Talmud for Gittin 106:16

אלא התם כדקתני טעמא א"ר מאיר מפני מה אני אומר בשבת בשוגג יקיים במזיד יעקר ובשביעית בין בשוגג בין במזיד יעקר מפני שישראל מונין לשביעית

but not for [breaking] a rule of the Torah.13 But pouring a libation is forbidden by the Torah, and yet he imposes a fine for doing so [innocently]? — This is because of the special seriousness of the sin of idolatry. Between the statements of R. Judah there is no contradiction: where he imposes no fine is for [breaking] a rule of the Rabbis, but for [breaking] a rule of the Torah he imposes a fine.14 But pouring a libation is forbidden by the Torah and he imposes no fine for doing so? — Because of the seriousness of the sin of idolatry people keep clear of it. But even in respect of rules of the Torah one statement of R. Meir was contrasted with another. For it has been taught: 'If a man plants a tree on Sabbath, if inadvertently, he may keep it, but if deliberately, it must be uprooted. If in the Sabbatical year, however, whether he plants it inadvertently or deliberately, it must be uprooted. This is the ruling of R. Meir.15 R. Judah says: In the Sabbatical year, if inadvertently, he may keep it,16 but if deliberately he must uproot it: [if planted] on Sabbath, whether inadvertently or deliberately, he must uproot it'! — While you are looking for contradictions,17 why not point one out in this statement itself? See now: the one [planting on Sabbath] and the other [planting in the Sabbatical year] are both forbidden by the Torah; why then should there be a difference between them? But the reason for that, you must say, is as was taught: Said R. Meir: Why do I say that [if he plants inadvertently] on Sabbath he may keep it and if deliberately he must uproot it, whereas [if he plants] in the Sabbatical year whether inadvertently or deliberately he must uproot it? Because Israel reckon from the Sabbatical year<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., for the years of 'uncircumcision' (v. Lev. XIX, 23ff.) Hence they remember if a tree was planted in the Sabbatical year, and if it were allowed to remain they might take it as a precedent, and so it was necessary to impose a fine in this case. ');">18

Jerusalem Talmud Shabbat

It was stated⁵⁰Tosephta 3:1 (ed. Liebermann), 4:1 (ed. Zuckermandel.) Babli 18b.: “A woman should not fill a pot with ˋassisiot⁵¹An undetermined kind of legumes; in the words of the Geonim they exist in the Land of Israel but not in Babylonia. Clearly they need a very long time for cooking similar to lupines. Cf. Arabic عصّ “to be hard”. Cf. Latin siser, -eris, n. (Greek σίσαρον) “a plant cultivated for its piquant root, perhaps rampion (campanula rapunculus) (E. G.). and lupines and put them into the oven at the start of the Sabbath, at nightfall. If she did, they are forbidden after the end of the Sabbath until the time they could have been done.” Rebbi Aḥa said: intentionally, following Rebbi Meïr; Rebbi Yose said: unintentionally, following Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Mana said, what my teacher⁵²The vocalization is from the ms. It corresponds to the spelling רְבִי used by Samuel Hannagid in his poem addressed to Rav Nissim and the inscription RABI (soft β) found at Bet-Shearim. Rebbi Yose said is correct: ⁵³Tosephta 2:21. Babli Giṭṭin 53b.“He who is planting on the Sabbath, if unintentional, he may keep it, if intentional, he must tear it out. In the Sabbatical year, he must tear it out whether [planting was] unintentional or intentional. Rebbi Jehudah says, it is the other way around. If he was planting on the Sabbath he must tear it out whether it was unintentional or intentional; in the Sabbatical, if unintentional, he may keep it, if intentional, he must tear it out. Why? Because the profit of the Sabbath [is forbidden] to him.” And here, since you say that after the end of the Sabbath he has to wait until the time it could have been done, he did not gain anything from the Sabbath. What is the reason of the rabbis? People are suspected about the Sabbatical but not about the Sabbath. Another explanation: One counts Sabbaticals, one does not count Sabbaths. What is this about? If somebody planted less than thirty days before the Sabbatical and now it is the Sabbatical, if it is because of suspicion, there is no suspicion; if it is for counting, it is not counted. Less than thirty days before the eighth year and now it is the eighth year, if it is because of suspicion, there is suspicion; if it is because of counting, there is counting. It follows him who says because of suspicion, but for him who says because of counting they fined the unintentional because of the intentional⁵⁴This last sentence is the opposite of the last sentence in Terumot. The latter text seems to be correct since in counting the age of a tree a month more or less is negligible. But one should not plant a tree a month before the Sabbatical, even though this is not forbidden, since the tree’s years for ˋorla will be counted from the Sabbatical..

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Previous Verse Full Chapter Next Verse