← 节蛋卷总目·第一章 蛋
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 25 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）是从手指的关节以上吹——他不把混着糠的谷粒放在掌心，而是放在指头上，这是不寻常的拿法。
是从他手指的关节以上吹，就是说，他不把混着糠的谷粒放在他的掌心，而是放在他的指头上，这是一种不寻常的拿法。
from the joints of his fingers and above, i.e., he does not place the kernels mixed with chaff in his palm but on his fingers, which is an unusual way to hold them.
西方，就是以色列地，的人笑这个解释，说：他既已改变了寻常的做法，连用整只手也该许可。其实 哈拉哈 照 拉夫以利亚撒 所说：人可一只手拿着谷粒吹，不可两只手，甚至可用尽全力，因这根本不算与被禁之工相似。
在西方，就是以色列地，他们笑这个解释，说：既然他已经从寻常的做法改变了他的举动，即便用他的整只手这样做，也应当被许可。
They laughed at this explanation in the West, Eretz Yisrael, saying: Since he alters his behavior from the usual method, doing so even with his entire hand should be permitted as well.
其实，哈拉哈 是照 拉夫以利亚撒 所说的：人可以一只手拿着谷粒吹，而不可两只手；他甚至可以用尽全力这样做，因为这根本不被看作与一项被禁止的工相似。
Rather, the halakha is as Rav Elazar said: One may blow while holding the grain with one hand but not two, and he may even do so with all his strength, as this is not considered similar to a prohibited labor at all.
密释纳：沙迈学派 说：节日里香料可以稍稍改变方式捣——用木杵；盐只可用陶瓶或木制的锅勺捣，与平日的做法大不相同。希列学派 说：香料可照寻常方式捣，连用石杵也可；盐虽须用不寻常的方式捣，稍稍改变，如用木杵，就足以使这举动成为许可的。
沙迈学派 说：在节日里，香料可以用一种稍稍不寻常的方式，就是用一根木杵来捣；而盐只可以用一个陶瓶或一把木制的锅勺来捣，以一种与平日大不相同的方式。
Beit Shammai say: Spices may be pounded on a Festival in a slightly unusual manner, with a wooden pestle, and salt may be pounded only with an earthenware flask or with a wooden pot ladle, in a manner very different from that of a weekday.
而 希列学派 说：香料可以照它们寻常的方式捣，即便用一根石杵；至于盐，虽然它必须以不寻常的方式捣，一个稍稍的改变，例如用一根木杵来捣它，就足以使这个举动成为许可的。
And Beit Hillel say: Spices may be pounded in their usual manner, even with a stone pestle, and as for salt, although it must be pounded in an irregular manner, a slight modification such as pounding it with a wooden pestle is enough to render the act permitted.
无论如何，沙迈学派 与 希列学派 都同意捣盐须有改变，不可照平日的方式。理由何在？拉夫胡纳 与 拉夫希斯达 为此相争。其中一位说：人人都知道各样菜肴都须要盐，所以人当在节日前一日预备盐；他既没有预备，节日里就只可用不寻常的方式做。然而并非各样菜肴都须要香料，所以节日前一日他可能不知道节日里会须要香料。
无论如何，所有人，无论 沙迈学派 还是 希列学派，都同意：捣盐需要一种改变；它不可以照寻常平日的方式来做。
In any event, everyone, both Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel, agrees that the pounding of salt requires a change; it may not be performed in the regular weekday manner.
这的理由是什么？
What is the reason for this?
拉夫胡纳 与 拉夫希斯达 就这个问题相争。
Rav Huna and Rav Ḥisda disputed this issue.
他们中的一位说：每一个人都知道，一切菜肴都需要盐，所以人应当在节日的前一日预备盐。
One of them said: Everyone knows that all dishes require salt, and therefore one should prepare salt the day before the Festival.
既然他没有这样做，这件工作在节日里就只可以用一种不寻常的方式来做。
Since he failed to do so, this task may be performed on the Festival only in an unusual manner.
然而并不是一切菜肴都需要香料，所以可能在节日的前一日，人并不晓得他在节日里会需要香料。
But not all dishes require spices, and therefore it is possible that on the day prior to the Festival, one was not aware that he would require spices on the Festival.
另一位说了另一个理由：一切香料都会走味，不能提早预备；盐却不走味，意思是人本可以前一日预备好。他既疏忽了，节日里就只可用不寻常的方式预备盐。
而另一位说了一个不同的理由：一切香料都会失去它们的味道，不能提早预备；而盐不会失去它的味道，这就是说，人本可以在前一日把它预备好。
And the other one said a different reason: All spices lose their flavor and cannot be prepared ahead of time, and salt does not lose its flavor, which means one could have prepared it the day before.
既然他疏忽了没有这样做，他在节日里就只可以用一种不寻常的方式预备盐。
Since he neglected to do so, he may prepare salt on the Festival only in an unusual manner.
革玛拉问：这两个理由的实际分别在哪里？答：在人事先知道节日里要煮哪一种菜的情形——他既知道要用哪些香料，本可以前一日预备好，那香料就与盐无异，也须用不寻常的方式预备；然而若理由是香料会走味，他知不知道要做哪些菜就无关紧要。或者，实际分别在番红花：它的味道一日之内不会散去，所以知道节日里要做什么菜的人，本可以前一日预备好番红花。
革玛拉问：这两个理由之间的实际分别是什么？
The Gemara asks: What is the practical difference between these two reasons?
革玛拉答：它们之间的实际分别，是在人事先知道他在节日里想煮哪一种菜肴的情形。
The Gemara answers: The practical difference between them is in a case where one knew beforehand which type of dish he wants to cook on the Festival.
既然他知道他会需要哪些香料，他本可以在前一日把它们预备好；在那情形里，香料就与盐没有分别，人就应当被要求用一种不寻常的方式预备它们。
Since he knew which spices he would require, he could have prepared them the day before, in which case spices are no different from salt, and one should be required to prepare them in an unusual manner.
然而若理由是香料会失去它们的味道，他知道他打算预备哪些菜肴这一事实就无关紧要。
However, if the reason is that spices lose their flavor, the fact that he knew which dishes he planned to prepare is of no relevance.
或者说，在番红花的情形里有一个实际的分别，它的味道在一日之内不会散去。
Alternatively, there is a practical difference in the case of saffron, whose flavor does not dissipate over the course of a single day.
因此，一个知道他在节日里要预备什么菜肴的人，本可以在前一日预备好番红花。
Consequently, one who knows what dish he will prepare on the Festival could have prepared the saffron the day before.
拉夫犹大 传 撒母耳 说：凡吃之前须捣的食物，都可照寻常方式捣，连盐也可。革玛拉诘难：你岂不是说众人都同意盐的预备方式须有改变？答：他是照那位 坦拿 的意见说这条 哈拉哈，如 《巴拉伊塔》 所教：拉比梅伊尔 说：沙迈学派 与 希列学派 在惯常须捣的食物上并不相争——两家都以为它们可照寻常方式捣，盐也可与它们一同捣。
拉夫犹大 说 撒母耳 说：一切在吃之前必须捣的食物，都可以照它们寻常的方式捣，这即便适用于盐。
Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: All foods that must be pounded before being eaten may be pounded in their usual manner, and this applies even to salt.
革玛拉对此提出诘难：可是你岂不是说过，所有人都同意盐在它的预备方式上需要一种改变吗？
The Gemara challenges this: But didn’t you say that everyone agrees that salt requires a change in its manner of preparation?
革玛拉答：他是照那位 坦拿 的意见说这条 哈拉哈 的，正如一条 《巴拉伊塔》 里所教：拉比梅伊尔 说：沙迈学派 与 希列学派 在惯常要捣的食物的情形上，并没有相争。
The Gemara answers: He said this halakha in accordance with the opinion of that tanna, as it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir said: Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel did not disagree in the case of foods that are regularly pounded.
他们两家都认为，它们可以照它们寻常的方式捣，而盐可以与它们一同捣。
They both maintain that they may be pounded in their usual manner, and salt can be pounded together with them.
他们只争单独捣盐是否许可：沙迈学派 说：盐可用瓶子与木锅勺捣，供烤肉用——就是少量，因烤肉不须多少盐；却不可捣成腌锅中之肉所需的大量。希列学派 说：可以用任何东西捣。革玛拉诧异：用任何东西？你怎能这样想？既已确立众人都同意这只可用不寻常的方式做，希列学派 怎能说可以任何方式捣盐？不如说：盐可以为任何用途捣——无论是烤肉用的少量，还是腌肉用的大量。
他们只是就单独捣盐是否许可而相争；因为 沙迈学派 说：盐可以用一个瓶子和一把木制的锅勺来捣，为了烤肉，就是少量，因为人烤肉不需要多少盐；然而它不可以捣成为一锅要煮的肉加盐所需的大量。
They disagreed only about whether it is permitted to pound salt by itself, as Beit Shammai say: Salt may be pounded with a flask and with a wooden pot ladle for roasting, i.e., in small quantities, as one does not require much salt for roasting meat, but it may not be pounded in the large quantities required to salt meat for a cooked pot.
而 希列学派 说：它可以用任何东西来捣。
And Beit Hillel say: It may be pounded by anything.
革玛拉对这最后一句话表示诧异：用任何东西？
The Gemara expresses surprise at this last statement: By anything?
这能进入你的心思吗？
Can this enter your mind?
既然已经确立：所有人都同意这只可以用一种不寻常的方式来做，希列学派 怎能说人可以用任何方式捣盐呢？
How can Beit Hillel say that one may pound salt in any manner, when it has been established that everyone agrees that this may be performed only in an unusual manner?
其实，要说：盐可以为任何用途而捣，无论是为烤肉的少量，还是为腌肉的大量。
Rather, say: Salt may be pounded for anything, whether it is a small quantity for roasting or a large quantity for salting meat.
拉夫阿哈·巴尔德拉 对他儿子说：你捣盐时，把它稍稍往一边倾斜再捣，好叫节日里至少做得稍有不同。革玛拉也记述：拉夫舍舍特 在节日里听见捣盐的杵声，自言自语：这声音不是从我家里来的，因我已吩咐家里的人不要这样做。
拉夫阿哈·巴尔德拉 对他的儿子说：你捣盐的时候，要把它稍稍往一边倾斜，然后再捣，好叫它在节日里至少是以一种稍有不同的方式来做的。
Rav Aḥa Bardela said to his son: When you pound salt, tilt it a little to the side and then pound, so that it will at least be performed in a slightly different manner on a Festival.
革玛拉同样记述：拉夫舍舍特 在一个节日里听见一根杵捣盐的声音。
The Gemara similarly relates: Rav Sheshet heard the sound of a pestle pounding salt on a Festival.
他对自己说：这声音不是从我家里面来的，因为我已经吩咐我家里的人不要这样做。
He said to himself: This sound is not coming from inside my house, as I have instructed the members of my household not to do so.
革玛拉问：或许他们是倾斜着捣、以许可的方式捣的？答：不会是这样，因 拉夫舍舍特 听见的是清脆的声音，与杵斜着时发出的不同。又问：或许他们捣的是香料，节日里可照寻常方式捣？答：捣香料发出的声音与众不同，像狗吠，他会认得出来。
革玛拉问：可是或许他们把它倾斜了，以一种许可的方式捣呢？
The Gemara asks: But perhaps they tilted it and pounded in a permitted manner?
革玛拉答：那不可能是这情形，因为 拉夫舍舍特 听见的是一个清脆的声音，不像一根杵倾斜时所发出的那种。
The Gemara answers: This could not have been the case, as Rav Sheshet heard that it was a clear sound, unlike the one produced when a pestle is tilted.
革玛拉问：可是或许他们捣的是香料，而香料在节日里可以照寻常的方式捣呢？
The Gemara asks: But perhaps they were pounding spices, which may be pounded in the regular fashion on a Festival?
革玛拉答：捣香料所发出的声音是与众不同的，像狗吠一样，他本会认得出来。
The Gemara answers: The sound produced by pounding spices is distinctive, like a bark, which he would have recognized.
§ 众贤在 《巴拉伊塔》 里教：节日里不可做碎麦粥——把麦粒碾成四瓣做成的一道菜，很费工夫——也不可用臼杵碾谷。革玛拉诧异：这是两条自相矛盾的裁定：坦拿 先说单是碎麦粥不可做，因这很费力，表明别的东西可以碾；随后又说根本不可用臼杵碾。答：他的意思是这样——《巴拉伊塔》 应改读为：为何不可做碎麦粥？因不可用臼杵碾。
众贤在一条 《巴拉伊塔》 里教导：在节日里，人不可以做碎麦粥，这是一道由碾成四瓣的麦粒做成、要费很大工夫的菜；人也不可以用臼和杵碾谷。
§ The Sages taught in a baraita: On a Festival one may not prepare groats [tisanei], a dish comprised of grains of wheat crushed into quarters, which involves great effort, nor may one grind grain with a mortar and pestle.
「碎麦粥」原文 tisanei（תִּיסְנֵי），英译以方括号附注。中文不写罗马字。
革玛拉表示困惑：这是两条相互矛盾的裁定。
The Gemara expresses puzzlement: These are two contradictory rulings.
这位 坦拿 先陈述：单是碎麦粥不可以做，因为这涉及繁重的工作，意思是别的东西可以碾。
The tanna first stated that groats alone may not be prepared, as this involves hard work, implying that other items may be ground.
他随后又陈述：人根本不可以用臼和杵碾。
He subsequently states that one may not grind with a mortar and pestle at all.
革玛拉答：他所说的是这样：这条 《巴拉伊塔》 应当修订、读作如下：人不可以做碎麦粥的理由是什么？
The Gemara answers: This is what he said: The baraita should be amended to read as follows: What is the reason that one may not prepare groats?
因为人不可以用臼和杵碾。
Because one may not grind with a mortar and pestle.
革玛拉问：坦拿 何不只说「不可用臼杵碾」，由此推知不可做碎麦粥？答：他若只教「不可用臼杵碾」，我会以为这只适用于大的臼杵，用它看来像平日的活动；用小的臼杵，人或许会说看来无妨，连碎麦粥也可用这臼杵做。所以 坦拿 教我们：碎麦粥无论用何方式都不可做。
而让这位 坦拿 只说：人不可以用臼和杵碾，由此就可以推知碎麦粥不可以做。
And let the tanna simply say: One may not grind with a mortar and pestle, from which it can be inferred that groats may not be prepared.
革玛拉解释：他若只教「人不可以用臼和杵碾」，我会以为这只适用于一副大的臼和杵，用它看起来像是平日的活动；然而论一副小的臼和杵，人或许会说它看来无妨，人甚至可以用这副臼和杵做碎麦粥。
The Gemara explains that if he teaches only: One may not grind with a mortar and pestle, I would have said that this applies only to a large mortar and pestle, whose use has the appearance of a weekday activity; but with a small mortar and pestle, one might say it seems well, and one may prepare even groats with this mortar and pestle.
所以这位 坦拿 教导我们：碎麦粥无论用什么方式都不可以做。
The tanna therefore teaches us that groats may not be prepared in any manner.
革玛拉诘难：岂不是有 《巴拉伊塔》 明教：不可用大的臼杵碾，却可用小的臼杵碾？阿巴耶 说：头一条 《巴拉伊塔》 所教的也是论大的臼杵，不是小的。换句话说，那条 《巴拉伊塔》 讲的是两条 哈拉哈，不是先前所说的一条：坦拿 先裁定连用小的臼杵也不可做碎麦粥，随后说大的臼杵无论作何用途都不可用。
革玛拉对此提出诘难：可是岂不是在一条 《巴拉伊塔》 里明明教导：人不可以用一副大的臼和杵碾，然而人可以用一副小的臼和杵碾吗？
The Gemara challenges this: But isn’t it taught explicitly in a baraita that one may not grind with a large mortar and pestle, but one may grind with a small mortar and pestle?
阿巴耶 说：头一条 《巴拉伊塔》 被教导的时候，它也是论一副大的臼和杵而教的，不是论一副小的。
Abaye said: Also, when the first baraita was taught, it was taught with regard to a large mortar and pestle, not a small one.
换句话说，这条 《巴拉伊塔》 陈述的是两条 哈拉哈，而不是像先前所说的一条。
In other words, the baraita is stating two halakhot, not one, as claimed previously.
这位 坦拿 先裁定：人即便用一副小的臼和杵也不可以做碎麦粥；他随后陈述：人不可以为任何用途使用一副大的臼和杵。
The tanna first rules that one may not prepare groats even with a small mortar and pestle, and he subsequently states that one may not use a large mortar and pestle for any purpose.