16b.1
推论
我们就到了 拉班西缅·本·迦玛列 的意思——他说:凡空隙不足四掌的,就用 视为相连 之法。因为这条 《巴拉伊塔》 若是依众拉比的意思教的,它何必把「从三掌到四掌」另列一类呢?三掌也好,四掌也好,那条 哈拉哈 是一样的:从三掌起,视为相连 之法就不用了。
-
我们就到了 拉班西缅·本·迦玛列 的意思——他说:凡空隙不足四掌的,就用 视为相连 之法。
we have arrived at the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who said: Concerning any gap less than four handbreadths wide, the principle of lavud is applied.
-
因为这条 《巴拉伊塔》 若是依众拉比的意思教的,它何必把「从三掌到四掌」另列一类呢?
As had it been taught in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis, why does the baraita list from three to four handbreadths as a separate category?
-
三掌也好,四掌也好,那条 哈拉哈 是一样的:从三掌起,视为相连 之法就不用了。
In the case of both three and four handbreadths, the halakha is one and the same: The principle of lavud does not apply from three handbreadths upward.
16b.2
解答
阿巴耶 说:头一句既依众拉比的意思,末后一句也必依众拉比的意思。众拉比也承认:凡那条 哈拉哈 许人在对着所立那一段的地方下别样种子的,那里若有四掌之地,就算作一道有分量的隔断,可以许人下种;若没有,就算不得有分量的隔断,不许下种。如此三掌的篱与四掌的篱就有分别——连众拉比也承认四掌的篱更有分量。
-
阿巴耶 说:头一句既依众拉比的意思,末后一句也必依众拉比的意思。
Abaye said: From the fact that the first clause is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis, the latter clause must also be in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis.
-
众拉比也承认:凡那条 哈拉哈 许人在对着所立那一段的地方下别样种子的,那里若有四掌之地,就算作一道有分量的隔断,可以许人下种;若没有,就算不得有分量的隔断,不许下种。
And the Rabbis concede that with regard to any case where the halakha permits sowing other species in the area opposite the standing portion, if there is an area of four handbreadths, it is considered a significant partition, which permits sowing; and if not, it is not considered a significant partition and does not permit sowing.
-
如此三掌的篱与四掌的篱就有分别——连众拉比也承认四掌的篱更有分量。
Accordingly, there is a difference between a fence of three handbreadths and one of four handbreadths, as even the Rabbis concede that a fence of four handbreadths is more significant.
16b.3
解答
拉瓦 说:末后一句既依 拉班西缅·本·迦玛列 的意思,头一句也必依 拉班西缅·本·迦玛列 的意思。拉班西缅·本·迦玛列 说空隙到四掌为止我们也用 视为相连 之法,那是就上头、离地的说的,如离墙悬着的横梁。至于下头、靠地的,那既像山羊能过去的隔断,连他也说那样不用 视为相连 之法。
-
拉瓦 说:末后一句既依 拉班西缅·本·迦玛列 的意思,头一句也必依 拉班西缅·本·迦玛列 的意思。
Rava said: From the fact that the latter clause is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, the first clause must also be in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel.
-
拉班西缅·本·迦玛列 说空隙到四掌为止我们也用 视为相连 之法,那是就上头、离地的说的,如离墙悬着的横梁。
And when Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said that we say the principle of lavud in the case of a gap up to four handbreadths wide, this applies above, off the ground, e.g., in the case of a cross beam suspended at a distance from the wall.
-
至于下头、靠地的,那既像山羊能过去的隔断,连他也说那样不用 视为相连 之法。
However, below, near the ground, it is like a partition through which goats can pass, and therefore he too agrees that we do not say the principle of lavud in that case.
16b.4
引证
革玛拉 回到「所破的与隔断所立的相等」那一争,再引一证。你来听下头这条 《巴拉伊塔》 所教的:这几面墙所围的地方,墙的大半是门与窗的,安息日在其中搬运是许的,只须所立的多过所破的。
-
革玛拉 回到「所破的与隔断所立的相等」那一争,再引一证。
The Gemara returns to the dispute with regard to a breach equal to the standing segments of a partition and cites another proof.
-
你来听下头这条 《巴拉伊塔》 所教的:这几面墙所围的地方,墙的大半是门与窗的,安息日在其中搬运是许的,只须所立的多过所破的。
Come and hear that which was taught in the following baraita: With regard to an area enclosed by these walls, in a case where most of them consist of entrance and windows, it is permitted to carry on Shabbat within the area, provided that the standing segments are greater than the breached segments.
16b.5
反驳
革玛拉 细看这条 《巴拉伊塔》 的措辞:你心里能以为它说的是墙的大半都是门与窗么?若是这样,所立的断然不多过所破的。所以当把这条 《巴拉伊塔》 改一字:这几面墙所围的地方,人在墙上多开了些门与窗的,其中搬运是许的,只须所立的多过所破的。
-
革玛拉 细看这条 《巴拉伊塔》 的措辞:你心里能以为它说的是墙的大半都是门与窗么?
The Gemara analyzes the formulation of the baraita: Can it enter your mind that the baraita is referring to a case where most of the walls are entrances and windows?
-
若是这样,所立的断然不多过所破的。
If so, the standing segments are certainly not greater than the breached segments.
-
所以当把这条 《巴拉伊塔》 改一字:这几面墙所围的地方,人在墙上多开了些门与窗的,其中搬运是许的,只须所立的多过所破的。
Rather, emend the baraita as follows: Carrying in the area enclosed by these walls, to which one added many entrances and windows, is permitted, provided that the standing segments are greater than the breached segments.
16b.6
推论
革玛拉 由此推说:所立的与所破的相等,那样所围之内的搬运就是禁的。这就把 拉夫帕帕 的意思驳倒了。革玛拉 断说:这果然是把它驳倒了。然而所行的 哈拉哈 仍依 拉夫帕帕 的意思。
-
革玛拉 由此推说:所立的与所破的相等,那样所围之内的搬运就是禁的。
The Gemara draws an inference: If the standing segments equal the breached segments, carrying is prohibited in that enclosure.
-
这就把 拉夫帕帕 的意思驳倒了。
This is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Pappa.
-
革玛拉 断说:这果然是把它驳倒了。
The Gemara concludes: Indeed, it is a conclusive refutation.
-
然而所行的 哈拉哈 仍依 拉夫帕帕 的意思。
Nevertheless, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rav Pappa.
16b.7
解答
革玛拉 奇道:既驳倒了,哈拉哈 还依他么?革玛拉 答:是的,正是这样,因为密释纳的字句细读起来是合 拉夫帕帕 的意思的。我们在密释纳里学的是这一句:只须……隔断上所破的不多过所立的。这分明见得:所破的与所立的相等,搬运是许的——正如 拉夫帕帕 所持的。
-
革玛拉 奇道:既驳倒了,哈拉哈 还依他么?
The Gemara wonders: A conclusive refutation and the halakha?
-
革玛拉 答:是的,正是这样,因为密释纳的字句细读起来是合 拉夫帕帕 的意思的。
The Gemara answers: Yes, that is the case, because the precise reading of the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rav Pappa.
-
我们在密释纳里学的是这一句:只须……隔断上所破的不多过所立的。
As we learned in the mishna the following phrase: Provided…there will not be breaches in the partition greater than the built segment.
-
这分明见得:所破的与所立的相等,搬运是许的——正如 拉夫帕帕 所持的。
This is clearly indicating that if the breached segments are equal to the built segments, carrying is permitted, as maintained by Rav Pappa.
16b.8
引密释纳
一队商旅在田野扎营,众行人要立隔断使那地于安息日许人搬运的,就用三条绳把那地围起来,一条在一条之上,第三条又在那两条之上。人可以在所围之内搬运,只须绳与绳之间不空出三掌。
-
一队商旅在田野扎营,众行人要立隔断使那地于安息日许人搬运的,就用三条绳把那地围起来,一条在一条之上,第三条又在那两条之上。
If a caravan is camped in a field, and the travelers seek to construct partitions to render the area fit for one to carry within it on Shabbat, one surrounds the area with three ropes, one above another, and a third one above the other two.
-
人可以在所围之内搬运,只须绳与绳之间不空出三掌。
One is permitted to carry within the circumscribed area provided that there will not be a gap of three handbreadths between one rope and the next.
16b.9
引密释纳
那几条绳的粗细合起来须过一掌,好叫整道隔断——三条绳连它们之间的空隙——有十掌高。
-
那几条绳的粗细合起来须过一掌,好叫整道隔断——三条绳连它们之间的空隙——有十掌高。
The measure of the ropes and their combined thickness must be greater than a handbreadth, so that the entire partition, consisting of three ropes and the empty spaces between them, will be ten handbreadths high.
16b.10
引密释纳
或者人也可以用竖立的板把那地围起来,只须板与板之间不空出三掌。
-
或者人也可以用竖立的板把那地围起来,只须板与板之间不空出三掌。
Alternatively, one may surround the area with boards that stand upright, provided that there will not be a gap of three handbreadths between one board and the next.
16b.11
引密释纳
众贤者立这一断的时候,单说的是商旅:这是 拉比犹大 的话——他以为这样的隔断,就是只有横的或只有竖的,惟在急难之时才许。不然,就须有十足的隔断。众拉比却说:密释纳里说商旅,只因他们是就眼前的常事说的,举了最常见的一样。行商旅的人素常立不起十足的隔断,所以拿绳或板把营围起来。其实密释纳里那条 哈拉哈 通于各样情形。
-
众贤者立这一断的时候,单说的是商旅:这是 拉比犹大 的话——他以为这样的隔断,就是只有横的或只有竖的,惟在急难之时才许。
When the Sages issued this ruling, they spoke exclusively of a caravan; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda, who maintains that a partition of this kind, which consists of only horizontal or vertical elements, is permitted exclusively in exigent circumstances.
-
不然,就须有十足的隔断。
Otherwise, full-fledged partitions are required.
-
众拉比却说:密释纳里说商旅,只因他们是就眼前的常事说的,举了最常见的一样。
However, the Rabbis say: They spoke of a caravan in the mishna only because they spoke in the present, citing the most typical case.
-
行商旅的人素常立不起十足的隔断,所以拿绳或板把营围起来。
Those traveling in caravans were typically unable to erect full-fledged partitions, so they would surround their camps with ropes or boards.
-
其实密释纳里那条 哈拉哈 通于各样情形。
However, the halakha in the mishna applies in all cases.
16b.12
引密释纳
密释纳又举一争:凡隔断不是经纬俱备、就是竖的横的都有的,就不算隔断:这是 拉比犹大之子拉比约西 的话。他以为竖板与横绳算不得隔断,纵在商旅急难之时也算不得。众拉比却说:两样里有一样、不拘竖的或横的,就够了。
-
密释纳又举一争:凡隔断不是经纬俱备、就是竖的横的都有的,就不算隔断:这是 拉比犹大之子拉比约西 的话。
The mishna cites an additional dispute: Any partition that is not constructed of both warp and woof, i.e., vertical and horizontal elements, is not a partition; this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda.
-
他以为竖板与横绳算不得隔断,纵在商旅急难之时也算不得。
He holds that the vertical boards and the horizontal ropes are not considered a partition, even in the exigent circumstances of a caravan.
-
众拉比却说:两样里有一样、不拘竖的或横的,就够了。
However, the Rabbis say: One of the two elements, either vertical or horizontal, is sufficient.
16b.13
提问
拉夫哈姆努纳 奉 拉夫 之名说:上一条密释纳里断定了众拉比所说的——隔断若只有经、就是只有竖的,所立的多过所破的,那篱就算立着。拉夫哈姆努纳 提出一疑:隔断若只有纬、就是只有横的,这条 哈拉哈 当怎样断呢?所立的多过所破的,它也算立着么,还是不算?
-
拉夫哈姆努纳 奉 拉夫 之名说:上一条密释纳里断定了众拉比所说的——隔断若只有经、就是只有竖的,所立的多过所破的,那篱就算立着。
Rav Hamnuna said that Rav said: It was concluded in the previous mishna that the Rabbis said that in the case of a partition that consists only of warp, i.e., vertical, elements, if the standing segment of the partition is greater than the breached segment, the fence is considered standing.
-
拉夫哈姆努纳 提出一疑:隔断若只有纬、就是只有横的,这条 哈拉哈 当怎样断呢?
Rav Hamnuna raised a dilemma: What is the halakha in the case of a partition that consists only of woof, i.e., horizontal, elements?
-
所立的多过所破的,它也算立着么,还是不算?
Is it also considered standing if the standing segment is greater than the breached segment, or not?
16b.14
解答
阿巴耶 说:你来听密释纳所说的,可解这一疑:那几条绳的粗细合起来须过一掌,好叫整道隔断有十掌高。若果真所立的多过所破的时,连只有横的篱也算立着,那我何须几条粗细合起来过一掌的绳呢?
-
阿巴耶 说:你来听密释纳所说的,可解这一疑:那几条绳的粗细合起来须过一掌,好叫整道隔断有十掌高。
Abaye said: Come and hear a resolution to this dilemma from the mishna: The measure of the ropes and their combined thickness must be greater than a handbreadth, so that the entire partition will be ten handbreadths high.
-
若果真所立的多过所破的时,连只有横的篱也算立着,那我何须几条粗细合起来过一掌的绳呢?
And if it is so that, in a case where the standing segment is greater than the breached segment, the partition is considered standing even in the case of a fence that consists of horizontal elements, why do I need ropes with a combined thickness of greater than a handbreadth?
16b.15
推论
倒不如留一段略不足三掌的空,安一条随便粗细的绳;再留一段略不足三掌的空,再安一条随便粗细的绳;再留一段略不足四掌的空,再安第三条随便粗细的绳。彼此相隔不足三掌的那几条绳,依 视为相连 之法当算作相连。整道隔断就当算立着,因为所立的有六掌,多过所破的四掌。
-
倒不如留一段略不足三掌的空,安一条随便粗细的绳;再留一段略不足三掌的空,再安一条随便粗细的绳;再留一段略不足四掌的空,再安第三条随便粗细的绳。
Instead, let one leave a space slightly less than three handbreadths, and place a rope of any size, leave another space slightly less than three handbreadths, and place another rope of any size, leave a third space slightly less than four handbreadths, and place a third rope of any size.
-
彼此相隔不足三掌的那几条绳,依 视为相连 之法当算作相连。
The ropes between which there is a space less than three handbreadths should be considered joined, based on the principle of lavud.
-
整道隔断就当算立着,因为所立的有六掌,多过所破的四掌。
The entire partition should be considered standing because the standing segment, measuring six handbreadths, is greater than the breached segment, which measures four handbreadths.
16b.16
反驳
革玛拉 提一难:你怎能以为这样就管用呢?那段略不足四掌的空,他放在哪里呢?他若放在底下,那在律上就像山羊能过去的隔断,算不得合式的隔断。
-
革玛拉 提一难:你怎能以为这样就管用呢?
The Gemara presents a difficulty: And how can you understand that this would be effective?
-
那段略不足四掌的空,他放在哪里呢?
Where does he position the space of slightly less than four handbreadths?
-
他若放在底下,那在律上就像山羊能过去的隔断,算不得合式的隔断。
If he positions it at the bottom, its legal status is like that of a partition through which goats pass, which is not a valid partition.
16b.17
反驳
他若放在顶上,那么这一边、就是最上那条绳以上的空,与那一边、就是那条绳以下的空,两下合来把它抵消了。上下两条绳之间既过三掌,依 视为相连 之法它们就不算相连。最上那条绳以下的四掌与它以上的空合起来,把那相连抵消了。
-
他若放在顶上,那么这一边、就是最上那条绳以上的空,与那一边、就是那条绳以下的空,两下合来把它抵消了。
If he positions it at the top, then the air on this side, above the uppermost rope, and on that side, below that rope, come and negate it.
-
上下两条绳之间既过三掌,依 视为相连 之法它们就不算相连。
As there are more than three handbreadths between them the upper and lower ropes, they are not joined together based on the principle of lavud.
-
最上那条绳以下的四掌与它以上的空合起来,把那相连抵消了。
The four handbreadths below the uppermost rope and the airspace above it combine to negate the connection.
16b.18
悬置
他若放在中间,那么所立的多过所破的,只是须把破口两边的所立合起来算。两边各自单算,所破的却多过所立的。那样若仍算作隔断,就当从这里断定:所立的须把破口两边的合起来算才多过所破的,隔断也算立着。只是那一件本是提出来作疑而未决的。
-
他若放在中间,那么所立的多过所破的,只是须把破口两边的所立合起来算。
If he positions it in the middle, then the standing segment of the partition is greater than the breached segment, provided that the standing portions on the two sides of the breach are combined.
-
两边各自单算,所破的却多过所立的。
However, if each side is considered separately, the breach is greater than the standing portion.
-
那样若仍算作隔断,就当从这里断定:所立的须把破口两边的合起来算才多过所破的,隔断也算立着。
If it is nevertheless deemed a partition, conclude from it that even if the standing segment is greater than the breached segment only when the standing segments on the two sides of the breach are combined, the partition is considered standing.
-
只是那一件本是提出来作疑而未决的。
However, that circumstance was raised as a dilemma and remained unresolved.
16b.19
提问
所以 拉夫哈姆努纳 所提的乃是这一疑:人若拿一张七掌零些许的席,在席上凿一个三掌宽的洞,洞以上留四掌、洞以下留些许,又把那席安得离地不足三掌——这条 哈拉哈 当怎样断呢?
-
所以 拉夫哈姆努纳 所提的乃是这一疑:人若拿一张七掌零些许的席,在席上凿一个三掌宽的洞,洞以上留四掌、洞以下留些许,又把那席安得离地不足三掌——这条 哈拉哈 当怎样断呢?
Rather, Rav Hamnuna raised the following dilemma: What is the halakha in a case where one brought a mat that is seven handbreadths and any additional amount, and carved in it a hole three handbreadths wide, and left four handbreadths above the hole and any additional amount below it, and positioned the mat less than three handbreadths off the ground?
16b.20
解答
拉夫阿施 说:他所提的疑,是就悬空离地的十掌隔断在律上算什么说的。那一疑与 拉比塔夫拉 在 拉夫 面前所提的相类:悬空的隔断算不算如同落到地的隔断,能许人在废墟里搬运么?拉夫 对他说:悬空的隔断惟悬在水上时才许人搬运,因为众贤者遇水从宽。
-
拉夫阿施 说:他所提的疑,是就悬空离地的十掌隔断在律上算什么说的。
Rav Ashi said: The dilemma he raised is with regard to the legal status of a ten-handbreadth partition suspended off the ground.
-
那一疑与 拉比塔夫拉 在 拉夫 面前所提的相类:悬空的隔断算不算如同落到地的隔断,能许人在废墟里搬运么?
That dilemma is similar to that which Rabbi Tavla raised as a dilemma before Rav: Does a suspended partition act as if it were a partition that reaches the ground and render it permitted for one to carry in a ruin?
-
拉夫 对他说:悬空的隔断惟悬在水上时才许人搬运,因为众贤者遇水从宽。
Rav said to him: A suspended partition renders it permitted for one to carry only when it is suspended over water, as there is a leniency introduced by the Sages with regard to water.
16b.21
反驳
我们在密释纳里学过:人可以用竖立的板把那地围起来,只须板与板之间不空出三掌。拉比犹大 说这一从宽——就是许人立只有横的或只有竖的隔断——单是就商旅说的。革玛拉 推说:商旅,是许的;一个人,就不许了。岂不是有一条 《巴拉伊塔》 教说:拉比犹大 说:论安息日一切不稳的隔断,如只有横的或只有竖的,众贤者不许一个人用它围过二 塞亚之地 之地?这就见得:地不过二 塞亚之地 的,拉比犹大 连一个人也许他用这样的隔断。
-
我们在密释纳里学过:人可以用竖立的板把那地围起来,只须板与板之间不空出三掌。
We learned in the mishna: One may surround the area with boards that stand upright, provided there will not be a gap of three handbreadths between one board and the next.
-
拉比犹大 说这一从宽——就是许人立只有横的或只有竖的隔断——单是就商旅说的。
Rabbi Yehuda said that this leniency, which allows the establishment of a partition consisting exclusively of horizontal or vertical elements, was stated only with regard to a caravan.
-
革玛拉 推说:商旅,是许的;一个人,就不许了。
The Gemara infers: With regard to a caravan, yes, it is permitted; with regard to an individual, no, it is not permitted.
-
岂不是有一条 《巴拉伊塔》 教说:拉比犹大 说:论安息日一切不稳的隔断,如只有横的或只有竖的,众贤者不许一个人用它围过二 塞亚之地 之地?
Wasn’t it taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda says: With regard to all unsteady partitions of Shabbat, e.g., those consisting exclusively of horizontal or vertical elements, the Sages did not permit their use for an individual if the space that they enclose is greater than two beit se’a?
-
这就见得:地不过二 塞亚之地 的,拉比犹大 连一个人也许他用这样的隔断。
This indicates that, for an area of up to two beit se’a, Rabbi Yehuda permits these partitions even for an individual.
16b.22
解答
革玛拉 答:拉比犹大 在密释纳里那话,可以照 拉夫纳赫曼——有人说是 拉夫贝拜·巴尔·阿巴耶——论另一句所说的来讲:这条 哈拉哈 所以要立,单为使行商旅的人有地方够办他们一切所需的事。这里、就是密释纳里,拉比犹大 那话也可以照样讲:是为使行商旅的人有地方够办他们一切所需的事。换句话说,拉比犹大 并不争这样的隔断本身管不管用,连一个人也管用。他说那条 哈拉哈 单指商旅,意思是:不拘所围之地多大,惟商旅才这样办。至于一个人,这样的隔断惟围二 塞亚之地 以内之地才管用。
-
革玛拉 答:拉比犹大 在密释纳里那话,可以照 拉夫纳赫曼——有人说是 拉夫贝拜·巴尔·阿巴耶——论另一句所说的来讲:这条 哈拉哈 所以要立,单为使行商旅的人有地方够办他们一切所需的事。
The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yehuda’s statement in the mishna can be understood in accordance with that which Rav Naḥman, and some say it was Rav Beivai bar Abaye, said with regard to a different statement: This halakha was necessary only in order to provide those traveling in the caravan with space to satisfy all their needs.
-
这里、就是密释纳里,拉比犹大 那话也可以照样讲:是为使行商旅的人有地方够办他们一切所需的事。
Here, too, in the mishna, Rabbi Yehuda’s statement can be understood as coming to provide those traveling in the caravan with space to satisfy all their needs.
-
换句话说,拉比犹大 并不争这样的隔断本身管不管用,连一个人也管用。
In other words, Rabbi Yehuda does not dispute the fundamental effectiveness of a partition of this kind, even for an individual.
-
他说那条 哈拉哈 单指商旅,意思是:不拘所围之地多大,惟商旅才这样办。
When he says that the halakha applies solely to a caravan, he means that it applies only in the case of a caravan, regardless of the size of the area in question.
-
至于一个人,这样的隔断惟围二 塞亚之地 以内之地才管用。
However, in the case of an individual, a partition of that kind is effective only if it encloses an area up to two beit se’a.
16b.23
提问
革玛拉 问:拉夫纳赫曼——有人说是 拉夫贝拜·巴尔·阿巴耶——那话原是就哪一句说的呢?是就密释纳末后那一断说的:凡隔断不是竖的横的都有的,就不算隔断:这是 拉比犹大之子拉比约西 的话。
-
革玛拉 问:拉夫纳赫曼——有人说是 拉夫贝拜·巴尔·阿巴耶——那话原是就哪一句说的呢?
The Gemara asks: Where was this statement of Rav Naḥman, and some say of Rav Beivai bar Abaye, stated?
-
是就密释纳末后那一断说的:凡隔断不是竖的横的都有的,就不算隔断:这是 拉比犹大之子拉比约西 的话。
It was stated with regard to this ruling at the end of the mishna: Any partition that is not made of both vertical and horizontal elements is not a partition; this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda.
16b.24
反驳
革玛拉 问:拉比犹大之子拉比约西 果真说过这话么?岂不是有一条 《巴拉伊塔》 教说:一个人也好,一队商旅也好,绳作的隔断都管用?那么一个人与一队商旅有什么分别呢?论一个人,那条 哈拉哈 给他二 塞亚之地 之地,他凭这样的隔断可以在其中搬运。论两个人,那条 哈拉哈 也给他们二 塞亚之地 之地。三个人在律上就算作商旅,那条 哈拉哈 给他们各人二 塞亚之地 之地,合共六 塞亚之地。这是 拉比犹大之子拉比约西 的话。
-
革玛拉 问:拉比犹大之子拉比约西 果真说过这话么?
The Gemara asks: Did Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, actually say this?
-
岂不是有一条 《巴拉伊塔》 教说:一个人也好,一队商旅也好,绳作的隔断都管用?
Wasn’t it taught in a baraita: For both an individual and a caravan, partitions made of ropes are effective?
-
那么一个人与一队商旅有什么分别呢?
And what, then, is the difference between an individual and a caravan?
-
论一个人,那条 哈拉哈 给他二 塞亚之地 之地,他凭这样的隔断可以在其中搬运。
With regard to an individual, the halakha provides him with an area of two beit se’a, in which he may carry by virtue of partitions of this kind.
-
论两个人,那条 哈拉哈 也给他们二 塞亚之地 之地。
With regard to two individuals as well, the halakha provides them with an area of two beit se’a.
-
三个人在律上就算作商旅,那条 哈拉哈 给他们各人二 塞亚之地 之地,合共六 塞亚之地。
Three individuals assume the legal status of a caravan, and the halakha provides each of them with an area of two beit se’a, for a total of six beit se’a.
-
这是 拉比犹大之子拉比约西 的话。
This is the statement of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda.
16b.25
引证
众拉比却说:一个人也好,行商旅的人也好,都给他们地方够办一切所需的事,只须不留出二 塞亚之地 的空地。他们所围的,不可比所须用的多出二 塞亚之地。照此看来,拉比犹大之子拉比约西 是靠着「绳能使一处许人搬运」这一断的,连一个人也是一样。
-
众拉比却说:一个人也好,行商旅的人也好,都给他们地方够办一切所需的事,只须不留出二 塞亚之地 的空地。
And the Rabbis say: With regard to both an individual and those traveling in a caravan, one provides them with space to satisfy all their needs, provided that there will not be an unoccupied space of two beit se’a.
-
他们所围的,不可比所须用的多出二 塞亚之地。
They may not enclose an area that is two beit se’a larger than the space that they require.
-
照此看来,拉比犹大之子拉比约西 是靠着「绳能使一处许人搬运」这一断的,连一个人也是一样。
Apparently, Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, relies on the ruling that ropes render an area fit for one to carry within it, even for an individual.
16b.26
解答
拉夫纳赫曼——有人说是 拉夫贝拜·巴尔·阿巴耶——说:密释纳里 拉比犹大之子拉比约西 的意思所以要立,单为在竖的横的俱备、合式作成的隔断上,给他们地方够办一切所需的事。至于只有横的或只有竖的隔断,惟商旅才凭它使六 塞亚之地 之地许人搬运。
-
拉夫纳赫曼——有人说是 拉夫贝拜·巴尔·阿巴耶——说:密释纳里 拉比犹大之子拉比约西 的意思所以要立,单为在竖的横的俱备、合式作成的隔断上,给他们地方够办一切所需的事。
Rav Naḥman, and some say it was Rav Beivai bar Abaye, said: The opinion of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, in the mishna was necessary only to provide them with the space to satisfy all their needs in the case of a properly constructed partition consisting of both horizontal and vertical elements.
-
至于只有横的或只有竖的隔断,惟商旅才凭它使六 塞亚之地 之地许人搬运。
A partition consisting of exclusively horizontal or vertical elements renders an area of six beit se’a fit for one to carry within it, only in the case of a caravan.
16b.27
引证
拉夫纳赫曼 奉我们的夫子 撒母耳 之名教说:论一个人,那条 哈拉哈 给他二 塞亚之地 之地。论两个人,那条 哈拉哈 也给他们二 塞亚之地 之地。三个人在律上就算作商旅,那条 哈拉哈 给他们各人二 塞亚之地 之地,合共六 塞亚之地。
-
拉夫纳赫曼 奉我们的夫子 撒母耳 之名教说:论一个人,那条 哈拉哈 给他二 塞亚之地 之地。
Rav Naḥman taught in the name of Rabbeinu Shmuel: With regard to an individual, the halakha provides him with an area of two beit se’a.
-
论两个人,那条 哈拉哈 也给他们二 塞亚之地 之地。
With regard to two individuals, the halakha provides them with an area of two beit se’a as well.
-
三个人在律上就算作商旅,那条 哈拉哈 给他们各人二 塞亚之地 之地,合共六 塞亚之地。
Three individuals assume the legal status of a caravan, and the halakha provides each of them with an area of two beit se’a, for a total of six beit se’a.
16b.28
反驳
有人问 拉夫纳赫曼 说:你撇下众拉比的多数之说,倒照 拉比犹大之子拉比约西 一个人的意思行么?
-
有人问 拉夫纳赫曼 说:你撇下众拉比的多数之说,倒照 拉比犹大之子拉比约西 一个人的意思行么?
Rav Naḥman was asked: Did you abandon the majority opinion of the Rabbis and act in accordance with the individual opinion of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda?
16b.29
解答
拉夫纳赫曼 就叫一个传话的人站在他旁边,教说:我先前在你们面前所说的话,是我错了。众拉比所说的实在是这样:论一个人,那条 哈拉哈 给他二 塞亚之地 之地。论两个人,那条 哈拉哈 也给他们二 塞亚之地 之地。三个人在律上就算作商旅,那条 哈拉哈 给他们地方够办一切所需的事。
-
拉夫纳赫曼 就叫一个传话的人站在他旁边,教说:我先前在你们面前所说的话,是我错了。
Rav Naḥman then placed a speaker standing over him, and taught: The matters that I stated before you are an error on my part.
-
众拉比所说的实在是这样:论一个人,那条 哈拉哈 给他二 塞亚之地 之地。
Indeed, this is what the Rabbis said: With regard to an individual, the halakha provides him with an area of two beit se’a.
-
论两个人,那条 哈拉哈 也给他们二 塞亚之地 之地。
With regard to two individuals, the halakha provides them with an area of two beit se’a as well.
-
三个人在律上就算作商旅,那条 哈拉哈 给他们地方够办一切所需的事。
Three individuals assume the legal status of a caravan, and the halakha provides them with space to satisfy all their needs.