Kommentar zu Sheviit 7:8

כלל גדול. ולדמיו שביעית – if he sold them and received their value in payment, their monetary value has the holiness of Seventh Year [produce].

Introduction This chapter begins to deal with the extremely important question of what types of produce fall under the category of “sabbatical year produce” such that all of the rules apply to them.

יש לו ביעור – when it is consumed by the wildlife/beasts of chase, he is obligated in its removal [from the house].

They said an important general principle with regard to the sabbatical year: anything that is food for man or beast, or a species [of plants] used for dyeing, and cannot be left growing in the soil, the law of the sabbatical year is applied both to it and to its money substitute and the law of removal applies both to it and to its money substitute. There are two general rules in this section. First of all, the species of plant must be either food for humans, domesticated animals (beasts) or used in the dyeing process. The second rule is that it must be the type of plant that if left in the ground will rot. Sheviit does not fully apply to something that is either not used for any of these three purposes or can be left in the ground without rotting. In tomorrow’s mishnah we will learn more about the rules for produce to which the laws of sheviit do not apply. The main consequence to something being considered sabbatical year produce is that it must be destroyed once the same species cannot be found in the field. Up until this point one could store the species in one’s house, but once this point has passed one must take that type of produce out of the house and get rid of it. Another consequence of something having the laws of sheviit apply to it is that one can use it only for eating, drinking or anointing. We will learn more about this in the next chapter. The laws of sheviit will apply to the money that is derived from the sale of sheviit produce. Thus if one sells some sheviit wheat, the money is treated as if it was the wheat. It must be used up before wheat no longer grows outside in the field, and one could use the money only to purchase food, drink and oil for anointing.

עלה לוף שוטה (leaves of the wild LOF – species of onion) – it is necessary to teach the leaves of the wild LOF, because it is taught in the concluding chapter of [Tractate] Uktzin (Chapter 3, Mishnah 4), that they do not defile with ritual uncleanness as food [until they are sweetened], you might think that I would say that the holiness of the Seventh Year do not take effect, it comes to tell us [that this is not the case].

Which are they? The leaves of the wild luf, the leaf of ceterach, endives, leeks, portulaca, and netz hahalav. This is a list of various leaves that people occasionally eat. Even though these leaves are not normal food (like wheat, barley, dates and figs) the laws of sheviit still apply to them because they are sometimes eaten by human beings. Albeck claims that he cannot identify “netz hahalav” (there is a street in Modiin named “netz hahalav”, but that doesn’t really help). When I googled it I came up with “Ornithogalum divergens.” You can google that yourself.

הדנדנה (dandana/mint) – in Arabic NAANAH, and in the foreign language MINTO (i.e., mint).

What is the food for cattle? Thorns and thistles. Again, these are not the only foods, or even the main foods, of domesticated animals such as cows, sheeps and goats. However, since they are eaten by these animals, the laws of sheviit do apply to them.

העולשין (endives) – there are two kinds of endives: garden endives and field endives, and in the rest of the years where garden endives are available, field endives are not considered as food and do not defile with ritual uncleanness as food and here it comes to tell us that in the Seventh Year where garden endives are not found, field endives are considered [as food] and defile with ritual uncleanness as food and the [laws of] the Seventh Year are practiced with them.

What is species of dyeing matter? Aftergrowths of woad and madder. This section lists plants used in the production of dyes.

וכרישין (leeks) – also there are two kinds of leeks – garden leeks and field leeks, but field leeks it was necessary to inform us about.

The law of the seventh year applies both to them and to their money-substitutes and the law of removal applies both to them and to their money substitute. A repeat of what was stated above.

הרגילה – they are purslane, and in the foreign language, BIRDUGLISH.

ונץ החלב – white flowers like milk. Another explanation: it is a grass that when it is cut milk comes out.

החוחים והדרדרים (thorns and thistles/artichokes) – they are kinds of thorns.

אסטיס (woad) – that they dye with it like Tekhelet/bluish dye – and it is called NEEL in Arabic, and they harvest it and it grows and it is similar to spontaneous after-growth; for this reason, the Tanna/Teacher calls them ספיחי אסטיס/aftergrowth of woad.

וקוצה (madder – a plant used in dyeing red) – one of a kind of dyes and there are those who say that it is ALATZPOR in Arabic.

יש להן שביעית – the holiness of Seventh Year [produce] is practiced with them, not to cause them loss and not to do business with them.

ויש להם ביעור – when the time arrives for removal, one must remove them [from the house – in years three and six] as will be explained inside the laws of removal (Chapter 9, Mishnah 2).

עיקר – root.

Introduction In yesterday’s mishnah we learned that the laws of sabbatical produce apply fully to something that is food for humans or beasts or dyeing material and if left in the ground will rot. Our mishnah discusses what the laws are with regard to plants that are food or dyes but can be left in the ground without rotting. Important note: I have explained this mishnah according to the version found in good manuscripts of the Mishnah. The other version begins, “Anything that is not food for man.” In my opinion this version makes less sense is probably a mistake.

ערקבלין (palm-ivy/prickly creepers) – my Rabbis explain this as grass that grows near the palm tree and rises and is attached around the palm. But I heard that it is grass that its leaves are similar to a scorpion.

And they said yet another general principle: Anything that is food for man or beast, or is used for dyeing, but can be left in the soil, the law of the sabbatical year applies both to it and to its money substitute but the law of removal does not apply to it or to its money substitute. If a plant can be left in the ground, then even though it is food or dye, only some of the laws of sheviit apply to it and some do not. Specifically the plant itself must be treated in the same way that sabbatical year produce is treated. However, the laws of removing it from one’s house do not apply. This is simple to understand. If the plant can be left in the ground, then there would be no reason to remove it from one’s home because one removes produce from one’s home only once that species can no longer be found in the field.

והחלבצין (bulb of Ornithogalum) – the roots of the Ornithogalum that was mentioned above (in Mishnah 1 of this chapter).

Which are these? The root of wild luf, the root of ceterach, scolopendrium, the root of netz hahalav and buchreyah. As it did before, the mishnah now defines these categories. The plants listed here are edible roots and can be left in the ground without rotting.

הבכרייה (hazelwort/spike-nard – an aromatic plant) – they call it KANGAR in Arabic.

What is the species of dyeing matter? Puah ( and reseda. These dyes are roots and can be left in the ground.

הפואה (dyer’s madder) – in Arabic, PUAH, and in the foreign language, ZRUYAH.

The law of the sabbatical year applies both to them and to their money substitute but the law of removal does not apply to them or to their money substitute. A summary of the rule in section four.

הרכפה (tuberous-rooted plant used for dyeing/a kind of onion) – roots that are under the ground and they seethe it and drink from them their oil, and these are fit as an antidote to worms in the stomach.

Rabbi Meir says: their money substitutes must be removed by Rosh Hashanah. Rabbi Meir says that although these plants themselves need not be removed from one’s home during the sabbatical year, their money-substitutes (things bought with the proceeds of their sale) must be removed by the time the sabbatical year is over. According to Rabbi Meir, a person might forget that he bought something with the proceeds from selling sabbatical year produce. If he leaves these money-substitutes in one’s home after the sabbatical year, he will forget that they are supposed to be treated with the sanctity of sabbatical year produce. Therefore, he must remove them from his home by the time the sabbatical year is over.

אין להם ביעור – because they continue to grow in the ground (as perennials) and they aren’t consumed by the beasts of chase/wildlife in the field, therefore, there is no need to remove them from the house.

They said to him: since this law does not apply to the plants themselves, all the more so it does not apply to their money-substitute. The other rabbis respond that if the produce itself need not be removed from one’s house (because it always can exist in the field) then all the more so the money-substitutes, which have less sanctity, need not be removed.

דמיהם מתבערים עד ר"ה – this is what he said: their monetary valu needs to be reoved from the world prior to Rosh Hashanah of the Eighth Year, and the same law applies that they had to teach in the Mishnah that they remove it it after Rosh Hashanah if there is anything of those funds in the world after Rosh Hashanah of the Eighth Year, one is obligated to remove them in the holiness of the Seventh Year.

ק"ו לדמיהן – But Rabbi Meir held: I am stringent regarding their monies (from the sale of the produce) more than the actual produce itself, for the produce/fruit is recognized that it would not be used for commerce, but money is not recognized and one might come to use it for commerce. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir.

והנץ שלו – the flower/blossom that is on the upper portion a frui/protuberance on the blossom-end of fruits (having the appearance of a pestle seated in a mortar).

Introduction Most of this mishnah deals with the prohibition of selling sabbatical year produce. Sabbatical year produce is supposed to be left ownerless in the field so that anyone who wants to can come and collect. One should not engage in business with this produce. However, under certain circumstances it can be sold.

וקליפי אגוזים – all of these are one dyes with them.

The peels and the blossom of the pomegranate, the nutshells, and fruit seeds the laws of sabbatical produce apply to them and to their money substitutes. Even though all of these parts of the fruits or nuts are not generally eaten, they are still considered to be part of the fruit and the laws of sabbatical produce still apply to them.

והגלעינים (stone/kernel of a fruit) – stone/kernel of fruit, as for example, the stones that are in olives that we remove oil from them. And the stones of dates that are appropriate for food for cattle.

The dyer may use them for himself, but he may not dye with them for a wage, since one may not engage in business with seventh year produce, or with first-born animals, or with terumah, or with nevelah, or with trefah, or with reptiles or with creeping things. The mishnah uses the details in the previous section as an introduction to the subject of what one can do with sabbatical year produce. A dyer can use the peels of fruit (commonly used in the making of dye) to make dyes for his own personal use. However, he may not use them to make money. There are other items that cannot be used to engage in business, meaning a person cannot sell them to earn a wage, although he may be able to sell them occasionally, on an ad-hoc basis. First-born animals: given to a priest. The person to whom a first-born animal is born cannot first use it to make money and then later on give it to a priest. Terumah: this also must be given to a priest, and he cannot use it to engage in business. Nevelah an animal that died on its own. Terefah an animal killed not in a kosher manner. Reptiles and creepy-crawly thing: animals that are not kosher. With regard to all three of these things, the rabbis forbade one from engaging in business with them, lest an Israelite come to eat them.

צובע לעצמו – as it is written (Leviticus 25:6): “[But you may eat whatever the land during its sabbath will produce -] you, [your male and female slaves, the hired and bound laborers who live with you),” for all of your needs.

One should not buy field-vegetables and sell them in the market. One should not buy vegetables that have grown on their own (the Mishnah calls these “field vegetable”) and sell them. The same holds true with regard to collecting vegetables that grow on their own. One may not collect them and then bring them to market in order to sell them.

שאין עושים סחורה בפירות שביעית – and dyeing for pay is business.

But he may gather them and have his son sell them on his behalf. However, there is a rather large leniency in this halakhah. A person can gather produce from the field and then give it to his son to sell in the market, on his behalf. According to the rabbis, this doesn’t look like engaging in business, rather it still looks as if he gathered the produce for personal use.

לא בבכורות ולא בתרומה – perhaps they will be detained with him and they will come to be a snare to him. And exactly with a first born living animal, they decreed this but if it is slaughtered, it is permitted t sell it, even according to the Rabbis, as long as they don’t sell it in a bazaa/a number of booths put up for a mercantile fair.

If he gathered them for his own use, and some remains over, he may sell them. Finally, if he gathered for personal use but unintentionally gathered too much, he may sell the remainder in the market. As long as his intention was only to collect for personal use, this is not considered to be a case of “trading” in sabbatical year produce.

ולט בנבלות ואל בטרפות – for after the All-Merciful wrote that “they are unclean for you,” (Leviticus 11:27), why does it have to state further, “and they will be impure for you,” (Leviticus 11:35) but rather one is for the prohibition of eating and the other is for the prohibition of benefitting from it. But if you say – that the donkey, the camel, the horse and the mule, these are different for they are gown for their work and they are not forbidden to do business, but rather, with something that stands to be eating. And any thing that is forbidden from the Torah is prohibited to conduct business with, but a thing that from their words (i.e., the Sages) it was made forbidden, it is not forbidden to conduct business with it, but rather, wine of gentiles of which it is not known that it has been dedicated to an idol, that was made forbidden according to their words (I.e., of the Sages), it is forbidden to conduct business with it.

ולא יהא לוקח – meaning to say, to gather and sell in the market as it appears like business, but when his son sells it by his hand, meaning, for him, even though he gathered them to sell them, it does not look like business.

לקח לעצמו – gathered it for himself to eat and there was leftover, it is permitted to sell them, even he himself.

לקח בכור – [a firstling] having a blemish (which is unfit for consumption by Kohanim; see Tractate Bekhorot, Chapter 5, Mishnah 2) which is permitted to foreigners (i.e., non-Kohanim).

Introduction In yesterday’s mishnah we learned that it is prohibited to engage in the business of buying and selling first-born animals or prohibited animals. Our mishnah teaches that under certain circumstances, one may sell such animals.

מותר למכרו – as long as he does not sell it other than for the price that he purchased it for, that he should not profit from it.

If one buys a first-born animal for his son’s [wedding] feast, or for a festival, and then decides that he has no need for it, he may sell it. The first-born animal referred to in this mishnah is one which has a physical flaw. Such an animal may be eaten, even by non-priests. If a person buys such an animal in order to use it in a “mitzvah meal” such as his son’s wedding or a festival, and then he decides that he does not need it, he can sell it. Clearly this is not a case of a person intending to make a trade in first-born animals, but rather just avoiding a loss.

מותרין למכרן – because it is written regarding an animal that dies of itself (Deuteronomy 14:21): “[You shall not eat anything that has died a natural death; give it to the stranger in your community to eat,] or you may sell it to a foreigner,” abut the Torah didn’t prohibit other than to keep thema live to engage in business with them but if he accidentally caught unclean animals, it is permitted.

Trappers of wild animals, birds and fishes, who chanced upon unclean species, may sell them. If a non-kosher animal, bird or fish happens into a trapper’s trap, the trapper may sell it to a non-Jew since his intention was to catch kosher animals, birds or fish. He need not just let them go.

ר"י אומר אף מי שנתמנה (if he incidentally encounters it) – even though that he does not hunt but rather that he found impure birds like (Deuteronomy 22:6): “If, along the road, you chance upon a bird’s nest.” But he disputes the first Tanna/teacher who stated that he especially was hunting.

Rabbi Judah says: also a man who happened to chance one upon by accident may buy or sell, provided that he does not make this into his regular profession. But the sages prohibit. Rabbi Judah goes a step further. If a person happens to chance upon a non-kosher animal, bird or fish he can buy it and then sell it. This is clearly a much greater leniency than that found in the previous section. It seems that Rabbi Judah holds that as long as one doesn’t make trade in non-kosher things his regular profession, he can engage in an occasional trade. The other rabbis disagree with Rabbi Judah and prohibit this. Buying the non-kosher animal when the intention is going to be to sell it is too close to engaging in business with such animals and is therefore prohibited.

נתמנה – incidentally encounters, from the language (Daniel 1:5): “The king allotted daily rations [to them from the king’s food and from the wine he drank[.”

וחכמים אוסרים – to someone who is does not hunt, and even has no skill in this, and the reason of the Rabbis is because the hunters that need to give a tax to the king from their trade, they (i.e., the Rabbis) permitted them to sell impure beasts, birds and fish in order that they are able to make payment to the king of the tax that is upon them, but not the rest of the people. But the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda.

לולבי זרדים (young sprouts of the service-tree, the interior of which is eaten as a relish) – the branches of the tree whose name is “sorb.”

Introduction This mishnah deals with the young branches of various trees. These soft branches were eaten and therefore we need to know whether the laws of sheviit apply to them.

לולבי האלה (branches of the terebinth) – the language of (Isaiah 6:13): “[It shall be ravaged] like the terebinth and the oak, [of which stumps are left even when they are felled: its stump shall be a holy seed],” BALLUT in Arabic and GALNADI in the froeign language.

The lulavim of hawthorn trees and carobs the laws of sheviit apply to them and to their money substitutes, the law of removal applies to them and to their money substitutes. The lulavim, that is the young, soft branches of hawthorn and carob trees, are edible and will rot if left on the tree. Therefore the laws of sheviit fully apply to them.

בטנה (pistachio) – from the language of (Genesis 43:11): “pistachio nuts and almonds”; in Arabic, POSTAK.

The lulavim of the terebinth, the pistachio tree and the white thorn, the laws of sheviit apply to them and to their money substitutes, but the law of removal does not apply to them and to their money substitutes. The lulavim of these trees, while edible, can remain on the tree indefinitely. As we learned in mishnah two above, if something can remain attached to the ground without rotting, then the laws of removing that produce from one’s home do not apply. One could therefore cut down such lulavim and preserve them in one’s home for as long as he wants.

והאטדים (white thorn)– a kind of the species of thorns that grow in it hard black stones/kernels and they are eaten.

But as for the leaves the law of removal applies, since they fall from their stem. Although the laws of removal do not apply to the lulavim because they can remain on the tree, the laws do apply to the leaves because they be left on the tree without rotting.

אבל לעלים – of all of these there is removal, even though the branches do not fall, and I do not call them (Leviticus 25:7): “and your cattle and the beasts] in your land may eat all its yield],” they cease to beasts from the field; cease to your cattle from the house, nevertheless, the leases that fall are from the place of their attachment. And the branches which are attached are called, “their fathers,” and since they fall, they have removal.

וורד – rose.

The rose, henna, balsam, the lotus tree the laws of sheviit apply to them and to their money substitutes. According to the first opinion in the mishnah, since these plants are used for perfumes, the laws of sheviit apply to them. Perfume is close enough to food and dyes that it is included in the laws of sheviit. With regard to the laws of removal, they will apply to any of them, such as the rose, that will rot if left in the ground.

והכופר (cyprus flower) – nit is what we call ALHANAH in Arabic. And there are those who say that it is a perfume that they call GROPOLI.

Rabbi Shimon says: sheviit does not apply to the balsam, since it is not a fruit. Sheviit does not apply to the balsam, according to Rabbi Shimon, because the balsam is not a fruit but rather wood and the laws of sheviit do not apply to things considered “wood.”

והקטף (balsam) – the balsam tree.

לוטם (resin – used as a perfume; Maimonides calls it a chestnut or hazelnut) – It is the Aramaic translation of (Genesis 37:25): “[their camels bearing] gum, balm [and ladanum to be taken to Egypt];” And there are those who say that it is TZINBAR in Arabic; PANYULISH in the foreign language.

יש להם שביעית ולדמיהן שביעית – the same law applies that they have removal [from the house] and their monetary value has removal, and even though it is not mentioned in the Mishnah.

מפני שאינו פרי ([that balsam is not subject to the laws of the Seventh Year]) – and their law is like wood that do not have the holiness of the Seventh Year because their benefit comes after their removal [from the house], and the Torah stated (Leviticus 25:6): “But you may eat whatever the land during its Sabbath will produce” – that which is similar to eating for their benefit and removal are equivalent, excluding the wood whose benefit comes after their removal. But the first Tanna/teacher [of this Mishnah] holds that the balsam is its fruit. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Shimon.

ורד חדש שכבשו בשמן שין – a rose of the Seventh Year that was preserved/pickled in oil of the Sixth [Year], he will remove/gather the rose prior to the time of removal [from the house] arrives and everything is permitted. But a rose of the Seventh Year that was preserved/pickled in oil of the Eighth [Year] and the time for the removal has already arrived of the rose, he is liable to removal everything, as it is taught at the ending clause: [Produce of the] Sabbatical Year renders forbidden [subject to the laws of the Sabbatical year] all other [permitted produce] of the same species [with which it has been mixed]. But [if the two lots of produce are] not of the same species, [only if the produce of the Sabbatical year] imparts its flavor [does it render the other produce forbidden].

Introduction This mishnah deals with the question of how the laws of removal with regard to mixtures where one of the things is sabbatical year produce and one of the things is not.

וחרובין חדשים וכו' – here we are speaking of one who comes to drink the wine after the time of the removal [from the house] and in every matter, e is liable to remove it. But if the carobs did not remain/tarry in the wine until the time of the removal, he gathers/collects the carobs and the wine is permitted like sifting, and this is taught explicitly in the Tosefta (see Tosefta Sheviit, Chapter 5, Halakhot 13-14 in the Lieberman edition to Seder Zeraim, page 188).

If a new rose has been preserved in old oil, the rose may be taken out. A new rose is one that grew during the sabbatical year whereas the old oil is from olives that were harvested prior to the seventh year. The rose may be taken out of the oil and removed from one’s house at the time when roses must be removed (when they are no longer found in the field) and the oil may still be used afterwards. This is because, according to the mishnah, the rose does not impart taste to the oil.

זה הכלל וכו' – it speaks about aoll the prohibitions in the Torah, that in all of them, of the [permitted produce of the] same species with however small the amount of produce and with two separate species when it imparts a flavor, and it is not the Halakha.

But if an old rose was preserved in new oil, it is subject to the law of removal. However, if it is an old rose from the seventh year, put into new oil from the eighth year, the aged rose (think of potpourri) will impart its taste and both the rose and the oil are subject to the laws of removal.

השביעית אוסרת בכל שהוא במינה – after the removal. But prior to the removal [from the house], they lack the holiness of the Seventh [Year], which would be prohibited to cause it loss and to conduct business with them until there is the imparting of a flavor, whether of its own species or not of its own species.

New carobs preserved in old wine, or old carobs in new wine, are subject to the law of removal. When it comes to carobs in wine, in both cases (new sheviit carobs in sixth year wine or old sheviit carobs in eighth year wine) both the carobs and the wine are subject to the laws of removal. Unlike new roses in oil, new carobs do impart taste to the wine and therefore they too are subject to the laws of removal.

ושלא במינה – even after the removal when it imparts a flavor.

This is the general principle: Any thing that imparts taste, he must remove it if it is one kind mixed with a different kind. But if it is mixed with the identical kind, then [the whole is subject to removal] even if only the smallest quantity exists. The mishnah now forms a somewhat complex general rule: First of all, as we learned before, if the prohibited item does not impart taste then the non-prohibited item is not rendered forbidden. Thus since the new rose does not impart its taste to the oil, it can be removed and the oil is not subject to the laws of removal. However, this is only true of the mixture is of two different substances, such as a rose and oil. If it is a case of one kind mixed in with a similar kind, then the whole mixture is prohibited, even if the forbidden substance is only of the smallest quantity. So if even a tiny bit of sabbatical year oil became mixed in with non-sabbatical year oil, all of the oil must be treated as if it were sabbatical year oil.

Sabbatical year produce renders similar kinds prohibited even [if it exists] in the smallest quantity. But if of different species only when it imparts taste. The above rule is now explicated with regard to sabbatical year produce. Sabbatical year produce mixed in with the same species prohibits in the smallest amount. but if it is of different species, then only if it imparts taste. Thus if sabbatical year carobs are mixed in with wine, the whole mixture must be treated as sabbatical year produce.