레위기 27:21 탈무드 참조: Jerusalem Talmud Kiddushin, Jerusalem Talmud Taanit, Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim & Jerusalem Talmud Challah

Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: “This shall be an elevation sacrifice for thirty days,” it is an elevation sacrifice for thirty days; after thirty days it automatically becomes profane²³A different version, describing an animal designated as (most holy) elevation offering for 30 days and afterwards as (simply holy) well-being offering, is quoted as tannaïtic text in the Babli, Nedarim 29a.. What is its status regarding larceny²⁴An animal dedicated as sacrifice is forbidden for all use; it cannot be used for work, nor can it be shorn for its wool. The question is whether illicit use of an animal temporarily declared a sacrifice triggers the penalties spelled out in Lev. 5:14–16.? Rebbi Joḥanan said, the larceny is clear²⁵Since during the 30 days it is a sacrifice, if it was used then all the penalties are due.. Rebbi Ze‘ira, Rebbi Hila both say, the larceny is in doubt²⁶If the animal was sacrificed during the thirty days, any prior use was larceny. But if the animal was not sacrificed, then it reverts to profane status and its use was not illegitimate; it would be forbidden to dedicate an animal to atone for the larceny. The prior use was an “evil that cannot be corrected.”. “You are preliminarily married to me for thirty days,” she is preliminarily married²⁷Permanently, even after 30 days.. What is the difference between dedication and woman? We find that a dedication can be eliminated without redemption but we do not find that a woman could leave without a divorce document. Where do we find that a dedication can be eliminated without redemption? Following Rebbi Simeon, since Rebbi Simeon says, “they enter without paying.²⁸Mishnah ‘Arakhin 7:4. If a field donated to the Temple was not redeemed before the Jubilee year, it becomes profane property of the Cohanim (Lev. 27:21). In R. Simeon’s opinion, the reversion to profane status is automatic; the Cohanim to whom it is distributed do not have to redeem it from the Temple treasury.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, explain it according to everybody regarding a bought field²⁹A field which was not a family heirloom but bought from another owner automatically reverts to its hereditary owner in the Jubilee year. Even if in the meantime the field was given to the Temple by the buyer, it reverts without payment (Lev. 27:24).. “This is your bill of divorce for thirty days”: it is no bill of divorce³⁰Since it is implied that after 30 days there should be no divorce, it is invalid. A divorce must be irrevocable to be valid (Giṭṭin 4:8, Note 192). A shortened version of the text is discussed by Ran, Nedarim 29a.. Rebbi Isaac ben R. Eleazar said, when do you say that she is preliminarily married? If he effectuated the preliminary marriage by money. But if he effectuated the preliminary marriage by a document, since marriage documents were inferred from divorce documents³¹Chapter 1, Note 21. and in the case of a divorce she is not divorced, so in the case of a preliminary marriage she is not preliminarily married.

⁹⁹This text is from Sukkah 5:8, explaining the discrimination against the Bilgah watch. One could not make them 23, as it is written¹⁰⁰1Chr. 9:22., these are the institutions of David and Samuel the Seer in their professionalism. It was a great feat of professionalism that no watch was taking and repeating in inheritance fields before the other could take¹⁰¹It is prescribed in Lev. 27:21 that real estate dedicated to the Temple by a person whose ancestor received this land in the original distribution under Joshua and which is not redeemed by the next Jubilee becomes property of the Cohanim. This is read to mean that it becomes property of the watch which regularly is on duty on the day of Atonement in the Jubilee year (Lev. 25:9). (Property bought, not inherited, must be redeemed, Lev. 27:23–24.) It now is asserted that no watch repeats serving on the Day of Atonement in a Jubilee year after less than 24 Jubilee periods (or 1200 years.) Since we have no details about the calendar rules of the First Temple period, at the end of which the rules of original distribution became moot, the statement can be neither verified nor falsified.. Rebbi Abbahu said, I computed it that no watch was taking and repeating in inheritance fields before the other could take.

There we have stated¹⁰⁹Mishnah Temurah7:2.: “There is about gifts for the upkeep of the Temple that unspecified gifts to the Temple are for the upkeep of the Temple. Sanctification for the upkeep of the Temple falls on everything¹¹⁰Anything of value can be donated to the Temple., and me`ilah applies to what grows from it<sup>111</sup>Not only growth from seeds donated but all income from the principal are protected by me`ilah laws as is the original donation., and priests have no usufruct from it.” Rebbi Ḥanania said, this is Rebbi Eliezer’s, as we have stated: “If somebody gives his property to the Temple and in it there was an animal fit for the altar, males or females. Rebbi Eliezer says, males should be sold to those who need an elevation offering, and females be sold to those who need well-being offerings, and the revenue together with the remainder be for upkeep of the Temple¹¹²Since the Mishnah starts “if somebody gives his property,” this means it is unspecified, given to the Temple to use it as it sees fit, and R. Eliezer says that all proceeds go to the upkeep of the Temple..” Rebbi Joḥanan said, the reason of Rebbi Eliezer : If a man dedicate his house holy to the Eternal¹¹³Lev. 27:14.. How do we hold? If for a dwelling, it already is written, if the dedicator redeem his house¹¹⁴Lev. 27:15.. Therefore we hold that he dedicates his property. From here that unspecified dedications to the Temple are for the upkeep of the Temple¹¹⁵Verse 14 states that if a person dedicates his house, a priest has to determine its value. V. 15 the notes that if the donor wants to regain his house, he has to pay 125% of the value. Since it is assumed that a dwelling is always needed, the donation of a house could have been described in one sentence, combining valuation and redemption. Since the verses are split, it is understood that also property not used as dwelling is included and is given to produce money for the Temple, not the priests (in contrast to agricultural property, vv.21..