yose

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.”

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.”

There, we have stated: “If somebody puts aside produce … to serve for Second Tithe.” Does that Mishnah disagree with Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Simeon? Rebbi Zeïra said, there they become spoiled retroactively, but here they become spoiled only starting from the moment of loss.

Rebbi Isaac ben Eleazar said, a person can say on Friday, this shall be heave tomorrow, but nobody can say on the Sabbath, this shall be heave tomorrow. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, nobody can say on Friday, this shall be heave tomorrow. A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun: “If a vessel was immersed that day and somebody filled it from an amphora with ṭevel tithe, if he said, its contents should be heave of the tithe tomorrow, i. e., after nightfall, then this is heave. If he said, that should be eruv, he did not say anything.” Explain it if he transgressed. But Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: “He says,” and you say, if he transgressed? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun retracted that.

Rebbi Isaac ben Eleazar said, a person can say on Friday, this shall be heave tomorrow, but nobody can say on the Sabbath, this shall be heave tomorrow. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, nobody can say on Friday, this shall be heave tomorrow. A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun: “If a vessel was immersed that day and somebody filled it from an amphora with ṭevel tithe, if he said, its contents should be heave of the tithe tomorrow, i. e., after nightfall, then this is heave. If he said, that should be eruv, he did not say anything.” Explain it if he transgressed. But Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: “He says,” and you say, if he transgressed? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun retracted that.

Rebbi Isaac ben Eleazar said, a person can say on Friday, this shall be heave tomorrow, but nobody can say on the Sabbath, this shall be heave tomorrow. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, nobody can say on Friday, this shall be heave tomorrow. A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun: “If a vessel was immersed that day and somebody filled it from an amphora with ṭevel tithe, if he said, its contents should be heave of the tithe tomorrow, i. e., after nightfall, then this is heave. If he said, that should be eruv, he did not say anything.” Explain it if he transgressed. But Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: “He says,” and you say, if he transgressed? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun retracted that.

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

Rebbi Eleazar said, this is from Rebbi Meïr since Rebbi Meïr says that you accept only the very first version. There, we have stated: “This one shall be a substitute for a burnt offering and for an offering of well-being, then it is a substitute for a burnt offering, the words of Rebbi Meïr.” Rebbi Yose said, we were of the opinion that Rebbi Meïr and the Sages disagree only after the time for speech, but not within the time for speech. Since Rebbi Eleazar said, the Mishnah is Rebbi Meïr’s, it means that even within the time of speech he cannot retract.

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 Jacob bar Zavdi asked before Rebbi Jeremiah: Is our Mishnah from Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose? As it was stated: “Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose says in the name of his father that one may take heave from wine on vinegar but not from vinegar on wine. If somebody transgressed, his heave is heave. Rebbi says that wine and vinegar are two distinct kinds and one does not give heave nor does one tithe from one on the other.” He was looking at him. He said to him, what are you staring at me? Bring a lash for yourself; there it is for tithing, here it is for kilaim. Rebbi Jonah said, he should not have stared at him since the earlier rabbis wanted to understand this matter and understood that there it refers to tithing but here to kilaim.

Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi asked before Rebbi Jeremiah: Is our Mishnah from Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose? As it was stated: “Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose says in the name of his father that one may take heave from wine on vinegar but not from vinegar on wine. If somebody transgressed, his heave is heave. Rebbi says that wine and vinegar are two distinct kinds and one does not give heave nor does one tithe from one on the other.” He was looking at him. He said to him, what are you staring at me? Bring a lash for yourself; there it is for tithing, here it is for kilaim. Rebbi Jonah said, he should not have stared at him since the earlier rabbis wanted to understand this matter and understood that there it refers to tithing but here to kilaim.

Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, they found written in the notebook of Rebbi Hillel ben Rebbi Vales; Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, they found written on the wall of Rebbi Hillel ben Rebbi Vales: Beans, πίσον, chick peas, mlwt’, krpwnh, climbing beans.

“Lettuce and garden lettuce.” Rebbi Ḥananiah said, roof lettuce. Simeon, the son of Rebbi Avi, said, Antiochian (lettuce.) Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, sweet yase. Endives may be eaten raw, field endives are ‘ulthin. Leeks. Fields leeks are κεφαλωτόν.

Salman the Levite, the brother of Zavdi the Levite, in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: All statements are pair by pair. Rav said, all are one kind. A baraitha disagrees with Rav, for we have stated: also the baka-bush. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun objected, did we not also state oregano?

Rebbi Jeremiah said, Cahana asked R. Simeon ben Laqish: What is the rule for someone who mates sea animals? He said to him, it is written about them (Gen. 1:21): “By their kinds.” Rebbi Aḥa did not say so, but Rebbi Aḥa used to say in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, wherever “by their kinds” is written, kilaim applies to it. Rebbi Cahana objected, it is written about the animals of the sea “by their kinds;” kilaim should apply to them! Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, here did Cahana spread his net over Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish and caught him. Rebbi Jonah said, I can explain it, because of one who leads. He brings a string and binds it to the gills of a white fish and a green fish; they rub one another and spawn.

It was stated: From where that one may not graft a tree bearing no edible fruit onto a fruit-bearing tree, or a fruit-bearing tree onto another fruit-bearing tree of a kind that is not his own kind, from where? The verse says (Lev. 19:19): “You must keep My basic Laws.” Rebbi Jonah, Rebbi Eleazar, in the name of Cahana: This is Rebbi Eleazar’s, “because of the basic Laws I gave.” If this is so, it was forbidden to Adam, the first man! Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi La, it is the opinion of everybody, because of the basic Laws that I gave to My world. If it is so, is should be forbidden to graft a black fig tree on a white fig tree. Rebbi Avin said, did you not infer the rules from kilaim of textiles? Just as for kilaim of textiles two kinds, not one from this kind and the other from the other kind, also any other kilaim that I forbade you, not one from this kind and the other from the other kind.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Zachariah, son-in-law of Rebbi Levy, asked: Apart from that, is it not forbidden because of seeds under a vine? Rebbi Yose said, explain it if he sets its root down more than three hand-breadths, distant more than six hand-breadths [from the vine], following what was stated: “roots of madder that enter within four cubits of a vineyard are permitted below three hand-breadths.”

It was stated: “If unripe figs that one hid in ṭevel or a flat pita that one hid in glowing charcoal were partially uncovered they may be taken on the Sabbath, otherwise they may not be taken on the Sabbath. Rebbi Eleazar ben Taddeus said, in either case he pushes in a spear or a knife and lifts them out.” The statement of Rebbi Eleazar ben Taddeus turns out following Rebbi Simeon, as we have stated: “One should not drag a chair, or a bed, or an easy chair because one makes a groove, but Rebbi Simeon permits it.” Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Huna, Rebbi Ḥaggai in the name of Rebbi Zeïra, Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Illaï: The Sages admit to Rebbi Simeon that a chair whose legs are stuck in mud one is permitted to move. And just as you say that one is permitted to move it, so one is permitted to bring it back. Rebbi Yose said, we also have stated: “They may be taken on the Sabbath.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, that is from Rebbi Simeon. But we have stated: “The Sabbatical year!” Can you say that “the Sabbatical year” follows Rebbi Simeon? Explain “the Sabbatical year!” For Rebbi Simeon permits the aftergrowth of the Sabbatical year, and here he says so? Even though Rebbi Simeon permits aftergrowth of the Sabbatical year, he still holds it subject to the holiness of the Sabbatical year. Here also, he worries neither about the Sabbatical year nor about the holiness of the Sabbatical year!

It was stated: “If unripe figs that one hid in ṭevel or a flat pita that one hid in glowing charcoal were partially uncovered they may be taken on the Sabbath, otherwise they may not be taken on the Sabbath. Rebbi Eleazar ben Taddeus said, in either case he pushes in a spear or a knife and lifts them out.” The statement of Rebbi Eleazar ben Taddeus turns out following Rebbi Simeon, as we have stated: “One should not drag a chair, or a bed, or an easy chair because one makes a groove, but Rebbi Simeon permits it.” Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Huna, Rebbi Ḥaggai in the name of Rebbi Zeïra, Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Illaï: The Sages admit to Rebbi Simeon that a chair whose legs are stuck in mud one is permitted to move. And just as you say that one is permitted to move it, so one is permitted to bring it back. Rebbi Yose said, we also have stated: “They may be taken on the Sabbath.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, that is from Rebbi Simeon. But we have stated: “The Sabbatical year!” Can you say that “the Sabbatical year” follows Rebbi Simeon? Explain “the Sabbatical year!” For Rebbi Simeon permits the aftergrowth of the Sabbatical year, and here he says so? Even though Rebbi Simeon permits aftergrowth of the Sabbatical year, he still holds it subject to the holiness of the Sabbatical year. Here also, he worries neither about the Sabbatical year nor about the holiness of the Sabbatical year!

It was stated: “If unripe figs that one hid in ṭevel or a flat pita that one hid in glowing charcoal were partially uncovered they may be taken on the Sabbath, otherwise they may not be taken on the Sabbath. Rebbi Eleazar ben Taddeus said, in either case he pushes in a spear or a knife and lifts them out.” The statement of Rebbi Eleazar ben Taddeus turns out following Rebbi Simeon, as we have stated: “One should not drag a chair, or a bed, or an easy chair because one makes a groove, but Rebbi Simeon permits it.” Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Huna, Rebbi Ḥaggai in the name of Rebbi Zeïra, Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Illaï: The Sages admit to Rebbi Simeon that a chair whose legs are stuck in mud one is permitted to move. And just as you say that one is permitted to move it, so one is permitted to bring it back. Rebbi Yose said, we also have stated: “They may be taken on the Sabbath.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, that is from Rebbi Simeon. But we have stated: “The Sabbatical year!” Can you say that “the Sabbatical year” follows Rebbi Simeon? Explain “the Sabbatical year!” For Rebbi Simeon permits the aftergrowth of the Sabbatical year, and here he says so? Even though Rebbi Simeon permits aftergrowth of the Sabbatical year, he still holds it subject to the holiness of the Sabbatical year. Here also, he worries neither about the Sabbatical year nor about the holiness of the Sabbatical year!

Does Rebbi Judah say that in this case it is not kilaim? Rebbi Zeïra said, Rebbi Jehudah follows his own opinion, since Rebbi Jehudah said, in the case of a vegetable field one hand-breadth. Rebbi Yose said, he who wants to question this statement of Rebbi Zeïra might deduce the opinion of Rebbi Jehudah from that of the rabbis. Just as the rabbis say, in the case of the prohibition of bet rova‘ one needs six-by-six to whip, so Rebbi Judah said in the case of the prohibition of six-by-six that one needs a hand-breadth to whip. But did we not state, Rebbi Judah permits it? Then it is difficult: what is the reason of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish? Since he threw it out from his hand as seed, he is guilty. But did we not state that “Rebbi Jehudah says, it is not kilaim?” Explain it, until the moment that it comes to rest. But was it not stated that Rebbi Judah permits it? Even if it came to rest, Rebbi Jehudah permits it. Rebbi Illaï said, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish follows his own opinion, since Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said in the name of Ḥizqiah: A vertex from a dry spot is permitted. Then it also should be thus in the case of two wheat grains and one of barley? That is correct. But did we not state, “unless there are two wheat kernels and one barley kernel, or one wheat kernel and two barley kernels, or one each of wheat, barley, and spelt?” Explain it if there is a grain of wheat on each side, a fence on each side, and the grain of barley caught in the middle. Rebbi Mattaniah said, that is only if there is no dry spot, but if there is a dry spot there, it is permitted.

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.

HALAKHAH: We have stated, “which contains.” Some Tannaïm state, “into which fell.” Rebbi Mana said, he who says “which contains” means one in 24, he who says “into which fell” means one in 25. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, both for him who says “which contains” and for him who says “into which fell,” it means one in 24. How is that? “Which contains,” if it is cut, “into which fell,” if it is standing.

What are we talking about? If he intended it for seed then even one grain of wheat is forbidden. If to mix in, it is forbidden to mix. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Abba bar Ḥiyya in the name of Rav: He who takes out impurities from his neighbor’s heap has to give him good grain in their stead. Rebbi Yose said, this implies that one is forbidden to mix in; if you say that one is permitted to mix them back in, why require good grain instead?

“Rebbi Yose says, he must pick it out.” What is the reason of Rebbi Yose? Because he started with the quarter, he must finish the entire quarter. Rebbi Yose agrees that if there was less than a quarter when he started, he does not need to attend to it. How is that done? If there was a quarter composed of two kinds, does he pick out one kind and that is sufficient, or does he have to pick out everything?

“Rebbi Yose says, he must pick it out.” What is the reason of Rebbi Yose? Because he started with the quarter, he must finish the entire quarter. Rebbi Yose agrees that if there was less than a quarter when he started, he does not need to attend to it. How is that done? If there was a quarter composed of two kinds, does he pick out one kind and that is sufficient, or does he have to pick out everything?

“Rebbi Yose says, he must pick it out.” What is the reason of Rebbi Yose? Because he started with the quarter, he must finish the entire quarter. Rebbi Yose agrees that if there was less than a quarter when he started, he does not need to attend to it. How is that done? If there was a quarter composed of two kinds, does he pick out one kind and that is sufficient, or does he have to pick out everything?

What is the reason of the rabbis? Because he intended to plough, even if it is not covering. It was stated: Abba Shaul said, “one does not oblige him to plough finely, only like the furrows of the rainy season. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, it used to be called ‘horse tail,’ so that the end of dust of any one furrow touch that of the next one.” What is the reason of Abba Shaul? Since he started, it is enough up to a quarter. Does Abba Shaul hold with Rebbi Yose? He is with the rabbis, for the rabbis said, because he intended to plough, even if it is not covering. Abba Shaul says, because he started intentionally to plough, it is enough up to a quarter. Rebbi Yose said, he must finish that entire quarter.

What is the reason of the rabbis? Because he intended to plough, even if it is not covering. It was stated: Abba Shaul said, “one does not oblige him to plough finely, only like the furrows of the rainy season. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, it used to be called ‘horse tail,’ so that the end of dust of any one furrow touch that of the next one.” What is the reason of Abba Shaul? Since he started, it is enough up to a quarter. Does Abba Shaul hold with Rebbi Yose? He is with the rabbis, for the rabbis said, because he intended to plough, even if it is not covering. Abba Shaul says, because he started intentionally to plough, it is enough up to a quarter. Rebbi Yose said, he must finish that entire quarter.

HALAKHAH: It was stated: One may put sheaves next to dried-up vines. Rebbi Yose said, that means that one may not plant a dry vine next to dry standing grain. May one sow next to dry vines? Let us hear from the following:“A dried-up vine is forbidden but does not sanctify.” Rebbi Eleazar said, this is the opinion of Rebbi Meïr, since Rebbi Meïr said, even cotton is forbidden but does not sanctify.

It is a condition of Joshua that one may collect grasses everywhere except in a field of fenugreek. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman: The Mishnah deals with him who sowed for sheaves. But did we not state: “One is not required to weed … fenugreek in which grasses appeared?” Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in his own name: “When it grew for seeds.” Rebbi Yose said, did Joshua come only to help sinners? If he committed a sin, it is forbidden as robbery, if he did not commit a sin it is permitted in respect to robbery. Hence, there is no difference whether he sowed for seeds or for sheaves. But did we not state: “One is not required to weed … fenugreek in which grasses appeared?” If he intends to use the grasses, one should oblige him to weed! Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Miasha: He would be happy if they were torn out and lying before him. Rebbi Yose did not say so, but in the end he approves that they should be torn out and lying before him. But then, if somebody found kilaim in a vineyard, they should be forbidden as robbery since in the end he desires that they should be torn out and lie before him! There, he has the means to bring it in, here he does not have the means to bring it in. Rav Naḥman said that Rebbi Mana asked: Think about it, if he had another field of fenugreek close by, then he has the means to bring it in! The words of the rabbis disagree, since Rebbi Zeriqan said in the name of the House of Yannai: All aftergrowth is forbidden except for that which appears on a fallow field, a field ready to be ploughed under, and a vineyard. He should have added, except for a field of fenugreek sown for the production of seeds! Rebbi Yose said, the words of Rebbi Joḥanan support me. It happened that somebody bought a garden plot of vegetables from a Gentile. He came and asked Rebbi Joḥanan, who said to him, go, harvest and sell at the going rate. Rebbi Abbahu objected before Rebbi Joḥanan: Did we not state: “or the threshing place on which many kinds are appearing?” He said to him, that place proves that he does not want them to exist. Could he not have answered, the one is like robbery, the other is permitted with respect to robbery? How can you object based on a scenario where it is forbidden as robbery to a decision in a case which is permitted with respect to robbery? It is as Rebbi Immi said, they were rich in answers. Or it is as Rebbi Nasa said, like a person who has two reasons but he answers only with one of them.

It is a condition of Joshua that one may collect grasses everywhere except in a field of fenugreek. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman: The Mishnah deals with him who sowed for sheaves. But did we not state: “One is not required to weed … fenugreek in which grasses appeared?” Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in his own name: “When it grew for seeds.” Rebbi Yose said, did Joshua come only to help sinners? If he committed a sin, it is forbidden as robbery, if he did not commit a sin it is permitted in respect to robbery. Hence, there is no difference whether he sowed for seeds or for sheaves. But did we not state: “One is not required to weed … fenugreek in which grasses appeared?” If he intends to use the grasses, one should oblige him to weed! Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Miasha: He would be happy if they were torn out and lying before him. Rebbi Yose did not say so, but in the end he approves that they should be torn out and lying before him. But then, if somebody found kilaim in a vineyard, they should be forbidden as robbery since in the end he desires that they should be torn out and lie before him! There, he has the means to bring it in, here he does not have the means to bring it in. Rav Naḥman said that Rebbi Mana asked: Think about it, if he had another field of fenugreek close by, then he has the means to bring it in! The words of the rabbis disagree, since Rebbi Zeriqan said in the name of the House of Yannai: All aftergrowth is forbidden except for that which appears on a fallow field, a field ready to be ploughed under, and a vineyard. He should have added, except for a field of fenugreek sown for the production of seeds! Rebbi Yose said, the words of Rebbi Joḥanan support me. It happened that somebody bought a garden plot of vegetables from a Gentile. He came and asked Rebbi Joḥanan, who said to him, go, harvest and sell at the going rate. Rebbi Abbahu objected before Rebbi Joḥanan: Did we not state: “or the threshing place on which many kinds are appearing?” He said to him, that place proves that he does not want them to exist. Could he not have answered, the one is like robbery, the other is permitted with respect to robbery? How can you object based on a scenario where it is forbidden as robbery to a decision in a case which is permitted with respect to robbery? It is as Rebbi Immi said, they were rich in answers. Or it is as Rebbi Nasa said, like a person who has two reasons but he answers only with one of them.

It is a condition of Joshua that one may collect grasses everywhere except in a field of fenugreek. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman: The Mishnah deals with him who sowed for sheaves. But did we not state: “One is not required to weed … fenugreek in which grasses appeared?” Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in his own name: “When it grew for seeds.” Rebbi Yose said, did Joshua come only to help sinners? If he committed a sin, it is forbidden as robbery, if he did not commit a sin it is permitted in respect to robbery. Hence, there is no difference whether he sowed for seeds or for sheaves. But did we not state: “One is not required to weed … fenugreek in which grasses appeared?” If he intends to use the grasses, one should oblige him to weed! Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Miasha: He would be happy if they were torn out and lying before him. Rebbi Yose did not say so, but in the end he approves that they should be torn out and lying before him. But then, if somebody found kilaim in a vineyard, they should be forbidden as robbery since in the end he desires that they should be torn out and lie before him! There, he has the means to bring it in, here he does not have the means to bring it in. Rav Naḥman said that Rebbi Mana asked: Think about it, if he had another field of fenugreek close by, then he has the means to bring it in! The words of the rabbis disagree, since Rebbi Zeriqan said in the name of the House of Yannai: All aftergrowth is forbidden except for that which appears on a fallow field, a field ready to be ploughed under, and a vineyard. He should have added, except for a field of fenugreek sown for the production of seeds! Rebbi Yose said, the words of Rebbi Joḥanan support me. It happened that somebody bought a garden plot of vegetables from a Gentile. He came and asked Rebbi Joḥanan, who said to him, go, harvest and sell at the going rate. Rebbi Abbahu objected before Rebbi Joḥanan: Did we not state: “or the threshing place on which many kinds are appearing?” He said to him, that place proves that he does not want them to exist. Could he not have answered, the one is like robbery, the other is permitted with respect to robbery? How can you object based on a scenario where it is forbidden as robbery to a decision in a case which is permitted with respect to robbery? It is as Rebbi Immi said, they were rich in answers. Or it is as Rebbi Nasa said, like a person who has two reasons but he answers only with one of them.

Rebbi Eleazar asked: What are the rules for a small field? Let us hear from the following: “ Rebbi Eleazar ben Simeon: Abba Yose ben Joḥanan from Yanoaḥ said for a large field 50 cubits, for a small field along most of it.” Since those who specified a measure for a large field did not do so for a small one, the Sages who did not specify a measure for a large field certainly would not specify a measure for a small field.

MISHNAH: A vertex of wheat coming close to a field of barley is permitted since it visibly is the end of its field. If someone’s field was sown with wheat and that of his neighbor with another kind, he may have of that kind adjacent to it. If both his and his neighbor’s fields were growing wheat, it is permitted that he have one row of flax adjacent to his, but no other kind. Rebbi Simeon says, either flax or any other kind. Rebbi Yose says, even in the middle of his field he may test a row for flax.

What are we dealing with? If he wants only to test, even in the middle of his field it should be permitted. If he does not intend only to test, why just linseed, and not any other kinds? We deal with the case he wants to test. Rebbi Yose does not worry about bad appearances; the rabbis worry about bad appearances.

Does a fence save grains? Does sown dry land save vegetables? Rebbi Samuel in the name of Rebbi Zeïra understood it from the following: “One sows close to dried-up tree roots.” This mentions only dry ones; hence, if they are moist, it is forbidden. Rebbi Yose understood it from the following: “One does sow close to a fallow field, a ploughed field, a closure, a foot path, a fence ten hand-breadths high.” That implies that a sown fence saves grains! Even if you accept “fence ten hand-breadths high,” a sown fence does not have to save grains. There is a difference here because the fence is sown and no sown fence saves grains.

It was stated: Rebbi Jonathan ben Yose said, one may sow close to a rock ten hand-breadths long and four hand-breadths wide on both of its sides. If it was ten by ten hand-breadths, one may sow close to it on all four sides.

Rebbi Judan said: Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba and Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac disagree. One says, even three in a width of six, the other said, one on one side, the other on the other side, and the third in the middle. We do not know who said what. Since Rebbi Yose said, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, only if there is no dry patch, that means that Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac said: One on one side, the other on the other side, and the third in the middle. If the sides were more than the dry patch, it is permitted.

Rebbi Yose said, Rebbi Gamliel, the son of Rebbi, went to the market. They came and asked him whether the roofing they mentioned referred to touching. He went and asked his father, who told him that the roofing they mentioned referred to touching. Rebbi Jonah said, Rebbi Hillel ben Rebbi Vales went to the market. They came and asked him whether the roofing they mentioned referred to touching. He went and asked his father, who told him that the roofing they mentioned referred to touching.

Rebbi Jonah said, Rebbi Zeïra and Rebbi Immi, both in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, one said one plants near a fence but not near a border wall, and the other said, a border wall which lost height is in order, hence a fence which lost height is invalid. But we do not know who said what. Since Rebbi Yose said, Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: One plants near a fence but not near a border wall, this means Rebbi Immi is the one who said that a border wall that lost height is in order, hence a fence which lost height is invalid. Rebbi Yose said, we also did make both statements, that a border wall that lost height is in order, hence a fence that lost height is invalid. One plants near a fence, as we have stated (Mishnah 2:8): “One does sow close to a fallow field, a plowed field, a stone wall, a foot path, a fence ten hand-breadths high.” One does not plant near a border wall, as we have stated (Mishnah 3:2): “In a furrow or a water canal that are one hand-breadth deep one may sow three kinds of seeds, one on each side and one in the middle.” If you say that one may sow close to a border wall, he should sow several rows down in the ditch. The colleagues said before Rebbi Samuel bar Abin: Explain it if the top of the border wall was sown. He said to them, if it is so, let him uproot that stem and sow several rows down in the ditch. Is it not better to uproot one stem and sow several rows down in the ditch?

Rebbi Jonah said, Rebbi Zeïra and Rebbi Immi, both in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, one said one plants near a fence but not near a border wall, and the other said, a border wall which lost height is in order, hence a fence which lost height is invalid. But we do not know who said what. Since Rebbi Yose said, Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: One plants near a fence but not near a border wall, this means Rebbi Immi is the one who said that a border wall that lost height is in order, hence a fence which lost height is invalid. Rebbi Yose said, we also did make both statements, that a border wall that lost height is in order, hence a fence that lost height is invalid. One plants near a fence, as we have stated (Mishnah 2:8): “One does sow close to a fallow field, a plowed field, a stone wall, a foot path, a fence ten hand-breadths high.” One does not plant near a border wall, as we have stated (Mishnah 3:2): “In a furrow or a water canal that are one hand-breadth deep one may sow three kinds of seeds, one on each side and one in the middle.” If you say that one may sow close to a border wall, he should sow several rows down in the ditch. The colleagues said before Rebbi Samuel bar Abin: Explain it if the top of the border wall was sown. He said to them, if it is so, let him uproot that stem and sow several rows down in the ditch. Is it not better to uproot one stem and sow several rows down in the ditch?

MISHNAH: Pumpkin in the middle of vegetables goes by the rules of vegetables, in the middle of grain it needs a bet rova‘. If one’s field was sown with grain and he desired to plant there one row of pumpkin, he must allow six hand-breadths to tend it. If it grows, he has to uproot before it. Rebbi Yose said, he allows four cubits to tend it. They said to him, are you making this more restrictive than for a vine? He said to them, we find that this case is more restrictive than that of a vine. For a single vine one allows six hand-breadths to tend it, but for a single pumpkin a bet rova‘. Rebbi Meir says in the name of Rebbi Ismael, if there are three pumpkin plants in a bet seah one should not sow in that bet seah. Rebbi Yose, the son of the Snatcher from Efrat, says in the name of Rebbi Ismael, if there are three pumpkin plants in a bet kor one should not sow in that bet kor.

MISHNAH: Pumpkin in the middle of vegetables goes by the rules of vegetables, in the middle of grain it needs a bet rova‘. If one’s field was sown with grain and he desired to plant there one row of pumpkin, he must allow six hand-breadths to tend it. If it grows, he has to uproot before it. Rebbi Yose said, he allows four cubits to tend it. They said to him, are you making this more restrictive than for a vine? He said to them, we find that this case is more restrictive than that of a vine. For a single vine one allows six hand-breadths to tend it, but for a single pumpkin a bet rova‘. Rebbi Meir says in the name of Rebbi Ismael, if there are three pumpkin plants in a bet seah one should not sow in that bet seah. Rebbi Yose, the son of the Snatcher from Efrat, says in the name of Rebbi Ismael, if there are three pumpkin plants in a bet kor one should not sow in that bet kor.

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

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

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

Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, come and see the difference between the early and the late statements of Rebbi Ismael! He started out with a bet kor and ended up with a bet seah́!

HALAKHAH: “A bald spot in a vineyard.” Rebbi Joḥanan said that the rules for a bald spot in a vineyard and a dried-up vineyard are the same. A bald spot is cleared in its middle, a dried-up vineyard is cleared on all four sides. Rebbi Yose said, this applies to a large vineyard but if it comes from the plants of a small vineyard, the rules of a bald spot in a vineyard do not apply. Also, we have stated: “What is a bald spot in a vineyard? A vineyard that dried up in its middle but enough for a vineyard remained, whether it be from all four sides, or from three, or from two opposite sides.” How is that? Five rows of seven each, one took out one row of vineyard, that leaves four vineyards and three intervals. One takes out another one, that leaves three vineyards and two intervals. One takes out another one, that leaves two vineyards and one interval.

Rebbi Zeïra, Rebbi Eudaimon of Haifa, in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: In height even one hundred cubits. Rebbi Judan said, that is, for kilaim, but as regards the Sabbath, a symbolic fence should not be better than a beam. Rebbi Yose said, it is the same for kilaim and Sabbath. According to Rebbi Yose, what is the difference between a beam and a symbolic fence? A symbolic fence does not save from one side unless it is used to close all four sides; a beam saves in one direction. This may be compared to what Rebbi Zeïra said in the name of Rav Hamnuna: A symbolic fence does not save unless it seals all four sides.

Rebbi Zeïra, Rebbi Eudaimon of Haifa, in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: In height even one hundred cubits. Rebbi Judan said, that is, for kilaim, but as regards the Sabbath, a symbolic fence should not be better than a beam. Rebbi Yose said, it is the same for kilaim and Sabbath. According to Rebbi Yose, what is the difference between a beam and a symbolic fence? A symbolic fence does not save from one side unless it is used to close all four sides; a beam saves in one direction. This may be compared to what Rebbi Zeïra said in the name of Rav Hamnuna: A symbolic fence does not save unless it seals all four sides.

“ It turns out that concerning kilaim everything less than three hand-breadths is considered closed. From three to four, if what is standing is more than what is torn down it is permitted, but if what is torn down is more than what is standing, it is forbidden. From four hand-breadths to ten cubits, if what is standing is more than what is torn down, it is permitted; but if what is torn down is more than what is standing it is permitted where it is standing, forbidden where it is torn down. Concerning the Sabbath, everything less than three hand-breadths is considered closed. From three to four, and from four hand-breadths to ten cubits, it is permitted if what is standing is more than what is torn down, but forbidden if what is torn down is more than what is standing. More than ten, it is forbidden even though what is standing is more than what is torn down.” Rebbi Ḥananiah, Rebbi Judah bar Pazi, in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: There is no “from three to four.” There is a hole of three and no place of four! Rebbi Mana objected: Did we not state: “One surrounds with reeds,” does a reed form a place? He said to him, do not object to me from a breach less than three hand-breadths, since anything less than three is considered closed! Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rav: In any case, since what is standing is more than what is torn down, it is permitted.

Samuel said, one measures along the oblique line. Rebbi Yose bar Zemina in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: You consider it as if one were planted there.

Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: It turns out that the statement of Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob is like that of the House of Shammai. Just as the House of Shammai say that one row constitutes a vineyard, so Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob says that one row constitutes a vineyard. What do you want to say? A large vineyard is forbidden by eight, a small vineyard is forbidden by eight! Rebbi Judan did not say so but taught that eight cubits is forbidden, eight cubits plus any length is permitted. Some want to state: “But if someone newly planted sixteen by sixteen, it would be permitted with eight cubits.” Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: It turns out that the statement of Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob is like that of the House of Shammai. Just as the House of Shammai are more restrictive when it is dried up than when it is planted, so Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob is more restrictive when it is dried up than when it is planted.

Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rav: The seed is permitted but one is forbidden to sow. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rav: The practice is that one is permitted to sow. Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of Rav: Practice follows Rebbi Meïr and Rebbi Simeon. Does it mean that the seed is permitted and one is permitted to sow, or that the seed is permitted but one is forbidden to sow? Since Rebbi Abba said: Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi measured the layout of my vineyard eight by eight; that means that the seed is permitted and one is permitted to sow. Rav Huna sowed leeks in his vineyard. Is that not forbidden because of kilaim? They were mixed up and a single vine needs no place to tend it, following the words of Rebbi Ismael; as Rebbi Ismael said, the words of the Sages are that a single vine needs no place to tend it. Rebbi Jacob bar Idi in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Practice outside the Land follows the lenient opinion. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, there they stated: Practice outside the Land follows the lenient opinion.

One assumes that another [vine] was planted there, for all four sides. One cannot actually plant on any of the four sides because it would form a tail and there is no tail for a tail. This implies that there is no tail for a large vineyard, which gives a simple answer to the question of Rebbi Yose ben Zabida in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: one considers as if another [vine] was planted there.

“ The trunk is aligned but the top is not aligned, that is a vineyard. The top is aligned but the trunk is not aligned, that is not a vineyard. If they were thin, but when they grow thick they will be aligned, that is a vineyard. How does one know that they are aligned? One brings a rope and stretches it.” Some Tannaïm state: “From within.” But some Tannaïm state: “From without.” Rebbi Jonah said, he who says “from within,” within a hand-breadth, but he who says “from without” requires that it touches. “If the outer row is not aligned in its trunks, one reserves for it the space to tend it and one may sow the rest.” Rebbi Yose says, if one sows within six hand-breadths all is forbidden; outside of six hand-breadths single vines are permitted but a vineyard is forbidden.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Simeon said to them: Those about which you say that one disregards the ones in the middle as if nonexistent, are the essence of the vineyard! Rebbi Ḥananiah said, that applies in the case where there are six parallel six. But if there are five parallel five, everybody agrees that one disregards the ones in the middle as if nonexistent. Rebbi Mana said, that means if there are five parallel five. But if there are six parallel six, if you disregard the ones in the middle as if nonexistent, these are like those! What does that mean which we have stated: One disregards the ones in the middle as if nonexistent? Rebbi Huna said, that one is permitted to draw them over his seeds. Rebbi Mana said, that supports what Rebbi Yose had said, that if one sows within six hand-breadths all is forbidden, outside of six hand-breadths single vines are permitted and a vineyard is forbidden

MISHNAH: A ditch that crosses a vineyard, ten hand-breadths deep and four wide. Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob said, if it is open from one side of the vineyard to the opposite side it appears to be between two vineyards; one sows in it. Otherwise, it is like a vat. If a vat in the vineyard is ten deep and four wide, one sows in it, the words of Rebbi Eliezer; but the Sages forbid it. On a watchman’s mound in a vineyard that is ten hand-breadths high and four wide one may sow; but if hair was pressing down, it is forbidden. For a vine planted in a depression or in a cleft one allows the area needed for tending it and one sows the rest. Rebbi Yose said, if there are less than four cubits one should not bring seeds there. A house in a vineyard may be sown.

Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: It is necessary that there be an empty space of four hand-breadths. Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac said, that is, if it is round. But if it is square, it does not need an empty space of four hand-breadths. Rebbi Ḥalaphta ben Shaul said, it needs three hand-breadths of dirt on top. Rebbi Yose said, that is, if it is round. But if it is square, it does not need three hand-breadths of dirt on top.

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

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

“ Reeds, spiny bushes, roses, and way-thorn are trees and not kilaim in a vineyard. Reed-mace, rush, and bulrush, and all other plants growing in ashes are kinds of grasses and not kilaim in a vineyard.” But did Rebbi Hoshaiah not state: “The following are the kinds of grasses: artichoke, ḥalimah,demua, and lycium.” There for benedictions, here for kilaim. Rebbi Yose said, this means that while one says the benediction “Creator of the fruit of the tree” for an etrog, one says the benediction “Creator of kinds of grasses” for its tmrz.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, the Mishnah was taught about a straight trellis. In that case, would it not be forbidden as a vineyard without a fence? Let us say, it was stated because of the House of Hillel. Rebbi Ḥananiah said, it is reasonable to assume that Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish agrees with Rebbi Joḥanan that it was taught about a straight trellis because of the House of Hillel, and Rebbi Joḥanan agrees with Rebbi Simeon [ben Laqish] that it was taught about a curved trellis because of Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri, since Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri said that anybody who affirms this is in error. If you say it was taught about a straight trellis, what can be in error? What is the difference between him who says one measures from the roots of the vines and him who says one measures from the bottom of the fence? Rebbi Yose said, explain it if the stems were partially inside four cubits and partially outside of four cubits. For him who says one measures from the roots of the vine, all is in order. For him who says one measures from the bottom of the fence, where the string drawn from the fence ends it is forbidden, the rest is permitted. If there were two cubits, only two cubits are forbidden for him who says one measures from the roots of the vines, but for him who says one measures from the bottom of the fence, another two cubits are forbidden.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rebbi Yose, Rebbi Ismael and Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri, all three said the same thing. Rebbi Ismael, as we have stated: “About a small garden surrounded by a trellis, if there is room for the vintner and his basket on each side one may sow there, if not, it may not be sown.” Rebbi Jonah said, the vintner requires one cubit, his basket one cubit on each side. They wanted to say, for him who says one measures from the roots of the vine, all is in order. For him who says one measures from the bottom of the fence, do the stems not diminish the measure of four cubits? Explain it if they were clinging to the wall. But are there not only four and the rules of the trellis start with five? Rebbi Ḥananiah said, explain it that two vines are planted at a corner; if one stretches a rope one sees four intervals. Rebbi Yose, as we have stated: “If there are less than four cubits one should not bring seeds there.” For him who says one measures from the roots of the vine, all is in order. For him who says one measures from the bottom of the fence, does the stem not decrease the measure of four cubits? Explain it if it was clinging to the wall. And similarly Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri here. It is reasonable to assume that Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Ismael will agree with Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri, but Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri will not agree with Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Ismael. Rebbi Yose will agree with Rebbi Ismael but Rebbi Ismael will not agree with Rebbi Yose.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rebbi Yose, Rebbi Ismael and Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri, all three said the same thing. Rebbi Ismael, as we have stated: “About a small garden surrounded by a trellis, if there is room for the vintner and his basket on each side one may sow there, if not, it may not be sown.” Rebbi Jonah said, the vintner requires one cubit, his basket one cubit on each side. They wanted to say, for him who says one measures from the roots of the vine, all is in order. For him who says one measures from the bottom of the fence, do the stems not diminish the measure of four cubits? Explain it if they were clinging to the wall. But are there not only four and the rules of the trellis start with five? Rebbi Ḥananiah said, explain it that two vines are planted at a corner; if one stretches a rope one sees four intervals. Rebbi Yose, as we have stated: “If there are less than four cubits one should not bring seeds there.” For him who says one measures from the roots of the vine, all is in order. For him who says one measures from the bottom of the fence, does the stem not decrease the measure of four cubits? Explain it if it was clinging to the wall. And similarly Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri here. It is reasonable to assume that Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Ismael will agree with Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri, but Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri will not agree with Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Ismael. Rebbi Yose will agree with Rebbi Ismael but Rebbi Ismael will not agree with Rebbi Yose.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rebbi Yose, Rebbi Ismael and Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri, all three said the same thing. Rebbi Ismael, as we have stated: “About a small garden surrounded by a trellis, if there is room for the vintner and his basket on each side one may sow there, if not, it may not be sown.” Rebbi Jonah said, the vintner requires one cubit, his basket one cubit on each side. They wanted to say, for him who says one measures from the roots of the vine, all is in order. For him who says one measures from the bottom of the fence, do the stems not diminish the measure of four cubits? Explain it if they were clinging to the wall. But are there not only four and the rules of the trellis start with five? Rebbi Ḥananiah said, explain it that two vines are planted at a corner; if one stretches a rope one sees four intervals. Rebbi Yose, as we have stated: “If there are less than four cubits one should not bring seeds there.” For him who says one measures from the roots of the vine, all is in order. For him who says one measures from the bottom of the fence, does the stem not decrease the measure of four cubits? Explain it if it was clinging to the wall. And similarly Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri here. It is reasonable to assume that Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Ismael will agree with Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri, but Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri will not agree with Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Ismael. Rebbi Yose will agree with Rebbi Ismael but Rebbi Ismael will not agree with Rebbi Yose.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rebbi Yose, Rebbi Ismael and Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri, all three said the same thing. Rebbi Ismael, as we have stated: “About a small garden surrounded by a trellis, if there is room for the vintner and his basket on each side one may sow there, if not, it may not be sown.” Rebbi Jonah said, the vintner requires one cubit, his basket one cubit on each side. They wanted to say, for him who says one measures from the roots of the vine, all is in order. For him who says one measures from the bottom of the fence, do the stems not diminish the measure of four cubits? Explain it if they were clinging to the wall. But are there not only four and the rules of the trellis start with five? Rebbi Ḥananiah said, explain it that two vines are planted at a corner; if one stretches a rope one sees four intervals. Rebbi Yose, as we have stated: “If there are less than four cubits one should not bring seeds there.” For him who says one measures from the roots of the vine, all is in order. For him who says one measures from the bottom of the fence, does the stem not decrease the measure of four cubits? Explain it if it was clinging to the wall. And similarly Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri here. It is reasonable to assume that Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Ismael will agree with Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri, but Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri will not agree with Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Ismael. Rebbi Yose will agree with Rebbi Ismael but Rebbi Ismael will not agree with Rebbi Yose.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rebbi Yose, Rebbi Ismael and Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri, all three said the same thing. Rebbi Ismael, as we have stated: “About a small garden surrounded by a trellis, if there is room for the vintner and his basket on each side one may sow there, if not, it may not be sown.” Rebbi Jonah said, the vintner requires one cubit, his basket one cubit on each side. They wanted to say, for him who says one measures from the roots of the vine, all is in order. For him who says one measures from the bottom of the fence, do the stems not diminish the measure of four cubits? Explain it if they were clinging to the wall. But are there not only four and the rules of the trellis start with five? Rebbi Ḥananiah said, explain it that two vines are planted at a corner; if one stretches a rope one sees four intervals. Rebbi Yose, as we have stated: “If there are less than four cubits one should not bring seeds there.” For him who says one measures from the roots of the vine, all is in order. For him who says one measures from the bottom of the fence, does the stem not decrease the measure of four cubits? Explain it if it was clinging to the wall. And similarly Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri here. It is reasonable to assume that Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Ismael will agree with Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri, but Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri will not agree with Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Ismael. Rebbi Yose will agree with Rebbi Ismael but Rebbi Ismael will not agree with Rebbi Yose.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rebbi Yose, Rebbi Ismael and Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri, all three said the same thing. Rebbi Ismael, as we have stated: “About a small garden surrounded by a trellis, if there is room for the vintner and his basket on each side one may sow there, if not, it may not be sown.” Rebbi Jonah said, the vintner requires one cubit, his basket one cubit on each side. They wanted to say, for him who says one measures from the roots of the vine, all is in order. For him who says one measures from the bottom of the fence, do the stems not diminish the measure of four cubits? Explain it if they were clinging to the wall. But are there not only four and the rules of the trellis start with five? Rebbi Ḥananiah said, explain it that two vines are planted at a corner; if one stretches a rope one sees four intervals. Rebbi Yose, as we have stated: “If there are less than four cubits one should not bring seeds there.” For him who says one measures from the roots of the vine, all is in order. For him who says one measures from the bottom of the fence, does the stem not decrease the measure of four cubits? Explain it if it was clinging to the wall. And similarly Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri here. It is reasonable to assume that Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Ismael will agree with Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri, but Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri will not agree with Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Ismael. Rebbi Yose will agree with Rebbi Ismael but Rebbi Ismael will not agree with Rebbi Yose.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman, Rebbi Jonathan, in the name of Rebbi Eliezer: He who prunes his vineyard down to less than a hand-breadth subjects it to orlah because of the bad appearance. The Sages say, only if he prunes down to the ground. Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Jonathan, in the name of Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob: He who forms a heap from gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and peah, is subject to the Great Heave because of the bad appearance. Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Jonathan, Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob in the name of the House of Shammai: A corpse in the public domain induces impurity four cubits around it, to sustain its dignity. Rebbi Mana said, this last statement is in the name of the House of Shammai; Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, all are in the name of the House of Shammai. Rebbi Jonah said, also that which we stated here is because of the bad appearance. If it were not so, what would be the difference whether one stands on the ground or on the terrace?

We have stated there: “If somebody throws from four cubits [distance] to a wall, if [the projectile hits] higher than ten hand-breadths, he is like one throwing into the air, if lower than ten hand-breadths, he is like one throwing onto the ground.” Rav Ḥisda said, if it extends slanting. But will it not finally descend? Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, explain it that it was a soft fig cake and it stuck. Rebbi Ḥaggai asked before Rebbi Yose, does this not imply that the declivity of a terrace belongs to the level below? He said to him, there the vegetables profit from the terrace but here people rub it and it falls down. If it would say, if there is a hole [in the wall] and it profits from the hole just as vegetables profit from the terrace, you would be justified.

“Two gardens, one above the other, the lower one is made into a vineyard, the upper one is not made into a vineyard. One may sow the upper one until one reaches the airspace of ten.” Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked before Rebbi Zeïra, does this not imply that the declivity of a terrace belongs to the below? He said to him, because plants will bend into the airspace of the vineyard. “If the upper one is made into a vineyard but the lower one is not made into a vineyard, one may sow the lower one and the declivity until one reaches the roots of the vines.” Rebbi Yose said, one does not have here “the roots of the vines” but “below three [hand-breadths],” following that which was stated: “roots of madder that enter within four cubits of a vineyard are permitted below three hand-breadths.”

MISHNAH: If somebody trains a vine over part of a papyrus, he should not sow under the rest, but if he did, it does not become sanctified. If the new growth expands it becomes forbidden. The same applies to one who trains over parts of a futile tree. If somebody trains a vine over part of a fruit tree he may sow under the rest. If new grows expands, he must move it. It happened that Rebbi Joshua visited Rebbi Ismael from Kefar Aziz. He showed him a vine trained over parts of a fig tree and asked, may I sow under the rest? He told him, it is permitted. He took him from there to the armory and showed him a vine trained over part of a beam and a sycamore stump on which were many beams. He said to him, under that one beam it is forbidden, the rest is permitted. What is a futile tree? One which does not bear fruit. Rebbi Meïr says, every tree is futile except olive and fig trees. Rebbi Yose says, a futile tree is one of which one does not plant entire orchards.

There, we have stated: “All tied-up water skins are pure except those of Arabs. Rebbi Meïr says, temporarily tied ones are pure, permanently tied ones are impure. Rebbi Yose says, all tied ones are pure.” Some Tannaïm state it inverted. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Yasa: Like our Mishnah. Rebbi Yudan said, the indicator of Kelim is Kilaim, for if it were not so, what would be the difference between permanent and temporary tie? In the House of Rebbi Yannai they said: A permanent tie must be cut, a temporary tie does not have to be cut.

MISHNAH: An interrupted trellis is more than eight cubits. No linear measurement stated by the Sages requires “more than” except an interrupted trellis. What is an interrupted trellis? A trellis [whose vines are] dried up in its middle, but there remained five vines on each side. If between them are eight cubits, one should not sow there. If there are more than eight cubits, one gives each side its working space and he may sow the rest. A trellis which starts from a wall in a corner and ends there, one gives it its working space and he may sow the rest. Rebbi Yose said, if there are less than four cubits one should not bring seeds there. Sticks that stand out from the trellis, if he worries whether to remove them, then under them it is permitted, but if he made them so that the new growth can expand on them, it is forbidden. One looks at a blossom that comes out from the trellis as if a plumb-line were hanging down from it; under it it is forbidden. The same holds for a branch. Under a shoot of vine drawn from one tree to another, it is forbidden. If he binds them together with a rope or bast, under the binding it is permitted. But if he did that to accomodate future growth, it is forbidden.

Rebbi Jonah asked: Why do we say: “No linear measurements stated by the Sages require ‘more’ except an interrupted trellis?” Did we not state: “Ten Jerusalem qab which equal six esronim and excess”? There about volumes, here about linear measures. But did we not state: “Rebbi Yose ben Meshullam said, ‘more’ is a qab per one hundred seah, a sixth of the amount that causes dema‘”? There about volumes, here about linear measures. But did we not state: “Rebbi Jehudah ben Baba said, the garden and the corral which are seventy and a remainder by seventy and a remainder”? Samuel said, they taught two thirds of a cubit.

There is no difference whether one built a fence and then planted eleven vines or he planted eleven vines and then built a fence. If the middle vine is destroyed we have trellis and interrupted trellis. If the fence is destroyed, there is no trellis and no interrupted trellis. Rebbi Eudaimon, brother of Rebbi Yose, inquired: If he then rebuilt the fence, since the trellis was reconstituted, do you say that the interrupted trellis also was reconstituted?

Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Once Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri burned in Nagnegar. What did he burn? He burned an interrupted trellis. Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Once Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri burned in Nagnegar. What did he burn? He burned between the trellis and the fence. Rebbi Yose said, I pointed out a difficulty before Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa: It is understandable, if he burned an interrupted trellis then the words of the Sages disagree with his. But if he burned between the trellis and the fence, are there words of the Sages which disagree with his? He had not heard what Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said: Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagree about the trellis itself: Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is forbidden and sanctifies. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, it is forbidden but does not sanctify.

Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Once Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri burned in Nagnegar. What did he burn? He burned an interrupted trellis. Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Once Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri burned in Nagnegar. What did he burn? He burned between the trellis and the fence. Rebbi Yose said, I pointed out a difficulty before Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa: It is understandable, if he burned an interrupted trellis then the words of the Sages disagree with his. But if he burned between the trellis and the fence, are there words of the Sages which disagree with his? He had not heard what Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said: Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagree about the trellis itself: Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is forbidden and sanctifies. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, it is forbidden but does not sanctify.

We stated here the opinion of Rebbi Yose and stated it there. If we had stated it here but not there, we would have said he says it is forbidden here because of the laws of the trellis, but there where one does not deal with the laws of the trellis he would say it is permitted. Hence, it is necessary to state it there. Or if we had stated it there but not here, we would have said there he says it is forbidden because it is enclosed on all four sides, but here where it is not enclosed on all four sides he would say it is permitted. Hence, it is necessary to state it both here and there.

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

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

There, we have stated: “One keeps seeds, the plough, and urine three hand-breadths away from a wall.” Rebbi Jeremiah said that Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba raised a question: There, you say that the roots do not expand sideways and here you say, the roots do expand sideways! Rebbi Yose said, in both cases the roots do not expand sideways but they create soft earth and undermine the base of the wall. You can see that because we also stated “urine”. Does urine expand sideways? Rebbi Yose the son of Rebbi Abun explained, did we not also state “the plough”? Does the plough expand sideways?

There, we have stated: “One keeps seeds, the plough, and urine three hand-breadths away from a wall.” Rebbi Jeremiah said that Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba raised a question: There, you say that the roots do not expand sideways and here you say, the roots do expand sideways! Rebbi Yose said, in both cases the roots do not expand sideways but they create soft earth and undermine the base of the wall. You can see that because we also stated “urine”. Does urine expand sideways? Rebbi Yose the son of Rebbi Abun explained, did we not also state “the plough”? Does the plough expand sideways?

Rebbi Samuel in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: The Mishnah speaks of the space above the shoot. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac: The Mishnah speaks about the air space of ten. Rebbi Yose said, we were of the opinion that a vineyard has air space; a single vine has no air space. Since Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac: The Mishnah speaks about the air space of ten, that means that even a single vine has air space.

Rebbi Yose said, one whips only for the main vineyard.

MISHNAH: If somebody draws his vine over somebody else’s grain it sanctifies and he is responsible for its alienation. Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Simeon say, nobody can sanctify anything that is not his. Rebbi Yose said, it happened that someone sowed in his vineyard in the Sabbatical year. When this came before Rebbi Aqiba, he said nobody can sanctify anything that is not his.

MISHNAH: If somebody draws his vine over somebody else’s grain it sanctifies and he is responsible for its alienation. Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Simeon say, nobody can sanctify anything that is not his. Rebbi Yose said, it happened that someone sowed in his vineyard in the Sabbatical year. When this came before Rebbi Aqiba, he said nobody can sanctify anything that is not his.

Rebbi Jonah and Rebbi Yose, both of them say that it is Rebbi Meïr’s. [An animal] which was worshipped: Some Tannaïm state that it is forbidden whether it is his own or somebody else’s; some Tannaïm state that his own is forbidden, somebody else’s is permitted. They wanted to say, the opinion that it is forbidden whether it is his own or somebody else’s is Rebbi Meïr’s and Rebbi Jehudah’s; the opinion that his own is forbidden, somebody else’s is permitted, is Rebbi Yose’s and Rebbi Simeon’s. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi La: It is everybody’s opinion. Just as you say there that a living thing is forbidden for Heaven even though it is permitted for the private person, so anything that is not yours may be forbidden for Heaven even though it is permitted for the private person.

Rebbi Jonah and Rebbi Yose, both of them say that it is Rebbi Meïr’s. [An animal] which was worshipped: Some Tannaïm state that it is forbidden whether it is his own or somebody else’s; some Tannaïm state that his own is forbidden, somebody else’s is permitted. They wanted to say, the opinion that it is forbidden whether it is his own or somebody else’s is Rebbi Meïr’s and Rebbi Jehudah’s; the opinion that his own is forbidden, somebody else’s is permitted, is Rebbi Yose’s and Rebbi Simeon’s. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi La: It is everybody’s opinion. Just as you say there that a living thing is forbidden for Heaven even though it is permitted for the private person, so anything that is not yours may be forbidden for Heaven even though it is permitted for the private person.

Rebbi Jonah and Rebbi Yose, both of them say that it is Rebbi Meïr’s. [An animal] which was worshipped: Some Tannaïm state that it is forbidden whether it is his own or somebody else’s; some Tannaïm state that his own is forbidden, somebody else’s is permitted. They wanted to say, the opinion that it is forbidden whether it is his own or somebody else’s is Rebbi Meïr’s and Rebbi Jehudah’s; the opinion that his own is forbidden, somebody else’s is permitted, is Rebbi Yose’s and Rebbi Simeon’s. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi La: It is everybody’s opinion. Just as you say there that a living thing is forbidden for Heaven even though it is permitted for the private person, so anything that is not yours may be forbidden for Heaven even though it is permitted for the private person.

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, this is a fine imposed by Rebbi Meïr. Did he act on that, “if somebody draws his vine over somebody else’s grain …”? But what did that person do? When it grows, it grows according to his intention. One person showed his tetradrachma to Rebbi Eleazar who told him that it was good. It turned out to be worthless. This case came before Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish who fined him according to the following: If somebody shows a denar to the money-changer and it turns out to be bad, [the money-changer] has to pay because he takes a fee. Does Rebbi Eleazar take a fee? Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Abuna: One who takes it into his hand has the status of one who takes a fee. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun does not say so, but Rebbi Eleazar says that this fine is imposed by the rabbis; Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish says the fine is imposed by Rebbi Meïr. When the case came before Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, he asked Rebbi Eleazar, who imposed this fine? He [Rebbi Eleazar] said, the rabbis. He [Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish] answered him, go and pay.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, everybody agrees that the grapes will be forbidden. Rebbi Eleazar said to him, what makes forbidden is not forbidden and what is not forbidden will be forbidden? They disagree if somebody draws his vine over somebody else’s grain. But if somebody draws a neighbor’s vine over his own grain, everybody agrees that what makes forbidden is forbidden. If somebody draws a neighbor’s vine over his neighbor’s grain we can understand from the following: “Rebbi Yose said, it happened that someone sowed in his vineyard in the Sabbatical year. When this came before Rebbi Aqiba, he said nobody can sanctify anything that is not his.” This was given as answer!

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

It was stated: “The tithes from a flower pot without hole are of practice, its heave does not create dema‘ and one does not owe a fifth for it.” Rebbi Yose asked: May one say “He Who created bread from the earth” for it? Rebbi Jonah asked: Is a gourd considered plucked that one may use it as the cover [of a sukkah]? Rebbi Judah bar Pazi asked: If somebody planted five vines in five pots without holes and arranged them two parallel two and one as tail, can you say this is a vineyard? He may rearrange, does there exist a movable vineyard?

HALAKHAH: “Kilaim in a vineyard are forbidden,” etc. It is written (Deut. 22:9): “Do not sow kilaim in your vineyard.” Not only sowing, how about keeping? The verse says, vineyard and no kilaim. Does this follow Rebbi Aqiba, for Rebbi Aqiba said that he who keeps [kilaim] transgresses a prohibition? Rebbi Yose said, it is the word of everybody. Everybody agrees that what is forbidden is forbidden if he did not preserve through an action, but if he preserved through an action he is whipped, as it is stated: He who covers kilaim is whipped.

Rebbi Yudan from Kappadokia asked before Rebbi Yose: There they say that tree seeds are called seeds but here you say that tree seeds are not called seeds. He said to him: There the verse excluded them since usually people do not call them “seeds,” but here the verse added (Lev. 11:37) “any sown seed that may be sown.”