Moed Katan 4a (ד.) — the Talmud in English

that enters the seventh year

meaning, one may not plow on the eve of the Sabbatical Year with plowing that will benefit the seventh year.

And

likewise,

the harvest of the Sabbatical Year that extends into the conclusion of the Sabbatical Year

, produce that reached one-third of its growth during the Sabbatical Year is subject to the laws of the Sabbatical Year, even if it is harvested in the eighth year.

Rabbi Yishmael says:

The entire verse is always speaking about Shabbat.

And the phrase “and with plowing and harvesting you shall rest” comes to teach us:

Just as plowing

is always plowing of

permitted activity

, as we find no mitzva to plow,

so too harvesting

that is prohibited on Shabbat is only harvesting of

permitted activity.

The harvesting of the omer, which is a mitzva, is excluded

, as even if one finds produce already ready for harvesting, it is a mitzva to harvest it; and we learn from here that the mitzva of harvesting the omer overrides Shabbat [unlike plowing, and likewise sowing, since if one finds a field already sown, it is valid for the omer].

We see that Rabbi Akiva, who derives from this verse a law concerning the Sabbatical Year, derives the additional period of the Sabbatical Year from this verse. And it is necessarily the case that there is no halakha given to Moses at Sinai concerning the additional period.

And we answer:

Rather, said Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak: When

the halakhot were learned

from Moses at Sinai, they were

to permit

plowing for the sake of a young planting called a

young tree.

That is, to permit plowing for ten young trees in an orchard-field of one se’a.

Whereas

the verses

, from which we learned the additional period of thirty days, came

to prohibit

plowing in an ordinary orchard-field, which is called a

mature field.

And because the prohibition of the additional period in a mature field is of Torah origin, we needed the halakha given to Moses at Sinai to permit plowing during the additional period of the Sabbatical Year for “ten young trees.”

We still raise an objection:

And since

we have heard

the halakha permitting a young planting

, permitting plowing during the additional period of the Sabbatical Year for ten young trees,

is it not automatically

evident from it that plowing for the sake of a

mature field is prohibited

during the additional period? And if so, why do I need a verse concerning the additional period?!

And we answer:

Rather, the halakha

came

for Rabbi Yishmael.

According to him, the additional period of the Sabbatical Year cannot be derived from the verses, since the phrase “with plowing and harvesting” is needed to permit harvesting the omer on Shabbat; and we therefore require a halakha given to Moses at Sinai to prohibit the additional period of the Sabbatical Year.

And the fact that we seek to derive the additional period of the Sabbatical Year from

verses

applies specifically

according to Rabbi Akiva

, who derives the additional period of the Sabbatical Year from the latter part of the verse. And Rabbi Akiva was unaware of a halakha given to Moses at Sinai concerning this matter.

We offer another answer to the question of how Rabban Gamliel and his court could nullify the additional period of the Sabbatical Year:

And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Rabban Gamliel and his court found a basis in Torah law

for

nullifying it

, although the halakha given to Moses at Sinai permitting plowing for the sake of saplings during the additional period of the Sabbatical Year would seemingly indicate a prohibition with regard to “mature fields.”

What is the reason

? From where did they find a basis for this in the Torah?

They derived

this through a gzera shava

: “sabbath, sabbath,”

“the land shall observe a sabbath,”

from the Sabbath of Creation.

Just as there

, with regard to the Sabbath of Creation, only

it

itself

is prohibited

from labor, but

before it and after it are permitted

to engage in labor ,

so too here

, with regard to the sabbath of the land, only

it

, the seventh year itself,

is prohibited

from labor, but

before it and after it are permitted.

And from here they derived from the Torah that there is no prohibition against agricultural labor during the additional period of the Sabbatical Year, not even during the thirty days before Rosh HaShana.

Rav Ashi challenged this:

For

the one who says

that

the halakha

prohibits plowing during the thirty days before Rosh HaShana, is it possible that

a gzera shava can uproot a halakha!?

And

likewise, for

the one who says

that

a verse

is the source from which we derive the additional period—is it possible that

a gzera shava

can uproot a verse!?

After all, no person may formulate a gzera shava on his own, and a gzera shava transmitted by tradition cannot contradict either a verse or a halakha given to Moses at Sinai!

Rather, said Rav Ashi

as another answer to the question of how they nullified the additional period:

Rabban Gamliel and his court held in accordance with Rabbi Yishmael, who said: The halakha

given to Moses at Sinai

was learned by tradition

concerning the additional period, and it is not derived from the verse “with plowing and harvesting you shall rest.”

And

however,

when the halakha was learned

to prohibit the additional period, it applied only

when the Temple was standing, analogous to the water libation

, which applies only when the Temple is standing; we derive the two laws from one another.

But when the Temple is not standing, it was not

stated as a halakha that the additional period is prohibited. Therefore Rabban Gamliel and his court could nullify it.

We learned in the Mishna:

But one may not

irrigate

from rainwater, and

one may not

from cistern water

, which must be drawn from the pit with a bucket.

And we raise a question about this:

Granted, cistern water

is prohibited for irrigation because

there is excessive exertion

in drawing it from a deep pit.

But rainwater

collected beside the field, for which one need only open an opening to a channel, through which the water irrigates the field on its own—

what exertion is there

? And why is it prohibited?!

The Gemara offers two answers:

1.

Rabbi Ila said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: This is a decree concerning rainwater because of cistern water.

That is, even in a place where there is no concern that the rainwater will stop, and there is no reason to issue a decree on account of irrigation with the rainwater itself [and there is no exertion in irrigating with rainwater], nevertheless they prohibited irrigating with it, lest one also irrigate with cistern water, for which irrigation involves exertion. There is a similarity between them, in that both are collected beside the field, and both consist of rainwater.

2.

Rav Ashi said:

We are concerned that

the rainwater itself

will become cistern water.

Perhaps one will irrigate with it until the rainwater diminishes, and one will no longer be able to irrigate through the channel without exertion, and will come to draw the water with exertion. But there is no reason to prohibit all irrigation with rainwater out of concern that one might err and irrigate with cistern water located in a pit.

The Gemara explains:

And they disagree concerning

that

which Rabbi Zeira said.

Rabbi Zeira said.

As Rabbi Zeira said that Rabba bar Yirmeya said that Shmuel said: With regard to rivers that draw water from lakes—

it is permitted to irrigate from them during the intermediate days of the Festival.

One

, Rav Ashi, who does not issue a decree concerning rainwater because of the possibility that one may come to use cistern water from a pit,

holds in accordance with Rabbi Zeira

, who did not issue a decree concerning lakes because of cistern water.

And the other

, Rabbi Ila in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan, who issued a decree concerning rainwater because of cistern water, and prohibited it even when there is no concern that the water will diminish,

does not hold in accordance with Rabbi Zeira

, since Rabbi Yoḥanan prohibited irrigation in every case, whereas Rabbi Zeira permits it.

The central matter: Rabbi Zeira said that Rabba bar Yirmeya said that Shmuel said: With regard to rivers that draw water from lakes, it is permitted to irrigate from them during the intermediate days of the Festival.

Rabbi Yirmeya raised an objection to Rabbi Zeira

from that which is stated in the Mishna:

“But not from rainwater and not from cistern water,”

which indicates that we are concerned that the water will stop.

He said to him

, Rabbi Zeira:

Yirmeya, my son,

my son,

these are the lakes in Babylonia

from which I permitted irrigation.

They are like water that never stops

, and there is no concern about exertion. And that which we learned in the Mishna, that one may not irrigate with rainwater, refers to water that does stop, leading to cistern water. This is in accordance with Rav Ashi.

The Sages taught: Reservoirs

, unconstructed pools,

and constructed pools

, even if they

filled with water

from the rains

on the eve of the Festival, one may not irrigate from them during the intermediate days of the Festival.

But if a water channel passed between them

, between the pools,

it is permitted

to irrigate from them, even though they may become depleted, since there is no concern about exertion, as one can irrigate from the water channel.

Rav Pappa said: And this

, that the water channel permits irrigation from the pools, applies only

when most of that field drinks from that water channel

at one time.

But if the water channel is insufficient to irrigate most of the field at once, we are concerned that the pools will become depleted, and it is prohibited to irrigate from them, lest one come to exert himself and draw water.

Rav Ashi

disagrees, and

said: Even if most of the field does not drink

at once from the water channel, it is permitted to irrigate from the pools when a channel passes between them.

Since

it

continues to flow

at all times, filling and transferring water,

and comes

to the entire field, we are not concerned that he will exert himself to bring water from another channel, since the

owner says

,

if it does not drink in one day—

it will drink in two or three days.

The Sages taught:

If there were two irrigated fields, one elevated and another beside it at a lower level; and in the elevated field there was a spring from which it was irrigated, while beside the lower field they made

a pool that

was

drips water

, receiving drops

from

the water used to irrigate the

upper irrigated field

—

this pool may be used to irrigate another irrigated field

, the lower one, which is beside it.

And we challenge this:

But

the pool

is liable to stop

its water, and there is concern that he will exert himself to bring water from another place!?

And we answer:

Rabbi Yirmeya said: It is still

dripping

, as water continues to drip from the upper irrigated field, and it certainly has not stopped.

Ravina and Rabbah Tosafa were traveling along the road.

.