Bagian Terkait Imamat 16:4

Leather which was tanned for an amulet. It is permitted to write a mezuza on it; Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel forbids¹¹⁵Rabban Simeon requires that the parchment on which the mezuza is written be especially prepared for sacramental use.. Rebbi Yose said, we were of the opinion that where they disagree is about a private person; therefore not for Heaven. Since it was stated, holy stones have to be quarried in holiness, in holiness they have to be quarried¹¹⁶The duplication means that the stones (of the High Priest’s breastplate) have to be quarried (and later, the priestly garment to be woven) with the intention to produce sacred utensils.. Holy garments have to be woven in holiness, in holiness they have to be woven. And Rebbi Ḥaninah said in the name of Rebbi Yasa, this is as the disagreement. This implies that they disagree even for Heaven¹¹⁷For use in the Temple. Tosephta Menaḥot9:21., as it was stated: If somebody makes a vessel for Heaven, as long as it was not used for Heaven, a lay person may use it; after it was used for Heaven, a lay person may not use it. But was it not stated, If somebody makes a vessel for Heaven, a lay person may not use it? Rebbi Ḥananiah in the name of Rebbi Yasa, as the disagreement. [As it was stated:]¹¹⁸The text in parentheses was added by a corrector who did not understand the text. The following text is not quoted as support of the prior statement but is discussed in its own right; the question is whether it is a parallel to the earlier statement or not. If somebody makes a vessel for a lay person, as long as it was not used for a lay person, Heaven may use it; after it was used for a lay person Heaven may not use it. But was it not stated, If somebody makes a vessel for a lay person, Heaven may not use it? Rebbi Ḥuna in the name of the rabbis there: Explain it that it was paid for by the Temple tax¹¹⁹Therefore it is Temple property and any non-sacramental use is larceny committed on Heaven’s property. and you cannot infer anything.

But is not second quality of Pelusian better than first Indian¹³⁴Then why does the Mishnah not require second quality Pelusian linen for the afternoon service?? A formulation which is an exaggeration¹³⁵Arabic فرط “excess, exaggeration”. The Mishnah is formulated to give leeway in the choice of materials.. There, we have stated¹³⁶Mishnah Menaḥot8:5, about the oil qualified for the lamp and the flour sacrifices in the Temple. Since the Mishnah is known, the corrector’s addition is not absolutely necessary.: “Nothing is better than the best of first quality. [Second tier of the first and first tier of the second are equal.]” But is not the second tier of first quality better than the first of second quality? A formulation which is an exaggeration. What about it? Rebbi Nahman in the name of Rebbi Mana: In the morning, linen is written four times. In the afternoon, linen is written¹³⁷In Lev. 16:23 linen is mentioned only once, in contrast to 4 times in v. 4..