תלמוד על כלאים 7:2

HALAKHAH: “Kilaim in a vineyard are forbidden,” etc. It is written (Deut. 22:9): “Do not sow kilaim in your vineyard.” Not only sowing, how about keeping? The verse says, vineyard and no kilaim²Cf. Chapter 7, Note 44. The parallel to this argument is in Sifra Qedošim 2(18) [Babli Mo‘ed Qaṭan 2b, Avodah Zarah 64a, Makkot 21b]: (Lev. 19:19): “ ‘Your field you should sow no kilaim.’ Not only sowing, how about keeping? The verse says, no kilaim, I told you only because of kilaim.” This argument covers grains, vegetables, and vines. However, the same verse also mentions kilaim of animals and textiles in similar language and these may be kept in the opinion of the Mishnah. It follows that a derivation based on the verse Lev. 19:19 has to be rejected and only an argument parallel to that in Chapter 7 is acceptable.. Does this follow Rebbi Aqiba, for Rebbi Aqiba said that he who keeps [kilaim] transgresses a prohibition³“Prohibition” usually refers to a criminal offense. “Forbidden” refers to a moral obligation. Since the statement of R. Aqiba in Tosephta Kilaim 1:15 deals with kilaim of seeds (grains and vegetables), he cannot imply that passively keeping kilaim is prosecutable as a criminal offense. However, in the Babli (Mo‘ed Qaṭan 2b, Avodah Zarah 64a), R. Aqiba is quoted in a baraita to the effect that keeping kilaim is a criminal offense. This forces Rashi and the other commentators to conclude that “keeping” here means “fencing in” or a similar activity. (Rashi to Mo‘ed Qaṭan 2 is lost; the commentary is in Avodah Zarah.) The Yerushalmi has no such difficulty.? Rebbi Yose said, it is the word of everybody. Everybody agrees that what is forbidden is forbidden if he did not preserve through an action, but if he preserved through an action he is whipped, as it is stated: He who covers kilaim is whipped.