תלמוד על שביעית 1:2

May one do that during the prohibition of the first two terms⁸Chapter 1, Note 4.? Let us hear from the following⁹A different text is in Tosephta 1:4: “One sells and transports manure from a Jew suspected of violating the Sabbatical before the Sabbatical year; from a Gentile or a Samaritan it is permitted even during the Sabbatical. How long may one fertilize? Anytime one may plough one may fertilize.”
Since the agricultural Sabbatical is certainly rabbinic, if there is no Jubilee year and no Temple the Samaritans are not bound by its rules. The language of the Tosephta binds the prohibition of fertilizing to that of ploughing; when the two terms were abolished for ploughing they automatically were abolished for fertilizing.: “One may sell and transport manure with those who work during the Sabbatical year until the New Year, with a Gentile and a Samaritan even during the Sabbatical year on condition that he not unload the boxes.” It said only, “on condition that he not unload the boxes,” hence he is permitted to transport. That means it is permitted¹⁰Since the condition that one may not unload is stipulated only for working with a Gentile during the Sabbatical but does not apply to working with a Jew suspected of violating the rules of the Sabbatical. Then certainly he is permitted to transport and unload for himself.. If you say it is forbidden, he should be forbidden to transport.

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, if he shows him the stump⁶³This means, if he indicates the places where the worker should go and collect. Most commentators delete the word but it is confirmed by both mss.; then he pays him only the wages of his feet⁶⁴Since the contract was only for the transport, the wages are not Sabbatical.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, even if he did not show it to him it is as if he had. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, as it was stated⁶⁵This baraita is also quoted Avodah Zarah 5:1 (fol. 44c). In the first case, it is a contract for delivery, in the second case a contract for work. Since the expression used by R. Simeon ben Laqish, “wages of his feet”, are used in the baraita regarding an unrestricted contract for work, the restrictive use of R. Simeon ben Laqish seems to be unjustified.: “If somebody hires a worker to bring wine for a sick person, or an apple for a sick person, if he delivered it, he must pay, otherwise he does not have to pay. But if he said to him, wine for a sick person from place X, or an apple for a sick person from place X, he has to pay him whether he delivered or not because he pays him the wages of his feet.” What does Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish do with this? He explains that he showed him. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan, as it was stated: “Nobody should say to his neighbor⁶⁶The rich person says to the poor one that he is willing to pay for the gleanings the poor will collect. Since gleanings and peah become the unrestricted property of the poor, the transaction is legitimate if the poor man is paid for delivery of the produce; it is illegitimate if the poor man is hired to collect as agent for the rich person. The same rules apply for a Levite and First Tithe., here you have a denar and bring me gleanings today, bring me peah today. But he may say to him, for gleanings you will bring today, for peah you will bring today. The same rules apply to a Levite.” Here, he did not show him; is it considered as if he showed him? What does Rebbi Joḥanan dowith this? They were particularly lenient with the Sabbatical because it is rabbinical⁶⁷Cf. Chapter 1, Note 7..