← 节蛋卷总目·第四章 搬来者
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）牲畜的饲料，如草与芦苇枝，不涉预备器皿之禁，所以安息日可以修剪它，随意使用。
牲畜的饲料，例如草与芦苇枝，没有任何因预备器皿而来的禁令。
Animal fodder, such as straw and reed branches, does not have any associated prohibition due to the preparing of a vessel.
所以人可以在安息日修剪它，并随他所愿使用它。
One may therefore trim it on Shabbat and use it as one wishes.
拉夫卡哈纳 以 《巴拉伊塔》 反驳 拉夫犹大：安息日可搬动香木，为嗅它、为在病人面前扇风；可用手指揉它放出香气来嗅；却不可从枝上折下，好使枝上湿处发出浓香来嗅；若折了，按妥拉之律免罚，却仍是禁的。若为剔牙，不可折；折了就须为安息日行被禁之工献赎罪祭。可见香木虽有作饲料的，仍禁折取，这似与他的话相抵。
拉夫卡哈纳 从以下这条 《巴拉伊塔》 对 拉夫犹大 提出反驳：人可以在安息日搬动香树的木头，为要嗅它们，也为要在病人面前摇动它们给他扇风。
Rav Kahana raised an objection to Rav Yehuda from the following baraita: One may handle wood of a spice tree on Shabbat in order to smell them and to wave them before a sick person to fan him.
他也可以在手指间揉碎它，放出它的香气，并嗅它。
And he may crush it between his fingers to release its fragrance, and he may smell it.
然而他不可从枝上把它折下来，为要在枝上造出一个会发出浓烈香气的湿处，好嗅它；而若他折了，按妥拉之律他免于刑罚，然而这样做是被禁止的。
However, he may not cut it from the branch in order to produce a moist spot on the branch that will emit a strong fragrance, so as to smell it; and if he did cut it, he is exempt from punishment according to Torah law, but it is prohibited to do so.
若他打算用它剔牙，他不可折它；而若他折了，他就有义务为在安息日违犯一项被禁止的工而献一个赎罪祭。
If he intends to clean his teeth with it, he may not cut it, and if he did cut it, he is liable to bring a sin-offering for transgressing a prohibited labor on Shabbat.
这表明：尽管有些香树的木头被用作牲畜的饲料，折下它仍是被禁止的。
This indicates that although some wood of a spice tree was used as animal fodder, it is nevertheless prohibited to cut it.
这看来与 拉夫犹大 相抵。
This appears to contradict Rav Yehuda.
拉夫犹大 对 拉夫卡哈纳 说：如今连「免罚而禁」一语对我的意见也是难处，并不合理——难道要说反过来「须献赎罪祭」吗？这教导不能照字面解，而须这样理解：那条 《巴拉伊塔》 所论的是像梁木那样的硬木，在那里有犯被禁之工的顾虑。革玛拉质疑：硬枝能用手揉碎吗？
拉夫犹大 对 拉夫卡哈纳 说：如今，连「免罚却被禁止」这句话对我的意见也构成难处，而且并不合理。
Rav Yehuda said to Rav Kahana: Now, even the statement exempt but prohibited poses a difficulty to my opinion, and it is not reasonable.
难道须要说相反的话，就是「有义务献一个赎罪祭」吗？
Is it required to say the opposite, i.e., liable to bring a sin-offering?
这条教导不能照它的字面理解；而是必须这样理解：那条 《巴拉伊塔》 被教导时，是论像梁木那样的硬木块，论它们有人会行一项被禁止之工的顾虑。
This teaching cannot be understood at face value; rather, it must be understood as follows: When that baraita was taught, it was referring to hard pieces of wood such as beams, with regard to which there is a concern that one might perform a prohibited labor.
革玛拉质疑这话：而硬枝能用手揉碎吗？
The Gemara questions this: And can hard branches be crushed by hand?
革玛拉答：这条 《巴拉伊塔》 有缺文，所教的是这样：香木可揉碎来嗅，也可折下来嗅。这话在什么情形说？在软木；硬木却不可折，若折了，免罚而禁。若为剔牙，不可折；折了就须献赎罪祭。
革玛拉回答：这条 《巴拉伊塔》 是有缺文的，而它所教的是以下这些：论香树的木头，人可以揉碎它并嗅它，也可以折它并嗅它。
The Gemara replies: The baraita is incomplete and is teaching the following: With regard to wood of a spice tree, one may crush it and smell it and cut it and smell it.
这句话是在什么情形里说的？
In what case is this statement said?
是论软的木块；然而论硬的，人不可折它们。
With regard to soft pieces of wood, but with regard to hard ones, one may not cut them.
而若他折了它，他免于刑罚，然而这样做是被禁止的。
And if he did cut it he is exempt, but it is prohibited to do so.
若他打算用它剔牙，他不可折它；而若他折了，他就有义务献一个赎罪祭。
If he intended to clean his teeth with it, he may not cut it, and if he did cut it, he is liable to bring a sin-offering.
同样，一条 《巴拉伊塔》 教：可折下来嗅；另一条教：不可折下来嗅。拉比泽拉 传 拉夫希斯达 说：这不难——许的一条论软木，禁的一条论硬木。
同样，一条 《巴拉伊塔》 里教导：人可以折它并嗅它；而另一条 《巴拉伊塔》 里教导：人不可为了嗅它而折它。
Similarly, it is taught in one baraita: One may cut it and smell it, and it is taught in another baraita: One may not cut it to smell it.
拉比泽拉 说 拉夫希斯达 说：这并不难。
Rabbi Zeira said that Rav Ḥisda said: This is not difficult.
在这个情形里，当它被许可时，是论软木。
In this case, when it is permitted, it is referring to soft wood.
在那个情形里，当那条 《巴拉伊塔》 禁止它时，是论硬的木块。
In that case, where the baraita prohibits it, it is referring to hard pieces of wood.
论这条 哈拉哈 本身，拉夫阿哈·巴尔·雅各 力驳：硬的为何不可？这与我们在密释纳里所学的有何不同——人可打破一个桶来吃里面的干无花果，只要不存心做器皿，事后还可用那桶？折木来嗅当然不比打破桶更算被禁之工。况且 拉瓦·巴尔·拉夫阿达 与 拉维恩·巴尔·拉夫阿达 都说：我们在 拉夫犹大 家时，他常折下许多香木枝给我们，虽然它们硬得够做斧柄与锛柄。
论这条 哈拉哈 本身，拉夫阿哈·巴尔·雅各 对此强烈反驳：论硬的，为什么不可？
With regard to the halakha itself, Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov strongly objects to this: With hard ones, why not?
这个情形与我们在一条密释纳里所学的有什么不同：一个人可以打破一个桶，为要从中吃干无花果，只要他并不借此存心做一件器皿；而他事后还可以使用那个桶。
In what way is this case different from that which we learned in a mishna: A person may break a barrel in order to eat dried figs from it, provided that he does not thereby intend to make a vessel, and he may use the barrel afterward.
为了嗅而折下木头，当然不比打破一个桶更算一项被禁止的工。
Breaking off wood in order to smell it is certainly not more of a prohibited labor than breaking a barrel.
而且，还有 拉瓦·巴尔·拉夫阿达 与 拉维恩·巴尔·拉夫阿达，两人都说：当我们在 拉夫犹大 家的时候，他会折下许多香树的木枝给我们，尽管它们硬得足以合用作斧头与锛子的柄。
And furthermore, it is Rava bar Rav Adda and Ravin bar Rav Adda, who both say: When we were at the house of Rav Yehuda, he would break and give us many sticks of wood of a spice tree, although they were hard enough to be fit for handles of axes and hatchets.
革玛拉答：这不难——一个照 拉比以利以谢，一个照众拉比。如 《巴拉伊塔》 所教：拉比以利以谢 说：安息日或节日，人可从面前取一根细木剔牙；众拉比说：只可从牲畜的饲槽取牙签——它合作饲料，算为一切用途预备好。他们都同意不可摘取；若摘了用来剔牙或当钥匙开门，安息日无心而为，须献赎罪祭；节日故意而为，受因节日行工而亵渎节日者的四十鞭刑。以上是首说那位贤者的话。
革玛拉答：这并不难；这个情形是照 拉比以利以谢 的意见，而那个情形是照众拉比。
The Gemara answers: This is not difficult; this case is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, whereas that case follows the Rabbis.
正如一条 《巴拉伊塔》 里所教：拉比以利以谢 说：在安息日或节日，一个人可以从他面前取一根细木，用它剔牙；而众拉比说：人只可以从牲畜的饲槽里取一根牙签；既然它合于作牲畜的饲料，它就被看作为一切用途预备好的。
As it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Eliezer says: On Shabbat or a Festival, a person may take a sliver of wood from before him to clean his teeth with it, and the Rabbis say: One may take a toothpick only from an animal’s trough; since it is fit for animal fodder, it is considered prepared for all purposes.
而他们都同意：他不可摘取它。
And they agree that he may not pluck it.
而若他摘了它，用来剔牙，或用它当钥匙、用它开门，若他是在安息日无意地这样做，他就有义务献一个赎罪祭。
And if he did pluck it to clean his teeth with it or to use it as a key and open a door with it, if he did so unwittingly on Shabbat, he is liable to bring a sin-offering.
若他是在节日故意这样做，他就受那施于借着行工亵渎节日之人的四十鞭。
If he did so intentionally on a Festival, he receives the forty lashes administered to one who desecrates the Festival by performing labor.
这些是 拉比以利以谢 的话。
These are the words of Rabbi Eliezer.
众拉比说：无论安息日还是节日，即便用手摘来当钥匙，也只因拉比之规而禁。所以 拉比以利以谢——他在那里说安息日无心摘牙签做钥匙这样的器皿须献赎罪祭——这里折木来嗅，就说免罚而禁；众拉比——他们在那里说摘牙签免罚而禁——这里折木来嗅，就可 按理 许可。
而众拉比说：这个与那个，无论人是在安息日还是在节日这样做，即便他用手摘了它、用作钥匙，它也只是因着一道拉比的防范之规而被禁止。
And the Rabbis say: Both this and this, whether one did so on Shabbat or a Festival, even if he plucked it by hand to use it as a key, it is prohibited only due to a rabbinic decree.
所以，拉比以利以谢——他在那里说，一个在安息日无意地摘了一根牙签、为要做一件像钥匙那样之器皿的人，有义务献一个赎罪祭——那么在这里，论一个为要嗅它而折下一根细木的人，他就免于刑罚，然而是被禁止的。
Therefore, Rabbi Eliezer, who states there that one who plucks a toothpick on Shabbat unwittingly in order to make a vessel such as a key is liable to bring a sin-offering, then here, in the case of one who cuts a sliver of wood in order to smell it, he is exempt, but it is prohibited.
然而众拉比——他们在那里，在摘牙签的情形里说，他免于刑罚然而是被禁止的——那么在这里，当人为嗅之故折下一根细木时，它就是 按理 许可的。
However, the Rabbis who state there, in the case of plucking a toothpick, that he is exempt but it is prohibited, then here, when one cuts a sliver of wood for purposes of smelling, it is permitted ab initio.
革玛拉问：拉比以利以谢 不接受我们在密释纳里所学的这条 哈拉哈 吗——人可打破桶来吃里面的干无花果，只要不存心做器皿？这表明不存心做器皿就 按理 许可，他却说免罚而禁。革玛拉答：拉夫阿施 说：那条教导的从宽裁定，是论用沥青补过的器皿——先前破过、碎片用沥青粘合的；人为自己所需打破它，不算砸毁完整的器皿，所以不算造了器皿。
革玛拉问：而 拉比以利以谢 不接受我们在一条密释纳里所学的这条 哈拉哈 吗：一个人可以打破一个桶，为要从中吃干无花果，只要他并不借此存心做一件器皿？
The Gemara asks: And does Rabbi Eliezer not accept this halakha that we learned in a mishna: A person may break a barrel in order to eat dried figs from it, provided that he does not thereby intend to make a vessel?
这表明：若人不存心做一件器皿，它就是 按理 许可的；而 拉比以利以谢 却认为他免于刑罚，然而是被禁止的。
This shows that if one does not intend to make a vessel, it is permitted ab initio; whereas Rabbi Eliezer maintains that he is exempt, but it is prohibited.
革玛拉答：拉夫阿施 说：当那条 《巴拉伊塔》 被教导时，它从宽的裁定是论一件用沥青修补过的器皿，意思是一件先前破过、碎片用沥青粘在一起的器皿。
The Gemara answers: Rav Ashi said: When that baraita was taught, its lenient ruling was with regard to a vessel patched with pitch [mustaki], meaning a vessel that had previously been broken and its pieces glued together with pitch.
「用沥青修补过的器皿」原文 mustaki（מוּסְתָּקִי），英译以方括号附注。中文不写罗马字。
若人为他自己的需要打破它，他并没有砸毁一件完整的器皿，所以他不被看作造了一件器皿。
If one breaks it for his own needs, he does not smash a complete vessel, and he is therefore not considered to have fashioned a vessel.
§ 密释纳教：节日可从院子里收集草。众贤教：可从院子里收集材料生火，因院里一切都算预备好的，只要不堆成堆；拉比西缅 连堆成堆也许。革玛拉问：他们争在何处？从严的众拉比以为：看来像为明天与别日收集，所以禁，免得人被疑从节日为平日预备；后者以为：他的锅证明他的用意——旁人见他用草煮食，不会疑他为节日之后预备。
在密释纳里所教：而人在节日可以从院子里收集草。
§ It is taught in the mishna: And one may collect straw from the courtyard on a Festival.
众贤教导：人可以从院子里收集材料并生火，因为院子里的一切都被看作预备好的，只要他不把它们堆成堆；而 拉比西缅 即便这样也许可。
The Sages taught: One may collect materials from a courtyard and kindle a fire because everything in a courtyard is considered prepared, provided he does not arrange it in piles, and Rabbi Shimon permits it even in such a manner.
革玛拉问：他们在什么上相争？他们争论的根据是什么？
The Gemara asks: With regard to what do they disagree; what is the basis of their dispute?
一位贤者，就是从严的众拉比，认为：看来像是他在为明天与别的一天收集，所以它是被禁止的，使人不致被疑为从节日为平日预备。
One Sage, i.e., the Rabbis, who are stringent, holds: It looks as though he is collecting for tomorrow and another day, and it is therefore prohibited, so that one will not be suspected of preparing from a Festival to a weekday.
而一位贤者，就是 拉比西缅，认为：他的锅证明他的用意。
And one Sage, Rabbi Shimon, holds: His pot proves his intention.
当旁观者看见他用这草烹调时，他们就不会疑他为节日之后预备。
When onlookers see that he is using the straw for cooking, they will not suspect him of preparing for after the Festival.
§ 密释纳教：节日不可用任何方式生新火。革玛拉问：理由何在？革玛拉解释：因他在节日造出新东西——这类似创造之举，所以禁。
在密释纳里所教：人在节日不可用任何方式生出新火。
§ It is taught in the mishna that one may not produce new fire on a Festival in any manner.
革玛拉问：这的理由是什么？
The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this?
革玛拉解释：是因为他在节日造出了一件新东西。
The Gemara explains: Because he creates something new on a Festival.
这类似一个创造之举，所以是被禁止的。
This is similar to an act of creation, and it is therefore prohibited.
§ 密释纳说：不可把瓦烧白来在上面烤食物。革玛拉问：他借此做了什么？他既是为预备食物，这与别的烤法有何不同？拉巴·巴尔·巴尔·哈纳 传 拉比约哈难 说：这里论的是新瓦，禁止是因为……（下接 34a）
这条密释纳陈述：人不可借着加热把瓦片烧白，为要在上面烤食物。
§ The mishna states that one may not whiten tiles by heating them, in order to roast food on them.
革玛拉问：他借此做了什么？既然他的用意是预备食物，这与任何别的烤法有什么不同？
The Gemara asks: What does one thereby do; since his intention is to prepare food, how does this differ from any other manner of roasting?
拉巴·巴尔·巴尔·哈纳 说 拉比约哈难 说：我们在这里所处理的是新瓦片，而它之所以被禁止，是因为
Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Here we are dealing with new tiles, and it is prohibited because