Wikipedia

Kil'ayim (prohibition)

Kil'ayim (or Klayim; Hebrew: כלאים, lit. "mixture," or "diverse kinds") are the prohibitions in Jewish law which proscribe the planting of certain mixtures of seeds, grafting, the mixing of plants in vineyards, the crossbreeding of animals, the formation of a team in which different kinds of animals work together, and the mixing of wool with linen in garments.

Kil'ayim
Halakhic texts relating to this article
Torah:Leviticus 19:19 and Deuteronomy 22:9–11
Jerusalem Talmud:Tractate Kilayim
Mishneh Torah:Hilchot Kilayim
Shulchan Aruch:Yoreh De'ah, 295-304

The prohibitions are derived from the Torah in Leviticus 19:9 and Deuteronomy 22:9–11, and the Mishnah in tractate Kilayim, which has a Gemara in the Jerusalem Talmud, further elaborates on the applicable circumstances.

Prohibitions

edit

The Torah (Leviticus 19:19; Deuteronomy 22:9–11) lists several different examples of mixtures that are prohibited as mixed species. The halakha classifies the prohibitions under the following categories:[1]

  • interbreeding of animals of different species
  • planting mixed seeds
  • grafting of different species of trees
  • shatnez - mixing wool and linen in garments
  • planting grain or seed-crop in a vineyard
  • ploughing or doing other work with two different species of animal.

Permitted and forbidden instances

edit

In fabrics

edit

Torah law forbids the wearing of Kil'ayim (shatnez) – sheep wool and linen fabrics that have been hackled together, or spun and woven together. Likewise, "intertying" sheep wool and linen together is forbidden, the two exceptions being garments of kohanim worn in the Temple and tzitzit. Concerning tzitzit, the Sages of Israel permit using wool and linen strings in tandem only when genuine blue dye tchelet is available, whereas kabbalist sources go a step further by encouraging this practice.[2] The Torah forbids only wool and linen to be worn together.[3] Camel's wool, Cashmere wool, Yak fiber, and the like of such fibres, are not prohibited to be worn with linen.[4]

According to Maimonides, if a Jew had purchased an all-woolen product from a gentile and wanted to ascertain whether or not it was, indeed, pure wool – without the admixture of flax-linen, its fabric could be tested by dyeing. A dye-solution applied to the fabric would reveal whether or not it was of pure wool, as wool and linen products do not retain the same shades in a dye solution.[5]

In plantings

edit

The prohibition of sowing together diverse seedlings is derived from the biblical verse, "You shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed" (Leviticus 19:19), and which prohibition has been explained to mean planting or sowing two or more diverse vegetable crops within a radius of three-handbreadths, ca. 27 centimetres (11 in), from one another, where they draw nutrients from each other.[6] As a first resort, however, one is to distance two or more diverse vegetable crops from each other at a remove of six-handbreadths, ca. 54 centimetres (21 in), even if their foliage were to grow and intermix.[7][8] Two or more diverse seed-crops must be distanced enough so as to be distinguished from each other as two separate plantings.[9] The laws governing diverse seed-plantings or vegetables apply only to crops grown in the Land of Israel, but do not apply to seed-crops or vegetables planted outside the Land of Israel.[6][10] The prohibition not only applies to sowing together diverse kinds, but also hoeing the ground wherein diverse kinds were sown together, as well as covering them over in top soil, whether by one's foot, or by hand, or by any implement.[6] The same prohibition applies to when they were sown together in a flower pot that was perforated at the bottom.[6]

According to biblical exegete Nachmanides, the reason for its prohibition being that when seedlings draw nutrients from other seedlings, their properties and natural forms are changed thereby and the sower cancels thereby the fixed design and purpose of the universe.[11]

Diverse seed-plantings or vegetables that grew together in violation of the biblical command are permitted to be eaten,[12] although the crop itself must be uprooted.[13][6][14] If two diverse grain seeds (e.g. wheat and barley) were inadvertently mixed together, they must be separated before they can be sown. If, however, there were 24 parts more of one grain than the other (ratio of 24 to 1), the lesser grain is considered cancelled by the other, and may still be sown together.[6] If there were not 24 parts more than the mixed grain, the whole must be sorted.[15]

Specific permitted and forbidden species

edit

The first chapter of Mishnah Kil'ayim permits the growing together of certain plants, although the members of each pair belong to two different kinds. An example of which are certain species of Graminae, or the grass family. Wheat and tares belong to different genera (Triticum and Lolium, respectively), but they resemble each other in both their seeds and their leaves. Tares are often found growing in wheat fields. Its seeds may germinate even several years after having been planted, so that its growth could not always be prevented. This argument has been used to explain why it was not prohibited to have wheat and tares growing together in the same field.[16]

The rabbinic treatise develops the principle that a planter should not only be concerned with the mixing together of different classes of items (a thing generally forbidden), but also with the appearance of such intermixing, such that if the two kinds are similar in appearance, although of different genera, this can, at times, be tolerated.[17]

The Mishnah in tractate Kil'ayim (1:1) explicitly permits faba beans (Vicia faba) (Hebrew: פול) and mung beans (Vigna radiata; Vigna mungo) (Hebrew: ספיר) to be planted together, as they are considered homogeneous.[18] It also permits the planting of white mustard (Sinapis alba) (Hebrew: חרדל) and of Egyptian mustard (Brassica nigra) (Hebrew: חרדל מצרי) together (Kil'ayim 1:2), as they, too, are considered to be homogeneous, despite being two different genera.[19][20] However, white mustard (Sinapis alba) (Hebrew: חרדל) and charlock mustard, also known as wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis) (Hebrew: לפסן), though also similar in appearance, may not be planted together (ibid. 1:5), as they are considered heterogeneous.[21] J. Feliks maintained that while the two vegetables are similar in respect to both their leaves, yellow flowers, and taste, they are considered diverse-kinds because of a difference in their roots. Accordingly, the plant's roots become the ultimate criterion for determination of some diverse kinds.[22]

 
Field showing distinct plots for different species

Cucumbers (Hebrew: קשות) and muskmelons (Hebrew: מלפפון),[23] although two different species, are not considered "diverse kinds" with respect to each other and may be planted together.[24] Rabbi Yehudah, disputing, says that they are considered "diverse kinds" with respect to each other and cannot be planted together.

Although two different species, the Mishnah (Kil'ayim 1:3) permits planting together turnips (Brassica rapa subsp. rapa) (Hebrew: לפת) with rape (Brassica napus subsp. napus) (Hebrew: נפוס).[25] Likewise, cauliflower (Brassica oleracea botrytis) (Hebrew: תרובתור) and kohlrabi (Brassica var. caulorapa) (Hebrew: כרוב), although different species, are permitted to be planted together.[26] Maimonides, in his commentary on the same Mishnah, explained the word karūb as having the Judeo-Arabic connotation of כרנב, meaning either cabbage (Brassica oleracea var. capitata) or kale (Brassica oleracea var. acephala).[27]

Conversely, radish (Raphanus raphanistrum) (Hebrew: צנון) and rape (Hebrew: נפוס) cannot be planted together (Kil'ayim. 1:5). Jonah maintains that while the two vegetables are similar in respect to both their leaves and their fruits, they are considered diverse-kinds because of a difference in taste.[28] Neither can the Egyptian gourd (Cultivar of Cucumis melo) (Hebrew: דלעת מצרית) be planted together with the Grecian gourd (Lagenaria vulgaris) (Hebrew: דלעת יונית), as they too are heterogeneous.[29]

Grafting of trees

edit
 
Grafting of two varieties of citrus trees

The prohibition of grafting of trees is treated on in the Mishnah (Kil'ayim 1:4).[30] The prohibition applies to trees growing in the Land of Israel, as well as to trees growing outside the Land of Israel.[31] Among trees, while it is permissible to grow two different kinds of trees in close proximity to each other, it is forbidden for an Israelite (or a gentile working on behalf of an Israelite) to graft the branch (scion) of one tree onto the stump of another tree to produce thereby a hybrid fruit if the trees are not one and the same kind. Quinces (Cydonia oblonga) (Hebrew: פרישין) are named as an exception, for if a branch taken from it were grafted onto a stump belonging to hawthorns (Crataegus azarolus) (Hebrew: עוזררין), although they are two different species, it is permitted unto Israel to benefit therefrom, since they are considered related.[32][33] Likewise, to graft the branch of Krustemelin (said to be the "Calaprice pears")[34] onto the rootstock of an ordinary pear (Pyrus communis) is permitted. However, apple trees (Malus domestica) (Hebrew: תפוח) grafted onto medlars (Mespilus germanica) (Hebrew: חֻזרד),[35] or peach trees (Prunus persica) (Hebrew: פרסקין) grafted onto almond trees (Prunus dulcis) (Hebrew: שקדים), or jujubes (Ziziphus jujuba) (Hebrew: שזפין) grafted onto Christ's thorn jujubes (Ziziphus spina-christi) (Hebrew: רימין), although similar in appearance, are "diverse kinds."[36][37] The fruit produced by grafting the bud of one dissimilar tree onto the rootstock of the other are permitted to be consumed by Israel,[38][39][40][6] although the trees themselves, according to some authorities, are not permitted to be maintained.[41][42]

The Chazon-Ish, who was uncertain about the identity of the trees mentioned in the Mishnah owing to conflicting opinions, made it a rule to be stringent in all of them, prohibiting their grafting in all cases. A Jew who transgressed by grafting two dissimilar trees was, formerly, liable to flogging.[43] The prohibition of grafting two dissimilar trees applies to trees in the Land of Israel, as well as to trees outside the land of Israel; whether trees belonging to a Jew or to a gentile.[44]

Vineyards

edit

A vineyard (Hebrew: כרם) is defined as at least 5 vines growing together, two of which are planted alongside an opposite row containing two vines, with the fifth vine tailing the others.[45] A trellis (Hebrew: עריס) is where 5 vines are planted together in a single row.[45]

The Sages of Israel have described the prohibition of growing diverse kinds in a vineyard, strictly from a biblical perspective, as referring only to two grain varieties (such as wheat and barley) planted with a grape seed, or either to hemp and arum, or similar plants which reach maturity with the grain.[46][47][48] By a rabbinic prohibition, however, it is not permitted to plant or maintain a vineyard while the vineyard shares the same immediate ground with any vegetable or seed-crop grown for food (e.g. mustard seeds, chickpeas, etc.).[46] The result of doing so would be to cause its owner to forfeit the seed-crop together with the increase of the vineyard thereof.[49] Therefore, the rabbis made it incumbent upon husbandmen and vine-dressers to distance their seed-crop from a vineyard. According to Maimonides, if a trellised vine of at least five plantings was made alongside a fence or a wall, even if the stumps of the grape-vines were distant from the wall one cubit, the planter of seed is only permitted to sow seed 4 cubits beyond the wall or fence (about 2 meters), since the grape-vine is prone to spread itself as far as the wall, and there must always be at least 4 cubits from a vineyard and the seed-crop.[50] Certain plants that grow of themselves in a vineyard, such as lianas (Cissus spp.),[51] bindweed (Convolvulus spp.),[52] sweet clover (Melilotus), the anemone (Anemone coronaria), are not accounted as "diverse kinds" in a vineyard, to cause its owner to forfeit the crop of the vineyard altogether.[53]

If, however, either wild marjoram (Origanum syriacum) (Hebrew: אזוב),[a] or whorled savory (Satureja thymbra) (Hebrew: סיאה), or dyer's croton (Chrozophora tinctoria) (Hebrew: לשישית),[54] white-leaved savory (Micromeria fruticosa) (Hebrew: קורנית),[b] or mallows (Malva sylvestris) (Hebrew: חילמית), Grape hyacinth (Muscari commutatum) (Hebrew: בולפסין), or saffron (Crocus spp) (Hebrew: כרכום), Egyptian cucumber (Cucumis melo var. chate) (Hebrew: קישואין), gourds (דלועין‎), muskmelons (מלפפונות‎),[55] or beetroot (Beta vulgaris) (Hebrew: בורכייר)[c] were left to grow in a vineyard in the Land of Israel, any of these kinds would render the entire vineyard prohibited.[56] The common denominator between these plants is that, in the Land of Israel during Mishnaic times, if they were seen growing in places other than in a vineyard, their owners would have been interested in their upkeep and maintenance, due to some benefit derived from these plants, such as when they are used as animal fodder, or for human consumption, or for medicinal purposes.[57][58][59] Their presence in a vineyard, if they are allowed to grow unmolested (Hebrew: מקיימין) shows willful negligence in what concerns this prohibitory law of Diverse kinds. The same rule applies to other plants not specifically named in the Tosefta (Kil'ayim 3:12), but which plants may have special and common usage among the people of a certain place where he has made his residence, and which plants grow in his vineyard, even outside the Land of Israel.[59][d]

 
Vineyard growing in Israel

If thorn bushes, such as camelthorn (Alhagi maurorum) (Hebrew: ההגין), and box-thorn (Lycium shawii) (Hebrew: אטדין), grew within a vineyard, they are not accounted as a seed-crop and may be sustained in a vineyard, the rabbis giving to them the classification of trees amongst trees.[63] However, in places where thorn bushes are used as fodder for camels and the owner of the vineyard is content to have the thorn bushes grow in his vineyard to that end, the thorn bushes, if maintained, would render the entire vineyard forbidden.[64][65]

By a rabbinic injunction, the prohibition of growing diverse seed-crops in a vineyard extends to vineyards vintaged by Jews outside the Land of Israel.[66][31] In reference to the mixed seed planted in a vineyard, the law is only transgressed when wheat, barley, and grape seed are sown simultaneously in that vineyard.[67][68] The reason for this prohibition, according to Maimonides, is to avoid imitating the custom of the people in olden days who would sow barley and stones of grape together, in the belief that the vineyard could only prosper in this way.[67] The planter transgresses the biblical command from the moment grain begins to take root within a vineyard, and the grapes have reached the size of white peas (Vigna unguiculata).[69][70][71]

By a rabbinic decree, other seed-crops are forbidden to be planted in a vineyard.[68] Had a person transgressed and grew a seed-crop within his vineyard, not only is the produce forbidden to be eaten, but also had he sold the produce, the proceeds accruing from the sale of such produce are also forbidden, and must be burnt, together with the vineyard.[72][3] The practical bearing of this rabbinic edict is in respect of someone who came along and maliciously sowed Diverse seedlings in his neighbor's vineyard where there is beginning to grow nascent fruit. In such a case, the rabbinic authority has made the seed crop prohibited (requiring its burning), but the vineyard and its fruit are still permitted.[73] The reason for this leniency is because most seedlings sown in a vineyard are only a rabbinic prohibition, and the rabbis did not punish the owner of the vineyard in the case of another person's malfeasance. However, wherever the non-seed plants of hemp (Hebrew: קנבוס) and arum (Hebrew: לוף) were planted in a vineyard, seeing that their planting in a vineyard stands in direct violation of the Torah itself, such plantings would render the entire vineyard prohibited, requiring its burning.[73]

In animals

edit

The prohibition vis-à-vis animals pertains to their cross-breeding, as well as to the prohibtion of ploughing a field with two different species of animals coupled together, such as with an ox and donkey that are hitched together by yoke.[74]

In modern classification of animals, the genus Canis is used to include dogs, wolves, coyotes, and jackals. Even so, the mating of dogs and wolves is forbidden. The common "village dog" (Hebrew: הכלב הכופרי), said by some commentators to be the saluki dog, is considered a diverse kind with the fox. Similarly, the mating of a horse and mule (even though they cannot reproduce) is forbidden.[75]

Though a Jew is forbidden to crossbreed a horse and a donkey (producing a hinny or mule), had a gentile bred them, it is permitted for a Jew to make use of them.

References

edit
  1. ^ Wald, Stephen (2007)
  2. ^ "Tzitzit made of klayim?". Kehuna.org. 23 April 2014. Retrieved 2015-02-17.
  3. ^ a b Kiara, S. (1987), Hil. Kil'ayim, p. 390
  4. ^ Nathan ben Abraham (1955), vol. 1, s.v. Tractate Kil'ayim, chapter 8
  5. ^ Maimonides (1974), vol. 4, s.v. Hil. Kil'ayim 10:27–28
  6. ^ a b c d e f g Aharon HaLevi (1958), mitzvah # 245
  7. ^ Maimonides (1974), vol. 4, Hil. Kil'ayim 3:10
  8. ^ Cf. Mishnah (Kil'ayim 2:10); Hiyya the Great (1970). M.S. Zuckermandel (ed.). Tosephta - Based on the Erfut and Vienna Codices (in Hebrew). Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books. p. 76 (Kil'ayim 2:10). ISBN 9004112650. OCLC 13717538. ...Man is permitted to make a furrow in his field for planting cucumbers, gourds, watermelons, muskmelons, cowpeas, turning one plant so that it faces the other, and another so that is faces the other, on the condition that there is not six-handbreadths between one [plant] and the other.
  9. ^ Maimonides (1974), vol. 4, Hil. Kil'ayim 3:7
  10. ^ Meiri (2006), p. 94, Kiddushin 39a, s.v. כלאי זרעים
  11. ^ Rabbi Moses ben Nahman on the Torah, s.v. Leviticus 19:19
  12. ^ Kiara, S. (1987). Ezriel Hildesheimer (ed.). Sefer Halachot Gedolot (in Hebrew). Vol. 3. Jerusalem. ISBN 9004112650. OCLC 977392294.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link), Hil. Kil'ayim (p. 390)
  13. ^ Sifra on Leviticus 19:19
  14. ^ Cf. Hiyya the Great (1970). M.S. Zuckermandel (ed.). Tosephta - Based on the Erfut and Vienna Codices (in Hebrew). Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books. p. 76 (Kil'ayim 2:16). ISBN 9004112650. OCLC 13717538. Israel who maintained diverse kinds in his field, priests [of Aaron's lineage] do not enter into his field, but rather look upon it as a gravestone of a cemetery...
  15. ^ Cf. Hiyya the Great (1970). M.S. Zuckermandel (ed.). Tosephta - Based on the Erfut and Vienna Codices (in Hebrew). Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books. p. 74 (Kil'ayim 1:15). ISBN 9004112650. OCLC 13717538. ...Every seah-bulk [of grain] (i.e. equivalent to 144 eggs in volume) wherein [is mixed] a quarter-kab (i.e. equivalent to 6 eggs in volume) of a different kind must be reduced.
  16. ^ Mandelbaum, Irving (2020). "Kilayim Chapter One". A History of the Mishnaic Law of Agriculture: Kilayim. p. 27. doi:10.2307/j.ctvzgb97r.8. ISBN 9781946527875. JSTOR j.ctvzgb97r.8. S2CID 243538731. {{cite book}}: |journal= ignored (help)
  17. ^ Mandelbaum, Irving (1985). "Scripture and the Interpretation of Mishnah — The Case of Tractate Kilayim". Proceedings of the World Congress of Jewish Studies. 9 (Division C (Jewish Thought and Literature)). World Union of Jewish Studies: 15. JSTOR 23529209.
  18. ^ Based on the identification of this legume in R. Nathan ben Abraham's Mishnah commentary, as well as that of Maimonides (s.v. Kil'ayim 1:1)
  19. ^ Amar, Z. (2015), pp. 86-87, explaining Maimonides' commentary on Mishnah Kil'ayim 1:2.
  20. ^ "Mustard". www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org.
  21. ^ Amar, Z. (2015), p. 109, explaining Maimonides' commentary on Mishnah Kil'ayim 1:5.
  22. ^ Mandelbaum, Irving (2020). "Kilayim Chapter One". A History of the Mishnaic Law of Agriculture: Kilayim. p. 38. doi:10.2307/j.ctvzgb97r.8. ISBN 9781946527875. JSTOR j.ctvzgb97r.8. S2CID 243538731. {{cite book}}: |journal= ignored (help)
  23. ^ On the definition of this last word, melephephon, see Mishnah Commentary by Pinchas Kehati (1977), ninth edition, vol. 1 (Zera'im), s.v. Kil'ayim 1:2, who explains this fruit as "melon." The 11th-century Mishnah exegete, Nathan ben Abraham I, also explained melephephon as having the Judeo-Arabic connotation of אלכ'רבז (muskmelon), saying that it was “one of the kinds of watermelon whose smell is sweet.” The Jerusalem Talmud (Kil'ayim 1:2) relates an ancient belief that if one were to take a seed from a watermelon and a seed from an apple, and then place them together in an impression made in the earth, the two seeds would fuse together and become diverse kinds. "It is for this reason," says the narrator of the Talmud, "that they call it (i.e. the fruit) by its Greek name, melephephon. The old Greek word for "melon" was actually μήλο = mêlo(n) apple + πεπόν = pépōn an edible (lit. ripened) [gourd], meaning literally "apple-shaped melon" (see: Random House Webster's College Dictionary, s.v. melon). This fruit, muskmelon (Cucumis melo), was thought to be a cross-breed between a watermelon and an apple. Maimonides, however, calls "melephephon" in Mishnah Kil'ayim 1:2 and Terumah 8:6 by the Arabic name, al-khiyyār, meaning "cucumbers" (Cucumis sativus) – which although far from an apple is in the same genus and watermelons. Talmudic exegete, Rabbi Solomon Sirilio (1485–1554), disputed Maimonides' view in his commentary on the Jerusalem Talmud (Kil'ayim 1:2, s.v. קישות), saying that Maimonides explained "melephephon" to mean in Spanish "pepinos" = cucumbers (Cucumis sativus), which, in the opinion of an early Mishnaic exegete, Rabbi Isaac of Siponto (c. 1090–1160), was really to be identified as “small, round melons” (Cucumis melo), since Rabbi Yehudah in our Mishnah holds that it is a diverse kind in relation to kishūt (snakemelon [1], H. Paris 2012 p. 2, phenotypically similar to cucumber). Nevertheless, today, in Modern Hebrew, the word melephephon is now used to denote "cucumbers," based on Maimonides' identification.
  24. ^ Mishnah Kil'ayim 1:2
  25. ^ Although the vegetable known as nefos was called by Maimonides by its idiom, "Syrian radish," it was actually not a radish at all, since it is listed in Mishnah Kil'ayim 1:5 as being a diverse-kind (kil'ayim) in relation to the true radish (Heb. צנון). Zohar Amar suggests that it may have actually been Brassica napus; see Amar, Z. (2015), p. 113. One is to bear in mind that Brassica napus has roots resembling those of parsnips and carrots, for which reason medieval Hebraists and philologists would have classified the vegetable as a parsnip / carrot (Judeo-Arabic: אלג'זר), as did Rabbi Nathan ben Abraham in his commentary of the Mishnah. It is to be noted, furthermore, that in foliage, Brassica napus and turnip (Brassica rapa) have similar leaves, for which reason they are not considered diverse-kinds with respect to each other.
  26. ^ The Hebrew word karūb being explained by Mishnaic exegete, Rabbi Nathan ben Abraham, as having the connotation of the Judeo-Arabic word אלכלם, meaning, "kohlrabi." By this definition, the word karūb is not to be confused with the Modern Hebrew word by the same name, now used for "cabbage" (cultivars of Brassica oleracea). See: Amar, Z.; Kapah, E. (2011), vol. 2, p. 19.
  27. ^ Amar, Z. (2015), pp. 100, 172, explaining Maimonides' commentary on Mishnah Kil'ayim 1:3.
  28. ^ Mandelbaum, Irving (2020). "Kilayim Chapter One". A History of the Mishnaic Law of Agriculture: Kilayim. Brown Judaic Studies. p. 38. doi:10.2307/j.ctvzgb97r.8. ISBN 9781946527875. JSTOR j.ctvzgb97r.8. S2CID 243538731.
  29. ^ Mishnah (Kil'ayim 1:5)
  30. ^ Maimonides (1974), vol. 4, Hil. Kil'ayim 1:6, who wrote: "Among trees, there is no such thing as kil'ayim except with respect to grafting." Cf. Kessar, Ḥayim (1988), vol. 2, p. 344, s.v. on Mishneh Torah, Hil. Kil'ayim 3:4. Rabbi Ḥayim Kessar writes there: "Such is the case with trees, where there are two trees similar in appearance to each other, etc. Mishnah ibid., and it is plain that it refers to a tree with respect to grafting, as I shall explain in what follows" (END QUOTE). The matter of tree grafting is evinced also by the Jerusalem Talmud (Kil'ayim 1:4), in a discussion on the same Mishnah, where after citing cases of grafting of two different kinds of trees named in the Mishnah, the trees were then cut down. The Talmud also brings down examples of hybrid fruit caused by grafting two dissimilar trees together.
  31. ^ a b Adani, Samuel ben Joseph (1997). "Abridged principles of halacha (chapter 3)". Sefer Naḥalat Yosef (in Hebrew). Ramat-Gan: Makhon Nir David. p. 16b. OCLC 31818927. (reprinted from Jerusalem editions, 1907, 1917 and 1988)
  32. ^ Mishnah (Kil'ayim 1:4).
  33. ^ On the definitions of these words, see: Amar, Z. (2015), pp. 132-133, 118
  34. ^ Thus explained by Isaac ben Melchizedek's Mishnah Commentary (1975:79), s.v. Kila'yim 1:4. On this fruit, see Pere calaprice.
  35. ^ Definition here follows that of Maimonides. However, Rabbi Nathan ben Abraham explains חֻזרד as being a cultivar of pear.
  36. ^ Mishnah (Kil'ayim 1:4)
  37. ^ On the definitions of these words, see: Amar, Z. (2015), pp. 76, 150, 157. In Modern Hebrew, the word shezīf (Heb. שזיף) now means "plum" (Prunus domestica subsp. insititia, or simply known by the synonym Prunus insititia), although in today's meaning, it is not to be confused with the Mishnaic meaning.
  38. ^ Babylonian Talmud (Hullin 115a)
  39. ^ Meiri (2006), p. 94, Kiddushin 39a, s.v. הרכבת אילן
  40. ^ Kiara, S. (1987), Hil. Kil'ayim, p. 394
  41. ^ Tosefta (Kil'ayim 1:3); Jerusalem Talmud (Kil'ayim 1:4). Cf. Jacob ben Asher, Arba'ah Turim (Yoreh De'ah 295:7); Halberstam, C. (2002), vol. 1, Yoreh De'ah, responsum # 60 (pp. 239–243)
  42. ^ Cf. Chazon-Ish (1994), p. 46a–b [2:9], who brings down a rabbinic dispute over whether trees grafted by way of transgressing the prohibitive command require uprooting, or whether they can be maintained.
  43. ^ Babylonian Talmud (Kiddushin 39a)
  44. ^ Kanievsky, C. (1984), p. 5a [1:5 (26)]
  45. ^ a b Mishnah Kil'ayim 6:1 (Maimonides commentary)
  46. ^ a b Aharon HaLevi (1958), mitzvah # 548
  47. ^ Meiri (2006), p. 94, Kiddushin 39a, s.v. וכלאי הכרם
  48. ^ Ishtori Haparchi (1999), chapter 56, p. 265
  49. ^ As explained by the words of the Torah (Deuteronomy 22:9): "Lest all should be forfeited together with the increase of the vineyard."
  50. ^ Mishnah (Kil'ayim 6:1). Cf. Maimonides (1974), vol. 4, s.v. Hil. Kil'ayim 8:3.
  51. ^ Amar, Z.; Kapah, E. (2011), vol. 2, p. 14 (s.v. אירוס)
  52. ^ The Hebrew word described here is קסוס, and which, according to Zohar Amar, may also refer to the common ivy (Hedera helix) and the lablab bean (Dolichos lablab). See: Amar, Z. (2015), pp. 143–144. Mishnaic exegete, Rabbi Nathan ben Abraham, explains קסוס as having the Judeo-Arabic connotation of אללבלאר (= Bindweed).
  53. ^ Mishnah (Kil'ayim 5:8): הארוס והקיסוס ושושנת המלך‎. Cf. the definition of these words in Rabbi Nathan ben Abraham's commentary on the Mishnah, where shoshannat ha-melekh is explained by him as being אכליל אלמלך‎ = Sweet clover (Melilotus). According to Isaac ben Melchizedek's commentary on Seder Zera'im of the Mishnah, shoshannat ha-melekh is a flower, and has the connotation of the Greek word κρίνος, meaning "lily / iris." Maimonides, however, explains shoshannat ha-melekh as being the flower which he calls in Judeo-Arabic שקאיק אלנעמאן‎, meaning, "anemone."
  54. ^ Tosefta (Kil'ayim 3:12), s.v. הלשישית‎; cf. Ḳrispil, Nissim (1985). A Bag of Plants (The Useful Plants of Israel) (in Hebrew). Vol. 3 (Ṭ.-M.). Jerusalem: Cana Publishing House Ltd. pp. 627–629, 632–633. ISBN 965-264-011-5. OCLC 959573975., s.v. Chrozophora tinctoria
  55. ^ The Hebrew word used here is a Greek loanword, מלפפונות (melephephonot; sing. melephephon). The old Greek word for "melon" was actually μήλο = mêlo(n) apple + πεπόν = pépōn melon, meaning literally "apple-shaped melon" (see: Random House Webster's College Dictionary, s.v. melon). This fruit, muskmelon (Cucumis melo), was thought to be a cross-breed between a watermelon and an apple. Maimonides, however, calls "melephephon" in Mishnah Kilayim 1:2 and Terumah 8:6 by the Arabic name, al-khiyyar, meaning "cucumbers" (Cucumis sativus) – far from being anything related to apples and watermelons. Talmudic exegete, Rabbi Solomon Sirilio (1485–1554), disputed Maimonides' view in his commentary on the Jerusalem Talmud (Kila'im 1:2, s.v. קישות), saying that Maimonides explained "melephephon" to mean in Spanish "pepinos" = cucumbers (Cucumis sativus), which, in the opinion of an early Mishnaic exegete, Rabbi Isaac of Siponto (c. 1090–1160), was really to be identified as “small, round melons” (Cucumis melo), since Rabbi Yehudah in our Mishnah holds that it is a diverse kind in relation to kishūt (a type of cucumber). Moreover, had the "melephephon" simply been a subspecies of kishūt, explained by Maimonides as having the meaning of al-fakous (Egyptian cucumber = Cucumis melo var. chate), in the Arabic language, they would not have been considered diverse kinds with respect to each other, similar to a black ox and a white ox that plough together are not considered diverse kinds. Nevertheless, today, in Modern Hebrew, the word melephephon is now used to denote "cucumbers," based on Maimonides' identification.
  56. ^ Tosephta (1970). M.S. Zuckermandel (ed.). Tosephta - Based on the Erfut and Vienna Codices (in Hebrew). Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books. pp. 77-78 (Kil'ayim 3:12). OCLC 13717538. (first printed in Berlin 1899) [Note: In other editions of the Tosefta, the source is marked as Kil'ayim 3:13]
  57. ^ Maimonides, Mishneh Torah (Hil. Kil'ayim 5:18), who wrote: "He that sees in a vineyard an herb which people are not accustomed to sow, even though he should have an interest in its upkeep, either for an animal or for medicinal purposes, this does not render [the vineyard] prohibited, until he willfully keeps over a thing the like of which is maintained by the majority of the people of that place. For example, he that maintains thorny plants in a vineyard in Arabia, where they are desirous of [maintaining] the thorny plants for their camels, this renders [the vineyard] prohibited."
  58. ^ Cf. Jerusalem Talmud (Kil'ayim 5:7, Commentary of Solomon Sirilio
  59. ^ a b Mishnah (Kil'ayim 5:8), Commentary of Hilketha Gaviratha in Mishnayot Zekher Chanokh (משניות זכר חנוך) (in Hebrew). Vol. 1 (Zera'im). Jerusalem: Vagshal Publishing Ltd. 2011. p. 341 (Kil'ayim 5:8). OCLC 1140888800. All vegetables are accounted as diverse kinds in a vineyard. However, this is the case only when the majority of the inhabitants of that place are accustomed to keep them, even if they should keep them for livestock fodder or for clothing
  60. ^ Tosefta (Kil'ayim 3:16)
  61. ^ Babylonian Talmud (Shabbat 139a)
  62. ^ Abramsky, Y., ed. (2002). Tosefta with the Commentary Ḥazon Yeḥezḳel (in Hebrew). Vol. 1 (Seder Zera'im). Jerusalem: Bene ha-meḥaber. p. 132 (Kil'ayim 3:16). OCLC 741496655., s.v. ר"ט אומר אין כלאים‎ (published post-mortem)
  63. ^ Tosefta (Kil'ayim 3:15)
  64. ^ Ishtori Haparchi (1999), chapter 58, pp. 285-286
  65. ^ Menahem Meiri, Beit ha-Behirah (Baba Bathra 156b, s.v. המקיים כלאים בכרם‎)
  66. ^ Meiri (2006), p. 94, Kiddushin 39a, s.v. כלאי הכרם
  67. ^ a b Maimonides (1956). Guide for the Perplexed. Translated by Michael Friedländer (2nd ed.). New York: Dover Publishers. p. 338 (part 3, ch. 37). ISBN 0-486-20351-4.
  68. ^ a b Ishtori Haparchi (1999). Avraham Yosef Havatzelet (ed.). Kaftor wa-Ferach (in Hebrew). Vol. 3 (chapter 56). Jerusalem. p. 265. OCLC 32307172.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  69. ^ Sifrei on Deuteronomy 22:9 (P. Ki Tetzei)
  70. ^ Maimonides (1974), vol. 4, s.v. Hil. Kil'ayim 5:13-15
  71. ^ Ishtori Haparchi (1999), chapter 58, p. 299
  72. ^ Nathan ben Abraham (1955), vol. 1, s.v. Tractate Kil'ayim
  73. ^ a b Bornsztain, A. (1995). The Complete Questions & Responsa Avnei Nezer (Stones of the Crown) (in Hebrew). Vol. 2 (Yoreh De'ah). Jerusalem. p. 216. OCLC 762439748.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link), s.v. responsum no. 388:2 (Hil. Kil'ayim)
  74. ^ Palestinian Targum on Deuteronomy 22:10; Babylonian Talmud (Baba Kama 54b)
  75. ^ Mishnah, Kil'ayim 1:6

Notes

edit
  1. ^ The English translation here follows the identification of eizôb in Amar, Z. (2015). Flora and Fauna in Maimonides' Teachings (in Hebrew). Kfar Darom. p. 43. OCLC 783455868.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link), which is understood to mean za'atar in Arabic, or what is known by its taxonomic name Origanum syriacum. Jacob Neusner, in his English translation of the Tosefta, renders the word as hyssop, based on the common English translation for the Hebrew word eizôb.
  2. ^ Related to thyme and to the mint family Lamiaceae, in general. The English translation here follows the identification of koranit in Witztum, Allan (1992). "Hebrew, Aramaic and Arabic Names for Plants in the Mint Family". Lĕšonénu: A Journal for the Study of the Hebrew Language and Cognate Subjects (in Hebrew): 149. JSTOR 24345785.
  3. ^ The Hebrew word used in Tosefta 3:12 is בורכייר, and which is explained by Nathan ben Jehiel in his Arukh, and by commentators Moses Margolies, Elijah of Fulda and Solomon Sirilio, as meaning כנגר (corrected as بَنْجَر = בנגר ) in the Arabic language, and which word means beetroot. Jacob Neusner, however, deviated from this tradition and wrote in his momentous work, Neusner, J.; Sarasan, Richard S., eds. (1986). The Tosefta - Translated from the Hebrew. Vol. 1 (First Division, Zera'im - The Order of Agriculture). Hoboken, New Jersey: Ktav Publishing House. p. 263. ISBN 9780870686931. OCLC 2874998., that the word meant cudweed (Filago pyramidata).
  4. ^ An exception to this rule is dodder (Cuscuta spp.) (Hebrew: כשות), a parasitic plant that attaches itself to some trees and used for medicinal purposes, and which the Sages of Israel forbid in a vineyard grown in the Land of Israel.[60] Even though the laws of Diverse kinds apply to vineyards outside the Land of Israel, dodder was permitted to grow in vineyards outside the Land of Israel.[61] This leniency was applied to them because dodder itself is a unique case, and it was disputed among the Sages whether or not it is permitted in a vineyard, with Rabbi Tarfon permitting it, seeing that it was thought by him to be a tree growing amongst trees.[62] The Sages, disagreeing with Rabbi Tarfon, prohibited it to be grown in a vineyard in the Land of Israel. Since those living outside the Land of Israel were mostly considered to be unlearned, they were not put under the same strictures when they can find a lenient opinion in the Land of Israel. Even so, Rabbeinu Chananel prohibits giving instruction to the unlearned to act leniently in this case.

Bibliography

edit
Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Kil%27ayim_(prohibition)&oldid=1255130606"