Kiddushin 82

Chapter 82

א פיחת עשרה או הוסיף עשרה תרומתו תרומה מנלן וכי תימא דיליף מגירושין מה לגירושין שכן ישנן חול אמר קרא אתם (במדבר יח, כח) גם אתם לרבות את השליח
1 If he decreases by ten or increases it by ten,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Giving one fortieth or one sixtieth.');"><sup>1</sup></span> his separation is valid.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'his terumah is terumah,' because he can maintain that he so judged the owner.');"><sup>2</sup></span> How do we know this?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That one can appoint an agent for this purpose.');"><sup>3</sup></span>
ב ונכתוב רחמנא בתרומה וניתו הנך ונגמרו מיניה משום דאיכא למפרך שכן ישנה במחשבה
2 And should you answer that it is derived from divorce, [I would rejoin:] as for divorce, that [may be] because it is a secular matter!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whereas terumah being sacred, its separation may be stricter and require the actual owner.');"><sup>4</sup></span> - Scripture saith, [Thus] ye also [shall offer an heave-offering] [where] 'ye' [alone would have sufficed],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'Scripture saith, ye, also ye.'');"><sup>5</sup></span> to include an agent.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is a principle of exegesis that od (also) is an extension.');"><sup>6</sup></span>
ג והא דתנן חבורה שאבד פסחה ואמרו לאחד צא ובקש ושחוט עלינו והלך ומצא ושחט והן לקחו ושחטו אם שלו נשחט ראשון הוא אוכל משלו והם אוכלים ושותים עמו
3 But let Scripture write [it] in respect to terumah, and these [marriage and divorce] would come and be derived from it? - Because one can refute [the analogy], since it is possible by [mere] intention.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A person may decide to separate a part of his grain (e.g., that in the right or left corner) as terumah and then eat the rest. This is obviously a leniency, and it may be argued that that is why one can also appoint an agent.');"><sup>7</sup></span> Again, as to what we learnt: If a company lose their Paschal sacrifice<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The passover sacrifice was eaten by a group of people who had joined and arranged beforehand to eat a particular animal: unless one had thus 'counted himself in' before it was killed he could not eat thereof.');"><sup>8</sup></span> and instruct one [of their number], 'Go out, seek it, and slaughter it on our behalf; and he goes, finds, and slaughters it, while they [also] take [an animal] and slaughter [it]: if his is slaughtered first, he eats of his, and they eat<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cur. ed.: eat and drink, but Wilna Gaon deletes 'and drink'.');"><sup>9</sup></span>
ד מנלן וכי תימא דיליף מהנך מה להנך שכן ישנן חול אצל קדשים
4 with him.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since he was their agent. - Their own sacrifice is unfit.');"><sup>10</sup></span> How do we know it?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The principle of agency in sacrifices.');"><sup>11</sup></span> And should you answer that it is derived from these, [I would rejoin:] as for these, [that may be] because they rank as secular in relation to sacred animals!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even terumah, for sacrifices have a higher degree of sanctity.');"><sup>12</sup></span>
ה נפקא ליה מדרבי יהושע בן קרחה דא"ר יהושע בן קרחה מנין ששלוחו של אדם כמותו שנאמר (שמות יב, ו) ושחטו אותו כל קהל עדת ישראל בין הערבים וכי כל הקהל כולן שוחטין והלא אינו שוחט אלא אחד אלא מכאן ששלוחו של אדם כמותו
5 - It is learnt from R'Joshua B'Karhah['s dictum]. For R'Joshua B'Karhah said: How do we know that a man's agent is as himself? Because it is said, and the whole assembly of the congregation shall kill it [the Passover sacrifice] at even:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XII, 6.');"><sup>13</sup></span>
ו נכתוב רחמנא בקדשים וניתי הנך וניגמרו מיניה משום דאיכא למפרך מה לקדשים שכן רוב מעשיהן ע"י שליח
6 does then the whole assembly really slaughter? surely, only one person slaughters [an animal]:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though it is eaten by several.');"><sup>14</sup></span> hence it follows that a man's agent is as himself.
ז חדא מחדא לא אתיא תיתי חדא מתרתי הי תיתי
7 Now, let the Divine Law write [the principle of agency] in respect to sacrifices, and these others can come and be derived from them? - Because it may be refuted: as for sacrifice, that is because most of their operations are through an agent.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From the receiving of the blood onward, everything in connection with sacrifices was performed by priests acting on behalf of the Israelites who offered them.');"><sup>15</sup></span> One cannot be derived from another: but let one be derived from two [others]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By shewing that the factor common to both is also present in the third.');"><sup>16</sup></span> - Which can be thus derived?
ח לא נכתוב רחמנא בקדשים ותיתי מהנך מה להנך שכן ישנן חול אצל קדשים לא נכתוב רחמנא בגירושין ותיתי מהנך מה להנך שכן ישנן במחשבה
8 Should the Divine Law not state it of sacrifices, that it may be derived from these others? As for these, [it might be argued] that [sc. agency] is because they rank as secular in comparison with sacrifices. Should the Divine Law omit it in the case of divorce, that it may be derived from the others: as for these, that is because intention has force in their case.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Terumah, v. p. 206, n. 5; sacrifices: If one resolves to declare an animal a sacrifice, it is so, even without an explicit declaration. - Shebu. 26b.');"><sup>17</sup></span>
ט אלא לא לכתוב רחמנא בתרומה ותיתי מהנך ה"נ
9 But let the Divine Law not write it of terumah, and it could be derived from the others!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. marriage and sacrifices, since either of the above refutations then apply.');"><sup>18</sup></span> - That indeed is so. Then what is the purpose of 'ye', 'ye also'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra.');"><sup>19</sup></span>
י ואלא אתם גם אתם למה לי מיבעי ליה לכדרבי ינאי דא"ר ינאי גם אתם מה אתם בני ברית אף שלוחכם בני ברית
10 - It is needed for R'Jannai's dictum, viz. , 'Ye also': just as ye are members of the covenant,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' With Abraham, Gen. XVII, 2; i.e., Jews. V. B.M. (Sonc. ed.) p. 415, n. 5.');"><sup>20</sup></span> so must your agents be members of the covenant. For this, what need have I of a verse?
יא הא למה לי קרא מדרבי חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן נפקא דא"ר חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן אין העבד נעשה שליח לקבל גט מיד בעלה של אשה לפי. שאינו בתורת גיטין וקידושין
11 It may be derived from R'Hiyya B'Abba's dictum in R'Johanan's name! For R'Hiyya B'Abba said in R'Johanan's name: A [heathen] slave cannot become an agent to receive a divorce from a woman's husband, because he himself is not subject to the law of marriage and divorce!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the Jewish sense. This shews that it is mere logic that one cannot act as an agent where he cannot be a principal, and the same applies to the others.');"><sup>21</sup></span> - It is necessary. I might think that a slave [is ineligible], since he is not empowered to free [a married woman] at all.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit.,' he is not a person of freeing at all.' It is impossible for a slave to free a married woman, sc. his wife, by divorce, since he cannot marry.');"><sup>22</sup></span>
יב איצטריך ס"ד אמינא עבד דלאו בר היתירא הוא כלל אבל עובד כוכבים הואיל ואיתיה בתרומה דנפשיה דתנן העובד כוכבים והכותי שתרמו תרומתן תרומה אימא שליח נמי עביד קמשמע לן
12 But a heathen, since he is qualified to [separate] terumah of his own [crops], as we learnt: If a heathen or Cuthean<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After the overthrow of the Northern Kingdom of Israel and the deportation of its inhabitants the land was repopulated by various peoples, some of whom came from Cuth and gave their name to the new settlers as a whole. These accepted a form of semi-Judaism. Their status in respect to Jewry fluctuated; at times they were accepted as Jews, at others they were rejected. Finally they were definitely excluded from the Jewish people.');"><sup>23</sup></span> separates terumah, it is valid: I might think that he can also be appointed an agent [for a Jew]; hence we are informed [otherwise]. Now, according to R'Simeon who exempts [them],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even if a Gentile does separate terumah, it is not valid and remains hullin.');"><sup>24</sup></span>
יג ולר' שמעון דפטר דתנן תרומת עובד כוכבים מדמעת וחייבין עליה חומש ור"ש פוטר אתם גם אתם למה לי
13 for we learnt: A heathen's terumah creates a [forbidden] mixture,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if it falls into a quantity of hullin less than a hundred times as much as itself, and cannot be separated, the whole ranks as terumah, and is forbidden to an Israelite.');"><sup>25</sup></span> and one is liable to an [additional] fifth on its account.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If an Israelite eats terumah unwittingly, he must make restoration of the principal plus a fifth; Lev. XXII, 14.');"><sup>26</sup></span> But R'Simeon exempts [it]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the terumah separated by a Gentile on his crops from the law of terumah, i.e., he does not regard it as terumah at all.');"><sup>27</sup></span>
יד איצטריך סד"א הואיל ואמר מר אתם ולא אריסין אתם ולא שותפין אתם ולא אפוטרופוס אתם ולא התורם את שאינו שלו אימא אתם ולא שלוחכם נמי קמ"ל
14 - what is the need of ye', ye also'? - It is necessary: I might reason, Since a Master said: 'Ye', but not tenant-farmers;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A tenant-farmer who leases land and pays a percentage of the crops as rent cannot separate terumah upon the landlord's share without his authority.');"><sup>28</sup></span> 'ye,' but not partners;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Likewise, one partner in a field cannot separate terumah for the other without the latter's consent.');"><sup>29</sup></span> 'ye,' but not guardians;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of orphans estates.');"><sup>30</sup></span>
טו הניחא לרבי יהושע בן קרחה אלא לרבי יונתן דמפיק ליה להאי קרא לדרשא אחרינא מנא לן דתניא רבי יונתן אומר מנין שכל ישראל כולן יוצאים
15 ye,' but not one who separates terumah upon what is not his,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This gives the reason for the preceding: tenant-farmers, etc., cannot separate terumah for the other's crops, because one may not separate for what is not his.');"><sup>31</sup></span> then I might also say, ye,' but not your agents.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., under no circumstances can one separate terumah upon crops not belonging to him, even when authorised by their owner.');"><sup>32</sup></span> Hence we are informed [that it is not so]. Now, that is well according to R'Joshua B'Karhah.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra.');"><sup>33</sup></span> But according to R'Nathan, who utilises this verse for a different exegesis, what can be said? For it was taught: R'Nathan said: How do we know that all Israel [may] fulfil their obligations<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'go forth' (from their obligation) .');"><sup>34</sup></span>