## Bava Batra Daf 79a

###### Bava Batra 79a:1
[Bava Batra 79a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/79a:1)

עַד נֹפַח״ – עַד שֶׁתָּבֹא אֵשׁ שֶׁאֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה נִיפּוּחַ, ״עַד מֵידְבָא״ – עַד שֶׁתַּדְאִיב נִשְׁמָתָן. וְאָמְרִי לַהּ: עַד דְּעָבֵיד מַאי דְּבָעֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**even until Nophah,”** meaning **until the fire comes that does not require fanning [*nippuaḥ*],** i.e., the fire of Gehenna, which will consume them. **“Until Medeba [*Medeva*]”;** this means **until their souls are pained [*tadiv*]. And some say** an alternative explanation: It means **until** God **does what He wishes [*mai deva’ei*]** with them and punishes them as they deserve.


###### Bava Batra 79a:2
[Bava Batra 79a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/79a:2)

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: כׇּל הַפּוֹרֵשׁ מִדִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה – אֵשׁ אוֹכַלְתּוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְנָתַתִּי [אֶת] פָּנַי בָּהֶם, מֵהָאֵשׁ יָצָאוּ וְהָאֵשׁ תֹּאכְלֵם״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yehuda says** that **Rav says:** With regard to **anyone who separates** himself **from matters of Torah, a fire consumes him, as it is stated: “And I will set My face against them; out of the fire they come forth, and the fire shall devour them”** (Ezekiel 15:7). The Torah is likened to fire in the verse: “Is not My word like fire?” (Jeremiah 23:29). The verse in Ezekiel teaches: “Out of the fire they come forth,” referring to those who separate themselves from the fire of Torah; “and the fire shall devour them,” i.e., they are consumed by the fire of Gehenna.


###### Bava Batra 79a:3
[Bava Batra 79a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/79a:3)

כִּי אֲתָא רַב דִּימִי, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן: כׇּל הַפּוֹרֵשׁ עַצְמוֹ מִדִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה – נוֹפֵל בְּגֵיהִנָּם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אָדָם תּוֹעֶה מִדֶּרֶךְ הַשְׂכֵּל, בִּקְהַל רְפָאִים יָנוּחַ״. וְאֵין רְפָאִים אֶלָּא גֵּיהִנָּם – שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְלֹא יָדַע כִּי רְפָאִים שָׁם, בְּעִמְקֵי שְׁאוֹל קְרֻאֶיהָ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**When Rav Dimi came** from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that **Rabbi Yonatan says: Anyone who separates himself from the matters of Torah falls into Gehenna. As it is stated: “The man who strays out of the way of understanding shall rest in the congregation of the spirits”** (Proverbs 21:16). “The way of understanding” is the way of the Torah. **And** one who departs from the Torah arrives in the place of the **spirits,** which **is nothing other than Gehenna, as it is stated: “But he does not know that the spirits are there; that those whom she has called are in the depths of the netherworld”** (Proverbs 9:18).


###### Bava Batra 79a:4
[Bava Batra 79a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/79a:4)

מָכַר אַשְׁפָּה – מָכַר זִבְלָהּ וְכוּ׳. תְּנַן הָתָם: כׇּל הָרָאוּי לַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְלֹא לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת; לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת וְלֹא לַמִּזְבֵּחַ; לֹא לַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְלֹא לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת – מוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶן וּבְמַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: One who **sold a dunghill has sold its manure,** and one who sold a cistern has sold its water. **We learned** in a mishna **elsewhere** (*Me’ila* 12b): With regard to **any** item that is **fit to** be sacrificed on **the altar but** is **not** fit **for Temple maintenance,** or is fit **for Temple maintenance but not for the altar,** or items that are fit **neither for the altar nor for Temple maintenance** in their current state and are slated to be sold with the profit used for the Temple, in all these cases if one consecrates these items and then derives benefit **from them or their contents** for a non-sacred purpose, he thereby is liable for **misuse** of consecrated property and is obligated to bring an offering as atonement.


###### Bava Batra 79a:5
[Bava Batra 79a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/79a:5)

כֵּיצַד? הִקְדִּישׁ בּוֹר מְלֵאָה מַיִם; אַשְׁפּוֹת מְלֵאוֹת זֶבֶל; שׁוֹבָךְ מָלֵא יוֹנִים; שָׂדֶה מְלֵאָה עֲשָׂבִים; אִילָן נָשׂוּי פֵּירוֹת – מוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶן וּבְמַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**How so?** One who **consecrated a cistern filled with water, dunghills filled with manure, a dovecote filled with doves, a field filled with plants,** or **a tree bearing fruit,** and subsequently derived benefit **from them or their contents** is liable for **misuse** of consecrated property.


###### Bava Batra 79a:6
[Bava Batra 79a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/79a:6)

אֲבָל הִקְדִּישׁ בּוֹר וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִתְמַלֵּא מַיִם; אַשְׁפָּה וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִתְמַלְּאָה זֶבֶל; שׁוֹבָךְ וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִתְמַלֵּא יוֹנִים; אִילָן וְאַחַר כָּךְ נָשָׂא פֵּירוֹת; שָׂדֶה וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִתְמַלְּאָה עֲשָׂבִים – מוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶן, וְאֵין מוֹעֲלִין בְּמַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכָן; דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: הִקְדִּישׁ אֶת הַשָּׂדֶה וְאֶת הָאִילָן – מוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶן וּבְגִידּוּלֵיהֶם, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן גִּידּוּלֵי הֶקְדֵּשׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But** with regard to one who **consecrated a cistern and it was later filled with water, a dunghill and it was later filled with manure, a dovecote and it later was filled with doves, a tree and it later bore fruit,** or **a field and it was later filled with plants,** if he derives benefit **from them** he is liable for **misuse** of consecrated property but he is **not** liable for **misuse** of consecrated property by deriving benefit from **its contents.** This is **the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yosei says:** With regard to one who **consecrated a field or a tree,** he is liable for **misuse** of consecrated property if he derives benefit from **them or that which grows from them, because they are growths of consecrated** property.


###### Bava Batra 79a:7
[Bava Batra 79a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/79a:7)

תַּנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי: נִרְאִין דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה – בְּבוֹר וְשׁוֹבָךְ, וְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי יוֹסֵי – בְּשָׂדֶה וְאִילָן. הַאי מַאי? בִּשְׁלָמָא ״נִרְאִין דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בְּבוֹר וְשׁוֹבָךְ״ – מִכְּלָל דִּפְלִיג אַשָּׂדֶה וְאִילָן,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**It is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **said: The statement of Rabbi Yehuda appears** to be correct **in** the cases of **a cistern and a dovecote,** i.e., if one consecrated an empty cistern or dovecote, the water or doves that later fill it do not become consecrated. **And the statement of Rabbi Yosei** appears to be correct **in** the cases of **a field and a tree.** The Gemara asks: **What is** the meaning of **this** statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi? **Granted,** when he says that **the statement of Rabbi Yehuda appears** to be correct **in** the cases of **a cistern and a dovecote, by inference** this means **that** Rabbi Yehuda **disagrees** with Rabbi Yosei **in** the cases of **a field and a tree,** and Rabbi Yehuda does explicitly disagree in those cases.


###### Bava Batra 79a:8
[Bava Batra 79a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/79a:8)

אֶלָּא ״נִרְאִין דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּשָׂדֶה וְאִילָן״ – מִכְּלָל דִּפְלִיג בְּבוֹר וְשׁוֹבָךְ?! וְהָא רַבִּי יוֹסֵי ״שָׂדֶה וְאִילָן״ קָאָמַר!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But** when Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says that **the statement of Rabbi Yosei appears** to be correct **in** the cases of **a field and a tree,** this indicates **by inference that** Rabbi Yosei **disagrees** with Rabbi Yehuda **in** the cases of **a cistern and a dovecote. But Rabbi Yosei stated** his opinion solely **in** the cases of **a field and a tree,** as only plants and fruit grow directly from consecrated property, and this reasoning is not relevant in the case of a cistern or dovecote.


###### Bava Batra 79a:9
[Bava Batra 79a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/79a:9)

וְכִי תֵּימָא: לִדְבָרָיו דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה קָאָמַר; וְהַתַּנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: אֵין אֲנִי רוֹאֶה דְּבָרָיו שֶׁל רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בְּשָׂדֶה וְאִילָן, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן גִּידּוּלֵי הֶקְדֵּשׁ. בְּשָׂדֶה וְאִילָן הוּא דְּאֵינוֹ רוֹאֶה, הָא בְּבוֹר וְשׁוֹבָךְ – רוֹאֶה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you would say** that Rabbi Yosei **stated** his opinion **in accordance with the statement of Rabbi Yehuda,** whereas he himself holds that even the items found in a dovecote or a cistern are consecrated, this is difficult: **But isn’t it taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Yosei said: I do not see the statement of Rabbi Yehuda** as correct **in** the cases of **a field and a tree, because** the plants and the fruit **are the growths of consecrated** property? Infer from here that it is **in** the cases of **a field and a tree that** Rabbi Yosei **does not see** and accept the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. **But in** the cases of **a cistern and a dovecote, he** does **see** and accept his opinion.


###### Bava Batra 79a:10
[Bava Batra 79a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/79a:10)

הָכִי קָאָמַר: נִרְאִין דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה לְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, בְּבוֹר וְשׁוֹבָךְ – שֶׁאַף רַבִּי יוֹסֵי לֹא נֶחְלַק עָלָיו אֶלָּא בְּשָׂדֶה וְאִילָן, אֲבָל בְּבוֹר וְשׁוֹבָךְ מוֹדֵי לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that **this** is what Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi **is saying: The statement of Rabbi Yehuda appears to Rabbi Yosei** to be correct **in** the cases of **a cistern and a dovecote.** In other words, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi is saying **that even Rabbi Yosei disagrees with** Rabbi Yehuda **only in** the cases of **a field and a tree. But in** the cases of **a cistern and a dovecote, he concedes to him** that the prohibition against misuse of consecrated property does not apply to items that were added afterward and were not present at the time of the consecration.


###### Bava Batra 79a:11
[Bava Batra 79a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/79a:11)

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: הִקְדִּישָׁן רֵיקָנִין וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִתְמַלְּאוּ – מוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶן, וְאֵין מוֹעֲלִין בְּמַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכָן. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: אַף מוֹעֲלִין בְּמַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The Sages taught:** In the case of cisterns, with regard to one who **consecrated them** when they were **empty and they were later filled,** if one derives benefit **from them** he is liable for **misuse** of consecrated property, **but** he is **not** liable for **misuse** of consecrated property if he derives benefit **from their contents.** This ruling will be clarified below. **Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, says:** One is liable for **misuse** of consecrated property **even** by deriving benefit **from their contents.**


###### Bava Batra 79a:12
[Bava Batra 79a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/79a:12)

אָמַר רַבָּה: מַחֲלוֹקֶת בְּשָׂדֶה וְאִילָן – דְּתַנָּא קַמָּא סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי; אֲבָל בְּבוֹר וְשׁוֹבָךְ – דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל מוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶן וְאֵין מוֹעֲלִין בְּמַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabba says:** This **dispute** in the *baraita* applies only **in** the cases of **a field and a tree, as the first *tanna* holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda, and Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei. But in** the cases of **a cistern and a dovecote, everyone agrees** that if one derives benefit **from them** he is liable for **misuse** of consecrated property **but** he is **not** liable for **misuse** of consecrated property if he derives benefit **from their contents.**


###### Bava Batra 79a:13
[Bava Batra 79a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/79a:13)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי, וְאֶלָּא הָא דְּתַנְיָא: הִקְדִּישָׁן מְלֵאִין – מוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶן וּבְמַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכָן, וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מַחְלִיף;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said to him: But** consider **that which is taught** in the continuation of the *baraita*: If one **consecrated them** when they were **full** and then derives benefit **from them or from their contents,** he is liable for **misuse** of consecrated property. **And Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, reverses** his previous ruling in this case and holds that if the items were consecrated when full their contents are not subject to the prohibition against misuse of consecrated property.