Dear Rabbi,

I have a question about Talmud Pasachim 55a. It is on pages 272 & 273 of the photo copied pages I have. Rabina said: After all it refers to Judea, but in respect to taking root we do say once that part of the day is as the whole of it, but we do not say twice that part of the day is as the whole of it.

The footnote isn't helping me understand what Rabina means by "We do not say twice that part of the day is as the whole of it." The footnote says, "For if he weeds some time on the fourteenth we would have to count the rest of the day as a complete day, and also the beginning of the siuxteenth until the waving of the omar as another complete day."

Is Rabina saying the expression "part of a day is as the whole of it" can only be applied to one end of the time frame, not both ends? For instance - if the subject is a 5-day time frame, then the expression can only be applied to part of the first day or part of the fifth day, not to both? Is that what Rabina is meaning by saying "we do not say twice"?

Thanks for your kind help.

John Lemley, Vancouver, WA, USA

Rabbi Eliezer,

Thank you for your helpful response. (I just returned from being out of the country and got your e-mail.) I agree with you, Rabina's statement is very clear. Rabina says we only use the expression "part of the day is as the whole of it" for the first day or for the last day of a series of days, not for both days..

However, the Artscroll footnote is what causes me a problem. It says "if he weeds sometime on the 14th we would have to count the rest of the day" The fifteenth counts as day number two. But, the sixteenth is also counted as another complete day. This example is "saying twice" that part of a day is as the whole of it. Yet, Rabina says "we do not say twice."

So, my question is: Why does the footnote "say twice" when Rabina says we do not "say twice"?

Kol Tuv,

John Lemley, Vancouver, WA, USA