פסחים 11:1 — Soncino English Talmud

[but] not with the consent of the Sages: this is R. Meir's opinion. R. Judah said: They acted with the consent of the Sages. Thus R. Judah did not preventively forbid lest one come to eat thereof? — Said Raba: Hadash is different: since you permit it to him only by means of plucking. he remembers. Said Abaye to him: That is well at the time of plucking, [but] what can be said of the grinding and sifting? — That is no difficulty: grinding [is done] with a handmill; sifting [is done] on top of the sieve. But as to what we learned: ‘one may reap an artificially irrigated field and [the corn] in the valleys, but one may not stack [the corn]’, and we established this as [agreeing with] R. Judah, what can be said? — Rather, said Abaye: From hadash one holds aloof; but one does not hold aloof front leaven. Raba demurred: R. Judah is self-contradictory. while the Rabbis are not self-contradictory? — Rather, said Raba: R. Judah is not self-contradictory, as we have answered. The Rabbis too are not self-contradictory: he himself is seeking it in order to burn it, shall he then eat thereof! R. Ashi said: R. Judah is not self-contradictory, [for] we learned, ‘flour and parched corn’, But this [answer] of R. Ashi is a fiction: this is well from [the time when it is] parched ears and onwards; ‘but from the beginning until it is parched corn, what can be said? And should you answer, [It is gathered] by plucking, as Raba [answered], then what can be said of [what we learnt that] ‘one may reap an artificially irrigated field and [the corn in] the valleys’, which we established as [agreeing with] R. Judah? Hence R. Ashi's [answer] is a fiction. But, wherever one does not [normally] hold aloof, did R. Judah preventively forbid? Surely we learned: A man may not pierce an eggshell, fill it with oil, and place it over the mouth of a [burning] lamp in order that it should drip, and even if it is of earthenware; but R. Judah permits it! — There, on account of the strictness of the Sabbath he will indeed keep aloof. Then [one ruling] of the Sabbath can be opposed to [another ruling] of the Sabbath. For it was taught: If the cord of a bucket is broken, one must not tie it [together] but merely make a loop [slip-knot]; whereas R. Judah maintains: He may wind a hollow belt or a fascia around it, providing that he does not tie it with a slip-knot. [Thus] R. Judah's [views] are self-contradictory. and similarly the Rabbis’? — The Rabbis’ [views] are not self-contradictory: oil [from one source] can be interchanged with oil [from another]; whereas looping cannot be mistaken for knotting. R. Judah's [views] are not self-contradictory; R. Judah's reason is not that he forbids looping on account of knotting, but because looping itself is [a form of] knotting. Now, the Rabbis may be opposed to the Rabbis. For we learned: A bucket [over a well] may be tied with a fascia but not with a cord; but R. Judah permits it. Now what cord is meant: Shall we say an ordinary [bucket] cord: [how does it state] ‘R. Judah permits it’, — surely it is a permanent knot, for he will certainly come to abandon it? Hence it is obvious that a weaver's [rope is meant]. and [yet] the Rabbis preventively forbid a weaver's cord on account of an ordinary cord? — Even so: one rope may be mistaken for another, [whereas] looping cannot be mistaken for knotting. But, wherever one [normally] holds aloof from it, does not R. Judah preventively forbid? Surely we learned: If a firstling is attacked with congestion, even if it should die [otherwise]. we must not bleed it: this is R. Judah's view; but the Sages rule: He may bleed [it], providing that he does not inflict a [permanent] blemish upon it? — There, because one is excited^ᵃ^ᵇ^ᶜ^ᵈ^ᵉ^ᶠ^ᵍ^ʰ^ⁱ^ʲ^ᵏ^ˡ^ᵐ^ⁿ^ᵒ^ᵖ^ᵠ^ʳ^ˢ^ᵗ^ᵘ^ᵛ^ʷ^ˣ^ʸ^ᶻ^ᵃᵃ^ᵃᵇ^ᵃᶜ^ᵃᵈ^ᵃᵉ^ᵃᶠ

^ᵃnote:Lest they eat of it while preparing it.
^ᵇnote:V. Men. 67b.
^ᶜnote:Bah emends to Rabbah, which is the reading in Men. 67b.
^ᵈnote:The new corn may not be reaped at all before the bringing of the ‘omer’, but must be plucked by hand.
^ᵉnote:That it may not be eaten.
^ᶠnote:There is nothing to remind him then of the interdict.
^ᵍnote:The sieve is reversed. The unusual ways in which these are done serve as reminders.
^ʰnote:In the usual way, before the ‘omer.
^ⁱnote:V. Men. 71a.
^ʲnote:There is nothing there to remind one of the prohibition.
^ᵏnote:As it is forbidden at all times until the ‘omer, when it ceases to be hadash. Thus he is accustomed to abstain from it and is not likely to forget himself.
^ˡnote:During the year, and thus may possibly eat of it when the prohibition is already in force.
^ᵐnote:That you seek to reconcile R. Judah's views only. Yet surely the Rabbis too need harmonizing, for whereas the Rabbis do not preventively forbid in the case of leaven, they do so here, as R. Meir states, ‘They did not act with the consent of the Sages’.
^ⁿnote:Surely we need not entertain that fear.
^ᵒnote:In the above cited Mishnah.
^ᵖnote:Which are not fit for eating.
^ᵠnote:t,usc, V. B.M., Sonc. ed. p 47. n. 1.
^ʳnote:In the intermediate stages it is fit for eating! How could it then be handled.
^ˢnote:Which serves as a reminder.
^ᵗnote:Though there is nothing there to serve as a reminder, v. infra.
^ᵘnote:And replenish the contents of the lamp during Sabbath.
^ᵛnote:The reason of the Rabbis is lest he take the oil for eating, which, constitutes extinguishing. R. Judah permits it, though one does not normally abstain from oil, v. Shab. 29a.
^ʷnote:The tying of a permanent knot constitutes one of the thirty-nine principal classes of forbidden work on Sabbath.
^ˣnote:A band or fillet.
^ʸnote:V. Shab. 113a.
^ᶻnote:Just as he consumes oil from elsewhere, so may he come to draw supplies from this eggshell, seeing no difference.
^ᵃᵃnote:Lit., ‘interchanged with’.
^ᵃᵇnote:On the Sabbath. The first is certainly only temporary, but the second may be left there, and thus a permanent knot will have been tied on the Sabbath.
^ᵃᶜnote:V. Shab. 113b.
^ᵃᵈnote:I.e., leave it there as a thing having no other purpose than this.
^ᵃᵉnote:Which is not usually used for drawing water, and will not consequently be left there.
^ᵃᶠnote:One must not inflict a permanent blemish on a firstling. R. Judah rules that the animal must not be bled even without inflicting a permanent blemish upon it, lest one come to do so even by making a permanent blemish. Thus R. Judah forbids preventively, though people do hold aloof from sacred animals, to which category a firstling belongs.