Egyptian-Hebrew stream·Mishnah·Berakhot — Chapter IX

Source context

Theme

Tannaitic legal-ethical ruling and its oral-traditional transmission as a distinct mode of normative knowledge

Steiner

not engaged in the GA corpus

Cross-tradition

• Oral Torah (Jewish Tannaitic tradition)The Mishnah's chapter-level rulings preserve the Oral Torah's method of preserving normative judgments through repetition and memorization, structurally parallel to other ancient traditions of oral canonical transmission such as the Vedic shruti.
• Aristotelian practical reason (phronesis)The Mishnah's case-based reasoning about correct conduct exhibits cross-tradition congruence with Aristotelian phronesis insofar as both derive universal norms through the disciplined examination of particular human situations.

Chapter IX

CHAPTER IX.

§ 1. He who sees a place wherein wonders were wrought unto Israel, says, "Blessed be He who wrought wonders unto our ancestors in this place." On seeing a place from which idolatry has been extirpated, he says, "Blessed be He who hath extirpated idolatry out of our land."

§ 2. On comets, earthquakes, lightnings, thunder, and tempests, say, "Blessed be He whose might and omnipotence fill the universe." On seeing mountains, hills, seas, rivers, and deserts, he says, "Blessed is He who created the world." R. Jehudah saith, when a man sees the ocean, he is to say, "Blessed is He who created the great sea;" this blessing he is to say who sees the ocean at intervals only. On [genial] rains and at the receipt of good news, he says, "Blessed be He who is good and beneficent." On hearing evil tidings, he says, "Blessed is the true [righteous] judge."

§ 3. He who has built a new house, or bought new furniture, says, "Blessed is He who has kept us alive," &c. Man is bound to say the blessing for evil without reference to the good that may accrue from it; and for good without reference to the evil that may accrue from it. He who supplicates for that which has already taken place, offers a prayer in vain. If [for instance] a person whose wife is pregnant, prays, "God grant that my wife bring forth a male child:" or if a person on the road hears loud lamentations in the town and prays, "God grant that it may not concern any of my family." Such as these are prayers in vain.

§ 4. Whoever enters a fortified town must say two prayers; one on his entering, and one on his quitting it. Ben Azai saith four; two on his entering, and two on his quitting it; viz.—he returns thanks for past [mercies] and prays for [mercies] to come.

§ 5. Every man is bound to bless God for evil, as well as he is bound to thank him for [the] good [he receives from Providence]; for it is said, "And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and all thy soul, and all thy might." 1 "With all thy heart" means, with both thy inclinations, the evil as well as the good. "with all thy soul," means, even should he deprive thee of life; and "with all thy might" means, with all thy property. According to another opinion, "with all thy might," signifies with whatever measure [or attribute] he metes out his dispensations unto thee; do

thou thank him as much as thy might possibly permits thee. 2 No man is to behave in an irreverent manner when near the eastern gate [of the Temple], for it is in the direction of the Sanctum Sanctorum. No man is to go on the mountain of the Temple [Moriah] with his stick, his shoes, or with his purse [girdle of money], nor yet with dust-covered feet; nor is he to make it a thoroughfare [to lessen the distance] [short cut], much less is he permitted to spit thereon. All the blessings pronounced in the Temple concluded with the set form, [Blessed be the Lord God of Israel] "from eternity." But since the Epicureans [Atheists] perversely taught, there is but one state of existence, it was directed that men should close their benedictions with the form [Blessed be the Lord God of Israel] "from eternity to eternity." It was moreover directed that every man should greet his friend by the name of the Lord, as it is said "And, behold, Boaz came from Bethlehem, and said unto the reapers, The Lord be with you: and they answered him, The Lord bless thee;" 3 and it is also said, "The Lord be with thee, thou mighty man of valour." 4 Moreover, it is said, "Despise not thy mother, because she is grown old." 5 And it is also said, "It is time to be doing for the Lord, they have made void thy law." 6 R. Nathan saith, "They have made void thy law, because the time is arrived when it becomes necessary to be doing for the Lord:"

Footnotes

12:1 Deut. vi. 5.

13:2 In the original, there is a play upon the words ‏מאד‎, ‏מדה‎, ‏מודד‎, and ‏מודה‎, which cannot be preserved in any translation.

13:3 Ruth ii. 4.

13:4 Judges vi. 12.

13:5 Prov. xiii. 22.

13:6 Ps. cxix. 126.

Chapter IX

CHAPTER IX.

§ 1. On the score of kilaim in clothing nothing is prohibited, excepting only woollen with linen; and no garments pollute through leprosy but those made of wool and of flax. The priests, while ministering in the holy Temple, wear no other garments but such as are made of wool or of flax. Camel's wool, [or hair], which has been mixed with sheep's-wool, should the larger proportion be of the camel, it is lawful to add flax thereto; but should the larger portion be of the sheep, such addition is prohibited: if the proportions are equal, it is likewise prohibited. Such is also the case where hemp and flax have been mixed together.

§ 2. Chinese silk and floss silk [i.e. the outward coating of the silk-worm's cocoon or ball, which coating resembles wool], although not considered as kilaim, are nevertheless prohibited to be worn together, on account of their appearance. Bolsters and pillows are

not subject to the rules of kilaim, provided man's flesh do not touch them. Kilaim may not be worn even for an instant, nor may it be put on even over ten other garments, nor yet for the purpose of avoiding oppressive duties.

§ 3. Towels, mantles [for the rolls of the law], and bathing cloaks, are not subject to the laws of kilaim. R. Eleazar, however, prohibits them. Barbers' cloths are prohibited on the score of kilaim.

§ 4. Shrouds for the dead, and saddle-cloths of an ass, are not subject to the law of kilaim; but the latter must not be borne on the shoulder, even to carry dung therein.

§ 5. Dealers in clothes may, according to their custom, carry garments of kilaim for sale; but they may not carry them with the intention of protecting themselves therewith in warm weather against the sun, or in wet weather against the rain. Those, however, who are particular [in the observance of the law], tie the garments on a stick, and carry them over their shoulders.

§ 6. Those who sew garments [tailors], may sew clothes of kilaim in their usual way [placing the garment on their laps], but they must not so place it with the intention of protecting themselves therewith, in warm weather against the sun, or in rainy weather against the wet. Those, however, who are particular [in the observance of the law], place the garment on the ground to sew it.

§ 7. ‏ברסין‎ [a kind of woollen counterpane, Lat. birrus], and ‏ברדיסין‎ [a kind of woollen blanket, Lat. bardiacus], and ‏דלמטיקיון‎ [Lat. dalmatica, or dalmatian cloaks], and ‏פינון‎ [Greek πινος, hose made of uncombed wool], are not to be worn until they have been examined. R. José saith, "that examination is not necessary with those which come from the sea-coast, or are brought from beyond seas," because the legal presumption is, that they have been made of hemp. Shoes or boots made of skin and lined with felt, are not subject to the law of kilaim.

§ 8. Nothing is prohibited on the score of kilaim but what has been spun and woven; as it is said Deut. xxii. 11, "Thou shalt not wear ‏שעטנז‎, a garment of divers sorts," [i.e. that which is hackled, spun, and twisted]. R. Simeon ben Eleazar saith, "Whosoever wears kilaim deviates from the right path, and causes his heavenly Father also to deviate from him."

§ 9. It is prohibited to mix felt [with flax], because it is made of combed wool; it is also prohibited to put a hem or border of wool to a garment of linen, because it resembles the other [woven] part. R. José saith, "It is prohibited to tie a scarlet woollen band [over a

linen shirt], because it is sewn on before it is tied; also to tie a woollen cord or band to a linen one, to gird one's loins withal, even though there should be a leather strap between [the two bands]."

The letters with which weavers and laundresses mark linen [and other garments], are subject to the law of kilaim [so that linen must not be marked with woollen thread; and vice versa]. If a needle [threaded either with linen or woollen thread] has been passed once only through a garment [without drawing it back through another place, thereby forming a stitch], it causes no connection, and is consequently not kilaim, and it is permitted to withdraw it on the Sabbath-day. But if the needle has been passed through twice, so that both ends of the thread are on the same side [of the stuff out of which the garment is made], that is a connection, and whoever withdraws it on the Sabbath-day is guilty. R. Jehudah saith, "it is necessary that the needle should have passed through three times." A sack and a wicker basket, to which a piece of linen or of woollen is tied, are kilaim [if sewn together].

Chapter IX

CHAPTER IX.

§ 1. R. Akivah saith, "Whence is it [to be inferred] that carrying an idol maketh unclean, even as menstruation doth? From the text, 'Thou shalt cast them away as a menstruous cloth: thou shalt say unto it [the idol], get thee hence.' 1 Even as the carrying of a menstruous cloth defileth, so does likewise the carrying of an idol."

§ 2. Whence is it [to be inferred] that a ship is clean? From the text, "The way of a ship in the heart [midst] of the sea." 2 Whence is it [to be inferred] that in a garden-bed, six hands square, five different kinds of seed may be sown; [i.e.] four [kinds] in the four corners of the garden-bed, and the fifth in the middle? 3 From the text, "For as the earth, bringeth forth her bud, and the garden causeth ‏זְרוּעֶיהָ‎, her seeds, to spring forth." 4 The text does not say, ‏זַרְעָהּ‎ [her seed, in the singular, as if of one kind only], but ‏זְרוּעֶיהָ‎, [her seeds of various kinds].

§ 3. Whence is it [to be inferred] that a woman who sheds semen on the third day [after coition] is unclean? From the text, "And be ye ready against the third day." 5 Whence is it [to be inferred] that a circumcised infant is to be bathed [washed] on the third day [after circumcision], even though that falls on the Sabbath? From the text, "And it came to pass on the third day, when they were sore," 6 Whence is it [to be inferred] that a red string is to be tied to the head of the scapegoat? 7 From the text, "Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall become white as snow." 8

§ 4. Whence is it [to be inferred] that anointing is [as unlawful] as drinking on the day of atonement? Although there is no [absolute proof] for this assertion, there is an indication thereof in the text, "Let it come into his bowels like water, and like oil into his bones." 9

§ 5. He [is likewise guilty] who carries out wood sufficient to boil a light egg, spices sufficient to season a light egg; and [different kinds of spice are to be] computed together. Nut-shells, pomegranate peels, isatis [woad], and madder, sufficient to dye a small cap-cloth; urine, alum, ‏בורית‎, and ‏קמוליא‎ and ‏אשלג‎, 10 sufficient to wash a small cap-cloth. R. Jehudah saith, "sufficient to pass over a blood-stain, [by way of experiment to see if it can be taken out]."

§ 6. Pimento the smallest quantity, extract of pitch the smallest quantity; all kinds of spice [perfumes] and of metals [ores] the smallest quantity. Altar stones and altar dust, 11 fragments of rolls of

the law, and fragments of their wrappers [gnawed to pieces by moths] the smallest quantity; because these things are preserved to be secreted. R. Jehudah saith, also, "whoever carries out the smallest quantity of what has been used for idol-worship; for it is said, 'And there shall cleave nought of the accursed thing to thine hand.'" 12

If a man carry out the box of a dealer in spices [apothecary], although there be various kinds [of spice] therein, he is [only] bound to bring one sin-offering. Garden seeds, [rather] less than the size of a dried fig. R. Jehudah ben Bethera saith, "Five [things there are of which, should a man carry the smallest quantity, he is guilty], cucumber seeds two [grains],pumpkin seeds two [grains],Egyptian bean-seed [two grains], a clean 13 live grasshopper any portion [however small], [if it be] dead the size of a dried fig. A vineyard bird 14 any [the smallest] portion [be it] dead or alive." R. Jehudah saith, "He likewise [is guilty]who carries out any [the smallest] portion of an unclean live grasshopper, because these are preserved for children to play with."

Footnotes

49:1 Isa. xxx. 22.

50:2 Prov. xxx. 19.

50:3 Vide Treatise Kilaim, chap. III. § 1.

50:4 Isa. lxi. 11.

50:5 Exod. xix. 11.

50:6 Genes. xxxiv. 25.

50:7 Lev. xvi. 8, 20–22.

50:8 Isa. i. 18.

50:9 Ps. cxix. 18.

50:10 Commentators do not satisfactorily explain the meaning of these three words. Dr. Jost asserts, that ‏בורית‎ is alkaline salt; that ‏אשלג‎, derived from ‏שלג‎, snow, is a kind of frothy soap; and that ‏קמוליא‎ is the creta-cimolia, of which Pliny states (Hist. Nat. lib. v. 57), that it is used for washing.

50:11 From the Temple at Jerusalem.

51:12 Deut. xiii. 17.

51:13 Such as may be eaten. (Vide Lev. xi. 22).

51:14 It is nowhere explained what particular bird is meant by this designation; probably it is grasshopper. (Vide Choolin, fo. 65).

Chapter IX

CHAPTER XI.

§ 1. Whoever throws [something] from a private reshuth into the public reshuth, or from the public reshuth into a private reshuth, is guilty; from one private reshuth into another private reshuth, [there being] a public reshuth between the two, R. Akivah pronounces him guilty; but the sages absolve him.

§ 2. How is this to be understood? [Suppose] two balconies project [from the private reshuth of the houses to which they respectively belong] into the public reshuth, and face each other, whoever reaches [hands] or throws any thing out of one into the other, is absolved. If both [balconies] be in one row, he who reaches [hands something out of one into the other] is guilty, but he who throws [any thing from one into the other] is absolved; for such [reaching or handing] was [part of] the work of the Levites [in their ministry at the tabernacle, viz.] two waggons stood next to each other in the public reshuth, and the boards [of the tabernacle] they handed from one waggon into the other, but they did not throw them. If a heap of mould [dug out] of a pit, or a rock [stone], be ten hands high and four wide, whoever takes [any thing] away from either, or puts [any thing] thereon, is guilty; [should the size thereof be] less than this, [ten hands by four], he is absolved.

§ 3. If, from [a distance of] four amoth, a man throws [something] against the wall [should it hit] higher than ten hands [from the ground], it is as if he threw [it] in the air; [should it hit] lower than ten hands [from the ground], it is as if he threw [it] on the ground. He who throws [any thing] on the ground, [to the distance of] four amoth, is guilty. If he threw [it] within the four amoth, but it rolled beyond the four amoth, he is absolved. [If he threw it] beyond the four amoth, and [it] rolled back again within them, he is guilty.

§ 4. He who throws [something] into the sea, [to the distance of] four amoth, is absolved. If a pool of water be traversed by a public reshuth [thoroughfare], whoever throws [any thing] into it [to the distance of] four amoth, is guilty. What [depth] constitutes a pool? Less than ten hands [deep]. Any pool which is [occasionally] traversed as a public reshuth [thoroughfare], whoever throws [any thing] into it [to the distance of] four amoth, is guilty.

§ 5. He who throws from the sea to the shore, or from the shore to the sea; from the sea to the ship, or from the ship to the sea, or

from one ship into another, is absolved. If ships are fastened together, [things] may be moved [conveyed] from one into the other; if they are not fastened together, even though they touch, [things] must not be moved [conveyed] from one into the other.

§ 6. If a man throws [something] and, after it has left his hand, he remembers [it is Sabbath], should that [which he has thrown] be caught up by any other [person], or snapped up by a dog, or should it become ignited [and burnt in the air], he [who has thrown it] is absolved. Has he thrown [something] with intent to wound either man or beast, and remembers [that it is Sabbath] before the wound is inflicted, [as long as the object is not hit], he is absolved. The rule is, all those who [when guilty] are bound to bring a sin offering, do not become guilty, unless [both] the beginning and end, [result of their offence] be unwittingly [inadvertently]. If the beginning be unwittingly and the end wittingly [premeditated], or if the beginning be wittingly [premeditated], and the end unwittingly [accidental] [in either case] they [the offenders] are absolved; unless [as has already been stated], both beginning and end [result of the offence] be unwittingly [inadvertently] committed.

Chapter IX

CHAPTER IX.

§ 1. All the roofs of a town 1 [form] one reshuth, provided always there be not one roof, ten hands higher or ten hands lower [than the rest]. Such is the dictum of R. Meir; but the sages hold [that] every roof forms a separate reshuth. R. Simeon saith, "Roofs, as well as courts and wood-stores [inclosed places, form] one reshuth,

[for [the carrying and conveying of] all [such] utensils as were actually] therein [when] the Sabbath-rest [began], but not for those utensils [which were] in the house [when] the Sabbath-rest [began]."

§ 2. If a large roof he next adjoining a small one, [the owners of] the large [roof] are permitted [to carry utensils thither from the house], but [the owners of] the small [roof] are prohibited [so to do]. If a large court opens into a small one, through a gap [or breach in the wall], [the inmates of] the large [court] are permitted [by means of erub to carry or convey through the breach], but [the inmates of] the small [court] are prohibited [so to do], because it [the smaller court] is considered as a door [entry] to the large [court]. If a court [through the fall of its walls] is laid open towards the public reshuth, whosoever brings any thing from a private reshuth into the court, or

from the court into a private reshuth, is guilty. Such is the dictum of R. Eleazar. The sages hold, "that [whoever brings any thing] from the court into the public reshuth, or from the public reshuth, is absolved; since [by the fall of its walls, and the consequent opening] the court is become like carmelith."

§ 3. A court, [the corner walls of which have fallen down on the Sabbath, so] that [it] has been laid open towards the public reshuth on two sides; and also a house [which by the fall of the corner wall is thus] laid open on two sides; or an entry, the beam and posts of which have been removed, it is permitted [to the inmates to carry or convey thence] on that [particular] Sabbath; but it is prohibited [so to do] for the future, [on any subsequent day of rest]. Such is the dictum of R. Jehudah; but R José saith, "If it were permitted on that [particular] Sabbath, it would also be permitted for the future; but if it is prohibited for the future [on any subsequent day of rest], it is also prohibited on that [particular] Sabbath."

§ 4. If an attic be built over two [adjoining] houses—likewise bridges, the avenues to which are open at both ends—it is lawful [to carry or convey] underneath on the Sabbath. Such is the dictum of R. Jehudah; but the sages prohibit it. Moreover, R. Jehudah further said, "It is lawful to combine, by [means of] erub, an alley that is open at both ends," but the sages prohibit it.

Footnotes

91:1 In the East all roofs are flat.

Chapter IX

CHAPTER IX.

§ 1. Persons who, in consequence of being [legally] unclean, or on a distant journey, did not observe the first passover, must observe the second. They also who, through error or compulsory force, have been prevented observing the first, must observe the second passover. Then why does the text (Numb. ix. 10) particularly mention "the unclean person, or he who is on a distant journey"? in order to teach us that in case of neglect of the observance of the second passover by them, they only do not incur the penalty of utter excision n 7, but others do incur it.

§ 2. What must be considered a distant journey? According to R. Akivah, it is from Moodaim [‏מודעים‎], 1 and beyond, and from all places around Jerusalem, situated at the same distance. R. Eleazar says, "Any distance beyond the outside of the threshold of the court of the Temple, must be considered as comprehended under that term." R. José says, "It was to denote this, that it is directed that a dot must be placed over the ‏ה‎ in the word ‏רהוקה‎ [signifying 'distant'], to indicate that it is not necessary that a person should actually be on a distant road, but that he is considered as distant while he has not passed beyond the threshold of the court of the Temple."

§ 3. What is the difference between the first and second Passover? They differ, that in respect to the first mentioned, nothing leavened may be seen nor found in the house; while on the second, leavened and unleavened may be had together in the house [whilst the sacrifice is eaten]. By the eating of the first mentioned, it is necessary

to say the "Hallel," but not by the last mentioned; but it is necessary to say the "Hallel" during the time either is sacrificed: both must be roasted, and eaten with unleavened-cakes and bitter herbs; and [the sacrifice of] both supersedes the Sabbath.

§ 4. When a paschal sacrifice was brought under circumstances of legal impurity, it might not be eaten by men having a running issue, or by women suffering under an excessive flow of menses, by those in their ordinary menstrual period, and by lying-in women; but if they have eaten thereof, they do not thereby incur the penalty of utter excision, ‏כרת‎. R. Eleazar considers these as also not subject to that punishment, if they have entered the sanctuary in that state.

§ 5. What is the difference between the Passover as celebrated in Egypt, and that observed by later generations? The Egyptian Passover was specially ordered to be purchased on the 10th of Nissan, and it was required that its blood should be sprinkled with a bunch of hyssop on the lintel, and on the two side-posts of the door, and also that it should be eaten with unleavened-bread on the first night of the Passover in a hasty manner; whilst it is required to abstain during the Passover of later generations, from all leaven during the whole seven days of its duration.

§ 6. R. Joshua says, "I heard once [of my teachers] that the animal which was substituted for another, intended as a paschal sacrifice, might be offered; and I have also heard, that it might not be offered: and I am unable to explain this." R. Akivah says, "I will explain it: if a paschal offering had been lost, and is again found, before the animal intended to replace it had been slaughtered, it must be left to pasture until it contracts a legal blemish, when it is to be sold, and peace-offerings purchased with its proceeds; and it is even so with the animal substituted for it, and if it was found after the other animal had been already killed, it may be sacrificed as a peace-offering, as also any animal substituted for it."

§ 7. If a person has set apart, or selected as a paschal-offering, a she-goat or a ewe-lamb, or a male of two years old, they must be left to pasture until they contract a [legal] blemish; they must then be sold, and the proceeds paid to the fund of voluntary burnt-offerings. 2 If a person who has selected his paschal-offering die [in the

interim, before it is sacrificed], his son cannot bring it as a paschal offering, but must bring it as a peace-offering. 3

§ 8. When a paschal sacrifice has become mixed with other [animals intended] as sacrifices, they must all be left to pasture till they contract a [legal] blemish; they are then to be sold, and [the owner] must bring for the price obtained for the finest animal among them, another sacrifice of each kind of offering [with which it was mixed], and the loss is to be defrayed from the private means of the owner. A paschal-offering which had become mixed with first-born [of animals], may, according to R. Simeon, be eaten by a company of priests.

§ 9. When a company have lost their paschal sacrifice, and say to some one, "Go, seek, and slaughter it for us," and he went, found, and slaughtered it, whilst the company had also slaughtered one; if his had been slaughtered first, he shall eat of it, and the others shall join with him in eating; but if theirs had been first slaughtered, they shall eat of theirs and he of his; if it is uncertain which had been slaughtered first, or that both had been slaughtered at one time, then shall he eat of his paschal-offering, of which the others are not permitted to partake, and their’s must be burned; but they are not bound to observe a second Passover. If he had told them, "If I should stop out long, go ye and slaughter a paschal-sacrifice for me," and he went, found, and slaughtered [the lost paschal-sacrifice], whilst the others had also slaughtered one: if theirs had been first slaughtered, they shall eat it, and he may eat it with them; but if his had been first slaughtered, he shall eat of his, and they of theirs; if it be uncertain which sacrifice had been slaughtered first, or that both had been slaughtered at one time, then shall they eat theirs, but he is not permitted to eat thereof with them; and his sacrifice must be burned, but he is not bound to observe a second Passover. If he said to them, ["Slaughter a paschal offering for me should I stay away,"] and they had said to him ["Seek and slaughter for us our lost paschal sacrifice,"] they shall all eat of that which had been slaughtered first; 4 if it is uncertain which had been first slaughtered,

then both must be burned; but if there was no expressed agreement between all the parties, they are not to be considered as at all connected with each other, [and each must eat his sacrifice separately].

§ 10. When the paschal sacrifices of two companies have become mixed, each company shall take one [of the animals], and a member of each company shall go to the other, whilst a member of that company goes to the first mentioned, and each company shall thus address the member of the other: "If this paschal offering be ours, we withdraw from your company, and be thou numbered with us; but should it be yours, then we withdraw from ours, and will be numbered with you;" 5 and thus five companies, of five members each, and ten, of ten, [shall act], namely, that one of each company shall conjoin with him one of another company, and shall thus address him. 6

§ 11. When a paschal offering of two individuals has become mixed, each shall take one of the animals to himself, and invite a person from the street [a stranger] to eat it with him; these individuals shall then go to each other, and thus address each other's guest: "If this sacrifice is mine, withdraw from this, and be numbered with me, but if it is yours, then I do withdraw from mine, and will be numbered with you." 7

Footnotes

119:1 This is the place mentioned so often in Josephus, and in the history of the Maccabees, under the name of Modain. Its distance from Jerusalem was stated to have been fifteen miles, ‏מילין‎; which it is calculated may be walked over by a person of ordinary powers, in the space between the rising of the sun, and commencement of the evening [the period during which the paschal sacrifice might be slaughtered], in the months of Nissan and Tishri, or during the period of the vernal and autumnal equinoxes, when the days and nights are of equal length.

120:2 There was a chest in the Temple for the reception of voluntary gifts for that purpose.

121:3 This does, of course, only apply in case that son had not been included among those appointed and numbered to eat it.

121:4 The difference between this and the preceding proposition of our Mishna consists, that in the preceding part he said, "Slaughter it for me if I stop away," the others did not say, "We will do so," but here is an expressed mutual agreement to do certain acts by both parties.

122:5 And their paschal sacrifice shall be eaten by the other company.

122:6 As above stated.

122:7 The necessity for these forms is two-fold: First, because it is a maxim, that one individual cannot be numbered in two companies, and eat of the paschal sacrifice of both; and, secondly, because every paschal offering must have owners to eat, and can only be eaten by the owners, and by those appointed and numbered to eat it with them.

Chapter IX

CHAPTER IX.

§ 1. There are certain classes of women who, although lawfully married, are, nevertheless, prohibited to marry [in the event of the death of their husbands without issue] their brothers-in-law by Yeboom. Others may marry their brothers-in-law, although their

marriage with their deceased husbands was illegitimate. Some, again, are permitted to both husband and brother-in-law; while others are prohibited to both. Lawfully married, and yet prohibited to their brother-in-law, are,—a widow married to an ordinary priest, whose brother is a high-priest; [also] when a desecrated priest, who has a brother properly qualified, marries a qualified priest's daughter; when an Israelite, who has a bastard brother, was married to an Israelite woman; when a bastard marries a bastardess, and he has a legitimate Israelite brother:—all these marriages are indeed legal, but the females may, nevertheless, in case of their husband's death, not marry their brothers-in-law by Yeboom.

§ 2. The following women may be married to their brothers-in-law by Yeboom, although they had been illegitimately married to their husbands:—when a high-priest, whose brother is an ordinary priest, has betrothed a widow; when a priest, whose brother is a desecrated priest, had married a profane woman; when a legitimately born Israelite has a bastard brother, and marries a bastardess; or a bastard, whose brother is a legitimately born Israelite, married an Israelite woman:—all these may be married to their brothers-in-law by Yeboom, although they were [in the first instance] illegally married to their deceased husbands. Prohibited to both husband and brother-in-law are:—when a high-priest married a widow, and his brother also became high-priest, or even if only an ordinary priest; when a qualified priest, whose brother is also qualified, had married a profane woman; when a legitimately born Israelite, who has a legitimate brother, marries a bastardess:—all these [women] are prohibited to both husband and brother-in-law, but every other woman [legally married] may be married by Yeboom.

§. 3. In respect to the secondary degrees prohibited by the scribes [see chap. II. § 4], the following is to he observed:—when a woman is related in the secondary degree to her husband, but not to her brother-in-law, 1 she is indeed unlawfully married, but may [if a widow without issue] be married by Yeboom to her late husband's brother; if related in the secondary degree to her brother-in-law, but not to her husband, she cannot be married to her brother-in-law by Yeboom, although the marriage with her late husband was strictly legal; but if related in the secondary degree to both, she is prohibited to both: such a woman has no right to the portion secured

to her by her marriage-contract, 2 nor repayment for the usufructum goods she brought to her husband, nor has she a right to her maintenance, and to repayment for the wear and tear [deterioration] of the property of which her husband had the usufruct; her offspring however, are legitimate, but the husband must be compelled to divorce her. A widow married to a high-priest; or a divorced woman, or one who had performed the ceremony of Chalitzah, married to an ordinary priest; a bastardess, and a female Netin, married to an Israelite; and a legitimately-born Israelite woman married to a Netin, or to a bastard—have a right to their Ketubah [though illegally married.]

§ 4. An Israelite woman who was betrothed to a priest, or is pregnant by one, or is waiting to be married by Yeboom to a priest; a priest's daughter also, who is similarly situated in respect to an Israelite, may not eat of the heave; an Israelite woman betrothed to, or pregnant by, a Levite, or waiting to be married to one by Yeboom; also a Levite's daughter similarly situated in respect to an Israelite, may not eat tithe. A Levite's daughter betrothed to, or pregnant by, a priest, or one who waits to be married to a priest by Yeboom; also a priest's daughter similarly situated in respect to a Levite, may neither eat of the heave-offering, nor of tithe.

§ 5. An Israelite woman married to a priest, may eat of the heave, and also after his death if left with a son by him; if she then married a Levite she may eat tithe, and also, after his death, if left with a son by him. If she married subsequently an Israelite, she may no longer eat either heave or tithe, not even after the decease of her Israelite husband, in case she was left with a son by him; if after his death his son also died, she may eat tithe; when her son from the Levite dies, she may again eat heave, and when her son from the priest also dies, she may not eat either heave or tithes.

§ 6. A priest's daughter married to an Israelite, may not eat heave, even after his death, if left with a son by him; if she married afterwards a Levite, she may eat tithe, also after his death, if left with a son by him: if she was then again married to a priest, she may eat heave; after the death of her son from the priest, she may no longer eat heave; after the death of her son from the Levite she

may not eat tithe, and if her son: by the Israelite also dies, she returns to her father's house. And the text (Lev. xxii. 13) applies to her case, where it is said, "She shall again return to her father's house as in her youth, and shall eat of her father's meat," [i.e. heave, &c.]

Footnotes

217:1 Ex. gr. The maternal grandmother of the husband; whereas his brothers are related to her by her father's side only.

218:2 Because the marriage is illegal. This want of right to compel the payment of her marriage contract is limited to the sum she actually brought; but she can compel the payment of the ‏תוקפת‎, or voluntary addition by the husband.

Chapter IX

CHAPTER IX.

§ 1. He who in the Ketubah undertakes to his bride, 1 "Right and title have I none to thy property," does [nevertheless] enjoy the usufruct thereof during her lifetime, and if she dies, he inherits from her. 2 Such being the case, what [then] is the effect of his undertaking to her, "Right and title have I none to thy property?" That what she sells, or gives away, is valid. Had he undertaken in writing, "Right and title have I none to thy property, nor to the usufruct thereof;" he is not entitled to the usufruct during her lifetime. R. Jehudah saith, "At all events he has the usufruct of the proceeds

of her property, 3 unless he undertakes to her, 'Right and title have I none to thy property, nor to the fruits thereof, nor to the proceeds of these fruits [henceforth and] for ever.' Had he undertaken to her, 'Right and title have I none to thy property, nor to the fruits thereof [or to the proceeds of these fruits] 4 during thy lifetime, nor at thy death,' he does not enjoy the usufruct during leer life, and at her decease he does not inherit of her." R. Simeon ben Gamaliel saith, "At her decease he does inherit of her, because he has contracted [to do that which is] opposed to what is written in the law; and whosoever contracts [to do that which is] opposed to what is written in the law, his contract is null and void."

§ 2. Should a man dying leave a wife, creditors and heirs, and his property, either as a trust or as a loan is in the hands of other persons, R. Tarphon holds, "It must be given up to the weakest among them." 5 But R. Akivah remarked, "No commiseration [must interfere with] the administration of justice; therefore it [the property] must be given up to the heirs, for all others [creditors] must be sworn, 6 whereas the heirs need not be sworn." 7

§ 3. If he 8 has left fruit reaped [gathered off the ground], whichever [of the parties concerned] first obtains possession thereof, is entitled thereto. Should the wife have taken possession of more than [the amount of] her Ketubah, or the creditor of more than [the amount of] his debt, the surplus must, according to R. Tarphon, be given to the weakest among them; but R. Akivah remarked, "No commiseration [must interfere with] the administration of justice; therefore it [the surplus] must be given up to the heirs, for all others need be sworn, but the heirs need not be sworn."

§ 4. He who appoints his wife saleswoman [in his shop], or administratrix [manager of any part of his property], may have her

sworn 9 whenever he pleases. R. Eleazar saith, "[He may do so under any circumstances], even as to her spindle or her dough."

§ 5. If he has undertaken to her, "Vow or oath will I not impose on thee," he cannot have her sworn, but he may have her heirs sworn, and those who act under her authority. [If he has undertaken to her] "Vow or oath will I not impose on thee, nor on thy heirs, nor on those who act under thy authority, 10 he cannot have her sworn, not her, nor her heirs, nor those who act under her authority? But his heirs can have her sworn, her, her heirs, and those who act by her authority. [If he has undertaken] "Vow or oath shall neither I, nor my heirs, nor those who act by my authority, impose on thee, or on thy heirs, or on those who act by thy authority, 11 neither he, nor his heirs, nor any that act by his authority," can have her sworn, neither her, nor her heirs, nor those who act under her authority.

§ 6. If she [a widow circumstanced as in the preceding § stated], goes [directly] from her husband's grave to her father's house, or should she return to the house of her father-in-law, but is not appointed administratrix [manager of her deceased husband's property], his heirs cannot have her sworn. But if she has been appointed administratrix, the heirs may have her sworn as to the future, but they cannot have her sworn as to the past. 12

§ 7. She who prejudices her own Ketubah, 13 cannot recover unless she be sworn. Should one witness bear testimony that she has [already] been paid, she cannot recover unless she be sworn. [If she is to be paid] out of orphans’ property, or alienated property, or should he [the husband] be absent, she cannot recover unless she be sworn.

§ 8. "Prejudice her Ketubah;" how [can she do so]? [Suppose] her Ketubah was a thousand zooz; the husband asserts, "Thou hast received [the whole amount of] thy Ketubah;" to which she replies, No, I have only received a hundred zooz;" 14 [in that case] she cannot recover [the amount she claims] unless she be sworn. 15 "Should

one witness bear testimony that she has [already] been paid;" how [is this meant]? [Suppose] her Ketubah was a thousand zooz; the husband asserts, "Thou hast received [the whole amount of] thy Ketubah;" to which she replies, "No, thou hast only paid me a hundred zooz." Should one witness bear testimony against her, [and affirm that] she has already been paid, she cannot recover [the amount she claims] unless she be sworn. "Out of alienated property;" how [is this to be understood]? Should he [the husband] have sold his property to others, and she [seeks to] recover [the amount of her Ketubah] from the purchasers, she cannot enforce payment unless she be sworn. 16 "Out of orphans’ property;" how [is this meant]? Should he [the husband] die, and leave his property to his orphan children, and she [seeks to] recover [the amount of her Ketubah] from the orphans, she cannot enforce payment unless she be sworn. "If he [the husband] is absent;" how [is this to be understood]? If he is gone beyond seas, and she [seeks to] recover [the amount of her Ketubah] during his absence, she cannot enforce payment unless she be sworn. R. Simeon saith, 17 "Whenever she [a widow] claims [the amount of] her Ketubah, the heirs of her husband can put her upon her oath: but if she does not claim [the amount of] her Ketubah, the heirs cannot put her upon her oath.

§ 9. If a woman produces her Get, 18 but does not produce a [written] Ketubah, she is [nevertheless] entitled to recover [the standard amount of] her Ketubah. 19 Should she produce her [written] Ketubah, but does not produce her Get, but says, "My Get is lost," to which he [the husband] replies, "My receipt [in discharge of thy Ketubah] is lost;" and likewise, in case a creditor produces his bond, 20 but does not produce the judicial pre-monition: 21 [in either of these cases] they [the wife or the creditor] do not recover [the amount

they respectively claim]. R. Simeon ben Gamaliel saith, "Ever since the time of [public] danger began, a woman can recover [the amount of] her Ketubah without producing the Get, and a creditor can recover [the amount of] his bond without producing the judicial pre-monition. [Should she produce] two Gittin and two Ketuboth, 22 she is entitled to recover the amounts of both Ketuboth. [Should she produce] two Ketuboth and one Get, or two Gittin and one Ketubah, or one Ketubah, one Get, and [proof of her husband's subsequent] decease, 23 she can only recover the amount of one Ketubah; for he who divorces his wife and takes her back, does only take her back under the obligation of her first Ketubah. [Of] a minor, whom his father gives in marriage, the Ketubah [which he has signed] continues valid, as it is in virtue thereof that she continues his wife. Should a proselyte embrace Judaism, together with his wife, her Ketubah remains legally valid, as it is in virtue thereof that she continues his wife."

Footnotes

264:1 The undertaking must be entered into previous to marriage, and is valid, even though but verbal.

264:2 As the undertaking is held to extend to the fee of the property only, but not to the usufruct thereof. And after her death he inherits, because the words, "thy property," lose their legal force at her decease, as the property is then no longer hers.

265:3 The amount of these proceeds being vested in land, or otherwise disposed of, so as to become a fresh source of income.

265:4 These words are in parenthesis in the text.

265:5 Some commentators hold that this expression applies to the creditor whose bond bears the latest date, and whose title is in law held to be the weakest, as he has no claim on the property which his debtor has alienated prior to that date. Others apply the expression to the wife.

265:6 Before they can establish their claim against orphans.

265:7 But succeed to the property as a matter of course. All these enactments arose from the axiom, that moveable property is not liable for debt, which axiom, however, had to be altered when Israelites ceased to be landholders.

265:8 The deceased.

266:9 That she has not abused his confidence, and the trust reposed in her, and that she has not applied his property to his detriment, or to her own advantage, or that of others.

266:10 In case she be divorced.

266:11 Should she be divorced during his absence.

266:12 She can only be called to account for the period after her husband's decease.

266:13 For an explication of this phrase, vide next §.

266:14 She does admit payment of part, and in so doing she destroys the integrity of her Ketubah.

266:15 To the truth of her statement.

267:16 That her husband has not paid her any part of her Ketubah, and that there is no other property out of which she could be paid.

267:17 With reference to the rule laid down in § 4 of this chapter.

267:18 Act or letter of divorce. (Vide Treatise Gittin.)

267:19 That is to say, if the Get be not torn or cancelled, as this is invariably done by the Bethdin at the time the Ketubah is paid. The fact of her not producing her written Ketubah is immaterial, for the law enacts that every woman shall have a Ketubah; it is, therefore, assumed that she has one, even though it is not in her possession.

267:20 After the Sabbatical year, which acquits all debts.

267:21 Which alone preserves his right. (Vide Treatise Shebiith, chap. X., § 4, and Moed Katan, chap. Ill. § 3, note.)

268:22 One Ketubah being dated previous to the first Get, and the second Ketubah previous to the second Get.

268:23 In case her husband received her again as his wife after the divorce, and she now claims a double amount, one under the Get and one as a widow.

Chapter IX

CHAPTER IX.

§ 1. When a husband divorces his wife, and [on delivering the Get] says to her, "Thou art herewith allowed to be married to any man except to A.B.," such a Get is said to be valid by R. Eleazar; but the sages declare it void. How must a husband act in such a case? He must take the Get back, and return it to her, saying at the same time to leer, "Thou art herewith permitted to be married to all men." But if he wrote the exception in the Get, although he took it back and erased it, that Get is void.

§ 2. If the husband said, "Thou art herewith permitted to be married to any man, except to my father or to your father, to my or to your brother, to a slave or to a non-Israelite," or to any other person with whom she is interdicted by law to marry, the Get is valid. If he said, "Thou art herewith permitted to be married to any one, except as a widow to a high priest, or as a divorced woman, or one released by Chalitzah, to an ordinary priest; as a bastardess or Nethinah to an Israelite, or as an Israelitess to a bastard or Netin," or to any with whom the marriage has a legal force, although it was illegally contracted; the Get is void [in all such cases].

§ 3. The essential substance of a Get are the following words: "Thou art [herewith] permitted [to be married] to all men." R. Jehudah saith [the following is the essential part], "Thou hast herewith of me a writing of separation, a letter of divorce, and a document of dismissal, that thou mayest go and be married to any man thou mayest like." The essential substance of a document for the manumission of a slave, is the following: "Thou art herewith a free woman [or man], and thou wilt henceforth [by virtue of this document] be dependant on thyself alone."

§ 4. In three cases a Get is invalid, yet, any child born to the wife

in a subsequent marriage is legitimate, viz. When a husband wrote the Get himself, but there are no subscribing witnesses to it; or, if the attestation was attached to it, but it wanted the date; or, that it was [properly] dated, but attested by one witness only. These are three cases when the Get is void, but in which a child born to the wife in a subsequent marriage is nevertheless legitimate. R. Eleazar saith, "Although there be no attesting witnesses to the Get, it is still valid if the husband delivered it to the wife in the presence of witnesses; and [in respect to bonds given for debt, under similar circumstances] the creditor can recover it from mortgaged property, 1 because the attestation of contracts by witnesses has been instituted, solely with a view to the promotion of order and regularity."

§ 5. When two men sent two Gittin, exactly alike in their contents, and these became interchanged, both Gittin are to be delivered to each woman [in turn]; hence, when one of the said Gittin was lost, the other becomes ineffective. When five men write together in a single Get, the man A. to divorce his wife B., and the man C. his wife D., and so forth, and this is duly attested by the signature of witnesses, this Get will be valid to divorce all these [wives], and must be delivered to each [separately]. If, however, a Get was written on the same page for each woman, and duly subscribed by witnesses, then that Get only is valid to which the signature of the witnesses are read [with]. 2

§ 6. When two Gittin are written by the side of each other [on the same page], and they are undersigned by two witnesses [who sign] in Hebrew, underneath each other, and it is further signed by two other witnesses, who sign in Greek, also underneath each other, then, that Get only is valid to which the first witnesses are read  3

[paragraph continues] But if it was signed alternately by a witness in Hebrew, and by another in Greek, underneath each other, both Gittin are void.

§ 7. If part of a Get was written on the second column of a page, and the witnesses have signed underneath, it is valid. If the witnesses signed it at the beginning of the second column, or in the margin, or on the back of a plain Get, 4 it is void. If the commencement of one Get was written at the side of the commencement of the other, and the witnesses signed in the middle, both are void. [If the end of the one is at the side of the end of the other, and the signatures of the witnesses between them, that with which the attestation is read is valid]. If the commencement of the second Get followed immediately the end of the first, with the names of the witnesses at the bottom [between the two], then that Get only is valid to which, at its conclusion, the names of the witnesses are read. 5

§ 8. A Get written in Hebrew but attested in Greek, or one written in Greek but attested in Hebrew, or to which one witness attested in Hebrew and another in Greek, or one attested by the writer and another witness, is valid. If only the plain [or given] name of a witness is signed to the Get [without his father's name], with the addition of the word "witness," it is valid. Also, if it was signed "son of A.B. witness;" or, when he wrote his own and his father's name, but omitted the word "witness" [it is also valid], for thus was it customary among the, pure or liberal men of Jerusalem. If the surname of either the husband or the wife had also been written in the Get, it is valid likewise. A Get written in consequence of a compulsive legal decree by an Israelite tribunal is valid; but not one which was forcibly imposed by the, mandate of a non-Israelite tribunal. Yet the latter is nevertheless valid, when the non-Israelite tribunal compels it in accordance with the Israelite law, and orders the culprit to conform to what the Israelite law requires of him.

§ 9. When a rumour prevails in a town that a woman had been

betrothed, that woman must be considered as one betrothed. 6 If it is again reported that she had been divorced, she must be considered as a divorced woman; but this is only when no reasons for doubt exist. Reasons for doubt are, for instance, when it is reported that such a one was divorced but conditionally; or that he threw the marriage-bond towards her, and it is doubtful whether it fell nearest to him or her. These are reasons for doubt.

§ 10. Beth Shammai say, "No man may divorce his wife, unless he found in her scandalous behaviour [unchastity], for it is said [Deu. xxiv.], 'Because he found in her some scandalous behaviour [‏ערוה‎];'" but Beth Hillel say, "Even if she spoiled his food, because it is said, [‏ערות דבר‎]". 7 R. Akivah saith, "Even if he found one handsomer than her, for it is said [ibid.] 'If it happen that she found no favor in his eyes.'"

Footnotes

303:1 See chap. V., note 2, page 290 of this Treatise.

303:2 Namely, the last Get on the page, underneath of which the witnesses have signed.

303:3 This will be best understood by the annexed diagram. Supposing the lines under A. and B. to represent two Gittin, written in two columns on the same page, and signed by two witnesses in Hebrew, and by two others in Greek, in a manner that part of their signature appears under each Get. It will be plainly perceived, that the names of the witnesses who write in Hebrew is under the Get to the right, and the names of their fathers under the left hand Get, because Hebrew is written from right to left, but in the p. 304 Greek signatures, as also in that written in any of the modern languages [which are written from left to right], the reverse must necessarily occur, and the names of the witnesses appear under the Get to the left, and that of their fathers under that to the right, and in that case our Mishna decides, that "the Get to which the first witnesses are read is the only valid one," viz. if the Hebrew signatures are the first, then the Get towards the right is valid, but if the Greek signatures are first, then the Get towards the left is the only valid one.

304:4 As contradistinguished from a folded Get, which is signed on the back.

304:5 Viz. the first.

305:6 That is, when there are corroborating circumstances, such as more lights, or more company than usual, having been seen at the house of such a female.

305:7 Which he explains ‏ערוה‎, "unchastity," or ‏דבר‎, "for [any other] cause," though trifling, such as spoiling a dish. R. Akivah will understand from the text, that a man is at liberty to divorce his wife, even without any fault on her part, which he exemplifies by the instance of a man finding a woman fairer than his wife. It was from the ambiguous, or rather vague expression of the quoted text, that these sages have drawn these inferences so opposed to each other, not that they intended, at least the latter two [viz. Beth Hillel and R. Akivah], to apply them practically, for, not to mention that the Halacha, or doctrinal decision, rejects this interpretation of the text by R. Akivah, it must be quite obvious, that no society could exist, in which a husband was at liberty to divorce his wife, the moment he could find another that pleased him better. The limits of a note do not permit to show more amply from various parts of the Talmudical writings, that divorces were always discouraged, and permitted only under peculiar circumstances, and for a legal object. It must therefore suffice to quote the concluding words of the Gemara, Treatise Gittin.—R. Eleazar saith, "Even the altar drops tears when a man divorces the wife and companion of his youth, for thus it is written (Mal. ii. 13, 14), 'And this have ye done again, covering the altar of the Lord with tears, with weeping, and with crying out.… Yet ye say, Wherefore? Because the Lord bath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, against whom thou hast dealt treacherously, although she is thy companion, and the wife of thy covenant.'"

Chapter IX

CHAPTER IX.

§ 1. The skin [of a slaughtered animal], 1 the broth, the meat dissolved by boiling, that which adheres to the bottom of a saucepan, 2 the fragments of meat adhering to the skin 3 when it is removed from the animal, bones [containing marrow], sinews, horns and hoofs, are computed together to form [with the edible matter or flesh in them] the quantity of the size of an egg, when they are liable to contract and communicate pollution to other edibles, but not the pollution of Nebelah. Thus also, if a person slaughters an unclean animal for a heathen, it pollutes edibles while it struggles, but it does not communicate the pollution of a dead body till life is extinct, or, if its head had been quite chopped off. There are consequently more cases in which edibles contract pollution than there are in respect to pollution by Nebelah. R. Jehudah saith, in reference to the fragments of meat adhering to the skin, "If any of these, when computed together, are of the size of an olive in any one place, guilt is thereby incurred." 4

§ 2. In the following instances the skin is to be considered as flesh:—human skin, that of the domestic swine, 5 and, according to R. José, also that of wild swine, the tender skin on the hump of a young camel, 6 and that of the head of a young calf, the skin [between] the split hoofs, that over the matrix, and that of an animal fœtus in embryo, also that under the tail, and those of the ferret, the chameleon, the lizard, and the snail. R. Jehudah saith, "That of a lizard must be considered like a weasel[’s skin]." 7 If any of these had been tanned or converted into leather, or that they had been sufficiently trodden [in the process of converting the skin into leather], they are clean, excepting human skin. R. Jochanan ben Nouri saith, "The eight creeping things have skins." 8

§ 3. When a person removes the skin of a domestic or wild animal, whether clean or unclean, 9 large or small, in order to cover himself therewith, 10 pollution is contracted and communicated when as much skin is removed as can be taken hold of, 11 and if to make a bottle of skin, 12 until the skin over the breast is removed. 13 If the skinning was commenced from the legs, the whole is considered as connecting, and subject to contract and communicate pollution. The skin covering the neck is not considered as connecting by R. Jochanan ben Nouri, but the sages do so consider it until the whole skin is removed.

§ 4. When there is the size of an olive of flesh on a skin in one spot, any person who-touches the filaments proceeding therefrom, or the hairs on the skin which are opposite [and touch the said flesh], is unclean. If there were two pieces of flesh of the size of two half olives each, it pollutes by being carried, but not by the mere touching it. Such is the dictum of R. Ishmael, but R. Akivah holds "That they do not pollute either by being carried or touched," but he admits, "That if the size of two half olives were stuck on a skewer and moved, it is unclean." Why, then, does [R. Akivah], in respect to the skin, hold it to be clean? Because the skin prevents their contact.

§ 5. Whoever touches a marrow-bone of a dead body, 14 or of a consecrated sacrifice, 15 whether the said bones are open or closed, is unclean. Whoever touches a marrow-bone of an animal that is Nebelah, or of creeping animals, is clean when the bone is closed, but if it is open ever so little, pollution is contracted by contact with it. Whence is it proved that [the marrow-bone of a Nebelah] does also pollute the person carrying it? Because it is said [Lev. xi. 24, 25], "Whoever toucheth [the carcase]," and "Whoever beareth aught of the carcase," &c., which proves that whatever communicates by

being touched, does also communicate it by being carried, and that which cannot communicate pollution by contact, cannot communicate it by being carried.

§ 6. The egg of a creeping animal, in which the young animal is already developed, is clean, but when it has the smallest perforation it renders unclean. In respect to a mouse which is yet half flesh and half earth, 16 if the flesh is touched it renders unclean, but not if only the earth thereof had been touched. R. Jehudah saith, "Whoever touches the earth which immediately adjoins the fleshy part is also unclean."

§ 7. Members, 17 or pieces of flesh which had been forcibly torn off a [live] animal, 18 but which are yet pendant to it, are subject to contract and communicate pollution like other edibles, while they remain thus pendant in their place, 19 but require the susceptibility of contracting pollution to be communicated to them, 20 before they contract it. When the animal was slaughtered they may contract pollution by its blood, according to R. Meir, but R. Simeon saith, "They do not thereby contract it." When the animal dies of itself, it requires the susceptibility of contracting pollution to be communicated to it before it is unclean. 21 The [pendulous] member does, however, pollute as a member taken off an animal while yet alive, but not as Nebelah. Such is the dictum of R. Meir; but R. Simeon saith, "That member or the pieces of flesh [above mentioned] are clean."

§ 8. A limb or piece of flesh torn from a human body, but yet pendant to it, is clean [if the person is alive], 22 but should he die, the flesh is clean, but the limb pollutes as a limb severed from a living being, but not as a part of a dead body. Such is the dictum of R. Mein; but R. Simeon holds the said limb to be clean.

Footnotes

347:1 Containing a piece of meat of less size than that of an egg.

347:2 Or, as Maimonides explains the original expression, ‏קייפה‎, the spice put in to render the meat palatable.

347:3 The original word ‏אלל‎, is variously explained. (See ‏זבחים‎, chap. III. § 4, and the Commentary of Bartenora.) The rendering we have given is corroborated by the end of this Mishna, and appears the most plausible.

347:4 Pollution is communicated by Nebelah when of the size of an olive only.

347:5 Because it is soft and edible.

347:6 Which has not yet carried any burden.

347:7 Whose skin does not contract pollution.

347:8 And their skin, not being deemed the same as their flesh, does not contract pollution, even as that of the weasel.

348:9 That is, whether the animal and he that skins it is clean, or that the animal is unclean, and he that skins it is clean.

348:10 Or, to spread it over a bed or table.

348:11 Viz., two handbreaths.

348:12 For this purpose the skin is not cut open the whole length of the animal, but is cut round, from the neck to the tail, so as to form a bag, which in eastern countries is used to put liquids in.

348:13 Because the breast is the most difficult part of the operation.

348:14 When a person touches or carries any part of a dead body, should it even be so small as a grain, he contracts pollution in consequence.

348:15 Which remained after the third day [‏פיגול‎ and ‏נותר‎]. These render the person who touches them unclean. (See Treatise Yadaim.)

349:16 It was anciently supposed that some species of mice were produced on dunghills, &c., from the soil, so that one part of the body was animated before the other.

349:17 That is, pieces consisting of flesh, bone, and sinews, are thus called.

349:18 In a manner that it will never heal nor grow again.

349:19 That is, it is not unclean of itself, as Nebelah, but it can contract pollution by coming in contact with a ‏שרץ‎, or creeping animal.

349:20 By being moistened.

349:21 Because, as it was torn off while the animal was alive, it cannot be considered as Nebelah.

349:22 Because the expression of the text is, "When a man dieth within a tent," &c. (Numbers xix. 15.)

JSON: /api/sources/mishnah/12-chapter-ix.json