Talmud su Levitico 25:2
דַּבֵּ֞ר אֶל־בְּנֵ֤י יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ וְאָמַרְתָּ֣ אֲלֵהֶ֔ם כִּ֤י תָבֹ֙אוּ֙ אֶל־הָאָ֔רֶץ אֲשֶׁ֥ר אֲנִ֖י נֹתֵ֣ן לָכֶ֑ם וְשָׁבְתָ֣ה הָאָ֔רֶץ שַׁבָּ֖ת לַיהוָֽה׃
Parla ai figlioli d'Israele e di 'loro: Quando verrai nel paese che io ti do, allora il paese osserverà un sabato al Signore.
Jerusalem Talmud Shabbat
If He stated a general principle as a positive commandment but the detail as a prohibition, the word of Rebbi Eleazar is that this is a general principle followed by a detail198If a pentateuchal verse partially is an exhortation to action and partially a prohibition, it nevertheless forms a logical unit.. 199From here to the end of the discussion there exists a parallel in Kilaim 8:1, Notes 20–36 (Babli Moˋed qaṭan 3a). The punishment for violating a biblical prohibition for which no penalty is specified is by flogging. The problem is that ploughing is not specifically mentioned in Lev. 25. Rebbi Eleazar said, one whips for ploughing in the Sabbatical year. Rebbi Joḥanan said, one does not whip for ploughing in the Sabbatical year. What is Rebbi Eleazar’s reason? The Land shall keep a Sabbath for the Eternal200Lev. 25:2., a general principle. Your field you shall not sow, your vineyard you shall not prune201Lev. 25:4., detail. Sowing and pruning were included in the general case; why were they mentioned separately? To include with them; since sowing and pruning are particular in that they perform work on the soil or on a tree, I have only what is work on the soil or on a tree. How does Rebbi Joḥanan treat this? They are two different things, and two different details for one general principle do divide. In Rebbi Eleazar’s opinion do they not divide202To require separate atonement if performed inadvertently.? He holds that because they do not divide, they are for making inferences. In Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion, are they not for making inferences? There is a difference here because He stated a general principle as a positive commandment but the detail as prohibitions. No positive commandment allows inferences for a prohibition and no prohibition allows inferences for a positive commandment. Rebbi Eleazar said, a positive commandment allows inferences for a prohibition but no prohibition allows inferences for a positive commandment. In Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion it is obvious that one may dig cisterns, ditches, and caves during it202*During the Sabbatical year.. In Rebbi Eleazar’s opinion, may one dig cisterns, ditches, and caves during it202*During the Sabbatical year.? Just as one cannot make inferences for prohibitions, so one should not be able to make inferences for permissions203For R. Joḥanan, if ploughing is not sanctionable, digging for other than agricultural purposes certainly is permitted. But for R. Eleazar digging is work on the soil (in the language of his argument) but not in the field (as forbidden in the verse.). Rebbi Abba from Carthage said, Rebbi Joḥanan’s reason is six years you shall sow, not in the Sabbatical; and six years you shall prune your vineyard204Lev. 25:3., not in the Sabbatical at all. Any prohibition inferred from a positive commandment is a positive commandment; one violates a positive commandment205As such it is not sanctionable; cf. Sanhedrin 5:3, Note 73.. Rebbi Yose said, there is not even a positive commandment206He takes R. Eleazar literally at his word. If Lev. 25:3–4 represents a general principle followed by a detail (even if the principle is a positive commandment and the detail a prohibition) then by R. Ismael’s rule כְּלָל וּפְרָט אֵין בִּכְלָל אֶלָּא מַה שֶׁבִּפְרָט “general principle followed by detail: the general principle only applies to the detail”, nothing not mentioned in the verse is prohibited.
Since R. Yose was R. Jeremiah’s student, he should be mentioned after his teacher (which he is both in Sanhedrin and Kilaim.). Rebbi Jeremiah said, one violates a positive commandment. Why is it written that the Land shall keep a Sabbath for the Eternal200Lev. 25:2.? That is for the prohibition implied by it207This refers to R. Yose’s opinion, that sowing and pruning are forbidden in the Sabbatical but these and all other agricultural work are violations of the positive commandment to give rest to the Land..
Since R. Yose was R. Jeremiah’s student, he should be mentioned after his teacher (which he is both in Sanhedrin and Kilaim.). Rebbi Jeremiah said, one violates a positive commandment. Why is it written that the Land shall keep a Sabbath for the Eternal200Lev. 25:2.? That is for the prohibition implied by it207This refers to R. Yose’s opinion, that sowing and pruning are forbidden in the Sabbatical but these and all other agricultural work are violations of the positive commandment to give rest to the Land..
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Jerusalem Talmud Peah
Rebbi Zeïra168This paragraph explains the action of the Sabbatical year on Temple property. The text follows the parallel in Pesaḥim 4:9 (fol. 31b). in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan (Lev. 25:2): “The land shall observe a Sabbath for the Eternal.” The sanctity of the Sabbatical year falls169Hence, the status of ownership has no influence on the duties of the Sabbatical year. on anything that is the Eternal’s. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba asked before Rebbi Mana: It is impossible170In Mishnaic Hebrew, אפשר means “it is possible,” but איפשר is a contraction of אֵי אפשר and means “it is impossible.” to eat it171Any produce from Temple property collected in the Sabbatical year. without redemption since Temple property cannot exit172Its sacred status without the sanctity being transmitted to the money that goes into the Temple treasury. without redemption. If one redeems and eats it, it would be as if one bought an axe with money from the Sabbatical173Since it is written (Lev. 25:6): “The rest of the Land should be for you to eat,” we infer that the spontaneous growth is there to be eaten, not to be traded. It is possible to trade produce of the Sabbatical year as long as the final use is for food. The Temple has no need for money for food since the public sacrifices must be paid from the Temple tax of half a šeqel and private sacrifices are paid by the donors. Valuables donated to the Temple are used for building upkeep, vessels, and implements. Any monetary gain from Sabbatical produce for these purposes is forbidden; how can the Temple accept illegal money?! He said to him, the treasurer174The Temple treasurer. He has the right and the obligation to sell all Temple property which is not directly used for sacrifices in order to raise money for the upkeep of the Temple. The Sabbatical produce is not sold but directly exchanged for vessels or implements needed by the Temple. This exchange is permitted; it removes the holiness of Temple property but has no influence on the Sabbatical status of the produce. Then the third party may sell the produce as Sabbatical food (Explanation by R. Z. Frankel.) The third party probably is chosen before any harvest of the Sabbatical year to avoid leading ignorant people into sin. exchanges it through a third person. Rebbi Mattaniah175He belongs to the last generation of Galilean Amoraïm, later than R. Ḥiyya bar Abba. said, why do we not explain it176That the laws of the Sabbatical year apply to Temple property. according to everybody, as Rebbi Joḥanan said177This refers to Mishnah Nedarim4:10: “If they were on the road (a person A and another B who had made a vow not to use anything belonging to A). If B has nothing to eat, A gives food to a third person as a gift and B may use it. If no third person is with them, A puts the food up on a fence or a rock and says: This is abandoned to anybody who wants it. B may take and eat it, but Rebbi Yose forbids it.” On this, R. Joḥanan notes in Halakha 4:10 that R. Yose forbids only because the food was forbidden to B before it was declared abandoned; the abandonment is invalid relative to B. But if something was abandoned before any vow was made, R. Yose agrees that the vow cannot retroactively influence the status of abandoned property. Cf. Chapter 6, Note 17.: The words of Rebbi Yose: because his vow precedes his declaration of abandonment. And here178In the case of the vineyard, the abandonment of the gleanings is written in the Torah and certainly precedes any dedication., because his vow of abandonment precedes his dedication179The abandonment of the Sabbatical year is not invalidated by the dedication. Hence, the produce of the Sabbatical year should not need redemption..
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Jerusalem Talmud Pesachim
169From here on, the Halakhah also is Peah7:8 (פ).“How did they permit sycamore figs of dedicated trees? The Sages said to them, do you not agree with us that growth of dedicated [plants] is forbidden? They told them, when our forefathers dedicated them, they dedicated only the tree stems because of the strong men who came and took them by force.170Tosephta 3:22 (Babli 56b). Sycamores produce inferior fruits but superior building material. The “strong men” are probably the Hasmonean rulers or Herod. The people protected their sycamore groves by putting them out of bounds of any human government.” Do the rabbis mean to say that they dedicated tree stems and fruits? Even if you say that they dedicated the tree stems but not the fruits, the rabbis wonder if somebody dedicates an orchard, may he reserve the growth for himself171In Mishnah Meˋilah 3:6 the anonymous Tanna declares that taking the fruits of a Temple tree does not constitute the crime of meˋilah, larceny committed on Temple property. But R. Yose declares the fruits to be covered by meˋilah. The Babli 56b points out that the Sages of the Tosephta, while agreeing that no felony is committed by taking the sycamore figs, nevertheless must assume that taking them means overstepping a prohibition. No such prohibition is written in the Torah. While any stipulation contradicting a commandment of the Torah is invalid (Peah 6:9), one violating a rabbinic prohibition may be valid. It remains unresolved whether the people of Jericho had permission to reserve the right to use the jummiz.? Let us hear from the following172Mishnah Peah 7:8, about a vineyard dedicated to the Temple (i. e., its fruits to be sold by the Temple and the proceeds to be given to the Temple treasury).: “After the gleanings are recognizable, the gleanings belong to the poor.” That is different because nobody may dedicate anything that is not his own173Since gleanings on vines belong to the poor by Divine decree (Deut. 24:21).. Does that not mean that even if the gleanings were not yet recognizable, they should belong to the poor? This is different, because it is a vineyard for the Temple, as it was stated174Tosephta Peah 3:15. Here starts a Genizah fragment, edited by L. Ginzberg in Ginze Schechter, vol. 1, New York 1928, pp. 442–448 (ג).: “It somebody plants a vineyard for the Temple, it is exempt from single berries175Which in secular growth belong to the poor (Lev. 19:10). Addition by the corrector, supported by a lacuna in ג., and from ˋoriah176The fruits growing in the first three years after planting, forbidden for use (Lev.19:23)., and from the Fourth Year177Where the fruit has to be redeemed (Lev. 19:24)., but it is subject to the Sabbatical year.” Rebbi Zeˋira in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: The land shall observe a Sabbath for the Eternal178Lev. 25:2.. The sanctity of the Sabbatical falls even on anything that is the Eternal’s.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Avot D'Rabbi Natan
Exile comes into the world because of idolatry, sexual transgression, murder, and not letting the land rest during the sabbatical year. Idolatry, as it says (Leviticus 26:30), “I will destroy your altars.” The Holy Blessed One said: Since you want to worship idols, I will exile you to a place where they worship idols. That is why it says, “I will destroy your altars.” Not letting the land rest during the sabbatical year, as it says (Leviticus 26:34), “Then shall the land make up for its sabbatical years [throughout all the time that it is desolate and you are in the land of your enemies].” The Holy Blessed One said to them: Since you do not let the land rest, it will rest by itself, and the number of months that you did not let it rest, it will rest by itself. That is why it says, “Then shall the land make up…all the time.” (Sexual transgression: How so? Rabbi Yishmael son of Rabbi Yosei said: As long as Israel commits sexual transgressions, the Divine Presence removes Itself from them, as it says (Deuteronomy 23:15), “Let no unseemly [lit., naked] thing be seen among you, so that [God] will turn away from you.”)
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy