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

Today's Daf Yomi

May 23, 2014 | 讻状讙 讘讗讬讬专 转砖注状讚

Masechet Rosh Hashanah is dedicated anonymously in honor of Rabbanit Michelle Farber whose dedication to learning and teaching the daf continues to inspire so many people around the world.

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Rosh Hashanah 15

Study Guide Rosh Hashanah 15


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

诪讗谉 砖诪注转 诇讬讛 讚讗讝讬诇 讘转专 诇拽讬讟讛 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讜拽转谞讬 砖讘讟

The Gemara clarifies this ruling: Whom did you hear that said the tithe year of an etrog follows the time of the picking of its fruit? It was Rabban Gamliel. And yet this baraita is teaching that the new year for tithing an etrog is the fifteenth of Shevat, against the opinion of Rabba bar Rav Huna, who says that according to Rabban Gamliel it is the first of Tishrei.

讗诇讗 讗讬 讗转诪专 讛讻讬 讗转诪专 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚讗诪专 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗转专讜讙 讗讞专 诇拽讬讟讛 讻讬专拽 专讗砖 讛砖谞讛 砖诇讜 砖讘讟

Rather, if this was said, it was said as follows: Rabba bar Rav Huna said: Even though Rabban Gamliel said that the tithe year of an etrog follows the time of the picking of its fruit, like a vegetable, its new year is in Shevat, like a tree.

诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讛转诐 讚拽转谞讬 讗诐 讛讬转讛 砖谞讬讛 谞讻谞住转 诇砖诇讬砖讬转 讜诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讛讻讗 讚拽转谞讬 讗诐 讛讬转讛 砖诇讬砖讬转 谞讻谞住转 诇专讘讬注讬转

The Gemara asks: What is different there, in the baraita with regard to one who picked vegetables on the eve of Rosh HaShana, such that it teaches the case when it was the second year of the Sabbatical cycle going into the third year, and what is different here, in the baraita dealing with one who was picking the fruit of an etrog tree on the eve of the fifteenth of Shevat, such that it teaches the case when it was the third year going into the fourth year? Why is the same example not brought in both cases?

诪讬诇转讗 讗讙讘 讗讜专讞讬讛 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚讗转专讜讙 拽砖讬讗 诇讬讛 讬讚讗 讜讗讬讬讚讬 讚诪诪砖诪砖讬 讘讬讛 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 讘砖讘讬注讬转 诇讗 讟注讬谉 驻专讬 注讚 转诇转 砖谞讬谉

The Gemara answers: It teaches us a matter in passing, that it is damaging for an etrog when the tree is handled, and since everyone handles it in the Sabbatical Year, as all the orchards are declared ownerless and everyone is permitted to enter and pick produce, the tree does not bear fruit that is fit for eating for another three years.

讘注讗 诪讬谞讬讛 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讗转专讜讙 专讗砖 讛砖谞讛 砖诇讜 讗讬诪转讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 砖讘讟 砖讘讟 讚讞讚砖讬诐 讗讜 砖讘讟 讚转拽讜驻讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚讞讚砖讬诐

Rabbi Yo岣nan inquired of Rabbi Yannai: With regard to an etrog, when is its new year? Rabbi Yannai said to him: It is in Shevat. Rabbi Yo岣nan asked again: Are you referring to the lunar month of Shevat or to the Shevat of the solar season, which begins thirty days after the winter solstice, but on a different date each year? Rabbi Yannai said to him: I am referring to the lunar month of Shevat.

讘注讗 诪讬谞讬讛 专讘讗 诪专讘 谞讞诪谉 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讛讬转讛 砖谞讛 诪注讜讘专转 诪讛讜 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛诇讱 讗讞专 专讜讘 砖谞讬诐

Rava inquired of Rav Na岣an, and some say that it was Rabbi Yo岣nan who inquired of Rabbi Yannai: If it was a leap year, what is the halakha? Does the new year for trees then move to the First Adar, which is the penultimate month in a leap year? He said to him: Follow the majority of years. Even in a leap year the new year for trees is in Shevat.

讗诪专 专讘讛 讗转专讜讙 讘转 砖砖讬转 砖谞讻谞住讛 诇砖讘讬注讬转 驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛诪注砖专 讜驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛讘讬注讜专 讜讘转 砖讘讬注讬转 砖谞讻谞住讛 诇砖诪讬谞讬转 驻讟讜专讛 讘诪注砖专 讜讞讬讬讘转 讘讘讬注讜专

Rabba said: An etrog from the sixth year of the Sabbatical cycle that entered into, and was picked in, the Sabbatical Year is exempt from tithes, like the produce of the Sabbatical Year, and is also exempt from the mitzva of elimination of Sabbatical Year produce from one鈥檚 house after produce of that particular species is no longer found in the field. A Sabbatical Year etrog that entered into, and was picked in, the eighth year is exempt from tithes but is subject to the mitzva of elimination of Sabbatical Year produce from one鈥檚 house.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讘讬讬 讘砖诇诪讗 住讬驻讗 诇讞讜诪专讗 讗诇讗 专讬砖讗 驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛讘讬注讜专 讗诪讗讬 讚讗诪专讬谞谉 讝讬诇 讘转专 讞谞讟讛 讗讬 讛讻讬 转讬讞讬讬讘 讘诪注砖专

Abaye said to him: Granted, in the latter clause the halakha follows the more stringent approach, as it follows the time of the formation of the fruit, which was in the Sabbatical Year, and therefore the etrog is subject to the mitzva of elimination. But in the first clause, which states that the etrog is exempt from the mitzva of elimination, why is this so? It must be that we say to follow the time of the formation of the fruit, which was in the sixth year. But if so, it should be subject to tithes.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讬讚 讛讻诇 诪诪砖诪砖讬谉 讘讛 讜讗转 讗诪专转 转讬讞讬讬讘 讘诪注砖专

Rabba said to him: Everyone鈥檚 hand is touching it, as all are permitted to enter the orchards and touch all the fruit, and so the etrog is regarded as ownerless, and yet you wish to say that it should be subject to tithes? Even if it is not exempt as fruit of the Sabbatical Year, it is exempt from tithes because it is now ownerless.

讜专讘 讛诪谞讜谞讗 讗诪专 讘转 砖砖讬转 砖谞讻谞住转 诇砖讘讬注讬转 诇注讜诇诐 砖砖讬转 讜讘转 砖讘讬注讬转 讛谞讻谞住转 诇砖诪讬谞讬转 诇注讜诇诐 砖讘讬注讬转

Rav Hamnuna argued and said: An etrog from the sixth year of the Sabbatical cycle that entered into, and was picked in, the Sabbatical Year is always and for all purposes considered sixth-year produce. And an etrog from the Sabbatical Year that entered into, and was picked in, the eighth year is always and for all purposes considered produce of the Sabbatical Year.

诪讬转讬讘讬 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 诪砖讜诐 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗转专讜讙 讘转 砖砖讬转 砖谞讻谞住转 诇砖讘讬注讬转 驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛诪注砖专 讜驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛讘讬注讜专 砖讗讬谉 诇讱 讚讘专 砖讞讬讬讘 讘诪注砖专 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 讙讚诇 讘讞讬讜讘 讜谞诇拽讟 讘讞讬讜讘 讜讘转 砖讘讬注讬转 砖谞讻谞住转 诇砖诪讬谞讬转 驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛诪注砖专 讜驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛讘讬注讜专 砖讗讬谉 诇讱 讚讘专 砖讞讬讬讘 讘讘讬注讜专 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 讙讚诇 讘砖讘讬注讬转 讜谞诇拽讟 讘砖讘讬注讬转

The Gemara raises an objection from the following baraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Yehuda said in the name of Rabbi Shimon: An etrog from the sixth year that entered into, and was picked in, the Sabbatical Year is exempt from tithes, and it is also exempt from the mitzva of elimination of Sabbatical Year produce from one鈥檚 house, as there is nothing that is subject to tithes unless it both grew at a time of obligation in tithes and was also picked at a time of obligation. Likewise, an etrog from the Sabbatical Year that entered into, and was picked in, the eighth year is exempt from tithes, and it is also exempt from the mitzva of elimination, as nothing is subject to the mitzva of elimination unless it both grew in the Sabbatical Year and was also picked in the Sabbatical Year.

专讬砖讗 拽砖讬讗 诇专讘 讛诪谞讜谞讗 住讬驻讗 拽砖讬讗 讘讬谉 诇专讘讛 讘讬谉 诇专讘 讛诪谞讜谞讗

The Gemara notes: The first clause of this baraita poses a difficulty with regard to the opinion of Rav Hamnuna, who says that a sixth-year etrog that was picked in the Sabbatical Year is subject to tithes. And the latter clause of the baraita poses a difficulty with regard to the opinions of both Rabba and Rav Hamnuna, as they both say that a Sabbatical-Year etrog that was picked in the eighth year is subject to the mitzva of elimination.

转谞讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讘讟讜诇诪讜住 讛注讬讚 诪砖讜诐 讞诪砖讛 讝拽谞讬诐 讗转专讜讙 讗讞专 诇拽讬讟转讜 诇诪注砖专 讜专讘讜转讬谞讜 谞诪谞讜 讘讗讜砖讗 讜讗诪专讜 讗讞专 诇拽讬讟转讜 讘讬谉 诇诪注砖专 讘讬谉 诇砖讘讬注讬转

The Gemara answers: The matter is a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, as it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yosei said: Avtolemos testified in the name of five Elders: An etrog follows the time of its picking in the matter of tithes. But our Sages voted in Usha and said that an etrog follows the time of its picking, both in the matter of tithes and in the matter of the Sabbatical Year.

砖讘讬注讬转 诪讗谉 讚讻专 砖诪讬讛

The Gemara raises a question about this baraita: Who mentioned anything about the Sabbatical Year? The subject of the discussion was tithes.

讞住讜专讬 诪讬讞住专讗 讜讛讻讬 拽转谞讬 讗转专讜讙 讗讞专 诇拽讬讟转讜 诇诪注砖专 讜讗讞专 讞谞讟讛 诇砖讘讬注讬转 讜专讘讜转讬谞讜 谞诪谞讜 讘讗讜砖讗 讗讞专 诇拽讬讟转讜 讘讬谉 诇诪注砖专 讘讬谉 诇砖讘讬注讬转

The Gemara answers: The baraita is incomplete and is teaching the following: Avtolemos testified in the name of five Elders: An etrog follows the time of its picking in the matter of tithes and it follows the time of the formation of its fruit in the matter of the Sabbatical Year. But our Sages voted in Usha and decided that an etrog follows the time of its picking, both in the matter of tithes and in the matter of the Sabbatical Year.

讗讬转诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讜专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 讗诪专讬 转专讜讬讬讛讜 讗转专讜讙 讘转 砖砖讬转 砖谞讻谞住讛 诇砖讘讬注讬转 诇注讜诇诐 砖砖讬转 讻讬 讗转讗 专讘讬谉 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗转专讜讙 讘转 砖砖讬转 砖谞讻谞住讛 诇砖讘讬注讬转 讗驻讬诇讜 讻讝讬转 讜谞注砖讬转 讻讻专 讞讬讬讘讬谉 注诇讬讛 诪砖讜诐 讟讘诇

It was stated that the amora鈥檌m of Eretz Yisrael discussed this issue: Rabbi Yo岣nan and Reish Lakish both say: An etrog from the sixth year of the Sabbatical cycle that entered into, and was picked in, the Sabbatical Year is always and for all purposes considered as sixth-year produce. When Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: A sixth-year etrog that entered into, and was picked in, the Sabbatical Year, although at the beginning of the Sabbatical Year it was only the size of an olive-bulk and during the Sabbatical Year it grew to the size of a loaf of bread, is considered sixth-year produce that is subject to tithing, and if one eats it without tithing, he is liable for eating untithed produce.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讗讬诇谉 砖讞谞讟讜 驻讬专讜转讬讜 拽讜讚诐 讞诪砖讛 注砖专 讘砖讘讟 诪转注砖专 诇砖谞讛 砖注讘专讛 讗讞专 讞诪砖讛 注砖专 讘砖讘讟 诪转注砖专 诇砖谞讛 讛讘讗讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讘诪讛 讚讘专讬诐 讗诪讜专讬诐 讘讗讬诇谉 砖注讜砖讛 砖转讬 讘专讬讻讜转 讘砖谞讛

The Sages taught in a baraita: A tree whose fruits were formed before the fifteenth of Shevat is tithed in accordance with the previous year, and if the fruits were formed after the fifteenth of Shevat it is tithed in accordance with the coming year. Rabbi Ne岣mya said: In what case is this statement said? It is said with regard to a tree that produces two broods, two crops, in a single year.

砖转讬 讘专讬讻讜转 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讗诇讗 讗讬诪讗 讻注讬谉 砖转讬 讘专讬讻讜转

The Gemara interrupts with a question about the wording of this baraita: Does it enter your mind to say two broods? Animals produce broods, but trees do not. Rather, say: Like two broods, i.e., two seasons鈥 worth of crops.

讗讘诇 讗讬诇谉 讛注讜砖讛 讘专讬讻讛 讗讞转 讻讙讜谉 讚拽诇讬诐 讜讝讬转讬诐 讜讞专讜讘讬谉 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讞谞讟讜 驻讬专讜转讬讛谉 拽讜讚诐 讞诪砖讛 注砖专 讘砖讘讟 诪转注砖专讬谉 诇砖谞讛 讛讘讗讛

The baraita continues: But in the case of trees that produce only one brood of fruit, for example, palm trees, and olive trees, and carob trees, which yield fruit only once a year, although their fruit took form before the fifteenth of Shevat, they are tithed in accordance with the coming year, since they follow the time of their fruit鈥檚 picking. According to Rabbi Ne岣mya, most fruit will be tithed according to the time that the fruit is picked, since only a minority of fruit trees produce two crops a year.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 谞讛讙讜 讛注诐 讘讞专讜讘讬谉 讻专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛

Rabbi Yo岣nan said: The people were accustomed to act with regard to carobs in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya, that their tithe year follows the time of the fruit鈥檚 picking.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 诇专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘谞讜转 砖讜讞 砖讘讬注讬转 砖诇讛谉 砖谞讬讛 诪驻谞讬 砖注讜砖讜转 诇砖诇砖 讛砖谞讬诐

Reish Lakish raised an objection to the opinion of Rabbi Yo岣nan from a mishna that teaches: In the case of white fig trees, the Sabbatical Year for them with regard to the halakhot of eating and elimination is in the second year of the Sabbatical cycle, due to the fact that their fruit grows for three years, and so the fruit that ripens in the second year of the Sabbatical cycle had already taken form in the previous Sabbatical Year. This indicates that the tithe follows the time of the formation of the fruit and not the time of picking.

讗讬砖转讬拽 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讛讻讛谉 诇专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讻讛谉 讗诪讗讬 讗讬砖转讬拽 诇讬诪讗 诇讬讛 讗诪讬谞讗 诇讱 讗谞讗 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讜讗转 讗诪专转 诇讬 专讘谞谉

Rabbi Yo岣nan was silent and did not respond, as though he had no answer. Rabbi Abba the priest said to Rabbi Yosei the priest: Why was Rabbi Yo岣nan silent? He should have said to Reish Lakish as follows: I am speaking to you of the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya, and you say to me the opinion of the Rabbis?

诪砖讜诐 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 砖讘拽转 专讘谞谉 讜注讘讚转 讻专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛

Rabbi Yosei the priest answered: He could not have made this argument, because Reish Lakish would then have said to him: Do you abandon the opinion of the Rabbis, who constitute the majority, and act in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya, who express a sole dissenting opinion?

讜诇讬诪讗 诇讬讛 拽讗诪讬谞讗 诇讱 谞讛讙讜 讜讗转 讗诪专转 诇讬 讗讬住讜专讗 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 讘诪拽讜诐 讗讬住讜专讗 讻讬 谞讛讙讜 砖讘拽讬谞谉 诇讛讜

Rabbi Abba the priest asked further: Rabbi Yo岣nan should have said to him: I am speaking to you only about how the people practice and that their custom follows the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya, and you say to me that it is a prohibition? Rabbi Yosei the priest answered: He could not have said this, because Reish Lakish would then have said to him: Where there is a prohibition, even if they were accustomed to act in a particular manner, would we leave them to continue?

讜诇讬诪讗 诇讬讛 讻讬 讗诪讬谞讗 诇讱 讗谞讗 诪注砖专 讞专讜讘讬谉 讚专讘谞谉 讜讗转 讗诪专转 诇讬 砖讘讬注讬转 讚讗讜专讬讬转讗

Rabbi Abba the priest asked further: Rabbi Yo岣nan should have said to Reish Lakish as follows: I am speaking to you about the tithe of carobs, which is only by rabbinic decree, as by Torah law all fruits apart from grapes and olives are exempt from tithing, and you speak to me about the Sabbatical Year, which is by Torah law? This being an irrefutable argument, the Gemara once again clarifies this matter.

讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讛讻讛谉 转诪讬讛谞讬 讗诐 讛砖讬讘讛 专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 诇转砖讜讘讛 讝讜 讗诐 讛砖讬讘讛 讛讗 讗讜转讘讛 讗诇讗 讗讬诪讗 讗诐 拽讬讘诇讛 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗诐 诇讗 拽讬讘诇讛

Rather, Rabbi Abba the priest said: I wonder whether Reish Lakish actually raised this original objection to the opinion of Rabbi Yo岣nan, since it has such a clear refutation. The Gemara asks: Whether he asked it? But he did ask it, as is reported in the story. Rather, say: I wonder if Rabbi Yo岣nan accepted this question and was silent because he had nothing to answer, or he did not accept it but nevertheless remained silent because he thought the question was not worthy of an answer.

Masechet Rosh Hashana 聽is dedicated anonymously in honor of聽Rabbanit Michelle Farber whose dedication to learning and teaching the daf continues to inspire so many people around the world.

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

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

learn daf yomi one week at a time with tamara spitz

Rosh Hashanah: 11-17 – Daf Yomi One Week at a Time

This week we will learn when the world was created, when our Forefathers were born. and what month the Redemption...
alon shvut women

About the Etrog II

Rosh Hashanah, Daf 15, More on the Etrog - fruit or vegetable by Susan Suna On Daf 39 in Masechet...

Rosh Hashanah 15

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Rosh Hashanah 15

诪讗谉 砖诪注转 诇讬讛 讚讗讝讬诇 讘转专 诇拽讬讟讛 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讜拽转谞讬 砖讘讟

The Gemara clarifies this ruling: Whom did you hear that said the tithe year of an etrog follows the time of the picking of its fruit? It was Rabban Gamliel. And yet this baraita is teaching that the new year for tithing an etrog is the fifteenth of Shevat, against the opinion of Rabba bar Rav Huna, who says that according to Rabban Gamliel it is the first of Tishrei.

讗诇讗 讗讬 讗转诪专 讛讻讬 讗转诪专 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚讗诪专 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗转专讜讙 讗讞专 诇拽讬讟讛 讻讬专拽 专讗砖 讛砖谞讛 砖诇讜 砖讘讟

Rather, if this was said, it was said as follows: Rabba bar Rav Huna said: Even though Rabban Gamliel said that the tithe year of an etrog follows the time of the picking of its fruit, like a vegetable, its new year is in Shevat, like a tree.

诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讛转诐 讚拽转谞讬 讗诐 讛讬转讛 砖谞讬讛 谞讻谞住转 诇砖诇讬砖讬转 讜诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讛讻讗 讚拽转谞讬 讗诐 讛讬转讛 砖诇讬砖讬转 谞讻谞住转 诇专讘讬注讬转

The Gemara asks: What is different there, in the baraita with regard to one who picked vegetables on the eve of Rosh HaShana, such that it teaches the case when it was the second year of the Sabbatical cycle going into the third year, and what is different here, in the baraita dealing with one who was picking the fruit of an etrog tree on the eve of the fifteenth of Shevat, such that it teaches the case when it was the third year going into the fourth year? Why is the same example not brought in both cases?

诪讬诇转讗 讗讙讘 讗讜专讞讬讛 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚讗转专讜讙 拽砖讬讗 诇讬讛 讬讚讗 讜讗讬讬讚讬 讚诪诪砖诪砖讬 讘讬讛 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 讘砖讘讬注讬转 诇讗 讟注讬谉 驻专讬 注讚 转诇转 砖谞讬谉

The Gemara answers: It teaches us a matter in passing, that it is damaging for an etrog when the tree is handled, and since everyone handles it in the Sabbatical Year, as all the orchards are declared ownerless and everyone is permitted to enter and pick produce, the tree does not bear fruit that is fit for eating for another three years.

讘注讗 诪讬谞讬讛 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讗转专讜讙 专讗砖 讛砖谞讛 砖诇讜 讗讬诪转讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 砖讘讟 砖讘讟 讚讞讚砖讬诐 讗讜 砖讘讟 讚转拽讜驻讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚讞讚砖讬诐

Rabbi Yo岣nan inquired of Rabbi Yannai: With regard to an etrog, when is its new year? Rabbi Yannai said to him: It is in Shevat. Rabbi Yo岣nan asked again: Are you referring to the lunar month of Shevat or to the Shevat of the solar season, which begins thirty days after the winter solstice, but on a different date each year? Rabbi Yannai said to him: I am referring to the lunar month of Shevat.

讘注讗 诪讬谞讬讛 专讘讗 诪专讘 谞讞诪谉 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讛讬转讛 砖谞讛 诪注讜讘专转 诪讛讜 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛诇讱 讗讞专 专讜讘 砖谞讬诐

Rava inquired of Rav Na岣an, and some say that it was Rabbi Yo岣nan who inquired of Rabbi Yannai: If it was a leap year, what is the halakha? Does the new year for trees then move to the First Adar, which is the penultimate month in a leap year? He said to him: Follow the majority of years. Even in a leap year the new year for trees is in Shevat.

讗诪专 专讘讛 讗转专讜讙 讘转 砖砖讬转 砖谞讻谞住讛 诇砖讘讬注讬转 驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛诪注砖专 讜驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛讘讬注讜专 讜讘转 砖讘讬注讬转 砖谞讻谞住讛 诇砖诪讬谞讬转 驻讟讜专讛 讘诪注砖专 讜讞讬讬讘转 讘讘讬注讜专

Rabba said: An etrog from the sixth year of the Sabbatical cycle that entered into, and was picked in, the Sabbatical Year is exempt from tithes, like the produce of the Sabbatical Year, and is also exempt from the mitzva of elimination of Sabbatical Year produce from one鈥檚 house after produce of that particular species is no longer found in the field. A Sabbatical Year etrog that entered into, and was picked in, the eighth year is exempt from tithes but is subject to the mitzva of elimination of Sabbatical Year produce from one鈥檚 house.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讘讬讬 讘砖诇诪讗 住讬驻讗 诇讞讜诪专讗 讗诇讗 专讬砖讗 驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛讘讬注讜专 讗诪讗讬 讚讗诪专讬谞谉 讝讬诇 讘转专 讞谞讟讛 讗讬 讛讻讬 转讬讞讬讬讘 讘诪注砖专

Abaye said to him: Granted, in the latter clause the halakha follows the more stringent approach, as it follows the time of the formation of the fruit, which was in the Sabbatical Year, and therefore the etrog is subject to the mitzva of elimination. But in the first clause, which states that the etrog is exempt from the mitzva of elimination, why is this so? It must be that we say to follow the time of the formation of the fruit, which was in the sixth year. But if so, it should be subject to tithes.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讬讚 讛讻诇 诪诪砖诪砖讬谉 讘讛 讜讗转 讗诪专转 转讬讞讬讬讘 讘诪注砖专

Rabba said to him: Everyone鈥檚 hand is touching it, as all are permitted to enter the orchards and touch all the fruit, and so the etrog is regarded as ownerless, and yet you wish to say that it should be subject to tithes? Even if it is not exempt as fruit of the Sabbatical Year, it is exempt from tithes because it is now ownerless.

讜专讘 讛诪谞讜谞讗 讗诪专 讘转 砖砖讬转 砖谞讻谞住转 诇砖讘讬注讬转 诇注讜诇诐 砖砖讬转 讜讘转 砖讘讬注讬转 讛谞讻谞住转 诇砖诪讬谞讬转 诇注讜诇诐 砖讘讬注讬转

Rav Hamnuna argued and said: An etrog from the sixth year of the Sabbatical cycle that entered into, and was picked in, the Sabbatical Year is always and for all purposes considered sixth-year produce. And an etrog from the Sabbatical Year that entered into, and was picked in, the eighth year is always and for all purposes considered produce of the Sabbatical Year.

诪讬转讬讘讬 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 诪砖讜诐 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗转专讜讙 讘转 砖砖讬转 砖谞讻谞住转 诇砖讘讬注讬转 驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛诪注砖专 讜驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛讘讬注讜专 砖讗讬谉 诇讱 讚讘专 砖讞讬讬讘 讘诪注砖专 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 讙讚诇 讘讞讬讜讘 讜谞诇拽讟 讘讞讬讜讘 讜讘转 砖讘讬注讬转 砖谞讻谞住转 诇砖诪讬谞讬转 驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛诪注砖专 讜驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛讘讬注讜专 砖讗讬谉 诇讱 讚讘专 砖讞讬讬讘 讘讘讬注讜专 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 讙讚诇 讘砖讘讬注讬转 讜谞诇拽讟 讘砖讘讬注讬转

The Gemara raises an objection from the following baraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Yehuda said in the name of Rabbi Shimon: An etrog from the sixth year that entered into, and was picked in, the Sabbatical Year is exempt from tithes, and it is also exempt from the mitzva of elimination of Sabbatical Year produce from one鈥檚 house, as there is nothing that is subject to tithes unless it both grew at a time of obligation in tithes and was also picked at a time of obligation. Likewise, an etrog from the Sabbatical Year that entered into, and was picked in, the eighth year is exempt from tithes, and it is also exempt from the mitzva of elimination, as nothing is subject to the mitzva of elimination unless it both grew in the Sabbatical Year and was also picked in the Sabbatical Year.

专讬砖讗 拽砖讬讗 诇专讘 讛诪谞讜谞讗 住讬驻讗 拽砖讬讗 讘讬谉 诇专讘讛 讘讬谉 诇专讘 讛诪谞讜谞讗

The Gemara notes: The first clause of this baraita poses a difficulty with regard to the opinion of Rav Hamnuna, who says that a sixth-year etrog that was picked in the Sabbatical Year is subject to tithes. And the latter clause of the baraita poses a difficulty with regard to the opinions of both Rabba and Rav Hamnuna, as they both say that a Sabbatical-Year etrog that was picked in the eighth year is subject to the mitzva of elimination.

转谞讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讘讟讜诇诪讜住 讛注讬讚 诪砖讜诐 讞诪砖讛 讝拽谞讬诐 讗转专讜讙 讗讞专 诇拽讬讟转讜 诇诪注砖专 讜专讘讜转讬谞讜 谞诪谞讜 讘讗讜砖讗 讜讗诪专讜 讗讞专 诇拽讬讟转讜 讘讬谉 诇诪注砖专 讘讬谉 诇砖讘讬注讬转

The Gemara answers: The matter is a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, as it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yosei said: Avtolemos testified in the name of five Elders: An etrog follows the time of its picking in the matter of tithes. But our Sages voted in Usha and said that an etrog follows the time of its picking, both in the matter of tithes and in the matter of the Sabbatical Year.

砖讘讬注讬转 诪讗谉 讚讻专 砖诪讬讛

The Gemara raises a question about this baraita: Who mentioned anything about the Sabbatical Year? The subject of the discussion was tithes.

讞住讜专讬 诪讬讞住专讗 讜讛讻讬 拽转谞讬 讗转专讜讙 讗讞专 诇拽讬讟转讜 诇诪注砖专 讜讗讞专 讞谞讟讛 诇砖讘讬注讬转 讜专讘讜转讬谞讜 谞诪谞讜 讘讗讜砖讗 讗讞专 诇拽讬讟转讜 讘讬谉 诇诪注砖专 讘讬谉 诇砖讘讬注讬转

The Gemara answers: The baraita is incomplete and is teaching the following: Avtolemos testified in the name of five Elders: An etrog follows the time of its picking in the matter of tithes and it follows the time of the formation of its fruit in the matter of the Sabbatical Year. But our Sages voted in Usha and decided that an etrog follows the time of its picking, both in the matter of tithes and in the matter of the Sabbatical Year.

讗讬转诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讜专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 讗诪专讬 转专讜讬讬讛讜 讗转专讜讙 讘转 砖砖讬转 砖谞讻谞住讛 诇砖讘讬注讬转 诇注讜诇诐 砖砖讬转 讻讬 讗转讗 专讘讬谉 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗转专讜讙 讘转 砖砖讬转 砖谞讻谞住讛 诇砖讘讬注讬转 讗驻讬诇讜 讻讝讬转 讜谞注砖讬转 讻讻专 讞讬讬讘讬谉 注诇讬讛 诪砖讜诐 讟讘诇

It was stated that the amora鈥檌m of Eretz Yisrael discussed this issue: Rabbi Yo岣nan and Reish Lakish both say: An etrog from the sixth year of the Sabbatical cycle that entered into, and was picked in, the Sabbatical Year is always and for all purposes considered as sixth-year produce. When Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: A sixth-year etrog that entered into, and was picked in, the Sabbatical Year, although at the beginning of the Sabbatical Year it was only the size of an olive-bulk and during the Sabbatical Year it grew to the size of a loaf of bread, is considered sixth-year produce that is subject to tithing, and if one eats it without tithing, he is liable for eating untithed produce.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讗讬诇谉 砖讞谞讟讜 驻讬专讜转讬讜 拽讜讚诐 讞诪砖讛 注砖专 讘砖讘讟 诪转注砖专 诇砖谞讛 砖注讘专讛 讗讞专 讞诪砖讛 注砖专 讘砖讘讟 诪转注砖专 诇砖谞讛 讛讘讗讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讘诪讛 讚讘专讬诐 讗诪讜专讬诐 讘讗讬诇谉 砖注讜砖讛 砖转讬 讘专讬讻讜转 讘砖谞讛

The Sages taught in a baraita: A tree whose fruits were formed before the fifteenth of Shevat is tithed in accordance with the previous year, and if the fruits were formed after the fifteenth of Shevat it is tithed in accordance with the coming year. Rabbi Ne岣mya said: In what case is this statement said? It is said with regard to a tree that produces two broods, two crops, in a single year.

砖转讬 讘专讬讻讜转 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讗诇讗 讗讬诪讗 讻注讬谉 砖转讬 讘专讬讻讜转

The Gemara interrupts with a question about the wording of this baraita: Does it enter your mind to say two broods? Animals produce broods, but trees do not. Rather, say: Like two broods, i.e., two seasons鈥 worth of crops.

讗讘诇 讗讬诇谉 讛注讜砖讛 讘专讬讻讛 讗讞转 讻讙讜谉 讚拽诇讬诐 讜讝讬转讬诐 讜讞专讜讘讬谉 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讞谞讟讜 驻讬专讜转讬讛谉 拽讜讚诐 讞诪砖讛 注砖专 讘砖讘讟 诪转注砖专讬谉 诇砖谞讛 讛讘讗讛

The baraita continues: But in the case of trees that produce only one brood of fruit, for example, palm trees, and olive trees, and carob trees, which yield fruit only once a year, although their fruit took form before the fifteenth of Shevat, they are tithed in accordance with the coming year, since they follow the time of their fruit鈥檚 picking. According to Rabbi Ne岣mya, most fruit will be tithed according to the time that the fruit is picked, since only a minority of fruit trees produce two crops a year.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 谞讛讙讜 讛注诐 讘讞专讜讘讬谉 讻专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛

Rabbi Yo岣nan said: The people were accustomed to act with regard to carobs in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya, that their tithe year follows the time of the fruit鈥檚 picking.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 诇专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘谞讜转 砖讜讞 砖讘讬注讬转 砖诇讛谉 砖谞讬讛 诪驻谞讬 砖注讜砖讜转 诇砖诇砖 讛砖谞讬诐

Reish Lakish raised an objection to the opinion of Rabbi Yo岣nan from a mishna that teaches: In the case of white fig trees, the Sabbatical Year for them with regard to the halakhot of eating and elimination is in the second year of the Sabbatical cycle, due to the fact that their fruit grows for three years, and so the fruit that ripens in the second year of the Sabbatical cycle had already taken form in the previous Sabbatical Year. This indicates that the tithe follows the time of the formation of the fruit and not the time of picking.

讗讬砖转讬拽 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讛讻讛谉 诇专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讻讛谉 讗诪讗讬 讗讬砖转讬拽 诇讬诪讗 诇讬讛 讗诪讬谞讗 诇讱 讗谞讗 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讜讗转 讗诪专转 诇讬 专讘谞谉

Rabbi Yo岣nan was silent and did not respond, as though he had no answer. Rabbi Abba the priest said to Rabbi Yosei the priest: Why was Rabbi Yo岣nan silent? He should have said to Reish Lakish as follows: I am speaking to you of the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya, and you say to me the opinion of the Rabbis?

诪砖讜诐 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 砖讘拽转 专讘谞谉 讜注讘讚转 讻专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛

Rabbi Yosei the priest answered: He could not have made this argument, because Reish Lakish would then have said to him: Do you abandon the opinion of the Rabbis, who constitute the majority, and act in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya, who express a sole dissenting opinion?

讜诇讬诪讗 诇讬讛 拽讗诪讬谞讗 诇讱 谞讛讙讜 讜讗转 讗诪专转 诇讬 讗讬住讜专讗 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 讘诪拽讜诐 讗讬住讜专讗 讻讬 谞讛讙讜 砖讘拽讬谞谉 诇讛讜

Rabbi Abba the priest asked further: Rabbi Yo岣nan should have said to him: I am speaking to you only about how the people practice and that their custom follows the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya, and you say to me that it is a prohibition? Rabbi Yosei the priest answered: He could not have said this, because Reish Lakish would then have said to him: Where there is a prohibition, even if they were accustomed to act in a particular manner, would we leave them to continue?

讜诇讬诪讗 诇讬讛 讻讬 讗诪讬谞讗 诇讱 讗谞讗 诪注砖专 讞专讜讘讬谉 讚专讘谞谉 讜讗转 讗诪专转 诇讬 砖讘讬注讬转 讚讗讜专讬讬转讗

Rabbi Abba the priest asked further: Rabbi Yo岣nan should have said to Reish Lakish as follows: I am speaking to you about the tithe of carobs, which is only by rabbinic decree, as by Torah law all fruits apart from grapes and olives are exempt from tithing, and you speak to me about the Sabbatical Year, which is by Torah law? This being an irrefutable argument, the Gemara once again clarifies this matter.

讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讛讻讛谉 转诪讬讛谞讬 讗诐 讛砖讬讘讛 专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 诇转砖讜讘讛 讝讜 讗诐 讛砖讬讘讛 讛讗 讗讜转讘讛 讗诇讗 讗讬诪讗 讗诐 拽讬讘诇讛 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗诐 诇讗 拽讬讘诇讛

Rather, Rabbi Abba the priest said: I wonder whether Reish Lakish actually raised this original objection to the opinion of Rabbi Yo岣nan, since it has such a clear refutation. The Gemara asks: Whether he asked it? But he did ask it, as is reported in the story. Rather, say: I wonder if Rabbi Yo岣nan accepted this question and was silent because he had nothing to answer, or he did not accept it but nevertheless remained silent because he thought the question was not worthy of an answer.

Scroll To Top