Babylonian Talmud

Rodkinson 1918 — source 1, scan section 66

to sit) beneath which there were utensils. R. Aqiba holds that idols are regarded the same as menstruating women and the ves- sels beneath the stone become defiled (for the reason that the stone is the basis of the idol, and the former becomes part of the idol, and hence everything beneath it becomes defiled), but the rabbis regard an idol as a reptile, i.e., as a reptile lying upon a large stone (in which case any utensils chancing to be beneath the stone do not become defiled). This decree is unanimously conceded. R. Ahadbou b. Ami asked: What about an idol smaller in size than an olive ? R. Joseph objected to this question : What is the purpose of the query ? Does it refer to the prohibition of idolatry ? Even an idol the size of a fly, like the idol of the * The Hebrew term used for " filthy thing " in the passage is " Davah," and in Leviticus, xx. 18, Davah is translated, " a woman suffering from her separation (men- struation)." f The word " Tizrom " (cast them away) Rabba holds to be a derivation from the word " Zar" (strange) and not from " Zarah" (cast away). 154 TRACT SABBATH. 155 Ekronites, which was called Zebub * (fly) is also prohibited ; for we are taught it is written in the passage [Judges, viii. 33]: " And they made themselves Baal-berith for a god " ; by Baal-berith is meant the Zebub (fly) idol of Ekron, and every idolater (at that time) made an image of his idol in miniature in order to keep it constantly at hand and to be able at any time to take it out, embrace, and kiss it ; hence there is no question as to size. Nay, the query of R. Ahadbou is in regard to causing defile- ment ? Either it is regarded as a reptile and defiles, even if only of the size of a lentil, or it is considered as a corpse and causes defilement if it is the size of an olive. (A part of a corpse the size of an olive causes the person touching it to become defiled.) Answered R. I via, and according to others Rabba b. Ulla: " Come and hear the following Boraitha: ' No defilement is caused by idols smaller than olives, for it is written [II Kings, xxiii. 6]: " And cast its powder upon the graves of the children of the people." ' " (The adduction is) that as a corpse cannot cause defilement by a part less than the size of an olive, the same is the case with idols, which are regarded as corpses. MISHNA //, : (R. Aqiba says again 🙂 Whence the adduction that a ship, though a wooden vessel, is not subject to defile- ment ? From the passage [Prov. xxx. 19] : " The way of a ship is in the heart of the sea." GEMARA : It is certain f that R. Aqiba intends to convey to us that the reason the passage cited in the above Mishna informs us of a fact known to all is because the sense is to be construed thus: In the same manner as the sea is not subject to defilement, so also a ship can never become defiled. There is a Boraitha : Hananyah said : We make the adduc- tion from a sack (which is subject to defilement) that everything which can be carried after the manner of a sack, sometimes full and at other times empty, is subject to defilement, except a ship, which cannot be carried at all, full or empty. What are the points of difference in the two adductions (of R. Aqiba and Hananyah) ? They are concerning a small (river) boat. One holds that all boats (ships) must be regarded as the sea itself (hence not subject to defilement), while the other is of the opinion that a small (river) boat must be regarded as a sack because it is *See II Kings, i. 2. f The term " it is certain " (peshitah) is generally used by the Geraara in the sense of the question, " Is it not self-evident ?" In the above case, however, it is intended for an explanation of the reason for R, Aqiba's adduction. See Rashi. 156 THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD. carried to the place whence it is launched and hence is subject to defilement; as R. Hanina b. Aqa'bbia said: Why did the rabbis say that a small (river) boat is subject to defilement ? Because it is usually loaded in the dry dock and then carried into the river. Rabbi Johanan in the name of Rabbi said: " One should not absent himself from the college even for one hour. Behold, this teaching (concerning a river boat) has been taught in the schools for many years and no one knew the reason for it until R. Hanina b, Aqa'bbia came and explained it." R. Jonathan said : One should never absent himself from the house of learning or abstain from learning the law, even when at the point of death, for it is written [Num. xix. 14]: " This is the law, when a man dieth in his tent " ; {i.e.) even at the point of death man must occupy himself with the study of the law. Rash Lakish, however, adduces from the same verse that one does not retain (in memory) the law, unless he is ready to die for it. MISHNA ///. : (R. Aqiba said 🙂 Whence do we adduce that in a patch of ground six spans long by six spans wide five different kinds of seed may be planted — one kind each in each of the four corners and one in the centre of the patch ? From the passage [Isaiah, Ixi. 11]: " For as the earth bringeth forth her growth, and as a garden causeth what is sown therein to spring forth." (We see then) it is not written " as a garden causeth its seed to spring forth," but what is sown therein. GEMARA: How is this to be understood from that passage ? Said R. Jehudah : The passage cited in the above Mishna is to be thus explained : * ' The earth bringeth forth her growth. ' ' ' ' Bring- eth forth " (which is in the singular) can be counted for " one " (kind of seed). Her " growth " (also singular) can also be counted for " one." (Now we have two.) " What is grown therein " (evidently plural) can be counted for two more (making four), and " to spring forth " (in the singular again) can be counted as one, making five in all ; and (as far as the six spans square are concerned) the rabbis are quite certain (through tradition) that five different kinds of seed in a patch six spans square do not interfere with one another. But whence do we know that the assurance of the rabbis can be depended upon ? Answered R. Hyya b. Aba in the name of R. Johanan, from the passage [Deut. xix. 14]: " Thou shalt not remove the landmark of thy neighbor, which they of old time have set," which is to be ex- plained: " Thou shalt not go beyond what is limited by those TRACT SABBATH. 157 of old." But what have those of old limited? Answered R. Samuel bar Na'hmeni in the name of R. Jonathan : " It is written [Gen. xxxvi. 20] : " These are the sons of Seir the Chorite, who inhabited the land." Only they inhabited the land ? Did the rest of mankind inhabit heaven ? It simply means to state that they made the earth inhabitable by their knowledge of agriculture