no Jews are available has the status of Syria. For Syria, we hear from the following: Rebbi Ḥaggai descended into Homs. The family Astor asked him: Since no Jews are available here, we lease to Gentiles; do we have to tithe for them? He sent and asked Rebbi Zeïra. Rebbi Zeïra asked Rebbi Immi, who told him that they did not have to tithe. From this you hear that the rules of leasing follow Rebbi Yose. Also from the following: Rebbi Ḥanina, the son of Rebbi Abbahu, said my father had a case; he sent and asked Rebbi Ḥiyya, Rebbi Yasa, and Rebbi Immi, and they taught him that the rules of leasing follow Rebbi Yose; hence, as far as tithing for them is concerned, they do not tithe for them.

“If an Israel received (as sharecropper) a field from another Israel on condition that the tithes go to a certain person, that clause is forbidden; on condition that I shall take them and deliver them to a certain person, that clause is permitted.” Is the second version not identical with the first? Rebbi Aḥa said, “if you agree” makes the difference. Rebbi Yose said, you say it is permitted if it follows the standard sharecropper’s contract. You say it is forbidden if it does not follow the standard sharecropper’s contract. It turns out that Rebbi Yose holds with Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Aḥa with Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina. As Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina said, a person gives his tithes for the benefit of goodwill. Rebbi Joḥanan said, a person may not give his tithes for the benefit of goodwill. What is the reason of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina? (Num. 5:10) “Everybody shall be the owner of his holy things.” What does Rebbi Joḥanan with this? He may give them to whomever he likes.

“If an Israel received (as sharecropper) a field from another Israel on condition that the tithes go to a certain person, that clause is forbidden; on condition that I shall take them and deliver them to a certain person, that clause is permitted.” Is the second version not identical with the first? Rebbi Aḥa said, “if you agree” makes the difference. Rebbi Yose said, you say it is permitted if it follows the standard sharecropper’s contract. You say it is forbidden if it does not follow the standard sharecropper’s contract. It turns out that Rebbi Yose holds with Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Aḥa with Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina. As Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina said, a person gives his tithes for the benefit of goodwill. Rebbi Joḥanan said, a person may not give his tithes for the benefit of goodwill. What is the reason of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina? (Num. 5:10) “Everybody shall be the owner of his holy things.” What does Rebbi Joḥanan with this? He may give them to whomever he likes.

“If an Israel received (as sharecropper) a field from another Israel on condition that the tithes go to a certain person, that clause is forbidden; on condition that I shall take them and deliver them to a certain person, that clause is permitted.” Is the second version not identical with the first? Rebbi Aḥa said, “if you agree” makes the difference. Rebbi Yose said, you say it is permitted if it follows the standard sharecropper’s contract. You say it is forbidden if it does not follow the standard sharecropper’s contract. It turns out that Rebbi Yose holds with Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Aḥa with Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina. As Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina said, a person gives his tithes for the benefit of goodwill. Rebbi Joḥanan said, a person may not give his tithes for the benefit of goodwill. What is the reason of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina? (Num. 5:10) “Everybody shall be the owner of his holy things.” What does Rebbi Joḥanan with this? He may give them to whomever he likes.

They asked before Rebbi Zeïra, in that situation, a Cohen to an Israel, what is the rule? At Rebbi Yose’s they said that he did not answer. Rebbi Ḥizqiah in the name of Rebbi Aḥa said, so he said to them: In the opinion of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina, why is a Cohen to an Israel forbidden, not because it looks badly? Also Rebbi Joḥanan holds that from an Israel to an Israel it is forbidden because it looks badly. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, there is desecration of sacrifices and you said because it looks badly? Because of the following, as it was stated: “Cohanim and Levites who help at the threshing floor have no right either to heave or to tithe, and if the farmer gave, it is desecrated, as it is said (Lev. 22:15): ‘They should not desecrate the sanctified things of the Children of Israel,’ but they desecrate them! In addition, they said that their heave is no heave, their tithes are no tithes, their dedications are no dedications, and about them the verse says (Micha 3:11): ‘Their heads judge for bribes and their priests come for a price.’ The Omnipresent brings over them three catastrophies; that is what is written (Micha 3:12): ‘Therefore, because of you Zion will be ploughed over as a field, etc.’”

HALAKHAH: It was stated: “If a Jew and a Gentile bought a field in Syria, it is as if ṭevel and tithed produce were mixed together, the words of Rebbi. Rebbi Simeon ben Gamliel says, the Jew’s part is obligated, the Gentile’s part is free.” Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: When do they disagree? If they split the field while the grain was standing. But if they split grain stacks, even Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel will agree with Rebbi that every single stalk belongs to the partnership. Rebbi Jonah said, Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: When do they disagree? If they split the field while the grain was standing. But if they split sheaves, even Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel will agree with Rebbi that every single stalk belongs to the partnership. According to Rebbi Jonah, what is the difference between stacks and sheaves? If he harvests a small amount and shares with his partner. Rebbi Hoshaia said, that is, if they bought with the idea that they would not split. But if they bought with the idea that they always would split, Rebbi will agree with Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel that his part already belonged to him from the first moment. Rebbi Yose said, the words of the rabbis disagree since Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan said that partners are the subject of the disagreement between Rebbi and Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel. Are brothers who split not like these partners?

Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina said, for the first basket he transgresses a commandment, for the second a commandment and a prohibition. For the first basket he transgresses a commandment since he gave both names simultaneously, and for the second a commandment and a prohibition since he gave both names simultaneously and he put the Second Tithe of the first basket before the First Tithe of the second basket.

Rebbi Abin and Rebbi Ḥanina both say that a split seah is between them. A quarter seah may prohibit three qab, and a quarter of three qab may prohibit a seah. A quarter seah may prohibit nine qab, and a quarter of nine qab may prohibit a seah. Three quarters of flax seed prohibit a seah. How is this? On a plot on which one sows one quarter of wheat, one sows three quarters of flax seed.

Why did they not object to him: If someone keeps single fresh stalks growing to produce seeds, must he not clear around them a bet rova‘ or fence them in by a fence of ten hand-breadths? For a row one is more lenient. Since they did not object to him, it follows that Rebbi Yose thinks that row and square are the same. For Rebbi Jonah and Rebbi Yose the Galilean said in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina: He who keeps a single fresh stalk growing to produce seeds must clear around it a bet rova‘ or fence it in by a fence of ten hand-breadths, even if it is the same kind. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya objected before Rebbi Zeïra, did we not state: “If coriander was sown for its seeds, its greens are exempt?” He answered him, coriander is a special case since both the plant and its seeds are eaten.

Not only a fence, but even if he puts up laths, if between one lath and the next there is less that three hand-breadths it is considered a fence. Even standing grain and straw? Or does it agree with what Rebbi Ḥanina said: Nothing forbidden may form a separation to save? They are of the opinion that what is forbidden does form a separation to forbid.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, only if he sowed near the middle vine. Rebbi Abin in the name of Samuel: Only if the middle vine is surrounded by vegetables. How is it computed? Seven rows by seven rows. Subtract from them four vines at the four corners; there are 45 vines remaining. That is what we stated: “He sanctifies 45 vines”.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, they taught about the worker.

Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: Under the grapes it is forbidden and sanctifies but not under the leaves. Rebbi Yose said, even under the leaves it is forbidden and sanctifies.

HALAKHAH: It was stated: “The only difference between a flower pot without a hole and one with a hole regards preparation for impurity.” That is for Rebbi Simeon, but for the rabbis there are others: A flower pot with a hole sanctifies in a vineyard, one without a hole does not. He who plucks from a flower pot with a hole is guilty, from one without a hole he is free from punishment. A flower pot with a hole cannot prepare plants, one without a hole prepares. Rebbi Yose referred to it as anonymous statement, Rebbi Ḥanina quoted it in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac: The Torah extended the purity of growing plants (Lev. 11:37): “If any of their cadavers falls on any sown seed apt to be sown, it is pure.”

From where that it is forbidden for any use? It is said here (Deut. 22:9) “lest you sanctify it” and it is said elsewhere (lest it become sanctified by it). Since “lest” there means it is forbidden for any use, “lest” here means it is forbidden for all use. Some want to say, it is said here “lest you sanctify it” and it is said at another place “there shall be no qadeš among the Israelites.” Since qdš there means forbidden for any use, so qdš here must mean forbidden for any use. Rebbi Huna said, his sex act is forbidden for all use. Some want to understand it from the following, as Rebbi Ḥanina said, “lest you sanctify it”, lest fire should be kindled.”

It is written (Deut. 22:9): “Do not sow kilaim in your vineyard.” This teaches us that one is not guilty unless he sows two kinds in the vineyard, the words of Rebbi Josia. Rebbi Jonathan said, even one kind. In the opinion of Rebbi Jonathan it is written (Lev. 19:19) “in your field do not sow kilaim”, why does it say “do not sow kilaim in your vineyard”? The colleagues say, to make it sinful even with one kind. In the opinion of Rebbi Josia, “in your field do not sow kilaim”; why does it say “do not sow kilaim in your vineyard”? The colleagues say, as a warning. If he was warned about “your field”, he is whipped, if he was warned about “your vineyard”, he is whipped. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said, to give another measure besides six hand-breadths; here it is four cubits. What are we talking about? If he made a fence on the inside, the vineyard is abolished. If he made a fence on the outside, that is the circumference. But we deal with a field that was a grain field and he cleared four cubits in its midst. This agrees with what Rebbi Ḥanina said, nothing forbidden may form a separation to save. They were of the opinion that what is forbidden does form a separation to prohibit. In the opinion of Rebbi Jonathan it is written (Lev. 19:19): “In your field do not sow kilaim”, why does it say: “Do not sow kilaim in your vineyard”? For that which Rebbi Hila said, if you would say [the Torah] did not say it, what would you say? Or following what Rebbi Zeïra said, “do not sow your vineyard kilaim,” creating your vineyard do not sow kilaim.

Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba said in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina, he who leads kilaim by voice will be whipped. We have stated so: “If he led it, if he made it draw, if he called it and it came, he is responsible to pay like a borrower.” But did not Samuel state: “If it was standing outside the Sabbath domain, he called it and it came after him, he is free.” There it comes of its own volition, here it is forced to walk But did we not state: “If he clapped before his [a slave’s] eye and blinded it, before his [a slave’s] ear and made it deaf, he [the slave] does not attain freedom.” Rebbi Eliezer ben Rebbi Yose said before Rebbi Yose, there is a difference because he [the slave] could have fled. Know that it is so because we have stated: “If he grabbed him he is guilty.”

“ ‘Field Stones’ is an animal.” Yassi from Arke: It is a mountain man and lives from its navel. If its umbilical cord is cut, it cannot live. Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: The reason of Rebbi Yose (Num. 19:16): “All that touches [a slain person] on the surface of the field”, when it grows on the field.

It is written (Gen. 47:30): “You shall carry me from Egypt and bury me in their burial place.” What would Jacob lose at any place he would be? Rebbi Eleazar gave an inner reason, Rebbi Ḥanina gave an inner reason, Rebbi Joshua ben Levi gave an inner reason. What is the inner reason? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, (Ps. 116:9) “I will walk before the Eternal in the Land of Life.” But the lands of life are only Tyre and its surroundings and Caesarea (maritima) and its surroundings; there is cheap (food), there is satiety. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Bar Qappara, the Land whose dead will live again in the days of the Messiah. What is the reason? (Is. 42:9) “He gives soul to the people on it.” That would mean that our teachers in the diaspora would lose out! Rebbi Simai said, the Holy One, praised be He, makes the earth erode before them and they roll like wine barrels. When they arrive at the Land of Israel their souls return to them. What is the reason? (Ez. 37:12) “I shall deposit you on the territory of Israel,” (v. 14) “give My spirit into you, and you will live.”

Rebbi Berekhiah asked Rebbi Ḥelbo. Rebbi Ḥelbo asked Rebbi Immi. Rebbi Immi asked Rebbi Eleazar. Rebbi Eleazar asked Rebbi Ḥanina, some say Rebbi Ḥanina asked Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Even those like Jeroboam ben Nabat and his kind? He said to him, (Deut. 29:22) “Sulphur and salt, conflagration throughout the country.” Rebbi Berekhiah said, one asked the other and we understand nothing from it. What does it mean? Since the Land of Israel was burned, judgment was executed on it. We have stated in the name of Rebbi Jehudah: Seven years was the Land of Israel burned; that is what is written (Dan. 9:27) “The Covenant overtook the public for one week.” What did the Samaritans in it do? Pieces, pieces and it was burned.

Rebbi Berekhiah asked Rebbi Ḥelbo. Rebbi Ḥelbo asked Rebbi Immi. Rebbi Immi asked Rebbi Eleazar. Rebbi Eleazar asked Rebbi Ḥanina, some say Rebbi Ḥanina asked Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Even those like Jeroboam ben Nabat and his kind? He said to him, (Deut. 29:22) “Sulphur and salt, conflagration throughout the country.” Rebbi Berekhiah said, one asked the other and we understand nothing from it. What does it mean? Since the Land of Israel was burned, judgment was executed on it. We have stated in the name of Rebbi Jehudah: Seven years was the Land of Israel burned; that is what is written (Dan. 9:27) “The Covenant overtook the public for one week.” What did the Samaritans in it do? Pieces, pieces and it was burned.

It is written (Jer. 20:6–7): “But you, Pashḥur, and all inhabitants of your house will go into captivity. You will come to Babylon, die there, and be buried there.” Rebbi Abba bar Zemina said, Rebbi Ḥelbo and Rebbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina. One of them said, if somebody dies there and is buried there, he has two [detriments] in hand. If he dies there and is buried here, he has one [detriment] in hand. The other one said, burial here atones for death there.

Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina: A human’s feet guarantee to put him where he is wanted. It is written (1K. 22:20) “Who will seduce Ahab that he should go and fall in Ramot Gilead?” Might he not die in his house rather than there? Eliḥoref and Aḥiah were two of Solomon’s secretaries. He [Solomon] saw the Angel of Death looking at them and grinding his teeth. He said a word and put them into space. He [the Angel of Death] went and took them from there, then he came laughing before him [Solomon]. He said to him, just before you were grinding your teeth and now you are laughing at us? He said to him, the Merciful told me to take Eliḥoref and Aḥiah from space and I was wondering who would put them there where I was sent to take them; He put it into your mind to do so that I could complete my mission. I went and dealt with them there. The two sons of Rebbi Reuben ben Strobilos were students of Rebbi. He [Rebbi] saw the Angel of Death looking at them and grinding his teeth and said, let us exile them to the South, maybe the exile atones. He [the angel of death] went and took them from there.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Ḥanina said, not until it comes down an entire side. Rebbi Yannai said, they said to Rebbi Ḥanina, get out and read! Did we not state, “if the two ends appear on the same side?” That means, only if it goes down and up. And did we not state, “Rebbi Jehudah says, only if there are three needle-stitches.” That means [the thread] goes down, up, and down. But so and so.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Ḥanina said, not until it comes down an entire side. Rebbi Yannai said, they said to Rebbi Ḥanina, get out and read! Did we not state, “if the two ends appear on the same side?” That means, only if it goes down and up. And did we not state, “Rebbi Jehudah says, only if there are three needle-stitches.” That means [the thread] goes down, up, and down. But so and so.

Regarding the prohibition of the first two terms, those above plough downwards and those below plough upwards. It seems reasonable that those above plough downwards but not that those below plough upwards. Let us hear from the following: “One removes a tree 25 cubits from a cistern.” We have stated on that: Both higher and lower. Or let us say both if the tree is higher and the cistern lower or if tree and cistern are on the same level. In this sense, we stated: “Whether the tree is higher and the cistern lower or the tree lower and the cistern higher”; is that reasonable? If the tree is higher and the cistern lower; but the tree lower and the cistern higher, do roots climb? Rebbi Ḥanina said not because of the roots [climbing], but they loosen the earth and damage the bottom of the cistern. A case came before Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun; he said that is a single opinion and we do not rely on it, for we have stated on this: “Rebbi Simeon says, just as they said higher so they said lower.”

“If one tree yields, etc.” Rebbi Vivian in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: Only he should not diminish from the computation of triads. Zeïra bar Ḥinena said, only he should not diminish from the computation of nonads.

“A field of reeds is judged like a field of grain.” Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: This was taught about dispersed ones.

Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia, Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina in the name of Rebbi Ḥama, father of Rebbi Hoshaia: He takes all accumulations with it. “Rebbi Simeon said, one may even remove a leaf from a bunch in the Sabbatical year.” The position of Rebbi Simeon is inverted: We have stated there (Mishnah 2:10): “One may tear off rice in the Sabbatical year; the words of Rebbi Simeon are that one may not trim.” And here, he says so? There is a difference here, he is like one who saves from a fire.

HALAKHAH: “When may one bring out,” etc. Is it permitted to assemble a dungheap at the door of one’s courtyard before the agricultural workers stop? Silanus asked Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba and he forbade it to him. Rebbi Ḥanina said, he permitted it, and they were gossipping about him that he was taking the tithe. He instructed himself to leave the Land, so that he could not take the tithe. Then should it be forbidden even after the agricultural workers did stop because of the bad impression, that they would not say, he brings it out to his irrigated field? The people of one’s town know whether he has an irrigated field or not. Rebbi Yose said, this means that they did not worry about a bad impression on passers-by.

Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba asked, are these standards like those standards? Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: These standards are like those standards. Here you say “the measure of a stone wall is ten hand-breadths, less than that is a quarry;” and there you say so? Where do we stand? If there were two rows of stones, one should state “eight hand-breadths”; if there were three one should state “twelve hand-breadths!” Rebbi Yose said, deduct half a hand-breadth for hewing top and bottom and so for the next row, one finds three rows of ten hand-breadths. Less than that is neither a stone wall nor a quarry.

If somebody improved [his field] and died, may his son sow? Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina: If somebody improved [his field] and died, his son may sow; if he improved [his field] and sold it, it is forbidden to be sown. If [the buyer] transgressed and sowed, it is permitted since they did decide only on a fence that one may live with.

A similar case: When does a man acquire Sabbatical fruit? Rebbi Jeremiah wanted to say, when he puts them in his vessels. Rebbi Yose wanted to say, even if he puts them into his vessels he did not acquire them; he thinks that they are his but they are not his. Compare the following: Rebbi Tarphon went to eat single figs from somebody’s property without reciprocity, following the House of Shammai. The watchmen saw him and started whipping him. When he saw himself in danger, he said to them, by your lives, tell in Tarphon’s house to have his burial shrouds ready. When they heard this, they prostrated themselves before him and said, Rebbi, forgive us. He said to them, so and so should come upon me if I did not forgive you beforehand every stick that was coming down on me. In these two instances did Rebbi Tarphon follow the House of Shammai and endangered himself, in the case here and in the recitation of Shema'. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina ben Gamliel: All his life did Rebbi Tarphon repent about this happening and said, woe to me that I used the Crown of the Torah.

86 Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina asked: May one make a plaster (emollient) of unripe figs? After he can eat his bread with them in the field it will be forbidden. Or since he may bring them into his house it might be permitted.

Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina kissed the cliffs of Acco and said, up to here is the Land of Israel. Rebbi Zeїra crossed the Jordan in his clothing. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba rolled himself in the step of Tiberias. The elder Rebbi Ḥiyya weighed rocks. Rebbi Ḥananiah weighed earth lumps to fulfill what was said (Ps. 102:19): “For Your servants desired its stones and they loved its dust.”

Rebbi Jonah said in the name of Rebbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina: He who dies in the seven years of Gog has no part in the Future World. Its sign is, he who ate at the preliminary wedding feast shall eat at the wedding feast. Rebbi Yose heard this and said, is that true? So far there is repentance for the Future World! Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ashi: In the future, fellows will exert themselves from synagogues to houses of study. What is the reason? (Ps. 84:8) “They will go from strength to strength, he will see the Power, God, in Zion,” until he will see the Power, God, in Zion.

Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina asked: Has this been said for all of this chapter or only for this Mishnah? The rabbis of Caesarea in the name of Rebbi Judah bar Titus: From the fact that we state only this Mishnah in Giṭṭin it follows that it was said only for this Mishnah.

If it is so, they should have been freed once they were exiled. It is written (Neh. 8:17): “All the congregation coming from captivity made Sukkot and sat in tabernacles … something nobody had done since the days of Joshua bin Nun.” Why Joshua? Rebbi Hillel, the son of Samuel ben Naḥmani: The verse damaged the reputation of the just person in his grave for the reputation of the just person in his time; it compares their coming in the days of Ezra to the coming in the days of Joshua. As at the coming in the days of Joshua they had been free and became obligated, also at the coming in the days of Ezra they had been free and became obligated. How did they become obligated? Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, they became obligated by the words of the Torah; that is what is written (Deut. 30:5): “The Eternal, your God, will bring you to the Land that your fathers had inherited and you will inherit it.” Just as the inheritance of your fathers was by the words of the Torah, so your inheritance is by the words of the Torah. “He will be good to you and give increase to you more than to your forefathers.” Your fathers had been free and became obligated, also you had been free and became obligated. On your fathers was no yoke of government, but you even though there is on you the yoke of government. Your fathers did become obligated only after 14 years, seven they conquered and seven they distributed, but you became obligated immediately when you entered. Your fathers did become obligated only after they had acquired all, you become obligated for every single piece at the moment you acquire it.

How does Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina explain “In view of all this”? Since they accepted [the obligations] with good grace, the verse credits it to them as if they had accepted it voluntarily. How does Rebbi Eleazar explain “more than your forefathers?” He explains it for the future since Rebbi Ḥelbo, Simeon bar Abba said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Your forefathers inherited the land of seven peoples, but you will in the future inherit the land of ten peoples. The three others are (Gen. 15:19) “the Qenites, the Qenizites and the Qadmonites.” Rebbi Jehudah said, [these are] Arabia, Salmaia and Nabataea. Rebbi Simeon says, Asia, Spain, and Damascus. Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob says, Asia, Cartagena, and Thrace. Rebbi says, Edom, Moab, and the best of Ammon. “More than your forefathers”: Your forefathers, even though they were redeemed, were later subjugated again. But you when you are redeemed will not be subjugated again. What is the reason? (Jer. 30:6) “Inquire and see whether a male gives birth.” Just as a male cannot give birth so you, after you are redeemed, will not be subjugated again.

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked Rebbi Ḥaninah: What is the status of one who buys in Ammon and Moab? He said to him, I heard from the great Rebbi Ḥiyya only “outside the crossroads of Ascalon.” That is difficult, he asked him this and he answered that? But since Rebbi Ḥaninah never said anything he had not heard and because he did not want to send him away emptyhanded, he [R. Simeon] asked him one topic and he [R. Ḥanina] answered another.

MISHNAH: Onions growing after it rained on them, if the leaves are black they are forbidden, becoming green they are permitted. Rebbi Ḥanina ben Antigonos says, if they cannot be drawn out by their leaves they are forbidden; in the same case in the year after the Sabbatical they are permitted.

Ulla bar Ismael in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: Rebbi and Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah descended into Acco and were received by Rebbi Mana. Rebbi said to them, make us a dish of vegetables; he made him red meat. The next day, he said again make us a dish of vegetables; he made him chicken. Rebbi said, this one is recognizable as coming from the door of Samaël. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah said to him, he is not even coming from the door of Samaël. Why did he do this? Because he is a student from the students of Rebbi Jehudah, and Rebbi Jehudah said vegetables are forbidden in the border settlements of the Land of Israel. When he met him, he told him the facts. He said to him, you should have acted following us.

There, we have stated: “From vegetables”, he is permitted field vegetables because these have an additional name. We have stated on that: “He who makes a vow to abstain from vegetables in the Sabbatical is also forbidden field vegetables.” Rebbi Crispus stated the reason in the name of Rebbi Ḥananiah ben Gamliel: That means, as long as Rebbi did not permit to import vegetables into the Land. But since Rebbi permitted to import vegetables into the Land there is no difference between the Sabbatical and the remaining years of the Sabbatical cycle. Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina says, endives are important enough to become impure as food in the Seventh year. That means, as long as Rebbi did not permit. But since he permitted, there is no difference between the Sabbatical and the remaining years of the Sabbatical cycle.

The Sepphoreans asked Rebbi Immi: May one keep moist with thistles? He said to them, you say in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina, even leaves of artichokes are permitted. Rebbi Yoshaia said, this is to act on, you may rely on me. Rebbi Yoshaia said, the only food exclusively for animals is green grass; if it was bought to moisturize one may use it to keep moist.

Did not Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina say: Endives are important enough in the Sabbatical to become susceptible to impurity of food? The reason was spelled out: This is, before Rebbi permitted the importation of vegetables from outside the Land into the Land. But after Rebbi permitted the importation of vegetables from outside the Land into the Land, there is no difference between the Sabbatical and the other years of the sabbatical cycle. Then they should not be important unless somebody thinks about them! Do we find anything on which from the start the sanctity of the Sabbatical (falls) [does not fall] but in the end the sanctity of the Sabbatical (does not fall) [may fall] on them? They objected: “The sanctity of the Sabbatical does not fall on calamint, hyssop, and thyme if one collected them as wood. If he considered them as food, the sanctity of the Sabbatical falls on them.” Rebbi Ḥananiah said, if he collected them first as food, the sanctity of the Sabbatical falls on them immediately.

The leaves removed from vegetables one puts on the roof and they dry up by themselves. Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Yoẓadaq: Wine until Passover, oil until Pentecost, dried figs until Purim. Rebbi Bibi in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: Dates until Ḥanukkah.

HALAKHAH: What is the difference between him who says “collect for me” and him who says “for its value collect for me”? Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina, this is one of the practices of obfuscation. There, we have stated: “One should not say to another person, bring these fruits to Jerusalem to distribute, but he should say: bring them that we should eat and drink them there.” What is the difference between him who says “to distribute” and him who says “bring them that we should eat and drink them in Jerusalem?” Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Jonathan, this is one of the practices of obfuscation. There, we have stated: “A person may borrow from another pitchers of wine or oil but he should not say: lend me.” What is the difference between him who says “let me borrow” and him who says “lend me”? Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Jonathan, this is one of the practices of obfuscation.

What is “river celery”? Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina said, πετροσέλινον “parsley”.

Rebbi Abba Bar Zemina in the name of Rebbi Isaac: Because of these two things did R. Joḥanan descend from Sepphoris to Tiberias. He said, you brought this old judge who forbids what I permit and permits what I forbid! Rebbi Abba said, there came a case before Rebbi Assi and he wanted to act following Rebbi Joḥanan but when he heard that Rav and Rebbi Ḥanina disagreed he refrained. Because they disagree: May the remainders of a wick, a fire, or oil that burned out on the Sabbath be lit on the holiday? Rav and Rebbi Ḥanina both say it is forbidden, but Rebbi Joḥanan says, it is permitted. Rebbi Judan said before Rebbi Mana, is it the reverse regarding an egg? He said to him, since the rabbis compare it, it means that the cases are identical.

Rebbi Abba Bar Zemina in the name of Rebbi Isaac: Because of these two things did R. Joḥanan descend from Sepphoris to Tiberias. He said, you brought this old judge who forbids what I permit and permits what I forbid! Rebbi Abba said, there came a case before Rebbi Assi and he wanted to act following Rebbi Joḥanan but when he heard that Rav and Rebbi Ḥanina disagreed he refrained. Because they disagree: May the remainders of a wick, a fire, or oil that burned out on the Sabbath be lit on the holiday? Rav and Rebbi Ḥanina both say it is forbidden, but Rebbi Joḥanan says, it is permitted. Rebbi Judan said before Rebbi Mana, is it the reverse regarding an egg? He said to him, since the rabbis compare it, it means that the cases are identical.

They said in the name of four elders: If somebody’s eruv was eaten on the first [day] he is like the people of his town on the second [day]. Rav Huna in the name of Rav: Practice follows the four elders. Rav Ḥisda asked: The arguments of Rav seem to be inverted. There, he makes it two sanctities, but here he makes it one sanctity. Because they disagree: May the remainders of a wick, a fire, or oil that burned out on the Sabbath be lit on the holiday? Rav and Rebbi Ḥanina both say it is forbidden, but Rebbi Joḥanan says it is permitted. Rebbi Mana said before Rebbi Judan, are the rules different for a wick and an egg? He said to him, since the rabbis compare it, it means that the cases are identical.

“Since nothing similar is growing wild on the fields.” And since nothing similar is growing wild on the fields should they be forbidden? Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba in the name of Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina said, because they usually grow layers. And because they usually grow layers should they be forbidden? Rebbi Samuel bar Rebbi Isaac said, for all other vegetables one can recognize whether they are new or old but here one should not go and bring from what is forbidden and say I brought from the layers.

Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba in the name of Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina: They were of the opinion that mountain wildlife does not develop in the valley, nor does valley wildlife develop on the mountains. Diocletian oppressed the people of Paneias; they told him: we are leaving. A Sophist told him, they will not go, and if they go they will return. If you want to check, bring deer and send them to a distant land; in the end they will return to their places. He did so, brought deer, covered their antlers with silver, and sent them to Africa. At the end of thirteen years they returned to their places.

Rebbi Ḥanina said, when [produce] on the field starts to rot, that in the house is permitted. Rebbi Hoshaia stated: Even after three years it is forbidden until it starts to rot.

HALAKHAH: There, we stated: “One does not give heave from finished for unfinished,” and here you say so? Rebbi Illa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Because of robbing the tribe. What means, because of robbing the tribe? Rebbi Ḥanania said, because of the exertion. Think about it, if there was a grain of rice? People willingly will pound something. Think about it, if it were in ears? So far goes our question. Rebbi Ḥanina, Rebbi Mana did not say so but he wanted to give heave proportional to the oil and gave only proportional to olives. Think about it, if he gave proportional to the oil? Now he did so, another time he will not do so. In addition, his neighbor will see him and say, this one wants to give a lot but I do not want to give a lot.

Rebbi Ḥananiah, Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: The argument of the House of Shammai is that he is like one who says: This shall be heave for itself and what is below it. Rebbi Ḥananiah wanted to say, of its own kind. Rebbi Zeïra said to him, do not accept that. When he said “this shall be”, what is in his hand was freed and the rest becomes profane, may profane free ṭevel? Rebbi Ḥananiah the son of Rebbi Hillel said, it is simultaneous. When he said “this shall be”, what is in his hand was freed together with the rest. Rebbi Ḥanina said, that is convincing for the Great Heave where one must give heave from what is earmarked. But heave of the tithe must be defined by measure, weight, or count.

Heave of the tithe is taken from pure produce for pure, from impure for impure, from pure for impure, but not from impure for pure. Rebbi Neḥemiah says, just as it may not be taken from impure for pure, so it may not be taken from impure for impure. Rebbi Neḥemiah agrees in the case of demay. That is, if he has from the same kind. If he does not have anything from the same kind, let us hear from the following: Rebbi Ḥanina Eyntanaya went with Rebbi Zeïra to Ḥammat Gader. He bought him a roll and wanted to put it in order from one day to the next. He said to him: We do not have to worry about a single opinion! Can you say that he had from the same kind?

There, we have stated: “If somebody gives heave from a wine cistern and says: ‘This should be heave on condition that it be removed whole’, it means whole from breakage and whole from spillage but not from impurity. Rebbi Simeon says, also from impurity.” Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, this Mishnah speaks of the impurity of ṭevul yom. Rebbi Ila said, since ṭevulê yom may be present around wine presses. Rebbi Yose said, a ṭevul yom has no touch for ṭevel.

“ They came back to say, a dish which will improve the more it shrinks is forbidden, deteriorate the more it shrinks is permitted. What is a dish better the more it shrinks? Cabbage, peas, and chopped meat.” Rebbi Tanḥum bar Illa said, they also considered heads of turnips and leeks as dishes better the more they shrink. What about eggs? Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Ismael: Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Ḥanina in the name of Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose: My father came home and found eggs and forbade them, hot water and permitted it. Rebbi Samuel bar Natan in the name of Rebbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina: I went with my father to Ḥammat Gader where they brought before us eggs small like ḥizrar apples and they tasted delicious like sweet bread.

“ They came back to say, a dish which will improve the more it shrinks is forbidden, deteriorate the more it shrinks is permitted. What is a dish better the more it shrinks? Cabbage, peas, and chopped meat.” Rebbi Tanḥum bar Illa said, they also considered heads of turnips and leeks as dishes better the more they shrink. What about eggs? Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Ismael: Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Ḥanina in the name of Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose: My father came home and found eggs and forbade them, hot water and permitted it. Rebbi Samuel bar Natan in the name of Rebbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina: I went with my father to Ḥammat Gader where they brought before us eggs small like ḥizrar apples and they tasted delicious like sweet bread.

Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba in the name of Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina: Since he transgresses a prohibition it follows that what he did is valid. Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba said in the name of Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina: He is whipped. Rebbi Zeïra said, they objected before Rebbi Joḥanan and he remained silent: If he transgresses, is he whipped or not? Rebbi Aḥa bar Jacob in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He is not whipped. How does Rebbi Joḥanan explain (Ex. 22:28): “Your fullness you should not make follow your dema‘”. He explains it for removal.

Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba in the name of Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina: Since he transgresses a prohibition it follows that what he did is valid. Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba said in the name of Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina: He is whipped. Rebbi Zeïra said, they objected before Rebbi Joḥanan and he remained silent: If he transgresses, is he whipped or not? Rebbi Aḥa bar Jacob in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He is not whipped. How does Rebbi Joḥanan explain (Ex. 22:28): “Your fullness you should not make follow your dema‘”. He explains it for removal.

Rebbi Ḥanina bar Issi said, Bar Qappara did not state so, but “if it turned out to between one in fifty and one in sixty, this is heave and he does not have to give more.”

Here you say, his heave is heave, but there you say, his heave is not heave! Rebbi Ḥanina ben Rebbi Hillel said, in one case he intended to diminish, in the other to add.

We understand that when pure it must be left to rot, but when impure to rot? In the opinion of Ḥizqiah, this is correct. In the opinion of Rebbi Joḥanan, should it not be burned? Rebbi Joḥanan is of the opinion of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina, maybe it is possible to find for them something to lift; but only if it is not usually mixed [with other food]. But if it usually is mixed, maybe something untoward will happen.

Did we not want to say that dedicated things have only their time and place? Rebbi Ḥanina said, explain it if that place was destroyed and he cannot even sell it for the price of wood.

Rebbi Abba bar Mamai asked: Does this not contradict Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina? As Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina said, a carcass can become insignificant in slaughtered [meat]; it becomes insignificant for touch, but for motion it cannot become insignificant for slaughtered [meat] can never become carcass [meat]. Rebbi Yose said, there it is impossible for slaughtered [meat] to become carcass [meat], but here profane produce may become heave. Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, Rebbi Simon raised the question and Rebbi Abba bar Mamai explained it.

Rebbi Abba bar Mamai asked: Does this not contradict Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina? As Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina said, a carcass can become insignificant in slaughtered [meat]; it becomes insignificant for touch, but for motion it cannot become insignificant for slaughtered [meat] can never become carcass [meat]. Rebbi Yose said, there it is impossible for slaughtered [meat] to become carcass [meat], but here profane produce may become heave. Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, Rebbi Simon raised the question and Rebbi Abba bar Mamai explained it.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Yudan bar Pazi and Rebbi Ayvo bar Naggari were sitting and saying: We did state “after they conceded”; who conceded to whom? The House of Shammai to the House of Hillel or the House of Hillel to the House of Shammai? They said, let us go out and study. The went out and heard Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Jehudah bar Ḥanina: We never find the House of Shammai conceding to the House of Hillel except in this matter. Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Abbai understood it from the following: “If someone pours from vessel to vessel and a ṭevul yom touches it, it should be lifted by 101.” If you say that the House of Hillel conceded to the House of Shammai that it cannot be lifted, who is the Tanna here, neither the House of Shammai nor the House of Hillel! Rebbi Ḥanina the son of Rebbi Hillel said, we might say that the House of Hillel stated that before they conceded. Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah said so: “After they conceded, Rebbi Eliezer said it should be lifted and burned”, and is Rebbi Eliezer not a follower of Shammai? Rebbi Ḥinena said, the Mishnah said so, after they conceded one to another, the House of Shammai recused themselves and the others teach us. Rebbi Abin says, there is another answer, following what Rebbi Hoshaia stated: Since pure [heave], which for outsiders is forbidden as deadly sin, can be lifted, certainly also impure [heave] which is [prohibited] as positive commandment for Cohanim.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Yudan bar Pazi and Rebbi Ayvo bar Naggari were sitting and saying: We did state “after they conceded”; who conceded to whom? The House of Shammai to the House of Hillel or the House of Hillel to the House of Shammai? They said, let us go out and study. The went out and heard Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Jehudah bar Ḥanina: We never find the House of Shammai conceding to the House of Hillel except in this matter. Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Abbai understood it from the following: “If someone pours from vessel to vessel and a ṭevul yom touches it, it should be lifted by 101.” If you say that the House of Hillel conceded to the House of Shammai that it cannot be lifted, who is the Tanna here, neither the House of Shammai nor the House of Hillel! Rebbi Ḥanina the son of Rebbi Hillel said, we might say that the House of Hillel stated that before they conceded. Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah said so: “After they conceded, Rebbi Eliezer said it should be lifted and burned”, and is Rebbi Eliezer not a follower of Shammai? Rebbi Ḥinena said, the Mishnah said so, after they conceded one to another, the House of Shammai recused themselves and the others teach us. Rebbi Abin says, there is another answer, following what Rebbi Hoshaia stated: Since pure [heave], which for outsiders is forbidden as deadly sin, can be lifted, certainly also impure [heave] which is [prohibited] as positive commandment for Cohanim.

Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, only if it fell into five places, but if it fell into one place, even Rebbi Eliezer agrees. Rebbi Joḥanan said, even if all fell into one place, there is disagreement. Ḥilfai said on that of Rebbi Eliezer, the lower profane produce becomes inert. But Rebbi Eleazar also said, the lower profane produce becomes inert. What is the difference between Rebbi Eliezer and the rabbis? Is one more restrictive with a lifted seah out of 100 or is one more lenient, following what Rebbi Joḥanan said, if a seah of heave fell into 100 of profane produce, anything will make it insignificant?

How is this? Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: The replacements of heave are like heave in every respect except that what grows from them is profane. The growth from heave is like profane in every respect except that it is forbidden for outsiders. Rebbi Yose said, we have stated all three: The replacements of heave are like heave in every respect as we have stated, “he does not pay in heave but in totally profane food which is turned into heave.” Except that what grows from them is profane as we have stated, “the growth from heave,” which implies that what grows from replacement is profane. The growth from heave is like profane in all respects, as we have stated, “ it is subject to gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and peah; Israel poor and Cohanim poor collect it,” except that it is forbidden to outsiders as we have stated, “Israel poor sell theirs to Cohanim for the price of heave but the money is theirs.”

HALAKHAH: Now Rebbi Meïr says, they pay, and the Sages say, they pay, what is between them? Rebbi Joḥanan said, the meal itself is between them. Rebbi Meïr said, the meal is the resposibility of the employer, but the rabbis say, the meal is the resposibility of the workers. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, the exertion is between them. Rebbi Meïr said, the exertion is the resposibility of the employer, but the rabbis say, the exertion is the resposibility of the workers. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: To what can this be compared, to one who sells something to another person, but it turns out that it was not his [to sell]. Does he not have to replace his buy? If you hold with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, this is fine. But if you hold with Rebbi Joḥanan, who said, the meal itself is between them, and you say so? He said following Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: The value of the meal is between them. If he promised them to feed them profane honey-cakes but he fed them heave honey-cakes. Did they not eat already? This follows him who says, a person’s soul is afraid of ṭevel.

What is the reason of Rebbi Meïr? (Lev. 21:9) “If she desecrates her father’s house by whoring,” one who may not return to her father’s house; this excludes one who may return to her father’s house. If she married acceptably but committed adultery, may she return to her father’s house? How is this? “If she desecrates by whoring;” the one whose desecration is by whoring, not the one whose desecration is by marriage. What is the reason of the rabbis? (Lev. 21:9) “A Cohen man’s daughter,” under all circumstances. Then also if her desecration is by her son? Rebbi Ḥinena par Papa stated before Rebbi Zeïra following Rebbi Ismael: (Lev. 21:9) “She desecrates her father.” One whose desecration is caused by herself, not one whose desecration is because of her father. Rebbi Ḥanina said, I learn from the words of Rebbi Ismael, even if her desecration is by her son.

Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba: Only if he sowed the [contents of the] second [box] before he harvested from the first. If he sowed the [contents of the] second [box] before he harvested from the first then what is cut and what is standing does not all become subject to proof. Rebbi Ḥanina Eyntanaya in the name of Rebbi Yannai: An onion of heave that was uprooted and replanted becomes permitted as soon as the new growth is more [than what was planted]. Rebbi Zeïra objected: Did we not state: “If it is a kind whose seeds disappear, all is permitted, if they do not disappear, it is forbidden.” If it is a kind whose seeds disappear, [it is permitted] the moment the new growth is more [than the original amount]. Similarly, if they do not disappear, [it is forbidden] even if the new growth is more! Rebbi Zeïra follows his own opinion, as Rebbi Zeira said in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: An onion from kilaim in a vineyard that he removed from the soil and planted anew is forbidden even if it increases manifold, since growth of what is forbidden can never justify forbidden produce.

Rebbi Yose said, this means that if he was standing sacrificing on the altar when it became known that he was the son of a divorcee or of a woman who had performed ḥaliẓah, his work remains valid until he is disqualified by a court. That [also] means that if it was doubtful whether he was impure or had a bodily defect, his work is valid if you can compare him to the son of a divorcee [or] the son of a woman who had given ḥaliẓah. But if you have to compare him to a person with a bodily defect, his work is invalid. But is the case of the miqweh not that of a doubt? Rebbi Ḥanina said, this means that any blemish on the family needs a court [judgment].

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: Wine left uncovered must be poured out, even if it is heave. A dish cooked with water that was left uncovered must be thrown out, even if it is heave and certainly if it is profane. Rebbi Yose said, our Mishnah says so: “Heave wine that was left uncovered should be poured out, and certainly profane wine.” The colleagues in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: It is forbidden to keep wine that was left uncovered; if it was kept and it turned into vinegar by itself it is forbidden. It is forbidden to keep figs and grapes that were pecked at; if they were kept and dried up by themselves they are permitted.

Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Ammi, Rebbi Eleazar: If he was entering and leaving it is permitted. The barrel of Bar Neṭoza became uncovered. He went and asked Rebbi Abba bar Mamai, who told him, it is permitted. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Ammi, Rebbi Eleazar: If he was sleeping it is permitted. Rebbi Ḥanina and Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, one said, if he was sleeping it is permitted; the other said, it is forbidden. We do not know who said what. It is reasonable [to infer that] Rebbi Ḥanina said, if he was sleeping it is permitted, since Rebbi Eleazar everywhere relies on Rebbi Ḥanina.

Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Ammi, Rebbi Eleazar: If he was entering and leaving it is permitted. The barrel of Bar Neṭoza became uncovered. He went and asked Rebbi Abba bar Mamai, who told him, it is permitted. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Ammi, Rebbi Eleazar: If he was sleeping it is permitted. Rebbi Ḥanina and Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, one said, if he was sleeping it is permitted; the other said, it is forbidden. We do not know who said what. It is reasonable [to infer that] Rebbi Ḥanina said, if he was sleeping it is permitted, since Rebbi Eleazar everywhere relies on Rebbi Ḥanina.

Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Ammi, Rebbi Eleazar: If he was entering and leaving it is permitted. The barrel of Bar Neṭoza became uncovered. He went and asked Rebbi Abba bar Mamai, who told him, it is permitted. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Ammi, Rebbi Eleazar: If he was sleeping it is permitted. Rebbi Ḥanina and Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, one said, if he was sleeping it is permitted; the other said, it is forbidden. We do not know who said what. It is reasonable [to infer that] Rebbi Ḥanina said, if he was sleeping it is permitted, since Rebbi Eleazar everywhere relies on Rebbi Ḥanina.

It happened that a butcher in Sepphoris sold to Jews carcasses and torn meats. Once he drank wine Friday night, went to the roof, fell down, and died. The dogs were licking his blood. People came and asked Rebbi Ḥanina, should we lift him from before them? He said to them, it is written (Ex. 22:30): “Torn meat on the fields you shall not eat, you must throw it to the dogs!” This one robbed the dogs and fed it to Jews. He said to them, let them, they are eating from their own!

Everybody agrees that water which was heated is forbidden. What is the difference between bread and water? Here the fire rules, there the fire does not rule. There, a vessel separates, here no vessel separates. Samuel said, what can this evil one do to me? I only drink hot [water]. His word says, cold water that was heated is permitted. Rebbi Ḥanina said, this evil one has a delicate taste; he will not drink hot water that cooled. His word says, hot water that cooled is permitted. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Both are forbidden. A baraita supports Rebbi Joḥanan: “Hot water is permitted as long as it is steaming. But water left uncovered is forbidden even after it was heated. Pickling, preserving, and lupine water is permitted. Water in which he soaked[food for] pickling or preserving, or lupines, is forbidden. If he soaked wild grapes for a sick person, it is forbidden.”

What is the measure of a hole? Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina showed it thus: he said, the tip of my small finger. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, so that the tip of the small finger of a newborn cannot enter it. Even if [the hole] were smaller, it [the snake] could enter it but since it does not know how to leave again, it does not enter. A woven basket even if very tight is forbidden for it can enter at one place and leave at another. A knapsack is forbidden even if it hangs very high since it will let itself down.”

What is “close by”? Rebbi Samuel said, from the handles of an amphora to its mouth. Would it not be seen? Rebbi Ḥanina said, it is a small kind called šefifōn and looks like a hair.

Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina: With a vessel which inside is pure but impure outside one does not defile a small amount even to save a large amount. But did we not state: “Let it descend and become impure; he should not make it impure with his hands?” Rebbi Samuel bar Berekhiah said, explain for two vessels, one pure inside and impure outside, the other impure inside and pure outside. But that Mishnah speaks of one impure vessel! Rebbi Mana said, explain it if the vat is pure; the Mishnah deals with an impure vat. Did we not state: “Let it descend and be absorbed [into the ground]; he should not cause it to be absorbed by his hands’ [action].” Explain it if it rolled onto to a bet happĕrās.

Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: Garlic up to the size of a barley corn is a plant whose seeds disappear. Larger than that, it is a plant whose seeds do not disappear. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: Garlic is like barley in every respect.

Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: Garlic up to the size of a barley corn is a plant whose seeds disappear. Larger than that, it is a plant whose seeds do not disappear. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: Garlic is like barley in every respect.

“If a mashed apple is added to dough which soured, [the dough] is forbidden” It was stated: Rebbi Yose permits it. Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: They disagree when it becomes sour from the juice [of the apple]. But if it becomes sour from its solid substance it is permitted. Just as Rebbi Yose says there, its souring is not clearly souring, so he says here, its cooking is not clearly cooking.

Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina: A quarter [log] of fish sauce in two seah of fish sauce. But the sauce of an impure fish never can save! Rebbi Abbahu said, I computed that close to 200. Rebbi Ila in the name of Rebbi Simeon bar Ḥiyya, a quarter [log] of fish sauce in two seah of fish and fish sauce. A case came before Rebbi Joshia and he instructed accordingly.

Rebbi Ḥanina Tortayya in the name of Rebbi Hoshaiah: Bulb vegetables with bulb vegetables, a kind with itself, Rebbi Aqiba permits but the Sages forbid. Rebbi Assi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: The Sages agree with Rebbi Aqiba that meat with meat is permitted. Rebbi Zeїra said to Rebbi Assi: If that had not been said, we would not know that it is so, but maybe it was said as follows: Rebbi Aqiba agrees with the Sages that meat with meat is forbidden. Rebbi Abbahu came in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Rebbi Aqiba agrees with the Sages that meat with meat is forbidden. Rebbi Ḥinena understood it from the next Mishnah: “Rebbi Aqiba says, all those which are cooked together are permitted except with meat.” Therefore, “meat with meat is forbidden.” Maybe it was formulated as: The Sages agree with Rebbi Aqiba that meat with meat is forbidden. Rebbi Ḥinena: Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, the Sages agree with Rebbi Aqiba that meat with meat is forbidden.

Rebbi Zeїra, Rebbi Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan; Ada bar Gershon, Rebbi Birai, Rebbi Levi bar Plautus, an elder in the name of Rebbi: 61 are forbidden, 62 are permitted. Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: Our colleague Ada testified before us: 60. He said, if somebody brings before me more than 60, I shall declare it kosher. They said to Simeon bar Abba, you say this, but the others say otherwise! He said to them, I [said] what I heard, they what they heard. Simeon bar Abba said before Rebbi Ḥanina in the name of the elder Rebbi Ḥiyya: Up to thirty. He said, an exaggeration. Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: A case came before Rabban Gamliel ben Rabbi. He said, my father did not agree to 47, I agree to 45. Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: A case came before Rebbi; he asked: Are there 50?

Rebbi Zeїra, Rebbi Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan; Ada bar Gershon, Rebbi Birai, Rebbi Levi bar Plautus, an elder in the name of Rebbi: 61 are forbidden, 62 are permitted. Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: Our colleague Ada testified before us: 60. He said, if somebody brings before me more than 60, I shall declare it kosher. They said to Simeon bar Abba, you say this, but the others say otherwise! He said to them, I [said] what I heard, they what they heard. Simeon bar Abba said before Rebbi Ḥanina in the name of the elder Rebbi Ḥiyya: Up to thirty. He said, an exaggeration. Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: A case came before Rabban Gamliel ben Rabbi. He said, my father did not agree to 47, I agree to 45. Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: A case came before Rebbi; he asked: Are there 50?

Rebbi Zeїra, Rebbi Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan; Ada bar Gershon, Rebbi Birai, Rebbi Levi bar Plautus, an elder in the name of Rebbi: 61 are forbidden, 62 are permitted. Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: Our colleague Ada testified before us: 60. He said, if somebody brings before me more than 60, I shall declare it kosher. They said to Simeon bar Abba, you say this, but the others say otherwise! He said to them, I [said] what I heard, they what they heard. Simeon bar Abba said before Rebbi Ḥanina in the name of the elder Rebbi Ḥiyya: Up to thirty. He said, an exaggeration. Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: A case came before Rabban Gamliel ben Rabbi. He said, my father did not agree to 47, I agree to 45. Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: A case came before Rebbi; he asked: Are there 50?