## Menachot Daf 31a

###### Menachot 31a:1
[Menachot 31a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/31a:1)

אַשִּׁידָּה, דִּתְנַן: בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים נִמְדֶּדֶת מִבִּפְנִים, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים מִבַּחוּץ, וּמוֹדִים אֵלּוּ וְאֵלּוּ שֶׁאֵין עוֹבִי הָרַגְלַיִם וְעוֹבִי הַלְּבִזְבְּזִין נִמְדָּד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
that Rabbi Ḥanina’s statement was **with regard to a chest, as we learned** in a mishna (*Kelim* 18:1): A wooden chest that is large enough to contain forty *se’a* is not susceptible to contracting ritual impurity, since it is no longer considered a vessel. In determining its capacity, **Beit Shammai say** that **it is measured on the inside, and Beit Hillel say** that **it is measured on the outside** so that the volume of the walls of the chest itself is included in the measurement. **And** both Beit Shammai **and** Beit Hillel **concede that the volume of the legs and the volume of the rims [*halevazbazin*]** are **not measured.**


###### Menachot 31a:2
[Menachot 31a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/31a:2)

רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: מוֹדִים שֶׁעוֹבִי הָרַגְלַיִם וְעוֹבִי הַלְּבִזְבְּזִין נִמְדָּד, וּבֵינֵיהֶן אֵין נִמְדָּד. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן שֵׁזוּרִי אוֹמֵר: אִם הָיוּ רַגְלַיִם גְּבוֹהוֹת טֶפַח – אֵין בֵּינֵיהֶן נִמְדָּד, וְאִם לָאו – בֵּינֵיהֶן נִמְדָּד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yosei says: They concede that the volume of the legs and the volume of the rims** are **measured, but** the space enclosed **between** the rims and the legs **is not measured. Rabbi Shimon Shezuri says: If** the **legs were** one **handbreadth high** then the space **between** the legs **is not measured,** since the area has an independent significance, **but if** the space is **not** one handbreadth high, the space **between** the legs **is measured** as part of the chest. It is with regard to this statement that Rabbi Ḥanina said the *halakha* is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon Shezuri.


###### Menachot 31a:3
[Menachot 31a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/31a:3)

רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק אָמַר: אַיַּיִן, דִּתְנַן: רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: שֶׁמֶן תְּחִלָּה לְעוֹלָם, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: אַף הַדְּבָשׁ, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן שֵׁזוּרִי אוֹמֵר: אַף הַיָּיִן. מִכְּלָל דְּתַנָּא קַמָּא סָבַר יַיִן לָא? אֵימָא: רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן שֵׁזוּרִי אוֹמֵר: יָיִן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said** that Rabbi Ḥanina’s statement was **with regard to wine, as we learned** in a mishna (*Teharot* 3:2): **Rabbi Meir says: Oil,** an example of a liquid, that contracted impurity, is **always** considered to have **first**-degree ritual impurity, even if it came into contact with an item that was impure with second-degree ritual impurity, which, according to the standard *halakhot* of ritual impurity, should result in it having third-degree ritual impurity. **And the Rabbis say** that this is the *halakha* **even** with regard to **honey. Rabbi Shimon Shezuri says:** This is the *halakha* **even** with regard to **wine.** The Gemara asks: **By inference,** is that to say **that the first *tanna* holds** that **wine** is **not** considered a liquid? Rather, **say** as follows: **Rabbi Shimon Shezuri says: Wine** is considered a liquid, but oil and honey are not.


###### Menachot 31a:4
[Menachot 31a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/31a:4)

תַּנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן שֵׁזוּרִי: פַּעַם אַחַת נִתְעָרֵב לִי טֶבֶל בְּחוּלִּין, וּבָאתִי וְשָׁאַלְתִּי אֶת רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן, וְאָמַר לִי: לֵךְ קַח לְךָ מִן הַשּׁוּק וְעַשֵּׂר עָלָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara relates another statement of Rabbi Shimon Shezuri: **It is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Shimon Shezuri said: Once, my untithed produce became mixed together with** a greater quantity of **non-sacred,** i.e., tithed, **produce, and I came and asked Rabbi Tarfon** how I should separate tithes from the untithed produce that was mixed with the tithed produce. **And he said to me: Go and take from the market** doubtfully tithed produce, which requires the removal of tithes by rabbinic law, **and separate tithes from it on behalf of** the untithed produce that is mixed with the tithed produce.


###### Menachot 31a:5
[Menachot 31a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/31a:5)

קָסָבַר דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא בְּרוּבָּא בָּטֵל, וְרוֹב עַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ מְעַשְּׂרִים הֵן, וְהָוֵה לֵיהּ כְּתוֹרֵם מִן הַפְּטוּר עַל הַפְּטוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: Rabbi Tarfon **holds** that **by Torah law** the minority of untithed produce is **nullified in the majority** of tithed produce and is therefore exempt from tithes; it is by rabbinic law that it is not nullified and one is obligated to separate tithes from it. **And** additionally, he holds that **the majority of those who are unreliable with regard to tithes [*amei ha’aretz*] do separate tithes,** in which case by Torah law one is not obligated to separate tithes from produce purchased from the market. **And** therefore, if Rabbi Shimon Shezuri receives produce from an *am ha’aretz*, **he is considered** by Torah law **to be separating tithes from exempt** produce **on behalf of exempt** produce, while all of it is obligated in tithes by rabbinic law.


###### Menachot 31a:6
[Menachot 31a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/31a:6)

וְלֵימָא לֵיהּ: ״לֵךְ קַח מִן הַגּוֹי״, קָסָבַר: אֵין קִנְיָן לְגוֹי בְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל לְהַפְקִיעַ מִיַּד מַעֲשֵׂר, וְהָוֵה לֵיהּ מִן הַחִיּוּב עַל הַפְּטוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **But let** Rabbi Tarfon **say to him: Go and take** produce **from a gentile.** Since it is exempt from tithes by Torah law but requires tithing by rabbinic law, he could then separate tithes from this produce on behalf of the untithed produce that is nullified by the tithed produce. The Gemara explains: Rabbi Tarfon **holds** that **a gentile has no acquisition** of land **in Eretz Yisrael to abrogate** the sanctity of the land, thereby removing it **from** the obligation to **tithe** its produce. **And** therefore, if Rabbi Shimon Shezuri were to take produce from a gentile, he would be **considered to be** separating tithes **from** produce **that is obligated** in tithes by Torah law **on behalf of exempt** produce, which one may not do.


###### Menachot 31a:7
[Menachot 31a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/31a:7)

אִיכָּא דְאָמְרִי, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: ״לֵךְ קַח מִן הַגּוֹי״, קָסָבַר יֵשׁ קִנְיָן לְגוֹי בְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל לְהַפְקִיעַ מִיַּד מַעֲשֵׂר, וְהָוֵה לֵיהּ מִן הַפְּטוּר עַל הַפְּטוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**There are** those **who say** that Rabbi Tarfon **said to him: Go and take** produce **from a gentile** and separate tithes from it on behalf of the untithed produce that is intermingled in the majority of tithed produce. Accordingly, Rabbi Tarfon **holds** that **a gentile has acquisition** of land **in Eretz Yisrael to abrogate** the sanctity of the land, thereby removing it **from** the obligation to **tithe** its produce. **And** therefore, if Rabbi Shimon Shezuri takes produce from a gentile, **he is considered,** by Torah law, **to be** separating tithes **from exempt** produce **on behalf of exempt** produce, while all of it is obligated in tithes by rabbinic law.


###### Menachot 31a:8
[Menachot 31a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/31a:8)

וְלֵימָא לֵיהּ: ״קַח מֵהַשּׁוּק״, קָסָבַר: אֵין רוֹב עַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ מְעַשְּׂרִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **But let** Rabbi Tarfon **say to him:** Go and **take** produce **from** an *am ha’aretz* in **the market** and separate tithes from it on behalf of the mixed untithed produce. The Gemara explains: Rabbi Tarfon **holds** that **the majority of *amei ha’aretz* do not separate tithes,** in which case he is considered to be separating tithes from produce that is obligated in tithes by Torah law on behalf of exempt produce.


###### Menachot 31a:9
[Menachot 31a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/31a:9)

שְׁלַח לֵיהּ רַב יֵימַר בַּר שֶׁלֶמְיָא לְרַב פָּפָּא: הָא דְּאָמַר רָבִין בַּר חִינָּנָא אָמַר עוּלָּא אָמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן שֵׁזוּרִי, וְלֹא עוֹד, אֶלָּא כׇּל מָקוֹם שֶׁשָּׁנָה רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן שֵׁזוּרִי הֲלָכָה כְּמוֹתוֹ, אַף בְּנִתְעָרֵב לֵיהּ טֶבֶל בְּחוּלִּין?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yeimar bar Shelamya sent** the following question **to Rav Pappa: That which Ravin bar Ḥinnana said** that **Ulla says** that **Rabbi Ḥanina says:** The ***halakha*** is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon Shezuri, and moreover, any place where Rabbi Shimon Shezuri taught** a *halakha*, the ***halakha*** is **in accordance with his** opinion, was that said **even with regard to** the case of **one whose untithed produce became mixed together with non-sacred,** i.e., tithed, **produce,** or was Rabbi Ḥanina referring only to cases where Rabbi Shimon Shezuri stated his opinion in the Mishna, but not in a *baraita*?


###### Menachot 31a:10
[Menachot 31a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/31a:10)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אִין, אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: אֲמַר לִי מָר זוּטְרָא, קָשֵׁי בַּהּ רַבִּי חֲנִינָא מִסּוּרָא: פְּשִׁיטָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Pappa **said to him: Yes,** the *halakha* is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon Shezuri even with regard to untithed produce that was mixed together with tithed produce. **Rav Ashi said: Mar Zutra said to me: Rabbi Ḥanina of Sura raised a difficulty with this:** Isn’t it **obvious?**