bunch

And ye shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the blood that is in the bason, and strike the lintel and the two side posts with the blood that is in the bason; and none of you shall go out at the door of his house until the morning.

And when Philip had finished this announcement, he says to them, Loose Bartholomew; and having gone up, they loosed him. And after loosing him, Philip says to him: Bartholomew, my brother in the Lord, you know that the Lord has sent you with me to this city, and you have shared with me in all the dangers with our sister Mariamme; but I know that the going forth from your body has been appointed in Lycaonia, and it has been decreed to Mariamme to go forth from the body in the river Jordan. Now therefore I command you, that when I have gone forth from my body, you shall build a church in this place; and let the leopard and the kid of the goats come into the church, for a sign to those that believe; and let Nicanora provide for them until they shall go forth from the body; and when they shall have gone forth, bury them by the gate of the church. And lay your peace upon the house of Stachys, as Christ laid His peace on this city. And let all the virgins who believe stand in that house each day, watching over the sick, walking two and two; but let them have no communication with young men, that Satan may not tempt them: for he is a creeping serpent, and he caused Adam by means of Eve to slip into death. Let it not be so again in this time as in the case of Eve. But do you, O Bartholomew, look to them well: and you shall give these injunctions to Stachys, and appoint him bishop. Do not entrust the place of the bishopric to a young man, that the Gospel of Christ may not be brought to shame; and let every one that teaches have his works equal to his words. But I am going to the Lord, and take my body and prepare it for burial with Syriac sheets of paper; and do not put round me flaxen cloth, because the body of my Lord was wrapped in linen. And having prepared my body for burial in the sheets of paper, bind it tight with papyrus reeds, and bury it in the church; and pray for me forty days, in order that the Lord may forgive me the transgression wherein I transgressed, in requiting those who did evil to me. See, O Bartholomew, where my blood shall drop upon the earth, a plant shall spring up from my blood, and shall become a vine, and shall produce fruit of a bunch of grapes; and having taken the cluster, press it into the cup; and having partaken of it on the third day, send up on high the Amen, in order that the offering may be complete.

And they were standing under a tree of (the Garden of) Eden, and the fruit of this tree was like the appearance of a bunch of grapes of the vine, and behind the tree was standing as it were a serpent in form, having hands and feet like a man's, and wings on its shoulders, six on the right side and six on the left, and they were holding the grapes of the tree in their hands, and both were eating it whom I had seen embracing.

They may not give terumah from pure [produce] for impure [produce], but if they did give, the terumah is terumah. In truth they said: If a cake of pressed figs had become partly defiled, one may give terumah from the clean part for that part which had become defiled. The same applies to a bunch of vegetables, or a stack of grain. If there were two cakes [of figs], two bunches [of vegetables], two stacks [of grain], one pure and one impure, one should not give terumah from one for the other. Rabbi Eliezer says: one can give terumah from that which is pure for that which is impure.

If he was eating a bunch of grapes, and he entered from the garden into the courtyard: Rabbi Eliezer says: he may finish eating. But Rabbi Joshua says: he may not finish. If dusk set in at the eve of Shabbat: Rabbi Joshua says: he may finish eating. But Rabbi Eliezer says: he may not finish.

What is the difference between the pesah [which was offered] in Egypt and the pesah of [subsequent] generations? The pesah in Egypt was taken on the tenth [of Nisan], And it required sprinkling with a bunch of hyssop on the lintel and on the two door-posts, And it was eaten in haste on one night, whereas the pesah of [subsequent] generations is kept the whole seven [days].

There were poles of cedar wood stretching from the wall of the Sanctuary to the wall of the Porch to prevent it from bulging. There were chains of gold fixed in the roof beams of the Porch by which the priestly initiates used to ascend and see the crowns, as it says, “And the crowns shall be to Helem and to Toviyah and to Yedaya and to Hen the son of Zephaniah as a memorial in the Temple of the Lord” (Zechariah 6:14). A golden vine stood at the door of the Sanctuary trained on poles, and anyone who offered a leaf or a grape or a bunch used to bring it and hang it there. Rabbi Eliezer bar Zadok said: on one occasion three hundred priests were commissioned [to clear it].

But Rebbi Yoḥanan required that traditions should be reported in his name. Also David begged for divine mercy in this respect, (Ps. 61:5) “may I dwell in Your tent forever!” Rebbi Phineas, Rebbi Jeremiah, in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan; Could David think of living forever? Rather, David meant: May I have the merit that my words will be mentioned in my name in synagogues and houses of study. What good does that do to him? Levi, the son of the Nazir said: If someone mentions a tradition in the name of its author, the latter’s lips whisper with him in the grave. What is the reason? (Cant. 7:10) “Dripping from the lips of the sleeping ones.” Like that bunch of grapes which drips by itself. Rebbi Ḥanina bar Pappai and Rebbi Simon, one said, like one who drinks spiced wine, the other said, like one who drinks old wine, even though he consumed it, its taste remains in his mouth.

Rebbi Eleazar in the name of the great Rebbi Ḥiyya: Half a bunch of grapes are dropped berries. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: Half a bunch of grapes or an entire bunch are dropped berries. But did we not state: “Two berries are dropped berries?” Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya: If he cuts and deposits them under the vine.

Rebbi Eleazar in the name of the great Rebbi Ḥiyya: Half a bunch of grapes are dropped berries. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: Half a bunch of grapes or an entire bunch are dropped berries. But did we not state: “Two berries are dropped berries?” Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya: If he cuts and deposits them under the vine.

Rebbi Eleazar in the name of the great Rebbi Ḥiyya: Half a bunch of grapes are dropped berries. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: Half a bunch of grapes or an entire bunch are dropped berries. But did we not state: “Two berries are dropped berries?” Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya: If he cuts and deposits them under the vine.

MISHNAH: What are dropped berries? Anything that drops during vintage. If he was gathering grapes, cut off the bunch, it got mixed up in the leaves, fell to the ground and scattered, that belongs to the proprietor. He who puts a basket under the vine while he is gathering grapes robs the poor, and about him it was said (Prov. 22:28, 23:10): “Do not displace an eternal boundary.” What is a gleaning of grapes? Anything that has no shoulder and no dropping. If it has either shoulder or dropping it belongs to the proprietor, in case of doubt it belongs to the poor. A gleaning on a cut branch, if it can be cut off together with a bunch it belongs to the proprietor, otherwise to the poor. An isolated berry, Rebbi Jehudah says, it is considered a bunch, but the sages say, a gleaning.

MISHNAH: What are dropped berries? Anything that drops during vintage. If he was gathering grapes, cut off the bunch, it got mixed up in the leaves, fell to the ground and scattered, that belongs to the proprietor. He who puts a basket under the vine while he is gathering grapes robs the poor, and about him it was said (Prov. 22:28, 23:10): “Do not displace an eternal boundary.” What is a gleaning of grapes? Anything that has no shoulder and no dropping. If it has either shoulder or dropping it belongs to the proprietor, in case of doubt it belongs to the poor. A gleaning on a cut branch, if it can be cut off together with a bunch it belongs to the proprietor, otherwise to the poor. An isolated berry, Rebbi Jehudah says, it is considered a bunch, but the sages say, a gleaning.

MISHNAH: What are dropped berries? Anything that drops during vintage. If he was gathering grapes, cut off the bunch, it got mixed up in the leaves, fell to the ground and scattered, that belongs to the proprietor. He who puts a basket under the vine while he is gathering grapes robs the poor, and about him it was said (Prov. 22:28, 23:10): “Do not displace an eternal boundary.” What is a gleaning of grapes? Anything that has no shoulder and no dropping. If it has either shoulder or dropping it belongs to the proprietor, in case of doubt it belongs to the poor. A gleaning on a cut branch, if it can be cut off together with a bunch it belongs to the proprietor, otherwise to the poor. An isolated berry, Rebbi Jehudah says, it is considered a bunch, but the sages say, a gleaning.

Rebbi said to Rav Periri: Would you show me the bunch of grapes in your vineyard? He said to him, if you come out, I will show it. When he was still far away, he spied something like an ox. He said to him, does not the ox destroy the vineyard? He said to him, what you take for an ox is the bunch of grapes. He quoted for it (Cant. 1:12): “As long as the King was at his round table, my nard gave its fragrance;” the Temple is destroyed and you persist in your obstinacy? Immediately, they looked for it and it was never found again.

Rebbi said to Rav Periri: Would you show me the bunch of grapes in your vineyard? He said to him, if you come out, I will show it. When he was still far away, he spied something like an ox. He said to him, does not the ox destroy the vineyard? He said to him, what you take for an ox is the bunch of grapes. He quoted for it (Cant. 1:12): “As long as the King was at his round table, my nard gave its fragrance;” the Temple is destroyed and you persist in your obstinacy? Immediately, they looked for it and it was never found again.

It was stated: “Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah says, fallen dates sold with regular dates are free.” Is it about two boxes, one beside the other or one on top of the other? No, here we deal with a mixed bunch. Did they start to ferment or did they not start to ferment? Rebbi Mana said, we deal with fermenting ones. If they started to ferment, they should be obligated for themselves! You cannot say that, since Rebbi Joḥanan said, the Sages detailed them because the majority of these kinds are collected only from abandoned property. Rebbi Ḥanina said, we deal with nonfermenting ones. If we deal with nonfermenting ones they should be free even when mixed. You cannot say that, since it was stated: “Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose said in his father’s name that a bunch of grapes of which one berry ripened, is all connected for tithes.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, Rebbi Zeïra and Rebbi Illaï, one adopted the first opinion, the other the second opinion. But the Sages say one does not follow either of them; those fermenting are obligated, those not fermenting are free.

It was stated: “Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah says, fallen dates sold with regular dates are free.” Is it about two boxes, one beside the other or one on top of the other? No, here we deal with a mixed bunch. Did they start to ferment or did they not start to ferment? Rebbi Mana said, we deal with fermenting ones. If they started to ferment, they should be obligated for themselves! You cannot say that, since Rebbi Joḥanan said, the Sages detailed them because the majority of these kinds are collected only from abandoned property. Rebbi Ḥanina said, we deal with nonfermenting ones. If we deal with nonfermenting ones they should be free even when mixed. You cannot say that, since it was stated: “Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose said in his father’s name that a bunch of grapes of which one berry ripened, is all connected for tithes.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, Rebbi Zeïra and Rebbi Illaï, one adopted the first opinion, the other the second opinion. But the Sages say one does not follow either of them; those fermenting are obligated, those not fermenting are free.

MISHNAH: He who buys from a farmer and then buys from him a second time tithes from one batch for the other, even if they are from two crates, even if the are from two different hamlets. If the farmer sells vegetables on the market, in case that his supply comes from his own vegetable gardens, one tithes from one for all others, from other vegetable gardens, one has to tithe each bunch separately.

Rebbi Jonah said, not only from his own vegetable gardens, but even from vegetable gardens of others, if they tithe under his instruction, he tithes from one for the other, but if they do not, he has to tithe each bunch separately.

MISHNAH: An am haäreẓ who said to a ḥaver, buy for me a bunch of vegetables, buy for me a loaf, if he buys anonymously, he is free. If he says, this one is for me and that one is for my friend, if they became mixed up he has to tithe, even if there are a hundred.

MISHNAH: One fertilizes and hoes in melon and gourd fields until the New Year; the same applies to irrigated fields. One trims, removes, dusts, and smokes until the New Year. Rebbi Simeon said, one may even remove a leaf from a bunch in the Sabbatical year. One may remove stones until the New Year. One cuts, prunes, and shapes until the New Year. Rebbi Joshua says, like the pruning and shaping of the fifth year, so is that of the sixth. Rebbi Simeon says, any time that I may work the tree I may shape it.

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.

MISHNAH: One does not give heave from pure produce for impure, but if heave was given it is heave. In truth, they said if a cake of dried figs became partially impure one may give heave from its pure part for its impure part, and similarly for a bunch of vegetable or a heap [of grain]. If there were two cakes, two bundles, two heaps, one pure and one impure, one should not give heave from one for the other. Rebbi Eliezer says, one may give heave from pure produce for impure. One may not give heave from impure produce for pure, but if he gave in error, his heave is heave, if intentionally, he did not do anything. Similarly, a Levite who has ṭevel tithe which he continually uses to give, if he is in error, what he did is done, if intentionally, he did nothing. Rebbi Jehudah says, if he had known of it earlier, even if he did it in error, he did not do anything. He who immerses vessels on the Sabbath, if unintentionally he may use them, if intentionally he may not use them. He who tithes or cooks on the Sabbath, if in error it may be eaten, if intentionally it may not be eaten. He who plants on the Sabbath, if unintentionally he may keep it, if intentionally it must be uprooted. In the Sabbatical year it must be uprooted, whether in error or intentionally.

“And similarly for a bunch of vegetable.” The Mishnah deals with the case that it became impure as a bunch but when the single stalks were impure and he bound them together, this does not apply. But will it not be split and made into two parts in the end? Explain it if he gave it a name when it still was connected. What is the situation if a bundle became impure, he unbound it and bound it again?

“And similarly for a bunch of vegetable.” The Mishnah deals with the case that it became impure as a bunch but when the single stalks were impure and he bound them together, this does not apply. But will it not be split and made into two parts in the end? Explain it if he gave it a name when it still was connected. What is the situation if a bundle became impure, he unbound it and bound it again?

Should we have stated only fig cake and neither bunch nor heap? If we had stated about fig cake and not bunch we would have said he may give heave for the fig cake which is all one body but not for the bunch which is not one body. So it is necessary to state also “bunch”. If we had stated bunch not heap, we would have said he may give heave for the bunch because it is all held together but not for the heap which is not held together in one piece. So it is necessary to state fig-cake, necessary to state bunch, and necessary to state heap.

Should we have stated only fig cake and neither bunch nor heap? If we had stated about fig cake and not bunch we would have said he may give heave for the fig cake which is all one body but not for the bunch which is not one body. So it is necessary to state also “bunch”. If we had stated bunch not heap, we would have said he may give heave for the bunch because it is all held together but not for the heap which is not held together in one piece. So it is necessary to state fig-cake, necessary to state bunch, and necessary to state heap.

Should we have stated only fig cake and neither bunch nor heap? If we had stated about fig cake and not bunch we would have said he may give heave for the fig cake which is all one body but not for the bunch which is not one body. So it is necessary to state also “bunch”. If we had stated bunch not heap, we would have said he may give heave for the bunch because it is all held together but not for the heap which is not held together in one piece. So it is necessary to state fig-cake, necessary to state bunch, and necessary to state heap.

Should we have stated only fig cake and neither bunch nor heap? If we had stated about fig cake and not bunch we would have said he may give heave for the fig cake which is all one body but not for the bunch which is not one body. So it is necessary to state also “bunch”. If we had stated bunch not heap, we would have said he may give heave for the bunch because it is all held together but not for the heap which is not held together in one piece. So it is necessary to state fig-cake, necessary to state bunch, and necessary to state heap.

Should we have stated only fig cake and neither bunch nor heap? If we had stated about fig cake and not bunch we would have said he may give heave for the fig cake which is all one body but not for the bunch which is not one body. So it is necessary to state also “bunch”. If we had stated bunch not heap, we would have said he may give heave for the bunch because it is all held together but not for the heap which is not held together in one piece. So it is necessary to state fig-cake, necessary to state bunch, and necessary to state heap.

Should we have stated only fig cake and neither bunch nor heap? If we had stated about fig cake and not bunch we would have said he may give heave for the fig cake which is all one body but not for the bunch which is not one body. So it is necessary to state also “bunch”. If we had stated bunch not heap, we would have said he may give heave for the bunch because it is all held together but not for the heap which is not held together in one piece. So it is necessary to state fig-cake, necessary to state bunch, and necessary to state heap.

Should we have stated only fig cake and neither bunch nor heap? If we had stated about fig cake and not bunch we would have said he may give heave for the fig cake which is all one body but not for the bunch which is not one body. So it is necessary to state also “bunch”. If we had stated bunch not heap, we would have said he may give heave for the bunch because it is all held together but not for the heap which is not held together in one piece. So it is necessary to state fig-cake, necessary to state bunch, and necessary to state heap.

MISHNAH: If he was eating a bunch of grapes and entered from the garden into the courtyard. Rebbi Eliezer said, he should finish, but Rebbi Joshua said, he should not finish. If it got dark on Sabbath eve, Rebbi Eliezer said, he should finish, but Rebbi Joshua said, he should not finish.

HALAKHAH: There, we have stated: “If a vine is planted in the courtyard, one may take an entire bunch, and similarly for pomegranate and water melon, the words of Rebbi Ṭarphon.” Rebbi Zeïra, Rebbi Ḥiyya, in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Rebbi Ṭarphon says following Rebbi Eliezer. Rebbi Ṭarphon says, one makes the cut of food equal to its start. Rebbi Illa, Rebbi Assi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Either Rebbi Ṭarphon follows Rebbi Eliezer or Rebbi Ṭarphon makes a meal consisting of two or three snacks equal to one snack. What is the reason of Rebbi Eliezer? Because he started with permission. It was stated: “Rebbi Nathan said, not that Rebbi Eliezer said because he started with permission but Rebbi Eliezer holds he should wait until the end of the Sabbath or he should leave the courtyard again and finish.”

New section. “All red fruits when they start to become red.” Miasha stated: Even if only one pomegranate was soft, all is connected for tithe. “A bunch of grapes one berry of which became red is all connected for tithes.” Rebbi Ḥanina said, they made it clear to us, [this refers to] the entire vine, even to the entire strain. They added and made it clear, all this direction. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, the entire vineyard. If it was a small vineyard and he made it large, large and he made it small, one and he split in into two, two which he united?

MISHNAH: If somebody says to another person, here take this as for twenty figs that I shall choose, he chooses and eats; for the bunch of grapes that I shall choose, he selects single grape berries and eats; for the pomegranate that I shall choose, he picks single kernels and eats; for the watermelon that I shall choose, he bites off and eats. But if he said, for these twenty figs, for these two bunches, for these two pomegranates, for these two watermelon, he eats as he is used to and he is free since he bought when it was still connected to the ground. If somebody hires a worker to slice figs; if that one told him, on condition that I may eat from the figs, he eats and is free; on condition that I and my son will eat, or that my son may eat in lieu of my wages, he may eat and is free, and his son may eat but is obligated; on condition that I may eat while cutting and after cutting, while cutting he eats and is free, after cutting he eats and is obligated since he does not eat because of the Torah. That is the principle: He who eats because of the Torah is free; if he does not eat because of the Torah he is obligated. If he was working with lĕbāsîm he should not eat benôt ševa‘ and vice-versa. But he may hold back until he reaches the place of good ones and eat there. If somebody switches with another person so that each one eats directly, or each one cuts, or one eats and one cuts, he is obligated. Rebbi Jehudah says, he who exchanges to eat is obligated, to cut is free.

Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: The laborer may eat the first bunch of grapes. It was stated, the last bunch. Rebbi Samuel in the name of Rebbi Hila: If he put it in the basket it is forbidden. Rebbi Yose said, that needs to be said if he harvests and another transports. But if he harvests and transports originally he eats because of local usage. At the end he eats because of “ the laborers eat when they go from one row to the next and when they return to the winepress, and the donkey until it is unloaded.”

Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: The laborer may eat the first bunch of grapes. It was stated, the last bunch. Rebbi Samuel in the name of Rebbi Hila: If he put it in the basket it is forbidden. Rebbi Yose said, that needs to be said if he harvests and another transports. But if he harvests and transports originally he eats because of local usage. At the end he eats because of “ the laborers eat when they go from one row to the next and when they return to the winepress, and the donkey until it is unloaded.”

MISHNAH: From a fig tree standing in a courtyard, one may eat one by one and if he took them together he is obligated. Rebbi Simeon says, one in his right hand, one in his left hand, and one in his mouth. If he climbed to the top of the tree he may fill the fold of his toga and eat. From a vine planted in a courtyard one may take an entire bunch; the same holds for a pomegranate and a watermelon, the words of Rebbi Ṭarphon. Rebbi Aqiba says, he takes single grape berries, single seeds of a pomegranate, and picks from the watermelon. Of coriander sown in the courtyard he snips off leaf by leaf and eats; when he takes them together they are obligated. Calamint, hyssop, and thyme in the courtyard are obligated if they are guarded. If a fig tree was standing in a courtyard but its crown was hanging over a vegetable garden, one eats as usual and is free. If it was standing in a vegetable garden but its crown was hanging over a courtyard, one eats one by one and if he takes them together he is obligated. If it was standing in the Land and hanging over outside the Land or standing outside the Land and hanging over the Land, everything is determined by the stem. For houses of walled cities, everything is determined by the stem. For cities of refuge, all goes by the crown, for Jerusalem all goes by the crown.

There, we have stated: “If he was eating a bunch of grapes and entered into the courtyard from the garden. Rebbi Eliezer said, he should finish, but Rebbi Joshua said, he should not finish.” Rebbi Zeїra in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Either Rebbi Ṭarphon says following Rebbi Eliezer or Rebbi Ṭarphon says, one makes the cut of food equal to its start. Rebbi Illa, Rebbi Assi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Either Rebbi Ṭarphon follows Rebbi Eliezer or Rebbi Ṭarphon makes one snack containing two or three snacks equal to one snack. What is the reason of Rebbi Eliezer? Because he started with permission. It was stated: “Rebbi Nathan said, not that Rebbi Eliezer said because he started with permission but Rebbi Eliezer holds he should wait until the end of the Sabbath or he should leave the courtyard again and finish.”

Rebbi Zeïra, Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of Rav: A bunch of grapes which he squeezed into a cup became ṭevel; into a tamḥui it did not become ṭevel.

These are Cilician grits, these are square. It was stated: “Rabban Gamliel says, there is nothing square from the six days of Creation.” Rebbi Berekhiah objected: Did we not state: “The body of baheret is like a square Cilician grit.” Rebbi Bisna said, that in itself says that there is no square. Why did we state that? That he should square it. But there are noxious insects! They are full of knots. But there is the bunch of pila! It is round below. Some want to say, Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel spoke only about animals. It was stated so: There is square in foods, there is no square in animals.

MISHNAH: How does one designate First Fruits? A person comes into his field and there sees an early ripening fig, an early ripening bunch of grapes, an early ripening pomegranate; he binds them with bast and says, “these are First Fruits.” Rebbi Simeon says, nevertheless he repeats and calls them First Fruits after they have been separated from the ground.

MISHNAH: What is the difference between Passover in Egypt and the Passover of generations? The Pesaḥ in Egypt was bought on the Tenth, and needed sprinkling with a bunch of hyssop on the lintel and two door-posts, and was eaten in a hurry, during one night. But Passover of generations is all of seven [days].

Why did Rebbi Joḥanan insist to require that traditions should be reported in his name? For also David begged for divine mercy in this respect, as it says, may I dwell in Your tent forever, I shall seek shelter under the cover of Your wings, Selah. Could David think of living forever? Rather, David said before the Holy One, praise to Him: Master of the World, may I have the merit that my words will be mentioned in synagogues and houses of study. What good does that do to him? Simeon, the son of the Nazir said in the name of Rebbi Isaac If a Sage’s pronouncement in matters of practice is mentioned in this world, the latter’s lips whisper with him in the grave for it is said, dripping from the lips of the sleeping ones. Like that softened bunch of grapes, if a person puts his finger on it immediately it drips, so also the lips of the just drip, for if one mentions their pronouncements in matters of practice the latter’s lips whisper in the grave. What good does that do to them? The son of the Nazir says, like one who drinks spiced wine; Rebbi Isaac said, like one who drinks old wine, even though he cannot taste it.

Rebbi Joḥanan was leaning on Rebbi Jacob bar Idi when Rebbi Eleazar saw him and hid himself before him. He said, these two things this Babylonian does to me: First, that he does not greet me, and second, that he does not teach the traditions in my name. He said to him, thus they behave among themselves; the younger one does not greet the older since they observe Boys see me and hide themselves, and old people rose and stood. As they were walking, he saw a Bet Midrash. He said to him: Here Rebbi Meïr sat and reported traditions in the name of Rebbi Ismael but he never reported traditions in the name of Rebbi Aqiba. He answered: Everybody knows that Rebbi Meïr was the student of Rebbi Aqiba. He retorted, everybody knows that Rebbi Eleazar is the student of Rebbi Joḥanan. May one pass by the water statue? He said to him, do you want to honor it? Pass it by and blind its eyes! He said to him, Rebbi Eleazar did well that he did not pass before you. He said to him: Rebbi Jacob bar Idi, you know how to pacify. But Rebbi Joḥanan required that traditions should be reported in his name. Also David begged for divine mercy in this respect, may I dwell in Your tent forever! Rebbi Phineas, Rebbi Jeremiah, in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan; Could David think of living forever? Rather, David meant: May I have the merit that my words will be mentioned in my name in synagogues and houses of study. What profit does he have from this? The son of Tira said: If someone mentions a tradition in the name of its author, the latter’s lips whisper with him in the grave. What is the reason? Dripping from the lips ofthe sleeping ones. Like that bunch of grapes which drips by itself. Rebbi Ḥinena bar Pappus and Rebbi Simon, one said, like one who drinks spiced wine, the other said, like one who drinks old wine, even though he consumed it, its taste remains in his mouth.

It was stated: Rebbi Jehudah bar Ilai says: Abba Ḥalaphta, Rebbi Eleazar ben Mattia, and Ḥanina bar Ḥakhinai stood on those stones and estimated that each one on them was a load of 40 seah. From here you can estimate how big was the bunch of grapes. It is written: “Each one should lift a stone on his shoulder.” One cannot compare one who lifts from the ground to his shoulder to one who lifts first from the ground to his knee and then from his knee to his shoulder. One cannot compare one who lifts first from the ground to his knee and then from his knee to his shoulder to one onto whom others hang [the load]. One cannot compare one onto whom others hang [the load] to [a load] carried by two. It is written: “One man per tribe.” In the opinion of Rebbi Aqiba who says these are expressions of additions, there were 24, sixteen for the grape bunch and eight for figs, pomegranates, and their belongings. In the opinion of Rebbi Simeon, who says there are double expressions, there were twelve, eight for the grape bunch and four for figs, pomegranates, and their belongings. In the opinion of Rebbi Ismael a beam; in the opinion of Rebbi Aqiba a beam and beams of beams.

It was stated: Rebbi Jehudah bar Ilai says: Abba Ḥalaphta, Rebbi Eleazar ben Mattia, and Ḥanina bar Ḥakhinai stood on those stones and estimated that each one on them was a load of 40 seah. From here you can estimate how big was the bunch of grapes. It is written: “Each one should lift a stone on his shoulder.” One cannot compare one who lifts from the ground to his shoulder to one who lifts first from the ground to his knee and then from his knee to his shoulder. One cannot compare one who lifts first from the ground to his knee and then from his knee to his shoulder to one onto whom others hang [the load]. One cannot compare one onto whom others hang [the load] to [a load] carried by two. It is written: “One man per tribe.” In the opinion of Rebbi Aqiba who says these are expressions of additions, there were 24, sixteen for the grape bunch and eight for figs, pomegranates, and their belongings. In the opinion of Rebbi Simeon, who says there are double expressions, there were twelve, eight for the grape bunch and four for figs, pomegranates, and their belongings. In the opinion of Rebbi Ismael a beam; in the opinion of Rebbi Aqiba a beam and beams of beams.

It was stated: Rebbi Jehudah bar Ilai says: Abba Ḥalaphta, Rebbi Eleazar ben Mattia, and Ḥanina bar Ḥakhinai stood on those stones and estimated that each one on them was a load of 40 seah. From here you can estimate how big was the bunch of grapes. It is written: “Each one should lift a stone on his shoulder.” One cannot compare one who lifts from the ground to his shoulder to one who lifts first from the ground to his knee and then from his knee to his shoulder. One cannot compare one who lifts first from the ground to his knee and then from his knee to his shoulder to one onto whom others hang [the load]. One cannot compare one onto whom others hang [the load] to [a load] carried by two. It is written: “One man per tribe.” In the opinion of Rebbi Aqiba who says these are expressions of additions, there were 24, sixteen for the grape bunch and eight for figs, pomegranates, and their belongings. In the opinion of Rebbi Simeon, who says there are double expressions, there were twelve, eight for the grape bunch and four for figs, pomegranates, and their belongings. In the opinion of Rebbi Ismael a beam; in the opinion of Rebbi Aqiba a beam and beams of beams.

MISHNAH: When Yose ben Yo‘ezer from Ṣereda and Yose ben Joḥanan from Jerusalem died, the grape bunches disappeared, as it was said: “There is no bunch to eat, no early ripe fig that my soul desires.”

HALAKHAH: There did not arise another grape bunch until Rebbi Aqiba rose. Were the other couples not also grape bunches? But these served in a position of leadership; the others did not serve in a position of leadership.

“As vows of the wicked, he vowed as nazir, a sacrifice, and an oath.” Samuel said, the Mishnah speaks about several cases, either as nazir, or a sacrifice, or an oath. Rebbi Ze‘ira said, he is a nazir in all three of them. Rebbi Abin said, if somebody wants to explain that of Rebbi Ze‘ira, it is such: There was before him a bunch of grapes and another person came and said, there is an oath on me, then there is an oath on him. Another person came and said, that is qorbān for me, it is qorbān for him. Another person came and said, there is an oath on me, then there is an oath on him. Another person came and said, what these three said is on me, does it not turn out that this one is obligated for qorbān and oath?

HALAKHAH: “I shall be a nazir [abstaining] from dried figs and fig cake,” etc. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the reason of the House of Shammai: because he mentioned the state of nazir. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, because of substitutes of substitutes. Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi said, a verse supports Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “So says the Eternal, as cider is found in the grape bunch, etc.” The Torah called a grape bunch “cider”. And people call a dried fig cider, because of substitutes of substitutes. What is the difference between them? If he said, “I shall be a nazir[abstaining] from dried figs and fig cake.” In Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion he is a nazir, in Rebbi Simeon’s opinion he is not a nazir. “I shall be a nazir[abstaining] from a loaf of bread,” in Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion he is a nazir, in Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish’s opinion he is not a nazir. “From a loaf of bread,” he did not say anything. Rebbi Uqba asked before Rebbi Mana: The opinion of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish seems to be inverted, as we have stated there: “ ‘I take upon myself the obligation to bring a flour offering from barley.’ He shall bring from wheat.” And Rebbi Abbahu said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, because he mentioned “flour offering.” And here, he says so? He accepts one and he accepts the other. He accepts because he mentioned the state of nazir, and he accepts because of substitutes of substitutes. You should know that it is so since we have stated: “If he said, the cow said.” She did not say anything; it is because he mentioned the state of nazir, and here he mentioned the state of nazir.

HALAKHAH: “I shall be a nazir [abstaining] from dried figs and fig cake,” etc. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the reason of the House of Shammai: because he mentioned the state of nazir. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, because of substitutes of substitutes. Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi said, a verse supports Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “So says the Eternal, as cider is found in the grape bunch, etc.” The Torah called a grape bunch “cider”. And people call a dried fig cider, because of substitutes of substitutes. What is the difference between them? If he said, “I shall be a nazir[abstaining] from dried figs and fig cake.” In Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion he is a nazir, in Rebbi Simeon’s opinion he is not a nazir. “I shall be a nazir[abstaining] from a loaf of bread,” in Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion he is a nazir, in Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish’s opinion he is not a nazir. “From a loaf of bread,” he did not say anything. Rebbi Uqba asked before Rebbi Mana: The opinion of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish seems to be inverted, as we have stated there: “ ‘I take upon myself the obligation to bring a flour offering from barley.’ He shall bring from wheat.” And Rebbi Abbahu said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, because he mentioned “flour offering.” And here, he says so? He accepts one and he accepts the other. He accepts because he mentioned the state of nazir, and he accepts because of substitutes of substitutes. You should know that it is so since we have stated: “If he said, the cow said.” She did not say anything; it is because he mentioned the state of nazir, and here he mentioned the state of nazir.

Any expressions can be used for nezirut except the expression qorban. Any expressions can be used for qorban except the expression nezirut. If he said about a bunch of grapes, “I am locked away from you, I am separated from you, I am prevented from you, I am nazir from you,” he is a nazir. “It is for me qorban,” he only forbade it for himself as qorban. If he said about a loaf of bread, “I am locked away from it, I am separated from it, I am prevented from it, it is qorban for me,” he only forbade it for himself as qorban. “I am nazir from it,” he is a nazir. “Prevented” implies both nezirut and qorban. If somebody said about a bunch of grapes, “I am prevented from it,” if he wanted to eat it, one tells him, is it not holy for its money’s worth? If he redeemed it, one tells him, are you not a nazir?

Any expressions can be used for nezirut except the expression qorban. Any expressions can be used for qorban except the expression nezirut. If he said about a bunch of grapes, “I am locked away from you, I am separated from you, I am prevented from you, I am nazir from you,” he is a nazir. “It is for me qorban,” he only forbade it for himself as qorban. If he said about a loaf of bread, “I am locked away from it, I am separated from it, I am prevented from it, it is qorban for me,” he only forbade it for himself as qorban. “I am nazir from it,” he is a nazir. “Prevented” implies both nezirut and qorban. If somebody said about a bunch of grapes, “I am prevented from it,” if he wanted to eat it, one tells him, is it not holy for its money’s worth? If he redeemed it, one tells him, are you not a nazir?

“Fresh”, to include unripe berries. “Fresh”, to include the flower. The baraita follows Rebbi Yose, since Rebbi Yose said, the flower is forbidden for the nazir because it is a fruit. It is possible to eat a bunch of grapes and to be guilty in reference to “grapes, fresh or dried, he shall not eat.” If he soaked it for soaking, pressed it for wine, and they warned him about “anything that comes from the wine-vine”, etc.

HALAKHAH: “A worker may eat zucchini even for a denar’s worth,” etc. Rebbi Eleazar ben Antigonos says in the name of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Yannai, this means that a worker may eat more than his [daily] wages. But some say, Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Yannai: This means that a worker may eat the first or the last bunch of grapes.

It was stated: Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, there is nothing square from the six Days of Creation. Rebbi Berekhiah objected: Did we not state: “The body of baheret is like a square Cilician grit. The place for a grit is nine lentils. The space for a lentil is four hairwidths; in all 36 hairwidths.” Rebbi (Yosna) said, that in itself says that there is no square. Why was it stated “squared”? That he should square it. And כגעה? It is full of knots. But there is the bunch of pila! It is round below. Some wanted to say, Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said this only about creatures, There is square in foods, there is no square in creatures.

But has it not been taught: R. Yose says: If at the outset a bunch of hyssop has only two stalks or if its remnants consist of one, it is invalid, since a bunch is not valid unless at the outset it contains three and its remnants are no less than two? Reverse [the assumption]: According to R. Yose three are indispensable, according to the rabbis three are required only for the proper observance of the commandment.

But has it not been taught: R. Yose says: If at the outset a bunch of hyssop has only two stalks or if its remnants consist of one, it is invalid, since a bunch is not valid unless at the outset it contains three and its remnants are no less than two? Reverse [the assumption]: According to R. Yose three are indispensable, according to the rabbis three are required only for the proper observance of the commandment.

So it has also been taught: If a bunch of hyssop contains two stalks at the outset or if its remnant consists of one it is valid; it is not invalid unless at the outset or when it is a remnant it consists of one.