Comentário sobre Kilaim 2:12

Introduction Our mishnah deals with a seah (=6 kav) in which a quarter of a kav (1/24 of the seah) of at least one different species of seed has been mixed. If the other species is at least 1/24 of the main species, it is forbidden to plant this mixture. However, if there is less than 1/24 of the other seed, it is permitted to plant the mixture and this is not kilayim. In our mishnah we learn what the person can do to remedy a mixture of seeds that has more than 1/24 of the other species.

Any seah which contains a quarter [of a kav] of a different species, one should reduce [its proportion of the latter] According to the first opinion in the mishnah, if the other seed is more than 1/24 all he has to do is reduce the proportion, either by adding more of the dominant seed or reducing the minority seed.

Rabbi Yose says: one should pick [it all out]. Rabbi Yose is stricter and holds that he has to pick out all of the minority seed before he can plant. Since the mixture was originally prohibited, it is not sufficient to just adjust the proportion. However, Rabbi Yose agrees that if the mixture was originally less than 1/24 he can plant it without concern for kilayim.

Whether it consists of one species or of two species. The above rules apply whether or not there were one or two or more minority seeds. The first opinion still holds that he can adjust the proportion so that there are less than 1/24 of the minority seeds, and Rabbi Yose still holds that he must pick them all out.

Rabbi Shimon says: they said this only if it consists of one species. Rabbi Shimon limits the leniency in section one to a case where there was only one minority species. If there were two different minority seeds, he must remove them all before he plants.

But the sages say: anything which is kilayim, in a seah [it adds up] in making up the quarter. The sages add a new rule. If two species are kilayim with each other, such as barley and lentils, then when they are mixed in with a dominant seed such as wheat, the barley and lentils add up and if they are together more than 1/24 of the total amount, the mixture must either be reduced or the minority seeds removed. However, if the species are not kilayim with each other, such as barley and oats they do not add up, because oats is not kilayim with barley (see mishnah one).

Introduction Today’s mishnah is a direct continuation of yesterday’s mishnah. In sections two and three it brings up some exceptions to the general rule that 1/24 of a different seed(s) will forbid a mixture.

To what does this refer? To [an mixture of] grain [occurring] with [different] grain, or pulse with [different] pulse, to grain with pulse, and to pulse with grain. The rule in yesterday’s mishnah only applies to a case where grains and pulse (beans) became mixed up. In section two we will see that the rule for garden seeds is different.

However they stated: Seeds from a garden which are not eaten, they add up [with other seeds to form an amount sufficient to prohibit the sowing of a seah] when there is 1/24 of the quantity [of such seed] that is necessary to sow a bet seah. “However they stated” implies that there is a rule in this section that deviates from the normal rule above. The mishnah refers here to inedible seeds such as garlic seeds or turnip seeds. If there is in a mixture 1/24 of these seeds in the amount of seeds of grain needed to plant a bet seah (a plot of land that can grow a seah of produce, about 2500 square cubits), but in this size field the seeds would produce much less than a seah, such as a kav, then 1/24 of a kav of these seeds would prohibit a mixture of another seah of other produce (remember grain prohibits if there is 1/6 of a kav). In other words, since these seeds, if they were grain seeds, would produce a much smaller amount of product if they were planted in a field that could grow a seah of produce, they prohibit mixtures at 1/24 of the level of the amount of product that they would produce, in this case 1/24 of a kav.

Rabbi Shimon says: just as they ruled to be stringent so too they ruled to be lenient flax [mixed in with] produce, combines when there is 1/24 of the quantity [of such seed] that is necessary to sow a bet seah. In the previous section we saw a stringency with regard to garden seeds that are not eaten. Since these seeds produce much less product, the laws are more stringent in their prohibiting a mixture with other produce, such as grain. In contrast, when an equal amount of flax seed is planted in a plot of land used to produce a seah of grain, it will produce three seahs of flax (three times the amount of grain). Therefore, the law is more lenient with them and there will need to be ¾ of a kav of flax seeds mixed in with other seeds before they become prohibited. As a general rule we could summarize that if an amount of seed produces less final product, it will be more potent in prohibiting mixtures, but if it produces more final product, it will be less potent in prohibiting mixtures.

Introduction This mishnah deals with a person who had planted his field with wheat and then changed his mind and decided that he wanted to plant barley. What must he do so that he can plant barley? Note that I have explained this mishnah according to Albeck. There are other quite different explanations.

If one’s field was sown with wheat, and he changed his mind and decided to sow it with barley, he must wait until it [the wheat] rots. Before he plants the barley, he must wait for the wheat seed to start to rot underneath the soil, meaning until it stops being “seed”. According to the Tosefta, this takes three days in moist ground and more than that in dry ground. After the wheat has rotted, he can plant barley and according to the mishnah the wheat won’t grow.

He turns [the soil] and then he may sow [the barley], if it [the wheat] had already grown. If the wheat has started to sprout, he must first overturn the soil and then he may plant the barley.

He should not say: “I shall [first] sow [the barley] and, then turn [the soil]” rather he must first turn [the soil] and then sow. He shouldn’t say that he is going to first sow the barley and then turn over the soil because this would be prohibited. Rather what he must do is first overturn the soil and then he can plant the barley.

How much must he plow [when overturning the soil]? Like the furrows [that are plowed after the [first] rainy season. The mishnah now turns its attention to how much one must plow for it to be considered as if he had properly turned the soil. The first opinion is that he must plow furrows like those that are plowed after the first rainy season. These furrows are spread apart one from the other, meaning the mishnah is rather lenient. He need not overturn all the soil.

Abba Shaul says: [one should plow] so that one does not leave [unplowed] as much [ground] as holds a quarter [kav] to a bet seah. Abba Shaul holds that he must make sure that no more than ¼ kav within a bet seah (a field large enough to grow a seah of wheat) is left unturned. Since there are six kav to a seah, this means that he must not leave more than 1/24 unturned. Abba Shaul is clearly stricter than the anonymous opinion in section four.

[His field was] sown [with grain, or pulse, or garden-seed], and he changed his mind and decided to plant it [with vines], he may not say: “First I shall plant [the vines] and then turn [the soil],” but he must [first] turn [the soil] and then he may plant [the vines].
[If it was] ‘planted’ [with vines] and he changed his mind and decided to seed [with grain, pulse or garden-seed], he may not say: “First I shall sow [the grain etc.] and then I uproot [the vines],” but he must [first] uproot [the vines] and then he may sow [the grain etc.]
If he wants, he may cut down [the vines] to less than a handbreadth [above ground], and then he may sow [the grain] and later, he uproots [the vines].
This mishnah continues to deal with a situation in which a person has planted his field with one type of seed and then changes his mind and wishes to plant it with another.
Sections one and two: These two sections are both basically the same as the last section of yesterday’s mishnah. What he must do is first get rid of that which he had already planted if he planted seeds he must turn the soil and if he planted grape vines he must uproot them and then he can plant the new vines or sow the new seed.
Section three: If he doesn’t want to totally uproot the vines before he sows the seed he may cut the vine shoots down to less than a handbreadth’s height, sow the seed and then uproot at a later date. When the shoots are less than a handbreadth tall they are considered as if they are not really vine shoots.

Introduction This mishnah deals with a field in which other species grew on their own and whether or not this is a case of kilayim.

His field was sown cumin or with arum, he must not sow on top of them, since they produce crops only after three years. Cumin and arum (a type of onion) only sprout up after three years. Therefore if he has already sown his field with one of these types of seed, he shouldn’t plant something else there because eventually the cumin or arum will sprout up.

[A field of] grain among which sprang up some aftergrowth woad, alternatively an area of threshing-floors in which many species sprang up, alternatively [a field of] clover among which grew up a number of species of herbs, he is not obliged to weed them out. This section mentions a situation in which weeds have sprouted up among an area where he planted with a certain species or on a threshing floor, where they thresh grain. He is not obligated to uproot the weeds because he didn’t want them to be there. We learn here that these are not treated like cases of kilayim because he didn’t plant two types of seeds together, nor was he even desirous of their coexistence.

But if he weeded or cut down the weeds, they say to him: “Uproot it all, except for one species.” If he weeded or cut down some of the weeds, the court now must force him to uproot the rest of the weeds because by getting rid of some of them, he has revealed that he wishes to keep there the ones that he didn’t remove. Since he wants to keep them, they cause a case of kilayim in the field.

Introduction This mishnah deals with a person who wants to plant his field in long rows, each row containing a different species. The mishnah describes how he might do this while avoiding the problem of kilayim.

One who wants to lay out his field in long straight rows each sown with a different species:
Bet Shammai says: three furrows of newly broken land. According to Bet Shammai he has to separate these rows with a gap the size of three furrows which are dug on newly planted land. When he separates the rows by this amount each row is considered to be its own field, since they are recognizably distinct. Alternatively, others interpret Bet Shammai to mean that each row must be of this width. When the rows are of this size, each is considered a separate field and hence, with even a small separation between the different rows, it will be recognizable that each row is a separate field.

But Bet Hillel says: the width of a Sharon yoke. According to Bet Hillel, the rows must be separated by the width of the size of the yoke used in Sharon, the lowlands inside the coast of Israel. According to the other understanding, the rows must be of this width.

And the words of these are close to the words of these. The anonymous mishnah notes that there is not that great of a difference between the sizes of the furrows separating the rows (or the size of the rows) mentioned by Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel.

Introduction This mishnah begins to discuss the issue of adjacent fields planted with different types of species. In the previous mishnah we learned that there must be a separation between fields or rows planted with different species. In today’s mishnah we learn that sometimes it is okay to have fields of different species adjacent to one another. We should note that according to the rabbis kilayim is only prohibited from the Torah (deoraita) when one mixes seed in one’s hand and sows them together. Areas with different species that are adjacent to one another are only prohibited by the rabbis (derabanan) because this looks like kilayim. Under certain circumstances, when it doesn’t look like kilayim, this is permitted.

If the point of an angle of a wheat [field] overlaps into a barley [field], it is permitted because it looks like the end of his field. In this case, a point of an angle of a field planted with wheat enters into, or according to other interpretations, is adjacent to, a field planted with barley. Imagine a triangular field, where one of the corners is next to a square field. Since it looks like the angle is the end of the wheat field, there is no problem of kilayim here.

If his [field] is of wheat, and his neighbor’s is of another species, he may sow [next to the border] some of the same species [as that of his neighbor]. If his field was of wheat and his neighbor had a field of another species such as barley, he may sow barley next to his neighbor’s field. This doesn’t look like kilayim in his own field, because the row of barley looks like part of his neighbor’s field.

If his field was of wheat and that of his neighbor’s was of wheat, he may sow next to him a row of flax, but not a row of any other species. Rabbi Shimon says: it is all the same whether he sows flax or any other species. Rabbi Yose said: even in the middle of one's field it is permitted to check one’s field with a row of flax. In this case both his field and his neighbor’s field are of wheat. He is allowed to sow one row of flax between the two fields. Everyone knows that one row of flax is so negligible that no one would plant in this manner in order to grow flax for use. Rather it is readily apparent that the only reason to plant the flax was to check the fertility of his field, whether in the future his field is appropriate for sowing flax. Since every one knows that his purpose in planting this furrow was not for the produce, it does not look like kilayim. According to Rabbi Shimon it doesn’t make a difference what type of seed the single row consists of in all cases it is recognizable that he is only planting in order to see if his field can grow this type of species. It seems that according to Rabbi Shimon people don’t plant rows of single species in order to grow the produce, rather just to check the fecundity of the field. Rabbi Yose holds that one may do so even within one’s own field. That is, one can plant one row of flax in the middle of a wheat field (or any other type of field), because it is apparent that the row of flax was put there only in order to check the field, whether it can sustain flax. Anyone seeing such a set up will understand that this is not kilayim.

Introduction In yesterday’s mishnah we learned that it is permitted to plant one row of flax next to a field of grain. In today’s mishnah we learn that one is not allowed to do so with mustard or safflower.

They may not sow mustard or safflower close to a field of grain, but they may sow mustard or safflower close to a vegetable field. Mustard and safflower are dangerous to a vegetable field and therefore the owner will eventually uproot them. Since this is not a beneficial arrangement, one is allowed to sow them there. However, since these seeds are not damaging to grain, he may not sow even a single row next to a grain field.

And they may sow close to fallow land or to plowed land, or to a wall made with loose stones, or to a path, or to a fence ten handbreadths high, or to a trench ten [handbreadths] deep and four wide, or to a tree forming a tent over the ground, or to a rock ten [handbreadths] high and four wide. In this section of the mishnah we learn that if there is a break between one field and another, he can plant one species next to a different species. For instance, if there was fallow land or plowed land separating two fields, he can plant two different species next to each other. A wall, even if its stones are only loosely piled on top of each other, a path, fences and ditches that are ten handbreadths high or deep and four handbreadths wide, also all serve as separators, preventing a problem of kilayim. The tree which forms a tent over the ground refers to a tree whose branches lie low to the ground. If one species is planted under the branches, he can plant another species outside of the branches, because the branches themselves serve to separate the two species. Finally, a rock ten handbreadths high and four wide also serves as a separator.

Introduction This mishnah teaches how many different species of seed one might sow within one field the size of a bet seah (a field large enough to produce a seah’s worth of grain).

One who wishes to make his field into square plots [each sown] with a different species, he should divide it into twenty-four square plots for a bet seah, a square plot per bet rova, and he may then sow in each whatever species he wants. A bet seah is fifty cubits by fifty cubits, 2500 square cubits. If you were to divide this size field into twenty-four plots, each being able to contain a quarter of a rova (a rova is 1/6 of a seah), each plot would be 104 1/6 square cubits, 10.2 x 10.2. Each of these plots is considered a separate field and therefore he can plant whatever seed he wants in each. Since they are distinct plots and the whole field is set up this way, it is clear to anyone who sees the field that this is not kilayim.

If there is one square plot or two [inside his field], he may sow them with mustard, but if there are three he may not sow them with mustard, since it looks like a field of mustard, the words of Rabbi Meir. The mishnah now refers to a case where there are a limited number of plots within a field planted with a single species. Rabbi Meir says that one can plant one or two plots of mustard within the field and this still doesn’t look like kilayim. However, if he plants three plots of mustard this looks like a field of mustard mixed in with a field of grain, and there is a problem of looking like kilayim. This is a problem specifically with mustard because people don’t typically plant this much mustard within a grain field. If it was another species, he could plant more plots and they wouldn’t look like a full field of one species intermingled with another.

But the sages say: nine square plots are permitted, ten are forbidden. The sages rule more leniently than Rabbi Meir, allowing one to plant up to nine plots of a different species within a field the size of a bet seah. However, ten square plots looks like a field, and is therefore prohibited. Nine plots can be arranged in the following way so that each plot does not come into contact with each other: Note that according to other opinions, there are other ways to draw this. In any case, what is most important is that since no two plots of one species are adjacent to each other, it doesn’t look like two different kinds of fields intermingled.

Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov says: even though the whole of his field is a bet-kor, he may not make within it more than one square plot. A bet-kor, which is 75,000 square cubits, is much larger than a bet-seah, which is only 2500 square cubits. Nevertheless, Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov says that no more than one plot of a different species may be planted there. This explanation, while if fits the words, is hard to understand. Therefore, Albeck explains that Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov looks at the whole field as one square plot, meaning that even in a gigantic field such as a bet-kor, one can sow only one type of seed. He doesn’t allow any plots of another species.

Introduction The first part of our mishnah is a continuation of yesterday’s mishnah. Yesterday we learned that if a person wishes to sow his field with different species he must leave an empty plot in between the sown plots. The empty plot must be the size of a bet rova (1/24 the size of a bet seah). In our mishnah we learn that any plot which can’t be used for sowing seed serves as a break between the different species, even if the plot is not completely empty. The second half of our mishnah teaches how far one must separate different species in order that they shouldn’t look like kilayim.

Whatever there is within a bet rova [which separates different species] is included in the area of a bet rova: the space which vine roots consume, a grave, a rock, [all] count in the measure of a bet rova. If there is something within the bet rova plot that prevents one from sowing there, the bet rova still counts as an empty plot serving to separate the two different species. The first object is the space around a vine that the vine’s roots take up. Thus if there is a plot planted with a vine, the vine’s roots, which are halakhically considered to take up six handbreadths (we will return to this subject in 3:7), and these six handbreadths count toward the empty bet rova. So too a grave and a rock all count towards the empty space needed to separate between the different species, even though it is obviously impossible to plant on a grave or on a rock.

[One who wants to sow one type of] grain [in a field of another type] of grain the measure is a bet rova. One who wants to plant one type of grain in a field of another type of grain must distance the two one bet rova from each other. According to the Rambam this must be a square meaning 10 1/5 cubits by 10 1/5 cubits.

Vegetables within [a field of other] vegetables the measure is six handbreadths. Vegetables are planted in smaller plots, hence one can plant them closer to each other (imagine the tomato or cucumber garden my Dad has behind his house they’re very good, so if you’re ever in Margate, NJ in the summer..). The distance is only six handbreadths square, far smaller than that for grain.

Vegetables within [a field of] grain, or grain within [a field of] vegetables the measure is a bet rova. Rabbi Eliezer says: vegetables in [a field of] grain the measure is six handbreadths. The mishnah now deals with cases where a person wants to put grain in a field of vegetables, or vice versa. According to the first opinion, the two species must be kept at a distance of a bet rova, since one is grain. According to Rabbi Eliezer, he must distance them only six handbreadths, the measure for distancing vegetables.

Introduction Our mishnah discusses whether stalks of one species that lean over stalks of another species constitutes kilayim.

Stalks of grain which are leaning over other stalks of grain, or vegetable [plants] on other [] vegetable plants, or stalks of grain over vegetables plants or vegetable plants over stalks of grain, all this is permitted, except in the case of the Greek gourd. In the case referred to in this mishnah, the person properly distanced the different species one from the other. If the stalks grew or the vegetable plants grew and began to hang over the other species, this does not constitute kilayim, since he distanced them properly. The only except is the Greek gourd, which evidently can significantly tangle itself up with other species that are growing near it. Since this will really look like kilayim, he must uproot either the gourd or the other species growing near it.

Rabbi Meir says: also in the case of the cucumber or Egyptian beans. But I recognize their words [as more acceptable] than mine. Rabbi Meir adds two other species that also entangle themselves up with other species growing near them. However, in the end, Rabbi Meir admits that the rabbis’ limiting this to the Greek gourd is more acceptable than his extending it to the cucumber and Egyptian beans. One might ask: if he tends to agree with the other rabbis, then why does he still make his statement at all? The answer, according to commentators, is that he received his opinion from his teachers, and although he did not actually agree with this opinion, he still stated it in order that it should be preserved for future generations.