diff --git "a/json/Mishnah/Modern Commentary on Mishnah/English Explanation of Mishnah/Seder Zeraim/English Explanation of Mishnah Sheviit/English/Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp.json" "b/json/Mishnah/Modern Commentary on Mishnah/English Explanation of Mishnah/Seder Zeraim/English Explanation of Mishnah Sheviit/English/Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp.json" new file mode 100644--- /dev/null +++ "b/json/Mishnah/Modern Commentary on Mishnah/English Explanation of Mishnah/Seder Zeraim/English Explanation of Mishnah Sheviit/English/Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp.json" @@ -0,0 +1,590 @@ +{ + "language": "en", + "title": "English Explanation of Mishnah Sheviit", + "versionSource": "http://learn.conservativeyeshiva.org/mishnah/", + "versionTitle": "Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp", + "status": "locked", + "license": "CC-BY", + "shortVersionTitle": "Dr. Joshua Kulp", + "actualLanguage": "en", + "languageFamilyName": "english", + "isBaseText": true, + "isSource": true, + "isPrimary": true, + "direction": "ltr", + "heTitle": "ביאור אנגלי על משנה שביעית", + "categories": [ + "Mishnah", + "Modern Commentary on Mishnah", + "English Explanation of Mishnah", + "Seder Zeraim" + ], + "text": { + "Introduction": [], + "": [ + [ + [ + "Introduction\nAs with many mishnayot, our mishnah begins with the first chronological point of the sabbatical laws, the sixth year which proceeds the sabbatical year. According to the rabbis, some of the sabbatical year prohibitions begin in the sixth year. This concept is called “tosefet sheviit” the additional time of sheviit.\nThere is somewhat of a debate in talmudic literature over whether this additional time is from the Torah or is a long-standing tradition.\nOur mishnah discusses “tosefet sheviit” for an orchard.", + "Until when may they plow an orchard in the sixth year? Bet Shammai say: as long as such work will benefit the fruit. And Bet Hillel says: till Atzeret (. According to Bet Shammai, as long as the plowing that one does to an orchard is beneficial for that years’ fruit, then it is allowed. Once the plowing starts to be in preparation for the seventh year, it is already prohibited. Instead of giving a time that is somewhat subjective, Bet Hillel gives a set date Shavuot. Until Shavuot it is permitted to plow, and after Shavuot it is forbidden.", + "The views of this [school] are close to those of the other. The anonymous voice in the Mishnah notes that the dates of the two schools are not that far apart from one another. This might cause us to ask why they disagree. There are a few answers that I could think of. The first is that although there is only a small amount of time difference, it is still significant. This is not a particularly satisfactory answer because then we would have to ask why the mishnah says that the two are indeed so close to one another. A different answer is that Bet Hillel wants an objective, hard and fast date, whereas Bet Shammai is more willing to live with a more subjective criterion. The answer that I prefer is that Bet Shammai prefers to attach the prohibition to nature, or physical reality. At a certain point plowing stops being for this year’s fruit and then it becomes prohibited. Bet Hillel on the other hand wants to tie the prohibition into a legally determined date, a date set by a court and not by nature." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nIn yesterday’s mishnah we learned up until what point before the sabbatical year one may plow an orchard. Today we learn how many trees in a field are necessary for it to be considered an orchard. If it is not considered an orchard, then they will have to stop plowing the field at an earlier point in the year.", + "What constitutes an orchard? Any field in which there are at least three trees for every bet seah. A bet seah is 2500 square cubits. If there are three trees in a field this size, then the bet seah can be treated as an orchard.", + "If each tree is capable of yielding a cake of pressed figs, the size of sixty in the Italian maneh, then the entire bet seah may be plowed for their sake. The three trees that constitute this orchard must each be able to produce a cake of pressed figs the size of sixty Italian manehs. According to commentators, this is about 24kg. If these two criteria are filled, than they may plow the entire bet seah until Shavuot, since the plowing of the entire field benefits all the trees.", + "If less than this amount, they may only plow the area that is occupied by the gatherer when his basket is placed behind him. However, if there are fewer trees or they produce less fruit, then they may plow only around those trees. The space they may plow is the size of a fruit-gatherer and his basket, as he walks around the tree. The rest of the field has more stringent rules, those which apply to a grain field, which may only be plowed until Pesah, as we shall see in chapter two below." + ], + [ + "Whether they are fruit-bearing trees or non-fruit-bearing trees, we treat them as if they were fig-trees. If they are capable of yielding a cake of pressed figs, the size of sixty in the Italian maneh, then the entire bet seah may be plowed for their sake. If less than this amount, they may plow them only for their own needs.
In yesterday’s mishnah we learned that in order for the field to be considered an orchard, it needs to have three trees that bear a certain amount of fruit. Our mishnah adds that if there are non-fruit-bearing trees in the field, we look at them as if they were fig trees. In other words, if these trees are large enough such that if they were fig trees each tree would have been able to produce a cake of pressed figs the size of sixty maneh, then they count and the whole field may be plowed. If they are smaller, then the whole field may not be plowed; only the space surrounding that tree may be plowed. The remainder of the mishnah is just a repeat of yesterday’s mishnah." + ], + [ + "Introduction The first half of this mishnah continues to deal with the same subject with which we have been dealing with since the beginning of Sheviit--when may one plow an entire field of trees and when one may plow only the individual trees? The second half of the mishnah deals with Exodus 34:21, which states, that plowing and harvesting are forbidden on the Sabbath. The sages wondered why the verse would specify a prohibition of plowing and harvesting on the Sabbath when all work is prohibited. Hence they took the verse out of context and applied it to the Sabbatical year, instead of Shabbat (the sabbatical day).", + "If one of the trees was capable of bearing a cake of dried figs [weighing sixty manehs], and the other two unable; or, if two could do so, but one cannot, then they may plow them only for their own needs. If one or even two of the trees was large enough but the others were not, they still may only plow the individual trees and not the whole field.", + "[This is the rule if the number of trees is] from three to nine, but if there were ten trees or more, whether they produce [the requisite amount of fruit or not] the whole bet seah may be plowed on their account. However, if there were more than ten trees, then they can plow the entire field, even if those ten trees don’t produce the requisite amount of fruit.", + "As it says: “In plowing and in harvesting, you shall rest” (Ex 34:21). It was unnecessary to state plowing and harvesting in the seventh year, rather [what it means is] the plowing of the year preceding which encroaches on the sabbatical year, and the harvest of the seventh year which extends into the year after. This midrash is the basis of the entire first three and a half mishnayot of the tractate. According to the rabbinic way of reading the Torah, this verse is seemingly superfluous, since we already know that one must rest on the Sabbath. Their answer is twofold. First of all, this verse applies to the sabbatical year, and not to the Shabbat. Second, it would also be unnecessary for this verse to prohibit plowing and harvesting in the sabbatical year itself because Leviticus 25:4-5 has already prohibited similar activities. Therefore, the mishnah interprets this verse as referring to the plowing that precedes the Sabbatical year and to harvesting that occurs after the Sabbatical year. As we have learned throughout the chapter, it is forbidden to plow a field for the benefit of produce that will grow in the sabbatical year. Here we learn that in the year following the Sabbatical year it is forbidden to harvest produce which mostly grew during the Sabbatical year, or that was illegally sown during the Sabbatical year.", + "Rabbi Ishmael says: just as plowing is an optional act, so harvesting [referred to in the verse] is optional, thus excluding the harvesting of the omer [which is obligatory]. R. Yishmael gives an entirely different interpretation of the verse. He interprets the verse to refer to the Shabbat and not to the Sabbatical year. As to why this verse is necessary, after we have learned elsewhere that work is prohibited on Shabbat, Rabbi Ishmael explains that this verse comes to teach us that only “optional” harvesting is prohibited and not “obligatory” harvesting, the only example of which is the harvesting of the Omer on the second day of Pesah. If the second day of Pesah should fall on Shabbat, which it can according to the rabbinic calendar (but not according to the Sadducean calendar, where it always falls on Sat. night) then the harvesting of the Omer (the first barley) supersedes the Shabbat prohibition. Just as plowing is optional and therefore prohibited, so too the only type of harvesting that is prohibited is that which is optional." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah continues to deal with the question of when three trees in an orchard justify plowing the entire orchard up until Shavuot in the year preceding the sabbatical year.", + "Three trees belonging to three persons, they join together and they may plow the entire bet seah on their account. The three trees count even if they are owned by three different people. In other words, what is critical is that there are three trees, even if they are not owned by the same person.", + "What space should there be between them? Rabban Gamaliel says: sufficient for the driver of the herd to pass through with his implements. Trees must be properly spaced. If they grow too close to one another, then in order to care for them, the owner will have to thin them out. Therefore, if the trees in this orchard are too close together, they won’t count, because at least one of three trees is doomed to be cut down. Rabban Gamaliel says that the space left in between the trees must be sufficient for a person riding on animal to pass in-between while he is holding his tools. Any space less than this and one of the trees doesn’t count towards the necessary three trees needed to plow the entire field." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah teaches that if instead of adult trees the trees were young saplings, then the rule is different because young saplings require far more watering and care then do adult trees.", + "If ten saplings are scattered over the entire area of a bet seah, they may plow the whole bet seah, even until Rosh Hashanah. When it came to adult trees, in order for it to be permitted to plow the entire field, the mishnah required three trees that produce a minimal amount of fruit. When it comes to saplings, if there are ten saplings in the field they may plow the entire field all the way up to Rosh Hashanah, without any “tosefet sheviit” extension of the sabbatical year.", + "But if they were arranged in a row or they were surrounded by a fence, they may plow them only for their own needs. However, if the saplings are not spread out through the entire field, but are rather set up in a row, then the entire field may not be plowed. Alternatively, if the saplings are surrounded by a fence, one that does not surround the entire field but just those saplings, then they are treated as individual trees and the remainder of the field may not be plowed. The reason is that since they are concentrated in one area, if someone plows the whole field, it will look like he is getting the field ready to be planted on the sabbatical year." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nOur mishnah teaches that gourd plants, which also need to be plowed frequently, count as with the saplings.", + "Saplings and gourds are counted together within space of a bet seah. If there are a combination of ten saplings and gourd plants then they may plow the entire field. There are two caveats which the Talmud adds. First of all, these must be large gourd plants, large enough to justify needing to plow large plots of land to take care of them. Secondly, there must be more saplings then gourd plants, for instance six saplings and four gourds.", + "Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: if there are ten gourds in the bet seah they may plow the whole bet seah until Rosh Hashanah. According to Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel, gourd plants are treated just like the saplings. Thus if there are ten gourd plants, the whole field may be plowed all the way up until Rosh Hashanah." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nIn the previous mishnah we learned that saplings may be plowed up until Rosh Hashanah. Our mishnah defines up until what point a tree is a sapling sort of like asking, when is the bar mitzvah for a tree?", + "Up until when are they called saplings?
Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah says: until they are permitted for common use. According to Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah, the tree is considered a sapling as long as its fruit is forbidden to be used because it is “orlah.” The fruit of a tree cannot be eaten for the first three years of the tree’s life and in the fourth year it is sanctified and it must be brought to Jerusalem and eaten there. It doesn’t become permitted for common use until the fifth year. At that point the sapling becomes a tree, according to this opinion. Congratulations tree! We’re very proud of you.", + "But Rabbi Joshua says: until they are seven years old. Rabbi Joshua says that the tree must be seven years old before it is no longer a sapling. The Tosefta explains that this refers to olive trees, which take longer to mature. Fig-trees are saplings until they are six, whereas the grape vine is a sapling until it is five.", + "Rabbi Akiba says: [the word] sapling, [it goes] according to its name. Rabbi Akiba says that it depends on how people refer to the tree/sapling. If they call it a sapling, it doesn’t matter how old it is, it is still considered a sapling. And if they call it a tree, it is no longer a sapling, no matter its age.", + "A tree which had been cut down and then produced fresh shoots: if one handbreadth or less, they are regarded as saplings, if more than a handbreadth they are regarded as trees, the words of Rabbi Shimon. If a tree has been cut down and starts to send out shoots again, it is in the category of “sapling” until the shoots are one handbreadth long. After that point, it reverts to being a tree." + ] + ], + [ + [ + "Introduction\nAfter having completed its discussion of the rules governing plowing the orchard in the sixth year, the Mishnah turns its attention to the grain field, called in the mishnah a “white field” probably due to its whitish appearance.", + "Until when may they plow a white field in the sixth year? Until the moisture has dried up in the soil, or as long as men still plow in order to plant cucumbers and gourds. According to the first opinion, one may plow a grain field in the sixth year up until the later of one of two points. Either until the moisture of the ground that the rain produced has been dried up. This would be some time usually after Pesah, when it stops raining in Israel. Alternatively, as long as people are still plowing in order to plant cucumbers or gourds, two plants which require a lot of water. After this point, the plowing is assumed to be for the sabbatical year and it is prohibited.", + "Rabbi Shimon said: in that case you are placing the law in the hands of each man! Rather in the case of a white field until Pesah, and in the case of an orchard until Atzeret (. Rabbi Shimon voices an interesting complaint about the previous opinion. Rabbi Shimon seems to believe that halakhah should not be dependent upon the practices of the individual, which could vary greatly from place to place. Rather they should be dependent on an absolute date, one common to all. They therefore say that the grain field may be plowed only until Pesah and like Bet Hillel in mishnah one above, the orchard may be plowed only until Shavuot. I should note that this seems to be somewhat of a general trend in many areas of halakhah. What were once dependent on variant practices, ages, customs etc., later become standardized so that the halakhah is observed uniformly in all places. As far as why there is a difference between the two fields and why plowing the grain field ends earlier than the plowing of the orchard, the Yerushalmi explains that the grain field needs a lot more irrigation. Since it won’t rain much after Pesah, plowing won’t really help that year’s crop after Pesah. The orchard requires less water and the plowing is only to help convey what little water there is to the tree. Therefore, the deadline for plowing is a little later." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah teaches some other exceptions to the general prohibitions of tending to a field in the sixth year of the sabbatical cycle.", + "They may manure and hoe cucumbers and gourds until Rosh Hashanah. Manuring and hoeing are not prohibited by the Torah in the sabbatical year. They are prohibited only derabanan, from rabbinic authority. Therefore, these activities are completely permitted up until Rosh Hashanah of the sabbatical year, when the law is more lenient.", + "So too with regard to irrigated fields. Irrigated fields, fields which require artificial irrigation may be weeded all the way up until Rosh Hashanah of the sabbatical year. This is because the fruits of that year need the water and this is not preparation for the following year.", + "They may remove flaws from trees, strip off leaves, cover roots with earth, and fumigate the plants until Rosh Hashanah. This section continues to list activities that are prohibited during the sabbatical year only “derabanan” and are therefore permitted during the sixth year. Another reason that these labors may be permitted is that they are not intended to prepare for the seventh year, but rather to improve the fruit already growing on the tree, the fruit of the sixth year.", + "Rabbi Shimon says: one may also remove leaves from a grape cluster even in the seventh year itself. Rabbi Shimon adds another permitted activity, this time one that is permitted even on the seventh year itself. Removing leaves from grape clusters does not improve the tree, which would be prohibited. Rather it only prevents damage to the cluster of grapes. Therefore, it is allowed on the sabbatical year." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nMost of today’s mishnah deals with pruning a tree on the sixth year.", + "They may clear away stones until Rosh Hashanah. Clearing away stones is permitted all the way until the end of the sixth year. It is prohibited, however, during the sabbatical year itself, although this prohibition is only derabanan.", + "They may trim, prune and remove [excess parts of the tree] until Rosh Hashanah. These are three different words for removing parts of the tree in order to give it more room to grow, or for it to grow stronger. These three activities are all permitted up until Rosh Hashanah, again because they are not biblically prohibited during the sabbatical year.", + "Rabbi Joshua says: just as one may trim and remove in the fifth year so too may one perform this work in the sixth year. Albeck explains that according to Rabbi Joshua, the pruning of the sixth year must be like that of the fifth year. If the pruning done in the fifth year continues into the sixth year, then the pruning done in the sixth year may continue into the seventh year. However, if the pruning done in the fifth year ends before Rosh Hashanah, then the following year’s pruning must also end before Rosh Hashanah. In other words, he sets his pattern in the fifth year and he must continue to follow it in the sixth year.", + "Rabbi Shimon says: as long as I may legally tend the tree itself, I may remove [excess parts of it]. In the sixth year one may tend the tree by plowing around it only up until Shavuot. Therefore, according to Rabbi Shimon, one may prune it only up until Shavuot as well. To Rabbi Shimon pruning is just another form of tending the tree, and hence the same rules apply." + ], + [ + "They may besmear saplings, wrap them around, and trim them, and they may make for them shelters and water them until Rosh Hashanah. The activities in this section are meant to protect the saplings and therefore they are permitted all the way up until Rosh Hashanah. Besmearing the saplings means to repair bark that is peeling. Another interpretation is that it refers to smearing oil on the trees in order to ward off bugs. Wrapping the trees is done in order to protect them. Trimming them is similar to those activities referred to in the previous mishnah, all of which were permitted up until Rosh Hashanah. The shelters are small structures to protect the saplings from the elements. The irrigation here refers to spraying or sprinkling them with water to keep them moist.", + "Rabbi Elazar bar Zadok says: he may even water the foliage on the sabbatical year, but not the roots. Rabbi Elazar bar Zadok says that he can water the foliage even on the sabbatical year, because that is just to keep them moist. However, he may not water the roots because it is the seventh year." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah has to do with oiling and piercing unripe figs while they are on the fig tree. The oil would speed up the ripening process and the piercing would allow the oil to penetrate into the figs.", + "They may oil unripe figs and pierce them until Rosh Hashanah. Oiling and piercing are allowed up until Rosh Hashanah, just as were the other activities meant to aid the tree that did not work the ground.", + "Unripe figs of the sixth year which have [remained on the tree] until the seventh year, or of the seventh year which have remained on the tree until the eighth year, they may not oil them or pierce them. However, if despite the oiling and piercing, the figs did not ripen until the sabbatical year began, they may not be oiled and pierced during the seventh year. Similarly, figs from the seventh year which have remained on the tree until the eighth year may not be oiled or pierced because they are seventh year produce and as such, cannot be worked.", + "Rabbi Judah says: In a place where it was the custom to oil, one may not oil them, since that would be considered work; but in a place where it was not the custom to oil, they may oil them. Rabbi Judah provides what might seem to be a paradoxical ruling. Oiling is forbidden only if it is considered work in that locality. If it is customary to oil them, then oiling is considered work and it is forbidden to oil them in the seventh year. However, if oiling is not customary in that place, then it is not considered work and someone who wants to oil them may do so. In this he disagrees with the opinion in the previous section, according to which oiling was always prohibited in the seventh year. We should note that Rabbi Judah’s statement will make the halakhah vary from place to place. As we noted earlier in Sheviit, some sages seem to have objected to this phenomenon. It seems, in contrast, that it did not bother Rabbi Judah at all.", + "Rabbi Shimon permitted in connection with the tree, because he is permitted to do all work for the tree. Rabbi Shimon allows one to do any work on the tree itself in the eighth year, after the sabbatical year has been completed, because only the fruit carries the sanctity of the seventh year, and not the tree. Other commentators interpret Rabbi Shimon as permitting the oiling and piercing of seventh year figs which have entered the eighth year because on the eighth year all work done on the tree is permitted." + ], + [ + "Introduction This mishnah teaches that planting and grafting plants is prohibited some time before Rosh Hashanah. The sages debate exactly how much before Rosh Hashanah it is prohibited.", + "They may not plant or sink [vine-shoots], or graft in the sixth year within thirty days of Rosh Hashanah. According to the first opinion, it is forbidden to plant or graft one plant on to another thirty days before Rosh Hashanah. Sinking vine shoots refers to the practice of putting a vine shoot into the ground in one place and bringing it up again another in order to start a new vine. These activities are prohibited thirty days before Rosh Hashanah because it will take thirty days for the plant to strike roots, or to be successfully grafted.", + "If he has planted or sank or grafted, he must uproot. If he does not observe this prohibition and he does plant, graft or sink a vine shoot less than thirty days before Rosh Hashanah of the sabbatical year he must uproot the plant because this is considered to be a tree that was planted on the sabbatical year. Such a tree is prohibited.", + "Rabbi Judah says: any grafting that has not taken root within three days will never do so. Rabbi Judah says that the plant or the graft takes roots within three days. If it does not, it won’t survive. Hence, it is permitted to plant, graft or sink up until three days before Rosh Hashanah.", + "Rabbi Yose and Rabbi Shimon say: two weeks. Rabbis Yose and Shimon hold that the plant strikes roots within two weeks, hence it is permitted to plant, graft or sink vine-shoots up until two weeks before Rosh Hashanah." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThe year in which produce is tithed also counts with regard to whether it is considered to be sabbatical produce. Thus if something is tithed in the sixth year then it counts as sixth year produce, whereas if would be scheduled to be tithed in the seventh year, it counts as sabbatical produce.\nDetermining what year something is tithed depends on what type of produce it is, and how much it has grown. The standards are different for each type of produce. Thus grain and olives that have grown to 1/3 of their eventual size before Rosh Hashanah are tithed with the previous year. Vegetables belong to the year in which they are harvested. Our mishnah discusses some species that do not fit neatly into either the grain or vegetable category.\nWe should note that it is important to know what year produce is in with regard to tithes because the laws change from year to year. In the first, second, fourth and fifth years second tithe is separated, whereas in the third and sixth year, poor person’s tithe is separated. In the seventh year no tithes are separated. It is also important to know what year the produce is in because one can’t tithe from one year’s produce for another.", + "Rice, millet, poppy and sesame that had taken root before Rosh Hashanah must be tithed according to the previous year, and are permissible in the seventh year. The criterion for determining whether rice, millet, poppy or sesame are tithed during the previous year (in this case the sixth year) or whether they go with the following year, is whether they have taken root. If they have taken root then they are tithed according to the sixth year, which means that the owner will have to separate regular tithe and poor person’s tithe, which takes the place of second tithe in the third and sixth years of the sabbatical cycle. In addition, they are not subject to the laws of produce grown during the seventh year. We will learn more about these laws later in the tractate.", + "If they did not then they are forbidden in the seventh year, and are tithed according to the year following. If they did not take root before Rosh Hashanah, then they are forbidden in the seventh year. As we shall learn, this doesn’t mean that they are absolutely prohibited, but rather that the laws governing seventh year produce will govern this produce as well. They will be tithed also as seventh year produce, which means that they won’t have be tithed at all, as seventh year produce is totally exempt from tithes." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah continues to list types of produce that are tithed according to when they take root.", + "Rabbi Shimon Shezuri says: Egyptian beans which he sowed for seed only, are like them. According to Rabbi Shimon Shezuri if Egyptians beans were sewn for seeds, which either means to grow them in order to harvest just the seeds, or according to other commentators, to eat the seeds, then they are tithed according to when they take root. If, however, they were planted in order to eat the beans, then they are tithed as are vegetables, according to the time when they were harvested.", + "Rabbi Shimon says: large beans, are [also] like them. Rabbi Shimon says that large beans also go according to when they take root.", + "But Rabbi Elazar says: large beans, if they began to form pods before Rosh Hashanah. Rabbi Elazar says that large beans go according to their own criterion when they begin to form pods. If they do so before Rosh Hashanah, they are tithed according to the previous year, but if not, they are tithed according to the subsequent year." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah teaches that for some types of species the year in which they are tithed depends on how much water they have recently received and how much water they typically are irrigated.", + "Seedless onions and Egyptian beans from which he withheld water for thirty days prior to Rosh Hashanah are tithed with the preceding year, and are permitted in the seventh year. This first section refers to a situation where these species are growing in an artificially-irrigated field. If these types of species had not been watered for thirty days before Rosh Hashanah then they are not treated as vegetables and they are tithed not according to the time that they are harvested (as are vegetables) but according to the previous year. They are also permitted in the seventh year, because they count as sixth year produce.", + "And if not, they are forbidden in the seventh, and are tithed according to the following year. But if they are watered, then they go according to when they are harvested if during the sixth year, they are sixth year produce and if during the seventh year, they are seventh year produce.", + "And [seedless onions and Egyptian beans grown in a] rain-irrigated field from which two periods of rain have been withheld, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: three. Seedless onions and Egyptian beans grown in a rain-irrigated field subsist mostly on rainwater but they do need occasional watering. However, since they need less artificial irrigation, the period in which water has been withheld must be greater than for the same species grown in a field that is always artificially irrigated. Therefore, if he withholds water from them before Rosh Hashanah for two periods in which he would have watered them, then they are tithed with the previous year and if the next year is the sabbatical year, the laws of sabbatical produce do not apply. This is according to Rabbi Meir, according to whom not watering them for two periods causes them to no longer be in the category of vegetables. The sages disagree and say that the onions and beans lose the status of vegetables only after three periods of irrigation are withheld from them." + ], + [ + "Gourds which he had kept [in the ground] for seed: if they had hardened before Rosh Hashanah and had become unfit for human food, they may be kept during the seventh year; otherwise, they must not be kept in the seventh year. As we shall learn later in the tractate, if produce is deemed to be “sabbatical year produce” then it must be removed when that species is no longer growing in the field. Our mishnah deals with someone who keeps gourds in the ground for them to dry up and then uses them for seed. If they have dried and hardened before Rosh Hashanah and are no longer fit for humans to eat, then they don’t count as sabbatical year produce, but rather go according to the sixth year. Thus when he harvests them during the seventh year, he will not be obligated to remove them when there are no longer gourds still growing in the field. However, if they have not hardened by Rosh Hashanah, then the laws of sabbatical produce do apply and he will be able to keep them only as long as gourds are growing in the field.", + "Their buds are forbidden in the seventh year. Since their buds remain fit for human consumption even after the gourds themselves have hardened, they are prohibited during the seventh year, because that is when they are harvested.", + "They may irrigate the soil of a white field (a grain, the words of Rabbi Shimon. But Rabbi Elazar ben Jacob prohibits. Rabbi Shimon allows one to water a grain field on the sabbatical year so that grain will grow in the eighth year. However, Rabbi Elazar ben Jacob prohibits this.", + "They may soak the rice in the sabbatical year. Rabbi Shimon says: but they may not be trim [the rice]. One is allowed to intensively soak rice during the sabbatical year. According to some commentators this refers to rice that took root before Rosh Hashanah. However, Rabbi Shimon points out that even though irrigating, which is usually prohibited during the seventh year, is permitted, trimming the plants to improve them is forbidden. Again we see that preserving the plant is permitted while doing any work to improve it is forbidden." + ] + ], + [ + [ + "Introduction\nIt is forbidden to fertilize the field with manure during the sabbatical year. Furthermore, it is forbidden to bring out the dung used as fertilizer and heap it in the fields because that is the typical first step in the fertilization process. Doing so looks as if they are preparing to fertilize the fields. Therefore they have to wait until the normal time for bringing out the manure has passed before they can bring it out during the sabbatical year. In our mishnah, three sages debate when this time begins.\nBesides noting that it might not have been so pleasant to live with the dung accumulating in the courtyard, we should also note that this mishnah is an excellent example of sages agreeing on the larger picture (fertilizing is prohibited, and one must wait to bring out the manure) and yet disagree on the details, here when one can bring it out.", + "From when may they bring out manure to the dung-heaps?
From when the workers have ceased to work, the words of Rabbi Meir. According to Rabbi Meir, it becomes permitted to bring out the manure once those who do not observe the sabbatical laws are done doing so. This would have distinguished those who did observe the laws, for they would noticeably take the manure out later than everyone else. As to who the people are who take the manure out on time, they are either non-Jews or perhaps Jews who do not observe these laws.", + "But Rabbi Judah says: until the sweetness [of the manure] has dried up. Rabbi Judah says that they have to wait until the manure dries up. This is Rashi’s explanation. Albeck explains that “the sweetness” refers to sweet herbs. Once their moisture is gone it is clearly too late to fertilize and hence it is permitted to bring the manure out into the field.", + "Rabbi Yose says: until [the dung dries] into knots. Rabbi Yose says that they have to wait until the manure itself has dried up." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah continues to discuss bringing out manure to make dung-heaps. This mishnah teaches how many dung-heaps may be made and how big they must be to avoid giving the appearance that one is fertilizing the field.", + "How much manure may they take out and make into dung-heaps? Three dung-heaps for every bet seah, [each consisting of] ten baskets [of foliage] of a letekh each. The mishnah wants to limit the number of dung-heaps and their size so that it does not look like the person bringing them out is fertilizing the field. Therefore, there is a limit to how many dung-heaps may be piled up. They can only make three piles. Furthermore, each heap must contain at least ten baskets of dung, and each basket must contains a letekh (=15 seah). In total, each pile must contain 150 seah of manure. Less than that, and the rabbis fear that it may look like he is fertilizing his field.", + "They may add to the number of baskets, but not to the number of heaps. Rabbi Shimon says: also to the number of heaps. If he wants he can add to the number of baskets he brings out. In other words, there is a minimum of ten baskets, but if he wishes he can add more. However, he cannot make more heaps because that looks like he is fertilizing the field. Rabbi Shimon says that he can even add to the number of heaps. Evidently more large heaps do not, according to Rabbi Shimon, make it look like one is fertilizing the field." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah continues to deal with the topic of what to do with the accumulating dung during the sabbatical year.", + "A man may deposit in his field three dung-heaps for every bet seah [and even] more, the words of Rabbi Shimon. The sages forbid unless he [deposits them] three [handbreadths] below or thee handbreadths above. The beginning of today’s mishnah seems to be nearly the same as the last clause of yesterday’s mishnah, where Rabbi Shimon stated that one may make more than three dung-heaps in the field, without this looking like he was fertilizing. Here we seem to learn the same thing over again. According to some commentators, this repetition serves to introduce the statement of the sages found below. I should note that I have translated this mishnah according to the version found in all good manuscripts. The version preserved in the printed edition of the mishnah differs. The other sages forbid more than three dung-heaps unless he lowers them three handbreadths into a pit, or raises them three handbreadths and puts them on top of a mound. If he does this, it will be clear to all that his intention is not to fertilize his field. While we had learned in yesterday’s mishnah that the sages prohibit, we had not learned that they do allow this if one raises or lowers the mounds.", + "A man may pile up all the manure into one [large] store. Rabbi Meir forbids unless he [deposits them] three [handbreadths] below or thee handbreadths above. Most sages allow one to pile the dung that would have filled three dung-heaps into one large pile. However, Rabbi Meir forbids this unless he either raises the heap three handbreadths or lowers it. According to the Yerushalmi, Rabbi Meir forbids this only if there is more than the allowed measure of dung, that is more than the measure of three dung heaps, each of 150 seah of dung. Since he couldn’t make three separate heaps of a larger size without having to raise or lower the heaps, Rabbi Meir holds that he must also raise or lower one large heap.", + "If he had just a little, he may constantly add to it. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah forbids unless he [deposits them] three [handbreadths] below or thee handbreadths above. If he does not have enough dung to make such large heaps, he may take out the small amount that he does have and then add to it little by little. He need not wait until such a large volume accumulates. Rabbi Elazar forbids this because it looks as if he is planning to fertilize the field. This would only be permitted if he first lowered the pile or made it higher. Only through such a method is it clear that his intention is not to fertilize but rather just to remove the dung from his courtyard." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nIf one does not have an adequate pen for his cattle, he may make one for them in his field, even though this may look like he is bringing them out there to fertilize the field. However, he is limited as to the dimensions of the pen. Our mishnah teaches what those limitations are.", + "One who uses his field as a pen for cattle, he [first] makes an enclosure for every two bet se'ahs. He then uproots three sides, and leaves the middle side. It turns out that he has made a pen of four seahs. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: one of eight seahs. This section teaches how one goes about making a pen for his cattle on his field during the sabbatical year. First he makes the enclosure that covers two whole bet seahs. Once the enclosure is full of manure he removes the fences on three sides and leaves one fence standing and uses it to begin a new enclosure. It turns out that this fence is the middle fence between the old enclosure and the new enclosure. In the end the whole enclosure will be four seahs. According to the first opinion, he cannot make a bigger enclosure. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel disagrees and allows him to make an enclosure of eight seahs. According to some commentators, this means that he can make the first enclosure of four and the other of four as well. According to others, he makes the first enclosure two bet seahs, and then he can put a new one on each side, thereby ending up with eight bet seahs that were enclosed.", + "If his entire field is only four seahs in area, he must allow a portion of it to remain [unenclosed] for appearance's sake. One thing he cannot do is make his entire field an enclosure for his cattle because this looks like he is putting them there to fertilize the field and not just because he needs a place for his animals. In order to make it clear that his intention is not to fertilize, he must leave at least a portion of his field unpenned.", + "And he may take the dung out from the enclosure, and spread across his field in the manner of those who fertilize their fields. Once the pen is full of manure, he can bring it out to the field in the way prescribed by the preceding mishnayot, that is he can make three dung-heaps per bet seah." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah deals with quarrying stones during the sabbatical year. The problem is that this looks too much like clearing his field of stones in order to use it for growing. The mishnah gives a solution that avoids giving that appearance.", + "A man may not open a stone quarry within his field for the first time, unless there are in it three layers, each three [cubits long], three wide and three high, for a total of twenty-seven stones. First of all, it is forbidden to begin a quarry in the field on the sabbatical year. If he hadn’t dug stones there previously, then he may not do so in the sabbatical year. However, if there was already there a quarry, then he may use it because it will be clear that he is removing stones to use in building or for some other purpose and he is not clearing the field to use it for agriculture. The minimum measure of the previous quarry must be three layers, each layer being three cubits long, three wide and three high. This is the space that would allow twenty-seven one cubit stones to have been quarried. I should note that this explanation is according to the Rambam, but there are other explanations of the mishnah." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah discusses removing a stone wall during sheviit. Again, we are concerned lest it appear that he is clearing his field in order to plant there.", + "A wall that consists of ten stones, each a load for two men, may be removed, [if] the measurement of this wall is [at least] ten handbreadths high. If the wall is ten handbreadths high and there are at least ten heavy stones there, then he can remove the entire wall because it will be clear that he is removing a wall and not clearing his field in order to plant. It seems that if there is really a wall there, it will be clearer to everyone what he is doing.", + "Less than that he quarries it and he may lower it to within one handbreadth of the ground. If the wall is smaller then he cannot just remove the whole thing. Rather he may remove individual stones, until he lowers it to within one handbreadth of the ground. Leaving that one handbreadth will make it clear to everyone that he is not clearing the wall so that he can plant there.", + "When is this so? From his own field, but from that of another, he may remove whatever he wishes. The mishnah now presents two exceptions to the previous rule. The first is that the rule applies only to a wall in his own field. If the wall is in another person’s field, he may remove the whole thing because it is unusual for a person to clear a wall in order to plant another person’s field.", + "When is this so? When he did not begin [to remove the stones] in the sixth year, but if he began in the sixth year, he may remove whatever he wishes. The second exception is if he had begun to remove stones from the wall in the sixth year. If he had begun the previous year, then it will seem clearer to everyone who sees him that he is just removing stones and not clearing the field for planting." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah continues to deal with the topic of removing stones from one’s field on the sabbatical year.", + "Stones which the plow has turned up, or which had been covered and became uncovered, if there are among them at least two, [each] the load of two men, they may be removed. If some stones turn up unexpectedly in one’s field, he is allowed to remove them if there are at least two of them and if each of those two is so large it requires two men to carry them. In such a case the one who sees the person removing these stones will not think that he is simply clearing his field in order to plant. Rather the observer will realize that he is removing the stones in order to use the stones in building. Note that in this case he is allowed to remove not only the large stones but the other stones as well.", + "One who removes stones from his field, he removes the top layers, but he leave those touching the ground. If one needs to remove stones from his field in order to use them in building, he can remove the top layers but not the bottom layers. The reason that he has to leave the bottom layers is to make sure that people don’t think that he is clearing the field in order to prepare it for planting.", + "And likewise a heap of pebbles, or a pile of stones; he may remove the top layers but must leave those touching the ground. The same rule applies if he is removing a heap of pebbles or a pile of stones. Again, he may remove the top layers but not the bottom.", + "If, however, there is beneath them rocky soil or stubble, they may be removed. If below the pebbles or stones there is still rocky soil, soil that can’t be used for growing, then he may even remove the bottom layer, because it is clearly not being done in preparation for sewing seed." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nToday’s mishnah deals with building steps leading down into a ravine. According to Albeck this mishnah refers to terrace farming. The steps are the terraces that are built into the sides of the mountain in order to better utilize this land for farming.", + "They may not build steps leading to ravines in the sixth year after the rains have stopped, for this would be improving the fields for the seventh year. But he may build in the seventh year itself, after the rains have stopped, for this would be a improving the fields for the eighth year. Normally speaking, they would build the steps/terraces into the ravine after the rains had stopped (around Pesah time). The rains would have damaged the terraces and hence after the rains stopped it would be time to repair the terraces. If he builds such terraces in the sixth year for the seventh year then it looks like he is improving the field in order to plant it in the seventh year. However, he can build terraces in the seventh year after the rains have stopped because everyone will see that this is preparing the field for the eighth year, which is permitted.", + "He may not block them [the steps] with earth, but he may make an embankment. When rebuilding the terraces during the seventh year he may not block them with earth because then it looks like he is preparing the earth to plant for the seventh year. But he may make an embankment, which Albeck interprets as a stone wall that does not have any earth on top of the stones. When he rebuilds the terrace in such a way it will be clear that he is not planning on sewing for the seventh year.", + "Any stone which he can stick out his hand and pick up, may be removed. While building the embankment or the terrace he can’t just pick up any stone he wishes because that looks like he is clearing his field in order to prepare it for sewing. He can only pick up a stone that is close enough to him that he can just stick out his hand and pick it up." + ], + [ + "Shoulder-stones may be removed from any place.
And the contractor may bring them from anywhere.
Which are shoulder-stones? Any one that cannot be picked up with one hand, the words of Rabbi Meir.
But Rabbi Yose says: the name is to be taken literally; those that are carried on a man’s shoulder, either two or three at a time.
This mishnah continues to deal with the topic of which stones may be removed from a field without it looking like he is clearing his field for planting.
Section one: Since it will be clear when he removes the shoulder-stones that he is going to use them in building and that he is not removing them in order to clear his field, it is always permitted to remove such stones.
Section two: A building contractor is allowed to bring stones that are even smaller than shoulder-stones because it is obvious that he is taking them for building and not in order to clear a field.
Others interpret a “contractor” to mean one who has contracted the field, meaning that is he is sharecropping it for someone else. Since this is not his field, it is more permissible for him to take stones out of it and he may take stones that are even smaller than shoulder-stones.
Section three: Of course, we now have to define what shoulder-stones are. According to Rabbi Meir a shoulder-stone is just another way of saying a stone that is too large for a person to pick up with one hand.
Rabbi Yose on the other hand does not understand the term “shoulder-stone” to signify the size of the stone. Rather this term refers to the way that they are carried, two or three on one’s shoulder at the same time." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nNormally speaking one is not allowed to dig a hole on his property during the sabbatical year because that is considered working the land. Our mishnah deals with a few exceptions to this rule.", + "One who makes a fence between his own property and the public domain, he is allowed to dig down to rock level. One is allowed to build a fence during the sabbatical year between his property and the public domain because people who see him will not suspect him of preparing his property for planting. He is allowed to dig all the way down to bedrock.", + "What should he do with the soil? He piles it up in the public domain, and then restores it, the words of Rabbi Joshua. Were he to just heap the soil up in his own field it would look like he was tending to his field. Therefore, according to Rabbi Joshua he heaps it up in the public domain, and then afterwards he may use that soil to repair holes in the public domain.", + "Rabbi Akiva says: just as no damage may be done to a public domain, so one may not repair it. Then what should he do with the soil? He heaps it up in his own field in the manner of those who bring out dung [for manure]. Rabbi Akiva points out that there is a problem with Rabbi Joshua’s solution as to what to do with the soil. One is not allowed to do any damage to the public domain, even if he will afterwards restore the damage he has done. Heaping his soil in the public domain is forbidden, even if he is only doing so on a temporary basis. Rather what he should do is heap it up in his own field using the same rules that we saw with regarding to the dung used for manure. He needs to make three dungheaps per bet seah.", + "Similarly when one digs a cistern, a trench or a cave. The same debate between Rabbi Joshua and Rabbi Akiva exists also with regard to digging a cistern, a trench or a cave." + ] + ], + [ + [ + "Introduction\nDuring the sabbatical year it is permitted to gather non-food material from a field in order to use it for various purposes, such as lighting a fire. However, it is forbidden to gather this stuff in order to improve the field.", + "At first they said: a man may gather wood, stones and grasses from his field, just as he was allowed to do from the field of his fellow, the large ones. Originally, a person was allowed to gather large pieces of wood, stones and grass from his own field without being suspected of doing so in order to improve the field, just as he was allowed to collect from his fellow’s field without being suspected of doing so in order to improve someone else’s field. The assumption was that since these were large pieces it would be obvious that he was doing so only in order to use that which he collected for fire.", + "When the transgressors increased, they decreed that this one may gather from this one’s field and this one may gather from this one’s field, but not as a [mutual] favor. It doesn’t need to be said that no stipulation can be made for food. As they are wont to do, people began to transgress this permission and to collect even the smaller pieces and to lie and state that they had only collected the small pieces. Therefore, the sages decreed that a person could no longer collect even the large pieces from his own field. However, what one could do is collect these things from his friend’s field, under the assumption that when one collects wood, stone or grasses from someone else’s field it is not in order to improve the field. The other person could also collect from his field. However, one wasn’t allowed to grant this right as a mutual favor, as in “you can collect from my field if I can collect from yours.” The mishnah also notes that it is obvious that one cannot stipulate that one will give someone food in return for collecting the wood in his field and giving it to him." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nIt is forbidden to improve upon a field during the sabbatical year. Our mishnah deals with the halakhic consequences of one who nevertheless does improve upon the field.", + "A field from which thorns had been removed may be sown in the eighth year. During the sabbatical year it is forbidden to remove the thorns from the field, because it is forbidden to improve upon the field. However, this prohibition is only derabanan, a rabbinic and therefore lesser prohibition. Therefore, one who has removed the thorns from his field during the seventh year can still plant the field during the eighth year, the year after the sabbatical year.", + "But if it had been improved upon, or cattle had been allowed to live upon it, it may not be sown in the eighth year. However, if he improved upon the field by plowing it, which is forbidden from the Torah, then he may not plant the field during the eighth year. For transgressing this prohibition, the rabbis penalized him by not allowing him to plant after the sabbatical year had passed. The same is true if he allowed animals to live on his field, and thereby fertilize it. This was a subject that we dealt with in 3:4.", + "A field which had been improved upon in the seventh year: Bet Shammai says: they may not eat its produce in the seventh year, But Bet Hillel says: they may eat. The mishnah now talks about what happens if despite the fact that one is not allowed to improve a field during the seventh year, one nevertheless goes ahead and does so. According to Bet Shammai, the produce of the field is now forbidden during the seventh year, because the rabbis punished the transgressor. Bet Hillel says that the produce may be eaten. Of course, the laws governing produce that grows on its own during the seventh year will apply to this produce as well.", + "Bet Shammai says: they may not eat produce of the sabbatical year with an expression of thanks. But Bet Hillel says: they may eat [sabbatical year produce] with an expression for thanks and without an expression of thanks. During the Sabbatical year all of the produce grown in the fields is considered ownerless, and may be eaten by anyone. Beth Shammai holds that when one eats such produce one may not express his thanks to the owner of the field. These fruits are ownerless; giving thanks to the owner of the field may give people the impression that he is the one giving them, whereas in truth it is the Torah’s laws which have given them to the person eating. Bet Hillel holds that one may express thanks to the owner of the field or he may eat the fruit without expressing thanks.", + "Rabbi Judah says: the statements must be reversed, for this is one of the instances where Bet Shammai is lenient and Bet Hillel is stringent. In the previous two sections Bet Shammai was more stringent than Bet Hillel. Rabbi Judah says that the opinions should be reversed, because this is one of the cases where Bet Shammai is more lenient than Bet Hillel. In Mishnah Eduyot 5:1 Rabbi Judah teaches that this is one area where Bet Shammai is more lenient than Hillel." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah deals with the renting land from a Gentile during the seventh year, and other similar issues.\nI should note that as I write this commentary, we just began the Shmitah year here in Israel. The laws of the Shmitah have presented perhaps the greatest halakhic challenge to rabbis wishing to preserve a halakhic framework within a modern economy complete with a modern agriculture. It is clear that Israeli farmers could not simply allow their fields to lie fallow for a year and expect to make a living in that year or in the following years. One of the solutions to this problem is called “heter mekhirah” permission to sell. Just as Jews sell their chametz on Pesah and buy it back after Pesah, so too many farmers sell their fields to Gentiles during Pesah and then buy them back afterwards. The Gentiles grow the produce and then sell it in the markets here to Jews. While some would scorn such a solution as looking for a way around the halakhah or even as “cheating,” I think that such solutions allow Jews to preserve halakhah and yet be a part of the world.\nI would add, however, that while legal solutions allow one to solve grave financial problems that would be caused were the halakhah to be observed in its original formula, we should not forget the spirit behind the halakhah. Just as the spirit behind selling chametz is to cleanse oneself of the leaven and all that it symbolizes, so too the spirit behind the Shmitah observance is to give the land, which ultimately belongs to God, a chance to rest as well.", + "They may rent newly plowed land from a Gentile in the seventh year, but not from an Israelite. A Gentile may plow his land on the sabbatical year. Therefore, a Jew can rent this plowed land from the Gentile in order to plant seeds on it after the sabbatical year has passed. However, since a Jew may not plow his land during the sabbatical year, if he does so another Jew may not rent the fields from him.", + "And they may encourage Gentiles during the seventh year, but not Israelites. One who passes by a Gentile plowing or planting his field (in the land of Israel) on the sabbatical year may wish him luck. Even though the land is supposed to rest, Gentiles are not obligated to observe this law and in order to preserve peace between Jews and non-Jews, one may encourage him in his plowing.", + "They may exchange greetings with them because of the ways of peace. It is always permitted to formally greet Gentiles in order to preserve the ways of peace between Jews and non-Jews. This mishnah may seem a bit strange to one who grew up in a society where Jews and non-Jews often get along quite way. The background to the Mishnah is the notion that non-Jews are our enemy and that one who greets them may be giving comfort to Israel’s enemy. The mishnah disagrees with this view and says that greetings are actually to our own advantage, because by greeting someone you increase the peace with them. To use a cliché, the best way to deal with an enemy is often to turn him into a friend." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah deals with one who thins out the trees in his field during the sabbatical year so that the other trees will be able to grow. This is permitted because it is permitted to do things during the sabbatical year that will preserve the trees already growing in his field. However, when he does so he needs to make sure that it doesn’t look like he is clearing his field so that he can plant new trees, which is prohibited.", + "One who thins out his olive-trees [in the seventh year]: Bet Shammai says: he cuts them down to the ground. Bet Hillel says: he may completely uproot them. According to Bet Shammai, the one who is thinning out olive trees in his field may only cut them down to the ground. He may not uproot them because according to Bet Shammai, this looks like he is preparing the field for planting. Bet Hillel, on the other hand, allows the person thinning out his field to completely uproot the trees. Evidently, Bet Hillel is not concerned lest this look like he is preparing the field for planting. Perhaps people will easily be able to notice that he is thinning out his field and not clearing the land.", + "They agree that if one levels his field, he can only cut them down to the ground. Bet Hillel agrees with Bet Shammai that if one is leveling the trees in his field, which means that he is cutting down more than just one or two in any one spot, he may only cut them down to the ground and he may not uproot them. Since when he is leveling them it looks more like he is clearing his field in order to prepare it for planting, he must be extra cautious to avoid giving this impression.", + "What is considered “thinning out”? One or two plants. And what is considered “leveling”? Three plants next to each other. The mishnah now defines the difference between thinning out and leveling. Thinning out is when he cuts down one or two trees and leaves the third tree next to them. Leveling is when he cuts down three adjacent trees.", + "This applies to his own property only, but from the property of another, even he that levels may uproot. The above halakhot refer to a case where one is working in his own field. However, if one is working in his friend’s field even one who is leveling may uproot the trees because no one will suspect him of clearing his friend’s field so that it can be planted. This is a similar concept to that which we learned in mishnah 3:6." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah continues to deal with cutting down trees during the Shemitah year.", + "One who cuts down branches of an olive tree, he may not cover up [the stump] with earth, but he may cover it with stones or straw. This section deals with a person who cuts down branches of an olive tree. Covering up the stump with earth would improve the tree by allowing it to rejuvenate. Hence this is prohibited. However, he may cover it up with stones or straw. This would prevent the tree from drying out. Since this work maintains the health of the tree rather than improving the tree, it is permitted.", + "One who cuts down branches of a sycamore tree, he may not cover up [the stump] with earth, but he may cover it with stones or straw. This section teaches the same halakhah with regard to sycamore trees.", + "One may not cut down from a virgin sycamore in the seventh year, for this would constitute actual labor. A virgin sycamore is a sycamore from which branches have never been cut down. When one cuts the tree down to its roots it strengthens the tree by making it grow thicker. Since this improves the tree it is forbidden on the sabbatical year. Again, maintenance work is permitted but improving is prohibited.", + "Rabbi Judah says: in its usual manner, it is forbidden. Rather he either cuts it ten handbreadths above [the soil], or he cuts it down to ground level. Rabbi Judah agrees that to cut down parts of the tree is forbidden, but he holds that if it is cut down in an unusual manner it is permitted. The usual way would be to cut it down to a size of less than ten handbreadths. This is prohibited. There are two unusual ways to cut it down. Either he cuts it down and leaves more than ten handbreadths, or he cuts it down all the way to the ground leaving nothing." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah continues to deal with the subject of keeping trees healthy on Sheviit.", + "One who trims grape vines, or cuts reeds: Rabbi Yose the Galilean says: he must leave [uncut at least] one handbreadth. But Rabbi Akiba says: he may cut them in the usual manner, with the axe, sickle or saw, or with whatever he pleases. According to Rabbi Yose the Galilean when one trims grape vines or cuts down reeds in a marshy area, he must leave a handbreadth from where he trims or cuts to make sure that it doesn’t look like he is either pruning the grape vine or preparing the land for planting. Pruning is prohibited because it is done to improve the vine and preparing the land for planting is similarly prohibited. When he leaves the handbreadth it is clear that he is only cutting down in order to get the stuff out of the way. Rabbi Akiba is not concerned with this and allows him to trim the grape vines and cut the reeds in a normal manner.", + "A tree that had split may be tied up in the seventh year, not that it may heal, but only that it should not widen. If a tree somehow split during the sabbatical year, it is permitted to tie it back together. However, the intent should not be so that the tree will heal because this would be improving the tree. Rather, the intent must be just to prevent worse damage from occurring. Again, improving is prohibited whereas maintaining is permitted." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nFruits that grow on their own during the sabbatical year may be eaten. However, they must be fully ripe before they can be eaten. This halakhah is derived from a midrash on Leviticus 25:7 which states, “And the fruit of the field shall be for food.” From here the rabbis derived that only when fruit has become “food” can one eat it, and not before.\nOur mishnah defines how ripe a fig must be before it is eaten.", + "From when may one begin to eat of the fruit of the trees in the seventh year? With unripe figs as soon as they assume a rosy appearance, one may eat them in the field with his bread. Once they have begun to ripen, he may take them home. When figs begin to ripen and to turn red, they may be eaten in the field with bread. Since this is a normal way of eating them, they may be eaten this way during the sabbatical year. When they have more fully ripened, they may be taken home, again because this is the normal time to gather figs into one’s home.", + "And similarly in the other years of the sabbatical cycle [when this latter stage has been reached] they are subject to tithes. Fruit is not liable to be tithed until it has ripened. So figs are not liable to be tithed until they have ripened, the time when one would bring them into one’s home. However, on the sabbatical year itself one need not tithe them at all because all produce is ownerless and ownerless produce need not be tithed. Thus there are no tithes during the sabbatical year." + ], + [ + "Unripe grapes: as soon as they contain juice he may eat them with bread in the field. When they have begun to ripen, he may take them home.
And similarly in the other years of the sabbatical cycle [when they have reached this latter stage] they are subject to tithes.
This mishnah continues to deal with when in its development may one eat fruit growing during the sabbatical year. Basically this mishnah is the same as yesterday’s and therefore does not need any further explanation." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah completes the discussion of when various fruits are considered to be ripe enough to eat on Sheviit. It is interesting to note that the mishnah discusses only figs, grapes and olives. Clearly these are the most important trees in this region, and the only other common fruit that comes to mind is the date.", + "Olives, as soon as they can produce a quarter log [of oil] for each se'ah, they may be split and eaten in a field. When they produce a half-log, then he may crush them in a field and use their oil. When they have reached a third [of their overall potential], they may be crushed in the field and brought home. When it comes to olives, the rules are slightly more complicated since there are three stages of preparation and not just two, as there were with the figs and grapes. Also, olives are not eaten individually, and hence we must pay attention to how much oil they produce and not how ripe each individual olive is. When the olives are laden enough with oil that a seah of them can produce a quarter of a log of oil, then when he is still in the field he can split them and use the little oil that comes out. This oil will not be of great use to him. When they develop a little more, and can produce ½ of a log, then he can crush them but he still must eat them in the field. Finally, when they are able to produce a third of their potential of oil, which is considered to be three logs per seah, meaning they can now produce one log per seah, then he may crush them and bring the oil home.", + "And similarly in the other years of the sabbatical cycle [when they have reached this latter stage] they are subject to tithes. This is the same as section two in the previous two mishnayot.", + "With all other fruit of trees [the season when they become due to be tithed] is the season when they are permitted in the seventh year. This section summarizes the laws found in this mishnah and in the two above. Just as we saw throughout, a fruit becomes permitted in the seventh year at the same time when it becomes liable for tithes in other years. It seems that this is generally when it is ripe enough to eat or use, even if it is not yet fully ripe." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nDuring the seventh year it is forbidden to cause produce to come to ruin, because it must be for eating. Therefore, it is forbidden to cut down trees from the time that their fruit has begun to appear until the fruit is fully ripe. This is the period of time when the fruit needs to be on the tree in order to develop.", + "From when may they no longer cut down trees in the seventh year? Bet Shammai says: every tree, after it has produced [fruit]. Bet Hillel says: carob trees after [the carobs] begin to droop, vines after the berries begin to be moist, olive-trees after they had blossomed, any other tree after it has produced [fruit]. According to Bet Shammai it is forbidden to cut down any fruit tree once the fruit has begun to appear on the tree. Bet Hillel gives different times for three of the most productive trees, the olive, the grape vine and the carob tree. In these three cases he seems to be slightly more lenient, allowing one to cut down the tree at a later period in its development than would Bet Shammai. However, when it comes to other trees, Bet Hillel agrees that it is forbidden from the time that the fruit begins to appear.", + "And any tree as soon as it reaches the season for tithes it may be cut down. Once the fruit has reached the season when it must be tithed before it is eaten (see above, mishnayot 7-9) the fruit is considered to be viable off the tree. Since the fruit can be used as food when picked, it is no longer considered to be ruining the fruit by cutting down the tree. Therefore, it is now permitted to cut down the entire tree.", + "How much should be on an olive tree such that it may not be cut down? A quarter [kav]. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: all depends on the olive-tree. This mishnah deals with a general prohibition of cutting down fruit-producing trees during any year. This prohibition is derived from Deuteronomy 20:19, which contains the prohibition of cutting down fruit-bearing trees when waging war. The olive tree is the most productive and important of the trees in the ancient Israeli economy, and, I should note, is still the most important agricultural product in many areas of Israel, especially certain Arab areas. According to the first opinion, if the tree can produce a quarter-kav of oil, then it cannot be cut down. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says that it all depends on the tree, its size and the type of oil that it produces." + ] + ], + [ + [ + "Introduction\nWhen determining whether fruit is considered to be “fruit of the sabbatical year,” we go after the time that the fruit begins to appear on the tree. Therefore, a fruit that begins to appear in the seventh year and is not picked for another two years is considered to be “sabbatical fruit” and all of the laws governing this “sabbatical fruit” will apply to this fruit, even though it is picked long after the seventh year is over.", + "White figs: their “sheviit” is in the second year [of the sabbatical year], since they ripen once in three years. White figs take three years to ripen. Hence, white figs that begin to appear on the tree during the seventh year will be picked three years later during the second year of the sabbatical cycle. This fruit will have the status of “sabbatical fruit.”", + "Rabbi Judah says: Persian figs, their “sheviit” is in the year following the seventh year, since they ripen once in two years. Thereupon they said to him: this was said only of the species of white figs. Rabbi Judah says that a similar law applies to Persian figs which take two years to ripen. The other rabbis respond that the law stated in section one was stated only in regard to the white figs. All other fruit ripen in one year. It seems that they are disagreeing here about reality. The other rabbis seem to say that all fruit (at least the fruit which were known to them) is fully ripe the same year that it begins to grow, with the one exception of the white fig. Rabbi Judah says that there are other species to which this halakhah applies, including the Persian fig." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah and the next three mishnayot all deal with the “luf,” a type of onion. The practice was to store the luf underground in order to preserve it. The problem on Sheviit is that this might look like planting, which is forbidden on sheviit.", + "One who buries luf (a type of in the soil during the sabbatical year:
Rabbi Meir says: it must be not less than two seahs in quantity, three handbreadths in height, and covered with earth one handbreadth deep. According to Rabbi Meir, he needs to bury at least two seahs worth of luf-onions (=12 kab). The heap of luf that he is going to bury must be at least three handbreadths high and he must cover it with at least one handbreadth deep of soil. If he fulfills these three conditions, then he can bury the luf without it looking like he is planting it, because no one would plant in such a manner.", + "The sages say: it must be not less than four kabs in quantity, one handbreadth high, and covered with earth one handbreadth deep. The sages rule more leniently than does Rabbi Meir. The quantity of luf that must be buried can be lower and the heap need not be as large. However, they agree that it must be covered with earth at least one handbreadth deep.", + "And he should bury it in a place where people walk. In order to prevent the luf from sprouting and growing they should plant it in a place where people walk. This would also seem to serve well in distinguishing between storing and planting one does not plant in a place where people will trample the plants." + ], + [ + "Introduction During the sabbatical year any one can come and take the produce. Our mishnah deals with luf which has remained in the ground during the seventh year and is not picked until the eighth year.", + "Luf which has remained [in the ground until] after the passing of the seventh year:
Rabbi Eliezer says: if the poor had gathered its leaves, then they have gathered. If not, then an account must be made with the poor. Luf can remain in the ground for several years before it needs to be picked. Our mishnah talks about luf that could have been picked during the seventh year, but was left in the ground until the eighth year, thereby giving it time to grow. Rabbi Eliezer rules that if the poor people gathered it during the seventh year, then it is theirs and they need not compensate the field owner for the fact that he was planning on leaving the luf in the ground until the eighth year. If the poor people don’t gather the luf, then the field owner owes them for the benefit he gained by having the luf remain in the ground during the seventh year. In other words, the luf during the seventh year really belongs to the poor people and if they don’t collect it the field owner must compensate them, at least partially, for the fact that they did not do so.", + "Rabbi Joshua says: if the poor had gathered its leaves, then they have gathered. If not, the poor have no account with him (the field owner). Rabbi Joshua agrees that the poor have the right to gather its leaves during the sabbatical year. However, if they don’t gather them, then they have no right to request from the field owner the amount that they had lost." + ], + [ + "Introduction This mishnah deals with three types of plants that are customary to leave in the ground even after they have fully ripened. It is customary to uproot these plants with a rake and not by hand. The problem with the rake is that it might look like he is working the land, which is of course, forbidden on Sheviit. Surprisingly, the first of these plants is my favorite and yours as well, the luf.", + "Luf of the sixth year that has entered the seventh year, similarly summer onions and puah (madder) grown in good soil:
Bet Shammai says: they must be uprooted with wooden rakes. According to Bet Shammai, when one wishes to uproot these types of plants, he must do so with a type of instrument which differs from the one normally used. This will show everyone that his intention is not to work the land but rather to just uproot the plants.", + "Bet Hillel says: [even] with metal rakes. Bet Hillel disagrees and holds that he may do so with the normal metal rakes, the same way that he always does.", + "They agree in the case of puah with strong roots, that they may be uprooted with metal spades. Bet Shammai agrees that if he wishes to uproot puah that has strong roots, and the wooden rake is not sufficient, that he may use the metal rake." + ], + [ + "From when may one buy luf after the seventh year? Rabbi Judah says: immediately. But the sages say: [only] after the new crop has appeared. Our mishnah discusses when a person can begin to sell luf after the seventh year is over without people suspecting that the luf was sabbatical year produce. According to Rabbi Judah, he may begin to sell it immediately. Although, as we shall see when it comes to vegetables, anything bought after the seventh year must be treated like seventh year produce until enough time has passed for new vegetables to grow, with luf they were less stringent because we can assume that luf in the eighth year is actually from the sixth year. The other rabbis hold that luf is treated the same way as other vegetables it too is forbidden until there has been enough time for a new crop to appear." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah deals with selling implements which could be used to transgress the laws of the sabbatical year. The rabbis did not allow one person to aid another to transgress by selling to that person a tool which he could use to transgress another commandment. We should note that according to commentators, the mishnah refers to selling these things to someone who is suspected of not observing the laws of the shemittah.", + "These are the implements which a craftsman may not sell in the seventh year:
A plow and all its [accompanying] implements, a yoke, a winnowing-fan, and a pickax. This section contains a list of implements that are only used for labors prohibited on the seventh year. The plow and the yoke are used for plowing which is clearly forbidden. The winnowing fan is used to separate wheat from chaff. While this is permitted, it is only permitted in small, personal quantities. Since this type of fan is used for large quantities of wheat or other grain, one cannot sell such a fan on the sabbatical year. The pickax was used to dig holes, which was also forbidden.", + "But he may sell a sickle used by hand, a scythe, and a cart with all its implements. This section lists implements which could be used to perform prohibited labors but also could be used to perform permitted labors. One may assume that the person to whom one sells will use them appropriately and hence they may be sold on the seventh year. A hand sickle would be used to harvest a small amount, for personal use, which one may do on the sabbatical year. Similarly, a scythe would be used for smaller amounts and is permitted. The cart can be used for forbidden work, but could also be used to transport things that one is allowed to carry.", + "This is the general principle: any tools designed for work involving a transgression [in the seventh year] is prohibited; but if for a forbidden and a permissible purpose, it may be [sold]. This is the general rule that summarizes the details found in the previous two sections. It is not unusual for the Mishnah to provide both a general rule and detailed examples." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah deals with a potter who wants to sell jars to a customer during the seventh year. Again, he may not sell more than the amount normally needed for personal usage.\nAs a reminder, during the sabbatical year one can harvest fruit that grows on its own and use it for personal needs. But one may not sell the produce nor may one store it beyond the time when such produce can be found in the fields. Produce found in the fields is considered ownerless, no matter who owns the field.", + "The potter may sell five oil-jars and fifteen wine-jars, for this is the usual amount one collects from ownerless produce. A potter can sell up to five oil jars and fifteen wine jars, for this is a usual amount that a normal person would need to collect ownerless olives and grapes from the field and turn them into oil and wine.", + "But if he brought more, it is still permitted. If the person gathering the ownerless oil and wine brought in more olives and grapes than just five oil-jars or fifteen wine-jars worth, then one still may use this olive oil and wine. For instance, if I go to your house and you have gathered more than this amount I can still eat your food, as long as you are not making a business out of it or keeping it longer than is allowed. Nevertheless, it is still prohibited for a potter to sell more than five oil jars or fifteen wine jars because we could assume that a greater amount would be used to market the oil or wine.", + "He may also sell [more jars] to Gentiles in the land of Israel and to Jews outside of the land. The laws of sheviit apply in the land of Israel to Jews only. Therefore, a potter can sell whatever he wants either to a non-Jew living in the land of Israel or to a Jew living outside the land. He is not responsible if the non-Jew should subsequently sell the jars to a Jew or a Jew should bring them to the land of Israel and use them there against the halakhah. There is, after all, a limit to a person’s responsibility to not aid others in transgressing. Another example would be that while the potter cannot sell the jars in the seventh year, he can sell them in other years, even though they may be used eventually in the seventh year." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah continues to deal with selling things to a person who is suspected of not observing the laws of sheviit, for fear that he may use them inappropriately on sheviit.", + "Bet Shammai says: one must not sell him a plowing cow in the seventh year. But Bet Hillel permits, since he may slaughter it. Bet Shammai seems to disagree with the rule that we learned in mishnah six above, that if something can be used for both a prohibited and a permitted purpose, one can sell that thing to a person suspected of transgressing the laws of sheviit. A cow that is generally used for plowing is the example that the Mishnah uses. According to Bet Shammai, one cannot sell such a cow to a person suspected of transgressing sheviit. Bet Hillel, on the other hand, holds that this is permitted because it is possible that the person bought the cow in order to slaughter it. Bet Hillel gives the person the benefit of the doubt, whereas Bet Shammai does not.", + "One may sell him produce even at sowing time. One may sell produce to a person suspected of transgressing sheviit even at the season when a person sows seed. We do not suspect that he is buying the produce in order to use its seed rather we assume that he is buying it in order to eat it.", + "And one may lend him a seah measure, even though he knows that he has a threshing-floor. It is permitted to lend this person a utensil which measures a seah and we don’t suspect that he will use it to measure wheat in order to sell it. Rather we assume that he might need to measure it in order to know how much he needs to grind.", + "One may exchange coins for him, even though he knows that he has workers. If this person asks to make change, one may exchange coins with him even if he suspects that the person may use the coins to pay workers to do work prohibited on the sabbatical year. Again, we give the person the benefit of the doubt and assume that he may need the coins for some permitted purpose.", + "But all these things, if he expresses [that they will be used for unlawful purposes], then they are forbidden. If the person borrowing or buying these things expresses that he is intending to use them for a prohibited purpose, then it is clear that one may not sell or loan to him, or do any of the activities mentioned in the above mishnayot. We obviously cannot give him the benefit of the doubt if he says that he is going to use them for a prohibited activity." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah continues to deal with lending instruments to a person who may commit a transgression with that instrument.", + "A woman may lend to her neighbor who is suspect of transgressing the laws of the sabbatical year, a sifter, a sieve, a hand-mill, or an oven. The first section continues to deal with lending instruments to a person who may not observe the sabbatical year. Again, since these instruments might be used for a permitted purpose, they may be loaned out, even though they may also be used for a prohibited purpose. The specific suspicion here is that the woman has stored her produce after the time when that produce no longer exists in the field. At this time, one is supposed to clear the produce out of the house so for instance if dates are still on the palm, one may store them in the house, but once they are no longer found outside, one must clear them out of her home. The sifter, sieve, hand-mill and oven might all be used to process such produce (especially grain), but they may also be used to process food that one is allowed to keep in the house either non-sabbatical year produce or produce that still exists in the field. Therefore, she may lend them to her.", + "But she may not sift or grind with her. Although she may lend these instruments to her, she may not go so far as to actually grind or sift with her. We learn here an important principle one may extend the benefit of the doubt to others, but one also should keep some distance if there is concern that such a person is transgressing. This is what will be stated in section four one may not aid those who commit a transgression.", + "The wife of a haver may lend to the wife of an am haaretz a sifter and a sieve and may even sift, grind, or sift flour with her. The mishnah now moves to a case similar to the previous one. Here we are talking about a woman married to a “haver,” a term we used throughout tractate Demai. A haver is one who scrupulously observes the laws of tithing and purity. The opposite is an am haaretz, a person who is suspected of not observing these laws. However, most amei haaretz do indeed tithe there food. Therefore, the wife of a haver cannot only lend her these instruments, she can use them with her. The fear that she has not tithed her produce does not create a prohibition.", + "But once she poured water [over the flour], she may not touch [it] with her, for one may not aid those who commit a transgression. There is one problem that remains. The am haaretz does not observe purity laws. Produce is susceptible to impurity only once it has become wet. At this point, when the am haaretz’s wife touches the produce, specifically the dough which now has water in it, she will make it impure. The problem with causing the dough to become impure is that it has “hallah” in it hallah is the portion of the dough that must be removed and given to the priests. If it is impure the priest will not be able to use it and it will have to be burned. The wife of the “haver” cannot aid in destroying this hallah, and therefore, once water has been placed in the dough, she may no longer touch it.", + "And all these things were only allowed in the interests of peace. The leniencies above, the permission to lend various instruments to people who are likely to perform a transgression with them, were intended to preserve the “ways of peace (darkei shalom)” between those who were scrupulous in their observance of these laws (the haver and his wife) and those who were not (the am haaretz and his wife). It is interesting to note that there is a limit to leniencies given because of “darkei shalom.” One may lend instruments to those who might not use them appropriately, but not if it is certain that they will use them inappropriately. For instance, I could lend my car to someone who might use it during the week and might use it on Shabbat, but it would seem that I could not lend the car to someone who will certainly use it on Shabbat. Darkei Shalom implies that one must give others the benefit of the doubt, but when there is no doubt, then “one may not aid those who commit a transgression.”", + "They may offer encouragement to Gentiles during the sabbatical year, but not to Jews. The mishnah concludes with a few more examples of things done because of “darkei shalom.” This section is a repeat of mishnah 4:3 above, and I am merely repeating my commentary here: One who passes by a Gentile plowing or planting his field (in the land of Israel) on the sabbatical year may wish him luck. Even though the land is supposed to rest, Gentiles are not obligated to observe this law and in order to preserve peace between Jews and non-Jews, one may encourage him in his plowing. However, one may not offer encouragement to a Jew because that would be aiding him in committing a transgression.", + "In the interests of peace, one may also offer greetings to Gentiles. It is always permitted to formally greet Gentiles in order to preserve the ways of peace between Jews and non-Jews." + ] + ], + [ + [ + "Introduction\nOur mishnah defines the territorial boundaries of the land of Israel with regard to the status of the produce grown in the sabbatical year. As we shall see, the Mishnah divides the land into three parts.", + "[The land of Israel is divided into] three territories with regard to the sabbatical law.
[Any produce grown in land] that was occupied by those who came up from Babylon, namely from Eretz Israel as far as Chezib, may not be eaten, nor [may its soil] be cultivated. The laws of the sabbatical year apply fully to any land occupied by the Israelites when they returned from the exile in Babylon. The southern border is called “Eretz Israel” and would seem to include all of the southern part of Israel. Chezib is north of Acco (my favorite beach in Israel is there it’s now called Achziv). The produce grown in this area cannot be eaten, which means that it must be eaten with the “sanctity of sabbatical produce.” One cannot store it once it can no longer be found in the fields.", + "[Any produce grown in land] that was occupied by those who came up from Egypt, namely from Chezib to the river, and until Amonah, may be eaten, but [its soil] may not be cultivated. The laws of sheviit apply less fully to the land conquered by Joshua and those who came up from Egypt. This would include the land from Chezib to “the river.” Unfortunately, the mishnah does not answer what river it is talking about, and there are many different opinions as to the interpretation of this clause. According to Albeck, Amonah is the name of a mountain (see II Kings 5:12) which is opposite of Lebanon. There is a river that comes from the Amonah mountain and descends to Damascus. So “the river” and Amonah are actually the same place. The produce grown in this area may be eaten and it does not have the sanctity of sheviit produce. However, the land may not be cultivated. It is interesting that the Joshua’s conquering of this land did not bequeath permanent holiness to it. Once the Israelites were exiled, this land descended in holiness and since it was not reoccupied, it never recovered.", + "From the river till Amonah and inwards, [produce] may be eaten and [the soil] cultivated. This section is also somewhat difficult to explain because the word, “inwards” is not clear. Albeck explains that this refers to the land between Amonah and the sea. This would include Tyre and Sidon, which are today on the coast of Lebanon. This land was never conquered by the Israelites and therefore the laws of sheviit do not apply there at all, even though many Jews may have been living there during the mishnaic period." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nOur mishnah refers to territory called “Syria”(not to be confused with modern Syria). This is land that was conquered by King David but was not conquered by Joshua. For many halakhot it has a semi-status, being in some ways treated like the land of Israel, but in other ways treated differently.\nWe should note one other background law required to understand this mishnah. During the sabbatical year a farmer may not keep the produce that he grows in his field for himself. He is obligated to make it ownerless, such that anyone can come and take it. If he doesn’t make it ownerless then it is prohibited to work the field, as it is said in Leviticus 25:5, “You shall not reap the aftergrowth of your harvest or gather the grapes of your untrimmed vines.” Our mishnah, according to most commentators, refers to a person who has not made his field ownerless, and therefore, may not work the field.", + "In Syria, one may perform work on produce that has been detached, but not on produced attached [to the soil]. They may thresh, winnow, and tread [the grapes], or make [the grain] into sheaves, but they may not harvest [the crops], nor cut the grapes, nor harvest the olives. In Syria some types of work are permitted and some are prohibited. Any work done with produce that has already been detached from the ground may be performed. The mishnah explains that this refers to threshing or winnowing grain, treading on grapes or making sheaves. However, they may not harvest anything. Since Syria is not actually the land of Israel, harvesting is not prohibited biblically, and is only prohibited by decree of the rabbis. The Yerushalmi explains that the rabbis carved out a middle status for Syria. They did not allow one to harvest there, so that Jews wouldn’t abandon the land of Israel and go live in Syria. However, when it came to working with produce detached from the land, the rabbis were not so strict, thereby enabling people who couldn’t earn a living in Israel, to go to Syria for the year and earn some money there.", + "Rabbi Akiva said this principle: the kind of work that is permitted in Eretz Israel may also be done in Syria. Rabbi Akiva disagrees with the previous opinion and formulates a general rule that he applies to this situation. Anything that is permitted to do in Eretz Yisrael as long as it is done in an unusual manner, may be done in Syria in a usual manner (this is how Albeck understands Rabbi Akiva’s statement). For instance in Eretz Yisrael one cannot harvest grapes in a normal manner, but one can do so in an abnormal manner. Therefore, in Syria one can harvest even in a normal manner. Other commentators explain that Rabbi Akiva is formulating a general principle to explain the previous section. In Eretz Yisrael it is only forbidden derabanan (rabbinically) to work with detached produce, and therefore in Syria it is completely permitted." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah deals with onions that were harvested in the sixth year and then left stored in the ground until the seventh year. In the seventh year rain falls on them and they sprout new leaves. The question is: are these onions considered to be seventh year produce because their sprouts grew in the seventh year?", + "Onions on which rain fell and which had sprouted, if their leaves had turned black, they are forbidden; if they had become green they are permitted. If the leaves of the onions sprouted and turned black, which Albeck explains to mean that they turned dark green, then they are considered to be sabbatical year produce, and they must be treated as such. However, if they become green and wilted (again, according to Albeck) then the sprouts do not count as if they grew from the land, but rather as if they grew from the onions. Hence, they are not treated as sabbatical year produce and they are permitted.", + "Rabbi Hanina ben Antigonus says: if they can be plucked out by their leaves, they are forbidden. Rabbi Hanina says that the status of the onions depends on how strong the leaves are. If one can pull the onions out of the ground by the leaves, then the leaves are considered to have grown enough in the seventh year to prohibit the onions. But if one cannot pull the onions out by the leaves, then the leaves are insignificant and the onions are not prohibited.", + "In the year after the sabbatical year, the like of these are permitted. The same rules will apply in the opposite manner with regard to onions that were grown in the seventh year and rain fell on them in the eighth year. If one can pull them up by their leaves, then the leaves are treated as eight year produce, but if not they are treated as seventh year produce and are forbidden." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nOur mishnah discusses when one can begin to trust that the vegetables he buys in eighth year, the year that follows the sabbatical year are not sabbatical year produce and therefore forbidden but rather actually are from the eighth year.", + "When may one buy vegetables at the outgoing of the sabbatical year [without fear that they are sabbatical produce]?
When enough time has passed for similar [vegetables] to grow. Once enough time has passed in the new year for similar vegetables to ripen, one can trust that a vegetable that he comes across in the market is from the eighth year and not the seventh year.", + "Where produce ripens quickly, even that which is late in ripening is also permissible. Some vegetables grow quicker in some areas than in others. The mishnah is lenient and allows one who is in a place where the vegetables take longer to grow and have not yet ripened to buy a vegetable that may have come from a place where that vegetable has already ripened. In other words, since the vegetable might have come from that place, we assume that it did.", + "Rabbi used to allow the buying of vegetables immediately after the sabbatical year was over. There are two reasons that Rabbi [Judah Hanasi] may have been so lenient and allowed one to buy vegetables immediately. First of all, he may have held that vegetables ripen quickly. If so, then “immediately” must mean after a minimum of a few days. Alternatively, he may have permitted the vegetable under the assumption that it came from outside the land of Israel, and such produce is always permitted. If this is the correct interpretation then “immediately” can be taken literally." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThere are certain cases in which halakhah demands that certain types of produce be destroyed. Our mishnah teaches that such produce must be destroyed in the land of Israel and cannot be brought outside of the land.", + "One may not take oil [of terumah] that had to be burned, nor produce of the seventh year, from the land [of Israel] to other countries. There are two items mentioned here. The first is terumah oil that has become impure. Such oil must be burned and one can derive no benefit from it. The second is sabbatical year produce after the time when it must be destroyed (we shall learn more about this in the next chapter). It is forbidden to export either of these two things because they must be destroyed in the land of Israel. It would seem to me that there may also have been a suspicion that a person might take them out of the land of Israel and not destroy them at all.", + "Rabbi Shimon said: I have heard it expressly stated that they may be exported to Syria, but not to any other country outside the land. Rabbi Shimon says that he has heard a tradition whereby one can bring these things to Syria and destroy them there. Evidently in this matter Syria is treated as if it was part of the land of Israel. Compare this with mishnah two above." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah deals with bringing terumah from outside of the land of Israel into Israel.", + "They may not import terumah from outside the land of Israel into Israel. The rabbis forbade importing terumah lest this encourage priests to go outside of the land of Israel and bring terumah back with them. This prohibition was created in order to discourage people from moving out of the land. It seems that they were not concerned lest a kohen move outside of Israel permanently because the terumah he received there could not be brought back with him.", + "Rabbi Shimon said: I have heard it expressly stated that they may be bring from Syria, but not from any other country outside the land. As he did with regard to yesterday’s mishnah, Rabbi Shimon says that Syria is exceptional and that a kohen who goes to Syria to get terumah can bring it back with him. Assumedly, he was not concerned lest the kohen travel too much to Syria to get terumah, because Syria is almost a part of the land of Israel." + ] + ], + [ + [ + "Introduction\nThis chapter begins to deal with the extremely important question of what types of produce fall under the category of “sabbatical year produce” such that all of the rules apply to them.", + "They said an important general principle with regard to the sabbatical year: anything that is food for man or beast, or a species [of plants] used for dyeing, and cannot be left growing in the soil, the law of the sabbatical year is applied both to it and to its money substitute and the law of removal applies both to it and to its money substitute. There are two general rules in this section. First of all, the species of plant must be either food for humans, domesticated animals (beasts) or used in the dyeing process. The second rule is that it must be the type of plant that if left in the ground will rot. Sheviit does not fully apply to something that is either not used for any of these three purposes or can be left in the ground without rotting. In tomorrow’s mishnah we will learn more about the rules for produce to which the laws of sheviit do not apply. The main consequence to something being considered sabbatical year produce is that it must be destroyed once the same species cannot be found in the field. Up until this point one could store the species in one’s house, but once this point has passed one must take that type of produce out of the house and get rid of it. Another consequence of something having the laws of sheviit apply to it is that one can use it only for eating, drinking or anointing. We will learn more about this in the next chapter. The laws of sheviit will apply to the money that is derived from the sale of sheviit produce. Thus if one sells some sheviit wheat, the money is treated as if it was the wheat. It must be used up before wheat no longer grows outside in the field, and one could use the money only to purchase food, drink and oil for anointing.", + "Which are they? The leaves of the wild luf, the leaf of ceterach, endives, leeks, portulaca, and netz hahalav. This is a list of various leaves that people occasionally eat. Even though these leaves are not normal food (like wheat, barley, dates and figs) the laws of sheviit still apply to them because they are sometimes eaten by human beings. Albeck claims that he cannot identify “netz hahalav” (there is a street in Modiin named “netz hahalav”, but that doesn’t really help). When I googled it I came up with “Ornithogalum divergens.” You can google that yourself.", + "What is the food for cattle? Thorns and thistles. Again, these are not the only foods, or even the main foods, of domesticated animals such as cows, sheeps and goats. However, since they are eaten by these animals, the laws of sheviit do apply to them.", + "What is species of dyeing matter? Aftergrowths of woad and madder. This section lists plants used in the production of dyes.", + "The law of the seventh year applies both to them and to their money-substitutes and the law of removal applies both to them and to their money substitute. A repeat of what was stated above." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nIn yesterday’s mishnah we learned that the laws of sabbatical produce apply fully to something that is food for humans or beasts or dyeing material and if left in the ground will rot. Our mishnah discusses what the laws are with regard to plants that are food or dyes but can be left in the ground without rotting.\nImportant note: I have explained this mishnah according to the version found in good manuscripts of the Mishnah. The other version begins, “Anything that is not food for man.” In my opinion this version makes less sense is probably a mistake.", + "And they said yet another general principle: Anything that is food for man or beast, or is used for dyeing, but can be left in the soil, the law of the sabbatical year applies both to it and to its money substitute but the law of removal does not apply to it or to its money substitute. If a plant can be left in the ground, then even though it is food or dye, only some of the laws of sheviit apply to it and some do not. Specifically the plant itself must be treated in the same way that sabbatical year produce is treated. However, the laws of removing it from one’s house do not apply. This is simple to understand. If the plant can be left in the ground, then there would be no reason to remove it from one’s home because one removes produce from one’s home only once that species can no longer be found in the field.", + "Which are these? The root of wild luf, the root of ceterach, scolopendrium, the root of netz hahalav and buchreyah. As it did before, the mishnah now defines these categories. The plants listed here are edible roots and can be left in the ground without rotting.", + "What is the species of dyeing matter? Puah ( and reseda. These dyes are roots and can be left in the ground.", + "The law of the sabbatical year applies both to them and to their money substitute but the law of removal does not apply to them or to their money substitute. A summary of the rule in section four.", + "Rabbi Meir says: their money substitutes must be removed by Rosh Hashanah. Rabbi Meir says that although these plants themselves need not be removed from one’s home during the sabbatical year, their money-substitutes (things bought with the proceeds of their sale) must be removed by the time the sabbatical year is over. According to Rabbi Meir, a person might forget that he bought something with the proceeds from selling sabbatical year produce. If he leaves these money-substitutes in one’s home after the sabbatical year, he will forget that they are supposed to be treated with the sanctity of sabbatical year produce. Therefore, he must remove them from his home by the time the sabbatical year is over.", + "They said to him: since this law does not apply to the plants themselves, all the more so it does not apply to their money-substitute. The other rabbis respond that if the produce itself need not be removed from one’s house (because it always can exist in the field) then all the more so the money-substitutes, which have less sanctity, need not be removed." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nMost of this mishnah deals with the prohibition of selling sabbatical year produce. Sabbatical year produce is supposed to be left ownerless in the field so that anyone who wants to can come and collect. One should not engage in business with this produce. However, under certain circumstances it can be sold.", + "The peels and the blossom of the pomegranate, the nutshells, and fruit seeds the laws of sabbatical produce apply to them and to their money substitutes. Even though all of these parts of the fruits or nuts are not generally eaten, they are still considered to be part of the fruit and the laws of sabbatical produce still apply to them.", + "The dyer may use them for himself, but he may not dye with them for a wage, since one may not engage in business with seventh year produce, or with first-born animals, or with terumah, or with nevelah, or with trefah, or with reptiles or with creeping things. The mishnah uses the details in the previous section as an introduction to the subject of what one can do with sabbatical year produce. A dyer can use the peels of fruit (commonly used in the making of dye) to make dyes for his own personal use. However, he may not use them to make money. There are other items that cannot be used to engage in business, meaning a person cannot sell them to earn a wage, although he may be able to sell them occasionally, on an ad-hoc basis. First-born animals: given to a priest. The person to whom a first-born animal is born cannot first use it to make money and then later on give it to a priest. Terumah: this also must be given to a priest, and he cannot use it to engage in business. Nevelah an animal that died on its own. Terefah an animal killed not in a kosher manner. Reptiles and creepy-crawly thing: animals that are not kosher. With regard to all three of these things, the rabbis forbade one from engaging in business with them, lest an Israelite come to eat them.", + "One should not buy field-vegetables and sell them in the market. One should not buy vegetables that have grown on their own (the Mishnah calls these “field vegetable”) and sell them. The same holds true with regard to collecting vegetables that grow on their own. One may not collect them and then bring them to market in order to sell them.", + "But he may gather them and have his son sell them on his behalf. However, there is a rather large leniency in this halakhah. A person can gather produce from the field and then give it to his son to sell in the market, on his behalf. According to the rabbis, this doesn’t look like engaging in business, rather it still looks as if he gathered the produce for personal use.", + "If he gathered them for his own use, and some remains over, he may sell them. Finally, if he gathered for personal use but unintentionally gathered too much, he may sell the remainder in the market. As long as his intention was only to collect for personal use, this is not considered to be a case of “trading” in sabbatical year produce." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nIn yesterday’s mishnah we learned that it is prohibited to engage in the business of buying and selling first-born animals or prohibited animals. Our mishnah teaches that under certain circumstances, one may sell such animals.", + "If one buys a first-born animal for his son’s [wedding] feast, or for a festival, and then decides that he has no need for it, he may sell it. The first-born animal referred to in this mishnah is one which has a physical flaw. Such an animal may be eaten, even by non-priests. If a person buys such an animal in order to use it in a “mitzvah meal” such as his son’s wedding or a festival, and then he decides that he does not need it, he can sell it. Clearly this is not a case of a person intending to make a trade in first-born animals, but rather just avoiding a loss.", + "Trappers of wild animals, birds and fishes, who chanced upon unclean species, may sell them. If a non-kosher animal, bird or fish happens into a trapper’s trap, the trapper may sell it to a non-Jew since his intention was to catch kosher animals, birds or fish. He need not just let them go.", + "Rabbi Judah says: also a man who happened to chance one upon by accident may buy or sell, provided that he does not make this into his regular profession. But the sages prohibit. Rabbi Judah goes a step further. If a person happens to chance upon a non-kosher animal, bird or fish he can buy it and then sell it. This is clearly a much greater leniency than that found in the previous section. It seems that Rabbi Judah holds that as long as one doesn’t make trade in non-kosher things his regular profession, he can engage in an occasional trade. The other rabbis disagree with Rabbi Judah and prohibit this. Buying the non-kosher animal when the intention is going to be to sell it is too close to engaging in business with such animals and is therefore prohibited." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah deals with the young branches of various trees. These soft branches were eaten and therefore we need to know whether the laws of sheviit apply to them.", + "The lulavim of hawthorn trees and carobs the laws of sheviit apply to them and to their money substitutes, the law of removal applies to them and to their money substitutes. The lulavim, that is the young, soft branches of hawthorn and carob trees, are edible and will rot if left on the tree. Therefore the laws of sheviit fully apply to them.", + "The lulavim of the terebinth, the pistachio tree and the white thorn, the laws of sheviit apply to them and to their money substitutes, but the law of removal does not apply to them and to their money substitutes. The lulavim of these trees, while edible, can remain on the tree indefinitely. As we learned in mishnah two above, if something can remain attached to the ground without rotting, then the laws of removing that produce from one’s home do not apply. One could therefore cut down such lulavim and preserve them in one’s home for as long as he wants.", + "But as for the leaves the law of removal applies, since they fall from their stem. Although the laws of removal do not apply to the lulavim because they can remain on the tree, the laws do apply to the leaves because they be left on the tree without rotting." + ], + [ + "The rose, henna, balsam, the lotus tree the laws of sheviit apply to them and to their money substitutes. According to the first opinion in the mishnah, since these plants are used for perfumes, the laws of sheviit apply to them. Perfume is close enough to food and dyes that it is included in the laws of sheviit. With regard to the laws of removal, they will apply to any of them, such as the rose, that will rot if left in the ground.", + "Rabbi Shimon says: sheviit does not apply to the balsam, since it is not a fruit. Sheviit does not apply to the balsam, according to Rabbi Shimon, because the balsam is not a fruit but rather wood and the laws of sheviit do not apply to things considered “wood.”" + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah deals with the question of how the laws of removal with regard to mixtures where one of the things is sabbatical year produce and one of the things is not.", + "If a new rose has been preserved in old oil, the rose may be taken out. A new rose is one that grew during the sabbatical year whereas the old oil is from olives that were harvested prior to the seventh year. The rose may be taken out of the oil and removed from one’s house at the time when roses must be removed (when they are no longer found in the field) and the oil may still be used afterwards. This is because, according to the mishnah, the rose does not impart taste to the oil.", + "But if an old rose was preserved in new oil, it is subject to the law of removal. However, if it is an old rose from the seventh year, put into new oil from the eighth year, the aged rose (think of potpourri) will impart its taste and both the rose and the oil are subject to the laws of removal.", + "New carobs preserved in old wine, or old carobs in new wine, are subject to the law of removal. When it comes to carobs in wine, in both cases (new sheviit carobs in sixth year wine or old sheviit carobs in eighth year wine) both the carobs and the wine are subject to the laws of removal. Unlike new roses in oil, new carobs do impart taste to the wine and therefore they too are subject to the laws of removal.", + "This is the general principle: Any thing that imparts taste, he must remove it if it is one kind mixed with a different kind. But if it is mixed with the identical kind, then [the whole is subject to removal] even if only the smallest quantity exists. The mishnah now forms a somewhat complex general rule: First of all, as we learned before, if the prohibited item does not impart taste then the non-prohibited item is not rendered forbidden. Thus since the new rose does not impart its taste to the oil, it can be removed and the oil is not subject to the laws of removal. However, this is only true of the mixture is of two different substances, such as a rose and oil. If it is a case of one kind mixed in with a similar kind, then the whole mixture is prohibited, even if the forbidden substance is only of the smallest quantity. So if even a tiny bit of sabbatical year oil became mixed in with non-sabbatical year oil, all of the oil must be treated as if it were sabbatical year oil.", + "Sabbatical year produce renders similar kinds prohibited even [if it exists] in the smallest quantity. But if of different species only when it imparts taste. The above rule is now explicated with regard to sabbatical year produce. Sabbatical year produce mixed in with the same species prohibits in the smallest amount. but if it is of different species, then only if it imparts taste. Thus if sabbatical year carobs are mixed in with wine, the whole mixture must be treated as sabbatical year produce." + ] + ], + [ + [ + "Introduction\nOur mishnah teaches that produce that is usually used for food cannot be used, during the sabbatical year, for medicinal purposes. This is because one is usually supposed to use sabbatical year produce for its typical purpose if it is food it should be eaten, if it is drink it should be drunk and if it is used for dyeing it should be used in dyeing.", + "They said an important general principle with regard to the sabbatical year: The phrase “this is an important general principle” appears only three times in the entire Mishnah, and it appears twice in Sheviit. Its other appearance is in the seventh chapter of Shabbat. It seems that this whole mishnah is the “general principle” and not just section one.", + "Anything that is usually designated as food for humans, one may not make a poultice of it for a person. And there is no need to say [that he may not make a poultice of it] for a beast. Produce that is normally used as human food cannot be used as a poultice at all, neither for humans nor for an animal.", + "Anything that is not usually designated as for food for humans may be used as a poultice for a person, but not for cattle. However, if it is normally animal feed, it can be used as a poultice for humans, but not for animals. Since it is fit for animal feed it can’t be used as a poultice for them but since it is not fit for human consumption a person could use it as a poultice.", + "And anything not usually designated either for humans or for animals, but now he thought to use it as food for either a person or an animal, we impose upon it the stringent laws applying both to people and beasts. If something was not normally used for food for humans or for animals, but in a certain circumstance a person decided to use it for either purpose, it is dealt with stringently. It can’t be used for medicinal purposes for a human being, as we learned in section one. The “stringent law” which applies to beasts is explained in the Yerushalmi as being a prohibition of boiling it till it is completely soft. According to the Yerushalmi it is prohibited to boil till completely soft sabbatical produce which is normally used for animal food.", + "If he thought to use it as wood [for a fire], behold it is treated as wood [and the laws of sheviit do not apply]; for example, savory, hyssop, or thyme. The laws of sheviit do not apply to things that are used to light a fire. So if with regard to one of these things he decided to use it to make a fire, then the laws of sabbatical year produce do not apply at all. The mishnah gives an example of some plants that are multi-purpose and therefore how they can be used will depend on what he intends to use them for." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nOur mishnah teaches that sabbatical year produce can only be used for its usual purpose. This seems to be a prohibition against “over-intervention” or manufacture of sabbatical year produce. While wheat can be made into bread, olives into oil and grapes into wine, a human being cannot convert these products into a material which is not what they seem, at least to us, to have been intended to become. This is because the produce that grows on its own during sheviit belongs to God, and not to us. While we may use it, we may not overly change it.", + "Sabbatical year produce may be used for food, drink and for anointing. Although Leviticus 25:6 states, “But you may eat whatever the land during its sabbath will produce” the rabbis do not take this to mean that you can only eat sabbatical produce. It can also be used as drink or as an ointment.", + "That which is usually eaten can be used for food only; that which is usually used for anointing can be used only for anointing, and that which is usually used for drinking can be used for drink only. One may not anoint with wine and vinegar, but he may anoint with oil. However, one cannot change something normally used for food and use it for something else, and the same with regard to drinking and anointing. The example is wine and vinegar which cannot be used for anointing, because they are not normally used for such a purpose. Note that even though oil is also used for cooking and eating, since anointing is also a normal usage, it can also be used as such.", + "So too with terumah and second tithe. Terumah and second tithe are called “kadosh (holy)” by the Torah, and they too can therefore only be used for eating, drinking and anointing.", + "Greater leniency was applied to [oil of] the seventh year, since it can be used for lamp-kindling. While terumah and second tithe cannot be used for lighting a lamp, sheviit oil can. Perhaps this section signifies that there is a difference between sheviit on the one hand and terumah and second tithe. Sheviit’s laws are governed by the principle that one should not overly intervene in their processing. Therefore, if oil is normally used for lighting, sheviit oil can also be used for lighting. Terumah and second tithe are “holy” and therefore they cannot be used for lighting, because that is not considered a “holy” purpose." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nToday’s mishnah deals with selling sheviit produce. Above, in 7:3 we learned that one cannot engage in trade with sheviit produce. However, if one gathers produce from a field in order to use it at home and then there is some left over, he may sell it. Our mishnah teaches that even though under such circumstances he is allowed to sell the produce, he may not sell it in its normal manner.", + "Produce of the seventh year may not be sold by measure, weight or number. When one comes to sell seventh year produce, he must not sell it in the normal manner, either by measure, weight or number, because this makes it look like he is engaging in trade.", + "Neither may figs [be sold] by number, nor vegetables by weight. Albeck explains that they used to sell figs in bunches, and in each bunch there were 100 figs. It would obviously be forbidden to sell them this way. However, even if he changes the normal way of selling figs and sells them by number, say 50 figs, it is still prohibited. This might be akin to selling eggs by number instead of by the usual dozen. Similarly, vegetables were normally sold by the bunch. On sheviit, it is prohibited to sell them by weight, because this looks too much like engaging in trade.", + "Bet Shammai says: they may not be sold, even in bundles. Bet Shammai adds that it is even forbidden to sell vegetables by bundles, even though this is not “by measure, weight or number,” which were prohibited in section one. To Bet Shammai, nothing can be sold in its normal manner. Rather one would have to sell them loose, roughly estimating how many are being sold.", + "But Bet Hillel says: that which is usually tied in bundles [to bring] to the house may even be tied into bundles for the market, such as leeks and netz hahalav. To Bet Hillel, if there is a vegetable that one would normally make into bundles just to bring home, then he may make it into bundles and bring it to the store. This is permitted because it doesn’t necessarily look like he is bringing them to the market to engage in trade. The two examples are leeks and “netz hahalav” both mentioned above in 7:1." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nOne who sells seventh year produce, the money that he receives from the sale has the same status as does the produce. That money has to be used to buy more produce for eating, drinking or anointing, the same things for which seventh year produce itself must be used.\nThe first half of the mishnah teaches what happens when a person pays a worker to gather vegetables for him in the seventh year. Is this like buying sabbatical year produce?\nThe second half of the mishnah teaches that while it is permitted to exchange sabbatical year produce for non-sabbatical year produce, it is forbidden to use sheviit produce to pay off debts.", + "If one says to a worker: “Take this issar and gather vegetables for me today,” his payment is permitted. In this case the employer paid the worker an issar (a coin) for his labor and not for the vegetables. Since the money was not exchanged directly for the vegetables, it is “permitted” meaning that it need not be treated as if it was seventh year produce.", + "[But if he said:] “In return for this [issar], gather vegetables for me today,” then his payment is forbidden. However, if he said that the issar was exchanged more directly for the vegetables, then the money is “forbidden” meaning that it must be treated as seventh year produce. It all depends on how he phrases the contract.", + "If one bought a loaf from a baker worth a pondion [and said:] “When I have gathered vegetables from the field, I will bring them to you,” this is permitted. The second section deals with a person who wishes to buy a loaf of bread (made from non-sabbatical year produce) worth a pondion (a small coin) from a baker and he wishes to pay his debt with vegetables that he collects from the field. In the first case this is permitted, because one is allowed to exchange sabbatical year produce for food that is made from non-sabbatical produce. The bread now must be treated as if it too was sabbatical year produce, as we will learn in mishnah seven.", + "If he bought it from him without any explanation, he may not pay him his debt with the value of seventh year produce, for no debt can be paid with the value of seventh year produce. If he bought the loaf of bread on credit without specifying how he was going to pay for it, he may not later pay his debt off with the sabbatical year produce, because one cannot pay a debt with sabbatical year produce. To summarize: one can trade sabbatical year produce for other foodstuffs as long as this is a trade. But when it becomes paying off an already existent debt, it is prohibited." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nOur mishnah teaches that one generally is not allowed to pay workers with money that was gained from selling sheviit produce. However, under certain circumstances this is permitted.", + "They may not pay [sheviit proceeds to] a well-digger, an attendant at a public bath, a barber, or a sailor. This section teaches that one cannot use sheviit money, money that was used to buy sheviit produce, to pay a worker’s wages even if those wages will go to a person who is providing a service that the receiver bodily enjoys. Sheviit money can be used to buy food and drink. We might have thought that since food and drink are things that the body enjoys, one could use sheviit money to buy other things that the body enjoys, such as a hair cut, water to wash, a bath or even a trip on a boat. The mishnah teaches that sheviit money cannot be used even for these purposes.", + "But he may give them to well-digger so that the well-digger will provide him with drink. However, if the well-digger is going to provide water for drinking and not just for washing, then one may pay him with sheviit money. This is akin to buying water directly with sheviit money which is, as we have stated, permitted.", + "To all of them he may give it as a gift. One can give sheviit money to his employees as a gift, a bonus over their regular payment, even though this looks as if he is paying them with sheviit money." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nOne is not allowed to process sheviit produce in the normal way that it is processed. This is derived midrashically from Leviticus 25:5 which states, “The grapes of your vine you shall not harvest.” The rabbis remark that he may not harvest them in the normal way, but he may harvest them in an unusual manner. Our mishnah extends this prohibition (and permission) beyond the time of harvesting, to the time of processing and preserving that which has been harvested. We should note by now that this type of thought is common in rabbinic literature things done in a different manner are not prohibited, or sometimes not as prohibited, as they would be if they were done in the normal fashion.", + "Sabbatical figs may not be cut in the muktzeh, but he may cut them in an open place. The muktzeh was, according to Albeck, the place where they would normally cut figs. They would make cuts in the figs and then either fold them up in order to dry them out or make fig cakes out of them. In either case this was prohibited because this was the normal way of processing figs. However, one could cut them up in an “open place (hurvah)” which also might be translated as “a desolate place.” This is permitted since it would have been unusual to cut up figs there.", + "Grapes may not be trodden in the wine-press, but they may be trodden in a kneading-trough. The mishnah continues to state similar laws with regards to grapes and olives. Grapes cannot be trodden in a regular wine-press, but if one puts them in a kneading-trough, it is permitted.", + "Olives may not be prepared in an olive-press or in a small olive-press, but he may crush them and bring them into a small olive-press in the field. Olives cannot be prepared in the regular, large olive press and not even in a smaller version of this olive press. However, one may crush the grapes and then put them into a smaller olive press (called a “bodedah”) which is carved out of stones and can be found in the fields.", + "Rabbi Shimon says: they may even be crushed in the [larger] olive-press, and then he brings them into the smaller press. Rabbi Shimon is slightly more lenient. He can begin the process of crushing the grapes in the larger olive press (the “bet habad”) and then complete the process in the bodedah." + ], + [ + "One may not cook sheviit vegetables in oil of terumah lest they become invalidated. But Rabbi Shimon permits it. There are two explanations for why this is prohibited and what it is exactly that might be invalidated. The first explanation is that the terumah might become invalidated because when one has to remove the sheviit produce (when it can no longer be found in the field) one will also have to get rid of the terumah oil it is cooked in. This is a problem because it is forbidden to destroy pure terumah. The second explanation is that there is a fear that the sheviit vegetables will become invalidated. If the terumah oil becomes impure one will have to burn the vegetables along with the oil. This is a problem because it is forbidden to destroy sheviit produce (before it must be removed). Rabbi Shimon holds that there is no prohibition against invalidating holy food items such as sheviit and terumah. Hence he permits.", + "The last thing exchanged is always subject to the sabbatical law, and the produce itself remains forbidden. This section refers to one who buys food with sheviit money. As we have stated the sheviit money has the status of sheviit. If one buys meat, for instance, with the money, the meat now has the status of sheviit, and the money is completely unsanctified. If one then sells the meat for fish, the fish has the status of sheviit and the meat loses this status. This will continue no matter how many things are bought and sold. The last thing bought always has the status of sheviit. Along with this, the produce itself always retains the status of sheviit buying it does not cause it to be “redeemed” as it does with second tithe." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nOur mishnah contains a list of things that one may not purchase or do with sheviit money (money used to buy sheviit produce). It also explains what one must do if one did buy such things with sheviit money.", + "One might not buy slaves, land, or an unclean beast with sheviit money. Since these are not food items, it is forbidden to buy them with money that one received from the proceeds of selling sheviit produce.", + "If he did buy he must [buy and] eat [food] for their equivalent. There is however a remedy for having done so. One should buy an amount of produce equivalent to the amount one paid for the land, slaves or unclean beast. Then one must eat this food as if it had the sanctity of sheviit.", + "One may not bring the bird-offerings of a zav or a zavah, or of a woman after childbirth with sheviit money. A zav or a zavah is a man or woman who has had an abnormal genital discharge. After a period of uncleanness the person must bring two birds as sacrifices (Leviticus 15:14, 29). The same sacrifices are brought by a woman after she gives birth (Lev. 12:8). One cannot purchase these sacrifices with sheviit money. Albeck explains that one cannot bring any sacrifices with sheviit money. It is not entirely clear why, then, the mishnah mentions these sacrifices.", + "If he did bring he must [buy and] eat [food] for their equivalent. same as section two.", + "One may not anoint vessels with oil of seventh year produce. Sheviit oil may be used to anoint one’s body, but not one’s vessels.", + "If he did annoint he must [buy and] eat [food] for their equivalent. same as section two." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nIn today’s mishnah the rabbis debate what should be done with a hide that has been oiled with seventh year oil.", + "A hide which they oiled with seventh year oil: Rabbi Eliezer says: it must be burnt; But the sages say: he must [buy and] eat [food] for its equivalent. Albeck explains that Rabbi Eliezer was especially stringent upon the person who put sabbatical year oil on the hide because he considered this to be a disgraceful use of sheviit produce. The rabbis said that this was no different than the cases in yesterday’s mishnah, where a person used sabbatical year produce in an improper way. Just as in those cases he could remedy the situation by eating an equivalent amount of non-sabbatical year produce as if it was sabbatical year produce, so too he could act over here.", + "They said in front of Rabbi Akiba: Rabbi Eliezer used to say, A hide which they smeared with seventh year oil must be burnt. He replied: Silence! I won’t tell you what Rabbi Eliezer actually said in this connection. In this fascinating story, some rabbis tell Rabbi Akiva what Rabbi Eliezer had said, or at least what they had thought he had said, in regard to this issue. Their tradition matches that reported in section one. Rabbi Akiva angrily responded that he would not reveal to them what Rabbi Eliezer had actually said. It is unclear why Rabbi Akiva responded in such a manner, or what it is that Rabbi Eliezer seems to have said. In the Talmud two sages argue whether Rabbi Eliezer was actually more stringent or less stringent. What I think is more interesting is that Rabbi Akiva for some reason feared revealing Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion. Rabbi Eliezer is often a figure whom the other rabbis wanted to push away from being the accepted halakhah. Perhaps Rabbi Akiva fears that if he reveals his true opinion, people may be tempted to follow it. In order to keep people away from Rabbi Eliezer he censors him. However, we should note that the editors of the Mishnah record this censorship instead of erasing it from any historical memory." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nIn this mishnah we hear of another instance in which some rabbis relate to Rabbi Akiva what Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Akiva silences them.", + "They also said in front of him: Rabbi Eliezer use to say: “Whoever eats bread [baked] by Samaritans is like one who eats the flesh of a pig.” He replied: Silence! I won’t tell you what Rabbi Eliezer actually said in this connection. Albeck explains that Rabbi Eliezer made such a strong statement against a person who eats Samaritan bread because he wished to warn Jews to keep away from the Samaritans. The Samaritans were a group whose holy city, Shechem, was found in the Shomron (Samaria). In some ways they would have acted like other Jews, but in many other ways they would have been different. As a group somewhat similar to the other Jews it is understandable why Rabbi Eliezer might have wished to keep them away. Again, we don’t know why Rabbi Akiva silences the other rabbis." + ], + [ + "A bath heated with straw or stubble of the seventh year, it is permitted to wash in it. It is forbidden to burn straw and stubble that grow in the seventh year because they could be used for animal food. However, if he did use them to heat up a bath, the bathwater may be used. Other commentators explain that it is completely permitted to use straw and stubble to heat up a bath because this is something for human “consumption” and we have learned before that something that is not used as food for a human can be used to make a salve. ", + "But if he is an important man, he should not wash in it. If he is an important man, then he should act more stringently and not use the straw and stubble to heat up a bath, because people might learn from his actions that they can use all sabbatical produce for any use. Another explanation is that if he is an important, honorable man, they might burn for him sheviit products that one is not allowed to burn, such as edible food items that might smell good. " + ] + ], + [ + [ + "Introduction\nOur mishnah teaches that there are certain types of produce that grow in the field which are not subject to the laws of sheviit. There are two such categories in our mishnah. The first are wild plants that people do not cultivate and store. The assumption automatically made with regard to these plants is that they are ownerless.\nThe second category is plants that grow without being cultivated. If something grows on its own, it should be permitted to eat it on sheviit. However, we shall see that some rabbis were stricter on this matter.", + "Rue, goosefoot, purslane, hill coriander, celery, and meadow-berries, are exempt from tithes. Plants that are ownerless such as those in this section need not be tithed. Since these things grow wildly and people don’t gather them in order to store them, they are not subject to tithes.", + "And they may be purchased from anyone during the sabbatical year, since such produce is not usually stored. Generally speaking it is prohibited to purchase sheviit produce from an “am haaretz” a person who is not scrupulous in observance of these laws. The reason for this prohibition is that the sanctity of the sheviit produce is transferred to the money when one uses it to buy the produce. Henceforth, that money can only be used to buy food, drink or oil for anointing. Since we can assume that the am haaretz will not observe these laws, one should not buy sheviit produce from an am haaretz. However, since these things grew on their own without being cultivated the laws of sheviit do not apply and one may buy them from anyone, even an am haaretz.", + "Rabbi Judah says: aftergrowths of mustard are permitted, since transgressors are not suspected concerning them. The second half of the mishnah deals with things that grew on their own on Sheviit. The problem with such produce is that it is impossible to tell whether something grew on its own on sheviit or was planted and cultivated on sheviit. Rabbi Judah holds that mustard is permitted, because it is unlikely that someone had planted this mustard and grew it intentionally on the sabbatical year.", + "Rabbi Shimon says: all aftergrowths are permitted, with the exception of the aftergrowths of cabbage, since such cannot be placed within the category of field-vegetables. Rabbi Shimon is even more lenient and holds that it is permitted to purchase all vegetable aftergrowths except for cabbage which is clearly not an aftergrowth because it grows only in a garden and only if it is specifically planted.", + "But the sages say: all aftergrowths are forbidden. The other rabbis hold that it is forbidden to eat any aftergrowths because they may have come from produce planted on sheviit. I should note that I have explained the mishnah according to Albeck. Others explain it differently." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nSheviit produce may be stored in one’s house as long as that same type of produce can be found in the field. The question is where must this produce be found in the field? Anywhere in the world? In the same town? Same country? Our mishnah divides the land of Israel into three territories and then three sub-territories such that if a certain produce can be found in the field in that territory it may be stored in one’s house in that territory.", + "There are three territories in respect to the law of removal [of sheviit produce]: [these are]: Judea, Transjordan, and Galilee, and there are three territories in each one. If a certain type of produce can be found in the field in Judea, then that produce can be stored in one’s home in Judea, but not in the Galilee or Transjordan, if that produce is no longer found in the field there. Once that type of produce is no longer in a certain region, everyone from that region must remove that produce from their homes.", + "Upper Galilee, lower Galilee, and the valley. From Kefar Hananiah upwards, the region where sycamores do not grow, is Upper Galilee. From Kefar Hananiah downwards, where the sycamores do grow, is Lower Galilee. The borders of Tiberias are the valley. Each land is subdivided into three other lands, which the Mishnah now proceeds to list. This section divides the Galilee into three sections, which by the way are still used as reference points to this day.", + "Those of Judea are: the mountain region, the plains [of the south], and the valley. This section divides the region of Judea into three. The mountain region is also called, “The King’s Mountain.” The valley goes from Ein Gedi in the south to Jericho in the north.", + "The plains of Lod are like the plains of the south, and its mountain region is like the king's hill-country. The plains of Lod are considered to be part of the plains of the south, even though they are geographically somewhat separate.", + "From Bet Horon to the sea is considered as one land. From Bet Horon, which is in the northwestern side of Judea (near Modiin where I live) to the sea is one region for matters of sheviit. It is considered part of Judea. The mishnah does not explain how the Transjordan is divided, although this is explained elsewhere." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah is a continuation of yesterday’s mishnah, which dealt with the division of the land of Israel into three territories.", + "Why did they speak of three territories? So that they may eat in each country until the last of the seventh year produce in that country is ended. This is the same explanation that we provided in the introduction to yesterday’s mishnah. The reason that they divided the land of Israel into three territories was to allow one to eat produce as long as that produce was found somewhere else in that specific sub-territory, for instance, the Lower Galilee.", + "Rabbi Shimon says: they have spoken of three countries only in the case of Judea, but all other territories are to be regarded as King’s mountain (Har. Rabbi Shimon disagrees with the entire meaning of the division of the land into three territories. The only land divided into three territories is Judea, but the rest of the land of Israel follows the King’s Mountain, the mountainous region in Judea. In other words, people in the Galilee and in Transjordan can eat a certain produce as long as that produce is found in the region of the King’s Mountain.", + "It is unclear whether this section is Rabbi Shimon’s opinion, or that of the anonymous author of section one. In either case, someone holds that when it comes to olives and dates, as long as they can be found on the trees anywhere in the land of Israel, one can store them in one’s home. In other words, there is no division of the land of Israel when it comes to olives and dates." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nOur mishnah defines what type of produce must be found in the field such that that type of produce may continue to be stored and eaten in one’s home.", + "One may eat by virtue of similar produce regarded as ownerless [still found in the fields], but not when it was stored [and declared ownerless]. This is an important clarification. All produce that grows in the field on Sheviit is considered ownerless anyone may come and pick it. One can store that produce and eat it at home as long as ownerless produce of the same kind is found in the field. Once the ownerless produce in the field is gone, one can no longer eat it at home. However, if someone stored that produce and then made it ownerless later so that anyone (including animals) could come and eat it, this doesn’t count as “found in the field.” This will not allow one to eat such produce at home.", + "Rabbi Yose permits even when it was stored [and then declared ownerless]. Rabbi Yose allows one to continue to eat produce even if the only other type of produce of this nature that is “found in the field” is something that a person once stored and only then made ownerless so that others or animals could come and eat it.", + "One may continue to eat by virtue of the poor grains [that grow between the grass], or by virtue of the trees that yield bi-annually, but one must not eat by virtue of winter-grapes. The produce that is found in the field can be a low quality version of the same kind that is stored in one’s house. So if there are poor grains that grow among the grasses in the field, then one can continue to eat similar type of grains, but of higher quality, in one’s home. The same is true of a tree that produces two yields, one in the spring and one in the summer. If the summer yield is still in the tree then one can continue to eat that which is stored at home. However, when it comes to grapes, “winter-grapes” do not count. Grapes in Israel are harvested in the fall and once the fall-grapes are no longer on the vines, one cannot store the grapes (or their by-products) at home.", + "Rabbi Judah permits provided they began to ripen before the summer [of the seventh year] had ended. Rabbi Judah says that these winter-grapes do count if they started to ripen before summer was over. In such a case they are considered close enough to fall-grapes that one can eat other stored fall-grapes (and their by-products) when these winter-grapes are found in the field." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nMost of our mishnah deals with a case where someone preserved three different types of vegetable in one jar does he eat these vegetables until the first of them can no longer be found in the field, the last or must he eat each individual vegetable up until the time that vegetable is no longer found in the field.", + "One who preserved three kinds of vegetables in one jar: Rabbi Eliezer says they may be eaten only so long as the first still remains [in the field]. But Rabbi Joshua says: even so long as the last remains. Rabban Gamaliel says: when the like kind is no longer to be found in the field, the same kind in the jar must be removed, [and the halachah agrees with him.] There are three different opinions as to what to do in such a case. Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion is that he can eat all of the vegetables until one of them is no longer found in the field. This is the most stringent opinion. Rabbi Joshua holds that as long as one of them remains he may eat all three of them. This is the most lenient. Rabban Gamaliel’s opinion is somewhat of a compromise. Each vegetable can be eaten as long as that vegetable is found in the field. There is an additional line to the mishnah that notes that the halakhah is in accordance with Rabban Gamaliel. However, these words are missing from better manuscripts of the mishnah.", + "Rabbi Shimon says: all vegetables are regarded as one [kind] in respect of the law of removal. Rabbi Shimon is even more lenient than Rabbi Joshua. He says that all vegetables may be eaten as long as any vegetables are found in the field. In other words, “vegetable” is a species; so as long as vegetables are in the field, vegetables may be stored and eaten at home.", + "Purslane may be eaten until there is no more wild purslane in the valley of Bet Netopha. Purslane can be eaten as long as wild purslane is found in the valley of Bet Netopha in the lower Galilee. Evidently, this is the last place in the season where one could find purslane in the land of Israel." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah deals with how long one may continue to eat certain types of produce that can either be gathered while still moist or when already dry.", + "If one gathered moist herbs, he may eat them until the sweet [herbs in the field] have dried up. After the sweet herbs are no longer found in the field, he must remove the moist herbs that he has gathered into his house. This is Albeck’s explanation of the term “sweet”. Other commentators explain that the word “sweet” refers to the ground water which “sweetens” the herbs growing in the field. Once this water has dried up, he may no longer keep the moist herbs at home, because they can no longer be found moist in the field.", + "And if he gathered dry [herbs], [he may eat them] until the second rainfall. However, if he gathered the herbs while they were dry he may keep them in his home until the second rain of the eighth year, because it is only at this late stage that the dry herbs in the field from the seventh year will no longer be fit for animal consumption. Again, as we have learned, if there is such a type of plant in the field that an animal can eat, then a person can eat it in his home. There are three different opinions as to when the second rainfall is the 7, the 17th or the 23rd of Heshvan, the second month of the Jewish year.", + "Leaves of reeds and of leaves of the vine [may be eaten] until they fall from the stems. If he is eating leaves of reeds or vines he can eat them as long as they are still found moist on the stems of the reeds or vines. If they are so dry that when one touches them they fall from the stem, then he must remove them from his house.", + "But if he gathered them dry, they may be eaten until the second rainfall. However, if he is eating them when they are already dry then he can continue to do so until the second rainfall of the eighth year.", + "Rabbi Akiba says: in all these cases, [they may be eaten] until the second rainfall. Rabbi Akiva disagrees with the halakhot in sections one and three and holds that even when it comes to moist herbs or leaves, he can continue to eat them and store them until the second rainfall." + ], + [ + "Similarly, if one rents a house to someone “until the rains,” he means until the second rainfall.
Or if one had vowed not to derive any benefit from his friend “until the rains” [he is prohibited] until the second rainfall.
Until when may the poor enter the orchards? Until the second rainfall.
And when may one begin to enjoy or burn the straw and stubble of sabbatical produce? After the second rainfall.
This mishnah deals with various other halakhot that have to do with “the second rainfall.”
Sections one and two: The meaning of “until the rains” is established by our mishnah as being until the second rainfall.
Section three: In non-sabbatical years the poor can enter the orchards to collect various types of produce that are given to the poor (forgotten foods, corners of the fields, dropped food all of this was discussed at length in Peah). They can enter the orchard after the second rains have fallen.
Section four: Straw and stubble that are animal food cannot be burned during the sabbatical year. However, once the second rainfall has come and ruined the straw and stubble which is still found in the field, one can burn that which remains in his home and even derive benefit from such burning." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nOur mishnah deals with what one does with sabbatical year produce at the time of removal.", + "If one had sabbatical produce [at home] and the time of removal had come, he may give out food for three meals to every one. The first thing that one may do with the sabbatical produce when it is time to remove it from one’s home is to give enough of it for three meals to any person he knows. Anything he can’t give away to people that he knows he must take out of his house and publicly declare, “My fellow Jews, anyone who needs to take should come and take.”", + "Rabbi Judah says: the poor may eat from it even after the removal, but not the rich. According to Rabbi Judah, only poor people may come and take from this food. This is derived from Exodus 23:11, “Let the needy among your people eat of it.” Some interpret this to mean that the owner of the field who produced this food may not reclaim it for himself but all others may.", + "But Rabbi Yose says: both the poor and the rich may eat after the removal. Rabbi Yose holds that not only the poor but also the rich may eat of this produce after the removal. According to this reading of Rabbi Yose’s words, the removal is somewhat of a formality, because after he removes it from his home and makes the declaration he may go back and reclaim it. The Rambam seems to have a different reading altogether. He holds that neither the poor nor the rich may eat of it. According to the Rambam removal means giving three meals worth of the food to any relatives, friends or acquaintances and then actually destroying whatever is left over." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah deals with a person who has inherited or received as a gift seventh year produce after the time when that produce should have been removed.", + "If one had inherited seventh year produce or had received them as a gift: Rabbi Eliezer says: they must be given to anyone who eats them. But the sages say: the sinner must not benefit, rather it should be sold to anyone who eats it, and its price divided among everyone. According to Rabbi Eliezer he should give the seventh year produce away to those who will eat it, even though it is forbidden for them to do so. He shouldn’t sell it to them because then the sanctity of the produce would be transferred to the proceeds. The other sages say that the problem with just giving it to such people is that they benefit by getting free produce. They are sinners because they eat sabbatical year produce why should they benefit from their sins? Therefore, he should sell it to them and then divide the money among the poor. I should note that I have explained this mishnah according to Albeck there are several other explanations.", + "If one eats dough of seventh year [produce] before the hallah was taken from it, he has incurred thereby the death penalty [at the hands of heaven]. The final section of this chapter teaches that one must separate “hallah” from dough made of seventh year produce. “Hallah” is separated from dough and given to the priest and any non-priest who eats from it is liable for death at the hands of heaven. Although tithes do not need to be taken from seventh year produce, hallah does. Therefore if one eats dough of sabbatical year produce before the hallah is removed, he is punished in the same way he would be if he had eaten dough before the hallah was removed in any other year." + ] + ], + [ + [ + "Introduction\nThe final chapter of Sheviit is concerned with the remission of loans.\nDeuteronomy 15:2-3 states, “Every seventh year you shall practice remission of debts. This shall be the nature of the remission: every creditor shall remit the due that he claims from his fellow; he shall not dun his fellow or kinsman, for the remission proclaimed is of the LORD. You may dun the foreigner; but you must remit whatever is due you from your kinsmen.”\nOur chapter discusses what types of loans are remitted, when they are remitted and other technical aspects of the remission of loans at the end of the seventh year. Most importantly, mishnah three will discuss the prozbul, a document instituted by Hillel the Elder which prevents loans from being cancelled. We will discuss the prozbul when we get to that mishnah.", + "The sabbatical year cancels a debt written in a document or one not written in a document. The seventh year cancels all “loans” whether those loans were secured with a document or not. This is derived from the words, “every creditor shall remit the due that he claims from his fellow.”", + "A debt to a shop is not cancelled, but if it had been converted into the form of a loan, then it is cancelled. Rabbi Judah says: the former debt is always cancelled. If a person opens an account with his store, that debt is not remitted because it is not considered a loan. The rabbis look at this as if every day is the time when he should pay back the debt, and hence it is not a loan. However, if the storekeeper turns it into an official loan, for instance if he says something like, “You have until such and such a time to pay me back the money you owe me” then the debt is remitted in the seventh year. Rabbi Judah has a more nuanced view of when a debt to a store becomes a “loan.” The first time someone buys something from a shop without paying the debt is not a loan. However, the second time he does so, the prior debt turns automatically into a loan. Since it is a loan, the seventh year will cancel the debt. The same will happen every time he subsequently buys without paying each time the former debt turns into a loan and is therefore affected by the sabbatical year.", + "A wage-debt to a worker is not cancelled, but if it had been converted into a loan it is cancelled. Rabbi Yose says: the [payment for] any work that must cease with the seventh year, is cancelled, but if it need not cease with the seventh year, then it is not cancelled. Similar to a debt to a shop, wages owed to a worker are not considered a loan but a “debt.” However, once the worker turns this into a loan, the sabbatical year does cancel it out. Rabbi Yose says that whether or not the sabbatical year cancels the debt to the worker depends on whether the work can continue to be done on the seventh year. If the work cannot be done in the seventh year, then the debt to the worker automatically becomes a loan because the working arrangement has to stop. However, if the work can continue to be done during the seventh year, for instance the worker was not working in the field, then the debt remains a debt and not a loan because the work could potentially continue." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah continues to discuss what types of debts are remitted at the end of the sabbatical year.", + "One who slaughters a cow and divides it up on Rosh Hashanah [at the end of the seventh year]: If the month had been intercalated, [the debt] is remitted. But if it had not been intercalated, it is not remitted. Debts are remitted only at the very end of the sabbatical year. Thus a loan taken out on the last day of the year will be remitted, but a loan taken out on the first day of the next year will not be remitted. What makes this more complicated is that Elul, the last month of the year can have either 29 or 30 days. That is to say that the 30th day after Rosh Hodesh Elul could either be the first day of the next year, Rosh Hashanah, or the last day of the previous year. Our mishnah describes a person who has slaughtered a cow and “registered” other people to receive parts of the cow. Once he divides up the meat and gives it to them they owe him the money, and our mishnah treats this like a loan. So if he divides up the meat on the 30th of Elul at the end of the sabbatical year, what our mishnah calls “Rosh Hashanah” because it could potentially be Rosh Hashanah, and then it turns out that they added a day to the month, thereby keeping that day part of the previous year, then the loan is remitted by the seventh year. However, if they decide that this day is Rosh Hashanah then the seventh year was over before the meat was divided up. Since the loan was incurred in the eighth year it is not remitted. What a difference a day makes!", + "[Fines for] rape, for seduction, for defamation, and all other obligations arising from legal procedure, are not remitted. A rapist and a seducer pay a fine of 50 shekels (see Ketubot 3:4 and Exodus 22:16, and Deuteronomy 22:29). One who defames a virgin pays a fine of 100 shekels (Deuteronomy 22:19). These are not considered normal loans and hence the sabbatical year does not cause them to be remitted. Similarly, any amount of money that a court has ordered a person to pay for whatever reason, that debt is not remitted on the sabbatical year. These are not considered “loans” but rather “debts.”", + "One who loans and takes a pledge, and one who hands over his debt documents to a court, [these debts] are not remitted. There are two types of situations discussed here. The first is a person who loans someone money and in return takes a pledge, an object of some value that he will return when the loan is repaid. Because he took a pledge the loan is not remitted. One reason for this may be that when he gets the money that he loaned back, it is as if he selling the pledge back to the debtor. The second situation is one who transfers his debts to the court so that the court will collect the debts on his behalf. He does this before the seventh year is over. The prohibition of collecting a debt after the seventh year falls on the individual creditor and not on the court. Thus the court can collect these debts on the creditor’s behalf without the debts being remitted by the seventh year. As we shall see in tomorrow’s mishnah, using this halakhah, Hillel invented away for people to avoid the remission of debts in the seventh year." + ], + [ + "[A loan secured by] a prozbul is not cancelled.
This was one of the things enacted by Hillel the elder; for when he observed people refraining from lending to one another, and thus transgressing what is written in the Torah, “Beware, lest you harbor the base thought, [‘The seventh year, the year of remission, is approaching,’ so that you are mean to your needy kinsman and give him nothing.”
Hillel enacted the prozbul.
This mishnah contains one of the most famous “takkanot” or pieces of halakhic legislation in the Mishnah. The takkanah is called the “prozbul” and was meant to be a way to prevent the sabbatical year from causing loans to be remitted. We shall see why Hillel made this takkanah inside the mishnah.
Section one: The prozbul was a document that a person would write before the seventh year and through it he would transfer his debts to the court. We shall learn more about how this document works in tomorrow’s mishnah. By using the prozbul document, a person’s could collect from his debtors after the seventh year.
Section two: At first it might seem that the prozbul would have been detrimental to the poor. After all, the sabbatical year was designed to give them relief from their debts by causing all loans to be remitted after the seventh year. However, the Torah already anticipated that this might cause lenders to be extremely hesitant about giving out loans. After all, these loans were an act of charity because they couldn’t charge interest. Hillel saw that the sabbatical year’s remission of loans would ultimately cause the poor to suffer by making loans unavailable to them. Therefore, in order to aid people in getting loans, he had to secure the creditor’s ability to be repaid hence he enacted the prozbul." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nToday’s mishnah describes what was written in the prozbul, the document we began to discuss yesterday.", + "This is the formula of the prozbul: “I turn over to you, so-and-so, judges of such and such a place, that any debt that I may have outstanding, I shall collect it whenever I desire.” And the judges sign below, or the witnesses. Through the prozbul, a person would turn his debts over to a court so that the court would collect them in his place. As we learned in mishnah two, anyone who turns his debts over to a court does not have them remitted by the sabbatical year. So before the sabbatical year was over, the creditor would write out a document through which he would turn his debts over to the court. He would then have a right to collect them after the sabbatical year was over. This was the “legal fiction” through which Hillel prevented people from not loaning to the poor." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah deals with the dates that are written in the prozbul.", + "A pre-dated prozbul is valid, but a post-dated one, is invalid. If a prozbul was written in the month of Tevet, but the date written in it was Cheshvan, which comes before Tevet, the prozbul is still valid. This is because a pre-dated prozbul will be to the detriment only of the creditor since the prozbul will be effective only for loans given out before the prozbul is written. However, if he post-dates the prozbul, i.e. he writes it in Cheshvan but dates it to Tevet, the prozbul is invalid because this is to the benefit of the creditor and to the detriment of the borrower.", + "Pre-dated loan documents [of loans] are invalid, but post-dated one valid. The mishnah now contrasts the prozbul with the loan documents themselves. If one pre-dates a loan document then it is invalid. This is because a loan document creates a lien on the other person’s property and may cause a third party to lose out. For instance, Reuven loans money to Shimon and the loan actually takes place in Nissan but he dates the document to Tishrei. Because the document was dated to Tishrei, the lien will be placed on any property Shimon owned in Tishrei. Thus if Levi bought property between Tishrei and Nissan and Shimon defaults on his loan, Reuven can collect his debt from Levi, even though the loan actually occurred after Levi bought the property. In such a case, there was no lien on Shimon’s property when Levi acquired it, and Reuven’s seizure from Levi is illegal. Therefore, pre-dated loan documents are invalid. However, post-dated loan documents are valid because they are only to the detriment of the creditor. Since no one else will lose out, these documents are valid.", + "If one borrows from five persons, then he writes a separate prozbul for each [creditor]. But if five borrow from the same person, then he writes only one prozbul for them all. The prozbul is written for the creditor and not the borrower. Thus if one person borrows money from five different people, each creditor needs his own prozbul. However, if one person lends money to five different people, he needs only one prozbul in order to collect his debt after the seventh year." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nIn order to write a prozbul over a debt, the debtor must have land. This is because the lien placed on the land by the debt makes it as if the debt has already been collected by the court at the point of the loan. Therefore when the creditor goes to collect the loan on behalf of the court through the use of the prozbul, it is as if he is collecting a loan that has already been collected. Thus this is not a violation of the prohibition of collecting a debt after the seventh year.\nOur mishnah teaches that this requirement can be in a sense “fictionalized” such that the debtor need not actually own land.", + "A prozbul is written only for [a debt secured by] land. As I explained in the introduction above, in order for a prozbul to be written, the borrower must have land.", + "But if [the debtor] has none, then [the creditor] can give him title to a share, however small, of his own field. The requirement for the debtor to have land may have made receiving a loan difficult, which is again a problem for the poor who are in most need of loans. If a prozbul cannot be written over a loan, a lender may be hesitant about loaning money to someone who really needs it (for instance a sharecropper, who may not own the land and may need a loan to pay for seed). Therefore, the creditor is allowed to give title to a piece of his land to the borrower. This title can in actuality be a fiction, whereby the creditor gives him the smallest piece of land possible on his own property and then he can write a prozbul on as large of a debt as he wishes.", + "If he had land in pledge in a city, a prozbul can be written on it. If the debtor gave a piece of land as a pledge in order to secure another loan, the creditor may write a prozbul for a different loan, counting the pledged land as if it was actually still fully in the hands of the debtor. Again, we see that the rabbis are relaxing some of the requirements in order to make it easier for a person to write a prozbul so that he could take out a loan.", + "Rabbi Hutzpit says: a prozbul may be written for a man on the security of his wife's property, or for an orphan on the security of property belonging to his guardian. Sometimes, a prozbul can be written for a person even though he does not actually own the property. For instance a man who does not own property but is married to a woman who does own property can have a prozbul written on the basis of his wife’s property. Similarly, orphans who don’t actually own property may have a prozbul written based on the property owned by their guardian." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nIn this mishnah the rabbis and Rabbi Eliezer debate whether a beehive, resting on the ground, is considered to have the status of land. As we shall see, there are halakhic consequences to it either being considered land or not.", + "A bee-hive:
Rabbi Eliezer says: Behold, it is like land and a prozbul may be written [using it as security] and it is not susceptible to uncleanness while it remains in its place, and one who takes honey from it on Shabbat is liable. According to Rabbi Eliezer, the beehive has the status of land. The mishnah lists three consequences to this determination. 1) If the debtor owns a beehive, a prozbul may be written using just the beehive as security, even though he owns no actual land. This is a topic that we covered in yesterday’s mishnah. 2) Land and anything that is considered attached to it (such as plants or houses) is not susceptible to impurity. Thus, according to Rabbi Eliezer, the beehive cannot become impure. However, this is only true while it remains in its place. If the beehive was picked up and moved elsewhere, it can become susceptible to impurity. 3) One who plucks something from the land is liable for a Shabbat transgression. Hence, according to Rabbi Eliezer, one who removes honey from a beehive on Shabbat is liable.", + "But the sages say: it is not like land, a prozbul may not be written [using it as security], it is susceptible to uncleanness while in its place, and one who takes honey from it on Shabbat is exempt. The rabbis do not consider the beehive to be “land” and therefore, in all three of these halakhot, they rule opposite of Rabbi Eliezer." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nThis mishnah deals with the possibility that a debtor would pay back a loan after the seventh year has caused the loan to be remitted.", + "One who returns a debt [after] the seventh year, the [creditor] must say to [the debtor]: “I remit it.” But [the debtor] should say: “Even so [I will repay it].” [The creditor] may then accept it from him, because it says: “And this is the word of the release” (Deuteronomy 15:2). If a debtor comes to a creditor to repay a loan after the seventh year has caused his loan to be remitted, the creditor must tell the debtor that he need not repay the loan. He cannot simply accept it from him without saying anything. However, once the creditor has said that he remits the loan, the debtor should say back to him, “Even so I will repay it.” The rabbis recognize that paying back a loan is a good thing and that a debtor who has the ability to pay back a loan should not use the seventh year as an excuse not to. Importantly, the mishnah notes that the creditor may accept his money back. It is prohibited for him to approach the borrower and demand repayment of the loan. But it is not prohibited for the creditor to accept the money back. This dialogue is derived midrashically from the words, “This is the word of the release,” which we would usually translate at “This is the matter of the release.” The Hebrew word for “matter” and “word” are the same. The rabbis derive from this phrase that it is sufficient for the creditor to say that the loan is remitted. By saying such words, he fulfills his duty and if the borrower still wishes to repay the loan, the creditor may accept it from him.", + "Similarly, when [an accidental] killer has been exile to a city of refuge, and the citizens want to honor him, he must say to them: “I am a murderer.” If they say: “Even so, [we want to honor you], then he may accept [the honor] from them, because it says: “And this is the word of the murderer” (Deuteronomy 19:4). The Torah uses similar words when describing the accidental killer who must flee to the refuge city. Therefore the rabbis derive a similar halakhah. When arriving at the refuge city the accidental killer must let the people of the city know that he is not coming as a simple tourist or person wishing to take up residence. He must tell them that he is an accidental killer. However, if they still wish to honor him even though they know he is an accidental killer, he may accept the honor." + ], + [ + "Introduction\nIn the final mishnah of Sheviit we learn that although one is not obligated to pay back a debt that has been remitted by the seventh year, the sages praise a debtor who does so in any case. Our mishnah teaches two other instances in which a person is not obligated to do something but nevertheless should do so. This is an important category in all forms of law, be it Jewish law or other forms of law. The law tells a person bottom-line what she/he has to do it does not always tell a person what he should do. There is a realm, in my opinion, of morality that goes beyond the law. This is the subject of our mishnah.", + "One who repays his debts after the seventh year, the sages are pleased with him. As I noted in yesterday’s mishnah, it is praiseworthy to pay back a loan, even if it has been remitted by the seventh year. After all, the person really does owe the money. Perhaps we could say that he should take advantage of the sabbatical year remission only if he absolutely must do so.", + "One who borrows from a convert whose sons had converted with him, the debt need not be repaid to his sons, but if he returns it the sages are pleased with him. Conversion is considered to be a process similar to birth a person is in a sense “born-again” when they convert. Therefore, they lose any legal ties to their parents or children and according to Torah law, children who convert do not inherit from their parents. Therefore, if someone owes a convert money and the convert dies, technically he need not repay the convert’s children who were born before he converted (if they were born after he converted then they are legally considered his children). However, the rabbis praise a person who does repay this loan, because, after all, he does in reality owe the money, and we all know that in reality, these are his children.", + "All movable property can be acquired [only] by the act of drawing, but whoever fulfills his word, the sages are well pleased with him. When a person acquires movable property, that is to say, things such as animals and objects, he must actually take them into his possession in order to acquire them. Money does not itself effect acquisition. Therefore, if Reuven buys, for instance, a table from Shimon and gives Shimon the money, the table is not his until he actually takes possession of it. Should Shimon find a better price for the table, he could sell it to someone else and just return the money to Reuven. Similarly, Reuven could ask for his money back if he finds a better table or a better price. However, the sages praise a person who keeps his word and does not renege on a deal, even when he is allowed to do so. Congratulations! We have finished Sheviit! It is a tradition at this point to thank God for helping us finish learning the tractate and to commit ourselves to going back and relearning it, so that we may not forget it and so that its lessons will stay with us for all of our lives. As I wrote this commentary to Sheviit, Israel was beginning to observe a sabbatical year. I am not adding plants to my garden and when I go to the store I check the labels on the produce I buy to make sure that I am not buying “sabbatical year produce.” While I know that most of the readers of this commentary yare living outside of Israel, everyone should know that many of the laws in this tractate are still influential and practiced in the land. Observing the shemittah in Israel and still maintaining a modern economy, all the while protecting the needs of farmers has been a great challenge to rabbis, and continues to be a major issue to this day. The tractate is also interesting because it is the most environmental tractate in the Mishnah. The Torah’s laws teach us that human beings do not ultimately possess the land they are merely sojourners on it, for the land actually belongs to God. It is clear, at least to me, that the greatest challenge that our generation and probably all future generations face, is the massive environmental damage humans have done and continue to do to our planet. We risk making the world simply an uninhabitable place to live. Sheviit teaches us that the land needs to rest, it needs to recover from all that we ask of it. While we may not be able to fulfill all of these laws the way that they were originally formulated, the message is one that resonates with greater alarm every day. I just hope that we listen in time to make a difference. Tomorrow we begin Tractate Terumot." + ] + ] + ] + }, + "schema": { + "heTitle": "ביאור אנגלי על משנה שביעית", + "enTitle": "English Explanation of Mishnah Sheviit", + "key": "English Explanation of Mishnah Sheviit", + "nodes": [ + { + "heTitle": "הקדמה", + "enTitle": "Introduction" + }, + { + "heTitle": "", + "enTitle": "" + } + ] + } +} \ No newline at end of file