## Pesachim Daf 25a

###### Pesachim 25a:1
[Pesachim 25a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/25a:1)

מָה לְעׇרְלָה שֶׁכֵּן לֹא הָיְתָה לָהּ שְׁעַת הַכּוֹשֶׁר — תֹּאמַר בְּבָשָׂר בְּחָלָב שֶׁהָיְתָה לוֹ שְׁעַת הַכּוֹשֶׁר! חָמֵץ בַּפֶּסַח יוֹכִיחַ — שֶׁהָיָה לוֹ שְׁעַת הַכּוֹשֶׁר, וְאָסוּר בַּהֲנָאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this inference: **What** comparison can be made **to *orla*,** which is more stringent than meat in milk, **as it never had a time when it was fit?** Can **you say** the same **with regard to meat in milk, which had a time when it was fit?** Unlike *orla* fruits, which were prohibited from the beginning of their existence, both meat and milk were permitted on their own before they were cooked together. Therefore, the Gemara brings other proofs: **Let leavened bread on Passover prove** that this issue is not a factor, **as it had a time when it was fit,** before Passover, **and** yet **it is prohibited** to derive **benefit** from it.


###### Pesachim 25a:2
[Pesachim 25a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/25a:2)

מָה לְחָמֵץ בַּפֶּסַח — שֶׁכֵּן עָנוּשׁ כָּרֵת, תֹּאמַר בְּבָשָׂר בְּחָלָב שֶׁאֵינוֹ עָנוּשׁ כָּרֵת! כִּלְאֵי הַכֶּרֶם יוֹכִיחוּ, שֶׁאֵין עָנוּשׁ כָּרֵת — וְאָסוּר בַּהֲנָאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this: **What** comparison can be made to **leavened bread on Passover,** which is a stringent prohibition, **as** one who eats it **is punished with *karet*?** Can **you say** the same **with regard to** one who eats **meat in milk, who is not punished with *karet*?** The Gemara answers: **Let** the case of **diverse kinds** planted **in the vineyard prove** that this is not relevant, **as** one who violates that prohibition **is not punished with *karet*, and** yet **it is prohibited** to derive **benefit** from the resulting mixtures.


###### Pesachim 25a:3
[Pesachim 25a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/25a:3)

וְאִם אִיתָא, נִיפְרוֹךְ: מָה לְכִלְאֵי הַכֶּרֶם — שֶׁכֵּן לוֹקִין עֲלֵיהֶן אֲפִילּוּ שֶׁלֹּא כְּדֶרֶךְ הֲנָאָתָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara returns to the issue of Abaye’s statement with regard to the unique stringency of diverse kinds planted in a vineyard: **And if it is so** that one is flogged for deriving benefit from diverse kinds planted in a vineyard, even if one derives benefit from them in an unusual manner, **we can challenge** this last proof: How can one compare meat in milk to diverse kinds in a vineyard, **as** with regard to diverse kinds in a vineyard, **one is flogged even if he** derives **benefit from them in an unusual manner?**


###### Pesachim 25a:4
[Pesachim 25a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/25a:4)

וְאַבָּיֵי, ״תֹּאמַר״ בְּמַאי?! תֹּאמַר בְּבָשָׂר בְּחָלָב שֶׁאֵין לוֹקִין עָלָיו אֶלָּא דֶּרֶךְ הֲנָאָתוֹ — אַטּוּ בְּבָשָׂר בְּחָלָב אֲכִילָה כְּתִיבָה בֵּיהּ?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** how would **Abaye** respond to this question? When one draws this challenge to its logical conclusion with the phrase: Can **you say,** and explains in detail how the prohibition of meat in milk differs from that of diverse kinds in a vineyard, **with regard to what** difference would the challenge be raised? **You** may **say** that **with regard to meat in milk one is flogged only for** deriving **benefit in the usual manner,** as opposed to the *halakha* with regard to diverse kinds, according to which one is flogged even for deriving benefit in an unusual manner. However, **is that to say** that the term **eating is written** in the Torah **with regard to meat in milk?** The basis for this *halakha* with regard to diverse kinds in a vineyard is the lack of the term eating in the verse; however, the prohibition of meat in milk is also missing that term. Therefore, there are no grounds for this challenge: If the lack of the word eating leads to the conclusion that one is flogged even when deriving benefit in an unusual manner, logically that punishment should apply to both diverse kinds and meat in milk.


###### Pesachim 25a:5
[Pesachim 25a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/25a:5)

וְאִידַּךְ דְּקָא מוֹתֵיב לַהּ! סָבַר, לְהָכִי קָא גָּמַר מִנְּבֵילָה. מָה נְבֵילָה דֶּרֶךְ הֲנָאָתָהּ — אַף בָּשָׂר בְּחָלָב דֶּרֶךְ הֲנָאָתוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And the other** Sage, **who raised this objection,** holds that **for this** reason Isi ben Yehuda **derives** this aspect of the prohibition **from** the case of **an animal carcass. Just as** with regard to **an animal carcass** one is flogged only **when** deriving **benefit in the usual manner,** as the verse that prohibits it uses the term eating, **so too,** with regard to **meat in milk,** one is flogged only when deriving **benefit in the usual manner.** Despite what is written in the Gemara, the fact that one is flogged only for deriving benefit from the animal in the usual manner is not derived from the carcass of an unslaughtered animal but from *tereifa*, an animal with a condition that will cause it to die within twelve months. With regard to *tereifa* it is written: “And you shall be holy men unto Me; therefore you shall not eat any flesh that is torn of beasts in the field [*tereifa*]; you shall cast it to the dogs” (Exodus 22:30). From the fact that one may cast it to the dogs it can be derived that one may derive benefit in any manner other than the usual manner, i.e., eating.


###### Pesachim 25a:6
[Pesachim 25a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/25a:6)

וְאַבָּיֵי: לְהָכִי לֹא כָּתַב אֲכִילָה בְּגוּפוֹ, לוֹמַר שֶׁלּוֹקִין עָלָיו אֲפִילּוּ שֶׁלֹּא כְּדֶרֶךְ הֲנָאָתוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Abaye** holds that **for this** reason it **did not write** the term **eating** in the verse **itself** with regard to the prohibition of meat in milk: In order **to say that one is flogged even** when deriving **benefit in an unusual manner.**


###### Pesachim 25a:7
[Pesachim 25a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/25a:7)

וְלִיפְרוֹךְ: מָה לְכִלְאֵי הַכֶּרֶם שֶׁכֵּן לֹא הָיְתָה לוֹ שְׁעַת הַכּוֹשֶׁר! אָמַר רַבִּי אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה: זֹאת אוֹמֶרֶת כִּלְאֵי הַכֶּרֶם עִיקָּרָן נֶאֱסָרִין, הוֹאִיל וְהָיְתָה לָהֶן שְׁעַת הַכּוֹשֶׁר קוֹדֶם הַשְׁרָשָׁה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara continues. **Let** Isi ben Yehuda **challenge: What** comparison can be made **to diverse kinds in a vineyard, as** the forbidden produce **had no time that it was fit** because the prohibition came into effect as soon as the produce began to grow? **Rabbi Adda bar Ahava said:** Apparently, since this question was not asked, **that is to say that** with regard to **diverse kinds in a vineyard, their roots are forbidden** as well, including the seeds and saplings from which the mature plants grow. Therefore, no challenge can be raised, **since they had a time when they were fit, before taking root.**


###### Pesachim 25a:8
[Pesachim 25a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/25a:8)

מֵתִיב רַב שְׁמַעְיָה: הַמַּעֲבִיר עָצִיץ נָקוּב בַּכֶּרֶם, אִם הוֹסִיף מָאתַיִם — אָסוּר. הוֹסִיף אִין, לֹא הוֹסִיף לָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Shemaya raised an objection** based on what was taught in a mishna: With regard to **one who transfers a perforated pot** with seeds in it **into a vineyard, if** the size of the seeds growing in the pot **increases** by one **two-hundredth** of their previous size, such that the permitted portion is not two hundred times the forbidden, newly grown portion, then the mixture **is prohibited** due to the prohibition against planting diverse kinds in a vineyard. The forbidden portion is nullified only if it comprises less than one two-hundredth of the mixture. The Gemara reads precisely: **If it increases, yes,** it is prohibited; **if it does not increase, no,** it is not prohibited. Apparently, only additional growth is prohibited, and not the seeds themselves.


###### Pesachim 25a:9
[Pesachim 25a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/25a:9)

אָמַר רָבָא, תְּרֵי קְרָאֵי כְּתִיבִי: כְּתִיב ״הַזָּרַע״ וּכְתִיב ״הַמְּלֵאָה״, הָא כֵּיצַד? זָרוּעַ מֵעִיקָּרוֹ — בְּהַשְׁרָשָׁה. זָרוּעַ וּבָא, הוֹסִיף — אִין, לֹא הוֹסִיף — לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said: Two verses are written** about this *halakha*, i.e., two separate terms in one verse indicate two separate prohibitions. The verse states: “You shall not sow your vineyard with two kinds of seed; lest the fullness of the seed which you have sown be forfeited together with the increase of the vineyard” (Deuteronomy 22:9). **It is written: “The seed,”** indicating that it is prohibited once it is planted and takes root, **and it is written: “The fullness,”** indicating that it is prohibited only if it has grown. **How** can **these** two terms be reconciled? If it were **planted initially** in the vineyard, it becomes prohibited immediately **upon taking root.** If it were **planted** elsewhere **and brought** into the vineyard later, such as in a perforated pot, then the following distinction applies: If **its** size **increases** in the vineyard, **yes,** it is prohibited; if **its** size **does not increase, no,** it is not prohibited.


###### Pesachim 25a:10
[Pesachim 25a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/25a:10)

אָמַר רַבִּי יַעֲקֹב אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: בַּכֹּל מִתְרַפְּאִין, חוּץ מֵעֲצֵי אֲשֵׁירָה. הֵיכִי דָמֵי? אִי נֵימָא דְּאִיכָּא סַכָּנָה — אֲפִילּוּ עֲצֵי אֲשֵׁירָה נָמֵי! וְאִי דְּלֵיכָּא סַכָּנָה — אֲפִילּוּ כׇּל אִיסּוּרִין שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה נָמֵי לָא?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara discusses another matter pertaining to deriving benefit. **Rabbi Ya’akov said** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan said** with regard to objects from which it is prohibited to derive benefit: **One** may **heal oneself with any substance except for wood of a tree designated for idolatry [*asheira*].** The Gemara asks: **What are the circumstances? If we say** it is a case in which **there is danger** to a person’s life, then it is permitted to use **even the wood of an *asheira*. And if** it is a situation **where there is no danger,** then **all the prohibited** substances **in the Torah also** may **not** be used, as one may not derive benefit from them.


###### Pesachim 25a:11
[Pesachim 25a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/25a:11)

לְעוֹלָם דְּאִיכָּא סַכָּנָה, וַאֲפִילּוּ הָכִי עֲצֵי אֲשֵׁירָה לָא. דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: אִם נֶאֱמַר ״בְּכׇל נַפְשְׁךָ״, לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר ״בְּכׇל מְאֹדֶךָ״. וְאִם נֶאֱמַר ״בְּכׇל מְאֹדֶךָ״, לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר ״בְּכׇל נַפְשְׁךָ״?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Actually,** it is referring to a case where **there is danger, and even so,** one my **not** derive benefit from **the wood of an *asheira*. As it was taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Eliezer says: If it is stated:** “And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, **and with all your soul,” why is it stated: “And with all your might”** (Deuteronomy 6:5)? **And if it is stated: “With all your might,” why is it stated: “With all your soul”?** One of these statements appears to be superfluous.


###### Pesachim 25a:12
[Pesachim 25a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/25a:12)

אֶלָּא לוֹמַר לָךְ: אִם יֵשׁ אָדָם שֶׁגּוּפוֹ חָבִיב עָלָיו מִמָּמוֹנוֹ — לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר ״בְּכׇל נַפְשְׁךָ״. וְיֵשׁ אָדָם שֶׁמָּמוֹנוֹ חָבִיב עָלָיו מִגּוּפוֹ — לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר ״בְּכׇל מְאֹדֶךָ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** it is **to tell you** that **if there is a person whose body is more beloved to him than his property, therefore it is stated: “With all your soul.”** The verse teaches that one must be willing to sacrifice his life to sanctify God’s name. **And there is a person whose property is more beloved to him than his body, therefore it is stated: “With all your might.”** Rabbi Eliezer understands the phrase: “With all your might,” to mean: With all your possessions. Apparently, there are circumstances in which a person must be prepared to die rather than be healed with a prohibited substance.


###### Pesachim 25a:13
[Pesachim 25a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/25a:13)

כִּי אֲתָא רָבִין אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: בַּכֹּל מִתְרַפְּאִין, חוּץ מֵעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וְגִילּוּי עֲרָיוֹת

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**When Ravin came** from the Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he **said** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan said: One** may **heal oneself with any substance** from which one may not derive benefit, **except for idolatry or forbidden sexual relations**