Talmud su Yadayim 4:9

One does not save from a fire²⁶This seems to be a truncated quote from a baraita which disagrees with the preceding argument and states that Hagiographa cannot be saved from a fire if this would involve transgressing rabbinic prohibitions.. For him who says, they render hands impure²⁷Mishnah Yadaim 3:8 reports on disagreement whether touching a scroll of Ecclesiastes makes one’s hands impure. There seems to be tacit agreement that Esther does not make the hands impure. This impurity is purely rabbinical; it was instituted so people should not store their heave, which is sanctified, with also holy Scripture, since this would attract rats which would attack the leather on which the scrolls were written. A scroll which does not render the hands impure is not holy; no rabbinic restrictions would have to be waved to save them from a fire., one saves them from a fire; but for him who says, they do not render hands impure, one does not save them from a fire. They objected: Is there not a Hebrew book which was written in Aramaic²⁸Mishnah Yadaim 4:5.; it will not render hands impure but one saves it from a fire, since we have stated: “even though they are written in any language they have to be hidden.” The Mishnah follows Rebbi Simeon, since Rebbi Simeon said, nothing forbidden only rabbinically stands in the way of Holy Scriptures²⁹Mishnah Eruvin 10:3. Only biblical prohibitions have to be observed when caring for Scripture on the Sabbath.. Do they disagree³⁰The mishnaic statements in Yadaim and Eruvin.? There it is because of their degradation³¹Lest rats be attracted to the scrolls, Note 27., but here everybody agrees that one saves them from a fire. For whom is it needed? For Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel. Even though Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said³²Mishnah Megillah 1:11. There do exist approved Aramaic versions of the Pentateuch and Jonathan ben Uziel’s Aramaic paraphrase of Prophets but no recognized Aramaic versions of Hagiographa. The existing Aramaic versions of Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Esther, and Chronicles all seem to be post-Talmudic., “also Hagiographa they permitted only that they could be written in Greek,” would he agree here that one saves them from a fire? “It happened that Rabban [Simeon ben]³³Added from E. From the context this seems to be the correct attribution, referring to Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel I, the head of the revolutionary government in the first war against the Romans. In the Babylonian parallels, Babli 115a, Tosephta 13:2 (ed. Liebermann) the name always is “Rabban Gamliel” I, the grandfather of Rabban Gamliel of Jabneh. Gamliel was supervising builders on the the Temple Mount when he an Aramaic version of Job was brought to him. He told the builder to hide it under a row of stones.”

Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman: Did not Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish ask Rebbi Ḥaninah: What is the status of one who buys in Ammon and Moab⁷⁵What is the status for Sabbatical and tithes? From the discussion in the paragraph after the next it will be clear that “Ammon and Moab” does not refer to the Biblical states but to the domain of the former tribes Reuben and Gad in Transjordan.? Rebbi Zeïra said, I asked this question before Rebbi Assi: Are not Ammon and Moab from Moses? Rebbi Mana asked this question before Rebbi Ḥaggai: Are not Ammon and Moab from Moses? Ammon and Moab are not from Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah⁸⁴In Mishnah Yadayim 4 there is a list of decrees enacted on the day R. Eleazar ben Azariah was made head of the Synhedrion. On the authority of R. Joshua it was decreed that “Ammon and Moab” (i. e., the domains of the former tribes Reuben and Gad) must give tithe of the poor in the Sabbatical. This implies that the land there is cultivated during the Sabbatical. Therefore, Transjordan cannot be part of the Holy Land where work is forbidden.! Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, it is written (Num. 22:26): “For Ḥešbon is the city of Siḥon, the king of the Amorites.” Rebbi Simeon was not sure whether it was purified from the hand of Siḥon and Og or not. If you say it was purified it is obligated, if you say it was not purified it is free. Rebbi Tanḥuma said (Deut. 2:31): “Make profane for inheritance, to inherit his land.” I made his land profane before you⁸⁵Even in the times of Moses and Joshua, Transjordan did not have the status of a Holy Land. The opposite conclusion is drawn from the same verses in Babli Ḥulin 60b..

“If they are unable to marry in Israel they disable.” These are¹¹¹Babli 68a, Tosephta Yebamot8:1, Niddah 6:1.: “A child of nine years and one day¹¹²Mishnah 4., an Ammonite, Moabite, or Egyptian¹¹³Mishnah Yadaim 4:4 notes that modern Ammonites, Moabites, and Egyptians are no longer the peoples living in these places at the time of the Exodus; therefore, the prohibitions ofDeut. 23:4–9 are no longer operative. All arguments based on these rules are theoretical exercises of retrospection. proselyte, or a bastard, desecrated, Gibeonite¹¹⁴Cf. Chapter 2, Note 72., Samaritan¹¹⁵Their problems are discussed in the next Halakhah., and Gentile who had intercourse with the daughter of an Israel, a Cohen, or a Levite, disqualified her for the priesthood. Rebbi Yose said, everybody’s intercourse disqualifies whose descendant would be disqualified; his intercourse does not disqualify those whose descendant would not be disqualified. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, in all cases, if his daughter is permitted to you, so is his widow¹¹⁶For a Cohen, not necessarily for anybody else.; if his daughter is not permitted to you, neither is his widow.” In what do they differ? Rebbi Joḥanan says, an Ammonite or Moabite proselyte¹¹⁷A female Moabite or Ammonite was never prohibited from marrying a Jew (Mishnah 8:3; Sifry Deut. 249.). The same argument in Babli 69a. is between them. For him who says, everybody’s intercourse disqualifies whose descendant would be disqualified, here since his descendant¹¹⁸If he is a male (Mishnah 8:3). would be disqualified, his intercourse disqualifies. For him who says, if you may marry his daughter you may marry his widow, here since you may marry his daughter you may marry his widow. The words of the Sages? Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of [the rabbis], Rebbi Abba, both say: Regarding the daughter of an Ammonite or Moabite proselyte or the daughter of a second-generation Egyptian¹¹⁹Any third generation Egyptian, male or female, is permitted; Deut. 23:9; Mishnah 8:3., even though his daughter is permitted to you, his widow is forbidden to you. Rebbi Zakkai: Rebbi Alexander sent to ask [about] the daughter of an Ammonite proselyte and the daughter of a second-generation Egyptian. Rebbi Yose said to him, did you not hear that Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of the rabbis, Rebbi Abba, both say: Regarding the daughter of an Ammonite proselyte or the daughter of a second-generation Egyptian, even though his daughter is permitted to you, his widow is forbidden to you. And everybody’s intercourse disqualifies whose descendant would be disqualified. Do we not need it when her mother was from Israel? That you should not say that since her mother was desecrated so her daughter was desecrated. In addition, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagreed, the daughter of an Ammonite proselyte or the daughter of a second-generation Egyptian¹²⁰From a Jewish mother., Rebbi Joḥanan said, they are acceptable, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, they are disqualified. Rebbi Yose ben Abun said, they disagree about the old women¹²¹The mother, the wife of an Ammonite or second generation Egyptian.: Rebbi Joḥanan said, they are acceptable¹²²He follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel. Rebbi Alexander’s question is not answered since it is moot anyhow., Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, they are disqualified.