Pesachim 45

לרבים רבי יהודה אומר להוציא את הנטוע לרבים

for the public. R'Judah said: It is to exclude what is planted for the public. What is the reason of the first Tanna?

מאי טעמא דתנא קמא דכתיב ונטעתם ליחיד משמע לרבים לא משמע כתב רחמנא לכם להביא את הנטוע לרבים ורבי יהודה ונטעתם משמע בין לרבים בין ליחיד ולכם בין יחיד בין רבים משמע הוי רבוי אחר רבוי ואין רבוי אחר רבוי אלא למעט

Because it is written, 'and ye shall have planted;' [this] implies [a law] to the individual, but it does not imply [a law] for the public;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the public do not plant.');">¹</span> [therefore] the Merciful One wrote, 'unto you', to include what is planted for the public. While R'Judah [argues]: 'and ye shall have planted' implies [a law] both to the public and to the individual, and 'unto you' [too] implies both for the public and for the individual: thus it is an extension after an extension, and an extension after an extension has no [other significance] save to limit.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is a principle of exegesis. Cf. the inverse principle of the English language: a double negative is a positive.');">²</span>

והרי תרומה דרחמנא אמר (ויקרא כב, י) וכל זר לא יאכל קדש ותנן מערבין לנזיר ביין ולישראל בתרומה

But there is terumah, of which the Merciful One saith, There shall no common man<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., an Israelite who is not a priest.');">³</span> eat of the holy thing:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXII, 10.');">⁴</span> yet we learned: An 'erub may be made for a nazirite with wine, and for a [lay] Israelite with terumah?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though these may not be eaten by each respectively. - Thus a nonpriest may benefit from terumah');">⁵</span>

אמר רב פפא שאני התם דאמר קרא (במדבר יח, כז) תרומתכם שלכם תהא ואידך תרומתכם דכל ישראל קאמר

- Said R'Papa: There it is different, because Scripture saith, your heave-offering:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XVIII, 27.');">⁶</span> it shall be yours. And the other?

והרי נזיר דרחמנא אמר (במדבר ו, ד) מחרצנים ועד זג לא יאכל ותנן מערבין לנזיר ביין אמר מר זוטרא שאני התם דאמר קרא נזרו שלו יהא

;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hezekiah: what is the purpose of 'your heave-offering? Cf. p. 99, n. 10.');">⁷</span> It means, 'your heave-offering,' [viz.] that of all Israel.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e.. it is merely the idiomatic usage of the language.');">⁸</span> But what of a nazirite, though the Merciful One saith, from the kernels even to the husk, he shall not eat,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. VI, 4.');">⁹</span>

רב אשי אמר (במדבר ו, ה) קדוש יהיה גדל פרע שער ראשו גידולו קדוש ואין דבר אחר קדוש מידי ואין דבר אחר כתיב אלא מחוורתא כדמר זוטרא

yet we learned: An erub may be made for a nazirite with wine? - Said Mar Zutra, There it is different, because Scripture saith, [All the days of] his naziriteship:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. VI, 4.');">⁹</span> it shall be his.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the things which he may not eat are nevertheless available for his use in other ways'.');">¹⁰</span> R'Ashi said: He shall be holy, he shall let the locks of the hair of his head grow long:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 5.');">¹¹</span>

והרי חדש דרחמנא אמר (ויקרא כג, יד) לחם וקלי וכרמל לא תאכלו עד עצם היום הזה ותנן קוצר לשחת ומאכיל לבהמה

his [hair] growth is holy,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the sense that he must not benefit from it.');">¹²</span> but nothing else is holy. Is then 'and nothing else' written?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' There is nothing to warrant this inference.');">¹³</span>

אמר רב שמעיה שאני התם דאמר קרא קצירכם קצירכם שלכם יהא ואידך קצירכם דכל ישראל משמע

But it is clearly as Mar Zutra [stated]. But what of hadash,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos.');">¹⁴</span> where the Merciful One saith, And ye shall eat neither bread, nor parched corn, nor fresh ears, until this selfsame day;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXIII, 14, q.v.');">¹⁵</span>

והרי שרצים דרחמנא אמר (ויקרא יא, מא) שקץ הוא לא יאכל ותנן ציידי חיה ועופות ודגים שנזדמנו להם מינין טמאין מותרין למוכרן לנכרים שאני התם דאמר קרא לכם שלכם יהא

yet we learned: He may cut [the corn] for fodder and feed his cattle?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' With this hadash, though he may not eat it himself. Thus benefit is permitted.');">¹⁶</span> - Said R'Shemaiah, There it is different, because Scripture saith, [ye shall bring the sheaf of the firstfruits of] your harvest.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 10.');">¹⁷</span> [implying,] it shall be yours<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Available for your benefit.');">¹⁸</span>

אי הכי אפי' לכתחלה נמי שאני הכא דאמר קרא יהיו בהוייתן יהו

And the other?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hezekiah,: what is the purpose of 'your harvest' according to him? Cf. p. 99, n. 10.');">¹⁹</span> - Your harvest' implies that of all Israel. But what of creeping things, where the Merciful One saith, It is a detestable thing; it shall not be eaten;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XI, 41.');">²⁰</span>

ולחזקיה למה לי למיכתב לא יאכל ומייתי לכם למישרייה לא לכתוב רחמנא לא יאכל ולא בעי לכם אמר לך חזקיה טעמא דידי נמי מהכא

yet we learned: Hunters of beasts, birds, and fish, who chance upon unclean species, are permitted to sell them to Gentiles? -There it is different, because Scripture saith, [they are a detestable thing] unto you:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 10.');">²¹</span> it shall be yours. If so, [it should be permitted] at the very outset too?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To hunt unclean animals, whereas the Mishnah merely permits selling if they happened to trap them.');">²²</span>

והרי חמץ דרחמנא אמר לא יאכל חמץ ותניא ר' יוסי הגלילי אומר תמה על עצמך היאך חמץ אסור בהנאה כל שבעה שאני התם דאמר קרא (שמות יג, ז) ולא יראה לך שאור שלך יהא

- Here it is different, because Scripture saith, and they shall be [a detestable thing]:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XI, 11.');">²³</span> [meaning.] they shall be in their [forbidden] state. Now according to Hezekiah, for what purpose is 'shall not be eaten' written-so that 'unto you' is adduced to teach that it is permitted; let the Merciful One not write 'shall not be eaten,' so that 'unto you' will be unnecessary? - Hezekiah can answer you: My opinion<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'reason'.');">²⁴</span>

ורבנן שלך אי אתה רואה אבל אתה רואה של אחרים ושל גבוה ואידך תרי לך כתיבי

is indeed [deduced] from this.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The very fact that 'unto you' is required shows that elsewhere 'shall not be eaten' includes the prohibition of benefit in general.');">²⁵</span> But what of leaven, though the Merciful One saith, there shall no leavened bread be eaten,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XIII, 3.');">²⁶</span> yet it was taught.

ואידך חד בנכרי שכיבשתו וחד בנכרי שלא כיבשתו ואידך תלתא לך כתיבי ואידך חד בשאור וחד בחמץ וצריכי

R'Jose the Galilean said: Wonder at yourself! how can leaven be prohibited for [general] use the whole seven [days]? - There it is different, because Scripture saith, neither shall there be leaven seen unto thee:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 7.');">²⁷</span> [this implies,] it shall be thine. And the Rabbis?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who hold that benefit is forbidden: how do they interpret 'unto thee'?');">²⁸</span>

לימא כתנאי (ויקרא ז, כד) יעשה לכל מלאכה מה ת"ל לכל מלאכה שיכול למלאכת גבוה יהא מותר למלאכת הדיוט יהא אסור תלמוד לומר לכל מלאכה דברי רבי יוסי הגלילי

- Thine own thou must not see, but thou mayest see that belonging to others and to the Most High. And the other?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Jose: how does he know this?');">²⁹</span> 'unto thee' is written twice.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And there shall no leavened bread be seen unto thee, neither shall there be leaven seen unto thee.');">³⁰</span>

רבי עקיבא אומר שיכול למלאכת הדיוט יהא טהור למלאכת גבוה יהא טמא תלמוד לומר לכל מלאכה

And the other? - One refers to a heathen whom you have conquered, and the other refers to a heathen whom you have not conquered.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., whether the heathen is a Jewish subject or not, his leaven may be seen in a Jewish house.');">³¹</span> And the other?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How does he know this?');">³²</span> - 'Unto thee' is written three times.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The third is in Deut. XVI, 4 q.v.');">³³</span>

ורבי יוסי הגלילי לטומאה ולטהרה לא איצטריך קרא כי איצטריך קרא לאיסור ולהיתר ורבי עקיבא איסור והיתר לא צריך קרא כי איצטריך קרא לטומאה ולטהרה

And the other? - One refers to leaven [se'or], and one refers to leavened bread [hamez]. and they are [both] necessary.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If leaven (se'or) alone were written, I might argue that it is forbidden because its degree of leaven is very strong, but leavened bread (hamez) which is not so strong, is permitted. And if leavened bread (hamez) were written, I would say that that is forbidden because it is fit to be eaten, but not so leaven (se'or) . which cannot be eaten. - Bez. 7b.');">³⁴</span> Shall we say that it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. R. Abbahu's ruling.');">³⁵</span> is dependent on Tannaim? [And the fat of that which dieth of itself, and the fat of tha which is torn of beasts.] may be used for all service [: but ye shall in no wise eat of it].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. VII, 24.');">³⁶</span> Why is 'for all service' stated? For I might think, for the service of the Most High let it be permitted, but for secular servic let it be forbidden;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since we find fat (heleb) used in the service of God, the fat of a sacrifice being burnt on the altar.');">³⁷</span> therefore it is stated, 'for all service': this is the view of R'Jose the Galilean. R'A said: For I might think, for secular service let it be clean, [but] for service of the Most High let it be unclean;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g if leather was softened with heleb, sacred food must not be placed on it, for it will thereby be defiled.');">³⁸</span> therefore it is stated, 'for all service'. Now R'Jose the Galilean [holds] that in respect of uncleanness and cleanness a verse is not required, a verse being required only in respect of what is forbidden and what is permitted. While R'Akiba [maintains]: [in respect of] what is forbidden and what is permitted no verse is required, a verse being required only in respect of uncleanness and cleanness.