Talmud sobre Terumot 2:2

אֵין תּוֹרְמִין מִן הַטָּמֵא עַל הַטָּהוֹר. וְאִם תָּרַם, שׁוֹגֵג, תְּרוּמָתוֹ תְּרוּמָה, וּמֵזִיד, לֹא עָשָׂה כְלוּם. וְכֵן בֶּן לֵוִי שֶׁהָיָה לוֹ מַעֲשֵׂר טֶבֶל, הָיָה מַפְרִישׁ עָלָיו וְהוֹלֵךְ, שׁוֹגֵג, מַה שֶׁעָשָׂה, עָשׂוּי, מֵזִיד, לֹא עָשָׂה כְלוּם. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אִם הָיָה יוֹדֵעַ בּוֹ בַּתְּחִלָּה, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא שׁוֹגֵג, לֹא עָשָׂה כְלוּם:

Não se pode deixar Terumah dos impuros para os puros. E se ele acidentalmente definir o Terumah de lado, sua Terumah é [válida] Terumah . Se intencionalmente, [é como se] ele não tivesse feito nada. E também com um levita que tinha dízimos dos quais Terumah não havia sido retirado e estava continuamente designando [partes desses dízimos impuros como Terumah de outros dízimos]: se acidentalmente, o que ele fez é feito [com validade]. Se intencionalmente, [é como se] ele não tivesse feito nada. O rabino Yehudah disse que, se soubesse que era impuro no começo, mesmo que esquecesse e designasse acidentalmente, é como se não tivesse feito nada.

Jerusalem Talmud Nazir

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Bar Qappara: You catch him at the mention of “ox”, at the mention of “first”⁷⁸He denies that the reason of the House of Shammai be a comparison with the rules of substitutions but holds that they interpret any statement of dedication for the maximum benefit of the Temple (similar to the position of Rav Papa in the Babli, 32a).. “The black ox which comes out of my house first,” if a white one came out and the black followed him, you catch him because he is the leader of the black ones. “The white ox which comes out of my house first,” if a black one came out and the white followed him, you catch him because he is the leader of the white ones. “The ox which stands at the manger” and it was lying down, “lying down” and it was standing, should be like what Rebbi Abbahu said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If he wanted to give heave from wheat and he gave from barley, during nighttime he did not do anything, during daytime, what he did is done⁷⁹Since at night he could not see what he did, we have to take his word as expressing his intent. Therefore, the heave designated during nighttime is not sanctified. But during daytime, his action overrides his words and the heave from barley is sanctified. Similarly, the House of Shammai will sanctify the ox if the dedication was made under circumstances in which his action can override his words.. Brown grain and it turned out to be white⁸⁰For the spelling and definition of these words, cf. Peah 2:5, Notes 85–86. אגרו, אגדו is human food, שחמתית שמתית usually is animal feed., even during daytime he did not do anything. “A ram” is nothing⁸¹If he dedicated some kind of cattle but the animal coming out of his house was a goat or sheep, even the House of Shammai will agree that there was no dedication.. “A calf” yes, since it is written: “A calf of cattle as purification offering.” “A sheep” is nothing. “Tetradrachmas” is nothing. “Change” is nothing⁸²This refers to Mishnah 2. If he dedicated the first “denar” which he takes out of his wallet, the House of Shammai will agree that if he takes out only small change, none of which carries the denomination “denar”, it is not dedicated. Also tetradrachmas are never called “denar”. {Denar might mean “money” or “coin” in general. Denominations in late provincial usage may not correspond to standard values.}. “A gold denar”⁸³Even though an unspecified "denar" in normal speech means "silver denar", the House of Hillel might agree that in a dedication it does apply to an aureus, a gold denar (in honest coin worth 25 silver denars) even though it is always referred to as "gold denar", not simply "denar". was sanctified.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Versículo anterior Capítulo completo Próximo versículo