Kiddushin 116

א"ל הוצאה את איכסיף הוא סבר משמעתא קאמר ליה א"ל הכי קאמינא רב אסי דהוצל קאי כותיך

- He replied: You are huza'ah.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is explained in the text.');">¹</span> So he was ashamed, for he thought that he meant it with reference to the subject.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deriving the word from huza, 'shrub', he understood him to say 'You are a shrubcutter'; i.e., your suggestion shows that your knowledge is only fit for this work.');">²</span>

נימא כתנאי הגונב טבלו של חבירו משלם לו דמי טבלו של חבירו דברי רבי ר' יוסי בר' יהודה אומר אינו משלם אלא דמי חולין שבו מאי לאו בהא קמיפלגי דמר סבר טובת הנאה ממון ומר סבר טובת הנאה אינה ממון

I meant this, he reassured him, R'Assi of Huzal<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' An ancient town below Nehardea, but nearer to Sura, within whose province it lay in matters of jurisdiction. Obermeyer, p. 299f.');">³</span> agrees with you.

לא דכולי עלמא טובת הנאה אינה ממון והכא בטבלים שנפלו לו מבית אבי אמו כהן ובמתנות שלא הורמו כמי שהורמו דמיין קמיפלגי מר סבר כמי שהורמו דמיין ומ"ס לאו כמי שהורמו דמיין

Shall we say that it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The question whether disposal rights rank as money.');">⁴</span> is a controversy of Tannaim?

ואיבעית אימא דכולי עלמא כמי שהורמו דמיין וטובת הנאה אינה ממון והכא בדשמואל קמיפלגי דאמר שמואל חיטה אחת פוטרת את הכרי

[For it was taught.] He who steals his neighbour's tebel must pay him the value of his tebel:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Including the terumoth and tithes which were yet to be separated. Ran in Ned. ');">⁵</span> this is Rabbi's view.

דמר אית ליה דשמואל ומר לית ליה דשמואל

R'Jose son of R'Judah said: He must pay only for the hullin it contains. Surely they differ in this: one Master holds that disposal rights are money, while the other maintains that they are not? - No: all agree that disposal rights are not money, but here, however, the reference is to tebalim which he inherited from the house of his maternal grandfather, a priest, and they differ as to whether unseparated [priestly] dues are regarded as separated: one Master holds that they are regarded as separated,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence they have a monetary value to the Israelite, and so the thief must pay for them.');">⁶</span>

ואיבעית אימא דכולי עלמא לית להו דשמואל והכא היינו טעמא דרבי דקנסוהו רבנן לגנב

and the other that they are not. Alternatively, all agree that they are regarded as separated, and disposal rights have no monetary value.

ואיבעית אימא דכולי עלמא אית להו דשמואל והכא היינו טעמא דרבי יוסי בר' יהודה דקנסוהו רבנן לבעל הבית דלא איבעי ליה לשהויה לטיבליה

Here, however, they differ in respect to Samuel's dictum, for Samuel said: One grain of wheat frees the whole stack:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [The removal of one single grain is sufficient to raise the prohibition that rests on the stack, as far as a non-priest is concerned, though the precept of 'giving' terumah is not fulfilled except on setting aside for the priest an amount varying between one fortieth to one sixtieth.]');">⁷</span> One Master accepts Samuel's ruling; the other does not accept it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is now understood that the reference is to one's ordinary produce, not to a legacy. Now, Rabbi agrees with Samuel: hence the robbed person can say: 'It was all mine, for I would have separated only one grain.' According to this, the controversy refers only to the value of terumah, which, notwithstanding Samuel's dictum, varied from one fortieth to one sixtieth. But the thief is certainly not liable for the tithe it contains, on all views, since that must be one tenth.');">⁸</span>

תנן המקדש בתרומות ובמעשרות ובמתנות במי חטאת ובאפר פרה הרי זו מקודשת ואף על פי ישראל ורמינהו הנוטל שכר לדון דיניו בטלים להעיד עדותו בטלה להזות ולקדש מימיו מי מערה ואפרו אפר מקלה

Another alternative: All reject Samuel's dictum, but here this is Rabbi's reason, viz the Rabbis penalized the thief. Another alternative: all agree with Samuel; but here this is R'Jose son of R'Judah's reason: The Rabbis penalized the owner, for he should not have tarried with his tebel.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But should have separated the dues when the obligation arose.');">⁹</span>

אמר אביי לא קשיא כאן בשכר הבאה ומילוי כאן בשכר הזאה וקידוש

We learnt: IF ONE BETROTHS [A WOMAN] WITH TERUMOTH, TITHES, [PRIESTLY] GIFTS, THE WATER OF PURIFICATION AND THE ASHES OF PURIFICATION, SHE IS BETROTHED, EVEN AN ISRAELITE. But the following is opposed thereto: If one accepts payment for judging, his judgments are null; for testifying, his testimony is worthless; for sprinkling and mixing [with water] the ashes [of the Red Heifer],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' An unclean person. v. Num. XIX, 17ff.');">¹⁰</span>

דיקא נמי דקתני הכא במי חטאת ובאפר פרה וקתני התם להזות ולקדש שמע מינה

his water is cavern water<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., useless, for running ('living') water is specified; ibid. 17.');">¹¹</span> and his ashes are ashes of a hearth!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., like ashes of any substance, not those of the red heifer, hence unfit. - This shews that they have no monetary value, since payment is forbidden.');">¹²</span>

<br><br><big><strong>הדרן עלך האיש מקדש</strong></big><br><br>

- Said Abaye. There is no difficulty: here it [the Mishnah] refers to payment for bringing [the ashes] and drawing [the water];<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That is permitted.');">¹³</span>

מתני׳ <big><strong>האומר</strong></big> לחבירו צא וקדש לי אשה פלונית והלך וקדשה לעצמו מקודשת לשני וכן האומר לאשה הרי את מקודשת לי לאחר שלשים יום ובא אחר וקידשה בתוך שלשים יום מקודשת לשני בת ישראל לכהן תאכל בתרומה

there, payment for sprinkling and mixing [are meant].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is forbidden.');">¹⁴</span> This may be proved too, for here it is stated: WITH THE WATER OF PURIFICATION AND THE ASHES OF PURIFICATION,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [They were, that is to say, still unmixed, and he betrothed her with them. Tosaf. Ri.]');">¹⁵</span>

מעכשיו ולאחר שלשים יום ובא אחר וקידשה בתוך שלשים יום מקודשת ואינה מקודשת בת ישראל לכהן או בת כהן לישראל לא תאכל בתרומה

while there it is taught, for sprinklin and mixing. This proves it.

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> האומר לחבירו צא וקדש תנא מה שעשה עשוי אלא שנהג בו מנהג רמאות ותנא דידן הלך נמי דקתני הלך ברמאות

<big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>IF HE SAYS TO HIS NEIGHBOUR, 'GO FORTH AND BETROTH ME SUCH A WOMAN,' AND HE GOES AND BETROTHS HER TO HIMSELF, SHE IS BETROTHED TO THE SECOND. LIKEWISE, IF HE SAYS TO A WOMAN, 'BE THOU BETROTHED UNTO ME AFTER THIRTY DAYS,' AND ANOTHER COMES AND BETROTHS HER WITHIN THE THIRTY DAYS, SHE IS BETROTHED TO THE SECOND: THUS AN ISRAELITE'S DAUGHTER [BETROTHED] TO A PRIEST MAY EAT TERUMAH.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because she is certainly betrothed to him.');">¹⁶</span>

מאי שנא הכא דקתני האומר לחבירו

[BUT IF HE DECLARES, BE THOU BETROTHED UNTO ME [FROM NOW AND AFTER THIRTY DAYS,'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As though it were a long ceremony, commencing immediately but requiring thirty days for its completion.');">¹⁷</span> AND ANOTHER COMES AND BETROTHS HER WITHIN THE THIRTY DAYS, SHE IS BETROTHED AND NOT BETROTHED [TO BOTH]:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., she is not free from either, nor may she live with either; v. p. 47. n. 10.');">¹⁸</span> AN ISRAELITE'S DAUGHTER [THUS BETROTHED] TO A PRIEST, OR A PRIEST'S DAUGHTER TO AN ISRAELITE, MAY NOT EAT TERUMAH.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Her status being undetermined.');">¹⁹</span> <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>IF HE SAYS TO HIS NEIGHBOUR'A Tanna taught: What he did is done, but that he has behaved toward him as a cheat. And our Tanna?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Does he too not condemn him?');">²⁰</span> - When he states: AND HE GOES,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'AND HE WENT'.');">²¹</span> he indeed means, He goes in cheating fashion. Why is it taught here, IF HE SAYS TO HIS NEIGHBOUR,