Talmud sobre Brachot 7:6

“A Samaritan.” That follows him who said, a Samaritan is a like full Jew. But for him who says that a Samaritan is like a Gentile, it is not so. As they disagreed²⁰Cf. Demay 3:4, Note 98; Berakhot 7:1, Note 59.: A Samaritan is like a Gentile, the words of Rebbi. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, a Samaritan is like a Jew in every respect. Even if you say, a Samaritan is like a Gentile, why are Samaritans disqualified? Not because of a Gentile and a slave²¹Since 2K.17, 24ff. clearly states that the settlers from Babylon, Kuta, etc. at the start were idolators; if they intermarried with the remainders of the Israelite populations there, their descendants all acquired the status of descendants of Gentiles (or slaves) from Israelite mothers.? If a Gentile or a slave has intercourse with a Jewish woman, the child is a bastard²²This is the argument of R. Joḥanan and R. Simeon ben Laqish in Yebamot 7:6, Note 129; it is rejected there since the child of a Jewish woman from a Gentile, together with her mother, is disqualified from priesthood but not a bastard (Notes 130,131).. But a bastard girl can claim a fine! For restrictions or family relations you consider him a Gentile or a slave who had intercourse with a Jewish woman; the child is a bastard. But for a fine you consider this as a Jew having intercourse with a Gentile woman, in which case the child is a Gentile²³The separation from Samaritans is purely one of practice, with no theoretical basis, and disapproved of by the Mishnah. In the Babli, 29b/30a, the argument (attributed to R. Meïr) is rejected, in order not to reward a sinner (the rapist or seducer.).

Samuel said, if two men acted as judges, their judgment stands, but they are called an insolent court³⁶Babli 3a,5b,30a,87b; Ketubot 22a. Cf. Berakhot 7:1, Note 18.. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish both are instructing: Even³⁷Even if the parties accepted them as judges. if two men acted as judges, their judgment is no judgment³⁸In the Babli, this opinion is represented by Rava (5b) and R. Abbahu (87b), the student of R. Johanan and R. Simeon ben Laqish.. There, we have stated³⁹Mishnah Bekhorot 4:4. The Mishnah refers to a person who did not pass the required examinations and was not formally qualified as a judge.: “If he rendered judgment, acquitted the guilty and condemned the innocent, declared the pure impure or the impure pure, what he did is done but he has to pay from his own pocket.” Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: if they told him, we accept you as if you were two⁴⁰Since R. Abbahu follows his teachers and holds that any judgment passed by a court of two judges is void, as well as from the following quote, it is clear that one has to read “three” in place of “two”.. What are we dealing with? If his error was that he judged them on his discretion⁴¹If there exists no clear precedent for the case; different schools promulgate different rules and he followed a minority opinion because it seemed to him to be the correct one, his judgment is valid but there is no reason why he should have to pay. The Babli, 33a, declares a judgment against a clear majority of opinions as an error in law., then what he did is done. If his error was that he judged them by Torah law⁴²If his judgment contradicted a Mishnah or a clear precedent, in Israel a judgment of the Patriarch’s court or in Babylonia a concurrent judgment of both Yeshivot, his judgment is void (cf. Ketubot 9:2, Note 100). If any money changed hands as a consequence of the erroneous judgment, it has to be returned., why should he pay from his own pocket? Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: if they told him, we accept you as if you were three on condition that you judge us by Torah law. He erred and judged them on his discretion. What he did is done, but since he erred and judged them on his discretion, he has to pay from his own pocket⁴³As a fine. because he was presumptuous to judge alone by Torah law, as we have stated⁴⁴Mishnah Avot 4:8.: “Do not judge sitting alone, for only One judges sitting alone.”

HALAKHAH: “If a person vowed to be a nazir and went to bring his animal,” etc. Where do we hold? If he saw an animal passing on the market and said, I am a nazir on that animal which passed by, he is a nazir even if the animal was stolen¹¹⁴Since the animal was not his and he could not be sure that the owners would sell it to him, his vow was not dependent on that animal (unless he would spell out that he would not be a nazir unless the animal was sold to him).. If he thought that he had one and it turned out that he did not, would we say if he was rich and became poor, the nezirut would be invalidated? But we must hold that he said, I am a nazir on the animal I have at home, then went and found it stolen. If he vowed before the animal was stolen he is a nazir, after the animal was stolen he is not a nazir. The students of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Julianus say: Rebbi Jehudah asked: If the thieves returned it in the night, did his nezirut return to him retroactively¹¹⁵From the moment of his vow. or for the future¹¹⁶He has to start anew from the moment the animal was returned. No answer is given.?

MISHNAH: With demay, one may make eruv¹⁹²There are two kinds of eruv (“mixing”) on the Sabbath. If many houses open into a common courtyard, in order to carry from the houses to the courtyard it is necessary to turn the courtyard into common property. This is done by putting into the courtyard some food to which all houses contributed. The second kind is “mixing of domains”, explained in Peah, Chapter 8, Note 56., participate¹⁹³In order to turn a dead-end street into a common domain in which one may carry on the Sabbath, the residents of the courtyards opening into the dead-end street have to participate in giving food for a common meal. Since the rules for the dead-end street are different from those for a courtyard, the word eruv is not used., recite grace¹⁹⁴Even if demay wine has not been put in order and one wants to use it for the cup of blessing. If a transgression of a Biblical commandment were involved, using it for a benediction would constitute blasphemy., and recite grace in a group¹⁹⁵The longer form of Grace with an additional invocation.. One may separate it while naked¹⁹⁶In contrast to separating heave and tithes from certain produce, demay does not require a benediction and no invocation of the Name, and, hence, may be separated while one is naked (Cf. Berakhot Halakhah 8:2). or at twilight¹⁹⁷Friday night after sundown when it is still light but possibly already Sabbath. Certain food cannot be put in order then because this would make it usable now when before it was not at the start of the Sabbath. But demay which in any case is food of the poor, may be put in order during twilight (Mishnah Šabbat 2:7).. And if one lifted the Second Tithe before the First, it is also acceptable¹⁹⁸For untithed food, lifting the Second Tithe before the First is forbidden; here it is permitted. Maimonides points out that in any case the heave of the tithe must be a full one percent of the original amount.. The oil the weaver puts on his hands²⁰⁰Mishnah Šabbat 2:7: “If it is doubtful whether it is night or not, one does not tithe the certain, one does not immerse vessels (to remove impurity), one does not kindle lights, but one may tithe demay, make an eruv, and cover warm food (to keep it warm for the next morning.)” is obligated for demay, that which the carder puts on wool is free from demay.

Rebbi Taypha the Red⁹⁷An Amora of the fourth generation, student of R. Abbahu and sometimes mentioned in connection with the Amora R. Yose. in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: Samaritans can be trusted with deposits. Is that not the Mishnah: “With a Samaritan”? Our Mishnah before they became suspect, he comes to tell us even after they became suspect⁹⁸The Yerushalmi always refers the question whether Samaritans are counted as Jews or as Gentiles to the disagreement between Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel and his son Rebbi, as reported below. However, it is stated in ‘Avodah zarah 5:3, fol. 44d (quoted in Babli Ḥulin 6a) that in the times of Rebbis Ammi, Assi, and Abbahu, Samaritans were found to use Gentile wine (or to adopt Gentile behavior), and from that moment on Samaritans were considered as Gentiles. However it seems from the Yerushalmi that up to the end of the Talmudic period in Galilee, the separation of Jews and Samaritans was not universally accepted. (One also may assume that parts of Jewish Sadducee communities changed to a Samaritan affiliation after the destruction of the Temple.). How is it, should he be trusted to say, I took it and replaced it by other deposits that were put in order? If you believe him in that he took it, you should believe him in what he gave. If you do not believe that he took, do not believe that he gave⁹⁹In the Tosephta (Demay 4:22), this argument is given in reference to deposits with an am haäreẓ.. You believe a Samaritan that he gave¹⁰⁰Grain from another source, but you do not believe him that he exchanged. In the Tosephta (Demay4:24) one reads: “If he says, I took it and replaced it with some that was put in order, one does not worry either about tithes or about the Sabbatical.” and you do not believe that he took. Rebbi Jonah asked: What are we talking about? If he says, they are my own, even an am haäreẓ should not be trusted. If he says, X¹⁰¹A person recognized as a ḥaver. took tithes for me, even the Samaritan should be believed. Rebbi Abba said, explain it according to him who says that a Samaritan is like a Gentile. As they disagreed: A Samaritan is like a Gentile, the words of Rebbi. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, a Samaritan is like a Jew in every respect.

“One does not accept from the Non-Jew and the Samaritan.” Rebbi Abba said, explain it¹²⁵On the face of it, the equation of Samaritans with Gentiles is unintelligible. The baraita shows that up to the time of Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel, Rebbi’s father, the Samaritans were simply Sadducee Jews, the only Sadducee sect to survive after the destruction of the Temple. The Mishnah here reproduces Rebbi’s opinion. The paragraph also is in Berakhot7:1 (Note 59, ב). following him who said, a Samaritan is like a Gentile, as they disagreed: A Samaritan is like a Gentile, the words of Rebbi; Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, a Samaritan is like a Jew in all respects.

“From where that one adds another three, etc. It was stated: ³⁴¹Tosephta 7:1, Hagigah 2:9. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, in earlier times the ketubah of qualified women³⁴²Whose offspring were qualified to marry into the priesthood. In Temple times, this could serve as proof of qualification; cf. Qiddušin 4:4. was signed only by priests, Levites, or Israel whose daughters were qualified to marry into the priesthood. ³⁴³Most of the following text also is in the Babli, 88b. R. Yose, the collector of most of the material of Seder ˋOlam, represents a very idealized past. Rebbi Yose said, in earlier times there was no disagreement in Israel³⁴⁴A patently incorrect statement. The ancient rabbinic disagreement about the treatment of private sacrifices on holidays is the topic of Ḥagigah 2; the statement declares all non-rabbinic sects as non-Jewish. but the Synhedrion of 71 members were sitting in the free-stone hall³⁴⁵Adjacent to the Temple, built into the Herodian Temple wall, constructed from large rectangular stones without mortar.; two courts of three³⁴⁶Read: 23. However, A. Weiss (לשאלת טיב בית דין של שבעים ואחד, ספר היובל לכ׳ לוי גינצבורג, ע׳ קץ-רטז New York 1946) insists that the only courts of 23 in Jerusalem were committees of the court of 71. members each were sitting, one in the glacis³⁴⁷The space between the Temple wall and a smaller wall surrounding the Temple areas. and one on the Temple Mount³⁴⁸Outside any enclosure.; and a court of 23 was sitting in every town of the Land of Israel. If somebody had a question of religious practice, he went and asked it from the court in his town. If they had heard [the answer], they told him; otherwise he and their distinguished member went and asked a court in their neighborhood. If these had heard [the answer], they told him; otherwise he and their distinguished member went and asked from the court on the Temple Mount. If these had heard [the answer], they told him; otherwise he and their distinguished member went and asked from the court on the glacis. If these had heard [the answer], they told him; otherwise they together entered the High Court in the free-stone hall since from there instruction came accepted in all of Israel, as it is said: From this place which the Eternal will choose³⁴⁹Deut. 17:10. Disobedience of a High Court ruling is only a capital crime if the ruling was delivered from “the place”, from a court sitting in a room partially on Temple grounds. When the High Court lost its standing as court of criminal appeals (Note 31) and left the free-stone hall, it also lost its ability to prescribe practice ex cathedra.. Even though the Synhedrion in the free-stone hall had 71 members, those present never numbered less than 23. If one of them had to leave, he was looking around; if 23 others were present, he would leave, otherwise he would not leave³⁵⁰Babli Soţah 45a.. They were in session from the daily morning sacrifice to the daily evening sacrifice. On Sabbaths and holidays, they were sitting in the study hall on the Temple Mount³⁴⁸Outside any enclosure.. If a question of practice came up, if they had heard the answer, they told them; otherwise they prepared to vote. If a majority was for acquitting, they acquitted. If a majority³⁵¹In his theory, on appeal only a simple majority is needed. was for a guilty verdict, they rendered a verdict of guilty. If a majority was for declaring pure, they declared pure. If a majority was for declaring impure, they declared impure. From the time that there were many students of Shammai and Hillel who did not study enough under their teachers, many disagreements arose and two doctrines developed³⁵²Babli Soţah 47b.. From there³⁵³The free-stone hall., they were sending to all towns in the Land of Israel; any time they found a person who was wise, meek, even-tempered, benevolent, pleasing, humble, good-hearted, with good intentions, and well endowed, they were placing him on the court of the Temple Mount³⁵⁴In all three Babylonian texts, the person is appointed judge in his town and the appeals courts replenished from sitting judges., from there to the court on the glacis, and from there to the High Court in the free-stone hall.

Samuel stated, the sanctification of the New Moon is only by ten {attendants}¹⁰³In Sanhedrin1:2 (Note 120) this is quoted as Amoraic statement of Samuel. It is not the determination of the day of the New Moon, which can be made by a competent court of three, but the solemn declaration of the start of a new month.. ¹⁰⁴Gen. rabba 91(1). Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: It is said here community, and it is said there, how long this bad community. Since “community” mentioned there are ten, so also “community” mentioned here are ten¹⁰⁵Lev. 19:2 reads, speak to the community of Israel, you shall be holy. From this one wants to prove that all matters called “holy” need a community of at least ten adult males. Since the ten bad scouts are called a “bad community” in Num. 14:17, it follows that in Pentateuchal usage a group is called “community” if it has 10 members. Since we do not find the expression used for a smaller number, 10 is the required minimum. Babli 23b.. Rebbi Simon said, it is said here, in midst, and it is said there¹⁰⁶Gen. 42:5., the sons of Israel came to buy in midst of the comers. Since “in midst” mentioned there are ten, so also “in midst” mentioned here are ten¹⁰⁷Here the reference is to Lev22:32: I shall be sanctified in the midst of the Children of Israel. One intends to prove that God may be sanctified by any group of at least 10 of the Children of Israel.. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said to him, if you infer from “in midst”, there are many¹⁰⁸There are two possible interpretations of this statement. Since Lev22:32 is the conclusion of statements about the Temple service, it may refer to all the people and therefore require a minimum of 600’000 people, or it may refer to the large number of times the lexeme “in the midst” is used in the Pentateuch, from which nothing can be inferred.. [But it is said here “the sons of Israel”, and it is said there “the sons of Israel”. Since there are ten, also here are ten.¹⁰⁹The word “Cohen” is mentioned 3 times in Lev. 27:8, 2 times each in vv. 14,14, and once in vv. 11,21,23, for a total of 10.]

MISHNAH: It happened that one brought Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai a dish to taste, and Rabban Gamliel two dates and a pail of water and they said, bring them to the sukkah⁶⁷They did not want to avail themselves of the leniency of Mishnah 5.. But when one gave Rebbi Ṣadoq food⁶⁸Including bread. in the volume of less than an egg he took it with a napkin⁶⁹He covered his hands with the towel so he did not have to wash them before touching the bread., ate it outside of the sukkah, and did not recite a benediction⁷⁰He did not say Grace for volumes less than a chicken egg. afterwards.

Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi in the name of Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, only from the place of masculinity²⁴³Here starts the discussion of the last sentence in this Mishnah, the assertion of R. Eleazar ben Shamua (in the Babli, R. Eliezer) that for the definition of homosexuality an hermaphrodite is a full male. The position of R. Joḥanan here is an explicit statement of R. Eleazar (ben Shamua) in Tosephta 10:2.. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: even from the female place²⁴⁴For him, heterosexual intercourse of a male with an hermaphrodite is still homosexuality. In the Babli, 83b, that is the opinion of Rav.. Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: Rebbi Joshua ben Levi retracted this, from the following verse²⁴⁵Lev. 18:22. As the Babli explains, on the face of it, the verse seems to support the first opinion of R. Joshua ben Levi, but a second look shows that the prohibition is to lie with a male, i. e., the male aspect of the hermaphrodite.: “And with a male you should not lie in the way of a woman’s beddings”, one who may lie in two ways, including the female. Who is that? That is the hermaphrodite. Rebbi said, I looked for but did not find words of Ben Shamua about the hermaphrodite, for the entire group ganged up on me²⁴⁶Babli 84a; there, “the students of R. Eleazar ben Shamua ganged up on him like chickens in a chicken coop.”. Why? Not to make it public or because he was not worth it? What difference does it make? He usually made public. If you say, it was not to make it public²⁴⁷The uncommon form לגלע instead of the common לגלות seems so be an Arabism, from جلع “to uncover indecently”. It seems that the teachings of R. Eleazar ben Shamua’s students were esoteric., the publicity is already in his hand. The reason must be that he was not worth it. What could he made public? He inherits²⁴⁸If there are 2 children, a hermaphrodite and a daughter, at the death of the father the daughter has a claim on the estate for a dowry but the only heir is the hermaphrodite.
The Babli, 83b, which attributes the Mishnah to R. Eliezer, proves from parallel statements that the hermaphrodite is considered a full male only in respect to homosexuality. In all other respects, it is considered a case of doubt whether he is male or female., he testifies²⁴⁹He can testify formally in cases where a male witness is required (such as the validity of certain legal acts.), his grain offering is burnt completely²⁵⁰The grain offering of a Cohen is burned completely (Lev. 6:16); the grain offering of the daughter of a Cohen is treated like the offering of an Israel and most of it is eaten by the Cohanim in the Temple precinct., one says grace with him as with a male.

There are Tannaim who state, he opens, looks, rolls up, and recites the benediction. There are Tannaim who state, he opens, looks, and recites the benediction. Rebbi Ze`ira, Abba bar Jeremiah, Rav Mattanah in the name of Samuel, Practice follows him who said, he opens, looks, and recites the benediction¹⁵⁹A person who comes to read from the Torah must first recognize the place from which he is going to read and then pronounce the benediction. The Babli 32a explains that the first opinion (attributed to R. Meïr) requires him to close the scroll so people should not think that the benediction is written in the text. The second opinion (attributed to R. Jehudah) notes that everybody knows the benediction by heart and therefore will know that the benediction is not written in the scroll.. And what is the reason? When he opened it, the entire people stood up¹⁶⁰Neh. 8:5.. What is written afterwards? ¹⁶¹From here on there is a parallel in Berakhot 7:4, 11c line 29 ff.Ezra praised the Eternal, the Great God¹⁶²Neh. 8:8.. In what did he declare Him great? Rebbi Giddul said, by the explicit Name. Rav Mattanah said, he declared Him great by the benediction. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Why are they called the men of the Great Assembly? Because they re-instituted the grandeur to its old glory¹⁶³Babli Yoma 69b.. Rebbi Phineas said, Moses instituted the prayer formula, the God, the Great, the Strong, and the Awesome¹⁶⁴Deut. 10:17, incorporated into the first benediction of the Amidah.. Jeremiah said, the Great and Strong God¹⁶⁵Jer. 32:18.; he did not mention “the Awesome”. Why is He strong? He is appropriately called strong since He sees the destruction of His Temple and is silent. Why did he not mention “Awesome”? Awesome is only the Temple, as it is written, God Awesome in Your Sanctuary¹⁶⁶Ps. 68:36.. Daniel said the Great and Awesome God¹⁶⁷Dan. 9:4.. Why did he not mention “the Strong”? His sons are delivered to iron collars¹⁶⁸Latin collare.; where is His strength? But why does he say, Awesome? He is appropriately called awesome by the awesome deeds he made for us in the fiery oven. But when the men of the Great Assembly arose they re-instituted the grandeur to its old glory: But now, our God, the Power, the Great, the Strong, and the Awesome, keeper of Covenant and grace, may it not be little in Your eyes¹⁶⁹Neh. 9:32., etc. But does flesh and blood have the power to state limits in these matters¹⁷⁰Is it possible to ascribe criticism of God to Prophets and Sages?? Rebbi Isaac bar Eleazar said, the prophets know that their God is truthful and they do not flatter him.

HALAKHAH: “Three rows of students of the Sages,” etc. Rebbi Abba (bar) [Rebbi]⁹²This is a quote from Halakhah 1:6, Note 338. One has to read with the text there, R. Abba, R. Yasa, rather than introduce an otherwise unknown R. Abba bar Yasa. In the opinion of the Babli, the law school had room for 3 times 23 students. It seems that the Yerushalmi agrees; therefore the derivation of the number 23 of members of the court is hinted at by the quote of its first sentence. Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: It says here congregation, and it says there congregation. Rav brought it from a Mishnah; the Mishnah says “be a tail of lions and not a head of jackals.⁹³Avot 4:15.” The parable says, be a head of jackals but not a tail of lions. But we have stated: “If they needed to ordain, they ordained one from the first row.⁹⁴The Mishnah does not require that the occupant of the first seat of the first row be ordained; it could be anyone from the first row. Therefore, the last seat in the first row is better than the top seat in the second row.”

It was stated¹⁷⁹Tosephta Demai 5:2: “A Gentile who was calling out, ‘come and buy fruits, they are from Azeqa, from an orlah tree, from a vineyard in its fourth year,’ cannot be believed because he intends to advertise. But if he says, ‘I bought them from a certain Gentile,’ he is to be trusted for restrictions, the words of Rebbi. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, he cannot be trusted since the words of a Gentile are irrelevant.”: “A Gentile who was calling out, ‘come and buy fruits from me, they are from an orlah tree¹⁸⁰A tree in the first three years after planting, when its fruits are forbidden for all use (Lev. 19:23)., they are from a vineyard in its fourth year¹⁸¹See Peah 7:6.,’ cannot be believed. If he says, ‘I brought them from a certain Gentile,’ he may be trusted for restrictions¹⁸²He can be believed in that the produce is untithed; he cannot be believed that the produce is not subject to heave and tithes., the words of Rebbi. The Sages say, the words of a Gentile are irrelevant¹⁸³As far as Jewish religious obligations are concerned..” Rebbi Judan asked, what if he calls out when he is uninformed¹⁸⁴If he never heard of Jewish restrictions, or calls out in a place without any Jewish inhabitants. The questions are not answered, so they must be answered in a restrictive sense.? Rebbi Judan asked, what if one holds that a Samaritan is like a Gentile, since they disagreed: “A Samaritan is like a Gentile, the words of Rebbi. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, a Samaritan is like a Jew in all respects¹⁸⁵Cf. Demay 3:4, Berakhot 7:1.”?