1Rebbi Abba bar Mamal asked, the system of Rebbi Simeon seems inverted. There he says, from the heirs, but here he says, from the public 92 In the Mishnah he qualifies the rule that the daily flour offering in the absence of a High Priest is charged to the public as a Court stipulation, implying that by biblical law it should be charged to the High Priest’s heirs. In Sifra he deduces the rule from a biblical verse. . Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said, is that not a pertinent question? There came Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: It is a word from the Torah that it should be brought from the public. I could say, one should tax for it 92 In the Mishnah he qualifies the rule that the daily flour offering in the absence of a High Priest is charged to the public as a Court stipulation, implying that by biblical law it should be charged to the High Priest’s heirs. In Sifra he deduces the rule from a biblical verse. ; they instituted that it should come from what is taken from the lodge 93 It seems that one should read with B: collect it from the heirs. .
2Rebbi Yose 94 With B read: Yasa (Assi). said, Rebbi Joḥanan asked: Entire in the morning and entire in the evening, or half in the morning and half in the evening, [or entire in the morning and nothing in the evening] 95 The High Priest has to bring a fIour offering mornings and evenings ( Lev. 6:13 ). If the High Priest is dead or disabled and according to the Mishnah his flour offering has to be brought entire, does that mean two offerings per day, or only one in the morning? It is clear that the sentence about bringing two halves has to be deleted and the corrector’s addition from B accepted. ? Then it should be obvious to him, what about three log 96 The text about the High Priest’s offering only mentions oil but does not specify its quantity. It is deduced either from the libations required in general for a sheep ( Num . 15:4 ) or from the specifics indicated for the daily sacrifice ( Num . 28:5 ) that a tenth of an ephah of flour requires a quarter of a hin , 3 log , of olive oil. This therefore is the quantity of oil required here, even though it is used for frying, not for mixing as in the cases where the quantities are specified. Sifra Ṣaw Pereq 4:1–5; cf. Babli Menaḥot 52b . ? Three log in the morning and three log in the afternoon, or a log and a half in the morning and a log and a half in the afternoon? Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, also the following was a problem for him: Two handful 97 In the Babli, Menaḥot 52a , R. Joḥanan reports that the Tenth of the High Priest also requires addition of a handful of incense like other flour offerings. He also reports that there is a dispute whether the living High Priest has to bring one handful, which is split into two, or two separate handfuls for morning and evening services. But since here the question is about the Tenth for the absent or incapacitated High Priest, one infers that the Yerushalmi holds that the living High Priest only brings one handful. in the morning and two handful in the evening or one handful in the morning and one handful in the evening? Rebbi Yose said, did they not the two handful infer from the sinner’s flour offering 98 This reading is impossible since the sinner’s flour offering ( Lev. 5:11 ) is brought without oil and incense. The commentators conjecture an emendation “from the shew bread” which is put onto the table in two rows, each one with a cup of incense. ? Just as there two handful, also here two handful. Just as there it was problematic for him, so here it is problematic for him 99 Missing in B and M, probably correctly. . Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, did one not infer the three log from the daily afternoon sacrifice 96 The text about the High Priest’s offering only mentions oil but does not specify its quantity. It is deduced either from the libations required in general for a sheep ( Num . 15:4 ) or from the specifics indicated for the daily sacrifice ( Num . 28:5 ) that a tenth of an ephah of flour requires a quarter of a hin , 3 log , of olive oil. This therefore is the quantity of oil required here, even though it is used for frying, not for mixing as in the cases where the quantities are specified. Sifra Ṣaw Pereq 4:1–5; cf. Babli Menaḥot 52b . ? Since there {are} three log, so also here three log. [Just as] there it was problematic for him, [so] here it is (obvious) [problematic] for him1 00 .
3Rebbi Samuel ben Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: It would have been logical 105 Since the Cow is treated as a sanctum , it is clear that until its ashes are collected as required in Num . 19:9 , any action not in accordance with the procedure prescribed in vv. 2–9 will invalidate the procedure and usufruct of correct procedure will be larceny of sacra . According to the general principle that once the required procedures are executed, there can be no longer larceny of sacra , the problem is to decide whether the correct preparation of the ashes is the final step in this regard, or the sprinkling on a person impure in the impurity of the dead, as described in the verses following. To say that it would be logical is tantamount to a statement that one could argue the second position but, since the answer is not clear from the biblical text, it is up to the Court overseeing the Temple to decide which opinion to follow. that one commit larceny with them, but they decided that one does not commit larceny with them. But did we not state 106 Babli Menaḥot 51b/52a . : “ it is ḥattat , this teaches that one commits larceny with it. [With it one commits larceny,] 107 Corrector’s addition following B and M, correct but not absolutely necessary. with its ashes one does not commit larceny.” Rebbi Abbahu said, at the beginning they were using it as a disinfectant 108 Reading as Arabic שקשק “to rinse”. and were putting it on their wounds and therefore they decided that one would commit larceny with it 109 But biblically the ashes never could lead to larceny of sacra . . When they were fenced in 110 It was certain that no illegitimate use would be tolerated. , they decided that one does not commit larceny with it.
4By what is that woman atoned for 13 Since the money may have been given by a woman needing purification, if it happens that her monies were used as elevation offering, how can she ever eat sancta ? The sentence and the next are reproduced at the end of the Chapter (7). ? Rebbi Isaac said, it is a stipulation of the Court that the providers of nests also provide the disqualified and the lost ones 14 The provider has to provide a few extra birds which are treated as possible purification offerings (a situation impossible for four-legged animals) but are not eaten. .
5MISHNAH: All spittle 1 Any impurity caused by a human body itself, such as in a person afflicted by gonorrhea, is a source of severe impurity, and all his body fluids are sources of severe impurity. In any place other than Jerusalem, one must assume that spittle was ejected by an impure person whose impurity was caused by his body (cf. Mishnah Ṭahorot 4:5 ). By rabbinic usage, all Gentiles are considered to be in this category. In Jerusalem, where people are used to eat sancta the entire year according to R. Meïr, or on the holidays according to R. Yose, one may assume that impure people are careful not to contaminate their pure neighbors. This is a reconstruction by authors living two generations after the destruction of the Temple. found in Jerusalem is pure except on the Upper Market 2 A Gentile neighborhood. , the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Yose says, on all other days of the year, those in the middle of the road are impure, and those on the sides pure. On holidays, those in the middle of the road are pure and those on the sides impure since the minority will remove themselves to the sides. All implements which are found in Jerusalem on the road descending to the place of immersion are impure, on the way ascending they are pure since they were brought down on a way different from that on which they were brought up, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Yose says, all are pure except the bag and the rake 15 As the Halakhah shows, a word “the hoe” is missing here, found in B and the independent Mishnah mss. set apart for graves. If a knife was found on the Fourteenth 21 The 14 th of Nisan, the day of slaughter of the Pesaḥ sacrifice. Even though the previous Mishnah stated that all implements found in Jerusalem are presumed to be pure, for use on sancta one is restrictive and requires immersion in a miqweh and waiting for the following sundown. The only time this requirement is waived is the 14 th of Nisan, the day of mass slaughter, where it is presumed that every knife which is qualified to be used for ritual slaughter was immersed in a miqweh the previous day. , one may slaughter with it immediately; on the Thirteenth one has to repeat and immerse 22 Since all knives are immersed on the 13 th of Nisan, one has to assume that this particular knife was lost on the way to the miqweh . . A dagger 23 Which is not usable for slaughter and therefore not necessarily immersed in a miqweh . in either case one has to repeat and immerse. If the Fourteenth falls on a Sabbath, one may slaughter with it immediately 24 Since one may not immerse on that day, certainly the knife had been immersed on the 13 th . ; on the Fifteenth one may slaughter with it immediately 25 Since the 15th of Nisan is a holiday where immersion is not done, and the knife was purified for the 14th, the presumption of purity extends to this case. . If it 26 The dagger. was tied to a knife its status is that of the knife.