Avodah Zarah, Daf Samekh Bet, Part 5

 

Introduction

Since the Talmud spoke about the laws of Sabbatical year produce, there now appears a story about the subject.

 

דבי רבי ינאי יזפי פירי שביעית מעניים ופרעו להו בשמינית

אתו אמרו ליה לרבי יוחנן. אמר להו יאות הן עבדין

 

Those of the house of R. Yannai used to borrow Sabbatical year produce from the poor and repay them in the eighth year.

When this was reported to R. Yohanan, he said to them, They are acting correctly.

 

During the Sabbatical year the people of the house of R. Yannai would borrow produce from poor people (who can collect freely from the fields) before such produce needed to be removed from one s home. They would pay the poor people back after the Sabbatical year, when produce can be sold. The question is does this count as engaging in trade with Sabbatical year produce. R. Yohanan says it does not since by the time they compensated them, the original produce no longer existed. This seems to be a sort of legal fiction to circumvent the laws of the Sabbatical year, and also to benefit the poor.

וכנגדן באתנן מותר דתניא נתן לה ולא בא עליה בא עליה ולא נתן לה אתננה מותר

 

And a corresponding case may be found in the matter of a prostitute s hire which is permitted; for it has been taught: If he gave her [an animal] without having intercourse with her or had intercourse without giving it to her, her hire is permitted [for use in the Temple].

 

The Talmud analogizes the above case with the prohibition of using an animal paid to a prostitute as a sacrifice (see Deuteronomy 23:19). As we shall see below, if he has sex with her and then gives her the animal, the animal may be used. By giving it to her after the sex, the animal is considered a gift and not payment.

 

נתן לה ולא בא עליה פשיטא כיון דלא בא עליה מתנה בעלמא הוא דיהיב לה

 

Now if he gave it to her without having intercourse with her, obviously [it may be used in the Temple] since he did not have intercourse with her, it was just a gift that he gave to her!

 

The Talmud now analyzes the baraita. If he did not have intercourse with her, then obviously the animal is not prohibited. It was not a payment because nothing happened.

 

ותו בא עליה ולא נתן לה הא לא יהיב לה ולא מידי וכיון דלא נתן לה מאי אתננה מותר

 

Furthermore, if he had intercourse with her and did not give it to her, behold he didn t give her anything, and since he did not give anything to her what does it mean that her hire is permitted!

 

The second half of the baraita is equally difficult. If he didn t give her anything then there is no animal to be prohibited.

 

אלא הכי קאמר נתן לה ואחר כך בא עליה או בא עליה ואחר כך נתן לה אתננה מותר

 

Rather this is what it means: If he gave it to her and subsequently had intercourse with her, or had intercourse with her and subsequently gave it to her, the hire is permitted.

 

The Talmud now seems to imply that the animal is basically always permitted, whether he gives it to her before intercourse or after. In tomorrow s section the Talmud will analyze then how it can ever be prohibited.