Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

February 4, 2018 | 讬状讟 讘砖讘讟 转砖注状讞

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

Avodah Zarah 20

This mishna lists other things that are forbidden to do with non-Jews/or idol worshippers are mentioned – selling trees and items attached to the ground and selling/making jewelry for their idols. Rabbi Eliezer ads that one can sell them jewelry聽– however there is a debate whether this is actually part of the mishna聽or a mistaken addition or should be corrected to聽read “if one sold to them, it is permitted to benefit from the money.” The gemara聽derives from the verse “lo techanem” 3 things that are forbidden, including the halacha in the mishna about selling items attached to the ground, complimenting non-Jews and giving them gifts for free. The other halachot mentioned are also alayze3d – are there really forbidden? Contradictory sources are brought. The debate in the mishna between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda is discussed – can one sell a tree on condition that the non-Jew will chop it down after the sale?


If the lesson doesn't play, click "Download"

讚讗诪专 拽专讗 诇讗 转讞谞诐 诇讗 转转谉 诇讛诐 讞谞讬讬讛 讘拽专拽注 讛讗讬 诇讗 转讞谞诐 诪讬讘注讬 诇讬讛 讚讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 专讞诪谞讗 诇讗 转转谉 诇讛诐 讞谉

The source is that the verse states: 鈥淵ou should not show them mercy [lo te岣nnem]鈥 (Deuteronomy 7:2), which is understood as meaning: You should not give them a chance to encamp [岣nayah] in, i.e., to acquire land in, Eretz Yisrael. The Gemara asks: This phrase: 鈥淵ou should not show them mercy鈥; isn鈥檛 it necessary to teach that this is what the Merciful one is saying: You should not give them favor [岣n] by praising them?

讗诐 讻谉 诇讬诪讗 拽专讗 诇讗 转讞讜谞诐 诪讗讬 诇讗 转讞谞诐 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 转专转讬

The Gemara answers: If that were so, let the verse say: Lo te岣nnem, with the letter vav, as then it would be evident that this is a form of the root 岣t, vav, nun, which means favor. What is the reason that the verse instead states: Lo te岣nnem, without the letter vav? Conclude two conclusions from it, that one may not praise them and also that one may not allow them to acquire land.

讜讗讻转讬 诪讬讘注讬 诇讬讛 讚讛讻讬 讗诪专 专讞诪谞讗 诇讗 转转谉 诇讛诐 诪转谞转 砖诇 讞谞诐 讗诐 讻谉 诇讬诪讗 拽专讗 诇讗 转讞讬谞诐 诪讗讬 诇讗 转讞谞诐 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讻讜诇讛讜

The Gemara asks: But still, isn鈥檛 the phrase 鈥淵ou should not show them mercy鈥 necessary to teach the halakha that this is what the Merciful One states: You should not give them an undeserved [岣nnam] gift? The Gemara answers: If that were so, let the verse say: Lo te岣nnem. What is the reason that it is spelled without the letter yud, as: Lo te岣nnem? Learn from it all of these three halakhot.

转谞讬讗 谞诪讬 讛讻讬 诇讗 转讞谞诐 诇讗 转转谉 诇讛诐 讞谞讬讬讛 讘拽专拽注 讚讘专 讗讞专 诇讗 转讞谞诐 诇讗 转转谉 诇讛诐 讞谉 讚讘专 讗讞专 诇讗 转讞谞诐 诇讗 转转谉 诇讛诐 诪转谞转 讞谞诐

This is also taught in a baraita: 鈥淵ou should not show them mercy鈥; this teaches that you should not give them a chance to encamp in the land of Eretz Yisrael. Another matter: 鈥淵ou should not show them mercy鈥; this indicates that you should not give them favor. Another matter: 鈥淵ou should not show them mercy鈥; this teaches that you should not give them an undeserved gift.

讜诪转谞转 讞谞诐 讙讜驻讛 转谞讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 诇讗 转讗讻诇讜 讻诇 谞讘诇讛 诇讙专 讗砖专 讘砖注专讬讱 转转谞谞讛 讜讗讻诇讛 讗讜 诪讻专 诇谞讻专讬 讗讬谉 诇讬 讗诇讗 诇讙专 讘谞转讬谞讛 讜诇讙讜讬 讘诪讻讬专讛 诇讙专 讘诪讻讬专讛 诪谞讬谉 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 转转谞谞讛 讗讜 诪讻专

The Gemara notes: And this issue of an undeserved gift to a gentile is itself a dispute between tanna鈥檌m. As it is taught in a baraita: 鈥淵ou shall not eat of any unslaughtered animal carcass; you may give it to the resident alien who is within your gates, that he may eat it; or you may sell it to a foreigner; for you are a sacred people to the Lord your God鈥 (Deuteronomy 14:21). I have derived only that it is permitted to a resident alien through giving and to a gentile through selling. From where do I derive that it is permitted to transfer an unslaughtered animal to a resident alien through selling? The verse states: 鈥淵ou may give itor you may sell it,鈥 meaning that one has the option to do either of these.

诇讙讜讬 讘谞转讬谞讛 诪谞讬谉 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 转转谞谞讛 讜讗讻诇讛 讗讜 诪讻专 诇谞讻专讬 谞诪爪讗 讗转讛 讗讜诪专 讗讞讚 讙专 讜讗讞讚 讙讜讬 讘讬谉 讘谞转讬谞讛 讘讬谉 讘诪讻讬专讛 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讚讘专讬诐 讻讻转讘谉 诇讙专 讘谞转讬谞讛 讜诇讙讜讬 讘诪讻讬专讛

The baraita continues: From where is it derived that it is permitted to a gentile through giving and one is not required to sell it to him? The verse states: 鈥淵ou may give itthat he may eat it; or you may sell it to a foreigner.鈥 Therefore, you may say that he may transfer it to both a resident alien and a gentile, both through giving and through selling. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: These matters are to be understood as they are written; one may transfer an unslaughtered animal carcass to a resident alien only through giving, and to a gentile only through selling, as it is prohibited to give an undeserved gift to a gentile.

砖驻讬专 拽讗诪专 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 诇讱 讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讻讚拽讗诪专 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 诇讻转讜讘 专讞诪谞讗 转转谞谞讛 讜讗讻诇讛 讜诪讻专 讗讜 诇诪讛 诇讬 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 诇讚讘专讬诐 讻讻转讘谉 讛讜讗 讚讗转讗

The Gemara comments: Rabbi Meir is saying well, as the verse indicates that either method is acceptable. The Gemara explains: And Rabbi Yehuda could have said to you: If it enters your mind to understand the verse in accordance with that which Rabbi Meir says, then let the Merciful One write: You may give it to the resident alien who is within your gates that he may eat it, and also you may sell it to a foreigner. Why do I need the word 鈥渙r鈥 between these two options? Learn from it that it comes to teach that the matters are to be understood as they are written.

讜专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讛讛讜讗 诇讗拽讚讜诪讬 谞转讬谞讛 讚讙专 诇诪讻讬专讛 讚讙讜讬 讜专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讻讬讜谉 讚讙专 讗转讛 诪爪讜讜讛 诇讛讞讬讜转讜 讜讙讜讬 讗讬 讗转讛 诪爪讜讜讛 诇讛讞讬讜转讜 诇讛拽讚讬诐 诇讗 爪专讬讱 拽专讗

The Gemara asks: And how does Rabbi Meir explain the wording of the verse? The Gemara answers: That word, 鈥渙r,鈥 teaches that one should give precedence to giving to a resident alien over selling to a gentile. And Rabbi Yehuda holds that since you are commanded to sustain a resident alien, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd he shall live with you鈥 (Leviticus 25:35), and you are not commanded to sustain a gentile, there is no need for a verse to teach that one should give precedence to a resident alien.

讚讘专 讗讞专 诇讗 转讞谞诐壮 诇讗 转转谉 诇讛诐 讞谉 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘 讚讗诪专 专讘 讗住讜专 诇讗讚诐 砖讬讗诪专 讻诪讛 谞讗讛 讙讜讬讛 讝讜

搂 It is taught in the baraita cited earlier: Another matter: 鈥淵ou should not show them favor鈥; this teaches that you should not give them favor by praising them. The Gemara notes that this supports the opinion of Rav. As Rav says: It is prohibited for a person to say: How beautiful is this gentile woman!

诪讬转讬讘讬 诪注砖讛 讘专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 砖讛讬讛 注诇 讙讘讬 诪注诇讛 讘讛专 讛讘讬转 讜专讗讛 讙讜讬讛 讗讞转 谞讗讛 讘讬讜转专 讗诪专 诪讛 专讘讜 诪注砖讬讱 讛壮 讜讗祝 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 专讗讛 讗砖转 讟讜专谞讜住专讜驻讜住 讛专砖注 专拽 砖讞拽 讜讘讻讛 专拽 砖讛讬转讛 讘讗讛 诪讟讬驻讛 住专讜讞讛 砖讞拽 讚注转讬讚讛 讚诪讙讬讬专讗 讜谞住讬讘 诇讛 讘讻讛 讚讛讗讬 砖讜驻专讗 讘诇讬 注驻专讗

The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: There was an incident involving Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who was on a step on the Temple mount, and he saw a certain gentile woman who was exceptionally beautiful and said: 鈥淗ow great are Your works, O Lord!鈥 (Psalms 104:24). And Rabbi Akiva too, when he saw the wife of the wicked Turnus Rufus he spat, laughed, and cried. He spat, as she was created from a putrid drop; he laughed, as he foresaw that she was destined to convert and he would marry her; he cried, as this beauty would ultimately be consumed by dirt.

讜专讘 讗讜讚讜讬讬 讛讜讗 讚拽讗 诪讜讚讛 讚讗诪专 诪专 讛专讜讗讛 讘专讬讜转 讟讜讘讜转 讗讜诪专 讘专讜讱 砖讻讻讛 讘专讗 讘注讜诇诪讜

And how would Rav explain the incident involving Rabban Gamliel, who praised the beauty of a gentile? The Gemara answers: Rabban Gamliel was giving thanks to God for creating such beautiful people rather than praising the gentile herself. As the Master said: One who sees beautiful or otherwise outstanding creatures recites: Blessed be He, Who has created such in His world.

讜诇讗住转讻讜诇讬 诪讬 砖专讬 诪讬转讬讘讬 讜谞砖诪专转 诪讻诇 讚讘专 专注 砖诇讗 讬住转讻诇 讗讚诐 讘讗砖讛 谞讗讛 讜讗驻讬诇讜 驻谞讜讬讛 讘讗砖转 讗讬砖 讜讗驻讬诇讜 诪讻讜注专转

But is it permitted to gaze upon a woman? The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita. The verse states: 鈥淎nd you shall keep yourself from every evil thing鈥 (Deuteronomy 23:10); this teaches that a person should not gaze upon a beautiful woman, even if she is unmarried; and a person should not gaze upon a married woman, even if she is ugly;

讜诇讗 讘讘讙讚讬 爪讘注 [砖诇] 讗砖讛 讜诇讗 讘讞诪讜专 讜诇讗 讘讞诪讜专讛 讜诇讗 讘讞讝讬专 讜诇讗 讘讞讝讬专讛 讜诇讗 讘注讜驻讜转 讘讝诪谉 砖谞讝拽拽讬谉 讝讛 诇讝讛 讜讗驻讬诇讜 诪诇讗 注讬谞讬诐 讻诪诇讗讱 讛诪讜转

and a person should not gaze upon the colored garments of a woman; and a person should not gaze at a male donkey, at a female donkey, at a pig, at a sow, or at fowl, when they are mating; and even if one were full of eyes like the Angel of Death and saw from every direction, it is not permitted to look.

讗诪专讜 注诇讬讜 注诇 诪诇讗讱 讛诪讜转 砖讻讜诇讜 诪诇讗 注讬谞讬诐 讘砖注转 驻讟讬专转讜 砖诇 讞讜诇讛 注讜诪讚 诪注诇 诪专讗砖讜转讬讜 讜讞专讘讜 砖诇讜驻讛 讘讬讚讜 讜讟讬驻讛 砖诇 诪专讛 转诇讜讬讛 讘讜 讻讬讜谉 砖讞讜诇讛 专讜讗讛 讗讜转讜 诪讝讚注讝注 讜驻讜转讞 驻讬讜 讜讝讜专拽讛 诇转讜讱 驻讬讜 诪诪谞讛 诪转 诪诪谞讛 诪住专讬讞 诪诪谞讛 驻谞讬讜 诪讜专讬拽讜转

They said about the Angel of Death that he is entirely full of eyes. When a sick person is about to die, the Angel of Death stands above his head, with his sword drawn in his hand, and a drop of poison hanging on the edge of the sword. Once the sick person sees him, he trembles and thereby opens his mouth; and the Angel of Death throws the drop of poison into his mouth. From this drop of poison the sick person dies, from it he putrefies, from it his face becomes green.

拽专谉 讝讜讬转 讛讜讗讬

The Gemara answers: Rabban Gamliel did not intentionally look at the woman; rather, he was walking around a corner and he saw her unexpectedly as they each turned.

讜诇讗 讘讘讙讚讬 爪讘注 [砖诇] 讗砖讛 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讗驻讬诇讜 砖讟讜讞讬谉 注诇 讙讘讬 讻讜转诇 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讜讘诪讻讬专 讘注诇讬讛谉 讗诪专 专讘讗 讚讬拽讗 谞诪讬 讚拽转谞讬 讜诇讗 讘讘讙讚讬 爪讘注 讗砖讛 讜诇讗 拽转谞讬 讜诇讗 讘讘讙讚讬 爪讘注讜谞讬谉 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛

With regard to the statement in the baraita: Nor may one gaze at the colored garments of a woman, Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: This is the halakha even if they are spread on a wall, not only when they are being worn. Rav Pappa says: And the prohibition applies only when one knows their owner. Rava said: The language of the baraita is also precise, as it teaches: Nor may one gaze at the colored garments of a woman, and it does not teach: Nor may one gaze at colored garments. Learn from it that the prohibition applies only to the garments of one he knows.

讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讘注转讬拽讬 讗讘诇 讘讞讚转讬 诇讬转 诇谉 讘讛 讚讗讬 诇讗 转讬诪讗 讛讻讬 讗谞谉 诪谞讗 诇讗砖驻讜专讬 讛讬讻讬 讬讛讘讬谞谉 讛讗 拽讗 诪住转讻诇

Rav 岣sda said: That statement applies only in the case of old garments, i.e., garments that have been worn; but in the case of new garments, we have no problem with it. The reason is that if you do not say so, how can we give a woman鈥檚 garment before it is worn to a launderer, i.e., one who prepares new garments for use, knowing that the launderer must look at the garments?

讜诇讟注诪讬讱 讛讗 讚讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 诪讬谉 讘诪讬谞讜 诪讜转专 诇讛讻谞讬住 讻诪讻讞讜诇 讘砖驻讜驻专转 讛讗 拽讗 诪住转讻诇 讗诇讗 讘注讘讬讚转讬讛 讟专讬讚 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讘注讘讬讚转讬讛 讟专讬讚

The Gemara refutes this proof: But according to your reasoning, i.e., your assumption that a launderer is no different from all other men, there is a similar difficulty with that which Rav Yehuda says: If one wishes to mate an animal of one species with an animal of its own species, it is permitted to insert the male organ into the female like a brush into a tube. One could ask here as well: But isn鈥檛 he looking at the animals as they mate? Rather, he is occupied with his work, and therefore his mind will not entertain sinful thoughts. So too with regard to a launderer, he is occupied with his work, and therefore a launderer differs from other men.

讗诪专 诪专 诪诪谞讛 诪转 谞讬诪讗 驻诇讬讙讗 讚讗讘讜讛 讚砖诪讜讗诇 讚讗诪专 讗讘讜讛 讚砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 诇讬 诪诇讗讱 讛诪讜转 讗讬 诇讗 讚讞讬讬砖谞讗 诇讬拽专讗 讚讘专讬讬转讗 讛讜讛 驻专注谞讗 讘讬转 讛砖讞讬讟讛 讻讘讛诪讛 讚诇诪讗 讛讛讬讗 讟讬驻讛 诪讞转讻讛 诇讛讜 诇住讬诪谞讬谉

The Master said above in the baraita: From this drop of poison on the Angel of Death鈥檚 sword, the sick person dies. The Gemara asks: Shall we say that this opinion disagrees with a statement of Shmuel鈥檚 father? As Shmuel鈥檚 father says: The Angel of Death said to me: Were I not concerned for human dignity, I would uncover the place of the incision of the slaughter, as one does to an animal that is slaughtered. This indicates that the Angel of Death kills by slaughtering his victims with his sword, not by poisoning them. The Gemara answers: Perhaps that drop of poison cuts the two organs that must be severed in ritual slaughter, i.e., the trachea and the esophagus, and thereby slaughters people.

诪诪谞讛 诪住专讬讞 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讘专 讻讛谞讗 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讘专 讻讛谞讗 讗诪专讬 讘讬 专讘 讛专讜爪讛 砖诇讗 讬住专讬讞 诪转讜 讬讛驻讻谞讜 注诇 驻谞讬讜

The Gemara notes that the continuation of the baraita, which states that from this drop of poison a corpse putrefies, supports the opinion of Rabbi 岣nina bar Kahana. As Rabbi 岣nina bar Kahana says that they say in the school of Rav: One who wishes that his dead relative will not putrefy should turn it on its face immediately, as the drop of poison enters through the mouth, and this causes the putrefaction of the corpse.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讜谞砖诪专转 诪讻诇 讚讘专 专注 砖诇讗 讬讛专讛专 讗讚诐 讘讬讜诐 讜讬讘讜讗 诇讬讚讬 讟讜诪讗讛 讘诇讬诇讛

搂 The Gemara cites another source that interprets the verse cited above. The Sages taught a baraita explaining the verse: 鈥淎nd you shall keep yourself from every evil thing鈥 (Deuteronomy 23:10), which is immediately followed by the verse: 鈥淚f there be among you any man who is not ritually pure by reason of that which happened to him by night鈥 (Deuteronomy 23:11). This teaches that a person should not think impure thoughts by day and thereby come to the impurity of an emission by night.

诪讻讗谉 讗诪专 专讘讬 驻谞讞住 讘谉 讬讗讬专 转讜专讛 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 讝讛讬专讜转 讝讛讬专讜转 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 讝专讬讝讜转 讝专讬讝讜转 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 谞拽讬讜转 谞拽讬讜转 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 驻专讬砖讜转 驻专讬砖讜转 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 讟讛专讛 讟讛专讛 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 讞住讬讚讜转 讞住讬讚讜转 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 注谞讜讛 注谞讜讛 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 讬专讗转 讞讟讗 讬专讗转 讞讟讗 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 拽讚讜砖讛 拽讚讜砖讛 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 专讜讞 讛拽讜讚砖 专讜讞 讛拽讜讚砖 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 转讞讬讬转 讛诪转讬诐 讜讞住讬讚讜转 讙讚讜诇讛 诪讻讜诇谉 砖谞讗诪专 讗讝 讚讘专转 讘讞讝讜谉 诇讞住讬讚讬讱

From here Rabbi Pine岣s ben Ya鈥檌r would say: Torah study leads to care in the performance of mitzvot. Care in the performance of mitzvot leads to diligence in their observance. Diligence leads to cleanliness of the soul. Cleanliness of the soul leads to abstention from all evil. Abstention from evil leads to purity and the elimination of all base desires. Purity leads to piety. Piety leads to humility. Humility leads to fear of sin. Fear of sin leads to holiness. Holiness leads to the Divine Spirit. The Divine Spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead. And piety is greater than all of them, as it is stated: 鈥淭hen You did speak in a vision to Your pious ones鈥 (Psalms 89:20).

讜驻诇讬讙讗 讚专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 注谞讜讛 讙讚讜诇讛 诪讻讜诇谉 砖谞讗诪专 专讜讞 讛壮 讗诇讛讬诐 注诇讬 讬注谉 诪砖讞 讛壮 讗转讬 诇讘砖专 注谞讜讬诐 讞住讬讚讬诐 诇讗 谞讗诪专 讗诇讗 注谞讜讬诐 讛讗 诇诪讚转 砖注谞讜讛 讙讚讜诇讛 诪讻讜诇谉

And this statement disagrees with the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: Humility is greater than all of them, as it is stated: 鈥淭he spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord has anointed me to bring good tidings to the humble鈥 (Isaiah 61:1). Since the pious is not stated, but rather 鈥渢he humble,鈥 you learn that humility is greater than all of them.

讗讬谉 诪讜讻专讬谉 诇讛谉 讜讻讜壮 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 诪讜讻专讬谉 诇讛谉 讗讬诇谉 注诇 诪谞转 诇拽讜抓 讜拽讜爪抓 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 讗讬谉 诪讜讻专讬谉 诇讛谉 讗诇讗 拽爪讜爪讛 砖讞转 注诇 诪谞转 诇讙讝讜讝 讜讙讜讝讝 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 讗讬谉 诪讜讻专讬谉 诇讛谉 讗诇讗 讙讝讜讝讛 拽诪讛 注诇 诪谞转 诇拽爪讜专 讜拽讜爪专 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 讗讬谉 诪讜讻专讬谉 讗诇讗 拽爪讜专讛

搂 The mishna teaches that one may not sell to a gentile any item that is attached to the ground. The Sages taught: One may sell to them a tree on the condition that he cut it down, and the buyer cuts it down; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Meir says: One may sell to them only a tree that has actually been cut down. Similarly, one may sell to them fodder, i.e., produce that has grown stalks but is not yet ripe, on the condition to cut it down, and he cuts it down; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Meir says: One may sell to them only fodder that has been cut down. So too, one may sell to them standing grain on the condition to harvest it, and he harvests it; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Meir says: One may sell to them only harvested grain.

讜爪专讬讻讗 讚讗讬 讗砖诪注讬谞谉 讗讬诇谉 讘讛讗 拽讗诪专 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讻讬讜谉 讚诇讗 驻住讬讚 诪砖讛讬 诇讬讛 讗讘诇 讛讗讬 讚讻讬 诪砖讛讬 诇讛 驻住讬讚 讗讬诪讗 诪讜讚讬 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛

The Gemara comments: And it is necessary to state the halakha in each of these different scenarios. As, had the baraita taught us the dispute only with regard to a tree, I might have said that it is only in that case that Rabbi Meir says it must be cut down before being sold. The reason is that since the gentile does not lose out by keeping the tree in the soil, he might keep it in the ground. But in this case of standing grain, since if he keeps it in the ground he will lose out, one might say that Rabbi Meir concedes to Rabbi Yehuda that it may be sold before being harvested, on the condition that the gentile will harvest it, because the gentile would not leave the grain in the soil to spoil.

讜讗讬 讗砖诪注讬谞谉 讘讛谞讬 转专转讬 诪砖讜诐 讚诇讗 讬讚讬注 砖讘讞讬讬讛讜 讗讘诇 砖讞转 讚讬讚讬注 砖讘讞讬讬讛讜 讗讬诪讗 诪讜讚讬 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 诪讗讬专

And had the baraita taught us only these two halakhot, one might have said that Rabbi Yehuda permits selling these items on the condition that they be cut down because the improvement to the tree or grain is not recognizable when it is left in the ground. But in the case of fodder, whose improvement is recognizable, as it would continue to grow and ripen if left in the ground, one might say that Rabbi Yehuda concedes to Rabbi Meir that we are concerned that the gentile will not cut down the fodder, and therefore one may sell it only once it has been cut down.

讜讗讬 讗砖诪注讬谞谉 讘讛讗 讘讛讗 拽讗诪专 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讘诇 讘讛谞讱 讗讬诪讗 诪讜讚讬 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 爪专讬讻讗

And furthermore, had the baraita taught us only the dispute in this case of fodder, one might have said that it is merely in this case that Rabbi Meir says it must be cut down before being sold, but with regard to those cases of a tree or standing grain, one might say that he concedes to Rabbi Yehuda that one may sell these items before they are harvested on the condition that the gentile will harvest them, as there is no recognizable improvement to them if they are left in the ground. Consequently, it is necessary for the dispute to be stated in all three cases.

讗讬讘注讬讗 诇讛讜 讘讛诪讛 注诇 诪谞转 诇砖讞讜讟 诪讛讜

A dilemma was raised before the Sages: With regard to the sale of large livestock, which is forbidden due to the concern that the gentile might use them to perform labor (see 14b), if such livestock are sold on the condition that the gentile will slaughter them, what is the halakha?

讛转诐 讟注诪讗 诪讗讬 砖专讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讚诇讗讜 讘专砖讜转讬讛 拽讬讬诪讬 讜诇讗 诪爪讬 诪砖讛讬 诇讛讜 讗讘诇 讘讛诪讛 讻讬讜谉 讚讘专砖讜转讬讛 讚讙讜讬 拽讬讬诪讗 诪砖讛讬 诇讛 讗讜 讚诇诪讗 诇讗 砖谞讗

The Gemara explains the aspects of the dilemma: There, in the mishna, what is the reason that Rabbi Yehuda permits the sale of a tree on the condition that the gentile will cut it down? Is the reason that the trees are not in the gentile鈥檚 domain and therefore he is not able to keep them, as the Jew will force him to cut them down? But in the case of large livestock, since the animal stands in the domain of the gentile once it is sold, there is a concern that he might keep it and not slaughter it. Or perhaps there is no difference between the cases, and Rabbi Yehuda would permit one to sell even large livestock to a gentile, on the condition that he will slaughter the animals.

转讗 砖诪注 讚转谞讬讗 讘讛诪讛 注诇 诪谞转 诇砖讞讜讟 讜砖讜讞讟 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 讗讬谉 诪讜讻专讬谉 诇讜 讗诇讗 砖讞讜讟讛

The Gemara suggests a resolution: Come and hear, as it is taught in a baraita: One may sell large livestock to a gentile on the condition that he slaughter it, and he slaughters it; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Meir says: One may sell to a gentile only a slaughtered animal.

诪转谞讬壮 讗讬谉 诪砖讻讬专讬谉 诇讛诐 讘转讬诐 讘讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 讜讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讜诪专 砖讚讜转 讜讘住讜专讬讗

MISHNA: One may not rent a house to a gentile in Eretz Yisrael, and needless to say one may not rent fields to them, as explained in the Gemara. And in Syria

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Avodah Zarah 20

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Avodah Zarah 20

讚讗诪专 拽专讗 诇讗 转讞谞诐 诇讗 转转谉 诇讛诐 讞谞讬讬讛 讘拽专拽注 讛讗讬 诇讗 转讞谞诐 诪讬讘注讬 诇讬讛 讚讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 专讞诪谞讗 诇讗 转转谉 诇讛诐 讞谉

The source is that the verse states: 鈥淵ou should not show them mercy [lo te岣nnem]鈥 (Deuteronomy 7:2), which is understood as meaning: You should not give them a chance to encamp [岣nayah] in, i.e., to acquire land in, Eretz Yisrael. The Gemara asks: This phrase: 鈥淵ou should not show them mercy鈥; isn鈥檛 it necessary to teach that this is what the Merciful one is saying: You should not give them favor [岣n] by praising them?

讗诐 讻谉 诇讬诪讗 拽专讗 诇讗 转讞讜谞诐 诪讗讬 诇讗 转讞谞诐 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 转专转讬

The Gemara answers: If that were so, let the verse say: Lo te岣nnem, with the letter vav, as then it would be evident that this is a form of the root 岣t, vav, nun, which means favor. What is the reason that the verse instead states: Lo te岣nnem, without the letter vav? Conclude two conclusions from it, that one may not praise them and also that one may not allow them to acquire land.

讜讗讻转讬 诪讬讘注讬 诇讬讛 讚讛讻讬 讗诪专 专讞诪谞讗 诇讗 转转谉 诇讛诐 诪转谞转 砖诇 讞谞诐 讗诐 讻谉 诇讬诪讗 拽专讗 诇讗 转讞讬谞诐 诪讗讬 诇讗 转讞谞诐 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讻讜诇讛讜

The Gemara asks: But still, isn鈥檛 the phrase 鈥淵ou should not show them mercy鈥 necessary to teach the halakha that this is what the Merciful One states: You should not give them an undeserved [岣nnam] gift? The Gemara answers: If that were so, let the verse say: Lo te岣nnem. What is the reason that it is spelled without the letter yud, as: Lo te岣nnem? Learn from it all of these three halakhot.

转谞讬讗 谞诪讬 讛讻讬 诇讗 转讞谞诐 诇讗 转转谉 诇讛诐 讞谞讬讬讛 讘拽专拽注 讚讘专 讗讞专 诇讗 转讞谞诐 诇讗 转转谉 诇讛诐 讞谉 讚讘专 讗讞专 诇讗 转讞谞诐 诇讗 转转谉 诇讛诐 诪转谞转 讞谞诐

This is also taught in a baraita: 鈥淵ou should not show them mercy鈥; this teaches that you should not give them a chance to encamp in the land of Eretz Yisrael. Another matter: 鈥淵ou should not show them mercy鈥; this indicates that you should not give them favor. Another matter: 鈥淵ou should not show them mercy鈥; this teaches that you should not give them an undeserved gift.

讜诪转谞转 讞谞诐 讙讜驻讛 转谞讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 诇讗 转讗讻诇讜 讻诇 谞讘诇讛 诇讙专 讗砖专 讘砖注专讬讱 转转谞谞讛 讜讗讻诇讛 讗讜 诪讻专 诇谞讻专讬 讗讬谉 诇讬 讗诇讗 诇讙专 讘谞转讬谞讛 讜诇讙讜讬 讘诪讻讬专讛 诇讙专 讘诪讻讬专讛 诪谞讬谉 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 转转谞谞讛 讗讜 诪讻专

The Gemara notes: And this issue of an undeserved gift to a gentile is itself a dispute between tanna鈥檌m. As it is taught in a baraita: 鈥淵ou shall not eat of any unslaughtered animal carcass; you may give it to the resident alien who is within your gates, that he may eat it; or you may sell it to a foreigner; for you are a sacred people to the Lord your God鈥 (Deuteronomy 14:21). I have derived only that it is permitted to a resident alien through giving and to a gentile through selling. From where do I derive that it is permitted to transfer an unslaughtered animal to a resident alien through selling? The verse states: 鈥淵ou may give itor you may sell it,鈥 meaning that one has the option to do either of these.

诇讙讜讬 讘谞转讬谞讛 诪谞讬谉 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 转转谞谞讛 讜讗讻诇讛 讗讜 诪讻专 诇谞讻专讬 谞诪爪讗 讗转讛 讗讜诪专 讗讞讚 讙专 讜讗讞讚 讙讜讬 讘讬谉 讘谞转讬谞讛 讘讬谉 讘诪讻讬专讛 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讚讘专讬诐 讻讻转讘谉 诇讙专 讘谞转讬谞讛 讜诇讙讜讬 讘诪讻讬专讛

The baraita continues: From where is it derived that it is permitted to a gentile through giving and one is not required to sell it to him? The verse states: 鈥淵ou may give itthat he may eat it; or you may sell it to a foreigner.鈥 Therefore, you may say that he may transfer it to both a resident alien and a gentile, both through giving and through selling. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: These matters are to be understood as they are written; one may transfer an unslaughtered animal carcass to a resident alien only through giving, and to a gentile only through selling, as it is prohibited to give an undeserved gift to a gentile.

砖驻讬专 拽讗诪专 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 诇讱 讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讻讚拽讗诪专 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 诇讻转讜讘 专讞诪谞讗 转转谞谞讛 讜讗讻诇讛 讜诪讻专 讗讜 诇诪讛 诇讬 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 诇讚讘专讬诐 讻讻转讘谉 讛讜讗 讚讗转讗

The Gemara comments: Rabbi Meir is saying well, as the verse indicates that either method is acceptable. The Gemara explains: And Rabbi Yehuda could have said to you: If it enters your mind to understand the verse in accordance with that which Rabbi Meir says, then let the Merciful One write: You may give it to the resident alien who is within your gates that he may eat it, and also you may sell it to a foreigner. Why do I need the word 鈥渙r鈥 between these two options? Learn from it that it comes to teach that the matters are to be understood as they are written.

讜专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讛讛讜讗 诇讗拽讚讜诪讬 谞转讬谞讛 讚讙专 诇诪讻讬专讛 讚讙讜讬 讜专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讻讬讜谉 讚讙专 讗转讛 诪爪讜讜讛 诇讛讞讬讜转讜 讜讙讜讬 讗讬 讗转讛 诪爪讜讜讛 诇讛讞讬讜转讜 诇讛拽讚讬诐 诇讗 爪专讬讱 拽专讗

The Gemara asks: And how does Rabbi Meir explain the wording of the verse? The Gemara answers: That word, 鈥渙r,鈥 teaches that one should give precedence to giving to a resident alien over selling to a gentile. And Rabbi Yehuda holds that since you are commanded to sustain a resident alien, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd he shall live with you鈥 (Leviticus 25:35), and you are not commanded to sustain a gentile, there is no need for a verse to teach that one should give precedence to a resident alien.

讚讘专 讗讞专 诇讗 转讞谞诐壮 诇讗 转转谉 诇讛诐 讞谉 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘 讚讗诪专 专讘 讗住讜专 诇讗讚诐 砖讬讗诪专 讻诪讛 谞讗讛 讙讜讬讛 讝讜

搂 It is taught in the baraita cited earlier: Another matter: 鈥淵ou should not show them favor鈥; this teaches that you should not give them favor by praising them. The Gemara notes that this supports the opinion of Rav. As Rav says: It is prohibited for a person to say: How beautiful is this gentile woman!

诪讬转讬讘讬 诪注砖讛 讘专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 砖讛讬讛 注诇 讙讘讬 诪注诇讛 讘讛专 讛讘讬转 讜专讗讛 讙讜讬讛 讗讞转 谞讗讛 讘讬讜转专 讗诪专 诪讛 专讘讜 诪注砖讬讱 讛壮 讜讗祝 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 专讗讛 讗砖转 讟讜专谞讜住专讜驻讜住 讛专砖注 专拽 砖讞拽 讜讘讻讛 专拽 砖讛讬转讛 讘讗讛 诪讟讬驻讛 住专讜讞讛 砖讞拽 讚注转讬讚讛 讚诪讙讬讬专讗 讜谞住讬讘 诇讛 讘讻讛 讚讛讗讬 砖讜驻专讗 讘诇讬 注驻专讗

The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: There was an incident involving Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who was on a step on the Temple mount, and he saw a certain gentile woman who was exceptionally beautiful and said: 鈥淗ow great are Your works, O Lord!鈥 (Psalms 104:24). And Rabbi Akiva too, when he saw the wife of the wicked Turnus Rufus he spat, laughed, and cried. He spat, as she was created from a putrid drop; he laughed, as he foresaw that she was destined to convert and he would marry her; he cried, as this beauty would ultimately be consumed by dirt.

讜专讘 讗讜讚讜讬讬 讛讜讗 讚拽讗 诪讜讚讛 讚讗诪专 诪专 讛专讜讗讛 讘专讬讜转 讟讜讘讜转 讗讜诪专 讘专讜讱 砖讻讻讛 讘专讗 讘注讜诇诪讜

And how would Rav explain the incident involving Rabban Gamliel, who praised the beauty of a gentile? The Gemara answers: Rabban Gamliel was giving thanks to God for creating such beautiful people rather than praising the gentile herself. As the Master said: One who sees beautiful or otherwise outstanding creatures recites: Blessed be He, Who has created such in His world.

讜诇讗住转讻讜诇讬 诪讬 砖专讬 诪讬转讬讘讬 讜谞砖诪专转 诪讻诇 讚讘专 专注 砖诇讗 讬住转讻诇 讗讚诐 讘讗砖讛 谞讗讛 讜讗驻讬诇讜 驻谞讜讬讛 讘讗砖转 讗讬砖 讜讗驻讬诇讜 诪讻讜注专转

But is it permitted to gaze upon a woman? The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita. The verse states: 鈥淎nd you shall keep yourself from every evil thing鈥 (Deuteronomy 23:10); this teaches that a person should not gaze upon a beautiful woman, even if she is unmarried; and a person should not gaze upon a married woman, even if she is ugly;

讜诇讗 讘讘讙讚讬 爪讘注 [砖诇] 讗砖讛 讜诇讗 讘讞诪讜专 讜诇讗 讘讞诪讜专讛 讜诇讗 讘讞讝讬专 讜诇讗 讘讞讝讬专讛 讜诇讗 讘注讜驻讜转 讘讝诪谉 砖谞讝拽拽讬谉 讝讛 诇讝讛 讜讗驻讬诇讜 诪诇讗 注讬谞讬诐 讻诪诇讗讱 讛诪讜转

and a person should not gaze upon the colored garments of a woman; and a person should not gaze at a male donkey, at a female donkey, at a pig, at a sow, or at fowl, when they are mating; and even if one were full of eyes like the Angel of Death and saw from every direction, it is not permitted to look.

讗诪专讜 注诇讬讜 注诇 诪诇讗讱 讛诪讜转 砖讻讜诇讜 诪诇讗 注讬谞讬诐 讘砖注转 驻讟讬专转讜 砖诇 讞讜诇讛 注讜诪讚 诪注诇 诪专讗砖讜转讬讜 讜讞专讘讜 砖诇讜驻讛 讘讬讚讜 讜讟讬驻讛 砖诇 诪专讛 转诇讜讬讛 讘讜 讻讬讜谉 砖讞讜诇讛 专讜讗讛 讗讜转讜 诪讝讚注讝注 讜驻讜转讞 驻讬讜 讜讝讜专拽讛 诇转讜讱 驻讬讜 诪诪谞讛 诪转 诪诪谞讛 诪住专讬讞 诪诪谞讛 驻谞讬讜 诪讜专讬拽讜转

They said about the Angel of Death that he is entirely full of eyes. When a sick person is about to die, the Angel of Death stands above his head, with his sword drawn in his hand, and a drop of poison hanging on the edge of the sword. Once the sick person sees him, he trembles and thereby opens his mouth; and the Angel of Death throws the drop of poison into his mouth. From this drop of poison the sick person dies, from it he putrefies, from it his face becomes green.

拽专谉 讝讜讬转 讛讜讗讬

The Gemara answers: Rabban Gamliel did not intentionally look at the woman; rather, he was walking around a corner and he saw her unexpectedly as they each turned.

讜诇讗 讘讘讙讚讬 爪讘注 [砖诇] 讗砖讛 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讗驻讬诇讜 砖讟讜讞讬谉 注诇 讙讘讬 讻讜转诇 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讜讘诪讻讬专 讘注诇讬讛谉 讗诪专 专讘讗 讚讬拽讗 谞诪讬 讚拽转谞讬 讜诇讗 讘讘讙讚讬 爪讘注 讗砖讛 讜诇讗 拽转谞讬 讜诇讗 讘讘讙讚讬 爪讘注讜谞讬谉 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛

With regard to the statement in the baraita: Nor may one gaze at the colored garments of a woman, Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: This is the halakha even if they are spread on a wall, not only when they are being worn. Rav Pappa says: And the prohibition applies only when one knows their owner. Rava said: The language of the baraita is also precise, as it teaches: Nor may one gaze at the colored garments of a woman, and it does not teach: Nor may one gaze at colored garments. Learn from it that the prohibition applies only to the garments of one he knows.

讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讘注转讬拽讬 讗讘诇 讘讞讚转讬 诇讬转 诇谉 讘讛 讚讗讬 诇讗 转讬诪讗 讛讻讬 讗谞谉 诪谞讗 诇讗砖驻讜专讬 讛讬讻讬 讬讛讘讬谞谉 讛讗 拽讗 诪住转讻诇

Rav 岣sda said: That statement applies only in the case of old garments, i.e., garments that have been worn; but in the case of new garments, we have no problem with it. The reason is that if you do not say so, how can we give a woman鈥檚 garment before it is worn to a launderer, i.e., one who prepares new garments for use, knowing that the launderer must look at the garments?

讜诇讟注诪讬讱 讛讗 讚讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 诪讬谉 讘诪讬谞讜 诪讜转专 诇讛讻谞讬住 讻诪讻讞讜诇 讘砖驻讜驻专转 讛讗 拽讗 诪住转讻诇 讗诇讗 讘注讘讬讚转讬讛 讟专讬讚 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讘注讘讬讚转讬讛 讟专讬讚

The Gemara refutes this proof: But according to your reasoning, i.e., your assumption that a launderer is no different from all other men, there is a similar difficulty with that which Rav Yehuda says: If one wishes to mate an animal of one species with an animal of its own species, it is permitted to insert the male organ into the female like a brush into a tube. One could ask here as well: But isn鈥檛 he looking at the animals as they mate? Rather, he is occupied with his work, and therefore his mind will not entertain sinful thoughts. So too with regard to a launderer, he is occupied with his work, and therefore a launderer differs from other men.

讗诪专 诪专 诪诪谞讛 诪转 谞讬诪讗 驻诇讬讙讗 讚讗讘讜讛 讚砖诪讜讗诇 讚讗诪专 讗讘讜讛 讚砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 诇讬 诪诇讗讱 讛诪讜转 讗讬 诇讗 讚讞讬讬砖谞讗 诇讬拽专讗 讚讘专讬讬转讗 讛讜讛 驻专注谞讗 讘讬转 讛砖讞讬讟讛 讻讘讛诪讛 讚诇诪讗 讛讛讬讗 讟讬驻讛 诪讞转讻讛 诇讛讜 诇住讬诪谞讬谉

The Master said above in the baraita: From this drop of poison on the Angel of Death鈥檚 sword, the sick person dies. The Gemara asks: Shall we say that this opinion disagrees with a statement of Shmuel鈥檚 father? As Shmuel鈥檚 father says: The Angel of Death said to me: Were I not concerned for human dignity, I would uncover the place of the incision of the slaughter, as one does to an animal that is slaughtered. This indicates that the Angel of Death kills by slaughtering his victims with his sword, not by poisoning them. The Gemara answers: Perhaps that drop of poison cuts the two organs that must be severed in ritual slaughter, i.e., the trachea and the esophagus, and thereby slaughters people.

诪诪谞讛 诪住专讬讞 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讘专 讻讛谞讗 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讘专 讻讛谞讗 讗诪专讬 讘讬 专讘 讛专讜爪讛 砖诇讗 讬住专讬讞 诪转讜 讬讛驻讻谞讜 注诇 驻谞讬讜

The Gemara notes that the continuation of the baraita, which states that from this drop of poison a corpse putrefies, supports the opinion of Rabbi 岣nina bar Kahana. As Rabbi 岣nina bar Kahana says that they say in the school of Rav: One who wishes that his dead relative will not putrefy should turn it on its face immediately, as the drop of poison enters through the mouth, and this causes the putrefaction of the corpse.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讜谞砖诪专转 诪讻诇 讚讘专 专注 砖诇讗 讬讛专讛专 讗讚诐 讘讬讜诐 讜讬讘讜讗 诇讬讚讬 讟讜诪讗讛 讘诇讬诇讛

搂 The Gemara cites another source that interprets the verse cited above. The Sages taught a baraita explaining the verse: 鈥淎nd you shall keep yourself from every evil thing鈥 (Deuteronomy 23:10), which is immediately followed by the verse: 鈥淚f there be among you any man who is not ritually pure by reason of that which happened to him by night鈥 (Deuteronomy 23:11). This teaches that a person should not think impure thoughts by day and thereby come to the impurity of an emission by night.

诪讻讗谉 讗诪专 专讘讬 驻谞讞住 讘谉 讬讗讬专 转讜专讛 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 讝讛讬专讜转 讝讛讬专讜转 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 讝专讬讝讜转 讝专讬讝讜转 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 谞拽讬讜转 谞拽讬讜转 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 驻专讬砖讜转 驻专讬砖讜转 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 讟讛专讛 讟讛专讛 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 讞住讬讚讜转 讞住讬讚讜转 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 注谞讜讛 注谞讜讛 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 讬专讗转 讞讟讗 讬专讗转 讞讟讗 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 拽讚讜砖讛 拽讚讜砖讛 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 专讜讞 讛拽讜讚砖 专讜讞 讛拽讜讚砖 诪讘讬讗讛 诇讬讚讬 转讞讬讬转 讛诪转讬诐 讜讞住讬讚讜转 讙讚讜诇讛 诪讻讜诇谉 砖谞讗诪专 讗讝 讚讘专转 讘讞讝讜谉 诇讞住讬讚讬讱

From here Rabbi Pine岣s ben Ya鈥檌r would say: Torah study leads to care in the performance of mitzvot. Care in the performance of mitzvot leads to diligence in their observance. Diligence leads to cleanliness of the soul. Cleanliness of the soul leads to abstention from all evil. Abstention from evil leads to purity and the elimination of all base desires. Purity leads to piety. Piety leads to humility. Humility leads to fear of sin. Fear of sin leads to holiness. Holiness leads to the Divine Spirit. The Divine Spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead. And piety is greater than all of them, as it is stated: 鈥淭hen You did speak in a vision to Your pious ones鈥 (Psalms 89:20).

讜驻诇讬讙讗 讚专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 注谞讜讛 讙讚讜诇讛 诪讻讜诇谉 砖谞讗诪专 专讜讞 讛壮 讗诇讛讬诐 注诇讬 讬注谉 诪砖讞 讛壮 讗转讬 诇讘砖专 注谞讜讬诐 讞住讬讚讬诐 诇讗 谞讗诪专 讗诇讗 注谞讜讬诐 讛讗 诇诪讚转 砖注谞讜讛 讙讚讜诇讛 诪讻讜诇谉

And this statement disagrees with the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: Humility is greater than all of them, as it is stated: 鈥淭he spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord has anointed me to bring good tidings to the humble鈥 (Isaiah 61:1). Since the pious is not stated, but rather 鈥渢he humble,鈥 you learn that humility is greater than all of them.

讗讬谉 诪讜讻专讬谉 诇讛谉 讜讻讜壮 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 诪讜讻专讬谉 诇讛谉 讗讬诇谉 注诇 诪谞转 诇拽讜抓 讜拽讜爪抓 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 讗讬谉 诪讜讻专讬谉 诇讛谉 讗诇讗 拽爪讜爪讛 砖讞转 注诇 诪谞转 诇讙讝讜讝 讜讙讜讝讝 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 讗讬谉 诪讜讻专讬谉 诇讛谉 讗诇讗 讙讝讜讝讛 拽诪讛 注诇 诪谞转 诇拽爪讜专 讜拽讜爪专 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 讗讬谉 诪讜讻专讬谉 讗诇讗 拽爪讜专讛

搂 The mishna teaches that one may not sell to a gentile any item that is attached to the ground. The Sages taught: One may sell to them a tree on the condition that he cut it down, and the buyer cuts it down; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Meir says: One may sell to them only a tree that has actually been cut down. Similarly, one may sell to them fodder, i.e., produce that has grown stalks but is not yet ripe, on the condition to cut it down, and he cuts it down; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Meir says: One may sell to them only fodder that has been cut down. So too, one may sell to them standing grain on the condition to harvest it, and he harvests it; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Meir says: One may sell to them only harvested grain.

讜爪专讬讻讗 讚讗讬 讗砖诪注讬谞谉 讗讬诇谉 讘讛讗 拽讗诪专 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讻讬讜谉 讚诇讗 驻住讬讚 诪砖讛讬 诇讬讛 讗讘诇 讛讗讬 讚讻讬 诪砖讛讬 诇讛 驻住讬讚 讗讬诪讗 诪讜讚讬 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛

The Gemara comments: And it is necessary to state the halakha in each of these different scenarios. As, had the baraita taught us the dispute only with regard to a tree, I might have said that it is only in that case that Rabbi Meir says it must be cut down before being sold. The reason is that since the gentile does not lose out by keeping the tree in the soil, he might keep it in the ground. But in this case of standing grain, since if he keeps it in the ground he will lose out, one might say that Rabbi Meir concedes to Rabbi Yehuda that it may be sold before being harvested, on the condition that the gentile will harvest it, because the gentile would not leave the grain in the soil to spoil.

讜讗讬 讗砖诪注讬谞谉 讘讛谞讬 转专转讬 诪砖讜诐 讚诇讗 讬讚讬注 砖讘讞讬讬讛讜 讗讘诇 砖讞转 讚讬讚讬注 砖讘讞讬讬讛讜 讗讬诪讗 诪讜讚讬 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 诪讗讬专

And had the baraita taught us only these two halakhot, one might have said that Rabbi Yehuda permits selling these items on the condition that they be cut down because the improvement to the tree or grain is not recognizable when it is left in the ground. But in the case of fodder, whose improvement is recognizable, as it would continue to grow and ripen if left in the ground, one might say that Rabbi Yehuda concedes to Rabbi Meir that we are concerned that the gentile will not cut down the fodder, and therefore one may sell it only once it has been cut down.

讜讗讬 讗砖诪注讬谞谉 讘讛讗 讘讛讗 拽讗诪专 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讘诇 讘讛谞讱 讗讬诪讗 诪讜讚讬 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 爪专讬讻讗

And furthermore, had the baraita taught us only the dispute in this case of fodder, one might have said that it is merely in this case that Rabbi Meir says it must be cut down before being sold, but with regard to those cases of a tree or standing grain, one might say that he concedes to Rabbi Yehuda that one may sell these items before they are harvested on the condition that the gentile will harvest them, as there is no recognizable improvement to them if they are left in the ground. Consequently, it is necessary for the dispute to be stated in all three cases.

讗讬讘注讬讗 诇讛讜 讘讛诪讛 注诇 诪谞转 诇砖讞讜讟 诪讛讜

A dilemma was raised before the Sages: With regard to the sale of large livestock, which is forbidden due to the concern that the gentile might use them to perform labor (see 14b), if such livestock are sold on the condition that the gentile will slaughter them, what is the halakha?

讛转诐 讟注诪讗 诪讗讬 砖专讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讚诇讗讜 讘专砖讜转讬讛 拽讬讬诪讬 讜诇讗 诪爪讬 诪砖讛讬 诇讛讜 讗讘诇 讘讛诪讛 讻讬讜谉 讚讘专砖讜转讬讛 讚讙讜讬 拽讬讬诪讗 诪砖讛讬 诇讛 讗讜 讚诇诪讗 诇讗 砖谞讗

The Gemara explains the aspects of the dilemma: There, in the mishna, what is the reason that Rabbi Yehuda permits the sale of a tree on the condition that the gentile will cut it down? Is the reason that the trees are not in the gentile鈥檚 domain and therefore he is not able to keep them, as the Jew will force him to cut them down? But in the case of large livestock, since the animal stands in the domain of the gentile once it is sold, there is a concern that he might keep it and not slaughter it. Or perhaps there is no difference between the cases, and Rabbi Yehuda would permit one to sell even large livestock to a gentile, on the condition that he will slaughter the animals.

转讗 砖诪注 讚转谞讬讗 讘讛诪讛 注诇 诪谞转 诇砖讞讜讟 讜砖讜讞讟 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 讗讬谉 诪讜讻专讬谉 诇讜 讗诇讗 砖讞讜讟讛

The Gemara suggests a resolution: Come and hear, as it is taught in a baraita: One may sell large livestock to a gentile on the condition that he slaughter it, and he slaughters it; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Meir says: One may sell to a gentile only a slaughtered animal.

诪转谞讬壮 讗讬谉 诪砖讻讬专讬谉 诇讛诐 讘转讬诐 讘讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 讜讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讜诪专 砖讚讜转 讜讘住讜专讬讗

MISHNA: One may not rent a house to a gentile in Eretz Yisrael, and needless to say one may not rent fields to them, as explained in the Gemara. And in Syria

Scroll To Top