Kommentar zu Orlah 1:10

נוטע לסייג – that the tree will be a fence for a vineyard.

Introduction Our mishnah teaches that if a fruit tree is planted for a reason other than to provide fruit, it is exempt from the laws of orlah and its fruit may be eaten within the first three years of growth. This law is a great example of the strong role intent, in Hebrew, kavvanah, plays in rabbinic law. The intent of the person planting the tree is what determines the status of its fruit, and not the mere physicality of whether the tree is three years or older.

לקורות – to grow trees to make of them beams for building, but the essences of its planting is not to eat its fruit.

One who plants [a fruit tree] as a fence or to provide wood beams, it is exempt from [the law of] orlah. As stated in the introduction, if the tree was planted for another reason other than for its fruit, its fruit is permitted immediately, without having to wait three years. This law also stems (no pun intended) from Leviticus 19:23, which begins, “When you enter the land and plant any tree for food...” The tree is subject to the laws of orlah only if it is planted for food.

פטור מן הערלה – as it is written (Leviticus 19:23): “[When you enter the land] and plant any tree for food, [you shall regard its fruit as forbidden].” That which is for food is liable [for Orlah]; for a fence and for beams and for wood it is exempt.

Rabbi Yose says: even if he said “The inward [facing part of the tree] is for food, and the outward [facing part] is for a fence,” the inward [facing part] is subject [to orlah], and the outward [facing part] is exempt. Rabbi Yose says that one can divide a tree into two parts. If the inward part, the part facing the field, was planted for food and the outer part was planted to serve as a fence to his field, he can eat the fruit of the outside part without waiting three years. But the laws of orlah do apply to the inside part.

הפנימי למאכל – if he intended that the inner young shoot (especially of a fig-tree) [facing towards the field] will be for food and the outer young shoot [facing away from the field] will be for a fence, even though that everything is [from] one tree, the outer [young shoot] is exempt [from the laws of Orlah]. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yosi.

ומצאו נטוע – he is exempt [from Orlah], as it is written (Leviticus 19:23): “When you enter the land and plant [any tree for food],” excluding that which is planted by idolaters until they (i.e., the Israelites) had not come to the Land.

Introduction This mishnah deals with situations in which a tree is exempt from the laws of orlah, or situations in which it is subject, even though one might have thought that it should be exempt.

נטעו – whether an Israelite or an idolater [had planted it] after they came to the Land, even though the Israelites had not [yet] conquered the Land, he (i.e., the Israelite) is liable [for the laws of Orlah], as it is written (Leviticus 19:23): “any tree” whether it was planted by an Israel or whether it was planted by an idolater.

If at the time when our ancestors came into the land and they found [a tree already] planted it was exempt [from the laws of orlah]. If they planted [a tree], even though they had not yet conquered [the land], it was subject [to orlah]. This law is based on the beginning of Leviticus 19:23, “When you enter the land and plant any tree for food.” The laws of orlah do not apply to trees that were planted before the Israelites entered the land of Israel in the times of Joshua. If they planted a tree, the laws would apply even though the land had not yet been conquered. Obviously this law is not of any practical significance. This is a good example of what interests the rabbis. They are interested in practical matters and there are many halakhot in the Mishnah that have practical significance. But they are no less interested in explaining the Torah, even in cases where there is no practical implication to their words. This section of this mishnah is solely meant to explain the verse.

הנוטע לרבים – that he planted in his domain for the needs of the many/majority.

If one planted a tree for [the use of] the many, it is subject. But Rabbi Judah makes it exempt. According to the first opinion, if one plants a tree on his own property for the use of many others, the tree is still subject to the laws of orlah. Rabbi Judah disagrees and says that it is not.

חייב – as it is written (Leviticus 19:23): “[three years] it shall be forbidden to you, [not to be eaten],” including that which is planted for the community/public.

If one has planted [a tree] in the public domain, or if a non-Jew has planted, or if a robber has planted, or one who plants on a boat, or [a tree] that has grown of itself, it is subject to orlah. In all of the cases in this mishnah we might have thought the tree is not subject to the laws of orlah, therefore the mishnah teaches that the tree is subject. The first three categories all seem to say that the status of the planter and the status of the tree do not matter. Thus, although a tree in the public domain does not belong to the one who planted it, it is still subject to orlah. Halakhah does not generally apply to non-Jewish produce, but since the status of the tree is not determined by its owner, the tree planted by a non-Jew is subject to orlah. The robber does not own the field in which he planted the tree. Nevertheless, the tree is subject to the laws of orlah. All three of these categories serve to distinguish orlah from most of the other agricultural laws. For instance, produce which grows in the public domain is exempt from tithes. A tree that is planted on a boat is also liable, because the boat is treated as if it was land. Finally, a tree that has no owner is also liable, because as we have stated, it is the tree that is determinative, not the owner.

ורבי יהודה פוטר – he holds that “and plant [any tree for food” (Leviticus 19:23) implies for the community/public, but an amplification following an amplification intimates a restriction, but the Rabbis hold [that the word] “and plant” (Leviticus 19:23) – implies each one for itself. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.

והנוטע ברשות הרבים – for his own needs.

והעובד כוכבים שנטע – in a field of an Israelite.

והגזלן – [a robber] who stole a field and planted it and the owners despaired of it (i.e., of getting it back).

והנוטע בספינה – even though it was not perforated if it is earthenware, because an earthenware utensil does not stand before the roots and they penetrate through the earthenware and absorb from the ground, but something of wood requires perforation.

והעולה מאליו – and especially in the place of the settlement, but not in the place of forests and deserts.

אילן שנעקר – that the wind uprooted it or the river swept it away and brought it to another place.

Introduction This mishnah discusses whether a replanted tree counts as if it was newly planted, such that one would have to wait another three years before its produce could be eaten.

והסלע עמו – the dust/mud that is around the roots is called a clod, because it is made there as hard as a rock, and it states that if the if that dust/mud was with it and he added upon it dirt and it became rooted there in the land, we see if it (i.e., the fruit tree) can live from the dust/mud that comes with it without any other additional dust/mud [it is] like it is planted in its first place and it is exempt from Orlah, but if not, it is like a tree that grows on its own and is liable [for Orlah].

If a tree was uprooted and the hard soil together with it, or if a stream swept it away and the hard soil together with it, [then] if it could have lived it is exempt, But if [it could] not, it is subject. The criterion throughout the mishnah for determining whether the tree is considered to be replanted is whether it could have lived from the amount of soil that was uprooted with it. The test would seem to be placing it in a pot if there was enough soil still stuck to the roots of the tree that the tree could continue to live then it is exempt from the laws of orlah, meaning that this is not considered replanting. But if it could not live from this soil, then the clock is rewound and the fruit of next three years will be prohibited.

זעזעתו המחרישה – the dust/mud is scattered and the roots are revealed.

If the hard soil has been detached from its side, or if a ploughshare shook it, or if someone shook it, and one reset it with earth, [then] if it could have lived, it is exempt, But if not, it is subject. This same rule applies in situations where the tree lost some of its soil and then a person put more soil back there. If the tree could have lived off of the soil that was left attached to it, then putting new soil on it doesn’t count as replanting. But if it could not have lived off of this soil, then it does count as replanting.

ונשתייר בו שורש – it is attached to the ground and was not uprooted [completely].

Introduction This mishnah deals with when a tree is considered to have been uprooted.

כמחט של מתוח – is our reading, meaning to say, the measurement of the thickness of the root is like the needle that the weavers stretch the cloth after he weaved it to stretch it out and to widen it.

If a tree was uprooted and one root was left [in the ground], it is exempt. As long as one root is still attached to the ground, the tree is considered to still be planted and, if the tree is older than three years, it is exempt from the rules of orlah.

How much must the [thickness of the] root be? Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel said in the name of Rabb Eliezer ben Judah a man of Bartota: as [thick as] a pin [used for] stretching. In order for the root to count as still attaching the tree to ground, it must be as thick as a pin that weavers used for stretching the cloth. Others explain that this is a pin used by launderers. In any case, if the root is thinner than that, it would not be sufficient to nourish the tree, so we would have to consider the tree as having been detached and then replanted, which means that for the next three years its fruit will be prohibited.

ובו בריכה – it was the custom of those who work the ground that they dig a hole and take one shoot (especially of a fig-tree) from the tree and hide it in that hole and the root of that shoot comes out from other side and becomes a tree there and the head of the shoot remains attached to the tree. But the law of Orlah does not apply while it is still yet attached to the tree and absorbs from it, even though it also absorbs from the ground. But if the old tree is uprooted from the ground and it is found that all of its support and its absorbing is now from the young shoot.

Introduction There are two agricultural practices mentioned in this mishnah. The first is taking a branch from a vine, bending it down into the ground and then bringing it up again elsewhere. Underground the branch will grow new roots. Our mishnah will ask the question of how to reckon the years of the vine that grows from what it calls a “bent-down and rooted shoot.” The second practice is grafting, whereby one takes a detached branch and grafts into onto an existing vine.

חזרה הזקנה להיות כבריכה – and both of them – the old [tree] and the young shoot- are as if they were planted now and we count for the three years from the time when the tree was uprooted.

A tree which was uprooted and it has a bent-down [and rooted] shoot, and it [the tree] derives sustenance from it [the shoot], the old [tree] is [considered] like the shoot. In this case the original, old tree (or vine) was uprooted, but a branch that had been bent into the ground still remains in the ground and provides sustenance to the tree. The mishnah rules that the tree is considered to be like the shoot. Shoots that are bent into the ground are not subject to the laws of orlah as long as they are still attached to the older vine/tree, because the Torah says, “When you plant” and the rabbis understand this as excluding bending shoots into the ground. Note that the innovation here is that even though the branch that had been bent and rooted into the ground now looks like a new vine, it still counts as far as attaching the old vine to the ground.

הבריכה שנה אחר שנה – after the first young shoot had grown, he took from it one young shoot and sunk it into the ground and he did this several times, one after another.

If one bends [and roots] from it year after year, and it became detached, one counts from the time it became detached. If one bends and roots branches into the ground year after year, and at some point the new vines the grow from these shoots become detached from the mother tree, their count as far as orlah goes begins from the time they become detached. Up until that point their count went according to the old vine but once they are detached we have to look at them as if they were just planted.

מונה – [he counts it – the years of prohibition under the law of Orlah] for all of them from the time when the first young shoot broke off from the tree.

A grafted shoot of vines, and a grafted shoot [growing] on another grafted shoot, even if he rooted them in the soil, they are permitted. This section deals with grafting vines onto an older tree. If one grafts new vines onto an old tree their orlah count goes according to the older tree. This is true even if he puts grafts onto other grafts, and even if he bends some of those grafts into the ground such that they receive nourishment from the soil. In all of these cases, as long as the new grafts are connected to the old tree, one does not have to start a new count of years for the issue of orlah.

ספוק גפנים – [the connection of grape vines (by training and engrafting)] – it is the manner of those who work the ground that they take a long vine-shoot from this grape-vine and stretch it to the grape-vine that is by its side and engraft the vine-shoot on to the grape-vine. That is what is called “engrafting,” and it is exempt from the laws of Orlah. But that which is taught in the Mishnah (Tractate Sotah, Chapter 8, Mishnah 2 and Tosefta Rosh Hashanah 1:4) – that all are the same are the ones who plant such a tree, who sink them into the ground, and who graft them – are liable for Orlah. There they are speaking about when he severs the vine-shoot from the vine or the young shoot from the tree and afterwards sinks them or engrafts them.

Rabbi Meir said: in an instance where it is strongly [grafted], it is permitted, but in an instance where it is poorly [grafted], it is prohibited. Rabbi Meir is referring to a grafted branch which is grafted onto an already existing grafted branch. If the grafted branch onto which the new one is being grafted is strongly attached to the tree, meaning this graft is successful and is producing new fruits, then the new graft is permitted in terms of orlah. The old graft is considered part of the old tree. But if the prior graft is not strongly attached, then the new one is prohibited, because we can’t look at the old graft as if it is attached to the tree.

מקום שכחה יפה מותר – if the vine-shoot that he sank in the grape-vine where the vine’s growth was healthy and it absorbs/sucks from the grape-vine from where it was taken, it is permitted and exempt from Orlah, but if the vine’s growth was poor, it is liable for Orlah, but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir.

A bent-down [and rooted] shoot that has become detached and is full of fruit, [then] if it increased one two hundredth, it is prohibited. The final section of our mishnah returns to discuss a branch of a vine that is bent down and rooted into the ground. As we learned above, as long as the branch is attached to the old vine, its fruit is permitted. In this case, the branch grows fruit while attached and then becomes detached. The question is: does the orlah count restart for the fruit that has already grown? The mishnah rules that if the fruit grew 1/200 in size, then the fruit is prohibited. This is the standard number for cases of orlah mixed with non-orlah. If there is 1/200th orlah, then the mixture is prohibited. This would also be the case here the part that grew when the branch was attached is not orlah, whereas the new growth is orlah. So if the new growth is 1/200th or more of the total volume, then it is prohibited.

והיא מלאה פירות – if he detached them immediately, they are permitted because they grew while permitted, but if he left them on the tree and they grew after they had been broken off and there isn't I the fruit that grew already by [one-] two-hundredth [part] to annul the supplement, it is prohibited for Orlah prohibits them until [one-] two-hundredth [part] growth. And the same law applies in an old tree that was uprooted and on it are fruits and he went back and replanted them.

שנתערבה בנטיעות – of permitted [saplings/plantings] and he doesn’t recognize the sapling of Orlah

Introduction Our mishnah deals with orlah or a vineyard into which seeds had been planted which then become mixed up with non-prohibited plants or produce. The question is: does this mixture become nullified if the prohibited part is less than 1/200 of the permitted part?

ושל כלאי הכרם – and of mixed seeds in a vineyard, as for example, if he transferred that which grows in a perforated pot (placed in the ground – which is legally like that which grows in the ground itself – see Mishnah Tractate Demai, Chapter 5, Mishnah 10) under one grape-vine and it was prohibited and he doesn’t recognize it amidst the rest of his grape-vines.

If a shoot of orlah or a vineyard in which seeds had been planted (, became mixed up with [other] shoots, behold one may not gather [the fruit]. A person has a bunch of plants in his backyard, or a few vineyards. Some of the plants are orlah, or some of the vineyards have seeds of grain planted in them (kilayim). These plants or vineyards are prohibited. However, he doesn’t know which plants are orlah or which vineyards are kilayim (the grain is assumedly gone). If he has not yet gathered the fruit, he cannot gather any of the fruit from any of these plants. While some times prohibited things can become nullified if they are small enough percentages of a mixture, this is the case only if the produce is already detached from the ground. Since this produce is still attached to the ground, he cannot even pick it.

הרי זה לא ילקט – for since he doesn’t recognize it as something prohibited, all of them are prohibited.

But if one has gathered [it], it is neutralized in two hundred-and-one, provided that he did not act deliberately. Rabbi Yose says: even if he acted deliberately, it becomes neutralized in two hundred-and-one. If he gathered it already without realizing that some of the produce was prohibited, then as long as there is not more than 1/200 part orlah or kilayim, the prohibited stuff is nullified. However, if he deliberately picked the produce, knowing that this would allow it to be nullified, he is penalized and it is prohibited. The rule is that one is not allowed to intentionally nullify a prohibited substance. Rabbi Yose says that this is not really a case of intentionally nullifying a prohibited substance. When he picks the produce he is not yet nullifying the prohibited plants, because the stuff still attached to the ground can’t be nullified. It is only nullified when the produce is picked and it turns out that less than 1/200 of it is prohibited. Therefore, he can deliberately pick the produce so that the prohibited plants will be nullified.

אף יתכוין וילקט – for it is legal presumption that a person does not prohibit his vineyard through one sapling and we don’t suspect that perhaps he comes to combine the sapling ab initio. But even though that generally we don’t abolish a prohibition, ab initio, here is something that is not frequent, and we don’t make the decree. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yosi.

ומי גפנים – the water the comes out from the grape-vines when we cut them, or the vine-shoots in the days of Nisan.

Introduction This mishnah deals with the subject of what parts of a vine are prohibited because of orlah.

וסמדר – [budding berries] is the flowering that from it comes out the half-ripe fruit/grapes. But the half-ripe fruit itself, everyone admits that it is fruit.

Leaves, sprouts, sap of vines, and vine-buds are permitted in respect of orlah and the laws of the fourth year, and to a nazirite, but are prohibited if they come from an Asherah [tree]. Rabbi Yose says: vine-buds are prohibited because they are fruit. The laws of orlah and fourth year produce do not apply to the non-edible parts of the tree only to the fruit. So if one wants to derive benefit from these parts during the first four years of the tree’s existence, he may do so. When it comes to the vine, these parts are permitted to a nazirite, since he is prohibited from consuming only the grapes and the parts of the grapes (see Numbers 6:3-4). However, when it comes to an Asherah tree, which is a tree used in idolatry, then every part of the tree is prohibited. Rabbi Yose considers the vine-buds to be food, even though most people wouldn’t eat them before they fully ripen. Therefore, the laws of orlah and fourth year produce and the Nazirite prohibitions apply to them.

מותרים בערלה – as it is written (Leviticus 19:23): “You shall regard its fruit as forbidden.” But these are not fruit.

Rabbi Eliezer said: if one curdles [milk] with the resinous substances of [a tree liable to] orlah, it is prohibited. Rabbi Joshua said: I have received an explicit tradition that if one curdles [milk] with the resinous substance of the leaves, or with the resinous substance of the roots, it is permitted, but with the resinous substance of the unripe berries, it is prohibited, because these are fruit. This section deals with the resin that comes from the tree and is used to curdle milk and make cheese. Rabbi Eliezer says that the laws of orlah apply to this substance and therefore if one uses it to curdle milk, the cheese will be prohibited. Rabbi Joshua disagrees based on a received oral tradition that the laws of orlah do not apply to the resin that comes from the tree and is used to curdle the milk. This is true as long as the resin comes from the leaves or roots, parts of the tree to which the laws of orlah never apply. However, if he uses the resin that comes from the unripe berries, the cheese is prohibited because these unripe berries are, according to Rabbi Yose, subject to the laws of orlah. And even according to the opinion that disagrees with Rabbi Yose, although the unripe berries are not subject to orlah, when they ripen they will be subject to orlah. Therefore, this cheese will be prohibited.

וברבעי – they are eaten in the fourth year outside of Jerusalem without redemption, as it is written (Leviticus 19:24): “[In the fourth year] all fruit shall be set aside for jubilation [before the LORD],” but these are not considered fruit.

ובנזיר – the Nazirite is permitted to eat them, for concerning the Nazirite it is written (Numbers 6:3): “nor eat grapes fresh or dried” and these are not eatable.

ואסורים באשרה – as it is written (Deuteronomy 13:18): “Let nothing that has been doomed stick to your hand [in order that the LORD may turn from His blazing anger and show you compassion],” and the Asherah is a tree that is worshipped.

המעמיד בשרף הערלה – curdles cheese with the sap/resinous substances of the trees of Orlah/uncircumcised trees. Sap/resinous substance is called GUMA in the foreign tongue, and Rabbi Eliezer holds that the sap is fruit, whether the tree produces fruit or whether the tree does not produce fruit. But the Halakha is not according to either Rabbi Yosi or to Rabbi Eliezer.

בשרף הפגיס – the sap that flows from fruit that have not fully ripened. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehoshua.

ענקוקלות – it is a the language of an abbreviation/Notarikon – grapes that were smitten before they had grown to one-third of the normal size, meaning to say that they were smitten before they brought forth a third of their growth.

Introduction Our mishnah continues to deal with what parts of the grape or fruit are subject to the laws of orlah, the asherah (idol-tree), the nazirite prohibitions and fourth-year vineyards.

חרצנים – seeds withing the grapes.

Defective grapes, grape kernels, grape husks, and the temed drink made from them, the peel of a pomegranate and its sprout, nutshells, and fruit-seeds, are all subject to the laws of orlah, asherah and a nazirite, but permitted in respect of a fourth year vineyard. All of the parts of grapes, fruits and nuts are subject to the laws of orlah, so that one could not use them during the first three years of growth. They are also prohibited if they grow from an asherah tree, for as we learned in yesterday’s mishnah, all parts of the asherah tree are prohibited. Finally, they are prohibited to a nazirite because Numbers 6:3-4 states, “no vinegar of (new) wine or vinegar of old wine, nor shall he drink any liquor of grapes…from the kernels even to the husk she shall not eat.” However, the rules of the fourth year vineyard, which must be taken to Jerusalem and eaten there, do not apply to these parts of the grape or fruit, because the laws of maaser sheni and the fourth year vineyard (which are always the same) apply only to the parts of the plant that are normally eaten.

והזגים – the shells that are on the outside.

Fallen unripe fruit is subject to all of them. Fallen unripe fruit is subject to all of these prohibitions because it is food, even though it is not yet ready to be eaten.

תמד – that he placed water on the sediment or on the shells of grapes or on the husks or kernels of grapes and they have the taste of wine.

והנץ שלהם – the flower that is on the protuberance on the blossom-end of the fruit.

והגרעינין – the seed of each fruit, such as the seeds found within the dates and the olives and the peaches and similar things.

אסורים בערלה – as it is written (Leviticus 19:23): “[you shall regard] its fruit [as forbidden],” what is secondary to its fruit..

ומותרים ברבעי – fourth year’s fruit of young trees is not prohibited from deriving benefit from it but is eaten by its owners in Jerusalem like Second Tithe, and is not sanctified in the sanctity of Second Tithe, but rather it is a thing that appropriate for eating.

נובלות – fruit that falls from the tree prior to the completion of its ripening.

כולן אסורות – whether for Orlah, or for the fourth year’s fruit of young trees , whether for an Asherah or for a Nazirite.

נוטעים יחור של ערלה – for the tree is permitted to derive benefit [from it] but not the walnut, which is the fruit and it is prohibited to benefit [from it], and Rabbi Yosi admits that if he planted and sunk and grafted which is permitted, that both of these cause it to be permitted.

Introduction This mishnah deals with planting things that come from an orlah tree which is orlah.

בכפניות – a young shoot that has date-berries in its early stage while they are still berries in the budding stage are called כפניות/date-berries in its early stage. Rabbi Yosi, according to his rationale who stated that berries in the budding stage are forbidden because they are fruit. And the Halakha is according to him, for it is permitted to plant a young shoot of Orlah, but the Halakha is not like him that he prohibits date-berries in the budding stage.

Rabbi Yose says: one may plant a shoot of orlah; Since the laws of orlah do not apply to the branches or shoots of a tree, one may plant a shoot of orlah. If the laws of orlah did apply, it would be forbidden to derive any benefit from the shoot, including planting it to grow a tree.

But one may not plant a nut of orlah, because it is fruit. The laws of orlah do apply to the nuts of a tree, because they are considered to be fruit. Hence, one cannot plant a nut.

And one may not graft early date berries of orlah. The laws of orlah also apply to the “early date berries”, which according to some commentators are early date-palm branches and according to others, are a certain type of date. In any case, these date berries count as fruit and hence cannot be used in grafting.