Mishnah
Mishnah

Talmud sobre Meilá 3:6

כָּל הָרָאוּי לַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְלֹא לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת, לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת וְלֹא לַמִּזְבֵּחַ, לֹא לַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְלֹא לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת, מוֹעֲלִין בּוֹ. כֵּיצַד, הִקְדִּישׁ בּוֹר מָלֵא מַיִם, אַשְׁפָּה מְלֵאָה זֶבֶל, שׁוֹבָךְ מָלֵא יוֹנִים, אִילָן מָלֵא פֵרוֹת, שָׂדֶה מְלֵאָה עֲשָׂבִים, מוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶם וּבְמַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכָן. אֲבָל אִם הִקְדִּישׁ בּוֹר וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִתְמַלֵּא מַיִם, אַשְׁפָּה וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִתְמַלְאָה זֶבֶל, שׁוֹבָךְ וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִתְמַלֵּא יוֹנִים, אִילָן וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִתְמַלֵּא פֵרוֹת, שָׂדֶה וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִתְמַלְאָה עֲשָׂבִים, מוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶן, וְאֵין מוֹעֲלִין בְּמַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכָן, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, הַמַּקְדִּישׁ שָׂדֶה וְאִילָן, מוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶם וּבְגִדּוּלֵיהֶם, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן גִּדּוּלֵי הֶקְדֵּשׁ. וְלַד מְעֻ שֶּׂרֶת לֹא יִינַק מִן הַמְעֻשֶּׂרֶת. וַאֲחֵרִים מִתְנַדְּבִים כֵּן. וְלַד מֻקְדָּשִׁין לֹא יִינַק מִן הַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין. וַאֲחֵרִים מִתְנַדְּבִים כֵּן. הַפּוֹעֲלִים לֹא יֹאכְלוּ מִגְּרוֹגָרוֹת שֶׁל הֶקְדֵּשׁ. וְכֵן פָּרָה לֹא תֹאכַל מִכַּרְשִׁינֵי הֶקְדֵּשׁ:

Tudo o que é [santificado] apto para o altar, mas não adequado para a manutenção do templo, ou para manutenção, mas não o altar, ou nem para manutenção nem para o altar, está sujeito às leis da meila . Como assim? Se ele santificava um poço cheio de água, um estrume cheio de esterco, uma pomba cheia de pombas, uma árvore cheia de frutos, um campo cheio de grama, eles e o que está neles estão sujeitos à meilah . Mas se ele consagrou uma cova e mais tarde foi preenchida com água, uma cocheira que mais tarde foi preenchida com esterco, uma pomba que foi posteriormente preenchida com pombas, uma árvore que foi posteriormente preenchida com frutas, um campo que foi posteriormente preenchido com grama , eles estão sujeitos à meilah , mas não o que está neles, diz o rabino Yehuda. O rabino Shimon diz que alguém que santificou seu campo ou uma árvore, eles e tudo o que deles cresce estão sujeitos à meilah porque são o crescimento de coisas santificadas. Os filhotes de ma'aser [animais com dízimo] não devem ser amamentados pelos animais ma'aser [suas mães]; portanto, outros doariam seus animais para esse fim [de amamentação]. Os filhotes de animais santificados não devem cuidar de outros animais consagrados e, portanto, outros doariam seus animais para esse fim [da amamentação]. Os trabalhadores não devem comer os figos secos que foram santificados e, da mesma forma, uma vaca não deve comer da forragem que foi santificada.

Jerusalem Talmud Pesachim

169From here on, the Halakhah also is Peah7:8 (פ).“How did they permit sycamore figs of dedicated trees? The Sages said to them, do you not agree with us that growth of dedicated [plants] is forbidden? They told them, when our forefathers dedicated them, they dedicated only the tree stems because of the strong men who came and took them by force.170Tosephta 3:22 (Babli 56b). Sycamores produce inferior fruits but superior building material. The “strong men” are probably the Hasmonean rulers or Herod. The people protected their sycamore groves by putting them out of bounds of any human government.” Do the rabbis mean to say that they dedicated tree stems and fruits? Even if you say that they dedicated the tree stems but not the fruits, the rabbis wonder if somebody dedicates an orchard, may he reserve the growth for himself171In Mishnah Meˋilah 3:6 the anonymous Tanna declares that taking the fruits of a Temple tree does not constitute the crime of meˋilah, larceny committed on Temple property. But R. Yose declares the fruits to be covered by meˋilah. The Babli 56b points out that the Sages of the Tosephta, while agreeing that no felony is committed by taking the sycamore figs, nevertheless must assume that taking them means overstepping a prohibition. No such prohibition is written in the Torah. While any stipulation contradicting a commandment of the Torah is invalid (Peah 6:9), one violating a rabbinic prohibition may be valid. It remains unresolved whether the people of Jericho had permission to reserve the right to use the jummiz.? Let us hear from the following172Mishnah Peah 7:8, about a vineyard dedicated to the Temple (i. e., its fruits to be sold by the Temple and the proceeds to be given to the Temple treasury).: “After the gleanings are recognizable, the gleanings belong to the poor.” That is different because nobody may dedicate anything that is not his own173Since gleanings on vines belong to the poor by Divine decree (Deut. 24:21).. Does that not mean that even if the gleanings were not yet recognizable, they should belong to the poor? This is different, because it is a vineyard for the Temple, as it was stated174Tosephta Peah 3:15. Here starts a Genizah fragment, edited by L. Ginzberg in Ginze Schechter, vol. 1, New York 1928, pp. 442–448 (ג).: “It somebody plants a vineyard for the Temple, it is exempt from single berries175Which in secular growth belong to the poor (Lev. 19:10). Addition by the corrector, supported by a lacuna in ג., and from ˋoriah176The fruits growing in the first three years after planting, forbidden for use (Lev.19:23)., and from the Fourth Year177Where the fruit has to be redeemed (Lev. 19:24)., but it is subject to the Sabbatical year.” Rebbi Zeˋira in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: The land shall observe a Sabbath for the Eternal178Lev. 25:2.. The sanctity of the Sabbatical falls even on anything that is the Eternal’s.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Versículo anteriorCapítulo completoPróximo versículo