Talmud su Berakhot 6:6
הָיוּ יוֹשְׁבִין לֶאֱכֹל, כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מְבָרֵךְ לְעַצְמוֹ. הֵסֵבּוּ, אֶחָד מְבָרֵךְ לְכֻלָּן. בָּא לָהֶם יַיִן בְּתוֹךְ הַמָּזוֹן, כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מְבָרֵךְ לְעַצְמוֹ. לְאַחַר הַמָּזוֹן, אֶחָד מְבָרֵךְ לְכֻלָּם. וְהוּא אוֹמֵר עַל הַמֻּגְמָר, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין מְבִיאִין אֶת הַמֻּגְמָר אֶלָּא לְאַחַר הַסְּעֻדָּה:
Se si sedessero per mangiare [senza reclinarsi, un segno che non avevano organizzato di mangiare insieme, poiché quando gruppi di persone si erano disposti a mangiare insieme, si sarebbero adagiati sui tappetini, e avrebbero mangiato e bevuto sdraiati sul lato sinistro], ciascuno si benedice per se stesso, [non essendoci un pasto "nominato" senza sdraiarsi. Tuttavia, se dicessero: "Andiamo a mangiare il pane in quel posto", anche se non si adagiano, è come se lo avessero, e si benedice tutti; e si uniscono anche per grazia.] Se si reclinavano, si benedice tutti. Se durante il pasto venivano portati del vino davanti a loro, ognuno benedica (sopra il vino) per se stesso [poiché la loro gola non è libera, e le poltrone reclinabili non sono intenzionate alla benedizione, ma all'ingestione di ciò che è in bocca. O può darsi che siamo preoccupati per il loro soffocamento nel rispondere ad Amen.] E fa la benedizione sul mugmar [Colui che fa grazia benedice il mugmar: "Chi crea legni di spezie". E anche se potrebbe esserci una persona più eminente di lui, dato che ha iniziato con una (benedizione), ne fa l'altra], anche se il mugmar non viene portato fino a dopo il pasto [dopo la grazia, in modo che non sia un requisito del pasto. Tuttavia, da quando ha iniziato queste ultime benedizioni, le completa. ["Mugmar": Dopo il pasto non erano soliti portare spezie di legno su una padella di carbone, per produrre una fragranza aromatica.]
Jerusalem Talmud Sheviit
HALAKHAH: Does the sanctity of the Sabbatical fall on dyes for humans5Cosmetics.? Let us hear from the following (Lev. 25:6): “For you”, all that is needed by you6“The Sabbath of the Land shall be for you (plural) to eat, for you (singular), your slave, and your hand-maiden, your hired hand and your (Gentile) resident who dwell with you.” The first “for you” seems to be superfluous. Since the verse gives permission to a slave owner to eat Sabbatical produce, it follows that the rich may eat. The poor are given permission to eat in Ex. 23:11: “The Seventh Year you shall let lie fallow and abandon it so that the needy of your people may eat; the remainder the wild animals of the field shall eat.” It is inferred that “for you” means all legitimate human needs that apply to all equally.. We have stated on that: For example eating, drinking, anointing, and coloring. This excludes wound dressing which is only for the sick. This excludes olentia7See Berakhot, pp. 87, 501. תפילין is derived from Arabic תַּפִֹל “mal odorous”. which are only for the malodorous. Rebbi Jonah asked: Why does one exclude wound dressing because the sanctity of the Sabbatical cannot fall on it? But did we not state8A related text is in Tosephta 5:7: “Din,Bṣr, and indigo usually are sown after the end of the Sabbatical.” As R. S. Lieberman notes, the identity of the first two plants can no longer be established. The isatis plant is used as dye (indigo) but the seeds are good only for sowing. Hence, seeds harvested in the Sabbatical retain their Sabbatical quality even after the end of the year. {For דן cf. Arabic דאן “to be of inferior quality”, for צד Arabic צדא “rust”.}
The argument goes as follows: It is stated in Mishnah 8:1 that animal feed may be used to make wound dressing; only Sabbatical human food may not be used. In itself, animal feed has the sanctity of the Sabbatical and cannot be used for industrial purposes. Then one cannot understand why dyestuff seeds retain their sanctity but wound dressing does not. The answer is that the next argument will show that human needs have precedence over animal needs but once the product is no longer available for all of mankind it cannot have sanctity attached.: “Sanctity of the Sabbatical falls on din, sad, and indigo seed that one sows after the end of the Sabbatical.” What is that? “For you”, for all of you equally. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Hila understood it from the following (Lev. 25:7)9Sifra Behar Pereq 1(10). “For your domestic animal and the beast in your Land shall be all its yield as feed.” It is clear from the preceding verse that not all growth of the Sabbatical is for animals since humans were given prior permission to eat it. Therefore, the expression “shall be” is interpreted as: All that is not used for humans shall be animal feed.: “Shall be”, even to kindle the light and to dye. Does this not destroy animal feed? Rebbi Mana said, explain it if animal feed is used for human needs and you cannot infer anything from it10For potential human food..
The argument goes as follows: It is stated in Mishnah 8:1 that animal feed may be used to make wound dressing; only Sabbatical human food may not be used. In itself, animal feed has the sanctity of the Sabbatical and cannot be used for industrial purposes. Then one cannot understand why dyestuff seeds retain their sanctity but wound dressing does not. The answer is that the next argument will show that human needs have precedence over animal needs but once the product is no longer available for all of mankind it cannot have sanctity attached.: “Sanctity of the Sabbatical falls on din, sad, and indigo seed that one sows after the end of the Sabbatical.” What is that? “For you”, for all of you equally. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Hila understood it from the following (Lev. 25:7)9Sifra Behar Pereq 1(10). “For your domestic animal and the beast in your Land shall be all its yield as feed.” It is clear from the preceding verse that not all growth of the Sabbatical is for animals since humans were given prior permission to eat it. Therefore, the expression “shall be” is interpreted as: All that is not used for humans shall be animal feed.: “Shall be”, even to kindle the light and to dye. Does this not destroy animal feed? Rebbi Mana said, explain it if animal feed is used for human needs and you cannot infer anything from it10For potential human food..
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah
73This paragraph also is Ḥagigah 1:4 (ח). Rebbi Ze`ira, Ulla bar Ismael in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: With pilgrimage well-being offerings which were slaughtered on the eve of a festival one does not satisfy his obligation for the pilgrimage74A pilgrimage to the Temple on the occasion of one of the three festivals of pilgrimage brings with it the obligation for two kinds of sacrifices. The first is the “elevation offering of appearance”, in response to the commandment (Ex. 34:20): They shall not appear empty-handed before My presence. The second is a family sacrifice with the full name שַׁלְמֵי חֲגִיגָה “pilgrimage well-being offering”, usually shortened to חֲגִיגָה “pilgrimage offering”, in response to the commandment to be joyous on the festival of pilgrimage, since when there is a possibility of sacrificing the eating of well-being sacrifices is an act of joy (Deut. 27:7). But this must be a sacrifice on the holiday, not in preparation for the holiday. Babli Pesaḥim 70b, bottom.. Rebbi Abba objected, was it not stated: With the pilgrimage offering of the Fourteenth one fulfills the obligation of joy but one does not fulfill the one of well-being offerings75The pilgrimage offering of the Fourteenth is an additional sacrifice on the 14th of Nisan, together with the Pesaḥ sacrifice. Since the Pesaḥ is to be eaten after the main meal, the meat for the main course is provided by the additional well-being offering. Since the meal is taken in the night of the holiday, it contributes to the enjoyment of the holiday, but it is not a sacrifice on the holiday. Babli Pesaḥim 70a. (Cf. the author’s The Scholar’s Haggadah, pp. 248–249.)? Rebbi Ze`ira said, explain it that he slaughtered it on the holiday. Rebbi Abba said, if he slaughtered it on the holiday it is not a festival offering of the Fourteenth. What about it? Rebbi Ze`ira said, when we still were there, we heard stated Ulla bar Ismael in the name of Rebbi Eleazar. When we came up to here we heard stated, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: only be joyful76Deut. 16:15., to add the night of the (last) [first]77The (scribe’s text) is confirmed in Ḥagigah; the [corrector’s] is from Sifry Deut. 142. The clause only be joyful seems unnecessary since the preceding verse already commands to enjoy the festival of Tabernacles. It is read to mean that the final day, which no longer belongs to Tabernacles, only has the obligation of joy, but none of the two sacrifices which already were obligatory on Tabernacles. Therefore by the argument presented for the offering of the Fourteenth, the last day may be celebrated with meat from a sacrifice brought on the preceding day. The corrector’s text is irrelevant for the discussion here, it refers the sacrifice of the Fourteenth to the 14th of Tishre, to provide food for the initial meal of the holiday. festival day for joy. Or maybe also the nights of the (first) [last] day of the festival? Only split78In Ḥagigah: “or inverse.” The text here is the Babli’s, 48a.. Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: and you shall be jouyouson your festival of pilgrimage79Deut. 16:14.. When you are obligated for a sacrifice of pilgrimage you are obligated for joy80Therefore no sacrifice on the eve of a holiday can be obligatory.. They objected, did we not state, hallel and joy eight? Think of it, if the first day of the holiday falls on a Sabbath! He cannot slaughter on the eve of the holiday since Rebbi Ze`ira, Ulla bar Ismael in the name of Rebbi Eleazar said, with pilgrimage well-being offerings which were slaughtered on the eve of a festival one does not satisfy his obligation for the pilgrimage. He cannot slaughter on the holiday since we already have learned that the pilgrimage offering does not push aside the Sabbath81Since no fixed date is given in the verse for these sacrifices, they cannot be brought on a Sabbath.. When did they say, Hallel and joy eight? Rebbi Yose said, Rav Eudaimon the emigrant explained it for Cohanim and the goat82If the first day is a Sabbath, all required holiday sacrifices are brought on the altar. They all are holocausts except for the goat as purification offering whose meat is eaten by the Cohanim. But since it is a Sabbath, it may not be cooked or roasted for private use and the meat must be eaten raw. The Babli Pesaḥim 71a holds that eating raw meat is no joy..
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Jerusalem Talmud Beitzah
MISHNAH: He also said three matters of leniency: On the holiday one sweeps between the couches103The couches are in the dining hall, triclinium, which may be swept after the meal to collect the morsels of food which fell down during the dinner. If the dining hall has a dirt floor, sweeping with a broom will have the side effect of filling uneven spots in the floor, which is a building activity and therefore forbidden. There would be no problem on a stone floor. and puts down incense104One puts spices on burning charcoal to cover any bad smell. This cannot be considered cooking food, and even for the House of Hillel it is forbidden since it is available only to the rich and the verse Ex. 12:16 only permits work for things available to everybody.; and one makes a helmeted kid-goat105A kid-goat roasted whole. Since this is the way the pascal lamb has to be roasted as sacrifice in Temple times, it is forbidden in absence of a Temple. in the Passover night, but the Sages forbid.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy