← 岁首卷总目·第一章 四个岁首
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 7 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）他不会毫无保留地把祭物转交给公众，心里仍把它们当作自己的；所以 《巴拉伊塔》 教我们：这不必顾虑。
他不会毫无保留地把它们转交给公众，而是在心里仍把它们当作自己的；所以这条 《巴拉伊塔》 教我们：这不是须要顾虑的事。
he will not transfer them over to the public without reservation, and in his heart he will hold on to them as his own, therefore the baraita teaches us that this is not a matter of concern.
革玛拉问：我们密释纳的 坦拿 为何不把尼散月初一算作舍客勒的岁首？答：密释纳的 坦拿 只列确定的岁首；既教「用旧收的来献，尽了义务」，他就不能把这岁首当作确定的规则来说，所以没教它。
革玛拉问：而我们这条密释纳的 坦拿，为什么没有把尼散月初一算作舍客勒的岁首？
The Gemara asks: And why didn’t the tanna of our mishna count the first of Nisan as the New Year for shekels?
革玛拉答：这条密释纳的 坦拿 只列出确定的岁首。
The Gemara answers: The tanna of the mishna lists only definite New Years.
既然所教的是：人若用旧收的来献，他就尽了他的义务，他就不能把这个岁首当作一条确定的规则来陈述，所以他没有教它。
Since it is taught: If one brought them from the old contribution, he has fulfilled his obligation, he could not state this New Year as a definite rule, and so he did not teach it.
§ 《巴拉伊塔》 所教：有人说尼散月初一也是租屋的岁首。众贤在 《巴拉伊塔》 里教：把房屋租给别人一年的，从某日数到某日满十二个月；但他若说租「这一年」，即便是亚达月初一才立约，一个月后尼散月初一一到，就算一年，租约就终结。
在那条 《巴拉伊塔》 里所教的：而有人说，尼散月初一也是租赁房屋的岁首。
§ It was taught in the baraita: And some say that the first of Nisan is also the New Year for the renting of houses.
众贤教导以下这条 《巴拉伊塔》：人若把一所房屋租给另一个人一年，他就从某日数到某日，满十二个月。
The Sages taught the following baraita: If one rents out a house to another person for a year, he counts twelve months from day to day.
然而他若说他是租「这一年」，那么即便这约是在亚达月初一才立的，一个月后尼散月初一一到，它就被算作一年，租约也就终结了。
But if he said that he was renting it for this year, then even if the agreement was made only on the first of Adar, once the first of Nisan arrived one month later, it is counted as a year, and the rental contract comes to end.
革玛拉评说：即便照那位说一年中的一日算作一年的意见，这里论租屋的 哈拉哈 也不同，因为人不会为不到三十日而费事去租房屋；所以人若在亚达月初一之后才租，亚达月剩下的日子不算满一年。
革玛拉评说：即便照那位说「一年中的一日算作一年」的意见，这里论租赁的诸条 哈拉哈 也不同，因为人不会费事去租一所房屋不到三十日。
The Gemara comments: Even according to the one who said that one day in a year is considered a year, it is different here, with regard to rental halakhot, as a person does not take the trouble to rent a house for less than thirty days.
所以，人若在亚达月初一之后才租一所房屋，亚达月剩下的日子就不被看作满一年。
Therefore, if one rented a house after the first of Adar, the remaining days of Adar are not considered a full year.
革玛拉问：为何不说提斯利月初一是租屋的岁首，这样人若在夏天租屋一年，这一年就在提斯利月终结？答：不加说明而租屋的人，是打算租整个雨季，直到雨季结束的尼散月。
革玛拉问：可是为什么不说提斯利月初一是租赁房屋的岁首，这样人若在夏天租一所房屋一年，这一年就会在提斯利月终结？
The Gemara asks: But why not say that the first of Tishrei is the New Year for the renting of houses, and so if one rents a house for a year in the summer the year would come to an end in Tishrei?
革玛拉答：一个不加说明而租房屋的人，是打算租整个雨季，直到尼散月雨季结束的时候。
The Gemara answers: A person who rents a house without specification intends to rent it for all of the rainy season, until Nisan, when the rainy season comes to a close.
革玛拉问：《巴拉伊塔》 的首位 坦拿 与我们密释纳的 坦拿，为何不把尼散月初一列为租屋的岁首？他们以为连在尼散月，天也常被云遮、下雨；所以租屋的人不会只打算租到尼散月初一，他大概不愿在还下雨时落得无家可归。
革玛拉问：而那条 《巴拉伊塔》 的首位 坦拿 与我们这条密释纳的 坦拿，为什么没有把尼散月初一列为租赁房屋的岁首？
The Gemara asks: And why didn’t the first tanna of the baraita and the tanna of our mishna include the first of Nisan as the New Year for the renting of houses?
他们认为，即便在尼散月，天空被云遮盖、下起雨来也是常有的。
They hold that even in Nisan it is common that the sky becomes covered with clouds and rain falls.
所以，一个租房屋的人并不打算只租到尼散月初一，因为他大概不愿在还下雨的时候，落得无家可归。
Therefore, one who rents a house does not have in mind to rent it only until the first of Nisan, as presumably he does not want to find himself in a situation where he is homeless when it is still raining.
§ 密释纳说：以禄月初一是牲畜什一的岁首。革玛拉评说：这条密释纳所引的意见出于谁？是 拉比梅伊尔，另一条密释纳正记着他这句话。
密释纳说：以禄月初一是牲畜什一的岁首。
§ The mishna states: On the first of Elul is the New Year for animal tithes.
革玛拉评说：这条密释纳里所引之意见的作者是谁？
The Gemara comments: Who is the author of the opinion cited in this mishna?
是 拉比梅伊尔，正如在一条密释纳里所教的：拉比梅伊尔 说：以禄月初一是牲畜什一的岁首。
It is Rabbi Meir, as it is taught in a mishna that Rabbi Meir says: On the first of Elul is the New Year for animal tithes.
革玛拉问：至于诸节期——尼散月初一是诸节期的岁首——密释纳所引的意见出于谁？是 拉比西缅，他以为三个节期须按次序、逾越节在先过去，才违犯迟延之禁。那就说密释纳末段：拉比以利亚撒 与他说，牲畜什一的岁首在提斯利月初一。难道前段与末段照他，中段论牲畜什一却照 拉比梅伊尔？
革玛拉问：而论诸节期，就是尼散月初一是诸节期的岁首，这条密释纳里所引之意见的作者是谁？
The Gemara asks: And with regard to the Festivals, i.e., that the first of Nisan is the New Year for Festivals, who is the author of the opinion cited in the mishna?
是 拉比西缅，他认为人只有在三个节期照它们合宜的次序、以逾越节为首过去之后，才违犯迟延之禁。
It is Rabbi Shimon, who holds that one transgresses the prohibition against delaying only if the three Festivals have passed in their proper order, with Passover first.
那就说这条密释纳的末段，它说 拉比以利亚撒 与 拉比西缅 说：牲畜什一的岁首在提斯利月初一。
Say the last clause of the mishna, which states that Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon say: The New Year for animal tithes is on the first of Tishrei.
难道能是前段与末段照 拉比西缅 的意见，而论牲畜什一的中段却照 拉比梅伊尔 的意见吗？
Can it be that the first clause and the last clause follow the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, while the middle clause relating to animal tithes follows the opinion of Rabbi Meir?
拉夫约瑟 说：整条密释纳照 拉比犹大·哈纳西，他照不同 坦拿 的意见取这条密释纳：论诸节期他照 拉比西缅，论牲畜什一他照 拉比梅伊尔。
拉夫约瑟 说：整条密释纳是照 拉比犹大·哈纳西 的意见，而他照不同 坦拿 的意见来取这条密释纳。
Rav Yosef said: The entire mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and he takes the mishna according to the opinions of different tanna’im.
论诸节期，他持 拉比西缅 的意见；而论牲畜什一，他持 拉比梅伊尔 的意见。
With regard to the Festivals, he holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, while with regard to animal tithes he holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir.
革玛拉提出难处：若是这样，怎么是四个岁首？密释纳的 坦拿 若以为以禄月初一是牲畜什一的岁首，就有五个：尼散月初一、尼散月十五日、以禄月初一、提斯利月初一、细罢特月十五日。拉瓦 说：照每一个意见都只有四个：照 拉比梅伊尔 是四个，他去掉诸节期的岁首——照他没有固定时候开始数诸节期；照 拉比西缅 也是四个，他去掉牲畜什一的岁首——照他它在提斯利月初一，已列在里面。
革玛拉提出一个难处：若是这样，怎么会有四个岁首？
The Gemara raises a difficulty: If so, how are there four New Years?
这条密释纳的 坦拿 若认为以禄月初一是牲畜什一的岁首，就有五个岁首：尼散月初一、尼散月十五日、以禄月初一、提斯利月初一，与细罢特月十五日。
If the tanna of the mishna holds that the first of Elul is the New Year for animal tithes, there are five New Years: The first of Nisan, the fifteenth of Nisan, the first of Elul, the first of Tishrei, and the fifteenth of Shevat.
拉瓦 说：照每一个意见都只有四个岁首：照 拉比梅伊尔 是四个，他去掉诸节期的岁首，因为照他，没有一个固定的时候开始数诸节期。
Rava said: There are only four New Years according to each opinion: There are four according to Rabbi Meir, who removes the New Year for Festivals, as according to him there is no fixed time from which to begin counting the Festivals.
照 拉比西缅 的意见也是四个岁首，因为他去掉牲畜什一的岁首，因为照他，它在提斯利月初一，而那一日已经列在里面了。
According to Rabbi Shimon’s opinion as well there are four New Years, for he removes the New Year for animal tithes, as according to him it is on the first of Tishrei, which is already listed.
拉夫纳赫曼·巴尔·以撒 另作解答：密释纳当这样理解：有四个月份里有若干岁首——照 拉比梅伊尔，尼散月里有两个岁首：初一为诸王，十五日为诸节期。
拉夫纳赫曼·巴尔·以撒 另说了一个解答：这条密释纳应当这样理解：有四个月份，其中有若干个岁首，因为照 拉比梅伊尔，在尼散月里有两个岁首：初一是为诸王的，十五日是为诸节期的。
Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said an alternative answer: The mishna is to be understood as follows: There are four months in which there are several New Years, since in Nisan, according to Rabbi Meir, there are two New Years: For kings on the first and for Festivals on the fifteenth.
革玛拉从一条 《巴拉伊塔》 提出反驳：尼散月十六日是 初熟之捆 供物的岁首，从这日起许吃新谷；西弯月初六是两个饼（七七节 用新麦所献的公众两个饼）的岁首，从这日起许在圣殿里献新谷所做的素祭。若是这样，照 拉瓦，密释纳该教六个岁首；照 拉夫纳赫曼·巴尔·以撒 该教五个，因西弯月也是有岁首的月份。
革玛拉从以下这条 《巴拉伊塔》 提出一个反驳：尼散月十六日是 初熟之捆 供物的岁首，因为从这一日起，许人吃新收成的谷物。
The Gemara raises an objection from the following baraita: The sixteenth of Nisan is the New Year for the omer offering, as from this date onward it is permitted to eat from the new crop of grain.
西弯月初六是两个饼的岁首，就是在 七七节 用新麦所带来的公众两个饼供物，因为从这一日起，许人在圣殿里献用新谷所做的素祭。
The sixth of Sivan is the New Year for the two loaves, i.e., the public offering of two loaves from the new wheat brought on Shavuot, as from this day onward it is permitted to sacrifice meal-offerings in the Temple from the new grain.
若是这样，照 拉瓦，就让这条密释纳教导有六个岁首，包括尼散月十六日与西弯月初六；而照 拉夫纳赫曼·巴尔·以撒，就让它教导有五个岁首，因为西弯月是一个有岁首的月份。
If so, according to Rava, let the mishna teach that there are six New Years, including the sixteenth of Nisan and the sixth of Sivan, and according to Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak let it teach that there are five New Years, since Sivan is a month in which there is a New Year.
拉夫帕帕 说：密释纳的 坦拿 数岁首时，只数从晚上开始的，不从晚上开始的不数；初熟之捆 与两个饼的岁首不从晚上开始，而是从献上之时开始，所以不列入。
拉夫帕帕 说：这条密释纳的 坦拿 数岁首时，只数那些从晚上开始的；那些不从晚上开始的，他不数。
Rav Pappa said: When the tanna of the mishna counts New Years, he counts only those that begin in the evening; those that do not begin in the evening he does not count.
既然与 初熟之捆 和两个饼相关的岁首不是从晚上开始，而只是从它们被献上之时开始，他就没有把它们列入。
Since the New Years associated with the omer and the two loaves do not begin in the evening but only from the time that they are sacrificed, he does not include them.
革玛拉问：诸节期的岁首岂不也不从晚上开始？节期开始的晚上并不违犯迟延之禁，要到早上献过常献祭、能把所许的牲畜带上祭坛才违犯；可是 坦拿 仍数它。答：他既须在节期以前还愿，从节期一开始就担着违犯迟延之禁的责任。
革玛拉问：可是有诸节期的岁首，它不从晚上开始，因为人在节期开始的晚上并不违犯迟延之禁，而只在早上、常献祭献过、人能把所许的牲畜带到祭坛之后才违犯；尽管如此，这位 坦拿 仍数它。
The Gemara asks: But there is the New Year for Festivals, which does not begin in the evening, as the prohibition against delaying is not transgressed in the evening, when the Festival begins, but only in the morning, after the daily offering has been brought and one is able to bring the vowed animal to the altar, and nevertheless the tanna counts it.
革玛拉答：既然他须在节期以前把他所许的带来，从节期一开始，他就担着违犯迟延之禁的责任。
The Gemara answers: Since he had to bring his vow by the Festival, he stands liable from the beginning of the Festival for transgressing the prohibition against delaying.
革玛拉又问：禧年的岁首岂不也不从晚上开始，而是从赎罪日白天吹 羊角号 之时开始？可是 坦拿 仍数它。答：密释纳照 拉比约哈难·本·贝罗卡之子拉比以实玛利，他说禧年从 岁首日 开始，吹角只是完成奴仆的释放；所以禧年的岁首列在里面。
革玛拉又问：可是有禧年的岁首，它不从晚上开始，而是从赎罪日白天吹 羊角号 之时开始；尽管如此，这位 坦拿 仍数它。
The Gemara asks further: But there is the New Year for the Jubilee, which does not begin in the evening but from the time of the shofar blast on Yom Kippur during the day, and nevertheless the tanna counts it.
革玛拉答：这条密释纳是照 拉比约哈难·本·贝罗卡之子拉比以实玛利 的意见，他说禧年从 岁首日 开始，而吹 羊角号 只是完成奴仆的释放。
The Gemara answers: The mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, who said that the Jubilee Year begins on Rosh HaShana, and the blowing of the shofar merely completes the release of the slaves.
所以，禧年的岁首是包括在内的。
Therefore, the New Year for the Jubilee is included.
拉夫谢沙·巴尔·拉夫伊迪 另解 初熟之捆 与两个饼的岁首为何不在密释纳里：密释纳的 坦拿 数岁首时，只数不取决于某个举动的；取决于举动的，如献那捆大麦或两个饼，他不数。
拉夫谢沙·巴尔·拉夫伊迪 对 初熟之捆 供物的岁首与两个饼的岁首为何没在密释纳里提到，说了一个不同的解释：这条密释纳的 坦拿 数岁首时，只数那些不取决于某个举动的；那些取决于某个举动的，例如献上 初熟之捆 或两个饼，他不数。
Rav Sheisha, son of Rav Idi, said a different explanation for why the New Year for the omer offering and the New Year for the two loaves are not mentioned in the mishna: When the tanna of the mishna counts New Years, he counts only those that do not depend upon an action; those that depend upon an action, e.g., the offering of the omer or the two loaves, he does not count.
革玛拉问：诸节期的岁首岂不是取决于一个举动，即献常献祭——常献祭以前不可献别的祭？可是 坦拿 仍数它。答：不然，违犯「不可迟延」之禁不取决于别的事，节期一开始它就自行开始。
革玛拉问：可是有诸节期的岁首，它取决于一个举动，就是献上常献祭，因为在常献祭以前不可带来任何祭物；尽管如此，这位 坦拿 仍数它。
The Gemara asks: But there is the New Year for the Festivals, which depends upon an action, i.e., the sacrifice of the daily offering, since no offering may be brought before the daily offering, and nevertheless the tanna counts it.
革玛拉答：不是这样，因为违犯「不可迟延」这条禁令并不取决于别的任何事；而是节期一开始，它就自行开始。
The Gemara answers: This is not so, as the transgression of the prohibition: You shall not delay, does not depend upon anything else; rather, it begins on its own as soon as the Festival begins.