28b.1
解答
——说的是园里所种的那一样，人素常吃的。
-
——说的是园里所种的那一样，人素常吃的。
he was referring to the garden variety, which is commonly eaten.
← 移入纹卷总目·第三章 以何物合界
这不是译本，是辅读层。中文承载文本本身，并逐句标出哪些是塔木德自己的话、 哪些是 施泰因扎尔茨 补入的解释，以及哪些地方翻译必然有所流失。
谢法利亚 的 威廉·戴维森 版用 <b> 标出塔木德原文，其余为
施泰因扎尔茨 补入。下面的比例是逐句从这个标记算出来的，不是判断。
这一面每读 5 句，只有一句以塔木德自己的话为主。把这件事藏起来， 读者会以为自己读的是塔木德；标出来，他才知道自己站在哪里。
——说的是园里所种的那一样，人素常吃的。
——说的是园里所种的那一样，人素常吃的。
he was referring to the garden variety, which is commonly eaten.
革玛拉 既提了芝麻菜的种，就问：那种有什么用处呢？人素常单吃它的叶。拉比约哈难 说：先前几代的人没有胡椒，就把这种捣碎，拿烤肉蘸着吃。可见芝麻菜的种也是人吃的，虽然那不是它素常的用处。
革玛拉 既提了芝麻菜的种，就问：那种有什么用处呢？
Having mentioned arugula seeds, the Gemara asks: For what are they suitable?
人素常单吃它的叶。
Generally, only the plant’s leaves are eaten.
拉比约哈难 说：先前几代的人没有胡椒，就把这种捣碎，拿烤肉蘸着吃。
Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The earlier generations, who had no pepper, would crush these seeds and dip their roasted meat in them.
可见芝麻菜的种也是人吃的，虽然那不是它素常的用处。
Therefore, arugula seeds are also eaten, even though this is not their typical use.
革玛拉 记着：拉比泽拉 研习得累了，就去坐在 拉夫犹大·巴尔·阿米 学舍的门口，说：众贤者进出的时候，我要在他们面前起身，好得敬重他们的赏——敬重 妥拉 学者本是一条诫命。他累得研习不动，就寻个法子一面歇息、一面仍行着别一条诫命。
革玛拉 记着：拉比泽拉 研习得累了，就去坐在 拉夫犹大·巴尔·阿米 学舍的门口，说：众贤者进出的时候，我要在他们面前起身，好得敬重他们的赏——敬重 妥拉 学者本是一条诫命。
The Gemara relates that when Rabbi Zeira was exhausted from his studies, he would go and sit at the entrance to the academy of Rav Yehuda bar Ami, and say: When the Sages go in and out, I shall stand up before them and receive reward for honoring them, as it is a mitzva to honor Torah scholars.
他累得研习不动，就寻个法子一面歇息、一面仍行着别一条诫命。
Too tired to engage in actual Torah study, he sought a way to rest while fulfilling a different mitzva at the same time.
有一次，一个上学的孩童从学舍出来。拉比泽拉 对他说：你的先生今日教了你什么？他对他说：菟丝子当诵的祝祷是「他造地的出产」，青麦当诵的祝祷是「万物因他的话而有」。拉比泽拉 对他说：倒过来才更有理，因为这一样、就是青麦，是从地里得养的；那一样、就是菟丝子，是从空中得养的——各样当照它所从得养的诵祝才合宜。
有一次，一个上学的孩童从学舍出来。
Once, a young school child was leaving the study hall.
拉比泽拉 对他说：你的先生今日教了你什么？
Rabbi Zeira said to him: What did your teacher teach you today?
他对他说：菟丝子当诵的祝祷是「他造地的出产」，青麦当诵的祝祷是「万物因他的话而有」。
He said to him: The proper blessing for dodder is: Who creates the fruit of the ground; the proper blessing for green grain is: By Whose word all things came to be.
拉比泽拉 对他说：倒过来才更有理，因为这一样、就是青麦，是从地里得养的；那一样、就是菟丝子，是从空中得养的——各样当照它所从得养的诵祝才合宜。
Rabbi Zeira said to him: On the contrary, the opposite is more reasonable, as this, the green grain, derives nourishment from the ground, whereas that, the dodder, derives nourishment from the air, and it is fitting to recite a blessing over each item in accordance with its source of nourishment.
革玛拉 断说：所行的 哈拉哈 依那上学的孩童。这是什么缘故呢？因为这一样、就是菟丝子，是熟透的出产；那一样、就是青麦，不是熟透的出产。出产未熟透的，人只可诵「万物因他的话而有」。至于你所说「这一样、就是青麦，从地里得养；那一样、就是菟丝子，从空中得养」，那话并不然。菟丝子也是从地里得养的，因为我们看见那带刺的丛木一被砍断，缠在它上头的菟丝子就死了。这就见得菟丝子也是从地里得养的，不过是间接得养罢了。
革玛拉 断说：所行的 哈拉哈 依那上学的孩童。
The Gemara concludes: The halakha is in accordance with the young school child.
这是什么缘故呢？
What is the reason for this?
因为这一样、就是菟丝子，是熟透的出产；那一样、就是青麦，不是熟透的出产。
This, the dodder, is fully ripened produce, and that, green grain, is not fully ripened produce.
出产未熟透的，人只可诵「万物因他的话而有」。
If produce is not fully ripened one can only recite the blessing: By Whose word all things came to be.
至于你所说「这一样、就是青麦，从地里得养；那一样、就是菟丝子，从空中得养」，那话并不然。
And that which you said: This, the green grain, derives nourishment from the ground, whereas that, the dodder, derives nourishment from the air, this is not so.
菟丝子也是从地里得养的，因为我们看见那带刺的丛木一被砍断，缠在它上头的菟丝子就死了。
Dodder also derives nourishment from the ground, for we see that when the prickly shrub is cut off, the dodder attached to it dies.
这就见得菟丝子也是从地里得养的，不过是间接得养罢了。
This shows that dodder also derives its nourishment from the ground, albeit indirectly.
革玛拉 接着议 拉夫 那话的下一层：未熟的枣果然不可用来立 合界 么？岂不是有一条 《巴拉伊塔》 教说：棕心、就是棕树里头那软而可吃的心，可以用第二样什一之银买；只是它染不上食物的不洁，因为它本不是食物，乃是树身的一部分。至于未熟的枣，可以用第二样什一之银买，连食物的不洁也染得上。
革玛拉 接着议 拉夫 那话的下一层：未熟的枣果然不可用来立 合界 么？
The Gemara now considers the next part of Rav’s statement: And is it correct that one may not establish an eiruv with unripe dates?
岂不是有一条 《巴拉伊塔》 教说：棕心、就是棕树里头那软而可吃的心，可以用第二样什一之银买；只是它染不上食物的不洁，因为它本不是食物，乃是树身的一部分。
Wasn’t it taught in a baraita: Heart of palm, the soft, edible inner core of a palm tree, may be bought with second-tithe money; but it does not contract the ritual impurity of foods, as it is not actually a food, but rather a part of the tree itself.
至于未熟的枣，可以用第二样什一之银买，连食物的不洁也染得上。
And unripe dates may be bought with second-tithe money, and they even contract the ritual impurity of foods.
拉比犹大 所说的略有不同：棕心在律上处处如同树，惟可以用第二样什一之银买这一层不同，因为它是可吃的。未熟的枣处处如同果子，因为那本是实在的果子，惟有一处不同——它免分什一，因为还没有熟透。
拉比犹大 所说的略有不同：棕心在律上处处如同树，惟可以用第二样什一之银买这一层不同，因为它是可吃的。
Rabbi Yehuda says this somewhat differently: Heart of palm is like a tree in all its legal aspects, except that it may be bought with second-tithe money, as it is edible.
未熟的枣处处如同果子，因为那本是实在的果子，惟有一处不同——它免分什一，因为还没有熟透。
And unripe dates are like fruit in all regards, as they are actual fruit, except with respect to one characteristic, which is that they are exempt from tithes because they are not yet fully ripened.
革玛拉 答：那里那条 《巴拉伊塔》 说的是永不熟透的那一样棕树所结的果。那样的果纵在未熟之时，也算作十足的果子。拉夫 所说的却是到底会熟的棕树所结的果。那样的果未熟之时，不过是它长成路上的一程罢了。
革玛拉 答：那里那条 《巴拉伊塔》 说的是永不熟透的那一样棕树所结的果。
The Gemara answers: There, the baraita is referring to the fruit of palms that never fully ripen.
那样的果纵在未熟之时，也算作十足的果子。
They are therefore regarded as full-fledged fruit even in their unripe state.
拉夫 所说的却是到底会熟的棕树所结的果。
Rav, however, was referring to the fruit of palms, which eventually ripen.
那样的果未熟之时，不过是它长成路上的一程罢了。
Their unripe state is merely a transitional stage in their development.
革玛拉 问：若是这样，拉比犹大 论这一样会说它免分什一么？岂不是有一条 《巴拉伊塔》 教说 拉比犹大 说：贝特约尼 那地的未熟无花果，人所以提它，单是就分什一说的——因为有话说：贝特约尼 的未熟无花果与 图维纳 的未熟枣，人有分什一之责，虽然那两样永不熟透，因为它们处处都算十足的果子？
革玛拉 问：若是这样，拉比犹大 论这一样会说它免分什一么？
The Gemara asks: If so, would Rabbi Yehuda say with regard to this that they are exempt from tithes?
岂不是有一条 《巴拉伊塔》 教说 拉比犹大 说：贝特约尼 那地的未熟无花果，人所以提它，单是就分什一说的——因为有话说：贝特约尼 的未熟无花果与 图维纳 的未熟枣，人有分什一之责，虽然那两样永不熟透，因为它们处处都算十足的果子？
Wasn’t it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda said: The unripe figs of the place called Beityoni were only mentioned with regard to tithes, as it was stated: In the case of the unripe figs of Beityoni, and the unripe dates of the place called Tuvina, one is obligated to tithe them even though they never ripen, since they are considered full-fledged fruit in all respects?
所以当这样说：那条 《巴拉伊塔》 其实说的不是永不熟透的棕树所结的果，乃是到底会熟的那一样。只是论食物之不洁的 哈拉哈 与此有别：一样东西就食物之不洁而论算作食物，不能拿来证明它就 合界 而论也算食物。正如 拉比约哈难 在别处所说的：那几样既堪用火煮甜了吃，就分什一而论算作食物；这里也可以说：未熟的枣既堪用火煮甜了吃，就堪染食物的不洁。只是论 合界，我们所要的是当下就可吃的食物，须加工才成食物的还不够。
所以当这样说：那条 《巴拉伊塔》 其实说的不是永不熟透的棕树所结的果，乃是到底会熟的那一样。
Rather, say as follows: Actually, the baraita is not referring to the fruit of palms that never fully ripen, but rather to the fruit of palms that eventually ripen.
只是论食物之不洁的 哈拉哈 与此有别：一样东西就食物之不洁而论算作食物，不能拿来证明它就 合界 而论也算食物。
However, the halakha pertaining to the ritual impurity of foods is different, and an item’s status as a food with regard to the impurity of foods cannot be brought as proof of its status as a food with regard to an eiruv.
正如 拉比约哈难 在别处所说的：那几样既堪用火煮甜了吃，就分什一而论算作食物；这里也可以说：未熟的枣既堪用火煮甜了吃，就堪染食物的不洁。
As Rabbi Yoḥanan said elsewhere: Since they are fit to be sweetened through cooking with fire, they are regarded as food for the purpose of tithes; here too, we can say: Since they are fit to be sweetened through cooking with fire, unripe dates are fit to contract the impurity of foods.
只是论 合界，我们所要的是当下就可吃的食物，须加工才成食物的还不够。
However, with regard to an eiruv, we require food that is ready for consumption, and something that can be prepared to become food is not sufficient.
革玛拉 问：拉比约哈难 那一句原是就哪一件说的呢？革玛拉 答：是就下头这条 《巴拉伊塔》 所教的一断说的：苦杏仁还小还青的时候，人有分什一之责，因为那时还没长成、正堪吃。长大了倒免分什一，因为那时已不能吃了。甜杏仁则大的有分什一之责，小的免，因为还没有熟透。拉比约西之子拉比西缅 奉他父亲之名说：这一样那一样、就是大苦杏仁与小苦杏仁，都免分什一。有人说他奉他父亲之名说的是：这一样那一样都有分什一之责。拉比伊拉 说：拉比哈尼纳 在 西弗里 断案，依的是那说「这一样那一样都免分什一」的。
革玛拉 问：拉比约哈难 那一句原是就哪一件说的呢？
The Gemara asks: Where was this comment of Rabbi Yoḥanan originally stated?
革玛拉 答：是就下头这条 《巴拉伊塔》 所教的一断说的：苦杏仁还小还青的时候，人有分什一之责，因为那时还没长成、正堪吃。
The Gemara answers: It was stated on this ruling, which was taught in a baraita: One is obligated to tithe bitter almonds while they are still small and green, as they are fit to be eaten while still undeveloped.
长大了倒免分什一，因为那时已不能吃了。
When they are large, however, one is exempt from tithing them, as they are no longer edible.
甜杏仁则大的有分什一之责，小的免，因为还没有熟透。
One is obligated to tithe sweet, large almonds, whereas one is exempt from tithing small ones, as they have not yet fully ripened.
拉比约西之子拉比西缅 奉他父亲之名说：这一样那一样、就是大苦杏仁与小苦杏仁，都免分什一。
Rabbi Shimon, son of Rabbi Yosei, said in the name of his father: One is exempt from tithing both this and that, large and small bitter almonds.
有人说他奉他父亲之名说的是：这一样那一样都有分什一之责。
And some say that he said in the name of his father: One is obligated to tithe both this and that.
拉比伊拉 说：拉比哈尼纳 在 西弗里 断案，依的是那说「这一样那一样都免分什一」的。
Rabbi Ila said: Rabbi Ḥanina ruled in Tzippori in accordance with the one who said: One is exempt from tithing both this and that.
革玛拉 问：依那说「这一样那一样都有分什一之责」的，长大的苦杏仁有什么用处呢？拉比约哈难 说：那几样既堪用火煮甜了、成为可吃的，就分什一而论算作食物。
革玛拉 问：依那说「这一样那一样都有分什一之责」的，长大的苦杏仁有什么用处呢？
The Gemara asks: According to the view of the one who said one is obligated to tithe both this and that, for what are large, bitter almonds suitable?
拉比约哈难 说：那几样既堪用火煮甜了、成为可吃的，就分什一而论算作食物。
Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Since these almonds are fit to be sweetened and made edible through cooking with fire, they are regarded as food for the purpose of tithes.
革玛拉 再细看上头所引那条 《巴拉伊塔》。先生说 拉比犹大 说：棕心在律上处处如同树，惟可以用第二样什一之银买这一层不同。革玛拉 问：拉比犹大 的意思与头一位 坦拿 的意思一样。
革玛拉 再细看上头所引那条 《巴拉伊塔》。
The Gemara further examines the baraita cited earlier.
先生说 拉比犹大 说：棕心在律上处处如同树，惟可以用第二样什一之银买这一层不同。
The Master said that Rabbi Yehuda says: Heart of palm is like a tree in all its legal aspects, except that it may be bought with second-tithe money.
革玛拉 问：拉比犹大 的意思与头一位 坦拿 的意思一样。
The Gemara asks: Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion is identical to that of the first tanna.
阿巴耶 说：两下在律上有一处实在的分别，就在人把那棕心煮过或煎过的那一样。依 拉比犹大，纵煮过煎过，它也染不上食物的不洁；头一位 坦拿 却以为那样它就染得上。
阿巴耶 说：两下在律上有一处实在的分别，就在人把那棕心煮过或煎过的那一样。
Abaye said: There is a practical difference between them in a case where one boiled or fried the heart of palm.
依 拉比犹大，纵煮过煎过，它也染不上食物的不洁；头一位 坦拿 却以为那样它就染得上。
According to Rabbi Yehuda, it does not contract the ritual impurity of foods even if it was boiled or fried, whereas the first tanna holds that in that case it does contract impurity.
拉瓦 力驳这个讲法：果真有人说过纵煮过煎过也染不上食物的不洁么？岂不是有一条 《巴拉伊塔》 教说：牲畜的皮与胞衣，人素常不吃的，染不上食物的不洁；只是皮若煮到可吃、胞衣若有人存心要吃，就染得上食物的不洁？这就见得连本不合吃的东西，一经煮过煎过也染得上食物的不洁；棕心照众人的意思也当如此。
拉瓦 力驳这个讲法：果真有人说过纵煮过煎过也染不上食物的不洁么？
Rava strongly objects to this: Is there really anyone who said that even if one boiled or fried it, it does not contract the ritual impurity of foods?
岂不是有一条 《巴拉伊塔》 教说：牲畜的皮与胞衣，人素常不吃的，染不上食物的不洁；只是皮若煮到可吃、胞衣若有人存心要吃，就染得上食物的不洁？
Wasn’t it taught in a baraita: The hide and the placenta of an animal, which people do not typically eat, do not contract the ritual impurity of foods; however, a hide that one boiled until it became edible and a placenta that one intended to eat do contract the impurity of foods?
这就见得连本不合吃的东西，一经煮过煎过也染得上食物的不洁；棕心照众人的意思也当如此。
This indicates that even something not originally fit to be eaten contracts the impurity of foods once it has been boiled or fried, and the same should apply to heart of palm according to all opinions.
所以 拉瓦 说：两下的分别在吃以先当诵的那一句祝祷上，因为有话传下来说众 阿摩拉 为棕心当诵哪一句祝祷相争：拉夫犹大 说当诵「他造地的出产」。撒母耳 说当诵「万物因他的话而有」。
所以 拉瓦 说：两下的分别在吃以先当诵的那一句祝祷上，因为有话传下来说众 阿摩拉 为棕心当诵哪一句祝祷相争：拉夫犹大 说当诵「他造地的出产」。
Rather, Rava said: There is a practical difference between them with regard to the blessing that must be recited prior to eating, for it was stated that the amora’im disagreed about the blessing recited over heart of palm: Rav Yehuda said the appropriate blessing is: Who creates the fruit of the ground.
撒母耳 说当诵「万物因他的话而有」。
And Shmuel said the appropriate blessing is: By Whose word all things came to be.
革玛拉 讲明两位的意思：拉夫犹大 说当诵「他造地的出产」，是因它是食物。棕心既可吃，就称为果子，我们就照众果子的样式为它诵祝。撒母耳 说当诵「万物因他的话而有」。因为它到底要硬起来、成为不可吃的树，所以我们不为它诵「他造地的出产」——它终必失了果子的分位。
革玛拉 讲明两位的意思：拉夫犹大 说当诵「他造地的出产」，是因它是食物。
The Gemara explains the two opinions: Rav Yehuda said the appropriate blessing is: Who creates the fruit of the ground, as it is food.
棕心既可吃，就称为果子，我们就照众果子的样式为它诵祝。
Since heart of palm is edible it is called a fruit, and we recite a blessing over it in the manner of all fruits.
撒母耳 说当诵「万物因他的话而有」。
And Shmuel said the appropriate blessing is: By Whose word all things came to be.
因为它到底要硬起来、成为不可吃的树，所以我们不为它诵「他造地的出产」——它终必失了果子的分位。
Since it will eventually harden and become like an inedible tree, we do not recite over it the blessing: Who creates the fruit of the ground, as it will eventually lose the status of a fruit.
撒母耳 对 拉夫犹大 说：利齿，你的意思是有理的，因为萝卜到底也要硬起来，我们却仍为它诵「他造地的出产」。
撒母耳 对 拉夫犹大 说：利齿，你的意思是有理的，因为萝卜到底也要硬起来，我们却仍为它诵「他造地的出产」。
Shmuel said to Rav Yehuda: Shinnana, your opinion is reasonable, as a radish will eventually harden, and yet we recite over it the blessing: Who creates the fruit of the ground.
革玛拉 说：其实不然，因为人种萝卜本是要趁它软的时候吃；人种棕树却不是为吃那棕心。所以棕心算不得棕树的果子，乃是从它取出来的食物，只当为它诵「万物因他的话而有」。革玛拉 断说：撒母耳 虽夸了 拉夫犹大，所行的 哈拉哈 仍依 撒母耳 的意思。
革玛拉 说：其实不然，因为人种萝卜本是要趁它软的时候吃；人种棕树却不是为吃那棕心。
The Gemara comments: But it is not so, because people plant radish with the intention of eating it while it is soft; but people do not plant palm trees with the intention of eating heart of palm.
所以棕心算不得棕树的果子，乃是从它取出来的食物，只当为它诵「万物因他的话而有」。
Therefore, heart of palm is not considered the fruit of the palm, but rather food extracted from it, over which only the following blessing should be recited: By Whose word all things came to be.
革玛拉 断说：撒母耳 虽夸了 拉夫犹大，所行的 哈拉哈 仍依 撒母耳 的意思。
And the Gemara concludes: Even though Shmuel praised Rav Yehuda, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Shmuel.
革玛拉 如今来查上头奉 拉夫 之名所引那一句本身。拉夫犹大 说 拉夫 论菟丝子与青麦说：人可以用它们立 合界；吃它们的时候当诵「他造地的出产」。革玛拉 问：立 合界 须用多少菟丝子呢？革玛拉 答：正如 拉夫耶希埃勒 论相类的一件所说的：一把。这里的量也是一把。
革玛拉 如今来查上头奉 拉夫 之名所引那一句本身。
The Gemara now examines the matter itself cited in the previous discussion in the name of Rav.
拉夫犹大 说 拉夫 论菟丝子与青麦说：人可以用它们立 合界；吃它们的时候当诵「他造地的出产」。
Rav Yehuda said that Rav said with regard to dodder and green grain: One may establish an eiruv with them, and when eating them one recites the blessing: Who creates the fruit of the ground.
革玛拉 问：立 合界 须用多少菟丝子呢？
The Gemara asks: How much dodder must be used to establish an eiruv?
革玛拉 答：正如 拉夫耶希埃勒 论相类的一件所说的：一把。
The Gemara answers: As Rav Yeḥiel said with regard to a similar issue: A handful.
这里的量也是一把。
Here, too, the measure is a handful.
照样，立 合界 须用多少青麦呢？拉巴·巴尔·托维亚·巴尔·以撒 说 拉夫 说：农人满满的一捆。
照样，立 合界 须用多少青麦呢？
Similarly, how much green grain is needed to establish an eiruv?
拉巴·巴尔·托维亚·巴尔·以撒 说 拉夫 说：农人满满的一捆。
Rabba bar Toviya bar Yitzḥak said that Rav said: A full farmers’ bundle.
拉夫希勒基亚·巴尔·托维亚 说：人可以用碱草立 合界。革玛拉 诧异说：用碱草立 合界，这话可入你的心么？人并不吃碱草。所以当说：人可以用烧成碱草的那样草立 合界，因为那草未烧以先是人可吃的。立 合界 须用多少呢？拉夫耶希埃勒 说：一把。
拉夫希勒基亚·巴尔·托维亚 说：人可以用碱草立 合界。
Rav Ḥilkiya bar Toviya said: One may establish an eiruv with glasswort.
革玛拉 诧异说：用碱草立 合界，这话可入你的心么？
The Gemara expresses astonishment: Does it enter your mind that one may establish an eiruv with glasswort?
人并不吃碱草。
People do not eat glasswort.
所以当说：人可以用烧成碱草的那样草立 合界，因为那草未烧以先是人可吃的。
Rather, one may establish an eiruv with the herb from whose ashes glasswort is prepared, as it is fit for human consumption before it is burnt.
立 合界 须用多少呢？
And how much of it is needed to establish an eiruv?
拉夫耶希埃勒 说：一把。
Rav Yeḥiel said: A handful.
革玛拉 记着：拉比耶利米 有一次出去到几个村子去，村人问他说：用湿豆立 合界，这条 哈拉哈 当怎样断呢？他答不上来。他回到学舍，众人对他说：拉比雅奈 曾这样说：人可以用湿豆立 合界。须用多少呢？拉夫耶希埃勒 说：一把。
革玛拉 记着：拉比耶利米 有一次出去到几个村子去，村人问他说：用湿豆立 合界，这条 哈拉哈 当怎样断呢？
The Gemara relates that Rabbi Yirmeya once went out to visit certain villages, and the villagers asked him: What is the halakha with regard to establishing an eiruv with moist beans?
他答不上来。
He did not have an answer for them.
他回到学舍，众人对他说：拉比雅奈 曾这样说：人可以用湿豆立 合界。
When he came to the study hall, they said to him: This is what Rabbi Yannai said: One may establish an eiruv with moist beans.
须用多少呢？
And how much is needed for that purpose?
拉夫耶希埃勒 说：一把。
Rav Yeḥiel said: A handful.
拉夫哈姆努纳 说：人也可以用生甜菜立 合界。革玛拉 提一难：果真如此么？拉夫希斯达 岂不是说过：生甜菜能把壮健的人吃死——这就见得甜菜于人有损，因此不该合于立 合界？
拉夫哈姆努纳 说：人也可以用生甜菜立 合界。
Rav Hamnuna said: One may also establish an eiruv with raw beets.
革玛拉 提一难：果真如此么？
The Gemara raises a difficulty: Is that so?
拉夫希斯达 岂不是说过：生甜菜能把壮健的人吃死——这就见得甜菜于人有损，因此不该合于立 合界？
Didn’t Rav Ḥisda say: Raw beet kills a healthy person, which indicates that beets are unhealthy and should therefore be unfit for establishing an eiruv?