counts

A partition of reeds: if between one reed and another there are less than three handbreadths, [the space] through which a kid (young goat) could enter, it counts as a [legally effective] partition. A [stone] fence which has been broken through up to [the length of] ten cubits, [the breach] is [regarded] as a doorway; more than that, opposite the breach it is prohibited [to sow seeds]. If there were many breaches in the fence, if that which remains standing exceeds that which is broken through, it is permitted [to sow there]. But if the breached sections exceed those which remain standing, it is forbidden [to sow opposite the breaches.]

On three occasions they measure the contents of the basket: At the full time of the first ripe fruits, and of the late summer fruits, and in the middle of the summer. He who counts [the fruit] is praiseworthy, he who measures it is more praiseworthy, and he who weighs them is most praiseworthy of all.

What counts as a species with its same species? Wheat is not reckoned together with any [species] other than with spelt; Barley is reckoned together with all [species] except wheat. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri says: the rest of the species are reckoned together one with another.

A tree which was uprooted and it has a bent-down [and rooted] shoot, and it [the tree] derives sustenance from it [the shoot], the old [tree] is [considered] like the shoot. If one bends [and roots] from it year after year, and it became detached, one counts from the time it became detached. A grafted shoot of vines, and a grafted shoot [growing] on another grafted shoot, even if he rooted them in the soil, they are permitted. Rabbi Meir said: in an instance where it is strongly [grafted], it is permitted, but in an instance where it is poorly [grafted], it is prohibited. A bent-down [and rooted] shoot that has become detached and is full of fruit, [then] if it increased one two hundredth, it is prohibited.

In what ways is he like men? He causes impurity with white discharge, like men; He dresses like men; He can take a wife but not be taken as a wife, like men. [When he is born] his mother counts the blood of purification, like men; He may not be secluded with women, like men. He is not maintained with the daughters, like men; He transgresses the law of: “You shall not round” (Leviticus 19:2 and “You shall not defile for the dead,” (Leviticus 21:1) like men; And he must perform all the commandments of the Torah, like men.

And in what ways is he like women? He causes impurity with red discharge, like women; And he must not be secluded with men, like women; And he doesn’t make his brother’s wife liable for yibbum (levirate marriage); And he does not share [in the inheritance] with the sons, like women; And he cannot eat most holy sacrifices, like women. At his birth his mother counts the blood of her impurity like [they do when they give birth to a] girl; And he is disqualified from being a witness, like women. If he had illicit intercourse, he is disqualified from eating terumah, like women.

It once happened that two were even as they ran up the ramp, and one of them pushed his fellow who fell and broke his leg. When the court saw that they incurred danger, they decreed that they would remove the ashes from only by a count. There were four counts. This is the first count.

The order of the blasts: three sets of three each. The length of a teki’ah is equal to three teru'ahs, and the length of a teru'ah is equal to three yevavot. If one prolonged the first teki'ah so that it went directly into the second, it counts only as one. One who has blessed [recited the Amidah] and then a shofar is given to him, he sounds a teki'ah teru'ah teki'ah three times. Just as the shaliah tzibbur is obligated, so every single individual is obligated. Rabban Gamaliel says: the shaliah tzibbur (communal prayer leader) causes the whole congregation to fulfill their obligation.

One who buries his dead three days before a festival, the decrees of shiva are annulled from him; [One he buries his dead] eight days before a festival, the decrees of the shloshim [thirty days] are annulled from him. Because they [the sages] said that Shabbat counts but does not interrupt, while festivals interrupt and do not count.

If a woman agreed to bring him cash, every sela’ counts as six denarii. The bridegroom must accept upon himself [to give his wife] ten denarii for her [perfume] basket for each maneh [which she brings as dowry]. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel said: in all matters the local usage shall be followed.

[If one says,] “Behold, I am a nazirite [now] and a nazirite when I shall have a son”, and begins to count his own [naziriteship] and then a son is born to him, he completes his own [naziriteship] and then counts the one on account of his son. [If one says,] “Behold, I am a nazirite when I shall have a son, and a nazirite [on my own account]”, and begins to count his own [naziriteship] and then a son is born to him, he interrupts his own [naziriteship], counts the one on account of his son, and then complete his own.

[If one says,] “Behold, I am a nazirite [now] and a nazirite when I shall have a son”, and begins to count his own [naziriteship] and then a son is born to him, he completes his own [naziriteship] and then counts the one on account of his son. [If one says,] “Behold, I am a nazirite when I shall have a son, and a nazirite [on my own account]”, and begins to count his own [naziriteship] and then a son is born to him, he interrupts his own [naziriteship], counts the one on account of his son, and then complete his own.

If one takes a nazirite vow while in a graveyard, then even if he remains there for thirty days, these do not count, and he does not have to bring the sacrifice [prescribed] for impurity. If he leaves it and re-enters, [the period] counts, and he must bring the sacrifice [prescribed] for impurity. Rabbi Eliezer says: not [if he re-enters] on the same day, for it says, “But the former days shall be void,” (Numbers 6:12) until there are former days.

If a man vowed to be a nazirite and then asked a sage [to be released from his vow] but [the sage] bound him [to his vow] he counts [the naziriteship] from the time that the vow was made. If he asked a sage [to be released from his vow] and he released him, if he had an animal set aside [for a sacrifice], it goes forth to pasture with [the rest of] the herd. Beth Hillel said to Beth Shammai: do you not admit that here where the consecration is in error, [the animal] goes forth to pasture with the herd? Beth Shammai said to them: do you not admit that if a man in error calls the ninth [animal], the tenth, or the tenth the ninth, or the eleventh the tenth, each is consecrated? Beth Hillel said to them: it is not the staff that makes these consecrated. For suppose that by mistake he placed the staff upon the eighth or upon the twelfth, would this have any effect? Rather Scripture which has consecrated the tenth, has also declared consecrated the ninth and the eleventh.

If he shaves after one of the sacrifices and the sacrifice is found to be invalid, his shaving is invalid and his sacrifices do not count: If he shaves after the sin-offering, which was not offered for its correct designation and then he brought the other sacrifices under their correct designations, his shaving is invalid and [none of] his sacrifices counts for him. [Similarly], if he shaves after the burnt-offering or the wellbeing offering, which have not been offered for their correct designation, and then he brought the other sacrifices under their correct designation, his shaving is invalid and [none of] his sacrifices counts for him. Rabbi Shimon says: that particular sacrifice does not count, but his other sacrifices do count. If he shaved after all three sacrifices and one of them was found to valid, his shaving is valid and he has [only] to bring the other sacrifices.

If he shaves after one of the sacrifices and the sacrifice is found to be invalid, his shaving is invalid and his sacrifices do not count: If he shaves after the sin-offering, which was not offered for its correct designation and then he brought the other sacrifices under their correct designations, his shaving is invalid and [none of] his sacrifices counts for him. [Similarly], if he shaves after the burnt-offering or the wellbeing offering, which have not been offered for their correct designation, and then he brought the other sacrifices under their correct designation, his shaving is invalid and [none of] his sacrifices counts for him. Rabbi Shimon says: that particular sacrifice does not count, but his other sacrifices do count. If he shaved after all three sacrifices and one of them was found to valid, his shaving is valid and he has [only] to bring the other sacrifices.

Rabbi Judah says: From Rekem eastwards, Rekem being like the east; from Ashkelon southwards, Ashkelon being like the south; and from Acco northwards, Acco being like the north. Rabbi Meir says: Acco counts as the land of Israel in the matter of bills of divorce.

He who wounds his fellow is liable to compensate him on five counts: for injury, for pain, for healing, for loss of income and for indignity. ‘For injury’: How so? If he blinded his fellow’s eye, cut off his hand or broke his foot, [his fellow] is looked upon as if he was a slave to be sold in the market and they assess how much he was worth and how much he is worth. ‘For pain’? If he burned him with a spit or a nail, even though it was on his fingernail, a place where it leaves no wound, they estimate how much money such a man would be willing to take to suffer so. ‘Healing’? If he struck him he is liable to pay the cost of his healing. If sores arise on him on account of the blow, he is liable [for the cost of their healing]. If not on account of the blow, he is not liable. If the wound healed and then opened and healed and then opened, he is liable for the cost of the healing. If it healed completely, he is no longer liable to pay the cost of the healing. ‘Loss of income’: He is looked upon as a watchman of a cucumber field, since he already gave him compensation for the loss of his hand or foot. ‘Indignity’: All is according to the status of the one that inflicts indignity and the status of the one that suffers indignity. If a man inflicted indignity on a naked man, or a blind man, or a sleeping man, he is [still] liable. If a sleeping man inflicted indignity, he is exempt. If a man fell from the roof and caused injury and inflicted indignity, he is liable for the injury but not for the indignity, as it says, “And she puts forth her hand and grabs him by the private parts”, a man is liable only when he intended [to inflict indignity].

If a man struck his father or his mother and inflicted no wound, or if he wounded his fellow on Yom Kippur, he is liable for all five counts. If he wounded a Hebrew slave, he is liable on all five counts, except loss of income if it was his slave. If he wounded a Canaanite slave (non-Jewish slave) he is liable on all five counts. Rabbi Judah says: “Slaves do not receive compensation for indignity.”

If a man struck his father or his mother and inflicted no wound, or if he wounded his fellow on Yom Kippur, he is liable for all five counts. If he wounded a Hebrew slave, he is liable on all five counts, except loss of income if it was his slave. If he wounded a Canaanite slave (non-Jewish slave) he is liable on all five counts. Rabbi Judah says: “Slaves do not receive compensation for indignity.”

If a man struck his father or his mother and inflicted no wound, or if he wounded his fellow on Yom Kippur, he is liable for all five counts. If he wounded a Hebrew slave, he is liable on all five counts, except loss of income if it was his slave. If he wounded a Canaanite slave (non-Jewish slave) he is liable on all five counts. Rabbi Judah says: “Slaves do not receive compensation for indignity.”

If a man struck his father or mother and left a wound, or if he wounded his fellow on the Sabbath, he is not liable for any of the [five] counts because he is liable for his life. If a man wounded his Canaanite (non-Jewish) slave he is not liable on any of the five counts.

If a man struck his father or mother and left a wound, or if he wounded his fellow on the Sabbath, he is not liable for any of the [five] counts because he is liable for his life. If a man wounded his Canaanite (non-Jewish) slave he is not liable on any of the five counts.

What counts as lost property? If he found an ass or a cow grazing on the path, this does not count as lost property. But if he found an ass with its trappings turned over, or a cow running in the vineyards, this is lost property. If he returned it and it escaped again, and he returned it and it escaped again, even four or five times, he is obligated to return it [yet again], since it is stated (Deut. 22:1): “You shall surely return it to your brother”. If [the finder] lost time at work that was worth a sela (an amount of money), he may not say to the owner, “Give me a sela”. Rather the owner need only pay him the wages of an unemployed laborer. If there was a court of law in the that place the finder may stipulate before them [for damages for time lost]. If there was no court of law, before whom can he stipulate? His comes first.

One who lends money to his fellow may not dwell in his courtyard for free or rent it from him at a reduced rate, since that counts as usury. One may increase rent-charge [not paid in advance] but not purchase price [not paid in advance]. How so? If his fellow rented him his courtyard, and said to him, “If you pay me now the cost is 10 selas per year, but if you pay me on a monthly basis, the rent is one sela per month”, this is permitted. However, if he sold him his field, and said to him, “If you pay me now it is yours for 1,000 zuz, but if you pay me at the time of threshing it will be 1,200 zuz”, it is forbidden.

If one wolf [attacked the flock that he was watching] it does not count as an unavoidable accident [for which no blame is placed on the guardian]. Two wolves do count as an unavoidable accident. Rabbi Judah says: “In a time where wolves are commonly attacking the settlements, even one wolf is considered to be an unavoidable accident.” Two dogs do not count as an unavoidable accident. Yadua the Babylonian said in the name of Rabbi Meir says: “If [two dogs came] from one direction they do not count as an unavoidable accident, but if [they came] from two directions they count as an unavoidable accident. A bandit counts as an unavoidable accident. A lion or a bear or a leopard or a panther or a serpent counts as an unavoidable accident. When [is this so]? When they come of themselves. But if he took the flock to a place of wild animals or bandits they do not count as an unavoidable accident.

If one wolf [attacked the flock that he was watching] it does not count as an unavoidable accident [for which no blame is placed on the guardian]. Two wolves do count as an unavoidable accident. Rabbi Judah says: “In a time where wolves are commonly attacking the settlements, even one wolf is considered to be an unavoidable accident.” Two dogs do not count as an unavoidable accident. Yadua the Babylonian said in the name of Rabbi Meir says: “If [two dogs came] from one direction they do not count as an unavoidable accident, but if [they came] from two directions they count as an unavoidable accident. A bandit counts as an unavoidable accident. A lion or a bear or a leopard or a panther or a serpent counts as an unavoidable accident. When [is this so]? When they come of themselves. But if he took the flock to a place of wild animals or bandits they do not count as an unavoidable accident.

If a beast died a natural death this counts as an unavoidable accident [for which a hirer or paid guardian is not liable]. But if he tortured it and it died it does not count as an unavoidable accident [and the hirer and paid guardian would be liable]. If it was led up to the top of a crag and it fell down and died, this does not count as an unavoidable accident. An unpaid guardian may make a stipulation that he will be exempt from taking an oath, and a borrower [may make a stipulation that he will be exempt] from making restitution, and a paid guardian and a hirer [may make a stipulation that they will be exempt] from taking an oath or from making restitution.

They compel [a partner in a courtyard to contribute to] the building of a gate-house and a door for the courtyard. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: “Not all courtyards are fit for a gate-house.” They compel [a resident of the town to contribute to] the building of a wall for the town and double doors and a bolt. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: “Not every town is fit for a wall.” How long must a man dwell in a town to count as one of the men of the town? Twelve months. If he has purchased a dwelling place he immediately counts as one of the men of the town.

The legal period of possession [in order to establish ownership] for houses, cisterns, trenches, caves, dovecotes, bath-houses, olive-presses, irrigated fields and slaves and anything which continually produces a yield is three complete years. The legal period of possession [in order to establish ownership] for a field irrigated by rain water is three years and they need not be completed. Rabbi Yishmael says: “Three months during the first year, and three months during the last year and twelve months during the middle year, which makes eighteen months.” Rabbi Akiva says: “One month during the first year and one month during the last year and twelve months during the middle year, which makes fourteen months.” Rabbi Yishmael said: “When does this apply? With regards to a sown field, but with tree plantation, if he brought in his produce (grapes), collected the olives and gathered in his fig harvest, this counts as three years.”

An act of possession without which there is no claim [on the ownership of the property] is not valid possession [to establish ownership]. How is this so? If he said to him: “What are you doing on my property? And the other answered: “No one ever said anything to me”, this is not valid possession [to establish ownership]. [If he said to him]: “You sold it to me”, “You gave it to me as a gift”, “Your father sold it to me”, “Your father gave it to me as a gift”, this is valid possession [to establish ownership]. He who holds possession [for three years] due to inheritance [from the previous owner], does not need to make a claim. Craftsmen, partners, sharecroppers and guardians cannot establish ownership through possession. A man cannot establish ownership through possession of his wife’s property, nor may a wife establish ownership through possession of her husband’s property, nor a father of his son’s property, nor a son of his father’s property. When is this so [that one needs three years to establish ownership]? When the person attempts to acquire the land through possession. But, when the property was given as a gift, or when brothers shared a piece of their inheritance, or when one claimed title by possession to the property of a convert [who died without inheritors], then if the claimant has shut in, walled up or broken down anything, this counts as securing ownership through possession.

If a man said, “This is my son”, he is believed. If [he said], “This is my brother”, he is not believed, yet the other may join him in his portion. If he died the property returns to its place. If he inherited property from elsewhere the other’s brothers inherit it together with him. If a man died and a testament was found bound to his thigh, this counts as nothing. But if [he had delivered it and] through it granted title to another, whether of his heirs or of those who are not his heirs, his words are valid.

If brothers were partners and one of them fell into a public office, it falls to the common benefit. If one [of them] got sick and needed healing, his healing is at his own expense. If certain of the brothers in their father’s lifetime had made a present as groomsmen [at their father’s expense] and [after his death] the present was restored to them, it is restored to the common benefit, for the groomsmen’s gift [counts as a loan] and can be recovered in a court of law. But if [one of the brothers in his father’s lifetime] sent his fellow jars of wine or jars of oil, they cannot be recovered through a court of law, since they count [not as a loan but] as a charitable deed.

These are the relatives [that are not qualified to be witnesses or judges]: A suitor’s father, brother, father’s brother, mother’s brother, sister’s husband, father’s sister’s husband, mother’s sister’s husband, mother’s husband, father-in-law, or wife’s sister’s husband them and their sons and their sons-in-law; also the suitor’s step-son only [but not the stepsons’ sons]. Rabbi Yose said, “Such was the mishnah of Rabbi Akiva, but the first mishnah taught: ‘a suitor’s uncle, or his uncle’s son, and all that are qualified to be his heir. Moreover all that were kinsmen at the time [are disqualified]; but kinsmen that have ceased to be kinsmen become qualified.” Rabbi Judah says: “If a man’s daughter died and left children, her husband still counts as a kinsman.”

And these are liable to be flogged: One who had relations with his sister, or his father's sister, or his mother's sister, or his wife's sister, or his brother's wife, or his father's brother's wife, or a menstruant; A high priest who marries a widow, an ordinary priest who marries a divorcee or a halutzah; An Israelite who marries a mamzereth or natinah, or an Israelite woman who is married to a mamzer or a natin. In the case of a [woman who is both] a divorcee and a widow [a high priest] is liable on two counts. But in the case of a [woman who is both] a divorcee and a halutzah, an ordinary priest is liable only on one count.

Beth Shammai says: [produce pronounced] ownerless with respect to the poor [only] is counted as ownerless. But Beth Hillel says: it is not counted as ownerless unless it is made ownerless also with respect to the rich, as in the year of release (shmittah). If all the sheaves of the field were of one kav each and one was of four kavs, and it was forgotten, Beth Shammai says: it does not count as forgotten, And Beth Hillel says: it counts as forgotten.

A sheaf which was close to a wall or to a stack or to the herd or to [field] utensils, and was forgotten, Beth Shammai says: it does not count as forgotten, And Beth Hillel says: it counts as forgotten.

Rabbi Joshua and Rabbi Yakim, a man of Hadar, testified concerning a jar of ashes of a red heifer which was put over a creeping thing, that they were unclean. Whereas Rabbi Eliezer had pronounced them clean. Rabbi Papias testified concerning one who had vowed two naziriteships, that if he cut his hair after the first one on the thirtieth day, he could cut his hair after the second one on the sixtieth day; and if he cut his hair on the fifty-ninth day he has also fulfilled his duty, for the thirtieth day counts towards the required number.

Rabbi Judah said: be careful in study, for an error in study counts as deliberate sin. Rabbi Shimon said: There are three crowns: the crown of Torah, the crown of priesthood, and the crown of royalty, but the crown of a good name supersedes them all.

A convert who converted and owned a cow: If he slaughtered it before he converted, he is exempt from giving the gifts. If [he slaughtered it] after he converted, he is liable. If there was a doubt about it, he is exempt, for the burden of proof lies upon the claimant. What is ‘the shoulder’? From the joint up to the shoulder-socket of the forelimb, and this is the same for the nazirite. The corresponding part of the hind leg is called the thigh. Rabbi Judah says: the thigh extends from the joint up to the fleshy part of the leg. What counts as ‘the cheek? From the joint of the jaw to the last protrusion of the windpipe.

How does one tithe animals? He brings them to a shed and makes for them a small opening so that two cannot go out at the same time. And he counts them with a rod: one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine. And the one that comes out tenth he marks with red chalk and he says: “Behold, this is [the tithe].” If he did not mark it, or if he did not count them with a rod, or if he counted them while they were crouching or standing, they are still considered tithed. If he had one hundred [lambs] and he took ten or if he had ten and he took one [without counting], this is not [a valid] tithe. Rabbi Yose bar Judah says: this is a [valid] tithe. If one [of the lambs] already counted jumped back into the flock [in the shed] they are all exempt. If one of the lambs that was a tithe jumped back into the flock [in the shed], they all go to pasture until they become unfit for sacrifice, and the owners may eat them in their unfit state.

If two [lambs] came out at the same time, he counts them in pairs. If he counted [the two] as one, the ninth and the tenth are spoiled. If the ninth and the tenth came out at the same time, the ninth and the tenth are spoiled. If he called the ninth the tenth, the tenth the ninth and the eleventh the tenth, all three are holy: the ninth can be eaten when it becomes blemished, the tenth is the tithe and the eleventh is sacrificed as a shelamim, and it can make a substitute, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah said: can one substitute make another substitute? They said in the name of Rabbi Meir: if it were a substitute, it would not have been sacrificed. If he called the ninth the tenth, the tenth the tenth and the eleventh the tenth, the eleventh is not holy. The following is the rule: wherever the name of the tenth [animal] has not been taken away from it, the eleventh is not consecrated.

If one sold a house among the houses of a walled city, he may redeem it at once and at any time during twelve months. This is a kind of interest, yet it is not interest. If the seller died, his son may redeem it. If the purchaser died, it may be redeemed from his son. One counts the year only from the time that he sold it, as it is said, “Before a full year has elapsed” (Leviticus 25:30). When it says a “a full” [year] the extra month is included. Rabbi says: he is allowed a year and its extra month.

A city whose roofs [look as if] they form its wall, Or that was not encompassed by a wall in the days of Joshua ben Nun, is not considered like houses in a walled city. [A house in any of] the following counts a house in a walled city: [those in a city] of no less than three courtyards, having two houses each, which have been encompassed by a wall in the days of Joshua ben Nun, such as the old acropolis of Tzippori, the fort of Gush-Halav, old Yodfat, Gamla, G'dod, Hadid, Ono, Jerusalem and other similar cities.

How so? A spindle stuck into the wall, with [a portion of corpse] of half an olive-size above it and [a portion of corpse] of half an olive-size below it. Even though one [portion] is not directly [above] the other, [the spindle] becomes unclean. Hence it is found that [a movable object] conveys uncleanness to come upon itself whatever its thickness. A pot seller passes by a grave with a yoke over his shoulder, one end of which overshadows a grave, vessels on the other side remain clean. If the yoke is one handbreadth wide, they become unclean. Mounds which are near to a city or to a road, whether they are new or old, are unclean. [As for those that are] far away, new ones are clean but old ones are unclean. What counts as near? Fifty cubits. And old? Sixty years old, the words of Rabbi Meir. R. Judah says: Near means there is none nearer than it, and old means that no one remembers [when it was made].

If one had a scall the size of a split bean and it spread over all his head he becomes clean. The head and the beard do not prevent [one another], the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Shimon says: they do prevent. Rabbi Shimon said: Is there not a logical inference: if the skin of the face and the skin of the body, between which something intervenes, do prevent [one another], the head and the beard, between which nothing intervenes, should they not also prevent [one another]? The head and the beard do not combine, nor is a spreading from one to the other effective. What exactly counts as the beard? From the joint of the jaw to the thyroid cartilage.

[Water from] a spring which is made to pass over into a trough becomes invalid. If it was made to pass over the edge in any quantity, [what is] outside [the trough] is valid, for [the water of] a spring purifies however little its quantity. If it is made to pass over into a pool and then is stopped, the pool counts as a mikveh. If it is made to flow again, it is invalid for zavim and for those with skin disease and for the preparation of the hatat waters until it is known that the former [water] is gone.

These are the men who had a seminal emission who require immersion: If he noticed that his urine issued in drops or was murky: At the beginning he is clean; In the middle and at the end, he is unclean; From the beginning to the end, he is clean. If it was white and viscous, he is unclean. Rabbi Yose says: what is white counts like what is murky.

How [does the rule that] it suffices [to reckon her period of uncleanness from] the time she discovers the flow work? If she was sitting on a bed and was occupied with ritually clean objects and then she leaves [the bed] and then sees [blood flow] she is unclean but the objects are clean. Even though they have said that she conveys uncleanness for a period of twenty-four hours [retroactively] she counts [the seven days of her menstruation] only from the time she observed the flow.

A girl one day old defiles due to menstruation. A girl ten days old defiles due to zivah. A boy one day old defiles due to zivah, and defiles due to scale disease and due to corpse uncleanness; He subjects [his deceased brother's widow] to yibbum [levirate marriage]; He exempts [his mother] from yibbum, He enables her to eat terumah And he disqualifies her from eating terumah; He inherits and transmits inheritance; He who kills him is guilty of murder, And he counts to his father, to his mother and to all his relatives as a fully grown man.

If one lowered wheels or the gear of oxen into water at the time of the hot east wind in order that they might become tightened, this comes under the law of ‘if water be put’. If one took down a beast to drink, the water which came up on its mouth comes under the law of ‘if water be put’, but that which came up on its feet does not come under the law of ‘if water be put’. If he intended that its feet should be washed, even the water that came up on its feet comes under the law of ‘if water be put’. At the time of footsoreness or of threshing it always causes susceptibility to uncleanness. If a deaf-mute, an imbecile or a minor took it down, even though his intention was that its feet should be washed, it does not come under the law of ‘if water be put’, because with these the act alone counts, but not the intention.

One who carries his produce up to the roof because of maggots, and dew came down upon it, it does not come under the law of ‘if water be put’; But if he intended for this to happen, it does come under the law of ‘if water be put’. If a deaf-mute, or a person not of sound senses, or a minor carried it up, although he expected that dew should come down upon it, it does not come under the law of ‘if water be put’, because with these the act alone counts, but not the intention.

If food that was tithe had been rendered susceptible to impurity by a liquid, and a tevul yom or one with unwashed hands touched it, terumah of tithe may still be removed from it in purity, since it only has third degree uncleanness, and third degree uncleanness counts as clean in hullin.

Rebbi Zeriqan and Rebbi Ammi in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: The reason of Rebbi is (Ps. 119:62): “At midnight I get up to thank You for Your just laws.” And it is written (Ps. 119:148): “My eyes preceded night watches.” Rebbi Ḥizqiah said: Rebbi Zeriqan and Rebbi Abba, one explained the reason of Rebbi, the other the reason of Rebbi Nathan. He who explained the reason of Rebbi: “at midnight”. He who explained the reason of Rebbi Nathan (Jud. 7:19): “at the start of the middle watch.” How does Rebbi Nathan uphold the basis of Rebbi’s reason, “at midnight”? Sometimes “at midnight,” sometimes “my eyes preceded night watches.” How is that? When David had a state dinner, “at midnight.” When he ate by himself, “my eyes preceded night watches.” In no case did dawn come and found David asleep. That is what David said (Ps. 57:9): “Wake up, my honor, wake up, o harp and lute, I shall awake dawn.” My honor has to be awake because of the honor of my Creator. My honor counts for nothing before the honor of my Creator. I shall awake dawn, dawn will not awake me. His evil instinct was trying to seduce him and told him: David, usually dawn awakes kings and you say “I shall awake dawn!” Usually kings sleep until three hours into the day and you say “at midnight I get up!” But he answers, “for Your just laws.” What did David do? Rebbi Phineas in the name of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Menaḥem: He took a harp, put it on his headboard, got up at midnight and started playing on it so that his companions in the study of Torah should hear it. What were his companions in the study of Torah saying? When king David studies Torah, certainly we have to do it also! Rebbi Levi said: a lute was hanging in David’s window and in the night the North wind was blowing and moving it and it was playing by itself. This refers to what is written (2Kings 3:15): “It happened when the musical instrument was playing.” It does not say “when he played on the musical instrument” but “when the instrument was playing”; it was playing by itself.

The Holy One, praise to Him, adds good intention to deeds; the Holy One, praise to Him, does not add bad intention to deeds. The Holy One, praise to Him, adds good intention to deeds as it is written (Mal. 3:16): “Then those who fear the Eternal will speak together, each man with his neighbor.” The Holy One, praise to Him, does not add bad intention to deeds (Ps. 66:12): “If I saw mischief in my heart, the Eternal would not listen.” That refers to Israel, but for Gentiles it is the reverse; the Holy One, praise to Him, does not add good intention; bad intention the Holy One, praise to Him, does add. The Holy One, praise to Him, does not add good intention, as it is written (Dan. 6:15): “Until sundown he tried to rescue him;” it does not say “to save him.” The Holy One, praise to Him, adds bad intention: (Obad. 9–10) “From killing. Because of the oppression of your brother Jacob.” But did he kill him? This teaches that he thought about killing him and the verse counts it as if he had killed him.

MISHNAH: Every seah that contains a quarter of seeds from another kind should be diminished; Rebbi Yose says, he must pick it out, whether it be from one kind or from two kinds. Rebbi Simeon said, they said it only for one kind, but the Sages say, everything that is kilaim with the seah counts together for a quarter. When is this said? Grain with grain, legumes with legumes, grain with legumes, legumes with grain. In truth, they said that garden seeds which are not eaten add up together for one in 24 when they fall on a bet seah. Rebbi Simeon said, that which they said to restrict, they also said for leniency. Flax seeds in grain add up together for one in 24 when they fall on a bet seah.

MISHNAH: Anything that is inside the bet rova‘ counts for the measurement of bet rova‘. The surroundings of a vine, a grave, or a rock count for the measurement of bet rova‘. Grain and grain need a bet rova‘, vegetable and vegetable six hand-breadths. Grain and vegetables, vegetables and grain need a bet rova‘. Rebbi Eliezer says, vegetable and grain six hand-breadths. Grain leaning over grain, vegetable over vegetable, grain over vegetable, vegetable over grain, all is permitted except Greek gourd. Rebbi says, also green melon and Egyptian beans, but I prefer their words over my words.

Rebbi Zeïra, Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of Cahana: He who is planting on the Sabbath is guilty because of sowing. Rebbi Zeïra said, he who prunes is like one who plants. If he planted and pruned on the Sabbath, according to Cahana he is guilty on two counts, according to Rebbi Zeïra only on one count. Did not Rebbi Zeïra say the pruner is like the planter, did he say the planter is like the pruner? All was included in the notion of sowing; pruning was singled out for particular stringency. Because pruning was singled out for particular stringency you want to exempt it because of sowing? There is no difference, both according to Cahana and according to Rebbi Zeïra he is guilty on two counts.

Rebbi Zeïra, Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of Cahana: He who is planting on the Sabbath is guilty because of sowing. Rebbi Zeïra said, he who prunes is like one who plants. If he planted and pruned on the Sabbath, according to Cahana he is guilty on two counts, according to Rebbi Zeïra only on one count. Did not Rebbi Zeïra say the pruner is like the planter, did he say the planter is like the pruner? All was included in the notion of sowing; pruning was singled out for particular stringency. Because pruning was singled out for particular stringency you want to exempt it because of sowing? There is no difference, both according to Cahana and according to Rebbi Zeïra he is guilty on two counts.

It was stated: “If somebody planted, sank, or grafted 30 days before the New Year, it counts for him as a full year and he is permitted to keep it in the Sabbatical year. Less than 30 days before the New Year, it does not count for him as a full year and he is not permitted to keep it in the Sabbatical year. Truly, they said, the fruits from this planting are forbidden until the fifteenth of Shevaṭ.” What is the reason? Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan (Lev. 19:24): “And in the year.” How do you understand this? Rebbi Zeïra said (Lev. 19:23): “Three years they shall be uncircumcised for you, and in the [fourth] year.”

Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked before Rebbi Zeїra: Does this mean, the first third for the past, the second third for the future? He said to him, the first third is slow in coming; afterwards it grows rapidly. Rebbi Abba said, Rebbi Zeїra learned that from a competent sharecropper. Samuel said, sixty days for six leaves, six days for sixty leaves. It was stated: “Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, from the appearance of leaves to the bud fifty days, from the bud to the wind-fall fifty days, from wind-fall to figs fifty days. Rebbi says, all of them by forty days.” If somebody harvested figs and does not know when their buds were formed, Rebbi Jonah said he counts a hundred days backwards; if the Fifteenth of Ševaṭ falls in this period he knows when they budded.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, they are really invalid. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, he only counts from the time of writing. But did we not state: “A prozbol is valid, whether predated or postdated, but it only counts from the time of writing”? If you assert this for financial documents, what is the difference between a prozbol and a financial document?

Rebbi Joḥanan said, they are really invalid. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, he only counts from the time of writing. But did we not state: “A prozbol is valid, whether predated or postdated, but it only counts from the time of writing”? If you assert this for financial documents, what is the difference between a prozbol and a financial document?

There, we have stated: “One who counts is praiseworthy, he who measures is better, and he who weighs is the best of the three.” And here, you say so? Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, here for the Great Heave, there for the heave of the tithe. We have stated so: “Eliezer ben Gimel says, from where that one does not give heave by measurement, weight, or count? The verse says (Num. 18:27): ‘Your heave will be thought of for you’. You give heave by thought, you do not give heave by measurement, weight, or count. Just as this is for the Great Heave, so it is for the heave of the tithe.”

It was stated: “A woman should not fill a pot with ‘assasiot and lupines and put them into the oven at the start of the Sabbath, at nightfall. If she did, they are forbidden after the end of the Sabbath until the time they could have been done.” Rebbi Aḥa said: intentionally, following Rebbi Meïr; Rebbi Yose said: unintentionally, following Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Mana said, that is correct, did not Rebbi Yose say, “ He who is planting on the Sabbath, if unintentional, he may keep it, if intentional, he must tear it out. In the Sabbatical year, he must tear it out whether [planting was] unintentional or intentional. Rebbi Jehudah says, it is the other way around. In the Sabbatical, if unintentional, he may keep it, if intentional, he must tear it out, on the Sabbath he must tear it out whether [planting was] unintentional or intentional because the profit of the Sabbath [is forbidden] to him.” And here, since you say that after the end of the Sabbath he has to wait until the time it could have been done, he did not gain anything from the Sabbath. What is the reason of the rabbis? People are suspected about the Sabbatical but not about the Sabbath. Another explanation: One counts Sabbaticals, one does not count Sabbaths. What is this about? If somebody planted less than thirty days before the Sabbatical and now it is the Sabbatical, if it is because of suspicion, there is no suspicion; if it is for counting, it is counted. Less than thirty days before the eighth year and now it is the eighth year, if it is because of suspicion, there is suspicion; can it be explained for counting? But you have to say because of suspicion; they fined for the unintentional because of the intentional.

MISHNAH: For three periods one calibrates the measuring box, for early fruits, late fruits, and in the middle of the summer. He who counts is praiseworthy, he who measures is more praiseworthy, and he who weighs is the most praiseworthy of the three.

There, we have stated: “The following disable and do not fill: Water, whether pure or impure, pickling water, cooking water, afterwine before it became vinegar.” Here, you treat it as food, there as fluid. Rebbi Mana said, here when it is thick, there when it is thin. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, you may even say in both cases thick or thin. Taste counts for heave but not for a miqweh.

MISHNAH: Date honey, apple wine, vinegar from winter grapes, and any other fruit juices from heave, Rebbi Eliezer subjects to [repayment of] value and fifth, but Rebbi Joshua frees [from payment]. Rebbi Eliezer declares them impure as drinks. Rebbi Joshua said, the Sages did not enumerate seven fluids as one counts raw materials for perfumes but they said, seven fluids are impure, all other fluids are pure.

Rebbi Yose understood it from the following: “[I swear] an oath that I shall not eat, when he ate and drank he is guilty on two counts.” The colleagues said, he is guilty only on one count. Rebbi Yose said to them, we say after this, “an oath that I shall neither eat nor drink, when he ate and drank he is guilty on two counts.” It is as if somebody had two loaves before him when he said: [I swear] an oath that I shall not eat this one, and then he said: [I swear] an oath that I shall not eat that one, would he not be guilty on two counts?

Rebbi Yose understood it from the following: “[I swear] an oath that I shall not eat, when he ate and drank he is guilty on two counts.” The colleagues said, he is guilty only on one count. Rebbi Yose said to them, we say after this, “an oath that I shall neither eat nor drink, when he ate and drank he is guilty on two counts.” It is as if somebody had two loaves before him when he said: [I swear] an oath that I shall not eat this one, and then he said: [I swear] an oath that I shall not eat that one, would he not be guilty on two counts?

Rebbi Yose understood it from the following: “[I swear] an oath that I shall not eat, when he ate and drank he is guilty on two counts.” The colleagues said, he is guilty only on one count. Rebbi Yose said to them, we say after this, “an oath that I shall neither eat nor drink, when he ate and drank he is guilty on two counts.” It is as if somebody had two loaves before him when he said: [I swear] an oath that I shall not eat this one, and then he said: [I swear] an oath that I shall not eat that one, would he not be guilty on two counts?

It was stated: “If a Gentile grafted a food-tree on a futile tree, even though a Jew is not permitted to do this, it is obligated for ‘orlah.” From when does one count ‘orlah? From the moment it is planted. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, only those for which intent is important; for example carob trees from Ẓalmon or Gidud; but on a willow it is as if planted in the earth. Rebbi Joḥanan said, even on a willow. But did we not state: “One does not plant, sink, or graft in the year preceding a Sabbatical year later than thirty days before the New Year; if he planted, sank, or grafted it should be uprooted.” According to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish who will explain it by grafting on a willow it is understandable. According to Rebbi Joḥanan who said even on a willow, why should it be uprooted? There is a difference because they unite in the Sabbatical year. And that is what has been said, “If somebody planted, sank, or grafted 30 days before the New Year, it counts for him as a full year and he is permitted to keep it in the Sabbatical year. Less than 30 days before the New Year, it does not count for him as a full year and he is not permitted to keep it in the Sabbatical year. Truly, they said, the fruits from this planting are forbidden until the fifteenth of Shevaṭ.” Rebbi Joshua from Ono stated: There is no “grafted” here. Rebbi Abba Mari said, even for Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish there is no “grafted” here; for the past, certainly not to start out with.

MISHNAH: If a tree was moved with its lump, if it can survive it is exempt, otherwise obligated. If the lump was partially moved, or the plough displaced it and turned it into dust, if the tree can survive it is exempt, otherwise obligated. If a tree was cut but there remained a root, it is exempt. How large shall the root be? Rabban Gamliel in the name of Rebbi Eleazar ben Jehudah from Birtota: Like a tenter’s needle. If a tree was uprooted but it had a sunken branch and now lives off that, the original trunk becomes like the sunken branch. If he sank year after year and it was interrupted, one counts from the moment it was interrupted. Attachment of vines, attachment after attachment, even if he sank them into the earth, are permitted. Rebbi Meïr says, where it is in its force it is permitted, where it is weak it is forbidden. A sunk branch which became separated but is full of fruits, if it increased by one twohundredth it is forbidden.

Does one not count other pomegranates? But Badan pomegranates one usually counts because they are preferred; other pomegranates one does not usually count because they are not preferred.

Rav Jehudah in the name of Rav: Everybody agrees that for carrying out one is not liable. It is everybody’s opinion that walking counts as if one was putting down. Where do they disagree? If one is throwing, for Ben Azzai declares him not liable but the Sages declare him liable. Ben Azzai considers the air space over karmelit like its essence but the Sages consider the air space over karmelit not like its essence.

It was stated: “A woman should not fill a pot with ˋassisiot and lupines and put them into the oven at the start of the Sabbath, at nightfall. If she did, they are forbidden after the end of the Sabbath until the time they could have been done.” Rebbi Aḥa said: intentionally, following Rebbi Meïr; Rebbi Yose said: unintentionally, following Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Mana said, what my teacher Rebbi Yose said is correct: “He who is planting on the Sabbath, if unintentional, he may keep it, if intentional, he must tear it out. In the Sabbatical year, he must tear it out whether [planting was] unintentional or intentional. Rebbi Jehudah says, it is the other way around. If he was planting on the Sabbath he must tear it out whether it was unintentional or intentional; in the Sabbatical, if unintentional, he may keep it, if intentional, he must tear it out. Why? Because the profit of the Sabbath [is forbidden] to him.” And here, since you say that after the end of the Sabbath he has to wait until the time it could have been done, he did not gain anything from the Sabbath. What is the reason of the rabbis? People are suspected about the Sabbatical but not about the Sabbath. Another explanation: One counts Sabbaticals, one does not count Sabbaths. What is this about? If somebody planted less than thirty days before the Sabbatical and now it is the Sabbatical, if it is because of suspicion, there is no suspicion; if it is for counting, it is not counted. Less than thirty days before the eighth year and now it is the eighth year, if it is because of suspicion, there is suspicion; if it is because of counting, there is counting. It follows him who says because of suspicion, but for him who says because of counting they fined the unintentional because of the intentional.

An adult who was taken captive among Gentiles. Rav and Samuel, one said, he counts six and keeps the Sabbath, but the other said, he keeps the Sabbath and counts six. Rebbi Isaac ben Eleazar in the name of Rav Naḥman bar Jacob: he counts six and keeps the Sabbath, five and keeps the Sabbath, four and keeps the Sabbath, three and keeps the Sabbath, two and keeps the Sabbath, one and keeps the Sabbath. Rebbi Mana said, if he was abducted on Tuesday he makes the Sabbath (great was his power) [profane]. At the second period he makes the Sabbath (if not to wonder) [only the eighth]. Therefore he should worry about all days, as by the following: If he preliminarily married a woman in Elam. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa: Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Joḥanan says, he worries about all women. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, he does not worry about all women. There he has a fix, he may marry a convert, he may marry a freedwoman. Here what do you have? There, they are saying, he worries about all days and works for the necessities of life.

An adult who was taken captive among Gentiles. Rav and Samuel, one said, he counts six and keeps the Sabbath, but the other said, he keeps the Sabbath and counts six. Rebbi Isaac ben Eleazar in the name of Rav Naḥman bar Jacob: he counts six and keeps the Sabbath, five and keeps the Sabbath, four and keeps the Sabbath, three and keeps the Sabbath, two and keeps the Sabbath, one and keeps the Sabbath. Rebbi Mana said, if he was abducted on Tuesday he makes the Sabbath (great was his power) [profane]. At the second period he makes the Sabbath (if not to wonder) [only the eighth]. Therefore he should worry about all days, as by the following: If he preliminarily married a woman in Elam. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa: Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Joḥanan says, he worries about all women. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, he does not worry about all women. There he has a fix, he may marry a convert, he may marry a freedwoman. Here what do you have? There, they are saying, he worries about all days and works for the necessities of life.

An adult who was taken captive among Gentiles. Rav and Samuel, one said, he counts six and keeps the Sabbath, but the other said, he keeps the Sabbath and counts six. Rebbi Isaac ben Eleazar in the name of Rav Naḥman bar Jacob: he counts six and keeps the Sabbath, five and keeps the Sabbath, four and keeps the Sabbath, three and keeps the Sabbath, two and keeps the Sabbath, one and keeps the Sabbath. Rebbi Mana said, if he was abducted on Tuesday he makes the Sabbath (great was his power) [profane]. At the second period he makes the Sabbath (if not to wonder) [only the eighth]. Therefore he should worry about all days, as by the following: If he preliminarily married a woman in Elam. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa: Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Joḥanan says, he worries about all women. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, he does not worry about all women. There he has a fix, he may marry a convert, he may marry a freedwoman. Here what do you have? There, they are saying, he worries about all days and works for the necessities of life.

[Rebbi] Zeˋira, Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of Cahana: He who is planting on the Sabbath is guilty because of sowing. Rebbi Zeˋira said, he who prunes is like one who plants. If he planted and pruned on the Sabbath, according to Cahana he is guilty on two counts, according to Rebbi Zeˋira only on one count. Did not Rebbi Zeˋira say the pruner is like the planter, did he say perhaps the planter is like the pruner? All was included in the category of sowing; pruning was singled out for particular stringency. Because pruning was singled out for particular stringency you want to exempt it because of sowing? This means, there is no difference. If he planted and pruned on the Sabbath, according to both Cahana and Rebbi Zeˋira he is guilty on two counts.

[Rebbi] Zeˋira, Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of Cahana: He who is planting on the Sabbath is guilty because of sowing. Rebbi Zeˋira said, he who prunes is like one who plants. If he planted and pruned on the Sabbath, according to Cahana he is guilty on two counts, according to Rebbi Zeˋira only on one count. Did not Rebbi Zeˋira say the pruner is like the planter, did he say perhaps the planter is like the pruner? All was included in the category of sowing; pruning was singled out for particular stringency. Because pruning was singled out for particular stringency you want to exempt it because of sowing? This means, there is no difference. If he planted and pruned on the Sabbath, according to both Cahana and Rebbi Zeˋira he is guilty on two counts.

HALAKHAH: Does the Mishnah follow Rebbi Yose who said, “one always saves food for three meals”? Since all is one body, all of it counts as one meal.

MISHNAH: A person counts his guests and his desserts orally but not from a written list. A person may make a lottery with his children and his family on the table on condition that he not make portions large or small, because of gambling. One casts lots on sancta on the holiday but not on portions.

From where the Four Cups? Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Benaiah: Corresponding to the four deliveries: Therefore, say to the Children of Israel, I am the Eternal, and I shall take you out, etc. And I shall take you as My people, etc. I shall take you, I shall save you, I shall free you, I shall take you. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, corresponding to the four cups of Pharao: The cup of Pharao was in my hand; I took the grapes and squeezed them into Pharao ’s cup, and gave the cup in Pharao ’s hand. You will give the cup in the hand of Pharao. Rebbi Levi said, corresponding to the four kingdoms. But our teachers say, corresponding to the four cups of doom that the Holy One, praise to Him, will make the Gentiles drink at the end of days. Truly, so said the Eternal, the God of Israel, to me: take this cup of the wine of wrath. The golden cup of Babylon is in the hand of the Eternal. Truly a cup is in the hand of the Eternal, intoxicating wine, fully to be mixed; He shall sprinkle from it but its dregs shall be drunk, squeezed to the last, by all the wicked of the earth. He shall let coals rain on the wicked; fire, sulphur, and burning wind is the portion of their cup. What does the portion of their cup mean? R. Abun said: a double cup like the double cup taken after a thermal bath. And in accordance with this correspondingly the Holy One, praised be He, will let Israel drink four cups of consolation at the End of Days: The Eternal is the portion of my part and my cup. You anointed my head with oil; my cup is overflowing. I shall lift up the cup of salvations counts for two.

Rebbi Yose understood all this from the following: “An oath that I shall not eat; when he ate and drank he is liable only once.” The colleagues said before Rebbi Yose, but it is said following this, “an oath that I shall not eat nor drink, when he ate and drank he is liable for two”! Rebbi Yose told them, if somebody had two loaves in front of him said, an oath that I shall not eat this loaf, when he ate [both of them] together would he not be guilty on two counts?

HALAKHAH: “There are four New Year’s Days,” etc. It is written, this month shall be for you the head of the months. For you it is the head of the months but it is head neither for years nor for Sabbatical periods nor for Jubilees nor for planting nor for vegetables. And I could say, for you it is the head of the months but it is head neither for kings nor for holidays. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: It is written, he started to build in the second month, in the second, in the fourth year of his reign. It bracketed the fourth year of his reign with the second of the months. Since the second of the months is only counted from Nisan, also the second in the fourth year of his reign is only counted from Nisan. Or is it only the second in the month? Any place where the second day in the month is intended it is explicit. Or is it only the second in the week? We do not find this count in the Torah. But is it not written, it was evening and it was morning, the second day? One makes no inferences from the Creation of the World. Which one is the second of the months and which one is the second of the years? Rebbi Ḥanania and Rebbi Mana. One said, he started to build in the second month, that is the second of the months; in the second, that is the second in the year. But the other one, even if you switch it does not change anything. Rebbi Simeon bar Karsana in the name of Rebbi Aḥa understood it from the following: This month is for you, an exclusion. The first it be for you, [an exclusion.] An exclusion after an exclusion is to include for kings and holidays. Could one include for years, or for Sabbatical periods, or for Jubilees, or for planting, or for vegetables? Following what Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan said: It is written, he started to build in the second month, in the second, in the fourth year of his reign. It bracketed the fourth year of his reign with the second of the months. Since the second of the months is only counted from Nisan, also the second in the fourth year of his reign is only counted from Nisan. Rebbi Jonah, Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph: He started to build in the second month, that is the second of the months; in the second, that is the second in the year. And when he says, in the fourth year of his reign, it bracketed the fourth year of his reign with the second of the months. Since the second of the months is only counted from Nisan, also the second in the fourth year of his reign is only counted from Nisan. Samuel stated and disagreed: In the third month of the Israelites’ exodus from Egypt. From here that one counts months from the exodus from Egypt. Not only months, from where years? The Eternal spoke to Moses in the wilderness of Sinai in the second year. Not only at that time, from where later? In the fortieth year of the Israelites’ exodus from Egypt. Not only temporarily, from where for later generations? It was in the 480th year of the Israelites’ exodus from Egypt, etc. After the Temple had been built they started to count from its building: It was at the end of twenty years after Salomon built the two houses. They did not merit to count from its building, they started counting from its destruction: In the twenty-fifth year of our exile, on New Year’s Day, on the tenth of the month, etc. They did not merit to count for themselves, they started counting regnal years, [as it is written,] in year two of Darius; in year three of Cyrus, king of Persia. And I am saying, he started to build in the second month, in the second, in the fourth year of his reign. It bracketed the fourth year of his reign with the second of the months. Since the second of the months is only counted from Nisan, also the second in the fourth year of his reign is only counted from Nisan.

Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: Also for the kings of the peoples of the world one only counts from Nisan. In the sixth, in year two of Darius. In the eighth, [in year] two of Darius. Should we not say, “in the eighth in year three”? Heipha said, the eighth was said first but there is no earlier and later in the Torah. Rebbi Jonah said, it is written: and now take notice, starting with this day, before a stone is set upon stone in the Temple of the Eternal. How is this? In the sixth the foundation stone was laid. In the eighth this verse was said. If you are saying, they already laid, Heipha is correct. If you are saying, they did not lay, Heipha did not say anything. Rebbi Isaac objected: Is it not written, it was in the 601-st year, in the first, on the first day of the month? And it was stated on this, the year of the Flood is not counted. Explain it following Rebbi Eliezer, as Rebbi Eliezer said, in Tishre was the world created. But is it not written, it was in the month of Nisan of year twenty; it was in the month of Kislew of year twenty? Explain it following Rebbi Eliezer, as Rebbi Eliezer said, any year of which 30 days have not elapsed is not counted as a full year. But is it not written, It was in the first month of the second year, on the first of the month, when the Sanctuary was erected? If you are saying that it was the third year and because 30 days had not elapsed it is not counted as a full year, is it not written, it was in the second year in the second month, on the twentieth of the month? There are 50 days in the year, and it would not be counted as a whole year? That is one of Rebbi Isaac’s answers which are difficult.

What is the difference whether one says that one counts from Nisan or one counts from Tishre? Rebbi Jonah says, the difference is the proof power of documents. If he took a loan in Iyar and wrote in it, the second year of government; he sold real estate in Marḥeshwan and wrote in it, the second year of government. For him who says that one counts from Nisan, the loan preceded. For him who said that one counts from Tishre, the sale preceded.

What is the difference whether one says that one counts from Nisan or one counts from Tishre? Rebbi Jonah says, the difference is the proof power of documents. If he took a loan in Iyar and wrote in it, the second year of government; he sold real estate in Marḥeshwan and wrote in it, the second year of government. For him who says that one counts from Nisan, the loan preceded. For him who said that one counts from Tishre, the sale preceded.

What is the difference whether one says that one counts from Nisan or one counts from Tishre? Rebbi Jonah says, the difference is the proof power of documents. If he took a loan in Iyar and wrote in it, the second year of government; he sold real estate in Marḥeshwan and wrote in it, the second year of government. For him who says that one counts from Nisan, the loan preceded. For him who said that one counts from Tishre, the sale preceded.

What is the difference whether one says that one counts from Nisan or one counts from Tishre? Rebbi Jonah says, the difference is the proof power of documents. If he took a loan in Iyar and wrote in it, the second year of government; he sold real estate in Marḥeshwan and wrote in it, the second year of government. For him who says that one counts from Nisan, the loan preceded. For him who said that one counts from Tishre, the sale preceded.

How for kings? If he died in Adar and a king took office in Adar it is counted as a year for both of them. Rebbi Jonah said, only if he reached Nisan. Otherwise like the following, he ruled one month in Samaria. You can determine the years of the kings of Israel only through the years of the kings of Jehudah, and you can determine the years of the kings of Jehudah only through the years of the kings of Israel. It is written: And the time that David ruled over Israel was forty years, etc. And it is written, in Hebron he ruled over Jehudah seven years and six months, etc. In total they are deficient and in detail excessive. Rebbi Isaac bar Qaṣaṣata in the name of Rebbi Jonah: they were thirty-two and a half years, but to honor Jerusalem he counts them as entire. The great Jehudah says, the greater number absorbs the lesser. Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman said, when your days will be complete. The Holy One, praise to Him, said to David: I am counting full days for you, I am not counting missing days for you. [Will not your son Solomon build the Temple to sacrifice? Law and justice that you are upholding is more to my liking than sacrifices, as it is said, upholding justice and law is preferred by the Eternal to sacrifice.] Rav Huna said, the entire six months during which David was in flight before his son Absalom, his sins would have been atoned for by a female goat as for a commoner. Rebbi Yudan ben Rebbi Shalom said, it is written, for six months dwelt there Joab and all of Israel. The Holy One, praise to Him, said to him: I did tell you, do not attack them, but you desired to attack them. By your life, they will not be counted for you.

How for saplings? It was stated: “If somebody planted, sank, or grafted 30 days before the New Year, it counts for him as a full year and he is permitted to keep it in the Sabbatical year. Less than 30 days before the New Year, it does not count as a full year and he is not permitted to keep it in the Sabbatical year. Truly, they said, the fruits of this planting are forbidden until the fifteenth of Shevaṭ.” What is the reason? Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: And in year [the fourth]. How do you understand this? Rebbi Ze`ira said, three years they shall be uncircumcised, and in year. Rebbi Abba bar Mamal said before Rebbi Ze`ira: It is understandable if he planted it 30 days before the New Year. But if it was not planted 30 days before the New Year? Come and see: Is not a full year being counted for him, and you say so? He said to him: If it is so, even if he planted 30 days before the New Year, should it not be forbidden until 30 days before the New Year? What about it? Rebbi Mana said, since it stands in the middle of its year, it has to finish its year.

Rebbi Shila from Kefar Tamarta in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He made the moon for festive times, the sun knows its destination. Because the sun knows its destination, He made the moon for festive times. Rebbi Berekhiah said, it is written: They travelled from Rameses in the first month,etc. When {the sun} sets on the nights of the holiday there were fourteen settings preceding it. This means that one counts for the moon from the setting of the sun. Rebbi Simon said, they shall be, by both of them. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it was evening, it was morning, one day. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, the month, until it be totally from the new one. You are finding to say, what Rebbi Joḥanan said requires the statement of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, and what Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said requires the statement of Rebbi Joḥanan. If Rebbi Joḥanan had stated his but Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish had not made his statement, we would have said that he only said that all might be from the new one. Therefore it is necessary that Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish made his statement. Or if Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish had stated his but Rebbi Joḥanan had not made his statement, we would have said that he stated day, therefore not night. Therefore what Rebbi Joḥanan said is necessary and what Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said is necessary.

As it was stated: It happened that Rebbi Joḥanan ben Beroqa and Rebbi Eleazar Ḥasma were walking from Jabneh to Lydda when they were visiting Rebbi Joshua in Beqi`in. He asked them, what was new today in the House of Study? They said to him, we all are your students and drink from your waters. He said to them, even so, it is impossible that there not be a new idea every day in the House of Study. Who stayed there over the Sabbath? They said to him, Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah. And what was his text? Assemble the people, men, women, and toddlers. He started by saying, since men come to learn and women to listen, why do the toddlers come? It must be to give a reward to those who bring them. He said to them, a generation is not orphaned which counts Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah among them.

HALAKHAH: “The decree of seven”, sandal and soap. “The decree of thirty,” mending, and pressing, and shaving. What is pressing? New pressed woolen garments, and pressed white linen garments. Rebbi Ḥelbo, Rav Ḥuna in the name of Rav: If his eighth day fell on a Sabbath, he shaves on Friday. How is this possible? Explain it if he had been dragged away by a wild animal and they gave up hope to look after him. It was stated thus: When do you start to count for somebody who was dragged away by a wild animal? When they gave up hope to look after him. If they found separate limbs of him one counts when his head and most of his body had been found. Rebbi Jehudah says, spine and skull form the majority. Rebbi Abun said, explain it that the cover plate was laid Friday evening at the start of darkness. How is this possible? Rebbi Aḥa said, explain it if it was closed by a Gentile. Some wanted to say that he received a current notice on the Sabbath.

Rebbi Eleazar instructed Simeon bar Abba: the holiday is counted in the count of thirty. Rebbi Yose said, we find that thirty precede seven: “The decree of seven is cancelled for him who buried his dead three days before the holiday.” He only said three, therefore not two. That is what you are saying, in private; but the public does not occupy themselves with him. It was stated this way: One who buried his dead three days during the holiday counts seven after the holiday. During the first three days the public occupies themselves with him; the last four days the public do not occupy themselves with him. His work is done by others and his slaves and animals work in privacy at other places. Does one visit him? Rebbi Jacob bar Idi in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: Did they not say that there is no mourning on the Sabbath? Why did they say that one visits him? Not to honor? So here to honor. Similarly, one day before the holiday cancels the decree of two.

If he came and found mourning in his house. On the second or third {day} he finishes with them. On the fourth he counts by himself. Rebbi Simeon says, even on the (sixth) [fourth] he finishes with them. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, practice follows Rebbi Simeon if he was not the head of the family. But the head of the family counts by himself. As the following: Rebbi Mana instructed Rebbi <jacob in> Armenia: since you are the head of the family, count by yourself. <this you are saying> if he did not see most of the people. But if most of the people were seen by him one takes him to the bath house. As the following: Rav <rebbi> Huna instructed the brother of Rebbi Jehudah bar Zavdi, since most of the people were seen by him, take him to the bath house.

If he came and found mourning in his house. On the second or third {day} he finishes with them. On the fourth he counts by himself. Rebbi Simeon says, even on the (sixth) [fourth] he finishes with them. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, practice follows Rebbi Simeon if he was not the head of the family. But the head of the family counts by himself. As the following: Rebbi Mana instructed Rebbi <jacob in> Armenia: since you are the head of the family, count by yourself. <this you are saying> if he did not see most of the people. But if most of the people were seen by him one takes him to the bath house. As the following: Rav <rebbi> Huna instructed the brother of Rebbi Jehudah bar Zavdi, since most of the people were seen by him, take him to the bath house.

If he was informed on the holiday about the death of a relative but the Thirty were completed before the end of the holiday. The colleagues are saying, since he was informed within the Thirty, he counts Seven after the Thirty. Rebbi Yose said to them, since he heard at a moment where he could not mourn it is as if he was informed after Thirty(;) [and] he observes only one day. Rabbi Idi of Caesarea in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If he received recent information on the Sabbath, he tears {his garment} the next day and mourns. Rebbi Ḥanania said, he does not mourn. Rebbi Mana said to him, is there tearing without mourning? Since for his father or his mother even after a length of time he is obligated to tear. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Even as derivative of a derivative he is forbidden to shave. As the following: Rebbi Mana was in Caesarea. He heard that his grandson had died, and he went and eulogized. They said to him, did the Rabbi not teach us, even as derivative of a derivative he is forbidden to shave? He said to them, those who were with him. We were not there. Rebbi Eudaimon bar Tobi in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: even as derivative of a derivative he is obligated to tear, as Rebbi Abbahu said, groan silently, from here that he has to cry. Do not arrange mourning for the dead, from here that he has to mourn. Your splendor put on yourself, some want to say, these are tefillin. Some want to say, this is pressing. He who says these are tefillin; just as tefillin refer to two days, also mourning two days? He who says this is pressing; just as pressing is for thirty days, also mourning thirty days? Put your shoes on your feet, from here that he is forbidden wearing shoes. And do not cover your mustache, from here that he has to cover his mouth. Could he cover it from below? Rav Ḥisda said, so they should not say, he has a mouth-ache. And do not eat men’s bread, from here that the smaller ones go to the greater ones. And from where that the greater ones go to the smaller ones? Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac said, it is written: For so says the Eternal, do not go to a funeral repast, etc.