Talmud sobre Avodah Zarah 5:13

In a baraita²⁶The baraita as stated here is not found in any other source except the Yerushalmi parallels Pesaḥim 28c, Avodah Zarah 45b. In Mekhilta Mišpaṭim 19; quoted in Babli Pesaḥim22b, Qiddušin 56b, Baba Qama 41a the text explicitly notes that, since “its meat shall not be eaten” is included in the statement of the sentence to be passed by the court, only after judgment is rendered does slaughter become ineffective. This may also be the rule implied by the Yerushalmi Targum to Ex. 21:28: וְלָא יִתְנְכַס לְמֵיכוּל יַת בִּשְׂרֵיהּ “it should not be slaughtered to make its flesh edible.” Since the Babli follows R. Eleazar, no discussion of the prohibition of usufruct is necessary. one disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan: “What does one understand from what has been said (Ex. 21:28): ‘The ox shall certainly be stoned’? Do we not know that its meat is forbidden as food²⁷As carcass meat.? Then why does the verse say, ‘its meat shall not be eaten’? To tell you that just as it is forbidden as food so it is forbidden for usufruct.” What does Rebbi Joḥanan do with this? He explained it if the owners slaughtered it before sentence was pronounced²⁸This statement directly contradicts the position of the Babli. R. Yoḥanan will hold that the prescriptive commandment to stone the ox after judgment has been passed automatically makes any slaughter invalid; that would not need a proof from the verse..

It was stated⁵⁹Tosephta 4:4, with slightly different wording.: “Rebbi Jehudah said, it happened that we were at Ein Kushin⁶⁰A place which according to the Yerushalmi [Avodah Zarah 5:4 (fol. 44d)] is near Kefar Shalem and according to the Babli (Avodah Zarah 31a) near Birat Sareqa (fortification of the Saracens). None of these places has been convincingly identified. and ate arum at the end of the holiday at the end of the Sabbatical⁶¹The 23rd of Tishre, soon after the end the Sabbatical. Am instruction given by a major authority must represent practice. following instructions by Rebbi Tarphon. Rebbi Yose told him, I was with you but it was only the end of Passover.”

“What is the positive commandment about the menstruating woman?” Rebbi Abin said, Keep the Children of Israel away from their impurities⁷⁰Lev. 15:31. The verse continues: Lest they die in their impurities when they defile My abode which is in their midst. This is the positive commandment not to defile the Temple. The verse concludes the chapters on impurities created by the human body (childbirth, skin diseases, male and female venereal diseases, menstruation, and sexual relations with a menstruating woman). Therefore it also is the positive commandment regarding the menstruating woman and is interpreted to forbid sexual relations with a woman close to the expected onset of her menses. The question about the woman experiencing a discharge during sex must refer to an unexpected event. Babli Ševuot 18b, most of the paragraph.. Rebbi Jonathan sent to ask Rebbi Simeon ben Rebbi Yose bar Lakonia, from where a warning for one having sex with an impure woman? He wanted to throw a stone after him; he told him, you are asking me something that children recite every day in the synagogue⁷¹Serving as elementary school under the system of compulsory elementary education instituted by Joshua ben Gamla.: To a woman in the separation ofher impurity you shall not come near to uncover her nakedness⁷²Lev. 18:19.. He answered him, that is not my problem. My only problem is rather “if he was having sex with an impure woman, he is liable. If he was having sex with a pure one and she said to him, I became impure,” if he separates immediately, is he liable⁷³As the Babli explains, interrupting the coition during an erection is pleasurable for the male and therefore forbidden under the circumstances. The end of the erection must precede the separation.? He told him, I and you have the same problem. Let us go out and learn. They went out and heard the voice of a Tanna who stated following Ḥiskiah: If lying a man will lie with her⁷⁴Lev. 15:24.. Not only that if he was having sex with an impure woman, he is liable. If he was having sex with a pure one and she said to him, I became impure, if he separates immediately, is he liable? The verse says, her secretion shall be⁷⁴Lev. 15:24., even if her secretion starts⁷⁵The rabbinic expression for the onset on the menses is פִּרֵס נִידָּה, “breaking through”. with him. What should he do? Rav Hoshaia, Rav Jehudah in the name of Samuel, he shall cool down. If he did not cool down? Rebbi Yose said, for him I am reading do not come near⁷²Lev. 18:19. as “do not separate”. Closeness is separation. Rav Ḥuna in the name of Rav Abba: Those who say, be close to yourself, do not touch me for I sanctified you⁷⁶Is. 65:5. Also in the Babli the verse is quoted in support of the interpretation of the root קרב as “to separate”.. Rebbi Zeˋira said, he should imagine that a sword is cutting into his flesh. Is everybody Rebbi Zeˋira? Rebbi Tanḥuma in the name of Rav Ḥuna: He shall press his fingertips on the wall, then he will cool down⁷⁷Babli Ševuot 18a..

HALAKHAH: ¹⁵⁸Mishnah Avodah Zarah 5:11. The entire Halakhah is from Avodah Zarah 5:11, fol. 45a; the parallel in Babli Avodah Zarah 73a/b. There, we have stated: “Libation wine¹⁵⁹Cf. Note 115. is forbidden and makes forbidden in the most minute amount.” Ḥizqiah said, if somebody mixed a cup from forbidden and from permitted [wine], if the forbidden fell in last it makes it forbidden, permitted at the end makes it permitted¹⁶⁰This seems to contradict the Mishnah just quoted.. Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac said, this follows Rebbi Eliezer, as Rebbi Eliezer said, I am going after the last one. Rebbi Jeremiah said, this is a stringency about libation wine. Rebbi Yose asked, if it were a stringency about libation wine, even if the permitted fell in last it should be forbidden¹⁶¹R. Jeremiah’s position is impossible.! Rebbi Assi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If somebody mixed a cup from forbidden and from permitted [wine], one considers the permitted as nonexistent¹⁶²Mixed wine always contains wine and water; the amount of prohibited wine must be so small as not to give taste to the mixing water.; if the forbidden does impart taste it is forbidden, otherwise permitted. Rebbi Hoshaia said, only if the permitted fell in last¹⁶³In that case, the prohibited was already insignificant in the water when the permitted fell in; nothing is changed.. Rebbi Ammi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, it does not make any difference whether the forbidden fell in first and the permitted last or the permitted first and the forbidden last, even water and wine, even if it was mixed perfectly from permitted, one considers the permitted as nonexistent; if the forbidden does impart taste it is forbidden, otherwise permitted. Rebbi Zeïra said, that which you say and everybody stated, how can this be¹⁶⁴If one speaks about mixing cups, it is most unlikely that any ever would be permitted under these rules.? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, if a flask of libation wine fell into an amphora of wine and then¹⁶⁵It was immediately fished out; the amphora will be forbidden as libation wine. it fell into a water cistern, one considers the permitted as nonexistent; if it can be tasted it¹⁶⁶The water. In the Babli, Avodah Zarah 73a/b, both in the printed version and in the Sephardic ms. published by S. Abramson, the disagreement between Ḥizqiah and R, Joḥanan is about libation wine which fell into a water cistern and then a flask of water fell into the cistern and was fished out. The Ashkenazic version of the Munich ms. speaks of libation and permitted wine which fell into a water cistern; a scenario compatible with the statement of R. Abbahu. is forbidden, otherwise permitted.

It was stated⁹⁴Tosephta 6:26; there camel drivers are mentioned instead of “all those working”. The quote in the Babli (Avodah Zarah 62a) mentions only donkey drivers.: “The wages of donkey drivers, carriers, and all those working with Sabbatical produce are Sabbatical.” Rebbi Zeïra said, this baraita deals with permitted produce. What is the meaning of “the wages are Sabbatical”? That they may take their wages in the form of Sabbatical produce. Then it must be that, when Rebbi Joḥanan taught those of [the House of] Rebbi Yannai not to take the wages of their oil presses in wine but in money, he taught them following Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Neḥemiah⁹⁵The baraita is taken as the position of the rabbis opposing Rebbis Jehudah and Neḥemiah (Note 69). This position is rejected in the Babli (loc.cit.) since the text does not include “all those working with produce”. It is held that poorly paid workers may be paid in kind following the rules of Mishnah 5 but not highly paid donkey drivers, following Rebbi Abbahu.. Rebbi Hila⁹⁶He is R. La.: the baraita deals with those who carry forbidden produce⁹⁷Produce from guarded fields or harvested in a professional way.. What is the meaning of “the wages are Sabbatical”? As Rebbi Abbahu, Rebbi Joḥanan said, they fined him with wine of libations⁹⁸This refers to Mishnah Avodah Zarah 5:1 which states that the wages of a Jewish worker earned by a contract which specifies work for wine used, or to be used, for idolatrous libations is forbidden for all usufruct. R. Abbahu (Avodah Zarah Halakhah 5:1) notes that no principle of law requires that the wages be forbidden; it is a rabbinic ordinance imposed to avoid situations in which pagan wine might be sold to Jews, and the same situation applies here.; here also, they fined him.