Talmud Bavli
Talmud Bavli

Related for Yevamot 178:13

ומיטמא לה והא הכא דמדאורייתא אביה מיטמא לה ומדרבנן מיטמא לה בעל משום דהויא לה מת מצוה

Now, what relation is there between Heads and Fathers? But [this has the purpose] of telling you that as fathers may distribute as an inheritance to their children whatever they wish, so may the heads distribute as an inheritance to the people whatever they wish. 'He may defile himself for her'. But, surely, by Pentateuchal law it is her father who may here defile himself for her, and yet it is the husband who by a Rabbinical law was allowed to defile himself for her!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How then could it be maintained that Beth din has no authority to abrogate Pentateuchal laws? ');"><sup>37</sup></span> — [This was allowed] because she is a meth mizwah.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'dead of the commandment', a corpse in which no one is interested and the burial of which is obligatory upon any person who discovers it. ');"><sup>38</sup></span>

Tosefta Shekalim (Lieberman)

On the 15th of this [month] the officials of the court go out and declare the mixed crops as ownerless, For what the court has declared as ownerless is considered ownerless and is exempt from the tithes. If [a] man found mixed crops in a vineyard, it is lawful as "robbery" and free from tithes; but is in the field it is forbidden as "robbery" and he is obliged to pay tithes.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Tosefta Terumot

Rabbi Eliezer says, we [may] take terumah from the pure on behalf of the impure (Ter. 2:1). Said Rabbi Eliezer, it so happened the threshing floors caught fire in Kfar Signah, and they took terumah from the pure on behalf of the impure. They said to him, what proof is that? Rather, [we should conclude] that they took terumah "from them on behalf of them" (i.e., from pure produce on behalf of other pure produce). Rabbi Ilai (אלעאיי not אליעזר per Lieberman) said in the name of Rabbi Eliezer, they [may] take terumah from the pure on behalf of the impure, even [when it comes to produce that is in] liquids. How is this done? Whoever pickles olives in [a state of] impurity and seeks to take terumah from them in purity, he brings a funnel whose mouth is not wider than an egg, and places it on the mouth of an amphora, and brings the olives and puts them inside [the funnel] and takes terumah, and [in this way] he is able to take terumah from the pure on behalf of the impure or the "earmarked" (המוקף, see Tos. Kifshutah). They said to him, nothing is considered "fluid" but wine and oil (see Y. Chal. II.3.9). Rabbi Yosei says, he who takes terumah from the impure on behalf of the pure, whether inadvertent or intentional, his terumah is [valid] terumah (see Y. Ter. VI.1.6). Said Rabbi Yosei, why should there be any difference between this case (i.e., taking terumah from the impure on behalf of the pure) and the case of taking terumah from the bad [quality] on behalf of the good (which is valid terumah (Ter. 2:6 ))?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Previous VerseFull ChapterNext Verse