Kiddushin 138

(דברים יז, ח) דברי ריבות בשעריך וקמת ועלית אלא ארץ ישראל גבוה מכל ארצות מנלן דכתיב (ירמיהו כג, ז) לכן הנה ימים באים נאם ה' לא יאמר עוד חי ה' אשר העלה את בני ישראל מארץ מצרים כי אם חי ה' אשר העלה ואשר הביא את בני ישראל מארץ צפון ומכל הארצות אשר הדחתים שם

[If there arise.] matters of controversy in thy gates: then thou shalt arise and go up.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 8; 'In thy gates' implies anywhere in Palestine, whence one had to 'go up' to the Temple.');">¹</span> But how do we know that Eretz Yisrael is higher than all [other] countries? - Because it is written: Therefore behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that they shall no more say: As the Lord liveth, which brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt; but, as the Lord liveth, which brought up and which led the seed of the house of Israel out of the north country, and from all the countries whither I had driven them.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Jer. XXIII, 7f.');">²</span>

מאי איריא דתני עלו מבבל נתני עלו לארץ ישראל מסייע ליה לרבי אלעזר דאמר ר' אלעזר לא עלה עזרא מבבל עד שעשאה כסולת נקיה ועלה

Then why particularly state, WENT UP FROM BABYLON: let him teach, went up to Eretz Yisrael? - This supports R'Eleazar. For R'Eleazar said: Ezra did not go up from Babylon until he made it like pure sifted flour: then he went up.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He intentionally took those of inferior rank so that they should not remain in Babylon, where, owing to the absence of leaders, they might mingle with the rest of the nation. Therefore the Tanna states: WENT UP FROM BABYLON, intimating that in that itself he had a purpose, apart from the rebuilding of Palestine, viz., to purge the Jews in Babylon.');">³</span>

איתמר אביי אמר עלו מאיליהם תנן ורבא אמר העלום תנן וקמיפלגי בדרבי אלעזר דאמר רבי אלעזר לא עלה עזרא מבבל עד שעשאה כסולת נקיה ועלה

Abaye said: We learnt: THEY WENT UP voluntarily; Raba said: We learnt: He [Ezra] brought them up [against their will]. And they differ over R'Eleazar ['s dictum,] viz. : Ezra did not go up from Babylon until he made it like pure sifted flour: then he went up.

אביי לית ליה דרבי אלעזר רבא אית ליה דרבי אלעזר איבעית אימא דכולי עלמא אית להו דרבי אלעזר והכא בהא קא מיפלגי מר סבר אפרושי אפרושינהו ומנפשייהו סליקו ומר סבר בעל כרחייהו אסוקינהו

Abaye rejects it, Raba accepts it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For such purging could only be effected by compulsion.');">⁴</span> Alternatively, all accept R'Eleazar's dictum, but they differ in this: One Master [Abaye] holds that he [merely] separated them, whereupon they voluntarily ascended [to Palestine]:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In order to become mixed up with the others.');">⁵</span>

בשלמא למאן דאמר עלו היינו דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל כל ארצות עיסה לארץ ישראל וארץ ישראל עיסה לבבל אלא למ"ד העלום מידע ידעינהו נהי דידעי לההוא דרא לדרא אחריני לא ידעי

the other Master holds that [even so] he led them up against their will. Now, on the view that they went up [voluntarily], it is well: thus Rab Judah said in Samuel's name: All countries are as dough in comparison with Palestine,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Dough is a mixture of flour and water. I.e., the Jews there have not such a pure descent as those in Palestine.');">⁶</span>

בשלמא למאן דאמר עלו היינו דכתיב (עזרא ח, טו) ואקבצם אל הנהר הבא על אחוה ונחנה שם ימים שלשה ואבינה בעם ובכהנים ומבני לוי לא מצאתי שם

and Palestine is as dough relative to Babylon.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. n. 2. Halevi, Doroth, 1, 3, p. 104 conjectures that this was due to the incessant wars with the Greeks, when many Jews and Jewesses were taken captive by the enemy, and the general weakening of Jewish observance during the Hellenizing period and later when the Sadducees ruled the country. The Jews in Babylon, however, were free from all this.');">⁷</span> But on the view that he [forcibly] led them up, they were indeed known?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In Palestine too, and restrained from intermarrying, so that Palestine remained just as pure as Babylon.');">⁸</span>

אלא למאן דאמר העלום הא מיזהר זהירי נהי דאיזהור בפסולים בכשירים לא איזדהור

- Granted that they were known to that gener - ation, they were not known to another generation. On the view that they went up, it is well: hence it is written: And I gathered them together to the river that runneth to Ahava; and there we encamped three days; and I viewed [i.e., scrutinized] the people, and the priests, and found there none of the sons of Levi.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ezra VIII, 15. He had to scrutinize them, since those of inferior descent voluntarily joined them.');">⁹</span>

כהני לויי וישראלי מנלן דסליקו דכתיב (עזרא ב, ע) וישבו הכהנים והלוים ומן העם והמשוררים והשוערים והנתינים בעריהם וכל ישראל בעריהם

But on the view that he brought them up - surely he was most careful with them!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He knew who they were; why scrutinize them?');">¹⁰</span> - Granted that he had been careful with the unfit,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., those of low descent.');">¹¹</span>

חללי גירי וחרורי חללי מנלן דתניא ר' יוסי אומר גדולה חזקה שנא' (עזרא ב, סא) ומבני הכהנים בני חביה בני הקוץ בני ברזילי אשר לקח מבנות ברזילי הגלעדי אשה ויקרא על שמם אלה בקשו כתבם המתייחשים ולא נמצאו ויגואלו מן הכהונה ויאמר התרשתא להם אשר לא יאכלו מקדש הקדשים עד עמוד כהן לאורים ותומים

yet he had not been careful with the fit. PRIESTS, LEVITES, AND ISRAELITES.

ואמר להם הרי אתם בחזקתכם במה הייתם אוכלים בגולה בקדשי הגבול אף כאן נמי בקדשי הגבול

How do we know that they had come up? - Because it is written, so the priests, and the Levites, and some of the people, and the singers, and the porters, and the Nethinim, dwelt in their cities, and all Israel in their cities.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. II, 70.');">¹²</span> HALALIM, PROSELYTES AND FREEDMEN.

ולמאן דאמר מעלים מתרומה ליוחסין הני דאכול בתרומה אתו לאסוקינהו שאני התם דריע חזקתייהו

How do we know halalim? For it was taught: R'Jose said: A presumptive right [hazakah] is powerful, as it is said: And of the children of the priests: the children of Habaiah, the children of Hakkoz, the children of Barzillai, which took a wife of the daughters of Barzillai the Gileadite, and was called after their name.

ואלא מאי גדולה חזקה דמעיקרא אכול בתרומה דרבנן ולבסוף אכול בתרומה דאורייתא

These sought their register among those that were reckoned by genealogy, but they were not found: therefore were they deemed polluted and put from the priesthood. And the Tirshatha<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' According to tradition it was Nehemiah.');">¹³</span>

ואיבעית אימא לעולם השתא נמי בדרבנן אכול בדאורייתא לא אכול וכי מסקינן מתרומה ליוחסין מדאורייתא מדרבנן לא מסקינן

said unto them, that they should not eat of the most holy things, till there stood up a priest with Urim and with Thummim.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ezra II, 61-63 [So to speak, 'never' since there was no Urim and Thummim in the second Temple. v. Sot. 48a'.]');">¹⁴</span> Now he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Tirshatha.');">¹⁵</span>

אי הכי מאי גדולה חזקה דמעיקרא ליכא למיגזר משום תרומה דאורייתא לבסוף אף ע"ג דאיכא למיגזר משום תרומה דאורייתא בדרבנן אכול בדאורייתא לא אכול

said to them, Behold, ye remain in your presumptive rights: whereof did ye eat in Exile? of the sacred food [eaten] in the country.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Gebul. country, is a technical term denoting any part of Palestine outside the Temple and Jerusalem. The reference is to terumah.');">¹⁶</span>

והכתיב (עזרא ב, סג) ויאמר התרשתא להם אשר לא יאכלו מקדש הקדשים בקדש הקדשים הוא דלא יאכל הא כל מידי ניכול

So now too [ye may partake] of the sacred food [consumed] in the country.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But not sacrifices. This shews that 'they were deemed polluted' means that they were accounted halalim, who may not partake of sacrifices.');">¹⁷</span> But on the view that we promote from terumah to family purity,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If a priest is seen eating terumah in his town, where he is known, we assume that he is of pure descent, and permit another priest to marry his daughter.');">¹⁸</span>

הכי קאמר לא מידי דמיקרי קדש ולא מידי דמיקרי קדשים לא מידי דמיקרי קדש דכתיב (ויקרא כב, י) וכל זר לא יאכל קדש ולא מידי דמיקרי קדשים דאמר קרא (ויקרא כב, יב) ובת כהן כי תהיה לאיש זר היא בתרומת הקדשים לא תאכל ואמר מר במורם מן הקדשים

those who ate terumah, they would come to promote them? - There it was different, because their presumptive status was weakened.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When it was seen that other priests ate sacrifices and they did not, it would be known that their genealogy was suspect (Rashi) . Tosaf.: their status was weakened because they had failed to prove their pure descent.');">¹⁹</span> Then what is meant by 'Great is a presumptive right? '<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The phrase implies that it leads to some extraordinary concession. But since there was no reason to fear that continuance in their right would lead to error, R. Jose should simply have stated that a presumptive right in the past gives a claim for the future.');">²⁰</span> - Because originally they ate Rabbinical terumah, and now they were to eat Biblical terumah.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Outside Palestine terumah is required by Rabbinical law only.');">²¹</span> Alternatively, after all they would now too eat only Rabbinical terumah,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Terumah on fruit and vegetables, which even in Palestine is only Rabbinical.');">²²</span> not Biblical; for when do we promote front terumah to family purity? [Only when it is terumah] by Biblical law, but we do not promote [when it is terumah] by Rabbinical law. If so, why [state], 'Great is a presumptive right? ' - Because formerly<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since outside Palestine there was none available.');">²³</span> there was no cause to forbid it on account of Biblical terumah,' but now,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'at the end'.');">²⁴</span> though it might have been forbidden on account of Biblical terumah,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On their return to Palestine. If they were permitted to eat Rabbinical, they might come to eat Biblical terumah.');">²⁵</span> they [nevertheless] ate of Rabbinical, but not of Biblical [terumah]. But it is written: 'and the Tirshatha said unto them, that they should not eat of the most holy things': thus, only of the most holy things<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which implies sacrifices of the higher sanctity; v. p. 264, n. 11.');">²⁶</span> might they not eat, but everything else they might eat? - This is what he said: [They were to eat] neither what is called kodesh [holy], nor what is called kodashim [holies].' Neither what is called kodesh', as it is written: There shall no stranger eat kodesh;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXII, 10; E.V. 'of the holy things,' i.e., terumah, to which the whole passage refers.');">²⁷</span> 'nor what is called kodashim,' as it is written: And if a priest's daughter be married unto a stranger, she shall not eat of the heave-offerings of the kodashim,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 12; E.V. holy things.');">²⁸</span> and a Master said [explaining this:] the priestly dues<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'that which was separated', viz., the breast and shoulder.');">²⁹</span> of sacrifices