Talmud. Various Authors
Читать онлайн книгу.
the share of the inhabitants of the town, whose money had been stolen or lost, was not included in the amount on hand, and hence the representatives of the city were obliged to make it good (Maimonides).
b1 MISHNA b. 'The same reason as stated in note 3 of the preceding Mishna applies also to this clause; and, besides, everybody had a share in the sacrifice of the animal, even if the sacrifice were made on the strength of future receipts, for pledges were on hand insuring the payment by the delinquents.
b2 If the money was taken from the second tithes, the value of which had to be consumed in the city of Jerusalem, he must replace it by an equal amount and proclaim that this money is in exchange for the money taken from the second tithe, and then consume it accordingly. If the money was taken from the Sabbatical year fruit, he must replace it and proclaim the same as above and make it public property, as is the law of Sabbatical years.
c1 MISHNA c. The meaning of this Mishna is as follows: If a man gathered money little by little, with the express intention of paying his shekalim tax out of such money, and separated it from other moneys, any remainder which he may have left over after such payment is, according to the school of Shamai, to be devoted for a voluntary offering, because it was separated; and according to the school of Hillel, it is ordinary money, that may be used at will, because it was gathered only for the purpose of paying the amount due, which was already paid. If a man, however, had a sum of p. 9 money, and declared that he would use this sum for the payment of his shekalim tax, the remainder which he may have after such payment is, even according to the school of Hillel, to be devoted for a voluntary offering. With money devoted for a voluntary offering, whole-offerings only were to be bought.
d1 MISHNA d. By his teaching in this Mishna, R. Simeon wishes to explain the reason of the decree of the school of Hillel concerning the remainder of money which had been gathered little by little for the purpose of paying the Shekalim, or for the bringing of a sin-offering, and says: "Because it is written [Exodus xxx. 15], 'The rich shall not give more, and the poor shall not give less, than the half of a shekel,' a man when gathering money for the payment of Shekalim knows exactly how much he will need; hence, although he separated the amount gathered, the remainder is ordinary money; but if he gathered money for a sin-offering, which has no fixed value, and for which he did not know exactly how much he would have to pay, his intention in separating the money was evidently to use the entire amount for such purpose, and hence the eventual remainder, which cannot be used for a sin-offering, as it is already sacrificed, should be used for a voluntary offering."
d2 R. Jehudah differs with R. Simeon, and states, that the reason given by the latter for the decree of the school of Hillel cannot be correct, for even Shekalim had not always a fixed value, and when a man commenced to gather money for the payment of his Shekalim he also may not have known how much he would have to pay when the time came, because the value of the coin might be changed in the meantime.
d3 R. Simeon answered R. Jehudah very properly: "Even if the value of the coin was changed, the man knew well that he would pay a certain sum equal to that paid by all others, and the entire amount p. 10 that he had gathered would not be consumed; as for a sin-offering, however, he never knew exactly just what amount he would need for its purchase, because it had no fixed value; therefore, when he separated the money from other moneys his intention was to use the entire amount."
e1 MISHNA e. After explaining the opinions of both schools (Shamai and Hillel) in the preceding Mishna, and the Halakha, as usual, prevailing according to the school of Hillel, this Mishna states the final Halakha anonymously, and then cites the subsequent ordinances, concerning which there is no difference of opinion.
e2 The reason for this rule is: A sin or guilt offering must be brought for each sin separately. If money was designated for one sin-offering, the remainder cannot be applied to another offering for the same sin, nor for another sin which one might commit in the future, hence the remainder must be a voluntary offering.
e3 The remainder of whole-offerings may be used for more whole-offerings, because the quantity of whole-offerings, which are voluntary, is not limited. The same applies to food and peace offerings. The remainder of Passover-offerings, however, which cannot he used for the same purpose again, and should, however, be used for an eatable sacrifice, cannot be used for a voluntary offering, which is a whole-offering, but for a peace-offering, which is eatable.
e4 The reason for R. Meir's dictum is: He holds, that if money is collected for a certain dead man, the remainder belongs virtually to him, i.e., should be applied only for the use of the corpse; hence the heirs have no share in it. R. Nathan, however, says, that the setting up of a gravestone is for the use of the corpse, it being in his honor and not of any benefit to the heirs.
CHAPTER III.
MISHNA: (a) At three periods of the year money is drawn from the treasury (of the Shekalim); viz.: Half a month before Passover, half a month before Pentecost, and half a month before the Feast of Booths. The same dates are also the terms for the obligation of cattle-tithing, so says R. Aqiba. Ben Azai says: "The dates for the latter terms are the twenty-ninth of Adar, the first of Sivan, and the twenty-ninth of Abh." R. Eliezer and R. Simeon both say: "The first of Nissan, the first of Sivan, and the twenty-ninth of Elul." But why do they say the twenty-ninth of Elul why not the first of Tishri? Because that is a feast-day, and it is not allowed to tithe on a feast-day; therefore they ordained it for the preceding day, the twenty-ninth of Elul. a1
(b) The money drawn from the treasury was brought in three chests, each of three Saahs' capacity. On these chests was written: Aleph, Beth, Gimmel. R. Ishmael says: "They were marked in Greek: Alpha, Beta, Gamma."--The one that drew the money was not allowed to enter (the treasury) with a turned-up garment, nor with shoes nor sandals, nor with Tephillin, nor with an amulet, in order that, in the event of his becoming impoverished, it should not be said that he was thus punished on account of transgression against the treasury; or if he became rich, that he enriched himself by means of money drawn from the treasury. For a man must stand as unblemished before his fellowman as before his God, as it is written [Numbers xxxii. 22]: "And ye be thus guiltless before the Lord and before Israel"; and [Proverbs iii. 4]: "So shalt thou find grace and good favor in the eyes of God and man." b1
(c) The members of the family of R. Gamaliel used to enter, each one with his shekel between his fingers, and throw it before the one who drew the money from the treasury, and the latter immediately placed it into the chest (which he took out).--The one who came in to draw the money did not proceed before he had said to the bystanders: "I will now proceed to draw," and they had answered: "Draw, draw, draw," three times. c1 (d) After the man had completed the first drawing, he covered the balance with a cover (of fur); the same was done after the second drawing; after the third drawing the balance remained uncovered; for (the covering in the first two instances) was done only in order not to draw by mistake again what had already been drawn from. The first drawing was performed in the name of the whole land of Israel, the second