גיטין דף סא ע"א

Everyone agrees;^[1] where they disagree is over a hook and over lines of hooks.

כ"ע לא פליגי - Since [the trap] has an inner space, the owner's vessel acquires [the catch] for him, and taking it is outright theft.

לחי - A fishhook, ayim in the vernacular (that is, a fishhook; more precisely, the barb at the end of the line).

קוקרי - Other snares and devices: they stretch a long cord in the river and string needles [hooks] along all of it.

"A find of a deaf-mute, an imbecile, etc. Rabbi Yosei says: It is outright theft":^[2]

Rav Chisda said: "Outright theft" by Rabbinic law.

מדבריהם - Even according to Rabbi Yosei it is not theft by Torah law.

What practical difference does it make?

נפקא מינה - [What difference does it make] from Rabbi Yosei's ruling?

To extract it from him through the judges.

להוציאו בדיינים - According to the Rabbis it cannot be extracted through the judges. But even according to Rabbi Yosei it is not real theft, so as to disqualify him from testimony or to make him transgress a negative commandment.

"A poor man who knocks [olives] down from the top of an olive tree, what is beneath him, etc.":^[3]

A Tanna taught: If he gathered them and placed them [on the ground] with his hand, it is outright theft.

אם ליקט ונתן - [If he gathered them and placed them] on the ground with his hand: since they reached his hand, it is outright theft.

Rav Kahana was going to Hutzal. He saw a certain man throwing ufyei, and dates were falling. [Rav Kahana] went and gathered [the dates] and ate.

אופיי - Sticks.

The man said to him: "See, master, that I knocked them down with my own hands."

[Rav Kahana] said to him: "You are from the place of Rabbi Yoshiyah."

רבי יאשיה - He was from Hutzal.

מאתריה דר' יאשיה אתה - That is why you are expert in the laws, for he expounds them in public and makes them known.

He applied to him the verse (Mishlei 10:25): "And the righteous man is the foundation of the world."

"We do not prevent poor gentiles from [taking] leket, shikchah and pe'ah, because of the ways of peace":^[4]

The Rabbis taught: We support poor gentiles along with poor Jews, visit sick gentiles along with sick Jews, and bury dead gentiles along with dead Jews, because of the ways of peace.

עם מתי ישראל - Not in Jewish graves; rather, we attend to them if they are found slain together with Jews.

MISHNAH. A woman may lend her friend who is suspected regarding Shevi'is^[5] a sieve, a sifter, millstones and an oven,

מתני' על השביעית - [Suspected of] keeping Shevi'is produce and storing it away from the time of bi'ur onward.

but she may not sort or grind together with her.

לא תבור ולא תטחון עמה - To help her, because it is forbidden to assist transgressors with one's hands at the time of the transgression.

The wife of a chaver may lend the wife of an am ha'aretz^[6] a sieve and a sifter, and may sort, grind and sift together with her;

ובוררת וטוחנת כו' - In the Gemara it asks: why [is this allowed]? She is suspected regarding tithes!

בזמן שהיא טמאה כו' - We do not have this reading [in the Mishnah]; we have it in the beraisa, in the Gemara.

but once she puts the water in,^[7] she may not touch [anything] with her, because one may not strengthen the hands of transgressors.

אבל משתטיל את המים לא תגע - Because once she kneads it, it becomes tevel for challah, and it becomes impure through her impure utensils; and this woman is helping her knead, and it is forbidden to cause impurity to challah.

And all of these they said only because of the ways of peace.

וכולן לא אמרו - That they permitted lending them utensils and helping them, not at the time of the transgression itself, was only because of the ways of peace.

And one may strengthen the hands of gentiles in Shevi'is,^[8] but not the hands of Jews;

ומחזיקין ידי נכרים - Here it means actually helping them.

and one may greet them, because of the ways of peace.

ושואלין בשלומם - On any day, and even though he thereby places the Name of Heaven upon the gentile, for "Shalom" is a Name of the Holy One, blessed be He.

GEMARA. What is the difference between the first part and the latter part?

גמ' מאי שנא רישא - Which teaches "she may not sort," because she would be assisting those who transgress Shevi'is.

ומאי שנא סיפא - Which teaches "she may sort and grind"; but is she not assisting those who transgress [the prohibition of] tevel?^[9]

Abaye said: Most amei ha'aretz do tithe.^[10]

רוב עמי הארץ מעשרין הן - Therefore it is a mere Rabbinic concern, and because of the ways of peace it is permitted to help them. But "suspected regarding Shevi'is" implies that she is established in our eyes as suspect.

Rava said: Here we are dealing with an am ha'aretz as Rabbi Meir defines him, and [the issue is] purity and impurity, which is Rabbinic,

רבא אמר - In truth we treat them as a doubt, half and half, and it is forbidden to help them, since the transgression is a Torah one. But the Mishnah speaks of one established as tithing, and it is the am ha'aretz of Rabbi Meir, who is suspected of eating produce in impurity; and the purity of chullin is Rabbinic, for the Torah warned to eat in purity only terumah and sacrifices. Therefore it is not a Torah prohibition, and because of the ways of peace it is permitted to help them.

as it was taught: Who is an am ha'aretz? Whoever does not eat his chullin in purity; these are the words of Rabbi Meir. And the Sages say: Whoever does not tithe his produce.

But since the latter part teaches: "Once she puts the water in, she may not touch [anything] with her,"^[11] it follows that the first part is not dealing with purity and impurity!

והא מדקתני סיפא כו' - The questioner holds that the reason it is forbidden once she puts in the water is that the produce has only now become susceptible to impurity, and until now it was not susceptible.

מכלל דרישא לאו בטומאה וטהרה - That there should be any trace of a transgression of impurity, since it was not yet susceptible. And if it speaks of one trusted regarding tithes, why does it teach "And all of these they said only because of the ways of peace"?

Both the first part and the latter part are about purity and impurity: the first part concerns the impurity of chullin, and the latter part the impurity of challah.

רישא וסיפא בטומאה וטהרה - And with produce already susceptible. In the first part, as long as she has not kneaded, it is only the impurity of chullin, which is Rabbinic, and they did not decree against assisting where the ways of peace are at stake, provided she does not eat [with her].

וסיפא בטומאת חלה - Which is a Torah matter, for it is forbidden to make it impure by hand, as it is written (Bamidbar 18:8): "[I have given you] the safekeeping of My terumos": guard it.

And they raised a contradiction [from a beraisa]:^[12]

Tosfos

ליקט ונתן ביד ה"ז גזל גמור - It seems this had to be taught for the case where he plucked them with his hand and dropped them, even though they did not stay in his hand and he held them only in order to drop them.

שדי אופיי מדקלא - The Kuntres (Rashi) explains ufyei as sticks. This is difficult: how could Rav Kahana pick up [the dates] and eat? Was he not concerned for the ways of peace? It seems right as Rabbeinu Chananel explains: ufyei are palm fronds. He was throwing [them] down from the palm, and dates were falling. Rav Kahana thought the man cared not about the fruit but only about the fronds, and the man told him, "I knocked them down with my own hands," so there is real theft as well.

משאלת אשה לחברתה כו' - The latter part explains, for the Mishnah teaches "because of the ways of peace." Rabbeinu Tam^[13] finds this difficult: let it be permitted anyway, since one can attribute [the use of the utensils] to permitted grain! As we find in Tractate Shevi'is, chapter 5 (mishnah 8): Beis Shammai say one may not sell him a plowing cow in Shevi'is, and Beis Hillel permit it, because he can slaughter it. And it is further taught there (mishnah 6): These are the utensils a craftsman may not sell in Shevi'is: a plow and all the implements of the yoke, etc. This is the rule: whatever is made only for a transgression is forbidden; whatever can serve the forbidden and the permitted is permitted. One cannot say that there too it is permitted only because of the ways of peace, for "ways of peace" does not apply to a sale. Moreover, in the first chapter of Avodah Zarah (15b) [the Gemara] infers from Beis Hillel that one may sell a cow to a gentile, since we say "perhaps he bought it for slaughter." Even if "ways of peace" applies when selling to a Jew, since refusing to sell to him looks like suspecting him, it does not apply at all when selling to a gentile. Moreover, it must be that there the reason is not the ways of peace, since those cases are not listed here. Rabbeinu Tam says: here it is where it is known that she has only Shevi'is produce. Therefore, were it not for the ways of peace it would be forbidden; and in a sale, where "ways of peace" does not apply, it is forbidden where there is nothing to attribute it to. This is also implied in the Yerushalmi, which says: "I say [she borrowed] the sieve to count coins on it, the sifter to sift sand, the millstones to grind spices, the oven to store bundles of flax." This implies that it speaks of one who has no permitted grain to attribute it to. And that attribution of the Yerushalmi is not a full attribution like the cow for slaughter, for if it were, it would be permitted even without the ways of peace, as in a sale. And if you ask: according to Rabbeinu Tam, what is the Gemara's question, "What is the difference between the first part and the latter part," since [the first part] certainly deals with Shevi'is produce? One can answer: the Gemara holds that the Rabbis were stringent with the grain of suspect people as if it were certainly tevel, keeping it in its presumption.

ריחים ותנור - Regarding the wife of an am ha'aretz [the Mishnah] does not list oven and millstones, because it listed sieve and sifter, and the same applies to millstones and oven: one item tells about its fellow. Alternatively: because an oven is not usually lent, since it becomes impure and then must be broken; and since it did not list the oven, it did not list the millstones. But with one suspected regarding Shevi'is it does not become impure, since she is not suspected regarding impurity. However, this is difficult: in the chapter Ad Kamah (Bechoros 30a) we learned: one suspected regarding this and that, meaning regarding Shevi'is and regarding tithes, is suspected regarding purities. Perhaps there it means impurity of produce, but regarding bodily impurity she is not suspected.

רבא אמר בע"ה כו' - Abaye is more lenient about helping where tithes are concerned than where Rabbinic purity is concerned, as is shown shortly, and Rava the reverse. Rava too holds that most amei ha'aretz tithe, and they were lenient with demai, in the chapter Af Al Pi (Kesubos 56b) and in the chapter Bameh Madlikin (Shabbos 23a). But here he holds that although most amei ha'aretz tithe, there is still the prohibition of demai, and it is forbidden to help them. And Abaye, in the first chapter of Shabbos (13a), regarding "A zav^[14] who is a parush may not eat with a zav who is an am ha'aretz," is more concerned lest he feed him unprepared foods, even though most tithe, while Rava is not concerned.

איזהו ע"ה כל שאינו אוכל כו' - In Avodah Zarah, in the Tosefta (chapter 3), this is taught in connection with giving daughters of chaverim in marriage to an am ha'aretz: [they may give him] grown daughters, and they stipulate with him that she will not prepare pure foods on his account; Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says one need not stipulate. And it teaches after that: Who is an am ha'aretz? Whoever does not eat his chullin in purity; these are the words of Rabbi Meir. For since he tithes, there is no need to be strict and refuse to marry him to the daughter of a chaver. And the Sages permit it even if he does not tithe, and she will conduct the ways of chaverus under him. And if you ask: in the chapter Hayah Notel (Sotah 22a) Rabbi Meir says: Who is an am ha'aretz? Whoever does not recite the Shema evening and morning with its blessings; and the Sages say: whoever does not put on tefillin; Ben Azzai says: whoever has no tzitzis. It seems that there it comes to explain which am ha'aretz we do not include in a zimun, as we say in the chapter Sheloshah She'achlu (Berachos 47b), and whose lost object is not announced, as we say in the chapter Elu Ovrin (Pesachim 49b).

רישא טומאת חולין וסיפא טומאת חלה - And if you ask: because of challah, let them be forbidden already from the time of sorting, grinding and sifting, as we find in Avodah Zarah, chapter Rabbi Yishmael (56a), that one may not harvest grapes with a Jew who prepares his produce in impurity. Although there it is permitted with a gentile, with a Jew it is forbidden because it becomes tevel for terumah, even though until [the wine] goes down into the pit, or [the grain] is piled, its work is not finished for terumah. One can answer that they are not alike. Here, if she separates before kneading, it has no status of challah at all; but there the status of terumah takes effect before its work is finished, as with maaser given early, in the ears; and it is also forbidden for a fixed meal. Even so, here it is forbidden from when the water is put in, though it is not obligated in challah until it is kneaded. However, this is difficult: we also learned there, in the chapter Rabbi Yishmael (Avodah Zarah 55b): A baker who works in impurity: one may not knead or shape [dough] with him; and a beraisa teaches on it: one may not sort with him. The Yerushalmi raises the contradiction and answers: here when he moistens [the grain], there when he does not moisten. But that answer fits only Abaye, who is stricter about impurity than about demai; according to Rava it is permitted even when [the produce] is susceptible, since it is the impurity of chullin, and he forbade only from when the water is put in. Rabbeinu Tam answered: there it teaches "one who prepares produce in impurity," implying that he certainly works in impurity, and likewise "a baker who works in impurity"; therefore they were stringent from the time of harvesting and sorting. But here it deals only with one who is merely suspected. And as for the question raised here from "One may not grind for those who eat produce in impurity": "those who eat" implies only mere suspicion, and afterwards it calls him "suspected." And if you ask: in the first chapter of Niddah (6b) we say: "We learned there: if a doubt of impurity arose for her before she kneaded, it is prepared in impurity; after she kneaded, it is prepared in purity," while here we forbid from when the water is put in. One can answer: there it is different, since a doubt of impurity already arose; we are not concerned as long as it is not yet obligated in challah, and there is no loss to the kohen, since in any case the kohen will not eat that challah. But here, with pure [dough], it is forbidden from when the water is put in.

Notes

1. 1. The Mishnah taught that taking animals, birds or fish caught in another person's traps counts as theft "because of the ways of peace," while Rabbi Yosei calls it outright theft. Where the trap has an inner space that holds the catch, the owner's vessel acquires it for him (kinyan kelim), so all agree it is real theft. The dispute is only over a hook or a line of hooks, which acquire nothing.
2. 2. The Mishnah: a find picked up by a deaf-mute, an imbecile or a minor. These people have no power of acquisition by Torah law, so whoever takes the find from them is not a thief by Torah law. The Sages ruled that it counts as theft "because of the ways of peace," and Rabbi Yosei calls it outright theft. Rav Chisda now explains what Rabbi Yosei means.
3. 3. The Mishnah: a poor man beats the top of an olive tree to knock down olives left for the poor. What falls beneath him has not yet come into his hand, so he has not acquired it. Even so, taking it from him counts as theft "because of the ways of peace," and Rabbi Yosei calls it outright theft. The beraisa adds the case where he had already gathered them by hand.
4. 4. Leket (gleanings), shikchah (forgotten sheaves) and pe'ah (the corner of the field) are gifts the Torah gives to the Jewish poor. Poor gentiles are nevertheless not stopped from taking them. "The ways of peace" (darkei shalom) are Rabbinic rulings made to prevent hatred and strife between people. Every case in this sugya rests on them.
5. 5. Produce of Shevi'is, the seventh (Shemittah) year, carries sanctity. Once a species is gone from the fields, whatever of it is kept at home must be removed (bi'ur). A woman "suspected regarding Shevi'is" is suspected of keeping such produce after that time, and of grinding and baking it.
6. 6. A chaver is one who has taken on himself to be careful about separating tithes and about purity. An am ha'aretz is one who is not trusted in these matters; the Gemara records a dispute whether this means tithes or eating ordinary food (chullin) in purity.
7. 7. Once the water is put into the flour and the dough is kneaded, it becomes obligated in challah, the portion of dough given to a kohen. Challah has the status of terumah, and the Torah forbids causing it to become impure. The wife of an am ha'aretz is presumed to use impure utensils.
8. 8. Gentiles are not commanded regarding Shevi'is, so helping them work their fields involves no "strengthening the hands of transgressors." A Jew who works his field in Shevi'is is a transgressor, so one may not help him.
9. 9. Tevel is produce from which terumah and tithes have not yet been separated. It is forbidden to eat. Grain of an am ha'aretz may be tevel, so helping her prepare it could be assisting a transgression.
10. 10. Demai is produce bought from an am ha'aretz. Since most of them do tithe, the obligation to tithe it again is only a Rabbinic stringency out of doubt. For a merely Rabbinic concern the Sages allowed help because of the ways of peace.
11. 11. Food can become impure only after it has been wetted by water or one of the seven liquids (hechsher, making it susceptible). If the flour had never been wetted, the dough could not become impure at all before the water was put in.
12. 12. The contradicting beraisa continues at the top of the next amud [Gittin 61b].
13. 13. Rabbeinu Tam: Rabbi Yaakov ben Meir, Rashi's grandson and the leading Tosafist. His questions and answers run through this Tosfos.
14. 14. A zav is a man who has had a flow-type discharge and is a primary source of impurity. A parush is one who keeps to eating even his ordinary food in purity.