A separate and special area on the subject of the thin and rough cattle involves the use of the "product" of the rough and thin cattle for the benefit of agriculture apart from the plowing and threshing, which is the manure
A separate and special field on the subject of the thin and rough cattle involves the use of the "product" of the rough and thin cattle for the benefit of agriculture apart from the plowing and threshing, which is the waste.
The organic manure enriches the soil, increases its fertility and helps early ripening of the grain. For this reason, the farmers highly valued the operation of the sewage and tried to obtain it wherever possible. This is mainly during the period when the demand for agricultural products from the army and the Roman bureaucracy in the country did not slacken, but on the contrary increased and increased. From this, the farmer was forced to improve as much as possible the fertility of the land in his possession and thereby satisfy the needs of the Roman authorities and himself and his family, and we have already seen the common image of the intensive farm, when the required weight of manure is estimated at its value.
The most prominent source of manure was cattle manure and the method of housing the cattle on the pit field was common. That is, to imprison him in a fenced, temporary, mobile enclosure, which was moved from place to place in an orderly and calculated manner on the surface of the agricultural area. The garbage accumulated in the yard was also moved to the field. In addition to this, there is the sheep manure that has accumulated in the barn or in the hayloft in the field, along with the manure of other animals.
The crescent and the fold were specified as the place where the flock rests, about which the sages of the Sanhedrin speak in their rulings and laws.
The Deir was a permanent structure (and supporting evidence of its kind has been uncovered in Israel in the area of Nahal Revivim, at the foot of Mount Boker near Nahal Bashor, in the Jericho Valley, and more), while the crescent was a mobile structure. In the barn they would collect the accumulated manure over a period of time and take it out to the field, such as the manure in barns, while the crescent, which is a designated area in the field surrounded by a partition, a fence, for the purpose of temporary grazing of the sheep, and thus they would "violate" the field. It was made up of different materials, as the Tosefta says - "In every Oshin Saharim - with stones, mats, and a basket, a cane, and even three ropes one above the other, provided that there are not three taps (about 27 cm) between the cane and the other so that the goat does not enter ( for reasons of safety)" (Sheviyat 19:XNUMX).
Such an area was sometimes very large and sometimes - "there was a lot of sheep, even a house of kur, even a house of quarries" (Tosefta Shem 15). That is, the crescent encompassed 47 dunams!!!, and in another place we both: "even a house of five kurin, even a house of ten kurin" (Tosefta Eruvin 9 (XNUMX)' XNUMX).
When do you remove animal manure?
The Mishnah testifies as follows: "From when will we remove (in the seventh year) dung (of animals) to the heaps (to the piles of dung that the farmers used to accumulate in several places)? They will stop laborers (to work the fields for the purpose of the seventh year) - the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: The sweet herbs.) Rabbi Yossi says: Meshaiksher (the sweet will shrink and there will be some kind of knots in it)" (Sheviyat 1:XNUMX).
And right after the mishna says that the garbage rate reached about three tons per dunam, and it is a very decent rate, and as evidence - "How much garbage (how much garbage is allowed to be taken out to landfills)?" Up to three Ashfats for Beit Sa'ah (for a 50 cubit by 50 cubit plot of land). of ten and ten lows (each pile holds ten bins of garbage) of Lath Lath (and each bin is of Lath, i.e. 15 Saa). Musifin on the lows (which give more than ten lows in one pile) and there is no Musifin on the ashfats. Rabbi Shimon says - even about the Ashpatos" (Misnath Sheviyat 2:XNUMX).
That is, the farmers were well aware of the multiple importance of the organic manure to the fertility of the field and its consequences in relation to the binding fiscal issue, and from this it is possible to learn about the breeding rate of the thin cattle on a serious scale. And on the other hand, the members of the Sanhedrin demonstrated in their rulings a broad and profound knowledge of the economic, agricultural and pastoral issues, not least of all the fiscal issues.
Accordingly, the Talmud explains the law - "He who rents the sheep (for its milk and/or wool) is forbidden to a young woman" (Yerushalmi VII, Chapter XNUMX, XNUMX, p. XNUMX). That is, so that the garbage is not concentrated in one place, but is spread over the entire crescent. From this, the shepherd would "shake the flock" - changing the place of the crescent moon (Seventh Tosefta, end of chapter XNUMX). And this is how the Talmud explains: "Hadah said that if she was drunk for a short time, but if she was drunk for a long time, it is permissible. That day is forbidden." That is, on the last day of the lease, the manure belonged to the owner of the flock, and when he rents a girl, he steals the manure from him. All of those mentioned regarding reference in the lease to the issue of garbage serve as important evidence for us regarding the explosive methods of garbage disposal in the various farms and its widespread use as a matter of routine. We will also learn from here about the large amount of garbage to the point of its necessary mention in the lease.
The mishna of Baba Metzia brings us important evidence regarding manure (indirectly) - "He who receives a field from his neighbor (to cultivate it, such as in plowing, shall give the owner of the field half, a third, or a quarter of the grain produced) - a place where they used to harvest, shall harvest (the grain with a reaping sickle and is not allowed to fallow it) , to uproot - he will uproot (hands with the root), to plow after it (after the harvest to turn the roots of the weeds so that they don't come back and grow), to plow. Everything according to the country's custom. Just as you (the owner of the field and the harvester) divide the grain, so you divide the chaff and beg..." (Baba Metzia 1:XNUMX). In my opinion, the Mishna that appears in the Jerusalem Talmud (Bava Kama, Chapter XNUMX, XNUMX, p. XNUMX) - "... a place where they used to reap - Yakzur, to thresh - Yador...", is prior to the above-mentioned Mishna because it does not attach importance to grazing the cattle on the field to manure . The above phrase - "as the state custom" legitimately feeds local administrators, who are obviously different from each other. This expression created a referential goal in the language of the Sages against an unrealistic desire to create unity.
In the tradition of the Jerusalem Talmud (Bava Kama, Chapter XNUMX, XNUMX, p. XNUMX) - "He who gathers sheep for the fold ... until Kadon (here), in the presence of Gadora (the fold) from the Spirits" where such an intention is missing in the Mishnah and here we learn about an interesting development in this regard.
The housing, that is, the systematic fertilizing of the fields, related to the prohibition of fertilizing the field in the seventh year and also forbidding its tenants and even stating that "a field that has been blessed (that has been favored, that has been improved in the seventh by plowing to remove its thorns from it) (or that has become a sheepfold for the needs of fertilizing) shall not be sown." and will be fined) at the end of the Sabbath..." (From the Year of the Sabbath 2:2). The Tosefta, on the other hand, stated that "there is no dairy, neither on Shabbat, nor on good days, nor on the moon of a day, even on a good day... Rabbi (Yehuda the President) says that on a day on a good day, on a good day, with his food, and on the day of a day, he even takes his wages" (Saviyat XNUMX:XNUMX). The difference in relief is based on the personal-private business of this president.
Just as it was permitted in the Sheviyat to accumulate the manure in ashpots in the field, so it was also permitted to occupy the field with guards, on the condition that the owner did not install large guards, but "does a guard only on a part of his field where a large amount of manure will be concentrated" (Tosefta Sheviyat 15:XNUMX) . And when the crescent is filled with an amount of manure that interferes with the flock's nest, it is permissible to move the flock to another crescent.
The sages of the Sanhedrin were divided as to the size of the crescent that is allowed to be prepared and placed on the seventh, such as in relation to the size of the herd, and this is what the Tosefta testifies: 56 m). Natalah, uproots from the crescent and makes ashpots in his field according to the way of the Mezbelin (according to the rate of three times three ashpots for the house of Sa'ah), and then makes one crescent. Rabbi Yehuda said - what do Deuteronomy say? While there was little sheep, but (if) there was a lot of sheep, even a beit kur (an agricultural area that can be sown with a grain kur = 50 dunams), even a beit kurim is allowed. Rabbi Shimon ben Eleazar says: Drive a stake in the middle and surround it with four shahars from its four spirits..." (Sheviyat 28:23.5).
Some believe that the distance between the four shahars that is allowed to their tenant in the seventh, can reach Beit Shmona Sayin (96 dunams) while others believe that "Beit Satayim and Beit Satayim. It shears and milks into it and brings it in and out through the ascent." That is, so that the wool and the milkman would not be spoiled, they allowed to use the free space near the crescent for milking and shearing the wool.
We signed in the field of fodder crops that were well suited to the intensive nature of the economy in Israel and in accordance with the Roman villa, which is the "city" in the sources of the Sages. This and due to a lack of permanent pasture due to problematic climate conditions and root crops in the summer and fall to feed the animals and with them special plants for feeding the animals teach us that the animals that were connected to the farms were fed with the help of the development of the fodder crops method. This method was very blessed because she was able to hold those animals whose uses were many and varied.
As usual, they fed the animal straw free of chaff, and for this purpose they would "bury" it from the mouth of the kabra, according to Rabbi Shimon, or place it in the wind so that the light chaff would be blown off it. The animal was fed with hay mixed with alfalfa and on the Sabbath the sages allowed the use of hay for feeding.
Sage sources list several types of fodder for livestock such as moss, thyme, sycamore and even carobs, becca and loof these plants appear in the Roman agricultural writers such as Varu and Columella.
It should be noted that due to the Roman production policy, the ever-increasing demand for meat and leather products among the army and the Roman bureaucracy in the land, the Jewish farmers were motivated to improve and cultivate the branch of animal husbandry and the members of the Sanhedrin marveled at their lenient regulations in this regard, including in the seventh period.
The dogs were an inseparable part of the herd, and we read the following paragraph in this regard: "Just as there is no Magdalin Magdalin in it, so there is no Magdalin thin animal." Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar (one of Rabbi Meir's students) says: Breeding infidel dogs ... even though they said: No dogs are bred in the settlement, but they are bred in the towns near the book..." (Tosefta Baba Kama, ch. 17). In another place, Rabbi Meir disagrees with the popular opinion in this language: "A dog is an animal (in a casual way). Rabbi Meir says: Kind of animal" (Ibid. 7:XNUMX). That is, in his opinion, the dog belongs to the settlement, the agricultural farm, the herd... and indeed his distinction is absolutely appropriate for the location of the aforementioned settlements.
"Infidel"? Is it from a village language, does it originate perhaps from Cyprus (Hellenic Cyprus), and perhaps from the Latin goat language, meaning capra, we were a herd dog. The Romans generally distinguished between a hunting dog (canis venaticum) and a guard dog (canis custodiae).
In light of the Mishna - "There is no tower in every place" (Bava Kama 7:XNUMX) and the Tosefta - "Rabbi Eliezer says: The breeder of dogs is like a herd of pigs" (Tosefta ibid). And it seems that the latter slightly explained the above-mentioned Mishnah in the sense that "a person will not raise the dog, unless it was tied with a chain...". In other words, we have before us an interesting historical process of improving the treatment of dogs in general, albeit with certain limitations.
In my opinion, we saw that a similar process that went through the breeding of the thin cattle, also went through the breeding and nurturing of the herd dogs. Moreover, we can never learn about them. That is, from the general negation and criticism we will learn about the explosiveness of the custom of breeding and nurturing dogs among the Jewish public and especially in areas suffering from security and safety problems. In any case, the importance of his work was recognized, including the dog's symbiosis in grazing work.
From this period, i.e. during the second century AD, the evidence regarding dog breeding and especially in relation to herds proliferates, including data regarding signs of dog breeding and especially in midrasims that reflect a later period - third century AD onwards and even include morals such as - "a parable of two dogs that were in a herd And they were gossips to each other (they fought, got angry and harassed each other, perhaps in relation to the primacy of the leadership of the herd). (But when...) one wolf came against the other (one or the other or one of the members of the herd)... they both went and killed the wolf" (Talmud Babyloni Sanhedrin XNUMX p. XNUMX).
Those pack dogs were fitted with a permanent collar with metal teeth to prevent fatal bites from prey animals such as wolves, hyenas or jackals.
The shepherds knew about mating, the hybridization between a wolf and a dog, they distinguished between a domesticated dog and a wild dog and one that they tried to tame for work related to guarding the herd. Rabbi Shimon ben Eleazar said that "one does not sell infidel dogs to foreigners" (Tosefta 9:XNUMX) due to their importance and value to the grazing economy.
Sometimes the sources resort to legendary numbers of the herd in relation to the number of dogs in it, to teach about the explosive "employment" of the dogs in the herds.
As in the previous chapters, I will also point out here that the involvement of the Sages in their rulings regarding rough cattle, organic waste, and the presence of grazing dogs among the Jewish public shows, firstly, their vast and abundant knowledge on the matter, and secondly, their ambition to be involved in the multitude of their regulations on this subject in order to find the modus vivendi among the provisions of the Halacha and the reality on the ground, thirdly - for their liberal and pragmatic approach in this matter and fourthly - for their desire to find a middle ground between the shepherds' plans and their ambitions and the limitations of the Roman presence and sometimes their plans and decrees in this regard.
I should note that a few years ago I published a "weighty" article on the subject Dogs in Sage literature On the "Hidan" website. You are welcome to browse it.
More of the topic in Hayadan:
