MISHNAH: Until when may one plough an orchard in the year preceding the Sabbatical? The House of Shammai say, as long as it helps the fruits, the House of Hillel say, until Pentecost. Their words do not differ by much.

HALAKHAH: “Until when may one plough, etc.” It is written¹9b, Makkot 8b. In both places, the argument is attributed to the school of R. Aqiba. In Mekhilta deR.Simeon bar Ioḥai to 34:22, it is attributed to R. Jehudah. Practice noted in the next paragraph follows the school of R. Ismael as explained in Mishnah 5. (Ex. 23:12): “Six days you shall do your work but on the Seventh Day you shall rest.” And it is written (Ex. 34:21): “You shall rest from ploughing and harvesting.². 23:12 reads: “Six days you shall do your work but on the Seventh Day you shall cease, so that your donkey and your ox may rest and the son of your bondsmaid and the stranger may recuperate.” Ex. 34:21: “Six days you shall work; on the Seventh day you shall rest, from ploughing and harvesting you shall rest.” It would seem more natural to quote the second verse in toto; this is the approach of the commentaries which emend the first quote away but such an approach is impossible since our text clearly quotes two different verses. The explanation is in the Mekhiltot(deR.Ismael,Massekhta dekhas pa, p. 331; deR.Simeon bar Ioḥai,Mishpaṭim, p. 217): It says in the Ten Commandments, that “six days you shall labor and do all your work.” Hence, one could think that the Sabbath has to be kept only if all work is permitted on weekdays. This would exclude the Sabbath days of the Sabbatical year since most agricultural work is forbidden in the Sabbatical. Hence, the verse Ex. 23:12 is necessary to include the Sabbath days of the Sabbatical years; this only makes sure that Ex. 34:21 is redundant as far as both Sabbath day and Sabbatical year are concerned.” Where do we hold? If one speaks about the Sabbath of Creation³, was it not already said (Ex. 20:9): “Six days you shall labor and do all your work?” If one speaks about Sabbatical years, was it not already said (Lev. 25:3): “Six years you shall sow your field and six years you shall prune your vineyard?” If it cannot refer to the Sabbath of Creation nor to Sabbatical years, let it refer to the prohibition of the first two terms⁴. “You shall rest from ploughing and harvesting,” from ploughing when harvesting is forbidden; what is this? This is ploughing in the year preceding the Sabbatical in preparation of the Sabbatical. And from harvesting when ploughing is forbidden, what is this? That is the harvest of Sabbatical growth after the Sabbatical.

footnotes: ¹ Shortened versions of this discussion are in the Babli, Roš Haššanah ² The argument is somewhat elliptic. Ex ³ The Sabbath day. ⁴ The “two terms” are the two periods during which agricultural work has to cease before the onset of the Sabbatical year, one for orchards and one for fields.

If it is so, why was it said: One ploughs until the New Year⁵. The statement of R. Joḥanan is a Tosephta (Ševi‘it 1:1). In the Babli (Mo‘ed qaṭan3b) the statement is attributed to R. Joshua ben Levi; in neither Talmud is it presented as a tannaïtic statement.? Rebbi Crispus in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Rabban Gamliel and his court abolished the prohibition of the first two terms. Rebbi Joḥanan asked: Did we not state: No court may annul the words of another court unless it is greater in wisdom and numbers⁶ 1:5. Rabban Gamliel and his court are inferior to the Men of the Great Assembly both in stature and in numbers.? Rebbi Crispus in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If they wanted to plough, they may plough⁷ 4a).. Then it should have been eliminated from the Mishnah! Rebbi Crispus in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If they wanted to re-establish it, they may do so.

footnotes: ⁵ From some baraita ⁶ Mishnah Idiut ⁷ Since the institution of the Sabbatical year is interwoven with that of the Jubilee year and the Jubilee is possible only if the Twelve Tribes are living on their ancestral lands, the Sabbatical in the times of the Second Commonwealth is not a biblical but a rabbinic institution. It is a general rule in dealing with institutions of the Men of the Great Assembly that one is restrictive in interpretation while the Temple exists and lenient when the Temple does not exist. Since one hopes that the Temple will be re-established, the rules have to be stated in the Mishnah for future generations (Interpretation of Rav Ashi in Babli Mo‘ed Qaṭan

Rebbi Jonah objected: There is the chapter on the induction and the chapter on the generation of the deluge which will have no future use⁸. 29) amd once in its execution (Lev. 8–9). The rules given there have no future application since the priesthood of the descents of Aaron is permanent. Similarly, since God has sworn that there will be no more global deluge (Gen. 9:11), the story of the deluge has no future applications.. Should they have been eliminated from what is studied? They are there to inform you. So here also to inform you. Rebbi Mana said, as we stated there⁹ 1:6, explaining why the Mishnah also transmits opinions which are rejected in practice. The information about rejected opinions is necessary for the future.: “If a person says, so is my tradition, one will say to him, you heard the opinion of Rebbi X.” And so, if somebody should say, I heard that it is forbidden to plough until the New Year, they will say to him, you heard the prohibition of the first two terms.

footnotes: ⁸ The induction of Aaron and his sons into the priesthood is decribed twice in the Torah, once as commandment (Ex ⁹ Mishnah Idiut

Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: When they forbade it, they were inspired by Scripture¹⁰, and when they permitted it, they were inspired by Scripture. When they forbade it, they were inspired by Scripture, (Lev. 25:3): “You shall rest from ploughing and harvesting,” from ploughing when harvesting is forbidden; what is this? This is ploughing in the year preceding the Sabbatical in preparation of the Sabbatical. And from harvesting when ploughing is forbidden, what is this? That is the harvest of Sabbatical growth after the Sabbatical. When they permitted it, they were inspired by Scripture, (Ex. 20:9): “Six days you shall labor and do all your work,” just as on the eve of the Sabbath of Creation³ one may do work until sundown, also before the start of the Sabbatical year one may work until sundown¹¹ 3b–4a) has another interpretation, based on R. Ismael’s opinion in Mishnah 1:5. It cannot accept the interpretation here since in the theory of the Babli one is obliged by biblical decree to start Sabbath and holidays some time before sundown (Yoma 82b, Roš Haššanah 9a)..

footnotes: ¹⁰ It is not claimed that the rules of the Sabbatical year in the Second Commonwealth are biblical, only that they are inspired by the interpretation of biblical verses. ³ The Sabbath day. ¹¹ Sundown of the eve of New Year’s Day.The Babli (Mo‘ed qaṭan

Why until Pentecost? Until then it is good for the fruits, from there on he degrades his fruits. But did we not state: Both for a useless tree¹² Chapter 6, Note 40. and a fruit tree, until then¹³ it fortifies the stem, from there on it weakens its force. Let him plough! Because he knows that he will weaken the tree, he does not intend to work the ground.

footnotes: ¹² For the definition of “useless tree”, cf. Kilaim ¹³ Pentecost. After that time, any ploughing makes sense only as preparation for the next season, the Sabbatical.

Why did we not state this with the leniencies of the House of Shammai and the stringencies of the House of Hillel? Sometimes there is no rain and no moisture and he would plough only before Pentecost following the House of Shammai¹⁴. The House of Hillel say, until Pentecost.

footnotes: ¹⁴ Ploughing in a time of draught robs the ground of moisture. In that case, the House of Shammai is more restrictive than the House of Hillel.

MISHNAH: What is an orchard? Any three trees on a bet seah¹⁵ Chapter 1, Note 195.; if they may produce a fig cake in the weight of a talent of 60 Italic minas¹⁶. He declares (Terumot 4:10) a rotl to be a Roman pound (the common apothecary’s weight in the Middle Ages); in Roman measures, 60 minas are 62.5 Roman pounds. one ploughs the entire bet seah because of them. If it is less, one ploughs for them only to accomodate the harvester and his basket beside him.

footnotes: ¹⁵ 2500 square cubits, cf. Kilaim ¹⁶ Since an Italic denar weighed 1/96 of a Roman pound, or 3.59 g, 60 minas or 6000 denar are approximately 21.5 kg. Maimonides estimates this as 62.48 rotl

HALAKHAH: Rav Jehudah in the name of Samuel, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan¹⁷ 5:5 (fol. 15a), a parallel is in Babli Baba Batra82b–83a, where the allowable distances are determined in a lengthy discussion. Probably the statement in (Caesarean) Yerushalmi Baba Batra is the original one; the extended (Tiberian) version here must be the result of a derivation parallel to the arguments of the Babli. The rules established in Baba Batra deal with transactions without special stipulations; the parties in a sale are free to specify exactly what is sold and what is not sold but if the details are not mentioned in the contract of sale then the rules given here are valid by default.: If somebody buys three trees on another person’s property, spaced so that ten trees could be planted in a bet seah¹⁸ that constitutes an orchard. If the trees are planted in a regular pattern, each tree is the center of a square of 250 square cubits. Hence, the distance of two trees is 250 = 15.811 cubits. (In the Babli, the distance is required to be “less than 16 cubits.”) and that the ox and its harness could pass between them¹⁹, Halakhah 5:3. In all cases, the stems of the trees are not included in the measurements, cf. Kilaim, Halakhah 4:8., then he acquired the ground under them, the ground between them, and outside the space for the harvester and his basket. Rav said, if they form a group²⁰ 5:2, in a rule concerning three villages close one to another, where Rav requires them to be built “like a tripod” and Samuel allows them to be aligned.. Samuel says, also if they are in a straight line. Rebbi Yose said, this refers to there but not to here²¹. Rebbi Jonah said, it refers even to here, if they are close²². Rebbi Mana said to him, did we not state “that the ox and its harness could pass between them”? Come and see, if the ox and its harness can pass between them, the roots can expand laterally, but if the ox and its harness cannot pass between them, the roots cannot expand laterally.

footnotes: ¹⁷ A very shortened version of this statement is in Baba Batra ¹⁸ This is the minimum of trees in a bet seah ¹⁹ This is defined as “working space” of 4 cubits in Kilaim ²⁰ If the trees form a triangle. The correct version is in a Genizah fragment, בעשויין ציבה, referring to צובה “tripod”. The Venice text has the word in Eruvin ²¹ The minimal and maximal distances apply to civil contracts, not to the laws of the Sabbatical. ²² Fruit trees planted less than four cubits apart cannot grow; they are planted either in a tree nursery to be transferred later to genuine agricultural use or they are grown for their wood and will be cut down. In no case is ploughing the field for them justified.

Rebbi Eliezer asked, from one to the other sixteen and on the sides twenty five²⁴? Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac asked: If they were next to a fence, does one plough the entire bet seah because of them²⁵? Rebbi Yose said, if you want that, we should give them their four bate seah, two bate seah here, two bate seah²⁶ because of a row of trees somewhere on it, one would be able to define a cross-shaped area to be ploughed, four partially overlapping bate seah. If the distance between two trees is a, one has two fields 50 wide and 50 long on each side of the trees and two fields 50 wide and 25-a long on each side straddling the line on which the trees are planted. One has to assume that in each direction there is a bet seah, a 50-by-50 field, but the four fields have a considerable area in common so that the total area is 4 bate seah. This interpretation is necessary because even the two lateral fields must have in common the strip carrying the trees and be wide (8 + width of the stems); it agrees with the very careful formulation of the sentence that lead those copyists astray who understood what they were copying. The argument shows that the question must be answered in the negative. there. Rebbi Jeremiah asked, if there was one vine drawn over two seah, do you plough the ground under it and outside it for the harvester and his basket²⁷ but there is no reason to see in this situation a contradiction to our Mishnah.?

footnotes: ²⁴ If the three trees are planted in a straight line (following Samuel), almost 16 cubits apart (Note 18), is it necessary to assume that the trees are exactly in the middle of the field and that in the perpendicular direction there are 25 cubits on both sides? One has to assume that the question also is whether there have to be 9 cubits between any extremal tree and the border of the field. It seems that instead of “R. Eliezer” one should read “R. Eleazar”, but there is no ms. evidence to back this up. ²⁵ A question in opposition to R. Eliezer’s. If the three trees are close to a fence, if one may plough a field even if the trees are not in the center, may one then plough both sides of the fence to a distance of 50 cubits if the fields on opposite sides belong to the same owner? ²⁶ If it is possible to plough a bet seah ²⁷ In this case, one ploughs much more that a bet seah

Regarding the prohibition of the first two terms, those above plough downwards and those below plough upwards²⁸. It seems reasonable that those above plough downwards but not that those below plough upwards. Let us hear from the following²⁹ 2:11. The chapter deals with the obligation of every citizen to avoid damaging his neighbor’s property. If a tree is planted too close to a cistern, the roots might penetrate the wall of the cistern. The full Mishnah reads: “One removes a tree 25 cubits from a cistern, and a sycomore tree fifty cubits, both higher or on the same level.” In some Mishnah mss. one reads “both higher and lower”, cf. Diqduqe Soferim Baba Batra p. נו Note ס.: “One removes a tree 25 cubits from a cistern.” We have stated on that: Both higher and lower. Or let us say both if the tree is higher and the cistern lower or if tree and cistern are on the same level. In this sense, we stated³⁰ is quoted in Babli Baba Batra 25b as current practice.: “Whether the tree is higher and the cistern lower or the tree lower and the cistern higher”; is that reasonable? If the tree is higher and the cistern lower³¹; but the tree lower and the cistern higher, do roots climb? Rebbi Ḥanina said not because of the roots [climbing], but they loosen the earth and damage the bottom of the cistern³². A case came before Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun³³; he said that is a single opinion and we do not rely on it, for we have stated on this: “Rebbi Simeon says, just as they said higher so they said lower.³⁴ 1:12. The opponent of R. Simeon is R. Yose (ben Ḥalaphta) who insists that agricultural land is meant for agricultural use and the owner of the cistern should not have built it too close to the border of his domain. In general, R. Yose is a higher authority than R. Simeon. In the Babli, R. Yose’s opinion is not mentioned; practice follows R. Simeon. In Yerushalmi Baba Batra, Halakhah 2:11/12, no position is taken between R. Yose and the rabbis.”

footnotes: ²⁸ Following R. Eliezer, one ploughs 25 cubits on both sides of a row of trees, even if the trees are planted on a slope. The problem is that one may plough the entire field because the roots of the trees have the entire field to expand in, but we do not expect the roots to expand upwards as much as they expand downwards. ²⁹ Mishnah Baba Batra ³⁰ This baraita ³¹ This is understandable. ³² In the Babli, this reason is given by R. Ḥaga (Ḥaggai). ³³ About a tree planted near a cistern; he rejects the argument of R. Ḥanina and decides following R. Yose. ³⁴ Tosephta Baba Batra

MISHNAH: Any useless¹² Chapter 6, Note 40. or fruit trees are considered as if they were fig trees³⁵. If they would produce a fig cake in the weight of a talent of 60 Italic minas¹⁶. He declares (Terumot 4:10) a rotl to be a Roman pound (the common apothecary’s weight in the Middle Ages); in Roman measures, 60 minas are 62.5 Roman pounds. one ploughs the entire bet seah because of them. If less, one ploughs for them only as necessary³⁶. If one tree yields a “fig cake” but two do not, or two do and one does not, one only ploughs for them as necessary, unless there are three, and so from three to nine³⁹. If there are ten or more than ten one ploughs the entire bet seah because of them, whether they produce or not, since it is said (Ex. 34:21): : “You shall rest from ploughing and harvesting.⁴⁰” One does not have to mention ploughing and harvesting of the Sabbatical, but it refers to ploughing in the year preceding the Sabbatical in preparation of the Sabbatical, and harvesting of Sabbatical growth after the Sabbatical. Rebbi Ismael says, just as ploughing is voluntary so harvesting is voluntary; this excludes the harvest of the ‘omer⁴³. 23:15), even if that day should be a Sabbath (the 16th of Nissan for Pharisees, the 22nd of Nissan for the author of the book of Jubilees.) Cf. Mekhilta deR.Simeon bar Ioḥai to Ex. 34:22..

footnotes: ¹² For the definition of “useless tree”, cf. Kilaim ³⁵ A fig tree of the size of the tree in question. ¹⁶ Since an Italic denar weighed 1/96 of a Roman pound, or 3.59 g, 60 minas or 6000 denar are approximately 21.5 kg. Maimonides estimates this as 62.48 rotl ³⁶ Space for the harvester and his basket. ³⁹ The tree must yield at least 20 minas in weight, its share in the 60 minas expected from three trees. The Halakhah will explain the meaning of “from three to nine”. ⁴⁰ Without good reason, one may not plough. ⁴³ This belongs to the discussion of the verse (Ex. 34:21): : “You shall rest from ploughing and harvesting,” as given in Halakhah 1, Notes 1–4. The only addition is the statement of R. Ismael, that the verse refers to the Sabbath day, on which all ploughing is forbidden; this has no definite date assigned to it. For him, while the verse is formulated as a prohibition, it implies the commandment to cut the sheaf of barley “on the day after the day of rest” following Passover (Lev

HALAKHAH: “Any useless tree, etc.” Why did they mention fig trees? Because their fruits are large and they produce many. The Etrog tree³⁷. has large fruits but it produces few of them. Olive trees produce much but its fruits are not large. But these produce much and its fruits are large. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada said, all trees produce one year less³⁸, cf. Demay p. 521. than another year but the fig tree produces every year.

footnotes: ³⁷ Citrus medica ³⁸ Latin parum

“If one tree yields, etc.” Rebbi Vivian in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: Only he should not diminish from the computation of triads. Zeïra bar Ḥinena said, only he should not diminish from the computation of nonads⁴¹.

footnotes: ⁴¹ According to the first opinion, it must be possible to split the trees into groups of trees, each of which produces a talent. According to the second opinion, all nine trees together have to produce three talents.

If there were four and the ox may pass between them with its harness and two where the ox cannot pass with its harness, you consider it as if there were five. If there are five, we have the disagreement of Rebbi Simeon and the rabbis, as we have stated there⁴² 5:2, cf. there, Note 27. Here also, the ox and its harness need four cubits. The rabbis disregard the additional trees and only require one group yielding a talent. R. Simeon forbids ploughing unless one group produces a talent and the remaining three trees (of which two are planted too close together) produce ⅔ of a talent.: “A vineyard planted less that four cubits apart, Rebbi Simeon says that it is no vineyard. But the Sages say that it is a vineyard and one disregards the ones in the middle as if nonexistent.”

footnotes: ⁴² Mishnah Kilaim

“One ploughs the entire bet seah because of them since it is said (Ex. 34:21): ‘You shall rest from ploughing and harvesting.’ ” That refers only to the first part, “one ploughs for them only as necessary because it is said ‘you shall rest from ploughing and harvesting.’ ”.

“One does not have to mention, etc.” Rebbi Ismael is consistent since Rebbi Ismael said the ‘omer may not come from Syria; the harvesting of the ‘omer is different, it is a commandment⁴⁴ 4:1. For the definition of Syria cf. Peak Chapter 7, Note 119. Since R. Ismael holds that the barley of the ‘omer is intrinsically holy, he holds that the cutting of the barley is an action of the Temple and paid for by the yearly Temple tax, hence relative to the Sabbath it has the status of a sacrifice and must be performed on the Sabbath if necessary. For him, the prohibition of ploughing before the Sabbatical has no scriptural base..

footnotes: ⁴⁴ The main place of this argument is in Šeqalim

MISHNAH: Three trees belonging to three different owners are counted together and one may plough the entire bet seah for them. How much space must be between them? Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, so that the ox and its harness can pass⁴² 5:2, cf. there, Note 27. Here also, the ox and its harness need four cubits. The rabbis disregard the additional trees and only require one group yielding a talent. R. Simeon forbids ploughing unless one group produces a talent and the remaining three trees (of which two are planted too close together) produce ⅔ of a talent..

footnotes: ⁴² Mishnah Kilaim

HALAKHAH: “Three trees, etc.” Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: Trees belonging to one owner and ground belonging to a second owner are counted together and one may plough the entire bet seah for them. Rebbi Yose said, we have stated more: Three trees belonging to three different owners are counted together and one may plough the entire bet seah until the New Year⁴⁵ 1:1: “Three trees belonging to three different owners and the field belonging to a forth. Even though the field’s owner plough for his own needs, the field is permitted [to be ploughed].”.

footnotes: ⁴⁵ The clearest formulation is in Tosephta Ševi‘it

MISHNAH: Ten saplings⁴⁶ distributed on a bet seah, one ploughs the entire bet seah for them until the new year. If they formed a row or were surrounded by a grate⁴⁷ 14:1, Middot3:8. Maimonides explains “planted in an arc of circle”, but the expression מוקף in Mishnaic Hebrew only means “surrounded by”. one ploughs only what is necessary for them.

footnotes: ⁴⁶ Ten saplings have the same status as three fully grown trees. As R. Simson points out, all these rules became moot with the elimination of the first two periods. ⁴⁷ This is the interpretation of R. Simson, based on the similar meaning of עטרה in Mishnah Ahilut

HALAKHAH: “Ten saplings, etc.“Rebbi Zeïra, Rebbi La, Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan⁴⁸4:1, fol. 54b) is an introduction to the next one which will mention the ten saplings. It deals with the laws of the feast of Tabernacles when in addition to the ceremonies prescribed by the Torah the altar was adorned by long willow twigs and water was poured as libation on the altar, against the opposition of the Sadducees.: The “willow” is practice going back to Moses on Mount Sinai. This is against Abba Shaul, since Abba Shaul said the willow is a word of the Torah (Lev. 23:40): “Brook willows,” two⁴⁹ 34a. In the Babli, it is not implied that taking the willows in the Temple is a separate biblical commandment. (In the opinion of I. Löw, ערבה denotes not the willow but the Euphrates poplar but in Arabic ע̇דב means “willow”.). One willow for the lulab⁵⁰. 23:40., the other willow for the Temple. Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, willow and pouring of water are practice going back to Moses on Mount Sinai. This is against Rebbi Aqiba, since Rebbi Aqiba said the pouring of water is a word of the Torah⁵¹ 110b. There, the derivation of R. Aqiba parallels the argument of Abba Shaul here, that (Num. 29:31) “and its libations” implies two libations, one of wine and one of water.. On the second day, (Num. 29:19) “and their libations.” On the sixth day, (Num. 29:31) “and its libations.” On the seventh day, (Num. 29:33) “and its rules.” מ י מ spells “water”⁵². 150, the argument is given in the name of R. Jehudah ben Batyra. In Num. 29:17–34, the sacrifices for the intermediate days of Tabernacles are given in identical language after the mention of the number of animals required. The only deviations from the identical patterns are ונסכיה ,ונסכיהם instead of ונסכה and כמשפטם instead of כמשפט. The additional letters are taken to form the word for “water.” Rabbenu Hillel notes in his commentary that ונסכיהם has two letters in excess over ונסכה so that the word to be formed would be מיים, in the time of the Yerushalmi the standard spelling of מים.. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba asked before Rebbi Joḥanan, why does one now plough because of old trees? He said to him, when the practice was established it was given so that when they desired to plough they might plough⁷ 4a)..

footnotes: ⁴⁸ This paragraph (from Sukkah ⁴⁹ Babli Sukkah ⁵⁰ The three kinds of branches taken together on Tabernacles, Lev ⁵¹ Babli Zebaḥim ⁵² In Sifry Num ⁷ Since the institution of the Sabbatical year is interwoven with that of the Jubilee year and the Jubilee is possible only if the Twelve Tribes are living on their ancestral lands, the Sabbatical in the times of the Second Commonwealth is not a biblical but a rabbinic institution. It is a general rule in dealing with institutions of the Men of the Great Assembly that one is restrictive in interpretation while the Temple exists and lenient when the Temple does not exist. Since one hopes that the Temple will be re-established, the rules have to be stated in the Mishnah for future generations (Interpretation of Rav Ashi in Babli Mo‘ed Qaṭan

Rebbi Abba bar Zabdi in the name of Rebbi Onias from Hauran⁵³44a, he is called Neḥoniah from the valley of Bet Ḥoron; the name in the Yerushalmi is correct since he was a first generation Amora from the Golan heights and an authority on thehalakhic boundaries of the Land of Israel in that region.: Willow, water libation, and ten saplings are institutions of the early prophets⁵⁴. Do they disagree⁵⁵ 1:1, Notes 74–75.? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Levi: That was the current practice; they forgot it, but the later ones got up and agreed to the opinion of the earlier ones to teach you that everything the Court insists on will come to be in the end just as Moses was told on Sinai; as Rebbi Mana said (Deut. 32:47): “For it is not an empty word, from you,” if it is empty it is from you because you do not exert yourself about it. “Because it is your life,” when is it your life? At the time that you exert yourself!

footnotes: ⁵³ In the parallel, Babli Sukkah ⁵⁴ Samuel and David. ⁵⁵ Do they assert that these rules were never promulgated by Moses? The rest of the paragraph is also in Peah

Rebbi Joḥanan said to Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba: Babylonian, two things came from you, prostrating oneself on fast days⁵⁶ was said lying on the floor (Avoda zarah 4:1, fol. 43d). In the parallel in Avodah zarah it is added that in prostrating oneself outside the Temple one may not have one’s face downward but must turn it sideways. From the Yerushalmi it seems that the Sephardic custom to prostrate oneself only on Yom Kippur is the original one; the Ashkenazic custom which permits prostrating also on New Year’s Day is secondary. and the willow of the seventh day⁵⁷ 44a, R. Joḥanan states that this is a Babylonian custom, instituted by the prophets of the exile, in remembrance of the procession in the Temple around the altar surrounded by willow twigs.. The rabbis of Caesarea say, and the moving⁵⁸ which adds that in computing the calendar one may move New Year’s Day to protect the ceremony of the willow (which is impossible on a Sabbath) in preference to enabling the blowing of the shofar on New Year’s day..

footnotes: ⁵⁶ On fast days, the silent prayer after the Amidah ⁵⁷ On the seventh day of Tabernacles, one uses willow twigs in the prayers for winter rains. In Babli Sukkah ⁵⁸ According to J. Levy, the word is derived from קזז “to push aside, to move”. The commentaries take the word to be derived from מקיז “to bleed”. Bleeding was no Babylonian medical specialty and Levy’s interpretation is supported by the text in Sukkah

It was stated⁵⁹ but no yield at all.: “A sapling by the rule of ten and an old tree by the rule of three.” Come and see, a sapling appearing like an old tree⁶⁰ you consider as an old tree; and you say a sapling by the rule of ten? Rebbi Ḥuna said, what means “by the rule of ten”? That a sapling does not follow the rule of three⁶¹. That you should not say, three producing saplings are like ten non-producing ones⁶² until New Year’s Day following the rule of saplings. and, similarly, three producing old ones⁶³ may be ploughed because of these three, one applies to them the leniencies of old trees (3 trees per bet seah) and saplings (ploughing until New Year’s day.) Explanation of this paragraph follows R. Eliahu Fulda and R. Saul Lieberman. are like ten non-producing ones. Therefore, it is necessary to say: “A sapling by the rule of ten.”

footnotes: ⁵⁹ Tosephta Ševi‘it 1:2: “An old tree appearing like a sapling is a sapling, a sapling appearing like an old tree is an old tree. What is the difference between a sapling and an old tree? An old tree until Pentecost, a sapling until the New Year. An old tree by the rule of three, a sapling by the rule of ten.” An old tree looking like a sapling is one which was cut down and now new growth rises from the stump. The rule of three is one requiring a talent of yield, the rule of ten requires ten saplings on a bet seah ⁶⁰ A sapling yielding a third of a talent of fruit. ⁶¹ he next sentence explains what is meant. ⁶² That one may plough the betseah ⁶³ These “old ones” are the saplings producing adult yield; one should not say that since the entire bet seah

“A field of reeds is judged⁶⁴ like a field of grain⁶⁵ Chapter 6, Notes 100–101. R. Abbahu has to explain the difference between the baraita quoted in the text and the Tosephta by restricting the baraita to a very special case. Fields of grain can be ploughed only until Passover (Mishnah 2:1)..” Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: This was taught about dispersed ones⁶⁶” and give widely divergent interpretations, none of which is convincing. R. S. Lieberman recognized that סאתים must describe some special kind of reeds used commercially; R. Abbahu recognizes that in general reeds follow the rules of the Tosephta. Lieberman tentatively suggests to derive the word from Syriac סתא, סאתא “vine, stem, branch” (Payne-Smith p. 2754). I am suggesting, equally tentatively, to derive the word from Arabic שתּ, שתּא “to be dispersed, strewn about”, meaning that the reeds in question do not grow tightly packed..

footnotes: ⁶⁴ Probably one should read נידונית instead of נידונות. ⁶⁵ In Tosephta 1:2: “A field of reeds is judged like saplings.” For reeds grown as commercial crops, cf. Demay ⁶⁶ The translation (and the vocalization of סאתים) are offered tentatively. The classical commentators read סְאָתַיִם “two seah” which they take unidiomatically to mean “two batte seah

Does this not contradict Samuel, since Samuel said, even when they form a line⁶⁷ if they are planted in a straight line. In Mishnah 7, ten saplings in a straight line do not free the entire bet seah but only four cubits around them. It was shown in Halakhah 2 that the rule of Samuel applies only if the trees are planted in the middle of the field and one has half a bet seah on each side. It is now asserted that Mishnah 7 presupposes that the saplings are not planted in a regular pattern.. There, since they are dispersed in abet seah you consider it as if it were full, but here they are all at one place.

footnotes: ⁶⁷ In Halakhah 2 (Note 20), Samuel declares that three trees free the entire bet seah

MISHNAH: Saplings and gourds go together in a bet seah. Rabban Gamliel says, if there are ten gourds in a bet seah, one ploughs the entire bet seah until New Year’s Day. How long are they called saplings? Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah said, until they become profane. Rebbi Joshua said, seven years. Rebbi Aqiba said, tree saplings when they are called so. A tree which was cut down and grows anew, if it was cut lower than one hand-breadth it is like a sapling, higher than a hand-breadth it is a tree, the words of Rebbi Simeon.

HALAKHAH: “Saplings and gourds, etc.” That is only if there are more saplings than gourds⁶⁸. Rebbi Ḥananiah ben Rebbi Hillel⁶⁹ asked, is that not reasonable only for Greek gourd? Rebbi Mana objected, did we not state⁷⁰ 1:2. For “green melon” (in modern Hebrew: “zucchini”) and “Greek gour”, cf. Kilaim 1:2 (Notes 38,59). Greek gourd is described as needing the most space among all gourd varieties.: “Three green melons, three gourds, and four saplings go together and one ploughs the entire bet seah because of them.” It fits only for the last sentence: Rabban Gamliel says, if there are ten gourds in a bet seah, one ploughs the entire bet seah until New Year’s Day. Rebbi Ḥananiah ben Rebbi Hillel asked, is that not reasonable only for Greek gourd⁷¹?

footnotes: ⁶⁸ For the anonymous Tanna, against Rabban Gamliel. ⁶⁹ Galilean Amora of the fifth generation, a student of R. Mana’s father R. Jonah. ⁷⁰ A similar statement in Tosephta Ševi‘it ⁷¹ For other varieties, Rabban Gamliel will not disagree with the anonymous Tanna.

“How long are they called saplings⁷⁵ since around trees one may plough until the New Year but elsewhere only until 30 days before the New Year, and years for orlah are also counted from the New Year., etc.” What means “until they become profane”? Until they are redeemed⁷⁶ for three years, must be redeemed in the fourth, and becomes fully profane in its fifth year; cf. Lev. 19:24. or until they become profane by themselves. Rebbi Abba bar Jacob in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: The Mishnah means “until they become profane by themselves⁷⁷.” Rebbi Yudan said, a baraita supports Rebbi Joshua: “⁷⁸. Rebbi says, when they said five, six, or seven years old, for vines five years old, for figs six years old, for olives seven years old.” But do we not see the growth of the fig tree come with fruits? Rebbi Yudan said, according to Rebbi we throw it on its width⁷⁹.

footnotes: ⁷⁵ This is important both for the Sabbatical year and orlah ⁷⁶ A fruit tree is orlah ⁷⁷ Only in this way can the definition be consistent. ⁷⁸ In Tosephta 1:2, R. Joshua says “five, six, and seven years”, and Rebbi explains “five for vines, etc.” In that version, the comment of R. Yudan would be superfluous. Hence, the text here is from an independentbaraita ⁷⁹ In growing olive trees, the thickness of the stem counts, not the bearing of fruit.

Rebbi Simeon and Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob said the same thing since Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman, Rebbi Jonathan, said in the name of Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob⁸⁰ 6:2, Note 23. Since R. Eliezer ben Jacob states that a trunk sticking out from the ground less than a hand-breadth is forbidden as orlah only by rabbinic decree, it follows that R. Simeon in the Mishnah also treats the prohibition of ploughing before the Sabbatical year as rabbinic. Otherwise, he and R. Eliezer ben Jacob would not say the same thing.: He who prunes his vineyard down to less than a hand-breadth is subject to the rules of orlah because of the bad appearance. The Sages say, only if he prunes down to the ground.

footnotes: ⁸⁰ Kilaim