מַשְׁקִין בֵּית הַשְּׁלָחִין בַּמּוֹעֵד וּבַשְּׁבִיעִית בֵּין מִמַּעְיָין שֶׁיָּצָא בַּתְּחִילָּה בֵּין מִמַּעְיָין שֶׁלֹּא יָצָא בַּתְּחִילָּה אֲבָל אֵין מַשְׁקִין לֹא מִמֵּי הַגְּשָׁמִים וְלֹא מִמֵּי הַקִּילוֹן MISHNA: One may irrigate a field that requires irrigation on the intermediate days of a Festival as well as during the Sabbatical Year, both from a newly emerged spring that began to flow only during the Festival, and from a spring that did not just emerge and that has been flowing for some time. However, one may not irrigate a field with rainwater collected in a cistern, a procedure that requires excessive exertion, or with water drawn with a shadoof [kilon], a lever used to raise water with a bucket from deep down in a well.
וְאֵין עוֹשִׂין עוּגִיּוֹת לַגְּפָנִים רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה אוֹמֵר אֵין עוֹשִׂין אֶת הָאַמָּה בַּתְּחִילָּה בַּמּוֹעֵד וּבִשְׁבִיעִית וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים עוֹשִׂין אֶת הָאַמָּה בַּתְּחִילָּה בַּשְּׁבִיעִית וּמְתַקְּנִין אֶת הַמְקוּלְקָלוֹת בַּמּוֹעֵד And one may not construct circular ditches around the bases of grapevines on the intermediate days of a Festival. Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya says: One may not construct a new water channel during the intermediate days of a Festival or during the Sabbatical Year. And the Rabbis say: One may construct a new water channel during the Sabbatical Year and one may repair damaged water channels during the intermediate days of a Festival.
וּמְתַקְּנִין אֶת קִלְקוּלֵי הַמַּיִם שֶׁבִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים וְחוֹטְטִין אוֹתָן וּמְתַקְּנִין אֶת הַדְּרָכִים וְאֶת הָרְחוֹבוֹת וְאֶת מִקְווֹת הַמַּיִם וְעוֹשִׂין כׇּל צוֹרְכֵי הָרַבִּים וּמְצַיְּינִין אֶת הַקְּבָרוֹת וְיוֹצְאִין אַף עַל הַכִּלְאַיִם: In addition to performing labor on one’s own property in order to avoid financial loss, it is also permitted to perform labor on the intermediate days of a Festival for the public welfare: One may repair damaged water cisterns that are in the public domain, and clean them out by removing the dirt and sediment that accumulated there; one may repair roads, streets, and ritual baths; and one may tend to all other public needs. So too, one may mark graves to inform the public of their ritual impurity, and inspectors may even go out to uproot the shoots of prohibited diverse kinds [kilayim] that grew in the fields during the rainy season.
גְּמָ׳ הַשְׁתָּא יֵשׁ לוֹמַר מִמַּעְיָין שֶׁיָּצָא בַּתְּחִילָּה דְּאָתֵי לְאִינְּפוֹלֵי מַשְׁקִין מִמַּעְיָין שֶׁלֹּא יָצָא בַּתְּחִילָּה דְּלָא אָתֵי לְאִינְּפוֹלֵי מִיבַּעְיָא GEMARA: The Gemara begins by questioning the wording of the mishna: Now that it has been said that on the intermediate days of a Festival one may irrigate a field from a newly emerged spring, whose walls have not yet stabilized and are likely to collapse, necessitating laborious repairs, is it necessary to mention that one may irrigate a field from a spring that did not just emerge, whose walls have already stabilized and are therefore not likely to collapse?
אָמְרִי אִצְטְרִיךְ אִי תַּנָּא מַעְיָין שֶׁיָּצָא בַּתְּחִילָּה הֲוָה אָמֵינָא הָכָא הוּא דְּבֵית הַשְּׁלָחִין אִין בֵּית הַבַּעַל לָא מִשּׁוּם דְּאָתֵי לְאִינְּפוֹלֵי אֲבָל מַעְיָין שֶׁלֹּא יָצָא בַּתְּחִילָּה דְּלָא אָתֵי לְאִינְּפוֹלֵי אֵימָא אֲפִילּוּ בֵּית הַבַּעַל נָמֵי The Gemara answers: They say that it was necessary to mention the second case as well. For had the tanna taught us the halakha with regard to only a newly emerged spring, I would have said that here, in the case of a field that requires irrigation, yes, one is permitted to irrigate from such a spring, but in the case of a field that ordinarily suffices with rainwater, no, one is not permitted to do so, because it is likely to collapse. But with regard to a spring that did not just emerge, that is not likely to collapse, I might say that one may provide supplementary irrigation even in the case of a field that ordinarily suffices with rainwater.
קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן לָא שְׁנָא מַעְיָין שֶׁיָּצָא בַּתְּחִילָּה וְלָא שְׁנָא מַעְיָין שֶׁלֹּא יָצָא בַּתְּחִילָּה בֵּית הַשְּׁלָחִין אֵין בֵּית הַבַּעַל לָא Therefore, the tanna teaches us that a newly emerged spring is no different from a spring that did not just emerge. In the case of a field that requires irrigation, yes, one may irrigate on the intermediate days of a Festival, while in the case of a field that ordinarily suffices with rainwater, no, one may not do so, even from an established spring.
וּמַאי מַשְׁמַע דְּהַאי בֵּית הַשְּׁלָחִין לִישָּׁנָא דְּצָחוּתָא הִיא דִּכְתִיב וְאַתָּה עָיֵף וְיָגֵעַ וּמְתַרְגְּמִינַן וְאַתְּ מְשַׁלְהֵי וּלְאֵי The Gemara raises a question with regard to a linguistic issue: And from where may it be inferred that this term, beit hashelaḥin, a field that requires irrigation, is a term denoting thirst, implying that supplementary watering is necessary? The Gemara answers: As it is written: “And you were faint and weary” (Deuteronomy 25:18). The term faint is referring to the thirst of the Israelites in the desert. And, in the standard Aramaic translation, we translate the verse as: And you were thirsty [meshalhei] and weary. The letters ḥet and heh are sometimes interchanged, and therefore the term beit hashelaḥin connotes a thirsty field.
וּמַאי מַשְׁמַע דְּהַאי בֵּית הַבַּעַל לִישָּׁנָא דִּמְיַיתְּבוּתָא הִיא דִּכְתִיב כִּי יִבְעַל בָּחוּר בְּתוּלָה וּמְתַרְגְּמִינַן אֲרֵי כַּמָּה דְּמִיתּוֹתַב עוּלֵם עִם בְּתוּלְתָּא יִתְיַיתְּבוּן בְּגַוִּיךְ בְּנַיִיךְ And from where may it be inferred that this term, beit haba’al, a field that suffices with rainwater, is a term denoting settlement, i.e., an established field that does not require extensive upkeep? As it is written: “For as a young man takes to himself [yiv’al] a virgin, so shall your sons take you to themselves” (Isaiah 62:5). And it is translated in the Aramaic translation: As a young man settles down with a virgin, so shall your sons become settled within you. Similarly, beit haba’al is referring to a settled field that suffices with rainwater.
מַאן תַּנָּא דִּפְסֵידָא אִין הַרְווֹחָה לָא וַאֲפִילּוּ בִּמְקוֹם פְּסֵידָא מִיטְרָח נָמֵי לָא טָרְחִינַן The Gemara begins to clarify the underlying principle of the mishna, asking: Who is the anonymous tanna of the mishna who maintains that labor performed to prevent a considerable loss, such as watering a field that requires irrigation, yes, it is permitted on the intermediate days of a Festival; but labor performed to increase one’s profit, such as watering a field that ordinarily suffices with rainwater, no, it is not permitted? Furthermore, even in a case involving loss, one may not excessively exert oneself, as the tanna of the mishna renders prohibited all cases of watering fields with collected rainwater or with water drawn with a shadoof, even in a field that requires irrigation.
אָמַר רַב הוּנָא רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב הִיא דִּתְנַן רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר מוֹשְׁכִין אֶת הַמַּיִם מֵאִילָן לְאִילָן וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יַשְׁקֶה אֶת הַשָּׂדֶה כּוּלָּהּ Rav Huna said: It is Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov, as we learned in a mishna: Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: In a field filled with trees, one may draw water via channels from tree to tree, provided that in doing so he does not water the entire field. As this field ordinarily suffices with rainwater, it is prohibited to water the entire field. Therefore, it is evident that Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov renders prohibited work performed to increase profit on the intermediate days of a Festival.
אֵימוֹר דְּשָׁמְעַתְּ לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר הַרְווֹחָה דְּלָא טִירְחָא בִּמְקוֹם פְּסֵידָא מִי שָׁמְעַתְּ לֵיהּ The Gemara challenges this comparison: Say that you heard that Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov holds that labor performed only to increase profit is not permitted. But did you hear him prohibit excessive exertion in a case of considerable loss? This aspect of the mishna finds no expression in the words of Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov.
אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא הָא מַנִּי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה הִיא דְּתַנְיָא מַעְיָין הַיּוֹצֵא בַּתְּחִילָּה מַשְׁקִין מִמֶּנּוּ אֲפִילּוּ שְׂדֵה בֵּית הַבַּעַל דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר אֵין מַשְׁקִין אֶלָּא שְׂדֵה בֵּית הַשְּׁלָחִין שֶׁחָרְבָה רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה אוֹמֵר לֹא כָּךְ וְלֹא כָּךְ יָתֵר עַל כֵּן אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה לֹא יַפְנֶה אָדָם אַמַּת הַמַּיִם וְיַשְׁקֶה לְגִינָּתוֹ וּלְחוּרְבָּתוֹ בְּחוּלּוֹ שֶׁל מוֹעֵד Rather, Rav Pappa said: In accordance with whose opinion is this mishna? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, as it is taught in a baraita: From a newly emerged spring one may irrigate even a field that ordinarily suffices with rainwater; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: One may irrigate only a field requiring irrigation that dried up and needs water. Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya says: Neither the one nor the other. Furthermore, Rabbi Yehuda said: Owing to the exertion involved, one may not divert a water channel from its regular path in order to water his garden or his ruin, which is now being used for planting, during the intermediate days of a Festival.
מַאי חָרְבָה אִילֵּימָא חָרְבָה מַמָּשׁ לְמָה לִי דְּמַשְׁקֵי לַהּ אָמַר אַבָּיֵי שֶׁחָרְבָה מִמַּעְיָין זֶה וְיָצָא לָהּ מַעְיָין אַחֵר The Gemara first clarifies the case of the baraita: What does Rabbi Yehuda mean when he speaks of a field that is dried up? If we say that the field is literally dried up and the plants are already parched, why do I need to water it? Abaye said: It means that the one spring from which the field had been irrigated until now dried up, but in the meantime another spring emerged. If the field is not irrigated from this spring, it will be ruined.
רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה אוֹמֵר לֹא כָּךְ וְלֹא כָּךְ לָא שְׁנָא חָרַב מַעְיָינָהּ וְלָא שְׁנָא לֹא חָרַב מַעְיָינָהּ מַעְיָין שֶׁיָּצָא בַּתְּחִילָּה לָא The Gemara explains the next clause of the baraita, which states: Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya says: Neither the one nor the other. By this he means that it is no different whether the original spring dried up or did not dry up. The guiding principle is: From a newly emerged spring one may not irrigate even a field that requires irrigation.
וּמִמַּאי דִּלְמָא עַד כָּאן לָא קָאָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֵּית הַשְּׁלָחִין אִין בֵּית הַבַּעַל לָא אֶלָּא מַעְיָין שֶׁיָּצָא בַּתְּחִילָּה In any event, Rabbi Yehuda seems to maintain an opinion that is like that of the mishna, i.e., that only a field that requires irrigation may be watered, but not a field that suffices with rainwater. And even in the case of a field that requires irrigation, excessive exertion is prohibited. The Gemara challenges this understanding: And from where do you conclude that the mishna reflects the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda? Perhaps Rabbi Yehuda stated that a field that requires irrigation, yes, one may irrigate it on the intermediate days of a Festival, and a field that suffices with rainwater, no, one may not do so, only with regard to a newly emerged spring,