Pesachim 17

Chapter 17

א <big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> אין חוששין שמא גיררה חולדה מבית לבית וממקום למקום דא"כ מחצר לחצר ומעיר לעיר אין לדבר סוף:
1 <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>WE HAVE NO FEAR THAT A WEASEL MAY HAVE DRAGGED [LEAVEN] FROM ONE ROOM TO ANOTHER OR FROM ONE SPOT TO ANOTHER.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., after a room has been searched and cleared of leaven a weasel may have brought leaven into it from elsewhere.');"><sup>1</sup></span> FOR IF SO, [WE MUST ALSO FEAR] FROM COURT-YARD TO COURT-YARD AND FROM TOWN TO TOWN, [AND] THE MATTER IS ENDLESS.
ב <big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> טעמ' דלא חזינא דשקל הא חזינא דשקל חיישינן ובעי בדיקה
2 <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>The reason is that we did not see it take [leaven]; but if we saw it take [it] we do fear, and it requires a [re-]search. yet why so; let us assume that it ate it?
ג ואמאי נימא אכלתיה מי לא תנן מדורו' העכו"ם טמאים וכמה ישהה במדור ויהא המדור צריך בדיקה ארבעים יום
3 Did we not learn: The dwellings of heathens are unclean,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because they used to bury their premature births in their houses.');"><sup>2</sup></span> and how long must he [the heathen] stay in a dwelling so that it should need searching?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For a buried body, before a Jew may live there.');"><sup>3</sup></span>
ד ואע"פ שאין לו אשה וכל מקום שחולדה וחזיר יכולין להלוך א"צ בדיקה
4 Forty days, even if he has no wife. But in every place where a weasel or a swine can enter no searching is required!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If a baby were thrown there these would eat it, Oh. XVIII, 7. - Thus the same should apply to leaven.');"><sup>4</sup></span>
ה א"ר זירא לא קשיא הא בבשר והא בלחם בבשר לא משיירא בלחם משיירא
5 - Said R'Zera, There is no difficulty: one treats of flesh, the other of bread: in the case of fles [the weasel] leaves nothing, [whereas in the case of bread it does leave [something] - Raba said: How compare! As for there, it is well: it is [a case of mere] 'say': say that there was [a burial there], say that t was not.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the presence there of a dead child is merely conjectured as a possibility.');"><sup>5</sup></span> And if you assume that there was, say that it [e.g. , a weasel] ate it.
ו אמר רבא האי מאי בשלמא התם אימור הוה אימור לא הוה ואם תמצא לומר הוה אימור אכלתיה אבל הכא דודאי דחזינא דשקל מי יימר דאכלתיה הוי ספק וודאי ואין ספק מוציא מידי ודאי
6 But here that we see for certa that it has taken [leaven], who is to say that it ate it? Surely it is a doubt [on the one hand] and a certainty the other], and a doubt cannot negative a certainty.
ז ואין ספק מוציא מידי ודאי והא תניא חבר שמת והניח מגורה מליאה פירות ואפילו הן בני יומן הרי הן בחזקת מתוקנין והא הכא דודאי טבילי הני פירי וספק מעושרין וספק לא מעושרין וקאתי ספק ומוציא מידי ודאי
7 But cannot a doubt negative a certainty? Surely it was taught: If a haber<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos.');"><sup>6</sup></span>
ח התם ודאי וודאי הוא דודאי מעשרי כדר' חנינא חוזאה דא"ר חנינא חוזאה חזקה על חבר שאין מוציא מתחת ידו דבר שאינו מתוקן
8 dies and leaves a store-house full of produce [crops]. even if they are but one day old, they stand in the presumption of having been tithed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Supra 4b.');"><sup>7</sup></span>
ט ואי בעית אימא ספק וספק הוא דילמא מעיקר' אימור דלא טבילי כר' אושעיא
9 Now here these crops were certainly liable to tithe, and there is a doubt whether they have been tithed or not tithed, yet the doubt comes and negatives the certainty? -There it is one certainty against another certainty, as [we presume that] they have certainly been tithed, in accordance with R'Hanina of Hozae.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A province of S. W. Persia, now known as Khuzestan; Obermeyer. pp. 204ff.');"><sup>8</sup></span> For R'Hanina of Hozae said: There is a presumption concerning a haber that he does not let anything untithed<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'unprepared'.');"><sup>9</sup></span>
י דא"ר אושעיא מערים אדם על תבואתו ומכניסה במוץ שלה כדי שתהא בהמתו אוכלת ופטורה מן המעשר
10 pass out from under his hand. Alternatively: it is a doubt [on the one hand] and a doubt [on the other]; perhaps from the very beginning say that it was not liable to tithe, in accordance with R'Oshaia.
יא ואין ספק מוציא מידי ודאי והתניא אמר ר' יהודה מעשה בשפחתו של מציק אחד ברימון שהטילה נפל לבור
11 For R'Oshaia said: one may practise an artifice with his produce and take it in its husks, so that his cattle may eat thereof and it be exempt from tithes.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Produce is not liable to tithes unless it is taken into the house through the front door when its work is completed, not through the roof or the backyard. If grain is brought in in its husks its work is not complete, as this is still to be separated, and it is not liable to tithe, and need not be tithed by Scriptural law; a human being may then make a light meal of it, while cattle may eat their fill. Thus there it may never have become liable to tithe at all. Though a human being may not make a meal of it, that is only a Rabbinical law and is certainly nullified here by the presumption that the haber had tithed it. But in its essence we see that it is doubt against doubt; the doubt whether it was liable to tithe at all offset by the doubt that it may have been tithed.');"><sup>10</sup></span> But cannot a doubt negative a certainty? Surely it was taught, R'Judah said: It once happened that the bondmaid of a certain oppressor<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A powerful Jew (Rashi) who wielded his power oppressively.');"><sup>11</sup></span> in Rimon<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A town originally belonging to the tribe of Zebulun, on the north-east frontier (Josh. XIX, 13) . It may correspond to the present Al-Rummanah, on the southern edge of the plain of Al-Battof, about ten kilometres north of Nazareth.');"><sup>12</sup></span> threw her premature-born child into a pit,