(续上)深处之坟所传的不洁。
-
深处一座坟所传的不洁。
with impurity imparted by a grave in the depths.
← 住棚卷总目·第二章 睡者
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 4 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。
(续上)深处之坟所传的不洁。
深处一座坟所传的不洁。
with impurity imparted by a grave in the depths.
革玛拉评说:有 《巴拉伊塔》 照 拉瓦 之意教导:拉比犹大 说:他们根本不带门板,因孩子过于自信,或许把头或肢体伸出门板边外、染上深处之坟的不洁;他们带来肚腹宽大的埃及牛,孩子坐在牛上,手拿石杯;到了西罗亚池就下去盛满,再上来坐在牛背上。
革玛拉评说:有一条 《巴拉伊塔》 是照 拉瓦 的意见教的,因为 拉比犹大 说:他们根本不带门板来,因为一个孩子有过分的自信,或许他会把他的头或他的一只肢体伸出门板的边外,就染上深处一座坟所传的不洁。
The Gemara comments: It is taught in a baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rava, as Rabbi Yehuda says: They would not bring doors at all, because a child has an exaggerated sense of self-confidence and perhaps he will extend his head or one of his limbs beyond the edge of the door and will become impure with impurity imparted by a grave in the depths.
而是他们带来肚腹宽大的埃及牛,孩子们就坐在它们上面,手里拿着石头做的杯子。
Rather, they would bring Egyptian oxen whose bellies are broad, and the children would sit upon them and they would hold cups of stone in their hands.
他们到了西罗亚池的时候,就下去把杯子盛满,再上来,坐在牛背上。
When they reached the Siloam pool they descended and filled them, and ascended and sat themselves on the backs of the oxen.
革玛拉问:床有好几拳大,我们岂不是在密释纳里学过 拉比犹大 说:我们惯常在众长老面前睡在床底下?可见床虽有几掌大,地位不是帐幕。答:床不同,它专为在上面使用而设,所以底下的空间地位不是帐幕。又问:那载孩子取水作红母牛之礼的牛,岂不也专为在上面使用而设?拉比犹大 却以它们的脊骨与肚腹为帐幕。
革玛拉问:可是论一张床,它量有好几拳大,我们岂不是在密释纳里学过:拉比犹大 说:我们的习惯是在众长老面前睡在床底下吗?
The Gemara asks: But with regard to a bed, which measures several fistbreadths, didn’t we learn in the mishna that Rabbi Yehuda says: It was our custom that we would sleep beneath the bed before the Elders?
看来,尽管一张床量有好几掌大,它的法定地位也不是帐幕。
Apparently, despite the fact that a bed measures several handbreadths, its legal status is not that of a tent.
革玛拉答:一张床是不同的,因为它是专为在它上面使用而设计的;所以它底下空间的地位不是帐幕。
The Gemara answers: A bed is different, since it is designed specifically for use upon it; therefore, the status of the space beneath it is not that of a tent.
革玛拉问:像那些用来载孩子去为红母牛取水的牛,岂不也是专为在它们上面使用而指定的吗?尽管如此,拉比犹大 却把它们的脊骨与肚腹看作一个帐幕。
The Gemara asks: Aren’t oxen like those used to transport the children to bring water for the red heifer also designated specifically for use upon them and nevertheless, Rabbi Yehuda deems their spinal column and bellies a tent.
拉文 从以色列地来到巴比伦时说:拉比以利亚撒 说:牛不同,因为日晒时它们为牧人遮日,下雨时为牧人挡雨——牧人躺在牛腹下避风雨。革玛拉问:若是这样——牛能遮蔽就成帐幕,即便主要用途是在上面使用——床的地位也该是帐幕,因它遮护放在底下的鞋履。
拉文 从以色列地来到巴比伦时说:拉比以利亚撒 说:牛是不同的,因为在日晒时它们为牧人遮挡日头,在下雨时为牧人遮挡雨水。
When Ravin came to Babylonia from Eretz Yisrael he said that Rabbi Elazar said: Oxen are different since they protect the shepherds in the sun from the sun, and in the rain from the rain.
牧人会躺在牛的肚腹底下,躲避风雨日晒。
Shepherds would lie beneath the bellies of the oxen as protection from the elements.
革玛拉问:若是这样,就是说一头牛因为能提供遮蔽而成为帐幕,即便它主要的指定用途是在它上面使用,那么一张床的地位也该是帐幕,因为它遮护放在它底下的鞋与凉鞋。
The Gemara asks: If so, i.e., if an ox is rendered a tent because it provides protection, even if its primary designation is for use upon it, then the status of a bed too should be that of a tent, since it protects shoes and sandals that are placed beneath it.
拉瓦 驳那解释,说:牛不同、地位是帐幕,是因它们的肚腹与背是造来护卫内脏的,如经上说:「你以皮和肉为衣给我穿上,用骨与筋把我全体联络」(约伯记 10:11)——经上既提皮肉为遮蔽,牛的地位就是帐幕。
不如说,拉瓦 驳斥了那个解释,说:牛是不同的,它们的地位是帐幕,因为它们的肚腹与背是为了护卫它们的内脏而造的,正如经上所说:「你以皮和肉为衣给我穿上,用骨与筋把我全体联络」(约伯记 10:11)。
Rather, Rava rejected that explanation and said: Oxen are different and their status is that of a tent since their bellies and backs are made to protect their innards, as it is stated: “With skin and flesh You have clothed me, and with bones and sinews You have knitted me together” (Job 10:11).
既然这节经提到肉与皮是提供遮蔽的,牛的地位就是帐幕。
Since flesh and skin are mentioned in the verse as providing shelter, the status of the oxen is that of a tent.
你若愿意,也可以说:在此 拉比犹大 是照他在别处的思路——我们要求 棚 是长久的居所;棚 里的床是暂时的居所,棚 是长久的帐幕,暂时的帐幕不来抵消长久的帐幕——长久的 棚 有分量,那分量压过其中任何暂时的结构;所以照 拉比犹大,床的地位不是帐幕。
你若愿意,也可以说:在这情形里,拉比犹大 是照他在别处所说的思路:我们要求一座 棚 是一个长久的居所。
And if you wish, say instead: In this case Rabbi Yehuda conforms to his reasoning, as he stated elsewhere: We require a sukka that is a permanent residence.
棚 里的床是一个暂时的居所,而 棚 是一个长久的帐幕;一个暂时的帐幕并不来抵消一个长久的帐幕。
The bed in a sukka is a temporary residence, and the sukka is a permanent tent; and a temporary tent does not come and negate a permanent tent.
长久的 棚 是有分量的,那分量压过它里面任何暂时的结构。
The permanent sukka is significant and that significance supersedes any temporary structure within it.
所以,照 拉比犹大 的意见,床的地位不是帐幕。
Therefore, in Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion, the status of the bed is not that of a tent.
革玛拉问:照 拉比西缅——他也说我们要求 棚 是长久的居所——暂时的帐幕却来抵消长久的帐幕?答:是的,他们所争的正是这一点:拉比西缅 以为暂时的帐幕来抵消长久的帐幕;拉比犹大 以为暂时的帐幕不来抵消长久的帐幕。
革玛拉问:可是照 拉比西缅,他也说我们要求一座 棚 是一个长久的居所,尽管如此,一个暂时的帐幕却来抵消一个长久的帐幕吗?
The Gemara asks: But according to Rabbi Shimon, who also stated that we require a sukka that is a permanent residence, nevertheless, a temporary tent comes and negates a permanent tent.
革玛拉答:是的,而那正是他们所争论之处。
The Gemara answers: Yes, and that is the point over which they disagree.
一位贤者,拉比西缅,认为:一个暂时的帐幕来抵消一个长久的帐幕;而另一位贤者,拉比犹大,认为:一个暂时的帐幕并不来抵消一个长久的帐幕。
One Sage, Rabbi Shimon, holds: A temporary tent comes and negates a permanent tent, and one Sage, Rabbi Yehuda, holds: A temporary tent does not come and negate a permanent tent.
密释纳记 拉比西缅 与 拉比犹大 相反地说:有一件事,关乎 拉班迦玛列 的迦南奴仆 塔维 睡在床底下,拉班迦玛列 说 塔维 这样做是因他是学者、知道奴仆免 棚 之诫。有 《巴拉伊塔》 教导:拉比西缅 说:从 拉班迦玛列 的闲谈里我们学到两件事:学到迦南奴仆免 棚 之诫,也学到睡在床底下的没有尽本分。
密释纳述说:拉比西缅 与 拉比犹大 的意见相反,说:有一件事,关乎 拉班迦玛列 的迦南奴仆 塔维,他睡在床底下;而 拉班迦玛列 说 塔维 这样做,是因为他是一位妥拉学者,知道奴仆免于 棚 这条诫命。
The mishna relates that Rabbi Shimon said, contrary to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda: There was an incident involving Tavi, the Canaanite slave of Rabban Gamliel who was sleeping beneath the bed, and Rabban Gamliel claimed that Tavi did so because he was a Torah scholar and knew that slaves are exempt from the mitzva of sukka.
有一条 《巴拉伊塔》 教导:拉比西缅 说:从 拉班迦玛列 的闲谈里,我们学到两件事。
It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon said: From the conversation of Rabban Gamliel we learned two matters.
我们学到迦南奴仆免于 棚 这条诫命,我们也学到睡在床底下的人没有尽他的本分。
We learned that Canaanite slaves are exempt from the mitzva of sukka, and we learned that one who sleeps beneath the bed did not fulfill his obligation.
革玛拉质疑 《巴拉伊塔》 的措辞:拉比西缅 何不说「从 拉班迦玛列 的话」,而用不寻常的「从 拉班迦玛列 的闲谈」?答:借这措辞他顺带教我们另一件事,如 拉比阿哈·巴尔·阿达 所说——也有人说 拉比阿哈·巴尔·阿达 传 拉比哈姆努纳 传 拉夫 说:何以知道连妥拉学者的闲谈也须细究,即便说话者看来无意作 哈拉哈 裁定?如经上论义人说:「按时候结果子,叶子也不枯干」(诗篇 1:3)——这教导:妥拉学者不但他主要的产出、他的果子有分量,连他闲谈里衍生的枝节、他的叶子也有分量。
革玛拉质疑这条 《巴拉伊塔》 的措辞。
The Gemara questions the formulation of the baraita.
就让 拉比西缅 说:「从 拉班迦玛列 的话里」吧。
And let Rabbi Shimon say: From the statement of Rabban Gamliel.
他为什么用这个不寻常的说法:「从 拉班迦玛列 的闲谈里」?
Why did he use the atypical expression: From the conversation of Rabban Gamliel?
革玛拉答:借着这个说法,他顺带教我们另一件事,就像 拉比阿哈·巴尔·阿达 所说的——也有人说 拉比阿哈·巴尔·阿达 传 拉比哈姆努纳 传 拉夫 说——从哪里推出,即便妥拉学者的闲谈也须要分析,即便说话之人的用意看来并不是要作一个 哈拉哈 的裁定?
The Gemara answers: Through this expression he teaches us another matter in passing, like that which Rabbi Aḥa bar Adda said, and some say that Rabbi Aḥa bar Adda said that Rabbi Hamnuna said that Rav said: From where is it derived that even the conversation of Torah scholars require analysis, even when the intention of the speaker was apparently not to issue a halakhic ruling?
正如论义人所说的:「按时候结果子,叶子也不枯干」(诗篇 1:3)。
It is as it is stated with regard to the righteous: “Which brings forth its fruit in its season and whose leaf does not wither” (Psalms 1:3).
这是教导:论一位妥拉学者,不但他主要的产出,就是他的果子,是有分量的,连从他闲谈里衍生出来的枝节,就是他的叶子,也是有分量的。
This teaches that with regard to a Torah scholar, not only is his primary product, his fruit, significant but even ancillary matters that stem from his conversation, his leaves, are significant.
密释纳:把 棚 支在床腿上——即把 棚 的顶盖靠在床上——的,合用。拉比犹大 说:若 棚 没有床的支撑就立不住,不合用。
把他的 棚 支在床腿上的人,就是他把 棚 的顶盖靠在一张床上,这座 棚 是合用的。
One who supports his sukka on the legs of the bed, i.e., he leans the sukka roofing on a bed, the sukka is fit.
拉比犹大 说:若这座 棚 没有床的支撑,本身就立不住,它就不合用。
Rabbi Yehuda says: If the sukka cannot stand in and of itself without support of the bed, it is unfit.
革玛拉问:拉比犹大 判这 棚 不合用的理由何在?拉比泽拉 与 拉比阿巴·巴尔·梅梅尔 所说理由不同:一说:因它不够长久——不够稳固,床一挪 棚 就会塌;一说:因他用能染不洁之物支撑顶盖——床架是器物;不但顶盖,连支撑顶盖之物也不可能染不洁。
革玛拉问:拉比犹大 判这座 棚 不合用的话,理由是什么?
The Gemara asks: What is the rationale for the statement of Rabbi Yehuda deeming this sukka unfit?
拉比泽拉 与 拉比阿巴·巴尔·梅梅尔 就这理由意见不同。
Rabbi Zeira and Rabbi Abba bar Memel disagree with regard to the rationale.
一位说:它不合用,是因为它缺少长久性。
One said: It is unfit because it lacks permanence.
这座 棚 不够稳固,因为床若被挪动,这座 棚 就会塌下来。
The sukka is not stable enough, as if the bed is moved the sukka will collapse.
另一位说:它不合用,是因为他是用一件能染礼仪上不洁的东西支撑这顶盖,因为床架是一件器物。
And one said: It is unfit because he is supporting the roofing with an object that is susceptible to ritual impurity, as the bedframe is a vessel.
不但顶盖,连支撑顶盖的东西,也不可以是能染礼仪上不洁的。
Not only the roofing, but that which supports the roofing as well may not be susceptible to ritual impurity.
革玛拉问:二说的实际分别何在?解释:分别在人把铁炙叉楔进地里、在上面盖 棚 的情形——照说因缺长久而不合用的一位,这 棚 是长久的,合用;照说因以能染不洁之物支撑而不合用的一位,他正是用能染不洁之物支撑,所以不合用。
革玛拉问:他们之间的实际分别是什么?
The Gemara asks: What is the practical difference between them?
革玛拉解释:分别在于人把铁炙叉楔进地里、在它们上面给 棚 加顶盖的情形。
The Gemara explains: The difference is in a case where one wedged iron skewers into the ground and roofed the sukka upon them.
照那说这座 棚 所以不合用是因为它缺少长久性的一位,这座 棚 是有长久性的,它就合用。
According to the one who said that the reason the sukka is unfit is because it lacks permanence, this sukka has permanence, and it is fit.
然而那说这座 棚 所以不合用是因为他用一件能染礼仪上不洁的东西支撑这顶盖的一位,他正是用一件能染礼仪上不洁的东西支撑它的,所以它不合用。
However, the one who said the reason the sukka is unfit is because he is supporting the roofing with an object that is susceptible to ritual impurity, he is supporting it with an object that is susceptible to ritual impurity, so it is unfit.
阿巴耶 说:众贤所教这争论,只在人把顶盖靠在床上的情形;若人把顶盖放在床上——在床上固定竿子、顶盖由竿子支撑——众人都同意 棚 合用。理由何在?照说因缺长久而不合用的,这 棚 是长久的——床即便挪动,顶盖也随之挪动,不会塌;照说因以能染不洁之物支撑而不合用的,这里他不是用能染不洁之物支撑,因顶盖不是由床支撑。
阿巴耶 说:众贤所教的这个争论,只在人把顶盖靠在床上的情形。
Abaye said: The Sages taught this dispute only in a case where one leaned the roofing on the bed.
然而人若把顶盖放在床的上面,就是他把竿子固定在床上,而顶盖是由那些竿子支撑的,众人都同意这座 棚 合用。
However, if one placed the roofing atop the bed, i.e., he affixed poles to the bed and the roofing is supported by those poles, everyone agrees that the sukka is fit.
它所以合用,理由是什么?
What is the reason that it is fit?
照那说这座 棚 所以不合用是因为它缺少长久性的一位,这座 棚 是有长久性的,因为即便床被挪动,顶盖也会随着它挪动,不会塌下来。
According to the one who said that the sukka is unfit because it lacks permanence, this sukka has permanence as even if the bed is moved, the roofing will move with it and will not collapse.
而照那说这座 棚 所以不合用是因为他用一件能染礼仪上不洁的东西支撑它的一位,在这情形里,他并不是用一件能染礼仪上不洁的东西支撑它,因为顶盖不是由床支撑的。
And according to the one who said the sukka is unfit because he supports it with an object that is susceptible to ritual impurity, in this case he is not supporting it with an object that is susceptible to ritual impurity, as the roofing is not supported by the bed.