Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

May 19, 2015 | 讗壮 讘住讬讜谉 转砖注状讛

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Joanna Rom and Steven Goldberg in loving memory of Steve's mother Shirley "Nana" Goldberg (Sura Tema bat Chaim v'Hanka)

Ketubot 106

讛讗讬 注砖讛 讜讛讗讬 注砖讛 注砖讛 讚讻讘讜讚 转讜专讛 注讚讬祝 住诇拽讬讛 诇讚讬谞讗 讚讬转诪讬 讜讗讞转讬讛 诇讚讬谞讬讛 讻讬讜谉 讚讞讝讗 讘注诇 讚讬谞讬讛 讬拽专讗 讚拽讗 注讘讬讚 诇讬讛 讗讬住转转诐 讟注谞转讬讛

This is a positive mitzva, for judges to judge cases properly, and this is a positive mitzva, to honor Torah scholars and their families. Rav Na岣an concluded that the positive mitzva of giving honor to the Torah takes precedence. Therefore, he put aside the case of the orphans and settled down to judge the case of that man, under the mistaken assumption that he was a relative of Rav Anan. Once the other litigant saw the honor being accorded to that man by the judge, he grew nervous until his mouth, i.e., his ability to argue his claim, became closed, and he lost the case. In this manner, justice was perverted by Rav Anan, albeit unwittingly and indirectly.

专讘 注谞谉 讛讜讛 专讙讬诇 讗诇讬讛讜 讚讗转讬 讙讘讬讛 讚讛讜讛 诪转谞讬 诇讬讛 住讚专 讚讗诇讬讛讜 讻讬讜谉 讚注讘讚 讛讻讬 讗讬住转诇拽 讬转讬讘 讘转注谞讬转讗 讜讘注讗 专讞诪讬 讜讗转讗 讻讬 讗转讗 讛讜讛 诪讘注讬转 诇讬讛 讘注讜转讬

Elijah the Prophet was accustomed to come and visit Rav Anan, as the prophet was teaching him the statements that would later be recorded in the volume Seder deEliyahu, the Order of Elijah. Once Rav Anan did this and caused a miscarriage of justice, Elijah departed. Rav Anan sat in observance of a fast and prayed for mercy, and Elijah came back. However, when Elijah came after that, he would scare him, as he would appear in frightening forms.

讜注讘讚 转讬讘讜转讗 讜讬转讬讘 拽诪讬讛 注讚 讚讗驻讬拽 诇讬讛 住讬讚专讬讛 讜讛讬讬谞讜 讚讗诪专讬 住讚专 讚讗诇讬讛讜 专讘讛 住讚专 讗诇讬讛讜 讝讜讟讗

And Rav Anan made a box where he settled himself down and he sat before Elijah until he took out for him, i.e., taught him, all of his Seder. And this is what the Sages mean when they say: Seder deEliyahu Rabba, the Major Order of Elijah, and Seder Eliyahu Zuta, the Minor Order of Elijah, as the first order was taught prior to this incident and the second came after it.

讘砖谞讬 讚专讘 讬讜住祝 讛讜讛 专讬转讞讗 讗诪专讬 诇讬讛 专讘谞谉 诇专讘 讬讜住祝 诇讬讘注讬 诪专 专讞诪讬 讗诪专 诇讛讜 讛砖转讗 讜诪讛 讗诇讬砖注 讚讻讬 讛讜讜 专讘谞谉 诪讬驻讟专讬 诪拽诪讬讛 讛讜讜 驻讬讬砖讬 转专讬 讗诇驻谉 讜诪讗转谉 专讘谞谉 讘注讬讚谉 专讬转讞讗 诇讗 讛讜讛 讘注讬 专讞诪讬 讗谞讗 讗讬讘注讬 专讞诪讬

搂 The Gemara relates: In the years of Rav Yosef there was a divine anger, manifested by world hunger. The Sages said to Rav Yosef: Let the Master pray for mercy concerning this decree. He said to them: Now, if in the case of the prophet Elisha, when the Sages would take their leave of him, 2,200 Sages would remain behind whom he would support from his own pocket, and yet he would not pray for mercy at a time of divine anger and famine, should I pray for mercy?

讜诪诪讗讬 讚驻讬讬砖讬 讛讻讬 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讗诪专 诪砖专转讜 诪讛 讗转谉 讝讛 诇驻谞讬 诪讗讛 讗讬砖 诪讗讬 诇驻谞讬 诪讗讛 讗讬砖 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讚讻讜诇讛讜 诇驻谞讬 诪讗讛 讗讬砖 讘砖谞讬 讘爪讜专转 讟讜讘讗 讛讜讜 讗诇讗 讚讻诇 讞讚 讜讞讚 拽诪讬 诪讗讛 讗讬砖

The Gemara asks: And from where is it derived that this number of scholars would remain behind with Elisha? As it is written: 鈥淎nd his servant said: How should I set this before a hundred men鈥 (II聽Kings 4:43). What is the meaning of 鈥渂efore a hundred men鈥? If we say that all of the gifts that he had received, i.e., the first fruits, twenty loaves of barley, and fresh ears of corn mentioned in the preceding verse, were meant to be placed before one hundred men, in years of drought and famine this was a good deal of food, which would have sufficed for them. Rather, it must mean that each and every one of the loaves was to be placed before one hundred men. Since he had twenty loaves plus two meals of first-fruits and ears of corn, there must have been 2,200 people present.

讻讬 讛讜讜 诪讬驻讟专讬 专讘谞谉 诪讘讬 专讘 讛讜讜 驻讬讬砖讬 讗诇驻讗 讜诪讗转谉 专讘谞谉 诪讘讬 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讛讜讜 驻讬讬砖讬 转诪谞讬 诪讗讛 专讘谞谉 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讛讜讛 讚专讬砖 讘转诇讬住专 讗诪讜专讗讬 讻讬 讛讜讜 拽讬讬诪讬 专讘谞谉 诪诪转讬讘转讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 讜谞驻爪讬 讙诇讬诪讬讬讛讜 讛讜讛 住诇讬拽 讗讘拽讗 讜讻住讬 诇讬讛 诇讬讜诪讗 讜讗诪专讬 讘诪注专讘讗 拽诪讜 诇讬讛 诪诪转讬讘转讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘讘诇讗讛

搂 Incidentally, the Gemara relates: When the Sages would take their leave from the school of Rav, 1,200 Sages would remain behind to continue their studies. When the Sages would take their leave from the school of Rav Huna, eight hundred Sages would remain behind. Rav Huna would expound the lesson by means of thirteen speakers, who would repeat his statements to the crowds that had gathered to hear him. When the Sages would arise from listening to lectures in the yeshiva of Rav Huna and dust off their cloaks, the dust would rise and block out the sun, forming a dust cloud that could be seen from afar. And they would say in the West, in Eretz Yisrael: The scholars have just arisen in the yeshiva of Rav Huna the Babylonian.

讻讬 诪讬驻讟专讬 专讘谞谉 诪讘讬 专讘讛 讜专讘 讬讜住祝 讛讜讜 驻讬讬砖讬 讗专讘注 诪讗讛 专讘谞谉 讜拽专讜 诇谞驻砖讬讬讛讜 讬转诪讬 讻讬 讛讜讜 诪讬驻讟专讬 专讘谞谉 诪讘讬 讗讘讬讬 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 诪讘讬 专讘 驻驻讗 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 诪讘讬 专讘 讗砖讬 讛讜讜 驻讬讬砖讬 诪讗转谉 专讘谞谉 讜拽专讜 谞驻砖讬讬讛讜 讬转诪讬 讚讬转诪讬

When the Sages would take their leave from the school of Rabba and Rav Yosef, four hundred Sages would remain behind, and they would refer to themselves as orphans, as they were the only ones left from the entire crowd. When the Sages would take their leave from the school of Abaye, and some say from the school of Rav Pappa, and some say from the school of Rav Ashi, two hundred scholars would remain behind, and they would refer to themselves as orphans of orphans.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 讘专 专讚讬驻讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诪讬 诪讘拽专讬 诪讜诪讬谉 砖讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讛讬讜 谞讜讟诇讬谉 砖讻专谉 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 转诇诪讬讚讬 讞讻诪讬诐 讛诪诇诪讚讬谉 讛诇讻讜转 砖讞讬讟讛 诇讻讛谞讬诐 讛讬讜 谞讜讟诇讬谉 砖讻专谉 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛

搂 The Gemara returns to the issue of those who receive their wages from public funds. Rabbi Yitz岣k bar Redifa said that Rabbi Ami said: Inspectors of blemishes of consecrated animals in Jerusalem, who would examine all animals brought to be sacrificed in the Temple to verify that they were free of any blemishes that would disqualify them from being sacrificed on the altar, would take their wages from the collection of the Temple treasury chamber. Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: Torah scholars who teach the halakhot of slaughter to the priests of the Temple would take their wages from the collection of the chamber.

讗诪专 专讘 讙讬讚诇 讗诪专 专讘 转诇诪讬讚讬 讞讻诪讬诐 讛诪诇诪讚讬诐 讛诇讻讜转 拽诪讬爪讛 诇讻讛谞讬诐 谞讜讟诇讬谉 砖讻专谉 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪讙讬讛讬 住驻专讬诐 砖讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讛讬讜 谞讜讟诇讬谉 砖讻专谉 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛

Rav Giddel said that Rav said: Torah scholars who teach the halakhot of the removal of a handful to the priests would take their wages from the collection of the chamber. All these scholars were constantly engaged in work necessary for the functioning of the Temple, and therefore they would receive their wages from the Temple treasury. Rabba bar bar 岣na said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: The proofreaders of the Torah scrolls in Jerusalem would take their wages from the collection of the chamber.

讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗诪专 专讘 谞砖讬诐 讛讗讜专讙讜转 讘驻专讻讜转 谞讜讟诇讜转 砖讻专谉 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛 讜讗谞讬 讗讜诪专 诪拽讚砖讬 讘讚拽 讛讘讬转 讛讜讗讬诇 讜驻专讻讜转 转讞转 讘谞讬谉 注砖讜讬讜转

Rav Na岣an said that Rav said: The women who weave the curtains that separate the Temple Sanctuary from the Holy of Holies would take their wages from the collection of the chamber. Rav Na岣an added: But I say that they would not be paid from the collection of the chamber; rather, their salary would come from the funds consecrated for Temple maintenance. Why? Since the curtains served in place of the solid construction of the building, they were part of the Temple itself. Therefore, any work performed for the curtains should be paid for from money allocated for building purposes, not from the funds collected to pay for offerings and the daily needs of the Temple.

诪讬转讬讘讬 谞砖讬诐 讛讗讜专讙讜转 讘驻专讻讜转 讜讘讬转 讙专诪讜 注诇 诪注砖讛 诇讞诐 讛驻谞讬诐 讜讘讬转 讗讘讟讬谞住 注诇 诪注砖讛 讛拽讟专转 讻讜诇谉 讛讬讜 谞讜讟诇讜转 砖讻专谉 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛

The Gemara raises an objection to this: The women who weave the curtains, and the house of Garmu, who were in charge of the preparation of the shewbread, and the house of Avtinas, who were in charge of the preparation of the incense, all would take their wages from the collection of the chamber. This contradicts Rav Na岣an鈥檚 claim.

讛转诐 讘讚讘讘讬 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讝讬专讗 讗诪专 专讘 砖诇砖讛 注砖专 驻专讻讜转 讛讬讜 讘诪拽讚砖 砖谞讬 砖讘注讛 讻谞讙讚 砖讘注讛 砖注专讬诐 讗讞讚 诇驻转讞讜 砖诇 讛讬讻诇 讜讗讞讚 诇驻转讞讜 砖诇 讗讜诇诐 砖谞讬诐 讘讚讘讬专 砖谞讬诐 讻谞讙讚谉 讘注诇讬讛

The Gemara answers: There, it is referring to the curtains of the gates, which were not considered part of the actual Temple building but were decorative in purpose. As Rabbi Zeira said that Rav said: There were thirteen curtains in the Second Temple, seven opposite, i.e., on the inside of, seven gates, one at the entrance to the Sanctuary, one at the entrance to the Entrance Hall, two additional curtains within the partition, in the Holy of Holies in place of the one-cubit partition, and two corresponding to them above in the upper chamber.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 谞砖讬诐 讛诪讙讚诇讜转 讘谞讬讛谉 诇驻专讛 讛讬讜 谞讜讟诇讜转 砖讻专谉 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛 讗讘讗 砖讗讜诇 讗讜诪专 谞砖讬诐 讬拽专讜转 砖讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讛讬讜 讝谞讜转 讗讜转谉 讜诪驻专谞住讜转 讗讜转谉

The Sages taught: With regard to the women who raise their children for the red heifer, i.e., who would raise their children in special places so that they would live their entire lives up to that point in a state of ritual purity, enabling them to draw the water for the purposes of the ritual of the red heifer, these women would take their wages from the collection of the chamber. Abba Shaul said: Their wages would not come from the collection of the chamber. Instead, wealthy and prominent women of Jerusalem would sustain them and provide them with a livelihood.

讘注讗 诪讬谞讬讛 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诪专讘

Rav Huna raised a dilemma before Rav:

讻诇讬 砖专转 诪讛讜 砖讬注砖讜 诪拽讚砖讬 讘讚拽 讛讘讬转 爪讜专讱 诪讝讘讞 谞讬谞讛讜 讜诪拽讚砖讬 讘讚拽 讛讘讬转 讗转讜 讗讜 爪讜专讱 拽专讘谉 谞讬谞讛讜 讜诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛 讛讬讜 注讜砖讬谉 讗讜转谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讬谉 谞注砖讬谉 讗诇讗 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛

Concerning Temple service vessels, what is the halakha with regard to the possibility that they may be prepared by using money consecrated for Temple maintenance? The Gemara explains the two sides of the dilemma: Are they requirements of the altar, and therefore they came from money consecrated for Temple maintenance, or are they requirements of offerings, and therefore they were prepared from the collection of the Temple treasury chamber? Rav said to him: They are prepared only from the collection of the chamber.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 讜讻讻诇讜转诐 讛讘讬讗讜 诇驻谞讬 讛诪诇讱 讜讬讛讜讬讚注 (讛讻讛谉) 讗转 砖讗专 讛讻住祝 讜讬注砖讛讜 讻诇讬诐 诇讘讬转 讛壮 讻诇讬 砖专转 讜讙讜壮

Rav Huna raised an objection to this from a verse that deals with those in charge of maintaining the Temple structure: 鈥淎nd when they had made an end, they brought the rest of the money before the king and Jehoiada, of which were made vessels for the house of the Lord, vessels with which to minister, and buckets, and pans, and vessels of gold and silver鈥 (II聽Chronicles 24:14). This indicates that vessels may be prepared with money consecrated for Temple maintenance.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚讗拽专讬讬讱 讻转讜讘讬 诇讗 讗拽专讬讬讱 谞讘讬讗讬 讗讱 诇讗 讬注砖讛 讘讬转 讛壮 住驻讜转 讜讙讜壮 讻讬 诇注砖讬 讛诪诇讗讻讛 讬转谞讛讜

Rav said to him: Whoever taught you the Writings did not teach you the Prophets, as you forgot about the parallel verse in the Prophets: 鈥淏ut there were not made for the house of the Lord cups of silver, snuffers, basins, trumpets, any vessels of gold, or vessels of silver, of the money that was brought into the house of the Lord; for they gave that to those who did the work鈥 (II聽Kings 12:14鈥15). This verse proves that vessels were not prepared with the money donated for Temple maintenance.

讗讬 讛讻讬 拽砖讜 拽专讗讬 讗讛讚讚讬 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讻讗谉 砖讙讘讜 讜讛讜转讬专讜 讻讗谉 砖讙讘讜 讜诇讗 讛讜转讬专讜

The Gemara asks: If so, the verses contradict each other, as in one place it states that the Temple vessels may be funded with the money donated for Temple maintenance, while in the other verse it states that this money was used exclusively for those involved in the actual work of Temple maintenance. The Gemara answers: This is not difficult; here it is speaking of a case where they collected funds and there was money left over. These funds could be used for Temple vessels. Conversely, here, the verse is referring to a situation where they collected funds and there was nothing left over, and therefore all of the money was allocated to actual Temple maintenance.

讜讻讬 讙讘讜 讜讛讜转讬专讜 诪讗讬 讛讜讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 诇讘 讘讬转 讚讬谉 诪转谞讛 注诇讬讛谉 讗诐 讛讜爪专讻讜 讛讜爪专讻讜 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 讬讛讜 诇讻诇讬 砖专转

The Gemara asks: And if they collected money and there was some left over, what of it? After all, that money was consecrated for another purpose. If the Temple vessels could not be prepared with money consecrated for Temple maintenance, how were they able to use any of these funds for this purpose? Rabbi Abbahu said: The court initially sets a mental stipulation about the money collected: If it is required for Temple maintenance, it is required and is allocated accordingly, and if not, it will be used for the service vessels.

转谞讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讻诇讬 砖专转 讘讗讬谉 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛 砖谞讗诪专 讗转 砖讗专 讛讻住祝 讗讬讝讛讜 讻住祝 砖讬砖 诇讜 砖讬专讬讬诐 讛讜讬 讗讜诪专 讝讛 转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛

The school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: The funding for the service vessels of the Temple comes from the collection of the Temple treasury chamber, as it is stated: 鈥淭he rest of the money鈥 (II聽Chronicles 24:14). Which money has a remainder? You must say that this is referring to the collection of the chamber. After the money was brought into the chamber, a certain portion of it would be set aside for the requirements of the offerings, while the remainder was used for other purposes.

讜讗讬诪讗 砖讬专讬讬诐 讙讜驻讬讬讛讜 讻讚讗诪专 专讘讗 讛注讜诇讛 注讜诇讛 专讗砖讜谞讛 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讛讻住祝 讻住祝 专讗砖讜谉

The Gemara asks: But one can say that the remainder itself was used for the Temple vessels, and the phrase 鈥渢he rest of the money鈥 does not refer to the funds of which there is a remainder, but to the remainder of the donations left in the chamber after the first collection was removed. The Gemara answers: This is as Rava said elsewhere, that the phrase 鈥渢he burnt-offering鈥 (Leviticus 6:5), with the definite article, is referring to the first burnt-offering; so too, the term 鈥渢he money鈥 (II聽Chronicles 24:14) is referring to the first money, i.e., the money removed from the collection of the chamber.

诪讬转讬讘讬 讛拽讟讜专转 讜讻诇 拽专讘谞讜转 爪讘讜专 讘讗讬谉 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛 诪讝讘讞 讛讝讛讘 讜诇讘讜谞讛 讜讻诇讬 砖专转 讘讗讬谉 诪诪讜转专 谞住讻讬诐

The Gemara raises an objection from the following source: The funds for the incense and all communal offerings come from the collection of the Temple treasury chamber. The funds for the golden altar, located inside the Sanctuary and upon which the incense was offered, the frankincense, and the service vessels all come from the leftover money of the funds set aside for the libations.

诪讝讘讞 讛注讜诇讛 讛诇砖讻讜转 讜讛注讝专讜转 讘讗讬谉 诪拽讚砖讬 讘讚拽 讛讘讬转 讞讜抓 诇讞讜诪转 讛注讝专讛 讘讗讬谉 诪砖讬专讬 讛诇砖讻讜转 讝讜 讛讬讗 砖砖谞讬谞讜 讞讜诪转 讛注讬专 讜诪讙讚诇讜转讬讛 讜讻诇 爪专讻讬 讛注讬专 讘讗讬谉 诪砖讬专讬 讛诇砖讻讛

The funds for the upkeep of the altar of burnt-offerings, which was located outside the Sanctuary and on which most offerings were burned, and for the chambers, and for the various courtyards, come from money consecrated for Temple maintenance. Funds for those matters that are outside the walls of the Temple courtyard come from the remainder of the chambers. And with regard to this we learned: The wall of the city, its towers, and all of the requirements of the city of Jerusalem likewise come from the remainder of the chamber. According to this source, the funds for the sacred vessels came from the leftover money of the funds set aside for the libations, not the collection of the Temple treasury chamber.

转谞讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞谉 诪讜转专 转专讜诪讛 诪讛 讛讬讜 注讜砖讬谉 讘讛 专讬拽讜注讬 讝讛讘 爪讬驻讜讬 诇讘讬转 拽讚砖讬 讛拽讚砖讬诐 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讗讜诪专 诪讜转专 驻讬专讜转 诇拽讬抓 讛诪讝讘讞 诪讜转专 转专讜诪讛 诇讻诇讬 砖专转

The Gemara answers: It is a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, as we learned in a mishna (Shekalim 6a): What would they do with the leftover funds of the collection of shekels that had not been spent on communal offerings? They would purchase golden plates as a coating for the walls and floor of the Holy of Holies. Rabbi Yishmael says: There were different types of remainders in the Temple, each of which had separate regulations. The leftover produce was used to purchase the repletion [keitz] of the altar, i.e., burnt-offerings sacrificed when the altar would otherwise be idle. The leftover funds of the collection were used to purchase service vessels.

专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讗讜诪专 诪讜转专 转专讜诪讛 诇拽讬抓 讛诪讝讘讞 诪讜转专 谞住讻讬诐 诇讻诇讬 砖专转 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 住讙谉 讛讻讛谞讬诐 讗讜诪专 诪讜转专 谞住讻讬诐 诇拽讬抓 讛诪讝讘讞 诪讜转专 转专讜诪讛 诇讻诇讬 砖专转 讜讝讛 讜讝讛 诇讗 讛讬讜 诪讜讚讬诐 讘驻讬专讜转

Rabbi Akiva says: The leftover funds of the collection of shekels were used to purchase the animals for the repletion of the altar, as they had originally been collected for offerings. The leftover libations were used to purchase service vessels. Rabbi 岣nina, the deputy High Priest, says: The leftover libations were used to purchase animals for the repletion of the altar, while the leftover funds of the collection of shekels were used to purchase service vessels. Both this Sage, Rabbi Akiva, and that Sage, Rabbi 岣nina, did not agree with Rabbi Yishmael鈥檚 opinion with regard to the leftover produce.

驻讬专讜转 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 诪讜转专 转专讜诪讛 诪讛 讛讬讜 注讜砖讬谉 讘讛 诇讜拽讞讬谉 驻讬专讜转 讘讝讜诇 讜诪讜讻专讬谉 讗讜转诐 讘讬讜拽专 讜讛砖讻专 诪拽讬爪讬谉 讘讜 讗转 讛诪讝讘讞 讜讝讜 讛讬讗 砖砖谞讬谞讜 诪讜转专 驻讬专讜转 诇拽讬抓 讛诪讝讘讞

The Gemara asks: What is this produce? As it is taught in a baraita: What would they do with the leftover funds of the collection? They would use it to buy produce at a cheap price and subsequently sell that produce at an expensive price, and the profit earned from this trade would be used for the repletion of the altar. And with regard to this we learned: The leftover funds of produce were used to purchase the animals for the repletion of the altar.

诪讗讬 讝讛 讜讝讛 诇讗 讛讬讜 诪讜讚讬谉 讘驻讬专讜转 讚转谞谉 诪讜转专 砖讬专讬 诇砖讻讛 诪讛 讛讬讜 注讜砖讬谉 讘讛谉 诇讜拽讞讬谉 讘讛谉 讬讬谞讜转 砖诪谞讬诐 讜住诇转讜转 讜讛砖讻专 诇讛拽讚砖 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讗讜诪专 讗讬谉 诪砖转讻专讬谉 讘砖诇 讛拽讚砖 讗祝 诇讗 讘砖诇 注谞讬讬诐

The Gemara asks: If so, what is the reason that both this Sage, Rabbi Akiva, and that Sage, Rabbi 岣nina, did not agree with Rabbi Yishmael鈥檚 opinion with regard to the leftover produce? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Akiva is consistent with his opinion elsewhere, as we learned in a mishna (Shekalim 6a): What would they do with the leftover remainder of the chamber? They would purchase wine, oil, and fine flour and sell them to those who needed them for their private offerings. And the profit from these sales would go to consecrated property, i.e., to the Temple treasury. This is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiva says: One may not generate profit by selling consecrated property, nor may one profit from funds set aside for the poor.

讘砖诇 讛拽讚砖 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诇讗 讗讬谉 注谞讬讜转 讘诪拽讜诐 注砖讬专讜转 讘砖诇 注谞讬讬诐 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诇讗 讚诇诪讗 诪转专诪讬 诇讛讜 注谞讬讗 讜诇讬讻讗 诇诪讬转讘讗 诇讬讛

The Gemara explains the reason for Rabbi Akiva鈥檚 ruling: What is the reason that one may not use consecrated property to generate a profit? It is because there is no poverty in a place of wealth, i.e., the Temple must always be run in a lavish manner. Therefore, one may not use Temple funds to generate small profits in the manner of paupers. What is the reason that one may not use funds set aside for the poor to make a profit? It is because perhaps one will encounter a poor person and there will be nothing to give him, as all of the money is invested in some business transaction.

诪讬 砖讛诇讱 诇诪讚讬谞转 讛讬诐 讗讬转诪专 专讘 讗诪专

搂 The Gemara returns to the mishna, which deals with the case of one who went overseas and his wife is demanding sustenance. It was stated that amora鈥檌m debated the following issue. Rav said:

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Joanna Rom and Steven Goldberg in loving memory of Steve's mother Shirley "Nana" Goldberg (Sura Tema bat Chaim v'Hanka)

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Ketubot 106

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Ketubot 106

讛讗讬 注砖讛 讜讛讗讬 注砖讛 注砖讛 讚讻讘讜讚 转讜专讛 注讚讬祝 住诇拽讬讛 诇讚讬谞讗 讚讬转诪讬 讜讗讞转讬讛 诇讚讬谞讬讛 讻讬讜谉 讚讞讝讗 讘注诇 讚讬谞讬讛 讬拽专讗 讚拽讗 注讘讬讚 诇讬讛 讗讬住转转诐 讟注谞转讬讛

This is a positive mitzva, for judges to judge cases properly, and this is a positive mitzva, to honor Torah scholars and their families. Rav Na岣an concluded that the positive mitzva of giving honor to the Torah takes precedence. Therefore, he put aside the case of the orphans and settled down to judge the case of that man, under the mistaken assumption that he was a relative of Rav Anan. Once the other litigant saw the honor being accorded to that man by the judge, he grew nervous until his mouth, i.e., his ability to argue his claim, became closed, and he lost the case. In this manner, justice was perverted by Rav Anan, albeit unwittingly and indirectly.

专讘 注谞谉 讛讜讛 专讙讬诇 讗诇讬讛讜 讚讗转讬 讙讘讬讛 讚讛讜讛 诪转谞讬 诇讬讛 住讚专 讚讗诇讬讛讜 讻讬讜谉 讚注讘讚 讛讻讬 讗讬住转诇拽 讬转讬讘 讘转注谞讬转讗 讜讘注讗 专讞诪讬 讜讗转讗 讻讬 讗转讗 讛讜讛 诪讘注讬转 诇讬讛 讘注讜转讬

Elijah the Prophet was accustomed to come and visit Rav Anan, as the prophet was teaching him the statements that would later be recorded in the volume Seder deEliyahu, the Order of Elijah. Once Rav Anan did this and caused a miscarriage of justice, Elijah departed. Rav Anan sat in observance of a fast and prayed for mercy, and Elijah came back. However, when Elijah came after that, he would scare him, as he would appear in frightening forms.

讜注讘讚 转讬讘讜转讗 讜讬转讬讘 拽诪讬讛 注讚 讚讗驻讬拽 诇讬讛 住讬讚专讬讛 讜讛讬讬谞讜 讚讗诪专讬 住讚专 讚讗诇讬讛讜 专讘讛 住讚专 讗诇讬讛讜 讝讜讟讗

And Rav Anan made a box where he settled himself down and he sat before Elijah until he took out for him, i.e., taught him, all of his Seder. And this is what the Sages mean when they say: Seder deEliyahu Rabba, the Major Order of Elijah, and Seder Eliyahu Zuta, the Minor Order of Elijah, as the first order was taught prior to this incident and the second came after it.

讘砖谞讬 讚专讘 讬讜住祝 讛讜讛 专讬转讞讗 讗诪专讬 诇讬讛 专讘谞谉 诇专讘 讬讜住祝 诇讬讘注讬 诪专 专讞诪讬 讗诪专 诇讛讜 讛砖转讗 讜诪讛 讗诇讬砖注 讚讻讬 讛讜讜 专讘谞谉 诪讬驻讟专讬 诪拽诪讬讛 讛讜讜 驻讬讬砖讬 转专讬 讗诇驻谉 讜诪讗转谉 专讘谞谉 讘注讬讚谉 专讬转讞讗 诇讗 讛讜讛 讘注讬 专讞诪讬 讗谞讗 讗讬讘注讬 专讞诪讬

搂 The Gemara relates: In the years of Rav Yosef there was a divine anger, manifested by world hunger. The Sages said to Rav Yosef: Let the Master pray for mercy concerning this decree. He said to them: Now, if in the case of the prophet Elisha, when the Sages would take their leave of him, 2,200 Sages would remain behind whom he would support from his own pocket, and yet he would not pray for mercy at a time of divine anger and famine, should I pray for mercy?

讜诪诪讗讬 讚驻讬讬砖讬 讛讻讬 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讗诪专 诪砖专转讜 诪讛 讗转谉 讝讛 诇驻谞讬 诪讗讛 讗讬砖 诪讗讬 诇驻谞讬 诪讗讛 讗讬砖 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讚讻讜诇讛讜 诇驻谞讬 诪讗讛 讗讬砖 讘砖谞讬 讘爪讜专转 讟讜讘讗 讛讜讜 讗诇讗 讚讻诇 讞讚 讜讞讚 拽诪讬 诪讗讛 讗讬砖

The Gemara asks: And from where is it derived that this number of scholars would remain behind with Elisha? As it is written: 鈥淎nd his servant said: How should I set this before a hundred men鈥 (II聽Kings 4:43). What is the meaning of 鈥渂efore a hundred men鈥? If we say that all of the gifts that he had received, i.e., the first fruits, twenty loaves of barley, and fresh ears of corn mentioned in the preceding verse, were meant to be placed before one hundred men, in years of drought and famine this was a good deal of food, which would have sufficed for them. Rather, it must mean that each and every one of the loaves was to be placed before one hundred men. Since he had twenty loaves plus two meals of first-fruits and ears of corn, there must have been 2,200 people present.

讻讬 讛讜讜 诪讬驻讟专讬 专讘谞谉 诪讘讬 专讘 讛讜讜 驻讬讬砖讬 讗诇驻讗 讜诪讗转谉 专讘谞谉 诪讘讬 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讛讜讜 驻讬讬砖讬 转诪谞讬 诪讗讛 专讘谞谉 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讛讜讛 讚专讬砖 讘转诇讬住专 讗诪讜专讗讬 讻讬 讛讜讜 拽讬讬诪讬 专讘谞谉 诪诪转讬讘转讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 讜谞驻爪讬 讙诇讬诪讬讬讛讜 讛讜讛 住诇讬拽 讗讘拽讗 讜讻住讬 诇讬讛 诇讬讜诪讗 讜讗诪专讬 讘诪注专讘讗 拽诪讜 诇讬讛 诪诪转讬讘转讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘讘诇讗讛

搂 Incidentally, the Gemara relates: When the Sages would take their leave from the school of Rav, 1,200 Sages would remain behind to continue their studies. When the Sages would take their leave from the school of Rav Huna, eight hundred Sages would remain behind. Rav Huna would expound the lesson by means of thirteen speakers, who would repeat his statements to the crowds that had gathered to hear him. When the Sages would arise from listening to lectures in the yeshiva of Rav Huna and dust off their cloaks, the dust would rise and block out the sun, forming a dust cloud that could be seen from afar. And they would say in the West, in Eretz Yisrael: The scholars have just arisen in the yeshiva of Rav Huna the Babylonian.

讻讬 诪讬驻讟专讬 专讘谞谉 诪讘讬 专讘讛 讜专讘 讬讜住祝 讛讜讜 驻讬讬砖讬 讗专讘注 诪讗讛 专讘谞谉 讜拽专讜 诇谞驻砖讬讬讛讜 讬转诪讬 讻讬 讛讜讜 诪讬驻讟专讬 专讘谞谉 诪讘讬 讗讘讬讬 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 诪讘讬 专讘 驻驻讗 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 诪讘讬 专讘 讗砖讬 讛讜讜 驻讬讬砖讬 诪讗转谉 专讘谞谉 讜拽专讜 谞驻砖讬讬讛讜 讬转诪讬 讚讬转诪讬

When the Sages would take their leave from the school of Rabba and Rav Yosef, four hundred Sages would remain behind, and they would refer to themselves as orphans, as they were the only ones left from the entire crowd. When the Sages would take their leave from the school of Abaye, and some say from the school of Rav Pappa, and some say from the school of Rav Ashi, two hundred scholars would remain behind, and they would refer to themselves as orphans of orphans.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 讘专 专讚讬驻讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诪讬 诪讘拽专讬 诪讜诪讬谉 砖讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讛讬讜 谞讜讟诇讬谉 砖讻专谉 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 转诇诪讬讚讬 讞讻诪讬诐 讛诪诇诪讚讬谉 讛诇讻讜转 砖讞讬讟讛 诇讻讛谞讬诐 讛讬讜 谞讜讟诇讬谉 砖讻专谉 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛

搂 The Gemara returns to the issue of those who receive their wages from public funds. Rabbi Yitz岣k bar Redifa said that Rabbi Ami said: Inspectors of blemishes of consecrated animals in Jerusalem, who would examine all animals brought to be sacrificed in the Temple to verify that they were free of any blemishes that would disqualify them from being sacrificed on the altar, would take their wages from the collection of the Temple treasury chamber. Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: Torah scholars who teach the halakhot of slaughter to the priests of the Temple would take their wages from the collection of the chamber.

讗诪专 专讘 讙讬讚诇 讗诪专 专讘 转诇诪讬讚讬 讞讻诪讬诐 讛诪诇诪讚讬诐 讛诇讻讜转 拽诪讬爪讛 诇讻讛谞讬诐 谞讜讟诇讬谉 砖讻专谉 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪讙讬讛讬 住驻专讬诐 砖讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讛讬讜 谞讜讟诇讬谉 砖讻专谉 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛

Rav Giddel said that Rav said: Torah scholars who teach the halakhot of the removal of a handful to the priests would take their wages from the collection of the chamber. All these scholars were constantly engaged in work necessary for the functioning of the Temple, and therefore they would receive their wages from the Temple treasury. Rabba bar bar 岣na said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: The proofreaders of the Torah scrolls in Jerusalem would take their wages from the collection of the chamber.

讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗诪专 专讘 谞砖讬诐 讛讗讜专讙讜转 讘驻专讻讜转 谞讜讟诇讜转 砖讻专谉 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛 讜讗谞讬 讗讜诪专 诪拽讚砖讬 讘讚拽 讛讘讬转 讛讜讗讬诇 讜驻专讻讜转 转讞转 讘谞讬谉 注砖讜讬讜转

Rav Na岣an said that Rav said: The women who weave the curtains that separate the Temple Sanctuary from the Holy of Holies would take their wages from the collection of the chamber. Rav Na岣an added: But I say that they would not be paid from the collection of the chamber; rather, their salary would come from the funds consecrated for Temple maintenance. Why? Since the curtains served in place of the solid construction of the building, they were part of the Temple itself. Therefore, any work performed for the curtains should be paid for from money allocated for building purposes, not from the funds collected to pay for offerings and the daily needs of the Temple.

诪讬转讬讘讬 谞砖讬诐 讛讗讜专讙讜转 讘驻专讻讜转 讜讘讬转 讙专诪讜 注诇 诪注砖讛 诇讞诐 讛驻谞讬诐 讜讘讬转 讗讘讟讬谞住 注诇 诪注砖讛 讛拽讟专转 讻讜诇谉 讛讬讜 谞讜讟诇讜转 砖讻专谉 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛

The Gemara raises an objection to this: The women who weave the curtains, and the house of Garmu, who were in charge of the preparation of the shewbread, and the house of Avtinas, who were in charge of the preparation of the incense, all would take their wages from the collection of the chamber. This contradicts Rav Na岣an鈥檚 claim.

讛转诐 讘讚讘讘讬 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讝讬专讗 讗诪专 专讘 砖诇砖讛 注砖专 驻专讻讜转 讛讬讜 讘诪拽讚砖 砖谞讬 砖讘注讛 讻谞讙讚 砖讘注讛 砖注专讬诐 讗讞讚 诇驻转讞讜 砖诇 讛讬讻诇 讜讗讞讚 诇驻转讞讜 砖诇 讗讜诇诐 砖谞讬诐 讘讚讘讬专 砖谞讬诐 讻谞讙讚谉 讘注诇讬讛

The Gemara answers: There, it is referring to the curtains of the gates, which were not considered part of the actual Temple building but were decorative in purpose. As Rabbi Zeira said that Rav said: There were thirteen curtains in the Second Temple, seven opposite, i.e., on the inside of, seven gates, one at the entrance to the Sanctuary, one at the entrance to the Entrance Hall, two additional curtains within the partition, in the Holy of Holies in place of the one-cubit partition, and two corresponding to them above in the upper chamber.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 谞砖讬诐 讛诪讙讚诇讜转 讘谞讬讛谉 诇驻专讛 讛讬讜 谞讜讟诇讜转 砖讻专谉 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛 讗讘讗 砖讗讜诇 讗讜诪专 谞砖讬诐 讬拽专讜转 砖讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讛讬讜 讝谞讜转 讗讜转谉 讜诪驻专谞住讜转 讗讜转谉

The Sages taught: With regard to the women who raise their children for the red heifer, i.e., who would raise their children in special places so that they would live their entire lives up to that point in a state of ritual purity, enabling them to draw the water for the purposes of the ritual of the red heifer, these women would take their wages from the collection of the chamber. Abba Shaul said: Their wages would not come from the collection of the chamber. Instead, wealthy and prominent women of Jerusalem would sustain them and provide them with a livelihood.

讘注讗 诪讬谞讬讛 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诪专讘

Rav Huna raised a dilemma before Rav:

讻诇讬 砖专转 诪讛讜 砖讬注砖讜 诪拽讚砖讬 讘讚拽 讛讘讬转 爪讜专讱 诪讝讘讞 谞讬谞讛讜 讜诪拽讚砖讬 讘讚拽 讛讘讬转 讗转讜 讗讜 爪讜专讱 拽专讘谉 谞讬谞讛讜 讜诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛 讛讬讜 注讜砖讬谉 讗讜转谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讬谉 谞注砖讬谉 讗诇讗 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛

Concerning Temple service vessels, what is the halakha with regard to the possibility that they may be prepared by using money consecrated for Temple maintenance? The Gemara explains the two sides of the dilemma: Are they requirements of the altar, and therefore they came from money consecrated for Temple maintenance, or are they requirements of offerings, and therefore they were prepared from the collection of the Temple treasury chamber? Rav said to him: They are prepared only from the collection of the chamber.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 讜讻讻诇讜转诐 讛讘讬讗讜 诇驻谞讬 讛诪诇讱 讜讬讛讜讬讚注 (讛讻讛谉) 讗转 砖讗专 讛讻住祝 讜讬注砖讛讜 讻诇讬诐 诇讘讬转 讛壮 讻诇讬 砖专转 讜讙讜壮

Rav Huna raised an objection to this from a verse that deals with those in charge of maintaining the Temple structure: 鈥淎nd when they had made an end, they brought the rest of the money before the king and Jehoiada, of which were made vessels for the house of the Lord, vessels with which to minister, and buckets, and pans, and vessels of gold and silver鈥 (II聽Chronicles 24:14). This indicates that vessels may be prepared with money consecrated for Temple maintenance.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚讗拽专讬讬讱 讻转讜讘讬 诇讗 讗拽专讬讬讱 谞讘讬讗讬 讗讱 诇讗 讬注砖讛 讘讬转 讛壮 住驻讜转 讜讙讜壮 讻讬 诇注砖讬 讛诪诇讗讻讛 讬转谞讛讜

Rav said to him: Whoever taught you the Writings did not teach you the Prophets, as you forgot about the parallel verse in the Prophets: 鈥淏ut there were not made for the house of the Lord cups of silver, snuffers, basins, trumpets, any vessels of gold, or vessels of silver, of the money that was brought into the house of the Lord; for they gave that to those who did the work鈥 (II聽Kings 12:14鈥15). This verse proves that vessels were not prepared with the money donated for Temple maintenance.

讗讬 讛讻讬 拽砖讜 拽专讗讬 讗讛讚讚讬 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讻讗谉 砖讙讘讜 讜讛讜转讬专讜 讻讗谉 砖讙讘讜 讜诇讗 讛讜转讬专讜

The Gemara asks: If so, the verses contradict each other, as in one place it states that the Temple vessels may be funded with the money donated for Temple maintenance, while in the other verse it states that this money was used exclusively for those involved in the actual work of Temple maintenance. The Gemara answers: This is not difficult; here it is speaking of a case where they collected funds and there was money left over. These funds could be used for Temple vessels. Conversely, here, the verse is referring to a situation where they collected funds and there was nothing left over, and therefore all of the money was allocated to actual Temple maintenance.

讜讻讬 讙讘讜 讜讛讜转讬专讜 诪讗讬 讛讜讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 诇讘 讘讬转 讚讬谉 诪转谞讛 注诇讬讛谉 讗诐 讛讜爪专讻讜 讛讜爪专讻讜 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 讬讛讜 诇讻诇讬 砖专转

The Gemara asks: And if they collected money and there was some left over, what of it? After all, that money was consecrated for another purpose. If the Temple vessels could not be prepared with money consecrated for Temple maintenance, how were they able to use any of these funds for this purpose? Rabbi Abbahu said: The court initially sets a mental stipulation about the money collected: If it is required for Temple maintenance, it is required and is allocated accordingly, and if not, it will be used for the service vessels.

转谞讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讻诇讬 砖专转 讘讗讬谉 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛 砖谞讗诪专 讗转 砖讗专 讛讻住祝 讗讬讝讛讜 讻住祝 砖讬砖 诇讜 砖讬专讬讬诐 讛讜讬 讗讜诪专 讝讛 转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛

The school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: The funding for the service vessels of the Temple comes from the collection of the Temple treasury chamber, as it is stated: 鈥淭he rest of the money鈥 (II聽Chronicles 24:14). Which money has a remainder? You must say that this is referring to the collection of the chamber. After the money was brought into the chamber, a certain portion of it would be set aside for the requirements of the offerings, while the remainder was used for other purposes.

讜讗讬诪讗 砖讬专讬讬诐 讙讜驻讬讬讛讜 讻讚讗诪专 专讘讗 讛注讜诇讛 注讜诇讛 专讗砖讜谞讛 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讛讻住祝 讻住祝 专讗砖讜谉

The Gemara asks: But one can say that the remainder itself was used for the Temple vessels, and the phrase 鈥渢he rest of the money鈥 does not refer to the funds of which there is a remainder, but to the remainder of the donations left in the chamber after the first collection was removed. The Gemara answers: This is as Rava said elsewhere, that the phrase 鈥渢he burnt-offering鈥 (Leviticus 6:5), with the definite article, is referring to the first burnt-offering; so too, the term 鈥渢he money鈥 (II聽Chronicles 24:14) is referring to the first money, i.e., the money removed from the collection of the chamber.

诪讬转讬讘讬 讛拽讟讜专转 讜讻诇 拽专讘谞讜转 爪讘讜专 讘讗讬谉 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛 诪讝讘讞 讛讝讛讘 讜诇讘讜谞讛 讜讻诇讬 砖专转 讘讗讬谉 诪诪讜转专 谞住讻讬诐

The Gemara raises an objection from the following source: The funds for the incense and all communal offerings come from the collection of the Temple treasury chamber. The funds for the golden altar, located inside the Sanctuary and upon which the incense was offered, the frankincense, and the service vessels all come from the leftover money of the funds set aside for the libations.

诪讝讘讞 讛注讜诇讛 讛诇砖讻讜转 讜讛注讝专讜转 讘讗讬谉 诪拽讚砖讬 讘讚拽 讛讘讬转 讞讜抓 诇讞讜诪转 讛注讝专讛 讘讗讬谉 诪砖讬专讬 讛诇砖讻讜转 讝讜 讛讬讗 砖砖谞讬谞讜 讞讜诪转 讛注讬专 讜诪讙讚诇讜转讬讛 讜讻诇 爪专讻讬 讛注讬专 讘讗讬谉 诪砖讬专讬 讛诇砖讻讛

The funds for the upkeep of the altar of burnt-offerings, which was located outside the Sanctuary and on which most offerings were burned, and for the chambers, and for the various courtyards, come from money consecrated for Temple maintenance. Funds for those matters that are outside the walls of the Temple courtyard come from the remainder of the chambers. And with regard to this we learned: The wall of the city, its towers, and all of the requirements of the city of Jerusalem likewise come from the remainder of the chamber. According to this source, the funds for the sacred vessels came from the leftover money of the funds set aside for the libations, not the collection of the Temple treasury chamber.

转谞讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞谉 诪讜转专 转专讜诪讛 诪讛 讛讬讜 注讜砖讬谉 讘讛 专讬拽讜注讬 讝讛讘 爪讬驻讜讬 诇讘讬转 拽讚砖讬 讛拽讚砖讬诐 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讗讜诪专 诪讜转专 驻讬专讜转 诇拽讬抓 讛诪讝讘讞 诪讜转专 转专讜诪讛 诇讻诇讬 砖专转

The Gemara answers: It is a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, as we learned in a mishna (Shekalim 6a): What would they do with the leftover funds of the collection of shekels that had not been spent on communal offerings? They would purchase golden plates as a coating for the walls and floor of the Holy of Holies. Rabbi Yishmael says: There were different types of remainders in the Temple, each of which had separate regulations. The leftover produce was used to purchase the repletion [keitz] of the altar, i.e., burnt-offerings sacrificed when the altar would otherwise be idle. The leftover funds of the collection were used to purchase service vessels.

专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讗讜诪专 诪讜转专 转专讜诪讛 诇拽讬抓 讛诪讝讘讞 诪讜转专 谞住讻讬诐 诇讻诇讬 砖专转 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 住讙谉 讛讻讛谞讬诐 讗讜诪专 诪讜转专 谞住讻讬诐 诇拽讬抓 讛诪讝讘讞 诪讜转专 转专讜诪讛 诇讻诇讬 砖专转 讜讝讛 讜讝讛 诇讗 讛讬讜 诪讜讚讬诐 讘驻讬专讜转

Rabbi Akiva says: The leftover funds of the collection of shekels were used to purchase the animals for the repletion of the altar, as they had originally been collected for offerings. The leftover libations were used to purchase service vessels. Rabbi 岣nina, the deputy High Priest, says: The leftover libations were used to purchase animals for the repletion of the altar, while the leftover funds of the collection of shekels were used to purchase service vessels. Both this Sage, Rabbi Akiva, and that Sage, Rabbi 岣nina, did not agree with Rabbi Yishmael鈥檚 opinion with regard to the leftover produce.

驻讬专讜转 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 诪讜转专 转专讜诪讛 诪讛 讛讬讜 注讜砖讬谉 讘讛 诇讜拽讞讬谉 驻讬专讜转 讘讝讜诇 讜诪讜讻专讬谉 讗讜转诐 讘讬讜拽专 讜讛砖讻专 诪拽讬爪讬谉 讘讜 讗转 讛诪讝讘讞 讜讝讜 讛讬讗 砖砖谞讬谞讜 诪讜转专 驻讬专讜转 诇拽讬抓 讛诪讝讘讞

The Gemara asks: What is this produce? As it is taught in a baraita: What would they do with the leftover funds of the collection? They would use it to buy produce at a cheap price and subsequently sell that produce at an expensive price, and the profit earned from this trade would be used for the repletion of the altar. And with regard to this we learned: The leftover funds of produce were used to purchase the animals for the repletion of the altar.

诪讗讬 讝讛 讜讝讛 诇讗 讛讬讜 诪讜讚讬谉 讘驻讬专讜转 讚转谞谉 诪讜转专 砖讬专讬 诇砖讻讛 诪讛 讛讬讜 注讜砖讬谉 讘讛谉 诇讜拽讞讬谉 讘讛谉 讬讬谞讜转 砖诪谞讬诐 讜住诇转讜转 讜讛砖讻专 诇讛拽讚砖 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讗讜诪专 讗讬谉 诪砖转讻专讬谉 讘砖诇 讛拽讚砖 讗祝 诇讗 讘砖诇 注谞讬讬诐

The Gemara asks: If so, what is the reason that both this Sage, Rabbi Akiva, and that Sage, Rabbi 岣nina, did not agree with Rabbi Yishmael鈥檚 opinion with regard to the leftover produce? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Akiva is consistent with his opinion elsewhere, as we learned in a mishna (Shekalim 6a): What would they do with the leftover remainder of the chamber? They would purchase wine, oil, and fine flour and sell them to those who needed them for their private offerings. And the profit from these sales would go to consecrated property, i.e., to the Temple treasury. This is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiva says: One may not generate profit by selling consecrated property, nor may one profit from funds set aside for the poor.

讘砖诇 讛拽讚砖 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诇讗 讗讬谉 注谞讬讜转 讘诪拽讜诐 注砖讬专讜转 讘砖诇 注谞讬讬诐 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诇讗 讚诇诪讗 诪转专诪讬 诇讛讜 注谞讬讗 讜诇讬讻讗 诇诪讬转讘讗 诇讬讛

The Gemara explains the reason for Rabbi Akiva鈥檚 ruling: What is the reason that one may not use consecrated property to generate a profit? It is because there is no poverty in a place of wealth, i.e., the Temple must always be run in a lavish manner. Therefore, one may not use Temple funds to generate small profits in the manner of paupers. What is the reason that one may not use funds set aside for the poor to make a profit? It is because perhaps one will encounter a poor person and there will be nothing to give him, as all of the money is invested in some business transaction.

诪讬 砖讛诇讱 诇诪讚讬谞转 讛讬诐 讗讬转诪专 专讘 讗诪专

搂 The Gemara returns to the mishna, which deals with the case of one who went overseas and his wife is demanding sustenance. It was stated that amora鈥檌m debated the following issue. Rav said:

Scroll To Top