מתני׳ היתר נדרים פורחין באויר ואין להם על מה שיסמכו הלכות שבת חגיגות והמעילות הרי הם כהררים התלוין בשערה שהן מקרא מועט והלכות מרובות הדינין והעבודות הטהרות והטמאות ועריות יש להן על מה שיסמכו והן הן גופי תורה:
MISHNA: Incidental to the Festival peace-offering, the mishna describes the nature of various areas of Torah study. The halakhot of the dissolution of vows, when one requests from a Sage to dissolve them, fly in the air and have nothing to support them, as these halakhot are not mentioned explicitly in the Torah. There is only a slight allusion to the dissolution of vows in the Torah, which is taught by the Sages as part of the oral tradition. The halakhot of Shabbat, Festival peace-offerings, and misuse of consecrated property are like mountains suspended by a hair, as they have little written about them in the Torah, and yet the details of their halakhot are numerous. The details of monetary law, sacrificial rites, ritual purity and impurity, and the halakhot of those with whom relations are forbidden all have something to support them, i.e., there is ample basis in the Torah for these halakhot, and these are the essential parts of Torah.
הלכות שבת: מיכתב כתיבן לא צריכא לכדר' אבא דאמר רבי אבא החופר גומא בשבת ואין צריך אלא לעפרה פטור עליה כמאן כרבי שמעון דאמר מלאכה שאינה צריכה לגופה פטור עליה אפילו תימא לרבי יהודה התם מתקן הכא מקלקל הוא מאי כהררין התלויין בשערה
§ The mishna stated that the halakhot of Shabbat are like mountains suspended by a hair. The Gemara asks: But the halakhot of Shabbat are written, i.e., the prohibition against performing labor is explicit in the Torah. The Gemara answers: No, it is necessary to say this in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Abba. As Rabbi Abba said: One who digs a hole on Shabbat only because he needs its dirt and not for the hole itself is exempt from liability for that act, as this is not the labor of digging prohibited on Shabbat by Torah law. The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion did Rabbi Abba issue this ruling? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, who said: One who performs on Shabbat a labor that is not necessary for its own sake, i.e., he performs the labor for a purpose other than the direct result of the action, is exempt from liability for it. The Gemara offers an alternative possibility. This ruling can be explained even if you say that Rabbi Abba holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, that one is liable for a labor that is not necessary for its own sake. There, in other cases, Rabbi Yehuda deems one liable because his purpose is creative. Here, where one is digging the hole for the dirt, the purpose is destructive, as the action damages the ground. Therefore, Rabbi Yehuda concedes that in this case he is exempt. The Gemara returns to the mishna. What then does the mishna mean by the phrase: Like mountains suspended by a hair?
מלאכת מחשבת אסרה תורה ומלאכת מחשבת לא כתיבא: חגיגות: מיכתב כתיבן לא צריכא לכדאמר ליה רב פפא לאביי ממאי דהאי וחגותם אותו חג לה' זביחה דלמא חוגו חגא קאמר רחמנא אלא מעתה דכתיב (שמות ה, א) ויחוגו לי במדבר הכי נמי דחוגו חגא הוא וכי תימא הכי נמי והכתיב (שמות י, כה) ויאמר משה גם אתה תתן בידינו זבחים ועולות דלמא הכי קאמר רחמנא אכלו ושתו וחוגו חגא קמאי לא סלקא דעתך דכתיב (שמות כג, יח) ולא ילין חלב חגי עד בקר ואי סלקא דעתך דחוגא הוא תרבא לחגא אית ליה ודלמא הכי קאמר רחמנא חלב הבא בזמן חג לא ילין אלא מעתה הבא בזמן חג הוא דלא ילין הא דכל השנה כולה ילין (ויקרא ו, ב) כל הלילה עד הבקר כתיב דלמא אי מההוא הוה אמינא ההוא לעשה כתב רחמנא האי ללאו ללאו כתב קרא אחרינא (דברים טז, ד) ולא ילין מן הבשר אשר תזבח בערב ביום הראשון לבקר ודלמא לעבור עליו בשני לאוין ועשה אלא אתיא מדבר מדבר כתיב הכא ויחוגו לי במדבר וכתיב התם (עמוס ה, כה) הזבחים ומנחה הגשתם לי במדבר מה להלן זבחים אף כאן זבחים ומאי כהררין התלויין בשערה דברי תורה מדברי קבלה לא ילפינן:
The Gemara answers: The Torah prohibited only planned, creative labor on Shabbat. An act of labor that is not intended, or whose result is unintended, or whose consequence is destructive, is not included in this category. Therefore, one who performs labor in this manner is exempt. And limitation of the prohibition against creative labor is not written anywhere in the Torah with regard to the laws of Shabbat. Admittedly, this principle is written in connection with the Tabernacle, and there is an established exegetical link between the building of the Tabernacle and Shabbat. Nevertheless, as this fundamental principle concerning the halakhot of Shabbat does not appear explicitly, it is compared to mountains suspended by a hair. § The mishna taught that the halakhot of Festival peace-offerings are like mountains suspended by a hair. The Gemara asks: But they are written in the Torah. The Gemara answers: No, it is necessary to say this in accordance with that which Rav Pappa said to Abaye: From where is it derived that this verse: “And you shall celebrate it as a Festival [veḥagotem] to the Lord” (Leviticus 23:41), is referring to an animal offering? Perhaps the Merciful One is simply saying: Celebrate a Festival. Abaye responded: However, if that is so, consider that it is written: “Let My people go, that they may hold a feast [veyaḥogu] to Me in the wilderness” (Exodus 5:1). So too, the meaning of this verse is that they will merely celebrate a Festival, and not bring an offering. And if you would say that is indeed so, that this means that they should celebrate a Festival, but isn’t it written: “And Moses said: You must also give into our hand sacrifices and burnt-offerings, that we may sacrifice to the Lord our God” (Exodus 10:25)? This shows that the command is referring to offerings. The Gemara raises a difficulty. But perhaps this is what the Merciful One said: Slaughter animals so that you can eat, drink, and celebrate a Festival before Me, but no offerings are necessary. The Gemara answers: This cannot enter your mind, as it is written: “The fat of My Festival feast [ḥagi] shall not remain all night until the morning” (Exodus 23:18). And if it enters your mind to say that it is referring to a regular Festival feast and not an offering, does a Festival feast have forbidden fats? The Gemara asks: But perhaps this is what the Merciful One states in the Torah: The fats of gift offerings that are brought during a Festival may not remain all night. If so, the phrase “My Festival feast” is not referring to a type of offering at all, but to a particular time. The Gemara answers: However, if that is so, this verse indicates that it is only those fats that are brought during a Festival that may not remain overnight. It may be inferred from here that fats which are brought throughout the year may remain all night. But it is written about burnt-offerings: “On its firewood upon the altar all night into the morning” (Leviticus 6:2). This shows that burnt-offerings must burn upon the altar all night. The Gemara further asks: Perhaps if this halakha was derived from that verse, I would say that verse serves as the source of a positive mitzva. Therefore, the Merciful One writes this verse: “Shall not remain all night,” as a prohibition as well. The Gemara responds. With regard to the prohibition against leaving over an offering on a Festival, another verse was written: “Neither shall any of the flesh, which you sacrifice the first day at evening, remain all night until the morning” (Deuteronomy 16:4). The Gemara asks: But perhaps the verse: “Shall not remain all night” comes to teach that one who does so violates two prohibitions and a positive mitzva. Rather, the Gemara rejects this explanation in favor of the claim that the source for a Festival peace-offering comes from a verbal analogy between the term “wilderness” stated here and the term: “wilderness” stated elsewhere. It is written here: “They shall make an offering to Me in the wilderness” (Exodus 5:1), and it is written there: “Did you bring to Me sacrifices and offerings forty years in the wilderness, house of Israel?” (Amos 5:25). Just as there it is referring to actual animal offerings, so too here, it is referring to animal offerings, not merely the celebration of a Festival. The Gemara asks: And in light of this verbal analogy, in what way is this halakha like mountains suspended by a hair? The Gemara answers: The textual evidence is not that strong, as generally one does not derive Torah matters from texts of the tradition, i.e., Prophets and Writings. Since the prophets were not permitted to introduce new halakhot, as the Torah is the only authoritative source in that regard, this verbal analogy does not carry the same weight as a halakha derived from the Torah itself.
(ה) וְלָמָּה מַזְכִּירִין דִּבְרֵי הַיָּחִיד בֵּין הַמְרֻבִּין, הוֹאִיל וְאֵין הֲלָכָה אֶלָּא כְדִבְרֵי הַמְרֻבִּין. שֶׁאִם יִרְאֶה בֵית דִּין אֶת דִּבְרֵי הַיָּחִיד וְיִסְמֹךְ עָלָיו, שֶׁאֵין בֵּית דִּין יָכוֹל לְבַטֵּל דִּבְרֵי בֵית דִּין חֲבֵרוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה גָדוֹל מִמֶּנּוּ בְחָכְמָה וּבְמִנְיָן. הָיָה גָדוֹל מִמֶּנּוּ בְחָכְמָה אֲבָל לֹא בְמִנְיָן, בְּמִנְיָן אֲבָל לֹא בְחָכְמָה, אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְבַטֵּל דְּבָרָיו, עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה גָדוֹל מִמֶּנּוּ בְחָכְמָה וּבְמִנְיָן:
(5) And why do they record the opinion of a single person among the many, when the halakhah must be according to the opinion of the many? So that if a court prefers the opinion of the single person it may depend on him. For no court may set aside the decision of another court unless it is greater than it in wisdom and in number. If it was greater than it in wisdom but not in number, in number but not in wisdom, it may not set aside its decision, unless it is greater than it in wisdom and in number.
ועד מתי חורשין שדה הלבן ערב שביעית משתכלה הלחה וכל זמן שבני אדם חורשים ליטע מקשאות ומדלעות ר' שמעון אומר א"כ נתנה תורה שיעור לכל אחד ואחד בידו אלא בשדה הלבן עד הפסח ובשדה האילן עד העצרת וב"ה אומרים עד הפסח ואמר ר' שמעון בן פזי אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי משום בר קפרא רבן גמליאל ובית דינו נמנו על שני פרקים הללו ובטלום אמר ליה רבי זירא לר' אבהו ואמרי לה ריש לקיש לר' יוחנן רבן גמליאל ובית דינו היכי מצו מבטלי תקנתא דב"ש וב"ה והא תנן אין ב"ד יכול לבטל דברי בית דין חבירו אלא אם כן גדול ממנו בחכמה ובמנין
The mishna (see Shevi’it 2:1) additionally states: And until when may one plow a white field, i.e., a grain field, on the eve of the Sabbatical Year? One may plow until the residual moisture in the fields from the rain ceases and so long as people continue to plow their fields in order to plant cucumbers and gourds, which are planted at the end of the winter. Rabbi Shimon says: If it is so that no set time was established, then the Torah has given an individual measure of time into the hands of each and every individual. One may plow until a self-determined time, as he can always claim that he is plowing in order to plant during the sixth year. Rather, a fixed time must be established: In a white field one may plow until Passover, in an orchard one may plow until Shavuot, and Beit Hillel say: Until Passover. And Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said in the name of bar Kappara: Rabban Gamliel and his court discussed and then voted about the prohibitions of these two periods, i.e., from Passover or Shavuot until Rosh HaShana, and nullified them, thereby permitting plowing until Rosh HaShana, the actual beginning of the Sabbatical Year. Rabbi Zeira said to Rabbi Abbahu, and some say that it was Reish Lakish who said to Rabbi Yoḥanan: How could Rabban Gamliel and his court nullify an ordinance instituted by Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel, who were greater authorities than they were? Didn’t we learn in a mishna (Eduyyot 1:5): A court cannot nullify the ruling of another court unless it surpasses it in wisdom and in number?