Talmud Jerusalem
Talmud Jerusalem

Talmud for Bava Metsia 4:3

ריש לקיש אמר אבא כהן ברדלייה אדם זכה במציאה בתוך ד' אמות שלו ר' יוחנן אמר והוא שתפול לתוך ידו. מתניתא פליגא על ריש לקיש נטל מקצת הפיאה וזרק בשאר אין לו בה כלום. אמר תיפתר בשלא אמר יזכו לי בד' אמות שלי. ומור דבתרה נפל עליה ופרס טליתו עליה מעבירין אותו ממנה. עוד היא בשלא אמר יזכו לי בד' אמות שלי. והתני רבי חייה שניהם שהיו מתכתשין בעומר ובא עני וחטפו מלפניהן זכה בו. עוד היא בשלא אמר יזכו לי בד' אמות שלי. והתנינן ראה את המציאה ונפל עליה ובא אחר והחזיק בה זה שהחזיק בה זכה בה.

Sustenance, for it is said, Thou openest thy hand etc.3 Why does not R. Johanan include also this [key]? — Because in his view sustenance is [included in] Rain.4 R. ELIEZER SAYS: ON THE FIRST DAY OF THE FEAST etc. The question was asked, Whence did R. Eliezer derive this? Did he learn it from Lulab5 or from the Libation of Water?6 If he learnt it from Lulab, then just as the obligation of the use of the Lulab comes into force on the [first] day of Tabernacles, so too should we begin to make mention of rain on that day. Or perhaps he learnt it from Libation. [If so, then] just as Water Libation may be [carried out] on the evening [preceding the first day] — (for a Master [interpreting the verse], And the meal-offering thereof and their drink-offerings,7 said, Even by night)-so too should one begin to make mention of rain on that evening!8 — Come and hear: R. Abbahu said: R. Eliezer deduced it from Lulab only. Some there are who say: R. Abbahu had a tradition. Whilst others say: He based it on a Baraitha. Which is the Baraitha? — It has been taught: ‘When do we [begin to] make mention of Rain? R. Eliezer says: From the time of the taking up of the Lulab; R. Joshua says, From the time when the Lulab is discarded.9 Said R. Eliezer: Seeing that these Four Species are intended only to make intercession for water,10 therefore as these cannot [grow] without water so the world [too] cannot exist without water. R. Joshua said to him: Is not rain on the Feast a sure sign of [God's] anger? R. Eliezer replied: I too did not say to pray but to make mention. And just as one makes mention of the Revival of the Dead all the year round11 although it will take place only in its proper time, so too should mention be made of the Power of Rain all the year round although it comes only in its due season. Therefore if one desires to make mention all the year round he may do so. Rabbi says: I hold the view that when one ceases to pray [for rain]12 one should also no longer make mention of it. R. Judah b. Bathyra says: On the second day of the Feast one [begins] to make mention. R. Akiba says: On the sixth day of the Feast. R. Judah says in the name of R. Joshua: The last to step before the Ark on the last day of the Feast makes mention, the first does not; on the first day of Passover the first makes mention, the last does not. Did not then R. Eliezer reply well to R. Joshua?- R. Joshua can answer you: It is quite in order to make mention of the Revival of the Dead [all the year round], since any day may be its time, but is rain seasonable at all times? Have we not learnt: Should Nisan terminate and then rain fall it is a sign of [God's] anger, for it is said, Is it not wheat harvest to-day etc.?13 ‘R. Judah b. Bathyra says: on the second day of the Feast one [begins] to make mention’. What is R. Judah b. Bathyra's reason? — It has been taught: R. Judah b. Bathyra says, Of the second day of the Feast, Scripture Says, we-niskehem,14 [‘and their drink-offerings’] and of the sixth day, u-nesakeah15 [‘and its drink-offerings’] and of the seventh day, kemishpatam16 [according to their rule]. Note [the letters] Mem, Yod, Mem which form the word mayim [‘water’].17 Here you have the biblical allusion to the Libation of Water. And what makes him [R. Judah b. Bathyra] fix it on the second day? — Because [the first of the allusions to the Water Libation] is found in connection [with the order for] the second day. Hence why we should [begin] to make mention on the second day. R. Akiba says: On the sixth day of the Feast one [begins] to make mention, for of the sixth day Scripture says, And its drink-offerings.18 Scripture thus speaks of two libations,19 the Libation of Water and the Libation of Wine. Perhaps both Libations must be of wine? — He [R. Akiba] is of the same opinion as R. Judah b. Bathyra who said, There is an allusion to water.2

Jerusalem Talmud Kiddushin

MISHNAH: If anything is given instead of money, if one entered in possession, the other is obligated for its exchange521If property is acquired by payment in kind, only one of the parties has to execute an act of taking possession. The other party then automatically is in possession and also assumes liability. This is not simple barter but exchange of money’s worth against money’s worth.. How is this? If an ox was exchanged for a cow, or a donkey for an ox, if one entered in possession, the other is obligated for its exchange. Possession of Heaven is by money522For the Temple, possession comes together with ownership by payment; it does not need a separate act on entering into possession., possession of an individual by taking hold. A promise to Heaven is like delivery to an individual523Anything vowed to Heaven is as if delivered; the promise cannot be retracted..
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Kiddushin

HALAKHAH: “If anything is given instead of money,” etc. There, we have stated524Mishnah Baba meṣia‘ 4:1. Legal tender coin is not “movables” (Babli 28a/b); payment transfers ownership but not possession. The exchange of movables transfers both ownership and possession.: “This is the principle: All movables acquire one another.” Rebbi Abba, Rav Ḥuna in the name of Rav: Even heaps among heaps525A heap of grain at one place may be exchanged for a heap of grain at another place even if it is impossible to assign an exact price to either of them.. Rebbi Eleazar said to him, we have stated only: “If anything is given instead of money,” anything that needs estimation. It turns out that Rebbi Abba follows Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Eleazar his own opinion, as we have stated there526Mishnah Šeqalim 1:7, Ḥulin 1:7, Bekhorot 9:3. Tradition held that firstlings are sanctified only if they belong to a single owner. The same is stated for animal tithe (Lev. 27:32); it is due only if the herd belongs to a single individual.: “Brothers having common property who are obligated for agio527Cf. Note 122. The annual Temple tax, half a holy šeqel (cf. Note 353) per person, had to be given as a coin (Šeqalim 1:6, 46 1. 32; cf. all sources quoted in Tanḥuma Buber Ky Tiśśa 7, Note 46.) If payment was not made in the correct coin, an agio had to be paid to the Temple’s collectors. Only one agio was due per household, when the father paid the tax for himself and all adult males in his house. (Liddell and Scott compare the Greek word κόλλυβος to Hebrew חלף, “exchange, substitution”.) are free from animal tithe528If brothers are obligated to pay separate agios, they do not form a household. The flock they own as inheritance from their father therefore is held in partnership and is free from the duty of animal tithe., but if they are obligated for animal tithe they are free from agio529If their father’s inheritance was not distributed, they still form their father’s family, pay the Temple tax together, and are obligated for animal tithe..” Rebbi Eleazar said, only if they exchanged kid goats against rams and rams against kid goats. But if they exchanged kid goats against kid goats and rams against rams, that was [the recipient’s] part from the first moment530It turns out that it was his from the moment of the father’s death. Then the animals never had multiple owners. In the Babli, Bekhorot 52b, the opinion attributed here to R. Eleazar is ascribed to Rav Anan; R. Eleazar there requires that not all brothers receive the same number of animals.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, even if they exchanged kid goats against kid goats and rams against rams, they are buyers531In all cases of liquidation of an inheritance with multiple heirs. This principle is accepted in the Babli in R. Joḥanan’s name (Beṣah 37b, Giṭṭin25a,48a, Baba qama 69b, Bekhorot52b,57a).. But we have stated there: “The buyer and the recipient of a gift are free from animal tithe. Brothers having common property who are obligated for agio are free from animal tithe.” When they split and then joined again. “But if they are obligated for animal tithe they are free from agio.” If they never split.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Previous VerseFull Chapter