Mishnah
Mishnah

Talmud su Yevamot 8:1

הֶעָרֵל וְכָל הַטְּמֵאִים, לֹא יֹאכְלוּ בַתְּרוּמָה. נְשֵׁיהֶן וְעַבְדֵּיהֶן, יֹאכְלוּ בַתְּרוּמָה. פְּצוּעַ דַּכָּא וּכְרוּת שָׁפְכָה, הֵן וְעַבְדֵיהֶן יֹאכְלוּ, וּנְשֵׁיהֶן לֹא יֹאכֵלוּ. וְאִם לֹא יְדָעָהּ מִשֶּׁנַּעֲשָׂה פְצוּעַ דַּכָּא וּכְרוּת שָׁפְכָה, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ יֹאכֵלוּ:

Chi non è circonciso [un Cohein non circonciso i cui fratelli sono morti a causa della circoncisione] e tutti coloro che sono impuri non possono mangiare teruma. [Questo deriva dall'offerta pasquale, in merito alla quale è scritto (Esodo 12:48): "E nessuno non circonciso ne mangerà."] Le loro mogli e i loro servi possono mangiare teruma. [Perché a causa della non circoncisione e dell'impurità non lasciano la categoria dei Cohanim; è solo che loro stessi vogliono un emendamento.] Un petzua dakka e un k'ruth shafchah (vedere 8: 2)—loro e i loro servi mangiano e le loro mogli non mangiano. [Perché la rende una chalalah convivendo con lei nel fatto che convive con una persona che non è adatta per (sposarla).] E se non conviveva con lei dal momento in cui è diventato un petzua dakka e un k'ruth shafchah [Se prima fosse sposata con lui, e non ha convissuto con lei dopo essere diventato un petzua dakka], potrebbero mangiare.

Jerusalem Talmud Pesachim

HALAKHAH: “He who was impure,” etc. Impure by a corpse5Num. 9:10., I not only have impure by a corpse, from where forced or in error? The verse says, every man, [it added]6Babli 93a.. So far following Rebbi Aqiba; following Rebbi Ismael? Rebbi Ismael stated, impure by a corpse is not equal to a far-away trip, nor is a far-away trip equal to impure by a corpse, what is common to them7This is the third hermeneutical principle of R. Ismael. Sifry Num. 69, Tosephta 8:2 (in the name of R. Aqiba); Targum Pseudo-Jonathan 9:10. is that he did not make the First and shall make the Second; also I am adding those forced or in error who did not make the First that they shall make the Second. Intentional from where? Rebbi Zeˋira said, but the man, to add the one acting intentionally8Num. 9:13: But the man who was pure.
This contradicts the position of R. Aqiba in the Tosephta, that both those impure by a corpse and those on a far trip are prevented from making the First Pesaḥ and therefore the third hermeneutical principle excludes the one who intentionally omitted the First even though he was pure and not far away. Cf. Babli 93a/b.. We have stated; “if in error or by force;” Rebbi Ḥiyya stated, “if in error, or by force, or intentional.9Tosephta 8:1.” Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah implies this, “because these are not liable for extirpation but those are liable for extirpation;” who is subject to extirpation if not intentional?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Chagigah

“The hermaphrodite.” All your males26Ex. 23:17, Deut. 16:16, description of who is required to appear in the Temple on a festival of pilgrimage. Babli 4a; Mekhilta dR. Ismael Mišpatim Chap. 20 (ed. Horovitz-Rabin p. 333)., to exclude the hermaphrodite. There38Mishnah Shabbat19:3. The entire paragraph essentially is found in Šabbat19, Notes 99–109, Yebamot8:1., we have stated: “One does not desecrate the Sabbath for a case of doubt39Whether the baby was actually born on a Sabbath or maybe on Friday or Sunday. In the latter case he may not be circumcised on the Sabbath. {or} for a hermaphrodite; Rebbi Jehudah permits for the hermaphrodite.” What does Rebbi Jehudah say in this case40Does R. Jehudah agree with the Mishnah which excludes the hermaphrodite from the duty of pilgrimage?? Let us hear from the following: Joḥanan ben Dahavai said in the name of Rebbi Jehudah, neither does the blind one41Who is excluded from the duty of pilgrimage. Tosephta 1:1, Babli 2a, Sanhedrin4b, Arakhin 2b.. Nobody says “neither” unless he agrees with the preceding statement42That the hermaphrodite is excluded.. The argument of Rebbi Jehudah seems inverted. There he says except, but here he says including. Rebbi Jehudah and the rabbis explain the same verse43Gen. 17:14, establishing the duty of circumcision. The verse emphasizing male is not needed to exclude female circumcision since the limb to be circumcised always is referred to as flesh, and therefore designates the only boneless limb, the penis, which characterizes males.. The rabbis explain uncircumcised. Why does the verse say, an uncircumcised male? Only if he be totally male44While the hermaphrodite can be circumcised, having a penis, and has to be circumcised since his maleness may be the dominant trait, he cannot be classified as male.. Rebbi Jehudah explains male45Babli Šabbat 137a. Instead of all your males, he reads your total maleness.. Why does the verse say, uncircumcised? Even if he is only partially uncircumcised. But here, all your males, to exclude the hermaphrodite.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Capitolo completoVersetto successivo