Home About Network of subjects Linked subjects heatmap Book indices included Search by subject Search by reference Browse subjects Browse texts

Tiresias: The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Source Database



10963
Tosefta, Peah, 4.1
NaN
NaN


Intertexts (texts cited often on the same page as the searched text):

41 results
1. Septuagint, Tobit, 1.6-1.8 (10th cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)

1.6. But I alone went often to Jerusalem for the feasts, as it is ordained for all Israel by an everlasting decree. Taking the first fruits and the tithes of my produce and the first shearings, I would give these to the priests, the sons of Aaron, at the altar. 1.7. of all my produce I would give a tenth to the sons of Levi who ministered at Jerusalem; a second tenth I would sell, and I would go and spend the proceeds each year at Jerusalem; 1.8. the third tenth I would give to those to whom it was my duty, as Deborah my fathers mother had commanded me, for I was left an orphan by my father.
2. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 14.28-14.29, 15.8, 17.15-17.16, 23.4-23.9, 24.19-24.21, 26.1-26.13 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

14.28. מִקְצֵה שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים תּוֹצִיא אֶת־כָּל־מַעְשַׂר תְּבוּאָתְךָ בַּשָּׁנָה הַהִוא וְהִנַּחְתָּ בִּשְׁעָרֶיךָ׃ 14.29. וּבָא הַלֵּוִי כִּי אֵין־לוֹ חֵלֶק וְנַחֲלָה עִמָּךְ וְהַגֵּר וְהַיָּתוֹם וְהָאַלְמָנָה אֲשֶׁר בִּשְׁעָרֶיךָ וְאָכְלוּ וְשָׂבֵעוּ לְמַעַן יְבָרֶכְךָ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכָל־מַעֲשֵׂה יָדְךָ אֲשֶׁר תַּעֲשֶׂה׃ 15.8. כִּי־פָתֹחַ תִּפְתַּח אֶת־יָדְךָ לוֹ וְהַעֲבֵט תַּעֲבִיטֶנּוּ דֵּי מַחְסֹרוֹ אֲשֶׁר יֶחְסַר לוֹ׃ 17.15. שׂוֹם תָּשִׂים עָלֶיךָ מֶלֶךְ אֲשֶׁר יִבְחַר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בּוֹ מִקֶּרֶב אַחֶיךָ תָּשִׂים עָלֶיךָ מֶלֶךְ לֹא תוּכַל לָתֵת עָלֶיךָ אִישׁ נָכְרִי אֲשֶׁר לֹא־אָחִיךָ הוּא׃ 17.16. רַק לֹא־יַרְבֶּה־לּוֹ סוּסִים וְלֹא־יָשִׁיב אֶת־הָעָם מִצְרַיְמָה לְמַעַן הַרְבּוֹת סוּס וַיהוָה אָמַר לָכֶם לֹא תֹסִפוּן לָשׁוּב בַּדֶּרֶךְ הַזֶּה עוֹד׃ 23.4. לֹא־יָבֹא עַמּוֹנִי וּמוֹאָבִי בִּקְהַל יְהוָה גַּם דּוֹר עֲשִׂירִי לֹא־יָבֹא לָהֶם בִּקְהַל יְהוָה עַד־עוֹלָם׃ 23.5. עַל־דְּבַר אֲשֶׁר לֹא־קִדְּמוּ אֶתְכֶם בַּלֶּחֶם וּבַמַּיִם בַּדֶּרֶךְ בְּצֵאתְכֶם מִמִּצְרָיִם וַאֲשֶׁר שָׂכַר עָלֶיךָ אֶת־בִּלְעָם בֶּן־בְּעוֹר מִפְּתוֹר אֲרַם נַהֲרַיִם לְקַלְלֶךָּ׃ 23.6. וְלֹא־אָבָה יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ לִשְׁמֹעַ אֶל־בִּלְעָם וַיַּהֲפֹךְ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ לְּךָ אֶת־הַקְּלָלָה לִבְרָכָה כִּי אֲהֵבְךָ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ׃ 23.7. לֹא־תִדְרֹשׁ שְׁלֹמָם וְטֹבָתָם כָּל־יָמֶיךָ לְעוֹלָם׃ 23.8. לֹא־תְתַעֵב אֲדֹמִי כִּי אָחִיךָ הוּא לֹא־תְתַעֵב מִצְרִי כִּי־גֵר הָיִיתָ בְאַרְצוֹ׃ 23.9. בָּנִים אֲשֶׁר־יִוָּלְדוּ לָהֶם דּוֹר שְׁלִישִׁי יָבֹא לָהֶם בִּקְהַל יְהוָה׃ 24.19. כִּי תִקְצֹר קְצִירְךָ בְשָׂדֶךָ וְשָׁכַחְתָּ עֹמֶר בַּשָּׂדֶה לֹא תָשׁוּב לְקַחְתּוֹ לַגֵּר לַיָּתוֹם וְלָאַלְמָנָה יִהְיֶה לְמַעַן יְבָרֶכְךָ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכֹל מַעֲשֵׂה יָדֶיךָ׃ 24.21. כִּי תִבְצֹר כַּרְמְךָ לֹא תְעוֹלֵל אַחֲרֶיךָ לַגֵּר לַיָּתוֹם וְלָאַלְמָנָה יִהְיֶה׃ 26.1. וְהָיָה כִּי־תָבוֹא אֶל־הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לְךָ נַחֲלָה וִירִשְׁתָּהּ וְיָשַׁבְתָּ בָּהּ׃ 26.1. וְעַתָּה הִנֵּה הֵבֵאתִי אֶת־רֵאשִׁית פְּרִי הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר־נָתַתָּה לִּי יְהוָה וְהִנַּחְתּוֹ לִפְנֵי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ וְהִשְׁתַּחֲוִיתָ לִפְנֵי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ׃ 26.2. וְלָקַחְתָּ מֵרֵאשִׁית כָּל־פְּרִי הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר תָּבִיא מֵאַרְצְךָ אֲשֶׁר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לָךְ וְשַׂמְתָּ בַטֶּנֶא וְהָלַכְתָּ אֶל־הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר יִבְחַר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ לְשַׁכֵּן שְׁמוֹ שָׁם׃ 26.3. וּבָאתָ אֶל־הַכֹּהֵן אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם וְאָמַרְתָּ אֵלָיו הִגַּדְתִּי הַיּוֹם לַיהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ כִּי־בָאתִי אֶל־הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע יְהוָה לַאֲבֹתֵינוּ לָתֶת לָנוּ׃ 26.4. וְלָקַח הַכֹּהֵן הַטֶּנֶא מִיָּדֶךָ וְהִנִּיחוֹ לִפְנֵי מִזְבַּח יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ׃ 26.5. וְעָנִיתָ וְאָמַרְתָּ לִפְנֵי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ אֲרַמִּי אֹבֵד אָבִי וַיֵּרֶד מִצְרַיְמָה וַיָּגָר שָׁם בִּמְתֵי מְעָט וַיְהִי־שָׁם לְגוֹי גָּדוֹל עָצוּם וָרָב׃ 26.6. וַיָּרֵעוּ אֹתָנוּ הַמִּצְרִים וַיְעַנּוּנוּ וַיִּתְּנוּ עָלֵינוּ עֲבֹדָה קָשָׁה׃ 26.7. וַנִּצְעַק אֶל־יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי אֲבֹתֵינוּ וַיִּשְׁמַע יְהוָה אֶת־קֹלֵנוּ וַיַּרְא אֶת־עָנְיֵנוּ וְאֶת־עֲמָלֵנוּ וְאֶת־לַחֲצֵנוּ׃ 26.8. וַיּוֹצִאֵנוּ יְהוָה מִמִּצְרַיִם בְּיָד חֲזָקָה וּבִזְרֹעַ נְטוּיָה וּבְמֹרָא גָּדֹל וּבְאֹתוֹת וּבְמֹפְתִים׃ 26.9. וַיְבִאֵנוּ אֶל־הַמָּקוֹם הַזֶּה וַיִּתֶּן־לָנוּ אֶת־הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת אֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבָשׁ׃ 26.11. וְשָׂמַחְתָּ בְכָל־הַטּוֹב אֲשֶׁר נָתַן־לְךָ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ וּלְבֵיתֶךָ אַתָּה וְהַלֵּוִי וְהַגֵּר אֲשֶׁר בְּקִרְבֶּךָ׃ 26.12. כִּי תְכַלֶּה לַעְשֵׂר אֶת־כָּל־מַעְשַׂר תְּבוּאָתְךָ בַּשָּׁנָה הַשְּׁלִישִׁת שְׁנַת הַמַּעֲשֵׂר וְנָתַתָּה לַלֵּוִי לַגֵּר לַיָּתוֹם וְלָאַלְמָנָה וְאָכְלוּ בִשְׁעָרֶיךָ וְשָׂבֵעוּ׃ 26.13. וְאָמַרְתָּ לִפְנֵי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בִּעַרְתִּי הַקֹּדֶשׁ מִן־הַבַּיִת וְגַם נְתַתִּיו לַלֵּוִי וְלַגֵּר לַיָּתוֹם וְלָאַלְמָנָה כְּכָל־מִצְוָתְךָ אֲשֶׁר צִוִּיתָנִי לֹא־עָבַרְתִּי מִמִּצְוֺתֶיךָ וְלֹא שָׁכָחְתִּי׃ 14.28. At the end of every three years, even in the same year, thou shalt bring forth all the tithe of thine increase, and shall lay it up within thy gates." 14.29. And the Levite, because he hath no portion nor inheritance with thee, and the stranger, and the fatherless, and the widow, that are within thy gates, shall come, and shall eat and be satisfied; that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all the work of thy hand which thou doest." 15.8. but thou shalt surely open thy hand unto him, and shalt surely lend him sufficient for his need in that which he wanteth." 17.15. thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose; one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee; thou mayest not put a foreigner over thee, who is not thy brother." 17.16. Only he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses; forasmuch as the LORD hath said unto you: ‘Ye shall henceforth return no more that way.’" 23.4. An Ammonite or a Moabite shall not enter into the assembly of the LORD; even to the tenth generation shall none of them enter into the assembly of the LORD for ever;" 23.5. because they met you not with bread and with water in the way, when ye came forth out of Egypt; and because they hired against thee Balaam the son of Beor from Pethor of Aram-naharaim, to curse thee." 23.6. Nevertheless the LORD thy God would not hearken unto Balaam; but the LORD thy God turned the curse into a blessing unto thee, because the LORD thy God loved thee." 23.7. Thou shalt not seek their peace nor their prosperity all thy days for ever." 23.8. Thou shalt not abhor an Edomite, for he is thy brother; thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian, because thou wast a stranger in his land." 23.9. The children of the third generation that are born unto them may enter into the assembly of the LORD." 24.19. When thou reapest thy harvest in thy field, and hast forgot a sheaf in the field, thou shalt not go back to fetch it; it shall be for the stranger, for the fatherless, and for the widow; that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all the work of thy hands." 24.20. When thou beatest thine olive-tree, thou shalt not go over the boughs again; it shall be for the stranger, for the fatherless, and for the widow." 24.21. When thou gatherest the grapes of thy vineyard, thou shalt not glean it after thee; it shall be for the stranger, for the fatherless, and for the widow." 26.1. And it shall be, when thou art come in unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance, and dost possess it, and dwell therein;" 26.2. that thou shalt take of the first of all the fruit of the ground, which thou shalt bring in from thy land that the LORD thy God giveth thee; and thou shalt put it in a basket and shalt go unto the place which the LORD thy God shall choose to cause His name to dwell there." 26.3. And thou shalt come unto the priest that shall be in those days, and say unto him: ‘I profess this day unto the LORD thy God, that I am come unto the land which the LORD swore unto our fathers to give us.’" 26.4. And the priest shall take the basket out of thy hand, and set it down before the altar of the LORD thy God." 26.5. And thou shalt speak and say before the LORD thy God: ‘A wandering Aramean was my father, and he went down into Egypt, and sojourned there, few in number; and he became there a nation, great, mighty, and populous." 26.6. And the Egyptians dealt ill with us, and afflicted us, and laid upon us hard bondage." 26.7. And we cried unto the LORD, the God of our fathers, and the LORD heard our voice, and saw our affliction, and our toil, and our oppression." 26.8. And the LORD brought us forth out of Egypt with a mighty hand, and with an outstretched arm, and with great terribleness, and with signs, and with wonders." 26.9. And He hath brought us into this place, and hath given us this land, a land flowing with milk and honey." 26.10. And now, behold, I have brought the first of the fruit of the land, which Thou, O LORD, hast given me.’ And thou shalt set it down before the LORD thy God, and worship before the LORD thy God." 26.11. And thou shalt rejoice in all the good which the LORD thy God hath given unto thee, and unto thy house, thou, and the Levite, and the stranger that is in the midst of thee." 26.12. When thou hast made an end of tithing all the tithe of thine increase in the third year, which is the year of tithing, and hast given it unto the Levite, to the stranger, to the fatherless, and to the widow, that they may eat within thy gates, and be satisfied," 26.13. then thou shalt say before the LORD thy God: ‘I have put away the hallowed things out of my house, and also have given them unto the Levite, and unto the stranger, to the fatherless, and to the widow, according to all Thy commandment which Thou hast commanded me; I have not transgressed any of Thy commandments, neither have I forgotten them."
3. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 2.18, 9.25-9.26 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

2.18. וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים לֹא־טוֹב הֱיוֹת הָאָדָם לְבַדּוֹ אֶעֱשֶׂהּ־לּוֹ עֵזֶר כְּנֶגְדּוֹ׃ 9.25. וַיֹּאמֶר אָרוּר כְּנָעַן עֶבֶד עֲבָדִים יִהְיֶה לְאֶחָיו׃ 9.26. וַיֹּאמֶר בָּרוּךְ יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֵי שֵׁם וִיהִי כְנַעַן עֶבֶד לָמוֹ׃ 2.18. And the LORD God said: ‘It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him.’" 9.25. And he said: Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren." 9.26. And he said: Blessed be the LORD, the God of Shem; And let Canaan be their servant."
4. Hebrew Bible, Leviticus, 19.9-19.10, 23.22 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

19.9. וּבְקֻצְרְכֶם אֶת־קְצִיר אַרְצְכֶם לֹא תְכַלֶּה פְּאַת שָׂדְךָ לִקְצֹר וְלֶקֶט קְצִירְךָ לֹא תְלַקֵּט׃ 23.22. וּבְקֻצְרְכֶם אֶת־קְצִיר אַרְצְכֶם לֹא־תְכַלֶּה פְּאַת שָׂדְךָ בְּקֻצְרֶךָ וְלֶקֶט קְצִירְךָ לֹא תְלַקֵּט לֶעָנִי וְלַגֵּר תַּעֲזֹב אֹתָם אֲנִי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם׃ 19.9. And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not wholly reap the corner of thy field, neither shalt thou gather the gleaning of thy harvest." 19.10. And thou shalt not glean thy vineyard, neither shalt thou gather the fallen fruit of thy vineyard; thou shalt leave them for the poor and for the stranger: I am the LORD your God." 23.22. And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not wholly reap the corner of thy field, neither shalt thou gather the gleaning of thy harvest; thou shalt leave them for the poor, and for the stranger: I am the LORD your God."
5. Hebrew Bible, Proverbs, 22.9 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

22.9. טוֹב־עַיִן הוּא יְבֹרָךְ כִּי־נָתַן מִלַּחְמוֹ לַדָּל׃ 22.9. He that hath a bountiful eye shall be blessed; For he giveth of his bread to the poor."
6. Hebrew Bible, 1 Kings, 10.28 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE)

10.28. וּמוֹצָא הַסּוּסִים אֲשֶׁר לִשְׁלֹמֹה מִמִּצְרָיִם וּמִקְוֵה סֹחֲרֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ יִקְחוּ מִקְוֵה בִּמְחִיר׃ 10.28. And the horses which Solomon had were brought out of Egypt; also out of Keveh, the king’s merchants buying them of the men of Keveh at a price."
7. Hebrew Bible, Isaiah, 58.7 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE)

58.7. הֲלוֹא פָרֹס לָרָעֵב לַחְמֶךָ וַעֲנִיִּים מְרוּדִים תָּבִיא בָיִת כִּי־תִרְאֶה עָרֹם וְכִסִּיתוֹ וּמִבְּשָׂרְךָ לֹא תִתְעַלָּם׃ 58.7. Is it not to deal thy bread to the hungry, And that thou bring the poor that are cast out to thy house? When thou seest the naked, that thou cover him, And that thou hide not thyself from thine own flesh?"
8. Septuagint, Tobit, 1.6-1.8 (4th cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)

1.6. But I alone went often to Jerusalem for the feasts, as it is ordained for all Israel by an everlasting decree. Taking the first fruits and the tithes of my produce and the first shearings, I would give these to the priests, the sons of Aaron, at the altar. 1.7. of all my produce I would give a tenth to the sons of Levi who ministered at Jerusalem; a second tenth I would sell, and I would go and spend the proceeds each year at Jerusalem; 1.8. the third tenth I would give to those to whom it was my duty, as Deborah my fathers mother had commanded me, for I was left an orphan by my father.
9. Anon., Jubilees, 32.10-32.14 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)

32.10. and thus he did daily for seven days. brAnd he and all his sons and his men were eating (this) with joy there during seven day 32.11. and blessing and thanking the Lord, who had delivered him out of all his tribulation and had given him his vow. 32.12. And he tithed all the clean animals, and made a burnt sacrifice, but the unclean animals he gave (not) to Levi his son, and he gave him all the souls of the men 32.13. And Levi discharged the priestly office at Bethel before Jacob his father in preference to his ten brothers, and he was a priest there 32.14. and Jacob gave his vow: thus he tithed again the tithe to the Lord and sanctified it, and it became holy unto Him.
10. Septuagint, 1 Maccabees, 11.35 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)

11.35. And the other payments henceforth due to us of the tithes, and the taxes due to us, and the salt pits and the crown taxes due to us -- from all these we shall grant them release.
11. Septuagint, Ecclesiasticus (Siracides), 31.14 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)

31.14. Do not reach out your hand for everything you see,and do not crowd your neighbor at the dish.
12. Josephus Flavius, Jewish Antiquities, 4.24, 4.69, 4.205, 12.117 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

4.24. 4. Now although Moses had a great while ago foreseen this calumny of Corah, and had seen that the people were irritated, yet was he not affrighted at it: but being of good courage, because he had given them right advice about their affairs, and knowing that his brother had been made partaker of the priesthood at the command of God, and not by his own favor to him, he came to the assembly; 4.24. 22. Besides those two tithes, which I have already said you are to pay every year, the one for the Levites, the other for the festivals, you are to bring every third year a third tithe to be distributed to those that want; to women also that are widows, and to children that are orphans. 4.69. 4. Accordingly he commanded the Levites to yield up to the priests thirteen of their forty-eight cities, and to set apart for them the tenth part of the tithes which they every year receive of the people; 4.205. 8. Let there be taken out of your fruits a tenth, besides that which you have allotted to give to the priests and Levites. This you may indeed sell in the country, but it is to be used in those feasts and sacrifices that are to be celebrated in the holy city; for it is fit that you should enjoy those fruits of the earth which God gives you to possess, so as may be to the honor of the donor. 12.117. But by them he sent to Eleazar the high priest ten beds, with feet of silver, and the furniture to them belonging, and a cup of the value of thirty talents; and besides these, ten garments, and purple, and a very beautiful crown, and a hundred pieces of the finest woven linen; as also vials and dishes, and vessels for pouring, and two golden cisterns to be dedicated to God.
13. Mishnah, Avodah Zarah, 2.1-2.2 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

2.1. One should not place animals in inns of non-Jews, because they are suspected of bestiality. A woman should not be alone with them, because they are suspected of licentiousness; Nor should a man be alone with them, because they are suspected of shedding blood. A Jewish woman should not act as midwife to a non-Jewish woman, because she would be delivering a child for idolatry. But a non-Jewish woman may act as midwife to a Jewish woman. A Jewish woman should not suckle the child of a non-Jewish woman, But a non-Jewish woman may suckle the child of a Jewish woman in her premises." 2.2. We may allow them to heal us when the healing relates to money, but not personal healing; Nor should we have our hair cut by them in any place, this is the opinion of Rabbi Meir. But the Sages said: in a public place it is permitted, but not when the two persons are alone."
14. Mishnah, Bava Qamma, 4.3 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

4.3. An ox of an Israelite that gored an ox belonging to the Temple, or an ox belonging to the Temple that gored an ox of an Israelite, the owner is exempt, as it says, “The ox belonging to his neighbor” (Exodus 21:35), and not an ox belonging to the Temple. An ox of an Israelite that gores an ox of a gentile, the owner is exempt. And an ox of a gentile that gores the ox of an Israelite, whether the ox is harmless or an attested danger, its owner pays full damages."
15. Mishnah, Berachot, 2.7 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

2.7. When Tabi his [Rabban Gamaliel’s] slave died he accepted condolences for him. His disciples said to him: Master, have you not taught us that one does not accept condolences for slaves? He replied to them: My slave Tabi was not like other slaves: he was a fit man."
16. Mishnah, Gittin, 9.8 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

9.8. A get which was written in Hebrew and whose signatures are in Greek, or was written in Greek and whose signatures are in Hebrew, or which has one Hebrew signature and one Greek signature, or which was written by a scribe and signed by one witness, is valid. [If a man signs], “So-and-so, witness,” it is valid. [If he signs,] “Son of so-and-so, witness, it is valid. [If he signs,] “So-and-so son of so-and-so” and he didn’t write “witness”, it is valid. If he wrote his own family name and hers, the get is valid. And this is how the scrupulous in Jerusalem would do. A get given imposed by court: in the case of a Jewish court is valid, and in the case of a Gentile court is invalid. And with regard to Gentiles, if they beat him and say to him, “Do what the Israelites say to you,” (and it is valid)."
17. Mishnah, Ketuvot, 5.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

5.5. The following are the kinds of work which a woman must perform for her husband:Grinding, Baking,If she brought one slave-woman into the marriage she need not grind or bake or wash. Washing,Rabbi Eliezer says: even if she brought him a hundred slave-women he may compel her to work in wool; for idleness leads to unchastity. Cooking, Nursing her child, Preparing his bed, And working in wool. [If she brought] two slave-women, she need not cook or nurse her child. If three, she need not prepare his bed or work in wool. If four, she may lounge in an easy chair. Rabbi Shimon ben Gamaliel says: if a man forbade his wife under a vow to do any work he must divorce her and give her kethubah to her for idleness leads to insanity."
18. Mishnah, Peah, 8.2-8.7 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

8.2. They [amei haaretz] are to be believed concerning gleanings, the forgotten sheaf and peah during their [harvest] season, and concerning the poor man’s tithe during its whole year. A Levite is always to be trusted. They are only believed in those things which men are accustomed to give them." 8.3. They are trusted concerning wheat, but they are not trusted when it is flour or bread. They are trusted concerning rice in its husk, but they are not trusted when it is either raw or cooked. They are trusted concerning beans but they are not trusted when they have been pounded, neither raw nor cooked. They are trusted when concerning oil, to declare that it is from the poor person’s tithe, but they are not trusted over [oil] when they claim that it is from the olives [left on the] top [of the tree.]" 8.4. They are trusted concerning raw vegetables, but they are not trusted concerning are cooked ones, unless he has only a little bit, for so it was the custom of a householder to take out of his stew-pot [and give a little to the poor]." 8.5. They may not give to the poor from the threshing-floor less than a half-kav of wheat or a kav of barley. R. Meir says: [only] half a kav [of barley]. [They must give] a kav and a half of spelt, a kav of dried figs or a maneh of pressed figs. Rabbi Akiva says: half a maneh. [They must give] half a log of wine. Rabbi Akiva says: a quarter. [They must give] a quarter [log] of oil. Rabbi Akiva says: an eighth. As for other kinds of produce: Abba Shaul says, [they must give enough] so that he can sell it and buy food enough for two meals." 8.6. This measure was stated for the priest, Levite and Israelite alike. If he was saving some [to give to his poor relatives], he can retain half and give the other half away. If he has only a small amount, then he must place it before them and they then divide it among themselves." 8.7. They may not give a poor person wandering from place to place less than a loaf worth a pundion at a time when four seahs [of wheat cost] one sela. If he spends the night [at a place], they must give him the cost of what he needs for the night. If he stays over Shabbat they must give him enough food for three meals. He who has the money for two meals, he may not take anything from the charity dish. And if he has enough money for fourteen meals, he may not take any support from the communal fund. The communal fund is collected by two and distributed by three people."
19. Mishnah, Pesahim, 7.2 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

7.2. One may not roast the pesah either on a [metal] spit or on a grill. Rabbi Zadok said: it once happened that Rabban Gamaliel said to his servant Tabi, “Go out and roast us the pesah on the grill.” If it [the pesah] touched the clay of the oven, he should pare its place. If some of its juice dripped on to the clay [of the oven] and dripped back on to it, he must remove its place. If some of its juice fell on the flour, he must take a handful away from its place."
20. Mishnah, Sanhedrin, 2.4-2.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

2.4. He may send forth the people to a battle waged of free choice by the decision of the court of seventy one. He may break through [the private domain of any man] to make himself a road and none may protest him. The king’s road has no limit. Whatsoever the people take in plunder they must place before him, and he may take first. “And he shall not have many wives” (Deut. 17:17) eighteen only. Rabbi Judah says: “He may take many wives provided they don’t turn his heart away [from worshipping God]. Rabbi Shimon says: “Even one that might turn his heart away, he should not marry. Why then does it say, “He shall not have many wives”, even if they are like Avigayil. “He shall not keep many horses” (Deut. 17:16) enough for his chariot only. “Nor shall he amass silver and gold to excess” (Deut. 17:17) enough to pay his soldier’s wages. He must write a Torah scroll for himself; when he goes forth to battle he shall take it with him, and when he returns he shall bring it back with him; when he sits in judgement it shall be with him, and when he sits to eat it shall be with him, as it says, “Let it remain with him and let him read it all his life” (Deut. 17:19)" 2.5. None may ride his horse and none may sit on his throne and none may make use of his scepter. No one may see him when his hair is being cut or when he is naked or when he is in the bath house, for it says, “You shall set a king upon yourself” (Deut. 17:15) that his awe should be over you."
21. Mishnah, Sukkah, 2.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

2.1. He who sleeps under a bed in the sukkah has not fulfilled his obligation. Rabbi Judah said: we had the custom to sleep under a bed in the presence of the elders, and they didn’t say anything to us. Rabbi Shimon said: it happened that Tabi, the slave of Rabba Gamaliel, used to sleep under the bed. And Rabban Gamaliel said to the elders, “Have you seen Tabi my slave, who is a scholar, and knows that slaves are exempt from [the law of] a sukkah, therefore he sleep under the bed.” And incidentally we learned that he who sleeps under a bed has not fulfilled his obligation."
22. Mishnah, Yevamot, 8.3 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

8.3. An Ammonite and a Moabite are forbidden [to enter into the congregation of the Lord] and their prohibition is for ever. However, their women are permitted at once. An Egyptian and an Edomite are forbidden only until the third generation, whether they are males or females. Rabbi Shimon permits their women immediately. Said Rabbi Shimon: This is a kal vehomer: if where the males are forbidden for all time the females are permitted immediately, where the males are forbidden only until the third generation how much more should the females be permitted immediately. They said to him: If this is a halakhah, we shall accept it; but if it is only a logical reference, there is a refutation. He replied: This is not so, I am in fact saying a halakhah. Mamzerim and nethinim are forbidden, and their prohibition is forever, whether they be males or females."
23. Mishnah, Shekalim, 8.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

8.4. If the curtain [separating the Holy of Holies from the rest of the Temple] was defiled by a derived uncleanness, they immerse it within [the precincts of the Temple] and they bring it back in again. But if it was defiled by a principal uncleanness, they immerse it outside and spread out in the Hel. If it was new it was spread out on the roof of the colonnade, so that the people might behold its workmanship which is beautiful."
24. Mishnah, Makhshirin, 2.8 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

2.8. If one found there lost property, If the majority [of the inhabitants] were non-Jews, he need not proclaim it; If the majority were Israelites, he must proclaim it; If they were half and half, he must [also] proclaim it. If one found bread there we must consider who form the majority of the bakers. If it was bread of clean flour, we must consider who form the majority of those who eat bread of pure flour. Rabbi Judah says: if it was coarse bread, we must consider who form the majority of those who eat coarse bread."
25. Tosefta, Avodah Zarah, 2.3-2.4, 3.3-3.5, 3.11-3.12, 3.16, 4.8-4.9, 4.11-4.12, 5.2, 8.6 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

26. Tosefta, Bava Qamma, 4.3, 8.19 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

27. Tosefta, Hulin, 1.1, 2.20, 3.24 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

28. Tosefta, Miqvaot, 6.1, 6.4 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

29. Tosefta, Moed Qatan, 2.16 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

30. Tosefta, Niddah, 2.5 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

31. Tosefta, Peah, 1.1-4.7, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 4.9, 4.10, 4.11, 4.12, 4.13, 4.14, 4.15, 4.16, 4.17, 4.18, 4.19, 4.20, 4.21 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

32. Tosefta, Pesahim, 2.15 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

33. Tosefta, Sanhedrin, 13.4 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

34. Tosefta, Yevamot, 8.1, 14.7 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

35. Tosefta, Zevahim, 5.6 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

36. Tosefta, Terumot, 1.14 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

37. Mishna, Meilah, 3.5 (2nd cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

3.5. The milk of consecrated animals and the eggs of [consecrated] turtle-doves may not be used, but are not subject to the law of sacrilege. When is this so? For things dedicated for the altar, but as for things dedicated for Temple upkeep, if one consecrated a chicken both it and its eggs are subject to the law of sacrilege, or [if one dedicated] a she-donkey, both it and its milk are subject to the law of sacrilege."
38. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Qamma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

38a. דאם כן נכתוב קרא להאי רעהו גבי מועד:,שור של ישראל שנגח שור של כנעני פטור: אמרי ממה נפשך אי רעהו דוקא דכנעני כי נגח דישראל נמי ליפטר ואי רעהו לאו דוקא אפילו דישראל כי נגח דכנעני נחייב,א"ר אבהו אמר קרא (חבקוק ג, ו) עמד וימודד ארץ ראה ויתר גוים ראה שבע מצות שקיבלו עליהם בני נח כיון שלא קיימו עמד והתיר ממונן לישראל,רבי יוחנן אמר מהכא (דברים לג, ב) הופיע מהר פארן מפארן הופיע ממונם לישראל,תניא נמי הכי שור של ישראל שנגח שור של כנעני פטור שור של כנעני שנגח שור של ישראל בין תם בין מועד משלם נזק שלם שנאמר עמד וימודד ארץ ראה ויתר גוים ואומר הופיע מהר פארן,מאי ואומר,וכי תימא האי עמד וימודד ארץ מבעי' ליה לכדרב מתנה וכדרב יוסף ת"ש הופיע מהר פארן מפארן הופיע ממונן לישראל מאי דרב מתנה דא"ר מתנה עמד וימודד ארץ ראה וכו' מה ראה ראה שבע מצות שנצטוו עליהן בני נח ולא קיימום עמד והגלה אותם מעל אדמתם,ומאי משמע דהאי ויתר לישנא דאגלויי הוא כתיב הכא ויתר גוים וכתיב התם (ויקרא יא, כא) לנתר בהן על הארץ ומתרגם לקפצא בהון על ארעא,מאי דרב יוסף דא"ר יוסף עמד וימודד ארץ ראה וכו' מה ראה ראה שבע מצות שקיבלו עליהם בני נח ולא קיימום עמד והתירן להם,איתגורי אתגר א"כ מצינו חוטא נשכר אמר מר בריה דרבנא לומר שאפילו מקיימין אותן אין מקבלין עליהן שכר,ולא והתניא ר"מ אומר מנין שאפילו נכרי ועוסק בתורה שהוא ככהן גדול ת"ל (ויקרא יח, ה) אשר יעשה אותם האדם וחי בהם כהנים ולוים וישראלים לא נאמר אלא אדם הא למדת שאפילו נכרי ועוסק בתורה הרי הוא ככהן גדול,אמרי אין מקבלים עליהן שכר כמצווה ועושה אלא כמי שאינו מצווה ועושה דא"ר חנינא גדול המצווה ועושה יותר ממי שאינו מצווה ועושה:,ת"ר וכבר שלחה מלכות רומי שני סרדיוטות אצל חכמי ישראל למדונו תורתכם קראו ושנו ושלשו בשעת פטירתן אמרו להם דקדקנו בכל תורתכם ואמת הוא חוץ מדבר זה שאתם אומרים שור של ישראל שנגח שור של כנעני פטור של כנעני שנגח שור של ישראל בין תם בין מועד משלם נזק שלם,ממ"נ אי רעהו דוקא אפילו דכנעני כי נגח דישראל ליפטר ואי רעהו לאו דוקא אפילו דישראל כי נגח דכנעני לחייב ודבר זה אין אנו מודיעים אותו למלכות,רב שמואל בר יהודה שכיבא ליה ברתא אמרו ליה רבנן לעולא קום ניזל נינחמיה אמר להו מאי אית לי גבי נחמתא דבבלאי דגידופא הוא דאמרי מאי אפשר למיעבד הא אפשר למיעבד עבדי,אזל הוא לחודאי גביה א"ל (דברים ב, ב) ויאמר ה' (אל משה) אל תצר את מואב ואל תתגר בם מלחמה וכי מה עלה על דעתו של משה לעשות מלחמה שלא ברשות אלא נשא משה ק"ו בעצמו אמר ומה מדינים שלא באו אלא לעזור את מואב אמרה תורה (במדבר כה, יז) צרור את המדינים והכיתם אותם 38a. bBecause if so,if one whose ox gores a consecrated ox is exempt from liability, blet the verse write thisphrase: b“of another,” with regard tothe case of ba forewarnedox. One could then infer that the owner is exempt from liability in the case of an innocuous ox as well, as the liability with regard to an innocuous ox is less severe than with regard to a forewarned ox. The stating of this exemption specifically in the context of an innocuous ox indicates that the exemption is only concerning the leniency stated in the verse, that if the gored ox belongs to another person, the owner of the belligerent ox is liable to pay only half the cost of the damage.,§ The mishna teaches: With regard to ban ox of a Jew that gored the ox of a gentile,the owner of the belligerent ox is bexemptfrom liability; whereas if a gentile’s ox gores a Jew’s ox, the owner is liable to pay the full cost of the damage. The Sages bsaid:This statement is difficult bwhichever way youlook at it. bIfthe phrase b“of another”is meant in ba precisemanner, and therefore the liability applies only if his ox gores the ox of another Jew, bwhen a gentile’sox bgores that of a Jew he should also be exemptfrom liability. bAnd ifthe phrase b“of another”is bnotmeant in ba precisemanner, then beven when a Jew’sox bgores that of a gentilethe owner of the belligerent ox bshould be liable. /b, bRabbi Abbahu saidthat the reason for this ruling is that bthe verse states: “He stood and shook the earth; He beheld, and made the nations tremble [ ivayyatter /i]”(Habakkuk 3:6). This is homiletically interpreted to mean that God bsaw the seven mitzvot that the descendants of Noah accepted upon themselvesto fulfill, and bsince they did not fulfillthem, bHe arose and permitted [ ivehittir /i] their money to the Jewish people,so that in certain cases Jews are not liable for damage caused to gentiles., bRabbi Yoḥa saidthat the source for this ihalakhais bfrom here:It is stated in reference to the giving of the Torah: “The Lord came from Sinai and rose from Seir unto them; bHe appeared from Mount Paran”(Deuteronomy 33:2), which is homiletically interpreted to mean: bFromthe time God came from Mount bParan,when giving the Torah, bthe money ofthe gentile nations bappeared,i.e., it was revealed and granted bto the Jewish people. /b, bThis is also taughtin a ibaraita /i: With regard to ban ox of a Jew that gored the ox of a gentile,the owner of the belligerent ox is bexemptfrom liability. By contrast, with regard to ban ox of a gentile that gored the ox of a Jew, whetherit was binnocuous or forewarned,the owner of the belligerent ox bpays the fullcost of the bdamage, as it is stated: “He stood and shook the earth; He beheld, and made the nations tremble.” Andanother verse bstates: “He appeared from Mount Paran.” /b,The Gemara asks: bWhatis the reason the ibaraitaadds: bAndanother verse bstates,indicating that the first verse is not a sufficient source?,The Gemara explains that this is how the ibaraitais to be understood: bAnd if you would saythat bthisverse: b“He stood and shook the earth” is necessary toexpress bthat which Rav Mattana and Rav Yosefderived from the verse, bcomeand bhearanother source: b“He appeared from Mount Paran,”meaning: bFrom Paran their money appeared to the Jewish people. What is Rav Mattana’sexposition? It is bas Rav Mattana says: “He stood and shook the earth.” What did He see? He saw the seven mitzvot that the descendants of Noah were commanded but did not fulfill,and bHe arose and exiled them from their landon account of their transgressions., bAnd from where mayit bbe inferred that thisterm ivayyatteris a term of exile? It is written here: “And made the nations tremble [ ivayyatter /i]”(Habakkuk 3:6), band it is written there: “ iLenatterupon the earth”(Leviticus 11:21), bwhich is translatedinto Aramaic as: b“To leap upon the earth.”Apparently, the root inun /i, itav /i, ireish /i, common to both words, indicates uprooting from one place to another., bWhat is Rav Yosef’sexposition? It is bas Rav Yosef says: “He stood and shook the earth; He beheld.” What did He see? He saw the seven mitzvot that the descendants of Noah accepted upon themselves and did not fulfill,so bHe arose and permittedtheir prohibitions bto them. /b,The Gemara asks: bDid theythereby bprofit,in that their prohibitions became permitted to them? bIf so, we have found a transgressorwho bis rewarded. Mar, son of Rabbana, says:This is not to say that for them to transgress their mitzvot is no longer a sin; rather, it is bto say that even if they fulfill them, they do not receive reward forfulfilling bthem. /b,The Gemara asks: bButdo they bnotreceive reward for fulfilling those mitzvot? bBut isn’t it taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Meir says: From whereis it derived bthat even a gentile who engages in Torah isconsidered blike a High Priest? The verse stateswith regard to the mitzvot: b“Which if a person does, he shall live by them”(Leviticus 18:5). It bis not stated:Which if bpriests and Levites and Israelitesdo, they shall live by them, bbut rather: A person,indicating that all people are included. bYou have therefore learned that even a gentile who engages in Torahstudy bisconsidered blike a High Priest. /b,The Sages bsaidin response: Rav Yosef meant that bthey do not receive the reward asdoes bone who is commandedto perform a mitzva band performsit, bbut asdoes bone who is not commandedto perform a mitzva band performsit anyway. bAs Rabbi Ḥanina says:One who is bcommanded and performsa mitzva bis greater thanone who bis not commanded and performsit., bThe Sages taughtthe following story in the context of the aforementioned ihalakha /i: bAnd the Roman kingdom once sent two military officials [ isardeyotot /i] to the Sages of Israel,and ordered them in the name of the king: bTeach us your Torah.The officials breadthe Torah, band repeatedit, bandrepeated it again, reading it for the bthirdtime. bAt the time of their departure, they said tothe Sages: bWe have examined your entire Torah and it is true, except for thisone bmatter that you state,i.e., that with regard to ban ox of a Jew that gored the ox of a gentile,the owner is bexemptfrom liability, whereas with regard to the ox bof a gentile that gored the ox of a Jew, whetherit was binnocuous or forewarned,the owner bpays the fullcost of the bdamage. /b,The officials’ reasoning was that this ihalakhais difficult bwhichever way youlook at it. bIfthe phrase b“of another”is meant in ba precisemanner, that the owners of both oxen must both be Jewish, then beven whenthe ox bof a gentile gores the ox of a Jewthe owner of the ox bshould be exemptfrom liability. bAnd ifthe phrase b“of another”is bnotmeant in ba precisemanner, and the oxen of all are included, then beven whenthe ox bof a Jew gores the ox of a gentilethe owner bshould be liable.They added: bBut we will not inform this matter to the kingdom;having acknowledged that the entire Torah is true, we will not reveal this ruling, as it will displease the kingdom.,§ Incidentally, it is related that bthe daughterof bRav Shmuel bar Yehuda died. The Sages said to Ulla: Arise; let us go console him.Ulla bsaid to them: Whatbusiness bdo I have with the consolation of Babylonians, which isactually bheresy? As, they saywhile consoling mourners: bWhat can be done?This seems to suggest that bif it were possible to dosomething, acting against the Almighty’s decree, bthey would doso, which is tantamount to heresy. Therefore, Ulla declined to accompany the Babylonian Sages.,Ulla therefore bwent toconsole Rav Shmuel bar Yehuda bby himself,and bsaid to him:The verse states: b“And the Lord said to me, do not be at enmity with Moab, neither contend with them in battle”(Deuteronomy 2:9). bWhat entered Moses’s mind,that God had to warn him not to undertake a particular action? Did it enter his mind bto wage warwith the Moabites bwithout permission? Rather, Moses reasoned an ia fortiori /iinference bby himself, saying: And ifwith regard to bthe Midianites, who came only to help the Moabitesharm the Jewish people (see Numbers, chapter 22), bthe Torah said: “Harass the Midianites and smite them”(Numbers 25:17)
39. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

47b. (במדבר יח, כח) מכל מעשרותיכם תרימו ומה ראית האי אידגן והאי לא אידגן:,מעשר שני והקדש שנפדו: פשיטא הב"ע כגון שנתן את הקרן ולא נתן את החומש והא קמ"ל דאין חומש מעכב:,השמש שאכל כזית: פשיטא מהו דתימא שמש לא קבע קמ"ל:,והכותי מזמנין עליו: אמאי לא יהא אלא עם הארץ ותניא אין מזמנין על ע"ה,אביי אמר בכותי חבר רבא אמר אפילו תימא בכותי ע"ה והכא בע"ה דרבנן דפליגי עליה דר' מאיר עסקינן דתניא איזהו ע"ה כל שאינו אוכל חוליו בטהרה דברי ר"מ וחכמים אומרים כל שאינו מעשר פירותיו כראוי והני כותאי עשורי מעשרי כדחזי דבמאי דכתיב באורייתא מזהר זהירי דאמר מר כל מצוה שהחזיקו בה כותים הרבה מדקדקין בה יותר מישראל,ת"ר איזהו ע"ה כל שאינו קורא ק"ש ערבית ושחרית דברי ר' אליעזר רבי יהושע אומר כל שאינו מניח תפילין בן עזאי אומר כל שאין לו ציצית בבגדו ר' נתן אומר כל שאין מזוזה על פתחו ר' נתן בר יוסף אומר כל שיש לו בנים ואינו מגדלם לת"ת אחרים אומרים אפי' קרא ושנה ולא שמש ת"ח הרי זה ע"ה א"ר הונא הלכה כאחרים,רמי בר חמא לא אזמין עליה דרב מנשיא בר תחליפא דתני ספרא וספרי והלכתא כי נח נפשיה דרמי בר חמא אמר רבא לא נח נפשיה דרמי בר חמא אלא דלא אזמין ארב מנשיא בר תחליפא והתניא אחרים אומרים אפילו קרא ושנה ולא שמש ת"ח הרי זה ע"ה שאני רב מנשיא בר תחליפא דמשמע להו לרבנן ורמי בר חמא הוא דלא דק אבתריה ל"א דשמע שמעתתא מפומייהו דרבנן וגריס להו כצורבא מרבנן דמי:,אכל טבל ומעשר וכו': טבל פשיטא לא צריכא בטבל טבול מדרבנן ה"ד בעציץ שאינו נקוב:,מעשר ראשון כו': פשיטא לא צריכא כגון שהקדימו בכרי מהו דתימא כדאמר ליה רב פפא לאביי קמ"ל כדשני ליה:,מעשר שני וכו': פשיטא לא צריכא שנפדו ולא נפדו כהלכתן מעשר שני כגון שפדאו על גבי אסימון ורחמנא אמר (דברים יד, כה) וצרת הכסף בידך כסף שיש (לו) עליו צורה הקדש שחללו על גבי קרקע ולא פדאו בכסף ורחמנא אמר (ויקרא כז, יט) ונתן הכסף וקם לו:,והשמש שאכל פחות מכזית: פשיטא איידי דתנא רישא כזית תנא סיפא פחות מכזית:,והנכרי אין מזמנין עליו: פשיטא הכא במאי עסקינן בגר שמל ולא טבל דאמר רבי זירא א"ר יוחנן לעולם אינו גר עד שימול ויטבול וכמה דלא טבל נכרי הוא:,נשים ועבדים וקטנים אין מזמנין עליהן: אמר רבי יוסי קטן המוטל בעריסה מזמנין עליו,והא תנן נשים ועבדים וקטנים אין מזמנין עליהם,הוא דאמר כרבי יהושע בן לוי דאמר ריב"ל אף על פי שאמרו קטן המוטל בעריסה אין מזמנין עליו אבל עושין אותו סניף לעשרה,ואמר ריב"ל תשעה ועבד מצטרפין מיתיבי מעשה ברבי אליעזר שנכנס לבית הכנסת ולא מצא עשרה ושחרר עבדו והשלימו לעשרה שחרר אין לא שחרר לא תרי אצטריכו שחרר חד ונפיק בחד,והיכי עביד הכי והאמר רב יהודה כל המשחרר עבדו עובר בעשה שנאמר (ויקרא כה, מו) לעולם בהם תעבודו לדבר מצוה שאני מצוה הבאה בעבירה היא מצוה דרבים שאני,ואמר ריב"ל לעולם ישכים אדם לבית הכנסת כדי שיזכה וימנה עם עשרה הראשונים שאפילו מאה באים אחריו קבל עליו שכר כולם שכר כולם סלקא דעתך אלא אימא נותנין לו שכר כנגד כולם,אמר רב הונא תשעה וארון מצטרפין א"ל רב נחמן וארון גברא הוא אלא אמר רב הונא תשעה נראין כעשרה מצטרפין אמרי לה כי מכנפי ואמרי לה כי מבדרי,אמר רבי אמי שנים ושבת מצטרפין אמר ליה רב נחמן ושבת גברא הוא אלא אמר רבי אמי שני תלמידי חכמים המחדדין זה את זה בהלכה מצטרפין מחוי רב חסדא כגון אנא ורב ששת מחוי רב ששת כגון אנא ורב חסדא,א"ר יוחנן קטן פורח מזמנין עליו תנ"ה קטן שהביא שתי שערות מזמנין עליו ושלא הביא שתי שערות אין מזמנין עליו ואין מדקדקין בקטן הא גופא קשיא אמרת הביא שתי שערות אין לא הביא לא והדר תני אין מדקדקין בקטן לאתויי מאי לאו 47b. b“From all of that is given to you, you shall set apartthat which is the Lord’s iteruma /i” (Numbers 18:29). God’s iteruma /i, iteruma gedola /i, must be taken from all of the Levites’ gifts. The Gemara asks: bAnd what did you seethat led you to require iteruma gedolafrom first tithe that was taken from grain in piles and not from first tithe that was taken from grain on stalks? Abaye answers: bThis,after it was threshed and placed into piles, is completely processed and bhas become grain, and that,which remained on the stalk, bdid notyet bbecome grain.The verse regarding iteruma gedolastates: “The first of your grain” (Deuteronomy 18:4), is given to the priest. Once it is considered grain, the right of the priest takes effect and the Levite is required to separate iteruma gedola /i.,The mishna states that if, among the diners, one ate bsecond tithe and consecrated food that were redeemed,he may be included in a izimmun /i.The Gemara remarks: bIt is obviousthat if these items were redeemed that one could participate in a izimmun /i. The Gemara responds: bWith what are we dealing here?We are dealing with ba casewhere the consecrated property was not completely redeemed, i.e., bwhere one gavepayment for bthe principal,the value of the tithe, bbut he did not givepayment for bthe fifththat he must add when redeeming items that he consecrated; bandthe mishna bteaches usthat failure to add bthe fifth does not invalidatethe redemption.,We learned in the mishna: bThe waiter who ateat least ban olive-bulkfrom the meal may join in a izimmun /i. The Gemara remarks: bIt is obvious.Why was it necessary for the mishna to teach this ihalakha /i? The Gemara answers: bLest you say that the waiterwho stands and serves the diners bdid not establishhimself as a participant in the meal and, therefore, cannot join the izimmun /i, the mishna bteaches usthat even the waiter is considered to have established himself as a participant in the meal.,The mishna states that ba Samaritan [ iKuti /i] may be included in a izimmun /i.The Gemara asks: bWhy?Even if you consider him a member of the Jewish people, blet him be merely an iam ha’aretz /i,one who is not scrupulous in matters of ritual purity and tithes, band it was taughtin a ibaraita /i: bAn iam ha’aretzmay not be included in a izimmun /i. /b,The Gemara offers several answers: bAbaye said:The mishna is referring to a iKutiwho is a iḥaver /i,one who is scrupulous in those areas. bRava said: Even if you saythat the mishna refers to ba iKuti /iwho is an iam ha’aretz /i, and herethe prohibition to include an iam ha’aretzin a izimmunrefers to an iam ha’aretz /ias defined by bthe Rabbis who disagree with Rabbi Meir, as it was taughtin a ibaraita /i: bWho is an iam ha’aretz /i? Anyone who does not eat non-sacred food ina state of britual purity.This is bthe statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say:An iam ha’aretzis banyone who does not appropriately tithe his produce. And these iKutimtithetheir produce bappropriately, as they are scrupulous with regard to that which is written in the Torah, as the Master said: Any mitzva that the iKutimembracedand accepted upon themselves, bthey areeven bmore exacting in itsobservance bthan Jews. /b,The Gemara cites a ibaraitawith additional opinions with regard to the defining characteristics of an iam ha’aretz /i: bThe Sages taught: Who is an iam ha’aretz /i? One who does not recite iShemain the evening and morning. This is bthe statement of Rabbi Eliezer.Rabbi Yehoshua says:An iam ha’aretzis bone who does not don phylacteries. Ben Azzai says:An iam ha’aretzis bone who does not have ritual fringes on his garment. Rabbi Natan says:An iam ha’aretzis bone who does not have a imezuzaon his doorway. Rabbi Natan bar Yosef says:An iam ha’aretzis bone who has children butwho does not want them to study Torah, so he bdoes not raise them toengage in bTorah study. iAḥerimsay: Even if one read the Bible and studied Mishna and did not serve Torah scholarsto learn from them the meaning of the Torah that he studied, bthat is an iam ha’aretz /i. Rav Huna said: The ihalakhais in accordance withthe opinion of iAḥerim /i. /b,The Gemara relates: bRami bar Ḥama did not include Rav Menashya bar Taḥlifa, who studied iSifra /i, iSifrei,and ihalakhot,in a izimmun /ibecause he had merely studied and did not serve Torah scholars. bWhen Rami bar Ḥama passed away, Rava said: Rami bar Ḥama died only because he did not include Rabbi Menashya bar Taḥlifa in a izimmun /i.The Gemara asks: bWas it not taughtin a ibaraita /i: iAḥerimsay: Even if one read the Bible and studied mishna and did not serve Torah scholars, that is an iam ha’aretz /i?Why, then, was Rami bar Ḥama punished? The Gemara answers: bRav Menashya bar Taḥlifa is different, as he served the Sages. And it was Rami bar Ḥama who was not precisein his efforts to check bafter himto ascertain his actions. bAnother versionof the Gemara’s answer: Anyone bwho hears ihalakhotfrom the mouths of Sages and studies them is considered a Torah scholar. /b,The mishna states that bone who ate untithed produce andfirst btithe etc.is not included in a izimmun /i. The Gemara remarks: bIt is obviousas one is forbidden to eat untithed produce. The Gemara responds: bIt was only necessaryto teach this ihalakhawith regard to a case where it is only considered buntithed produce by rabbinic law,although by Torah law it was permitted. bWhat are the circumstances?Where the produce grew bin an unperforated flowerpot,as anything grown disconnected from the ground is not considered produce of the ground and is exempt by Torah law from tithing. It is only by rabbinic law that it is considered untithed.,We learned in the mishna that one who ate bfirst tithefrom which its iterumawas not separated may not be included in a izimmun /i. The Gemara remarks: bIt is obvious.The Gemara responds: bIt was only necessaryfor the mishna to teach this with regard to a case bwherethe Levite bprecededthe priest after the kernels of grain were placed bin a pile. Lest you say as Rav Pappa said to Abaye,that in that case, too, the produce should be exempt from the obligation to separate iteruma gedola /i, the itannaof the mishna bteaches us asAbaye brespondedto Rav Pappa, that there is a difference between the case when the grain was on the stalks and the case when the grain was in a pile.,We also learned in the mishna that if one ate bsecond titheand consecrated food that had not been redeemed, he may not be included in a izimmun /i. The Gemara remarks: bIt is obvious?Why was it necessary for the mishna to teach this ihalakha /i? The Gemara responds: bIt was only necessaryfor the mishna to teach this ihalakhawith regard to a case bwhere they were redeemed, but not redeemed properly, i.e., second tithe that was redeemed with an unminted coin [ iasimon /i],a silver bullion that had not been engraved. bAnd the Torah says: “And bind up [ ivetzarta /i] the money in your hand”(Deuteronomy 14:25), which the Sages interpreted as follows: iVetzartarefers to bmoney that has a form [ itzura /i]engraved bupon it. Consecrated property;in a case bwhere he redeemed itby exchanging it bfor land instead of money, and the Torah states: “He will give the money and it will be assured to him”(Leviticus 27:19).,The mishna states that ba waiter who ate less than an olive-bulkmay not join a izimmun /i. The Gemara remarks: bIt is obvious.Why was it necessary for the mishna to teach this ihalakha /i? The Gemara answers: bSince the first clauseof the mishna btaughtthe ihalakhawith regard to a waiter who ate ban olive-bulk, the latter clause taughtthe ihalakhawith regard to a waiter who ate bless than an olive-bulk.Although it is obvious, in the interest of arriving at a similar formulation in the two parts of the mishna, it was included.,The mishna further states that ba gentile is not included in a izimmun /i.The Gemara remarks: bIt is obvious.Why was it necessary for the mishna to teach this ihalakha /i? The Gemara answers: bWith what are we dealing here?We are dealing bwitha case of ba convert who was circumcised butdid bnotyet bimmersehimself in a ritual bath, bas Rabbi Zeira saidthat bRabbi Yoḥa said: One is neverconsidered ba proselyte until he is circumcised and immerseshimself. bAs long as he did not immersehimself, bhe is a gentile. /b,We also learned in the mishna that bwomen, slaves, and minors are not included in a izimmun /i. Rabbi Yosei said: A minor lying in a cradle is included in a izimmun /i. /b,The Gemara objects: bDidn’t we learnin the mishna bthat women, slaves, and minors are not included in a izimmun /i? /b,The Gemara responds: Rabbi Yosei bstatedhis opinion bin accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: Although a minor lying in a cradle is not included in a izimmun /i, one may make him an adjunct tocomplete an assembly of btenpeople, enabling them to invoke God’s name in a izimmun /i.,On the subject of completing a izimmun /i, bRabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: NineJews band a slave join togetherto form a izimmunof ten. The Gemara braises an objection:There was an bincident involving Rabbi Eliezer, who entered a synagogue and did not finda quorum of bten, and he liberated his slave and he completed thequorum of bten.From this we may infer that if he bfreedhis slave, byes,he may join the quorum of ten, but if he bdid not freehim, bno,he may not join the quorum of ten. The Gemara responds: In that case, btwo were requiredto complete the quorum; Rabbi Eliezer bfreed one and fulfilled his obligation withanother bone,who completed the quorum of ten without being freed.,With regard to this incident, the Gemara asks: bHow did he do that? Didn’t Rav Yehuda say: Anyone who frees hisCanaanite bslave violates a positive mitzva, as it is statedwith regard to Canaanite slaves: “You will keep them as an inheritance for your children after you, to hold as a possession; bthey will serve as bondsmen for you forever”(Leviticus 25:46)? How, then, could Rabbi Eliezer have freed his slave? The Gemara answers: The case of ba mitzva is different.The Gemara asks: bIt is a mitzva that comes through a transgression,and a mitzva fulfilled in that manner is inherently flawed. The Gemara responds: bA mitzvathat benefits bthe many is different,and one may free his slave for that purpose.,In praise of a quorum of ten, the Gemara states that bRabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: One should always rise earlyto go bto the synagogue in order to have the privilege and be counted among the first tento complete the quorum, bas even if one hundredpeople barrive after him, he receives the reward of them all,as they are all joining that initial quorum. The Gemara is perplexed: bDoes it enter your mindthat he receives bthe reward of them all?Why should he take away their reward? bRather,emend the statement and bsay: He receives a reward equivalent tothe reward of bthem all. /b,With regard to the laws of joining a quorum, bRav Huna said: Nine plus an arkin which the Torah scrolls are stored bjointo form a quorum of ten. bRav Naḥman said to him: Is an ark a man,that it may be counted in the quorum of ten? bRather, Rav Huna said: Nine who appear like ten may join together.There was disagreement over this: bSome said this ihalakhaas follows: Nine appear like ten bwhen they are gathered. And some said this ihalakhaas follows: Nine appear like ten bwhen they are scattered,the disagreement being which formation creates the impression of a greater number of individuals.,Similarly, bRav Ami said: Twopeople band Shabbat jointo form a izimmun /i. bRav Naḥman said to him: Is Shabbat a person,that it may be counted in a izimmun /i? bRather, Rav Ami said: Two Torah scholars who hone each other’sintellect bin halakhicdiscourse bjoin togetherand are considered three. The Gemara relates: bRav Ḥisda pointedto an example of two such Torah scholars who hone each other’s intellect: bFor example, me and Rav Sheshet.Similarly, bRav Sheshet pointed: For example, me and Rav Ḥisda. /b,With regard to a minor’s inclusion in a izimmun /i, bRabbi Yoḥa said: A mature minor,i.e., one who is still a minor in terms of age, but is displaying signs of puberty, bis included in a izimmun /i. Thatopinion bwas also taughtin a ibaraita /i: bA minor who grew twopubic bhairs,a sign of puberty, bis included in a izimmun /i; and one who did not grow two hairs is not included in a izimmun /i. And one is not exacting with regard to a minor.The Gemara comments: bThis ibaraita bitself is difficult. You said thata minor bwho grew two hairs, yes,he is included, bone who did not growtwo hairs, bno,he is not included, band then it taught that one is not exacting with regard to a minor. Whatdoes this last clause come bto include? Is it not /b
40. Babylonian Talmud, Ketuvot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

67b. שבאו לינשא משיאין את היתומה ואחר כך משיאין את היתום מפני שבושתה של אשה מרובה משל איש:,ת"ר יתום שבא לישא שוכרין לו בית ומציעין לו מטה וכל כלי תשמישו ואחר כך משיאין לו אשה שנאמר (דברים טו, ח) די מחסורו אשר יחסר לו די מחסורו זה הבית אשר יחסר זה מטה ושלחן לו זו אשה וכן הוא אומר (בראשית ב, יח) אעשה לו עזר כנגדו:,תנו רבנן די מחסורו אתה מצווה עליו לפרנסו ואי אתה מצווה עליו לעשרו אשר יחסר לו אפילו סוס לרכוב עליו ועבד לרוץ לפניו אמרו עליו על הלל הזקן שלקח לעני בן טובים אחד סוס לרכוב עליו ועבד לרוץ לפניו פעם אחת לא מצא עבד לרוץ לפניו ורץ לפניו שלשה מילין:,תנו רבנן מעשה באנשי גליל העליון שלקחו לעני בן טובים אחד מציפורי ליטרא בשר בכל יום ליטרא בשר מאי רבותא אמר רב הונא ליטרא בשר משל עופות ואיבעית אימא בליטרא בשר ממש רב אשי אמר התם כפר קטן היה בכל יומא הוה מפסדי חיותא אמטולתיה:,ההוא דאתא לקמיה דרבי נחמיה אמר ליה במה אתה סועד א"ל בבשר שמן ויין ישן רצונך שתגלגל עמי בעדשים גלגל עמו בעדשים ומת אמר אוי לו לזה שהרגו נחמיה אדרבה אוי לו לנחמיה שהרגו לזה מיבעי ליה אלא איהו הוא דלא איבעי ליה לפנוקי נפשיה כולי האי,ההוא דאתא לקמיה דרבא אמר לו במה אתה סועד אמר לו בתרנגולת פטומה ויין ישן אמר ליה ולא חיישת לדוחקא דציבורא א"ל אטו מדידהו קאכילנא מדרחמנא קאכילנא דתנינא (תהלים קמה, טו) עיני כל אליך ישברו ואתה נותן להם את אכלם בעתו בעתם לא נאמר אלא בעתו מלמד שכל אחד ואחד נותן הקב"ה פרנסתו בעתו,אדהכי אתאי אחתיה דרבא דלא חזיא ליה תליסרי שני ואתיא ליה תרנגולת פטומה ויין ישן אמר מאי דקמא א"ל נענתי לך קום אכול,תנו רבנן אין לו ואינו רוצה להתפרנס נותנין לו לשום הלואה וחוזרין ונותנין לו לשום מתנה דברי רבי מאיר וחכמים אומרים נותנין לו לשום מתנה וחוזרין ונותנין לו לשום הלואה לשום מתנה הא לא שקיל אמר רבא לפתוח לו לשום מתנה,יש לו ואינו רוצה להתפרנס נותנין לו לשום מתנה וחוזרין ונפרעין ממנו חוזרין ונפרעין הימנו תו לא שקיל אמר רב פפא לאחר מיתה ר"ש אומר יש לו ואינו רוצה להתפרנס אין נזקקין לו אין לו ואינו רוצה להתפרנס אומרים לו הבא משכון וטול כדי שתזוח דעתו עליו,ת"ר (דברים טו, ח) העבט זה שאין לו ואינו רוצה להתפרנס שנותנים לו לשום הלואה וחוזרין ונותנין לו לשום מתנה תעביטנו זה שיש לו ואינו רוצה להתפרנס שנותנין לו לשום מתנה וחוזרין ונפרעין הימנו לאחר מיתה דברי ר' יהודה,וחכ"א יש לו ואינו רוצה להתפרנס אין נזקקין לו ואלא מה אני מקיים תעביטנו דברה תורה כלשון בני אדם,מר עוקבא הוה עניא בשיבבותיה דהוה רגיל כל יומא דשדי ליה ארבעה זוזי בצינורא דדשא יום אחד אמר איזיל איחזי מאן קעביד בי ההוא טיבותא ההוא יומא נגהא ליה למר עוקבא לבי מדרשא אתיא דביתהו בהדיה,כיון דחזיוה דקא מצלי ליה לדשא נפק בתרייהו רהוט מקמיה עיילי לההוא אתונא דהוה גרופה נורא הוה קא מיקליין כרעיה דמר עוקבא אמרה ליה דביתהו שקול כרעיך אותיב אכרעאי חלש דעתיה אמרה ליה אנא שכיחנא בגויה דביתא ומקרבא אהנייתי,ומאי כולי האי דאמר מר זוטרא בר טוביה אמר רב ואמרי לה אמר רב הונא בר ביזנא אמר ר"ש חסידא ואמרי לה א"ר יוחנן משום רבי שמעון בן יוחי נוח לו לאדם שימסור עצמו לתוך כבשן האש ואל ילבין פני חברו ברבים מנא לן מתמר דכתיב (בראשית לח, כה) היא מוצאת,מר עוקבא הוה עניא בשיבבותיה דהוה רגיל לשדורי ליה ארבע מאה זוזי כל מעלי יומא דכיפורא יומא חד שדרינהו ניהליה ביד בריה אתא אמר ליה לא צריך אמר מאי חזית חזאי דקא מזלפי ליה יין ישן אמר מפנק כולי האי עייפינהו ושדרינהו ניהליה,כי קא ניחא נפשיה אמר אייתו לי חושבנאי דצדקה אשכח דהוה כתיב ביה שבעת אלפי דינרי סיאנקי אמר זוודאי קלילי ואורחא רחיקתא קם בזבזיה לפלגיה ממוניה היכי עביד הכי והאמר ר' אילעאי באושא התקינו המבזבז אל יבזבז יותר מחומש הני מילי מחיים שמא ירד מנכסיו אבל לאחר מיתה לית לן בה:,רבי אבא הוה צייר זוזי בסודריה ושדי ליה לאחוריה וממצי נפשיה לבי עניי ומצלי עיניה מרמאי,רבי חנינא הוה ההוא עניא דהוה רגיל לשדורי ליה ארבעה זוזי כל מעלי שבתא יומא חד שדרינהו ניהליה ביד דביתהו אתאי אמרה ליה לא צריך מאי חזית שמעי דהוה קאמרי ליה במה אתה סועד 67b. bwho have cometo appeal to the charity fund bto be marriedoff, the administrators bmarryoff bthe orphan girlfirst band afterwardthey bmarryoff bthe orphan boy, because the humiliation of a womanwho is not married bis greater than that ofan unmarried bman. /b, bThe Sages taught:Concerning ban orphanboy bwho has come to marry,the community tries its utmost to provide for all of his needs. The charities brent a house for him, arrange for him a bed and all his utensils, and thereafterthey bmarry him a wife, as it is stated:“But you shall surely open your hand to him, and shall surely lend him bsufficient for his deficiency in that which is deficient for him”(Deuteronomy 15:8). With regard to the phrase b“sufficient for his deficiency,” thisis referring to bthe house. “Which is deficient”; thisis referring to a bbed and table. “For him [ ilo /i]”; thisis referring to ba wife. And similarlythe verse bstates: “I will make him [ ilo /i] a helpmate for him”(Genesis 2:18), when God created a wife for Adam.,Concerning this issue, bthe Sages taught: “Sufficient for his deficiency”;this teaches that byou are commanded with respect tothe pauper bto support him, but you are not commanded with respect to him to make him wealthy,as the obligation encompasses only that which he lacks, as indicated by the word deficient. However, the verse also states: b“Which is deficient for him”;this includes beven a horse upon which to ride and a servant to run in front of himfor the sake of his stature, if necessary. For someone accustomed to these advantages, their absences constitute a true deficiency, not an extravagant indulgence. The Gemara relates: bThey said about Hillel the Elder that he obtained for a poor person of noble descent a horse upon which to ride and a servant to run in front of him. One time he did not find a servant to run in front of him, andHillel himself bran in front of himfor bthree imil /i,to fulfill the dictate “which is deficient for him.”, bThe Sages taught:There was ban incident involving the people of the Upper Galilee, who bought for a poor person of noble descent fromthe city of bTzippori a ilitraof meat every day.The Gemara asks: If they provided him with the reasonable ration of ba ilitraof meat, what is the noveltyin this incident? Why does it bear repeating? bRav Huna said:It was ba ilitraof meat of poultry,which is very expensive. bAnd if you wish, sayinstead that bforthe weight of ba ilitra /iof coins, they bought him bactualred bmeat.The price of ordinary meat was so expensive that they had to pay the exorbitant price of a ilitraof coins. bRav Ashi saidthey did not spend a ilitraof coins for him. Rather, bthere,in the Galilee, bit was a small village,and bevery day they would losean entire banimaljust bfor him.They would slaughter an animal daily, simply to provide him with fresh meat, although there was otherwise no market for such a plentiful supply of meat in the village.,The Gemara relates another incident concerning charity. bA certainperson bcame before Rabbi Neḥemyato request charity. bHe said to him: On what do younormally bdine? He said to him:I usually dine bon fatty meat and aged wine.Rabbi Neḥemya asked him: bIs it your wish to belittle yourselfand partake together bwith me ina meal of blentils,which is my regular food? bHe partook with him of lentils, and he died,since he was not accustomed to this food. Rabbi Neḥemya bsaid: Woe to this one who was killedby bNeḥemya.The Gemara wonders: bOn the contrary,Rabbi Neḥemya bshould have said: Woe to Neḥemya who killed this one.The Gemara responds: bRather,Rabbi Neḥemya meant that it was bhe,the pauper, bwho should not have pampered himself somuch. The poor man was to blame for his own death. His excessive indulgence rendered him incapable of digesting simple foods such as lentils.,The Gemara relates another story. bA certain person came before Ravato request charity. bHe said to him: On what do younormally bdine? He said to him: On a fattened hen and aged wine. He said to him: And were you not concerned forcausing ba burden to the communityby expecting such opulent foods? bHe said to him: Is that to saythat it is bfrom theirfunds that bI eat? I eat fromthe support of bthe Merciful One.This would seem to be a reasonable argument, bas wealready blearnedthat in the verse b“the eyes of all wait for You, and You give them their food in its time”(Psalms 145:15), the phrase: bAt their time, isnot bstated, rather “in its time.”This bteaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, gives each and every one hispersonally appropriate bsustece at its proper time,and the community is merely His agent in discharging His will. Therefore, the man is justified in maintaining his standard., bIn the meantime,while they were talking, bRava’s sister, who had not seen him for thirteen years, came. Andas a gift, bshe brought him a fattened hen and aged wine. Rava saidto himself: bWhat is this thathappened bin front of methat suddenly I am brought food that I do not usually eat? He then understood that this was a providential response to what he had earlier said to the man. Rava bsaid to him: I have responded [ ina’aneti /i] to yourcontention. bAriseand beat. /b,§ bThe Sages taught:If an individual bdoes not havesufficient means of support band does not want to be supportedfrom charity funds, the charities bprovide himfunds bas a loanin a dignified manner, bandthen they bgo back and givethe funds bto him as a gift;this is bthe statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say:They bgive himfunds bas a gift, andthen they bgo back and givethe funds bto him as a loan.The Gemara wonders about the Rabbis’ ruling: How can we give it bas a gift?After all, bhe does notwant to btake itas a gift. The Gemara answers that bRava said:The Rabbis’ instruction is bto begindiscussions bwith himby offering the assistance bas a gift.If he refuses, the charities give it to him as a loan, but they treat it as a gift and refrain from attempting to collect a debt.,If bhe hassufficient funds of his own bbut does not want to support himselfby his own funds without the assistance of charity, the charities bgive himaid bas a gift, and thenthey bgo back and collectthe debt bfrom him.The Gemara asks: How can the administrators of the fund bgo back and collect from him?Would their efforts not be in vain, as bsubsequently he would not taketheir support, knowing that he would still have to pay for it? bRav Pappa said:The charities collect the accrued debt from his estate only bafterhis bdeath.The ibaraitacontinues: bRabbi Shimon says,disputing the opinion of the Rabbis: If bhe hassufficient funds band does not want to be supportedby his own means, they bdo not get involved with him,as the community is not obligated to support him. If bhe does not have and does not want to be supportedfrom charity, the charities bsay to him: Bring collateral and takea loan, bso that his mindset should be raised for him,with the false impression that he is not receiving a handout.,The Gemara cites a dispute related to the previous discussions. bThe Sages taughtin a ibaraitawith regard to the double expression in the Torah: “You shall open your hand to him [ iha’avet ta’avitenu /i]” (Deuteronomy 15:8). b“ iHa’avet /i”; thisis referring to one bwho does not havefunds band does not want to be supportedby charity. The policy is bthatthe charities bprovide himfunds bas a loan and go back and givethe funds bto him as a gift. “ iTa’avitenu /i”; thisis referring to one bwho hasmeans band does not want to supporthimself. The policy is bthatthe charities bprovidemoney bas a gift, and thenthey bgo back and collect fromhis estate bafterhis bdeath.This is bthe statement of Rabbi Yehuda. /b,The ibaraitacontinues: bAnd the Rabbis say:If bhe hasmoney band does not want to supporthimself, they bdo not get involved with him.The ibaraitaasks: bHow then do I upholdthe double expression b“ iha’avet ta’avitenu /i”?The ibaraitaanswers: bThe Torah spoke in the language of men,and the double form does not have halakhic significance.,The Gemara recounts another incident related to charity. bMar Ukvahad ba pauper in his neighborhood,and Mar Ukva bwas accustomed every day to toss four dinars for him into theslot adjacent to the bhinge of the door. One daythe poor person bsaid: I will goand bsee who is doing this service for me. That day Mar Ukva was delayed in the study hall,and bhis wife came with himto distribute the charity., bWhenthe people in the poor man’s house bsaw thatsomeone bwas turning the door,the pauper bwent out after themto see who it was. Mar Ukva and his wife branaway bfrom before himso that he would not determine their identity, and bthey entered a certain furnace whose fire wasalready brakedover and tempered but was still burning. bMar Ukva’s legs were being singed,and bhis wife said to him: Raise your legs and set them on my legs,which are not burned. Understanding that only his wife was spared from burns, because she was more worthy, Mar Ukva bbecame distraught.By way of explanation, bshe said to him: I amnormally bfound inside the house, andwhen I give charity, bmy assistance is readyand immediate, insofar as I distribute actual food items. Since you distribute money, which is not as readily helpful, my aid is greater than yours.,The Gemara asks: bAnd whatis ball this?Why did they go to such extreme lengths to avoid being discovered? The Gemara answers: It is bas Mar Zutra bar Toviya saidthat bRav said, and some saythat bRav Huna bar Bizna saidthat bRabbi Shimon Ḥasida said, and some saythat bRabbi Yoḥa said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: It is preferable for a person to deliver himself into a fiery furnace so thathe bnot whitenthe bfaceof, i.e., embarrass, bhis friend in public. From where do wederive this? bFrom theconduct of bTamar, as it is written:“And Judah said: Bring her forth, and let her be burnt. When bshe was brought forth,she sent to her father-in-law, saying: By the man, whose these are, am I with child” (Genesis 38:24–25). Although Tamar was taken to be executed by burning, she privately and directly appealed to Judah, rather than publicly identifying him as the father of her unborn children and causing him embarrassment.,The Gemara relates another incident involving Mar Ukva. bMar Ukvahad another bpauper in his neighborhood,and Mar Ukva bwas accustomed to send to him four hundred dinars everyyear on the beve of Yom Kippur. One day he sentthe money bto him by the hand of his son.The son breturnedand bsaid to him:The poor individual bdoes not needthe charity. Mar Ukva bsaid: What did you seethat prompted you to say this? He said to him: bI saw them spilling old wineon the ground bfor him,to give the room a pleasant smell. Mar Ukva bsaid:If he is bpampered this muchand requires even this luxury, then he needs even more money. bHe doubledthe funds band sent them to him. /b, bWhenMar Ukva bwas dying, he said: Bring me my charity records. He found that it was written therethat he had given bseven thousandfine, isiankei /i,i.e., gold, bdinars,to charity. bHe said: My provisions are light, and the way is far.This meager sum is insufficient for me to merit the World-to-Come. bHe got upand bspent halfof bhisremaining bmoneyon charity. The Gemara asks: bHow did he do this? But didn’t Rabbi Ilai say: In Usha they instituted: One who spendsmoney on charity, bhe should not spend more than one-fifthof his money for this purpose. The Gemara answers: bThisrestriction on giving too much charity bappliesonly bwhile he is alive,because bperhaps he will descend from his holdingsand become destitute. Therefore, for his own ficial security, he should never distribute more than one-fifth. bBut after death, we have noproblem bwith it.One need not save money in his estate anymore.,The Gemara recounts more stories related to charity. bRabbi Abba would wrap coins in his scarf and tossthe money bbehind himover his shoulder. bAndhe bwould place himself at the homes of the poorwithout being seen, so the poor could receive the aid without being embarrassed. bAnd he would incline his eyesjust enough so he could safeguard the handouts bfrom swindlerswho might take the money dishonestly., bRabbi Ḥaninaknew ba certain pauperand bwas accustomed to send to him four dinarson bevery Shabbat eve. One day he sent it in the hand of his wife. She cameback home and bsaid to him:The man bdoes not needcharity. Rabbi Ḥanina asked her: bWhat did you seethat prompted you to say this? She said to him: bI heard them saying to himinside the house: bWith what do younormally bdine: /b
41. Babylonian Talmud, Niddah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

56b. אי נמי דאשתכח בגומא אי אמרת חזקתו בדוק מאן דבדק בגומא נמי בדיק אי אמרת חזקתו מתכבד גומא לא מתכבדא,וכן הכתם וכו' איבעיא להו עד שעת כבוס חזקתו בדוק או דלמא חזקתו מתכבס,למאי נפקא מינה דאמר כיבס ולא בדק אי אמרת חזקתו בדוק הא לא בדק אי אמרת חזקתו מתכבס הא מתכבס,אי נמי דאשתכחה בסטרא אי אמרת חזקתו בדוק מאן דבדק בסטרא נמי בדיק אי אמרת חזקתו מתכבס בסטרא לא מתכבס,מאי תא שמע דתניא א"ר מאיר מפני מה אמרו השרץ שנמצא במבוי מטמא למפרע עד שיאמר בדקתי את המבוי הזה ולא היה בו שרץ או עד שעת כיבוד מפני שחזקת בני ישראל בודקין מבואותיהן בשעת כבודיהם ואם לא בדקו הפסידוהו למפרע,ומפני מה אמרו כתם שנמצא בחלוק מטמא למפרע עד שיאמר בדקתי את החלוק ולא היה בו כתם או עד שעת הכבוס מפני שחזקת בנות ישראל בודקות חלוקיהן בשעת כבוסיהן ואם לא בדקו הפסידו למפרע,ר' אחא אמר תחזור ותכבסנו אם נדחה מראיתו בידוע שלאחר כבוס ואם לאו בידוע שלפני הכבוס,רבי אומר אינו דומה כתם שלאחר הכבוס לכתם שלפני הכבוס שזה מקדיר וזה מגליד ש"מ חזקתו בדוק ש"מ,ומטמא בין לח וכו' א"ר אלעזר לא שנו אלא שרץ אבל כתם לח נמי מטמא למפרע אימר יבש היה ומיא נפיל עליה,שרץ נמי אימר יבש היה ומיא נפיל עליה אם איתא דהכי הוא אמרטוטי אימרטט, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big כל הכתמין הבאין מרקם טהורין רבי יהודה מטמא מפני שהם גרים וטועין הבאין מבין העובדי כוכבים טהורין מבין ישראל ומבין הכותים רבי מאיר מטמא וחכמים מטהרים מפני שלא נחשדו על כתמיהן, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big קפסיק ותני אפילו מתרמוד א"ר יוחנן זאת אומרת מקבלין גרים מתרמוד,איני והא רבי יוחנן וסביא דאמרי תרוייהו אין מקבלין גרים מתרמוד,וכי תימא זאת ולא סבירא ליה והאמר רבי יוחנן הלכה כסתם משנה,אמוראי נינהו ואליבא דרבי יוחנן,מבין ישראל וכו' ורבנן אי דישראל מטהרי דמאן מטמו,חסורי מחסרא והכי קתני מבין ישראל טמא מבין הכותים רבי מאיר מטמא דכותים גרי אמת הן וחכמים מטהרין דכותים גרי אריות הן,אי הכי שלא נחשדו על כתמיהן גרי אריות מבעי ליה,אלא הכי קאמר מבין ישראל ומבין הכותים טמאין דכותים גרי אמת הן הנמצאין בערי ישראל טהורין שלא נחשדו על כתמיהם ואצנועי מצנעי להו,הנמצאין בערי כותים רבי מאיר מטמא דנחשדו על כתמיהם וחכמים מטהרין שלא נחשדו על כתמיהן, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big כל הכתמים הנמצאים בכל מקום טהורין חוץ מן הנמצאים בחדרים ובסביבות בית הטמאות,בית הטמאות של כותים מטמאין באהל מפני שהם קוברין שם את הנפלים ר' יהודה אומר לא היו קוברין אלא משליכין וחיה גוררתו,נאמנים לומר קברנו שם את הנפלים או לא קברנו נאמנים לומר על הבהמה אם בכרה אם לא בכרה נאמנים על ציון קברות,ואין נאמנין לא על הסככות ולא על הפרעות ולא על בית הפרס,זה הכלל דבר שחשודים בו אין נאמנין עליו big strongגמ׳ /strong /big 56b. bAlternatively,there is a difference between these explanations in a case bwherethe creeping animal bwas found in a holein the ground. bIf you say the presumptive status ofa swept alleyway is that it has been bexamined,it is clear that bone who examinesthe alleyway balso examinesany bholes,and any items that were in the alleyway beforehand should remain pure. By contrast, bif you say its presumptive statusis that it has been completely bswept,this applies only to items that are on the ground, whereas ba hole is notconsidered to have been bswept.Consequently, even items that passed through the alleyway before it was swept should be deemed impure.,The mishna teaches: bAnd likewise,a blood bstainthat was discovered on the robe of a woman renders her impure retroactively. With regard to this ihalakhaas well ba dilemma was raised beforethe Sages: The mishna states that any pure items the woman handled bfromthe btime of launderingare impure. Does this mean that once the robe has been laundered bits presumptive statusis that it has been bexamined,as when it is laundered it is examined thoroughly, and any blood stain would have been discovered? bOr perhapsthe mishna means that bits presumptive statusis that bit isthoroughly blaundered,and any blood stain would have been removed by the laundering.,The Gemara asks: bWhat is thepractical bdifferencethat arises from this dilemma? The Gemara replies: There is a difference in a case bwherethe person who laundered the robe bsaid he launderedit bbut did not examineit. bIf you say its presumptive statusis that it has been bexamined,in bthiscase the man explicitly said that bhe did not examinethe robe, so it does not have this presumptive status. By contrast, bif you say its presumptive statusis that bit isthoroughly blaundered,in bthiscase too it has been blaundered. /b, bAlternatively,there is a difference between these explanations in a case bwherethe blood stain bwas found on the sideof the robe, in an area where there are folds and stitches. bIf you say its presumptive statusis that it has been bexamined,it is clear that bone who examinesthe robe balso examines the sideof the robe, and therefore any items that the woman handled before the robe was laundered should remain pure. By contrast, bif you say its presumptive statusis that bit isthoroughly blaundered,this applies only to the main part of the robe, but bonits bsideit bis not launderedthoroughly enough to remove a blood stain., bWhatis the ihalakhawith regard to these two dilemmas? bComeand bhear, as it is taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Meir says: For whatreason bdidthe Sages bsaythat the carcass of ba creeping animal that was found in an alleyway renderspure items bimpure retroactively fromthe time about which bone may state: I examined this alleyway and there was no creeping animal in it, or fromthe btime ofthe bsweepingof the alleyway? It is bdue tothe fact bthatthere is ba presumption with regard to Jewish peoplethat bthey examine their alleyways at the time of their sweeping. Andtherefore, bif they did not examinethe alleyway bthey retroactively losethe purity of any items that were there from the last time it was examined., bAndsimilarly, bfor whatreason bdidthe Sages bsaythat a blood bstain that was found onthe brobeof a woman brendersher bimpure retroactively fromthe time about which bone may state: I examined the robe and there was noblood bstain on it, or from the time of the launderingof the robe? It is bdue tothe fact bthatthere is ba presumption with regard to the Jewish womenthat bthey examine their robes at the time of their laundering. Andtherefore, bif they did not examinethe robe bthey retroactively losethe purity of any items they handled since it was last examined., bRabbi Aḥa says:Even in a case where the robe was not examined when it was laundered and a blood stain was subsequently found on it, and it is unknown whether the stain was present before the laundering, there is a remedy to the dilemma: bLet her launder it again. If the appearance ofthe blood stain bchangesas a result of this laundering bit is known thatthe robe became stained bafterthe previous blaundering,which is why the present laundering affected its appearance. Consequently, those pure items that the woman handled before the earlier laundering remain pure. bAnd ifthe blood stain’s appearance does bnotchange due to the second laundering bit is known thatthe robe became stained bbefore theprevious blaundering,and therefore the items that she handled before the laundering are impure., bRabbiYehuda HaNasi bsays:One can differentiate between a blood stain that was on the robe before it was laundered and one that stained the robe afterward by inspecting the stain itself. This is because the appearance of a blood bstain after the laundering is not similar tothe appearance of a blood bstain before the laundering, as thisstain, from after the laundering, bpenetrates [ imakdir /i]the garment, band thatstain, from before the laundering, bforms a crust [ imaglid /i]that can be scraped off the robe. With regard to the Gemara’s dilemma, one may bconclude fromRabbi Meir’s statement that bthe presumptive status ofa swept alleyway or a laundered robe is that it has been bexamined.The Gemara concludes: Indeed, bconclude from itthat this is so.,§ The mishna teaches: bAndthe carcass of a creeping animal or a blood stain brendersitems bimpureretroactively bwhetherthey are still bmoistor are already dried out. Rabbi Shimon says: The dry one renders items impure retroactively, whereas the moist one does not render items impure since the aforementioned times, but only from such a time that it could still be moist from then up to the moment it was discovered. With regard to the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, bRabbi Elazar says:The mishna btaughtthis ihalakha bonlywith regard to the carcass of ba creeping animal, butRabbi Shimon concedes that ba moistblood bstain also rendersthe woman bimpure retroactivelyfrom the time that the robe was examined. This is because one can bsaythe blood stain bwas drybeforehand band water fell upon it,causing it to become moist.,The Gemara asks: With regard to the moist carcass of ba creeping animal as well,one can bsay it was dried outbeforehand band water fell on it.It should therefore render items impure retroactively from the time that the alleyway was swept. The Gemara answers: bIf it is so, that this iswhat occurred, the dead creeping animal bwould be sundered apartand would not have its current appearance., strongMISHNA: /strong bAnyblood bstainson garments bthat come fromthe town of bRekem are ritually pure,as most of the residents there are gentiles, and the blood stains of gentile women are not ritually impure. bRabbi Yehuda deemsthose stains bimpure becausein his opinion the residents of Rekem are not gentiles; rather, bthey are convertswhose halakhic status is that of Jews, bbut they are misguidedand do not put away their bloodstained garments. The blood stains on garments bthat come from among the gentiles are ritually pure.With regard to blood stains on garments that come bfrom among the Jews and from among the Samaritans, Rabbi Meir deemsthem bimpure,as they may have come from the Jews. bAnd the Rabbis deemthem britually pure due tothe fact bthatJews bare not suspected offailing to put away btheirgarments on which there are blood bstains. /b, strongGEMARA: /strong The mishna bcategorically teachesthat any blood stains on garments that come from among the gentiles are ritually pure, thereby indicating that this applies bevento garments that come bfromamong the gentile population of bTarmod. Rabbi Yoḥa says: That is to say, one may accept converts from Tarmod,i.e., there is no concern with regard to whether they are actually Jews of flawed lineage, who may not marry Jews of fit lineage.,The Gemara asks: bIs that so? Butaren’t there bRabbi Yoḥa and the Elders who both saythat bone may not accept converts from Tarmod?This is due to a concern that the daughters of the ten tribes exiled during the First Temple period might have intermingled with them, and according to Rabbi Yoḥa the offspring of a Jewish woman and a gentile is a imamzer /i, who may not marry a Jew of fit lineage., bAnd if you would saythat Rabbi Yoḥa merely infers that this is the opinion of the mishna, as indicated by the term: bThatis to say, bbut hehimself bdoes not hold accordingly,that is not so. bDidn’t Rabbi Yoḥa saya principle that the ihalakhais in accordance withthe ruling of ban unattributed mishna,as is the case here?,The Gemara answers: bThey are iamora’im /i, andthey disagree bwith regard tothe opinion bof Rabbi Yoḥa.According to one iamora /i, Rabbi Yoḥa maintains that converts from Tarmod are not accepted, and he did not state that it is a principle that the ihalakhais in accordance with the ruling of an unattributed mishna. According to another iamora /i, Rabbi Yoḥa holds that the ihalakhais in accordance with the unattributed mishna, and therefore one may accept converts from Tarmod.,§ The mishna teaches with regard to blood stains on garments that come bfrom among the Jewsand from among the Samaritans that Rabbi Meir deems them impure, and the Rabbis deem them ritually pure. The Gemara asks: bButwith regard to the opinion of bthe Rabbis, if they deemstains that come bfrom a Jewishwoman bpure, whosestains bdo they deem impure? /b,The Gemara answers: The mishna bis incomplete and thisis what bit is teaching:Everyone agrees that blood stains on garments that come bfrom among the Jews are impure.With regard to blood stains that come bfrom among the Samaritans, Rabbi Meir deemsthem bimpure, ashe maintains the bSamaritans are true convertsand have the halakhic status of Jews, whose blood stains are impure. bAnd the Rabbis deemthem britually pure, asthey maintain the bSamaritans are convertswho converted under duress bdue tothe threat posed by blions,and therefore their conversion is void, and their halakhic status is that of gentiles.,The Gemara asks: bIf so,why does the mishna state that according to the Rabbis the blood stains of the Samaritans are ritually pure due to the fact bthat they are not suspected offailing to put away btheirgarments on which there are blood bstains?The mishna bshouldstate that their blood stains are pure, as they are bconvertswho converted bdue tothe threat of blions. /b, bRather, thisis what the mishna bis saying:Blood stains on garments that come bfrom among the Jews and from among the Samaritans are ritually impure, aseveryone agrees the bSamaritans are true converts.With regard to blood stains bthat are found inthe btowns of Jews, they are pure, as they are not suspected offailing to put away btheirgarments on which there are blood bstains, and theycertainly bput them away.Therefore, the stains necessarily come from gentiles.,The Gemara continues paraphrasing the mishna: With regard to blood stains bthat are found inthe btowns of Samaritans, Rabbi Meir deemsthem bimpure, asthe inhabitants bare suspected offailing to put away btheirgarments on which there are blood bstains. And the Rabbis deemthem bpure, asthey maintain that even Samaritans bare not suspected offailing to put away btheirgarments on which there are blood bstains,and the stains are necessarily from gentiles., strongMISHNA: /strong bAllblood bstainson garments bthat are found anywherewhere Jews and gentiles reside bare ritually pure,since they must not belong to Jews, who put away their stained garments. This is the ihalakha bexcept forthe stained garments bthat are found in theinner broomsof the house, as these might be garments that the Jews put away there; bandexcept for the stained garments found bin proximity to the house of impurity,i.e., the room that women used when they were impure due to menstruation., bThe house of impurity of Samaritans impartsthe bimpuritythat is imparted by a corpse bby means of a tent, due tothe fact bthat they bury the stillbornchildren bthere. Rabbi Yehuda says:The house of impurity of Samaritans does not impart that impurity, as bthey would not burya stillborn child there. bRather, they would castit outside band an animal would drag itaway.,Samaritans bare deemed credible to state: We buried the stillbornchildren bthere,in a certain place, and it transmits ritual impurity; borto state: bWe did not burythe stillborn children there, and it does not transmit ritual impurity. bThey arelikewise bdeemed credible to state about an animal whether itpreviously bgave birthor bwhether it did notpreviously bgive birth;and their testimony is accepted with regard to determining whether the animal’s offspring has the status of a firstborn animal, which is sacred. They barealso bdeemed credibleto testify babout the marking of graves,i.e., that where they marked is deemed a grave and where they did not mark is deemed a place where there is no grave., bButwith regard to the following cases, in which the exact location of a grave is unknown, the Samaritans bare not deemed credibleto testify: They are bnotdeemed credible to testify babout the overhanging boughs, nor about the protrusionsthat jut out of stone fences and cover the ground. If it is unknown which bough or protrusion hangs over a grave, forming a tent that transmits the impurity of a corpse, and if a Samaritan testifies that the grave is not beneath a particular bough or protrusion his testimony is not accepted. bAndlikewise they are bnotdeemed credible to testify babout a ibeit haperas /i.The Sages issued a decree that in such a case, the area that was plowed is impure as far as one hundred cubits from the original grave, due to the concern that the bones were dispersed by the plow., bThis is the principlegoverning the credibility of Samaritans: In the case of any bmatterof ihalakha bthat they are suspectedof not fulfilling, bthey are not deemed credibleto testify babout it. /b


Subjects of this text:

subject book bibliographic info
agoranomos Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 134
agricultural matters Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 81, 90, 134, 165, 192
agriculture Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 31
am ha-aretz Nikolsky and Ilan, Rabbinic Traditions Between Palestine and Babylonia (2014) 113
am haares Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 134
ammonites Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 286
amoraim Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 31
amorites Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 165
anderson, gary Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 188
animals Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 132, 165
animals food Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 116
aqiba Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 90, 115, 159
asherot Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 286
bar kokhba (revolt) Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 286
barber Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 237
barley Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 81
benefactor Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 108, 164
beneficiary Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 164
beth shearim Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 69
birds Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 90
boat (ship) Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 165
brand, yehoshua Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 69
bread, from quppa Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 116, 117, 126
bread, from tamhui Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 112
bread, of the poor Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 116, 117
bread Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 108
brooks, r. Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 81, 120, 125, 192
buying and/or selling Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 81, 134, 165, 192, 286
büchler, adolf Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 125
canaanite slaves Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 286
cattle Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 237
charity, amount to give Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 128, 134
charity, as a means of control Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 188
charity supervisors Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 108, 112, 116, 124, 164
circumcision Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 237
city/town Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 120
clothing, and shame Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 113
clothing, of the poor Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 113, 114
clothing Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 30, 108
cohen, shaye Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 125
collection, indirect Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 109, 124, 134
collection, prodigious giving Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 124, 134
collection, restorative Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 131, 132, 134
collection Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 164
collection by Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 164
collection of the sages Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 188
conspicuous consumption Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 127
conversion Nikolsky and Ilan, Rabbinic Traditions Between Palestine and Babylonia (2014) 113
converted ammonite, lion Nikolsky and Ilan, Rabbinic Traditions Between Palestine and Babylonia (2014) 113
corpse(-uncleanness) Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 165
court Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 286
damages (injury) Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 165, 286
dangerous gentile Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 90, 165, 237, 286
david, king Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 131
demai Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 134, 165
dependency Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 109, 120
dignity Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 125
dinars Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 115, 116
dog-(food) Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 116, 132
edomites Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 286
eggs Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 90
egyptians Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 286
eleazar Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 159
eleazar b. simeon Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 159
eliezer Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 120
elmslie, w. Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 237
food, and social status Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 132
food Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 30, 69, 116
forgotten things Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 31
frisch, ephraim Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 109
gemilut hasadim Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 30, 109
gentile Nikolsky and Ilan, Rabbinic Traditions Between Palestine and Babylonia (2014) 113
gift exchange Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 119, 120
gleanings Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 31
god, as benefactor Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 31
grapes Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 31
gray, alyssa Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 122, 123, 124, 125
hamilton, david Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 127
harvest, allocations for the poor Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 31
hezser, catherine Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 121
honor Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 122, 123, 127, 164, 188
horses, given as charity Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 118
hospitality, and reciprocity Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 108, 109
hospitality, different from charity Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 108, 109
hospitality, for the poor Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 108, 109
hospitality, relationship to tamhui Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 103, 108, 109
hospitality Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 132
householders, and status Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 120, 121
householders Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 103, 120, 121, 122
identity Nikolsky and Ilan, Rabbinic Traditions Between Palestine and Babylonia (2014) 113
jerash Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 69
jerusalem Keddie, Class and Power in Roman Palestine: The Socioeconomic Setting of Judaism and Christian Origins (2019) 179
judean desert Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 113, 134
legumes Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 116
levi-strauss, claude Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 117, 119, 120
levites Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 31; Keddie, Class and Power in Roman Palestine: The Socioeconomic Setting of Judaism and Christian Origins (2019) 179
loans Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 127
longenecker, bruce Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 108
maah Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 114, 115, 116
maimonides Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 109
mauss, marcel Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 119
meat, and social status Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 103, 131, 132, 134
money, from quppa Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 114, 115, 116
money Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 114, 115, 116
nahal hever, navtalah, house of Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 131
nazareth Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 69
novick, tzvi Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 109
olives Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 31
or, the jebusite Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 131
orphans Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 30, 31
orshansky, mollie Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 128
parkin, anneliese Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 108
parnas Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 134
peah Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 31
perutah Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 108, 115
pondion Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 115
poor, as givers of charity Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 108, 109
poor, clothing of Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 113, 114
poor, conjunctural Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 131, 132, 134
poor, obligation to reciprocate Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 108, 109
poor, stealing from Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 31
poor, wellborn Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 132
poor tithe Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 31
poverty, and status Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 128
quppa, and hospitality Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 108, 109
quppa, and restorative charity Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128
quppa, and the poor Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 108, 109
quppa, as basket Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 69
quppa, balanced reciprocity Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 109
quppa, for conjunctural poor Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128
quppa, provides bread Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 116, 117
quppa, provides clothing Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 112, 113, 114
quppa, provides money Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 114, 115, 116
quppa, reciprocity Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 103, 119, 120
righteousness Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 188
rosenblum, jordan Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 69
sahlins, marshall Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 109
samaritan Nikolsky and Ilan, Rabbinic Traditions Between Palestine and Babylonia (2014) 113
schwartz, seth Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 109
segal, eliezer Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 118
seleucids Keddie, Class and Power in Roman Palestine: The Socioeconomic Setting of Judaism and Christian Origins (2019) 179
semiotics, of bread Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 116, 117
semiotics, of clothing Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 112, 113, 114
semiotics Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 111
sen, amartya Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 128
sepphoris Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 131, 132, 134
shame Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 113, 123
shelter Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 30
slaves, and social status Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 122, 123, 124, 125
slaves, as charity Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 118, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125
slaves, in greco-roman world Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 121, 122
status, and charity Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128
status, and clothing Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 112, 113, 114
status Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 128
synagogues, proper attire for Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 113
synagogues Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 30, 164
tabi Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 121
tamhui, and archaeology Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 69
tamhui, as dish Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 69
tamhui, relationship to hospitality Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 103, 108, 109
tannaitic parallels, source Nikolsky and Ilan, Rabbinic Traditions Between Palestine and Babylonia (2014) 113
temple mount, jerusalem temple Keddie, Class and Power in Roman Palestine: The Socioeconomic Setting of Judaism and Christian Origins (2019) 179
tithes' Keddie, Class and Power in Roman Palestine: The Socioeconomic Setting of Judaism and Christian Origins (2019) 179
tsedaqah/tzdaka, as a religious obligation Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 108
tsedaqah/tzdaka, as righteousness Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 188
tsedaqah/tzdaka, defined Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 30, 31
tyre Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 114
usha ordinance Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 134
veblen, thorstein Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 127
vegetables Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 132
wealth, tannaim not poor Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 125
wealth Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 118, 122, 124, 132, 134
wegner, judith Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 119
widows Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 30, 31
wife, as charity Gardner, The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism (2015) 118, 119, 120, 121