← 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 12 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）两个蚁穴相距多远才算相邻、须有河相隔？答：一 帕尔萨 之内。
两个蚁穴相距多远以内算作相邻，以致须有一条河把它们隔开呢？
Up to what distance are the ant holes considered to be adjacent such that a river is required in order to separate between them?
一 帕尔萨 以内。
Up to a parasang [parsa].
密释纳说 拉比犹大 认为果园可照平常的方式捕捉、谷田只能用不平常的方式。《巴拉伊塔》 解释：平常的方式是挖坑挂上捕器；不平常的方式是把铁叉插进地里，用铲子敲打，掘开底下的土，直到找着并打死那些鼠类。
我们在密释纳里学过，拉比犹大 说：在果园里，可以照平常的方式捕捉鼹鼠和老鼠；在谷田里，却只可以用不平常的方式捕捉。
§ We learned in the mishna that Rabbi Yehuda says: In an orchard one may trap moles and mice in his usual manner, but in a field of grain, he may trap them only in a way that is not his usual manner.
注：此处革玛拉本作「拉比犹大 说」，而 6之间.12 所载密释纳作「众贤却说」，两处所归不一，照本段原文与英译。
众贤教导了下面这条 《巴拉伊塔》：人怎样照平常的方式捕捉呢？
The Sages taught the following baraita: How does one trap in his usual manner?
他在地上挖一个坑，把捕器挂在坑里。
He digs a hole in the ground and hangs a trap in it.
人怎样用不平常的方式捕捉呢？
How does one trap in a way that is not his usual manner?
他把一根铁叉插进疑有鼠类藏身的地里，用铲子敲打它，再把它底下的土掘开，直到找着并打死那些鼠类。
He inserts a spit into the ground where the rodents are suspected of hiding, strikes it with a spade, and removes the earth from beneath it until he finds and kills the rodents.
《巴拉伊塔》 引 拉比西缅·本·以利亚撒：谷田只能用不平常的方式捕捉，是指靠近城的谷田，损害有限；靠近果园的谷田，连平常的方式也可以，免得鼠类窜到果园毁坏树木。
一条 《巴拉伊塔》 里教导，拉比西缅·本·以利亚撒 说：他们说节中日在谷田里只可以用不平常的方式捕捉鼹鼠和老鼠，只是论靠近城的谷田说的，那里的损害只限于那块田，并不广大。
It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: When they said that one may trap moles and mice in a field of grain on the intermediate days of a Festival only in a way that is not his usual manner, they spoke only with regard to a field of grain that is adjacent to the city, where the damage is limited to that field and is not extensive.
可是在靠近果园的谷田里，连平常的方式也可以捕捉，免得鼹鼠和老鼠离开谷田，毁坏邻近果园里的树木，造成重大的损害。
But in a field of grain that is adjacent to an orchard, one may trap even in his usual manner, lest the moles and mice leave the field of grain and destroy the trees in the adjacent orchard, causing great damage.
密释纳说节中日可以堵住园子墙上的缺口。怎样堵？拉夫约瑟 说：用 枝梢 和月桂树枝，这只是临时的拦挡，不成为真正的隔墙。
密释纳里教导：节中日可以堵住自己园子墙上的缺口。
§ It is taught in the mishna: And one may seal a breach in the wall of his garden on the intermediate days of a Festival.
革玛拉问：人怎样堵这样的缺口呢？
The Gemara asks: How does one seal such a breach?
拉夫约瑟 说：用 枝梢 和月桂树的枝子，这些不构成真正的隔墙，只是一道临时的拦挡。
Rav Yosef said: With palm branches [hutza] and the branches of a bay tree [dafna], which do not create a significant partition, but simply a temporary barrier.
注：英译 palm branches [枝梢]，「月桂树」原文 דַּפְנָא。
《巴拉伊塔》：可以用石头填缺口，却不可用泥抹石。拉夫希斯达 说：只能堵、不能照平常方式筑墙，只是论园子的墙；院子的墙防外人进来偷窃，节中日也可以照平常的方式筑。
一条 《巴拉伊塔》 里教导：可以用石头填塞缺口，却不可用泥抹那些石头。
It was taught in a baraita: One fills in the breach with stone, but he does not plaster the stones with clay.
拉夫希斯达 说：他们所教的「只可堵缺口、不可照平常的方式筑墙」，只是论园子的墙说的，因为他把筑墙推到节后，并不会蒙受重大的损失。
Rav Ḥisda said: They taught that he may seal a breach but not build a wall in his usual manner only with regard to the wall of a garden, as no significant loss will be suffered if he delays building until after the Festival.
可是论到院子的墙——它能拦阻可能偷他东西的外人进来——即便在节中日，他也可以照平常的方式筑墙。
However, with regard to the wall of a courtyard, which prevents the entry of strangers who are likely to steal from him, he may build a wall in his usual manner even on the intermediate days of a Festival.
革玛拉提议以 《巴拉伊塔》 支持 拉夫希斯达：倾向 公共区 的墙，节中日可以照平常的方式拆了重筑。驳：那里的理由正如 《巴拉伊塔》 明说的，是因为危险，并不是因为院子需要保护。
革玛拉提议：我们可以说下面这条 《巴拉伊塔》 支持 拉夫希斯达 的话吧：一堵倾向 公共区、可能倒塌的墙，节中日可以照平常的方式拆掉重筑，因为它对过路人有危险。
The Gemara suggests: Let us say that the following baraita supports Rav Ḥisda’s statement: With regard to a wall that is leaning [goḥeh] toward the public domain and is likely to fall, one may demolish and rebuild it in his usual manner on the intermediate days of a Festival, due to the danger that it poses to passersby.
注：「倾向」，原文 גּוֹחֶה。
革玛拉驳回这个说法：那里的理由正如 《巴拉伊塔》 明文教导的，是因为那墙对过路人构成的危险，并不是因为它对院子所提供的保护。
The Gemara rejects this opinion: There, the reason is as the baraita explicitly teaches, i.e., it is due to the danger that the wall poses to passersby, and not due to the protection that it affords the courtyard.
一说这条 《巴拉伊塔》 引来不是支持而是反驳 拉夫希斯达：倾向 公共区 的墙因为危险才可重筑，可见不危险就不可；这岂不是对他主张院墙即便无危险也可照平常方式筑的决定性反驳？
也有人说，这条 《巴拉伊塔》 引来不是要支持 拉夫希斯达 的意见，而是要反驳它，如下：你来听一条 《巴拉伊塔》 里所教导的：一堵倾向 公共区、可能倒塌的墙，可以照平常的方式拆掉重筑，因为它对过路人有危险。
And some say that this baraita was cited not to support Rav Ḥisda’s opinion but in order to refute it, as follows: Come and hear that which is taught in a baraita: With regard to a wall that is leaning toward the public domain and is likely to fall, one may demolish and rebuild it in his usual manner, due to the danger that it poses to passersby.
革玛拉解释：这条 《巴拉伊塔》 表明，若筑墙的需要是因为它构成的危险，是的，他许可重筑那墙；可是理由若不是因为危险，不，他就不许可这样做。
The Gemara explains: The baraita indicates that if the need to build the wall is due to the danger that it poses, yes, he is permitted to rebuild the wall, but if the reason is not due to the danger, no, he is not permitted to do so.
我们就说这是对 拉夫希斯达 意见的决定性反驳吧？因为他说，即便没有任何危险，人也可以照平常的方式筑自己院子的墙。
Shall we say that this is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Ḥisda, who says that one may build the wall of his courtyard in his usual manner, even if no danger is present?
答：拉夫希斯达 可以对你说，那里墙有危险，甚至可以拆掉从头筑起；这里平常的院墙，他可以照平常的方式筑那有缺口的墙，却不可拆掉。
革玛拉回答：拉夫希斯达 可以对你说：那里，在现有的墙构成危险的情形，他甚至许可把墙拆掉，从头筑起。
The Gemara answers: Rav Ḥisda could have said to you: There, in the case where the existing wall poses a danger, he is even permitted to demolish the wall and build it from scratch.
这里，在围住院子的一堵平常的墙的情形，他许可照平常的方式筑那有缺口的墙，却不许可把它拆掉。
Here, in the case of an ordinary wall enclosing a courtyard, he is permitted to build the breached wall in the usual manner, but not to demolish it.
问：倾斜的墙何不也只许拆掉以除危险，重筑留到节后？答：那样他连拆都可能不拆，因为拆了院子就无遮护；所以为除危险，许可他拆了也重筑。
革玛拉问：在那里，在倾斜的墙的情形，我们也说他许可拆掉它，由此除去危险，却不许可重筑，要等到节后吧？
The Gemara asks: There too, in the case of the leaning wall, let us say that he is permitted to demolish it and thereby remove the danger, but not to rebuild it until after the Festival.
革玛拉回答：若是这样，他可能连拆也不拆了，因为拆掉那墙，他的院子就没有遮护了。
The Gemara answers: If so, he might refrain even from demolishing it, as demolishing the wall would leave his courtyard unprotected.
所以，为了除去那倾斜的墙构成的危险，他不但许可拆掉它，也许可重筑。
Therefore, to eliminate the danger posed by the leaning wall, he is permitted not only to demolish it, but to rebuild it as well.
拉夫阿施 说：密释纳的措辞也很精确，表明它说的是园子的墙，正如 拉夫希斯达 所理解的，因为它教导说：在安息年甚至可以照平常的方式筑墙。
拉夫阿施 说：密释纳的措辞也很精确，表明它说的是园子的墙，正如 拉夫希斯达 所理解的，因为它教导说：在安息年，甚至可以照平常的方式筑墙。
Rav Ashi said: The wording of the mishna is also precise and indicates that it is referring to the wall of a garden, as understood by Rav Ḥisda, as it teaches: During the Sabbatical Year one may even build in his usual manner.
（续上）密释纳所说的是什么墙？若是院子的墙，安息年本只禁农事、不禁营造，何须说可以筑？所以必是园子的墙：虽然看似为出产筑护墙，仍然许可。可见 拉夫希斯达 的解释是对的。
革玛拉澄清：密释纳所说的墙是哪一种墙呢？
The Gemara clarifies: Where is the wall to which the mishna refers?
我们若说密释纳是论院子的墙，那还需要说安息年可以筑它吗？
If we say that the mishna is referring to the wall of a courtyard, need it be said that it may be built during the Sabbatical Year?
安息年只禁止农事劳作，营造却是许可的。
Only agricultural labors are prohibited during the Sabbatical Year, but construction is permitted.
其实，它岂不是论园子的墙么？之所以需要说明这墙在安息年可以筑，是要表明：他虽然看起来像是为自己的出产筑一道护墙，却仍然许可这样做。
Rather, is it not referring to the wall of a garden, and it was necessary to state that this wall may be built during the Sabbatical Year to indicate that even though he appears as one who is building a protection for his produce, he is nevertheless permitted to do so.
这就证明密释纳所讨论的，是筑园子的墙。
This proves that the mishna’s discussion pertains to building the wall of a garden.
革玛拉总结：由此可以推知，拉夫希斯达 的解释确实是对密释纳的正确理解。
The Gemara concludes: Learn from this that Rav Ḥisda’s interpretation is indeed the correct understanding of the mishna.
密释纳：大麻风的灾病须由祭司察看。拉比梅伊尔 说，节中日祭司可以初次察看灾病，以定为洁净从宽，却不可定为不洁从严——人未经祭司宣告就不成为不洁，所以祭司可以缄默。众贤则说，从宽从严都不可察看。
人身上显出大麻风的症状时，必须由祭司察看，由他断定那些症状是不是够得上大麻风。
When symptoms of leprosy appear, they must be examined by a priest, who determines whether or not the symptoms qualify as leprosy.
拉比梅伊尔 说：节中日祭司可以初次察看显出大麻风症状的人，为要从宽，就是可以宣告那人没有大麻风；却不可为要从严，不可宣告那人为不洁。
Rabbi Meir says: A priest may initially examine an individual showing symptoms of leprosy on the intermediate days of a Festival in order to be lenient, i.e., he may pronounce the individual to be free of leprosy, but not in order to be stringent; he may not pronounce the individual to be impure.
祭司没有宣告他患大麻风之前，那人并不成为在礼仪上不洁，所以祭司可以保持缄默，免得在节期中叫那患病的人苦恼。
The individual does not become ritually impure until the priest pronounces him to have leprosy, and therefore the priest may remain silent and thereby prevent causing the afflicted individual distress during the Festival.
众贤却说：祭司不可为要从宽、也不可为要从严察看那些症状。
And the Rabbis say: The priest may not examine the symptoms in order to be lenient or in order to be stringent.
《巴拉伊塔》：拉比梅伊尔 说节中日祭司可以为从宽察看大麻风的灾病，不可为从严；拉比约西 说从宽从严都不可——你若为从宽理会他，见是大麻风也必须宣告不洁，不能缄默，所以索性不察看。
一条 《巴拉伊塔》 里教导：拉比梅伊尔 说：节中日祭司可以为要从宽察看显出大麻风症状的人，却不可为要从严。
It is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Meir says: A priest may examine an individual showing symptoms of leprosy on the intermediate days of a Festival in order to be lenient, but not in order to be stringent.
拉比约西 说：祭司不可为要从宽、也不可为要从严察看那些症状。
Rabbi Yosei says: The priest may not examine the symptoms to be lenient or to be stringent.
拉比约西 意见背后的道理是：你若为要从宽而理会那显出大麻风症状的人，你就也必须为要从严而理会他。
The reasoning behind Rabbi Yosei’s opinion is that if you attend to the individual with the symptoms of leprosy to be lenient, you must attend to him even to be stringent.
祭司若看出那症状确是大麻风，就必须宣告那受患的人在礼仪上不洁，而不可保持缄默。
If the priest sees that the symptom is in fact leprosy, he must declare the affected person ritually impure rather than remain silent.
所以，为要避免在节期中宣告他患大麻风，祭司根本不该察看他。
Consequently, in order to avoid declaring that he has leprosy on the Festival, the priest should not examine him at all.
拉比犹大·哈纳西 说：拉比梅伊尔 的话看来适用于被关锁的大麻风患者——满一周时节中日也可复察，宣告洁净叫他欢喜，再关锁一周也不比先前更坏；拉比约西 的话看来适用于确定的大麻风患者，理由见叶七背。
拉比犹大·哈纳西 说：拉比梅伊尔 的话看来在被关锁的大麻风患者的情形是对的。
Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: The statement of Rabbi Meir appears to be correct with regard to the case of a quarantined leper.
在这情形，即便在节中日，祭司也可以在那一周末了复察他，因为祭司若宣告他洁净，就叫他欢喜；若宣告他须再关锁一周，他的处境也不比先前更坏。
In this case, the priest may reexamine him at the end of the week even on the intermediate days of a Festival, because if he declares the individual to be pure, he will cause him to rejoice, and if he declares that the individual must be quarantined for another week, his situation is no worse than it was previously.
另一方面，拉比约西 的话看来在确定的大麻风患者的情形是对的，这人已经由祭司确定地宣告为不洁。
On the other hand, the statement of Rabbi Yosei appears to be correct with regard to the case of a confirmed leper, one who has already been declared conclusively impure by a priest.
革玛拉（叶七背）将解释这句话的理由。
The Gemara (7b) will explain the reason for this statement.
拉瓦 说：尚洁净、未经察看的人，众人都同意祭司不察看他；关锁第一周的，众人都同意察看他。他们的分歧在于……（下接 7之间）
拉瓦 说：一个显出大麻风症状、却仍是洁净的人，就是还没有经祭司察看的，众人都同意祭司不察看他，因为经过察看，他的身份只会变坏。
Rava said: With regard to an individual with symptoms of leprosy who is still ritually pure, i.e., who has not yet been examined by a priest, everyone agrees that the priest does not examine him, as his status can only worsen due to the examination.
一个疑似患大麻风、正在关锁第一周的人，众人都同意祭司察看他，因为他的症状若已消退，祭司可以宣告他洁净；即便症状依旧，他也不过再关锁一周而已。
With regard to a suspected leper who is in his first week of quarantine, everyone agrees that the priest examines him, as the priest may declare him pure if his symptoms have subsided, and even if his symptoms remained as they were, he will simply be quarantined for another week.
他们有分歧的……
When they disagree