Previous daf

1) The Tana of the Beraisa currently under discussion speaks about an Esrog tree which was entering from the *third* year into the *fourth*, and not from the *second* year into the *third*, as in other places - to teach us that an Esrog-tree is sensitive to touch, which we can see, in turn, from the fact that since in the Sh'mitah-year everyone enters the field and touches the tree, it does not produce fruit until the third year.

2)

(a) When Rebbi Yochanan asked Rebbi Yanai which Sh'vat is the New Year for an Esrog tree - he meant to ask him whether Sh'vat should be understood colloquially, or whether it refers to the month after the Tekufah of Teives (which may occur later than the regular Sh'vat).

(b) Rebbi Yanai replied that it should be understood colloquially.

(c) Likewise, the New Year for an Esrog in a leap-year - is Sh'vat, and not Adar?

(a) According to Rabah, a sixth-year Esrog entering into the seventh year is Patur both from Ma'aser and from Biy'ur - and a seventh-year Esrog entering the eighth year is Patur from Ma'aser, but Chayav Biy'ur. Note: In this Sugya, the Din of Biy'ur incorporates that of Shevi'is (i.e. whatever is *Patur* from Biy'ur, is *not* subject to the Din of Shevi'is, and whatever is *Chayav* Biy'ur, *is*).

(b) The Seifa of Rabah's statement suggests that Rabah goes after the budding of the Esrog with regard to Shevi'is. Abaye concludes that Rabah does not have a Safek whether by Shmitah, we go after the budding or the picking - because, if he did, then why in the Reisha, is the Esrog Patur from Biy'ur? It should be Chayav, because maybe we go after the picking, making it a seventh-year Esrog?

(c) He assumes that, by Ma'aser, Rabah goes after the picking.

(d) The problem Abaye then has with the Reisha - is that, if that is so, why is a sixth-year Esrog entering into the seventh year Patur from Ma'aser?

(a) Why is the sixth-year Esrog Patur from Ma'aser, aske Abaye? Seeing as regarding Sh'mitah, we go after the budding (making this a sixth-year Esrog) there is no reason to exempt it from Ma'aser?

(b) Rabah answers that it is exempt - because, due to the fact that it is the Sh'mitah year, and everyone enters the field and feels the Esrog tree, treating it as if it was Hefker, the Chachamim gave it a Din of Hefker (perhaps because the owner himself despairs from obtaining its fruit), and Hefker is Patur from Ma'aser.

(a) Rav Hamnuna agrees with every aspect of Rabah's statement except for the one we just discussed. In his opinion - a sixth-year Esrog entering into the seventh year is Chayav be'Ma'aser, because we go after the picking, and Chazal did not give it a Din Hefker.

(b) Rebbi Shimon ben Yehudah learns in the Reisha of a Beraisa like the Reisha of Rabah (posing a Kashya on Rav Hamnuna). And he says in the Seifa that a seventh-year Esrog entering the eighth year - is Patur both from Ma'aser and from Biy'ur (posing a Kashya on both Rabah and Rav Hamnuna).

(c) Rebbi Shimon ben Yehudah's reason for exempting an Esrog from Ma'aser in the Reisha - is the same as that of Rabah (because it is Hefker - as we explained earlier).

(d) Even though he goes after the budding of an Esrog (regarding Shevi'is), he nevertheless exempt it from Biy'ur in the Seifa - because, in his opinion, the Pasuk that speaks about Biy'ur ("ve'li'Vehemtecha ve'la'Chayah ... ") refers exclusively to fruit that not only *grew* in the seventh year, but that was also *picked* in the seventh year.

6)

(a) Rebbi Yossi, in a Beraisa, cites the opinion of Avtulmus quoting five Elders regarding Esrog - who says that an Esrog goes after the time of picking regarding Ma'aser.

(b) He then cites the opinion of 'our Rebbes' who concluded in Usha that by Esrog, we go after the picking, both with regard to Ma'aser and with regard to Shevi'is. To accommodate the Rebbes who mentioned Shevi'is - we add to the words of Avtulmus 've'Achar Chanatah li'Shevi'is'.

(c) Rabah and Rav Hamnuna will now hold - like Avtulmus, who goes after Chanatah by Shevi'is, though they argue as to whether Avtulmus will exempt the sixth year Esrog which enters the seventh year, as we explained above.

(a) Rebbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish maintain that a sixth-year Esrog that enters the seventh year is considered a sixth-year Esrog - it is Patur from Biy'ur and Chayav Ma'aser - like Rav Hamnuna.

(b) When Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael, he added that even if the Esrog had only grown to the size of a k'Zayis in the sixth year, and then went on to grow to the size of a loaf in the seventh, it is Chayav Ma'asros (because we go after the budding).

(c) The Tana of another Beraisa cites the criterion of a tree (regarding Ma'asros) as being whether the fruits budded *before* Tu bi'Sh'vat or *afterwards*. Rebbi Nechemyah confines this to a tree which produces *two* 'B'reichos' (batches) annually, but a tree which produces only *one* batch goes after the picking. But since when does the Lashon 'B'reichos' apply to a tree? 'B'reichos' is a term that is confined to birds? So we amend the Beraisa to '*ke'Ein* Sh'tei B'reichos' and *ke'Ein* B'reichah Achas' ('*like* two batches' [by birds], and '*like* one batch').

(d) Besides a date-palm and an olive-tree - Rebbi Nechemyah is also referring to a carob-tree.

(a) Rebbi Yochanan cites the Minhag as being like Rebbi Nechemyah - by a carob-tree (though this is not exclusive - see Tosfos DH 'Nahagu').

(b) 'B'nos Shu'ach' are white figs.

(c) The Tana in Shevi'is says about them - that the Din of She'vi'is only applies in the second year of the cycle, because it takes the fruit that *budded* in the Shmitah three years to ripen (a Kashya on Rebbi Yochanan, who said that the Minhag is like Rebbi Nechemyah, who goes after the *picking*).

(d) When Rebbi Yochanan heard Resh Lakish's Kashya, he was silent.

(a) Rebbi Aba ha'Kohen expressed surprise at Rebbi Yochanan's silence - because Rebbi Yochanan might have answered that he ruled like Rebbi Nechemyah, so how could they ask him from the Rabbanan?

(b) Rebbi Yossi ha'Kohen however, justified Rebbi Yochanan's silence - by pointing out that Rebbi Yochanan should not have cited that the Minhag was like Rebbi Nechemyah, against the majority opinion of the Rabbanan?

(c) We reject the contention that Rebbi Yochanan did not *rule* like Rebbi Nechemyah, but merely cited the *Minhag* - on the grounds that if the Rabbanan forbid going after the picking, how can one possibly follow a Minhag that contravenes this?

(d) We finally justify Rebbi Yochanan's statement - by differentiating between Shevi'is, which is d'Oraysa (and by which we therefore go after the budding, and Ma'aser of carobs, which is merely de'Rabbanan, and by which we can therefore go after the picking. Note: We have differentiated between the Din of Shevi'is and that of Ma'aser throughout the Sugya, and this final piece appears to explain why they made this distinction. The problem with that is Rebbi Yochanan includes olive-trees in his ruling, and giving Ma'aser from olives is d'Oraysa. See Rashash DH 'Ma'aser Charuvin'.

(a) We cannot accept the contention that Resh Lakish did not perhaps ask the Kashya - because the fact is that he *did*.

(b) At the end of the day, Rebbi Aba ha'Kohen was not certain how to interpret Rebbi Yochanan's silence - wheather he was silent because he had no answer to Resh Lakish's Kashya, or whether it was because the answer was so obvious, that he did not consider it worth answering.