Talmud su Deuteronomio 23:24

“With his lips but not in his mind.” I could think that I exclude him who decides in his mind; the verse says (Lev. 5:4): “To articulate”. But Samuel said, he who decides in his mind is not obligated until he pronounces with his lips. But did we not state: “(Ex. 35:5) Everyone who volunteers in his mind,” that is he who decides in his mind. You say, that is he who decides in his mind, but maybe that is he who pronounces with his lips? When he says (Deut. 23:24): “What comes out from your lips you have to keep,” that speaks about him who pronounces with his lips. Therefore, how can I confirm “every one who volunteers in his mind?” That is he who decides in his mind. What Samuel said refers to a sacrifice.

They asked before Rebbi Ila, so far for a commandment. From where a prohibition? The verse says⁶⁷Deut.12:5–6., you shall come there and bring there. Where do we hold? If for a commandment, it already had been said⁶⁶Num.29:39. “These” refer to in addition to your vows, and your voluntary gifts, your elevation offerings, and your flour offerings, and your libations, and your well-being offerings. The plural “your festive occasions” shows that for missing one holiday one cannot transgress “do not delay”; Babli 4b.. But if it cannot refer to a commandment, refer it to a prohibition. *Does one transgress about a Pesaḥ sacrifice at its proper time⁷⁰If an animal was dedicated to be used as Pesaḥ and intentionally it was not used, it cannot be used the next year since it will be too old. It cannot be used as well-being sacrifice since it does not qualify under the rules spelled out in Pesaḥim. Therefore the three-holiday rule is not applicable in this case, and the three-holiday rule is not applicable in all cases. (The animal could be sold immediately for a sacrifice and the money used to buy an animal as well-being sacrifice to which the three-holiday rule would apply.)? It was found stated, about Pesaḥ sacrifice at its proper time one transgresses. If it were otherwise, what would we say? Rebbi Samuel, the son of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, that you should not say that since if it was lost and found after the owner was exculpated, its body is brought as well-being offering⁷¹Mishnah Pesaḥim9:5, Note 82., therefore it was a question whether one transgresses about a Pesaḥ sacrifice at its proper time⁷²Since if the omission is not intentional the three-holiday rule would apply.. They asked before Rebbi Ze`ira, does one transgress between one holiday and the next<sup>73</sup>Since the obligation of actually bringing the sacrifice is restricted to the holiday week (in the case of Pentecost, which has no week, the holiday and the following six days.)? Rebbi Abba objected, was it not stated, a holiday offering which was not brought on the first shall be brought on the second; does one permit him to transgress<sup>74</sup>Therefore the question asked before R. Ze`ira has to be answered in the negative.? In addition from the following: You shall do⁷⁵Deut. 23:24; the source about vows in general., a positive commandment. Guard⁷⁵Deut. 23:24; the source about vows in general., a prohibition. Does he not transgress a positive commandment and a prohibition only after three holidays⁷⁶As established in the preceding paragraph.? Rebbi Abun in the name of the rabbis there: If one said, I take upon me the obligation to bring an elevation offering on Monday. Once Monday has passed and he did not bring it, he transgresses⁷⁷This is another case in which the three- holiday rule is inoperative. If a specific date was mentioned in the vow, once the date is passed the vow is not fulfilled.. If its year is complete you cast down the last day and he transgresses every single day⁷⁸This is a different case, similar to that of Pesaḥ. All animals destined for the altar have age limits. If an animal was vowed to the altar but its age limit was reached before it was sacrificed, the vow cannot be fulfilled anymore and is broken irrespective of the three-holiday rule.. If it is so, if three holidays have passed you cast down the last holiday and he transgresses every single holiday. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked, if its year was completed on Pentecost, is it possible to say it is not qualified and he transgresses⁷⁹Since on the holiday itself only the holiday offerings may be slaughtered, and on the following days the animal already would be too old, the animal would have to be offered on the day preceding the holiday. (The same statement could have been made for any other holiday.)?

¹²⁶Babli 5b, Sifry Deut. 164.“For demanding will demand¹²⁷Deut. 23:22., these are purification and reparation offerings¹²⁸Which are obligations demanded by God and cannot be objects of vows. Once the obligation is incurred, it has to be discharged within 3 holidays or one year.. The Eternal, your God, this is dedication for the upkeep of the Temple. From with you, this is collecting single stalks, forgotten sheaves, and peah¹²⁹Since it is an obligation to support the poor with you(Ex. 22:24); explanation of Rashi.. Or there would be sin in you, but no sin in your sacrifice¹³⁰As explained in the text, the sacrifice remains qualified even if brought too late..” For otherwise what would we say? Rebbi Samuel the son of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, that you should not say, maybe the sacrifice will be found disqualified; therefore it was necessary to say, (do not tarry to fulfill it, and not its substitute) [there would be sin in you, but no sin in your sacrifice.]¹³¹As shown by G, the (scribe’s text) is correct, [the corrector’s text] has to be deleted. The pronouncement of your lips you shall guard and execute¹³²Deut. 23:24; Sifry Deut. 165. Babli 6a.. “You shall guard and execute, to alert the court that they should force you.¹³³A vow is an obligation enforceable in court.” The rabbis of Caesarea in the name of Rebbi Avuna: From here the pledge¹³⁴Sheqalim and other obligations to the Temple can be enforced by forcibly taking pledges from the debtor’s property.. As you vowed to the Eternal, your God, a voluntary gift. Is there a vow which is called voluntary gift¹³⁵In rabbinic legal terminology, the sentence is self-contradictory since it equated vows with voluntary donations, which have different legal status.? But to make him liable for each single vow and every single voluntary gift. “What is the vow about which they spoke? He who says, on me is the obligation for an elevation offering¹³⁶His obligation is extinguished only by the offering of a qualified animal as sacrifice, irrespective of other circumstances.. What is the voluntary gift about which they spoke? He who says, this one is for an elevation offering.”¹³⁸Mishnah Qinnim1:1. Babli 6a, Megillah8a, Ḥulin139a. Rebbi Ḥama the colleague of the rabbis asked, if he said, “on me is the obligation”, and came back and said, “this one is”¹³⁹Is this a new obligation or is it a dedication of a specific animal intended to fulfill its prior general obligation? It is presumed that the second statement immediately follows the first.? Rebbi Ḥinena asked, would it not be reasonable if he said, “this one is”, and came back and said, “on me is the obligation”? A severe prohibition falls one a simple prohibition but a simple prohibition does not fall on a severe prohibition¹⁴⁰In the second case, the voluntary gift is transformed into a vow. In the first case, the vow is not transformed into a voluntary gift..