Nedarim 118

Chapter 118

א אם היו עלין שלהן שחורין אסורין הוריקו מותרין וכי שחורין אמאי אסורין לימא היתר שבהן להיכן הלך א"ל מי סברת על עיקר קתני אתוספת קתני אסורין אי הכי מאי אתא רשב"ג למימר דתניא רשב"ג אומר הגדל בחיוב חייב הגדל בפטור פטור תנא קמא נמי הכי אמר
1 if the leaves are blackish, they are forbidden; if greenish, they are permitted.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. 58a. ');"><sup>1</sup></span> But even if blackish, why are they forbidden? Let us say, whither has the permitted portion in them departed? — He replied: Do you think that it refers to the original stock? [Only] with respect to the increase is it taught. They are forbidden. If so, what does R. Simeon b. Gamaliel come to teach? For it was taught [thereon:] R. Simeon b. Gamaliel said: That which grew under the obligation [of removal]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Viz., in the Sabbatical year. ');"><sup>2</sup></span>
ב כולה מתני' רבן שמעון בן גמליאל קתני לה ועד כאן לא שמעת ליה לרבן שמעון בן גמליאל דלא קא טרח אבל היכא דקא טרח בטיל ברובא
2 is under that obligation: that which grew in a state of exemption is exempt. Surely the first Tanna too says thus? — The whole Mishnah is stated by R. Simeon h. Gamaliel.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The second clause is merely stating a reason for the ruling in the first. ');"><sup>3</sup></span> Yet you learn R. Simeon b. Gamaliel's view [to be thus] only where he took no trouble;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As in this case, the sixth year onions having been left in the earth during the seventh year. ');"><sup>4</sup></span>
ג וכל היכא דקא טרח בטיל ברובא והרי ליטרא מעשר טבל דקטרח וקתני ואותה ליטרא מעשר עליו ממקום אחר לפי חשבון שאני גבי מעשר דאמר קרא (דברים יד, כב) עשר תעשר וגו' והיתירא זרעי אינשי איסורא לא זרעי אינשי
3 but where one takes trouble,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where he plants the onions. ');"><sup>5</sup></span> it [the stock] is nullified by the excess [of the increase].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is Rabbah's remark: though it would appear that R. Simeon b. Gamaliel's view is opposed to his, in reality it is not. ');"><sup>6</sup></span>
ד גופא א"ר חנינא תירתאה א"ר ינאי בצל של תרומה שנטעו ורבו גידוליו על עיקרו מותר למימרא דגידולי
4 Now, where one takes trouble, is it nullified by the excess? But what of the case of the <i>litra</i> of tithe, itself <i>tebel</i>, where he took trouble, yet it is taught, 'whilst as for the original <i>litra</i>, a tithe thereof must he separated from elsewhere according to calculation'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 58b. ');"><sup>7</sup></span> — The tithe is different, because Scripture saith, Thou shalt surely tithe all the increase of thy sowing.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XIV, 22. ');"><sup>8</sup></span> and people sow what is permitted, but do not sow what is forbidden.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' U.e., we oblige him to give terumah on the original tithe, since he did wrong in sowing it without rendering the terumah. It is thus in the nature of a fine, that he should not profit by his neglect. But normally the original stock is nullified, when lahour is required to produce the excess. ');"><sup>9</sup></span> The text [above states:] 'R. Hanina of Torata said in R. Jannai's name: If one plants an onion of <i>terumah</i>, and its increase exceeds the stock, it is [all] permitted.' Shall we say that the permitted increase