V. For
[the rules of first shearings are similar to the laws for the firstling in
eight ways, but not to the rules of tithes. With regard to tithes:] (1) An
orphan [animal, whose mother died when it was born is not liable to the rules
of tithes]; (2) [An animal that was] purchased [is not liable to tithes]; (3)
[An animal that was] owned by partners [is not liable to tithes]; (4) [An
animal that was] given [to someone as a gift is not liable to tithes]; (5) [The
laws of tithes apply only] in the presence [of the Temple, i.e. while it stands
in Jerusalem]; (6) The priest [receives the first born and the first shearings
but not the animal tithes]; [137A] (7) [Animals designated as tithes must be]
consecrated [by designation at the time they are separated. First born animals
attain sanctity without special designation and first shearings have no inherent
sanctity]; (8) [Firstlings and first shearings may be] sold [by the priest.
Animal tithes may not be sold].
11/10/11
11/9/11
Talmud Bavli Hullin 136a-b - translation by Tzvee
I.11
A. [And
in the case of the obligation to separate from one's crops] tithes though
scripture states, “Tithes of your grain” (Deut. 14:23), [implying what is]
yours alone is [liable to these rules] and not [grain] held by partners,
B. the
Torah stated [additionally], “Of your [plural] tithes” (Deut. 12:6), [including
in the rule grain owned by partners.]
C. Why
then do we have [the language], “Tithes of your grain?”
D. It
comes to exclude [from liability to tithes produce] held in partnership with a
gentile.
11/8/11
Talmud Bavli Hullin 135a-b - translation by Tzvee
Bavli
Hullin Chapter Eleven
11:1
A. [The
laws concerning the obligation to donate to the priest] the first shearings [of
wool from the sheep of one's flock (Deut. 18:4)] apply both inside the Land of
Israel and outside the Land of Israel,
B. in
the time the Temple [in Jerusalem stands] and in the time the Temple does not
[stand].
C. [And
the laws apply] to [the fleece of] unconsecrated [animals] but not to [the
fleece of animals that were] consecrated [to the Temple].
D. A
stricter rule applies to [the obligation to give to the priest] the shoulder,
the two cheeks and the maw [of one's animals] than to [the obligation to give
to the priest] the first shearings [of wool from the sheep of one's flock].
11/7/11
Talmud Bavli Hullin 134a-b - translation by Tzvee
V.1
A. And
if [the priest or gentile who sold the beast to an Israelite] said, “[The beast
is sold] except for the priestly gifts,” he [the one who slaughters (D)] is
free of the priestly gifts [M. 10:3 G]. [134a] And they raised by way of contradiction [to M.]: [If a priest who
sells the beast to an Israelite said that he sells it] on the condition that
the gifts are mine, [the Israelite] may give them to any priest that he
chooses.
B. Do
you raise a contradiction from [a case where he stated] “on the condition” to
[a case where he stated] “except for”? [They are different conditional
modalities.] [The stipulation,] “Except for” leaves out a portion [from the transaction]. [The stipulation,] “On
the condition” does not leave out [any
portion from the transaction].
11/6/11
Rave review in the TBR by Claire Messud of Amos Oz’s, A Tale of Love and Darkness.
There is a rave review in the TBR of Amos Oz’s Tales of Love and Darkness.
...by CLAIRE MESSUD, "In his remarkable memoir, “A Tale of Love and Darkness,” Amos Oz created a richly detailed, vibrant and nuanced portrait of his young self, of his family and of the young nation of Israel growing around him. It is, for all its profound sadnesses, an exuberant account, overflowing with life and with a joy in language. ...more..."
Talmud Bavli Hullin 133a-b - translation by Tzvee
D. It comes to teach, “Among the sons of
Aaron.” [This implies that he is excluded from] any rite that is performed by
the sons of Aaron [T. Demai 2:6-7].
E. And [it states] any priest who does not accept [the rites], does not have a share with
the priests. The implication is that [this applies only to a priest] who
does not accept [a rite]. Lo, if he accepted it, even if he was not
knowledgeable in it, [he has a share with the priests, contrary to Hisda at B].
11/4/11
Talmud Bavli Hullin 132a-b - translation by Tzvee
B. He
said to him, “Rabbi, [132a] let me turn it back on you. Aaron and his
sons are specified in the passage [excluding thereby the daughter of a
priest: “And the rest of it Aaron and his sons shall eat; it shall be eaten
unleavened in a holy place; in the court of the tent of meeting they shall eat
it” (Lev. 6:16). “This is the offering which Aaron and his sons shall offer to
the Lord on the day when he is anointed: a tenth of an ephah of fine flour as a
regular cereal offering, half of it in the morning and half in the evening”
(Lev. 6:20). In other instances, mention of a priest subsumes the daughter of a
priest.]
Talmud Bavli Hullin 131a-b - translation by Tzvee
C. Here
too [131a] [it must be that] they came into his possession unseparated [from the
unconsecrated produce]. And this Tanna reasoned in accord with the view that,
Gifts that were not [physically] separated are treated [as pertains to legal
claims] as if they were separated [cf. I.4 E].
I.7
A. Come
and take note: Lo, if the royal administration seized a person’s grain in
the granary, if it was on account of a debt that he owed, he has to tithe the
grain [this is then a kind of sale], but if it was on the count of a missed
installment payment, he is exempt from having to tithe [cf. b. Git. 44a].
11/3/11
Jpost: Michael Freund is Worried that Talmud Teaching in Israel is Terrible
In jpost, "Fundamentally Freund: Teaching kids to hate Talmud" by MICHAEL FREUND claims, "The centrality of the Talmud in Jewish life now faces an alarming threat from a most unexpected source: Israel’s religious educational system."
The "alarming threat" to Talmudic centrality turns out to be that students find Talmud class to be boring and they say they hate it.
Alarmist Michael maybe needs to wake up to the fact that Talmud in fact is not central to Jewish life and that children are always quick to report that they are bored by school and hate most subjects.
Yes, it may be true that Talmud is taught poorly. But don't worry. That has been the case for 1500 years. With G-d's will, May it continue for another 1500.
And you can read our article about teaching Talmud the right way at the university here.
The "alarming threat" to Talmudic centrality turns out to be that students find Talmud class to be boring and they say they hate it.
Alarmist Michael maybe needs to wake up to the fact that Talmud in fact is not central to Jewish life and that children are always quick to report that they are bored by school and hate most subjects.
Yes, it may be true that Talmud is taught poorly. But don't worry. That has been the case for 1500 years. With G-d's will, May it continue for another 1500.
And you can read our article about teaching Talmud the right way at the university here.
Talmud Bavli Hullin 130a-b - translation by Tzvee
Bavli Hullin Chapter Ten
10:1
A. [The requirement to give to the
priests] the shoulder, the two cheeks, and the maw (Deut. 18:3) applies (1) in
the Land and outside of the Land, (2) in the time of the Temple and not in the
time of the Temple, (3) to unconsecrated beasts, but not to consecrated beasts.
B. For it [the contrary to A3] might
have appeared logical: Now, if unconsecrated animals, which are not liable for
the breast and thigh [which are taken from peace offerings for the priests,
(Lev. 7:31)], are liable for the [priestly] gifts [of the shoulder, cheeks, and
maw], Holy Things, which are liable
for the breast and thigh, logically should be liable to the priestly gifts.
C. Scripture therefore states, “And I
have given them to Aaron the priest and to his sons as a due for ever” (Lev.
7:34) —
D. he has a right [in consecrated
beasts] only to that which is explicitly stated [namely, the breast and thigh].
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)