Pesachim 55a (נה.) — the Talmud in English

Rav Pappa said:

The tanna taught only leniencies.

Every statement introduced with “There is no difference between” was said by one tanna, who listed all the laws involving leniencies, both with regard to uncertainty and with regard to labor. Likewise, when he said, “There is no difference between Tisha BeAv and a communal fast,” he also came to explain the leniency of Tisha BeAv in relation to a communal fast.

But he did not mention the stringencies here.

Therefore, with regard to bathing, which is a stringency, Tisha BeAv differs from a communal fast and is more stringent than it.

We learned in the Mishna:

“And everywhere, Torah scholars

refrain from labor. Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel says: A person should always present himself as a Torah scholar!”

And we raised a difficulty:

Is this to say that Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel holds that we are not concerned about conceit,

and therefore he permits every person to be stringent upon himself like a Torah scholar?

But

if

the Sages,

who said that specifically Torah scholars should refrain from labor,

hold that we are concerned about conceit,

and therefore not everyone may present himself as a Torah scholar.

But we hear the opposite

with regard to Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel and the Sages concerning their concern about conceit.

As we have established: A bridegroom is exempt from reciting the Shema on the first night after his wedding, because he is preoccupied with performing the mitzva.

And we learned: “A bridegroom, if he wishes to recite the Shema on the first night,”

he

recites it.

If he does not wish to interrupt even for a single moment his acceptance of the yoke of Heaven, he is permitted to do so. We are not concerned that this will appear as conceit.

Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel says: “Not everyone who wishes

to demonstrate that he cannot set aside the yoke of the kingdom of Heaven

and assume the mantle” the crown of abstinence and fear of Heaven],

the crown of abstinence and fear of Heaven]

may assume it!

He is not allowed to do so, because it appears as conceit.

It follows that their positions there are the opposite of their positions here regarding labor on Tisha BeAv. For Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel permitted every person to present himself as a Torah scholar, whereas the Sages did not permit this.

Rabbi Yohanan said: “The positions are reversed!”

The tanna who arranged the dispute between the Sages and Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel here and there switched Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel’s position with that of the Sages in one of the places.

Rav Shisha, son of Rav Idi, said:

It is always the case that

you should not reverse

their positions. Even so, there is no contradiction between here and there. He proceeds to explain:

The statement of the Sages is not difficult in relation to the statement of the Sages.

The Sages hold that

here,

on Tisha BeAv, an ordinary person who is not a Torah scholar should not refrain from labor,

since everyone engages in labor. But

if

he does not engage in labor, it appears as conceit.

But there,

with regard to reciting the Shema,

since everyone

else

who is not a bridegroom

recites

the Shema,

and he

the bridegroom

also recites it—

it does not appear as conceit!

For he is not deviating from the practice of the entire world.

The statement of Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel in relation to the statement of Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel

is

also not difficult.

For specifically

there,

with regard to reciting the Shema,

he

said that the bridegroom should not recite it,

because intent is required

when reciting the Shema.

And we are certain that

since he is preoccupied with his mitzva,

he cannot direct his mind properly.

If he recites it, he demonstrates that he is capable of proper concentration,

and it appears as conceit.

But here,

by not engaging in labor,

it does not appear as conceit.

For all those who see him refraining from labor

say: “He simply has no work!”

They will not attribute his idleness to conceit. Rather, they will say,

“Go out and see”

go and see

how many idle people there are in the marketplace.

Mishna:

We learned at the beginning of the chapter that the prohibition against performing labor on the eve of Passover until midday is dependent upon local custom.

And the Sages say: “In Judea, people performed labor on the eves of Passover until midday”.

But

in the Galilee they did not perform labor

at that time

at all.

During the night

of the fourteenth,

Beit Shammai prohibit

labor even then.

And Beit Hillel permit it until sunrise,

for the prohibition begins only during the day of the fourteenth.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: During the night, Beit Shammai prohibit and Beit Hillel permit! And we raised a difficulty:

Initially,

at the beginning of the chapter,

the tanna taught

the law concerning performing labor in the language of

custom.

As we learned: “Where it is customary not to perform labor, one may not perform labor.”

But

if

finally

in our Mishna

the tanna taught

this law in the language of

prohibition,

as we learned: “Beit Shammai prohibit.”

Rabbi Yohanan said: “This is not difficult.”

This

the Mishna at the beginning of the chapter

is Rabbi Meir’s

view, who holds that it is merely a custom.

This

our Mishna

is Rabbi Yehuda’s

view, who holds that it is a prohibition.

As it was taught in a baraita: “Rabbi Yehuda said: In Judea, people performed labor on the eves of Passover until midday. But in the Galilee they did not perform

labor at that time

at all.”

Rabbi Meir said to him: “What proof”

what relevance does

do Judea and the Galilee have here?”

For this law is not specifically dependent upon the Galilee and Judea.

Rather,

every

place where it is customary to perform labor

at that time

one may perform labor.

And every

place where it is customary not to perform labor

there

one may not perform labor,

and everything depends upon the local custom.

And

from the fact that Rabbi Meir says that it is a custom,

it follows

that Rabbi Yehuda

says it is a

prohibition!

For if we say that according to Rabbi Yehuda as well it is a custom, and that Rabbi Yehuda merely said that in the Galilee people were accustomed not to perform labor, in what way does Rabbi Meir disagree with him?

Rather, necessarily, according to Rabbi Yehuda it is a prohibition. That is why he distinguished between Judea and the Galilee: The inhabitants of Judea permitted performing labor until midday, whereas the inhabitants of the Galilee prohibited it. And our Mishna also follows his view. That is why it was phrased in terms of prohibition.

And we raise an objection:

Does Rabbi Yehuda hold

that

the fourteenth is permitted for performing labor

for the inhabitants of Judea?

But it was taught:

Any grain that took root after the sixteenth of Nisan, the day on which the omer offering was brought, is prohibited as hadash until the sixteenth of Nisan of the following year. Then the omer permits it.

Rabbi Yehuda says: “One who weeds

weeds from among the grain

on the thirteenth

of Nisan,

and a stalk is uprooted by his hand

together with the weeds, and he wishes to replant it,

should plant it in mud

so that it will take root quickly, before the sixteenth of Nisan, the day on which the omer offering is brought.

But

he should not plant it in parched soil

dry earth, because the grain does not take root quickly there. If it does not take root by the sixteenth of Nisan, the omer will not permit it, and he will have to wait for the following omer.

And we infer: Specifically

on the thirteenth

of Nisan did we learn, “One who weeds,”

may

weed then. But

on the fourteenth he may not

weed.

Necessarily, the reason is the prohibition against performing labor, for one may not perform the labor of weeding on the eve of Passover.

And one cannot say that the reason he mentioned one who weeds on the thirteenth is that planting it on the fourteenth would be of no benefit, because it would not have enough time to take root before the sixteenth.

For

after all,

we

have heard Rabbi Yehuda say: “Any graft that does not take hold

within

three days will no longer take hold!”

It is evident that three days suffice for the stalk to take root again. Therefore, if he plants it on the fourteenth, there are three days until the time of the omer offering.

And we conclude the objection:

And if it enters your mind that the fourteenth is permitted for performing labor, why do I need

to plant it specifically on the

thirteenth

of Nisan?

He could plant it even on the fourteenth.

For there is

until the time of the omer offering part of the day of

the fourteenth

the fourteenth,

and

the day of

the fifteenth

the fifteenth,

and part

of the day of

the sixteenth

the sixteenth.

Rava said:

The statement that Rabbi Yehuda did not permit weeding on the fourteenth

was taught with regard to the Galilee,

where the inhabitants prohibit performing labor then, as stated in the Mishna.

And we raise another objection:

But there is the night

of the fourteenth, during which Beit Hillel permit labor. Why, then, did he specifically mention “one who weeds on the thirteenth”?

Rav Sheshet said:

That

baraita is in accordance with Beit Shammai,

who prohibit labor even on the night of the fourteenth.

Rav Ashi said: In fact,

Rabbi Yehuda stated this law even

in accordance with Beit Hillel.

And the reason it teaches, “one who weeds on the thirteenth,” is

because people do not customarily weed at night.

Ravina said: In fact, even in Judea

Rabbi Yehuda said this, that one plants it specifically on the thirteenth and not on the fourteenth.

And it is not because of the prohibition against performing labor, but because of the prohibition of hadash.

And as for the difficulty raised against this—that there are three days until the omer during which the stalk could take root—it can be said that we do not have three complete days from the fourteenth until the time the omer is offered.

For when he plants it on the fourteenth, there is only part of that day. And even from the sixteenth we have only part of the day, since the omer is offered in the middle of it.

And with regard to taking root—

only

one

“part of the day is like the whole day”

do we say.

For example, if he plants it at the end of the thirteenth, it is properly considered as three days until the omer: the entire fourteenth, the entire fifteenth, and part of the sixteenth.

But

two

“parts of the day are like the whole day”

we do not say.

Therefore, if he planted it after the fourteenth had begun, it will not take root by the time of the omer.

Mishna:

Rabbi Meir says: “Any labor that one began before the fourteenth of Nisan, he may complete on the fourteenth.”

Even in a place where people do not perform labor on the fourteenth, if he began it while it was permitted, he may complete it.

But he may not begin it

the labor

for the first time on the fourteenth, even though he can complete it

before midday.

And the Sages say: “Three

types of

craftsmen may perform

their

labor

on the

eves of Passover until midday. And these are: tailors, barbers, and launderers!”

The reason will be explained in the Gemara.

Rabbi Yosei ben Yehuda says: “Even shoemakers”

shoemakers—may perform labor then.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: Any labor that one began before the fourteenth, he may complete on the fourteenth.

They raised a dilemma before them:

Did we learn specifically of labor that is

for the needs of the Festival,

which he may complete if he began it while permitted?

But

if it is

not for the needs of the Festival, even

to

complete it as well they did not

permit?

Or perhaps,

even when

it

is

not for the needs of the Festival, we learned

that he may complete it.

But

labor that is

for the needs

of the Festival, even to

begin

the labor on the fourteenth

we may begin, since even in a place where it is customary not to perform labor, this applies only to labor not required for the Festival.

because even in a place where the custom is not to perform labor, that applies only to labor not needed for the festival.

Or perhaps, whether

the labor is

for the needs of the Festival,

or

whether

it is

not for its needs, only if he began before the time of the prohibition may he

specifically if he began before the time of the prohibition,

complete it—not

complete it. But

beginning

on the fourteenth,

no, one may not begin under any circumstances.

under any circumstances.

And we resolve the dilemma:

Come and hear: “But he may not begin initially

to perform labor

on the fourteenth.”

And he may not make then

even a small

belt,

or even a small

or

head covering

a kerchief for covering the head,

either.

And we raise a difficulty:

What

does “even

a small belt” come to teach us?

What,

does it not mean, even these

a belt and a head covering,

which are for the needs of the Festival,

specifically

to complete them, no

did they permit him to complete them if he began their production before the fourteenth. But

to begin

making them on the fourteenth,

no,

they did not permit it.

And

by inference

we learn from this that specifically these items, which are for the needs of the Festival, may be completed. But labor

that

is

not for the needs of the Festival, we may not complete either

even if one began it before the fourteenth.

And we reject this:

No,

that is not proof from there.

In fact,

it can be said

that

even

labor not for the needs of the Festival may also be completed.

And the belt and head covering are also not for the needs of the Festival.

And what

is the novelty in mentioning a belt and a head covering with the expression

“even”?

It teaches us that

even these as well

may not be begun, and

even though they are small

small items

they are.

It might have entered your mind to say

that since they are made in a short time,

beginning them is their completion; we might also begin making them

, since there is no distinction between beginning and completing them.

It comes to teach us

that even in their case, they permitted only completion.