Yoma 81b — the Talmud in English

Rav Pappa said: ![](pamud.bmp "

Exact page location")

itself

Yom Kippur

is called “Shabbat” itself, as it is written

in it

“You shall observe your Shabbat”.

And since the affliction is called Shabbat, this is like the day of Shabbat both with regard to punishment and with regard to warning.

And we raised it:

Granted, Rav Pappa did not say in accordance with Rav Aḥa bar Yaakov

because

the verse

“a Shabbat of complete rest,”

which is written in the body itself

of Yom Kippur,

is preferable

to learn from it.

But Rav Aḥa bar Yaakov—

what is the reason he did not say in accordance with Rav Pappa?

And we answer:

he needs it

for this verse

as it was taught:

Leviticus 23

“And you shall afflict your souls on the ninth of the month”.

One might think he should begin and afflict himself on the ninth—

the verse says: “In the evening”.

After the ninth day has already passed.

If [it says] “in the evening,”—

one might think from when it grows dark—

the verse says: “On the ninth,”

before it grows dark.

How so?

He begins and afflicts himself while it is still day.

And

from here

the principle may be learned

that one adds from the non-sacred to the sacred.

And I have only

that one adds from the non-sacred to the sacred

at its onset.

At its departure—

from where

that one adds?

The verse says: “From evening to evening,”

that the fast should continue until the following evening.

And I have

that one adds from the non-sacred to the sacred

only

on

Yom Kippur.

Shabbatot—

from where?

The verse says

the surplus of the verse

“You shall observe”.

I have only Shabbatot; festivals—

from where?

The verse says

another surplus

“your Shabbat.”

How so?

Every place where “cessation” is stated, one adds from the non-sacred to the sacred.

And we raised it further:

and the tanna

above,

who

expounds

“essence, essence”

to exclude the addition from karet, and from this exclusion the mitzva of addition is to be learned, for by excluding the verse from punishment, it reveals that there is a prohibition in the matter,

this “on the ninth of the month”—

what does he do with it?

And we answer:

he needs it for that which Ḥiyya bar Rav of Difti taught.

For Ḥiyya bar Rav of Difti taught: “And you shall afflict your souls on the ninth.”

But does one fast on the ninth?

Is it not on the tenth that one fasts?

Rather, this is to tell you: Whoever eats and drinks on the ninth—

the verse considers it for him as though he fasted on the ninth and the tenth.

We learned in the Mishna: One ate foods that are unfit for eating.

Rava said: One who chewed

peppers, chewing them in an atypical manner,

on Yom Kippur—

is exempt.

And likewise, one who

chewed ginger on Yom Kippur—

is exempt.

An objection was raised

to Rava’s exempting one who chewed peppers on Yom Kippur:

For it was taught:

Rabbi Meir would say: From the implication of what is stated

Leviticus 19

“And you shall treat its foreskin as forbidden, its fruit,”

do I not know that it is a fruit tree?

Rather, what does “a fruit tree” come to teach?

A tree whose wood and fruit have the same taste.

You must say—

this is peppers,

for the low bush on which they grow is considered a tree subject to the law of orla, and it is not a vegetable exempt from orla.

And the verse came

to teach you that peppers are subject to orla,

and do not say that the pepper tree is a vegetable, since it is a low bush.

And

the verse also teaches you that

the Land of Israel lacks nothing.

As it is stated

Deuteronomy 8

“You shall lack nothing in it.”

And it is demonstrated that peppers are fit for eating from the fact that the law of orla applies to them, which applies only to a fruit tree.

And we answer:

There is no difficulty.

This—

with

a fresh pepper,

which is moist,

fit for eating; one is liable for it.

And this—

for which one is exempt when eating it—

with a dried one,

which is unfit for eating.

Ravina said to Marimar

How did Rava say that one who chewed ginger on Yom Kippur is exempt?

But Rav Naḥman said: This “himilta,”

a cooked dish made from crushed ginger spices mixed with honey,

which comes from the house of the Indians,

which comes from the land of Cush,

is permitted,

it is permitted to eat it, and there is no concern regarding it either because of the cooking of gentiles, since ginger is also eaten raw, without cooking [and they decreed only concerning something that is fit to be eaten only when cooked], and likewise there is no concern because of the prohibited residue of gentiles, since it imparts a flavor that impairs.

And we recite over it: “Who creates the fruit of the earth”!

And it is demonstrated that ginger is fit for eating as it is, and if so, why is one not liable for eating it on Yom Kippur?

And we answer:

There is no difficulty.

This—

with a fresh one,

when it is moist, it is fit for eating.

And this with a dried one,

which is unfit for eating.

The Sages taught: One who ate

on Yom Kippur

reed leaves

which are unfit for eating—

is exempt.

One who ate

grape shoots—

is liable.

What are these grape shoots?

Rabbi Yitzḥak of Migdal said: All those that sprouted from Rosh Hashanah until Yom Kippur,

for they are still young and tender. But if they sprouted before Rosh Hashanah, they are already hard and are unfit for eating.

And Rav Kahana said:

Those that sprouted

for the entire thirty days

are still fit for eating.

It was taught in accordance with Rabbi Yitzḥak of Migdal: One who ate reed leaves—

is exempt, and grape shoots—

is liable.

What are these grape shoots?—

All those that sprouted from Rosh Hashanah until Yom Kippur.

We learned in the Mishna:

One who drank brine or fish sauce is exempt.

And the Gemara infers:

This

one who drank

vinegar—

is liable.

Who is the author of the Mishna?—

It is Rabbi.

For it was taught: Rabbi says: Vinegar restores the soul.

Rav Giddel bar Menashe of Birei de-Narash expounded: The halakha is not in accordance with Rabbi,

and vinegar does not restore the soul.

The following year

afterward,

everyone went out; they diluted

water in vinegar in order to weaken its sourness,

and drank vinegar

vinegar mixed with water.

Rav Giddel heard, and became angry.

He said: Suppose that I said

that vinegar does not restore the soul, with regard to

after the fact,

so that one is not liable to bring an offering, but to permit drinking it

ab initio—

did I say that?

And further,

suppose that I said

regarding vinegar

a little,

a small amount, that it does not restore the soul.

But drinking vinegar

a great deal,

in a large measure—

did I say

that it does not restore the soul in a large quantity?

And further,

suppose that I said,

regarding vinegar

undiluted,

without a mixture of water.

Vinegar

diluted

with water—

did I say

that it does not restore the soul?!