Talmud sur Bekhorot 8:12

HALAKHAH: “One consolidates sheqalim to darics,” etc. Should one exchange them for a pearl? Perhaps the pearl would lose in value and the Temple treasury would suffer damage. As we have stated there⁶Mishnah Bekhorot8:7., “All⁷Any sancta which may be redeemed at all may be redeemed for money’s worth except sheqalim. can be redeemed by money or monies-worth except for sheqalim” [and one does not redeem by implements;]⁸Addition by the corrector from the Babli, unnecessary as already noted by R. Eliahu of Wilna. and Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac said, perhaps the implements would lose in value and the Temple treasury would suffer damage. Also here, perhaps the pearl would lose in value and the Temple treasury would suffer damage.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, because they are the periods of birth⁹Different kinds of livestock produce their young at different times.. Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Tanḥum bar Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: That animals be available for the pilgrims on the holidays¹⁰Babli Bekhorot57b/58a. It is explained later that the main time for animal tithe is early fall. The other two times are introduced for the convenience of the farmer that he may take his tithe animal to the Temple when he makes his pilgrimage anyhow.. Rebbi Yudan said, that he should not come to do not tarry¹¹It is sinful to give tithes too late (Ex. 22:28). This is interpreted to mean that one disregards a positive commandment if one does not hand over (for produce) or sacrifices (for animals) his tithes on or before the next holiday, and one transgresses the prohibition on the third holiday after the start of the obligation.. Rebbi Yose said, anybody who is late with his ṭevel transgresses¹²Ṭevel is untithed produce for which heave and tithes are due.. There,¹³Mishnah Bekhorot8:5. The text quoted here is the Mishnah text; nevertheless it seems that the statement from Mishnah Roš Haššanah1:1, quoted in B, that R. Eleazar (ben Shamua) and R. Simeon fix the date at the first of Tishre, has to be included here. From here on the text is copied in Roš Haššanah1:1 (Note 148). we have stated: “Rebbi Meïr says, on the first of Elul is the New Year for animal tithes. Ben Azzai says, those born in Elul are to be tithed separately.” Rebbi Ḥuna said, The reason of Rebbi Meïr: Up to that point they finish to give birth from the old ones; after that they start to give birth from the new ones¹⁴Since the gestation period for sheep is 5 months, those born in Av were conceived before the start of Nisan, those in Elul after the first of Nisan. If the start of the year is fixed in spring, the natural date for a new year of animal tithes is the start of Elul.. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rav Huna: The reason of Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Simeon, the rams are mounting the ewes, these are the early ones, and the valleys are clothed in grain, these are the late ones, they are friends and also are tithed¹⁵Ps.65:14. The last word is read as if it were יְעַשְׂרוּ. Babli Roš Haššanah8a., both enter the corral to be tithed. Ben Azzai said, since these are saying this and those are saying that, those born in Elul should be tithed by themselves. How is this? If there were born in his flock five in Av, five in Elul, and five in Tishre, they do not combine¹⁶The tenth lamb is animal tithe. If there are 5 in Av and 5 in Elul, they cannot add up to 10 since practice may follow R. Meïr; 5 in Elul and 5 in Tishre cannot combine since practice may follow R. Simeon.. If there were born in his flock five in Av and five in Tishre, they combine¹⁷This really should be: 5 in Tishre and 5 in the following Av, so they belong to the same fiscal year (Tosephta Bekhorot7:9, Babli Bekhorot58a.). Could Ben Azzai decide between his students¹⁸The reference to Ben Azzai in a dispute between R. Aqiba’s last students is anachronistic; Ben Azzai died young, before these became independent scholars.? Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Miasha in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac: For so disagreed the fathers of the world. Who are the fathers of the world? Rebbi Jonah stated before Rebbi Jeremiah: Rebbi Ismael and Rebbi Aqiba¹⁹Ben Azzai considers the points of view of R. Aqiba and R. Ismael as equivalent even though he never was R. Ismael’s student. If he does not follow his teacher, he must be an independent authority.. This implies that Ben Azzai was colleague and student of Rebbi Aqiba. If you are saying that he was his teacher, is there anybody who says to his teacher, “since these are saying this and those are saying that”? Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac understood it from the following²⁰Mishnah Bava batra9:14. The testimony of a Mishnah is preferable to that of a baraita.: “Ben Azzai said to him, we are sorry about their disagreement, and you come to find us disagreement where they are concurring.” This implies that Ben Azzai was colleague and student of Rebbi Aqiba. If you are saying that he was his teacher, is there anybody who says to his teacher, “you come to find us disagreement”?

There, we have stated: “Any born from the first of Tishre until the 29^th of Elul combine; five before New Year’s day and five after New Year’s day do not combine. Five before the threshing floor and five after the threshing floor do combine²¹Mishnah Bekhorot9:5. A general rule for all tithes is that they have to be given separately for each year. This is inferred from Deut. 14:22, referring to agricultural tithe, which has to be given year by year. The tax year for animal tithe is defined as from Tishre 1 to Elul 29..” Rebbi Yose said, this implies that the rules of animal tither are neither like those of germinating²²The tax year for tithe from the yield of trees (rabbinic except for olive oil) is defined as from Shevat 15 to Shevat 14; for these purposes a fruit is defined as in existence if it started growing after the flower lost its leaves. The equivalent for animals would be a visible pregnancy. nor like those of a third²³Agricultural produce (Biblically, grain) has to be given if it is harvested when barely edible, one-third ripe. Its year is from Tishre 1 to Elul 29.. If you would say like germinating, it should state, all whose pregnancy starts from the 29^th of Elul. If you would say like a third, it should state, up to the 22^nd24. Rebbi Shammai in the name of Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya: Like the third, they made it following Rebbi Simeon, since Rebbi Simeon said, {an animal} before its time enters the corral to be tithed²⁵He holds that the tithe is not slaughtered at the moment it is selected; at all times it is a prospective sacrifice. Babli Bekhorot21b.. Rebbi Mana met Rebbi Shammai; he asked him, did you say that? He told him, yes. He answered, but did we not state, “Ben Azzai says, those born in Elul are to be tithed separately.¹³Mishnah Bekhorot8:5. The text quoted here is the Mishnah text; nevertheless it seems that the statement from Mishnah Roš Haššanah1:1, quoted in B, that R. Eleazar (ben Shamua) and R. Simeon fix the date at the first of Tishre, has to be included here. From here on the text is copied in Roš Haššanah1:1 (Note 148).” Not even if it was born up to the 29^th of Elul? Could you say that Ben Azzai follows Rebbi Simeon²⁶Since it was explained in the preceding paragraph that Ben Azzai follows neither R. Simeon nor his opponents; his statement has to be acceptable to both parties.? You have to say, he follows the rabbis. Just as you say following the rabbis, he leaves them for the next year and they will be tithed with the others of their year²⁷An animal born between 23rd and 29th of Elul for Ben Azzai according to the rabbis has to be tithed the following year with the animals born the next year during Elul 1–22., so you have to say following ben Azzai, he leaves them for the next threshing floor²⁸Which is a preferred but not obligatory date for tithing. and they will be tithed with those from Elul. Rebbi Huna said, this implies that the days of a firstling while he still is before its time²⁹The first 7 days of its life. The firstling has to be delivered to a Cohen during its first year. are counted for its year. Rebbi Mana said, my father Rebbi Jonah understood this from the following³⁰Deut. 15:19. Since only its date of birth is mentioned. The firstling automatically is a dedicated sacrifice, and neither may nor can be selected.: Any male firstling which is born to your cattle and small cattle, etc. How is this? You count its year from the moment it is born.

HALAKHAH: “The ketubah of a virgin is 200 and that of a widow one mina,” etc. Huna in the name of Samuel: In the Temple šeqel¹¹²The Temple šeqel coins struck in Jerusalem during the first war with the Romans are silver coins weighing between 13.5 and 14.3 g. The corresponding Tyrian coinage is about 13.5 g. A Temple šeqel in Babylonian theory is twice the weight of a common šeqel, which is the name of the two-denar coin. This means that the Temple šeqel is equal, both in the Yerushalmi and in the Babli, to the Roman tetradrachma (סֶלַע), based on an unadulterated silver denar (drachma, זוּז) of 3.4 g. Tyre ceased to mint coins between the reigns of Augustus and Septimius Severus, meaning that Tyrian coins in the Mishnaic period were unadulterated silver. Samuel requires that the ketubah be adjusted for the inflation caused by the debasement of the currency in circulation. It may be that he holds that the basic ketubah amount is a biblical requirement (cf. Halakhah 13:11).. Rebbi Abba bar Bina said, circulating coin¹¹³The value of the ketubah has to be computed on the basis of the currency in circulation.. A Mishnah supports Rebbi Abba bar Bina¹¹⁴Mishnah Bekhorot 8:7; cf. Tosephta Ketubot 12:6.: “The five tetradrachmas of the firstborn¹¹⁵The redemption of the firstborn, Num. 3:47, identifying the biblical šeqel as tetradrachma. are in Tyrian coinage, the 30 of the slave¹¹⁶30 šeqel weregilt for the killing of another person’s slave by one’s ox, Ex. 21:32., the 50 of the rapist and the seducer¹¹⁷50 šeqel bride money paid by the rapist (Deut. 22:29) and, by inference, the seducer (Ex. 22:15–16) of a girl., the 100 of the slanderer¹¹⁸The fine imposed on a man wrongly accusing his wife of committing adultery during her preliminary marriage period, Deut. 22:19., are all computed in Temple šeqels in Tyrian coinage.” A woman’s ketubah is not stated with them. Rebbi Abin said, did they not learn the ketubah of a woman from the rapist and the seducer¹¹⁹Since the 50 tetradrachmas due from the rapist and the seducer are exactly 200 denarii; either these 200 denarii are the “bride money” described in the verse Ex. 22:16 or at least they are the inspiration for the rabbis to fixate the minimum ketubah at 200 zuz.? Since the rapist and the seducer are mentioned, it is as if women’s ketubah was stated with them¹²⁰The Mishnah from Bekhorot does not prove anything..

If it was in pieces and the head came out, what is the rule? Rebbi Yasa said, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Eleazar disagree. Rebbi Joḥanan said, its head counts for most of it. Rebbi Eleazar said, its head is like any other of its limbs¹⁴⁰Their disagreement is confirmed in the Babli, 29a.. A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan: “If it came out in pieces or defective, it is born as soon as most of its body came out.” Explain it if its head came out¹⁴¹The head is called “most of the body”.. A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Eleazar: “If it was a regular birth¹⁴²If the head appeared first, even if it was a stillbirth with an incomplete body., when most of its head came out.” Did not the first part say, the head is nothing?¹⁴³A “regular birth” must refer to a fully formed body since otherwise the first statement, that one needs most of the body, contradicts the second, that the skull with the forehead is enough. From the last statement of the Mishnah there is no objection to R. Eleazar since it does not speak of a defective fetus. Explain it¹⁴⁴The first, but not the second statement of the second half of the Mishnah. about the incomplete body. Rebbi Jonathan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish; Rebbi Jonathan agrees with Rebbi Joḥanan¹⁴⁵Here ends the Genizah fragment., Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish with Rebbi Eleazar. Rebbi Ze‘ira showed the colleagues his forehead with the skull¹⁴⁶That a birth is counted only from the moment that the forehead with the greater part of the skull had appeared.. One of the house of Gamliel ben Rebbi Leani asked before Rebbi Mana: Since you say, it is a child, does this not imply that one who comes after him is firstborn neither for inheritance nor for the Cohen¹⁴⁷Mishnah Bekhorot 8:1 states that any child born after an initial miscarriage such as described in this Chapter is a firstborn for inheritance but not for redemption by a Cohen (Ex.13:15).. He said to him, explain it if both were stillborn¹⁴⁸Obviously any miscarriage produces a stillborn baby. The rules of the firstborn for inheritance have nothing to do with those of the firstborn for redemption. While the firstborn for inheritance must be born (Deut 21:15), he cannot have been delivered by caesarean section and he must be the father’s first (Deut 21:17), but not necessarily the mother’s. Since a miscarriage is not counted for the father, only for the mother, the next child still can claim the double part of the inheritance (Sifry Deut. 217)..

HALAKHAH: “Any person who has a child anywhere”, etc. Rebbi Avin asked: “His child in every respect”, even for being fruitful and multiplying¹²⁹Cf. Mishnah 6:6. Since no answer is given, it seems obvious that a bastard counts as a child. This is the interpretation of R. Mose Isserls.? Is there no difference¹³⁰The Spanish tradition, from Nachmanides to R. Nissim, reads לפריה וּלרביה ולשניות “for being fruitful and multiplying and secondary prohibitions”. between a Gentile who came to a Jewish woman and she gave birth and a Jew who came to a Gentile woman and she gave birth¹³¹In both cases, of the three partners in the creation of a child, father, mother, and God (Peah, Chapter 1, Note 116), the child has only two since legally it has no father.? “When she became Jewish and gave birth it is a first-born for inheritance but not a first-born for the Cohen.¹³²Mishnah Bekhorot 8:1. If the Gentile first has a child as a Gentile, then converts and marries the father of her child, the next child, if male, will be the father’s firstborn (since he is no relative of the other child) but does not have to be redeemed (Ex. 34:20) since he is not the first child of the mother.”