Rujukan Talmud untuk Imamat 23:17: Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah, Jerusalem Talmud Sotah, Jerusalem Talmud Terumot & Jerusalem Talmud Shabbat

HALAKHAH: “The fife five and six,” etc. Therefore the one of sacrifices supersedes¹Since it is emphasized that at the water-drawing festivity fifes may not be used, it is implied that on other occasions fifes may be played in the Temple on the Sabbath. Babli 51a.. The Mishnah is Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah’s, as it was stated: The fife accompanying the sacrifices supersedes the Sabbath²Playing a musical instrument on the Sabbath and holidays in general is rabbinically forbidden, so one should not be tempted to tune or repair the instrument, which would be a biblical infraction. Since it is stated in Eruvin Chapter 10 that in general rabbinic Sabbath prohibitions are not to be observed in the Temple, the burden of proof is on those authorities who deny the use of fifes in the Temple on a Sabbath., the words of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah, but the Sages say, it supersedes neither the Sabbath nor the holiday. There we have stated³Mishnah Arakhin 2:3.: “On twelve days in the year the fife beats the time before the altar, at the sacrifice of the First Pesaḥ, the sacrifice of the Second Pesaḥ, on the first day of Passover, on the day of Pentecost, and on the eight days of Tabernacles.” Are there eight days without a Sabbath? Rebbi Yose said it anonymously, Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: It is Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah’s⁴Since the Mishnah implicitly states that fifes were used on the Sabbath in the week of Tabernacles.. In the opinion of those rabbis why does it not supersede? Because it is not clear⁵There is no biblical indication that fifes be used in Temple worship. A popular usage is no reason to disregard rabbinic prohibitions (i. e., popular restrictions) in the Temple.. But is it not written⁶1K. 1:40, a description of Solomon’s coronation., and the people blew fifes? That is written for Solomon’s festivity. Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Abba bar Mamal: And heartfelt joy like one marching with a fife⁷Is. 30:29. The verse starts with a reference to song of the night starting the holiday, referring to the recital of Hallel in the Passover night, as explained in Jonathan’s paraphrase of the verse. Therefore the verse shows that the combination of playing the fife and reciting the Hallel is traditional.. Any time one uses a fife one recites the Hallel. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Abba bar Mamal: Why does one recite Hallel all seven days of Tabernacles⁸In contrast to Passover, where Hallel is recited (and therefore the fife played) only on the first day. (Later practice to recite a truncated form of Hallel on these days is a Babylonian peculiarity unknown to and irrelevant for Galilean sources.)? Corresponding to the lulav which is renewed all seven days⁹Because it frequently needs new willow branches and occasionally also new myrtle branches.. And why a fife for all these things? We have stated, for one is at stated times and the other is at stated times; this is beloved and that is beloved. They attached the beloved to the beloved. “On Pentecost one says to him, here you have maṣsah, here you have leavened.¹⁰Mishnah 1:10.” There are Tannaim who state, here you have leavened, [here you have maṣsah.]¹¹Corrector’s addition, unnecessary since the question is which of the breads, the azyme shew-bread or the leavened two extra loaves of Pentecost (Lev. 23:17) are distributed first. He who said, here you have maṣsah, because it is beloved; he who said, here you have leavened, because it is frequent¹²Even though this text is repeated in Halakhah 5:8, it seems that text should read that maṣsah is frequent, and therefore leavened bread better liked. In fact the two breads of Pentecost are the only leavened breads permitted in the Temple area during the entire year and it is a general principle that in the Temple service the more frequent must have precedence over the less frequent..

Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Ismael: ³⁹This sentence is also quoted in Halakhah 3:1. The argument refers to Lev. 2:14, where “a flour offering of first fruits” is mentioned which is identified as the ‘Omer offering (Lev. 23:9–14), traditionally brought from barley (since early in spring there is no wheat ready). The argument attempts to show that the offering mentioned in Lev. 2:14 must be the ‘omer offering of barley. The argument of R. Ismael is quoted only here because it cannot be sustained. The basis of the argument is the position that a word used in the legal parts of the Torah can only have one meaning. Since the construct form “flour offering of” used for the ritual of the suspected wife (Num. 5:15,16,18) refers to barley, it is concluded that the “flour offering of first fruits” also must refer to barley. The problem is that the construct state is also used in Lev. 2:7, 6:14,16; Num. 4:16, 28:8 clearly referring to wheat offerings.“Flour offering of, flour offering of.” Since “flour offering of” said there is of barley, here also it is of barley. ⁴⁰A slightly garbled version of a text dealing with the same problem, preserved in Sifra Wayyiqra Paršata 13(4). The reading Liezer for the first Tanna mentioned here, as against Lazar as suggested by the text, follows the reading of Sifra. Since this Tanna is mentioned before R. Aqiba, a reading of Lazar would refer to R. Eleazar ben ‘Arakh. Rebbi Eliezer said, it says here “milky white⁴¹Lev. 2:14, a word used in the description of the offering of first fruits. For the translation of אביב as “milky white”, see J. Milgrom, Leviticus 1–16, 1991, pp. 192–194.” and it says in Egypt “milky white⁴²Ex. 9:31, referring to barley.”. Since “milky white” mentioned in Egypt refers to barley, here also it refers to barley. Rebbi Aqiba said, it was said to the public, bring first fruits on Passover and bring first fruits on Pentecost⁴³During or after the Holiday of Unleavened Bread (depending on the interpretation of the term “after the Sabbath”) the ‘Omer offering is required as “first harvest” (Lev. 23:9–14). Pentecost is described as “holiday of first fruits” (Num. 28:26).. ⁴⁴This text is slightly garbled. A more intelligible text is in Sifra (but one cannot exclude the possibility that the text in Sifra is Amoraic and has been edited to make it more intelligible) and the Babli, Menaḥot 68b:
רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר. נֶאֱמַר לַצִּיבּוּר. הֲבֵא בִיכּוּרִים בַּפֶּסַח וַהֲבֵא בִיכּוּרִים בָּעֲצֶרֶת. כְּמָה מָצִינוּ שֶׁמִּמִּין שֶׁהַיָּחִיד מֵבִיא חוֹבָתוֹ מִמֶּנּוּ יְהֵא הַצִּיבּוּר מֵבִיא בִּיכּוּרָיו בָּעֲצֶרֶת. אַף מִמִּין שֶׁהַיָּחִיד מֵבִיא חוֹבָתוֹ מִמֶּנּוּ יְהֵא הַצִּיבּוּר מֵבִיא בִּיכּוּרָיו בַּפֶּסַח. מֵאֵי זֶה מִין הַיָּחִיד מֵבִיא חוֹבָתוֹ. מִן הַשְּׂעוֹרִין. אַף הַצִּיבּוּר לֹא יָבִיא אֶלָּא מִן הַשְּׂעוֹרִין. אִם תֹּאמַר. מִן הַחִיטִּין. אֵין שְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם בִּיכּוּרִים.
Rebbi Aqiba says: It was said to the public, bring First Fruits on Passover and bring First Fruits on Pentecost. As we find that, from the kind a private person brings his obligatory offering the public has to bring their First Fruits on Pentecost, also from the kind a private person brings his obligatory offering the public brings their First Fruits on Passover. From which kind does the private person bring his obligatory offering? From barley! Also the public should bring only from barley. If you say, from wheat, the Two Breads are not First Fruits. If we find that from the kind a private person brings his obligatory offering⁴⁵The only obligatory flour offerings of a private person are the purification offering of the poor (Lev. 5:11) and the offering for the suspected wife. The voluntary offerings of a private person are all high quality wheat. the public bring their first fruits on Pentecost. From which kind does the private person bring his obligatory offering? From barley! Also the public should bring only from barley. If you say from wheat, the Two Breads⁴⁶Two wheat breads made from sour dough to be presented to the altar but not burned, Lev. 23:17. These are called “First Fruits”. If the ‘Omer offering, whose nature is not specified in the verse, were to be brought from wheat, the Two Breads would not be baked from “First Fruits”. would not be first fruits.

There¹⁰⁰Mishnah Ṭahorot 3:4. The discussion is about the second part of the Mishnah, not quoted in the text: “If they were put into the rain and swelled they are impure …” The volumes indicated are the minima that may carry impurity or make their consumption a criminal offense., we have stated: “[Profane] food in the volume of an egg that was left in the sun and shrank, similarly the volume of an olive from a carcass¹⁰¹Lev. 11:24–25., or the volume of a lentil of a crawling thing¹⁰²Lev. 11:31–32., the volume of an olive rejected or overdue [sacrifice]¹⁰³Rejected sacrifice is sacrifice made with the wrong intentions, Lev. 19:7; overdue is sacrifice left after the allotted time has expired (one night, day and night, or two days and the night in between, as the case may be; Lev. 7:17.), or of fat¹⁰⁴The fat in lumps in the body, Lev. 7:22–26., are pure.” The Southerners say, only if it originally was the volume of an olive¹⁰⁵In matters of impurity and dietary laws, it is not the actual volume that counts but the volume at the time the impurity or prohibition first arose. If impurity or prohibition are impossible in the original state, they cannot be acquired by subsequent swelling. Rebbi Joḥanan and Simeon ben Laqish hold that only the actual volume at the moment matters. Everybody agrees that his guidelines carry over to the determination of heave of the tithe.; Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish both say, even if originally it was less than the volume of an olive. There¹⁰⁶Mishnah Menaḥot 5:1: “All flour sacrifices are brought unleavened except the breads for a thanksgiving sacrifice (Lev. 7:13) and the Two Breads [for Pentecost (Lev. 23:17)] which are leavened. Rebbi Meïr says, the sour dough is made from the dedicated flour. Rebbi Jehudah says, this is not of the best but he brings sour dough, puts it into the measuring vessel and fills the latter [with flour.] They said to him,that will make it deficient or redundant.”
The problem is that in each case, the amount of flour necessary is prescribed by biblical law. According to R. Meïr, one takes the exact amount, and then takes from this a small amount which is moistened to make it sour; then the sour dough is returned to the original flour which is moistened and kneaded. R. Jehudah notes that this will make poor bread; he prefers real sour dough to be used in addition to the flour of the offering. He is told that in this case, when the finished product must have specified size, his procedure probably will never be exactly right., we have stated: “They said to him, that will make it deficient or redundant.” Who said this to him? Rebbi Meïr! Sometimes the sour dough will be of high quality and it rises; if it were fine flour it would have shrunk but now, since the sour dough is of high quality it rose; you have to look at the risen [dough] as if it had shrunk; it looks deficient. Sometimes the sour dough is bad and it shrinks¹⁰⁷It does not actually shrink but will not rise. Since the measure was not full to start out with, in order to accomodate the rising dough, one now will have invalidated the offering because it is too small.; if it were fine flour it would have risen but now, since the sour dough is bad, it shrinks; you have to look at the shrunken [dough] as if it had risen; it looks redundant. According to Rebbi Jeremiah, the Southerners, Rebbi Joḥanan, and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, all three say the same thing in case it is redundant¹⁰⁸This text, confirmed by the mss., is impossible since the Southerners disagree with Rebbis Joḥanan and Simeon ben Laqish precisely in the case of swelling food. In must read: Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbis Joḥanan, and Simeon ben Laqish all three say the same. The next sentence must then read: The Southerners, Rebbi Jonah and Yose all three say the same. The first group takes all food as is, the others agree only on shrinking, not on expanding food. The statements of Rebbis Jeremiah, Jonah, and Yose are in the preceding paragraph and deal with heave of the tithe.. According to Rebbi Jonah and Rebbi Yose, all three say the same thing in case it is deficient. Those of Bar Patti cooked rice and had forgotten to put it in order¹⁰⁹To tithe or at least give heave of the tithe by the rules of demay.. The colleagues wanted to say, he should take raw [rice] corresponding to the cooked. Rebbi Yose said to them, I also am saying so because regularly it increases in volume.