← 小节期卷总目·第一章 浇灌水田
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 14 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。
革玛拉再问：或许不洁在田内，树在外围，被犁的只是树间一带，有坟墓的内部并未犁过？
革玛拉问：可是或许不洁在里面，树在外面，被犁过的只有树与树之间的地带，而田里有坟墓的里面一带并没有被犁过？
The Gemara asks: But perhaps the ritual impurity was on the inside and the trees were on the outside, and only the area between the trees was plowed, while the inner portion of the field with the grave was not plowed?
答：这是树散布全田的情形，整块田很可能都犁过了。或说：标记不立得离不洁太远，标记既在树旁，坟墓也就在树旁，已被犁过。
革玛拉回答：这是指那些树散布全田的情形，所以很可能整块田都被犁过了。
The Gemara answers: The case is where the trees are scattered throughout the entire field, so that it is likely that the entire field was plowed.
你若愿意，也可以换个说法：这不必顾虑，因为我们前面说过，标记不立得离实际的不洁之处太远，免得使以色列地受损。
And if you wish, say instead: This is not a concern, as we said earlier that one does not distance the marker too far from the actual site of ritual impurity, so as not to cause a loss of Eretz Yisrael.
既然标记立在树的附近，可以推定那些树离坟墓的实际所在很近，坟墓所在之处是被犁过的。
As the marker is located near the trees, presumably the trees are close to the actual site of the grave, and the site of the grave was plowed.
拉比犹大 说须有长老或学者作证；阿巴耶 由此推出：城里有妥拉学者，城中一切事务都归他负责，他应当知道城里发生的事。
那条 《巴拉伊塔》 里教导说，拉比犹大 说：只有在有一位长老或一位学者能就此事作证的时候，人才凭这些标记断定，因为不是人人都精通此事，或许这块田根本没有被犁过。
It is taught in the baraita that Rabbi Yehuda says: One relies on these signs only when there is an Elder or a rabbinic scholar who can testify about the matter, as not all are well versed in this matter, and perhaps the field was not plowed at all.
阿巴耶 说：从 拉比犹大 这话可以学到：城里若有一位妥拉学者，城里的一切事务就都推到他身上，就是都归他负责。
Abaye said: Learn from this statement of Rabbi Yehuda that when there is a Torah scholar in the city, all affairs of the city are thrust upon him, i.e., are his responsibility.
所以，城里发生了什么事，他都应当知道。
Consequently, he is expected to know what has happened in the city.
拉夫犹大 论标记的石头：一块，表示其下不洁；两块，中间有石灰则中间一带不洁，无石灰则中间洁净、各石各标一处。
革玛拉继续讨论标记坟墓的事。
§ The Gemara continues its discussion of marking graves.
拉夫犹大 说：人若发现一块做了标记的石头，这表明它底下的地是不洁的。
Rav Yehuda said: If one found a single marked stone, this indicates that the ground underneath it is ritually impure.
他若发现两块做了标记的石头，就有如下区分：两石之间的地上若有石灰，这表明两石之间的地带是不洁的，两块石头标出不洁地带的边界；两石之间的地上若没有石灰，这表明两石之间的地带是洁净的，每块石头各标一处不洁。
If he found two marked stones, the following distinction applies: If there is lime on the ground between them, this indicates that the area between them is ritually impure and the two stones mark the boundaries of the impure area; and if there is no lime on the ground between them, this indicates that the area between them is ritually pure and each stone marks a separate area of ritual impurity.
革玛拉以一条 《巴拉伊塔》 相难：两块标记石之间，有犁过的迹象才洁净，否则不洁——并不以石灰为准。
革玛拉问：即使两石之间没有犁过的迹象，两石之间的地带也被视为洁净吗？
The Gemara asks: And is the area between them deemed ritually pure even though there is no sign of plowing having taken place between the stones?
一条 《巴拉伊塔》 里岂不是另有教导如下：人若发现一块做了标记的石头，这表明它底下的地是不洁的。
But isn’t it taught otherwise in a baraita as follows: If one found a single marked stone, this indicates that the ground underneath it is ritually impure.
他若发现两块做了标记的石头，就有如下区分：两石之间若有犁过的迹象，两石之间的地带就是洁净的；若没有，两石之间的地带就是不洁的。
If he found two marked stones, then the following distinction applies: If there is evidence of plowing having taken place between them, the area between the two stones is ritually pure; and if not, the area between them is ritually impure.
拉夫帕帕 调和：《巴拉伊塔》 讲的是石灰浇在石头顶上又四下散开的情形——有犁过的迹象，可说石灰是犁地时从石上剥落的，中间洁净；没有，就是石灰本为标记中间之地，中间不洁。
拉夫帕帕 说：这一抵触可以这样解决：这里，在这条 《巴拉伊塔》 中，所讲的是用作不洁标记的石灰本是浇在石头顶上的，又向四下薄薄地散开。
Rav Pappa said: The contradiction can be resolved by explaining that here, in the baraita, the case is where the lime used as a marker of ritual impurity had been poured on top of the stones, and it is spread thinly this way and that.
在这种情形下，两石之间若有犁过的迹象，两石之间的地带就是洁净的，因为可以说石灰是因犁地而从石头上剥落的；石灰原本只在石头顶上，表明石头底下有不洁，后来在犁地时落到了两石之间。
In this case, if there is evidence of plowing having taken place between the stones, the area between them is ritually pure, as one can say that the lime was peeled off from the stones due to the plowing; originally the lime was only on top of the stones, to indicate that there is ritual impurity underneath them, but then fell into the area between them during the plowing.
但两石之间若没有犁经过的迹象，那么石灰最可能是用来标记两石之间的地，两石之间的整个地带都是不洁的。
But if there is no evidence of a plow having passed between them, then it is most likely that the lime was meant to mark the ground between the stones, and the entire area between them is ritually impure.
拉比阿西 论田界的标记：一边、两边、三边做了标记，不洁的只是那些田界本身；四边都做了标记，田界洁净，所围的整块田不洁。
拉比阿西 说：一块田若只有一边的田界做了标记，就推定那田界本身是不洁的，而田的其余部分全是洁净的。
Rabbi Asi said: If only one border of a field is marked, it is assumed that the border itself is ritually impure while the entire rest of the field is ritually pure.
若有两边的田界做了标记，就推定这两边都是不洁的，而田的其余部分全是洁净的。
If two borders are marked, it is assumed that they are both ritually impure while the entire rest of the field is ritually pure.
若有三边的田界做了标记，就推定这三边都是不洁的，而田的其余部分全是洁净的。
If three borders are marked, it is assumed that the three of them are ritually impure while the entire rest of the field is ritually pure.
若四边的田界都做了标记，田界本身是洁净的，而田界所围的整块田是不洁的。
If all four borders are marked, the borders themselves are ritually pure, while the entire field enclosed by the borders is ritually impure.
理由是 《巴拉伊塔》 所说：标记不立得离不洁太远，免得使以色列地受损；四边都标，正是要表明整块田不洁。
因为夫子在 《巴拉伊塔》 中说过：标记不立得离实际的不洁之处太远，免得使以色列地受损，就是免得扩大人们不敢进入的地区。
As the Master said in the baraita: One does not distance the marker from the actual site of ritual impurity, so as not to cause a loss of Eretz Yisrael, i.e., not to increase the area into which people refrain from entering.
所以，他们把四边的田界都做了标记，表明整块田是不洁的。
Consequently, they marked all of the borders to indicate that the entire field is ritually impure.
密释纳说：在节中日，查验的人也出去拔除雨季时田里长出的杂种之苗。
密释纳教导说：在节中日，查验的人也出去拔除雨季时在田里长出的、为律法所禁的 杂种 之苗。
§ It is taught in the mishna: And inspectors even go out on the intermediate days of a Festival to uproot the shoots of prohibited diverse kinds [kilayim] that grew in the fields during the rainy season.
革玛拉以《舍客勒卷》的密释纳相难：亚达月初一，法庭就收舍客勒和拔除杂种两事发出公告。
革玛拉问：他们在节中日出去拔除杂种吗？
The Gemara asks: Do they go out to uproot diverse kinds during the intermediate days of a Festival?
革玛拉从另一条密释纳（《舍客勒卷》1:1）提出抵触，那里说：亚达月初一，法庭就收舍客勒一事发出公告，就是每个成年男子每年向圣殿库房缴纳的半舍客勒，用来购买公众的祭物。
The Gemara raises a contradiction from another mishna (Shekalim 1:1), which states: On the first of Adar the court issues a proclamation concerning the collection of the shekels, i.e., the yearly half-shekel contribution to the Temple treasury made by each adult male for the purpose of buying communal offerings.
法庭也就从田里拔除杂种的义务发出公告。
And the court also issues a proclamation with regard to the obligation to uproot diverse kinds from the fields.
那条密释纳又说：亚达月十五日修路、量浸礼池、标记坟墓，也出去拔除杂种。既已在亚达月拔过，为何逾越节的节中日又要出去？
亚达月十五日，在有城墙的城里诵读以斯帖记书卷，他们也出去清除路上的荆棘，修整城中的街道，并丈量浸礼池，查明池中的水是否够所需之量。
On the fifteenth of Adar the Megilla, the Scroll of Esther, is read in the walled cities, and they go out to clear thorns from the roads, to repair the city streets, and to measure the ritual baths to ascertain that they have the requisite quantity of water.
他们也料理其他一切公众的需要，用石灰标记坟墓，并出去拔除杂种的苗。
And they tend to all other public needs, and they mark graves with lime, and they go out to uproot the shoots of diverse kinds.
既然他们在亚达月已经出去拔除过杂种，为什么在逾越节的节中日又要出去呢？
If they already went out in Adar to uproot the diverse kinds, why would they go out again on the intermediate days of the festival of Passover?
拉比以利亚撒 与 拉比约西·巴尔·哈尼纳 分歧：一说亚达月拔早熟作物、节中日拔晚熟作物；一说亚达月拔冬播谷物、节中日拔菜蔬。
拉比以利亚撒 与 拉比约西·巴尔·哈尼纳 对此有分歧：一位说：这里，说他们在亚达月十五日出去的那条密释纳，指的是早熟的作物；而那里，说他们在节中日出去的那条密释纳，指的是晚熟的作物，这种作物要到逾越节的节中日才能清楚辨认。
Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina disagreed about this issue: One said: Here, in the mishna that states that they go out on the fifteenth of Adar, it is referring to the early crop, while there, in the mishna that states that they go out on the intermediate days of the Festival, it is referring to the late crop, which isn’t clearly recognizable until the intermediate days of Passover.
另一位说：这里，说他们在亚达月十五日出去的那条密释纳，指的是冬天播种、到亚达月已长高的谷物；而那里，说他们在节中日出去的那条密释纳，指的是菜蔬，它们在这季节较晚的时候才长出来。
And one said: Here, in the mishna that states that they go out on the fifteenth of Adar, it is referring to grains that are sown in the winter and have already grown tall by Adar, while there, in the mishna that states that they go out on the intermediate days of the Festival, it is referring to vegetables, which only grow later in the season.
拉比阿西 转述 拉比约哈难：亚达月月中出去拔除，只限花尚不能辨认的情形；花若早已能辨认，早就该出去拔了。
拉比阿西 说，拉比约哈难 说：他们所教导法庭的差役在亚达月月中出去拔除杂种，只是指花在较早的时候还不能辨认的情形，那时还无法断定那幼苗是否出自混杂的种子。
Rabbi Asi said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: They taught that court messengers go out to uproot diverse kinds in the middle of the month of Adar only in a case where the blossom was not yet recognizable at an earlier date, so it was still impossible to determine whether or not the seedling was from diverse kinds of seeds.
但若花在较早的时候已能辨认，他们就在那时出去拔除杂种的苗。
But if the blossom was already recognizable at an earlier date, they go out at that time to uproot the shoots of diverse kinds of seeds.
为何特选节中日？拉比约哈难（经 拉比雅各 转述）说：是为工钱——节中日工人不得做平常工作，会为公众工程减价。
革玛拉问：节中日有什么不同，以致我们特地在那一周出去拔除杂种的苗？
The Gemara asks: What is different about the intermediate days of a Festival that we specifically go out to uproot shoots of diverse kinds of seeds during that week?
拉比雅各 说，拉比约哈难 说：是为了法庭雇来拔除杂种的工人的工钱。
Rabbi Ya’akov said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: It is due to the wages paid to the workers hired by the court to uproot the diverse kinds.
在节中日，他们不可做平常的工作，所以他们会为我们，就是为公众的工程，减低工价，否则他们就全无进项了。
On the intermediate days of the Festival it is prohibited for them to perform ordinary labor, and so they reduce their rates for us, i.e., for public works, as otherwise they would have no income at all.
拉夫泽维德（或说 拉夫梅沙尔希亚）推论：拔除杂种的工钱出自圣殿库房的款项，所以要设法省钱；若由田主付，省钱于公众就无益了。
拉夫泽维德 说，也有人说是 拉夫梅沙尔希亚 说的：由这个解释可以学到：我们付工钱给拔除杂种的工人时，是从圣殿库房收得的款项中付给他们的。
Rav Zevid said, and some say that it was Rav Mesharshiyya who said: Learn from this explanation that when we give the workers who uproot the diverse kinds their wages, we give it to them from the funds of the collection of the Temple treasury chamber.
既然付给他们的是圣款，所以要设法尽量减少开支。
Since they are paid with consecrated money, an attempt is made to minimize the expenses.
因为你若以为我们是从他们的钱里付的，就是法庭强令田里有杂种的田主付钱给拔除的工人，那么省下这笔开支，对我们有什么益处呢？
As, if it enters your mind that we pay them from theirs, i.e., the court forces the owners of the fields where the diverse kinds are found to pay the workers who uproot them, what benefit would we derive from saving the expense?
工人要多少，就该让田主付他们多少。
However much the workers desire, they should pay them.
（下接 6之间）混入多少别种才算须拔除的杂种？拉夫撒母耳·巴尔·以撒 引《禁混种卷》的密释纳作答：凡一塞亚的种子，其中含有……
关于拔除杂种的问题，革玛拉问：作物里须混入多少别的品种，才算是这些工人必须拔除的杂种？
Concerning the issue of uprooting diverse kinds, the Gemara asks: And how much of another species must be mixed in with a crop in order to be considered diverse kinds that must be uprooted by these workers?
拉夫撒母耳·巴尔·以撒 说：其量正如我们在密释纳（《禁混种卷》2:1）里所学的：「凡一 塞亚 的种子，其中含有……」
Rav Shmuel bar Yitzḥak said: The amount is like that which we learned in the mishna (Kilayim 2:1): Any se’a of seeds that contains