Commentary for Avodah Zarah 95:12
איבעית אימא רבנן גידעו ופיסלו איצטריכא ליה ס"ד אמינא כיון דעבד ליה מעשה בגופיה עיקר אילן נמי ליתסר קמשמע לן:
I can also say that it agrees with the rabbis, and it needed to mention that he chopped or trimmed it lest I would have thought that since he did something to the body of the tree even the trunk is prohibited, therefore it comes to teach us that it is not.
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
The rabbis could also agree with the mishnah. To recall, they would hold that by just bowing down to the tree the new growth would be prohibited. So why then does it need to state that it is prohibited if he chopped or trimmed it? To teach you that even though he actually did something to the tree itself, the trunk remains permitted. Only the additional part is prohibited.
This concludes this section of the sugya. R. Ashi has been resolved and Shmuel’s original statement is not dependent on the dispute between R. Yose b. Judah and the rabbis.
This concludes this section of the sugya. R. Ashi has been resolved and Shmuel’s original statement is not dependent on the dispute between R. Yose b. Judah and the rabbis.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy