Talmud sobre Arakhin 8:6

חֶרְמֵי כֹהֲנִים אֵין לָהֶם פִּדְיוֹן, אֶלָּא נִתָּנִים לַכֹּהֲנִים. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶן בְּתֵירָא אוֹמֵר, סְתָם חֲרָמִים לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם כז), כָּל חֵרֶם קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים הוּא לַה'. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, סְתָם חֲרָמִים לַכֹּהֲנִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), כִּשְׂדֵה הַחֵרֶם לַכֹּהֵן תִּהְיֶה אֲחֻזָּתוֹ. אִם כֵּן, לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר כָּל חֵרֶם קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים הוּא לַה'. שֶׁהוּא חָל עַל קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים וְעַל קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים:

Las cosas prohibidas para [el uso de] los sacerdotes no pueden ser redimidas sino que deben ser entregadas a los sacerdotes. El rabino Judah ben Batera dice: las cosas proscritas sin especificación recaen en [el fondo para] las reparaciones del Templo, como se dijo: "Toda cosa proscrita es santísima para el Señor" (Levítico 27:25). Pero los Sabios dicen: las cosas prohibidas sin especificación van a los sacerdotes, como se dice: "Como un campo proscrito: su posesión pertenece al sacerdote" (Levítico 27:21). Si es así, ¿por qué se dice: "Todo lo proscrito es santísimo para el Señor"? Esto enseña que se aplica [también] a kodshai kodashim [sacrificios del más alto grado de santidad, pueden ser sacrificados solo en la esquina noroeste del altar, y consumidos solo dentro del recinto del Templo por sacerdotes varones, o quemados por completo] y kodashim kalim [sacrificios de menor grado de santidad, pueden ser sacrificados en cualquier parte del patio del Templo y consumidos por la mayoría de las personas, en cualquier lugar de Jerusalén].

Jerusalem Talmud Nedarim

“But the Sages say, indeterminate heave in Judea is prohibited, in Galilee permitted, since Galileans do not know of Temple heave.” But if they did know it, the indeterminate would be forbidden⁶⁶The meaning of vows has to be determined by popular usage. Since learned people are not supposed to make vows, it is clear that the interpretation of vows depends on the meaning of the words in the vernacular, independent of the place where the vow was made.. “Indeterminate bans in Judea are permitted, in Galilee prohibited, since Galileans do not know of priest’s bans.” But if they did know it, the indeterminate would be permitted. Here you say permitted, but there you say forbidden⁶⁷This is an attempt to explain the rules in legal terminology, without appeal to the vernacular. The indeterminate vow would be a case of doubt; in one case one rules that doubt removes the vow, in the other that it confirms the vow. This is the attitude of the Babli, 19b.. Rebbi Eleazar says, these are statements of two Tannaïm⁶⁸This is the solution of the Babli and Tosephta 1:6 which ascribe the statement on bans to R. Eleazar ben R. Ṣadoq. This solution is appropriate for the Yerushalmi, the Munich and Cambridge mss. of the Babli, and the quotes in many Medieval authors, which ascribe both statements to “the Sages” who would be free to rule in one case with R. Jehudah and in the other with R. Eleazar ben R. Ṣadoq. But in the printed Babli which, together with most independent Mishnah mss., attributes the statement of the Sages to R. Jehudah, the two-Tanna solution, rejected in the Yerushalmi but given in the Babli in the name of the Fourth Century Amora Abbai, is rather forced.. Rebbi Jeremiah said, all is from one Tanna, following the one who said⁶⁹Mishnah Arakhin 8:6, opinion of R. Jehudah ben Bathyra.: “indeterminate bans are for the upkeep of the Temple.” But for the one who said⁷⁰The anonymous Sages. The Babli, Arakhin 29a, states that in the absence of a Temple, bans for the upkeep of the Temple can be redeemed by pennies., “indeterminate bans are for priests,” even in Galilee they would be permitted. In Galilee where they are used to invoke Akhan’s ban⁷¹Jos. 7:25–26, the expression of an absolute and irredeemable prohibition of all use., you have to say forbidden; in Judea where they are not used to invoke Akhan’s ban, you have to say permitted.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Versículo anterior Capítulo completo Versículo siguiente