משנה: כְּלָל גָּדוֹל אָֽמְרוּ בַשְּׁבִיעִית כָּל־שֶׁהוּא מַאֲכַל אָדָם וּמַאֲכַל בְּהֵמָה וּמִמִּין הַצּוֹבְעִים וְאֵינוֹ מִתְקַייֵם בָּאָרֶץ יֵשׁ לוֹ שְׁבִיעִית וּלְדָמָיו שְׁבִיעִית. יֵשׁ לוֹ בִּיעוּר וּלְדָמָיו בִּיעוּר. וְאֵי זֶה זֶה זֶה עָלֵה הַלּוּף הַשּׁוֹטֶה. הָרַנְדְּנָה הָעוּלְשִׁין וְהַכְּרֵשִׁין וְהָרְגִילָה וְנֵץ הֶחָלָב. וּמַאֲכַל בְּהֵמָה הַחוֹחִים וְהַדַּרְדָּרִים. וּמִמִּין הַצּוֹבְעִים סְפִיחֵי אִסָּטִיס וְקוּצָה יֵשׁ לָהֶן שְׁבִיעִית וְלִדְמֵיהֶן שְׁבִיעִית. יֵשׁ לָהֶן בִּיעוּר וְלִדְמֵיהֶן בִּיעוּר. עוֹד כְּלָל אַחֵר אָֽמְרוּ כָּל־שֶׁהוּא מַאֲכַל אָדָם וּמַאֲכַל בְּהֵמָה וּמִמִּין הַצּוֹבְעִים וּמִתְקַייֵם בָּאָרֶץ יֵשׁ לוֹ שְׁבִיעִית וּלְדָמָיו שְׁבִיעִית. אֵין לוֹ בִּיעוּר וְלֹא לְדָמָיו בִּיעוּר. אֵי זֶה זֶה זֶה עִיקַּר הַלּוּף הַשּׁוֹטֶה וְעִיקַַּר הָרַנְדָּנָה הָעַרְקַבָּלִין וְהַחַלְבִּיצִין וְהַבּוּכָּרִיָּה. וּמִין הַצּוֹבְעִים הַפּוּאָה וְהָרִכְפָּא יֵשׁ לָהֶן שְׁבִיעִית וְלִדְמֵיהֶן שְׁבִיעִית. אֵין לָהֶן בִּיעוּר וְלֹא לִדְמֵיהֶן בִּיעוּר. רִבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר דְּמֵיהֶן מִתְבַּעְרִין עַד רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה. אָֽמְרוּ לוֹ לָהֶן אֵין בִּיעוּר קַל וָחוֹמֶר לִדְמֵיהֶן. קְלִיפֵּי רִימוֹן וְהַנֵּץ שֶׁלּוֹ קְלִיפֵּי אֶגּוֹזִים וְהַגַּלְעִינִין. יֵשׁ לָהֶן שְׁבִיעִית וְלִדְמֵיהֶן שְׁבִיעִית. הַצַּבָּע צוֹבֵעַ לְעַצְמוֹ לֹא יִצְבַּע בְּשָׂכָר. שֶׁאֵין עוֹשִֹין סְחוֹרָה בְּפֵירוֹת שְׁבִיעִית. וְלֹא בִּבְכוֹרוֹת וְלֹא בִּתְרוּמוֹת. ולֹא בִּנְבֵילוֹת וְלֹא בִּטְרֵיפוֹת וְלֹא בִּשְׁקָצִים וְלֹא בִּרְמָשִׂין. וְלֹא יְהֵא לוֹקֵחַ יַרְקוֹת שָׂדֶה וּמוֹכֵר בַּשּׁוּק אֲבָל הוּא לוֹקֵט וּבְנוֹ מוֹכֵר עַל יָדוֹ. לָקַח לְעַצְמוֹ וְהוֹתִיר מוּתָּר לְמוֹכְרוֹ. לָקַח בְּכוֹר לְמִשְׁתֶּה בְּנוֹ אוֹ לְרֶגֶל וְלֹא צָרִיךְ לוֹ מוּתָּר לְמוֹכְרוֹ. צָדֵי חַיָּה עוֹפוֹת וְדָגִים שֶׁנִּתְמַנּוּ לָהֶן מִינִין טְמֵיאִין מוּתָּר לְמוֹכְרָן. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר אַף מִשֶּׁנִּתְמַנֶּה לוֹ לְפִי דַרְכּוֹ לוֹקֵחַ וּמוֹכֵר. וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא אוּמְנָתוֹ בְכָךְ. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹסְרִין. MISHNAH: They established a comprehensive principle¹A discussion of the notion “comprehensive principle” is in Šabbat7:1 (Shabbat.68a">Babli Šabbat 68a). for the Sabbatical: Everything that is food for humans or animals or material for dye and cannot be preserved in the ground²Roots that stay edible in the ground until after the Sabbatical are not subject to removal since they are always available to wild animals. is subject to the Sabbatical and its proceeds are subject to the Sabbatical³If Sabbatical produce is sold, its proceeds become Sabbatical and must be used to buy other produce that has to be eaten in the Land under the rules of the Sabbatical.; it is subject to removal and its proceeds are subject to removal⁴If nothing of the kind for which the money was obtained is left on the fields for wild animals, the money must be spent for food that has to be distributed to the poor. In the unlikely case that there are no poor, the money has to be thrown into the Dead Sea..
What are these? This is the leaf of wild arum¹¹Cf. Kilayim 2:3:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Kilayim.2.3.1">Kilaim 2:5, Note 69., mint¹²Definition of Maimonides and Arukh (אלנענע). All sources except the Leyden ms. read הדנדנה., endives¹³Cf. Kilayim 1:2:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Kilayim.1.2.1">Kilaim 1:2, Note 41., leeks¹⁴Cf. Kilayim 1:2:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Kilayim.1.2.1">Kilaim 1:2, Note 42., purslain¹⁵Definition of Maimonides and Arukh, Arabic דגלה. and milk bud¹⁶. Definition of Maimonides in the majority of mss.: “parsley”. Some Maimonides mss.: “Mahaleb.” Arukh: White flowers, some say a grass producing wolf’s milk. The Gaonic commentary to Uqeẓin: Arabic ח̇דשף “artichoke; anything rough and hard”. Since artichokes for human food are קינרס, the thistles referred to here are animal feed.. Animal feed, thistles and thorns. Dyestuffs, the wild growth of isatis and safflower¹⁷Maimonides notes that “some commentators explain קוצה as safflower;” he expresses no opinion. Arukh defines as “madder”, but madder appears in Mishnah 4 as פואה under a different legal category.. These are subject to the Sabbatical and their proceeds are subject to the Sabbatical; both they and their proceeds are subject to removal.
They established another principle for the Sabbatical: Everything that is⁵⁵This is the reading of the Leyden ms., many of the best Mishnah mss., and R. Simson but not of Maimonides, the Mishnah mss. in the Maimonides tradition, and the Rome ms. These all read: Everything that is not …; cf. The Mishnah with variant readings, vol. Zeraïm II (Jerusalem 1975) p. 57, Sheviit 7:1:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sheviit.7.1.1">Note 14. food for humans or animals or dyestuff and is preserved in the ground is subject to the Sabbatical; its proceeds are subject to the Sabbatical; it is not subject to removal⁵⁶It cannot be subject to removal since there always remains something in the ground. nor are its proceeds subject to removal.
What are these? These are the root of wild arum, the root of mint¹²Definition of Maimonides and Arukh (אלנענע). All sources except the Leyden ms. read הדנדנה., ceterach⁵⁷In all manuscript sources except the Leyden ms., the name is עקרבלין or עקרבנין. This corresponds to Arabic עֻקרֻבַּאן., ḥalbiẓin⁵⁴These are mentioned in Mishnah 4. Maimonides declares the word to be unexplained. Arukh explains: “Egg shaped seeds developing like ferula(Italian, meaning ‘gigantic fennel’). Some people say, eggs of milk buds and that is a white flower.” In Syriac, the word means “Bethlehem star” (a flower). Arukh’s note, “some people say”, indicates that he had two Yerushalmi versions: the one before us from the Leyden ms./Venice print, and the reading of the Rome ms. in Halakhah 4: חלבנין, Arabic חֻלבּוּן “mercury” (Mercurialis, a plant); in Löw’s opinion Euphorbia tinctoria, a close relative of mercury., and wild nard⁵⁸Latin baccar,baccaris, Greek βάκχαρις, an aromatic root also called nardum rusticum (Pliny), used against evil spells. Arukh: Arabic בנגר “beet”. Maimonides: Meaning unclear.. Kinds of dyestuffs: madder and campeachy-wood⁵⁹Reseda luteola, definition of Maimonides, Arabic בקם. Definition of Arukh: Arabic שגרה̇ מרים “Miriam’s tree”, a tree, known to Arabic writers, used for dye.. These and their proceeds are subject to the Sabbatical; these and their proceeds are not subject to removal.
Rebbi Meïr says, their⁶⁰The plants mentioned in the preceding Mishnah. proceeds have to be removed before New Year’s Day. They said to him, they do not have to be removed, a fortiori their proceeds.
Pomegranate skins⁶⁸Tanning material and dyestuff. and its peduncles, nut shells⁶⁸Tanning material and dyestuff., and pits are subject to the Sabbatical and so are their proceeds. The dyer dyes for himself; he should not dye for payment⁶⁹He may work for wages if he has vegetable dyes from the preceding year. because one does not treat the produce of the Sabbatical as merchandise, nor firstlings or heaves, carcasses, torn animals, abominations⁷⁰E. g., seafood and reptiles., and crawling things⁷¹Invertebrates.. One may not buy vegetables to sell them on the market but he may collect and his son sells for him. If he bought for himself and has leftovers, it is permitted to sell them.
If somebody bought a first-born animal⁸⁵A first-born calf or lamb becomes the property of the Cohen. If the first-born develops a defect it may be eaten by everybody (Deuteronomy.15.21">Deut. 15:21); it may be sold by the Cohen to a layman. But since the first-born is a sacrifice from birth, it must be treated with respect and cannot become an object of trade. However, an occasional private sale is permitted under special circumstances. for his son’s wedding or for a holiday and now does not need it, he may sell it. Catchers of wild animals, birds, or fish who accidentally caught impure species may sell them. Rebbi Jehudah says, even one who incidentally has such an opportunity⁸⁶He is not a professional bird catcher or fisherman. An impure animal or fish crosses his way and he has the opportunity to grab it with the intent to sell it to Gentiles. For professionals it is clear that they may take impure species only if they accidentally catch them in their nets. may take and sell them on condition that this not be his profession, but the Sages prohibit it.

הלכה: צְבָעִין לְאָדָם מַהוּ שֶׁיְּהֵא עֲלֵיהֶן קְדוּשַׁת שְׁבִיעִית. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא לָכֶם כָּל־שֶׁהוּא צוֹרֶךְ לָכֶם. וְתַנֵּי עֲלָהּ כְּגוֹן אֲכִילָה וּשְׁתִיָיה וּסִיכָה וּצְבִיעָה. יָצָאת מָלוּגְמָא שֶׁאֵינָהּ אֶלָּא לְחוֹלִין. יָצָאת אֳלֵינְתִּין שֶׁאֵינָהּ אֶלָּא לַתֲּפִילִין. רִבִּי יוֹנָה בְּעֵי וְלָמָּה יָצָאת מָלוּגְמָא שֶׁאֵין עָלֶיהָ קְדוּשַׁת שְׁבִיעִית. וְהָתַנֵּי דִּן וְצָד וְזֶרַע אִסָטִיס שֶׁזּוֹרְעִין אוֹתָן בְּמוֹצָאֵי שְׁבִיעִית קְדוּשַׁת שְׁבִיעִית חָלָה עֲלֵיהֶם. מַיי כְדוֹן לָכֶם הַשָּׁוֶה לְכוּלְּכֶם. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָא שָׁמַע מִן הָדָא תִהְיֶה. אַף לְהַדְלָקַת הַנֵּר וְלִצְבּוֹעַ בָּהּ צֶבַע. וְלֹא נִמְצָא מְאַבֶּד אֶת אוֹכְלֵי בְהֵמָה. תִּיפְתָּר בִּצְבוּעִין לְאָדָם. אָמַַר רִבִּי מָנָא תִּיפְתָּר בְאוֹכְלֵי בְהֵמָה לְאָדָם וְלֵית שְׁמַע מִנֵּיהּ כְּלוּם. HALAKHAH: Does the sanctity of the Sabbatical fall on dyes for humans⁵Cosmetics.? Let us hear from the following (Leviticus.25.6">Lev. 25:6): “For you”, all that is needed by you⁶“The Sabbath of the Land shall be for you (plural) to eat, for you (singular), your slave, and your hand-maiden, your hired hand and your (Gentile) resident who dwell with you.” The first “for you” seems to be superfluous. Since the verse gives permission to a slave owner to eat Sabbatical produce, it follows that the rich may eat. The poor are given permission to eat in Exodus.23.11">Ex. 23:11: “The Seventh Year you shall let lie fallow and abandon it so that the needy of your people may eat; the remainder the wild animals of the field shall eat.” It is inferred that “for you” means all legitimate human needs that apply to all equally.. We have stated on that: For example eating, drinking, anointing, and coloring. This excludes wound dressing which is only for the sick. This excludes olentia⁷See Berakhot, pp. 87, 501. תפילין is derived from Arabic תַּפִֹל “mal odorous”. which are only for the malodorous. Rebbi Jonah asked: Why does one exclude wound dressing because the sanctity of the Sabbatical cannot fall on it? But did we not state⁸A related text is in Tosephta 5:7: “Din,Bṣr, and indigo usually are sown after the end of the Sabbatical.” As R. S. Lieberman notes, the identity of the first two plants can no longer be established. The isatis plant is used as dye (indigo) but the seeds are good only for sowing. Hence, seeds harvested in the Sabbatical retain their Sabbatical quality even after the end of the year. {For דן cf. Arabic דאן “to be of inferior quality”, for צד Arabic צדא “rust”.}
The argument goes as follows: It is stated in Mishnah 8:1 that animal feed may be used to make wound dressing; only Sabbatical human food may not be used. In itself, animal feed has the sanctity of the Sabbatical and cannot be used for industrial purposes. Then one cannot understand why dyestuff seeds retain their sanctity but wound dressing does not. The answer is that the next argument will show that human needs have precedence over animal needs but once the product is no longer available for all of mankind it cannot have sanctity attached.: “Sanctity of the Sabbatical falls on din, sad, and indigo seed that one sows after the end of the Sabbatical.” What is that? “For you”, for all of you equally. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Hila understood it from the following (Leviticus.25.7">Lev. 25:7)⁹Sifra Behar Pereq 1(10). “For your domestic animal and the beast in your Land shall be all its yield as feed.” It is clear from the preceding verse that not all growth of the Sabbatical is for animals since humans were given prior permission to eat it. Therefore, the expression “shall be” is interpreted as: All that is not used for humans shall be animal feed.: “Shall be”, even to kindle the light and to dye. Does this not destroy animal feed? Rebbi Mana said, explain it if animal feed is used for human needs and you cannot infer anything from it¹⁰For potential human food..

צְבָעִין לִבְהֵמָה מַהוּ שֶׁיְּהֵא עֲלֵיהֶן קְדוּשַׁת שְׁבִיעִית. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא עִיקַּר הַװֶרֶד וְעִיקַּר הָאֵגָה וְעִיקַּר הָאוֹג אֵין בָּהֶן קְדוּשַׁת שְׁבִיעִית. מִינֵי (כְּנִיסוֹת) מַהוּ שֶׁיְּהֵא עֲלֵיהֶן קְדוּשַׁת שְׁבִיעִית. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא הַייַרְעָנִין וְהַבּוֹרִית וְהָאָהָל יֵשׁ לָהֶן קְדוּשַׁת שְׁבִיעִית. בְּשָׂמִים מַהוּ שֶׁיְּהֵא עֲלֵיהֶן קְדוּשַׁת שְׁבִיעִית. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא הַפַּרְחָלָבַן [וְהָאוֹרֶן] אֵין עֲלֵיהֶן קְדוּשַׁת שְׁבִיעִית. חֲבֵרַייָא דְּרִבִי שִׁמְעוֹן הוּא. דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אָמַר אֵין לִקְטָף שְׁבִיעִית מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵינוֹ פֶרִי. רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ תִּיפְתָּר דִבְרֵי הַכֹּל בְּהָדָא נְסוֹרָתָה. מִינֵי אַדְלָקוֹת מַה אִית לָךְ כְּגוֹן הָהֵן פְּקוּעָה. Does the sanctity of the Sabbatical fall on dyes for animals? Let us hear from the following¹⁹In Tosephta 5:3, rose root is mentioned together with pine roots; in Tosephta 5:6, thornbush root is mentioned with carob tree root. The Tosephta agrees that these have no sanctity in the Sabbatical. Perhaps these roots were used as dye for animals (to designate the owner?). For sumac, cf. Peah 1:4:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Peah.1.4.1">Peah, Chapter 1 Note 243.: “Roots of rose, thornbush, and sumac have no sanctity of the Sabbatical.” Does the sanctity of the Sabbatical fall on cleansing materials²⁰Reading כְּבִיסוֹת “cleaning agents” instead of כניסות “entrances” with all commentators. Rome ms: סְכוּכוֹת “glasses”.? Let us hear from the following: Asphodel²¹A plant used by Palestinian Bedouin to clean their hands [E. Hareubeni, מצמחי הארץ, Sinai 4(1939) 622–624.], potash²²Potash obtained by burning salty plants., and aloë fall under the sanctity of the Sabbatical. Does the sanctity of the Sabbatical fall on perfumes? Let us hear from the following: Parḥalabin²³The identity of this plant has not been determined. In the Tosephta (5:6): הפדחבלין. It is possible to read in the Leyden ms. הפדח לבן which Kohut takes as “flower of the styrax (لبني)”. This fits the context but not the grammar, since it would have to be פדח הלֻבָּן. and laurel trees have no sanctity of the Sabbatical. The colleagues: This is by Rebbi Simeon, since Rebbi Simeon said²⁴Mishnah 7:9.: Balsamum has no sanctity of the Sabbatical since it is no fruit. Rebbi Samuel in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: Explain it according to everybody referring to jonquil²⁵Persian and Arabic נסרין, a very aromatic flower.. What about fuel, for example oakum²⁶The answer to this question, from the Tosephta, is given at the end of the Halakhah.?

וְהָהֵן װֶרֶד תַּנֵּי בָּהּ תְּלַת מִילִּין. עָלִין שֶׁלּוֹ יֵשׁ לָהֶן שְׁבִיעִית וְלִדְמֵיהֶן שְׁבִיעִית. יֵשׁ לָהֶן בִּיעוּר וְלִדְמֵיהֶן בִּיעוּר. פִּיקָה שֶׁלּוֹ יֵשׁ לָהּ שְׁבִיעִית וְלִדְמֶיהָ שְׁבִיעִית. אֵין לוֹ בִּיעוּר וְלֹא לִדְמֶיהָ בִּיעוּר. עִיקָּר שֶׁלּוֹ אֵין לוֹ שְׁבִיעִית וְלֹא לְדָמָיו שְׁבִיעִית אֵין לוֹ בִּיעוּר וְלֹא לְדָמָיו בִּיעוּר. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ מַהוּ לִכְבּוֹשׁ מִן הָהֵן װֶרֶד. אָמַר לוֹ וְכִי יֵשׁ לוֹ מְלָאכָה אֲחֶרֶת. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי חִייָא אוֹכֶל אָדָם הוּא. About roses, three things were stated: Their leaves are subject to the Sabbatical and so are their proceeds; they are subject to removal and so are their proceeds. Their spine²⁷Translation by Musaphia. Usually, פיקה means “small globe”. Rose wood may be used industrially and is subject to the Sabbatical. The plant is a perennial and need not be removed. is subject to the Sabbatical and so are its proceeds; it is not subject to removal, neither are its proceeds. Its root is not subject to the Sabbatical nor are its proceeds; it is not subject to removal, neither are its proceeds²⁸Tosephta 5:3.. Rebbi Jeremiah asked before Rebbi Abbahu: May one make preserves from roses²⁹In Mishnah 7:10, it is stated that rose leaves were preserved in olive oil. In general, Sabbatical produce may not be cooked if it can be eaten raw. R. Abbahu notes that rose leaves cannot be eaten raw. But as human food they fall under the rules of the Sabbatical; this implies that it must be permitted to make preserves from rose leaves.? He said to him, do they have any other use? Rebbi Ḥiyya stated that it is human food.

הוֹרֵי רִבִּי מָנָא אוֹרֳסָטִין שָׁרֵי אודורודוסטון שָׁרֵי קִיטְרָטוֹן שָׁרֵי מִירְסִינָּטוֹן שָׁרֵי דרמינון שָׁרֵי אִידְרוֹמִירוֹן אֲסִיר דיומילן אֲסִיר. Rebbi Mana taught: orosatin³⁰Probably rosatum,i, n. “rose wine”, also “preserves of roses” (Apicius). The Leyden ms. has a second form אודורוסטין (in the Rome ms. אודורודוסטין) which Musaphia has explained as ὑδρορόσατον “rose water”, in medical use in his time. is permitted, kitraton³¹Latin citratus,a,um, adj., “steeped in citrus oil” (Pliny). Compare also citreum “citron”; citrium “a kind of gourd.” is permitted, myrsinaton³²Cf. Latin myrtites,ae, m., from Greek μυρτίτης οἶνος, “myrtle wine”. is permitted, drmynwn³³No reasonable explanation of this word has been offered; Musaphia conjectures Greek ῥοδόμυρον, ῥόδινον μύρον “rose ointment.” {Kohout thinks of absinth, Farsi درمنة darmneh. But the word cannot mean a plant; it designates food or drink made from the plant whose name would be a composite like درمنه رومى.} is permitted, hydromyron³⁴The Venice print has אידרוטירון but the Leyden ms. אידרומירון as already conjectured by most Hebrew lexicographers. Kohout notes that the closest word is ὑδρόμηλον, τό “drink of water and μηλόμηλι, honey flavored with quinces”. He conjectures that it should be *ὑδρόμυρρον for “myrrh water” but notes that this word is not found in the dictionaries. {Cf. Greek ὑγρόμυρον “liquid ointment” (E. G.)} is forbidden, diomelon³⁵Reading of the Leyden ms. Cf. perhaps Greek διὰ μελίτων “salve made from honey.” (E. G.)
The Venice print and Rome ms. Have דיומידן which the lexicographers read with Musaphia as דימורון (Syriac רימירו), Greek διά μόρων “medicine from black mulberry juice and honey”. is forbidden.

צִיפֹּרַיֵּי שְׁאָלוּן לְרִבִּי אִימִּי מַהוּ לְחַטִּן בְּחוֹחִין.אָמַר לוֹ אַתּוּן אָֽמְרִין בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי חֲנִינָה אֲפִילוּ עֲלֵי קִינָרִיסָאשָׁרֵי. אָמַר רִבִּי יֹאשַׁיָּה לְעוּבְדָּה וּסְמוֹךְ עָלַיי. אָמַר רִבִּי יֹאשַׁיָּה אֵין לָךְ מְיוּחָד לִבְהֵמָה אֶלָּא חָצִיר בִּלְבַד וּשֶׁלְּקָחוֹ לְחַטִּן בּוֹ מוּתָּר לְחַטִּן בּוֹ. The Sepphoreans asked Rebbi Immi: May one keep moist with thistles³⁸This is noted in Makhshirin 3:5" href="/Mishnah_Makhshirin.3.5">Mishnah Makhširin 3:5; people used to collect grasses to put on top of their grain heaps to keep the latter from losing moisture. Since thistles are camel food, the question is about use of Sabbatical animal food for humans. In the Mishnah, and the Tosephta corresponding to the quote in the next paragraph, the spelling is להטין.? He said to them, you say in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina³⁹In the Rome ms: R. Yose ben R. Ḥanina., even leaves of artichokes⁴⁰Edible thistles. are permitted. Rebbi Yoshaia said, this is to act on, you may rely on me. Rebbi Yoshaia said, the only food exclusively for animals is green grass; if it was bought to moisturize one may use it to keep moist.

וְתַנֵּי חָצִיר וְכָל־שְׁאָר יְרָקוֹת שֶׁלְּקָחָן לְחַטִּן בָּהֶן מוּתָּר לְחַטִּן בָּהֶן. חִישֵּׁב עֲלֵיהֶן לְאֹכֶל אָדָם אָסוּר לְחַטִּן בָּהֶן. תַּנֵּי בַּר קַפָּרָא מוּתָּר לְחַטִּן בָּהֶן וְאָסוּר לָלוֹתמֵהֶן לָמָּה שֶׁיֵּשׁ עֲלֵיהֶן קְדוּשַׁת שְׁבִיעִית וְאוֹכְלֵי בְהֵמָה אֵין עֲלֵיהֶן קְדוּשַׁת שְׁבִיעִית דְאַתְּ אָמַר עוֹשִֹין מֵהֶן מָלוּגְמָא לְאָדָם. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי שְׁמָעִינָן שֶׁעוֹשִׂין מֵהֶן מָלוּגְמָא לְאָדָם וּשְׁמָעִינָן שֶׁמּוּתָּר לְסוֹחְטָן וְלַעֲשֹוֹתָן מֵהֶן סַמְמָנִין לְאָדָם. It was stated⁴²Tosephta 5:16 following the Erfurt ms. The traditional text and the Vienna ms. have “permitted” and “forbidden” switched.: “Green grass and any other vegetables he took to moisturize may be used to moisturize. When he thought about them as human food it is forbidden to use them to moisturize.” Bar Qappara stated: One may use them⁴³Vegetables collected or bought as human food. They cannot be squeezed for their moisture because this would destroy the plants so that they would no longer be food. to moisturize but he may not squeeze out from them because the holiness of the Sabbatical is on them. But there is no Sabbatical holiness on animal feed since you say one may use them to make wound dressing for humans. Rebbi Yose said, we understand that one may use them to make wound dressing for humans, and we understand that one may press them to prepare medication for humans.

תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן לוּלָבֵי זְרָדִים (וְשֶׁל עָרְלָה) וַעֲלֵי לוּף שׁוֹטֶה אֵין מְטַמְּאִין טוּמְאַת אוֹכְלִין עַד שֶׁיִּמְתְּקוּ לָמָּה שֶׁהֵן מָרִין. וְתוּרְמוֹסִין לָאו אִינֻּן מָרִין שַׁנְייָא הִיא תוּרְמוֹסִין שֶׁעִיקָּרָן אוֹכֶל אָדָם. לֹא צוֹרְכָה דְלֹא שְׁמָעִינָן שֶׁאֵין קְדוּשַּׁת שְׁבִיעִית חָלָה עֲלֵיהֶן עַד שֶׁיִּמְתְּקוּ. There, we have stated⁴⁴Mishnah Uqeẓin 3:4. The translation follows the text there: לוּלָבֵי וְרָדִים וְשֶׁל עָדָל וַעֲלֵי הַלּוּף הַשּׁוֹטֶה since the text enclosed in parenthesis, של ערלה “of orlah”, makes no sense. Orlah is forbidden for any use, certainly for food. Soft new shoots (mainly of vines) can be used as food, but for most people they are simply pieces of wood. Hence, they do not have the status of food unless somebody takes them as such.: “Sprouts of new shoots, [of nasturtium,] and the leaves of wild arum cannot receive impurity of food until they become sweet.” Why? Because they are bitter. But are lupines not also bitter⁴⁵The question refers to a text close to Tosephta Uqeẓin 3:9: “Sprouts of new shoots of vines and carob trees cannot receive impurity of food until they become sweet. But arum, mustard, lupines, and all other foods that need to be cooked {before they can be eaten} can receive impurity of food whether they have become sweet or not.” (cf. Demay, Chapter 2, Note 141.)? It is different with lupines since they are human food from the start⁴⁶They are only cultivated as human food.. It is different for these⁴⁷The kinds mentioned in Mishnah Uqeẓin.; we would not know that the sanctity of the Sabbatical would not fall on them unless they become sweet.

לֹא כֵן אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן חֲנִינָה עוּלְשִׁין חֲשׁוּבוֹת הֵן לְטַמֵּא טוּמְאַת אוֹכְלִין בַּשְּׁבִיעִית וְאִיתְמַר טַעֲמָא הָדָא אָֽמְרָה עַד שֶׁלֹּא הִתִּיר רִבִּי לְהָבִיא יֶרֶק מֵחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ לָאָרֶץ. אֲבָל מִשֶּׁהִתִּיר רִבִּי לְהָבִיא יֶרֶק מֵחוּץ לָאָרֶץ לָאָרֶץ הִיא שְׁבִיעִית הִיא שְׁאָר שְׁנֵי שָׁבוּעַ. וָכָא לֹא יְהוֹ חֲשׁוּבוֹת עַד שֶׁיַּחְשֹׁב עֲלֵיהֶן. וּמָצִינוּ דָּבָר בַּתְּחִילָּה קְדוּשַּׁת שְׁבִיעִית חָלָה עָלָיו. וּבְסוֹף אֵין קְדוּשַּׁת שְׁבִיעִית חָלָה עָלָיו. הָתִיבוּן הֲרֵי הַסִּיאָה וְהָאֵזוֹב וְהַקּוּרְנִית שֶׁלְּקָטָן לְעֵצִים אֵין קְדוּשַּׁת שְׁבִיעִית חָלָה עֲלֵיהֶן. חִישֵּׁב עֲלֵיהֶן לְאוֹכְלִין קְדוּשַּׁת שְׁבִיעִית חָלָה עֲלֵיהֶן. אָמַר רִבִּי חֲנַנְיָה שֶׁכֵּן אִם לְקָטָן מִתְּחִילָּה לְאוֹכְלִין קְדוּשַּׁת שְׁבִיעִית חָלָה עֲלֵיהֶן מִיַּד. ⁴⁸Here starts the discussion of the examples given in the Mishnah. Why do these plants have to be singled out? Did not Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina say: Endives are important enough in the Sabbatical to become susceptible to impurity of food?⁴⁹Chapter 5, Note 143. The reason was spelled out: This is, before Rebbi permitted the importation of vegetables from outside the Land into the Land. But after Rebbi permitted the importation of vegetables from outside the Land into the Land, there is no difference between the Sabbatical and the other years of the sabbatical cycle. Then they should not be important unless somebody thinks about them! Do we find anything on which from the start the sanctity of the Sabbatical (falls) [does not fall] but in the end the sanctity of the Sabbatical (does not fall) [may fall] on them⁵⁰All commentators switch the statements here (and in the following Tosephta) since it is clear that anything that is sanctified cannot lose its status as long as it is in existence. Both mss. have the text as it is given here but R. Simson quotes as his text וּמָצִינוּ דָּכָר בַּתְּחִילָּה קְדוּשַּׁת שְׁבִיעִית חָלָה עָלָיו. וּבְסוֹף אֵין קְרוּשַּׁת שְׁבִיעִית חָלָה עָלָיו, this is the text translated in brackets.? They objected: “The sanctity of the Sabbatical does not fall on calamint, hyssop⁵¹Maimonides defines אזוב as معتر ṣaʻtar “wild thyme;” this seems to be the acceptation in Yerushalmi and Tosephta. (In commercial usage today, zaʻtar is oregano.), and thyme if one collected them as wood⁵²In Mishnah 8:1, the three kinds mentioned here are counted as weeds that become food only by the intention of the harvester.. If he considered them as food, the sanctity of the Sabbatical falls on them.” Rebbi Ḥananiah said, if he collected them first as food, the sanctity of the Sabbatical falls on them immediately⁵³While one would expect clear rules what is and what is not covered by the sanctity of the Sabbatical, so that belated switches between profane and holy should be excluded, it is enough that the possibility of such a clear-cut decision exists even if in this particular case it becomes only clear retroactively which possibility was chosen..

הַסִּיאָה צִתְּרָה. אֵזוֹב אֵיזוֹבָא. קוֹרְנִית קוֹרְנִיתָא. מַהוּ חַלְבִּיצִין בֵּיצֵי נֵץ חָלָב. Calamint is ṣatra, hyssop is esoba, thyme is qornita. What are ḥalbiẓin⁵⁴These are mentioned in Mishnah 4. Maimonides declares the word to be unexplained. Arukh explains: “Egg shaped seeds developing like ferula(Italian, meaning ‘gigantic fennel’). Some people say, eggs of milk buds and that is a white flower.” In Syriac, the word means “Bethlehem star” (a flower). Arukh’s note, “some people say”, indicates that he had two Yerushalmi versions: the one before us from the Leyden ms./Venice print, and the reading of the Rome ms. in Halakhah 4: חלבנין, Arabic חֻלבּוּן “mercury” (Mercurialis, a plant); in Löw’s opinion Euphorbia tinctoria, a close relative of mercury.? Eggs of milk bud¹⁶. Definition of Maimonides in the majority of mss.: “parsley”. Some Maimonides mss.: “Mahaleb.” Arukh: White flowers, some say a grass producing wolf’s milk. The Gaonic commentary to Uqeẓin: Arabic ח̇דשף “artichoke; anything rough and hard”. Since artichokes for human food are קינרס, the thistles referred to here are animal feed..

אָמַר לָהֶן רִבִּי מֵאִיר מַחְמִיר אֲנִי בְּדָמִין מִן הָעִיקָּר. שֶׁהַשֶּׁמֶן שֶׁל שְׁבִיעִית מַדְלִיקִין בּוֹ מְכָרוֹ וְלָקַח בּוֹ שֶׁמֶן אֵין מַדְלִיקִין בּוֹ. רִבִּי אִימִּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן הֶחֱלִיף שֶׁמֶן בְּשֶׁמֶן שְׁנֵיהֶן אֲסוּרִין. כֵּיצַד הוּא עוֹשֶׂה רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה מַחֲלִיף שְׁנֵיהֶן שֶׁל חוּלִין. הֶחֱלִיף יַיִן בְּשֶׁמֶן כְּמַה דְאַתְּ אָמַר יַיִן אֵין סָכִין אוֹתוֹ. וְדִכְװָתֵיהּ שֶׁמֶן אֵין מַדְלִיקִין. הֶחֱלִיף עָלִין בְּלוּלָבִין. כְּמַה דְתֵימַר עָלִין יֵשׁ לָהֶן בִּיעוּר וְדִכְװָתֵיהּ לוּלָבִין יֵשׁ לָהֶן בִּיעוּר. הֶחֱלִיף אוֹכְלֵי אָדָם בְּאוֹכְלֵי בְהֵמָה כְּמַה דְתֵימַר אוֹכְלֵי אָדָם אֵין עוֹשִֹין מֵהֶן מָלוּגְמָא וְדִכְװָתֵהּ אוֹכְלֵי בְהֵמָה אֵין עוֹשִׂין מֵהֶן מָלוּגְמָא. וְהָתַנִּינָן מוֹכְרִין אוֹכְלֵי אָדָם וְאוֹכְלֵי בְהֵמָה לִיקַח בָּהֶן אוֹכְלֵי אָדָם אֲבָל לֹא אוֹכְלֵי בְהֵמָה אוֹכְלֵי בְהֵמָה לִיקַח בָּהֶן אוֹכְלֵי בְהֵמָה וְכָל־שֶׁכֵּן אוֹכְלֵי אָדָם (לִיקַח בָּהֶן אוֹכְלֵי בְהֵמָה). “⁶¹A parallel, speaking about other plants, is in Tosephta 5:3–4. Rebbi Meïr said to them: I am more restrictive with the proceeds than with the main [produce]. For one may light with Sabbatical oil but if one sold it and bought oil with it he may not light with it.” Rebbi Ammi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If one exchanged oil for oil, both of them are forbidden⁶²Since Sabbatical produce may be traded only as food, Sabbatical olive oil that was food, fuel, and ointment, after the sale is food only. Even if the money was used to buy profane (pre-Sabbatical) oil, the sanctity of the Sabbatical is transferred to the profane oil by the money, which may be used only for food. Therefore, in order to obtain fuel, the Sabbatical oil must be bartered, not sold, against profane oil. The following statements are applications of the same principle.. What can he do? Rebbi Ḥizqiah in the name of Rebbi Jeremiah: He barters both for profane [oil]. If he exchanged wine for oil; just as you say that he may not anoint with wine so he may not light with oil. If he exchanged leaves for sprouts, just as you say that leaves are subject to removal so sprouts are subject to removal. If he exchanged human food for animal feed, just as one may not make a wound dressing from human food so he may not make a wound dressing from animal feed. We also have stated⁶³The text as it stands is difficult to accept. A similar text is in Tosephta 5:19. The Vienna ms. of the Tosephta reads: “One may sell human food and animal feed to buy human food with the proceeds; one does not sell animal feed to buy animal feed and human food; it is not necessary to mention that one does not sell human food to buy animal feed.” The Erfurt ms. reads: “One may sell human food and animal feed to buy human food with the proceeds; one does not sell animal feed to buy animal feed and one does not sell human food to buy animal feed.” The text of the Venice print of the Tosephta is very close to the Erfurt text. However, the Yerushalmi text cannot be emended following the Tosephta texts (which might represent a Babylonian tradition); there is no reason to believe that the Yerushalmi would forbid trading animal feed for animal feed and human food. The best option is to disregard the clause put in parentheses.: “One may sell human food and animal feed to buy human food with the proceeds,animal feed to buy animal feed and certainly human food (to buy animal feed).”

וְהָדָא קְנִיבְתָא דְיַרְקָא מַסְקִין לָהּ לְאִיגְרָא וְהִיא יָֽבְשָׁה מִן גַּרְמָהּ. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹצָדָק בְּיַיִן עַד הַפֶּסַח בְּשֶׁמֶן עַד הָעֲצֶרֶת וּבְגְּרוֹגְרוֹת עַד הַפּוּרִים. רִבִּי בֵּיבַי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי חֲנִינָה וּבִתְמָרִין עַד הַחֲנוּכָּה. The leaves removed from vegetables one puts on the roof and they dry up by themselves⁶⁴Wilted leaves and greenery of vegetables that would detract from the value of the vegetables are removed before the vegetables are sold or used. They also have to be removed at the end of the Sabbatical but they may be stored somewhere where they by themselves dry out (or rot) and are no longer human food.. Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Yoẓadaq: Wine until Passover, oil until Pentecost, dried figs until Purim. Rebbi Bibi in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: Dates until Ḥanukkah⁶⁵The deadline after which Sabbatical produce must be eaten or destroyed after the end of the Sabbatical. The corresponding text in the Pesachim.53a">Babli (Pesaḥim 53a) is formulated as a baraita: “One eats grapes until Passover, olives until Pentecost, dried figs until Ḥanukkah, dates until Purim. Rav Bibi: Rebbi Joḥanan switches two in the baraita”. (Rebbi Joḥanan follows the text of the Yerushalmi for figs and dates.).

רִבִּי אִילָא רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר בָּא וָוא. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן וַחֲבֵרוֹתֵיהּ הֲווֹן יָֽתְבִין מַקְשִׁייָן אָמַר יֵשׁ לָהֶן בִּיעוּר אוֹ אֵין לָהֶן בִּיעוּר. עָבַר רִבִּי יַנַּאי. אָֽמְרוּן הַאי גַבְרָא מִישְׁאֲלִינֵיה אֲתוֹ שְׁאָלוּנֵיהּ אָמַר לָהֶן כָּל־דָּבָר שֶׁדַּרְכּוֹ לִישׁוֹר יֵשׁ לוֹ בִּיעוּר. וּשְׁאֵין דַּרְכּוֹ לִישׁוֹר אֵין לוֹ בִּיעוּר. וְאֵילּוּ מֵהֶן שֶׁדַּרְכָּן לִישׁוֹר וּמֵהֶן שֶׁאֵין דַּרְכָּן לִישׁוֹר וּשְׁרַע תַּנָּייָה מִינָהּ. Rebbi Joḥanan and his colleagues were sitting and discussed the problem whether these are subject to removal or not⁶⁷This refers to the second part of the Mishnah and Tosephta 5:3, giving examples of fruits and produce subject to the rules of Mishnah 3.. Rebbi Yannai was passing by. They said, this is a man worth asking. They asked him and he said to them: Everything that normally falls from the tree is subject to removal, but what does not normally fall is free from removal. Which ones normally fall, or normally do not fall, the Tanna refrained from [stating].

מַַהוּ לִצְבּוֹעַ בְּטוֹבַת הֲנַייָה. מִן מַה דְתַנֵּי הַשְּׁלֹשׁוּשִׁית וַחַלְבִצִין הַתֵּגָּר עוֹשֶׂה לְעַצְמוֹ הָדָא אָֽמְרָה שֶׁאָסוּר לִצְבּוֹעַ בְּטוֹבַת הֲנַייָה. May one dye for goodwill⁷²Not for money but for the prospect of future business.? Since it was stated: “Milk thistle⁷³According to I. Löw, Crozophora tinctoria, a plant used to produce dye, mentioned Tosephta 5:5 as subject to the rules of the Sabbatical. and ḥalbiẓin the trader prepares for himself⁷⁴Since it does not say, “but not for wages”, this implies that all commercial use is forbidden.”, that means that it is forbidden to dye for goodwill.

כְּתִִיב טְמֵאִים הֵמָּה לָכֶם. מַה תַלְמוּד לוֹמַר וּטְמֵאִים יִהְיוּ לָכֶם. אֶלָּא אֶחָד אִיסּוּר אֲכִילָה וְאֶחָד אִיסּוּר הֲנַייָה. כָּל־דָּבָר שֶׁאִיסּוּרוֹ דְּבַר תּוֹרָה אָסוּר לַעֲשׂוֹת בּוֹ סְחוֹרָה. וְכָל־דָּבָר שֶׁאִיסּוּרוֹ מִדִּבְרֵיהֶן מוּתָּר לַעֲשׂוֹת בּוֹ סְחוֹרָה. וַהֲרֵי חֲמוֹר. לִמְלַאכְתּוֹ הוּא גָדֵל. וַהֲרֵי גָמָל. לִמְלַאכְתּוֹ הוּא גָדֵל. רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה נְסַב וִיהַב בַּהֲדֵין מוּרִייֵס. רִבִּי חוּנָא נְסַב וִיהַב בַּהֲדֵין חִלְתּוּתָא. It is written (Leviticus.11.28">Lev. 11:28): “They are impure for you”. Why does it say (Leviticus.11.35">Lev. 11:35) “they shall be impure for you”? One is for the prohibition of eating, the other for the prohibition of usufruct⁷⁵The argument is also found in Orlah 3:1 (fol. 63d), Pesachim 2:1:2-16" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Pesachim.2.1.2-16">Pesaḥim 2:1 (fol. 28c), Bava Kamma 7:7:2-6" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Bava_Kamma.7.7.2-6">Baba Qama 7:10 (fol. 6a), Pesachim.21b">Babli Pesaḥim 21b, Kiddushin.56b">Qiddušin 56b, Baba Qama41a, Chullin.114b">Ḥulin 114b. The formulation in the Babli is: R. Abbahu said, every place where it is stated “it should not be eaten, do not eat” implies both prohibition as food and of usufruct unless the Torah details the permission of usufruct as for cadavers (Deuteronomy.14.21">Deut. 14:21). One has to assume that “anything forbidden” mentioned here also means “anything forbidden as food.”. Anything forbidden by the Torah is forbidden for trade but everything whose prohibition is rabbinical is permitted for trade. But is there not the donkey⁷⁶Donkey meat is forbidden. The camel should have been mentioned first since it is mentioned explicitly as forbidden animal; donkey meat is forbidden by the general clause permitting only ruminants.? It is raised for work. Is there not the camel? It is raised for work. Rebbi Yehoshaiah traded in muries⁷⁷Brine possibly made with wine (cf. Demay Chapter 1, Note 156). The nature of the prohibition is discussed in Terumot 11:1 (fol. 47c); it is agreed that the prohibition is rabbinical., Rebbi Ḥuna traded in asafoetida⁷⁸It is not clear how and why asafoetida would be prohibited. The best explanation is that of Pene Moshe(Margalit) that medicines are neither food nor dyestuff and, hence, may be traded in the Sabbatical year..

תַּנֵּי לֹא יְהוֹ חֲמִשָּׁה מְלַקְּטִין יֶרֶק וְאֶחָד מוֹכֵר אֲבָל מוֹכֵר הוּא שֶׁלּוֹ וְשֵׁל חֲבֵירוֹ. חֲמִשִּׁין אַחִין מְלַקְּטִין וְאֶחָד מוֹכֵר עַל יְדֵיהֶן. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּי רִבִּי בּוּן וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲשׂוּ פַּלְטֵיר. שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא מַזְבִּין בְּהוּא אָתָר בְּכָל־שָׁנָה. וְאִית דְּבָעֵי מֵימוֹר דְּלֹא יְהֵא מַזְבִּין בְּכָל־שָׁעָה. It was stated⁷⁹Tosephta 6:21–22. There, the text is: “If five people were collecting there should not be one selling for them, but one may sell his own and theirs. Five brothers may collect and one sells for them but they should not open a store.” The reading “50” may be an error for “5”, but the Yerushalmi definitely does not permit a person to sell more than what he and one other person collects.: “There should not be five people collecting and one selling for them, but one may sell his own and that of a colleague. 50 brothers may collect and one sells for them.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, but only should they not have a store⁸⁰Greek πρατήρ, cf. Demay, Chapter 5, Note 75. The Rome ms. has here an addition: “What means ‘that they not have a store’? That he should not sell.…”, [i. e.], that he should not sell at the same place all year round; some say that he should not sell at all hours.

תַּנֵּי הַחֶנְװָנִי שֶׁהָיָה מְבַשֵּׁל יְרָקוֹת בַּשְּׁבִיעִית לֹא יְהֵא מְחַשֵּׁב שְׂכָרוֹ עַל דְּמֵי שְׁבִיעִית אֲבָל מְחַשֵּׁב הוּא עַל הַיַּיִן וְעַל הַשֶּׁמֶן וְעַל הָאַבְטָלָה. רִבִּי לָא מְפַקֵּד לְאִילֵין חֲלִטָרַיָּא לָא תַהֲווֹן מְחַשְּׁבִין אַגְרֵיכוֹן עַל מִישְׁחָא אֶלָּא עַל חִיטַּיָּא. It was stated⁸¹Tosephta 6:22.: “The store owner⁸²He sells raw and cooked food. who was cooking vegetables during the Sabbatical should not compute his profit on the value of Sabbatical [produce] but rather compute it on wine, oil⁸³Presumably oil and wine are from the preceding year., and lost time “Rebbi La commanded the makers of fried food⁸⁴They make חליטא, dough baked swimming in oil. In this case, one has to assume that the oil is Sabbatical but the wheat is not.: “Do not compute your gain on the oil but on the wheat.”

תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. אָמַר רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אֵימָתַי בִּזְמָן שֶׁאֵין לוֹ אוּמָּנוּת אֶלָּא הוּא אֲבָל יֵשׁ לוֹ אוּמָּנוּת שֶׁלֹּא הִיא הֲרֵי זֶה מוּתָּר. הֵיךְ עֲבִידָא. הָיָה יוֹשֵׁב וּבָטֵל מִמְּלַאכְתּוֹ כָּל־שְׁנֵי שָׁבוּעַ כֵּיוָן שֶׁבָּאָת שְׁבִיעִית הִתְחִיל מְפַשֵּׁיט יָדוֹ וְנוֹשֵׂא וְנוֹתֵן בְּפֵירוֹת עֲבֵירָה אִם יֵשׁ עִמּוֹ מְלָאכָה אֲחֶרֶת כָּשֵׁר וְאִם לָאו פָּסוּל. אֲבָל אִם הָיָה יוֹשֵׁב וְעוֹסֵק בִּמְלַאכְתּוֹ כָּל־שְׁנֵי שָׁבוּעַ כֵּיוָן שֶׁבָּאָת שְׁבִיעִית הִתְחִיל מְפַשֵּׁיט יָדוֹ וְנוֹשֵֹא וְנוֹתֵן בְּפֵירוֹת עֲבֵירָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין עִמּוֹ מְלָאכָה אֲחֶרֶת מוּתָּר. רִבִּי בָּא בַּר זַבְדָּא. רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר. הֲלָכָה כְרִבִּי יוּדָה דְמַתְנִיתִן. אִקְלַס רִבִּי בָּא בַּר זַבְדָּא דָּמַר שְׁמוּעָה בְשֵׁם זְעִיר מִינֵּיהּ. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי יוּדָה לְחוּמְרָא. הֵיךְ עֲבִידָא הָיָה יוֹשֵׁב וְעוֹסֵק בִּמְלַאכְתּוֹ כָּל־שְׁנֵי שָׁבוּעוֹת. וּבַשְּׁבִיעִית הִתְחִיל וּמְפַשֵּׁיט אֶת יָדוֹ לִישָּׂא וְלִתֵּן בְּפֵירוֹת עֲבֵירָה אִם יֵשׁ עִמּוֹ מְלָאכָה אֲחֶרֶת מוּתָּר וְאִם לָאו אָסוּר. (אֲבָל אִם הָיָה עוֹסֵק בִּמְלַאכְתּוֹ כָּל־שְׁנֵי שָׁבוּעַ כֵּיוָן שֶׁבָּאָת שְׁבִיעִית הִתְחִיל מְפַשֵּׁיט יָדוֹ וְנוֹשֵׂא וְנוֹתֵן בְּפֵירוֹת עֲבֵירָה. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין עִמּוֹ מְלָאכָה אֲחֶרֶת אָסוּר) לֹא בְדָא. רִבִּי בָּא בַּר זַבְדָּא. רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר. הֲלָכָה כְרִבִּי יוּדָה דְּמַתְנִיתִן. אִקְלַס רִבִּי בָּא בַּר זַבְדָּא דָּמַר שְׁמוּעָה מִשּׁוּם זְעִיר מִינֵּיהּ. אוּף הָכָא כֵּן. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּי רִבִּי בּוּן תַמָּן אֵין הַמַּלְכוּת אוֹנֶסֶת. בְּרַם הָכָא הַמַּלְכוּת אוֹנֶסֶת. There, we have stated⁸⁷Sanhedrin 3:5:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sanhedrin.3.5.1">Mishnah Sanhedrin 3:6. The Mishnah gives a list of people whose testimony cannot be trusted in court: Gamblers, usurers, organizers of animal fights, and traders in Sabbatical produce. R. Jehudah says, these are unacceptable as witnesses (since they will sin for monetary gain and, therefore, are open to bribery) only if they make their living from these activities, not if gambling, etc., is done only on the side. The entire discussion appears word by word in Sanhedrin 3:5:2-16" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sanhedrin.3.5.2-16">Sanhedrin 3:6, fol. 21a–b.: “Rebbi Jehudah said, when is that? If he has no other, different profession. But if he has another, different profession it is permitted.” How is this implemented? If he was sitting idle all the years of the sabbatical cycle but when the Sabbatical began he became active and traded in forbidden produce, if he has another profession on the side he is acceptable, otherwise he is unacceptable. But if he was working in his profession all the years of the sabbatical cycle and when the Sabbatical began he became active and traded in forbidden produce, even if he has no other profession on the side he is permitted. Rebbi Abba bar Zavda, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Practice follows Rebbi Jehudah of our Mishnah. Rebbi Abba bar Zavda was publicly praised for presenting a tradition in the name of a younger person. It was stated⁸⁸In Sanhedrin, “R. Ḥiyya stated”.: Rebbi Jehudah is restrictive. How is this implemented? If he was working in his profession all the years of the sabbatical cycles but when the Sabbatical began he became active and traded in forbidden produce, if he has another profession on the side he is permitted, otherwise he is forbidden. (But if he was working in his profession all the years of the sabbatical cycles and when the Sabbatical began he became active and traded in forbidden produce, even if he has no other profession on the side he is forbidden.)⁸⁹The text in parentheses is missing in Sanhedrin and in the quotes of this paragraph by Maimonides, R. Simson, and R. Isaac Simponti. It is dittography and should be disregarded. With this we are not concerned. Rebbi Abba bar Zavda, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Eleazar⁹⁰Even though the Babli holds (in the name of the first generation R. Joshua ben Levi) that all statements of R. Jehudah in the Mishnah which start with אימתי are explanations of the anonymous text, not disagreements, and are always practice to be followed (Sanhedrin.24b">Sanhedrin 24b, Erubin 81b–82a); the Sanhedrin.26b">Babli (Sanhedrin 26b) states explicitly in the name of R. Abbahu and R. Eleazar that practice follows R. Jehudah. One has to take that as an echo of the discussion in the Yerushalmi.: Practice follows Rebbi Jehudah of our Mishnah. Rebbi Abba bar Zavda was publicly praised for presenting a tradition in the name of a younger person. Here also should it be so⁹¹Do the restrictive rules of R. Jehudah effectively apply to dealers in Sabbatical produce? R. Yannai permitted growing crops in the Sabbatical (Halakha 4:2) because of the tax burden on farmers; the tannaitic rules cannot be enforced as long as the tax is collected whether there is a crop or not.? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, there the government is not oppressive, here the government is oppressive.