Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword or section
Like this
2Activity

Table Of Contents

0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
05 - Arachin (Estimations)

05 - Arachin (Estimations)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 28 |Likes:
Published by bgeller4936

More info:

Published by: bgeller4936 on Sep 17, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

10/30/2013

pdf

text

original

 
Talmud - Mas. Arachin 2a
 
Talmud - Mas. Arachin 2a
C H A P T E R I MISHNAH. ALL [PERSONS] ARE FIT TO EVALUATE OR TO BE MADE THE SUBJECTSOF VALUATION,
1
ARE FIT TO VOW
2
[ANOTHER'S WORTH] OR HAVE THEIR WORTHVOWED: — PRIESTS, LEVITES AND [ORDINARY] ISRAELITES, WOMEN AND SLAVES.PERSONS OF UNKNOWN
3
SEX AND HERMAPHRODITES ARE FIT TO VOW [ANOTHER'SWORTH], OR TO HAVE THEIR WORTH VOWED, AND ARE FIT TO EVALUATE, BUTTHEY ARE NOT FIT TO BE MADE THE SUBJECTS OF VALUATION, FOR THE SUBJECTOF VALUATION MAY BE ONLY A PERSON DEFINITELY EITHER MALE OR FEMALE.
4
ADEAF-MUTE, AN IMBECILE, OR A MINOR
5
ARE FIT TO HAVE THEIR WORTH VOWEDOR BE MADE THE SUBJECT OF VALUATION, BUT THEY ARE NOT FIT TO MAKEEITHER A VOW [OF ANOTHER'S WORTH] OR TO EVALUATE, BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOMIND. GEMARA. What does ALL [PERSONS] ARE FIT TO EVALUATE mean to include? — It ismeant to include one close to manhood who must be examined.
6
What does [ALL
7
ARE] FIT TOBE MADE THE SUBJECTS OF VALUATION mean to include? — It is meant to include a persondisfigured, or one afflicted with boils.
8
For one might have assumed that since Scripture says: A vowaccording to thy valuation,
9
that only such persons as are fit to be made the subjects of a vow [asregards their worth], are fit to be made subjects of a valuation, and that persons who are unfit to bemade subjects of a vow [as regards their worth], are also unfit to be made subjects of a valuation,hence Scripture informs us: of persons.
9
i.e., no matter who they be. What does [ALL PERSONS]ARE FIT TO VOW mean to include? — [The phrase ALL] is needed only for [the clause] ‘are fit tohave their worth vowed’ — What is to be included [in the phrase ALL] ARE FIT TO HAVE THEIRWORTH VOWED? Is it to include persons of unknown sex or hermaphrodites — but they areexpressly stated [in our Mishnah]! Again is it to include a deaf-mute, an imbecile and a minor —they too are expressly stated! And if it is to include a person below the age of one month — that toois expressly mentioned!
10
And again if it is to include an idolater — he too is expressly mentioned!
11
— In reality it is meant to include a person below the age of one month; and the Mishnah states it[by implication] and later on expressly mentions it.
12
 What does ‘All persons are obliged to lay on hands’ mean to include?
13
— It is meant to includethe heir, and this against the view of R. Judah.
14
What does ‘All persons can effect a substitute’
15
mean to include? — That, too, means to include the heir, in contrast to the view of R. Judah. For itwas taught: An heir must lay on hands, an heir can effect a substitute. R. Judah says: An heir doesnot lay on hands, and an heir cannot effect a substitute. What is the reason of R. Judah's view? —[Scripture says:] His offering,
16
i.e., but not his father's offering. And he infers the rule concerningthe commencement of the dedication of the animal from the rule governing its end. Just as at the endof the dedication the heir does not lay on hands, thus also at the beginning
17
he cannot effect asubstitute. And the Rabbis? — [Scripture says redundantly:] And if he shall at all change — thatincluded the heir. And we infer the rule concerning the end of the dedication from the rule governingthe commencement of the dedication. Just as at the beginning of the dedication the heir has power toeffect a substitute, so at the end is he obliged to lay his hands on the animal's head.
18
But what do theRabbis do with ‘his offering’? [They interpret:] ‘his offering’, but not the offering of an idolater; ‘hisoffering’, but not the offering of his neighbour; ‘his offering. i.e., to include all who have a share
19
inthe ownership of a sacrifice in the duty to lay on hands. And R. Judah?
20
— He does not hold that allwho have a share in the ownership share the obligation of laying hands thereon; or, indeed, if heshould hold so____________________
(1)
Lev. XXVII, 1f fixes the value of the person dedicated to the sanctuary, this value depending only on the age of the
 
person dedicated. Hence, if someone uses the formula: Erek peloni ‘alay. i.e., the valuation of So-and-so be upon me (topay to the sanctuary). he must make payment in accord with the valuation fixed in Lev. XXVII, independent of theperson's physical or mental condition. Thus e.g., the valuation fixed there for a man of the age of between twenty andsixty, is fifty shekels.
(2)
But if he said: Deme peloni ‘alay, i.e., the equivalent of the market value of So-and-so be upon me (to pay to thesanctuary), he has made a vow and he must pay the amount which that person would fetch, if sold on the slave market. Inthis case the deciding factor would be not age, but physical and mental condition.
(3)
Tumtum; lit., ‘one hidden, stopped up’. i.e., a person whose genitalia are covered by a skin, hence one of unknownsex.
(4)
Scripture refers (ibid.) to ‘male’ and ‘female’, but persons whose sex cannot be determined are excluded from thevaluation.
(5)
A boy under the age of thirteen, a girl under the age of twelve years.
(6)
Mufla’ from the root meaning, to make clear, to examine, hence ‘one to be examined’ as to the purpose for which hemade the valuation. Above the age of thirteen such knowledge is taken for granted. Below the age of twelve it isassumed to be absent. During the period from twelve to thirteen the boy is to be subject to questioning. If theexamination establishes his knowledge of the purpose of the dedication, his dedication is considered valid, and renderspayment obligatory. Otherwise no significance is to be attached during that period to his utterance of the formula: Erek peloni ‘alay.
(7)
The first word of the Mishnah ALL is assumed to apply to the four cases enumerated. This word does not seemnecessary, the Mishnah might have stated e.g., Priests, Levites and Israelites are fit etc. The additional ALL hence isassumed by the questioner to have implied the inclusion of persons whom, without this inclusion, one might haveexcluded. Hence the series of questions establishing the identity of the persons included in each case. This discussionleads to the consideration of other passages throughout the Mishnah, in which the word ‘all’ occurs, and to anexplanation of who is included in each statement.
(8)
Lev. XXVII, 2.
(9)
A person disfigured, or afflicted with boils would fetch no price at all on the market place. In the expression A vowaccording to thy valuation, one might have inferred from this juxtaposition, that a certain fundamental agreementprevailed between cases of vow (of one's worth) and of valuation, and that therefore a person unfit to have his worthvowed (because a vow was redeemable by payment of the market value, which did not exist in the case of a disfiguredperson) would be unfit to be made the subject of a valuation. But this inference is cancelled by another Biblical phrase,which indicates that what is required is but ‘persons’, independent of their physical condition: When a man shall clearlyutter a vow of persons (ibid.).
(10)
V. infra 5a.
(11)
Ibid. 5b.
(12)
By the redundant ALL, which obviously includes some person or persons, which but for this all-inclusive term,would have been excluded. The particular reason why this case rather than any other of the four here dealt with isincluded here Rashi finds in the fact that it is the only one concerning which a controversy exists (infra 5a), whence thestatement here by implication is of importance in teaching that even the Rabbis who hold that one who is less than amonth cannot be subject to evaluation, nevertheless agree that he can have his worth vowed.
(13)
The Gemara proceeds now to discuss all other cases in which a redundant ‘all’ is to convey sone inclusion in theprinciple of other persons. The laying on of the hands on the head of the animal to be sacrificed conveyed the sense of ownership. It was a duty, hence a question arises in the case of several partners, or in the case of proxy.
(14)
R. Judah denied this obligation to an heir. Lev. I, 3 reads: If his be a burnt-offering . . . he shall lay his hand uponthe head. This, R. Judah argues, expressly limits the duty of laying the hand to the man who offered it, not to his heir,who is freed from his obligation.
(15)
Lev. XXVII, 10: He shall not alter it, nor change it, a good for a bad, or a bad for a good; and If he shall at allchange beast for beast, then both it and that for which it is changed shall be holy. The dispute concerns only the case of an heir in respect of an offering dedicated by his father but all agree that an exchange made by anyone besides theoriginal owner of the sacrifice would have no effect at all, the first animal remaining sacred, the second not beingaffected by the unauthorized attempt at exchange.
(16)
Lev. III ,2, 7 and 13 in connection with the laying on of hands in the case of peace-offerings. V. Rashi and Tosaf.a.l.
 
(17)
First an animal is separated for the purpose of being offered on the altar. That is the commencement of itssanctification. At the end, just before the slaying of the animal, the owner lays his hand on its head. R. Judah infers fromthe regulations at the end, viz., the prohibition for anyone but the owner to lay hands on the head, the inefficacy of thechange at the beginning, i.e., his intended exchange has no effect on the animal he wanted to substitute.
(18)
The Sages infer from the redundant ‘shall at all change’ that even another may effect the substitute and argue fromthe beginning of the sanctification to the end, hence permit an heir to lay hands on the animal.
(19)
The phrase ‘his offering’ occurs three times in Lev. III, viz., vv. 2, 7 and 13, and while two of these expressionshave a limiting sense, one has an inclusive meaning, lust as ‘his’ implies ownership, so must anyone who has a claim toownership lay his hands on the animal's head. Therefore, every member of a group who offer the animal together mustperform the laying on of hands.
(20)
Since R. Judah would interpret ‘his offering’ in each case in an exclusive sense, how could he derive the obligationof the laying on of hands on the part of anyone who shares in it-for which an inclusive interpretation is necessary?
Talmud - Mas. Arachin 2b
 
Talmud - Mas. Arachin 2b
 
Talmud - Mas. Arachin 2b
he would infer [the exclusion of] idolater and neighbour from one passage,
1
so that two more wouldremain redundant, from one of which he would infer that ‘his offering’ means ‘but not that of hisfather’, and from the other that all who have a share in the ownership of a sacrifice are obliged toperform the laying on of hands. But what does R. Judah do with ‘If he shall at all change’? — Heneeds that to include woman,
2
for it was taught: Since all this chapter is couched in masculinegender, what brings us eventually to include woman? The text stated: ‘If he shall at all change’.
3
But[whence do] the Sages [infer this]? — From the’ [redundant] ‘And if’. And R. Judah? — He does notinterpret ‘And if’.
4
 What does ‘All persons are obliged
5
to observe [the laws concerning] the booth’ mean to include?— That is meant to include a minor that no more needs his mother,
6
for we have learnt: A minor thatno more needs his mother is obliged to observe the laws concerning the booth.
7
What does ‘All areobliged to observe the law of the lulab’
8
mean to include? — That includes a minor who knows howto shake the lulab, for we learnt: A minor who knows how to shake
9
the lulab is obliged to observe[the laws of] the lulab.
10
What does ‘All are obliged to observe the [law of] the fringes’ include? —That includes the minor who knows how to wrap himself, for it was taught: A minor who knows howto wrap himself [into the tallith]
11
is obliged to observe the law of the fringes. What does ‘All areobliged to observe the rules concerning the tefillin’ include? — That includes a minor who knowshow to take care of the tefillin, for it was taught: If a minor knows how to take care of the tefillin,
12
his father buys tefillin for him. What does ‘All are obliged to appear’ include’
13
— It is meant toinclude one who is half 
 
14
slave and half freedman. According, however, to Rabina, who holds thatone who is half slave and half freed is free from the obligation to appear, [the word ‘All’] is meant toinclude one who was lame
15
on the first day of the festival and became normal again on the secondday. That would be right according to the view that all the days of the festival may make up for eachother. But according to the view that they all are but making up for the first day, what will ‘All’come to include?
16
— It will include one blind in one of his eyes. This [answer] is not in accord withthe following Tanna, for it was taught:
17
Johanan b. Dahabai said in the name of R. Judah: One blindin one eye is free from the obligation to appear, for it is said:
18
Yir'eh-yera'eh [he shall see — heshall appear] i.e.,just as He is present to see [the comer], so shall He be seen, just as His sight iscomplete,
19
so shall the sight of him who appears be intact.
19
Or, if you like, say this: In truth it ismeant to include one who is half slave and half freed man, and if the view of Rabina should appearas the difficulty, this is no difficulty either; the first view is in accord with the former Mishnah, thesecond with the later Mishnah. For we learnt:
20
One who is half slave and half freed man shall servehimself one day and his master the other — thus Beth Hillel. Said Beth Shammai to them: You took care of the interests of his master, but you have done nothing [thereby] on his behalf. For he isunable to marry either a female slave or free woman. Shall he do without marriage? But the worldwas created only for propagation of the species, as it is said: He created it not a waste. He formed it

Activity (2)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->