← 节仪卷总目·第三章 圣物更严
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 8 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）密释纳续说：掺了圣物的酒坛油坛，在榨酒榨油的时节，以及榨酒前七十天里，地之民都可信——那是人们开始洁净器皿、预备榨季的时候。
……掺混的，在榨酒和榨油的时节，地之民 在这些坛子上可信；榨酒之前七十天里也可信，因为人们正是在那时开始洁净器皿，预备榨酒的季节。
that are mingled, amei ha’aretz are trusted with regard to them during the period of the winepress and the olive press, and also up to seventy days before the winepress, for that is when people begin to purify their vessels in preparation for the wine-pressing season.
革玛拉从密释纳「在犹太地」一语推论：在加利利就不可信。问其缘故。
密释纳教导：在犹太地，地之民 在圣酒圣油的洁净上可信。
The mishna teaches that amei ha’aretz are trusted with regard to the purity of sacrificial wine and oil in Judea.
革玛拉推论：在犹太地可信，在加利利就不可信。
The Gemara infers: In Judea, yes, but in the Galilee, no.
这两地有别，是什么缘故？
What is the reason for this distinction between the two places?
雷什·拉基什 答：犹太地与加利利之间隔着一条撒玛利亚人居住的地带，外邦之地按贤士的规定一概算不洁，所以加利利的酒油运不到圣殿而不沾不洁，连谨守之人在加利利所制的也不收。
雷什·拉基什 说：因为犹太地与加利利之间隔着一条撒玛利亚人居住的地带，从这一地到那一地，非穿过这条地带不可。
Reish Lakish said: It is because a strip of land inhabited by Samaritans [Kutim] separates between Judea and the Galilee, and it is impossible to travel from one land to the other without traversing this strip.
贤士规定外邦人所居之地算作不洁，所以食物从加利利运往圣殿所在的犹太地，不可能不沾不洁。
The Sages decreed that lands inhabited by non-Jewish nations are considered ritually impure, so that it would be impossible to transport food from the Galilee to Judea, where the Temple is located, without the food becoming impure.
因此，即使是住在加利利的 谨守之人 所制的油和酒，也不收来作圣物之用。
Therefore, even oil and wine prepared by ḥaverim who lived in the Galilee were not accepted for sacrificial use.
革玛拉质疑：何不装在箱、柜、橱里运送？这些器具自成帐幕，里面的东西不沾不洁。答：本条密释纳照 拉比犹大·哈纳西 的意见——会挪动的帐幕不算帐幕；并引 《巴拉伊塔》：坐在箱柜里进入外邦之地的，他判不洁，拉比犹大之子拉比约西 判洁净。
革玛拉提出疑问：加利利的居民何不把酒和油放进箱子、匣子或橱柜里运到犹太地？这类器具里的东西不会沾染不洁，因为它们算作各自独立的帐幕。
The Gemara raises a difficulty: And let the residents of the Galilee place the wine and oil and transport it to Judea in a closed box, a chest, or a closet, whose contents cannot contract impurity, as they have the status of separate tents.
革玛拉回答：这条密释纳是照谁的意见？
The Gemara answers: In accordance with whose opinion is this mishna?
是照 拉比犹大·哈纳西 的意见。他说：抛动的帐幕，即会移动的帐幕，不称为正式的帐幕，所以里面的东西会沾染不洁。
It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, who said: A thrown tent, i.e., a moving tent, is not called a proper tent, and therefore its contents are subject to impurity.
那么在我们这个情形里，里面的东西就会沾染贤士加于外邦之地的不洁。
In our case, then, the contents would contract the impurity decreed upon the lands of non-Jewish nations.
正如一则 《巴拉伊塔》 所教导：坐在箱子、匣子或橱柜里进入外邦之地的人，拉比犹大·哈纳西 判他不洁，拉比犹大之子拉比约西 判他洁净。
As it is taught in a baraita: Concerning one who enters a land of non-Jewish nations sitting in a box, a chest, or a closet, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi declares him to be impure, and Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, declares him to be pure.
革玛拉再质疑：何不装在扎紧盖子的瓦器里？那样的器皿与死尸同帐也不沾不洁。拉比以利以谢 引 《巴拉伊塔》 答：圣物不因扎紧的盖子而免于不洁。
革玛拉又提出疑问：何不把油和酒装在扎紧盖子的瓦器里运到圣殿？这样的器皿即使与死尸同在一个帐幕下也不沾不洁，如经上说：「凡敞口的器皿，就是没有用绳子扎上盖的，也就不洁净了」（民数记19:15）。
The Gemara raises a further difficulty: And let them bring oil and wine to the Temple in an earthenware vessel sealed with a tightly bound cover, which cannot contract impurity even if it is in the same tent as a corpse, as it states: “And every open vessel, which has no covering tightly bound upon it, is unclean” (Numbers 19:15).
拉比以利以谢 说：贤士在一则 《巴拉伊塔》 里教导：圣物与别的东西不同，不因装在扎紧盖子的器皿里而免于不洁。
Rabbi Eliezer said: The Sages taught in a baraita: Sacrificial food, unlike other items, is not spared from impurity by being in a container with a tightly bound cover.
革玛拉问：另一则 《巴拉伊塔》 说洁净之水不因扎紧的盖子而免于不洁，言下之意似乎圣物可免。驳回：那言下之意说的是尚未调入红母牛灰的水，并非圣物。
革玛拉问：可是不是有一则 《巴拉伊塔》 教导：调有红母牛灰的洁净之水，不因装在扎紧盖子的器皿里而免于不洁吗？
The Gemara asks: But isn’t it taught in a baraita: Water of purification containing ashes from the red heifer is not spared from impurity by being in a vessel with a tightly bound cover?
这则 《巴拉伊塔》 岂不是隐含这样的推论：圣物在这种情形下可免于不洁？
What, is it not implied in the baraita this inference: That sacrificial food is spared from impurity in such a situation?
这则 《巴拉伊塔》 看来是说：这是洁净之水独有的严格规定，不及于别的东西，连圣物也不包括在内。
The baraita seems to imply that this is a special stringency for water of purification, which does not apply to anything else, including sacrificial food.
革玛拉驳回：不然，这则 《巴拉伊塔》 的言外之意应当别样理解，乃是这样：尚未调入红母牛灰而成圣的水，装在扎紧盖子的器皿里，就免于不洁，即使这水是预备日后作此用的。
The Gemara rejects this: No, the baraita’s inference should be understood differently, as this: Water that has not yet been consecrated by being mixed with ashes of the red heifer is spared from impurity by being in a vessel with a tightly bound cover, even if they are designated for such a use at a later stage.
革玛拉以 乌拉 的话质疑：谨守之人在加利利照圣物的洁净标准制酒制油，可见总有办法运到圣殿。答：确实运不过去，只是存放原处，心想以利亚来时洁净了道路，就可以用。
革玛拉又提出疑问：乌拉 岂不是说过：谨守之人 洁净他们的酒和油，即在加利利照圣物的洁净标准制酒制油，以备圣物之用？
The Gemara raises another difficulty: But didn’t Ulla say: Ḥaverim purify their wine and oil, i.e., they produce their wine and oil by the standards of purity used for sacrificial food in the Galilee, to be used for sacrificial purposes?
可见必定有办法把这些从加利利运到圣殿；不然，他们何必这样制备？
This indicates that there must have been some way of transporting them from the Galilee to the Temple, for otherwise why would they have prepared such items?
革玛拉回答：其实他们确实不能把这些运到圣殿。
The Gemara answers: Indeed, they could not transfer these items to the Temple.
他们只是把这些存放在原处，心里想的是：到弥赛亚的日子，以利亚 来了，洁净了从加利利到犹太地的道路，这些就可以用了。
Rather, they would leave them in their place, and their thought was that when Elijah comes in messianic times and purifies the road from Galilee to Judea, these items will become eligible for use.
密释纳说榨季中地之民在举祭的洁净上也可信；革玛拉举另一教导相抵：地之民榨完橄榄，要留一袋未榨的交给穷祭司，让祭司自己制洁净的油——可见榨季里他也不可信。
密释纳教导：在榨酒和榨油的时节，地之民 即使在 举祭 的洁净上也可信。
§ It was taught in the mishna: And during the period of the winepress and olive press, amei ha’aretz are trusted even with regard to the purity of teruma.
革玛拉举下面的教导与之相抵：地之民 榨完他的橄榄，要留下一袋未榨的橄榄，作为 举祭 交给一位穷祭司，好让祭司自己用它制出洁净的油。
And the Gemara raises a contradiction from the following teaching: An am ha’aretz who finishes pressing his olives should leave over one sack of unpressed olives, and give it to a poor priest as teruma, so that the priest himself can make ritually pure oil from it.
这表明即使在榨油的时节，地之民 也不被信任自己制出洁净的橄榄油。
This shows that even during the period of the olive press the am ha’aretz is not trusted to make pure olive oil himself.
拉夫纳赫曼 解：密释纳说的是在正常榨季及早榨油的人，那条教导说的是过了榨季才榨的人。拉夫阿达·巴尔·阿哈瓦 举例：就像你父亲家的橄榄。
拉夫纳赫曼 说：这并不难解。
Rav Naḥman said: This is not difficult.
这一条，即密释纳说 地之民 可信、能自己制出洁净橄榄油的，指的是早榨橄榄的人，即在正常榨油时节里榨的；那一条指的是晚榨橄榄的人，即大多数人榨油的时节已过才榨的。
This case of the mishna, where amei ha’aretz are trusted to produce pure olive oil themselves, is referring to people who press their olives early, during the regular season of the olive press, while that case is referring to those who press their olives later, after the period when most people press their olives has passed.
拉夫阿达·巴尔·阿哈瓦 对他说：比如什么样的情形？
Rav Adda bar Ahava said to him: Such as what case, for example?
比如你父亲家的那些橄榄。
Such as those olives of your father’s house.
拉夫纳赫曼 的父亲有很多橄榄，常在正常榨季过后才榨。
Rav Naḥman’s father had many olives, and he often pressed them after the regular pressing season.
拉夫约瑟 另解：不可信之说指加利利而言。阿巴耶 引 《巴拉伊塔》 驳他：约旦河东与加利利同犹太地一样，榨酒时节在举祭酒上可信，榨油时节在举祭油上可信——可见在举祭上两地无别。
拉夫约瑟 对上面的抵触另有解法。
Rav Yosef said a different resolution of the above contradiction.
说 地之民 不可信的那条教导，是就加利利而言的；正如密释纳前面论圣酒圣油时所教导，地之民 只在犹太地可信，在加利利不可信。
The source that states that amei ha’aretz are not trusted was taught with regard to the Galilee, and as the mishna taught earlier concerning sacrificial wine and oil, amei ha’aretz are trusted only in Judea and not in the Galilee.
阿巴耶 引一则 《巴拉伊塔》 驳他：约旦河东和加利利与犹太地一样：在榨酒的时节，他们在 举祭 酒上可信；在榨油的时节，在 举祭 油上可信。
Abaye raised an objection to him from a baraita: Transjordan and the Galilee are like Judea, in that they are trusted with regard to wine of teruma during the period of wine production, and with regard to oil of teruma during the period of oil production.
但在榨油的时节，他们在酒上不可信；在榨酒的时节，在油上也不可信。
However, they are not trusted with regard to wine during the period of oil production, nor are they trusted with regard to oil during the period of wine production.
这则 《巴拉伊塔》 表明，就 举祭 而言，住在加利利的 地之民 与住在犹太地的，在可信与否上并无分别。
This baraita shows that with regard to teruma there is no difference between the trustworthiness of amei ha’aretz who live in the Galilee and that of those who live in Judea.
拉夫约瑟 的解法不能成立，仍以最初的解答为准：那条教导说的是榨季结束之后。
所以，拉夫约瑟 的解答必须驳回；显然正确的解答就是我们起初所答的：那条教导说的是榨酒时节结束以后。
Rather, Rav Yosef’s answer must be rejected, and it is clear that the correct answer is as we answered initially, that it is speaking of the period following the conclusion of the winepress.
密释纳说榨季过后，地之民送来的举祭酒，谨守的祭司不可收，但可留到来年榨季。有人问 拉夫舍舍特：祭司若违规收下了，能否自己留到来年榨季？他引《得卖疑卷》的密释纳作答。（下接叶二十五背）
密释纳教导：榨酒和榨油的时节一过，地之民 若给一位 谨守之人 祭司送来一桶 举祭 酒，他不可从他们手里收下。
§ It was taught in the mishna: Once the periods of the winepress and olive press have passed, if amei ha’aretz brought to a ḥaver priest a barrel of teruma wine, he may not accept it from them.
但送的人可以把它留到下一个榨酒时节，即来年。
But the giver may leave it over for the following winepress season, in the following year.
有人在 拉夫舍舍特 面前提出疑难：祭司若违反 哈拉哈 收下了一位 地之民 的酒，哈拉哈 如何？
They raised a dilemma before Rav Sheshet: If the priest violated the halakha and did accept the wine from an am ha’aretz, what is the halakha?
他可以为自己把它留到下一个榨酒时节吗？
Is it permissible that he should leave it over for himself for the following winepress season?
既然 地之民 有意留到那时的酒和油可以收下，那么祭司自己有意留到那时，也许同样可以。
Since it is permissible to accept the wine and oil of an am ha’aretz intentionally left until that time, perhaps it is also permissible if the priest himself intentionally leaves it over until that time.
他回答说：你们在一条密释纳里学过（《得卖疑卷》6:9）：「……」
He said to him: You learned it in a mishna (Demai 6:9):