משנה: הֶעָלִים וְהַלּוּלָבִים וּמֵי גְפָנִים וְהַסְּמָדַר מוּתָּרִין בְּעָרְלָה וּבִרְבִיעִי וּבְנָזִיר וַאֲסוּרִין בַּאֲשֵׁירָה. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אָמַר הַסְּמָדַר אָסוּר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא פֶּרִי. רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר הַמְּעַמֵּד בִּשְׂרָף הֶעָרְלָה אָסוּר. אָמַר רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ שָׁמַעְתִּי בְּפֵירוּשׁ שֶׁהַמְּעַמֵּד בִּשְׂרָף הֶעָלִים וּבִשְׂרָף הָעִיקָּרִים מוּתָּר. בִּשְׂרָף הַפַּגִּים אָסוּר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא פֶּרִי. עַנְקוֹקְלוֹת וְהַחַרְצָנִים וְהַזָּגִים וְהַתֶּמֶד שֶׁלָּהֶן קְלִיפֵּי רִימּוֹן וְהַנֵּץ שֶׁלּוֹ קְלִיפֵּי אֱגוֹזִים וְהַגַּרְעִינִים אֲסוּרִין בְּעָרְלָה וּבָאֲשֵׁירָה וּבְנָזִיר. וּמוּתָּרִין בָּרְבִיעִי וְהַנּוֹבְלוֹת כּוּלָּן אֲסוּרוֹת. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר נוֹטְעִין יִיחוּר שֶׁלְעָרְלָה. וְאֵין נוֹטְעִין אֱגוֹז שֶׁלְעָרְלָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא פֶּרִי. וְאֵין מַרְכִּיבִין בְּכַפְנִיּוֹת שֶׁלְעָרְלָה. MISHNAH: Leaves, shoots, vine sap, and the flower178Definition of Maimonides, Arabic אַלפֻקָאח. He emphasized that חִצרִם “budding fruit” is forbidden. The same definition may be found in Arukh: “The state between budding of the flower and development of the fruit.” are permitted for ‘orlah, the Fourth Year, and a nazir179He is forbidden (Numbers.6.4">Num. 6:4) “anything made from the wine-vine”., but forbidden from a pagan sacred grove180Anything used in pagan worship is permanently forbidden for all usufruct except the soil and what stands on it. Therefore the grove itself cannot be forbidden but everything taken from it is.. Rebbi Yose said, the flower is forbidden because it is a fruit. Rebbi Eliezer says, it is forbidden to use ‘orlah sap as curd. Rebbi Joshua said, I heard explicitly that one is permitted to use sap of leaves and sap of roots as curd. But the sap of unripe figs is forbidden because that is a fruit.
Anqoqlot190Neither the meaning nor the etymology of this word are known as will be clear from the Halakhah. In the opinion of Arukh, the word designates the edible young shoots of the vine; this follows the Gaonic commentary of R. Nathan Av Hayeshivah who reads קנוקלות, or the reading of Or Zarua קנוקנות, “hairline sinews” (Chullin.92b">Babli Ḥulin 92b). This explanation is incompatible with the Yerushalmi. In the opinion of S. Krauss, the word is an expansion of עקל to which compare Arabic עקּל “to produce grapes”. The text of Sifra [Leviticus.19.1-20.27">Qedošim Parasha 3(3)] את ענקוקלות והבוסר also shows that ענקוקלות are misdeveloped grapes., the grape skins, the grape seeds, and the afterwine made from them, pomegranate skins and their flowers191The remainder of the flower visible at the tip of the outer skin., nut shells, and seeds192Of any ‘orlah tree. are forbidden from ‘orlah, sacred groves, and for a nazir193Only the first four items.. They are permitted in the fourth year194Only fruits are forbidden unless redeemed.. Windfall195Of fully formed fruits. is forbidden for all of these.
Rebbi Yose said, one may plant an ‘orlah shoot but not an ‘orlah nut because the latter is a fruit. Also, one does not graft with spathe185Definition of Maimonides; Arabic טַלע. Arukh and Rashi, based on Gaonic sources, define as “dates that never ripen.” I. Löw (followed by S. Lieberman) takes it as the male flower which from an ‘orlah date palm may not be taken to hang into the branches of a female tree. of ‘orlah.
הלכה: הֶעָלִים וְהַלּוּלָבִים. מַתְנִיתָא דְּלֹא כְרִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר דְּתַנֵּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר מִכֹּל אֲשֶׁר יֵעָשֶׂה מִגֶּפֶן הַיַּיִן מֵחַרְצַנִּים וְעַד זָג לֹא יֹאכֵל אַף הֶעָלִים וְהַלּוּלָבִין בְּמַשְׁמַע. HALAKHAH: “Leaves and shoots.” Our Mishnah does not follow Rebbi Eliezer, as was stated181Nazir 6:1:2-14" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Nazir.6.1.2-14">Nazir 6:1 (fol. 54d), 6:2 (fol. 55a); Nazir.34b">Babli Nazir 34b. in the name of Rebbi Eliezer: (Numbers.6.4">Num. 6:4) “Anything made from the wine-vine, from seeds to skin he shall not eat,” that includes leaves and shoots.
תַּנֵּי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר סְמָדַר אָסוּר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא פֶּרִי. וְקַשְׁיָא אִם אָסוּר בְּנָזִיר לָמָּה לִי פֶּרִי אִם פֶּרִי הוּא יְהֶא אָסוּר בַּכֹּל. מִילְּתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יִצְחָק אָֽמְרָה שֶׁהוּא אָסוּר בַּכֹּל. רִבִּי יִצְחָק שָׁאַל מָאן תַּנָּא אֵין מַרְכִּיבִין בְּכַפְנִיוֹת שֶׁלְעָרְלָה רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. It was stated182Nazir 6:2:2-5" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Nazir.6.2.2-5">Nazir 6:2, fol. 55a. There, the text reads “Rebbi Yose says the flower is forbidden for the nazir because it is a fruit.” The discussion presupposes this text; the question is whether the Mishnah has to be interpreted in the light of the baraita or whether R. Yose also forbids ‘orlah flower and requires redemption in the forth year.: “Rebbi Yose says the flower is forbidden because it is a fruit.” It is difficult! If it is forbidden for the nazir why a fruit183Since the rules for ‘orlah and the fourth year explicitly refer to fruits, if a flower is counted as a fruit automatically it would be subject to ‘orlah and the Fourth Year. If R. Yose restricts the prohibition of vine flowers to the nazir he must hold with R. Eliezer.? If it is a fruit it should be forbidden for everybody! The word of Rebbi Isaac implies that it is forbidden for everybody. Rebbi Isaac asked: Who stated 184Mishnah 9.“one does not graft with spathe185Definition of Maimonides; Arabic טַלע. Arukh and Rashi, based on Gaonic sources, define as “dates that never ripen.” I. Löw (followed by S. Lieberman) takes it as the male flower which from an ‘orlah date palm may not be taken to hang into the branches of a female tree. of ‘orlah”? Rebbi Yose!
תַּנֵּי פֶּרִי אַתְּ פּוֹדֶה וְאֵין אַתְּ פּוֹדֶה לֹא בּוֹסֵר וְלֹא פַגִּים. הוֹרֵי רִבִּי זְבִידָא בְּאִילֵּין פָגֵּי תְּמָרָה שֶׁיִּקָּבֵרוּ. רִבִּי יוֹנָה בָּעֵי עָבַר וּפְדָיוֹ שֶׁמָּא אֵינוֹ פָדוּי. וְתֵימַר טָעוּן קְבוּרָה. It was stated186Leviticus.19.24">Lev. 19:24 declares all fourth-year fruit holy; implying that it must be redeemed. The next verse notes that the rules for the first four years were given so the tree should increase its yield starting from the fifth year. The word yield is taken in Sifra Qedošim Paraša 3(10) to mean that the duty of redemption in the fourth year starts at the point in the ripening of the fruit at which in the fifth year the duty of tithing starts (Ma‘serot 1:2); in the case of grapes if there is some sap in the fruit. The two sources seem to contradict one another but Maimonides (Ma‘aser Šeni 9:2) adopts both of them.: You redeem fruit; you do not redeem either unripe grapes or unripe figs. Rebbi Zavida instructed about unripe dates that they should be buried187He holds that they cannot be eaten since they cannot be redeemed; they have to be treated like a firstling which died before it could be sacrificed.. Rebbi Jonah asked: If he transgressed and redeemed them, is it not redeemed? And you want to say, it needs to be buried!
רִבִּי פְּדָת רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן וְרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ שְׁנֵיהֶם אָֽמְרוּ דָבָר אֶחָד. תַּמָּן תַנִּינָן רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר אֵין לִקְטָף שְׁבִיעִית מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵינוֹ פֶּרִי. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָה לְרִבִּי פְּדָת כְּמַה דְתֵימַר תַּמָּן הֲלָכָה כְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן וְהָכָא הֲלָכָה כְרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹנָה וְדַמְיָה הִיא לְכָל רַבִּיָּה. קְטָף בָּטֵל עַל יְדֵי שְׂרָפוֹ. [וְאִילָן אֵינוֹ בָטֵל עַל גַּבֵּי שְׂרָפוֹ.] אוֹכְלֵי בְהֵמָה קְדוּשַּׁת שְׁבִיעִית חָל עֲלֵיהֶן. אֵין קְדוּשַּׁת עָרְלָה חָל עֲלֵיהֶן. אָמַר רִבִּי בּוּן אִית לָךְ חוֹרִי. רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אָֽמְרָהּ שְׁמוּעָה. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בְּשֵׁם גַּרְמֵיהּ אָֽמְרָהּ. לָמָּה שְׂרָף פֶּרִי פַּגִּין פֶּרִי. אִין תֵּימַר שְׂרָף פֶּרִי עָשָׂה כֵן בִּתְרוּמָה מוּתָּר. אִין תֵּימַר פַּגִּין פֶּרִי עָשָׂה כֵן בִּתְרוּמָה מוּתָּר. לָמָּה שֶּׁהַנָּייַת תְּרוּמָה מוּתֶּרֶת וַהַנָּייַת עָרְלָה אֲסוּרָה. 189The parallel, references switched from there to here, is in Sheviit 7:2:1-6" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sheviit.7.2.1-6">Ševi‘it 7:7, Notes 102–113. Rebbi Pedat, Rebbi Assi, in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Rebbi Simeon follows that of Rebbi Joshua, as we have stated there190Neither the meaning nor the etymology of this word are known as will be clear from the Halakhah. In the opinion of Arukh, the word designates the edible young shoots of the vine; this follows the Gaonic commentary of R. Nathan Av Hayeshivah who reads קנוקלות, or the reading of Or Zarua קנוקנות, “hairline sinews” (Chullin.92b">Babli Ḥulin 92b). This explanation is incompatible with the Yerushalmi. In the opinion of S. Krauss, the word is an expansion of עקל to which compare Arabic עקּל “to produce grapes”. The text of Sifra [Leviticus.19.1-20.27">Qedošim Parasha 3(3)] את ענקוקלות והבוסר also shows that ענקוקלות are misdeveloped grapes.: “Rebbi Simeon says, balsamum is not subject to the Sabbatical because it is not a fruit.” Rebbi Zeïra said to Rebbi Pedat, since we say there that practice follows Rebbi Joshua, would you have to say here that practice follows Rebbi Simeon? Rebbi Jonah said, are the situations similar? It is the other way: Balsamum is essentially sap, a tree is not essentially in its sap. The holiness of the Sabbatical falls on animal feed, but the holiness of orlah never falls on it. Rebbi Abun said, there is another [difference]: Rebbi Joshua quoted it as a tradition, Rebbi Simeon said it in his own name. Sap may be fruit, unripe fruits may be fruit. If you say that sap has the status of fruit, if he did it with heave it is permitted. If you say that unripe fruits are fruit, if he did it with heave it is permitted. Why? Because usufruct of heave is permitted but usufruct of orlah is forbidden.
עַנְקוֹקְלוֹת וְהַחַרְצָנִים. רִבִּי זְעִירָא וְחַד מִן רַבָּנִין בְּשֵׁם רַב עֲנָבִים שֶׁלָּקוּ עַד שֶׁלֹּא הֵבִיאוּ שְׁלִישׁ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן אֲפִילוּ לָקוּ מִשֶּׁהֵבִיאוּ שְׁלִישׁ. אָמַר רִבִּי חִייָא בַּר אָדָא לְשׁוֹן נוֹטָרִיקוֹן הוּא עֲנָבִין דְּלָקֵי תַלְתֵּיהוֹן. “Anqoqlot and the grape skins.” Rebbi Zeïra and one of the rabbis in the name of Rav: Grapes which went bad before they were one-third ripe. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, even after they were one-third ripe196In contrast to בוסר, “unripe grape berry”, these were spoiled before ripening.. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada said, it is a stenographic expression: “Grapes becoming bad at a third197He must read ענקולות: עֲ֗נָ֗בִין דְּלָקֵ֗י תַלְ֗תֵּ֗יהוֹן but there are no Mishnah mss. to back this up..”
רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר אֵין נוֹטְעִין יִיחוּר. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן עָבַר וְנָטַע מוּתָּר. עָבַר וְהִרְכִּיב אָסוּר. “Rebbi Yose said, one may not198This contradicts the Mishnah; the word is not in the Rome ms. However, the formulation of R. Joḥanan’s statement presupposes this reading; following the text of the Mishnah one would expect: “If one planted, it is permitted; if he transgressed and grafted it is forbidden.” The Babli (Avodah Zarah 48b) disagrees: “Rav Jehudah said, Rav said that R. Yose agrees that if one planted, grafted, or sank, it is permitted.” According to Rashi, that statement refers to both shoot and nut, according to Maimonides (Ma‘aser Seni 10:20) only to planting a nut.
There is a disagreement in principle between Babli and Yerushalmi. The Babli holds that any growth caused by the common action of a forbidden (‘orlah) and a permitted (the ground or the stem of an older tree) factor is automatically permitted (זו וזו גורם מותר). The Yerushalmi accepts this only if no one factor alone could have caused the result; cf. Chapter 2, Note 126. plant a shoot.” Rebbi Joḥanan said, if one transgressed and planted, it is permitted; if he transgressed and grafted it is forbidden199It is not clear whether this is a biblical or a rabbinic prohibition..
אֱגוֹז שֶׁלְעָרְלָה שֶׁנְּטָעוֹ וְכֵן בֵּיצַת עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה אֶפְרוֹחַ. רִבִּי חַגַּיי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יֹאשִׁיָּה אִיתְפַּלְּגוּן חִזְקִיָּה וְכַהֲנָא. כַּהֲנָא אָמַר מוּתֶּרֶת חִזְקִיָּה אָמַר אָסוּר. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּחִזְקִיָּה אֵין אֶפְשַׁר לְבֵיצַת עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה שֶׁנַּעֲשֵׂית אֶפְרוֹחַ. מַה נָן קַייָמִין. אִם בְּשֶׁפָּֽחְסָהּ אֵין כָּאן אֶפְרוֹחַ אִם בְּשֶׁהִכְנִיסָהּ לִפְנִימָה מִן הַקַּנְקֵילִין אִתָא חֲמִי וְאִלּוּ הִשְתַּחֲװֶה לָהּ לֹא אָֽסְרָהּ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִכְנִיסָהּ לִפְנִים מִן הַקַּנְקֵילִין אָֽסְרָהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָן אָבוֹי דְּרִבִּי מַתַּנְיָה תִּפְתָּר שֶׁגָּדַר בָּהּ עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. 201This paragraph (without mentioning the walnut) and the next are also in Avodah Zarah 3:6 (fol. 43a). An ‘orlah walnut which one planted, and similarly, an egg of idol worship which turned into a chick. Rebbi Ḥaggai in the name of Rebbi Josia: Ḥizqiah and Cahana differ. Cahana said it is permitted, Ḥizqiah said it is forbidden. In the opinion of Ḥizqiah it should be impossible for an egg of idol worship to become a chick. What is this about? If someone squashed it202Used the egg as a pagan sacrifice. The use of the egg as a pagan symbol was studied by J. J. Bachofen, Versuch über die Gräbersymbolik der Alten, Gesammelte Werke Bd. 4, Basel 1954., there is no chick. If he brought it inside the lattice enclosure203Latin cancelli; the fence outside the pagan temple., come and look: If he worshipped it it is not forbidden204It is Ḥizqiah’s own opinion in Avodah Zarah 3:6 (fol. 43a) that nothing becomes forbidden because of idol worship unless something was done with it. R. Joḥanan disagrees; for him an egg introduced into a pagan temple becomes forbidden.; because he brought it inside the grating should it be forbidden? Rebbi Yudan the father of Rebbi Mattaniah said, explain it if he used it to fence in the idol205There was a hole in the wall which was closed by putting an egg into the hole..
בֵּיצַת הֶקְדֵּשׁ שֶׁנַּעֲשֵׂת אֶפְרוֹחַ. אָמַר רִבִּי ייָסָא פְּלִיגֵי בָּהּ כַּהֲנָא וְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. כַּהֲנָא אָמַר אֲסוּרָה וְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר מוּתֶּרֶת. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא לְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי הָא רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר מוּתֶּרֶת אוֹף הוּא פוֹדֶה אוֹתָהּ בִּזְמַן זַרְעָהּ. רִבִּי חֲנִינָא וְרִבִּי יוֹנָה רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר בְּשֵׁם כַּהֲנָא פּוֹדֶה אוֹתָהּ בִּזְמַן זַרְעָהּ. וְרִבִּי חֲנַנְיָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי פִּינְחָס מְתַקְּנָתָהּ. כַּהֲנָא אוֹמֵר אֲסוּרָה וּפוֹדֶה אוֹתָהּ כְּמוֹ שֶׁהִיא. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר מוּתֶּרֶת וּפוֹדֶה אוֹתָהּ בִּזְמַן זַרְעָהּ. If an egg dedicated to the Temple became a chick. Rebbi Assi said, Cahana and Rebbi Joḥanan disagree about this. Cahana said it is forbidden and Rebbi Joḥanan said it is permitted. Rebbi Zeïra said to Rebbi Assi, since Rebbi Joḥanan said it is permitted, does he redeem207The Rome ms. and the text in Avodah Zarah read: does he not redeem it? Since this is a question, there is no material difference. One does not sow an egg; the reference is to Mishnah Terumot 9:4 which states that growth from dedicated grain is profane but nevertheless it has to be redeemed but only for the value of the seed grain used, not of the harvest. The question then is whether R. Joḥanan holds that the chick, being different from the egg, is purely profane and needs no redemption or, while being profane, needs redemption for the value of the egg. it as from the time it is sown? Rebbi Hanania208Reading of the text in Avodah Zarah. The reading here, R. Ḥanina, is impossible for chronological reasons. and Rebbi Jonah, Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Cahana: He redeems it as from the time it is sown. Rebbi Ḥanania in the name of Rebbi Phineas corrects it: Cahana said it is forbidden and he redeems it as it is now; Rebbi Joḥanan said it is permitted and he redeems it as from the time it is sown.