Talmud zu Nazir 3:10
Jerusalem Talmud Terumot
Let us hear from the following34In slightly enlarged form, Tosephta Miqwa’ot 1:17–20; in much shortened form Babli Qiddušin 66b.
The “reservoir of Discus” according to Rashi is named either after a place or a person Discus, Latin proper n.: “It happened that the reservoir of Discus at Jabneh was damaged, measured, and found deficient35Because something happened to the structure, they measured the volume of the water after the accident and found it to be less than 40 seah and, therefore, to be unusable for purification (cf. Chapter 4, Note 112). Since earlier, the miqweh was a valid one, a person who had immersed himself before the accident came to ask whether he could be considered pure because of the prior validity of the miqweh, or whether he was impure since now the miqweh was invalid.. Rebbi Ṭarphon declared pure and Rebbi Aqiba impure. Rebbi Ṭarphon said, the prior status of this miqweh was one of purity; it remains forever in its purity until it becomes known that it is deficient. Rebbi Aqiba said, the prior status of the impure is impurity, he remains forever in his impurity until it becomes known that he is pure. Rebbi Ṭarphon said, to what can this be compared? To one who was standing sacrificing on the altar when it became known that he was the son of a divorcee or of a woman who had performed ḥaliẓah, whose work is valid. Rebbi Aqiba said, to what can this be compared? To one who was standing sacrificing on the altar when it became known that he has a bodily defect, whose work is invalid36Lev. 21:16–24. Since it is stated (v. 17) that a person with a bodily defect “shall not come close to present the bread of his God,” it is clear that this prohibition overrides the general inclusion inferred from Deut. 26:3 or 33:11.. Rebbi Ṭarphon said to him, how is that, Aqiba? I am comparing this to the son of a divorcee or of a woman who had performed ḥaliẓah, and you compare it to one with a bodily defect. Let us see to which case it really is similar; if to the son of a divorcee or of a woman who had performed ḥaliẓah, let us learn from the son of the divorcee, but if to one with a bodily defect, let us learn from the person with a bodily defect. Rebbi Aqiba said to him, the miqweh is invalid because of an inherent defect; the one with a bodily defect is disqualified because of an inherent defect. The son of a divorcee cannot prove anything since he is disqualified because of others37His parents.. The miqweh is invalid because of itself, the one with a bodily defect is disqualified because of himself; the son of a divorcee cannot prove anything since he is disqualified by the court38As noted below, only the court can strip him of his role as Cohen, and only after regular judicial proceedings.. They voted on the matter and declared him impure. Rebbi Ṭarphon said to Rebbi Aqiba, he who separates himself from you is as if he separated himself from his own life.”
The “reservoir of Discus” according to Rashi is named either after a place or a person Discus, Latin proper n.: “It happened that the reservoir of Discus at Jabneh was damaged, measured, and found deficient35Because something happened to the structure, they measured the volume of the water after the accident and found it to be less than 40 seah and, therefore, to be unusable for purification (cf. Chapter 4, Note 112). Since earlier, the miqweh was a valid one, a person who had immersed himself before the accident came to ask whether he could be considered pure because of the prior validity of the miqweh, or whether he was impure since now the miqweh was invalid.. Rebbi Ṭarphon declared pure and Rebbi Aqiba impure. Rebbi Ṭarphon said, the prior status of this miqweh was one of purity; it remains forever in its purity until it becomes known that it is deficient. Rebbi Aqiba said, the prior status of the impure is impurity, he remains forever in his impurity until it becomes known that he is pure. Rebbi Ṭarphon said, to what can this be compared? To one who was standing sacrificing on the altar when it became known that he was the son of a divorcee or of a woman who had performed ḥaliẓah, whose work is valid. Rebbi Aqiba said, to what can this be compared? To one who was standing sacrificing on the altar when it became known that he has a bodily defect, whose work is invalid36Lev. 21:16–24. Since it is stated (v. 17) that a person with a bodily defect “shall not come close to present the bread of his God,” it is clear that this prohibition overrides the general inclusion inferred from Deut. 26:3 or 33:11.. Rebbi Ṭarphon said to him, how is that, Aqiba? I am comparing this to the son of a divorcee or of a woman who had performed ḥaliẓah, and you compare it to one with a bodily defect. Let us see to which case it really is similar; if to the son of a divorcee or of a woman who had performed ḥaliẓah, let us learn from the son of the divorcee, but if to one with a bodily defect, let us learn from the person with a bodily defect. Rebbi Aqiba said to him, the miqweh is invalid because of an inherent defect; the one with a bodily defect is disqualified because of an inherent defect. The son of a divorcee cannot prove anything since he is disqualified because of others37His parents.. The miqweh is invalid because of itself, the one with a bodily defect is disqualified because of himself; the son of a divorcee cannot prove anything since he is disqualified by the court38As noted below, only the court can strip him of his role as Cohen, and only after regular judicial proceedings.. They voted on the matter and declared him impure. Rebbi Ṭarphon said to Rebbi Aqiba, he who separates himself from you is as if he separated himself from his own life.”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Jerusalem Talmud Sanhedrin
MISHNAH: Anybody who adds inquiries40About the details of the crime which are investigated after time and place have been established. is praiseworthy. It happened that Ben Zakkai41According to the Babli, 41a/b, it is possible that he is Rabban Johanan ben Zakkai. During the time that capital jurisdiction was still in the hands of a Jewish court, not yet in that of the Roman governor, he was not yet the head of the Synhedrion and, therefore, had no title. cross-examined about fig stalks. What is the difference between investigations and cross-examinations? In investigations, if one said “I do not know”, their testimony is worthless42As testimony which cannot be shown to be perjured.. In cross-examinations, if one said “I do not know”, or even two say “we do not know,” their testimony remains valid43The credibility of the witnesses may be impaired. This is a matter to be decided by the judges, not an absolute obstacle.. Both in investigations and cross-examinations, if they contradict one another their testimony is worthless44A conviction requires testimony by two witnesses. If there are conflicting testimonies and the judges believe one of them, no conviction could result since it would be based on the word of one witness alone..
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy