Moed Katan 2a (ב.) — the Talmud in English

Mishna:

1. On Chol HaMoed,

one may irrigate an irrigated field,

that is, a field situated in an elevated place, such as fields in the mountains, which cannot subsist on rainwater alone, since some of the rainwater flows downward from it and is not absorbed by it, and therefore it requires regular irrigation by a person.

And it is permitted to toil and irrigate it even

o

n Chol Ha

Moed

when labor is prohibited on it .

And the Sages permitted irrigating it, since if it were not irrigated on Chol HaMoed, a great loss would result.

A

Likewise,

o

n the year of

Shemitta,

when working the land is prohibited, the Sages permitted irrigating an irrigated field so that it would not be ruined.

And when we said that one may irrigate an irrigated field on Chol HaMoed, this means:

whether

one irrigates it

f

rom

a spring that has only just emerged,

which has only now begun to flow and has not yet carved out a channel for itself in the ground;

or fr

om the water of

a spring that did not emerge only recently,

but has already maintained a channel for itself for a long time.

That is, a person may open the irrigation channel at the place where the spring water reaches it, whether it is a new spring or an old one, so that from there the water will flow to the field.

But one may not irrigate

an irrigated field on Chol HaMoed

with rainwater,

because irrigating with it involves excessive exertion. [Even if the water flows through an irrigation channel, so that irrigating in this manner involves no exertion and resembles irrigation with springwater, which does not involve excessive exertion, nevertheless the Sages decreed that one may not irrigate with it, because there is concern that the water will diminish through the irrigation and one will come to irrigate with rainwater collected in cisterns, an act that involves exertion; this will be explained below in the Gemara.]

[Even if the water flows through an irrigation channel, so that watering in this manner involves no exertion and resembles watering from spring water, which does not involve excessive exertion, the Sages nevertheless decreed that one may not water from it. There is concern that the water will diminish through the watering, and the person will come to water from rainwater collected in pits, which involves exertion. This will be explained later in the

A

Likewise,

one may not

irrigate during Chol HaMoed

with water from a cistern,

water drawn from a deep pit in which water has collected. Drawing water from it involves considerable exertion, and therefore this is prohibited on Chol HaMoed .

2.

And one may not make

on Chol HaMoed

circular basins around grapevines,

circular trenches around the bases of grapevines, made to receive water, because making them for the first time involves excessive exertion.

3.

Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya says: One may not construct an irrigation channel for the first time on Chol HaMoed,

because constructing a new irrigation channel involves excessive exertion.

A

Likewise, one may not construct an irrigation channel for the first time

in the Sabbatical year.

The Gemara discusses the reason for the prohibition in the Sabbatical year [folio 4b].

And the Sages say:

Even

one may construct an irrigation channel for the first time in the Sabbatical year.

A

Likewise,

one may repair

irrigation channels

that have become damaged,

which have become blocked and are not sufficiently deep [for irrigation],

on Chol HaMoed.

4.

And one may repair water systems,

such as when stones have fallen into drinking wells

in the public domain, and one may clear them out,

removing the stones, pebbles, and loose soil from the water wells, but one may not exert himself to dig.

5.

And one may repair the roads,

clearing thorns from them,

and the streets,

places where the townspeople sit,

and the ritual baths.

That is, if stones and earth have fallen into them, one removes them in order to repair them and make them fit for use.

6.

And one may perform all public needs

as explained in the Gemara [folio 5a].

7.

And one marks graves,

marking them with lime so that those who eat teruma will not approach them. Applying lime does not involve excessive exertion.

8.

And the agents

of the court

also go out regarding mixed species,

to inspect the fields to see whether mixed species are growing in them and to uproot them.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: One may irrigate an irrigated field on Chol HaMoed and in the Sabbatical year, whether from a spring that has only just emerged or from an old spring.

And we raise a difficulty:

Now, it may be said

[that is, the tanna says in the Mishna]: It says that one may irrigate even

from a spring that has only just emerged,

despite the concern

that it may come

that the ground surrounding the spring may

collapse,

because the ground adjacent to the spring may collapse, since it has not yet been carved out and the spring has not yet established its channel, and nevertheless the Mishna teaches

one may irrigate

from it, and we do not fear that one will come to excessive exertion if the ground collapses and he must repair it.

If so,

from a spring that did not emerge only recently,

whose channel is already established and whose surrounding ground is stable—

is it not obvious that it will not collapse!?

Does the tanna really need to teach us that it is permitted to irrigate from it as well on Chol HaMoed? It is already included in the rule that one may irrigate from a spring that has only just emerged!

And we answer:

They said

in the study hall, to resolve the difficulty:

It was necessary,

the tanna needed to teach the law concerning both springs.

For

if he had taught

only the law of

a spring that has only just emerged,

whose surrounding ground may collapse,

I would have said

that only

here,

in the case of a spring that has only just emerged,

is it that

we say that specifically

an irrigated field may not

be irrigated because refraining from irrigation would cause a loss. But

a field dependent on rainfall,

which is in a valley and does not suffer damage without regular irrigation,

may not

be irrigated on Chol HaMoed from a spring that has only just emerged,

because it may collapse,

since there is concern that the surrounding ground may collapse and one will come to excessive exertion.

But in the case of a spring that did not emerge only recently, which

we do not fear

will collapse, I would say that even

a

field dependent on rainfall as well

may be irrigated on Chol HaMoed.

Therefore

the tanna teaches us

that

it makes no difference whether it is a spring that has only just emerged or whether it is a spring that did not emerge only recently—

only

an irrigated field may not

indeed be irrigated. But

a field dependent on rainfall may not

be irrigated at all.

The Gemara explains the meaning of “irrigated field”:

And what

is the basis

for understanding that this “

irrigated field” is

a term denoting thirst,

thirst

it is?

As it is written

in the section concerning Amalek [at the end of Parashat Ki Tavo]: “

And you were faint and weary.”

“Faint” means thirsty.

A

And there

we translate

“faint and weary” as:

“And you were thirsty and weary.”

That is, “irrigated” in the language of the Aramaic translation is “thirsty” [the letter he is substituted for the letter het], which conveys the meaning of thirst.

The Gemara continues to explain the meaning of “field dependent on rainfall”:

And what

is the basis

for understanding that this “

field dependent on rainfall” is

a term denoting settledness?

It is a settled and satisfied place that has no concern about water; the rainfall that descends in its place is sufficient for it, and it has no need for irrigation.

As it is written

in Isaiah’s prophecy of redemption: “

As a young man marries a maiden”—

your sons will marry you.

And we translate “

For just as the world is settled with a maiden”—

so shall your sons be settled within you.”

That is, just as every man’s desire is fulfilled and his mind is settled through his marriage to a maiden and through his relations with her, so shall your sons be settled within you.

This is the analogy of a “field dependent on rainfall”: it is settled through rainwater, without any need for irrigation.

And we raised this question concerning it:

Who is the tanna,

who is the tanna who taught our Mishna, maintaining that:

1.

Only

in a case

of loss, not

only then is it permitted to exert oneself during the intermediate days of a Festival, as in the irrigation of an irrigated field mentioned in our Mishna; but labor involved in irrigation for the sake of

enhancement is not

permitted. As we learned in our Mishna, a rain-fed field, which does not suffer a loss, may not be irrigated during the intermediate days of a Festival, even though it will be improved more if it is irrigated.

2.

And

this tanna likewise holds that

even in a case of loss

in which labor has been permitted,

one may not exert oneself even then,

as in the case of irrigation from rainwater, which is prohibited because of the excessive exertion involved in irrigating with it.

Rav Huna said:

the tanna of our Mishna—

it is Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov,

who taught the Mishna below.

As we learned

in the Mishna below [6b]:

Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov says: One may draw water

during the intermediate days of a Festival in a rain-fed field only

from a tree

under which there is water

to another tree,

by making a small channel between them.

Provided that he does not irrigate the field

surrounding the trees in the rain-fed field

in its entirety,

since irrigating this field is merely enhancement, and Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov held that it is prohibited to do this during the intermediate days of a Festival. If so, he is the tanna of our Mishna, who holds that one may not perform labor for mere enhancement.

The Gemara challenges Rav Huna: From where do you know that Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov, who taught the Mishna below, is also the tanna who taught our Mishna?

You may say that you heard him

in the Mishna below,

Rabbi Eliezer

ben Yaakov only with regard to

enhancement, which is not

labor permitted for the sake of enhancement.

But regarding what we learned in our Mishna, that

exertion

is prohibited even

in a case of loss—

did you hear this from him,

from Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov, who holds this way!?

Rather, Rav Pappa said: This

Mishna

whose is it?

It is Rabbi Judah.

As it is taught

in a beraita in the Tosefta:

If a spring emerges initially, one may irrigate from it even a rain-fed field; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir.

Rabbi Judah says: One may irrigate only an irrigated field whose spring has dried up,

and below it will be explained what this means.

Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya says: Neither this nor that!

His words, too, will be explained below.

Moreover,

he was more stringent and

Rabbi Judah said:

Even in an irrigated field,

a person may not divert

the

water channel toward it and irrigate his garden or his ruin during the intermediate days of a Festival,

since this involves excessive exertion.

Rav Pappa continues:

And we raised this question in explaining the beraita:

What

is meant by “an irrigated field whose spring has

dried up,”

mentioned in the beraita?

If you say that it has literally dried up,

the field

in actuality,

so that nothing grew in it and it is a fallow field—this is difficult: It cannot be rehabilitated through irrigation, so

why would one irrigate it!?

And

concerning this,

Abaye said: It is referring to a field

that

has dried up from this spring,

from which it had always been irrigated,

and another spring emerged for it,

and if it is not irrigated from that spring, it will suffer a great loss.

Nevertheless, Rabbi Judah permitted irrigating it during the intermediate days of a Festival only from the water of the new spring that had emerged for it, since this does not involve excessive exertion; but it was not permitted to divert the course of the spring toward his field.

Thus, Rabbi Judah did not permit exertion even in a case of loss, such as an irrigated field that had been irrigated until then and has now suffered a loss.

The prohibition against enhancement can also be inferred from here: The permission was stated specifically with regard to irrigating an irrigated field from the water of the spring, and not a rain-fed field.

Therefore, it is possible to establish our Mishna as following the view of Rabbi Judah.

On this basis, Rav Pappa says that our Mishna, which prohibits exertion even in a case of loss and also prohibits enhancement without excessive exertion, is in accordance with Rabbi Judah.

The Gemara now explains what was stated in that beraita:

Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya says: Neither this nor that!

That is,

it makes no difference

whether

its spring has dried up

in the irrigated field,

and it makes no difference

whether

its spring has not dried up—

a spring that emerged initially may not be used to irrigate,

but only an old spring may be used.

Since Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya prohibited irrigating an irrigated field from a new spring even when its own spring had dried up, we cannot establish our Mishna in accordance with his view.

The Gemara now challenges Rav Pappa:

And from where

do you know that Rabbi Judah prohibited even enhancement?

Perhaps

it may be said that

Rabbi Judah stated only this

in his dispute with Rabbi Meir: He said only that

an irrigated field, yes,

it is permitted to irrigate, whereas

a rain-fed field, no,

one may not irrigate it—

but

specifically when it is from

a spring that emerged initially.

For the beraita is dealing with an irrigated field whose spring has dried up and which now is to be irrigated from a new spring.