The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Index Database
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

Babylonian Talmud, Betzah, 13b

אלא מן הגורן ומן היקב כך תרומת מעשר אינה ניטלת אלא מן הגורן ומן היקב,מחשב הא מדידה בעי,הא מני אבא אלעזר בן גימל היא דתניא אבא אלעזר בן גימל אומר (במדבר יח, כז) ונחשב לכם תרומתכם בשתי תרומות הכתוב מדבר אחת תרומה גדולה ואחת תרומת מעשר כשם שתרומה גדולה ניטלת באומד ובמחשבה כך תרומת מעשר ניטלת באומד ובמחשבה,גופא א"ר אבהו א"ר שמעון בן לקיש מעשר ראשון שהקדימו בשבלין שמו טובלו לתרומת מעשר מאי טעמא אמר רבא הואיל ויצא עליו שם מעשר:,אמר ר"ש בן לקיש מעשר ראשון שהקדימו בשבלין פטור מתרומה גדולה,שנא' (במדבר יח, כו) והרמותם ממנו תרומת ה' מעשר מן המעשר מעשר מן המעשר אמרתי לך ולא תרומה גדולה ותרומת מעשר מן המעשר,א"ל רב פפא לאביי אי הכי אפילו הקדימו בכרי נמי אמר ליה עליך אמר קרא (במדבר יח, כט) מכל (מעשרותיכם) תרימו את כל תרומת ה',ומה ראית האי אדגן והאי לא אדגן:,תנן התם המקלף שעורין מקלף אחת אחת ואוכל ואם קלף ונתן לתוך ידו חייב אמר רבי אלעזר וכן לשבת,איני והא רב מקלפא ליה דביתהו כסי כסי ור' חייא מקלפא ליה דביתהו כסי כסי אלא אי אתמר אסיפא אתמר המולל מלילות של חטים מנפח על יד על יד ואוכל ואם נפח ונתן לתוך חיקו חייב אמר רבי אלעזר וכן לשבת,מתקיף לה רבי אבא בר ממל ורישא למעשר אין לשבת לא ומי איכא מידי דלענין שבת לא הוי גמר מלאכה ולמעשר הוי גמר מלאכה,מתקיף לה רב ששת בריה דרב אידי ולא והא גרנן למעשר דתנן איזהו גרנן למעשר הקשואין והדלועין משיפקסו ושלא פקסו משיעמיד ערמה ותנן נמי גבי בצלים משיעמיד ערמה ואילו גבי שבת העמדת ערמה פטור,אלא מאי אית לך למימר מלאכת מחשבת אסרה תורה הכא נמי מלאכת מחשבת אסרה תורה:,כיצד מולל אביי משמיה דרב יוסף אמר חדא אחדא ורב אויא משמיה דרב יוסף אמר חדא אתרתי רבא אמר כיון דמשני אפילו חדא אכולהו נמי,כיצד מנפח אמר רב אדא בר אהבה אמר רב מנפחbut only from the granary and the winepress, so too, teruma of the tithe is separated only from the granary and the winepress.,The Gemara asks: If the mishna is referring to produce from which teruma gedola has not been separated, it is appropriate to use the term: Calculates. However, according to the suggestion that it is referring to a first tithe, from which teruma of the tithe must be separated, why does the mishna state: Calculates? The tanna of the mishna should have said: Measures. The amount of teruma gedola to be separated is calculated by estimation, as there is no fixed amount for this teruma according to Torah law. With regard to the teruma separated from first tithe, however, the Torah established the fixed amount of one-tenth, and one is required to measure precisely.,The Gemara explains: In accordance with whose opinion is this mishna? It is in accordance with the opinion of Abba Elazar ben Gimmel, as it is taught in a baraita: Abba Elazar ben Gimmel says: The verse states: “And your teruma shall be reckoned to you as though it were the corn of the granary and as the fullness of the winepress” (Numbers 18:27). The verse speaks of two terumot. One is teruma gedola, and the other one is teruma of the tithe. Just as teruma gedola is separated by estimation and is not measured exactly, and it is enough to separate it by thought, as the word “reckoned” implies that the mere intention to separate a particular portion serves to remove the rest of the produce from its untithed state, so too, teruma of the tithe can also be separated by estimation and by thought.,§ Since it was mentioned incidentally, the Gemara discusses the matter itself: Rabbi Abbahu said that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: With regard to first tithe, in a case in which the Levite preceded the priest while the grain was still on the stalks, its name renders it untithed produce, until he separates from it the teruma of the tithe. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this halakha? Rava said: Since the name of the first tithe was called upon it, the obligation of the teruma of the tithe takes effect as well.,The Gemara cites a similar halakha that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: With regard to first tithe, in a case in which the Levite preceded the priest while the grain was still on the stalks, before it was threshed and turned into a pile, the owner separated first tithe before teruma. In that case, the separated tithe is exempt from teruma gedola. Although teruma gedola should have been separated from the produce first, and it should have included some of the produce taken as the first tithe, the Levite is nevertheless exempt from separating this teruma.,This is because it is stated: “And you shall set apart from it a teruma for the Lord, even a tenth part of the tithe” (Numbers 18:26), which indicates: A tenth part of the tithe, i.e., the teruma of the tithe, I, God, said to you that you must separate it, and you are not obligated in both teruma gedola and teruma of the tithe from the first tithe.,Rav Pappa said to Abaye: If so, if there is a source for this halakha in the Torah, even if the Levite preceded the priest, i.e., first tithe was separated after the grain had been threshed and the kernels of grain placed in a pile, then it should also be exempt from teruma gedola. Abaye said to Rav Pappa: With regard to your claim, the verse states: “From all that is given you, you shall set apart that which is the Lord’s teruma (Numbers 18:29). This verse indicates that God’s teruma, i.e., teruma gedola, must be taken from all the produce, including the tithe.,The Gemara asks: And what did you see that led you to require the separation of teruma gedola from first tithe that was taken from processed grain piled in the granary but not from first tithe that was taken from grain on stalks? Abaye answers: This, grain that has been threshed and placed into piles, is completely processed and has become grain, and that, grain that remains on the stalk, has not yet become grain. Until the grain is threshed and assembled in a pile, the obligation to separate teruma does not take effect, as it is not considered grain. When such unprocessed grain is designated first tithe, it ceases to be untithed produce and the opportunity to separate teruma from it has been missed. However, once the grain has been processed, and the obligation to separate teruma has taken effect, it is as if the teruma is already mixed in, and the obligation to separate it cannot be overridden by the fact that this produce has been designated first tithe.,§ We learned in a mishna there (Ma’asrot 4:5): One who peels grains of barley to eat them raw may peel them one by one and eat them immediately without tithing them, as this is considered a casual manner of eating. But if he peeled and placed several of them into his hand, he is obligated to separate tithes. Rabbi Elazar said: And a similar halakha applies to Shabbat. Peeling grains of barley one by one is not considered threshing, and it is permitted; if a whole handful of grains are peeled together, this does constitute the prohibited labor of threshing.,The Gemara asks: Is that so? But didn’t Rav’s wife peel for him barley on Shabbat by the cupful? And likewise Rabbi Ḥiyya’s wife would peel barley for him on Shabbat by the cupful. Rather, if Rabbi Elazar’s comment was stated in this context, it was stated with regard to the latter clause of that same mishna (Ma’asrot 4:5): With regard to one who husks kernels of wheat by hand, he may blow onto the chaff to disperse it a little at a time and eat the kernels without separating tithes. But if he blows on the kernels and puts a large amount of them into his lap, he is obligated to separate tithes from the food. It was with regard to this teaching that Rabbi Elazar said: And a similar halakha applies to Shabbat.,Rabbi Abba bar Memel strongly objects to this: And with regard to the first clause of the mishna, one should conclude: Yes, if one peeled a handful of barley, it is considered prepared with regard to tithes, but no, it is not considered threshing with regard to Shabbat? But is there anything that, with regard to Shabbat, is not considered the completion of the labor and may be performed; and yet, with regard to tithes, it is considered the completion of the labor? Isn’t the prohibition against work on Shabbat far more stringent than tithes in all its details?,Rav Sheshet, son of Rav Idi, strongly objects to this claim: And is there no example of a halakha in which tithes are treated more stringently than Shabbat? And is there not the halakha of their granary for tithes, as we learned in a mishna (Ma’asrot 1:5): What is the equivalent of their granary, i.e., the point at which the processing of various vegetables is completed so that they become obligated in tithes? With regard to cucumbers and gourds, they become obligated from when one trims the thin hairs that cover them [misheyefaksu], and for those he did not trim, from when he assembles them in a pile. And we also learned in a mishna (Ma’asrot 1:6), with regard to onions, that it is from when one assembles them in a pile. Whereas with regard to Shabbat, one who assembles produce in a pile is exempt, as this is not a prohibited labor on Shabbat.,Rather, what have you to say? Why is one exempt if he forms a pile on Shabbat? The Torah prohibited only planned, constructive labor on Shabbat, the type of work that involves the creation of something new, and the formation of a pile is not considered that kind of labor. Here too, with regard to peeling barley, the Torah prohibited creative work. Although collecting the peeled barley in one’s hand is considered the completion of the labor in respect to tithes, it is not prohibited labor on Shabbat.,Apropos husking kernels on Shabbat, the Gemara asks: How may one husk grain on a Festival? Abaye said in the name of Rav Yosef: One finger on another, i.e., one may place the kernels between two fingers and rub. And Rav Avya said in the name of Rav Yosef: One may even do so one on two, i.e., between the thumb and two fingers. Rava said: Since he alters the manner in which he performs the activity, he may even do so with one finger on all the rest.,The Gemara further asks: How may one blow on the grain, to winnow it in a permitted manner on Shabbat? Rav Adda bar Ahava said that Rav said: One blows

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

None available Subjects of this text:

subject book bibliographic info
aqiba,crops not grown in israel,edible produce not deemed food Jaffee (1981) 134
aqiba,crops not grown in israel,meals,preparing untithed produce Jaffee (1981) 134
aqiba,crops not grown in israel,removal of tithes Jaffee (1981) 134
edible produce not deemed food Jaffee (1981) 134
eleazar,edible produce not deemed food,meals,preparing untithed produce Jaffee (1981) 134
eleazar,edible produce not deemed food Jaffee (1981) 134
eliezer,acquisition of untithed produce,edible produce not deemed food Jaffee (1981) 134
tort law,accidental damages Schick (2021) 25
tort law,strict liability' Schick (2021) 25