Chullin 51

Chapter 51

א בשהחמיץ מחלוקת ומתניתין ר' יהודה

1 Their dispute1

ב וכן א"ר יוסי ברבי חנינא

2 referred only to the case where it had fermented; and our Mishnah, therefore, is in accordance with R'Judah's view.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For only R. Judah holds the view that fermented Tamad is regarded as wine juice, consequently it may be purchased with Second Tithe money. Unfermented Tamad, however, even R. Judah admits is but water. It should be noted that there is an alternative answer possible, namely, that the dispute between the Rabbis and R. Judah concerned unfermented Tamad, and accordingly our Mishnah would follow the view of the Rabbis. R. Nahman, however, did not suggest this, for then R. Judah's view would be unintelligible as it is inconceivable that he would bold that unfermented Tamad should be regarded as wine juice (Rashi) .');">2

ג בשהחמיץ מחלוקת

3 R'Jose B'Huna also reported that their dispute referred only to the case where it had fermented.

ד וא"ר נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה

4 R'Nahman further said in the name of Rabbah B'Abbuha: If a man bought Tamad with Second Tithe money and it subsequently fermented, that which he has purchased is Second Tithe.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., a valid substitution has been effected, so that now the Tamad must be treated with the sanctity due to Second Tithe, and the original Second Tithe money, now in the hands of the vendor, has no sanctity whatsoever.');">3

ה תמד שלקחו בכסף מעשר ולבסוף החמיץ קנה מעשר מ"ט

5 Why is this? - Because it now appears that from the outset it was fruit [juice].4

ו איגלאי מילתא למפרע דפירא הוא

6 But [cannot the same argument be applied to] our Mishnah, which teaches that only if it had fermented [is it purchasable with Second Tithe money] but that if it had not fermented it is not [purchasable with Second Tithe money]?

ז אלא מתניתין דקתני

7 For it might be argued that had he let it stand it would have fermented?5

ח החמיץ אין לא החמיץ לא דלמא אי שבקיה הוה מחמיץ

8 - Rabbah answered [that our Mishnah deals with the case] where he let some of it stand in a glass and it did not ferment.

ט אמר רבה

9 Raba, however, said that the author of our Mishnah was R'Johanan B'Nuri.

י כששייר ממנו בכוס ולא החמיץ

10 For we have learnt: If a Kortob6

יא רבא אמר

11 of wine fell into three logs less a Kortob of water, the mixture having the colour of wine, and the whole of this mixture fell into a [deficient] mikweh, it does not render the mikweh invalid.7

יב הא מני

12 If a Kortob of milk fell into three logs less a Kortob of water, the mixture having the colour of water, and the whole of this mixture fell into a [deficient] mikweh, it does not render it invalid.7

יג ר' יוחנן בן נורי היא דתנן

13 But R'Johanan B'Nuri says: It all depends upon the colour.8

יד ג' לוגין מים חסר קורטוב שנפל לתוכן קורטוב יין ומראיהן כמראה יין ונפלו למקוה לא פסלוהו

14 Now did not R'Johanan B'Nuri lay down the rule that we must determine every mixture by its colour?

טו ג' לוגין מים חסר קורטוב שנפל לתוכן קורטוב חלב ומראיהן כמראה מים ונפלו למקוה לא פסלוהו

15 Then in the case of our Mishnah, too, one ought to determine the mixture by its colour, and the taste9

טז רבי יוחנן בן נורי אומר

16 and colour of the mixture is that of water.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Before fermentation. Consequently it is not purchasable with Second Tithe money and it also renders a mikweh invalid. R. Nahman, however, who does not decide the mixture by its colour but by its potency to ferment in the future, follows the view of the first Tanna.');">10

יז הכל הולך אחר המראה

17 The above view11

יח לאו א"ר יוחנן

18 differs from that of R'Eleazar.

יט בתר חזותא אזלינן

19 For R'Eleazar said: All12

כ הכא נמי זיל בתר חזותא וטעמא וחזותא דהאי מיא נינהו

20 agree that one may not set aside other [Tamad] as tithe for this [Tamad], unless this had already fermented.

כא ופליגא דרבי אלעזר דא"ר אלעזר

21 It is clear, then, that he [R'Eleazar] is of the opinion that the dispute [between R'Judah and the Rabbis] refers only to the case where it has not fermented; and when R'Judah said that he was liable to tithe it, he only meant [that he must set aside] some of it [as tithe] for the whole, but not that he may set aside other [Tamad as tithe for this], for then13

כב הכל מודים שאין מפרישין עליו ממקום אחר אא"כ החמיץ

22 he might be setting aside that which is subject to tithing [as tithe] for that which is exempt, or that which is exempt [as tithe] for that which is subject to tithing.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And in either case the act is of no effect in law, with the result that in the former instance the priest, and in the latter the owner, will be eating tebel i.e., untithed produce.');">14

כג קסבר

23 Our Rabbis taught: Tamad before it has fermented

כד בלא החמיץ מחלוקת

כה ועד כאן לא מחייב רבי יהודה אלא מיניה וביה אבל מעלמא לא דלמא אתי לאפרושי מן החיוב על הפטור ומן הפטור על החיוב:

כו ת"ר

כז התמד עד שלא החמיץ

Previous Chapter Next Chapter