Menachot 85b (פה:) — the Talmud in English

But whereas in the

beraita it is taught: “

and in the second he plows and

plows again”!?

That is to say, it is necessarily the case that our Mishna does not follow the opinion of the beraita, since an additional plowing beyond the ordinary plowing performed in a field certainly has no source in our Mishna, whereas the beraita mentions two plowings in the second year. Necessarily, these are two different methods, and one cannot use what is stated in the beraita to explain the Mishna.

And we answer:

This is not difficult: Here—

our Mishna—deals

with

a

worked field,

which was plowed in the first year, and therefore, when he plows in the second year, we have two plowings.

Here—

the beraita, in which we learned: “he plows and plows again”—

deals

with

a

non-worked field—

That is to say, if he indeed plowed it in the first year, then in the second year he performs one plowing and sows; but if he did not plow it in the first year, then he performs two plowings in the second year. Thus, there is no contradiction from the beraita. Nevertheless, it follows that in the second year he performs a second plowing.

But this resolution was not obvious to the Gemara, and therefore the Gemara asks:

What has been established

regarding the uncertainty about the interpretation of our Mishna?

And the Gemara resolves it:

Come and hear

that he does not plow a second time, from this

as it is taught:

This is how he does it:

He plows

the entire field in

half

of the year,

and sows

in the other half of the year

half

of the field—

And again, in the following year,

he plows

the entire field in

half

of the year,

and sows

in the second half of the year

the other half

of the field [the half that he had left fallow in the preceding year]; and he does the same alternately in the following years. It is proven that after he has made it fallow, he does not return and plow it again.

Rabbi Yohanan said: The omer is brought only from the south-facing fields in Eretz Yisrael,

where the sun rises and from which the sun sets; he plows half and sows half, he plows half and sows half.

Abba Shaul says: The omer was brought from the valley of Beit Makleh,

and that valley

was of the size of three se’a

of grain,

and it was a south-facing field, where the sun rises and from which the sun sets; he plows half and sows half, he plows half and sows half.

Rav Helkya bar Tovi had a corner plot of land, and it produced twice the yield, and he sold its wheat for fine flour— [

Rav Helkya bar Tovi had a plot of land in a corner,

and it produced twice as much grain as an ordinary field, and the grain was of very high quality; he sold it to make fine flour for the meal-offerings].

We learned in the Mishna:

And if it became worm-eaten, it is disqualified: The Sages taught:

Fine flour in which most has become worm-eaten,

it is

disqualified.

And

likewise,

wheat whose majority has become worm-eaten

is

disqualified

from grinding it and offering its fine flour.

Rav Yirmeya inquired,

Rav Yirmeya was uncertain about the interpretation of what we learned in the beraita: “wheat whose majority has become worm-eaten”:

Is this referring to

the majority of a kernel—

that is, every kernel whose majority has become worm-eaten is disqualified—

or even

the

majority of a se’a—

that is, if most of a se’a of wheat has become worm-eaten, the entire se’a is disqualified for meal-offerings, even those kernels that did not become worm-eaten at all?

And we conclude:

The question remains unresolved!

Anyone who consecrates an animal that has a blemish—which renders it disqualified—for the altar transgresses a prohibition and receives lashes for its consecration, as it is stated [Leviticus 22:20]: “Anything that has a blemish you shall not offer.” Through the oral tradition they learned that this is a warning against consecrating animals with blemishes.

Rava inquired:

If he consecrated

worm-eaten wheat,

what is the law concerning receiving lashes for them on account of

consecrating a

blemished animal

for the altar?

And the sides of the uncertainty are: Is it to be said:

Since it is disqualified,

since it is disqualified,

it is considered like a blemished animal,

and he receives lashes for consecrating it, as one who consecrates a blemished animal for the altar—

Or perhaps: A blemish applies only to an animal,

whereas these, although they are disqualified, are not blemished, and he does not receive lashes for consecrating them?

And we conclude:

The question remains unresolved!

We learned there,

in tractate Middot 2:5:

Any wood in which a worm is found,

it is

disqualified for the altar,

to place it on the altar’s pyre:

Shmuel said: They taught this only with regard to

wood that is

moist

and has become worm-eaten, since one cannot scrape away the worm-eaten part;

but

wood that is

dry,

he can

scrape away

the worm-eaten part,

and the wood is fit.

wood is fit.

Rava inquired:

If he consecrated it,

the wood that had become worm-eaten,

what is the law concerning receiving lashes for consecrating it

on account of

consecrating a

blemished animal

for the altar?

And the sides of the uncertainty are:

Is it to be said:

Since it is disqualified,

the wood

is considered like a blemished animal,

and he receives lashes for consecrating it, as one who consecrates a blemished animal for the altar—

Or perhaps: A blemish applies only to an animal,

and although worm-eaten wood is disqualified, it is not blemished, and he does not receive lashes for consecrating it.

And we conclude:

The question remains unresolved!

Mishna:

After the preceding mishnayot explained which produce is of the highest quality for making fine flour, our Mishna here explains which locations produce the finest oil.

Tekoa is first [the word “first” is in Greek]

—“first” in Greek—

for oil.

Oil that comes from Tekoa is of the highest quality for the Menora and meal-offerings, and they would bring it from there, as it is stated: “the choicest of your vows.”

Abba Shaul says: Second to it [to the city of Tekoa]

—to the city of Tekoa—

is Ragav,

which is

in Transjordan.

All lands were fit

to bring oil from them,

except

that

from here [from the places mentioned]

—from the places mentioned—

they would bring it.

They would not bring

oil for the Menora and meal-offerings—

from a manure field [a field that requires fertilizing],

because such fields are repulsive.

Nor from an irrigated field [a field that grows around a spring within it], because its produce is poor.

—a field that grows from a spring within it—because its produce is inferior.

Nor from what was sown between them,

that is, nor oil produced from olive trees between which grain was sown, because the crops weaken the olive trees, and the oil produced from them is not of superior quality.

And

nevertheless,

if he brought

from any of these sources,

the

oil is

fit. They would not bring anfaktin,

a type of oil, as will be explained in the Gemara—

but if he brought

anfaktin, it is

fit]

disqualified, according to Rashi.

They would not bring

oil:

from olives [

olive berries]

that had soaked in water,

because the water spoils the oil produced from them.

Nor from pickled olives [

oil produced from pickled olives].

Nor from boiled olives [

oil produced from boiled olives].

But if he brought

from any of these sources, the oil is

disqualified.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: “Tekoa is first for oil”:

It is written [II Samuel 14]: “

And Joab sent to Tekoa [

to Tekoa]

and took from there a wise woman”—

And we explain:

What is different about Tekoa?

Why did he send to bring a wise woman specifically from Tekoa?

He said—

that is, he explained—

Rabbi Yohanan: Because they are accustomed to olive oil, wisdom is found among them,

for olive oil sharpens the heart.

The Sages taught:

It is written concerning Moses’ blessing to the tribes [Deuteronomy 33:24]: “And concerning Asher he said: Blessed among sons is Asher; may he be pleasing to his brothers

and bathe his foot in oil”:

This is the portion of Asher

in Eretz Yisrael

that flows with oil like a spring.

That is to say, there is an abundance of oil in his portion.

They said: Once the people of Ludkia needed oil,

a place-name,

they appointed for themselves a polmostos

a gentile official,

one,

and

said to him: Go and bring us oil worth

measures,

one hundred myriad

maneh.

He went

that gentile

to Jerusalem

to bring the oil;

they said to him

the Jewish inhabitants of Jerusalem:

Go to Tyre,

where you will find so much oil.

That gentile went

to

Tyre; they said to him

the people of Tyre:

Go to Gush Halav—

which was in the portion of Asher—where you will find so much oil.

That gentile went

to

Gush Halav; they said to him

the local inhabitants:

Go to so-and-so,

with him you will find oil.

That gentile went

to

his house

of that individual,

but did not find him

at home.

They said to him

the members of the household:

He is in the field.

That gentile went

and

found

that individual

digging [

digging and hoeing]

beneath his olive trees,

even though he was wealthy.

He said—

the gentile asked—

to him,

the gentile said to that individual:

Do you have oil worth one hundred myriad

maneh

that I need?

He said to him,

the Jew to the gentile:

Yes!

But

wait for me until I finish my work.

The gentile waited

until

he finished

the Jew his

work; after he finished his work, he slung

that individual

his tools behind him [

he placed his work tools behind his back],

and went along gathering stones [

he was clearing stones from the field], and as a result he appeared to the gentile to be poor.

On the way he said to him:

Why,

do you have oil worth one hundred myriad!?

I imagine that the Jews who sent me to you have made a fool of me

by sending me to you.

When he arrived

the Jew

at his city, his maidservant brought him

the Jew’s

small kettle

of hot water, and he washed his hands and feet in it,

and additionally

she brought him a golden cup full of oil, and he dipped his hands and feet in it.

To fulfill what is stated

concerning Asher’s portion, “

and he dips his foot in oil.”

After they had eaten

both of them

and drunk, he measured out for him

the Jew

oil amounting to one hundred myriad manehs

as he had requested.

He said to him [

the Jew asked the gentile]:

Perhaps [

perhaps]

you need more

oil?

He said to him

the gentile to the Jew:

Yes! But I do not have the money

to buy more oil.

He said to him

the Jew to the gentile:

If you want to take

more oil,

take it

for yourself,

and I will come with you and collect its price

for the additional oil.

And indeed,

he measured out for him

another

eighteen myriad manehs of oil

in addition.

They said: That man did not leave [

that gentile agent]

a horse, a mule, a camel, or a donkey anywhere in the Land of Israel that he did not hire

to transport upon them the great quantity of oil he had purchased.

When

that gentile

arrived at his city, the people of his city went out to praise him

for having fulfilled his mission in the best possible manner.

He said to them

the gentile to the people of his city:

Do not praise me, but rather this one

the Jew

who came with me, who measured out for me one hundred myriad manehs of oil, and behold

he

is my creditor for eighteen myriad manehs

in addition.

To fulfill what is stated [

Proverbs 13] “

There is one who acts rich

yet has nothing, and one who acts poor yet has great wealth”:

there is one who presents himself as wealthy, but is in fact completely lacking, and there is one who presents himself as poor, yet possesses great wealth. This Jew, too, conducted himself as a poor man, for he was himself clearing stones and digging beneath his olive trees, yet he was extremely wealthy.

We learned in the Mishna:

One may bring neither from dung sites...

Anpakinon oil may not be brought, and if one brought it, it is disqualified:

And we raise an objection:

But it was taught in a beraita: One may not bring anpakinon oil,