Avodah Zarah, Daf Mem Het, Part 1

 

Introduction

This week s daf begins with another mishnah that says there are three things. This time asherot, idolatrous trees. The mishnah is largely parallel to the previous two mishnayot, one about three types of houses and one about three types of stones.

The sugya on this mishnah is also very similar to the sugya on the previous mishnah.

 

מתני׳ שלש אשרות הן

אילן שנטעו מתחלה לשם עבודת כוכבים הרי זו אסורה

גידעו ופיסלו לשם עבודת כוכבים והחליף נוטל מה שהחליף

העמיד תחתיה עבודת כוכבים ונטלה הרי זו מותרת:

 

There are three kinds of asherah:

A tree which has originally been planted for idolatry behold this is prohibited.

If he chopped and trimmed [a tree] for idolatry, and its sprouted afresh, he removes the new growth.

If he only set [an idol] under it and took it away, behold the tree is permitted.

 

גמ׳ אמרי דבי ר’ ינאי והוא שהבריך והרכיב בגופו של אילן

 

GEMARA. Those of the House of R. Yannai said: [When the Mishnah declares that he removes the new growth then the tree is permitted,] it applies only when he sank [a branch into the ground] and or grafted onto the trunk of the tree.

 

In the second clause, the mishnah says that if chopped and trimmed a tree for the sake of idolatry, the new growth is permitted. The House of R. Yannai says that this is only when he in essence started a new tree by either bending a shoot into the ground or grafting a new branch onto the tree.

 

והאנן גידעו ופיסלו תנן

 

But have we not taught in the Mishnah: If he chopped or trimmed.

 

The mishnah itself seems to imply that simply chopping or trimming is enough. In other words, just a negative act is enough to render the tree forbidden. He does not need to also do the positive act of starting a new tree.

 

אלא כי איתמר דרבי ינאי לענין ביטול איתמר דאף על גב דהבריך והרכיב בגופו של אילן כי נטל מה שהחליף שפיר דמי דמהו דתימא כיון דהבריך והרכיב בגופו של אילן כאילן שנטעו מתחלה דמי וליתסר כולה קמ"ל

 

Rather when the statement of the House of R. Yannai was stated it was in reference to annulment, that although he bent a branch [into the ground] or grafted it on the trunk of the tree, if he removes the new growth [on the grafting], it is all right. For what might you have said? Since he bent a branch [into the ground] or grafted it on the trunk of the tree, it is like a tree which had been originally planted for idolatry and the whole of it is prohibited. Consequently we are informed [that it is not so].

 

The Talmud again shifts the reference point of the interpretation of the mishnah (the same thing happened at the end of last week s daf). The House of R. Yannai made their statement with regard to annulment. If the tree was planted not for the sake of idolatry and then someone bent a vine into the ground or grafted on to it for the sake of idolatry, both ways of starting new trees, all he has to do to annul the idolatrous nature is remove the new growth. We might have thought that the entire tree is considered to have been planted for the sake of idolatry. The House of R. Yannai says it is not.