Menachot 72a — the Talmud in English

And we answer:

Rabbi Meir agrees with

Rabbi Meir

in one respect with

Rabbi Akiva:

in one matter—

when the grain has not reached one-third of its ripeness, for even if it is harvested for a person, this is not considered harvesting.

But he disagrees with him in one matter—

when it has reached one-third of its ripeness. For Rabbi Akiva holds that even in this case it is not considered harvesting, whereas Rabbi Meir disagrees with him in this regard and holds that even if it is harvested for an animal and by means of an animal, it is considered harvesting. We learned in the Mishna:

One may harvest because of the saplings, because of a house of mourning, or because of a house of study:

What is the reason

that one may harvest because of a house of mourning or because of a house of study?

Because the Merciful One said: “The beginning of

your harvest”

the Torah states

that your harvest may not precede the omer,

but a harvest for a mitzva

that is permitted before the omer may precede it.

We learned in the Mishna:

One may not make them into bundles; rather, he leaves them in small bunches:

What is the reason

that one may not make them into bundles?

d

In general,

whenever possible, we do not trouble ourselves

[we do not undertake unnecessary effort], since there is no need to make the bundles.

We learned in the Mishna:

The mitzva of the omer is to bring it from standing grain,

but if he did not find standing grain, he brings it from gathered sheaves; its mitzva is to come from moist grain, but if he did not find moist grain, he brings it from dry grain; its mitzva is to harvest it at night, but if it was harvested during the day, it is valid, and it overrides Shabbat:

The Sages taught:

It is written: “

And if you offer a meal-offering of first fruits

to the Lord.”

Why does the verse need to say

“you shall offer” here, when “you shall offer” has already been stated later in the verse: “Roasted grain, ground from fresh grain, you shall offer as the meal-offering of your God”?

Because the mitzva of the omer is to bring it from standing grain,

as it is stated: “When you begin to reap the standing grain [once the omer, which is the beginning of the harvest, has been reaped], you shall begin to count seven weeks.”

From where do we know that if he did not find standing grain

to harvest from it for the sake of the omer, he

brings it from gathered sheaves

that were harvested not for the sake of the omer?

The verse therefore states: “

You shall offer.”

Alternatively,

that is, we learn another law from the apparently superfluous word

“you shall offer”:

Because the mitzva is to bring it from moist grain,

as it is stated: “Fresh grain you shall offer,”

from where do we know that if he did not find moist grain, he brings it from dry grain? The verse therefore states: “

You shall offer.”

Alternatively,

that is, we learn another law from “you shall offer”:

Because its mitzva is to harvest it at night,

as explained above, on page 66a,

from where do we know that if it was harvested during the day it is valid,

and that it overrides Shabbat ?

The verse therefore states: “

You shall offer.”

And we learn all these laws from the word “you shall offer”:

“You shall offer” under any circumstances,

even from gathered sheaves.

“You shall offer” from any place,

even from a distant place, where the grain is not moist, because by the time it is brought to Jerusalem it will dry on the way.

“You shall offer,” even on Shabbat.

“You shall offer,” even in a state of ritual impurity.

We learned in the Mishna:

And if it was harvested during the day, it is valid:

And we raise an objection:

But did we not learn

in tractate Megilla 20b: The entire day is valid for reading the Megilla, for reading the Hallel, for sounding the shofar, and for the purification of a leper—

The entire night is valid for harvesting the omer and for burning the fats and limbs

of offerings that were sacrificed during the day and whose fats and limbs were placed on the altar but fell off it, in which case they are returned to the altar throughout the entire night.

This is the general rule: An act whose mitzva is performed during the day

is

valid throughout the entire day; an act whose mitzva is performed at night

is

valid throughout the entire night.

It follows that the Mishna

equates night with day,

meaning that when the Mishna says that their mitzva is throughout the entire night, this is analogous to what it says concerning those whose mitzva is throughout the entire day—

Just as during the day—

not at night—so too, for an act whose mitzva is at night—

not during the day

[that is, “also not during the day”]. We have therefore learned that the mitzva of harvesting the omer is at night and not during the day!?

Rabba said: This is not difficult: This

that we learned in our Mishna—that if it was harvested during the day it is valid—

is the opinion of Rabbi

.

And that

which we learned in Megilla—that if it was harvested during the day it is not valid—

is the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon,

and

as it was taught:

If a person was standing and offering the meal-offering of the omer, and it became ritually impure in his hand, and there is another one

to offer,

he is told: “

Bring another in its place.”

And if not,

that is, if there is no other meal-offering,

he is told: “

Be perceptive and remain silent,”

the words of Rabbi.

Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, says: In either case,

whether he has another offering or whether he does not have another offering,

he is told: “

Be perceptive and remain silent,”

because he cannot offer the other meal-offering, since it was not harvested at night as required.

For any omer that was harvested not in accordance with its mitzva

on the night of the sixteenth of Nisan

is invalid,

and therefore he cannot bring another meal-offering for the omer. Consequently, he must offer it in a state of ritual impurity and remain silent.

It is therefore clear: The meal-offering of the omer is valid only if it was harvested on the night of the sixteenth of Nisan; but if it was not harvested then, it is invalid. Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, thus follows the opinion of the Mishna in Megilla, which disqualifies harvesting the omer during the day.

Rabba bar bar Ḥana said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon,

who holds that the meal-offering of the omer is valid only if it was harvested on the night of the sixteenth of Nisan,

stated his opinion in accordance with the method of Rabbi Akiva, his father’s teacher

[Rabbi Shimon].

He said this, as we learned

in tractate Shabbat 130a:

And Rabbi Eliezer further said: One may cut wood [on Shabbat] to make charcoal, in order to make an iron implement [with which to circumcise the infant, because just as circumcision itself overrides Shabbat, so too its preparations override Shabbat, even if these preparations could have been performed on the eve of Shabbat]. Rabbi Akiva disagrees, for

Rabbi Akiva stated a general principle: “

Any labor that one could perform on the eve of Shabbat does not override Shabbat;

but labor that one cannot perform on the eve of Shabbat overrides Shabbat.”

And

Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, further held

in accordance with Rabbi Yishmael, who said: The harvesting of the omer is a mitzva,

that is, he agreed with Rabbi Yishmael, who derives from the verse that harvesting the omer—which is a mitzva—overrides Shabbat. And

as we learned

in tractate Shevi'it 1:4:

Rabbi Yishmael says:

It is written concerning Shabbat: “You shall refrain from plowing and harvesting,” and we learn:

Just as plowing,

from which the Torah instructed one to refrain, means

optional plowing,

since there is no plowing for the sake of a mitzva,

so too harvesting,

from which the Torah instructed one to refrain, refers specifically to

optional harvesting; the harvesting of the omer is excluded,

for there is no need to refrain from it, since

it is a mitzva.

And according to Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, who agrees with Rabbi Akiva, it necessarily follows from the fact that the verse teaches that harvesting the omer overrides Shabbat that the omer is not valid if it was harvested contrary to its mitzva, on the night of the sixteenth, for:

And if it enters your mind that if it was reaped not in accordance with its mitzva it is valid, why does the reaping of the omer override

the

Shabbat—let them reap it on the eve of Shabbat,

for even if they reap it not in accordance with its mitzva, the omer will be valid, and this is included among work that can be done on the eve of Shabbat, which does not override the Shabbat

Rather, from the fact that it overrides

the

Shabbat, infer:

it is work that cannot be done on the eve of Shabbat, for the omer

reaped not in accordance with its mitzva is invalid.

The Gemara had supposed—according to what was explained in the reason of Rabbi Elazar son of Rabbi Shimon, who disputes Rabbi concerning an omer reaped not in accordance with its mitzva—that Rabbi too agrees with him concerning the law of reaping, that it overrides Shabbat; but only for Rabbi Elazar son of Rabbi Shimon is there proof from this that the omer is invalid, since he is the son and student of his father, and his father, after all, holds according to the view of his teacher Rabbi Akiva,

and it necessarily follows that the omer reaped not in accordance with its mitzva is invalid. But Rabbi does not take into consideration the view of Rabbi Akiva and disputes him, and again it necessarily follows that there is no proof that the omer reaped not in accordance with its mitzva is invalid. Therefore the Gemara asks:

And

if

Rabbi is not a student of Rabbi Shimon

[and Rabbi is not the student of Rabbi Shimon], like Rabbi Elazar son of Rabbi Shimon —are you saying that Rabbi disputes Rabbi Shimon, who holds according to his teacher Rabbi Akiva !?

And it was taught in a beraita: Rabbi said: When we were studying Torah with Rabbi Shimon in Tekoa

[a place name],

we would bring up to him

on Shabbat

oil

for anointing

and a towel

for drying oneself, in the manner permitted according to Rabbi Shimon, namely:

from a courtyard to a roof, and from a roof

to a karpef

to a karpef,

and it is a type of courtyard,

and from one karpef to another karpef,

until we reach the spring in which we bathe—

It is thus explained that Rabbi studied Torah with Rabbi Shimon; and if so, it is impossible that Rabbi would dispute him, and he must have said that the omer reaped not in accordance with its mitzva is invalid, just as Rabbi Elazar son of Rabbi Shimon said!?

And we answer: Rabbi did not dispute Rabbi Shimon; rather,

Rabbi held

the view

of another statement of Rabbi Shimon

[like another saying] of Rabbi Shimon—

That is, from another saying of Rabbi Shimon, Rabbi learned to understand that the principle of Rabbi Akiva does not apply to the reaping of the omer, and that it overrides Shabbat even though the omer not reaped in accordance with its mitzva is valid, and this is not included among work that can be done on the eve of Shabbat, which does not override Shabbat—

For it was taught in a beraita: Rabbi Shimon said: Come and see how beloved a mitzva is in its proper time

[how greatly we must cherish it at its proper time]—

For behold, the burning of the fats and limbs

of the additional offerings and daily offerings of Shabbat

is valid throughout the entire night

following the conclusion of Shabbat, and nevertheless

he would not wait for them

on Shabbat

until it became dark,

but would burn them while it was still day, in order to hasten to fulfill a mitzva at its proper time—

We have thus learned that although the burning of the fats and limbs could be performed not on Shabbat but on the conclusion of Shabbat, nevertheless it overrides Shabbat; and necessarily this does not contradict the principle of Rabbi Akiva, because Rabbi Akiva stated this principle only concerning something whose time is not fixed, such as the preparations for circumcision; but something whose time is fixed and which overrides Shabbat overrides it even if it is possible not to perform the work on Shabbat—

And therefore Rabbi holds that the same is true concerning the reaping of the omer: although it is considered work that can be done on the eve of Shabbat, nevertheless, since the Torah fixed the time of the reaping at a fixed time, it overrides Shabbat.