Today's Daf Yomi
March 30, 2021 | י״ז בניסן תשפ״א
Masechet Shekalim is sponsored by Sarene Shanus and Harold Treiber in memory of their parents, “who taught us the value of learning and of being part of the Jewish community.”
This month's shiurim are sponsored by Bill Futornick in memory of Rabbi David Teitelbaum Z"L, who led Congregation Beth Jacob in Redwood City, CA for 38 years. He was an extraordinary leader, teacher, moral exemplar and family man who truly fought for equality and deeply embraced ahavat tzion.
-
This month’s learning is sponsored by Jon and Yael Cohen in memory of Dr. Robert Van Amerongen. May his memory be blessed.
Shekalim 9
Today’s Daf is sponsored by Laurence A Coe “in honor of Mimi and Miki Neumann Glazak, grandchildren of Michael Neumann z”l, whose life embodied the values of Torah and who inspired me to begin Daf Yomi.” And by Rabbi Claire Ginsburg Goldstein “in honor of her children Sam, Shira, and Shira’s Ivan, Seth and Sarah Rose who carry on my parents, Shmuel Yudl ben Osher Zimmel haCohen z”l, and Mindl Devorah bat Shlomo z”l. My children represent my parents’ legacy and values of continuing to build their Jewish homes in the Jewish community. May their Jewish journeys continue to be blessed.”
The gemara discusses the measurement of a quarter-log. In that context, a situation is brought where Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi had blood of a dead animal and deemed it pure. The rabbis asked if it was because there was less than a quarter-log or is the blood of an animal always pure (and only the flesh is impure)? Different answers are given. Curly-haired people should not enter the Temple treasury as they may hide money in their curls. Various verses are brought to prove that people need to make sure not to arouse suspicion among others. How exactly did it work when they put the funds in baskets – from which baskets did they take the money? What did each of the three baskets represent? What would Rabban Gamliel do specifically? Why? How was the money taken? From which basket and when? What did the each of the three collections represent? The chapter end with a famous quote from Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair explaining how one good behavior leads to the next, etc. etc. and how one can start with zrizut and it will ultimately lead to bringing Eliyahu the Prophet. Rabbi Meir also brings a statement about what can gain someone entrance into the World to Come.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Podcast (דף יומי לנשים - עברית): Play in new window | Download
תַּנֵּי. חֲצִי שְׁמִינִית [דף ט.] תִּבֶּרְיָנִית.
It was taught in a baraita: A quarter-log is equal to half of a Tiberian eighth. [9a] This is a measure that was used in the past, but no longer in the present.
אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. הָדָא דִידָן הֲוָה. וְלָמָּה קָרִי לָהּ עַתִּיקָא. מִן בְּגִין דַּהֲוָה בְיוֹמָא.
Rabbi Yoḥanan said: This is our measure today and it is not so old. The Gemara asks: Why does the tanna of the baraita call this measure old when it was still being used in his day?
אִית דְּאָֽמְרֵי. דַּהֲוָה זְעִירָא וְרָבַת. וְאִית דְּאָֽמְרֵי. דְאַזְעִירָא אַזְעָרַת קוֹמֵי דַהֲוָה.
The Gemara answers: Some say that this measure was originally small and it was made larger, and some say that after it was enlarged it was again made smaller, but not as small as it had been originally. Since this measure was not of the same size at all times, the tanna of the baraita was precise when he said that a quarter-log is equal to the old measure of one-eighth. So too, Rabbi Yoḥanan was precise when he said that this was the measure used in his day.
כַּמָּה הוּא שִׁיעוּרָן שֶׁלּ כּוֹס. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן פָּזִי וְרִבִּי יוּסֵי בַּר בֵּיבִין בְּשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל. אֶצְבָּעַיִם עַל אֶצְבָּעַיִם עַל רוּם אֶצְבַּע וּמֶחֳצָה וּשְׁלִישׁ אֶצְבַּע.
The Gemara asks: In terms of the measures currently in use, what is the measure of a cup that holds a quarter-log? Rabbi Yosei in the name of Rabbi Yosei ben Pazi and Rabbi Yosei bar Beivai in the name of Rabbi Shmuel said: Two fingers long by two fingers wide by the height of one and a half fingers and one-third of a finger. The Gemara previously discussed the measure of wine that determines liability if one carries it from one domain to another on Shabbat. There, the Gemara discussed wine in liquid form; here, the Gemara adds a parallel ruling with regard to congealed wine. It was taught in a baraita: The measure that determines liability for carrying from one domain to another congealed wine is an olive-bulk; this is the statement of Rabbi Natan.
רַבָּנִן דְּקַיְסָרִין וְרִבִּי יוֹסֵה בַּר בֵּיבִין בְּשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל. אַתְיָא דְּרִבִּי נָתָן כְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. כְּמוֹ דְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר. בָּרְבִיעָא. כֵּן אָמַר רִבִּי נָתָן. בָּרְבִיעָא. לִכְשֶׁיּקְרַשׁ יְהֵא בוּ כְזַיִת.
The Rabbis of Caesarea and Rabbi Yosei bar Beivai said in the name of Shmuel: These words of Rabbi Natan follow the opinion of Rabbi Shimon in a mishna (Shabbat 76b). Just as Rabbi Shimon said there: The measure that determines liability for all liquids, including wine, is a quarter-log, so Rabbi Natan said: When wine is in liquid form, the measure that determines liability for carrying it from one domain to another is a quarter-log; after it has congealed one is liable only if he carries out an olive-bulk, which is equivalent to a quarter-log of wine after it has congealed.
רִבִּי סִימוֹן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. מַעֲשֶׂה בְפִירְדַת רִבִּי שֶׁמֵּתָה. וְטִהֲרוּ אֶת דָּמָהּ מִשּׁוּם נְבֵילָה. וְשָׁאַל רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אֶת רִבִּי סִימוֹן. עַד כַּמַּה.
§ On a similar matter, Rabbi Simon said in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: An incident is related with regard to the mule of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi that died of a wound, and the Sages deemed its blood ritually pure, i.e., free of the impurity of an unslaughtered animal carcass. They said that the blood of a carcass does not impart ritual impurity as does the carcass itself. And Rabbi Eliezer asked Rabbi Simon, who had reported this ruling: Up to how much blood from an animal carcass does not render one ritually impure? Did they deem it pure because it was less than a quarter-log, but had it been more than a quarter-log they would have deemed it impure?
וְלֹא אַשְׁגַּח בֵּיהּ. וְשָׁאַל לֵיהּ רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי דְאָמַר לֵיהּ. עַד רְבִיעִית טָהוֹר. יוֹתֵר מִכֵּן טָמֵא. וּבְאַט רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר עַד דְּלָא אַחְזַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי סִימוֹן שְׁמַעְתָּא.
Rabbi Simon paid Rabbi Eliezer no attention and did not answer him, so Rabbi Eliezer went and asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, who said to him as follows: Up to a quarter-log of blood is pure; more than a quarter-log of blood is impure. Rabbi Elazar was displeased that Rabbi Simon had not fully reported the teaching to him, so that he had to go to Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi to ask about it.
רַב בֵּיבָא הֲוָה יְתִיב מַתְנוּ הָדֵין עוֹבְדָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר בִּיסְנָא. עַד רְבִיעִית טָהוֹר. יוֹתֵר מִיכֵּן טָמֵא.
Rav Beivai was sitting and teaching this case of the mule from Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s household, in which the Sages ruled that the blood of a carcass does not render one impure. Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Kahana wished to clarify the issue and said to him: Up to a quarter-log of blood is pure, but more than that is impure? Or did the Sages rule that the blood of a carcass is never ritually impure, whatever the measure may be?
וּבְעִט בֵּיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי זְרִיקָא. בְּגִין דִּשְׁאַל לָךְ אַתְּ בְּעַט בֵּיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. בְּגִין דְלָא הֲוָה דַּעְתִּי בִּי בָּעִיטְנָא בֵיהּ.
The Gemara relates: In response to Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Kahana’s question, Rav Beivai kicked him. Rabbi Zerika said to him, i.e., to Rav Beivai: You kicked him because he asked you a question? He said to him: I kicked him because my mind was unsettled, and not because he did anything wrong.
דְּאָמַר רִבִּי חָנָן. וְהָי֣וּ חַיֶּ֔יךָ תְּלוּיִם לְךָ֖ מִנֶּג֑דֶ. זֶה שֶׁלּוֹקֵחַ חִיטִּים לַשָּׁנָה. וּפָֽחַדְתָּ֙ לַ֣יְלָה וְיוֹמָ֔ם. זֶה שֶׁלּוֹקֵחַ מִן הַצִּידָקִי. וְלֹ֥א תַֽאֲמִ֖ין בְּחַיֶּֽיךָ׃ זֶה שֶׁלּוֹקֵחַ מִן הַפַּלְטָר.
Rav Beivai tries to explain his conduct: As Rabbi Ḥanan said: “And your life shall hang in doubt before you; and you shall fear night and day, and shall have no assurance of your life” (Deuteronomy 28:66). This verse in the passage of rebuke refers to three increasingly harsh levels of poverty: “And your life shall hang in doubt before you”; this is one who buys wheat for a year, who has no financial security with regard to the following year. “And you shall fear night and day”; this is one who buys small amounts of wheat from a vendor, with the attendant concern that he might not have enough for the morrow. “And you shall have no assurance of your life”; this is one who buys bread from the baker [paltor] and cannot afford to buy wheat in advance to assure even one future meal.
וַאֲנָא סְמִיכְנָא אֲפַלְטָר.
Rabbi Beivai concluded: And I am in the harshest state, as I rely on the baker. For this reason I did not have the presence of mind to respond appropriately to Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Kahana’s question.
וּמָהוּ כְדִי. הֵעִיד רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן פְּתוֹרָא עַל דַּם נְבֵלָה שֶׁהוּא טָהוֹר.
The Gemara asks: What then is the halakhic ruling regarding the ritual impurity of the blood of an animal carcass? In response, the Gemara quotes a mishna (Eduyyot 8:1): Rabbi Yehoshua ben Petora testified that the blood of an unslaughtered animal carcass is ritually pure, which implies that it is ritually pure regardless of the amount, even more than a quarter-log.
מַה לְטָהוֹר. לְטָהֵר מִן הַבָּשָׂר. הָא לְטַמֵּא אַתָּה מְטַמֵּא.
The Gemara rejects this answer: What does the mishna mean by ritually pure? That such blood is ritually pure in that it does not render an item susceptible to impurity. Even though blood is one of the seven liquids that render an item susceptible to ritual impurity, the blood of an animal carcass is not deemed blood for this purpose. But as for imparting ritual impurity by itself, the blood imparts ritual impurity, as does the carcass itself.
תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָא. דַּם הַשֶּׁרֶץ כִּבְשָׂרוֹ מְטַמֵּא וְאֵין מַכְשִׁיר. וְאֵין לָנוּ כַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ׃
The Gemara asks: How can the words of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Petora be understood in this way? Didn’t we learn elsewhere in a mishna (Makhshirin 6:5): The blood of a creeping animal is like its flesh; it imparts ritual impurity to items with which it comes into contact, but it does not render an item susceptible to impurity? And we have nothing else like it, i.e., there is no other liquid that imparts ritual impurity but does not render food susceptible to impurity. The implication is that the blood of an animal carcass would either both impart impurity and render an item susceptible to impurity or neither.
וְשִׁיעוּר טוּמְאָתוֹ שֶׁדָּמוֹ מְטַמֵּא כִּבְשָׂרוֹ.
The Gemara answers: When the mishna said that we have nothing else like a creeping animal, it meant that we have nothing else like it with regard to the measure required for its blood to confer impurity; the measure of a creeping animal’s blood is the same for both: The measure required for its imparting ritual impurity is such that its blood imparts ritual impurity like its flesh, i.e., in the measure of a lentil. This is not the case with an unslaughtered animal carcass, the flesh of which imparts ritual impurity in the measure of an olive-bulk, while its blood imparts impurity in the measure of a quarter-log. Consequently, there is no contradiction between the mishna in tractate Makhshirin and the testimony of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Petora.
אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵי פְּלִיגִין בָּהּ תְּרֵין אֲמוֹרָאִין חַד אָמַר. טָמֵא. וְחַד אָמַר. טָהוֹר. מָאן דְּאָמַר טָמֵא. כְּרִבִּי יְהוּדָה. וּמָאן טָהוֹר. כְּרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן פְּתוֹרָה.
Rabbi Yosei said: Two amora’im disagree about this matter. One said a quarter-log of this blood renders one ritually impure, and one said that even after contact with this blood, one remains ritually pure. The one who said it is impure follows the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda in a mishna in Eduyyot 5:1. Rabbi Yehuda maintains there that this issue is the subject of a dispute between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel. The halakha would follow the opinion of Beit Hillel, which is that carcass blood does confer impurity. And the one who said ritually pure holds like the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Petora, who testified (Eduyyot 8:1) that the blood of an animal carcass is ritually pure.
רַב אֲבוּהָא דְּאִימָן אַחְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יְהוּדָה מוֹרְייָנָא דְּנָשִׂיא הֲוִה.
] Rav Avduma of the descenders, i.e., travelers from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, bringing with them the Torah taught in Eretz Yisrael, said to him: And it is right. That which you explained is correct, as Rabbi Yehuda was the halakhic authority for the house of the Nasi. Rabbi Yehuda ruled then that the blood of the dead mule was pure only because there was less than a quarter-log of it.
[שֶׁמָּא יַעֲנִי וְיֹאמְרוּ וכו׳.] תַּנֵּי רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. קִיווֵץ לֹא יִתְרוֹם מִפְּנֵי הַחֲשַׁד. תַּנֵּי. הַגִּיזְבְּרִין הָיוּ מְפַסְפְּסִין בְּקִילִּקִין.
§ The Mishna taught that the one who collects the funds from the Temple treasury chamber must not enter the chamber wearing clothes that could arouse suspicion, as perhaps one day he will become poor and people will say that he was reduced to poverty because he had stolen shekels from the chamber. Rabbi Yishmael taught a similar halakha in a baraita: One who is curly haired must not collect funds from the Temple treasury chamber because of the suspicion that he will hide shekels from the chamber in his curls. It was taught in another baraita: The Temple treasurers would untangle [mefaspesin] the matted locks of the one who collected the funds from the chamber after he exited the chamber, to ascertain that no coins were hidden in his hair.
תַּנֵּי מְדַבְּרִין הָיוּ עִמּוֹ מִשָּׁעָה שֶׁהוּא נִכְנַס עַד שָׁעָה שֶׁהוּא יוֹצֵא. וִימַלֵּא פּוּמֵיהּ מוֹי. אָמַר רִבִּי תַנְחוּמָא. מִפְּנֵי הַבְּרָכָה.
It was taught in yet another baraita that deals with a similar suspicion: They would converse with the one collecting the funds from the chamber from the time he entered the chamber until the time he exited it, so that he should not be able to hide money from the chamber in his mouth. The Gemara asks: Why not let him fill his mouth with water, so that it would be impossible for him to insert money into his mouth, and then he would not have to speak? Rabbi Tanḥuma said: He cannot fill his mouth with water because of the blessing that he must recite before collecting the funds from the chamber.
רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹנָתָן. בַּתּוֹרָה וּבַנְּבִיאים וּבַכְּתובִים מָצָאנוּ שֶׁאָדָם צָרִיךְ לָצֵאת יְדֵי הַבִּרְיוֹת כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁהוּא צָרִיךְ לָצֵאת יְדֵי הַמָּקוֹם. בַּתּוֹרָה מְנַיִין. דִּכְתִיב וִהְיִיתֶם נְקִיִים מֵיְיָ וּמִיִּשְׂרָאֵל. בַּנְּבִיאים מְנַיִין. דִּכְתִיב אֵל֩ ׀ אֱלֹהִ֨ים ׀ יְי אֵ֣ל ׀ אֱלֹהִ֤ים ׀ יְי ה֣וּא יֹוֹדֵעַ וְיִשְׂרָאֵל֭ ה֣וּא יֵדָ֑ע. בַּכְּתובִים מְנַיִין. דִּכְתִיב וּמְצָא חֵן וְשֵׂכֶל טוֹב בְּעֵינֵי אֱלֹהִים וְאָדָם׃
§ Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said in the name of Rabbi Yonatan: We find in the Torah, in the Prophets, and in the Writings that a person must appear justified before people as he must appear justified before the Omnipresent. From where in the Torah is this derived? As it is written: “And you shall be guiltless before the Lord and before Israel” (Numbers 32:22). From where in the Prophets is this derived? As it is written: “The mighty One, God, the Lord, He knows, and Israel shall know” (Joshua 22:22). From where in the Writings is this derived? As it is written: “So shall you find grace and good understanding in the sight of God and man (Proverbs 3:4).
גַּמְלִיאֵל זֵוּגָא שָׁאַל לְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. אֵי זֶהוּ הַמְחוּוָר שֶׁבְּכוּלָּן. אָמַר לֵיהּ. וִהְיִיתֶם נְקִיִים מֵיְיָ וּמִיִּשְׂרָאֵל .
Gamliel Zuga asked Rabbi Yosei bar Rabbi Bun: Which of these verses is the clearest of all the sources that one must be blameless even in the eyes of man? The three proof texts say more or less the same thing; which is the most unambiguous of the three? Rabbi Yosei bar Rabbi Bun said to him: The verse “And you shall be guiltless before the Lord and before Israel” is the most unequivocal of all.
משנה שֶׁל בֵּית רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הָיָה נִכְנָס וְשִׁקְלוֹ בֵּין אֶצְבְּעוֹתָיו וְזוֹרְקוֹ לִפְנֵי הַתּוֹרֵם וְהַתּוֹרֵם מִתְכַּוֵּין וְדוֹחֲקוֹ לַקּוּפָּה.
Halakha 3 · MISHNA In order to indicate the importance that was attached to the ceremony of the collection of the Temple treasury chamber, the mishna relates that the members of the house of Rabban Gamliel desired that their shekels be the ones collected from the chamber and used for the purchase of the communal offerings. Each of them would therefore come to the Temple specifically on the day of the ceremony of the collection of the chamber, enter the chamber with his shekel between his fingers, and toss it in front of the one collecting the money so that he would see it and place it in the basket containing the money to be taken out of the chamber. Understanding what was happening, the one collecting the money from the chamber would purposely push this shekel into the basket, so that it would later be used to buy communal offerings.
אֵין הַתּוֹרֵם תּוֹרֵם עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר לָהֶן אֶתְרוֹם. וְהֵן אוֹמְרִים לוֹ תְּרֹוֹם, תְּרוֹם, תְּרוֹם, שָׁלֹֹֹש פְּעָמִים:
The one collecting the funds from the chamber may not begin to collect the money until he asks the Temple treasurers three times: Shall I collect the funds, and they say to him: Collect them, collect them, collect them, three times.
תָּרַם אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וְחִיפָּה בִּקְטַבֳלִיּוֹת הַשְּׁנִייָה וְחִיפָּה בִּקְטַבֳלִיּוֹת. הַשְּׁלִישִׁית לֹא הָיָה מְחַפֶּה.
The coins were stored in the Temple treasury in three large baskets, each measuring nine se’a. In the collection of the chamber ceremony, coins were removed from these baskets and placed in smaller baskets of three se’a each that were marked with letters (see the previous mishna on daf 8a). After he collected the funds from the first large basket and put them into one of the smaller baskets labeled with the letter alef, he immediately covered with a leather cover the large basket from which he had removed the money. After collecting funds from the second large basket, he covered it with a leather cover as well. But after collecting funds from the third large basket, he did not cover it.
וְלָמָּה הְיְה מְחַפֶּה שֶׁמָּא יִשְׁכַּח וְיִתְרוֹם מִן הַדָּבָר הַתָּרוּם.
The mishna asks: Why did he cover the first two baskets? In order to mark them as already having had funds collected from them. In this way, there was no concern that perhaps he would forget and once again collect funds from a basket from which funds had already been collected.
תָּרַם אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה לְשֵׁם אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל הַשְּׁנִייָה לְשֵׁם כְּרַכִים הַמּוּקָּפִין לָהּ וְהַשְּׁלִישִׁית לְשֵׁם בָּבֶל וּלְשֵׁם מָדַי וּלְשֵׁם [דף ט:] מְדִינוֹת הָרְחוֹקוֹת:
The mishna specifies the intent of the one collecting the funds from the baskets as he does so: He collected funds from the first basket on behalf of the people living in Eretz Yisrael; from the second basket on behalf of the people living in the cities near Eretz Yisrael; and from the third basket on behalf of the people living in Babylonia, and on behalf of the people living in Media, and on behalf of [9b] the people living in the distant countries.
הלכה שֶׁל בֵּית רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הָיָה כול׳. אִילּוּ שְׁנֵי כְרִיִים וְתָרַם מֵאֶחָד מֵהֶן עַל חֲבֵירוֹ שֶׁמָּא לֹא פָטַר חֲבֵירוֹ.
GEMARA: It was taught in the mishna that the members of the house of Rabban Gamliel would arrange that their shekels be the ones collected from the chamber and used for the purchase of the communal offerings. The Gemara asks: If there were two piles of produce, and one separated teruma from one pile on behalf of the other, hasn’t he exempted with this teruma the other pile as well? When tithing produce, it is not necessary to separate teruma from each pile. It suffices to set aside an appropriate measure of teruma from one of them, and this counts as teruma for the other as well. Here too, the shekels are collected from the chamber not only on behalf of those who contributed those specific shekels, but even for those whose shekels were not collected. If so, why did the members of the house of Rabban Gamliel make such efforts to ensure that their shekels be the ones collected from the chamber?
הַנַַּחַת רוּחַ הִיא לָהֶם שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה קָרְבָּן מִתְקָרֵב אֶלָּא מִשֶּׁלָּהֶן תְּחִילָּה
. The Gemara answers: Even so, they got satisfaction from the fact that the communal offering was necessarily brought from their shekels first. For this reason, they exerted themselves to ensure that their shekels were collected from the chamber.
תָּרַם אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה כול׳. תַּנֵּי שָׁמַט הַקַּטָבֳלִיּוֹת נַעֲשׂוּ כוּלָּן שְׁיֵרִיים.
\The Gemara records several halakhot dealing with the collection of funds from the Temple treasury chamber. It was taught in a baraita: If the one collecting the funds from the chamber mistakenly removed the leather covers that he had placed on the large baskets, so that now he doesn’t know from which baskets shekels have already been collected and from which they have not yet been collected, all the shekels in the uncovered baskets take on the status of the remainder of the chamber.
תַּנֵּי. שְׁלִישִׁית הִיא הָֽיְתָה עֲשִׁירָה שֶׁבְּכוּלָּן. שֶׁהָיוּ בָהּ אִצְטְלֵי שֶׁלְזָהָב וְדַרְכוֹמוֹת שֶׁלְזָהָב .
It was taught in another baraita: The third collection of funds from the Temple treasury chamber that took place half a month before Sukkot was the most abundant of all, as it contained both isteriot, small coins of gold, and darics, large coins of gold.
תַּנֵּי. תָּרַם אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה לְשֵׁם אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל וּלְשֵׁם כָּל־יִשְׂרָאֵל. שְׁנִייָה לְשֵׁם כַּרַכִין מַמּוּקָּפִין וּלְשֵׁם כָּל־יִשְׂרָאֵל. וְהַשְּׁלִישִׁית לְשֵׁם בָּבֶל וּלְשֵׁם מָדַי וּלְשֵׁם מְדִינוּת הָֽרְחוֹקוֹת וּלְשֵׁם כָּל־יִשְׂרָאֵל. It was taught in yet another baraita: He collected funds from the first basket on behalf of the people living in Eretz Yisrael and on behalf of all of Israel; from the second basket on behalf of the people living in the cities [kerakim] near Eretz Yisrael and on behalf of all of Israel; and from the third basket on behalf of the people living in Babylonia and Media, and on behalf of those who dwelled in the distant countries, and on behalf of all of Israel.
תַּנֵּי. נָטַל מִן הָרִאשׁוֹנָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה נוֹטֵל מִן הַשְּׁנִייָה. נָטַל מִן הַשְּׁנִייָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּשְּׁנִייָה נוֹטֵל מִן הַשְּׁלִישִׁית.
The Gemara discusses the order in which the funds are taken from the baskets. It was taught in a baraita: After shekels were first taken from the first basket labeled with an alef, although shekels still remain in the first basket, shekels are taken from the second basket labeled with a beit. After shekels were taken from second basket, although shekels still remain in the second basket, shekels are taken from the third basket labeled with a gimmel.
שָֽׁלְמָה שְׁלִישִׁת חוֹזֵר לַשְּׁנִייָה. שָֽׁלְמָה שְׁנִייָה חוֹזֵר לְרִאשׁוֹנָה. שָֽׁלְמוּ שְׁלָשְׁתָּן חוֹזֵר וְשׁוֹקֵל.
If the third basket is completely emptied, he goes back to take from the second basket. If the second basket is completely emptied, he goes back to take from the first basket. If all three baskets are completely emptied, he goes back to the chamber and takes from the shekels that have arrived since the last time shekels were collected from the chamber. He does not take from the shekels that remained in the chamber at the previous ceremony of collection into the baskets, as those coins acquired at that point the status of leftover shekels, which do not have sanctity.
רִבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר. חוֹזֵר לִשְׁיֵרִיים. שֶׁהָיָה רִבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר. מוֹעֲלִין בִּשְׁיֵרִיִים שֶׁמָּא יִצְרְכוּ לָהֶן בַּסּוֹף.
Rabbi Meir says: He goes back to take from the leftover shekels. Because Rabbi Meir said: The halakhot of misusing consecrated property apply even to the leftover shekels, as they remain in their sanctified state. Why so? Perhaps they will be needed in the end, since if the shekels collected from the chamber are depleted, the leftover can be used for the purchase of communal offerings.
[וְכֵן הָיָה רִבִּי פִינְחָס בֶּן יָאִיר אוֹמֵר. זְרִיזוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי נְקִיּוּת. נְקִיּוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי טַהֳרָה. טַהֳרָה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי קְדוּשָּׁה. קְדוּשָּׁה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי עֲנָוָה.
§ Since the previous mishna deals with the obligation to be guiltless even in the eyes of men and this mishna speaks of the alacrity displayed by the members of the house of Rabban Gamliel when they gave their shekels, the Gemara brings a baraita dealing with worthy traits, including the trait of alacrity: And so Rabbi Pineḥas ben Yair would say: Alacrity in the proper performance of the mitzvot leads to cleanliness of the soul, so that one will not sin. Cleanliness of the soul and refraining from all sin leads to purity, so that one purifies his soul from his previous sins. Purity leads to holiness. Holiness leads to humility, as one recognizes his lowliness.
עֲנָוָה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי יִרְאַת חֵטְא. יִרְאַת חֵטְא מְבִיאָה לִידֵי חֲסִידוּת. חֲסִידוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ. רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ מֵבִיא לִידֵי תְחִײַת הַמֵּתִים. תְּחִײַת הַמֵּתִים מְבִיאָה לִידֵי אֵלִיָּהוּ זָכוּר לַטּוֹב.
Humility leads to fear of sin, because when one recognizes his inferiority, he becomes more fearful of sin and is careful to avoid temptation. Fear of sin leads to piety, as one begins to impose upon himself stringencies beyond the letter of the law. Piety leads to the holy spirit, because when one acts in a manner that goes beyond the letter of the law, Heaven acts with him in a way that is not natural to man, and informs him of the secrets of the Torah through divine inspiration. The holy spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead, because the spirit of holiness and purity that descend upon him enter the bones of the deceased and resurrect them. The resurrection of the dead that will precede the arrival of the Messiah leads to the coming of the Prophet Elijah, of blessed memory, who will herald the upcoming redemption.
זְרִיזוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי נְקִיּוּת. דִּכְתִיב וְכִלָּה מִכַּפֵּר. נְקִיּוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי טַהֳרָה. דִּכְתִיב וְכִפֶּ֥ר עָלֶי֛הָ הַכֹּהֵן֭ וְטָהֵֽרָה.
The Gemara adduces proof texts for each of the previous statements: Alacrity leads to cleanliness of the soul, as it is written: “And when he has made an end of atoning” (Leviticus 16:20). “He has made an end” denotes alacrity; since one hastens to bring the process to conclusion, he achieves atonement, which cleanses the souls of sinners of their iniquities. Cleanliness leads to purity, as it is written with regard to the offering that a woman brings after her days of impurity and purity that follow childbirth (Leviticus 12): “And the priest shall make atonement for her, and she shall be pure” (Leviticus 12:8). Once she finishes the process of her atonement, that is to say, once she cleanses herself of sin, she reaches purity.
טְהֳרָה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי קְדוּשָּׁה. דִּכְתִיב וְטִיהֲהָּוֹ וְקִידְּשָׁהּ. קְדוּשָּׁה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי עֲנָוָה. דִּכְתִיב כִּי֩ כֹ֨ה אמַ֜ר רָ֣ם וְנִישָּׂא שֹׁכֵ֥ן עַד֙ וְקָד֣וֹשׁ שְׁמ֔וֹ מָר֥וֹם … וְאֶת־דַּכָּא֙ וּשְׁפַל־ר֔וּחַ.
Purity leads to holiness, as it is written with regard to the High Priest’s sprinkling of the blood of his bull and goat offerings on the golden altar on Yom Kippur: “And he shall purify it, and hallow it” (Leviticus 16:19), teaching that purity is followed by holiness. Holiness leads to humility, as it is written: “For thus says the High and Lofty One that inhabits eternity, Whose name is Holy: I dwell on high and in a holy place, yet with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit” (Isaiah 57:15). God’s holiness is drawn to a contrite and humble spirit.
עֲנָוָה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי יִרְאַת חֵטְא. דִּכְתִיב עֲ֭נָוָה יִרְאַ֣ת ה׳. יִרְאַת חֵטְא מְבִיאָה לִידֵי חֲסִידוּת. דִּכְתִיב וְחֶ֤סֶד ה׳ מֵעוֹלָ֣ם וְעַד־ע֭וֹלָם עַל־יְרֵאָ֑יו.
Humility leads to fear of sin, as it is written: “The reward of humility is the fear of the Lord” (Proverbs 22:4). Fear of sin leads to piety, as it is written: “But the loving-kindness [ḥesed] of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon those who fear Him” (Psalms 103:17). The recognition of God’s loving-kindness indicates piety [ḥasidut], which results from fear of God.
חֲסִידוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ. דִּכְתִיב אָ֤ז דִּבַּ֪רְתָּֽ־בְחָ֡זוֹן לַֽחֲסִידֶ֗יךָ. רוּחַ הַקּוֹדֶשׁ מֵבִיא לִידֵי תְחִײַת הַמֵּתִים. דִּכְתִיב וְנָֽתַתִּ֨י רוּחִ֤י בָכֶם֙ וִֽחְיִיתֶ֔ם. תְּחִײַת הַמֵּתִים מְבִיאָה לִידֵי אֵלִיָּהוּ זָכוּר לַטּוֹב. דִּכְתֵיב אָ֗ז תָּ֭בִין יִרְאַ֣ת ה׳ וְדַעַ֭ת עֶלְיוֹן תִּמְצָֽא׃
Piety leads to the holy spirit, as it is written: “Then You spoke in vision to Your pious ones” (Psalms 89:20). The holy spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead, as it is written: “And I shall put My spirit in you, and you shall live” (Ezekiel 37:14). The resurrection of the dead leads to the coming of the Prophet Elijah, of blessed memory, as it is written: “Behold, I will send you Elijah the Prophet before the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord” (Malachi 3:23). The day referred to here is the day of the resurrection of the dead.
תַּאנָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי מֵאִיר. כָּל־מִי שֶׁקָּבוּעַ בְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל וּמְדַבֵּר לְשׁוֹן הַקֹּדֶשׁ וְאוֹכֵל פֵּירוֹתָיו בּטָהָרָה וְקוֹרֵא קִרְיַת שְׁמַע בַּבֹּקֶר וּבָעֶרֶב יְהֵא מְבוּשָּׂר שֶׁבֶּן הָעוֹלָם הַבָּא הוּא]
The Gemara concludes the chapter with a different discussion of virtues: It was taught in a baraita in the name of Rabbi Meir: Anyone who lives permanently in Eretz Yisrael, and speaks the holy tongue, and eats the fruits of Eretz Yisrael in purity, and recites Shema in the morning and in the evening, will receive the tidings and assurances that he is one who has merited of the World-to-Come.
הדרן עלך פרק בשלשה פרקים
משנה הַתְּרוּמָה מֶה הָיוּ עוֹשִׂין בָּהּ. לוֹקְחִין בָּהּ תְּמִידִין וּמוּסָפִין וְנִסְכֵּיהֶם הָעֹמֶר וּשְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם וְלֶחֶם הַפָּנִים וְכָל־קָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּיבּוּר.
Halakha 1 · MISHNA At certain times of the year, half-shekels that had been donated to the Temple and stored in a chamber in the Temple were collected in order to be used for various purposes. The mishna asks: The collection of half-shekels, what would they do with it? They would purchase animals for the daily offerings, which were offered each morning and afternoon; and for the additional offerings, which were offered on Shabbat, the New Moon, and Festivals; and wine for their libations; barley for the omer meal-offering; and wheat for both the two loaves offered on Shavuot and the shewbread; and animals for all the communal offerings.
שׁוֹמְרֵי סְפִחִים בַּשְּׁבִיעִית נוֹטְלִין שְׂכָרָן מִתְּרוּמַת הַלִּשְׁכָּה. רִבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר אַף הָרוֹצֶה מִתְנַדֵּב שׁוֹמֵר חִנָּם. אָֽמְרוּ לוֹ אַף אַתָּה אוֹמֵר שֶׁאֵין בָּאִין אֶלָּא [דף י.] מִשֶּׁל צִיבּוּר:
§ The guards of the sefiḥin, grain that grew without being purposely planted, during the Sabbatical Year, ensured that people did not take this ownerless grain, so that it remained available to be used for the omer and the offering of the two loaves. They collect their wages from the collection of the Temple treasury chamber. Rabbi Yosei says: One who so desires may even volunteer his services and guard the grain as an unpaid bailee. The Rabbis said to him: Even you must say that the omer and the two loaves come only [10a] from communal funds and not from any one individual. If one were to volunteer his services, he would acquire the grain for himself by guarding it and transporting it to the Temple. In that case, these offerings would have come from an individual. So that the offerings come solely from communal funds, the guards must receive payment from the half-shekels removed from the chamber.
Masechet Shekalim is sponsored by Sarene Shanus and Harold Treiber in memory of their parents, “who taught us the value of learning and of being part of the Jewish community.”
This month's shiurim are sponsored by Bill Futornick in memory of Rabbi David Teitelbaum Z"L, who led Congregation Beth Jacob in Redwood City, CA for 38 years. He was an extraordinary leader, teacher, moral exemplar and family man who truly fought for equality and deeply embraced ahavat tzion.
-
This month’s learning is sponsored by Jon and Yael Cohen in memory of Dr. Robert Van Amerongen. May his memory be blessed.
Subscribe to Hadran's Daf Yomi
Want to explore more about the Daf?
See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners
Shekalim 9
The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria
תַּנֵּי. חֲצִי שְׁמִינִית [דף ט.] תִּבֶּרְיָנִית.
It was taught in a baraita: A quarter-log is equal to half of a Tiberian eighth. [9a] This is a measure that was used in the past, but no longer in the present.
אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. הָדָא דִידָן הֲוָה. וְלָמָּה קָרִי לָהּ עַתִּיקָא. מִן בְּגִין דַּהֲוָה בְיוֹמָא.
Rabbi Yoḥanan said: This is our measure today and it is not so old. The Gemara asks: Why does the tanna of the baraita call this measure old when it was still being used in his day?
אִית דְּאָֽמְרֵי. דַּהֲוָה זְעִירָא וְרָבַת. וְאִית דְּאָֽמְרֵי. דְאַזְעִירָא אַזְעָרַת קוֹמֵי דַהֲוָה.
The Gemara answers: Some say that this measure was originally small and it was made larger, and some say that after it was enlarged it was again made smaller, but not as small as it had been originally. Since this measure was not of the same size at all times, the tanna of the baraita was precise when he said that a quarter-log is equal to the old measure of one-eighth. So too, Rabbi Yoḥanan was precise when he said that this was the measure used in his day.
כַּמָּה הוּא שִׁיעוּרָן שֶׁלּ כּוֹס. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן פָּזִי וְרִבִּי יוּסֵי בַּר בֵּיבִין בְּשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל. אֶצְבָּעַיִם עַל אֶצְבָּעַיִם עַל רוּם אֶצְבַּע וּמֶחֳצָה וּשְׁלִישׁ אֶצְבַּע.
The Gemara asks: In terms of the measures currently in use, what is the measure of a cup that holds a quarter-log? Rabbi Yosei in the name of Rabbi Yosei ben Pazi and Rabbi Yosei bar Beivai in the name of Rabbi Shmuel said: Two fingers long by two fingers wide by the height of one and a half fingers and one-third of a finger. The Gemara previously discussed the measure of wine that determines liability if one carries it from one domain to another on Shabbat. There, the Gemara discussed wine in liquid form; here, the Gemara adds a parallel ruling with regard to congealed wine. It was taught in a baraita: The measure that determines liability for carrying from one domain to another congealed wine is an olive-bulk; this is the statement of Rabbi Natan.
רַבָּנִן דְּקַיְסָרִין וְרִבִּי יוֹסֵה בַּר בֵּיבִין בְּשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל. אַתְיָא דְּרִבִּי נָתָן כְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. כְּמוֹ דְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר. בָּרְבִיעָא. כֵּן אָמַר רִבִּי נָתָן. בָּרְבִיעָא. לִכְשֶׁיּקְרַשׁ יְהֵא בוּ כְזַיִת.
The Rabbis of Caesarea and Rabbi Yosei bar Beivai said in the name of Shmuel: These words of Rabbi Natan follow the opinion of Rabbi Shimon in a mishna (Shabbat 76b). Just as Rabbi Shimon said there: The measure that determines liability for all liquids, including wine, is a quarter-log, so Rabbi Natan said: When wine is in liquid form, the measure that determines liability for carrying it from one domain to another is a quarter-log; after it has congealed one is liable only if he carries out an olive-bulk, which is equivalent to a quarter-log of wine after it has congealed.
רִבִּי סִימוֹן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. מַעֲשֶׂה בְפִירְדַת רִבִּי שֶׁמֵּתָה. וְטִהֲרוּ אֶת דָּמָהּ מִשּׁוּם נְבֵילָה. וְשָׁאַל רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אֶת רִבִּי סִימוֹן. עַד כַּמַּה.
§ On a similar matter, Rabbi Simon said in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: An incident is related with regard to the mule of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi that died of a wound, and the Sages deemed its blood ritually pure, i.e., free of the impurity of an unslaughtered animal carcass. They said that the blood of a carcass does not impart ritual impurity as does the carcass itself. And Rabbi Eliezer asked Rabbi Simon, who had reported this ruling: Up to how much blood from an animal carcass does not render one ritually impure? Did they deem it pure because it was less than a quarter-log, but had it been more than a quarter-log they would have deemed it impure?
וְלֹא אַשְׁגַּח בֵּיהּ. וְשָׁאַל לֵיהּ רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי דְאָמַר לֵיהּ. עַד רְבִיעִית טָהוֹר. יוֹתֵר מִכֵּן טָמֵא. וּבְאַט רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר עַד דְּלָא אַחְזַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי סִימוֹן שְׁמַעְתָּא.
Rabbi Simon paid Rabbi Eliezer no attention and did not answer him, so Rabbi Eliezer went and asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, who said to him as follows: Up to a quarter-log of blood is pure; more than a quarter-log of blood is impure. Rabbi Elazar was displeased that Rabbi Simon had not fully reported the teaching to him, so that he had to go to Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi to ask about it.
רַב בֵּיבָא הֲוָה יְתִיב מַתְנוּ הָדֵין עוֹבְדָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר בִּיסְנָא. עַד רְבִיעִית טָהוֹר. יוֹתֵר מִיכֵּן טָמֵא.
Rav Beivai was sitting and teaching this case of the mule from Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s household, in which the Sages ruled that the blood of a carcass does not render one impure. Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Kahana wished to clarify the issue and said to him: Up to a quarter-log of blood is pure, but more than that is impure? Or did the Sages rule that the blood of a carcass is never ritually impure, whatever the measure may be?
וּבְעִט בֵּיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי זְרִיקָא. בְּגִין דִּשְׁאַל לָךְ אַתְּ בְּעַט בֵּיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. בְּגִין דְלָא הֲוָה דַּעְתִּי בִּי בָּעִיטְנָא בֵיהּ.
The Gemara relates: In response to Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Kahana’s question, Rav Beivai kicked him. Rabbi Zerika said to him, i.e., to Rav Beivai: You kicked him because he asked you a question? He said to him: I kicked him because my mind was unsettled, and not because he did anything wrong.
דְּאָמַר רִבִּי חָנָן. וְהָי֣וּ חַיֶּ֔יךָ תְּלוּיִם לְךָ֖ מִנֶּג֑דֶ. זֶה שֶׁלּוֹקֵחַ חִיטִּים לַשָּׁנָה. וּפָֽחַדְתָּ֙ לַ֣יְלָה וְיוֹמָ֔ם. זֶה שֶׁלּוֹקֵחַ מִן הַצִּידָקִי. וְלֹ֥א תַֽאֲמִ֖ין בְּחַיֶּֽיךָ׃ זֶה שֶׁלּוֹקֵחַ מִן הַפַּלְטָר.
Rav Beivai tries to explain his conduct: As Rabbi Ḥanan said: “And your life shall hang in doubt before you; and you shall fear night and day, and shall have no assurance of your life” (Deuteronomy 28:66). This verse in the passage of rebuke refers to three increasingly harsh levels of poverty: “And your life shall hang in doubt before you”; this is one who buys wheat for a year, who has no financial security with regard to the following year. “And you shall fear night and day”; this is one who buys small amounts of wheat from a vendor, with the attendant concern that he might not have enough for the morrow. “And you shall have no assurance of your life”; this is one who buys bread from the baker [paltor] and cannot afford to buy wheat in advance to assure even one future meal.
וַאֲנָא סְמִיכְנָא אֲפַלְטָר.
Rabbi Beivai concluded: And I am in the harshest state, as I rely on the baker. For this reason I did not have the presence of mind to respond appropriately to Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Kahana’s question.
וּמָהוּ כְדִי. הֵעִיד רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן פְּתוֹרָא עַל דַּם נְבֵלָה שֶׁהוּא טָהוֹר.
The Gemara asks: What then is the halakhic ruling regarding the ritual impurity of the blood of an animal carcass? In response, the Gemara quotes a mishna (Eduyyot 8:1): Rabbi Yehoshua ben Petora testified that the blood of an unslaughtered animal carcass is ritually pure, which implies that it is ritually pure regardless of the amount, even more than a quarter-log.
מַה לְטָהוֹר. לְטָהֵר מִן הַבָּשָׂר. הָא לְטַמֵּא אַתָּה מְטַמֵּא.
The Gemara rejects this answer: What does the mishna mean by ritually pure? That such blood is ritually pure in that it does not render an item susceptible to impurity. Even though blood is one of the seven liquids that render an item susceptible to ritual impurity, the blood of an animal carcass is not deemed blood for this purpose. But as for imparting ritual impurity by itself, the blood imparts ritual impurity, as does the carcass itself.
תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָא. דַּם הַשֶּׁרֶץ כִּבְשָׂרוֹ מְטַמֵּא וְאֵין מַכְשִׁיר. וְאֵין לָנוּ כַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ׃
The Gemara asks: How can the words of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Petora be understood in this way? Didn’t we learn elsewhere in a mishna (Makhshirin 6:5): The blood of a creeping animal is like its flesh; it imparts ritual impurity to items with which it comes into contact, but it does not render an item susceptible to impurity? And we have nothing else like it, i.e., there is no other liquid that imparts ritual impurity but does not render food susceptible to impurity. The implication is that the blood of an animal carcass would either both impart impurity and render an item susceptible to impurity or neither.
וְשִׁיעוּר טוּמְאָתוֹ שֶׁדָּמוֹ מְטַמֵּא כִּבְשָׂרוֹ.
The Gemara answers: When the mishna said that we have nothing else like a creeping animal, it meant that we have nothing else like it with regard to the measure required for its blood to confer impurity; the measure of a creeping animal’s blood is the same for both: The measure required for its imparting ritual impurity is such that its blood imparts ritual impurity like its flesh, i.e., in the measure of a lentil. This is not the case with an unslaughtered animal carcass, the flesh of which imparts ritual impurity in the measure of an olive-bulk, while its blood imparts impurity in the measure of a quarter-log. Consequently, there is no contradiction between the mishna in tractate Makhshirin and the testimony of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Petora.
אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵי פְּלִיגִין בָּהּ תְּרֵין אֲמוֹרָאִין חַד אָמַר. טָמֵא. וְחַד אָמַר. טָהוֹר. מָאן דְּאָמַר טָמֵא. כְּרִבִּי יְהוּדָה. וּמָאן טָהוֹר. כְּרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן פְּתוֹרָה.
Rabbi Yosei said: Two amora’im disagree about this matter. One said a quarter-log of this blood renders one ritually impure, and one said that even after contact with this blood, one remains ritually pure. The one who said it is impure follows the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda in a mishna in Eduyyot 5:1. Rabbi Yehuda maintains there that this issue is the subject of a dispute between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel. The halakha would follow the opinion of Beit Hillel, which is that carcass blood does confer impurity. And the one who said ritually pure holds like the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Petora, who testified (Eduyyot 8:1) that the blood of an animal carcass is ritually pure.
רַב אֲבוּהָא דְּאִימָן אַחְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יְהוּדָה מוֹרְייָנָא דְּנָשִׂיא הֲוִה.
] Rav Avduma of the descenders, i.e., travelers from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, bringing with them the Torah taught in Eretz Yisrael, said to him: And it is right. That which you explained is correct, as Rabbi Yehuda was the halakhic authority for the house of the Nasi. Rabbi Yehuda ruled then that the blood of the dead mule was pure only because there was less than a quarter-log of it.
[שֶׁמָּא יַעֲנִי וְיֹאמְרוּ וכו׳.] תַּנֵּי רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. קִיווֵץ לֹא יִתְרוֹם מִפְּנֵי הַחֲשַׁד. תַּנֵּי. הַגִּיזְבְּרִין הָיוּ מְפַסְפְּסִין בְּקִילִּקִין.
§ The Mishna taught that the one who collects the funds from the Temple treasury chamber must not enter the chamber wearing clothes that could arouse suspicion, as perhaps one day he will become poor and people will say that he was reduced to poverty because he had stolen shekels from the chamber. Rabbi Yishmael taught a similar halakha in a baraita: One who is curly haired must not collect funds from the Temple treasury chamber because of the suspicion that he will hide shekels from the chamber in his curls. It was taught in another baraita: The Temple treasurers would untangle [mefaspesin] the matted locks of the one who collected the funds from the chamber after he exited the chamber, to ascertain that no coins were hidden in his hair.
תַּנֵּי מְדַבְּרִין הָיוּ עִמּוֹ מִשָּׁעָה שֶׁהוּא נִכְנַס עַד שָׁעָה שֶׁהוּא יוֹצֵא. וִימַלֵּא פּוּמֵיהּ מוֹי. אָמַר רִבִּי תַנְחוּמָא. מִפְּנֵי הַבְּרָכָה.
It was taught in yet another baraita that deals with a similar suspicion: They would converse with the one collecting the funds from the chamber from the time he entered the chamber until the time he exited it, so that he should not be able to hide money from the chamber in his mouth. The Gemara asks: Why not let him fill his mouth with water, so that it would be impossible for him to insert money into his mouth, and then he would not have to speak? Rabbi Tanḥuma said: He cannot fill his mouth with water because of the blessing that he must recite before collecting the funds from the chamber.
רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹנָתָן. בַּתּוֹרָה וּבַנְּבִיאים וּבַכְּתובִים מָצָאנוּ שֶׁאָדָם צָרִיךְ לָצֵאת יְדֵי הַבִּרְיוֹת כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁהוּא צָרִיךְ לָצֵאת יְדֵי הַמָּקוֹם. בַּתּוֹרָה מְנַיִין. דִּכְתִיב וִהְיִיתֶם נְקִיִים מֵיְיָ וּמִיִּשְׂרָאֵל. בַּנְּבִיאים מְנַיִין. דִּכְתִיב אֵל֩ ׀ אֱלֹהִ֨ים ׀ יְי אֵ֣ל ׀ אֱלֹהִ֤ים ׀ יְי ה֣וּא יֹוֹדֵעַ וְיִשְׂרָאֵל֭ ה֣וּא יֵדָ֑ע. בַּכְּתובִים מְנַיִין. דִּכְתִיב וּמְצָא חֵן וְשֵׂכֶל טוֹב בְּעֵינֵי אֱלֹהִים וְאָדָם׃
§ Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said in the name of Rabbi Yonatan: We find in the Torah, in the Prophets, and in the Writings that a person must appear justified before people as he must appear justified before the Omnipresent. From where in the Torah is this derived? As it is written: “And you shall be guiltless before the Lord and before Israel” (Numbers 32:22). From where in the Prophets is this derived? As it is written: “The mighty One, God, the Lord, He knows, and Israel shall know” (Joshua 22:22). From where in the Writings is this derived? As it is written: “So shall you find grace and good understanding in the sight of God and man (Proverbs 3:4).
גַּמְלִיאֵל זֵוּגָא שָׁאַל לְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. אֵי זֶהוּ הַמְחוּוָר שֶׁבְּכוּלָּן. אָמַר לֵיהּ. וִהְיִיתֶם נְקִיִים מֵיְיָ וּמִיִּשְׂרָאֵל .
Gamliel Zuga asked Rabbi Yosei bar Rabbi Bun: Which of these verses is the clearest of all the sources that one must be blameless even in the eyes of man? The three proof texts say more or less the same thing; which is the most unambiguous of the three? Rabbi Yosei bar Rabbi Bun said to him: The verse “And you shall be guiltless before the Lord and before Israel” is the most unequivocal of all.
משנה שֶׁל בֵּית רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הָיָה נִכְנָס וְשִׁקְלוֹ בֵּין אֶצְבְּעוֹתָיו וְזוֹרְקוֹ לִפְנֵי הַתּוֹרֵם וְהַתּוֹרֵם מִתְכַּוֵּין וְדוֹחֲקוֹ לַקּוּפָּה.
Halakha 3 · MISHNA In order to indicate the importance that was attached to the ceremony of the collection of the Temple treasury chamber, the mishna relates that the members of the house of Rabban Gamliel desired that their shekels be the ones collected from the chamber and used for the purchase of the communal offerings. Each of them would therefore come to the Temple specifically on the day of the ceremony of the collection of the chamber, enter the chamber with his shekel between his fingers, and toss it in front of the one collecting the money so that he would see it and place it in the basket containing the money to be taken out of the chamber. Understanding what was happening, the one collecting the money from the chamber would purposely push this shekel into the basket, so that it would later be used to buy communal offerings.
אֵין הַתּוֹרֵם תּוֹרֵם עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר לָהֶן אֶתְרוֹם. וְהֵן אוֹמְרִים לוֹ תְּרֹוֹם, תְּרוֹם, תְּרוֹם, שָׁלֹֹֹש פְּעָמִים:
The one collecting the funds from the chamber may not begin to collect the money until he asks the Temple treasurers three times: Shall I collect the funds, and they say to him: Collect them, collect them, collect them, three times.
תָּרַם אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וְחִיפָּה בִּקְטַבֳלִיּוֹת הַשְּׁנִייָה וְחִיפָּה בִּקְטַבֳלִיּוֹת. הַשְּׁלִישִׁית לֹא הָיָה מְחַפֶּה.
The coins were stored in the Temple treasury in three large baskets, each measuring nine se’a. In the collection of the chamber ceremony, coins were removed from these baskets and placed in smaller baskets of three se’a each that were marked with letters (see the previous mishna on daf 8a). After he collected the funds from the first large basket and put them into one of the smaller baskets labeled with the letter alef, he immediately covered with a leather cover the large basket from which he had removed the money. After collecting funds from the second large basket, he covered it with a leather cover as well. But after collecting funds from the third large basket, he did not cover it.
וְלָמָּה הְיְה מְחַפֶּה שֶׁמָּא יִשְׁכַּח וְיִתְרוֹם מִן הַדָּבָר הַתָּרוּם.
The mishna asks: Why did he cover the first two baskets? In order to mark them as already having had funds collected from them. In this way, there was no concern that perhaps he would forget and once again collect funds from a basket from which funds had already been collected.
תָּרַם אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה לְשֵׁם אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל הַשְּׁנִייָה לְשֵׁם כְּרַכִים הַמּוּקָּפִין לָהּ וְהַשְּׁלִישִׁית לְשֵׁם בָּבֶל וּלְשֵׁם מָדַי וּלְשֵׁם [דף ט:] מְדִינוֹת הָרְחוֹקוֹת:
The mishna specifies the intent of the one collecting the funds from the baskets as he does so: He collected funds from the first basket on behalf of the people living in Eretz Yisrael; from the second basket on behalf of the people living in the cities near Eretz Yisrael; and from the third basket on behalf of the people living in Babylonia, and on behalf of the people living in Media, and on behalf of [9b] the people living in the distant countries.
הלכה שֶׁל בֵּית רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הָיָה כול׳. אִילּוּ שְׁנֵי כְרִיִים וְתָרַם מֵאֶחָד מֵהֶן עַל חֲבֵירוֹ שֶׁמָּא לֹא פָטַר חֲבֵירוֹ.
GEMARA: It was taught in the mishna that the members of the house of Rabban Gamliel would arrange that their shekels be the ones collected from the chamber and used for the purchase of the communal offerings. The Gemara asks: If there were two piles of produce, and one separated teruma from one pile on behalf of the other, hasn’t he exempted with this teruma the other pile as well? When tithing produce, it is not necessary to separate teruma from each pile. It suffices to set aside an appropriate measure of teruma from one of them, and this counts as teruma for the other as well. Here too, the shekels are collected from the chamber not only on behalf of those who contributed those specific shekels, but even for those whose shekels were not collected. If so, why did the members of the house of Rabban Gamliel make such efforts to ensure that their shekels be the ones collected from the chamber?
הַנַַּחַת רוּחַ הִיא לָהֶם שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה קָרְבָּן מִתְקָרֵב אֶלָּא מִשֶּׁלָּהֶן תְּחִילָּה
. The Gemara answers: Even so, they got satisfaction from the fact that the communal offering was necessarily brought from their shekels first. For this reason, they exerted themselves to ensure that their shekels were collected from the chamber.
תָּרַם אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה כול׳. תַּנֵּי שָׁמַט הַקַּטָבֳלִיּוֹת נַעֲשׂוּ כוּלָּן שְׁיֵרִיים.
\The Gemara records several halakhot dealing with the collection of funds from the Temple treasury chamber. It was taught in a baraita: If the one collecting the funds from the chamber mistakenly removed the leather covers that he had placed on the large baskets, so that now he doesn’t know from which baskets shekels have already been collected and from which they have not yet been collected, all the shekels in the uncovered baskets take on the status of the remainder of the chamber.
תַּנֵּי. שְׁלִישִׁית הִיא הָֽיְתָה עֲשִׁירָה שֶׁבְּכוּלָּן. שֶׁהָיוּ בָהּ אִצְטְלֵי שֶׁלְזָהָב וְדַרְכוֹמוֹת שֶׁלְזָהָב .
It was taught in another baraita: The third collection of funds from the Temple treasury chamber that took place half a month before Sukkot was the most abundant of all, as it contained both isteriot, small coins of gold, and darics, large coins of gold.
תַּנֵּי. תָּרַם אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה לְשֵׁם אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל וּלְשֵׁם כָּל־יִשְׂרָאֵל. שְׁנִייָה לְשֵׁם כַּרַכִין מַמּוּקָּפִין וּלְשֵׁם כָּל־יִשְׂרָאֵל. וְהַשְּׁלִישִׁית לְשֵׁם בָּבֶל וּלְשֵׁם מָדַי וּלְשֵׁם מְדִינוּת הָֽרְחוֹקוֹת וּלְשֵׁם כָּל־יִשְׂרָאֵל. It was taught in yet another baraita: He collected funds from the first basket on behalf of the people living in Eretz Yisrael and on behalf of all of Israel; from the second basket on behalf of the people living in the cities [kerakim] near Eretz Yisrael and on behalf of all of Israel; and from the third basket on behalf of the people living in Babylonia and Media, and on behalf of those who dwelled in the distant countries, and on behalf of all of Israel.
תַּנֵּי. נָטַל מִן הָרִאשׁוֹנָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה נוֹטֵל מִן הַשְּׁנִייָה. נָטַל מִן הַשְּׁנִייָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּשְּׁנִייָה נוֹטֵל מִן הַשְּׁלִישִׁית.
The Gemara discusses the order in which the funds are taken from the baskets. It was taught in a baraita: After shekels were first taken from the first basket labeled with an alef, although shekels still remain in the first basket, shekels are taken from the second basket labeled with a beit. After shekels were taken from second basket, although shekels still remain in the second basket, shekels are taken from the third basket labeled with a gimmel.
שָֽׁלְמָה שְׁלִישִׁת חוֹזֵר לַשְּׁנִייָה. שָֽׁלְמָה שְׁנִייָה חוֹזֵר לְרִאשׁוֹנָה. שָֽׁלְמוּ שְׁלָשְׁתָּן חוֹזֵר וְשׁוֹקֵל.
If the third basket is completely emptied, he goes back to take from the second basket. If the second basket is completely emptied, he goes back to take from the first basket. If all three baskets are completely emptied, he goes back to the chamber and takes from the shekels that have arrived since the last time shekels were collected from the chamber. He does not take from the shekels that remained in the chamber at the previous ceremony of collection into the baskets, as those coins acquired at that point the status of leftover shekels, which do not have sanctity.
רִבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר. חוֹזֵר לִשְׁיֵרִיים. שֶׁהָיָה רִבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר. מוֹעֲלִין בִּשְׁיֵרִיִים שֶׁמָּא יִצְרְכוּ לָהֶן בַּסּוֹף.
Rabbi Meir says: He goes back to take from the leftover shekels. Because Rabbi Meir said: The halakhot of misusing consecrated property apply even to the leftover shekels, as they remain in their sanctified state. Why so? Perhaps they will be needed in the end, since if the shekels collected from the chamber are depleted, the leftover can be used for the purchase of communal offerings.
[וְכֵן הָיָה רִבִּי פִינְחָס בֶּן יָאִיר אוֹמֵר. זְרִיזוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי נְקִיּוּת. נְקִיּוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי טַהֳרָה. טַהֳרָה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי קְדוּשָּׁה. קְדוּשָּׁה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי עֲנָוָה.
§ Since the previous mishna deals with the obligation to be guiltless even in the eyes of men and this mishna speaks of the alacrity displayed by the members of the house of Rabban Gamliel when they gave their shekels, the Gemara brings a baraita dealing with worthy traits, including the trait of alacrity: And so Rabbi Pineḥas ben Yair would say: Alacrity in the proper performance of the mitzvot leads to cleanliness of the soul, so that one will not sin. Cleanliness of the soul and refraining from all sin leads to purity, so that one purifies his soul from his previous sins. Purity leads to holiness. Holiness leads to humility, as one recognizes his lowliness.
עֲנָוָה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי יִרְאַת חֵטְא. יִרְאַת חֵטְא מְבִיאָה לִידֵי חֲסִידוּת. חֲסִידוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ. רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ מֵבִיא לִידֵי תְחִײַת הַמֵּתִים. תְּחִײַת הַמֵּתִים מְבִיאָה לִידֵי אֵלִיָּהוּ זָכוּר לַטּוֹב.
Humility leads to fear of sin, because when one recognizes his inferiority, he becomes more fearful of sin and is careful to avoid temptation. Fear of sin leads to piety, as one begins to impose upon himself stringencies beyond the letter of the law. Piety leads to the holy spirit, because when one acts in a manner that goes beyond the letter of the law, Heaven acts with him in a way that is not natural to man, and informs him of the secrets of the Torah through divine inspiration. The holy spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead, because the spirit of holiness and purity that descend upon him enter the bones of the deceased and resurrect them. The resurrection of the dead that will precede the arrival of the Messiah leads to the coming of the Prophet Elijah, of blessed memory, who will herald the upcoming redemption.
זְרִיזוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי נְקִיּוּת. דִּכְתִיב וְכִלָּה מִכַּפֵּר. נְקִיּוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי טַהֳרָה. דִּכְתִיב וְכִפֶּ֥ר עָלֶי֛הָ הַכֹּהֵן֭ וְטָהֵֽרָה.
The Gemara adduces proof texts for each of the previous statements: Alacrity leads to cleanliness of the soul, as it is written: “And when he has made an end of atoning” (Leviticus 16:20). “He has made an end” denotes alacrity; since one hastens to bring the process to conclusion, he achieves atonement, which cleanses the souls of sinners of their iniquities. Cleanliness leads to purity, as it is written with regard to the offering that a woman brings after her days of impurity and purity that follow childbirth (Leviticus 12): “And the priest shall make atonement for her, and she shall be pure” (Leviticus 12:8). Once she finishes the process of her atonement, that is to say, once she cleanses herself of sin, she reaches purity.
טְהֳרָה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי קְדוּשָּׁה. דִּכְתִיב וְטִיהֲהָּוֹ וְקִידְּשָׁהּ. קְדוּשָּׁה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי עֲנָוָה. דִּכְתִיב כִּי֩ כֹ֨ה אמַ֜ר רָ֣ם וְנִישָּׂא שֹׁכֵ֥ן עַד֙ וְקָד֣וֹשׁ שְׁמ֔וֹ מָר֥וֹם … וְאֶת־דַּכָּא֙ וּשְׁפַל־ר֔וּחַ.
Purity leads to holiness, as it is written with regard to the High Priest’s sprinkling of the blood of his bull and goat offerings on the golden altar on Yom Kippur: “And he shall purify it, and hallow it” (Leviticus 16:19), teaching that purity is followed by holiness. Holiness leads to humility, as it is written: “For thus says the High and Lofty One that inhabits eternity, Whose name is Holy: I dwell on high and in a holy place, yet with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit” (Isaiah 57:15). God’s holiness is drawn to a contrite and humble spirit.
עֲנָוָה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי יִרְאַת חֵטְא. דִּכְתִיב עֲ֭נָוָה יִרְאַ֣ת ה׳. יִרְאַת חֵטְא מְבִיאָה לִידֵי חֲסִידוּת. דִּכְתִיב וְחֶ֤סֶד ה׳ מֵעוֹלָ֣ם וְעַד־ע֭וֹלָם עַל־יְרֵאָ֑יו.
Humility leads to fear of sin, as it is written: “The reward of humility is the fear of the Lord” (Proverbs 22:4). Fear of sin leads to piety, as it is written: “But the loving-kindness [ḥesed] of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon those who fear Him” (Psalms 103:17). The recognition of God’s loving-kindness indicates piety [ḥasidut], which results from fear of God.
חֲסִידוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ. דִּכְתִיב אָ֤ז דִּבַּ֪רְתָּֽ־בְחָ֡זוֹן לַֽחֲסִידֶ֗יךָ. רוּחַ הַקּוֹדֶשׁ מֵבִיא לִידֵי תְחִײַת הַמֵּתִים. דִּכְתִיב וְנָֽתַתִּ֨י רוּחִ֤י בָכֶם֙ וִֽחְיִיתֶ֔ם. תְּחִײַת הַמֵּתִים מְבִיאָה לִידֵי אֵלִיָּהוּ זָכוּר לַטּוֹב. דִּכְתֵיב אָ֗ז תָּ֭בִין יִרְאַ֣ת ה׳ וְדַעַ֭ת עֶלְיוֹן תִּמְצָֽא׃
Piety leads to the holy spirit, as it is written: “Then You spoke in vision to Your pious ones” (Psalms 89:20). The holy spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead, as it is written: “And I shall put My spirit in you, and you shall live” (Ezekiel 37:14). The resurrection of the dead leads to the coming of the Prophet Elijah, of blessed memory, as it is written: “Behold, I will send you Elijah the Prophet before the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord” (Malachi 3:23). The day referred to here is the day of the resurrection of the dead.
תַּאנָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי מֵאִיר. כָּל־מִי שֶׁקָּבוּעַ בְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל וּמְדַבֵּר לְשׁוֹן הַקֹּדֶשׁ וְאוֹכֵל פֵּירוֹתָיו בּטָהָרָה וְקוֹרֵא קִרְיַת שְׁמַע בַּבֹּקֶר וּבָעֶרֶב יְהֵא מְבוּשָּׂר שֶׁבֶּן הָעוֹלָם הַבָּא הוּא]
The Gemara concludes the chapter with a different discussion of virtues: It was taught in a baraita in the name of Rabbi Meir: Anyone who lives permanently in Eretz Yisrael, and speaks the holy tongue, and eats the fruits of Eretz Yisrael in purity, and recites Shema in the morning and in the evening, will receive the tidings and assurances that he is one who has merited of the World-to-Come.
הדרן עלך פרק בשלשה פרקים
משנה הַתְּרוּמָה מֶה הָיוּ עוֹשִׂין בָּהּ. לוֹקְחִין בָּהּ תְּמִידִין וּמוּסָפִין וְנִסְכֵּיהֶם הָעֹמֶר וּשְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם וְלֶחֶם הַפָּנִים וְכָל־קָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּיבּוּר.
Halakha 1 · MISHNA At certain times of the year, half-shekels that had been donated to the Temple and stored in a chamber in the Temple were collected in order to be used for various purposes. The mishna asks: The collection of half-shekels, what would they do with it? They would purchase animals for the daily offerings, which were offered each morning and afternoon; and for the additional offerings, which were offered on Shabbat, the New Moon, and Festivals; and wine for their libations; barley for the omer meal-offering; and wheat for both the two loaves offered on Shavuot and the shewbread; and animals for all the communal offerings.
שׁוֹמְרֵי סְפִחִים בַּשְּׁבִיעִית נוֹטְלִין שְׂכָרָן מִתְּרוּמַת הַלִּשְׁכָּה. רִבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר אַף הָרוֹצֶה מִתְנַדֵּב שׁוֹמֵר חִנָּם. אָֽמְרוּ לוֹ אַף אַתָּה אוֹמֵר שֶׁאֵין בָּאִין אֶלָּא [דף י.] מִשֶּׁל צִיבּוּר:
§ The guards of the sefiḥin, grain that grew without being purposely planted, during the Sabbatical Year, ensured that people did not take this ownerless grain, so that it remained available to be used for the omer and the offering of the two loaves. They collect their wages from the collection of the Temple treasury chamber. Rabbi Yosei says: One who so desires may even volunteer his services and guard the grain as an unpaid bailee. The Rabbis said to him: Even you must say that the omer and the two loaves come only [10a] from communal funds and not from any one individual. If one were to volunteer his services, he would acquire the grain for himself by guarding it and transporting it to the Temple. In that case, these offerings would have come from an individual. So that the offerings come solely from communal funds, the guards must receive payment from the half-shekels removed from the chamber.
