Talmud su Ezechiele 45:78

It was stated³⁸Tosephta Terumot 8:21, in inverse order and with the position of R. Jehudah and the anonymous majority switched. Tosephta 8:22 deals with the same case but assumes that the pieces are impure. This implies that 8:21 (and the text here) deals with pure pieces. Both parts, incompatible with the Yerushalmi, are quoted in Babli Yebamot 81b.: “A piece of the showbread which was mixed with a hundred pieces of profane [bread], or a piece of purification sacrifice mixed with a hundred profane pieces [of meat], should not be lifted³⁹It is not clear whether they cannot be lifted because a kind cannot become negligible in its own kind or whether sacrifices follow specific, more stringent, rules.. Rebbi Jehudah says they should be lifted.” What is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah? (Ez. 45:15) “One sheep from 200 from the drink of Israel,” from what is permitted to Israel⁴⁰The full verse reads: “One sheep, from 200 from the drink of Israel, for cereal offering, burnt offering, and well-being offerings, to atone for them - speech of the Lord, the Eternal.”
Rashi explains: “One sheep,” a particular one from his flock; and so Moses said, (Deut. 12:11) “the best for your vows,” meaning le meilleur. “From 200 from the drink of Israel,” Our teachers explained this for the wine offering accompanying sacrifices. If 200 [volume units] were left in the vat one [volume unit] of ‘orlah or vineyard kilaim fell into the vat, that they become insignificant by one in 200. “From the drink of Israel,” that all sacrifices should be from what is permitted to Israel, where all food is subsumed under the appellation of “drink”.. It is difficult! It is written 200 and Rebbi Jehudah says 100⁴¹This objection is not answered. It seems that the question depends on the definition of “Israel” in the verse. If “Israel” means “some of Israel”, then the verse does not deal with the case of heave because that is permitted to Cohanim, it would be “drink of Israel.” If “Israel” means “all of Israel”, then one would expect that heave also needs 200 for lifting.. It is written alive⁴²“A sheep” means a living sheep. and Rebbi Jehudah says slaughtered. What is the difference between alive and slaughtered? Rebbi Ḥinena said, they considered live ones under the category of what usually is counted⁴³These never become insignificant, Mishnah 3:6..

HALAKHAH: It is written (Ez. 45:13): “One sixth of an ephah from a ḥomer of wheat²²An ephah is one tenth of a ḥomer (Ez. 45:11), a sixth of an ephah is one sixtieth of a ḥomer. Verse 13 starts: “This is the heave you have to take.”, and you shall take sixths²³A verb formed from “six” whose meaning seems to be: taking parts of one-sixths. It is used in the Halakhah once in the meaning “take one sixth” and once as “take sixths”, i. e., “take two sixths;” cf. H. Guggenheimer, Seder Olam, (Northvale NJ, 1998), p. 6. from an ephah from a ḥomer of barley.” I could think he may give heave one thirtieth from wheat but one sixtieth from barley²⁴This is the reading of both mss.; R. Simson switches the places of “thirty” and “sixty”. This is required by the argument but it is not clear whether the change is based on a text or on emendation. If the verse speaks of “sixths” for barley, it would mean that the heave to be given is 2/60 = 1/30. The average of the heaves taken from wheat and barley is then 1/2(1/60+1/30) = 1/40.. The verse says (Ez. 44:30): “All heave,” that all heaves should be equal. Samuel says, add the sixth to the sixths, it turns out that he gives heave one in forty. “Average, one in fifty.” Rebbi Levi said, it is written (Num. 31:30): “From the half of the Children of Israel take one part in fifty.²⁵In the Tosephta (5:8), this is a statement of R. Yose (the Tanna); probably a Babylonian tradition.” All you take at another place shall be like this; just as this is one in fifty, so what you take at another place shall be like this. “And stingy, one in sixty,” as it is written: “And you shall take a sixth from an ephah from a ḥomer of barley²⁶Tosephta 5:8, where the entire verse from Ezechiel is quoted; the quote in the Yerushalmi misses a part, probably by scribal error in the Vorlage of both mss., induced by the two occurrences of חמר..”

“The House of Shammai say, [one] in thirty.” “One sixth of an ephah from a ḥomer of barley²⁴This is the reading of both mss.; R. Simson switches the places of “thirty” and “sixty”. This is required by the argument but it is not clear whether the change is based on a text or on emendation. If the verse speaks of “sixths” for barley, it would mean that the heave to be given is 2/60 = 1/30. The average of the heaves taken from wheat and barley is then 1/2(1/60+1/30) = 1/40..” Average, one in forty, following Samuel. Stingy, one in sixty²⁷It must read “one in fifty”, as confirmed by Tosephta 5:3 and the text at the end of the paragraph. R. Levi is the one quoted above, for the average giver following the House of Hillel. following Rebbi Levi. As²⁸A scribal error; it should read: Rebbi Levi bar Ḥina said, starting a new topic. Rebbi Levi bar Ḥina²⁹It seems that his name should be ר׳ לוי בר חיתה, an Amora and preacher of the fourth generation, student of R. Abba bar Ḥiyya bar Abba. said, he who takes out his tithes following the rules does not lose. What is the reason? (Ez. 45:11) “The ephah shall be one tenth of a ḥomer, its measure shall be from the ḥomer³⁰The verse is misquoted; it should read ועשׂירת החמר האיפה אל החמר יהיה מתכנתה. The plain meaning of the verse is that the ḥomer shall be the standard, the ephah being derived from it. It is difficult to understand why אל has been changed toמן ; the sermon seems to rely on the original reading of the verse: The ephah taken for heave and tithes is to the ḥomer, additional to the ḥomer because God will soon replace it for you..” For what do you need that? As we say, “if it turned out to be one in fifty³¹Scribal error; it must be “sixty” as in the Mishnah., this is heave and he does not have to give more;” so the House of Shammai say, if it turned out to be one in fifty, this is heave and he does not have to give more.

³⁷⁵A different version is in the Babli, Bekhorot 5a. General Antigonos³⁷⁶In G, אגנטוס, cf. Note 267. asked Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai: Your teacher Moses either was a thief or he did not know how to compute, for it is written: a beqaˋ per head³⁷⁷The discussion is about Ex. 38:25,26 (in the LXX, ed. A. Rahlfs, 39:2,3) where it is stated that the Temple tax of a beqaˋ, half a šeqel, paid by 603’550 men came to 100 kikkar 1775 šeqel. The LXX follows rabbinic tradition in identifying the beqaˋ, the Babylonian zuz, with the drachma, i. e., the šeqel with the dupondius, and the kikkar(Accadic gaggarum “disk”) with the talent of 60 minas or 6’000 drachmas, i. e. 3’000 šeqel (cf. Qiddušin 1:1, Note 122.) But in Qiddušin 1:3 Note 339 it is declared that any šeqel mentioned in the Torah is a Roman tetradrachma. Then the silver contributed should have been twice the recorded amount, 201 talents 550 šeqel.. If you make the centenarius 100 pounds,³⁷⁸The libra weighing 100 drachmae is the natural weight equivalent of the Greek mina in coin. The centenarius,“hundredweight”, 100 pounds, is taken as the equivalent of the talent. But if by šeqel a tetradrachma is meant, a talent should have been 120 mina, not 60 as usual, and not 100 as presumed here. Computed from above, one-sixth is missing in the latter, half in the former case. he stole one sixth. If you make it 60 pounds, he stole half. He answered him, our teacher Moses was a trustworthy treasurer expert in computations. He answered him, is it not written, they contributed bronze twenty talents³⁷⁹A scribal error; in the verse (and G): 70 talents. The total recorded was 70 talents, 2’400 šeqel.; for us that makes 96 pounds³⁸⁰Since 25 tetradrachma make a mina,2’400 drachma are 96 mina. Nevertheless, the verse mentions šeqel, not mina. and he mentions them in detail. He answered back, because it does not add up to a centenarius; if you would say that it added up to a centenarius, he would have stolen half. He told him, but it is written 1’775, would that not make 71 pounds³⁸¹@ 25 tetradrachma each. and he mentions it in detail. He answered back, if you would say that it added up to a centenarius, he would have stolen half. He told him, but it is written, the sheqel is 20 gera, twenty sheqel, twenty-five sheqel, twenty-five sheqel the maneh³⁸²The Babylonian mina.shall be for you³⁸³Ez. 45:12; the correct text, intended here, is: 20 šeqel, 25 šeqel, 15 šeqel make a maneh, for a total of 60. Therefore, it is impossible to identify the Greek mina as 25 šeqel. Cf. Qiddušin 1:2 Note 204.; the talent of the Holy One, praise to Him, was double. He answered back, he³⁸⁴Read with G: “Your teacher Moses.” was a trustworthy treasurer and expert in computations.

They wanted to say, if he transgressed¹³⁶And brought uncovered wine or water to the altar. and brought it is qualified. Rebbi Joshua the Southerner stated before Rebbi Jonah that uncovered water and wine are disqualified¹³⁷In any case. from the altar. What is the reason? And one sheep from 200, from the drink of Israel¹³⁸Ez. 45:15., from something permitted to Israel¹³⁹While a prophet cannot prescribe, he can present authoritative practice. Since uncovered water is forbidden to Israel, it is absolutely disqualified for the altar.. So far water, wine? Rebbi Sabbatai said, which gladdens God and men¹⁴⁰Jud. 9:13, referring to wine. Since drinking uncovered wine, even if filtered to remove the poison, leaves people with fear and does not gladden; it is disqualified for all religious observances..