A Vineyard in Two Fields

Kilayim (4:7) | Yisrael Bankier | 3 years ago

It is very important to define when a collection of vines becomes a vineyard. One reason is that one is not allowed to plant within six tephachim of individual vines, while one cannot plant within four amot of a vineyard. This week we have learnt about the minimum number of vines and the required spacing to constitute a vineyard. Interestingly, the Mishnah (4:7) teaches that if one has a single row of vines on the edge of their field that is next to a single row of vines in their neighbour's field, they combine to be considered a vineyard. Note that this is despite the two rows being in different fields and owned by different people.¹

The Bartenura explains that R' Shimon would agree with the ruling in our Mishnah. To explain, the later Mishnah (7:4) records a debate regarding one that trains the branches of his vine over his neighbour's produce. The Chachamim explain that since the prohibition of kilayim has been violated and the produce would need to be burnt, he is responsible to pay for the damage caused. R' Shimon however argues that "ein adam mekadesh davar sheino shelo" -- one cannot make his friend property prohibited. The Bartenura there explains that this is not to be confused with the fact that one can make his friends food non-kosher by mixing in something prohibited. Kilayim is different since the Torah writes, "you shall not plant your vineyard kilayim". The Barterura here explains that this case is different. Since there are two rows of vines, R' Shimon would agree that it is defined as a vineyard.

The Mishnah Achrona notes that the Bartenura is based on the Yerushalmi. He explains further that there is a debate regarding the opinion of R' Shimon. One opinion is that while he cannot affect the produce in his friend's field, his vines however do become assur. The other opinion is that since he cannot make his friend's wheat assur, his vines are similarly mutar. One might think that the R' Shimon would maintain that this case is the same and since one cannot make their friend's field assur, the rows would not combine to define the space as a vineyard thereby making a larger area around the vines in his own field assur. The novelty then is that in this case R' Shimon would agree the vines combine.

The Mishnah Achrona however finds this understanding difficult. Each of the parties do not have enough vines to constitute a vineyard, so why should they combine? If we consider the opinion of R' Shimon, then it should be defined as ze ve'ze gorem. In other words, the case is arising from a combination of something that is mutar and assur. He cites the Mishnah in Orlah (2:11) that rules that in such a case it is mutar. The question remains unresolved.

An insight from the Derech Emuna can help in answering this question. The Derech Emuna asks, what would be the law if there was one row of vines, and he planted some grain six tephachim from the vines. The friend then planted another row of vines in his field next to these, thereby defining the region as a vineyard and the grains as being planted too close. R' Chaim suggests that perhaps in this case, since the seeds were already planted prior to the neighbour planting his row of vines, R' Shimon would maintain that the neighbour does not have the capacity to make that grain assur. When the Yerushalmi taught that R' Shimon would agree with the ruling in our Mishnah, that is referring to those items planted close to the newly defined vineyards, after both rows of vines were planted.

Perhaps we can suggest that difference as follows. R' Shimon maintains that ein adam mekadash davar sheino with respect to an action. Consequently, training one's vines over another's wheat or creating a vineyard next another's grain cannot have the result of making that grain prohibited. One cannot actively make another's produce prohibited through kilayim. Our Mishnah however is dealing with the definition of a vineyard - when a collection of vines turns into a vineyard. The perek that our Mishnah is part of is focused on the definition of a vineyard. Consequently, the Mishnah teaches that two rows, even in separate fields constitutes a vineyard. It is not a question of being mekadesh davar sheino shelo. While it is true that it will mean the region around those vines in which one is forbidden from planting is increased, the vines or ground itself is not becoming assur.²

¹ The Mishnah teaches that the only thing that would divide the two rows is if a fence separated them.

Download