13b.1
解答
不如把 《巴拉伊塔》 改说：只有原先如余下一样都是一根时，才不合用。
-
不如把这条 《巴拉伊塔》 改一改，说：它只有在原先如同余下一样都是一根时，才不合用。
Rather, emend the baraita and say: It is unfit only when its origins, like its remnants, are one.
← 住棚卷总目·第一章 棚
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 43 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。
不如把 《巴拉伊塔》 改说：只有原先如余下一样都是一根时，才不合用。
不如把这条 《巴拉伊塔》 改一改，说：它只有在原先如同余下一样都是一根时，才不合用。
Rather, emend the baraita and say: It is unfit only when its origins, like its remnants, are one.
玛雷马尔 教导：苏拉的这些芦苇捆，为出售而捆着的，可以用来盖 棚——卖主捆它们，只是为了便于点数，它们不会一直捆着。
玛雷马尔 教导：论这些从苏拉来、为出售而捆着的芦苇捆，人可以用它们给 棚 加顶盖。
Mareimar taught: With regard to these bundles of reeds from Sura that are bound for sale, one may roof the sukka with them.
卖主虽然捆了它们，他捆它们只是为了更容易点清数目，它们不会一直捆着。
Although the seller bound them, he bound them merely to ascertain the number more readily, and they will not remain bound.
拉比阿巴 说：用柳枝搭的这些小屋，上面把它们系在一起的绳一解开，就是合用的顶盖。革玛拉问：它们下面岂不仍系着？拉夫帕帕 说：拉比阿巴 所指的是连下面也解开的情形。
拉比阿巴 说：论这些用柳枝搭成的小屋，一旦把它们上面系在一起的绳结解开，它们就是合用的顶盖。
Rabbi Abba said: With regard to these huts made of willow branches, once their upper ties holding them together are undone, they are fit roofing.
革玛拉问：可是它们下面岂不仍系着吗？
The Gemara asks: But aren’t they still tied from below?
拉夫帕帕 说：拉比阿巴 所指的，是人连下面也把它们解开的情形。
Rav Pappa said: Rabbi Abba is referring to a case where he unties them from below as well.
拉夫胡纳·巴尔·拉夫约书亚 说：即便说 拉比阿巴 指的是下面不解开的情形，它们也合作 棚 顶盖，因为凡不预备挪动的捆，都不算捆扎——这些小屋上面既解开了，人若要挪动，就会散开。
拉夫胡纳·巴尔·拉夫约书亚 说：即便你说 拉比阿巴 所指的是人没有把它们下面解开的情形，它们也合作 棚 的顶盖，因为凡不预备要被挪动的捆扎，都不算作捆扎。
Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said: Even if you say that Rabbi Abba is referring to a case where one does not untie them from below, they are fit for sukka roofing, as any binding that is not destined to be moved is not considered a binding.
既然这些小屋上面已经解开了，人若要挪动它们，它们就会散开。
Since these huts are untied from above, were one to attempt to move them, they would fall apart.
拉比阿巴 传 撒母耳 说：众贤说人可用来尽逾越节吃苦菜之本分的那些菜蔬，若铺在尸体所传不洁之源上，就传不洁，不洁传到它们底下的物件；众贤却定：它们不挡不洁蔓延——不洁冲破这些菜蔬所成的遮盖向上升起，如同上面没有遮盖。人若用这些菜蔬盖 棚，就当它们根本不在，它们因「空隙之不合用」使 棚 不合用：正如顶盖里三掌空隙使 棚 不合用，三掌这些菜蔬也使 棚 不合用。理由何在？它们干了就碎落，所以即便新鲜时，也如同不在。
拉比阿巴 传 撒母耳 说：论众贤说人可以借以在逾越节尽吃苦菜之本分的那些菜蔬，它们若铺在尸体所传礼仪上不洁的一个来源之上，它们就传礼仪上的不洁，这不洁就蔓延到它们底下的物件上。
§ Rabbi Abba said that Shmuel said: With regard to vegetables about which the Sages said: One fulfills his obligation to eat bitter herbs on Passover, if they are spread over a source of ritual impurity imparted by a corpse, they transmit ritual impurity, and the impurity spreads to objects beneath them.
尽管如此，众贤却定：它们并不成为一道屏障，挡住礼仪上的不洁蔓延。
And, nevertheless, the Sages decreed that they do not serve as a barrier before the spread of ritual impurity.
这不洁冲破由这些菜蔬所成的遮盖，向上升起，如同它上面没有遮盖一样。
The impurity breaches roofing made of these vegetables and rises upward, as if there were no covering over it.
人若用这些菜蔬给一座 棚 加顶盖，就如同它们根本不在那里一样，它们因空隙之不合用而使这座 棚 不合用。
If one roofs a sukka with these vegetables, it is as if they were not there at all, and they render a sukka unfit due to the unfitness of airspace.
正如顶盖里三掌的空隙使一座 棚 不合用，同样，顶盖里三掌的这些菜蔬也使一座 棚 不合用。
Just as three handbreadths of airspace in the roofing renders a sukka unfit, so too, three handbreadths of these vegetables in the roofing renders a sukka unfit.
这条 哈拉哈 的理由是什么？
What is the reason for this halakha?
既然它们干了就会碎裂掉落，即便在新鲜的时候，它们也如同不在那里一样。
Since when they dry they crumble and fall, even while fresh, they are as one that is not there.
借 拉比阿巴 之言，革玛拉再引一句：拉比阿巴 传 拉夫胡纳 说：为酒醡而摘的葡萄串，没有「柄」——连着葡萄与串的梗，酿酒不用它，所以在不洁上它的地位不是柄，只是废料；这些梗若碰到不洁之源，不染不洁，也不把不洁传给连着的葡萄。
借着 拉比阿巴 的话，革玛拉再引一句。
Apropos the statements of Rabbi Abba, the Gemara cites another.
拉比阿巴 传 拉夫胡纳 说：论为酒醡而摘葡萄串的人，这些葡萄串没有柄。
Rabbi Abba said that Rav Huna said: In the case of one who harvests bunches of grapes for the winepress, these bunches do not have handles.
那把葡萄连在串上的梗，是酿酒所不需要的。
The stems, which connect the grapes to the clusters, are not required for the production of wine.
所以，论礼仪上的不洁，它们的法定地位不是柄；它们只是废料。
Therefore, their legal status is not that of a handle in terms of ritual impurity; they are merely waste.
因此，这些梗若碰到礼仪上不洁的一个来源，它们不染不洁，也不把不洁传给连着的葡萄。
Consequently, if these stems come into contact with a source of ritual impurity, they do not become impure and they do not transmit impurity to the attached grapes.
拉夫玛拿西亚·巴尔·加达 传 拉夫胡纳 说：为盖 棚 而收割谷物的，谷物没有柄——麦秸的地位不是谷粒的柄；他意在盖 棚，只要合用作顶盖的麦秸，不要不合用的谷粒；所以在这情形里，麦秸不是用来挪动谷粒的。
而 拉夫玛拿西亚·巴尔·加达 传 拉夫胡纳 说：论为给 棚 加顶盖而收割谷物的人，这谷物没有柄。
And Rav Menashya bar Gadda said that Rav Huna said: In the case of one who harvests grain for roofing a sukka, the grain has no handles.
麦秸的法定地位不是谷粒的柄。
The legal status of the straw is not that of a handle for the grain.
既然他的用意是给他的 棚 加顶盖，他所要的只是麦秸，那是合用的顶盖，而不是谷粒，那是不合用的。
Since his interest is roofing his sukka, he wants only the straw, which is fit roofing, and not the grain, which is unfit.
所以在这情形里，麦秸并不便于挪动谷粒。
Therefore, in this context, the straw does not facilitate moving the grain.
革玛拉评说：说收割谷物的麦秸不是柄的那一位，论摘葡萄的更会这样说，因为梗不合他所需——酒醡里不要梗，免得梗吸了酒。反过来，说摘葡萄的没有柄的那一位，只在那情形这样说；论收割谷物的，他会说有柄，因连着麦秸的谷粒合他所需：他可以用它们盖 棚、压住麦秸，免得被风吹散。
革玛拉评说：那说论收割谷物的人、麦秸不是柄的一位，论摘葡萄的人，就更会这样说，因为那些梗并不合他所需。
The Gemara notes: The one who said that in the case of one who harvests grain, the straw is not a handle, all the more so would he say so in the case of one who harvests grapes, since the stems are not suitable for his needs.
酒醡里不要梗，免得它们吸了酒。
Stems are not wanted in the winepress, so that they will not absorb wine.
反过来，那说论摘葡萄的人、它们没有柄的一位，只在那情形里这样说；然而论收割谷物的人，他会说它有柄，因为连着麦秸的谷粒是合他所需的。
By contrast, the one who said in the case of one who harvests grapes that it has no handles, he said so only in that case; however, in the case of one who harvests grain, he would say that it has handles, since the grain attached to the straw is suitable for his needs.
他可以用它们给 棚 加顶盖，压住麦秸，免得它被风吹散。
He can roof the sukka with them and weigh down the straw, so that it does not scatter in the wind.
革玛拉提议：可说 拉夫玛拿西亚·巴尔·加达 之言是 坦拿 之争，如 《巴拉伊塔》 所教：带着无花果的无花果枝、带着葡萄的葡萄藤、带着谷穗的麦秸、带着枣子的棕枝——凡此种种，废料若多于食物，用来盖的 棚 合用；不然，不合用。另有人 说：麦秸不多于连在能染不洁之食物上一掌之柄与食物的合计，棚 就不合用。
革玛拉提议：我们可否说 拉夫玛拿西亚·巴尔·加达 的话，是 坦拿 之间所争论的，正如一条 《巴拉伊塔》 所教：无花果枝而上面有无花果；葡萄藤而上面有葡萄；麦秸而上面有谷穗；棕枝而上面有枣子；论它们全部，废料的量若多于食物的量，用它们加顶盖的 棚 就合用。
The Gemara suggests: Let us say that the statement of Rav Menashya bar Gadda is subject to a dispute between tanna’im, as it is taught in a baraita: Fig branches, and there are figs on them; vines, and there are grapes on them; straw, and there are stalks of grain on them; palm branches, and there are dates on them, with regard to them all, if the amount of waste is greater than the amount of the food, a sukka roofed with them is fit.
若不然，这座 棚 就不合用。
And if not, the sukka is unfit.
另有人 说：这座 棚 不合用，直到麦秸的量多于连在能染礼仪上不洁之食物上那一掌之柄与食物两者合计的量。
Aḥerim say: The sukka is unfit until the amount of straw is greater than the combined amount of the handbreadth of the handles attached to the food that is susceptible to ritual impurity and the food.
岂不是他们所争的就在这一点：说麦秸须多过柄的一位 另有人，以为预定作顶盖的出产有柄；与他相争的首位 坦拿，以为没有柄？
革玛拉接着说：岂不是他们所争论的就在这一点：一位贤者，就是 另有人，说麦秸也须多于柄，他认为指定作顶盖的出产有柄；而另一位贤者，就是与他相争的首位 坦拿，认为它们没有柄吗？
The Gemara continues: What, is it not that they disagree with regard to this: That one Sage, Aḥerim, who said that the straw must be greater than the handles as well, holds that the produce designated for roofing have handles; and one Sage, the first tanna, who disagrees, holds that they do not have handles?
革玛拉评说：照 拉比阿巴——为酒醡而摘的葡萄串没有柄、为盖顶而割的谷物却有——这必是 坦拿 之争，他显然照 另有人。然而照 拉夫玛拿西亚·巴尔·加达——为盖顶而割的谷物没有柄——我们可要说这是 坦拿 之争、他照 《巴拉伊塔》 的首位 坦拿 吗？拉夫梅纳西亚 可以对你说：众人都同意为盖顶而割的谷物没有柄；《巴拉伊塔》 论的是：他起初为食用而割了秆，后来改变主意，决定拿来盖顶——谷物起初作食物时有柄，他虽改了心意，地位也不变。
革玛拉评说：照 拉比阿巴 的意见，他说为酒醡而摘的葡萄串没有柄，而为加顶盖而收割的谷物却有，这必是 坦拿 之间的一个争论。
The Gemara notes: According to the opinion of Rabbi Abba, who says that grape clusters harvested for the winepress do not have handles, but grain harvested for roofing does, it is certainly a dispute between tanna’im.
显然，他认同 另有人 的意见，他们认为为加顶盖而收割的谷物有柄。
Clearly, he holds in accordance with the opinion of Aḥerim, who hold that grain harvested for roofing has handles.
然而照 拉夫玛拿西亚·巴尔·加达 的意见，他说为加顶盖而收割的谷物没有柄，我们可要说这是 坦拿 之间的一个争论，而他认同这条 《巴拉伊塔》 首位 坦拿 的意见吗？
However, according to the opinion of Rav Menashya bar Gadda, who says that grain harvested for roofing does not have handles, shall we say that it is a dispute between tanna’im, and that he holds in accordance with the first tanna of the baraita?
拉夫梅纳西亚 可以对你说：众人都同意：论为加顶盖而收割谷物的人，这谷物没有柄。
Rav Menashya could have said to you that everyone agrees: With regard to one who harvests grain for roofing, the grain does not have handles.
而在这里，在这条 《巴拉伊塔》 里，我们所论的是什么？
And here in the baraita, with what are we dealing?
是人起初为了食用而割下这些秆，后来重新考虑他对它们的打算，决定用它们来加顶盖的情形。
It is a case where one initially cut the stalks for food, and reconsidered his plan for them, and decided to use them for roofing.
既然这谷物起初作为食物时是有柄的，它的地位就不因他改变了心意而改变。
Since initially, as food, the grain had handles, its status does not change despite his change of intent.
革玛拉问：他若为食用而割，众拉比以为谷物没有柄，理由何在？照常规，谷物是有柄的。你若说众拉比以为他一改主意决定拿来盖顶，起初的心意就被抵消，地位如同其他不可食的顶盖，所以没有柄——革玛拉问：他起初的心意真能这样被抵消吗？我们岂不是在密释纳里学过：一切器物（下接 14a）
革玛拉问：他若是为食用而割下它们，众拉比认为这谷物没有柄，理由是什么？
The Gemara asks: If he cut them for food, what is the rationale for the opinion of the Rabbis that the grain has no handles?
照常规，谷物是有柄的。
As a rule, grain has handles.
你若说：众拉比认为，他一旦重新考虑他对它们的打算、决定用它们来加顶盖，他起初的心意就被抵消了，它们的法定地位就如同其他任何不可食的顶盖，因此它们没有柄；革玛拉问：他起初的心意真能以那种方式被抵消吗？
And if you say that the Rabbis hold that once he reconsidered his plan for them and decided to use them for roofing, his initial intent was negated and their legal status is like any other inedible roofing, and they consequently have no handles, the Gemara asks: And was his initial intent negated in that manner?
我们岂不是在一条密释纳里学过：一切器物
Didn’t we learn in a mishna: All vessels