תּלמוד אויף שמות 34:19

כָּל־פֶּ֥טֶר רֶ֖חֶם לִ֑י וְכָֽל־מִקְנְךָ֙ תִּזָּכָ֔ר פֶּ֖טֶר שׁ֥וֹר וָשֶֽׂה׃

איטלעכס װאָס עפֿנט דעם טראַכט געהערט צו מיר; און פֿון אַל דײַן פֿי זאָלסטו הײליקן דעם זָכר, דעם ערשטלינג פֿון אָקס און שעפּס.

Jerusalem Talmud Bava Kamma

HALAKHAH: “The obligation to make double restitution is more frequent,” etc. From where does he get this? From “if being found it is found3Ex. 22:3: “If the stolen goods being found arc found alive in his hand, be it ox, or donkey, or sheep, doubly shall he pay.” Since in 21:37 quadruple or quintuple restitution was ordered for selling or slaughtering stolen cattle or sheep, the mention of “donkey” extends the set of objects subject to double restitution beyond that subject to multiple restitution.”. This includes not only ox, or donkey, or sheep: Since He says “alive”, it includes all living beings4Babli 83b, Mekhilta dR. Ismael Neziqin 13, Mekhilta dR. Simeon ben Ioḥai p. 194.. “The stolen goods”, to include movables. Why “ox, or donkey, or sheep”? If it were restricted to anything useful for the altar, one should have stated “ox and sheep”5Since a donkey is an impure animal excluded from the altar, its mention declares the law to be a strictly profane matter.. [If it were restricted to anything useful for the priests, one should have stated “ox and donkey.]6Addition of E, confirmed by a Genizah fragment. At first look, the argument seems to prove that double restitution be required only for animals whose firstborn are either given to the Cohen (cattle and sheep, Ex. 34:19), or for which a substitute is given to the Cohen (donkeys, Ex. 34:20,13:13). The extended arguments in the Babli, 64a, and even more so in Mekhilta dR. Simeon ben Ioḥai, p. 194, note that the explicit mention of “stolen goods” shows that the list is incomplete and, therefore, no restriction is intended.. Rebbi Ismael stated: It excludes real estate which is not movable; it excludes slaves from whom you only have service; it excludes documents which only are for proof7Babli 64b; for these only simple restitution is required. Documents which prove a claim do not in themselves represent money’s worth..
פֿרעגט אַ רבֿBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Pesachim

“At a place where they used not to sell one does not sell.” Why? Because he eliminates the duty of shearing78The first wool of shearing sheep should be given to a Cohen, Deut. 18:4. But goats are not raised for wool and are included in the prohibition.. Think of it, if it was a goat! Because he eliminates the duty of the first-born79Which must be given to a Cohen, Deut. 15:19. But a male animal does not bear lambs and also is included in the prohibition.. Think of it, if it was a male! Because he eliminates the gifts80The parts of the animal to be given to a Cohen, Deut. 18:3.. Then one should not sell wheat to him because he eliminates the duty of ḥallah; then one should not sell wine and oil to him because he eliminates the duty of benedictions81Which are pronounced before and after food, as described in the later Chapters of Tractate Berakhot.
The problem treated here is that in the next paragraph it is stated that one does not sell large animals to Gentiles because of problems with the laws of the Sabbath. Therefore one is inclined to say that the prohibitions of Mishnah Avodah zarah 1:5 are because of pagan worship and those of our Mishnah, which also is Mishnah Avodah zarah 1:6, because of Jewish worship. It is shown that this does not hold; the first part of the Mishnah is about pagan worship, about places where sheep or goats are sacrificed by pagans; only the second part is about Jewish matters.
.
פֿרעגט אַ רבֿBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Challah

MISHNAH: Jews were sharecroppers for Gentiles in Syria61The parts of David’s kingdom not conquered by the 12 tribes under Joshua; cf. Peah 7, Note 119. R. Eliezer holds that the laws of the Holy Land extend to Syria but Rabban Gamliel holds that Syria is essentially outside the Land and only selected laws of the Land are extended to apply there.; Rebbi Eliezer obligates their produce for tithes and the Sabbatical but Rabban Gamliel exempts them. Rabban Gamliel says there are two ḥallot in Syria62As explained in Mishnah 8. Biblical law restricts the duty of ḥallah to the Land (Num. 15:18–19). Rabbinic practice extends the obligation to the rest of the world but, since the soil outside the Land is intrinsically impure, any ḥallah outside the Land is impure and must be burned. Nevertheless, in order to remind people that the original duty is to give ḥallah to a Cohen, it was established that some dough should be given to a Cohen. This dough cannot be sanctified, otherwise it would be forbidden to the recipient. but Rebbi Eliezer says one ḥallah63He denies that Syrian soil is impure.. They took the leniency of Rabban Gamliel and the leniency of Rebbi Eliezer but then returned to follow Rabban Gamliel in both cases.
Rabban Gamliel says: There are three domains for ḥallah85In the biblical Land of Israel.. The Land of Israel86The actual Land of Israel of the Second Commonwealth; cf. Mishnah Ševi‘it 6:1, Note 3, for the geographic details. up to Akhzib, one ḥallah. From Akhzib to the Euphrates or Amanus87One has to add, with Mishnah Ševi‘it 6:1, “any place held by the immigrants from Egypt,” i. e., the regions North of Akhzib described as tribal territories in the book of Joshua., two ḥallot, one for the fire and one for the Cohen. The one for the fire has a measure88The true ḥallah which cannot be eaten since the impurity of Gentile lands is extended rabbinically to any region not inhabited by Jews. The “measure” is that for ḥallah of the Land, Mishnah 2:7., the one for the Cohen has no measure89A purely symbolic ḥallah to be eaten in impurity, as a remembrance of the rules to be restored in the times of the Messiah.. From Euphrates or Amanus inside90The rest of Syria, domain of biblical promise; cf. Ševi‘it 6:1, Note 3., two ḥallot, one for the fire and one for the Cohen. The one for the fire has no measure91Both ḥallot are symbolical since that region was not under obligation of ḥallah even during the First Commonwealth., the one for the Cohen has a measure but a ṭevul yom may eat it92He is forbidden true ḥallah.. Rebbi Yose says one does not need immersion93This also shows that the symbolic ḥallah is no true heave, cf. Berakhot 1, Note 3..
But it94The purely symbolic ḥallah mentioned last in Mishnah 8. By rabbinic ordinance, it is forbidden for people whose impurity originates in their own body. is forbidden to people suffering from genital flux95Lev. 15:1–15, 25–30., and to women during menstruation96Lev. 15:19–24. or after childbirth97Lev. 12:1–8.. It may be eaten at one table with a layman and may be given to any Cohen98Even a vulgar who cannot be expected to follow all rules of purity..
The following may be given to any Cohen122Irrespective of his level of observance and knowledge of the Law. Some of the prescribed gifts are given to priests serving in the Temple; there, they are under supervision and instruction. The other gifts are purely profane; they cannot be impaired by the impurity of the Cohen.: ḥērem-dedications123Num. 18:14. According to most sources, this special dedication is not for the upkeep of the Temple but for the Cohanim [Sifra Beḥuqotay Pereq12(9), Babli Sanhedrin 88a, Arakhin28a]. However, Babylonian practice follows the dissenting opinion (Arakhin29a)., firstlings124Ex. 13:1, Num. 18:15., the redemption money for a [firstborn] son125Ex. 13:1,13, Num. 3:47, 18:15., the redemption value of a firstling donkey126Ex. 13:1,13., foreleg, jawbone, and first stomach127Deut. 18:3., the first shearing128Deut. 18:4., oil to burn129Impure heave olive oil., Temple sacrifices, and First Fruits130Deut. 26:1–11.. Rebbi Jehudah forbids First Fruits131Since they have to follow rules of heave, Mishnah Bikkurim 2:1.. Heave vetch132This is animal fodder except in times of famine. Rebbi Aqiba permits but the Sages forbid.
פֿרעגט אַ רבֿBookmarkShareCopy