Commentary for Temurah 10:58

This refutes Raba?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So Sh. Mek.');">⁴⁷</span> - Raba will answer you: The case is different there,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where terumah was named before bikkurim.');">⁴⁸</span> since Scripture says: Out of all your gifts ye shall offer every heave offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XVIII, 29, intimating that although you have named first tithe before terumah you can still separate terumah; and the same applies to terumah and bikkurim.');">⁴⁹</span> And Abaye?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since he holds that a prohibited act can have legal effect, what need is there for the text 'Out of all your gifts, etc.'?');">⁵⁰</span> - He needs [the words 'Out of all your gifts'] for [answering the question which] R'Papa put to Abaye: If this be the case,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In Bez. ');">⁵¹</span> then even if he [the Levite, anticipated the priest] when [the grain was] in the pile, he should be exempt from the obligation of terumah?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Why then is the Levite exempt from the obligation of terumah only when the grain is in ear?');">⁵²</span> And [Abaye] answered him: To meet your query Scripture says: Out of all your gifts ye shall offer every heave offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Terumah. I.e., that he must, in certain circumstances, set aside terumah as well as the tithe from the tithe.');">⁵³</span> But why do you see fit to include the case of when [the grain was] in the pile,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As requiring the Levite to give terumah.');">⁵⁴</span> and to exclude the case of grain in the ear?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As not requiring the Levite to give terumah.');">⁵⁵</span> - I include the case of [grain] in the pile because it comes under the title of corn, whereas I exclude the case of grain in the ear because it does not come under the title of corn. But is there not the case of a widow married by a High Priest, concerning which the Divine Law says: A widow or a divorced woman, these shall he not take,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXI, 14.');">⁵⁶</span> and we have learnt: Wherever betrothal is valid and yet involves a transgression,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As a result, as e.g., in the case of a widow marrying a High priest.');">⁵⁷</span> the child has the legal status of the party which causes the transgression!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'which is defective'. In this case, the widow or divorcee, and the child becomes a halal (profane, unfit for the priesthood) v. Kid. 66b. Consequently we see here that a forbidden act has a legal effect, for it says that the betrothal is valid. For if a prohibited act has no legal effect, should the betrothal be valid?');">⁵⁸</span> - The case is different there since Scripture says: Neither shall he profane his seed among his people.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXI, 15, implying that such marriages produce halalim (unfit for the priesthood) but not mamzerim (illegitimate children) . Consequently we see that the betrothal in this case is valid.');">⁵⁹</span> And Abaye?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since he holds that a prohibited act has a legal effect, what need is there for the text: Neither shall he profane etc.');">⁶⁰</span> - Let Scripture then say: 'Lo yahel'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which would imply that it refers to the status of the child alone. kkjh k');">⁶¹</span> Why 'lo yehalel'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' the extra indicates a further teaching.');">⁶²</span> One [profanation refers] to it [the child]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That it becomes a halal. vkkj');">⁶³</span> and the other to [the woman] herself.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That she becomes profaned () and therefore if she is the daughter of a priest, she cannot eat her father's terumah. It is for this purpose that the text is necessary and not to teach that the betrothal is valid, despite the prohibition involved, as there is no need of an extra text to inform us of this, since in every case, according to Abaye, the ruling is that a forbidden act is valid.');">⁶⁴</span> But is there not the case of one who dedicates blemished animals for the altar, concerning which the Divine Law says: But whatsoever hath a blemish, that shall ye not offer.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXII, 20; which text is explained (infra) as meaning: Ye shall not consecrate.');">⁶⁵</span> And it has been taught:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So Sh. Mek.');">⁶⁶</span> If one dedicates blemished animals for the altar, although he infringes a negative command, the act is valid?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And they are sacred to the extent of their value.');">⁶⁷</span> This refutes Raba!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who holds that a forbidden act has no legal effect.');">⁶⁸</span> - Raba can answer you: The case is different there, since Scripture says: 'For it shall not be acceptable for you',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXII, 20. So Bah.');">⁶⁹</span> [intimating that] it is not acceptable but that its consecration is legal.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To the extent of its value for the altar.');">⁷⁰</span> And Abaye?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since he holds that a forbidden act has a legal effect, what need is there for this text?');">⁷¹</span> - If Scripture had not stated: 'For it shall not be acceptable for you', I might have thought the case<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of one who consecrates a blemished animal.');">⁷²</span> should be similar to that of one who transgresses a religious command, but that it [the animal] is fit [even to offer up]. [The text therefore] informs us [that it is not so].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That it cannot be offered up on the altar.');">⁷³</span> But is there not the case of one who dedicates unblemished animals for Temple repairs,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But not for sacrifice on the altar.');">⁷⁴</span> concerning which the Divine Law says:

Explore commentary for Temurah 10:58. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.