Shabbat 127

כדאמרי אינשי ואי בעי אפילו טובא נמי מפנין ומאי אבל לא את האוצר שלא יגמור כולו דילמא אתי לאשוויי גומות אבל אתחולי מתחיל ומני רבי שמעון היא דלית ליה מוקצה

as people who are not so precise in their formulation say: Four or five. And if one so desires, he may clear even more. And what then is the meaning of: However, one may not move these items to create space in the storeroom? It means that one may not finish moving the baskets out of the entire storeroom, lest he come to level the floor by filling the holes. However, one may begin removing baskets from the storeroom. And whose opinion is cited in this mishna? It is the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, who is not of the opinion that there is a prohibition of set-aside.

תנו רבנן אין מתחילין באוצר תחילה אבל עושה בו שביל כדי שיכנס ויצא עושה בו שביל והא אמרת אין מתחילין הכי קאמר עושה בו שביל ברגליו בכניסתו וביציאתו

The Sages taught in a baraita: One may not use the storeroom for the first time. If one has never taken supplies from this storeroom, he may not begin moving baskets from it. However, he makes a path in it, so that he will be able to enter and exit. The Gemara asks: He makes a path in it? Did you not say: One may not use the storeroom for the first time? The Gemara answers that the baraita is saying as follows: He makes a path in it by moving baskets with his feet, as he enters the storehouse and as he exits. He may not move the basket with his hand.

תנו רבנן תבואה צבורה בזמן שהתחיל בה מערב שבת מותר להסתפק ממנה בשבת ואם לאו אסור להסתפק ממנה בשבת דברי רבי שמעון רבי אחא מתיר כלפי לייא אלא אימא דברי רבי אחא ורבי שמעון מתיר

The Sages taught in a baraita: With regard to piled grain, if one had started to take grain from the pile on Shabbat eve, it is permitted to satisfy his needs from it on Shabbat, and if not, it is prohibited to satisfy his needs from it on Shabbat; this is the statement of Rabbi Shimon. Rabbi Aḥa permits doing so in any case. The Gemara raises a difficulty: On the contrary; it is Rabbi Shimon who is lenient with regard to the halakhot of set-aside. Rather, emend the baraita and say: This is the statement of Rabbi Aḥa. Rabbi Shimon permits doing so in any case.

תנא כמה שיעור תבואה צבורה לתך בעא מיניה רב נחומי בר זכריה מאביי שיעור תבואה צבורה בכמה אמר ליה הרי אמרו שיעור תבואה צבורה לתך

It was taught: How much is the measure of piled grain needed to confer the legal status of a storeroom? A half-kor. Rav Naḥumi bar Zekharya raised a dilemma before Abaye: The measure of piled grain, how much is it? Abaye said to him that they said: The measure of piled grain is a half-kor.

איבעיא להו הני ארבע וחמש קופות דקאמר בארבע וחמש קופות אין טפי לא אלמא למעוטי בהילוכא עדיף או דילמא למעוטי משוי עדיף

A dilemma was raised before the Sages: These four or five baskets, which the tanna stated in the mishna, is he saying the following: Four or five baskets, yes, one may move them, more baskets, no, one may not move them? This would indicate that it is preferable to minimize the walking distance because fewer baskets results in less walking in and out of the storeroom. Or perhaps it is preferable to minimize the size of the burden by carrying smaller baskets, as long as the total measure of all that one carries does not exceed the capacity of five large baskets?

תא שמע דתני חדא מפנין אפילו ארבע וחמש קופות של כדי שמן ושל כדי יין ותניא אידך בעשר ובחמש עשרה מאי לאו בהא קמיפלגי דמר סבר מעוטי בהילוכא עדיף ומר סבר מעוטי במשוי עדיף

Come and hear a resolution to this dilemma, as one baraita taught: One may move even four or five baskets containing jugs of oil and jugs of wine. And it was taught in another baraita: One may move them even in ten and in fifteen baskets. What, is it not that the two baraitot disagree concerning the following matter, as this Sage in the first baraita holds that it is preferable to minimize the walking distance by moving fewer, heavier baskets, and this Sage in the second baraita holds that it is preferable to minimize the size of the burden by moving lighter baskets over the course of several trips.

לא דכולי עלמא מעוטי בהילוכא עדיף ומי סברת בעשר ובחמש עשרהאקופות קאי אכדין קאי ולא קשיא הא דמשתקלי חד חד בקופה והא דמישתקלי תרי תרי והא דמשתקלי תלתא תלתא ובדקורי דהרפניא

The Gemara rejects this: No, everyone agrees that it is preferable to minimize the walking distance. And do you hold that: In ten and in fifteen, is referring to baskets? It is referring to jugs, and there is no dispute between the baraitot. And this is not difficult: This baraita, which spoke of moving five, is referring to a case in which the jugs are taken one by one in each basket. And that baraita, which speaks of moving ten, is referring to a case in which the jugs are taken two by two in each basket. And that baraita, which speaks of moving fifteen, is referring to a case in which the jugs are taken three by three, e.g., in the case of the small jugs of Harpanya.

איבעיא להו הני ארבע וחמש דקאמר אף על גב דאית ליה אורחין טובא או דילמא הכל לפי האורחין ואם תמצי לומר הכל לפי האורחין חד גברא מפני לכולהו או דילמא גברא גברא מפני לנפשיה

A dilemma was raised before the Sages: These four or five baskets, which the tanna stated in the mishna, is he saying that one may move only four or five baskets even though he has many guests? Or perhaps, it is all according to the number of guests, and if there are more guests one may move more baskets. And if you say it is all according to the number of guests, does one man move the baskets to make room for all of them, or perhaps each and every man moves a basket to make room for himself?

תא שמע דאמר רבה אמר רבי חייא פעם אחת הלך רבי למקום אחד וראה מקום דחוק לתלמידים ויצא לשדה ומצא שדה מלאה עומרים ועימר רבי כל השדה כולה (שמע מינה הכל לפי האורחין)

Come and hear a resolution to this dilemma from that which Rabba said that Rav Ḥiyya said: Once Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi went to a certain place and saw that the place was too crowded for the students. And he went to the field and found a field full of bundles of grain, and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi cleared the bundles from the whole field in its entirety. Conclude from it that the quantity that can be moved is all according to the number of guests.

ורב יוסף אמר רבי הושעיא פעם אחת הלך רבי חייא למקום אחד וראה מקום דחוק לתלמידים ויצא לשדה ומצא שדה מלאה עומרים ועימר רבי חייא כל השדה כולה שמע מינה הכל לפי האורחין

And Rav Yosef said that Rav Hoshaya said: Once Rabbi Ḥiyya went to a certain place and saw that the place was too crowded for the students. And he went to the field and found a field full of bundles of grain, and Rabbi Ḥiyya cleared the bundles from the whole field in its entirety. Conclude from it that the quantity that can be moved is all according to the number of guests.

ועדיין תבעי לך חד גברא מפני ליה לכולא או דילמא כל גברא וגברא מפני לנפשיה

The Gemara continues: And still you have a dilemma. Does one man move the baskets to make room for all of them, or perhaps each and every man moves baskets to make room for himself?

תא שמע ועימר רבי ולטעמיך רבי בדנפשיה עימר אלא צוה ועימר ולעולם כל חד וחד מפני לנפשיה:

Come and hear a resolution to this question. We learned: And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi cleared the bundles. Apparently, one person moved the bundles to make room for the others. The Gemara rejects the proof: And according to your reasoning, your opinion, do you think Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, the spiritual leader of his generation, cleared the bundles himself? Rather, he ordered others to do so, and he thereby cleared the bundles. And actually, each and every one moves a bundle to make room for himself.

מפני האורחין וכו׳: אמר רבי יוחנן גדולה הכנסת אורחין כהשכמת בית המדרש דקתני מפני האורחין ומפני בטול בית המדרש ורב דימי מנהרדעא אמר יותר מהשכמת בית המדרש דקתני מפני האורחין והדר ומפני בטול בית המדרש אמר רב יהודה אמר רב גדולה הכנסת אורחין מהקבלת פני שכינה דכתיב ויאמר (ה׳) אם נא מצאתי חן בעיניך אל נא תעבר וגו׳ אמר רבי אלעזר בא וראה שלא כמדת הקדוש ברוך הוא מדת בשר ודם מדת בשר ודם אין קטן יכול לומר לגדול המתן עד שאבא אצלך ואילו בהקדוש ברוך הוא כתיב ויאמר (ה׳) אם נא מצאתי וגו׳

We learned in the mishna: One may move baskets of produce due to the guests and in order to prevent the suspension of Torah study in the study hall. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Hospitality toward guests is as great as rising early to go to the study hall, as the mishna equates them and teaches: Due to the guests and due to suspension of Torah study in the study hall. And Rav Dimi from Neharde’a says: Hospitality toward guests is greater than rising early to the study hall, as it teaches: Due to the guests, and only afterward: And due to suspension of Torah study in the study hall. Rav Yehuda said that Rav said on a related note: Hospitality toward guests is greater than receiving the Divine Presence, as when Abraham invited his guests it is written: “And he said: Lord, if now I have found favor in Your sight, please pass not from Your servant” (Genesis 18:3). Abraham requested that God, the Divine Presence, wait for him while he tended to his guests appropriately. Rabbi Elazar said: Come and see that the attribute of the Holy One, Blessed be He, is not like that of flesh and blood. The attribute of flesh and blood people is such that a less significant person is unable to say to a more significant person: Wait until I come to you, while with regard to the Holy One, Blessed be He, it is written: “And he said: Lord, if now I have found favor in Your sight, please pass not from Your servant.” Abraham requested that God wait for him due to his guests.

אמר רב יהודה בר שילא אמר רבי אסי אמר רבי יוחנן ששה דברים אדם אוכל פירותיהן בעולם הזה והקרן קיימת לו לעולם הבא ואלו הן הכנסת אורחין וביקור חולים ועיון תפלה והשכמת בית המדרש והמגדל בניו לתלמוד תורה והדן את חברו לכף זכות

Rav Yehuda bar Sheila said that Rabbi Asi said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: There are six matters a person enjoys the profits of in this world, and nevertheless the principal exists for him for the World-to-Come, and they are: Hospitality toward guests, and visiting the sick, and consideration during prayer, and rising early to the study hall, and one who raises his sons to engage in Torah study, and one who judges another favorably, giving him the benefit of the doubt.

איני והא אנן תנן אלו דברים שאדם עושה אותם ואוכל פירותיהן בעולם הזה והקרן קיימת לו לעולם הבא ואלו הן כיבוד אב ואם וגמילות חסדים והבאת שלום שבין אדם לחברו ותלמוד תורה כנגד כולם [הני אין מידי אחרינא לא]

The Gemara asks: Is that so? And did we not learn in a mishna: These are the matters that a person does them and enjoys their profits in this world, and nevertheless the principal exists for him for the World-to-Come, and they are: Honoring one’s father and mother, and acts of loving kindness, and bringing peace between a person and another, and Torah study is equal to all of them. By inference: These matters, yes, one enjoys their profits in this world and the principal exists for him in the World-to-Come; other matters, no.

הני נמי (בגמילות חסדים שייכי לישנא אחרינא הני) בהני שייכי

The Gemara answers: These too, hospitality toward guests and visiting the sick, are in the category of acts of loving-kindness. A different version of that answer: These matters on the longer list are attributable to those, the matters on the shorter list.

תנו רבנן הדן חבירו לכף זכות דנין אותו לזכות ומעשה באדם אחד שירד מגליל העליון ונשכר אצל בעל הבית אחד בדרום שלש שנים ערב יום הכפורים אמר לו תן לי שכרי ואלך ואזון את אשתי ובני אמר לו אין לי מעות אמר לו תן לי פירות אמר לו אין לי תן לי קרקע אין לי תן לי בהמה אין לי תן לי כרים וכסתות אין לי הפשיל כליו לאחוריו והלך לביתו בפחי נפש

The Sages taught in a baraita: One who judges another favorably is himself judged favorably. And there was an incident involving a certain person who descended from the Upper Galilee and was hired to work for a certain homeowner in the South for three years. On the eve of the Day of Atonement, he said to the homeowner: Give me my wages, and I will go and feed my wife and children. The homeowner said to him: I have no money. He said to him: In that case, give me my wages in the form of produce. He said to him: I have none. The worker said to him: Give me my wages in the form of land. The homeowner said to him: I have none. The worker said to him: Give me my wages in the form of animals. He said to him: I have none. The worker said to him: Give me cushions and blankets. He said to him: I have none. The worker slung his tools over his shoulder behind him and went to his home in anguish.

לאחר הרגל נטל בעל הבית שכרו בידו ועמו משוי שלשה חמורים אחד של מאכל ואחד של משתה ואחד של מיני מגדים והלך לו לביתו אחר שאכלו ושתו נתן לו שכרו

After the festival of Sukkot, the homeowner took the worker’s wages in his hand, along with a burden that required three donkeys, one laden with food, one laden with drink, and one laden with types of sweets, and went to the worker’s home. After they ate and drank, the homeowner gave him his wages.

אמר לו בשעה שאמרת לי תן לי שכרי ואמרתי אין לי מעות במה חשדתני אמרתי שמא פרקמטיא בזול נזדמנה לך ולקחת בהן ובשעה שאמרת לי תן לי בהמה ואמרתי אין לי בהמה במה חשדתני אמרתי שמא מושכרת ביד אחרים בשעה שאמרת לי תן לי קרקע ואמרתי לך אין לי קרקע במה חשדתני אמרתי שמא מוחכרת ביד אחרים היא ובשעה שאמרתי לך אין לי פירות במה חשדתני אמרתי שמא אינן מעושרות ובשעה שאמרתי לך אין לי כרים וכסתות במה חשדתני אמרתי שמא הקדיש כל נכסיו לשמים

The homeowner said to him: When you said to me: Give me my wages, and I said: I have no money, of what did you suspect me? Why did you not suspect me of trying to avoid paying you? The worker answered, I said: Perhaps the opportunity to purchase merchandise [perakmatya] inexpensively presented itself, and you purchased it with the money that you owed me, and therefore you had no money available. The homeowner asked: And when you said to me: Give me animals, and I said: I have no animals, of what did you suspect me? The worker answered: I said: Perhaps the animals are hired to others. The homeowner asked: When you said to me: Give me land, and I said: I have no land, of what did you suspect me? The worker answered: I said: Perhaps the land is leased to others, and you cannot take the land from the lessees. The homeowner asked: And when you said to me: Give me produce, and I said: I have no produce, of what did you suspect me? The worker answered: I said: Perhaps they are not tithed, and that was why you could not give them to me. The homeowner asked: And when I said: I have no cushions or blankets, of what did you suspect me? The worker answered: I said: Perhaps he consecrated all his property to Heaven and therefore has nothing available at present.

אמר ליה העבודה כך היה הדרתי כל נכסי בשביל הורקנוס בני שלא עסק בתורה וכשבאתי אצל חבירי בדרום התירו לי כל נדרי ואתה כשם שדנתני לזכות המקום ידין אותך לזכות

The homeowner said to him: I swear by the Temple service that it was so. I had no money available at the time because I vowed and consecrated all my property on account of Hyrcanus, my son, who did not engage in Torah study. The homeowner sought to avoid leaving an inheritance for his son. And when I came to my colleagues in the South, the Sages of that generation, they dissolved all my vows. At that point, the homeowner had immediately gone to pay his worker. Now the homeowner said: And you, just as you judged favorably, so may God judge you favorably.

תנו רבנן מעשה בחסיד אחד שפדה ריבה אחת בת ישראל ולמלון השכיבה תחת מרגלותיו למחר ירד וטבל ושנה לתלמידיו

On a similar note, the Gemara relates that the Sages taught in a baraita: There was an incident involving a certain pious man who redeemed a young Jewish woman from captivity. When they arrived at the inn he had her lie beneath his feet. The next day, he descended, and immersed in a ritual bath to purify himself before Torah study and prayer, and taught his students. This conduct could arouse suspicion that the pious man kept the maiden for himself, as immersion in the morning is customary for men who have experienced a seminal emission by engaging in sexual relations.

ואמר (להן) בשעה שהשכבתיה תחת מרגלותי במה חשדתוני אמרנו שמא יש בנו תלמיד שאינו בדוק לרבי

And the pious man said to his students: When I had her lie beneath my feet, of what did you suspect me? They said to him: We said: Perhaps there is a student among us whose conduct is not established before the rabbi, and he wanted to make certain that this student would not inappropriately accost the young woman. Therefore, the rabbi kept the woman close by.

בשעה שירדתי וטבלתי במה חשדתוני אמרנו שמא מפני טורח הדרך אירע קרי לרבי אמר להם העבודה כך היה ואתם כשם שדנתוני לכף זכות המקום ידין אתכם לכף זכות

He said to them: When I descended and immersed, of what did you suspect me? They answered: Perhaps due to the exertion of travel, a seminal emission befell the rabbi. He said to them: I swear by the Temple service that it was so. And you, just as you judged me favorably, so may God judge you favorably.

תנו רבנן פעם אחת הוצרך דבר אחד לתלמידי חכמים אצל מטרוניתא אחת שכל גדולי רומי מצויין אצלה אמרו מי ילך אמר להם רבי יהושע אני אלך

The Sages taught a similar baraita: Once there was a certain matter needed by Torah scholars. They wanted to discuss an issue with a certain matron whose company was kept by all the prominent people of Rome. The Torah scholars wanted to address the government on behalf of the Jewish people, and they sought the matron’s advice. They said: Who will go? Rabbi Yehoshua said to them: I shall go.

הלך רבי יהושע ותלמידיו כיון שהגיע לפתח ביתה חלץ תפיליו ברחוק ארבע אמות ונכנס ונעל הדלת בפניהן אחר שיצא ירד וטבל ושנה לתלמידיו

Rabbi Yehoshua and his students went to her. When he arrived with his students at the entrance of her house, he removed his phylacteries at a distance of four cubits from the door, and entered, and locked the door before them. After he emerged, he descended and immersed in a ritual bath, and taught his students. Here too, this was conduct that could arouse suspicion that something improper transpired.

ואמר (להן) בשעה שחלצתי תפילין במה חשדתוני אמרנו כסבור רבי לא יכנסו דברי קדושה במקום טומאה

And he said to his students: When I removed the phylacteries, of what did you suspect me? They said to him, we said: The rabbi must hold that sacred items may not enter a place of impurity. Therefore, it would have been inappropriate to enter the house with phylacteries.

בשעה שנעלתי במה חשדתוני אמרנו שמא דבר מלכות יש בינו לבינה

He asked: When I locked the door, of what did you suspect me? They said to him: We said: Perhaps there is a discreet royal matter that must be discussed between him and her and should not be revealed.

בשעה שירדתי וטבלתי במה חשדתוני אמרנו שמא ניתזה צינורא מפיה על בגדיו של רבי אמר להם העבודה כך היה ואתם כשם שדנתוני לזכות המקום ידין אתכם לזכות:

Rabbi Yehoshua asked: When I descended and immersed, of what did you suspect me? They said to him, we said: Perhaps a bit of spittle sprayed from her mouth onto the rabbi’s clothes. The Sages decreed that the legal status of a gentile is like that of a zav; their bodily fluids transmit ritual impurity. Rabbi Yehoshua said to them: I swear by the Temple service that it was so. And you, just as you judged favorably, so may God judge you favorably.

מפנין תרומה טהורה וכו׳: פשיטא לא צריכא דמנחה ביד ישראל מהו דתימא כיון דלא חזיא ליה אסור קא משמע לן כיון דחזיא לכהן שפיר דמי:

We learned in the mishna: One may move ritually pure teruma on Shabbat. The Gemara objects: That is obvious. The Gemara answers: It is necessary to teach this only in a case in which it is placed in Israelite hands. Lest you say: Since it is not suitable for the Israelite to eat, he is prohibited to move it on Shabbat; therefore, it teaches us that since it is suitable for a priest to eat, one may well move it on Shabbat.

ודמאי (וכו׳): דמאי הא לא חזי ליה כיון דאי בעי מפקר ליה לנכסיה והוה עני וחזיא ליה השתא נמי חזי ליה דתנן מאכילין את העניים דמאי ואת האכסניא דמאי ואמר רב הונא תנא בית שמאי אומרים אין מאכילין את העניים דמאי ואת האכסניא דמאי ובית הלל אומרים מאכילין את העניים דמאי ואת האכסניא דמאי:

And we also learned in the mishna: One may move doubtfully tithed produce. The Gemara asks: With regard to doubtfully tithed produce, why may one move it? It is not suitable for him to eat. The Gemara answers: Since if he so desires, he may renounce all his property, declaring it ownerless, and he would then be poor, and the doubtfully tithed produce would be suitable for him, now too it is suitable for him. A pauper may eat doubtfully tithed produce, as we learned in a mishna: One may feed the poor doubtfully tithed produce and soldiers [akhsanya] doubtfully tithed produce. And Rav Huna said that it was taught: Beit Shammai say: One may neither feed the poor doubtfully tithed produce nor feed soldiers doubtfully tithed produce. And Beit Hillel say: One may feed the poor doubtfully tithed produce and feed soldiers doubtfully tithed produce. The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel.

ומעשר ראשון שניטלה תרומתו וכו׳: פשיטא לא צריכא שהקדימו בשבולים ונטלה הימנו תרומת מעשר ולא נטלה הימנו תרומה גדולה

We learned in the mishna: And one may move first tithe whose teruma of the tithe has already been taken. The Gemara poses a question: It is obvious that if the teruma was already tithed it is non-sacred produce in every sense. The Gemara explains: It was necessary to teach this halakha only in the following case: A Levite preceded the priest while the grain was still on the stalks and brought it to the threshing floor, and before the grain was threshed, the teruma of the tithes was taken and the teruma gedola was not taken.

וכי הא דאמר רבי אבהו אמר ריש לקיש מעשר ראשון שהקדימו בשבולין פטור מתרומה גדולה שנאמר והרמותם ממנו תרומת ה׳ מעשר מן המעשר מעשר מן המעשר אמרתי לך ולא תרומה גדולה ותרומת מעשר מן המעשר

And the above mentioned halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Abbahu, as Rabbi Abbahu said that Reish Lakish said: With regard to first tithe, in a case in which the Levite preceded the priest while the grain was still on the stalks, one is exempt from separating teruma gedola from it, as it is stated: “And you shall set apart from it a gift for the Lord, even a tenth part of the tithe” (Numbers 18:26). By inference: A tenth part of the tithe, i.e., the teruma of the tithe, I, God, said to you that you must take, and not both teruma gedola and the teruma of the tithe.

אמר ליה רב פפא לאביי אי הכי אפילו הקדימו בכרי נמי ליפטר אמר ליה עליך אמר קרא מכל מתנותיכם תרימו וגו׳

Rav Pappa said to Abaye: If so, even if the Levite preceded the priest after the kernels of grain were removed from the stalks and placed in a pile, the Levite should also be exempt from taking teruma gedola. Abaye said to him: With regard to your claim, the verse states: “From all that is given to you, you shall set apart that which is the Lord’s teruma” (Numbers 18:29). God’s teruma, i.e., teruma gedola, must be taken from all the Levites’ gifts.

ומה ראית האי אידגן והאי לא אידגן:

The Gemara asks: What did you see that led you to require teruma gedola from first tithe that was taken from grain in piles, and not from first tithe that was taken from grain on stalks? Abaye answers: This, stalks that were threshed and placed into piles, are completely processed and have become grain, and that, grains that have remained on the stalk, have not yet become grain. The verse states the following with regard to teruma gedola: “The first of your grain” (Deuteronomy 18:4) is given to the priest. Once it is considered grain, the rights of the priest take effect and the Levite is required to separate teruma gedola.

ומעשר שני וכו׳: פשיטא לא צריכא שנתן את הקרן ולא נתן את החומש הא קא משמע לן דאין חומש מעכב:

We learned in the mishna: One may move second tithe that was redeemed. The Gemara asks: This is obvious. The Gemara answers: It was necessary to teach this halakha only in a case where the consecrated property was not completely redeemed, i.e., where one gave payment for the principal, the value of the tithe, but he did not give payment for the fifth that he must add when redeeming items that he consecrated. And the mishna teaches us that failure to add the fifth does not invalidate the redemption, and the second tithe assumes non-sacred status from the moment that one pays the principal.

והתורמס היבש כו׳: דווקא יבש אבל לח לא מאי טעמא כיון דמריר לא אכלה:

And we learned in the mishna: One may move even dry lupine, which is not fit for consumption by a person, because it is goat food. The Gemara comments: This applies only when lupine is dry. However, when it is moist, no it is prohibited to move it. What is the reason for this prohibition? Since lupine is extremely bitter when wet, an animal will not eat it.