Êxodo 22:19 Referências do Talmudee: Jerusalem Talmud Nazir, Jerusalem Talmud Yevamot, Jerusalem Talmud Shabbat & Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot

זֹבֵ֥חַ לָאֱלֹהִ֖ים יָֽחֳרָ֑ם בִּלְתִּ֥י לַיהוָ֖ה לְבַדּֽוֹ׃

Quem sacrificar aos deuses será exterminado, exceto ao Eterno, somente a Ele.

Jerusalem Talmud Nazir

Rebbi Mana said, lighting fire was mentioned unnecessarily28Since the prohibition of making fire is implied in the Fourth Commandment in any reasonable interpretation. Therefore, making fire is a detail which can be used to characterize all work forbidden on the Sabbath.; prostrating oneself was mentioned by necessity to explain about itself since it is not work29Nothing is changed or produced by prostrating oneself; it is not obvious that it should be forbidden under any circumstances.. This follows what Ḥizqiah stated: “He who sacrifices to powers shall be banned30Ex. 22:19. This explains the punishment for idolatrous acts forbidden in the Second Commandment. This is the interpretation in all of talmudic literature (Babli Sanhedrin 60b, Mekhilta dR. Ismael p. 310, dR. Simeon ben Ioḥai p. 210.) (Nowhere in rabbinic literature does one find the more obvious explanation of Ex. 22:19: “Anyone sacrificing to the Elohim (God as Creator, Ruler of the physical world) shall be banned, only to YHWH (God the Merciful and Dispenser of Grace) alone.” In all of Lev. and Num., there is never any mention of a sacrifice to Elohim.}.” Sacrificing was mentioned separately to teach about everything31Since punishment for sacrificing is spelled out separately, any punishment for an act of idolatry must be given separately by the 9th rule, supporting R. Zakkai against R. Joḥanan., prostrating oneself to explain about itself since it is not work. Rebbi Jeremiah said, lighting fire was mentioned by necessity, to teach that courts should not sit on the Sabbath32In the Babli, Yebamot 6b, this is a Tannaïtic statement from the school of R. Ismael, appended to an argument also quoted in Mekhilta dR. Ismael, ויקהל.. What is the reason? It says here, “in all your settlements” and it says there, “these should be rules of law for your generations, in all your settlements33Num. 35:29. The quote is correct in Šabbat..” Since “settlements” mentioned there refers to courts, “settlements” referred to here also refers to courts. Rebbi Samuel bar Eudaimon said, even if you say that it was mentioned by necessity, it is as if it were mentioned unnecessarily34Since the argument is based on Num. 35:29, not on Ex. 22:19, the latter verse can be used in an application of the 9th rule., and anything mentioned unnecessarily teaches.
Perguntar a um rabinoBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Yevamot

A slave may be a permanent sojourner41A slave may refuse to be circumcised and stay in the Jewish household as a “sojourner”, a Gentile who has accepted the seven Noahide commandments (prohibition of idolatry, murder, adultery and incest with direct descendents; eating flesh torn from living beings, blasphemy; prohibition of robbery, duty to live under the rule of a civil law). As such he is under the protection of the often repeated commandment to treat the sojourner well and he can be tolerated in a Jewish household since his touch does not make wine prohibited (Babli Avodah zarah 64b).
In the Babli, 48b, this is the position taken by R. Ismael; R. Aqiba (48b) and R. Eliezer (71a) prohibit keeping uncircumcised slaves.
. A sojourner is like a Gentile in every respect42This is not meant to be a generally valid statement; the idolator is not protected by the Covenant of the sojourner. What is meant is a rather technical detail. It is stated repeatedly in the Torah, e. g. Deut. 13:18, that statues and other idolatrous objects are prohibited for any use by a Jew. Therefore, valuables of an idolatrous character may only be used by Jews (for example, melted down for their precious metal content) if they come into the hand of a Jew already profaned, i. e., if a non-Jew has treated them contemptuously, preferably damaging them. The Yerushalmi holds that the sojourner still has the power of a Gentile to render profane objects of idolatry even though he is a monotheist, and make them available for a Jew to use. The Babli, Avodah zarah 64b/65a, explains away all the reasons quoted in this paragraph and decides that only an idolator can effectively render idols profane.. Rebbi Samuel bar Ḥiyya bar Jehudah in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: One keeps the sojourner for twelve months. If he changes his mind, that is fine; otherwise he is like a Gentile in all respects43This statement, that the status of sojourner is only temporary and should lead to full conversion is not found anywhere else.. Rebbi Samuel bar Ḥiyya bar Jehudah, Rebbi Ḥanina in the name of Rebbi: The sojourner has to accept on condition that he may eat cadaver meat44In the Babli, Avodah zarah 64b, the opinion of “others” is that the sojourner has to accept all commandments in the Torah except those of kosher food.. Rebbi Hila said, one would then say, the words are [interpreted] as they are written. What does it mean, the words are [interpreted] as they are written? Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, “You shall not eat any cadaver; to the sojourner in your midst you shall give it that he eat it45Deut. 14:21: “You shall not eat any cadaver; to the sojourner in your midst you shall give it that he eat it, or sell it to a stranger.” This seems to imply that cadaver meat must be donated to the sojourner or sold to the Gentile. Whether it may be sold to the sojourner or donated to the Gentile is a matter of controversy in the Babli (Pesaḥim 21b, Avodah zarah 20a) and Sifry Deut # 104. R. Hila wants to decide following the majority that a sale to the sojourner is permitted..” Some Tannaim state: One does not receive a sojourner unless he accepts all commandments written in the Torah44In the Babli, Avodah zarah 64b, the opinion of “others” is that the sojourner has to accept all commandments in the Torah except those of kosher food.. Some Tannaim state: One does not receive a sojourner unless he renounces his idolatry46In the Babli Avodah zarah 64b, this is the opinion of R. Meïr. The operative majority opinion there, that he has to accept all seven Noahide commandments, is not mentioned in the Yerushalmi.. Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ashi: One does not receive a sojourner unless he renounces his idolatry as a Gentile47This is the same statement as the preceding one, only it emphasizes that the sojourner has not lost his power to render idols profane which was his as an idolator.. Rebbi Ze‘ira said, from their consensus: unless he renounces his idolatry as a Gentile. For if it were not so, what would we say? Since he is forbidden idolatry he cannot render profane. But are Gentiles not also forbidden48The Noahide precepts are supposed to be valid for all mankind. idolatry and they do render profane? Rebbi Yose said, that you should not say, since he is equal to an Israel in three respects, do not oppress49Deut. 24:14: “Do not oppress the poor hireling, or the deprived, from your brothers or the stranger in your land, in your gates.” The stranger who has the right of permanent residence in your gates is the approved sojourner., do not cheat50Deut. 23:17: “With you he shall dwell in your midst, at the place which he will chose, where he feels well within one of your gates; do not cheat him.”, and he is exiled like an Israel51The exile of the homicide to one of the cities of refuge, Num. 35:15: “For the children of Israel and the sojourner in their midst should these six cities be a refuge.”, that he has no power to render profane. Therefore, it was necessary to spell out that he renders idols profane like a Gentile. Who is the Tanna who includes “do not oppress”? He is Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah, as it was stated52More explicit in Babli Baba meṣi‘a 111b, Tosephta Baba meṣi‘a 10:4. In the latter source, it is explained that the prohibition of oppression includes the obligation to pay the day-laborer immediately.: The sojourner is protected by the prohibition, the words of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah.
Perguntar a um rabinoBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Shabbat

118A copy of this paragraph, closer to the original, is in Sukkah 1:1 (ס) 51d l. 56. The parallel discussion in the Babli is Sukkah 5a. Since the entire discussion is Amoraic, one must conclude that for earlier times the limitation of the public domain to 10 hand-breadths from the ground was tradition not subject to verification from biblical sources. From where that higher than ten [hand-breadths] is a different domain? Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: There I shall make My Appearance to you, and I shall speak to you from above the cover (which is on the Ark of the Covenant)from between the two Cherubim119Ex. 25:6. The words in parentheses are not in the verse and not in ס; they are added to indicate that the argument is about the Ark.. And it is written, you have seen that from Heaven I spoke to you120Ex. 20:22.. Since speech mentioned there is from another domain, also speech mentioned here is from another domain. But is the Ark not nine hand-breadths1211.5 cubits (Ex. 25:10).? In the House of Rebbi Yannai they said, the cover was one hand-breadth122In the Babli, Sukkah 5b, this is questioned but in the end accepted. The biblical data do not fit the assertion. The cover was square of surface area 3.75(cubit)2 (Ex. 25:17). The hand-breadth and the cubit are not well defined. If we take a small hand-breadth of 9 cm, cubit 54 cm, then a cover of one hand-breadth height would have a volume of 98.415 (dm)3. Since the cover was of pure gold, of specific weight about 19, the total weight would have been 1870 kg. But the total weight of gold contributed for the Tabernacle (Ex. 38:24) was 29.25 talents or, on a basis of 12.5 g for the sheqel, about 1097 kg, not to speak of the fact that a weight of almost 1.9 tons would have crushed the wooden ark. All these data were well within the knowledge of antiquity. One has to conclude that they imagined the cover to be hollow.. Rebbi Zeˋira asked, from where that the cover was one hand-breadth? Rebbi Ḥananiah bar Samuel stated, for all the vessels in the Sanctuary the Torah gave the measure of length and width, and gave the measure of its height. Except for the cover where the Torah gave the measure of length and width, but did not give the measure of its height. Therefore we shall learn it from the smallest vessel in the Sanctuary, you shall make for it a frame of one hand-breadth all around122In the Babli, Sukkah 5b, this is questioned but in the end accepted. The biblical data do not fit the assertion. The cover was square of surface area 3.75(cubit)2 (Ex. 25:17). The hand-breadth and the cubit are not well defined. If we take a small hand-breadth of 9 cm, cubit 54 cm, then a cover of one hand-breadth height would have a volume of 98.415 (dm)3. Since the cover was of pure gold, of specific weight about 19, the total weight would have been 1870 kg. But the total weight of gold contributed for the Tabernacle (Ex. 38:24) was 29.25 talents or, on a basis of 12.5 g for the sheqel, about 1097 kg, not to speak of the fact that a weight of almost 1.9 tons would have crushed the wooden ark. All these data were well within the knowledge of antiquity. One has to conclude that they imagined the cover to be hollow.. Since there it was one hand-breadth, so also here one hand-breadth. But maybe it is only make a golden wreath as its frame all around122In the Babli, Sukkah 5b, this is questioned but in the end accepted. The biblical data do not fit the assertion. The cover was square of surface area 3.75(cubit)2 (Ex. 25:17). The hand-breadth and the cubit are not well defined. If we take a small hand-breadth of 9 cm, cubit 54 cm, then a cover of one hand-breadth height would have a volume of 98.415 (dm)3. Since the cover was of pure gold, of specific weight about 19, the total weight would have been 1870 kg. But the total weight of gold contributed for the Tabernacle (Ex. 38:24) was 29.25 talents or, on a basis of 12.5 g for the sheqel, about 1097 kg, not to speak of the fact that a weight of almost 1.9 tons would have crushed the wooden ark. All these data were well within the knowledge of antiquity. One has to conclude that they imagined the cover to be hollow.? Since there it is a minimal size, so here also a minimal size. What about it? Rav Aḥa bar Jacob said, face. There is no face less than a hand-breadth123This cryptic statement is explained in the Babli (in the name of Rav Aḥa bar Jacob’s teacher Rav Huna) as referring to Lev. 16:2 where Aaron is warned not to appear before the face of the cover except on the day of Atonement. This implies that the cover was not simply a sheet lying over the ark but had a face, a vertical dimension which is not negligible..
Perguntar a um rabinoBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Sanhedrin

Disponível apenas para membros Premium