Talmud for Temurah 32:11

ואי ס"ד בצבור הנך מי איתנהו בצבור

whether in that of the sin-offerings of an individual or of a congregation?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Let us see to what class this sin-offering which was to be left to die was remembered as belonging. If it was remembered as being the sin-offering both of a congregation and an individual, then let us say that a sin-offering whose owners procured atonement and a sin-offering whose year is passed are left to die because of doubt, whereas in the other three cases, which are entirely different, as they could not occur in connection with a congregation, there could be no doubt that there is no death for the sin-offerings. And if the case of a sin-offering being left to die was remembered only in connection with the offering of an individual, then let us say that these three sin-offerings, substitute and offspring of a dedicated animal etc., since they can be brought only by an individual, are left to die, but about the other two sin-offerings there can be no doubt, for they are entirely different (Rashi) .');"><sup>10</sup></span>

Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot

Rebbi Jonah, Rebbi Yose the Galilean¹¹¹A Galilean Amora of the third generation, teacher of Rebbi Jonah., Rebbi Yasa bar Ḥanina: One does not ask rulings on practice before the bier of a deceased¹¹²In the Babli (Berakhot 3b) it is stated more generally, in the name of R. Joshua ben Levi, that words of Torah are forbidden in presence of a coffin. According to Rashi, the reason is (Prov. 17:5): “He who scoffs at the poor blasphemes his Maker.” Since the dead person can no longer study Torah, he is poor in this respect.. But Rebbi Yoḥanan asked Rebbi Yannai before the bier of Rebbi Simeon ben Yoẓadaq¹¹³This is the correct reading of the Rome ms. R. Simeon bar Yoẓadaq was an Amora of the first generation, one of the teachers of Rebbi Yoḥanan. The Leyden ms. has שמואל בר יוצדק by a scribal error. about him who dedicated his holocaust sacrifice for the upkeep of the Temple, and he answered him¹¹⁴The Mishnah (Temurah 32a) states that a forbidden substitution is valid only from lesser to higher sanctity. The highest sanctity of a sacrifice is the עוֹלָה, the holocaust, which is totally burnt on the altar, whereas gifts for the upkeep of the Temple are only a monetary obligation. So it should be impossible to dedicate an ‘olah for the upkeep of the Temple. However, a baraita (Babli Temurah 32b) states that a holocaust which afterwards was dedicated for the upkeep of the Temple cannot be slaughtered unless redeemed first and the money given to the Temple. The answer given there (presumably by Rebbi Yannai) is that the obligation of redemption is purely rabbinical, a kind of fine, but that from the Torah the second dedication is invalid.! Let us say when he was far away¹¹⁵So that the deceased could not have heard them even were he still alive. or when they were bringing him to the study hall¹¹⁶Most commentators explain that Rebbis Yoḥanan and Yannai were outside the Bet-Hamidrash. However, that would be the same as “being far away”. Therefore, it seems that the correct interpretation is given by R. Zacariah Frankel, that a eulogy of a Torah teacher in his own school by necessity must involve words of Torah.. But Rebbi Jeremiah asked Rebbi Zeïra before the bier of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac! Let us say that he answered him when he was far away; when he was close he did not answer him.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Previous Verse Full Chapter Next Verse