תלמוד ירושלמי
תלמוד ירושלמי

תלמוד על בבא מציעא 1:2

Jerusalem Talmud Gittin

MISHNAH: If he said to her, “take this bond,” or she found it behind his back, she read it and it turned out to be her bill of divorce, it is no bill of divorce until he says to her “this is your bill of divorce”. If he put it into her hand while she was asleep, after she awoke she read it and it turned out to be her bill of divorce, it is no bill of divorce until he says to her “this is your bill of divorce”. If she was standing in the public domain when he threw it to her and it landed close to her it is a bill of divorce, close to him it is no bill of divorce, half and half she is divorced and not divorced.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Peah

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Abba Cohen Bar Dalaia30A Tanna of the first generations: Abba, a priest of the course of Dalaiahu, the 23rd of the 24 priestly divisions.: A person acquires a find within four cubits of himself31If somebody sees an abandoned object and intends to acquire it, it becomes his property when he is closer than 4 cubits to it, and nobody has the right to run past him and grab it. Since the Mishnah obviously declares that principle inoperative with regard to peah, there seems to be a contradiction between two rabbinic principles. The Babli (Baba Meẓi‘a 10a/b) resolves the problem by restricting the principle of Abba Cohen to the public domain; it does not apply to private property such as a field. The Yerushalmi disagrees; since peah is abandoned property, as proved in the preceding Halakhah, it must be assumed that the ground on which peah grows is temporarily also abandoned to the poor.
The expression “himself” will be given special importance in the following discussion.
. What is the reason? (1Chr. 22:14) “Look, in my poverty32How can anybody (King David) who has the means of dedicating such enormous wealth, call himself “poor”? The explanation is that the wealth never actually came into his possession but that he dedicated it as soon as it became his property by intent and proximity. I prepared for the House of the Eternal 100’000 kikkar33One kikkar equals 3’000 sheqel, and, since the sheqel in the Talmud is defined as 2 drachmas, the kikkar is equal to the Greek talent of 6’000 drachmas. The 14 g silver sheqalim from the Jewish revolt were “sacred sheqalim” of double weight, or four civil denars. Honest silver denars or drachmae from the early principate weigh about 3.5 g. Taking civil sheqalim, one kikkar would be about 21 kg and David would have prepared 2 metric tons of gold and 20 metric tons of silver for the Temple. of gold, 1’000’000 kikkar of silver, bronze and iron unweighed because it was so much, I prepared wood and stones, and you34Solomon. should add to them.”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Peah

Rebbi Yasa said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan47The entire discussion belongs to the parallel in Giṭṭin 8:3 (fol. 49c), where it is stated in Mishnah 2 that a divorce document, of which it is written (Deut. 24:1): “He wrote her a divorce document and delivered it into her hands,” can be delivered by the husband’s throwing the document close to her (within four cubits) in the public domain, with the wife’s knowledge. Then Mishnah 3 adds: “The same rule applies to marriage and the settlement of debts,” meaning that if a woman agrees to marry a certain man and the groom, while declaring that the wedding gift is given for the purpose of marriage, instead of delivering it into the bride’s hand throws it close to her in the public domain in front of two witnesses, the marriage is valid. Similarly, if the creditor asks the debtor to throw to him the amount owed, if the debtor did that and it landed within the creditor’s four cubits in the public domain, the debtor has discharged all his obligations. On this, Rebbi Joḥanan comments that a gift can be acquired only by actual possession, not by four cubits in the public domain.: That refers to divorce documents, but it does not apply to a gift. Rebbi Joḥanan adds something48His statement about gifts is far from trivial., Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish adds something. Rebbi Joḥanan adds something. Since a find which cannot be acquired by the knowledge of another person49If two persons walk together, one sees a find and tells the second one to take it up for him, and the second one lifts it up with the intention of acting as the first person’s agent, the first one acquired it (Mishnah Baba Meẓi‘a 1:3). However, in that case the find must actually be taken up; the four cubits of the agent and his declaration are invalid. If the second person decides to take the find for himself, the four cubits and his declaration of intent of acquisition are valid and the find is his. can be acquired within four cubits, should this rule not apply a fortiori50Hence, his statement excluding gifts is necessary. to a gift that is acquired by the knowledge of another person51Without the donor’s intent of giving the gift, there is no gift and, hence, none can be acquired. [However, if A says to B: acquire the gift for C, the action of B is valid for C since one may let another person profit without the latter’s knowledge (explanation of R. Moses ben Ḥabib)].? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish adds something. Since a gift which cannot be acquired within four cubits52R. Simeon ben Laqish’s premise is R. Joḥanan’s conclusion and vice-versa. If the arguments were made by one person, they would be self-contradictory; for the position of two people they are acceptable. can be acquired by the knowledge of another person, should this not a fortiori apply to a find53Hence, the statement of R. Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Abba Cohen, that four cubits acquire for a person, is necessary insofar as it means acquisition for himself and not for another individual.?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Gittin

זמין למנויי פרימיום בלבד

Jerusalem Talmud Ketubot

זמין למנויי פרימיום בלבד
פסוק קודםפרק מלא