Jerusalem Talmud Kilayim Chapter 6

אֵי זֶהוּ עָרִיס הַנּוֹטֵעַ שׁוּרָה שֶׁל חָמֵשׁ גְּפָנִים בְּצַד הַגֶּדֶר שֶׁהוּא גָבוֹהַּ עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים אוֹ בְצַד חָרִיץ שֶׁהוּא עָמוֹק עֲשָׂרָה וְרָחַב אַרְבָּעָה נוֹתְנִין לוֹ עֲבוֹדָתוֹ אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת. בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים מוֹדְדִין אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת מֵעִיקַּר גְּפָנִים וּלְשָׂדֶה. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִין מִן הַגֶּדֶר וּלְשָׂדֶה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי טוֹעִין כָּל הָאוֹמְרִין כָּךְ. אֶלָּא אִם יֵשׁ אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת מֵעִיקַּר גְּפָנִים וּלְגֶדֶר נוֹתְנִין לוֹ עֲבוֹדָתוֹ וְזוֹרֵעַ אֶת הַמּוֹתָר. וְכַמָּה הִיא עֲבוֹדַת הַגֶּפֶן שִׁשָּׁה טְפָחִים לְכָל רוּחַ. וְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר שְׁלֹשָׁה. וְקַשְׁיָא עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּבֵית שַׁמַּי בְּלֹא כָּךְ אֵינוֹ אָסוּר מִשּׁוּם כֶּרֶם. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר בֶּעָרִיס הַמְּעוּקָם שָׁנוּ. אִם בֶּעָרִיס הַמְּעוּקָם שָׁנוּ בְּלֹא גֶדֶר אֵינוֹ אָסוּר מִשּׁוּם כֶּרֶם. רִבִּי יוֹנָה בָּעֵי מַהוּ לִיזְרֹעַ בֵּנְתַּיִם. כִּמְכוּוָּנוֹת הֵן וְאַתְּ אָמַר אָסוּר לִיזְרֹעַ בֵּנְתַּיִם. מַהוּ לִזְרֹעַ בֵּין הַגְּפָנִים כְּמַה דְתֵימַר גַּבֵּי מוּקְשֶׁה אָסוּר לִזְרֹעַ בֵּין הַגּוּמוֹת. אוּף הָכָא אָסוּר לִיזְרֹעַ בֵּין הַגְּפָנִים. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר בֶּעָרִיס הַמְכוּוָּן שָׁנוּ. אִם בֶּעָרִיס הַמְכוּוָּן שָׁנוּ בְּלֹא גֶדֶר אֵינוֹ אָסוּר מִשּׁוּם כֶּרֶם. נֵימַר [בְּגִין] בֵּית הִלֵּל תַּנִּיתָהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי חֲנַנְיָה מִסְתַּבְּרָא מוֹדֶה רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ לְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּעָרִיס הַמְכוּוָּן שָׁנוּ [בְּגִין] בֵּית הִלֵּל. וּמוֹדֶה רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן לְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּעָרִיס הַמְעוּקָם שָׁנוּ בְּגִין רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי דְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי אָמַר טוֹעִין כָּל הָאוֹמְרִין כֵּן. אִין תֵּימַר בֶּעָרִיס הַמְכוּוָּן שָׁנוּ מַה אִית בָּהּ טוֹעִין. בֵּין כְּמָאן דְּאָמַר מֵעִיקַּר הַגְּפָנִים מוֹשְׁחִין בֵּין כְּמָאן דְּאָמַר מֵעִיקַּר הַגֶּדֶר מוֹשְׁחִין. מַה בֵּינֵיהוֹן. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹנָה תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁהָיוּ הַכָּרְתִּין נְתוּנִין מִקְּצָתָן בְּתוֹךְ אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת וּמִקְּצָתָן חוּץ לְאַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת. מָאן דְּאָמַר מֵעִיקַּר הַגְּפָנִים מוֹשְׁחִין נִיחָא. מָאן דְּאָמַר מֵעִיקַּר הַגֶּדֶר מוֹשְׁחִין מָקוֹם שֶׁהַחוּט כָּלֶה אָסוּר וְהַשְּׁאָר מוּתָּר. הָיוּ שָׁם שְׁתֵּי אַמּוֹת מָאן דְּאָמַר מֵעִיקַּר הַגְּפָנִים מוֹשְׁחִין אֵינוֹ אָסוּר אֶלָּא שְׁתֵּי אַמּוֹת. מָאן דְּאָמַר מֵעִיקַּר הַגֶּדֶר מוֹשְׁחִין אָסוּר עַד שְׁתֵּי אַמּוֹת אַחֵר. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן רִבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל וְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי שְׁלָשְׁתָּן אָמְרוּ דָבָר אֶחָד. רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל דְּתַנִּינָן עַל גִּנָּה קְטָנָה שֶׁהִיא מוּקֶּפֶת עָרִיס אִם יֵשׁ בָּהּ מְלֹא בוֹצֵר סַלּוֹ מִיכָּן וּמְלוֹא בוֹצֵר סַלּוֹ מִיכָּן תִּיזָּרַע וְאִם לָאו לֹא תִיזָּרַע. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹנָה אַמָּה בוֹצֵר וְאַמָּה סַלּוֹ אַמָּה בוֹצֵר וְאַמָּה סַלּוֹ. הֲווֹן בָּעֵיי מֵימָר מָאן דְּאָמַר מֵעִיקַּר הַגְּפָנִים מוֹשְׁחִין נִיחָא מָאן דְּאָמַר מֵעִיקַּר הַגֶּדֶר מוֹשְׁחִין אֵין אוֹתָן הַכָּרְתִּין מְמַעֲטִין אַרְבַּע. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁהָיוּ חֲבוּקִין לַכּוֹתֶל. לֹא אַרְבַּע אִינֻּן כְּלוּם הִלְכֹת עָרִיס בְּחָמֵשׁ. אָמַר רִבִּי חֲנַנְיָה תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁהָיוּ שְׁתַּיִם גְּפָנִים נְתוּנוֹת בְּקֶרֶן זָוִית אַחַת שֶׁאִם יִמְתָּחֵם הֵן נִרְאִין כְּאַרְבַּע בֵּינַיִין. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי דְּתַנִּינָן רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר אִם אֵין שָׁם אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת לֹא יָבִיא זֶרַע לְשָׁם. מָאן דְּאָמַר מֵעִיקַּר הַגְּפָנִים מוֹשְׁחִין נִיחָא מָאן דְּאָמַר מֵעִיקַּר הַגֶּדֶר מוֹשְׁחִין אֵין אוֹתוֹ הַכּוֹרֶת מְמָעֵט אַרְבַּע. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁהָיה חָבוּק לַכּוֹתֶל. וְהָכֵין רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי דְּהָכָא. מִסְתַּבְּרָא רִבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל יוֹדוּן לְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי. וְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי לֹא יוֹדֵי לְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי יוֹדֵי לְרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל לֹא יוֹדֵי לְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי. רַב יְהוּדָה בְשֵׁם רַב הֲלָכָה כְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אִידִי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי הֲלָכָה כְדִבְרֵי מִי שֶׁהוּא מֵיקֵל בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ. אָמַר רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא וְתַנֵּיי תַמָּן הֲלָכָה כְדִבְרֵי מִי שֶׁהוּא מֵיקֵיל בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ.

MISHNAH: What is a trellis 2:4 explains that five vines in a row form a vineyard for the House of Hillel only if the vines are growing on a trellis near a fence, not if the fence is used as a trellis. This is the only possible explanation in Idiut , but in his Commentary on this Mishnah, Maimonides explains that vines lean on or upon the (stone) fence. He gives the same interpretation in his Code ( Kilaim 8:2) but then has to come to the conclusion ( loc . cit . 8:3) that the four cubits to be measured from the fence are on the side pointing away from the vines. R. Abraham ben David protests against this interpretation which “never entered the mind of any commentator.” Maimonides’s interpretation is difficult to accept, the tortured justifications of R. David ben Zimra and R. Joseph Caro in their commentaries on the Code notwithstanding, since the vines according to the Mishnah can be up to three cubits distant from the fence. ? If somebody plants a row of five vines along a fence ten hand-breadths high or a ditch ten hand-breadths deep and four wide, one gives it four cubits working space. The House of Shammai say one measures four cubits between the stems of the vines and the field. The House of Hillel say, between fence and field. Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri said, anybody who affirms this is in error; if there are four cubits between the stems of the vines and the fence one gives it its working space and he may sow the rest. What is the working space of a vine? Six hand-breadths in every direction; Rabbi Aqiba says three. HALAKHAH: It is difficult. Is it not forbidden anyhow for the House of Shammai as a vineyard? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, this was taught about a curved trellis. In that case, it would not be forbidden as a vineyard without a fence. Rebbi Jonah inquired, Wilna 1928. The question is addressed to the House of Hillel in the interpretation of R. Simeon ben Laqish. For them, two parts of the definition of a vineyard are missing; there is only one row and the vines are not planted in a straight line. The Mishnah declares a trellis in front of a fence to have a status similar to a vineyard but it is not clear whether the rules of a vineyard are valid without change. Since in Mishnah 7 , the space required to separate two trellises is only half the space required to separate two vineyards, it is clear that the rules of vineyards cannot be applied without change to trellises. We have to assume that also along the trellis the vines are planted at least four cubits apart. Since the vines are planted in a zig-zag pattern, between two vines in the same row the distance is almost eight cubits. Rebbi Jonah now asks, according to R. Simeon ben Laqish does the forbidden area cover the union of circular disks of radius 4 centered at the vines or is the entire convex hull of that domain (the smallest convex set containing the disks) forbidden? In the first case, between the vines the minimal distance from the trellis is less than 4 cubits; this is “in between”. The answer is that only in the case of vines planted in a straight line can one say that the interior of the parallel figure to the trellis in distance 4 is forbidden; here it seems that not even the entire parallel figure to the zig-zag line connecting the vines is forbidden but only the union of the five circular disks. The second question then asks whether maybe not even the entire disks are forbidden but only the union of five polygons, each centered at a vine. Let v denote the center of a vine, a the point at distance 4 from v on the perpendicular from v to the fence, a’ the reflection of a in v . On both sides of the line a’va draw parallels in distance 1. They intersect the parallels to the zig-zag line through a and a’ at b , b’; c , c ’. The polygon attached to v is then abb’a’c’ca . The forbidden area around a now is 8, not 16π > 50, and even on the zig-zag line there is an interval of almost 2 cubits that might be sown. The answer is negative, with reference to Halakhah 3:7 . FIGURE 6-1 HERE : May one sow in between? Is it in a straight line, that you say it is forbidden to sow in between? May one sow between the vines? As you say in the case of a row of gourds that it is forbidden to sow in between the pits, so here also it is forbidden to sow in between the vines. 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 2:1 ). ? 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. cit .), the House of Shammai will forbid only strips of two cubits each on both sides of the trellis but the House of Hillel will forbid an additional two cubits on the other side of the fence. According to R. Abraham ben David, the explanation of Maimonides defies all logic since a fence separates in all respects. R. Abraham explains that for the House of Shammai, a strip of width 2 is forbidden on each side of the vines. If the vines are d cubits wide, the total width of the forbidden strip is 4+ d . But for the House of Hillel, the width is only 4, less than the width required by the House of Shammai. , 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 the distance of the end of the forbidden domain from the fence will be 4+ t > 4 and R. Ismael cannot agree with R. Joḥanan ben Nuri that as soon as the distance is > 4 there are only isolated vines. ? 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 two vines form a corner, for a total of 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 Jehudah 39a ) disagrees and holds that kilaim is forbidden only in the Holy Land; elsewhere only sowing grain directly under a vine is forbidden by rabbinic decree since in the Holy Land this would sanctify. in the name of Rav: Practice follows Rebbi Aqiba. Rebbi Jacob bar Idi in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Practice outside the Land follows him who is lenient. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, there they stated: Practice outside the Land follows him who is lenient.

עָרִיס שֶׁהוּא יוֹצֵא מִן הַמַּדְרֵגָה. רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֶר אִם עוֹמֵד בָּאָרֶץ וּבוֹצֵר אֶת כּוּלּוֹ הֲרֵי זֶה אוֹסֵר אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת בַּשָּׂדֶה וְאִם לָאו אֵינוֹ אוֹסֵר אֶלָּא כְנֶגְדּוֹ. רִבִּי לִעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר אַף הַנּוֹטֵעַ אַחַת בָאָרֶץ וְאַחַת בַּמַּדְרֵגָה אִם גָּבוֹהַּ עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים אֵינָהּ מִצְטָרֶפֶת עִמָּהּ וְאִם לָאו הֲרֵי זוֹ מִצְטָרֶפֶת עִמָּהּ. רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן רִבִּי יוֹנָתָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר הַגּוֹמֵם אֶת כַּרְמוֹ פָּחוֹת מִטֶּפַח חַיָיב בְּעָרְלָה מִפְּנֵי מַרְאִית הָעַיִן דִּבְרֵי חֲכָמִים עַד שֶׁיִּגּוֹם מֵעִם הָאָרֶץ. רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹנָתָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב הָעוֹשֶׂה כְּרִי מִן הַלֶּקֶט וּמִן הַשִּׁכְחָה וּמִן הַפֵּיאָה חַיָיב בִּתְרוּמָה גְדוֹלָה מִפְּנֵי מַרְאִית הָעַיִן. רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹנָתָן וְרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב מִשֵּׁם בֵּית שַׁמַּי הַמֵּת מְטַמֵּא אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים מִפְּנֵי כְבוֹדוֹ. רִבִּי מָנָא אָמַר הָדָא אֲחָרָיָיתָא מִשּׁוּם בֵּית שַׁמַּי. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן אָמַר כּוּלְְּהוֹן מִשּׁוּם בֵּית שַׁמַּי. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹנָה אוּף הָדָא דְתַנִּינָן מִפְּנֵי מַרְאִית הָעַיִן. דִּלֹּא כֵן מַה בֵּין הָעוֹמֵד בָּאָרֶץ מַה בֵּין הָעוֹמֵד בַּמַּדְרֵיגָה. גְּבוֹהָה. מַה גְּבוֹהָה שׁוּרָה גְּבוֹהָ מַדְרֵיגָה. אִין תֵּימַר גְּבוֹהָה שׁוּרָה שׁוֹפֵעַ הַמַּדְרֵגָה כִלְמַטָּן. אִין תֵּימַר גְּבוֹהָה הַמַּדְרֵיגָה שִׁיפּוּעַ הַשּׁוּרָה מִלְּמַעֲלָן. וְהָתַנֵּי שְׁתֵּי שׁוּרוֹת בַּמַּדְרֵיגָה. אִית לָךְ מֵימַר גְּבוֹהָה שׁוּרָה. לֹּא גְּבוֹהָה מַדְרֵיגָה. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא כָּל אוֹתָן עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים שֶׁבַּמַּדְרֵיגָה עָשׂוּ אוֹתָם מָקוֹם בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ. תַּמָּן תַּנִינָן הַזּוֹרֵק אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת בַּכּוֹתֶל לְמַעֲלָה מֵעֲשָׂרָה טְפָכחִים כְּזוֹרֵק בָּאֲוֵיר לְמַטָּה מֵעֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים כְּזוֹרֵק בָּאָרֶץ. רַב חִסְדָּא אָמַר בְּמוֹדֵד לָכְּסֹן. וְאֵין סוֹפָהּ לֵירֵד. רִבִּי חִיָיא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁהָיְתָה דְּבֵילָה שְׁמֵינָה וְהִיא נִיטּוֹחָה. רִבִּי חַגַּי בָּעֵי קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי לֵית הָדָא אָמְרָה שִׁיפּוּעַ הַמַּדְרֵגָה כִלְמַטָּן. אָמַר לֵיהּ תַּמָּן זְרָעִין נֶהֱנִין מִן הַמַּדְרֵיגָה בְרַם הָכָא דֶּרֶךְ בְּנֵי אָדָם לִהְיוֹת שָׁפִין בָּהּ וְהִיא נוֹפֶלֶת. אִילּוּ אָמַר בְּשֶׁהָיָה שָׁם חוֹר וְהִיא נֶהֱנָה מִן הַחוֹר כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהַזְּרָעִין נֶהֱנִין מִן הַמַּדְרֵיגָה יָאוּת. שְׁתֵּי גִינּוֹת זוֹ עַל גַּבֵּי זוֹ הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה עֲשׂוּיָה כֶרֶם וְהָעֶלְיוֹנָה אֵינָהּ עֲשׂוּיָה כֶרֶם. זוֹרֵעַ אֶת הָעֶלְיוֹנָה עַד שֶׁהוּא מַגִּיעַ לָאֲוֵיר עֲשָׂרָה. רִבִּי בּוּן בַּר חִיָיא בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי זְעִירָא לֵית הָדָא אָמְרָה שִׁיפּוּעַ הַמַּדְרֵיגָה כִלְמַטָּן. אָמַר לֵיהּ מִשּׁוּם זְרָעִים נוֹטִין לַאֲוֵיר הַכֶּרֶם. הָעֶלְיוֹנָה עֲשׂוּיָה כֶרֶם וְהַתַּחְתּוֹנָה אֵינָהּ עֲשׂוּיָה כֶרֶם זוֹרֵעַ אֶת הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה וְאֶת הַמַּדְרֵיגָה עַד שֶׁמַּגִּיעַ לְעִיקַּר הַגְּפָנִים. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי לֵית כָּאן לְעִיקַּר הַגְּפָנִים אֶלָּא לְמַטָּה מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה. כְּהָדָא דְּתַנֵּי שָׁרְשֵׁי פֵּיאָה נִכְנָסִין לְתוֹךְ אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת שֶׁבְּכֶרֶם. לְמַטָּה מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה טְפָחִים הֲרֵי אֵילּוּ מוּתָּרִין.

MISHNAH: A trellis coming from a terrace. Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob says, if someone standing on the ground can harvest all [vines] then it forbids four cubits in the field; otherwise it only forbids around it. Rebbi Eliezer says, also if one plants one row on the ground and one on a terrace, if the latter is ten hand-breadth. higher they do not combine; otherwise, they do combine. HALAKHAH: Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman, Rebbi Jonathan, in the name of Rebbi Eliezer, and the corresponding text in Babli Soṭah 43b . The traditions of the Babli are in the name of R. Joḥanan, not R. Jonathan, and are not identical with the statements here. : He who prunes his vineyard down to less than a hand-breadth subjects it to orlah because of the bad appearance the first three years after planting (cf. Chapter 5, Note 93 ). The Sages apply orlah only if all growth above ground is cut off, and not as a matter of bad impressions. The Babli deals with a minimal vineyard of dwarf vines that never grow a hand-breadth tall and declares them to be permanent orlah . . 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 Chapter 1, Note 127 ). The Babli requires full tithing once a heap is formed on the field from exempt gifts to the poor (but the townspeople know the poor who have no land). 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. 19 ). The House of Shammai extend this impurity by rabbinic decree to anybody within four cubits of the corpse, so that only those occupied with the burial will come near the corpse. . 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? “Higher.” Is the row higher or is the terrace higher? If you say that the row is higher, the declivity of the terrace is counted as “below”. If you say the terrace is higher, the declivity of the row is counted as “above”. But did we not state: “Two rows on a terrace?, stating that one row below and two above do not form a “large vineyard” (cf. Halakhah 4:6 ) but a small vineyard on the top and an isolated row at the bottom. Since the two upper rows may be at slightly different heights but are counted together, their position cannot be the deciding factor. ” Can you say that the row is higher? No, the terrace has to be higher. Rebbi Mana said, they declared the entire ten hand-breadths of the terrace a domain by itself. We have stated there 11:4 . It is forbidden to transport anything in the public domain on the Sabbath a distance of more than four cubits. “Transporting” in the legal sense includes taking up, moving, and depositing. If one of these elements is missing, no offense occured. “Public domain” in this context extends only to ten hand-breadths above ground. Anything higher is free space to which the prohibition of transporting does not extend. Hence, if something was taken up from the public domain, thrown, and came to rest in free space, it is as if it was thrown and never came to rest; no offense occured. But if it came to rest within ten hand-breadths of the ground, the Sabbath was desecrated. : “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 5b , the material there being sheets of paper or parchment. In the Yerushalmi, the discussion here is reproduced in Šabbat 11:3 (fol. 14a). . 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 7b , 100 a. . Rebbi Ḥaggai asked before Rebbi Yose, does this not imply that the declivity of a terrace belongs to the level below. In that case, the Mishnah seems to extend the reach of any “bottom” upwards to 10 hand-breadths. He is answered that plants may grow on a slanted wall but anything sticking to the lower part of any wall bordering the public domain will be rubbed off; the fig cake cannot be considered to be at rest at such a place. The Babli ( Šabbat 100a ) disagrees with R. Yose and points out that even if a Tannaitic statement such as suggested by him did exist, it would not prove anything since R. Meïr [Yerushalmi Šabbat 11:3 (fol. 13a), Eruvin 10:8 (fol. 26b); Babli Šabbat 7b , 100 a, Eruvin 11b, 33b , 101b , Yoma 11b ] considers any depression a separate domain excluded from “free space”. ? 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 3:9 , in a slightly different text. Instead of “the airspace of ten”, the Tosephta has: “the stems of the lower one.” The text is missing in the Vienna ms.; the language is probably influenced by the second sentence. The version in the Yerushalmi permits sowing on the declivity above 10 hand-breadths from the bottom. The question of R. Abun bar Ḥiyya refers to these lower 10 hand-breadths. .” 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.”

הַמַּדְלֶה אֶת הַגֶּפֶן עַל מִקְצַת אפיפיירות לֹא יָבִיא זֶרַע אֶל תַּחַת הַמּוֹתָר וְאִם הֵבִיא לֹא קִידֵּשׁ. וְאִם הוֹלֵךְ הֶחָדָשׁ אָסוּר. וְכֵן הַמַּדְלֶה עַל מִקְצַת אִילָן סְרָק. הַמַּדְלֶה אֶת הַגֶּפֶן עַל מִקְצַת אִילַן מַאֲכָל מוּתָּר לְהָבִיא זֶרַע אֶל תַּחַת הַמּוֹתָר. וְאִם הוֹלֵךְ הֶחָדָשׁ יַחֲזִירֶנּוּ. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁהָלַךְ רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אֶצֶל רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל מִכְּפַר עֲזִיז הַרְאֵהוּ גֶּפֶן שֶׁהוּא מוּדְלֶה עַל מִקְצַת תְּאֵינָה. אָמַר לוֹ מַה אֲנִי לְהָבִיא זֶרַע תַּחַת הַמּוֹתָר אָמַר לוֹ מוּתָּר. וְהַעֲלֵהוּ מִשָּׁם לְבֵית מְגִינַיָיא וְהַרְאֵהוּ גֶּפֶן שֶׁהוּא מוּדְלֶה עַל מִקְצַת הַקּוֹרָה וְסַדַּן שֶׁל שִׁקְמָה וּבוֹ קוֹרוֹת הַרְבֶּה אָמַר לוֹ תַּחַת הַקּוֹרָה הַזּוֹ אָסוּר וְהַשְּׁאָר מוּתָּר. אֵי זֶהוּ אִילַן סְרָק כָּל שֶׁאֵינוֹ עוֹשֶׂה פֵירוֹת. רִבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר הַכֹּל אִילַן סְרָק חוּץ מִן הַזַּיִת וּמִן הַתְּאֵינָה. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר כֹּל שֶׁאֵין כָּמוֹהוּ נוֹטְעִין שָׂדוֹת שְׁלֵימוֹת הֲרֵי זֶה אִילַן סְרָק. חִזְקִיָּה אָמַר מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה וְעַד אַרְבָּעָה הִיא מַתְנִיתָא פָּחוֹת מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה כְסָתוּם מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה וְעַד אַרְבָּעָה מַשְׁלִים אַרְבָּעָה נַחַת הוּא לָהּ. עַד הֵיכָן. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אִידִי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ עַד אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת. רִבִּי אָחָא רִבִּי חִינְנָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ עַד שֵׁשׁ אַמּוֹת. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא אָזְלִית לְקֵיסָרִין וְשָׁמְעִית רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה בַּר שַׁמַּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יִצְחָק בֶּן לָעְזָר אִם הָיוּ שְׁתֵּי פִּיפָּיְירוֹת מוּתָּר. אָמַר רִבִּי חִינְנָא וְתַנֵּי וּפַלִּיג אִם הָיָה דַרְכּוֹ לִפְסֹעַ אָסוּר. וְתַנֵּי כֵן רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָעְזָר אוֹמֵר אִם הָיָה דַרְכּוֹ לִפְסֹעַ בֵּין פִּיפּוֹר לְפִיפּוֹר כְּפִיפּוֹר אֶחָד הוּא. מַה בֵּין אִילַן סְרָק מַה בֵּין אִילַן מַאֲכָל. אָדָם מְבַטֵּל אִילַן סְרָק עַל גַּבֵּי גַפְנוֹ וְאֵין אָדָם מְבַטֵּל אִילַן מַאֲכָל עַל גַּבֵּי גַפְנוֹ. תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן כָּל חֲמָתוֹת צְרוּרוֹת טְהוֹרוֹת חוּץ מִשֶּׁל עֲרָבִיִים. רִבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר צְרוּר הַשָּׁעָה טְהוֹרוֹת צְרוּר עוֹלָם טְמֵאוֹת. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר כָּל חֲמָתוֹת צְרוּרוֹת טְהוֹרוֹת. אִית תַּנָּיֵי תַּנֵּי מָחְלַף. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יָסָא כְּמַתְנִיתִין. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָן סֵימָנָא דְּכֵלִים כִּלְאַיִם דִּלֹ כֵן מַה בֵּין צְרוּר עוֹלָם מַה בֵּין צְרוּר שָׁעָה. דְּבֵי רִבִּי יַנַּאי אָמְרֵי צְרוּר עוֹלָם צָרִיךְ חִיתּוּךְ צְרוּר שָׁעָה אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ חִיתּוּךְ.

MISHNAH: If somebody trains a vine over part of a papyrus 17.3 . Some sources here and in Kelim have אפפיריו, a medieval commentator writes הפיפיריות. The latter reading, seeing in the prothetic א the definite article ה, is supported by the Halakhah which uses פיפור, פיפר and the similar reading of most commentaries in Kelim . Most moderns see in the word a form of Greek πάπυρος (but this fits better with Tosephta Kelim b . m . 5:15, כלי פפיר “paper vessels”.) According to the Geonim, one takes rope from papyrus leaves (according to Maimonides, the reeds themselves) and puts them crosswise into a frame in order to form a platform that will be supported by posts. Sources confirming the use of papyrus rope in Antiquity are adduced by Loew in Krauss’s Dictionary, s. v. פיפור. {In view of the formal parallelism between “part of a papyrus ” and “part of a futile tree”, “part of a fig tree”, one might also take papyrus as a living plant, rather than a rope or mat of papyrus fibers. Papyrus antiquorum , mostly perennial grassy plants cultivated throughout the ancient world, had multiple commercial uses: e. g., Cyperus esculentus with edible, oil-rich bulbs ( Bulbuli Trasi , Dulcinia ), Cyperus officinalis , used medically, Cyperus textilis , used in basket-weaving and paper manufacture. A papyrus plant growing near a vine would therefore also make sense in a discussion of kilaim . (E. G.)} , 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. HALAKHAH: Ḥizqiah said, the Mishnah speaks about distances from three to four hand-breadths 1:9, Sukkah 1:9 . Hence, sowing within three hand-breadths of a vine certainly sanctifies. If the distance is more than three but less than four, one tells the farmer to complete the four hand-breadths. More than four, while still forbidden, does not sanctify and even if the vine leaves grow they do not interfere as long as the distance is more than three hand-breadths. . Less than three is close up, up to four one has to complete, four is easy for it. How far? Rebbi Jacob bar Idi in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, up to four cubits. Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Ḥinena in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, up to six cubits. Rebbi Mana said: I went to Caesarea and heard Rebbi Hoshiah bar Shammai in the name of Rebbi Isaac ben Eleazar: If there were two papyri, it is permitted. Rebbi Ḥinena said, a statement disagrees: If he usually oversteps, it is forbidden. It was stated thus: Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar says, if he usually oversteps between lattices, it is treated as a single lattice. What is the difference between a futile and a fruit tree? A person will disregard a futile tree relative to his vine but nobody will disregard a fruit tree relative to his vine. There 26:4 . The only things that may be impure are living humans, dead humans and animals, vessels and garments, food and drink, and houses. Tractate Kelim deals with the impurity of vessels and textiles. In that tractate, “pure” means that the vessel in question cannot possibly become impure; “impure” means that it may become impure if exposed to impurity. If a vessel is used as a container, it can become impure as long as it can be used as container. If an impure vessel springs a leak large enough to make it unusable for its primary purpose, it becomes pure. Animal hides used as containers for water or wine are obtained by skinning slaughtered lambs or sheep. The skin then is open at the neck, the tail, and the four feet. If the feet and tail end are sown tight, there is no doubt that a permanent container was formed which may become impure. If the feet are only tied with rope, they also can become untied; the vessel so created is temporary and cannot become impure. The anonymous Tanna states that Arabs never sow their skins; they have developed a technique to tie the skins with rope to create permanent vessels. R. Meïr extends the rule to all skins whose knots are not supposed to be opened. R. Yose notes that any knot can be untied without damaging the skin; hence, no knot is permanent. , 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 , a “futile” tree is turned into a prop for the vine and loses its character of tree by the vintner’s intention as stated in the preceding paragraph; so likewise the knots with which the skin is tied are temporary or permanent according to the intention of the owner. If we do not change the names in Kelim , the arguments of R. Meïr become consistent; the Mishnah Kelim should not be changed. , 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 and Kilaim . .

פִּיסְקֵי עָרִיס שְׁמוֹנֶה אַמּוֹת וְעוֹד. וְכָל מִידּוֹת שֶׁאָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים בַּכֶּרֶם אֵין בָּהֶן וְעוֹד חוּץ מִפִּיסְקֵי עָרִיס. אֵילּוּ הֵן פִּיסְקֵי עָרִיס עָרִיס שֶׁחָרֵב מֵאֶמְצַע וְנִשְׁתַּיְירוּ בוֹ חָמֵשׁ גְּפָנִים מִכָּן וְחָמֵשׁ גְּפָנִים מִכָּן אִם יֵשׁ שָׁם שְׁמוֹנֶה אַמּוֹת לֹא יָבִיא זֶרַע לְשָׁם. שְׁמוֹנֶה אַמּוֹת וְעוֹד נוֹתְנִין לוֹ עֲבוֹדָתוֹ וְזוֹרֵעַ אֶת הַמּוֹתָר. עָרִיס שֶׁהוּא יוֹצֵא מִן הַכּוֹתֶל מִתּוֹךְ קֶרֶן וְכָלָה. נוֹתְנִין לוֹ עֲבוֹדָתוֹ וְזוֹרֵעַ אֶת הַמּוֹתָר. רִבִּי יוֹסֵה אָמַר אִם אֵין שָׁם אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת לֹא יָבִיא זֶרַע לְשָׁם. הַקָּנִים הַיּוֹצְאִין מִן הֶעָרִיס חַס עֲלֵיהֶן לִפְסָקָן כְּנֶגְדָּן מוּתָּר. עֲשָׂאָן כְּדֵי שֶׁיְהַלֵּךְ בָּהֶן הֶחָדָשׁ אָסוּר. הַָפֶּרַח הַיּוֹצֵא מִן הֶעָרִיס רוֹאִין אוֹתוֹ כִּילּוּ מְטוּטֶּלֶת תְּלוּיָה בוֹ כְּנֶגְדּוֹ אָסוּר. וְכֵן בְּדָלִית. הַמּוֹתֵחַ זְמוֹרָה מֵאִילָן לְאִילָן תַּחְתֶּיהָ אָסוּר. סִיפְּקָהּ בְּחֶבֶל אוֹ בְגָמֵי תַּחַת הַסִּיפּוּק מוּתָּר. עֲשָׂאוֹ כְדֵי שֶׁיְהַלֵּךְ עָלָיו הֶחָדָשׁ אָסוּר. לֵית הָדָא פְלִיגָא עַל רִבִּי זְעִירָא. דְּרִבִּי זְעִירָא אָמַר שְׁמוֹנֶה חוּץ מִמָּקוֹם כָּרְתִּין. פָּתַר לָהּ שְׁמוֹנֶה אַמּוֹת וְכָל שֶׁהוּא. וְלָמָּה לֹא תַנִינְתָהּ דְּלֹא תִיסְבּוֹר כְּהַהִיא דְּאָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן כָּל מִידּוֹת שֶׁאָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים וְעוֹד טֶפַח וְהָהֵן רִיבָה צִיבְחַד לְפוּם כֵן לֹא תַנִיתָהּ. רִבִּי יוֹנָה בָּעֵי לָמָּה לֵי נָן אָמְרִין כָּל מִידּוֹת שֶׁאָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים אֵין בָּהֶן וְעוֹד חוּץ מִפִּיסְקֵי עָרִיס. וְהָתַנִּינָן עֲשֶׂרֶת קַבִּין יְרוּשַׁלְמִיִים שֶׁהֵן שִׁשָּׁה עֶשְׂרוֹנִין וְעֹדוּויָין. תַּמָּן לְמִידּוֹת וְכָאן לְאַמּוֹת. וְהָתַנִּינָן אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן מְשׁוּלָּם אוֹמֵר וְעוֹד קַב לְמֵאָה סְאָה שְׁתוּת לִמְדַּמֵּע. תַּמָּן לְמִידּוֹת וְכָאן לְאַמּוֹת. וְהָתַנִּינָן אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָה בֶּן בָּבָא הַגִּינָּה וְהַקַּרְפֵּף שֶׁהִיא שִׁבְעִים וְשִׁיֵּרִיים עַל שִׁבְעִים וְשִׁיֵּרִיים. שְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר בִּשְׁנֵי שְׁלִישֵׁי אָמָּה שָׁנוּ. וְלָא שַׁנְיָיא בֵּין שֶׁבָּנָה גֶדֶר וְאַחַר כָּךְ נָטַע אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה גְפָנִים בֵּין שֶׁנָּטַע אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה גְפָנִים וְאַחַר כָּךְ בָּנָה גֶדֶר וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִפְסְקָה הָאֶמְצָעִית יֵשׁ כָּאן עָרִיס וְיֵשׁ כָּאן פִּיסְקֵי עָרִיס. חָרֵב הַגֶּדֶר אֵין כָּאן עָרִיס וְלֹא פִּיסְקֵי עָרִיס. רִבִּי אֶבְדּוּמֵי אֲחַוָּה דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בָּעֵי חָזַר וּבְנָיָיהּ אַתְּ אָמַר חָזַר עָרִיס לִמְקוֹמוֹ וְדִכְוָותָהּ חָזְרוּ פִּיסְקֵי עָרִיס לִמְקוֹמָן. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁשָּׂרַף רִבִי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי בְנַגְנֵיגָר. מַה שָׂרַף פִּיסְקֵי עָרִיס שָׂרַף. רִבִּי חִיָיא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁשָּׂרַף רִבִי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי בְנַגְנֵיגָר. מַה שָׂרַף בֵּין עָרִיס לַגֶּדֶר שָׂרַף. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי קַשִּׁיְיתָהּ קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא נִיחָא פִּיסְקֵי עָרִיס שָׂרַף דִּבְרֵי חֲכָמִים חֲלוּקִין עָלָיו. בֵּין עָרִיס לַגֶּדֶר שָׂרַף דִּבְרֵי חֲכָמִים חֲלוּקִין עָלָיו. וְלָא שְׁמִיעַ דְּאָמַר רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא אִיתְפַּלְּגוּן רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ עָרִיס עַצְמוֹ מַהוּ רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר אָסוּר וּמְקַדֵּשׁ. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר אָסוּר וּאֵינוֹ מְקַדֵּשׁ. וְהוּא שֶׁיְּהֵא בְקֶרֶן זָוִית אַרְבָּעָה טְפָחִים כְּדֵי מָקוֹם. תַּנִּינָן הָכָא רִבִּי יוֹסֵי וְתַנִּינָתָהּ תַּמָּן. אִילּוּ תַנִּינָתָהּ הָכָא וְלֹא תַנִּינָתָהּ תַּמָּן הֲוֵינָן אָמְרִין הָכָא עַל יְדֵי שֶׁהִיא הִלְכַת עָרִיס אַתְּ אָמַר אָסוּר תַּמָּן עַל יְדֵי שֶׁאֵינוֹ הִלְכַת עָרִיס אַתְּ אָמַר מוּתָּר. הֲוֵי צוּרְכָה מַתְנֵי תַּמָּן. אוֹ אִילּוּ תַנִּינָתָהּ תַּמָּן וְלֹא תַנִּיתָהּ הָכָא הֲוֵינָן אָמְרִין תַּמָּן עַל יְדֵי שֶׁהוּא מְגוּפָּף מֵאַרְבַּע רוּחֹתָיו אַתְּ אָמַר אָסוּר הָכָא עַל יְדֵי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְגוּפָּף מֵאַרְבַּע רוּחוֹתָיו אַתְּ אָמַר מוּתָּר. הֲוֵי צוּרְכָא מַתְנִיָּא הָכָא וְצוּרְכָה מַתְנִיָּא תַּמָּן. תַּמָּן אָמַר אַתְּ רוֹאֶה כִּילּוֹ שְׁפוּד שֶׁל מַתֶּכֶת תָּחוּב בּוֹ. שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר בָּא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן עַד מָקוֹם שֶׁהוּא נִקְמָן. רִבִּי חָמָא בַּר עוּקְבָּא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן חֲנִינַא תַּחַת הָאֶשְׁכּוֹלוֹת אָסוּר וּמְקַדֵּשׁ תַּחַת הֶעָלִין לֹא. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אֲפִילוּ תַּחַת הֶעָלִין אָסוּר וּמְקַדֵּשׁ.

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 the rope was drawn to support future growth of the vine or other shoots that will appear in the growing season, it becomes subject to the laws of vines. . But if he did that to accomodate future growth, it is forbidden. HALAKHAH: Does this not disagree with Rebbi Zeïra since Rebbi Zeïra said, eight except for the place of the trunks? Explain that as eight cubits and a little more1:3 , Ahilut 12:6) states that the circumference of a circle of diameter 1 is 3 it means that 3 ≤ π ≤ / 6 (3 ≤ π ≤ / 5 ). . And why has this not been stated? Are you not concurring with Rebbi Joḥanan that in all linear measurements stated by the Sages, “more than” means [more by] a hand-breadth 4:9 ) explains: כמה הוא ועוד אחד מששה טפחים באמה. “How much is ‘more than’? One of six hand-breadths per cubit.” The correct interpretation has been given by R. S. Lieberman: In Tosephta Kelim , Baba Meẓia‘ 6:13, R. Meïr declares the cubits used in a vineyard to be cubits of five hand-breadths (cf. Chapter 5, Note 27 ). The Tosephta here redefines the hand-breadth to be added as one new hand-breadth , when 6 new hand-breadths are 5 common hand-breadths or one vine cubit. According to the Tosephta, “more than” means at least ⅚ of a common cubit. This Tosephta text is in the manuscript and the editio princeps . R. Isaac Simponti, R. Simson and R. Abraham ben David read “one sixth of a cubit”, leaving open the possibility that hand-breadth and cubit are the standard ones. Maimonides has another reading, “1/60 cubit”, supported by Caphtor Waperaḥ and R. Bezalel Ashkenazi. However, as R. Abraham ben David points out, such a text would contradict the Yerushalmi here; the length added by R. Zeïra is certainly more than a tenth of a hand-breadth. ? But what he added is little, therefore it was not stated. Rebbi Jonah asked: Why do we say: “No linear measurements stated by the Sages require ‘more’ except an interrupted trellis?” Did we not state 7:2 : “The flour sacrifice of a Nazir came in two parts, loaves and flatbreads, but no paste (from flour and oil). It turns out that these are 10 Jerusalem qab which equal six esronim and excess.” Mishnah 7:1 had stated that the three kinds of bread for a thanksgiving sacrifice came from 10 esronim which were 15 Jerusalem qab . Hence, the breads of the Nazir are 6⅔ esronim . The “excess” (in the Hebrew, an otherwise nonexisting plural of “more”) is ⅔ issaron . We use the expression “more” in a domain other than vineyards. : “Ten Jerusalem qab which equal six esronim and excess”? There about volumes, here about linear measures. But did we not state 4:7: “R. Eliezer says, heave can be lifted by one in 101. Rebbi Joshua says, by one in more than 100; that ‘more’ has no measure. Rebbi Yose ben Meshullam said, ‘more’ is a qab per one hundred seah, a sixth of the amount that causes dema‘ ”. Dema‘ , the mixture of profane food and heave, was discussed in Demay , Chapter 4, Note 27 . If the amount of heave is small, it is possible to remove an amount equal to the heave and transfer the holiness to that food; the remainder of the food then returns to profane status. R. Eliezer states that in this respect “small” means at most 1 in 100 (1 part heave in 101 overall). R. Joshua requires that the amount be at most 1 in 99+ε; ε >0 being arbitrarily small. R. Yose ben Meshullam requires that the amount of heave be at most 1 in 99.1666̄; if the amount of heave is one seah , the amount of profane grain has to be 99 seah plus one sixth oí the amount causing the trouble, i. e., 99 ⅙ seah . {In Babli Eruvin 83a , “and more” is defined as one twentyfourth of the volume of an egg.} : “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 2:5 : “Additionally, R. Jehudah ben Baba said, one may carry (on the Sabbath) in a garden or a corral which measure seventy and a remainder by seventy and a remainder and are enclosed by a fence ten hand-breadths high on condition that they contain a watchman’s place.” On the Sabbath, one may carry his utensils in his house and in any enclosed space containing a human dwelling. Enclosed spaces no part of which is used as a human dwelling, such as vegetable plots and corrals, are accepted as private domain only if their surface area is not more that 5000 square cubits, the surface area of the enclosed space of the tabernacle (cf. Peah Chapter 2, Note 31 ). Since √5000 = 70.71068, R. Jehudah ben Baba’s remainder is 0.71068 cubits, a linear measure. : “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. All this applies if in the corner there are four hand-breadths of empty space. 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. There one says, one considers as if a metal spit was stuck there. Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: As far as was intended. 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.