Egyptian-Hebrew stream·Mishnah·Berakhot — Chapter II

Source context

Theme

oral legal exposition and halakhic case-reasoning within the Tannaitic tradition

Steiner

not engaged in the GA corpus

Cross-tradition

• Tannaitic oral tradition (rabbinic methodology)The chapter exemplifies the Mishnaic method of preserving oral rulings through structured repetition (shanah), forming a cross-tradition congruence with other traditions that treat spoken transmission as the living carrier of esoteric legal knowledge.
• Aristotelian casuistryThe case-by-case halakhic reasoning of Mishnaic chapters displays a cross-tradition congruence with Aristotelian phronesis-based practical reasoning, in which universal principles are tested and qualified through particular instances.

Chapter II

CHAPTER II.

§ 1. A man who is reading in the Torah [the parasha ‏שמע‎], when the time comes for saying [prayers], if he devotes his heart [attention] to the prayer, he has acquitted himself [of the obligation to say the ‏שמע‎]; but if not, he has not [so] acquitted himself. At the close of the different sections, man salutes out of respect and responds [to a salutation]: but in the middle of a section, he salutes from fear [only] and responds. Such is the dictum of R. Meir. R. Jehudah saith, "In the middle [of a section] he salutes from fear, and responds out of respect. At the close [of a section] he salutes out of respect, and returns the salutation of any man." 1

2The [close of the] sections are, between the first benediction and the second: between the second and ‏שמע ישראל‎ [Hear O Israel]: between ‏שמע‎ and ‏והיה אם שמע‎ [and it shall come to pass, &c]: 2 between ‏יהוה אם שמע‎ and ‏ויאמר‎ 3 [and the Lord spake unto Moses]: between ‏ויאמר‎ and ‏אמת ויציב‎, [it is true and confirmed]. R. Jehudah saith, "Between ‏ויאמר‎ and ‏אמת ויציב‎, man is not to break off." R. Joshua ben Korha saith, "Why does the ‏שמע‎ precede [the section] ‏והיה אם שמע‎? In order that man may yield homage to the kingdom of heaven, before he takes upon himself the yoke of the commandments. Why does [the section] ‏יהוה אם שמע‎ precede ‏ויאמר‎? because [the precepts of] ‏והיה אם שמע‎, may be practised by day and by night, 4 whereas the precepts of ‏ויאמר‎ can only be practised by day." 5
§ 3. He who says the ‏שמע‎, so as not to be audible to his own ears, has acquitted himself [of the duty to say it]. R. José saith, [paragraph continues] "He has not [so] acquitted himself; if he has said it without due attention to the letters [spelling and pronunciation]." R. José saith he has acquitted himself. R. Jehudah saith he has not. If he has said it in an irregular order, he has not acquitted himself. If he has made a mistake, he recommences from where he made the mistake. § 4. Labourers may say the ‏שמע‎ on the top of a tree or of a wall; which they are not at liberty to do with the ‏תפלה‎ [the 18 benedictions called ‏עמירה‎]. § 5. A bridegroom is exempt [from saying the ‏שמע‎] on the first night [of his nuptials] and until the expiration of the Sabbath, if he has not consummated his marriage. It happened that Rabbon Gamaliel said [the ‏שמע‎] on the first night of his nuptials. His disciples said to him, "Hast thou not taught us, Rabbi, that a bridegroom is exempt [from saying the ‏שמע‎] on the first night of his nuptials?" He answered them, "I will not listen to you, to withhold my homage from the kingdom of heaven even for the space of a single instant." § 6. He [R. Gamaliel] bathed on the first night of his wife's death. His disciples said to him, "Hast thou not taught us, Rabbi, that a mourner is prohibited to bathe on the first night?" He answered them, "I am not like all other men; I am infirm." § 7. When his slave Tabbi died, he, [R. Gamaliel], received visits of condolence. His disciples said to him, "Hast thou not taught us, Rabbi, that visits of condolence are not to be received for slaves?" He answered them, "My slave Tabbi was not like all other slaves; he was ‏כשר‎ [pious]." § 8. A bridegroom who wishes to recite the ‏שמע‎, on the first [bridal] night, is at liberty so to do. Rabbon Simeon ben Gamaliel saith, "Not every one who wishes to assume [the] fame [of superior piety] may do so."

Footnotes

3:1 As, in those days, the salutation, "Peace be with ye," conveyed the assurance of friendly intentions, and of personal safety; to omit saluting, or to neglect responding to a salutation, might be attended with dangerous consequences.

3:2 Deut. xi. 13.

3:3 Numbers xvi. 37.

3:4 It directs, "Ye shall teach them to your children." (Deut. xi. 18.)

3:5 It directs, "That ye may look upon it" [the fringe]. (Num. xvi. 39.)

Chapter II

CHAPTER II.

§ 1. If in a saah 1 of seed-corn there is one-fourth [of a kab] of any other kind of seed, the [last mentioned] quantity must be diminished. R. Jose saith, "Whether this quarter of a kab consist of one [different kind of] seed, or of two [kinds], it must be picked out of the saah." R. Simeon saith, "This rule [that the quantity of different seeds intermingled among a saah of seed-corn, must be

diminished if it amount to one-fourth of a kab] holds good only when the whole quarter of a kab is of one kind." But the sages hold, that whatever of kilaim is mixed among a saah of seed-corn, must all be included in the computation of the quarter of a kab.

§ 2. To what does this rule apply? To grain of one kind mixed among grain of other kinds; to legumes mixed among legumes; also to grain [mixed] among legumes, and to legumes mixed among grain. They [the sages] laid it down as a rule, that all kinds of non-edible garden seeds, are subject to the computation of kilaim, provided they reach the proportion of one twenty-fourth part of the total quantity of seed-corn required to sow a Beth-Saah. 2 R. Simeon saith, "As in this instance they [the sages] are more rigid, so in another instance they alleviate [the observance], inasmuch as flaxseed mixed among corn, is also subject to the computation of kilaim only when it reaches the proportion of one twenty-fourth part to the Beth-Saah. 3

§ 3. If a man having sown his field with wheat changes his mind, and determines to sow it with barley, he must tarry till the first sown seed has germinated [is dissolved in the ground], then he must plough up the field before he may sow the fresh seed; if the wheat [first sown] has sprung up, he is not to say, "I will first sow [the barley], and then plough up my field," but he must plough up first, and afterwards sow. To what extent is he bound to plough up his field? To the depth of the furrows for the early rain. Abbah Saul saith, "so that in a field of the size of a Beth-Saah there remain not the space [equal to receive] one-fourth kab of seed-corn [unploughed]."

§ 4. If a man, having sown his field, change his mind, and determine to plant thereon, he must not say, "I will first plant and then plough up my field," but he must plough un first and afterwards plant. If, having planted his field, he change his mind, and determine to sow on it, he must not say, "I will first sow my field, and then root up what I have planted," but he must first uproot, and then sow. But, if he like, he may cut down the stalks of the plants till within [less than] a hand high from the ground; he then sows, and, lastly, uproots what he has planted.

§ 5. If his field has been sown with carraway, or ‏לוף‎, 4 he must not sow any thing over them, as these two kinds do not spring up [ripen] till after three years. 5 If sprouts of isatis 6 have sprung up among corn, or if various kinds of seed have sprung up in the ground of a barn, or if fœnum Græcum 7 spring up, of various kinds, a man is not bound to weed them out; but if he has commenced to weed out or cut down any of them, he is [in that case] bound to destroy all except one kind only.

§ 6. If a man wishes to cultivate his field in patches [streaks or plots], set with different kinds [of seeds or plants], what distance is he bound to leave between the respective plots? Beth Shammai hold, "the distance of three furrows;" Beth Hillel hold, "the width of a yoke, such as is used in plains." Both opinions, however, approximate very closely.

§ 7. There is no legal objection if the point of the angle of [a field sown with] wheat enter into a field of barley; as any one can see to which field the angle belongs. If a man's field be sown with wheat, and the adjoining field of his neighbour with some other kind, there is no objection to his sowing the same kind [of seed] that his neighbour has sown, close to the adjoining field. If his own field be sown with wheat, and the adjoining one of his neighbour likewise, there is no objection to his sowing a furrow [row] of flax between them, but he must not sow any other kind. R. Simeon saith, "Flax forms no exception from other kinds [and is consequently prohibited];" but R. José saith, "Even in the midst of his own field a man may sow a furrow [row] of flax by way of experiment."

§ 8. Mustard or wild saffron must not be sown adjoining a cornfield; but they may be sown adjoining a meadow; also adjoining a field which lies fallow, or one that has been newly ploughed up; also next to a stone wall, or a footpath, or a hedge [fence] ten hands high; or to a trench [ditch], ten hands deep and four hands wide; or next to a tree which trails its branches along the ground; or to a rock [stone] ten hands high and for hands broad.

§ 9. If a man wishes to divide his field into square plots sown with, different kinds of seed, he must apportion it into twenty-four squares

to the beth saah of seed corn, one square to each quarter of a kab, and he may then sow whatever kind of seed he pleases into each [separate] square. If there be one or two such squares [in a cornfield], a man may sow mustard-seed in them; but if three [such squares] adjoining each other are in a field of corn, he must not sow mustard-seed on them, as the plot of ground would seem to be a mustard field. Such is the dictum of R. Meir; but the sages say, "Nine such squares may be sown with mustard-seed, but ten may not [are prohibited]." 8 R. Eleazar ben Jacob saith, "Though the field be of size sufficient to receive an entire kur 9 of seed, not more than one square must be made in it."

§ 10. Whatever forms part of the superficies of a field, and is of size sufficient to receive a quarter kab of seed, must be included in the computation of the quarter kab. Thus the space round a vine, or a grave, or a rock [stone], must be included in the computation of the quarter kab. [One kind of] corn must be sown [at the distance of] one quarter kab area from [another kind of] corn. Herbs [at the distance of] six hands from other herbs. Corn from herbs, or herbs from corn, [must be sown at the distance of] one quarter of a kab. R. Eleazar saith, "herbs from corn, at the distance of six hands only."

§ 11. One kind of corn inclining over [standing higher than] another kind of corn, or one kind of herbs over another, or corn over herbs, or herbs over corn, are all permitted, except Greek pumpkins. R. Meir saith, "excepting also cucumbers and Egyptian beans; nevertheless I prefer their opinion [that of the sages] to mine own."

Footnotes

15:1 A saah equal to six kab; a quarter kab, the twenty-fourth part of a saah.

16:2 An area of 2500 square amoth equal to the sowing of a saah measure of seed-corn.

16:3 As garden-seeds are smaller than corn; whereas, flax-seed, which takes up much more room, is only subject to the same proportion.

17:4 Arum [wake-robin].

17:5 The expression of the Mishna is obscure, particularly as the two species named ripen annually. Some are of opinion, the Mishna intends to say, that the tenacity of these two species is so great, that after three years they may spring up again.

17:6 Woad.

17:7 Fenugreek.

18:8 R. Meir holds, "that all the squares are, according to law, arable;" whereas the sages hold, "that alternate squares only are by law permitted to be made arable."

18:9 Kur, equal to thirty saah, or one hundred and eighty kab.

Chapter II

CHAPTER II.

§ 1. With what [species of wick] may [the lamps] be lighted [on the Sabbath]? and with what may [they] not be lighted? [They] may not be lighted with the moss [that grows upon] cedars, nor with undressed flax, nor with floss-silk, 1 nor with a wick made of osier, nor with thread [made of a kind of grass growing] in the

wilderness, nor with the weeds [growing] upon the water; 2 [they may not be lighted] with pitch, nor with wax, nor with oil of ‏קיק‎, 3 nor with [consecrated] oil [profaned and set apart] for burning, nor with [the fat from] the tails [of sheep], nor with tallow. Nahum, the Mede, opines that [they] may be lighted with boiled [or clarified] tallow; but the sages hold, that whether it be boiled or not boiled it may not be used to light therewith.

§ 2. [They] may not be lighted [even] on festivals with oil [set apart] to be burnt. R. Ishmael saith, that for the honour of the Sabbath [they] may not be lighted with the dregs of pitch; but the sages allow all [sorts of] oils: with oil of nuts, with oil of radish [seed], with oil of fish, with oil of gourd seed, with oil. of the dregs of pitch, and with naphtha. R. Tarphon saith, they must not be lighted but with oil of olives only.

§ 3. Nothing which grows from [the wood of] a tree is proper to light with but flax; 4 and whatever grows from [the wood of] a tree cannot be polluted by the pollution of a tent 5 but flax. A slip of cloth which has been folded but not singed, R. Eleazar saith it is unclean, and must not [be used to] light with; [but] R. Akivah opines [that] it is clean, and [may be used to] light with.

§ 4. A person may not perforate an eggshell, and fill it with oil, and place it over the lamp, that it may drop [therein], and although it be of earthenware [it is not permitted]; but R. Jehudah allows it. But if the potter had originally thus joined it, it is allowable, because it is then but one vessel. A person may not fill a dish [with] oil and place it beside the lamp, and put the end of the wick into it, so that it may attract [the oil]; but R. Jehudah permits it.

§ 5. He who extinguishes the lamp because he is afraid of heathens, 6 of robbers, of an evil spirit, 7 or that the sick may sleep, is absolved; but [if his intention is] to save his lamp, oil, or wick, he

is guilty; R. José allows it in either case except the wick, because he thereby forms a coal.

§ 6. For three transgressions women die in childbirth: because they are not careful of their separation at proper periods, 8 of separating the first cake of the dough, 9 and of lighting the lamp [for the Sabbath].

§ 7. A man is obliged to inquire concerning three things in his house on the eve of the Sabbath, near the dusk of the evening:—Have ye separated the tithe? Have ye prepared the Sabbatical mixture [erub]? Light the lamps.

§ 8. If it is doubtful whether it be dark or not, 10 the certainly untithed [grain or fruit] are not to be tithed; neither must the vessels be immersed, nor the lamps lighted; but it is permitted to tithe that which is doubtful, prepare the Sabbatical mixture, and cover [the pots of victuals to retain their heat.]

Footnotes

39:1 The outward coating of the silkworm's cocoon, or ball.

40:2 According to R. Obadiah de Bartenora, a kind of weed that adheres to ships which have been long at sea, or long in one place.

40:3 An oil extracted from the seed of the cotton-plant; or, according to another opinion quoted by Bartenora, a thick oil extracted from a species of gourd.

40:4 Because the Scripture styles it ‏עץ‎ [tree], Josh ii. 6.

40:5 Vide Num. xxix. 14, &c.

40:6 During the Persian dominion, the magi would, in some of their festivals, suffer no fire or light to be burned out of their temples.

40:7 According to Maimonides, a species of melancholy, which causes the sufferer to he easy in darkness only, or in solitude.

41:8 Lev. xii. 2.

41:9 9 Num. xv. 17.

41:10 If three stars be not distinctly visible, or if the sky is darkened by clouds.

Chapter II

CHAPTER II.

§ 1. Inclosures [partitions] must be made round wells: [they must be made of] four double deal-boards, [placed at the corners of the well so that the four deal-boards] appear like eight. Such is the dictum of R. Jehudah; but R. Meir saith, "Eight [deal-boards must be used], which appear [as if there were] twelve, [namely] four double deal-boards and four single ones; their height must be ten hands, their width six hands, whatever may be their thickness; [the interspace] between them [must not be wider] than to pass two teams of cattle, each team of three beasts abreast." Such is the dictum of R. Meir; but R. Jehudah saith, "each team of four beasts abreast," 1 that is to say, of cattle yoked together in a team,

but not walking loose [unyoked], so that one enters as the other passes out.

§ 2. It is permitted to bring the inclosure quite close to the well; provided always that the head and greater part of the body of a cow [animal] be within [the inclosure] while it drinks. It [the inclosure] may [likewise] be placed at some distance from the well, provided that more deal-boards [be used].

§ 3. R. Jehudah saith, "[The greatest distance from the well, at which it is permitted to place an inclosure is] two beth saah;" 2 but they [the sages] said to him, "[The size of] two beth saah is only applicable to a garden or a wood-store, but as for a pen [for cattle], or a fold, or a drying [bleaching] ground [behind the house], or a court [in front of the house], even though it be of the size of five beth kur, 3 yea, even of ten beth kur, it is lawful [to carry or move things therein on the day of rest]." It is [therefore] permitted to place [the inclosure] at any convenient distance [from the well], provided that more deal-boards [be used].

§ 4. R. Jehudah saith, "If a public thoroughfare interrupts [passes through] the inclosure, it must be closed up [with boards], at the sides [towards the thoroughfare]; but the sages hold, it is not necessary. Whether it be a public cistern, or a public well, or a private well, [such an inclosure of] boards must be made for it; but to a private cistern, a partition ten hands high is to be made. Such is the dictum of R. Akivah; but R. Jehudah ben Babah saith, "An inclosure of deal-boards must be made only for a public well; for all others [it is sufficient to] make a girth [rope fence], ten hands high."

§ 5. Moreover, R. Jehudah ben Babah also said, "If a garden or wood-store be somewhat above seventy amoth square, and is encompassed [inclosed] by a wall ten hands high, it is lawful to move [carry things] therein; provided always that there is a watch-box, or dwelling [of some kind within the garden or store], or that it be close to the town;" but R. Jehudah saith, "Even though there be nothing [else] within it than a cistern, or a reservoir, or a cave, it is lawful to move, carry things within it [the garden or store]." R. Akivah saith, "Even though there be not one of all these [objects] within [the garden or wood-store], it is lawful to move [carry things] therein [on the day of rest], provided it do not measure much above seventy square amoth." R. Eleazar saith, "If the length [of such a

garden of wood-store] exceed its width by even a single amah, it is not permitted to move [carry things] therein;" but R. José saith, "Even though its length be twice its width, it is lawful to move [carry things] therein."

§ 6. R. Elai said, "I heard from R. Eleazar, that even though it [the garden or wood-store] should be an entire beth kur [in extent], it is permitted to move or carry things therein on the day of rest. I also heard from him, that if one of the householders of a court had forgotten, and not [joined in] the erub, it is unlawful for him to carry any thing out of, or into, his house; but to them [the other inmates of the court] it is permitted [so to do]. Moreover, I heard from him, that a man might fully acquit himself of his duty 4 on the Passover, by using ‏עקרבנין‎; 5 and I inquired among all his disciples, seeking a companion [who had likewise heard him pronounce these opinions], but I could not find [meet with one]."

Footnotes

73:1 The space in width allowed for an ox is 1⅔ ell; so that, according to the opinion of R. Meir, the interspace must not exceed 11 ells; while R. Jehudah allows 14⅓ ells.

74:2 Vide Treatise Kilaim, chap. II. § 2.

74:3 Ibid. § 9.

75:4 To eat bitter herbs.

75:5 Scolopendrium [hart's-tongue].

Chapter II

CHAPTER II.

§ 1. As long as it is lawful for the priests to eat of the heave-offering, 1 [the Israelite] may give [non-consecrated articles of leaven] to his domestic or wild animals, or to fowls; he may also sell it to strangers, 2 or derive benefit from it in any other way; but when that time is passed, it is unlawful to derive any benefit whatever from it, not even to use it as fuel, or to light therewith an oven

or stove. 3 R. Jehudah says, "The removal of leaven must be effected by its being burned:" but the sages say, "It must be crumbled into small particles, cast forth to the wind, or thrown into the sea."

§ 2. Leaven belonging to a stranger, which has been in existence during the Passover, may be used after that festival, but not when it belonged to an Israelite, because it is said (Exod. xiii. 7), "Neither shall there be any leaven seen in all thy quarters."

§ 3. When a stranger has lent money to an Israelite upon the security of leavened articles, they may be applied to use after the Passover; but when an Israelite has lent money to a stranger upon leavened articles, they may not be applied to use after the Passover; leaven that has been covered by fallen ruins, must be considered as banished and removed; Rabbon Simeon ben Gamaliel says, "Only then, when it is so much covered that a dog cannot drag it out."

§ 4. If any person should eat leavened heave-offering during the Passover through error, he shall pay the principal, and the fifth part in addition; but if he did it wilfully, he is free of the obligation of repayment, and of paying for the value of the wood 4 in case of the heave-offering being unclean.

§ 5. A person discharges his obligation 5 with the following articles on Passover:—with cakes made of wheat, barley, spelt, oats, and rye; also with ‏דמאי‎ [corn which it is doubtful whether it was tithed], with the first tithe, of which the heave-offering has been taken, and with the second tithe, and consecrated things which have been redeemed. Priests,—with the cake of the dough [‏חלה‎], and the heave-offering, but not with that which is yet mixed or untithed [‏טבל‎], nor with the first tithe of which the heave-offering has not been taken, nor with unredeemed second tithe, and consecrated things not ransomed; also, not with the cakes of thank-offering, and the thin cakes of the Nazarite's offering, if they had prepared them for their own use; but if for public sale, they may discharge their obligation therewith.

§ 6. The obligation of eating bitter herbs on the Passover, may be discharged with the following herbs: namely, with lettuce, wild

endive, and garden endive, 6 with ‏חרחבינה‎, 7 and bitter coriander, 8 either fresh or in a dried state, but not if pickled, boiled, or cooked in any way: they may also be combined to the size of an olive, and the obligation is discharged if the stalks of them only had been used; and also when it is doubtful whether they were tithed, or are of the first tithe of which the heave-offering was taken, or of the second tithe, or of redeemed consecrated things.

§ 7. It is prohibited to soak bran on the Passover to feed fowls; but it is permitted to pour boiling water thereon; a woman may not soak the bran which she takes with her to the bath, but must use it in a dry state to rub her body therewith. A person may not masticate grains of wheat to put it [as a poultice] on his wound, because they will become leavened.

8It is unlawful to put flour in ‏חרוסת‎, 9 or in mustard, but if it were done, it must be immediately eaten; but R. Meir prohibits it. The paschal sacrifice may not be boiled in any liquid, or juice of fruit; but it is permitted to moisten it [after it has been roasted], or to dip it [in any liquid when eaten]. Water which a baker uses [to cool his hands while kneading ‏מעות‎ unleavened-cakes] must be thrown away immediately, because it becomes leaven.

Footnotes

99:1 This is according to the opinion of R. Gamaliel, mentioned above, chap. I. § 5.

99:2 Wherever the word "strangers" is mentioned in this chapter, it refers to those who are not Israelites.

100:3 That is, when used to prepare food in. The word ‏כירים‎ signifies "open ovens" or ranges, and ‏תנור‎ "closed ovens."

100:4 This will be understood by comparing chap. VI. of Treatise Terumoth, or of Heave-offerings.

100:5 Of eating unleavened-bread on the first night of the Passover.

101:6 Original, ‏תמכה‎. According to De Pomis in "Zemach David," it is the cardus marrubium; others consider it to be the green tops of the horseradish.

101:7 A kind of nettle; urtica, according to Landau's Dictionary.

101:8 Or, according to De Pomis, lactuca agrestis, or the wild lettuce.

101:9 This is a mixture of vinegar, almonds, and spice, which the ancients used to dip their food in; flour was sometimes added to thicken it.

Chapter II

CHAPTER II.

§ 1. He who sleeps under a bed in the succah, has not acquitted himself of his whole duty. 1 R. Jehudah said, "We were in the habit of sleeping under a bed in the presence of the elders, and they never said anything to us [against it]." R. Simeon said, "It happened that Tabbi, the bondman of R. Gamaliel, used to sleep under a bed." But R. Gamaliel said to the elders, "Do you see my bondman Tabbi; he is a disciple of the sages, and knows that bondmen are exempt from [the obligation of dwelling in] the succah; therefore, he sleeps under a bedstead [in the succah]." From this [observation of Rabbon Gamaliel] we in our usual way deduce, that he who sleeps under a bed [in the succah] has not acquitted himself of his whole duty.

§ 2. If a man support his succah with his bedstead, it is valid. R. Jehudah saith, "A succah which cannot stand by itself [without extraneous support] is not valid." A succah which is irregularly covered, and the shade [covered part of which] is greater than that open to the sun, 2 is valid; should the covering be close, like the roof of a house, although the stars are not visible through it, it is nevertheless valid.

§ 3. If a man construct his succah on the top of a waggon, or on a vessel, it is valid, and he may ascend thereto on the festival. If he has constructed the succah on the top of a tree, or on the back of a camel, it is valid; but he must not ascend thereto on the festival. 3 [If] two [side walls of the succah are formed] by a tree, and one by

human hands, or two [are formed] by human hands, and one by a tree, the succah is valid, but he must not ascend thereto on the festival. If three [side walls] are formed by human hands, and the fourth by a tree, the succah is valid, and he may ascend thereto on the festival. This is the rule, Whenever the succah can stand by itself, even should the tree [which partly supports it] be removed, the succah is valid, and it is lawful to ascend thereto on the festival.

§ 4. If a man construct his succah between trees, and the trees form side walls, the succah is valid. Persons deputed on a pious mission are exempt from [the duty of dwelling in] the succah; so likewise are sick persons, and those who attend on [nurse] them. Men may occasionally eat or drink something out of the succah [during the festival].

§ 5. It happened that a dish [of victuals] was brought to R. Jochanan ben Sachai [for him] to taste; and that two dates and a jar of water, were brought to Rabbon Gamaliel; each of them said, "Bring it to the succah." But when food, less [in quantity] than an egg, was brought to R. Zadok, he took it in the napkin, 4 and eat it out of the succah, but did not say grace after it.

§ 6. R. Eleazar saith, "A man is bound to eat fourteen meals in the succah, one in the morning, and one at night [of each day of the festival]:" but the sages say the thing has no legal limitation [is not fixed by law], except [that he is bound to take his meals in the succah], on the first night of the festival. R. Eleazar also said, "He who has not taken his meal [in the succah for the first night of the festival] can make amends for it [by taking his meal therein] on the last night of the festival:" but the sages hold that no amends [can] in that case be made; and they apply thereto the text, "That which is defective cannot be amended, and what is deficient cannot be made up." 5

§ 7. If the head, and the greater part of a man's body be in the succah, and his table in the house, Beth Shammai declare it not valid; but Beth Hillel declare it valid. The school of Hillel said to the school of Shammai, "Did it not happen that the elders of the school of Shammai, and those of the school of Hillel, went to visit R. Jochanan ben Hachoroni, and they found him sitting with his

head and the greater part of his body in the succah, while his table was [placed] in the house; and they said nothing to him [on the subject]." But the school of Beth Shammai replied, "[Do you adduce that] as a proof [in support of your opinion]?" They [the elders] did say to him "If such has [always] been thy custom, thou hast never throughout thy whole life properly obeyed the commandment [to dwell in the succah]!"

§ 8. Women, bondmen, and minors, are exempted from [the obligation of dwelling in] the succah. A boy, who no longer needs [the nursing of] his mother, is bound to [obey the commandment of] the succah. It so happened that the daughter-in-law of Shammai the elder, 6 gave birth to a son [on the festival] when he caused the ceiling to be removed, and covered [the vacancy] over her bed [with a vegetable covering] on account of the [new-born] infant.

§ 9. During the whole seven days of the festival, a man is to constitute the succah his regular domicile, and his house [is to be only] as an occasional abode. If rain fall, when is it permitted to clear out [remove from the succah]? When a mess of porridge has been spoiled, they [the elders] illustrate this by a comparison, "What does such a circumstance resemble? It is as if a servant pour out a goblet for his master, who throws a bowl full in his face."

Footnotes

132:1 The duty of residing in the succah comprises the duty of sleeping therein; but it is unlawful to interpose another roof under that of the succah; and a bed ten hands high is considered as a tent.

132:2 This is rendered according to one explication of the text given in the Talmud; but, according to another opinion, the Mishna here intends to establish two distinct rules:—1. If the covering is irregular, so that it leaves gaps, or openings, while parts of the covering hang down, while, if properly extended, there is sufficient material to cover the whole. 2. If the shaded part exceed that open to the sun. In either case the succah is valid.

132:3 He may, however, use it on the middle days.

133:4 He did not touch it with his naked hand, because, not having washed previous to eating, he did not wish to expose the food to any uncleanness that might attach to his hands.

133:5 Eccles. i. 15.

134:6 The founder of the school which bore his name, contemporary with Herod the Great, lived about eighty years before the destruction of the Temple.

Chapter II

CHAPTER II.

§ 1. When the festival takes place on Friday, it is unlawful to prepare thereon, on purpose, any food for the Sabbath, but for the festival alone, and whatever remains, remains for the Sabbath, and a person ought to prepare on the day before the festival, some article of food on account of the Sabbath, 1 and cook [additionally on the festival] in reference to it. Beth Shammai say, "It is necessary to prepare two articles of food." But Beth Hillel say, "One dish is sufficient." They agree, however, that fish with egg on it may be considered as two dishes. If the food thus prepared has been eaten, or lost [previous to the cooking of the food for the Sabbath], nothing more may be cooked in addition on account thereof; but if a small part of it had been left, more food may be cooked in addition, and on account thereof, for the Sabbath.

§ 2. When the festival happens immediately after the Sabbath, Beth Shammai say, "Every thing requiring purification must be immersed before the Sabbath." But Beth Hillel say, "Vessels must be immersed before the Sabbath, and human beings on the Sabbath."

§ 3. Both schools agree, that water which has become polluted, may be purified by putting it into an earthenware vessel, and bringing it in contact with the waters of a bath, but not in an unclean vessel. It is lawful, however, to immerse vessels whose original appropriation

has been altered, 2 and men may bathe when they have changed from one company to another [to eat the Paschal lamb]. 3

§ 4. Beth Shammai say, "A person may bring peace-offerings on the festival, but he may not impose his hands upon them; 4 neither may [a private individual] bring burnt-offerings thereon." But Beth Hillel allow the bringing of peace and burnt-offerings, and the imposition of hands upon them.

§ 5. Beth Shammai teach it to be unlawful to boil water on the festival for the purpose of washing the feet, unless the water is also fit to drink. But Beth Hillel allow it. A person may also light a fire for the sole purpose of warming himself by it.

§ 6. In three things Rabbon Gamaliel decides in aggravation [i.e. prohibiting], like the school of Shammai: viz. "It is prohibited to cover or place the pots of victuals in a hot place on the eve of the festival [so as to retain their heat]; as also on the Sabbath; to put together on the festival a disjointed lamp, and to bake thereon large loaves, but thin cakes only." Rabbon Gamaliel said, They never used in my father's house to bake large loaves on the festival, but thin cakes only." But the sages said unto him, "What proof does this practice of your father's family afford, who, although strict themselves in this respect, did nevertheless allow all Israel to bake on the festival, large loaves and thick pieces of dough [or cakes]?"

§ 7. He [Rabbon Gamaliel] decided in alleviation [that is, permitting] in respect to the three following things: he allowed to sweep on the festival between the couches or sofas 5 [after dinner], to put perfume on the coals [after dinner], 6 and to prepare a complete 7 kid on the nights of Passover; but the sages prohibit all these.

§ 8. Rabbi Eleazar ben Azariah permitted three things, which the other sages prohibit: his cow was allowed to go out on the Sabbath with a strap attached to her horns, 8 he held it also to be

lawful to curry cattle on the festival, and to grind thereon pepper in a pepper-mill. R. Jehudah says, "It is not lawful to curry cattle on the festival, because a wound may be inflicted [by the teeth of the iron currycomb], but they may be curried with a wooden comb." The Rabbins decide it to be unlawful to curry cattle either with an iron currycomb or with a wooden comb.

§ 9. A handmill, used to grind pepper, is liable to contract pollution in the three separate vessels of which it is composed: namely, as a vessel of capacity, 9 as a metal vessel, 10 and as a vessel of the sieve kind. 11

§ 10. A child's cart is liable to contract pollution through pressure, 12 and may be moved on the Sabbath from place to place; yet it may only be dragged over clothes or carpets. 13 Rabbi Jehudah says, "It is not lawful to drag any vessel or piece of furniture on the Sabbath, excepting such a [light] cart, because it only makes a slight impression on the ground [and does not remove the soil so as to make a furrow]."

Footnotes

147:1 This is what is known by the name of ‏ערובי תבשילין‎, or "Mixture of the cooking, or preparation of food," of which the following account and reason are given by Maimonides: "The Rabbins, in order to prevent cooking, or preparation of food on the festival for the following working-days, have prohibited it even for the Sabbath immediately following [and of course for a working-day]. They have ordered however, that some article of food should be prepared on the day before the festival, to which more may be cooked in addition on the festival, which has been ordered with the intention of reminding the general mass that it is not lawful to prepare any food on the festival which is not eaten thereon. It is called ‏ערוב‎, or mixture, because it mixes or combines the preparation of food necessary for the festival, with that required for the family's use on the Sabbath" (Maim. Hilchoht Yom Tob, ch. VI. and the ‏השנה‎ of ‏הראב״ר‎).

148:2 If a person has immersed vessels to be used for oil for common use, and wishes afterwards to use them for sacred purposes [such as putting in them wine of heave-offering, &c.], a fresh immersion will be required.

148:3 See Treatise Pesachim, chap. IX.

148:4 Leviticus i. 4.

148:5 The cushions on which the ancients reclined to eat.

148:6 Also an ancient eastern custom, which burning, not being strictly necessary, is prohibited by the sages on the festival.

148:7 Complete, with its head, legs, and entrails, on the roasting spit, and in the same manner as the roasting of the Passover lamb is prescribed.

148:8 See Treatise Sabbath, chap. V. § 4.

149:9 The lower part, where the ground pepper is collected.

149:10 The upper part, where the whole pepper is put in.

149:11 The middle part, which allows only the finely ground particles to pass through.

149:12 See Mishna, order Taharoth.

149:13 In order to avoid making a furrow on the ground.

Chapter II

CHAPTER II.

§ 1. If a witness was unknown, others were sent with him to testify concerning his character. Formerly, evidence as to the appearance of the new moon was received from any one; but when the heretics corrupted [the witnesses], 1 it was ordained, that evidence should be received only of those whose good character was well known.

§ 2. Formerly fires were lighted on the tops of the mountains [to announce the appearance of the new moon]; but when the Samaritans led the nation into error, 2 it was ordained that messengers should be sent out.

§ 3. In what manner were these mountain fires lighted? They brought long staves of cedar wood, canes, and sticks [or branches] of the olive tree, also the coarse threads, or refuse of flax, which were tied on the top of them with twine; with these they went to the top of the mountain, and lighted them; and kept waving them to and fro, upward and downward, till they could perceive the same repeated by another person on the next mountain, and thus on the third mountain, &c.

§ 4. Whence did these mountain fires commence? From the Mount of Olives to Sartaba, 3 from Sartaba to Grophinah, from Grophinah to Hoveran, from Hoveran to Beth Baltin; they did not cease to wave the flaming brands at Beth Baltin to and fro, upward and downward, until the whole country of the captivity 4 appeared like a blazing fire. 5

§ 5. There was a large court in Jerusalem called Beth Yangzek, where all the witnesses met, and where they were examined by the Beth Din. Great feasts [or treats] were made for them there, in order to induce them to come often. At first they did not stir from

that place all day [on the Sabbath], 6 till the elder Rabbon Gamaliel ordained that they might go 2000 cubits [amoth] on every side; 7 and not only these, but also the midwife, going to give her professional assistance, and those who proceed to another . place to assist the inhabitants in case of fire, attack of enemies, inundation, or to save people from under the ruins of fallen buildings, are considered as inhabitants of that place, and may go from thence [on the Sabbath] two thousand [amoth] cubits on every side.

§ 6. In what manner was the examination of the witnesses conducted? The first pair were always examined first. The eldest of them being introduced first, the following questions were put to him: "Tell us in what form you saw the moon; was it with her horns turned towards the sun, or away from it? To the north or to the south [of the sun]? What was her elevation on the horizon? Towards which side was her inclination? What was the width of her disk?" If he said towards the sun, his evidence went for nothing. The second witness was then brought in, and examined; if the evidence was found to agree, their testimony was received as valid. The remaining pairs of witnesses were then superficially examined, not because there was any necessity for their evidence, but only not to disappoint them, 8 and also to encourage them to come another time.

§ 7. The chief of the tribunal [‏בית דין‎] then said, the feast of the new moon is mekoodash [consecrated]; and all the people said after him, "Mekoodash, mekoodash." Whether the new moon had been seen at the proper time or not it was consecrated. R. Eleazar, son of Zadok, said, "If it had not been seen at its proper time, it was not consecrated, because it had already been consecrated in heaven."

§ 8. Rabbon Gamaliel had, on a tablet, and on the walls of his room, various delineations of the figure and aspect of the moon, which he shewed to ignorant witnesses, asking them, "Was it of this figure, or of that?" It happened once, that two witnesses came and said, "We saw the moon in the eastern part of the heavens in the morning, and in the western part in the evening." R. Johanan ben Nourri declared them to be false witnesses; but when they came to

[paragraph continues] Jamnia [‏יבנה‎], Rabbon Gamaliel received their evidence as valid. Two other witnesses came and said, "We saw the moon on its proper day, 9 but could not see it on the next evening of the intercalary day;" 10 and R. Gamaliel received them: when R. Dosah, son of Arkenaz, said, "They are false witnesses; for how can they testify of a woman being delivered [on a certain day], when, on the next day, she appears yet with every sign of pregnancy?" 11 Then R. Joshua said unto him, "I approve your opinion."

§ 9. Upon this Rabbon Gamaliel sent him [R. Joshua] word, saving, "I order you 12 to appear before me on the day of Atonement, according to your computation, with your staff and [purse of] money in your hand." 13 R. Akivah went to him [R. Joshua], and found him grieving, he said then to him, "I can prove that all Rabbon Gamaliel has done is [well] done, for it is said, 'These are the feasts of the Lord, holy convocations which ye shall proclaim,' either at their proper time, or not at their proper time, their convocations are to be considered as holy festivals." When he [R. Joshua] came to R. Dosah ben Arkenaz, the latter told him, "If we are to reinvestigate the decisions of the tribunal of Rabbon Gamaliel, we must also reinvestigate the decisions of all the tribunals of justice which have existed from the time of Moses till the present day; for it is said, (Exod. xxiv. 2), 'Moses, Aaron, Nadab, Abihu, and seventy elders went up [to the Mount].' Why were not the names of the elders also specified? To inform us, that every three men in Israel that form ‏בית דין‎ [tribunal of justice] are to be respected in an equal degree with the tribunal of Moses." Then did R. Joshua take his staff and money, and went to Jamnia, to Rabbon Gamaliel, on the

very day on which the Atonement would have been, according to his computation; when Rabbon Gamaliel arose, and kissed him on his [fore] head, saying, "Enter in peace, my master and disciple! My master—in knowledge; and my disciple—since thou didst obey my injunction."

Footnotes

159:1 Bribing them to give false evidence to mislead the Sanhedrin.

159:2 By their lighting these firebrands or beacons on the mountains at wrong times, to make a mockery of, or to mislead, the Jews.

159:3 This and the following are the names of the various mountain stations.

159:4 Babylon.

159:5 As every Jew used to go on his roof waving a blazing torch.

160:6 If they arrived on that day, when, according to law, they could only go four "amoth."

160:7 See Treatise Erubin, chap. IV.

160:8 As it would afflict them to be sent away without being examined by the Beth Din, and to have taken their journey in vain.

161:9 On the night of the thirtieth day of the month.

161:10 The thirty-first day since the first of last month, and the second or intercalary day of the feast of the new moon.

161:11 In the original, "with her belly up to her teeth."

161:12 Rabbon Gamaliel was prince of the Captivity, and chief of the Sanhedrin.

161:13 It is unlawful to carry a purse on the day of Atonement; but, according to the computation of R. Joshua, the day of Atonement would be a day too late; for, as he rejected the evidence of the witnesses because they assigned [in his opinion] too short a time for the appearance of the moon after its conjunction with the sun, he would be obliged to add an intercalary day, which would cause the day of Atonement to happen a day later than its proper day; as Rabbon Gamaliel knew, from astronomical observations, that the period between the conjunction and appearance of the moon occurs sooner at one time than at another; and that, therefore, the evidence of the witnesses might he true, and ought not to be rejected.

Chapter II

CHAPTER II.

§ 1. What is the order of the [seven last] fast-days? The ark containing the rolls of the law is to be brought in an open place of the city; ashes of burnt [substances] are to be strewed on the heads of the [‏נשיא‎] prince, and of the chief of the tribunal of justice, and other persons shall also put ashes on their heads; the eldest among them shall then address them in heart-moving terms: "My brethren, consider that it is not written in respect to [the repentance of] the Ninevites, that God regarded their having wrapped themselves in sackcloth, and considered their fast-days, but that 'God saw their acts, and that they had turned from their evil ways' (Jonah iii. 10), and the tradition of the prophets also is, 'Tear your hearts, and not your garments' (Joel ii. 13)."

§ 2. When they have stood up to pray, they shall place at the reading-desk to minister an old experienced person, who has children, and whose house or family is free [from transgression], so that his mind may be entirely devoted to his prayer: he shall say twenty-four blessings, namely, the eighteen blessings of the daily prayer [Amidah], to which he shall add six more.

§ 3. Which are as follows:—texts of ‏זכרונות‎ and ‏שופרות‎ 1 [the Psalms cxx., cxxi., cxxx., and cii.), "In my distress I cried unto the Lord, and he answered me," &c., "I raise my eyes unto the hills," &c., "Out of the depths have I cried unto thee, O Lord," &c., "A prayer for the afflicted when he is overwhelmed," &c. R. Jehudah says it was not necessary to mention the ‏זכרונות‎ and ‏שופרות‎, but the following passages instead are to he read, "When there is famine in the land, when there is pestilence in the land," &c. (1 Kings viii. 37), and, "The word of the Lord that came to Jeremiah concerning the dearth," &c. (Jer. xiv.), the concluding blessing is then added to each.

§ 4: To the first blessing 2 he shall say [in addition], "May he who answered Abraham on Mount Moriah answer you, and listen to your [petition and] cry on this day. Blessed art thou, O Lord, Redeemer of Israel!" To the second he shall say, "May he who answered our ancestors on the Red Sea answer you, and listen favourably this day to your cry. Blessed art thou, O Lord, who rememberest all things forgotten [by man]!" To the third he shall say, "May he who answered Joshua in Gilgal answer you, and listen [favourably] this day to your cry. Blessed art thou, O Lord, who deignest to listen to the sound of the shophar!" To the fourth he shall say, "May he who answered Samuel in Mizpah answer you, and listen [favourably] to your cry on this day. Blessed art thou, O Lord, who hearkenest to [our] cry!" To the fifth he shall say, "May he who answered Elijah on Mount Carmel answer you, and listen [favourably] to your cry on this day. Blessed art thou, O Lord, who hearkenest to prayer!" To the sixth he shall say, "May he who answered Jonah in the entrails of the fish answer you, and listen [favourably] to your cry on this day. Blessed art thou, O Lord, who answerest in the time of distress!" To the seventh 3 he shall say, "May he who answered David, and his son Solomon, in Jerusalem answer you, and listen [favourably] to your cry on this day. Blessed art thou, O Lord, who hast compassion on the earth!"

§ 5. It happened in the times of R. Halaphta and R. Hanina, son of Teradion, that a minister advanced to the reading-desk and finished the whole of the blessing without any [of the congregation] answering thereupon, "Amen:" 4 [a minister called], "Sound, O priests! sound!" [the minister who said the prayers continued], "May he who answered our father Abraham on Mount Moriah answer you, and listen [favourably] to your prayer this day:" [a minister called] "Sound an alarm, sons of Aaron! sound an alarm!" [the minister

who said the prayers continued], "May he who answered our ancestors on the Red Sea answer you, and listen [favourably] to your cry this day." When the sages were informed of this, they said, "This was not our custom, except at the eastern door [of the Temple], and on the Temple-mountain [Mount Moriah]."

§ 6. On the three first fasts, the priests who had the weekly watch of the Temple 5 fasted, but not the whole day; and the ministering priests did not fast at all. On the second three fasts, the priests on the weekly duty fasted the whole day; and the ministering priests fasted, but not the whole day. But on the last seven, both classes of priests fasted the whole day. Such is the opinion of R. Joshua; but the sages say, "The three first fasts were not kept by any of the said priests: on the second three, the priests who had the weekly duty used to fast, but not the whole day; and the officiating priests did not fast at all. On the last seven, the priests on the weekly duty fasted the whole day; and the officiating priests fasted, but not the whole day."

§ 7. The priests on the weekly duty may drink wine at night, but not during the day; 6 the officiating priests may not drink it either by day or night. The priests of the weekly watch, and the standing men 7 are prohibited from shaving their beards, and washing their clothes; but, on Thursday, 8 they are allowed to do so, in honour of the [approaching] Sabbath.

§ 8. Wherever it is mentioned in "The Roll of Fasts," 9 that "no lamentation and mourning is to be made" on certain days, it is also prohibited to do so on the day preceding, but allowed on the day following them; but R. José says, "It is prohibited to do so on the

day preceding, and on the day following; where it is said, that 'no fasts are to be kept thereon,' it is allowed to fast on the day preceding and following days." R. José says, "It is prohibited on the preceding, but allowed on the following day."

§ 9. Public fasts are not to be ordered to commence on a Thursday, in order not to raise the price of victuals in the markets; 10 but the first fasts are to be on Monday, Thursday, and [the following] Monday; but the second three fasts may follow on Thursday, Monday, and [the following] Thursday. R. José says, "Even as the first fasts are not to be commenced on Thursday, so also are the second and last fasts not to commence on that day."

§ 10. Public fasts are not to be ordered to take place on the feast of new moon, nor on that of dedication and of lots [pureem]; but if the fast has been already commenced thereon, it need not be broken. Such is the opinion of Rabbon Gamaliel. R. Meir says, "Although Rabbon Gamaliel has said that the fast need not be broken, he agrees that on these days they are not to fast the whole of the day; and thus is it with the [fast of the] ninth of Ab, when it happens on a Friday." 11

Footnotes

170:1 Texts relating to the kind remembrance of God to his creatures, and those in which the sounding of the shophar is mentioned; the texts of this kind which are read in the ‏מוסף‎ of ‏ראש השנה‎, are also to be used on this occasion.

171:2 Commencing ‏ראה נא בענינו‎, which although not the first in the Amidah, is the first in which the interpolations of the additional part are introduced.

171:3 Although but six additional blessings are to be said on these fast-days, yet this is called the seventh, in respect to its being the seventh blessing in which additional matter is introduced; for the first blessing ending ‏גואל ישראל‎, "Redeemer of Israel," is one of the eighteen blessings of the daily Amidah.

171:4 They answered instead, ‏ברוך שם כבוד מלכותו לעולם ועד‎, "Blessed be the name of the glory of his kingdom for ever and ever," which was the response made in the Temple, where alone the sacred name was pronounced.

172:5 The priests were divided into twenty-four ‏משמרות‎, each of which ministered a week in the Temple; each ‏משמרה‎ was again subdivided into seven ‏בתי אבות‎, each ‏בית אב‎ officiating on a day in the week, in their regular turn. The ‏בית אב‎, being thus the active and officiating priests, have permission to fast on only part of the day, that they may be fit for their holy ministration.

172:6 This does not relate to the fasts; but general regulations are here stated.

172:7 A number of Israelites attended at every public sacrifice, as representatives of the general body of the nation, to pray that the sacrifice offered for the nation might be favourably accepted; they are called ‏אנשי מעמד‎, standing men, because they stood near the priests during the sacrifice.

172:8 In order to compel their to come to the Temple clean.

172:9 There was a book so called, in which all remarkable days were enumerated. From extracts given in the Mishna, it appears that this book, or roll, was written in Chaldee.

173:10 The price of food would rise considerably in the markets, when the sellers conjectured that the accounts received by the Sanhedrin of the existing and probable future distress of the country, through the want of rain, was so serious, as to induce them to order a general fast so near the Sabbath. Another reason why it should not commence on a Thursday is, that this fear of dearth by the sellers, or the advantage they might take of this circumstance, would be increased by an additional demand for food, as the people would have to provide themselves for the evening of the fast, and for that on the following Sabbath.

173:11 This cannot happen at present, but might formerly, when the Sanhedrin fixed the day of the Feast of New Moon by the evidence of witnesses who had seen it.

Chapter II

CHAPTER II.

§ 1. Any one who reads the Meguillah in an irregular manner, does not acquit himself of his obligation; nor in case he reads it by heart, or translated in any language he does not understand; but it is lawful to read it to those who understand foreign languages, 1 in that foreign language. One who speaks a foreign language, who has it read to him in Hebrew, will be released from his obligation.

§ 2. Should any person read it so as to make long pauses between the parts, and slumber meanwhile, he will be released from his obligation. If any one should read the Meguillah whilst writing, expounding, or correcting it, with intention of thereby becoming released from his obligation, he will have fulfilled it, but not if he had no such intention. If the Meguillah was written with paint, ruddle, gum, vitriol black, on papyrus, or on rough vellum, the obligation is not properly fulfilled; but it must be written in Hebrew characters, on good parchment, and with ink.

§ 3. If an inhabitant of an [open] town 2 had gone to an [anciently] walled town, 3 or one of [an anciently] walled town had gone to an [open] town; if he intend to return [when the Meguillah is read] to his place, he shall read it at the same time they read it in his place; if not, he shall read it with the inhabitants of the place in which he then is. From whence is it necessary to have commenced the reading of the Meguillah, so as to have duly fulfilled the obligation? R. Meir saith, "It is obligatory to read the whole." R. Jehudah says, "It suffices if he commenced ‏איש יהודי‎ (Esther ii. 5)." R. José saith, "[Even if] from ‏אחר הדברים האלה‎ (Esther iii)."

§ 4. All are qualified to read the Meguillah, with the exception of a deaf or a foolish person, or a minor; but R. Jehudah allows it to be said by a minor. The following religious acts may not be done before sun-rise on the day on which they are obligatory, viz.:—To read the Meguillah, to circumcise, to bathe [on the seventh day of the purification of an unclean or defiled person], to sprinkle [the unclean as a purification]; nor may a woman [who had experienced her menses beyond the usual time, and who was to] wait a day [before she might bathe] 4 do so before the sun-rise of that day. But if any of these acts have been done at any period after day-break, they are valid.

§ 5. The following religious acts may be done during the whole of the day [on which they are obligatory], viz.:—The reading of the Meguillah; of the Hallel; the sounding of the cornet; the use of the loolab, or palm-branch; the prayer at the additional offering; the additional offering; the confession of sin on sacrificing the bulls; 5 the confession to be made on bringing the [second] tithe; the confession of sin by the high priest on the day of atonement; the imposition of hands [on a sacrifice]; the slaughtering of a sacrifice; the waving of the offering; the bringing it to the altar; the taking of the handful of flour (Lev. ii. 2); the burning with incense of the fat of a sacrifice on the altar; the pinching or wringing off the head of fowls brought as sacrifices (Lev. i. 15); the receiving of the blood of a sacrifice; the sprinkling thereof on the altar; the giving the bitter waters to drink to a woman suspected of adultery; the striking off of the heifer's neck (Deut. xxi. 4); and the purification of a leprous person.

§ 6. The following acts may be done during the whole of the night: the cutting of the sheaves for the "omer," and the burning with incense of the fat and members of a burnt-offering on the altar (Lev. vi. 9). This is the rule:—Whatever is commanded to be done by day, may legally be done during the whole of the day; and whatever is commanded to be done by night, it is lawful to do during the whole of the night.

Footnotes

184:1 By "foreign" languages, all languages not Hebrew are to be here understood.

184:2 Who read on the 14th of Adar.

184:3 Who read on the 15th. For the legal meaning of open and of anciently walled towns, see our 3rd note, page 180.

185:4 This is explained in Treatise Niddah.

185:5 See Leviticus iv. 3, &c. and 13, &c.

Chapter II

CHAPTER II.

§ 1. He who has turned his olives, 1 and [then] has a death 2 [in his family], or [otherwise] is prevented [from at once putting them to press], or has been disappointed by his labourers, may put the first press-block on [the olives], and leaves it [thereon] until after the Moed. Such is the dictum of R. Jehudah; but R. José saith, "He may put [the olives] into the oil press, and finish pressing [them], and bung up [the casks into which the oil is poured] in the usual manner."

§ 2. Thus, likewise, he whose wine [has been pressed but still] is in the press-pit, should he [then] have a death in his family, or be [otherwise] prevented, or have been disappointed by his labourers, he may pour [the wine into casks], cooper, and bung them up in the usual manner. Such is the dictum of R. José: but R. Jehudah saith, "He must only cover [the pit] with boards, so that the wine may not grow sour."

§ 3. A man may house his fruit from [dread of] thieves, and take flax out of the buck, that it be not spoiled, provided always he does not intentionally defer doing it till the Moed: but should he have intentionally deferred doing it till the Moed, then in all these cases he forfeits [the article in question]. 3

§ 4. They must not purchase houses, slaves, or cattle, excepting for the use of the festival, or for the use of the vendor, who otherwise might have nothing to eat. They must not clear away [remove things] from one house to another, though this may be done if both houses are in the same court. Things [which have been put into the hands of a craftsman to be made up or repaired] must not be brought home from the workshop, 4 but if he [the owner] suspects [that the things, if left with the workman, may be lost, or that he may exact a second payment] he may remove them to another court.

§ 5. They may cover dried figs with straw. R. Jehudah saith, "[They may] likewise [be put] in layers."

§ 6. Dealers in fruit, in garments, or in utensils, may privately sell what is required for use on the Moed. Huntsmen [fishers], and manufacturers of peeled barley and grits, may carry on their occupations in private, as the exigencies of the festival may require. R. José said, "They have of their own accord adopted the more rigorous observance, and do not carry on their occupation during the Moed."

Footnotes

195:1 When they are in the vat, in which case they must at once he pressed, or they rot.

195:2 On account of which, he must keep the seven days mourning, and abstain from work. Should this period expire during the Moed, or should the labourers have disappointed him, longer delay might become fatal to the olives.

195:3 Some explain this to mean, that he must leave the articles to be spoiled, others, that he forfeits them, the Beth Din causing them to be distributed.

195:4 Lest the owner be accused of having placed the things with the workman, and the latter of having been at work on them during the festival. The rule, however, only applies to such articles as are not wanted for use on the Moed.

Chapter II

CHAPTER II.

§ 1. How is it to be understood that the widow of his brother, who had not lived contemporary with him [releases her rival]? When of two [married] brothers one dies [without issue] and another brother was born after the decease of the first mentioned, and the second [or surviving] brother marries by Yeboom his widowed sister-in-law, and dies, then that sister-in-law is released, having been the wife of a brother who had not been contemporary with the [third, or youngest] brother. The wife [widow] of the second brother is also free, as the rival of the first mentioned, but if the other brother had only promised marriage to her and died, 1 then the sister-in-law must perform the ceremony of Chalitzah, but her brother-in-law may not marry her by Yeboom.

§ 2. When of two brothers one dies, and the survivor marries his widow by Yeboom, and another [third] brother was afterwards born, and the second brother dies, then the widow of the first brother is free, as having been the wife of a brother who had not been contemporary [with the third, or youngest brother], and the widow of the second is also free, as the rival of the first mentioned. If he had only promised her marriage and died, the second sister-in-law must perform the ceremony of Chalitzah, but the brother-in-law may not marry her; but R. Simeon says, "[The third brother] may marry by Yeboom [in the two last cases], whichever he likes, or cause either to perform to him the ceremony of Chalitzah."

§ 3. A rule obtains in respect to marriage by Yeboom. Every woman whom it is unlawful to marry, by reason of being within the degrees of relationship forbidden to intermarry, may not perform the ceremony of Chalitzah, nor can be married by her brother-in-law by Yeboom, and all women who cannot be so married, owing to other legal prohibitions, 2 or on account of holiness of station, must perform the ceremony of Chalitzah, but may not be married to the brother-in-law by Yeboom. When of two sisters [who had been married to two brothers] one only can be legally married [to a third, or surviving brother], she is bound either to give Chalitzah, or to marry that brother-in-law by Yeboom.

§ 4. By legal prohibitions [to marry as above mentioned] are meant the secondary degrees of relationship prohibited by the Rabbins to

intermarry.—Prohibited to intermarry on account of holiness of station are, a widow to a high priest; a woman who had been divorced, or performed the ceremony of Chalitzah, who had [unlawfully] been married to an ordinary priest; a person born in adultery, and a daughter of the Nethinin 3 married to an Israelite, or a daughter of Israel to a Nethin, or to one born in adultery.

§ 5. In every case where there is a surviving brother, though of illegitimate origin, the widow of the deceased brother of such a one becomes subject to the law of Yeboom; he also possesses all the rights of a brother, except when he is the son of a bondwoman, or of a strange [i.e. non-Israelite] woman. In every case where there is a son, 4 that son releases his father's wife from the obligation of Yeboom, and even if illegitimate, is amenable to the penalties of the law against striking or cursing his father; he possesses, moreover, all the rights of a son, except he were the son of a bond-woman, or of a strange [i.e. non-Israelite] woman.

§ 6. When a person has given ‏קדושין‎ [i.e. betrothing] to one of two sisters, and does no longer know to which of them he gave it, he must give ‏גט‎, i.e. a letter of divorce to each. If he left at his decease one brother only, that brother must cause both [sisters] to perform Chalitzah to him. If he left two brothers, one must have Chalitzah performed to him, and the other may marry the sister-in-law by Yeboom, but if these brothers had already married the sisters, in anticipation, 5 they are not to be separated from them.

§ 7. When two men [who are strangers to each other] have each of them betrothed one of two sisters, and neither of these men know which sister he has betrothed, then each man must give two Gets [letters of divorce] to the sisters. If [the men] died, and each left a brother, these brothers must have Chalitzah given to them by both sisters. If one of the men 6 had one brother, and the other two, in the case of one brother only, he must have the Chalitzah performed by both sisters; and in that of the two brothers, one must have Chalitzah performed to him, and the other brother may marry his brother's widow by Yeboom, but if they had already married the sisters in anticipation, 5 they are not to be separated from them. If

each man left two brothers, one brother of each pair must have Chalitzah performed to him by one of the sisters, and the other brother of each pair can then marry by Yeboom one of the sisters released by the Chalitzah performed to the other brother. If two brothers had already in anticipation 7 received Chalitzah from the sisters, the latter are not to be separated from them.

§ 8. It is proper that the eldest brother should perform the duty of Yeboom; yet, if it were done by a younger brother, the marriage is valid. When suspected of carnal intercourse with a bond-woman, or with a non-Israelite woman, he may not marry her, even after [the first mentioned] had been manumitted, or [the last mentioned] had become a proselyte, but if he did marry [any of these women], they shall not be separated; but if a person should be suspected of having had adulterous intercourse with a married woman, who, in consequence, had been separated from her husband judicially, then, even if the said suspected person had already married her, they must be separated.

§ 9. A person who brings to a married woman a Get from her husband, from beyond sea, 8 and declares that the said document was duly written and signed in his presence, 9 may not marry that woman. If a person should say to a married woman, "Thy husband is dead," or, "I have murdered him," or, "We have murdered him," such person may not marry that woman; R. Jehudah saith, "If he says, 'I have murdered him,' the woman may not marry at all, 10 but if he said, 'We have murdered him,' she may be married." 11

§ 10. A ‏חכם‎ [i.e. one learned in the Holy Law] who had declared binding a vow made by a woman against her husband, 12 may

not marry her; but he may do so in case that woman appeared before him at the tribunal, and there expressed her refusal, or performed the ceremony of Chalitzah; and in all the above-mentioned cases, if the men were married at the time [of the prohibition], and their wives died since, they may marry the women prohibited to them before; also, in case these women had, meanwhile, been married to others, and were divorced, or had become widows, the females also prohibited to these men, may marry their sons or brothers.

Footnotes

203:1 Before he consummated the marriage.

203:2 This is explained in the next section.

204:3 Nethinim are the descendants of the Gibeonites, who became proselytes in the time of Joshua.

204:4 Even if illegitimate.

204:5 Of the judicial decision of the tribunal, and without waiting for it.

204:6 Namely, those mentioned in the first proposition.

205:7 Of the judicial decision of the tribunal, and without waiting for it.

205:8 A distant country. (See Treatise Gittin, chap. I.)

205:9 He is bound to make such declaration. (Gittin, chap. I. § 1.)

205:10 Neither to the self-accusing murderer, nor to any other person; because the unsupported evidence of a criminal is not admissible, particularly in this case; when, perhaps, he may have charged himself with an imaginary crime, in order to obtain the woman.

205:11 To others, not the self-accuser. There is, however, a contradiction in this latter part of the Mishna; for whether such a person committed the crime alone, or in conjunction with others, he is, doubtless, equally guilty; and, therefore, why should his evidence be received in the latter case [and the woman allowed to marry], and not in the former? It is, therefore, explained to mean, that he said, "I was with those who murdered him, but did not murder him myself."

205:12 See Note 1, page 7.

Chapter II

CHAPTER II.

§ 1. A woman, who becoming widowed or divorced, asserts, "As a virgin I was married," while he [the husband, or his heir] asserts, "No! as a widow thou wast married," [in her case] should there be evidence to prove that she went [to be married] in a myrtle-wreath, 1 and with her hair flowing, her Ketubah is two hundred dinar. R. Jochanan ben Beroka saith, "The distribution of parched corn 2 is also evidence [in her favor]."

§ 2. R. Joshua admitted, "That should a man say to his neighbour, 'This field did belong to thy father, but I bought it of him,' he is to be believed, because the same mouth which binds also unbinds. 3 But should there be evidence that the field [in question] had belonged to the father of his neighbour, and he [the present holder, to justify and maintain his possession] asserts, 'I bought it of him,' he is not to be believed [on his bare unsupported assertion]."

§ 3. Should witnesses declare, "This [attestation] is [in] our handwriting, but we were forced [to attest]," or "we were minors," or "we were [on the score of consanguinity] legally disqualified [from becoming] witnesses," they are to be believed. 4 But if there be witnesses to prove that it is their handwriting, or if their handwriting is proved by other means, they are not to be believed.

§ 4. Should one of them declare, "This is my handwriting, and this is the handwriting of my companion;" and the other likewise declares, "This is my handwriting, and that is the handwriting of my companion," they are to be believed. Should each of them only declare, "This is my handwriting," they require the additional [testimony] of another person. Such is the dictum of Rabbi; but the sages hold that they do not require the additional [testimony] of another person, but every man is to be believed, when he declares, "This is my handwriting."

§ 5. A woman, who declares, "I have been married, but am divorced," is to be believed, because the same mouth which binds also unbinds. 5 But if there is evidence that she had been married, although she asserts, "I am divorced," she is not to be believed [on her bare assertion]. If she declares, "I have been captured by Gentiles, but am undefiled," she is to be believed, because the same mouth which binds also unbinds. 6 But if there is evidence that she was in captivity, although she asserts, "I am undefiled," she is not to be believed. Should the evidence appear after her [being declared qualified for] marriage [with a priest], her marriage is not invalidated.

§ 6. If two women have been captured by heathens, the one declaring, "I have been captive, but am undefiled," and the other likewise declaring, "I have been captive, and am undefiled," neither of them is to be believed. But if they bear testimony in favor of each other, they are to be believed.

§ 7. Such [is] likewise [the case] with two men. [If] one declares, "I am a priest," and the other [also] declares, "I am a priest," neither of them is to be believed. 7 But if they bear testimony in favor of each other, they are to be believed.

§ 8. R. Jehudah saith, "No man is to be raised [admitted] to the priesthood on the testimony of one witness [only]." R. Eleazar saith, "When does this rule hold good? In case there should be any opponents [who gainsay his claim]; but where there is no opposition, they do raise [admit] to the priesthood on the testimony of [only] one witness."

§ 9. A woman who is imprisoned among heathens on account of money matters, is [after her liberation] permitted to her husband [but if imprisoned] under sentence of death, [she is after her liberation]

interdicted to her husband. 8 A town having been taken by siege [storm], all the priestesses [wives of priests] that are within it become disqualified, and their marriage void. But if they have any witness [to attest that they have not been defiled], even [though it be] a bondman or a bondwoman, they are to be believed; whereas no person is to be believed in his own favor. [When Jerusalem was taken] R. Zachariah ben Hakazab [a priest] declared: "[By] this [holy] temple, [I swear] her hand [that of his wife] did not quit my hand from the hour the heathens entered into Jerusalem, and until they left [again]." But they [the sages] answered him: "No man can bear witness in his own favor."

§ 10. [In] the following [cases, men] are to be believed [should they offer] to testify, when grown up, to what they have seen while children. A man is to be believed, who affirms, "This is the handwriting of my father;" "this is my teacher's handwriting;" [or] "this is my brother's handwriting;" [or] "I remember that the woman A.B. went forth [to be married] with a myrtle-wreath and flowing hair;" 9 [or] "that A.B. went out of the school to bathe and eat heave, and that he partook with us on the thrashing-floor;" 10 [or] "that this place is a ‏בית הפרס‎" 11 [or] "thus far [until this spot] did we go on the Sabbath." 12 But he is not to be believed were he to state, "A.B. had a right of thoroughfare here;" [or] "A.B. had a right here to place his deceased relatives, and to perform funeral laments." 13

Footnotes

244:1 According to others "a veil." Virgin brides wore such ornaments.

244:2 On the marriage of a virgin, parched corn was distributed among the wedding-guests.

244:3 R. Joshua, maintaining that the woman cannot be a trustworthy witness in her own case, and having thereby established a general principle to that effect, admits the exception to his general rule, which is in the case of a man, who having by his own unsupported statement acknowledged a liability that otherwise could not have been brought home to him, is to be believed when he states how, and by what means he became discharged of that liability. For if his own unsupported evidence is to have force against him, it must have equal force for him.

244:4 Provided there be no other evidence than their own admission to prove their handwriting, so that this case comes under the principle of the preceding Mishna, that the same mouth which hinds also unbinds.

245:5 She is consequently at liberty to marry again.

245:6 She is consequently qualified to marry a priest.

245:7 Or considered as entitled to enjoy heave, &c.

246:8 From the libidinous practices of the heathens, it was presumed that they abused her person, and that she consented, in order to save her life.

246:9 That consequently she was married as a virgin.

246:10 That he was a priest, and entitled to heave, &c.

246:11 A burial-place that has been ploughed, and made arable, and the vicinage of which, in a circumference of one hundred Amoth, remains unclean.

246:12 Which indicates the Techoom. (Vide Treatise Erubin, chap. V. 4 5.)

246:13 Because these involve questions of property, requiring full evidence.

Chapter II

CHAPTER II.

§ 1. When a person who brings a Get from a foreign country declares, "It was written, but not signed in my presence," or the reverse, or, "The whole [Get] was written, but only in part attested 1 in my presence," or, "Only half of the writing [of the Get] but the whole of the signatures were written in my presence," it is void. 2 Also in case one [witness] says, "It was written," and another, "It was signed in my presence." When two say, "It was written in our presence," and one, "It was signed in my presence," it is also void. But R. Jehudah declares it valid. When one declares, "It was written in my presence," and two declare "It was signed in our presence," it is valid.

§ 2. If it were both written and signed in the day time, 3 or that both writing and signatures were done at night, 4 or that it was

written at night, but signed by day, it is valid. 5 If it were written by day, but signed at night, it is void, 6 but R. Simeon declares it valid; for he established it as a rule "That all documents written by day and signed at night are void, except letters of divorce."

§ 3. The writing of a Get may be done with any material, with ink, paint, 7 ruddle, gum, or with vitriol black, and with every other indelible material, but not with any liquor, the juice of fruit, nor with any delible material. It may be written on any thing, even on a leaf of an olive tree or on a cow's horn. In the latter case, however, the husband is bound to give her [the wife] the cow along with it. He may write it on the hand of a slave, but then he must give her the slave also; but R. José prohibits the writing of a Get on any thing endowed with life, or on edible articles.

§ 4. A Get may not be written on any thing that is yet attached or fixed to the soil. If it was so written, and it was afterwards severed from the soil, and then signed and delivered to the woman, it is valid. But R. Jehudah declares it void, for it must be written and signed on what is detached from the soil. R. Jehudah ben Beterah saith, "It must not be written on papyrus, on which an erasure or abrasion appears, nor on unfinished vellum, because it affords opportunity for falsification;" but the sages permit it.

§ 5. All are qualified to write a Get, even deaf and dumb, or foolish persons and minors. A woman may write her own Get, and the husband his acquittance [for the amount of the Ketubah he has paid her], because the validity of legal documents depends solely on the signature of the attesting witnesses. All are qualified [to act as missionaries or agents] to bring over a Get, except deaf and dumb or foolish persons, minors, a blind person, and a non-Israelite.

§ 6. When a minor received [a commission to deliver] a Get and became of age [before he delivered it], or a deaf person whilst in that state, and who afterwards recovered his hearing, or a blind person 8 who subsequently recovered his sight, or a demented person, who

was afterwards cured, or a non-Israelite, 9 who subsequently became a proselyte, the Get is void. But when a person received it whilst in possession of his faculty of hearing, and before he delivered he became deaf, and again recovered his hearing, or a person who could see, had become blind, and again recovered his sight, or a person of sound mind who had become demented, and was cured: the Get is valid, because the rule is, that when the commencement and end 10 of the act took place, whilst the person was in possession of his faculties, it is valid.

§ 7. Those females who are not considered competent witnesses to testify to a woman in respect to the decease of her husband, 11 are to be credited when [as messengers] they bring over a Get to her, viz., her mother-in-law, the daughter of her mother-in-law, her rival, the wife of her husband's brother, and her husband's daughter. Why is this difference in respect to the evidence as to a Get, or as to the death of a husband? Because there is [in the first mentioned case] a document in existence to confirm the evidence. A woman may bring her own Get with her, but she must declare at the same time, 12 "It was written and signed in my presence."

Footnotes

282:1 That is, signed by one witness only.

282:2 That is, if he was present only during the writing of the last part of the Get.

282:3 That is, written and signed on one and the same day.

282:4 That is, during one and the same night.

283:5 Because a night and the following day make together a legal day.

283:6 Because it was ante-dated, as the night belonged to the following day, and not to that to which the date of the Get referred.

283:7 Original ‏סם‎, which some explain to be a kind of earth found in the Isle of Samos, hence its name in Hebrew.

283:8 Because it is necessary that he should be able to attest and say, "I saw the Get written and signed."

284:9 Because he was not subject to the Jewish law, and the rule is, that whatever a person is not obliged to do himself he is not qualified to do for others.

284:10 The commencement of the act is, when the messenger received the Get from the husband, and the end is, when he delivers it to the wife.

284:11 See Treatise Yebamoth, chapters XV. and XVI.

284:12 Before the tribunal, before whom she is to appear to submit the Get for verification.

Chapter II

CHAPTER II.

§ 1. A man may betroth a woman either personally or by his proxy, and a woman may also be betrothed either personally or by her proxy. A father may likewise betroth his daughter while she is a minor [‏נערה‎] either personally or by his proxy. If a man said to a woman [offering her several dates at the same time], "Be thou betrothed unto me with this date"—"Be thou betrothed unto me with this." If among these dates there is any single one worth a Prutha she is betrothed, but not otherwise; but should he have said,

With this, and this, and this," she will be betrothed if all these dates have the aggregate value of a Prutha, but not otherwise; but if, meanwhile, she eat some of them, she will only then be betrothed if among the last dates [he gave her] there was one worth a Prutha.

§ 2. [Should a man say to a woman] "Be thou betrothed unto me with this cup of wine," and it was found to be honey, or if he said "honey," and it was found to be wine; or, "with this silver denarius," and it was found to be a golden one; or, "with this golden one," and it was found to be silver; or, "on condition that I am rich," and he was found to be poor; or, "that I am poor," and it was subsequently ascertained that he was rich, she is not betrothed. R. Simeon, however, says, "If the error or deception was in her favor the betrothing is valid."

§ 3. If he said, "On condition that I am a priest," and the is a Levite, or the reverse; "That I am a Netin," 1 and he is found to be a bastard, or the reverse; "That I live in a small town," and it is afterwards discovered that he lives in a large town, or the reverse; "That my house adjoins the public baths," and it is found situate remote from it, or the reverse; "That I have a daughter or bondwoman who understands the dressing of hair," and it was found that he had not such a one, or the reverse; "That I have no children," and it is found that he has, or the reverse: in all these cases the betrothing will be void, even though the woman declares she was resolved to be betrothed to the man, notwithstanding his misrepresentation. The above also applies in case the misrepresentation proceeded from the woman.

§ 4. If a man says to his proxy, "Go and betroth for me the woman A.B., in the city C.," and he [the proxy] went and betrothed

her elsewhere, the betrothment is void; but if he only said, "She is in the city C.," and the proxy betrothed her elsewhere, the betrothing is valid. 2

§ 5. If a man betrothed a woman on condition that she is not subject to any vow, and afterwards ascertains that she is, the betrothment is void. If he married her on the tacit understanding of the non-existence of such vows, and they are found to exist, he may divorce her, and is not bound to pay her the amount of her marriage contract. If [he betrothed her] on condition that she has no bodily defects, and she was found to have them, the betrothing is void. If he married her on a tacit [understanding of the non-existence of such defects], he may divorce her and is not bound to pay her the amount of her marriage contract. The same corporeal blemishes which disqualify a priest 3 do also disqualify females for marriage.

§ 6. If a man betrothed two females with the value of a Prutha, 4 or one woman with something of less value than a Prutha, the betrothment is void, even though afterwards he sent her many bridal presents, because these presents were only sent on the [supposed validity of the] previous betrothment. It is even so when a minor has thus betrothed a woman.

§ 7. If a person betrothed a mother and daughter at the same time, or two sisters at the same time, the betrothment is void [for either]. It happened once, that a man was gathering figs in a basket for five women, two of whom were sisters. The figs did indeed belong to the females, 5 but it was fruit of the Sabbatical year. 6 The man said, "All of ye shall be betrothed unto me with this." One of the females went and accepted the basket for all the others. The sages then decided "That the betrothment was void, as far as regarded the sisters."

§ 8. When a priest betrothes a woman with his share in the most holy sacrifices, or with that of sacrifices sacred in a minor degree, the betrothment is void. 7 Also, according to R. Meir, "If he betrothed a woman either knowingly, or through error, with his share in the second tithe." 8 The betrothment is void, according to R. Jehudah,

if he did it inadvertently, but valid, if he did it wilfully. 9 If he used consecrated things, the betrothment is valid, according to R. Meir, if he used them wilfully for that purpose, but void, if he used them through inadvertence. R. Jehudah saith, "If he used them through error, the betrothment is valid, but it is void, if he used them thus wilfully."

§ 9. When a person uses for the purposes of betrothment fruits of "Orlah," or "Kilaim" of the vineyards; or with an ox condemned to be lapidated [Exod. xxi. 29]; or with a calf whose neck is to be struck off [Deut. xxi]; or with the offering of birds of the leper; or with the hair of a Nazarite; or with the firstling of an ass [Exod. xiii. 13]; or with meat boiled in milk; or with the flesh of animals slaughtered for profane use in the temple-court: such betrothment is void; 10 but if he sold the mentioned articles, and used their proceeds for this purpose, the betrothment is valid.

§ 10. When a person betrothes a woman with heave, or with tithe, or with the oblations due to the priest, 11 or with the waters of expiation, or with the ashes [of the red heifer], she is duly betrothed, even when tine man is an Israelite. 12

Footnotes

310:1 See Treatise Yebamoth.

311:2 Vide Treatise Gittin, chap. VI. § 3.

311:3 Leviticus, chap. xxi.

311:4 See Treatise Ketuboth, chap. VII. 7.

311:5 It is necessary that the article given as a betrothment should be the man's property.

311:6 The produce of the fields are then common to all.

311:7 Because they were only given to the priests to eat, and not to be applied in any other way.

311:8 Because he profaned sacred things wilfully, by using them for this purpose.

312:9 R. Jehudah does not consider it a profanation of sacred things, to apply them for the purpose of betrothment.

312:10 Because it is unlawful to derive any benefit from the mentioned things.

312:11 Viz. the shoulder, the two cheeks, and the maw of the sacrifice.

312:12 And inherited them from a deceased maternal grandfather, who had been a priest.

Chapter II

CHAPTER II.

§ 1. When one of the pipes 1 has been cut through in killing fowl, and both 2 in killing cattle, they are Cashér; 3 also when the greatest part of these had been cut through. R. Jehudah saith, "It

is necessary that in killing fowl the veins at the side of the throat should also be cut through." If but one half [of the trachea] is cut through in fowl, and one and a half [i.e. the trachea, and half of the œsophagus] in cattle, it is unfit; but if the greater part of one tube is cut through in fowl, and the greater part of the two in cattle, it is Cashér.

§ 2. If a person cut off two heads of animals or fowl at once, it is Cashér; also if only the greater part of both tubes was cut through in each. When two persons take hold of a knife whilst killing, even if one held it at the top of the blade and the other at the bottom [or handle], it is Cashér.

§ 3. If he hewed or chopped off the head at one blow, it is Pasool. 4 If, when killing, he had accidentally cut off the whole head, it is Cashér, if the knife extended the width of a neck [beyond the place cut]. When a person in killing cut off two heads at once: if the knife extends the width of one neck only beyond the places cut, it is Cashér. 5 This is, however, only in case the knife had been passed down the throat of the animal only, without drawing it back, or that the second or back cut was only made without the down [or first] cut; but if the knife in cutting was drawn to and fro, if it exceeded in the least the width of the throat of the animals, even if it was as small as a penknive or lancet, it is Cashér. Should a knife happen to drop accidentally on the throat of an animal, although it was duly slaughtered in consequence, yet it is Pasool; for it is said [Deut. xxvii. 7], "Thou shalt sacrifice, and thou shalt eat," viz. that only which thou [thyself] sacrificest, that shalt thou eat. If whilst in the act of slaughtering, the knife should drop from a person's hand, and he picked it up; or his clothes, and he picked them up; 6 or, that having become exhausted by the exertion of setting or sharpening the knife, it was necessary that another person should finish the cutting; if the delay thereby occasioned was such, that during its duration another similar animal might have been slaughtered, it is Pasool. R. Simeon said, "When a knife could have been examined 7 during the interval."

§ 4. When the œsophagus had been duly cut through, but the trachea was torn off, or the reverse; or, that he cut through one of

the tubes, and then waited till the animal died; or, that he covered or hid the knife by placing it under the second tube, 8 and cut it off; it must, according to R. Jishbab, he considered as Nebelah [i.e. as an animal which died of itself], 9 but, according to R. Akivah, as Terefá [i.e. an animal torn by wild beasts]. 10 R. Jishbab gave the following rule from the authority of R. Joshua, "Every animal which, owing to a defect in slaughtering, has become Pasool [or unfit for use], must be considered as Nebelah; but when the slaughtering was duly performed, and it became Pasool through another cause, 11 it must be considered as Terefá." Then R. Akivah assented to him [R. Jishbab].

§ 5. When a domestic or wild animal or fowl was slaughtered, and no blood followed [the incision], it is Cashér, and may be eaten with unwashed hands; 12 because the absence of blood rendered it unsusceptible of contracting and conveying pollution. R. Simeon saith, "The slaughtering rendered it susceptible."

§ 6. If an animal is slaughtered when it is dangerously ill, according to Rabbon Simeon ben Gamaliel, "It is sufficient [to render it Cashér] when it can move or struggle with its fore and hind legs." R. Eleazar saith, "It suffices if the blood spirted after its throat was cut." R. Simeon teaches, "That even when a person slaughtered such an animal at night, and found in the morning the walls [of the slaughter-house] covered with blood, it is Cashér, agreeable to R. Eleazar's opinion." But the sages hold it to be Cashér only, "when the animal struggled with either his fore or hind leg, or that it wagged its tail;" this applies to small as well as to large cattle. When a small cattle [a sheep or goat, &c.] is slaughtered [when dangerously ill], and extends its fore-leg, but does not draw it back, it is Pasool, because it only indicates the last throe of parting life. This is to be understood only in case the animal is supposed to be in imminent danger; but when it is considered sound, although it should not have exhibited any of the mentioned symptoms [after being killed], it is Cashér.

§ 7. When a person had slaughtered an animal for a heathen, it is Cashér; but R. Eleazar decides it to be Pasool. R. Eleazar teaches, "That if he slaughtered it with the intention that the heathen should only eat the caul of the liver of the animal, 13 it is Pasool, because the tacit intention of the heathen is to use it for idolatrous purposes." R. Joshua argued against this, and demonstrated his opinion by a syllogism from minor to major [‏קל וחומר‎], 14 "If where the intention renders Pasool, as in the case of consecrated things, 15 the matter is determined by the intention of the acting priest, does it not follow that in the present instance, which relates to non-consecrated things, 16 and where the intention does not render them Pasool, it should be determined by the intention of him that slaughtered?" 17

§ 8. When a person slaughtered an animal in or to the name of mountains, hills, seas, rivers, or deserts, it is Pasool. 18 When one of two persons holding the same knife had killed the animal with the mentioned idolatrous intention, and the other with a lawful intention, the animal so killed is Pasool.

§ 9. It is not lawful to slaughter [so that the blood should run] into the sea, or in a river, or to place the animal within a vessel; 19 but it is lawful to slaughter in a wet ditch, 20 or within a utensil on board a ship. 21 It is not permitted to slaughter in any pit at all, but it is lawful to make a pit within the house, that the blood may collect therein; but this is not permitted in the public street, not to countenance the custom of heretics. 22

§ 10. When a person slaughters an animal [for profane use out of

the temple] as a burnt offering or [other] sacrifice, or as a doubtful sin offering, or as a Paschal sacrifice, or as a thanksgiving offering, it is Pasool; but R. Simeon considers it Cashér. When two persons take hold of a knife in slaughtering, and one of them did so with the intention of slaughtering it as one of the mentioned sacrifices, and the other with a lawful intention, it is Pasool. When it was slaughtered as a sin-offering, or as a certain trespass-offering, or as a firstborn, or as tithe [of animals], or as an exchanged sacrifice, it is Cashér; for this is the rule, "If tine animal was slaughtered as a sacrifice that can be offered by voluntary vow, it is Pasool; but if it was slaughtered as any other sacrifice, it is Cashér."

Footnotes

328:1 That is, of the first, or windpipe.

328:2 The trachea or windpipe; and the œsophagus or gullet.

328:3 This is only when it has thus happened without premeditation, for it is necessary to commence the act of slaughtering with the intention of cutting through both tubes. For the elucidation of the following part of the Mishna, it is necessary to observe, that, according to tradition, five things are to be avoided in killing cattle or fowl, as they would render them Pasool, i.e. improper and unlawful to be used as food. The five mentioned invalidating causes are:—

‏שהייה‎ or delay. As when a person cuts a little of the throat of the animal, then stops and cuts again, and continues in the same manner till the act of killing is completed.

‏דרסה‎, or pressure, i.e. when the cutting was effected by pressure only, without passing the knife to and fro on the animal's throat, or cutting off the head or tubes by a single stroke, using the knife like a hatchet or sword.

‏חלרה‎ or concealment, i.e. when the knife was covered with any thing; for instance, if it was covered or hidden by the wool of the animal, or by a cloth, or that it was passed between the tubes, and the killing completed by cutting the tubes either upward or downward.

‏הגרמה‎ or deviation. When the cutting has been beyond the bounds or limits on the throat of the animal, and it was made either above or below these limits hereafter to be indicated.

‏עקיר‎ or tearing. When the tubes of any of them had been forcibly torn away before the act of killing was completed. (For more detailed particulars see Talmud, Treatise Cholin, p. 9, and Maimonides, chap. iii. of Hilchoth Shechitah, in vol. ii. of Yad Hachazakah.)

329:4 On account of ‏דרסה‎, "forcible pressure;" see the preceding note.

329:5 Consequently, the knife must be at least thrice the size of the throat.

329:6 Which caused delay [‏שייהה‎].

329:7 To ascertain if it were fit for killing, and without notches.

330:8 The œsophagus or gullet.

330:9 Which pollutes the person who carries it. (See Treatise Kelim.)

330:10 Which does not communicate legal uncleanliness to the person who carries it.

330:11 Through any of the causes mentioned in the next chapter.

330:12 Blood is one of the seven fluids, mentioned in Treatise Yadaim, which render a substance susceptible of contracting legal pollution. (For a complete understanding of this Mishna see Treatises Zebachim and Yadaim.)

331:13 Or any small part, if of the size of an olive only.

331:14 Here the syllogism is from major to minor.

331:15 Holy sacrifices. (See Treatise Zebachim).

331:16 Animals slaughtered for private use.

331:17 And not that of the heathen; consequently, that animal should be Cashér. The Halacha or decision is according to R. Joshua's inference.

331:18 To eat, but not to derive benefit from it; but if he said, "I slaughter it to the demon or spirit of the mountain," &c., it is not only Pasool, but prohibited to derive benefit from it.

331:19 To collect the blood. This and the following were ordered to avoid the idolatrous practices which were anciently in vogue; when, for instance, they let the blood run into the sea, to propitiate Neptune or some other fabulous deity.

331:20 When the water is turbid.

331:21 Although the blood should run thence into the sea, for it is evidently done not to soil the ship.

331:22 This was also one of the ancient idolatrous practises to collect the blood in a pit.

Chapter II

CHAPTER II.

§ 1. If he [a person] has poured [water] on one hand at one gush, his hand is clean; [if] on both hands at one gush, R. Meir declares them [still to continue] unclean, until he has poured [water] out of a quarter-lug [vessel] upon them. Should a loaf of heave 1 fall [on the water], it [remains] clean. R. José [however] declares it unclean.

§ 2. Has he poured out his first [ablution] in one place, and his second in another place, should a loaf of heave fall on the first, it [becomes] unclean, if on the second, it [remains] clean. Has he poured out his first and second [ablutions] into one place, and a loaf of heave fall thereon, it [becomes] unclean. Should he pour out his first [ablution], and find on his hand a splinter or small stone, his hands continue unclean, as the second water only purifies the first [water] on the hand. 2 R. Simeon ben Gamaliel saith, "Whatsoever is a production of the water, [and is found on the hand after the first ablution, does not prevent the hand from being] clean."

§ 3. The hands become unclean or clean up to the wrist. How [is this meant]? Should he pour the first [ablution] up to the wrist, and the second [ablution] above the wrist, and some of the water runs back into the hand, that [continues] clean. Should he have poured [both] the first and the second [ablutions] above the wrist, and some of the water runs back into the hand, that [becomes] unclean. Should he have poured the first [ablution] over one hand, and then the second [ablution] over both hands together, they are unclean. Should he have poured the first [ablution] over both hands, and then the second [ablution] over one hand only, his hand is clean. Should he have poured [water] on one hand, and then rubbed it against its fellow [his other hand], it [the hand on which he poured the water] becomes unclean; [but if he rubbed it] against

his head, or against the wall, it remains clean. They may [at once] pour [water] over [the hands of] four or five [persons] alongside of each other or above each other, provided always, they be careful that the water comes on [every part of] their hands.

§ 4. [Should he be] in doubt whether it [the water] has been used for any purpose or not; [should he be] in doubt whether he had the prescribed quantity or not; [or should he be] in doubt whether [the water was legally] unclean or clean: in all these [cases of] doubt he is clean, because they [the sages] decided, "That whenever it is questionable whether the hands are unclean, [or] impart uncleanness, or are clean, [they are to be considered as] clean." R. Jose [however] held "[That whenever it is questionable whether the hands are] clean, they are [to be considered as] unclean." How [is this rule to be applied]? Were his hands clean, and two unclean loaves before him, should he be in doubt whether he touched them or not, [or,] his hands being unclean, and two clean loaves before him, he is in doubt whether he touched them or not, [ore] one of his hands being unclean and the other clean, there were before him two clean loaves, one of which he touched, should he be in doubt whether he touched it with the unclean [hand], or with the clean [one], [or,] his hands being clean, and there were before him two loaves, one unclean and the other clean, one of which he touched, should he be in doubt whether he touched the unclean or the clean [loaf, or,] his hands being one unclean and one clean, and before him two loaves, one unclean and one clean, both of which he touched, should he be in doubt [whether he touched] the unclean [loaf] with the unclean [hand], and the clean [loaf] with the clean [hand], or the clean [loaf] with the unclean [hand], and the unclean [loaf] with the clean [hand]: in all [these cases] the hands remain as they were, and the loaves as they were. 3

Footnotes

359:1 Or, should a man touch a loaf of heave after having performed his ablutions, but before his hands are quite dry.

359:2 As the splinter or stone intervenes between his skin and the water, it annuls the effect of the ablution, as the portion of his hand which it covers remains untouched by the water, and therefore unclean. And should he even perform the second ablution for heave, his hand still continues unclean, the second water having the effect only of purifying the first water, but not the hand.

360:3 What was clean remains so, and what was unclean also remains so.

JSON: /api/sources/mishnah/05-chapter-ii.json