Shevuot 31

Chapter 31

א על פי נביא נאכלת ועל פי נביא נשרפת:

1 by the ruling of the prophet the one was eaten, and by the ruling of the prophet the other was burnt.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' There is no discoverable reason why one loaf suffices and the other burnt; but this was the ruling of the prophets Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi who were present at Ezra's and Nehemiah's re-consecration of Jerusalem.');">1 ANY [ADDITION] THAT WAS NOT MADE WITH ALL THESE, ETC. It was taught: R'Huna said: WITH ALL THESE we learnt in our Mishnah; R'Nahman said: WITH ANY ONE OF ALL THESE we learnt in our<big>MISHNAH:</big>

ב כל שלא נעשית בכל אלו כו': איתמר רב הונא אמר בכל אלו תנן רב נחמן אמר באחת מכל אלו תנן

2 R'Huna said: WITH ALL THESE we learnt in our Mishnah, because he holds the first consecration2 consecrated it for the time being, and consecrated if for the future; and Ezra [in re-consecratin it] merely did it as a symbol.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because it was still holy, and did not need re-consecration, and could not, in any, case, be re-consecrated, because King and Urim and Tummim were lacking (v. Yoma 21 b) ; for R. Huna holds that we require 'all these' (enumerated in the Mishnah) for re-consecration, and Ezra neither re-consecrated the city nor made any addition to it which would require consecration.');">3 R'Nahman said: WITH ANY ONE OF ALL THESE we learnt in our Mishnah, because he holds the first consecration consecrated it for the time being, and did not consecrate it for the future; and Ezra really re-consecrated it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' With Sanhedrin, two loaves of thanksgiving, and song; for, according in R. Nahman, even one of the requisites (mentioned in the Mishnah) suffices for re-consecration. ihgmc');">4

ג רב הונא אמר בכל אלו תנן קסבר קדושה ראשונה קידשה לשעתה וקידשה לעתיד לבא ועזרא זכר בעלמא הוא דעבד

3 although there were no Urim and Tummim. Raba asked R'Nahman: We learnt: ANY ADDITION THAT WAS NOT MADE WITH ALL THESE!? - [Emend it and] learn: 'With any one of all these.' Come and hear: Abba Saul said: There were two meadows<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [ Schlatter, Tage Trajans, 20, renders it 'parts', 'districts'; Krauss, as 'fissures' produced by an earthquake, the Eroge mentioned in Josephus, Ant. IX, 10, 4, and which he identifies with Bethsaida (Bethesda) , v. REJ, LXXIII, 59ff.]');">5

ד רב נחמן אמר באחת מכל אלו תנן קסבר קדושה ראשונה קידשה לשעתה ולא קידשה לעתיד לבא ועזרא קדושי קדיש אע"ג דלא הוו אורים ותומים

4 on the Mount of Olives, the lower and the upper;6 the lower was consecrated with all these;7 the upper was not consecrated with all these, but by the returned exiles,8

ה איתיביה רבא לרב נחמן כל שלא נעשית בכל אלו תני באחת מכל אלו

5 without King and without Urim and Tummim; the lower one which was properly consecrated; the illiterate9 entered there, and ate there sacrifices of a minor grade of holiness,10 but not the second tithe.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Eaten by the owner in Jerusalem: Deut. XIV, 22-26. The second tithe could also have been eaten in the lower meadow, for it was properly consecrated, and was part of the city; but the illiterate thought that the second tithe had to be eaten within the inner (old) wall of Jerusalem, for the verse states: Thou shalt eat before the Lord thy God . . the tithe of thy corn . . (Deut. XIV, 23) . They were stricter with the tithe than with the sacrifices, because the verse (ibid. 22) states: Thou shalt surely tithe; and they had probably heard the popular exposition: rag,,a khcac rag rag, rag rag,');">11

ו תא שמע אבא שאול אומר שני ביצעין היו בהר המשחה תחתונה ועליונה תחתונה נתקדשה בכל אלו עליונה לא נתקדשה בכל אלו אלא בעולי גולה שלא במלך ושלא באורים ותומים

6 And the learned12 ate there sacrifices of a minor grade of holiness and also the second tithe.13 The upper one which was not properly consecrated; the illiterate entered there, and ate there sacrifices of a minor grade of holiness,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' They thought the upper meadow was as holy as the lower, because it had also been incorporated within the city by a wall, and they did not distinguished between the full consecration of the lower meadow and the incomplete consecration of the upper meadow.');">14

ז תחתונה שהיתה קדושתה גמורה עמי הארץ נכנסין לשם ואוכלין שם קדשים קלים אבל לא מעשר שני וחברים אוכלין שם קדשים קלים ומעשר שני

7 but not the second tithe. And the learned did not eat there either sacrifices of a minor grade of holiness or the second tithe. And why did they not consecrate it?

ח עליונה שלא היתה קדושתה גמורה עמי הארץ היו נכנסין שם ואוכלין שם קדשים קלים אבל לא מעשר שני וחברים אין אוכלין שם לא קדשים קלים ולא מעשר שני ומפני מה לא קידשוה שאין מוסיפין על העיר ועל העזרות אלא במלך ונביא ואורים ותומים ובסנהדרין של ע"א ובשתי תודות ובשיר

8 Because additions are not made to the city and to the Temple courts except by King, Prophet, Urim and Tummim, Sanhedrin of seventy-one, and two [loaves] of thanksgiving, and song. And why did they consecrate it?15 Why did they consecrate it?

ט ולמה קידשוה למה קידשוה הא אמרת לא קידשוה אלא למה הכניסוה מפני שתורפה של ירושלים היתה ונוחה היא ליכבש משם

9 You have just said they did not consecrate it! - But [read] 'why did they bring it within [the city boundaries]? ' Because it was a vulnerable spot of Jerusalem, and it would have been easy to conquer it [the city] from there.16 [This is, however, in conflict with R'Nahman's view!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For it is stated that the upper meadow was not consecrated, because all the essentials were not present, whereas R. Nahman holds that 'any one of all these' suffices.');">17 - He may answer that it is a subject upon which] Tannaim disagree [and he will agree with one of them], for it has been taught: R'Eliezer said: I heard [from my teachers] that when they were building the Temple [in Ezra's time], they made curtains for the Temple and curtains for the courts,18

י תנאי היא דתניא א"ר אליעזר שמעתי כשהיו בונין בהיכל עשו קלעים להיכל וקלעים לעזרות אלא שבהיכל בונין מבחוץ ובעזרות בונין מבפנים

10 but for the Temple they built [the wall] outside [the curtains],19 and for the courts they built [the walls] within [the curtains]. R'Joshua said: I heard that sacrifices were offered although there was no Temple,20

יא אמר רבי יהושע שמעתי שמקריבין אף על פי שאין בית אוכלין קדשי קדשים אע"פ שאין קלעים קדשים קלים ומעשר שני אע"פ שאין חומה מפני שקדושה ראשונה קידשה לשעתה וקידשה לעתיד לבא לאו מכלל דר' אליעזר סבר לא קידשה לעתיד לבא

11 and sacrifices of the highest grade of holiness were eaten although there were no curtains, and sacrifices of a minor grade and the second tithe, although there was no wall,21 because the first consecration consecrated it for the time being, and consecrated it for the future. This implies [does it not? ] that R'Eliezer holds, it did not consecrate it for the future.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because R. Eliezer requires curtains in order that it may be counted as a Temple; but without curtains it is not holy because, presumably, the first consecration did not consecrated it for the future. R. Nahman will thus agree with R. Eliezer.');">22

יב א"ל רבינא לרב אשי ממאי דלמא דכולי עלמא קדושה ראשונה קידשה לשעתה וקידשה לעתיד לבא ומר מאי דשמיע ליה קאמר ומר מאי דשמיע ליה קאמר וכי תימא קלעים לר' אליעזר למה לי לצניעותא בעלמא

12 Said Rabina to R'Ashi; How [do you deduce this]? Perhaps all agree that the first consecration consecrated it for the time being, and consecrated it for the future, but one Master states [merely] what he heard [from his teachers], and the other Master states [merely] what he heard [from his teachers].23 And if you will say, [if so,]24

יג אלא הני תנאי דתניא א"ר ישמעאל ברבי יוסי למה מנו חכמים את אלו שכשעלו בני הגולה מצאו אלו וקידשום אבל ראשונות בטלו משבטלה הארץ אלמא קסבר קדושה ראשונה קידשה לשעתה ולא קידשה לעתיד לבא

13 why, according to R'Eliezer, are curtains necessary? [We may reply,] for privacy only! Well then, there the Tannaim [disagree], for it has been taught: R'Ishmael son of R'Jose said: Why did th Sages enumerate these?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Mishnah ('Ar. 32a) , explaining that walled cities (Lev. XXV, 29, 30) are such which had walls round them since the days of Joshua, mentions a few as examples, such as Gamala, Gedud, etc. Why did the Sages mentioned these particularly? There were many more which could have been mentioned.');">25

יד ורמינהי אמר ר' ישמעאל בר' יוסי וכי אלו בלבד היו והלא כבר נאמר (דברים ג, ד) ששים עיר כל חבל ארגוב ממלכת עוג בבשן כל אלה ערים בצורות חומה גבוהה אלא למה מנו חכמים את אלו שכשעלו בני הגולה מצאו אלו וקידשום

14 Because when the exiles returned, they came upon these, and consecrated them;26 but [the sanctity of] the earlier [cities] was abolished when [the sanctity of] the land was abolished.' Hence, he holds that the first consecration consecrated it for the time being, but did not consecrate it for the future But we may point out an incongruity: R'Ishmael son of R'Jose said: Were there, then, only these?27

טו קידשום השתא הא אמרינן לקמן דלא צריכא לקדושי אלא מצאו אלו ומנאום

15 Surely it is already written: [And we took all his cities. sixty cities, all the region of Argob, the kingdom of Og Bashan. All these were fortified cities, with high walls.28

טז ולא אלו בלבד אלא כל שתעלה בידך מסורת מאבותיך שמוקפת חומה מימות יהושע בן נון כל מצות אלו נוהגות בה מפני שקדושה ראשונה קידשה לשעתה וקידשה לעתיד לבא קשיא דר' ישמעאל בר יוסי אדרבי ישמעאל בר יוסי

16 Then why did the Sages enumerate these? Because when the exiles returned, they came upon these, and consecrated them.' - They consecrated them now! Surely we state further on29

יז איבעית אימא תרי תנאי אליבא דר' ישמעאל בר יוסי איבעית אימא חדא מינייהו ר' אלעזר בר יוסי אמרה דתניא ר' אלעזר בר יוסי אומר (ויקרא כה, ל) אשר לוא חומה אע"פ שאין לו עכשיו והיה לו קודם לכן:

17 that it was not necessary to consecrate them! But read, 'they came upon these, and enumerated them. And not these only [are walled cities], but any one about which you may have a tradition from your fathers that it was surrounded by a wall from the days of Joshua, the son of Nun, then all these precepts<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Concerning the sale of a house (Lev. XXV, 20, 30) ; sending lepers outside the city (Lev. XIII, 46; Num. V, 2) ; and that the open space (1,000 cubits) round the city should be left uncultivated ('Ar. 33b) .');">30 apply to it; because the first consecration consecrated it for the time being, and consecrated it for the future.'31 There is thus a discrepancy between [the statement of] R'Ishmael son of R'Jose [in the Baraitha] and [that of] R'Ishmael son of R'Jose [in the Tosefta]!32 - If you will, you may say that [they reflect the opinions of] two tannaim [who] disagree about [the view of] R'Ishmael son of R'Jose; and if you will, you may say that one of the statements was spoken by R'Eleazar B'Jose,33 for it has been taught: R'Eleazar B'Jose said: [Scripture says: The city] that has a wall;34 although it has not [a wall] now, as long as it had one before [it is reckoned a walled city].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because the first consecration, when it had a wall, suffices for now also, though the wall is now destroyed. Hence, there are two tannaim, R. Ishmael and R. Eleazar b. Jose, who disagree as to whether the first consecration consecrated it for the future also or not; and R. Nahman will agree with R. Ishmael.');">35

Previous Chapter Next Chapter