Talmud zu Schemot 30:12

“Rebbi Jehudah said:, testified” etc. Rebbi Berekhiah said, the reason of Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai is¹¹²Ex. 30:12., this they shall give, twelve tribes shall give. Rebbi Tabi in the name of Rav Hamnuna: So answer the Sages to Rebbi Jehudah¹¹³Who reports the opinion of Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai approvingly.. A private purification sacrifice is let to die; a public purification sacrifice is not left to die¹¹⁴Once a sacrifice has been designated as a purification sacrifice it can neither be redeemed nor used for any other sacrifice. If such an animal was lost, another animal was used, and then the original was found again (or a few similar situations), nothing can be done with it, it must be left to die.. A private flour offering¹¹⁵Of a Cohen, as noted in the Mishnah. is brought totally, but no public flour offering is brought totally. This is difficult, how can one argue with a person about something with which he does not agree¹¹⁶ג reads: “by an argument that can be objected to.”? “For no public purification sacrifice is left to die; Rebbi Jehudah says, it shall be left to die.¹¹⁷Mishnah Yoma6:2; see there Halakhah 1, Note 33.” And he objects to them, are these not private flour offerings¹¹⁸The argument of Cohanim to which Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai objects implies that the half sheqel is not given as a tax but to acquire a minute part of the public sacrifices, which imply that there are no public offerings at all, only those of a private partnership.? They answer him, from the moment when it is delivered to the public, it is treated as a public offering¹¹⁹The argument is impossible since biblical rules for private and public offerings differ in some respects.. It is written, everybody being counted¹²⁰Ex. 30:13., Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Neḥemiah. One said, everyone who crossed the Sea shall give, the other one said, everyone being counted¹²¹In Numbers where it is made explicit that the tribe of Levi was not counted with the remainder of the tribes. Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai cannot explain this verse, unless he explains that Ex. 30:11–16 is not the basis of the duty to pay the sheqel, but Ben Kovri (Kokhri, Bukhri, Bikhri) cannot explain the inclusion in Mishnah 4. shall give. He who said, everyone who crossed the Sea shall give, supports Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai; he who said, everyone being counted shall give, supports Ben Kovri.

HALAKHAH: “One who says, I seduced X’s daughter,” etc. ¹⁴³The entire Halakhah is part of a larger text in Šebuot 5:7. Rebbi Isaac asked: Would he have to pay the slave’s value on his own testimony? What is his problem? Are the entire 30 [šeqel]¹³⁸The payment is a fixed sum of 30 šeqel (Ex. 21:32) whose status is discussed in the Halakhah. a fine or is only the excess over his value a fine? If you say, the entire 30 [šeqel] are a fine, he does not pay. If you say, the excess over his value is a fine, he pays¹⁴⁴The slave’s market value.. There, we have stated¹⁴⁵Mishnah Šebuot 5:5. The topic of the Mishnah is the obligation to bring a purification sacrifice for a false oath (Lev. 5:4). The sacrifice is due for “an expression of the lips for worse or good”, i. e., if the oath changes the situation as far as monetary obligations are concerned. If A was accused by B to have seduced B’s daughter (when B has no witnesses to prove his claim) and A swore falsely, A is obligated for a sacrifice since by admitting guilt he would have had to pay for shame and diminution of value.: “‘Your ox killed my slave’! The other said, ‘he did not kill’. ‘I want you to swear’ and he said ‘Amen’, he is free.¹⁴⁶This Tanna assumes that the entire 30 šeqel to be paid for the slave are a fine which cannot be collected upon the confession of the guilty party. Therefore, the oath did not change the situation as far as monetary obligations are concerned and no purification sacrifice is possible.” Rebbi Ḥaggai said before Rebbi Yose, explain it if he killed a slave afflicted with boils¹⁴⁷If the slave could not be sold on the slave market, he has no value and certainly all of the 30 šeqel are a criminal fine and not due upon confession.. He said to him, what does it say afterwards¹⁴⁸This is a baraita, not the continuation of the Mishnah.? “‘Your ox killed my son’! The other said, ‘he did not kill’. ‘I want you to swear’ and he said ‘Amen’, he is obligated.¹⁴⁹Since he would have to pay damages upon agreeing that his ox did the damage, his false oath requires a sacrifice.” Why do you not explain it that he was afflicted with boils, then he would be free¹⁵⁰If no damages were due.. Rebbi Ḥaggai said before Rebbi Yose, explain it following him who says “he shall pay the redemption of his person”, the one’s who caused the damage¹⁵¹Ex. 21:30: “If weregilt is imposed on him, he shall pay the redemption of his person, all that is imposed on him.” The question is, to which person does “his person” refer? Is the weregilt assessed by the person killed or the owner of the ox? The question is discussed in Baba Qama Tosephta 4:7, Yerushalmi 4:7 (4c), Babli 27a, 40a; Babli Makkot 2b; Mekhilta dR. Ismael Mišpaṭim p. 285, dR. Simeon bar Ioḥai p. 182.. He said to him, if following him who says “he shall pay the redemption of his person”, the one’s who caused the damage, everything is a fine¹⁵²In that case there is no direct connection between the amount to be paid and the damage caused.. Can one say to him, be also in the clear with Heaven¹⁵³Is there a moral obligation to pay when there is no legal way to force payment?? Let us hear from the following: It happened that Rabban Gamliel knocked out his slave Tebi’s tooth¹⁵⁴A slave has to be freed if his owner injures one of his limbs (Ex. 21:26,27). On the other hand, there is an interpretation of Lev. 25:46 which reads the statement about Gentile slaves, “for ever you shall have them work for you” that manumission of Gentile slaves without a good reason is forbidden. In the Yerushalmi (Yebamot11:6, Note 134) this interpretation is ascribed to R. Yose the Galilean, in the Babli to Rav Jehudah (Berakhot 47b) or R. Aqiba (Soṭah 3b). Another interpretation of the verse [Babli Niddah 47a; Sifra Behar Parašah 6(6)] insists that slaves can be used only for work, not sexual purposes.. He came to Rebbi Joshua¹⁵⁵The Babli, Baba Qama 74b/75a, reads the story as a ruling by R. Joshua that anybody who freed himself by confession from a fine cannot be fined even if later the fact is proven by two witnesses. It holds that Rabban Gamliel should have produced witnesses before talking informally to R. Joshua who even in a private setting could not forget about his position of president of the court. and said to him, I found a reason to free my slave Tebi. He said to him, what do you have in your hand? Fines can be imposed only by witnesses! Could they not say to him, do your duty before Heaven? That means one does not tell him, do your duty before Heaven! Rebbi Gamliel ben Avina¹⁵⁶Elsewhere, the name is Ininia (cf. Peah 1:1, Note 61). asked before Rebbi Mana: Does Rabban Gamliel follow him who said, it is permitted to manumit? He said to him, the story in itself implies that it is forbidden to manumit since, otherwise, he could have freed him immediately!