Talmud Jerusalem
Talmud Jerusalem

Talmud for Ketubot 3:1

מפני כבוד שבת מתניתא מסייעא לחברייא מפני מה אמרו בתולה נישאת ביום הרביעי כדי שיהא אדם מתקין צרכיו ג' ימים זה אחר זה ר' בא בר כהן אמר קומי רבי יוסי רבי אחא בשם רבי יעקב בר אידי אסור לאדם לישא אשה בערב שבת הדא דאת אמר לעשות סעודת אירוסין הא לארוס יארס שמואל אמר אפילו בתשעה באב יארס שלא יקדמנו אחר מחלפא שיטתא דשמואל תמן הוא אמר (תהילים ס״ח:ז׳) אלהים מושיב יחידים ביתה וגו' (תהילים סג) במאזנים לעלות המה מהבל יחד ובההוא אמר אכין אלא שלא יקדמנו אחר בתפילה ואף על פי כן לא קיימה רבי חזקיה רבי חייה בשם רבי אבהו אמר אסור לדון דיני ממונות בערב שבת והא מתניתא פליגא לפיכך אין דנין לא בערב שבת ולא בערב יום טוב דיני נפשות הא דיני ממונות דנין ותני רבי חייה כן דנין דיני ממונות בערב שבת אבל לא דיני נפשות כאן להלכה כאן לדבר תורה רבי יונה בשם רבי קריספא בוגרת כחבית פתוחה היא הדא דאת אמר שלא להפסידה מכתובתה אבל לקיימה אינו רשאי משום ספק סוטה ואתייא כיי דרבי חנינא דרבי חנינא אמר מעשה באשה אחת שלא נמצאו לה בתולים ובא מעשה לפני רבי אמר לה איכן הן אמרה ליה מעלותיו של בית אבא היו גבוהין ונשרו והאמינה רבי הדא דתימר שלא להפסידה מכתובתה אבל לקיימה אינו רשאי משום ספק סוטה ואתייא כיי דתנינן תמן בתולה אלמנה גרושה וחלוצה מן האירוסין כתובתן מאתים ויש להן טענת בתולים בתולה אלמנה גרושה חלוצה מן הנשואין כתובתן מנה ואין להן טענת בתולים הדא דאת אמר בכתובת מנה מאתים אבל לקיימה אינו רשאי משום ספק סוטה ואתייא כיי דתנינן תמן האוכל אצל חמיו ביהודה שלא בעדים אינו יכול לטעון טענת בתולים מפני שהוא מתייחד עמה הדא דמר לכתובת מנה מאתים אבל לקיימה אינו רשאי מפני ספק סוטה ואתייא כיי דתנינן הנושא את האשה ולא מצא לה בתולים היא אומרת משאירסתני נאנסתי ונסתחפה שדך והוא אומר לא כי אלא עד שלא אירסתיך והיה מקחי מקח טעות הדא דמר לכתובת מנה מאתים אבל לקיימה אינו רשאי משום ספק סוטה ואתייא כיי

a creative task, he should bring a sin offering. Two--he should bring a conditional sin offering. Three--he is exempt [from bringing a sacrifice of any sort.]” Rabbi Yose bar Bon raised the question [thus]: “If you were to say that two [stars indicate] doubt [as to whether it is day or night, then] if one saw two stars on the eve of the Sabbath and [others] warned him [that it was the Sabbath, thus making him liable for its violation], yet he [nonetheless] performed a creative task; [and if he subsequently] saw two stars on the departure of the Sabbath and [others] warned him [that it was still the Sabbath], yet he performed a creative task; then either way you like [he is liable for a violation of the Sabbath]. If the first [set of stars] were [an indication that it was still] daytime [and not yet the Sabbath], then the last stars were also [an indication that it was still] daytime [and still the Sabbath], then he is liable [for a violation of the Sabbath] on account of the last set [of stars]. If the last [set of stars] were [an indication that it was now] night time [and the Sabbath had begun], then the first stars were also [an indication that it was now] night time [and no longer the Sabbath], then he is liable [for a violation of the Sabbath] on account of the first set [of stars]. [Another example:] If he saw two stars on the eve of the Sabbath and partially harvested a fig, [and] if he [subsequently returned] in the morning and harvested another part, and if he saw two stars on the departure of the Sabbath and harvested the [last] part of the fig, then either way you like [he is liable for a sin offering]. If the first [set of stars] were [an indication that it was still] daytime [and not yet the Sabbath], then the last stars were also [an indication that it was still] daytime [and still the Sabbath] and the morning harvest joins with that of the departure of the sabbath, and he is liable [for a sin offering] on account of the last set [of stars]. If the last [set of stars] were [an indication that it was] night time [and now the Sabbath], then the last stars were also [an indication that it was] daytime [and no longer the Sabbath] and the morning harvest joins with that of the night of the Sabbath, and he is liable [for a sin offering] on account of the first set [of stars].” These [stars] that you are speaking of are [only] those whose way is not to appear in the daytime. However, we do not count those whose way is to appear in the daytime. Rabbi Yose bar Bon said: “Just so long as three stars may be seen aside from that [one we call] Kokhvata (prob. Venus).” (This may be a scribal error and the original version may have been: “Just so long as three stars may be seen [in one place, just] as one star [can be so seen.]”) Rabbi Yaakov of Romana in the name of Rabbi Yehuda ben Pazi: “One star, surely day. Two, night.” But does he [truly] have no [time period of] doubt!? He has doubt about [discerning] one star from another. A baraita teaches: “So long as the eastern horizon is reddened, it is daytime. What has been said about the stars, applies to those which are not generally seen until nightfall; for, no note is taken of those which appear before the day is terminated. Therefore, R. Yosse bar R. Aboon says: It means three stars not counting, R. Jacob from Darom (south) says: One star indicates that it is still day; but two stars certainly show that it is night. Is there any doubt of this? No; the doubt can only exist between the stars visible by day, and the other stars. With regard to this, we are taught that it is still day as long as the sky is red towards the east; SIGN OF [GOD'S] ANGER3 WHY MAKE MENTION OF IT? THEREUPON R. ELIEZER SAID TO HIM: I ALSO DID NOT SAY TO PRAY4 BUT TO MAKE MENTION [IN THE WORD] ‘HE CAUSETH THE WIND TO BLOW AND THE RAIN TO FALL’5 -IN ITS DUE SEASON. HE [R. JOSHUA] REPLIED TO HIM: IF THAT IS SO ONE SHOULD AT ALL TIMES MAKE MENTION OF IT. WE PRAY FOR RAIN ONLY CLOSE TO THE RAINY SEASON. R. JUDAH SAYS: THE LAST TO STEP BEFORE THE ARK6 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. GEMARA. What has the Tanna [in mind] when he teaches WHEN etc.?7 -The Tanna refers to [a Mishnah] elsewhere which teaches: We make mention of the Power of Rain in the [benediction of] the Revival of the Dead,8 and we pray for [rain] in the Benediction of the Years9 and [we insert] the Habdulah10 in [the benediction] ‘Thou favourest man with knowledge’.11 [With that passage in mind] the Tanna now teaches: When do we [begin] to make mention of the Power of Rain? Would it not have been more appropriate to teach it there, why did he leave it until now? — [Say] rather, because the Tanna had just completed [learning the Tractate] Rosh Hashanah12 where we have learnt: And on the Feast [the world] is judged through water. And, [as there] he taught: ‘And on the Feast [the world] is judged through water,’ therefore there he teaches: When do we [begin] to make mention of the Power of Rain. But let him teach: When do we [begin] to make mention of Rain: why, the Power of Rain?-R. Johanan said: Because Rain comes down by the Power [of God], as it is said, Who doeth great things und unsearchable, marvellous things without number.13 And it is [further] written, Who giveth rain upon the earth, and sendeth waters upon the fields.14 Where [in these verses is this idea] implied? — Rabbah b. Shila replied: It is derived from the analogous use of the word heker in verses treating of Creation. Here it is written, ‘Who doeth great things and unsearchable’. And there it is written, ‘Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard that the everlasting God, The Lord, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary? His discernment is past searching out.15 And [of Creation] it is [also] written, Who by Thy strength settest fast the mountains, Who art girded about with might.16 Whence do we know that mention of Rain is to be made in the Prayer?17 - It has been taught: To love the Lord your God and to serve Him with all your heart.18 What is Service of Heart? You must needs say, Prayer. And the verse following reads, That I will give the rain of your land in its season, the former rain and the latter rain.19 R. Johanan said: Three keys the Holy One blessed be He has retained in His own hands and not entrusted to the hand of any messenger, namely, the Key of Rain, the Key of Childbirth, and the Key of the Revival of the Dead. The Key of Rain, for It is written, The Lord will open unto thee His good treasure, the heaven to give the rain of thy land in its season,20 The Key of Childbirth, for it is written, And God remembered Rachel, and God hearkened

Jerusalem Talmud Terumot

HALAKHAH: “If somebody eats heave intentionally,” etc. 2Lev. 22:14: “Anybody who ate sanctified food in error must add its fifth to it and give the consecrated food to the Cohen.” The verse explicitly restricts the duty of adding a fifth to the case when heave is eaten in error. Also, the restitution is called holy only in that case. Since the money for restitution is not holy, the Cohen may give it to the offender, i. e., refrain from accepting it. The sin of eating heave intentionally is too great to be forgiven for just a monetary fine. The Mishnah applies only to the case in which the offender was not warned by two witnesses not to sin; in the latter case, he will be whipped by order of the court. Whether he then has to pay is discussed in the Halakhah. There, we have stated3Mishnah Makkot 3:1–5 gives a list of all transgressions punishable by flogging. The list starts with “him who sleeps with his sister”, and later mentions “him who eats ṭevel and First Heave of which no heave was taken,” where he is punished for eating the heave contained in the produce; hence, eating heave is punished by flogging.: “The following are flogged,” and we have stated4Mishnah Ketubot 3:1: “These are the girls for which one incurs a fine, .. he who sleeps with his sister, …” The fines are incurred either for the rape (Deut. 22:19) or the seduction (Ex.22:16) of a minor girl; cf. Note 26. The Mishnaiot seem to imply that raping one’s minor sister (and a non-Cohen’s eating heave) is punished by flogging and a fine.: “These are the girls.” Here you say, he is flogged, and there you say, he pays. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the Mishnah is two-sided: If he was cautioned5In addition, there must be two eye witnesses who saw the transgression; cf. Kilaim, Chapter 8, Note 9., he is flogged; if he was not cautioned, he pays. Rebbi Joḥanan is of the opinion that in a case where there is flogging or restitution, when he pays he is not flogged. Why should he not be flogged and have to pay? (Deut. 25:2) “His guilt.” You sentence him for one guilt but you may not sentence him for two guilts6“Guilt” (in the singular) here is taken to mean “atonement for his guilt”, that for one transgression there can be only one punishment. It is quite possible that with one act one commits a multiple sin; then each sin separately can be punished but no one sin can incur more than one punishment (Sifry Deut. 286).. The verse speaks of one who may incur two punishments (Deut. 25:2): “The judge shall have him laid down and flogged in his presence, a number [of times] because of his guilt.”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Terumot

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, even if he was not cautioned should he not pay since when cautioned he would be flogged7A similar text is in Ketubot 3:1 (fol. 27b), but there the Mishnah here is quoted as proof. In Ševu‘ot 4:9 (fol. 35d), R. Simeon ben Laqish is quoted as disagreeing with R. Meïr. In the Babli, Ketubot 33b, R. Simeon ben Laqish is quoted only as noting that Mishnah 3:1 gives the opinion of R. Meïr without endorsing it.? A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “These are the girls for which one incurs a fine,” but if he was cautioned, will he not be flogged8Since Mishnaiot Ketubot 3:1 and Terumot 7:1 are formulated unconditionally, they should be interpreted as applying any time there are two witnesses to the transgression, independent of witnesses regarding cautioning.? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish holds with Rebbi Meïr since Rebbi Meïr said, he is flogged and pays. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish9In the Babli, Makkot 4b, the author is Ulla (R. La).: Rebbi Meïr learned from the calumniator10The man who publicly accuses his wife whom he married as a supposed virgin when she was almost an adult (between 12 and 12½ years of age), not to have been virginal. If he cannot produce two witnesses who prove the adultery of the wife between the preliminary and the actual marriage, he is fined, whipped, and prohibited to ever divorce his wife.. (Deut. 22:19) “And they shall fine him”, money; (Deut. 22:18) “they shall punish him,” flogging. But the rabbis say, [the law of] the calumniator is separate because of its novelty; one cannot learn from a novelty! Because nowhere else will a person become guilty by speech, but here he becomes guilty by speech11The Halakhah later will discuss the case of perjured witnesses. These, according to the Yerushalmi, in a civil case will pay but not be flogged and, according to the Babli (Makkot 4b), in a criminal case will be flogged without prior cautioning. In no case can perjury parallel calumny.. Since one cannot transfer this feature, one cannot transfer the rules of either payment or flogging. Did not Rebbi Abbahu say in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: If he [eats] fat intentionally but is in error about the sacrifice, if he was cautioned he will be flogged and has to bring a sacrifice12Cf. Chapter 6, Notes 5,6.! Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac said, (Deut. 25:2) “Because of his guilt.” If two possibilities are given to the court, one chooses one of them. This excludes matters in the power of Heaven14Since sacrifices are between the individual and Heaven, the procedural rules of the court are inapplicable to the case and nothing can be inferred from rules of sacrifices for court procedures..
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Ketubot

MISHNAH: The ketubah106The minimum payable to the bride at the dissolution of the marriage either by divorce or by the husband’s death. This does not exclude that the ketubah document may stipulate higher amounts. of a virgin is 200 and that of a widow one mina107100 zuz. The Mishnah remains noncommittal about the nature of the coin involved.. The ketubah of virgins who after a preliminary marriage53Mishnah 1:2. In all three cases the husband died before the ḥuppah ceremony and the women are presumed to be virgins. become widows, divorcees, or who received ḥalîṣah, is 200 and they are subject to a claim of non-virginity108To invalidate the document if they are found not to be virgins.. The ketubah of a proselyte, a prisoner, and a slave who were redeemed109It is assumed that a female kidnap victim will be raped as a matter of course. But a girl raped at age less than 3 years still is a virgin., freed110Since slaves can have guiltless sexual relations with Gentiles, it is assumed that they do have such relations., or converted111There is no presumed minimal age for sexual activity of Gentiles. Therefore, a proselyte aged more than 3 years at conversion is presumed not to be virginal. at less than three years and one day of age, is 200 and they are subject to a claim of non-virginity108To invalidate the document if they are found not to be virgins..
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Ketubot

Available for Premium members only

Jerusalem Talmud Ketubot

Available for Premium members only
Full Chapter