Bava Metzia 211

מאי זרע אחר מאי חיטי לגבי שעורים כזרע אחר דמי או לא כל העולם כולו בשדפון ושלו בירקון אי נמי כל העולם כולו בירקון ושלו בשדפון מאי תיקו

What if they were separated by a different cereal?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If it be resolved that fodder is not a separation, what if it was surrounded by fields of different cereals, but still for human beings; these being unaffected, whilst those beyond, which were the same, being affected? ');">¹</span>

אמר ליה זרעה חיטי ואזל הוא וזרעה שערי ואשתדוף רובא דבאגא ואשתדוף נמי הנך שערי דיליה מאי מי אמרינן דאמר ליה אילו זרעתה חיטי הוה נמי משתדפא או דלמא מצי אמר ליה אילו זרעתה חיטי הוה מקיים בי (איוב כב, כח) ותגזר אומר ויקם לך

Further, is wheat as different seed in relation to barley, or not?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If it be answered that fields of different seed break the continuity and are disregarded, what if a wheat field was surrounded by fields of barley? ');">²</span>

מסתברא דאמר ליהאי זרעתה חיטי הוה מקיים בי ותגזר אומר ויקם לך ועל דרכיך נגה אור

What if others were smitten by blasting, and his by mildew, or others were smitten by mildew and his by blasting? The problems remain unsolved.

נשתדפו כל שדותיו של מחכיר ואשתדוף נמי הא בהדייהו ולא אשתדוף רובא דבאגא מאי מי אמרינן כיון דלא אשתדוף רובא דבאגא לא מנכי ליה או דלמא כיון דאשתדוף כולהו ארעתיה מצי אמר ליה האי משום לתך דידך הוא דהא משתדפו כל שדותיך

What if he [the lessor] said to him [the lessee], 'Sow it with wheat,' and he went and sowed it with barley, and then the greater part of the plain was blasted, and his barley too was blasted: do we say that he can argue, 'Had I sown wheat, it also would have been blasted'; or perhaps he can answer him, 'Had you sown it with wheat, [the Scriptural promise,] <i>Thou shalt also decree a thing, and it shall be established for thee</i>,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Job XXII, 28. ');">³</span>

מסתברא דאמר ליה אי משום לתאי דידי הוה משתייר לי פורתא כדכתיב (ירמיהו מב, ב) כי נשארנו מעט מהרבה

would have been fulfilled unto me?'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the promise that my hopes and prayers would be fulfilled; but these were for wheat, not barley. ');">⁴</span>

נשתדפו כל שדותיו של חוכר ואשתדוף רובא דבאגא ואשתדוף נמי הא בהדייהו מאי מי אמרינן כיון דאשתדוף רובא דבאגא מנכי ליה או דלמא כיון דאשתדוף כולהו ארעתיה מצי אמר ליה משום לתך דידך הוא דהא משתדפו כל שדותיך מסתברא דאמר ליה משום לתאך הוא

— It is reasonable that he can in fact answer him, 'Had you sown it with wheat, [the promise,] <i>'Thou shalt also decree a thing, and it shall be established for thee: and the light shall shine upon thy ways'</i> would have been fulfilled unto me.

אמאי הכא נמי נימא ליה אי משום לתאי דידי הוא הוה משייר לי פורתא דהוה מקיים בי כי נשארנו מעט מהרבה משום דאמר ליה אי הוה חזית לאישתיורי לך מידי הוה משתייר לך מדנפשך

What if all the lessor's fields were blasted, and this one was blasted, yet the greater part of the plain was unaffected? Do we say, Since the greater part of the plain was unaffected, he can make him no deduction? Or perhaps, since all his lands were blasted, he can say to him, 'This transpired on account of your evil fate,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [ [H], lit., 'cause'; Ginsberg, L. MGWJ, LXXVIII, p. 19.] ');">⁵</span>

מיתיבי היתה שנת שדפון וירקון או שביעית או שהיו שנים כשני אליהו אינו עולה לו מן המנין

the proof being that all your fields have been blasted'? — It is reasonable that he can answer him, 'Had it been on account of my bad luck, a little would have remained [unaffected], as it is written, <i>For we are left but few of many</i>.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Jer. XLII, 2. When misfortune is decreed upon a person, it is not absolute. That itself proves that in this case it was not due to the lessor's bad fortune, but was a natural phenomenon. ');">⁶</span>

קתני שדפון וירקון דומיא דשנים כשני אליהו מה שני אליהו דלא הוי תבואה כלל אף הכא נמי דלא הוי תבואה כלל אבל דאיכא תבואה סלקא ליה ולא קאמרינן מכת מדינה היא

What if all the lessee's fields were blasted, and the greater part of the plain too, and this field also was blasted along with them? Do we say, Since the greater part of the plain was affected, he can deduct his? Or perhaps, since all his fields were blasted, he [the lessor] can say to him, 'It is due to your misfortune, the proof being that all your fields have been smitten'? — It is logical that he can indeed say to him, 'It is due to your misfortune.' Why so? Here too let him answer, 'Had it been on account of my ill-luck, a little would have remained to me, in fulfilment of the verse, For we are left few of many'? — Because he can retort, 'Were you worthy that aught should remain to you, something of your own would have escaped.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where all the lessor's fields have been affected, he can argue, 'Something has in fact been left to me, viz., the rent I receive, even though reduced. This proves that it is my fate that something should be left to me, and therefore if this blasting were due to my evil fortune, some of my fields would have escaped, in accordance with the verse. But nothing at all has been left to you, which shews that you are excluded from that promise; so that after all it may be your peculiar fate that is responsible' (Tosaf.). ');">⁷</span>

אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק שאני התם דאמר קרא (ויקרא כה, טו) במספר שני תבואות ימכר לך שנים שיש בהן תבואה בעולם

An objection is raised: If it was a year of blasting or mildew, or the seventh year, or years like those of Elijah,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., of drought. ');">⁸</span>

אמר ליה רב אשי לרב כהנא אלא מעתה שביעית תעלה לו מן המנין דהא איכא תבואה בחוצה לארץ אמר ליה שביעית אפקעתא דמלכא היא

they are not included in the count.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Ar. 29b. This refers to a sale of land when the law of Jubilee was in force. The vendor always retained the option of repurchase, but not before the estate had been in the vendee's possession for at least two years. But if one of these was a year of blasting, etc., it was not counted. ');">⁹</span>

אמר ליה מר זוטרא בריה דרב מרי לרבינא אלא מעתה שביעית לא תעלה לו מן הגירוע אלמה תנן נותן סלע ופונדיון לשנה אמר ליה שאני התם דחזיא למישטחא בה פירי

Now blasting and mildew are stated as analogous to years like those of Elijah: just as during the years of Elijah there was no produce at all, so in the former too. But if there were some harvests [elsewhere], it is accounted to him,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The vendee is regarded as having enjoyed a year's harvest, to be taken into account in assessing the redemption price, which was calculated on a pro-rata basis, according to the number of years to the Jubilee and the length of time the vendee had been in possession. ');">¹⁰</span>

אמר שמואל לא שנו אלא שזרעה וצמחה ואכלה חגב אבל לא זרעה כלל לא דאמר ליה אילו זרעתה הוה מקיים בי (תהלים לז, יט) לא יבשו בעת רעה ובימי רעבון ישבעו

and we do not term it an epidemic!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To be charged to the first owner. This contradicts the Mishnah. ');">¹¹</span>

מתיב רב ששת רועה שהיה רועה והניח עדרו ובא לעיר ובא זאב וטרף ובא ארי ודרס אין אומרים אילו היה שם היה מציל אלא אומדין אותו אם יכול להציל חייב ואם לאו פטור ואמאי נימא ליה אי הוית התם הוה מקיים בי (שמואל א יז, לו) גם את הארי גם (את) הדוב הכה עבדך

— Said R. Nahman b. Isaac: There it is different, because Scripture says, According to the number of years of the harvests, he shall sell into thee,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXV. 15. ');">¹²</span>

משום דאמר ליה אי הוית חזית לאיתרחושי לך ניסא הוה איתרחיש לך ניסא כר' חנינא בן דוסא דמתיין עיזי דובי בקרנייהו ונימא ליה נהי דלניסא רבה לא הוה חזינא לניסא זוטא

[meaning], years in which the world enjoys harvests.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And this is the verse from which pro rata redemption after two years is deduced ('Ar. 29b). Hence, even if there is a widespread blight in which the whole plain is smitten, yet since some harvests are reaped elsewhere, the year is taken into account. ');">¹³</span> R. Ashi objected before R. Kahana: If so, the seventh should be included in the count, since there are harvests outside Palestine! — The seventh year, replied he, is excluded by royal decree.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., since Scripture forbade sowing in the seventh year, it was specifically excluded from the years of produce; hence is regarded as non-existent. ');">¹⁴</span> Mar Zutra, the son of R. Mari, said to Rabina: If so, the seventh year should not rank for rebate; why then did we learn, He must pay a <i>sela'</i> and a pundion per annum?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Ar. 25a. The reference is to Lev. XXVII, 16-19: And if a Man shall sanctify unto the Lord a field of his possession, then thy estimation shall be according to the seed thereof an homer of barley seed shall be valued at fifty shekels of silver. If he sanctify his field from the year of jubilee, accordingly to thy estimation it shall stand. But if he sanctify the field after the jubilee, then the priest shall reckon unto him the money according to the years that remain, even unto the year of jubilee, and it shall be abated from thy estimation. Now, the Mishnah states that according to this reckoning, for every year that remains a sela' and a pundion, which is 1/48th of a sela', is due. This shews that the fifty shekels are divided into 49, the number of years in a jubilee (excluding the jubilee itself). But if the Sabbatical years, not being years of seed, are excluded, there are only 42 years of seed into which the fifty must he divided, which gives almost a sela' and a denar per annum. ');">¹⁵</span> — He replied, There it is different, because it [the seventh year] is fit for fruits to be spread out therein.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., some use can be made of the seventh year, and the Bible did not specify 'years of harvests' in this connection. ');">¹⁶</span> Samuel said: This [sc. that a deduction may be made when there is a widespread epidemic] was taught only if he [the lessee] sowed it [the field], it [the crop] grew and was eaten by grasshoppers;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., blighted. ');">¹⁷</span> but not if he failed to sow it altogether, because he can say to him, 'Had you sown it, the promise, <i>They shall not be ashamed in the evil time,' and in the days of famine they shall be satisfied</i>,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ps. XXXVII, 19. ');">¹⁸</span> would have been fulfilled for me.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Therefore no deduction can he made, notwithstanding the widespread epidemic. ');">¹⁹</span> R. Shesheth raised an objection: If a shepherd, who was guarding his flock, left it and entered the town; and then a wolf came and killed [a sheep], or a lion [came], and tore it to pieces, we do not say, 'Had he been there, he could have saved them,' but judge his strength: if he could have saved them, he is responsible; if not, he is exempt.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra 41a. ');">²⁰</span> But why so? Let him say to him, 'Had you been there, the verse, <i>Thy servant slew both the lion and the bear</i>,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I Sam. XVII, 36. ');">²¹</span> would have been fulfilled for me!' — Because he can answer, 'Had you been worthy that a miracle should happen on your behalf, it would have happened, as in the case of R. Hanina b. Dosa, whose goats brought in bears by their horns.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Complaints being made that his goats were damaging the crops, he exclaimed, 'If it be so, let bears devour them; if not, let them capture bears and bring them in by their horns.' In the evening his goats came in, drawing the bears by their horns! V. Ta'an. 25a. ');">²²</span> But cannot he reply, 'Granted that I am not worthy of a great miracle,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That my flock should be saved even in your absence. ');">²³</span> yet am I worthy of a minor one!'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That it should be saved through your presence. ');">²⁴</span>