maybe

And now, my children, harken: work judgment and righteousness that ye maybe planted in righteousness over the face of the whole earth, and your glory lifted up before my God, who saved me from the waters of the flood.

Jesus said, "Maybe people think that I've come to cast peace on the world, and they don't know that I've come to cast divisions on the earth: fire, sword, and war. Where there are five in a house, there'll be three against two and two against three, father against and son and son against father. They'll stand up and be one."

He said, "A [creditor] owned a vineyard. He leased it out to some sharecroppers to work it so he could collect its fruit. "He sent his servant so that the sharecroppers could give him the fruit of the vineyard. They seized his servant, beat him, and nearly killed him. "The servant went back and told his master. His master said, 'Maybe he just didn't know them.' He sent another servant, but the tenants beat that one too. "Then the master sent his son, thinking, 'Maybe they'll show some respect to my son.' "Because they knew that he was the heir of the vineyard, the sharecroppers seized and killed him. Anyone who has ears to hear should hear!"

He said, "A [creditor] owned a vineyard. He leased it out to some sharecroppers to work it so he could collect its fruit. "He sent his servant so that the sharecroppers could give him the fruit of the vineyard. They seized his servant, beat him, and nearly killed him. "The servant went back and told his master. His master said, 'Maybe he just didn't know them.' He sent another servant, but the tenants beat that one too. "Then the master sent his son, thinking, 'Maybe they'll show some respect to my son.' "Because they knew that he was the heir of the vineyard, the sharecroppers seized and killed him. Anyone who has ears to hear should hear!"

We have stated: Rebbi Yehudah said: It happened that once I was walking behind Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah and Rebbi Aqiba when they were occupied with duties and time came to recite the Shema‘ and I got the opinion that maybe they had given up on reciting the Shema‘, so I recited it and went over my studies; but after that they started and the sun was already over the mountain tops.

HALAKHAH: Who stated that the mourner is forbidden to take a bath during the entire seven days? Rebbi Nathan. Something happened to Rebbi Ammi, he asked Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba who instructed him “all seven days following Rebbi Nathan”. Something happened to Rebbi Yose; he sent Rebbi Abba bar Cohen to Rebbi Aḥa; he said to him: Rebbi, did you not so teach us that something happened to Rebbi Ammi, he asked Resh Laqish who instructed him “all seven days following Rebbi Nathan”. He said to him, maybe these were two separate incidents, we say it in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, you say it in the name of Resh Laqish. And also from the following: Something happened to Rebbi Ḥama, father of Rebbi Oshaya, he asked the rabbis and they forbade it.

A clarification. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba and his group, some say Rebbi Yose bar Ḥalaphta and his group, and some say Rebbi Jacob and his group, were sitting to study Torah under a fig tree. The owner of the fig tree was coming every morning at sunrise and collected figs. They said, maybe he mistrusts us, let us change place. The next day, the owner of the fig tree came to them; he said to them: the one miẓwah that you used to do with me you are withholding from me. They said to him: We thought that maybe you mistrust us. During the morning he came and informed them that if the sun shines on ripe figs they get wormy. At that time they said, the owner of the fig tree knows the best time to collect figs and he collects them. Likewise, the Holy One, praise to Him, knows the time of the just ones to be removed from the world and He removes them.

A clarification. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba and his group, some say Rebbi Yose bar Ḥalaphta and his group, and some say Rebbi Jacob and his group, were sitting to study Torah under a fig tree. The owner of the fig tree was coming every morning at sunrise and collected figs. They said, maybe he mistrusts us, let us change place. The next day, the owner of the fig tree came to them; he said to them: the one miẓwah that you used to do with me you are withholding from me. They said to him: We thought that maybe you mistrust us. During the morning he came and informed them that if the sun shines on ripe figs they get wormy. At that time they said, the owner of the fig tree knows the best time to collect figs and he collects them. Likewise, the Holy One, praise to Him, knows the time of the just ones to be removed from the world and He removes them.

May a Cohen defile himself for the lifting of hands? Gedilah, the brother of Rebbi Abba bar Cohen said before Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Aḥa: A Cohen defiles himself for the lifting of hands. Rebbi Aḥa heard it and said: I never told him anything. On second thoughts he said, maybe he heard from me that which Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Every Cohen who stays in the synagogue and does not lift his hands transgresses a positive commandment, and he wanted to say that a positive commandment supersedes a negative commandment. I never told him anything. Bring him in and I will cause him to be flogged!

Similarly, he who urinates should not pray until he walks four cubits. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said: not only that he walks four cubits but even if he waits corresponding to a walk of four cubits. Rebbi Ammi said, if you say that he is forbidden until he removes himself four cubits, I say that maybe somebody else came and urinated there.

Rebbi Judan said in his own name: Flesh and blood has a protector. If someone is in trouble, he does not enter the protector’s place suddenly but rather stands at his door and calls his slave or familiar and that one will say: the man X is standing at the door of your courtyard. Maybe he will make him enter, maybe he will let him stand. But the Holy One, praise to Him, is not like this: If a human is in trouble, he should cry neither to Michael nor to Gabriel, rather he should cry to Me and I shall answer him immediately; that is what is written (Joel 3:5): “Every one who calls on the name of the Eternal will escape.”

Rebbi Judan said in his own name: Flesh and blood has a protector. If someone is in trouble, he does not enter the protector’s place suddenly but rather stands at his door and calls his slave or familiar and that one will say: the man X is standing at the door of your courtyard. Maybe he will make him enter, maybe he will let him stand. But the Holy One, praise to Him, is not like this: If a human is in trouble, he should cry neither to Michael nor to Gabriel, rather he should cry to Me and I shall answer him immediately; that is what is written (Joel 3:5): “Every one who calls on the name of the Eternal will escape.”

When does one recite the benediction for šeḥiṭah? Rebbi Yoḥanan says, if he prepares to slaughter. Yose ben Nehorai says, after he slaughtered. Why? Maybe its slaughtering is producing a carcass. Now, should he not first check the signs? The ḥazaqah of intestines is that they are in order. It was stated: If it was slaughtered and the wolves took its innards, it is in order. Should one question whether they were pierced? Rebbi Abba in the name of the rabbis from there: Intestines have ḥazaqah that they are in order.

he says that “one obolus and two silver coins are the word of the Torah.” Rebbi Hoshaia follows his own opinion since Rebbi Hoshaia said: He who eats forbidden food in the present time has to note down the quantities; maybe a new court will arise and change the measures for him; then he will know what measure he ate.

“Honoring father and mother.” Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: They asked Rebbi Eliezer, how far does honoring father and mother go? He said to them, you are asking me? Go and ask Dama ben Netinah. Dama ben Netinah was the head of the city council. Once his mother was slapping him in front of the entire council and a slipper fell from her hand, and he handed it back to her so that she should feel no inconvenience. Rebbi Ḥizqiah said: He was a Gentile from Ascalon and the head of the city council. He never sat on the stone on which his father used to sit and when his father died, he worshipped the stone. Once the jaspis of Benjamin was lost. They inquired, who would have one of similar quality? They were informed that Dama ben Netinah did. They went to him and and agreed on 100 denars. He went to the upper floor to bring it and found his father sleeping. Some say that the key to the chest was in his father’s fingers; some say his father’s foot was resting on the chest. He descended to them and told them: I could not bring it to you. They thought, maybe he wants more money, and raised the price to two hundred, then to a thousand. When his father woke up from his sleep, he went up and brought it to them. They wanted to give him according to the amount mentioned last, but he refused. He said: Do I sell my father’s honor for money? I will not have any advantage from honoring my father. What reward did the Holy One, praise to Him, give him? Rebbi Yose bar Abun said: The following night, his cow gave birth to a red heifer and Israel gave him its weight in gold and took it. Rebbi Sabbatai said (Job 37:23): “Justice and much charity He will not suppress.” The Holy One, praise to Him, will not wait to give the reward for good deeds to the Gentiles.

HALAKHAH: “One may give peah from the head of the field and from its middle.” Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Simeon bar Laqish: (Lev. 19:9) “And at your harvesting,” why does the verse have to say “to harvest”? Even if he has still more to harvest. Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Simeon bar Laqish: (Lev. 19:9) “And at your harvesting,” why does the verse have to say “to harvest”? One for the beginning and one for the end. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: (Lev. 19:9) “And at your harvesting,” why does the verse have to say “to harvest”? One for sacred property and one for private persons. Rebbi Yudan asked, do not coins redeem sacred property only when it is cut; maybe when it is standing? Rebbi Ḥaninah said, you should not say that harvest of sacred property should be treated like harvest of a private person.

Rebbi Zeïra asked before Rebbi Yasa: If he intended to let them acquire from the boundary strip? He avoided answering him. The opinions of Rebbi Yasa are contradictory since we have stated there (Mishnah 3:2): “The sages agree with Rebbi Aqiba about someone who sowed dill or mustard in three places.” (The Mishnah means: dill in three places or mustard in three places.) Samuel said, because the first of them does not wait for the last. Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Because they are usually sown in separate beds. And here he says so? It is obvious for him that it separates. What he could not decide is whether it does become sanctified as peah or maybe it does not become sanctified! Rebbi Hoshaiah stated: If someone gave peah from one field for another one, it does not acquire holiness. One understands that this means even the boundary strip.

If he wrote for one and changed his mind and wrote for another, Rav says he cannot change his mind, Rav Abba bar Ḥuna and Rebbi Joḥanan say he may change his mind. What does it mean? If his first and second masters were Cohanim and the third an Israel, in the opinion of Rav he may not eat terumah, in the opinion of Rav Abba bar Ḥuna in the name of R. Joḥanan he may eat terumah. Everybody agrees that if his first master was an Israel, he may not eat terumah; maybe the giver will recuperate.

It was stated: It may be eaten in strict mourning but not in impurity. What is the difference between strict mourning and impurity? Rav Naḥman said, impurity is frequent, strict mourning is infrequent. They made a decree for a frequent situation, they did not decree for an infrequent situation. Rebbi Yose said, they did not even make it similar to a doubt of ṭevel. Since for a doubt of ṭevel, whether Second Tithe was given in order, or maybe Second Tithe was not given in order, is that not forbidden for the strict mourner? But here, it is permitted to the mourner.

Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked before Rebbi La: Why demay and not also what is certain, why a little bit, maybe the greater part? Did we not state: One does not bring the heave from the threshing floor to town, nor from the prairie to cultivated land, except in a place where [an animal] would drag it away; in that case he brings it and takes money from the tribe. He said to him, is it not a commandment to return a find? Rebbi Yose said, it is a commandment to return a find in small matters; it is not a commandment to return in large matters, except if it is certain; it is not a commandment to return demay since we have stated: “one may destroy a small part of it on the road”. So far, if he had no money in hand. If he had money in hand? Rebbi Neḥumai, the son of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, said, my father had money in a double sack and he did not redeem. It turns out that Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba holds with Rebbi Zeïra and Rebbi Aḥa with Rebbi Immi.

May one determine the Second in place of the First? His sharecropper brought fruits to Rebbi Yose ben Shaul. He said to him, go and fix a place for the Second. He returned, and he told him, go and fix a place for the First. Should he not worry that maybe the Second was fixed at a place reserved for the First? This means that it is permitted to determine the Second in place of the First.

.What is the difference between them? Rebbi Simeon says, he separates and takes money from the tribe. The rabbis say that he separates and does not take money from the tribe. But is it not even like heave from outside the Land, does he not take money from the tribe? Maybe it was said on the principle of ṭevel for produce of the Gentile? Since we have stated: Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Simeon say, a Gentile may acquire real estate in the Land of Israel to free it from the tithes imposed on it. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Ḥiyya. in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Rebbi Simeon agrees that nevertheless he must separate tithes as a matter of practice.

Rebbi Jonah asked: May he ask him in a roundabout way? Rebbi Jonah asks in this way. Rebbi Jonah bought wheat from Bar Ḥaqulah. He went to him and said, not that I suspect you, but since I bought wheat from you and I saw a multitude with you, I said maybe you forgot to put them in order. Were they put in order? He complained strongly about him and said: Why do you suspect me?

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

That takes care of large quantities. If there was little, if he had ten figs, five large ones and five small ones? If he takes from the large ones, he has to take one minus a little. From the little ones, he has to take one plus a little. If he took one of the large ones, it contains a little bit of profane and one has to worry that maybe he turns that profane part into heave of the tithe for another place, and it is written (Num. 18:26): “The heave of the Eternal, tithe from tithe,” not profane from tithe. Rebbi Abba from Carthage said, he stipulates and says, the tithe due from this produce should be fixed from the tip of each stem and he marks it and says to the Cohen, as far as where I marked it.

HALAKHAH: It was stated: “Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Simeon prohibit to do so, maybe the wine bag will spring a leak and it turns out retroactively that he drank ṭevel.” But the reason of one is not the reason of the other. The reason of Rebbi Yose is that maybe he will pour. The reason of Rebbi Simeon is that maybe he will forget and drink the remainder. As it was stated: “The Second Tithe in this container should be redeemed by the tetradrachma in that wallet, it is redeemed. Rebbi Yose says, it is not redeemed.” What is the reason of Rebbi Yose? “ If he said, the old tetradrachma or the old denar, he did redeem. The Sages admit to Rebbi Yose that if he said, the tetradrachma I shall take from my son’s hand, or the denar I shall take from my son’s hand, it is not redeemed since it was not in his hand at that time.”

HALAKHAH: It was stated: “Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Simeon prohibit to do so, maybe the wine bag will spring a leak and it turns out retroactively that he drank ṭevel.” But the reason of one is not the reason of the other. The reason of Rebbi Yose is that maybe he will pour. The reason of Rebbi Simeon is that maybe he will forget and drink the remainder. As it was stated: “The Second Tithe in this container should be redeemed by the tetradrachma in that wallet, it is redeemed. Rebbi Yose says, it is not redeemed.” What is the reason of Rebbi Yose? “ If he said, the old tetradrachma or the old denar, he did redeem. The Sages admit to Rebbi Yose that if he said, the tetradrachma I shall take from my son’s hand, or the denar I shall take from my son’s hand, it is not redeemed since it was not in his hand at that time.”

HALAKHAH: It was stated: “Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Simeon prohibit to do so, maybe the wine bag will spring a leak and it turns out retroactively that he drank ṭevel.” But the reason of one is not the reason of the other. The reason of Rebbi Yose is that maybe he will pour. The reason of Rebbi Simeon is that maybe he will forget and drink the remainder. As it was stated: “The Second Tithe in this container should be redeemed by the tetradrachma in that wallet, it is redeemed. Rebbi Yose says, it is not redeemed.” What is the reason of Rebbi Yose? “ If he said, the old tetradrachma or the old denar, he did redeem. The Sages admit to Rebbi Yose that if he said, the tetradrachma I shall take from my son’s hand, or the denar I shall take from my son’s hand, it is not redeemed since it was not in his hand at that time.”

It was stated: “If there were two amphoras before him, one of pure tithe which was ṭevel and one of impure tithe which was ṭevel, he brings two vessels and takes from each of them heave of the tithe for both of them. He then turns and lifts one vessel and says: If this one is pure, I am making it heave of the tithe; else I did not do anything. Then he turns, does the same for the second vessel, immerses himself and drinks, the words of Rebbi. Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar says, he takes it only at the end.” What is the reason of Rebbi? I say, maybe he started drinking the impure one first. And what is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon? Maybe he drank the impure one at the end. Everybody agrees that he who drinks impure liquids may not even eat heave that is in doubt. If the liquids were possibly impure, everybody agrees that he may eat what certainly is heave. But here we deal with another Mishnah. What is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon? Since according to both the impurity is certain, he needs immersion. What is the reason of Rebbi? That he should not be led into drinking a reviït. According to the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon, he drinks less than a reviït. Is Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon not afraid that he would be led into drinking a reviït? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, the only explanation you have is our first one. Rebbi is afraid that he drank the impure liquid first and Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon is afraid that he drank the impure liquid at the end.

It was stated: “If there were two amphoras before him, one of pure tithe which was ṭevel and one of impure tithe which was ṭevel, he brings two vessels and takes from each of them heave of the tithe for both of them. He then turns and lifts one vessel and says: If this one is pure, I am making it heave of the tithe; else I did not do anything. Then he turns, does the same for the second vessel, immerses himself and drinks, the words of Rebbi. Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar says, he takes it only at the end.” What is the reason of Rebbi? I say, maybe he started drinking the impure one first. And what is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon? Maybe he drank the impure one at the end. Everybody agrees that he who drinks impure liquids may not even eat heave that is in doubt. If the liquids were possibly impure, everybody agrees that he may eat what certainly is heave. But here we deal with another Mishnah. What is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon? Since according to both the impurity is certain, he needs immersion. What is the reason of Rebbi? That he should not be led into drinking a reviït. According to the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon, he drinks less than a reviït. Is Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon not afraid that he would be led into drinking a reviït? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, the only explanation you have is our first one. Rebbi is afraid that he drank the impure liquid first and Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon is afraid that he drank the impure liquid at the end.

Rebbi Nahman in the name of Rebbi Mana: Miracles happened that day. It was Sabbath eve and all the surrounding towns came together to eulogize him. They made him [Rebbi] rest in eighteen synagogues until they brought him to his resting place but the day extended for them until each one had time to get to his house, fill an amphora of water, and light the candles. When the sun set, the rooster crowed. They were anxious and said, maybe we did desecrate the Sabbath? There came a voice and said to them, every one who was not lazy for the eulogies of Rebbi shall be announced for the life of the Future World, except the fuller. When the latter heard this, he ascended the roof, threw himself down, and died. There came a voice and said, including the fuller.

Rebbi Assi fasted eighty days to see the old Rebbi Ḥiyya. In the end, he saw him, his hands trembled and his eyes were dimmed. If you say that Rebbi Assi was an insignificant person, one weaver came to Rebbi Joḥanan and said, I saw the sky falling but one of your students supported it. He asked him, could you recognize him? He said, if I would see him, I would recognize him. He made all his students pass before him [the weaver], and he recognized Rebbi Assi. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish fasted three hundred fasts to see the old Rebbi Ḥiyya but did not see him. In the end, he stopped feeling bad and said, maybe he did study Torah more than I did. They said to him, he spread Torah more than you did and in addition he went into exile. He said to them, did I not also go into exile? They said to him, you went into exile to study, he went into exile to teach.

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

One may give two explanations: If he had little [manure] on his field, he may continuously add to it after the agricultural workers stopped; Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah forbids it. What is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah? Maybe there will be manure and it will turn out that he fertilizes that place. One may give another explanation: If he had little [manure] in his house before the Sabbatical year and he wants to transport it to his field during the Sabbatical, he may continuously add to it after the agricultural workers stopped; Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah forbids it. What is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah? Maybe there will be no more manure and it will turn out that he fertilizes that place. Has it not been fertilized before the Sabbatical year? Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Abba bar Mamai: Because of the bad impression [it is forbidden] unless he transports ten boxes together. Do the rabbis not care for a bad impression? Rebbi Idi said his stick, his basket, and his shovel prove that he intends to make a dungheap.

One may give two explanations: If he had little [manure] on his field, he may continuously add to it after the agricultural workers stopped; Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah forbids it. What is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah? Maybe there will be manure and it will turn out that he fertilizes that place. One may give another explanation: If he had little [manure] in his house before the Sabbatical year and he wants to transport it to his field during the Sabbatical, he may continuously add to it after the agricultural workers stopped; Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah forbids it. What is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah? Maybe there will be no more manure and it will turn out that he fertilizes that place. Has it not been fertilized before the Sabbatical year? Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Abba bar Mamai: Because of the bad impression [it is forbidden] unless he transports ten boxes together. Do the rabbis not care for a bad impression? Rebbi Idi said his stick, his basket, and his shovel prove that he intends to make a dungheap.

Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun applied these traditions from here, as we have stated: “Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah said, one does not build a new water canal during the intermediate days of holidays or during the Sabbatical year.” Rebbi Zeїra said, because he would prepare its banks to be sown. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Abba bar Mamai: Because of the bad impression. They wanted to say, the one who says there “because of the bad impression” says here “because of the bad impression”; the one who says “because he would prepare its banks to be sown”, what can he say here? The only answer would be “maybe there will be no more manure and it will turn out that he fertilizes that place.” What would be the difference between them? If he dug to build a water canal for a building. They wanted to say, the one who says there “because of the bad impression” will say in this case “because of the bad impression,” but the one who says there "because he would prepare its banks to be sown,” here its banks will not be prepared to be sown. Everybody agrees that if he built there with lime, pebbles, stones, or cement it would be permitted.

“The potter may sell”. Should we not worry and say, maybe he will switch? Rebbi Jonah said, one recognizes, these are for wine and those for oil. Rebbi Ulla said, the material of these is known and the material of those is known.

Ashqelon itself? Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: Since we have stated “the gardens of Ascalon” it follows that Ascalon is outside. Rebbi Simon in the name of Hilfai: The House of Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose and Ben Qappara voted on the airspace of Ascalon and declared it pure from the testimony of Rebbi Phineas ben Yaïr who said, we were descending to the Saracen [market] at Ascalon where we bought wheat, returned to our town, immersed ourselves and ate our heave. The next day they voted to free it from tithes. Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose removed his hand that was leaning on Ben Qappara. He said to him, my son, why did you not say to me: why did you remove your hand? I would have told you that yesterday I was he who declared it impure, I am he who declared it pure. But now I am saying, maybe it was conquered within the meaning of the Torah, how can I free it from the meaning of the Torah?

It was stated: “With his lips but not in his mind.” I could think that I exclude him who decides in his mind, the verse says (Lev. 5:4): “To articulate”. But Samuel said, he who decides in his mind is not obliged until he pronounces with his lips. But did we not state: “(Ex. 35:5) Everyone who volunteers in his mind,” that is he who decides in his mind. You say, that is he who decides in his mind, but maybe that is he who pronounces with his lips? When he says (Deut. 23:24): “What comes out from your lips you have to keep,” that speaks about him who pronounces with his lips. Therefore, how can I confirm “every one who volunteers in his mind?” That is he who decides in his mind. What Samuel said refers to a sacrifice.

HALAKHAH: “ If he brought heave from his house one treats it as ṭevel and Great Heave, the words of Rebbi; Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, it is certainly heave. If he brought First Tithe from his house, one treats it as ṭevel and First Tithe, the words of Rebbi; Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, he needs only to separate First Tithe. If he brought Second Tithe from his house, one treats it as ṭevel and Second Tithe, the words of Rebbi; Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, he needs only to separate Second Tithe.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, Rebbi worries that maybe he gave from one kind on another but Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel worries thay maybe he inverted the order.

HALAKHAH: “ If he brought heave from his house one treats it as ṭevel and Great Heave, the words of Rebbi; Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, it is certainly heave. If he brought First Tithe from his house, one treats it as ṭevel and First Tithe, the words of Rebbi; Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, he needs only to separate First Tithe. If he brought Second Tithe from his house, one treats it as ṭevel and Second Tithe, the words of Rebbi; Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, he needs only to separate Second Tithe.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, Rebbi worries that maybe he gave from one kind on another but Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel worries thay maybe he inverted the order.

Rebbi Jonah said, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked before Rebbi Joḥanan: What is the status of additional heave? He said to him, I am stating that as an isolated opinion. Do you mean for obligation or for freeing? If you say for obligation, that is understandable. If you say for freeing, if even Rebbi Jehudah, who permits from the non-earmarked, frees it, then the rabbis, who do not agree [to take] from the non-earmarked, certainly must so hold. Rebbi Yose, Rebbi Assi in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish came: The additional heave is subject to tithes. Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah said so. Rebbi Zeïra said to Rebbi Assi, which Mishnah? He did not answer him. He said to him, maybe that which we stated: “If he gave heave and it turned out to be one in sixty-one, this is heave and he does not have to give more.” Did we not state on this: “If he added, it is subject to tithes”?

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

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

Rebbi Simon says, Rebbi Eliezer stays with his opinion. Just as he says there, all that is defective was in his hand, so he says here all that is impure is in his hand. Rebbi Zeїra asked, may we not say that Rebbi Eliezer said it only because of a fence? Does not Rebbi Eliezer agree that for a seah lifted from ṭevel he must give a name to its tithes? If you say the seah which fell is the seah which came up, it would not be necessary to give a name to its tithes! Rebbi Mana said, Rebbi Zeїra is correct since we have stated after this: “A seah of pure heave which fell into a hundred of impure profane produce,” and Rebbi Eliezer does not disagree! The colleagues argued before Rebbi Yose: Rebbi Simon is correct, because otherwise would one burn heave because of a “fence”? He said to them, are the six doubts which we have stated not because of their “fences”? Do we not also burn here because of its “fence”? The colleagues said, we asked before Rebbi Yose: In any case, if it is impure heave, it should be burned, if it is profane, why could it not become impure? He said to us, is it not eaten as heave? Heave cannot be eaten except if it is pure, maybe impure? Do you not agree that if a doubt of impurity arose in its place that he cannot burn it? What is the difference whether a doubt of impurity arose at another place or at its place? But if you want to question, then question what Rebbi Hoshaiah stated, since Rebbi Hoshaiah stated: “A seah of pure heave that fell into 100 seah of impure heave.”

Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: The hot, the bitter, and the sweet are not under the rules for being uncovered. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: The hot, the bitter, and the sweet are not under the rules for being uncovered or under those of libation wine. Rebbi Simeon explains: The hot, spice wine. And the bitter, vermouth wine. And the sweet, cooked wine. Rebbi Joshua ben Zeidal had cooked wine which was left unsupervised in the possession of a Gentile. He asked Rebbi Yannai ben Rebbi Ismael who said to him, so says Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: The sweet is not under the rules for being uncovered or under those of libation wine. Rebbi Yannai ben Rebbi Ismael fell ill. Rebbi Zeïra, Rebbi Hoshaiah, Rebbi Abun bar Cahana, and Rebbi Ḥananiah the colleague of the rabbis went to visit him. They saw that Rebbi Joshua ben Zeidal was sitting [there]. They said, there is the master of the decision and the person of the happening; they went and asked him. Rebbi Yannai ben Rebbi Ismael said to them, so says Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, the sweet is not under the rules for being uncovered or under those of libation wine. Rebbi Zeïra said to him, maybe that statement of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish is for argument’s sake? He told him no, it is for action and you can rely on me. When they came back, there was Rebbi Hila standing with Rebbi Abun bar Cahana. He told him, if you did not prefer decisions, is it not a baraita? Since Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: “Why is cooked wine of Gentiles forbidden? Because it started out as wine. Why is vinegar of Gentiles forbidden? Because it started out as wine.” Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah says so: “wine and vinegar of Gentiles which originally was wine.”

MISHNAH: If somebody sows heave in error it should be ploughed under; if intentionally it must be kept. If it is one third ripe it must be kept, whether in error or intentionally. But flax must be ploughed under when [sown] intentionally. But it is subject to gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and peah. Israel poor and poor Cohanim collect; the Israel poor must sell to the Cohanim poor for the value of heave but the proceeds are theirs. Rebbi Ṭarphon says, only Cohanim poor may collect; maybe they would forget and put some in their mouths. Rebbi Aqiba said to him, if that is so, then only pure persons should collect. Also, it is subject to tithe and the tithe of the poor. Poor Israel and poor Cohanim may take; the poor Israel must sell to Cohanim for the value of heave but the proceeds are theirs. He who flails is praiseworthy; he who threshes, what shall he do? He hangs baskets over the neck of the animal and fills it from the same kind. In that way, he will not muzzle the animal or feed it heave.

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

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

New section. “Pomegranates when they get soft.” Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Assi: When the food gets soft in his hand. Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: From when half the juice is in them. Rebbi Jonah asked: Maybe he understood that from teachers of homilies? (Deut. 1:28) “Our brethren made our hearts melt,” they split our hearts in two.

“If he had one basket and he intended to fill half of it, it became ṭevel once it was half filled. If he intended to fill it completely, it does not become ṭevel until it is completely filled. If there were two and he intended to fill both of them, they do not become ṭevel until he filled both of them. When has this been said? When he brings it to market. But if be brings it to his house, he may eat snacks from it until he reaches his house.” What is the difference between him who brings to market and him who brings to his house? When he brings to his house, it depends on his intention. But if he brings to market, it does not depend on his intention but on that of his customers. Maybe he will find a customer; therefore, it becomes ṭevel immediately.

Rebbi Mana asked: If it was a full flask put between two beams it became ṭevel or maybe since it was deposited at a place where processing was not finished it did not become ṭevel?

Rebbi Jonah asked: Does the fixing of the price create ṭevel in a sale? Or maybe, since the owners can take it back there is no ṭevel? Rebbi Mana asked: Think of it if one was put in his mouth! Is it not unappetizing? Can he give it back? If you say so, is he not eating ṭevel retroactively? That means, the fixing of the price is like a sale.

Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Rebbi Jehudah spoke only about a Sabbath basket. Maybe Rebbi Jehudah spoke about someone who collected a harvesting basket full to send to his friend, that he cared for it as if it were a Sabbath basket?

If somebody made a heap [of somebody’s grain] without the latter’s knowledge: Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is ṭevel, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, it is notṭevel. Rebbi Joḥanan objected to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, did we not state: “And similarly women who gave to a baker to make sour dough for them, if not one of them had the required amount it is free from ḥallah.” (But all of them had the required amount?) He said to him, because if somebody makes dough in order to distribute it, the dough is free from ḥallah. But we have stated: “A baker who made sour dough for distribution is obligated for ḥallah.” He said to him, do not answer back about a baker. For a baker, it does not depend on his opinion but on the opinions of his customers; maybe he will find a customer and it will become ṭevel immediately. He said to him, but was it not stated: “The holes of ants which were overnight near an obligated heap are obligated,” therefore, near an exempt heap they are exempt. Rebbi Jonah, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Because of resignation. Samuel ben Abba said, only if they dragged tips of ears.

Menaḥem ben Maximus the brother of Jonathan Caiphas in the name of Rebbi Ammi: Flax may be bought from everybody during the Sabbatical. That is, if you do not know whether he is suspect or not. Therefore, if it is clear that he is suspect, it is forbidden. Zeugos, the relative of Rebbi Abba bar Zavda, in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: Vetch may be bought from anybody during the Sabbatical. Rebbi Yose said: Does our Mishnah say so? “The upper seed of arum, the seeds of leeks, seeds of egg plants, seeds of turnips and radishes, and other garden seeds which are not eaten.” We have stated on this: Seeds of indigo, seeds of madder, and seeds of vetch. That implies, not vetch itself. Maybe if you do not know whether he is suspect or not. Therefore, if it is clear that he is suspect, it is forbidden.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, they decreed on a blemished female because of her young. They decreed on a blemished male because of the blemished female. They said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, even an unblemished one is a decree. Earlier they said one may buy an animal for meat of desire and hide it from the altar. They turned to say, not even a wild animal, not even birds as it was stated: “Sabbatical [money] and Second Tithe [money] can be exchanged for a blemished female animal or other domestic and wild animals and birds whether alive or slaughtered, the words of Rebbi Meїr. But the Sages say, one exchanges only on slaughtered ones.” Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac: They decreed this that one should not raise them in herds. Rebbi Jeremiah stood next to Rebbi Zeïra who said to him, Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac is still alive and you hang your rags on him! Did not Rebbi Joḥanan say even an unblemished one is a decree! Maybe this was said only for Sabbatical [money]? They found it stated for Sabbatical [money].

Rebbi Yose in the name of Samuel: The buy is acquired. Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: Expiation. Rebbi Hila said, since we stated “he has to eat their worth”, that means it was sanctified. Rebbi Yose said, since he took it up, the buy was acquired; from there on it is one buy. Rebbi Yudan said, he has to dedicate it again; he means that maybe it was sanctified when it was not sanctified.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Zeïra said, for the profit of the Second; maybe the rest will be lost and then at least those held in his hand will be kept for Second [Tithe]. Rebbi Zeïra said, and one has to spell out and say, if those at the bottom are from the Second, those in my hand are taken in their stead. Rebbi Jonah said, only if he collected from all around but if he collected in a straight line it is as if he had swept and taken out fists full.

What is the reason of Shammai? Maybe he will forget and treat it as profane!

{What means] demay? Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Abbahu, Rebbi Ḥizqiah in the name of Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi: Maybe he put in order, maybe he did not put in order.

{What means] demay? Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Abbahu, Rebbi Ḥizqiah in the name of Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi: Maybe he put in order, maybe he did not put in order.

Rebbi Yose said, the word of Rebbi Abinna supports me, since Rebbi Abinna said, explain it following this baraita: “In a place where one does not usually work on the 14th, but not in a place where one is used to work on the 14th.” If it is cut; maybe also when it is standing? It was found stated: “In a place where people are used to work on cut produce, one may work even on standing grain.”

HALAKHAH: A woman asked Rebbi Mana: Since I want to make iṭry in my kneading-trough, may I take from it so that it should be free from ḥallah? He said to her, why not? He went to ask his father. He said to him, it is forbidden; maybe she would change her mind to use it as bread dough.

“The loaves for a thanksgiving sacrifice and those needed by the nazir, if he made them for himself they are exempt,” for it is written “the first of your baking troughs;” “to sell on the market he is obligated”, it does not depend on his intention but on that of his customers. Maybe he will find a customer; therefore, it becomes ṭevel immediately.

HALAKHAH: If somebody made a heap [of somebody’s grain] without the latter’s knowledge: Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is ṭevel, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, it is not ṭevel. Rebbi Joḥanan objected to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, did we not state: “And similarly women who gave to a baker to make sour dough for them, if none of them had the required amount it is free from ḥallah.” (But what if all of them had the required amount?) He said to him, because if somebody makes dough in order to distribute it, the dough is exempt from ḥallah. But we have stated: “A baker who made sour dough for distribution is obligated for ḥallah.” He said to him, do not answer back about a baker. For a baker, it does not depend on his opinion but on the opinions of his customers; maybe he will find a customer and will make bread dough for him. He said to him, but was it not stated: “The holes of ants which were overnight near an obligated heap are obligated,” therefore, near an exempt heap they are exempt. Rebbi Jonah said, Rebbi Yose, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Because of resignation. Samuel ben Abba said, only [if they dragged tips of] ears.

The Mishnah said: “if the shepherds eat from it.” Maybe sometimes the shepherds will not eat from it. Rebbi Joḥanan said, any he made into cracknels. We also have stated so: “Any he made into cracknels is obligated; if he made it connected it is free.” Rebbi Abba in the name of Samuel, Rebbi Ammi in the name of the elder Rebbi Ḥiyya, even if he formed it as rolls. But did we not state, “if the shepherds do not eat from it?” Explain it if he made it from the start [thinking] that the shepherds should not eat from it.

Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: This is Rebbi Aqiba’s, as we have stated there: “If somebody took ḥallah from a single qab, Rebbi Aqiba says it is ḥallah, but the Sages say it is no ḥallah.” Rebbi Aqiba said that only for the past, maybe for the start? Here we deal with the start. Rebbi Jonah, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, they followed the manner of Rebbi Aqiba.

Rebbi Zeïra, Rebbi Assi in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina; Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Ḥiyya, Rebbi Eleazar, Rebbi Ḥananiah in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina ben Gamliel: If a young tree was attached to an old one, the young one was cleansed. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said, the Mishnah says so: “Attachment of vines, attachment after attachment, even if he sank them into the earth, are permitted.” Should we not say that maybe the young tree formed roots before it was well connected to the old one? Rebbi Ḥananiah the son of Rebbi Hillel: This follows Rebbi Jehudah, since Rebbi Jehudah says it connects well more quickly than it forms roots.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Curius said, not that heave lifts ‘orlah but heave adds to the profane to lift (heave) [‘orlah]. One understands that heave lifts ‘orlah because pure [heave] lifts the impure. “ ‘Orlah lifts heave”, does impure [heave] lift the pure, not for laymen, maybe for Cohanim? But did we not state: “ ‘Orlah lifts kilaim, kilaim ‘orlah, and ‘orlah ‘orlah”? There it is different, both for lay people and for Cohanim.

“The agent”. Rebbi Yose, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: When he gathered in order to send by a third person; but if he gathered to bring them himself he cannot send them by a third person. He did not finish this; Rebbi Jonah finished this. Rebbi Zeïra, Rebbi Ammi, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Rebbi Hoshaiah: When he gathered in order to send by a third person; but if he gathered to bring them himself he cannot send them by a third person since all First Fruits which could become permitted by making the declaration become permitted only by making the declaration. Rebbi Mana said, even though Rebbi Yose did not say that, he said something similar: Rebbi Zeïra said to Rebbi Assi, do you remember that when the statement of Rebbi Hoshaiah was formulated, Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina said that a Mishnah disagrees: “If he designated his First Fruits and then sold his field he brings but does not make the declaration”! We upheld this if he had prior intention to sell. But did we not state: “If the tree dried up or was cut down”; that also if earlier it already was almost dry. Does making the declaration prevent? Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac said, where making the declaration is possible, making the declaration does not prevent. If he gathered to deliver them through a third person, would he be forbidden to deliver them through a third person because maybe he would change his mind to deliver them himself?

HALAKHAH: “For heave and First Fruits,” etc. It is written (Num.18.8): “Behold, I gave to you the watch over My heaves.” Two heaves, heave and First Fruits. About heave it is written (Lev. 22:9): “They should not carry sin because of it and die if they desecrate it.” First fruits as it is written (Deut. 12:6): “There you shall bring your elevation offerings,” these are First Fruits, as it is written (Deut. 26:4): “The Cohen shall take the basket from your hand.” Maybe we should say that the verse refers to sacrifices? Extirpation is already written in regard to sacrifices.

From where that higher than ten [hand-breadths] is a different domain? Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: There I shall make My Appearance to you, and I shall speak to you from above the cover (which is on the Ark of the Covenant)from between the two Cherubim. And it is written, you have seen that from Heaven I spoke to you. Since speech mentioned there is from another domain, also speech mentioned here is from another domain. But is the Ark not nine hand-breadths? In the House of Rebbi Yannai they said, the cover was one hand-breadth. Rebbi Zeˋira asked, from where that the cover was one hand-breadth? Rebbi Ḥananiah bar Samuel stated, for all the vessels in the Sanctuary the Torah gave the measure of length and width, and gave the measure of its height. Except for the cover where the Torah gave the measure of length and width, but did not give the measure of its height. Therefore we shall learn it from the smallest vessel in the Sanctuary, you shall make for it a frame of one hand-breadth all around. Since there it was one hand-breadth, so also here one hand-breadth. But maybe it is only make a golden wreath as its frame all around? Since there it is a minimal size, so here also a minimal size. What about it? Rav Aḥa bar Jacob said, face. There is no face less than a hand-breadth.

HALAKHAH: Mishnah: “One does not roast meat, onions, or an egg, unless they be roasted when it still is daylight,” etc. Rebbi Bun bar Cahana in the name of the rabbis: A dish which is fully cooked one may leave on a cooking stove which is not covered with ashes. Rebbi Zeˋira asked: Meat, onion, and egg shrink and it is bad for them. This one is shrinking and it is good for it, and you say so? Maybe this was said only for hot water. Rebbi Samuel came, Rebbi Zeˋira asked: It is forbidden to leave hot water which was fully heated on a cooking stove which is not covered with ashes. Rebbi Bevai in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: A dish of beef which was cooked as Ben Derosai’s food one may return on a cooking stove covered with ashes. This comes like what Rebbi Aḥa said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: One warns somebody who puts a pot on top of coals. When it will be cooked as Ben Derosai’s food it is forbidden. Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Tanḥum bar Ḥiyya in the name of the important Rebbi Simeon: Hot water which was fully heated one may return on a cooking stove which is not covered with ashes. Rebbi Zeˋira asked: To leave on is forbidden but to return is permitted? Maybe it was only said for the Passover sacrifice. There Rebbi Aḥa in the name of the important Rebbi Simeon: The Passover sacrifice which was fully roasted one may return on a cooking stove which is not covered with ashes.

HALAKHAH: Mishnah: “One does not roast meat, onions, or an egg, unless they be roasted when it still is daylight,” etc. Rebbi Bun bar Cahana in the name of the rabbis: A dish which is fully cooked one may leave on a cooking stove which is not covered with ashes. Rebbi Zeˋira asked: Meat, onion, and egg shrink and it is bad for them. This one is shrinking and it is good for it, and you say so? Maybe this was said only for hot water. Rebbi Samuel came, Rebbi Zeˋira asked: It is forbidden to leave hot water which was fully heated on a cooking stove which is not covered with ashes. Rebbi Bevai in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: A dish of beef which was cooked as Ben Derosai’s food one may return on a cooking stove covered with ashes. This comes like what Rebbi Aḥa said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: One warns somebody who puts a pot on top of coals. When it will be cooked as Ben Derosai’s food it is forbidden. Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Tanḥum bar Ḥiyya in the name of the important Rebbi Simeon: Hot water which was fully heated one may return on a cooking stove which is not covered with ashes. Rebbi Zeˋira asked: To leave on is forbidden but to return is permitted? Maybe it was only said for the Passover sacrifice. There Rebbi Aḥa in the name of the important Rebbi Simeon: The Passover sacrifice which was fully roasted one may return on a cooking stove which is not covered with ashes.

HALAKHAH: “A person may not pierce an eggshell.” Why? Because it did not start at each single drop, or maybe he might forget and stir? What is the difference between them? This refined דיקלון. If you are saying, because it did not start at each single drop, it did not stop at every single drop; if you say. maybe be might forget and stir, he will not forget and stir.

HALAKHAH: “A person may not pierce an eggshell.” Why? Because it did not start at each single drop, or maybe he might forget and stir? What is the difference between them? This refined דיקלון. If you are saying, because it did not start at each single drop, it did not stop at every single drop; if you say. maybe be might forget and stir, he will not forget and stir.

Mishnah: “But one may tithe what is questionable.” Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Abbahu, Rebbi Ḥizqiah in the name of Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi: “maybe it was put in order, maybe it was not put in order.”

Mishnah: “But one may tithe what is questionable.” Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Abbahu, Rebbi Ḥizqiah in the name of Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi: “maybe it was put in order, maybe it was not put in order.”

Rebbi Abbahu descended to Tiberias. The students of Rebbi Joḥanan saw that his face was shiny. They said before Rebbi Joḥanan, Rebbi Abbahu found a treasure. He asked them, why? They told him, his face is shiny. He said to them, maybe he understood a new teaching. He came to visit him. He asked him, what new teaching did you hear? He said, an old Tosephta. He recited about him, a man’s wisdom illuminates his face.

HALAKHAH: 5. “Reed to make a writing pen,” etc. Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: But at least that it reaches to the finger joints. Rebbi Zeˋira asked, one understands up to here. Maybe up to here? There, we have stated: “A pen of which the writing tip was broken off is impure because of the eraser. If the eraser was broken off it is impure because of the writing tip.” Rebbi Zeˋira asked, one understand up to here. Maybe up to here? Rebbi Yose said, any “egg” which was stated in Kelim means the actual volume of an egg. In Šabbat in the volume of a dried fig, of an egg.

HALAKHAH: 5. “Reed to make a writing pen,” etc. Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: But at least that it reaches to the finger joints. Rebbi Zeˋira asked, one understands up to here. Maybe up to here? There, we have stated: “A pen of which the writing tip was broken off is impure because of the eraser. If the eraser was broken off it is impure because of the writing tip.” Rebbi Zeˋira asked, one understand up to here. Maybe up to here? Rebbi Yose said, any “egg” which was stated in Kelim means the actual volume of an egg. In Šabbat in the volume of a dried fig, of an egg.

HALAKHAH: 3. Who taught “signs”? Rebbi Yose! What means “of any language”? Even אα. Should one not be concerned that maybe one will put them upside down or bottom up? They were made similar to reed pens. Should one not be concerned that maybe one will put them inside out or outside in? The rings did prove. Should one not be concerned that maybe one would exchange? Rebbi Aḥa said, it was written slanted. Why could they not be switched? Rebbi Immi said, You shall erect the Tabernacle according to its ruling. Does there exist a ruling for wood? But the log which merited to be put in the North should be put in the North, in the South should be put in the South.

HALAKHAH: 3. Who taught “signs”? Rebbi Yose! What means “of any language”? Even אα. Should one not be concerned that maybe one will put them upside down or bottom up? They were made similar to reed pens. Should one not be concerned that maybe one will put them inside out or outside in? The rings did prove. Should one not be concerned that maybe one would exchange? Rebbi Aḥa said, it was written slanted. Why could they not be switched? Rebbi Immi said, You shall erect the Tabernacle according to its ruling. Does there exist a ruling for wood? But the log which merited to be put in the North should be put in the North, in the South should be put in the South.

HALAKHAH: 3. Who taught “signs”? Rebbi Yose! What means “of any language”? Even אα. Should one not be concerned that maybe one will put them upside down or bottom up? They were made similar to reed pens. Should one not be concerned that maybe one will put them inside out or outside in? The rings did prove. Should one not be concerned that maybe one would exchange? Rebbi Aḥa said, it was written slanted. Why could they not be switched? Rebbi Immi said, You shall erect the Tabernacle according to its ruling. Does there exist a ruling for wood? But the log which merited to be put in the North should be put in the North, in the South should be put in the South.

It was stated: “Rebbi Eliezer says, just as slaughter pushes the Sabbath aside so the preparations of slaughter push the Sabbath aside. Rebbi Aqiba said to him, no. If you speak about slaughter which is impossible to be done on Friday, what can you infer about preparations of slaughter than can be done on Friday? Rebbi Eliezer said to him, the public parts shall prove which he could make on (Friday) which nevertheless push aside the Sabbath. What is the difference between preparations of slaughter before the slaughter and preparations of slaughter after slaughter? Rebbi Aqiba said to him, about preparations of slaughter after slaughter when the slaughter already had pushed away the Sabbath, what does this imply for preparations of slaughter before slaughter when the slaughter not yet had pushed away the Sabbath? Another explanation: Maybe the sacrifice would be found disqualified, then it turned out that the Sabbath was pushed aside without a slaughter.”

What can you say about a baby? Maybe the baby would become sick; then the Sabbath would be pushed aside without circumcision. They objected: If the altar collapsed on the Sabbath, it will not be possible to build on the Sabbath! A kind of altar can be built the day before. Think of it, if it developed a wart? It cannot be cut on the Sabbath! Warts can be cut on the day before. Think of it, if the fourteenth falls on a Sabbath, there cannot be sprinkling on the Sabbath! Sprinkling is done on the day before.

From a courtyard open to planks one carries from the courtyard to the planks but not from the planks to the courtyard. Therefore two are forbidden. Rebbi Abba said, not only two courtyards but even a single courtyard and in it two houses. They thought to say if they did not make an eruv; therefore if they made an eruv it would be permitted. Rebbi Daniel the son of Rav Qatina in the name of Rav Ḥuna: even if they made an eruv it is forbidden, for the eruv does not make them one. Rav Ḥuna follows his opinion, as they disagreed: An alley in which on one side dwelt a Gentile and on the other a Jew, Rav Ḥuna in the name of Rav: even if they made an eruv through doors the Gentile prohibits it for them. Abba bar bar Ḥana in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, even if they made the eruv through windows the Gentile does not prohibit for them. Even if Rav Ḥuna would hold with Rebbi Joḥanan that there it is permitted, here he has to agree that it is forbidden. There, maybe tomorrow the well will run dry and then he would think that perhaps an eruv is efficient for the planks of wells when an eruv is not efficient for the planks of wells.

It was stated: “Rebbi Eliezer says, if it was lost in the field his eruv is not a [valid] eruv; if it was lost in town his eruv is a [valid] eruv.” If it was lost in the field his eruv is not a [valid] eruv, for he cannot bring it in a Sabbath way. If it was lost in town his eruv is a [valid] eruv, for he can bring it through exempt space. Rebbi Eleazar said it correctly: what is the reason (of Rav) [of the rabbis]? Rebbi Abba the son of Rav Pappai said, it is Rebbi Meïr’s since Rebbi Meïr said, “he even originally reduces and takes.” Rebbi Meïr said this only for a holiday, maybe for the Sabbath? But here we are concerned with the Sabbath! Rebbi Abba Mari said, it is Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob’s, as we have stated there, “Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob said, one may tie in front of an animal that it should not leave.” There is no difference between tying and locking. That means, about a stone tower. But for a wooden tower he is like one who breaks the amphora to eat dried figs from it.

HALAKHAH: Paragraph. “If somebody slept on the road,” etc. They said, was not Rebbi Tarphon’s house of study within 2’000 cubits? Or maybe he made himself part of his town when it was still daytime? It was found stated: In the morning the sun shone. They told him, rabbi, here the town is before you, please enter.

The roof of a tower is considered [part of] the town. The roof of a cave is considered as fields. What, really dwellers? Or maybe just inhabitable? Since Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman said in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: one considers it as if filled by water and clay, this means even inhabitable. Rebbi Isaac ben Rebbi Eleazar said, this implies (a city) which has two exits, if between one and the other there are 3’999 cubits one walks in its entirety and outside it 2’000 cubits, 4’000 cubits he only has 2’000 cubits from the place of his eruv. Rabbi Aḥa said; Rebbi Ze`ira explained it. If he would put his sandal anywhere he could go outside and put it on; and if he would put his sandal anywhere he could go outside and put it on. What is the difference from which side he comes? From one side it is forbidden, from both sides it is permitted.

“If the courtyards made eruvin but did not participate in the alley.” The Mishnah is Rebbi Meïr’s since Rebbi Meïr said, by an eruv and by participation. Everybody follows Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Ze`ira in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Even about the reading of the Esther scroll everybody follows Rebbi Meïr. In matters of eruvin and public fast-days everybody follows Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name Rebbi Joḥanan and in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Even though Rebbi Meïr says that he may cede rights he agrees that if one of them forgot and did not contribute to the eruv, that he may rely on his participation. Who holds “by an eruv and by participation,” not Rebbi Meïr? Since Rebbi Meïr said, by an eruv and by participation. He told him, why do you make us forget the practices of eruvin? Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Ila; it should be like one of them. For one of them said, maybe he comes to a courtyard which does not need participation. Which is a courtyard which does not need participation? That is the customary courtyard. He sees them preparing an eruv but not participating. Then he will infer to say that maybe an eruv is valid without participation? But no eruv is valid without participation. And the other one will say, maybe he comes to a courtyard which already participated. He sees them preparing an eruv but not participating. Then he will neither make an eruv nor participate.

“If the courtyards made eruvin but did not participate in the alley.” The Mishnah is Rebbi Meïr’s since Rebbi Meïr said, by an eruv and by participation. Everybody follows Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Ze`ira in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Even about the reading of the Esther scroll everybody follows Rebbi Meïr. In matters of eruvin and public fast-days everybody follows Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name Rebbi Joḥanan and in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Even though Rebbi Meïr says that he may cede rights he agrees that if one of them forgot and did not contribute to the eruv, that he may rely on his participation. Who holds “by an eruv and by participation,” not Rebbi Meïr? Since Rebbi Meïr said, by an eruv and by participation. He told him, why do you make us forget the practices of eruvin? Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Ila; it should be like one of them. For one of them said, maybe he comes to a courtyard which does not need participation. Which is a courtyard which does not need participation? That is the customary courtyard. He sees them preparing an eruv but not participating. Then he will infer to say that maybe an eruv is valid without participation? But no eruv is valid without participation. And the other one will say, maybe he comes to a courtyard which already participated. He sees them preparing an eruv but not participating. Then he will neither make an eruv nor participate.

“If the courtyards made eruvin but did not participate in the alley.” The Mishnah is Rebbi Meïr’s since Rebbi Meïr said, by an eruv and by participation. Everybody follows Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Ze`ira in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Even about the reading of the Esther scroll everybody follows Rebbi Meïr. In matters of eruvin and public fast-days everybody follows Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name Rebbi Joḥanan and in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Even though Rebbi Meïr says that he may cede rights he agrees that if one of them forgot and did not contribute to the eruv, that he may rely on his participation. Who holds “by an eruv and by participation,” not Rebbi Meïr? Since Rebbi Meïr said, by an eruv and by participation. He told him, why do you make us forget the practices of eruvin? Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Ila; it should be like one of them. For one of them said, maybe he comes to a courtyard which does not need participation. Which is a courtyard which does not need participation? That is the customary courtyard. He sees them preparing an eruv but not participating. Then he will infer to say that maybe an eruv is valid without participation? But no eruv is valid without participation. And the other one will say, maybe he comes to a courtyard which already participated. He sees them preparing an eruv but not participating. Then he will neither make an eruv nor participate.

May one reduce using utensils? Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ashi said, one may reduce using utensils. Rebbi Jonah, Rebbi Isaac bar Ṭevlai: Rebbi Joḥanan said, one may not use utensils. There, they said, it is a disagreement between the Elder Rebbi Ḥiyya and Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose. One said, it is forbidden; but one said, it is permitted. He who said that it is forbidden, maybe he would forget and move it. Rebbi Joḥanan bar Marius instructed to cover it with a heap of sand.

HALAKHAH: Paragraph. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: This implies that money does not transfer title as word of the Torah. Then even if he comes to the grocer? There is a difference, maybe he would forget and sell it. Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Ḥinena: My father did not say so but: “But the Sages say, his money did not acquire for him.” This implies that money does transfer title as word from the Torah. “They agree for anybody else that his money does acquire for him,” because the grocer will transfer title through a third person. “Because one makes an eruv for a person only with his agreement;” the Mishnah is Rebbi Meïr’s since Rebbi Meïr said, by an eruv, by participation. Rebbi Ze`ira in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: In matters of eruvin and public fast-days everybody follows Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Jacob [bar Aḥa] in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Even about the reading of the Esther scroll everybody follows Rebbi Meïr.

“If somebody leaves to travel by sea, before thirty days he does not have to check; within thirty [days] he has to check”. That is to say, if he intends to return. But if he does not intend to return, even before thirty days he has to check. If there is a doubt; but if it is certain then even from New Year’s Day. Rebbi Abba said, but even if he intends to return he has to check, maybe he will change his mind and not return.

Rebbi Ḥananiah asked before Rebbi Mana, should they not insitute trumpet blowing? If you say so, it would turn out that [they would say, maybe] they blow for the daily sacrifice[, and they would be led astray]. He retorted, but did we not state: “Three to separate people from work, and three to separate between weekday and holiness”? He answered him, there every single Friday they are blowing, one will not err. But here it is once in a long time; if you say so, it would turn out that they would say, maybe they blow for the daily sacrifice, and they would be led astray.

Rebbi Ḥananiah asked before Rebbi Mana, should they not insitute trumpet blowing? If you say so, it would turn out that [they would say, maybe] they blow for the daily sacrifice[, and they would be led astray]. He retorted, but did we not state: “Three to separate people from work, and three to separate between weekday and holiness”? He answered him, there every single Friday they are blowing, one will not err. But here it is once in a long time; if you say so, it would turn out that they would say, maybe they blow for the daily sacrifice, and they would be led astray.

“If a Jew and a Gentile were travelling by ship and leavened matter was in the Jew’s hand, he sells it to the Gentile or gives it to him as a gift; then he reverts and buys it from him after Passover, on condition that it was an unconditional gift. The Jew may say to the Gentile, instead of buying it for a mina, come and buy it for 200 [denar]. Instead that you buy from a Gentile, come and buy it from a Jew, maybe I shall have need, then I shall buy from you after Passover.”