1)

(a)The Mishnah now discusses 'ha'Mavrich es ha'Gefen' - someone who transplants a branch that is still attached to the vine, by bending it underneath the ground and letting it re-grow some distance away from the original vine.

(b)In order to plant vegetables on top of it, the newly planted branch must be covered by - three Tefachim of earth.

(c)For this to be permitted, the new vine must be - at least six Tefachim away from the trunk ...

(d)... because of Avodas Gefen Yechidis.

(e)It is permitted to plant vegetables immediately beyond the new vine - because the roots of vegetables grow directly downwards, and not sideways (see Tos. Yom-Tov).

2)

(a)In order to permit planting vegetabless on top of it - the branch must be covered by at least three Tefachim of earth above which the owner now wants to plant them) ...

(b)This applies even if the new branch is growing inside a gourd or a pipe (made of clay) - because the roots of the vegetables will pierce it and reach the vine.

(c)The tree and the gourd are not Kil'ayim - because the Tana is speaking about a gourd that has dried-up.

(d)If the vine is replanted inside a rock however - then three finger-breadths space between the rock and the vegetables will suffice ...

(e)... because the roots cannot pierce stone.

3)

(a)Now the Mishnah discusses 'ha'Arkuvah she'be'Gefen' ... the branch of a vine that curves, reaching the ground before continuing to grow vertically.

(b)Someone who wants to plant vegetables in that area must measure the six Tefachim of Avodas Gefen Yechidis - from the vertical section of the branch (and not from the trunk.

4)

(a)According to R. Eliezer b'R. Tzadok, it is possible to turn three vines into a Kerem without planting new ones - by being Mavrich a branch from each one without covering the trunks of the original vines ...

(b)... as long as the distance between the 'new' vines and the 'old' ones is not less than four Amos and not more than eight. Otherwise, they are not considered a vineyard (see Tos. Yom-Tov).

(c)The same ruling will apply - if one is only Mavrich two of the three vines (presumably, the Mishnah mentions three, because it would be unusual to be Mavrich only two of them).

(d)The Mishnah is coming o teach us that - this permitted despite the fact that two vines are feeding from the same root.

5)

(a)The Mishnah - forbids planting vegetables beside a vine that has dried-up without leaving Avodas Gefen Yechidis, but adds that it is not Mekadesh.

(b)It is nevertheless forbidden - because of Mar'is ha'Ayin.

(c)This is certainly the case in the winter, when all vines appear to have died up. However - it applies equally in summer, because it sometimes happens even in summer that vines shed their leaves and appear to have dried-up, even though they haven't (see Tos. Yom-Tov).

6)

(a)R. Meir issues the same ruling ('Asur ve'Eino Mekadesh') with regard to Tzemer-Gefen - (a cotton plant [see also Tiferes Yisrael]) ...

(b)... which is not 'Mekadesh' - because it does not fall into the category of Zera'im (see Tos. Yom-Tov).

(c)R. Eliezer b'R. Tzadok quotes R. Meir as saying - that the same ruling will apply if one plants vegetables on top of a vine that one has been Mavrich, but which is covered with less than three Tefachim of earth.

(d)The Halachah is - like the Tana Kama).

7)

(a)The Mishnah now lists four more cases of 'Osrin ve'Lo Mekadshin', the first of which is 'Mosar Chorban ha'Kerem' (otherwise known as 'Karachas ha'Kerem'). The ramifications of this ruling are that - if, for example, fifteen (less than sixteen) Amos divide between the two sections of the vineyard, of which the owner plants seven, it is Asur Lechatchilah, but permitted Bedieved (though one is obligated to remove the vegetables).

(b)The ramifications of ...

1. ... the second case, 'Mosar M'chol ha'Kerem' are - that eleven (less than twelve) Amos divide between the vineyard and the wall, and the owner left four Amos next to the vineyard free, but planted the rest, and of ...

2. ... the third case, 'Mosar Piskei Aris' - that only eight Amos (less than eight Amos plus) divide between the two sections of the trellis, and the owner left six Tefachim on either side free and planted the rest, it is forbidden Lechatchilah but permitted Bedi'eved.

(c)The Tana presents this case in the plural ' ... Piskei ... ' - to teach us that it is even Asur where there is a trellis on either side (and it will certainly be Asur if there is a trellis only on one side.

(d)And the ramifications of the fourth case 'Mosar Apifrayos' are that - if one planted under the section of Apifrayos (Aris) on which no vine-branches are lying, it is 'Asur ve'Eino Mekadesh'.

8)

(a)The Tana finally rules that if one planted vegetables ...

1. ... underneath a vine ...

2. ... within the Avodas ha'Kerem (six Tefachim) of a single vine, or ...

3. ... within the Avodas ha'Kerem (four Amos) of a vineyard - they are Mekadesh.

(b)The Shi'ur of Avodas ...

1. ... ha'Gefen of a single vine is - six Tefachim.

2. ... ha'Kerem is - four Amos.

9)

(a)If Reuven arranges his vines to grow over Shimon's crops (see Tos. Yom-Tov) - he is liable to pay for the damage.

(b)Even the opinions that do not hold of 'Dina de'Garmi' (i.e. exempting a person who merely causes damage from paying) will concede that here, he is Chayav - because he performed an act that caused direct damage.

10)

(a)R. Yossi and R. Shimon disagree with the previous ruling - because they maintain that Reuven cannot render Shimon's property forbidden ...

(b)... though not if Reuven threw Cheilev or blood into Shimon's pot.

(c)The reason for the difference is - because their ruling is confined to Kil'ayim (as we shall now see).

(d)They extrapolate their ruling from the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei "Lo Tizra Karm'cha Kilayim - since 'Karm'*cha*' implies that one can only render one's own vineyard forbidden, but not somebody else's.

(e)The Chachamim counter that D'rashah from the very same Pasuk - from the otherwise superfluous word "Kilayim" (see also Tos. Yom-Tov), which comes to include even somebody else's vineyard.

11)

(a)R. Yossi relates how one person once planted crops in his vineyard during a Sh'mitah year and the case was brought before R. Akiva - who permitted it ...

(b)... a proof for R. Yossi and R. Shimon) - because Sh'mitah crops do not belong to the owner of the field, but to everybody.

(c)The Halachah - is like the Tana Kama (see Tos. Yom-Tov on the next Mishnah).

12)

(a)The Tana discusses somebody who 'steals' a vineyard and plants in it - and returns it to the owner planted ('ve'Yatza mi'Lefanav').

(b)The Tana permits the owner - to harvest the crops on Chol ha'Mo'ed.

13)

(a)The reason for the above concession might well be because of Mar'is ha'Ayin. It might otherwise not be necessary to pick the harvest until after Yom-Tov - seeing as the harvest does not become forbidden ...

(b)... like R. Yossi and R. Shimon in the previous Mishnah (see Tos. Yom-Tov).

(c)Alternatively, it might be Halachically obligatory to pick the crops immediately - because of the ruling forbidding Kilayim grows as long as one does nothing about it, but permitting it if one does whatever one can to prevent further growth.

14)

(a)The owner is obligated to pay laborers - up to one third above the going rate to harvest the crops immediately, to avoid the mixture from becoming Asur.

(b)Alternatively 'ad Sh'lish' means - up to a third more than the combined value of the grapes and the produce.

(c)If he cannot find workers to do the work immediately even at that price - then he must proceed to harvest the crops himself at his own regular pace, and as long as he is doing so, the mixture does not become forbidden, irrespective of how long it takes him.

15)

(a)The Mishnah considers the stolen vineyard the property of the thief - from the time that people no longer refer to it as the original owner's (but as the thief's).

(b)From that moment on - the mixture is subject to 'Kidush' (even according to Rebbi Yossi and Rebbi Shimon).

16)

(a)If a storm-wind blows the branches of his vines on to his vegetables, the owner is required to - immediately cut them and take them away (see Tos. Yom-Tov & Tiferes Yisrael).

(b)If an Oneis prevents from doing so - they remain permitted.

(c)In the event that his crops or vegetables have been blown so that they are now leaning underneath his vines - he simply returns them to their former position.

(d)It is not Mekadesh, should he fail to do so - because it is only if the roots of the crops or vegetables are underneath the vines that they are Mekadesh.

17)

(a)Freshly planted produce is subject to Kidush (should it increase by one two-hundredth) from the moment it takes root ('mi'she'Tashrish'). According to the text in the Mishnah 'mi'she'Tashlish', it is subject to Kidush - when it reaches one third of its total growth.

(b)The Mishnah declares grapes subject to Kidush - when they reach the stage of 'Pul ha'Lavan' (the size of a white bean).

(c)The ramifications of ...

1. ... this latter ruling are - that if one plants corn or vegetables in a vineyard, whose grapes have not reached the stage of 'Pul ha'Lavan', then provided he removes what he planted before they do, everything remains permitted.

2. ... the former ruling are - that if he planted corn or vegetables next to grapes which have reached the stage of 'Pul ha'Lavan', and he manages to remove them before they take root or grow to one third of their total growth, everything remains permitted, too.

18)

(a)The source of these rulings is the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei ""Pen Tikdash ha'Melei'ah ha'Zera asher Tizra" (regarding produce) u'Tevu'as ha'Karem" (regarding grapes). We learn from ...

1. ... "Pen Tikdash ha'Melei'ah ... " - that crops that have not yet taken root or that have grown less than a third of their total growth are not Mekadesh (since they do not fall under the category of 'Melei'as Zera').

2. ... "u'Tevu'as ha'Karem" - that grapes that have not grown to the size of 'Pul ha'Lavan' are not Mekadesh, since they are not yet called 'Tevu'ah'.

(b)The Tana now issues the same ruling with regard to crops that have dried up and grapes that are fully ripe ...

(c)... which no longer fall under the category of 'Melei'as Zera' and "Tevu'as ha'Kerem", respectively (see Tos. Yom-Tov).

19)

(a)The Tana now discusses crops or vegetables growing in a pot that one places in a vineyard or within four Amos of Avodas ha'Kerem. According to the Tana Kama, they are Mekadesh - provided it is holed, but not if it is not.

(b)The minimum size hole for pot to be considered holed is - the size of a small root.

(c)According to R. Shimon - either way it is Asur Lechatchilah, though Bedi'eved, it is not Mekadesh (since it is not considered having planted the crops or the vegetables in the ground).

(d)The Halachah is - like the Tana Kama.

20)

(a)Crops or vegetables that are a third grown (or that have taken root [Tos. YomTov]) become forbidden if one carries them through a vineyard whose grapes are 'ke'Pul ha'Lavan' - if during that time, they increase by one two-hundredth (see Tos. Yom-Tov).

(b)The grapes do not become Asur as well - because the pot was not placed on the ground (see Tos. Yom-Tov).