A History of the Mishnaic Law of Holy Things, Part 2: Menahot: Translation and Explanation (Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity) 1556353502, 9781556353505

Table of contents :
Cover

Citation preview

A HISTORY OF THE MISHNAIC LA\V OF HOLY THINGS PART TWO

STUDIES IN JUDAISM IN LATE ANTIQUITY EDITED BY

JACOB NEUSNER

VOLUME THIRTY

A IDSTORY OF THE MISHNAIC LAW OF HOLY THINGS PART TWO

A HISTORY OF THE MISHNAIC LAW OF HOLY THINGS BY

JACOB NEUSNER University Professor Professor of Religious Studies and The Ungerleider Distinguished Scholar of Judaic Studies Brown University

PART TWO

MENAHOT TRANSLATION AND EXPLANATION

Wip£&Stock PUBLISHERS Eugene, Oregon

Wipf and Stock Publishers 199 W 8th Ave, Suite 3 Eugene, OR 97401 A History of the Mishnaic Law of Holy Things, Part 2 Menahot: Translation and Explanation By Neusner, Jacob Copyright©1978 by Neusner, Jacob ISBN 13: 978-1-55635-350-5 ISBN 10: 1-55635-350-2 Publication date 3/20/2007 Previously published by E. J. Brill, 1978

For William Scott Green

TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface

IX

Abbreviations and Bibliography .

XI

Transliterations

XVII

1

Introduction I. IL III. IV.

v. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. XII. XIII.

Menahot Chapter One Menahot Chapter Two Menahot Chapter Three Menahot Chapter Four Menahot Chapter Five Menahot Chapter Six Menahot Chapter Seven Menahot Chapter Eight Menahot Chapter Nine Menahot Chapter Ten Menahot Chapter Eleven Menahot Chapter Twelve Menahot Chapter Thirteen

9

27 38 64 77 88 98 112 122 135 149 167 178

Appendix: Corrections to A History of the Mishnaic Law of Purities, Parts I-III Howard L. Religion

Index .

Apothaker,

Hebrew

Union

College-Jewish

Institute

192

of

. 200

PREFACE The present volume takes its place in the line of works pointing toward a history of the formation of earlier Rabbinic Judaism, down to the redaction of Mishnah in ca. 200. The only reliable route, obviously, is through the analysis of the earliest sources, beginning with Mishnah, from the perspectives required for such a history: What do the sources mean in their original circumstance? What ideas are taken for granted in them? What are the literary and intellectual traits exhibited by them? Only when these questions have been thoroughly dealt with shall we proceed to the next stage in the work. The sole purpose here, therefore, is the exegesis of the sources. The analytical work accomplished, we shall turn in Part VI to the synthetic procedures of historical restoration and reconstruction of the history and structure of the Judaism revealed in Mishnah. The exegesis is accomplished in two stages, first, through the form-analytical translation, second, through the provision of a modest explanation of what has gone before. I aim at severe economy of intellect, dealing only with questions important for the larger venture. The tractate under study makes its contribution to that concern for a limited exegetical program, since it poses few problems. But it is conceptually arid, essentially barren of both important and fresh ideas. What is new is only the subject-matter. What the tractate tells us is rules about meal-offerings of various kinds. What the tractate has to tell us about meal-offerings when it completes the repertoire of facts is very little. In its important intellectual initiatives it is nothing but a reprise of Zebahim. That does not mean we learn nothing except how to prepare a meal-offering, information of rather modest utility. It does mean that, in due course, we shall have to raise a quite unanticipated set of questions, now concerning Mishnah's insistence upon supplying us with a tractate ( and, as we shall observe, more than one such example) through which Mishnah has essentially little more to say what we learn in Scripture. Mishnah' s larger structure of topics and themes will in due course require reflection. This work carries forward the sequence of dedications to my students, each advancing the work of teaching and scholarly research begun in my seminar at Brown University. Professor Richard Sarason

X

PREFACE

continues his work of correction, annotation, and gloss, for which I remain profoundly thankful.

J.N. Providence, Rhode Island 12 September 1977 29 Elul 5737

ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY AE Ah. Albeck Allony Altschuler AN

Ar. A.Z. B. B.B. B.M. B.Q. Ber. Berger Berlin, 1968 Berlin, 1972 Berlin, 1971 Bert. Bes. Bik. Blackman

Buchler

C Cashdan, Menahoth Cashdan, Hullin Cohn Danby Danby, Offerings Dem. Deut. Ed. EG

Tosafot R. CAqiba Egger. From Mishnah, ed. Romm. :lAhilot l;:lanokh Albeck, Shishah sidre mishnah. Seder Qodoshim. (Tel Aviv, 1959). See GF Ezra Altschuler, T aqqanat cEzra . . . caJ masekhet MeCilah (Piotrkov, 1931). Abraham Mesokhtschub. Hagahot abne nezer. In QMH. CArakhin cAbodah Zarah Babylonian Talmud Baba:l Batra:l Baba:l M~ica Baba:l Qamma:l Berakhot Isaiah Berger, ed., Analytical Index to The Jewish Quarterly Review. 1889-1908 (N.Y., 1966). Charles Berlin, Harvard University Library. Catalogue of Hebrew Books (Cambridge, 1968) I-VI. Supplement (Cambridge, 1972) I-III. Widener Library Shelflist, 39. Judaica (Cambridge, 1971). Obadiah of Bertinoro. From Mishnah, ed. Romm. Be~ah Bikkurim Philip Blackman, Mishnayoth. Volume V. Order Qodashim. Pointed Hebrew Text, Introductions, Translation, Notes, Appendix, Supplement Indexes (London, 1954). Adolph Abraham Buchler, Hakkohanim veCabodatam (Jerusalem, 1966). Trans. into Hebrew by N. Ginton. English title page: The Priests and their Cult in the Last Decade of the Temple in Jerusalem. H. Loewe, The Mishnah of the Palestinian Talmud (Hammishnah cat pi ketab-yad Cambridge) (Jerusalem, 1967). Eli Cashdan, Menahoth. Translated into English with Notes, Glossary and Indices (London, 1948). Eli Cashdan, Hullin. Translated into English. With Notes, Glossary, and Indices (London, 1948). John Cohn, Ordnung Kadaschim, iibersetzt und erk/art (Third ed., Basel, 1968). Herbert Danby, The Mishnah (London, 1933). Herbert Danby, trans., The Code of Maimonides. Book Nine. The Book of Offerings. (New Haven, 1950). Dema:li Deuteronomy CEduyyot Hiddushe Eliyyahu MiGreiditz. From Mishnah, ed. Romm (Vilna, 1887).

XII EK

Epstein, Nusab Epstein, Tan.

Erub. Freedman GF GRA

Gelbstein

Ginzberg, T amid Git. Gray HA Hag. Hakkohen Hakkohen-Zaks

Hal. l;[ayyot HD Hildesheimer

Heitzmann, Middot

Heitzmann, T amid

Heitzmann, Qinnim

Hor.

ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

Yehoshuca Yosef Hakkohen, cEzrat kohanim ... caJ mishnayyot masekhet Middot (Warsaw, 1873) I-III. Y. N. H. Epstein, Mabo lenusab hammishnah (Tel Aviv, 1954). Y. N. H. Epstein, MeboJot lesifrut hattanaJim. Mishnah, tosefta, ummidrashe halakhah. Ed. E. ~. Melammed (Tel Aviv, 1957). CErubin H. Freedman, Zebahim. Translated into English with Notes, Glossary, and Indices (London, 1948). Geniza Fragments of Rabbinic Literature. Ed. Nehemya Alloni (Jerusalem, 1973). Elijah hen Solomon Z_alman ("Elijah Gaon" or "Vilna Gaon"), 1720-1797. For Tosefta: B~bli, ed. Romm (Vilna, 1887), Vol. XVII. Hillel Moshe Mishil Gelbstein, Sefer mishkenot leJabir Y acaqob. I:f.iddushim ubbeJurim bemasekhet Tamid (Repr. Jerusalem, 1972). Louis Ginzberg, "The Mishnah Tarnid," Journal of Jewish Lore and Philosophy, 1, 1919, pp. 33-44, 197-209, 265-295. Gi~in George Buchan-an Gray, Sacrifice in the Old Testament. Its Theory and Practice (1925. Repr.: N.Y., 1971). Emanuel Hai Riqi. Hon 'ashir. In QMH. l;[agigah Alexandry Hakkohen, Sefer ha)agudah leseder qodoshim veseder fohorot (Jerusalem, 1975). IsraJeJ Me)ir Hakkohen, Sefer liqute halakhot. Ed. Menal,iem Mendel Yosef Zaks (Jerusalem, 1971). I. Zebabim, Menabot, Tamid, Temurah, MeCifah. II. Bekhorot, Keritot, CArakhin, Nazir, Sofah, Niddah. l;[allah Yi~l_iaql;[ayyot, Zerac yifbaq. Ed. H. Y. L. Deutsch (N.Y., 1960). Hasde David. David Pardo, Hasde David. IV. T osefet Qedushah (Repr., Jerusalem, 1970). CAzrPel Hildesheimer, Middot bet hammikdash she! hordos bemasekhet Middot ubekitbe Yosef b. Matityahu (Jerusalem, 1974). [Compare "The Herodian Temple according to the Treatise Middoth and Flavius Josephus," Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement, 1886, pp. 92-113, and Israel Hildesheimer, Gesammelte Auf satze (Frankfurt a/M, 1923)]. Oscar Heitzmann, Middot (Von den Massen des Tempels). Text ilbenetzung und Erklarung. Nebst einem textkritischen Anhang. (Giessen, 1913). Oscar Heitzmann, Tamid (Vom taglichen Gemeindeopfer). Text, Vbersetzung, und Erklarung. Nebst einem textkritischen Anhang (Giessen, 1928). Oscar Heitzmann, Qinnim (Von den Vogelopfern). Text, Vbersetzung und Erklarung, Nebst einem textkritischen Anhang (Giessen, 1931). Horayot

ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBUOGRAPHY

Hubert & Mauss

Hul. HY

ID Jastrow

Jung, Arakin

K Katsh

Ke!. Ker. Kil. KM

Krupp

Lehrman Levin and Boyden Levine, 1971

Levy, Worterbuch Lewittes M M.

Ma. Maimonides, Comm. Mak. Makh. Me. Meg. Meiri

XIII

Henri Hubert and Marcel Mauss, Sacrifice: Its Nature and Function. (Chicago, 1964). Translated from the French, "Essai sur la nature et la fonction du sacrifice," L' Annee sociologique, 1898, by W. D. Halls. J:Iullin Tosefta lfazon Ye/pezqel by Yel;tezqel Abramsky (Jerusalem, 1954). Nathan Lebam, Imre dacat. In QMH. Marcus Jastrow, A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli, and Y erushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature (1904, Repr., N.Y., 1950) I-II. Leo Jung, CArakin. Translated into English. With Notes, Glossary, and Indices (London, 1948). Georg Beer, Faksimile-Ausgabe des Mishnacodex Kaufmann A 50 (Reprint: Jerusalem, 1968). Abraham I. Katsh, Ginze Mishna. One Hundred and FiftyNine Fragments from the Cairo Geniza in the SaltykovShchedrin Library in Leningrad Appearing for the First Time with an Introduction, Notes and Variants (Jerusalem, 1970). Kelim Keritot Kila 3 yim Kesef Mishneh. Joseph Karo. Commentary to Maimonides, Mishneh Torah. Published in Venice, 1574-5. Text used: Standard version of Maimonides, Mishneh Torah. Michael Krupp. CArakin (Schatzungen). Text, Vbersetzung, und Erklarung. Nebst einem textkritischen Anhang (Berlin & N.Y., 1971). S. M. Lehrman, J{.innim. Translated into English. With notes, Glossary, and Indices (London, 1948). S. I. Levin and Edward A. Boyden, The Kosher Code of the Orthodox Jew (Minneapolis, 1940. Repr. N.Y., 1975). Baruch A. Levine, "Prolegomenon." in Sacrifice in the Old Testament. In Theory and Practice. By George Buchanan Gray (Repr. N.Y., 1971), pp. vii-xliv. Jacob Levy, Worterbuch iiber die Talmr,dim und Midrashim (1924. Repr., Darmstadt, 1963) I-IV. Mendell Lewittes, trans. The Code of Maimonides. Book Eight. The Book of the Temple Service (New Haven, 1957). Babylonian Talmud Codex Munich (95) (Repr., Jerusalem, 1971). Mishnah MaCaserot Moses b. Maimon, Mishnah. Seder Qodoshim. Trans. by Josef Kappa.Q (Jerusalem, 1967). Makkot Makhshirin MeCilah Megillah Mena.QemShelomoh lebet Meir, Bet habbe/pirah Ca}masekhet Ifallah, Sheqalim, Tamid, veMiddot (Jerusalem, 1977). Ed. by Abraham Sofer.

XIV

Meiri, Hui. Melammed, Midrash Melammed, Ta/mud Men. Miller and Simon Miller, Temurah Miq. ML

M.Q. MS

N Naz. Netibot haqqodesh Ned. Neg. Neze,· Nid. Num. Noah NS Oh. Or. 01ar shi{!ot p Pa Par. PB Pes. Porusch, Kerithoth Porusch, Mei/ah Prov. Purities

QA

ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

Mena.1:iemShelomoh lebet Meir, Bet habbe};irah CaJmasekhet lfullin (Jerusalem, 1974). Ed. by Abraham Liss. E. $. Melammed, Hayya};as sheben midrashe halakhah lammishnah velattosefta (Jerusalem, 1967). E. $. Melammed, Pirqe mabo lesifrut hattalmud (Jerusalem, 1973). Mena.1:iot L. Miller and Maurice Simon, Bekoroth. Translated into English. With Notes, Glossary, and Indices (London, 1948). L. Miller, Temurah. Translated into English. With Notes, Glossary, and Indices (London, 1948). MiqvaJot Mishneh Lamme/ekh. Commentary to Maoimonides, Mishneh Torah. Judah Rosannes 1657-1727. For source see KM. MoCed Qaian Mele'khet Shelomo. Shelomo bar Joshua Adeni, 1567-1625. From Mishnah, ed. Romm. Mishnah Cim perush HaRambam. Def11s risho~n Napoli [5]252 [1492] (Jerusalem, 1970). Nazir Netibot haqqodesh Zeba};im. By A. I. M. Salman (Jerusalem, 1956). Nedarim Negacim Nezer haqqodesh caJ masekhet Zeba};im. By Moses Rosen (N.Y., 1953). Niddah Numbers Aminoa.l:iNoa.l:i,The Redaction of the Tractate Qiddushin in the Babylonian Talmud. In Hebrew (Tel Aviv, 1977). $evi Gutmacher, Na};alat ievi. In QMH. JQhalot CQrlah O[ar shif{ot. CArakhin (Jerusalem, 1972). Bekhorot (Jerusalem, 1973). Keritot (Jerusalem, 1973). Temurah (Jerusalem, 1973). Shishah sidre mishnah. Ketab yad Parma DeRossi 138 (Reprint: Jerusalem, 1970). Mishnah ketab yad Paris, Paris 328-329 (Reprint: Jerusalem, 1973). Parah Mishnah Codex Parma "B" DeRossi 497. Seder Tehoroth. Introduction by M. Bar Asher (Reprint: Jerusalem, 1971). Pesa.l:iim I. Porusch, Kerithoth. Translated into English. With Notes, Glossary, and Indices (London, 1948). I. Porusch, MeCi/ah. Translated into English. With Notes, Glossary, and Indices (London, 1948). Proverbs Jacob Neusner, A History of the Mishnaic Law of Purities (Leiden, 1974-1977) I-XXII. Qorban Aharon. Aaron Ibn I;layyim (d. 1632), Qorban Aharon, Perush LaSefer Sifra (Dessau, 1749).

ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

Qahaty QH QMH QS Rabad Rabad, Sifra Rabinowitz

Ralbag Rappaport

Ray R.H. Rosen, Bekhorot

Rosen, T emurah San. Sens Shah. Shabu. Sheb. ShP) was [ deemed to carry out the requirement that the bread be set forth) perpetually." 0. They went forth and put them down on the golden table which was on the porch. P. And they burned the dishes [ of frankincense, which had been removed). Q. And the loaves are divided among the priests. R. [If] the Day of Atonement coincides with the Sabbath, the loaves are divided in the evening. S. [If) it coincided with the eve of the Sabbath, the goat of the Day of Atonement is eaten in the evening. T. The Babylonians would eat it raw, U. because they are not squeamish [so Danby for DcTN YPH). M. 11:7 The narrative of the show-bread continues at A-C+D, E, F-H, I-J, K-L, glossed by M, with a dispute at N, 0-Q-six units. Then R-U are separate from the foregoing, with R relevant, and the remainder not. Continuing M. 11 :6, the pericope first describes the other appurtenances used in connection with the show-bread. There are two tables inside II

160

MENAHOT

CHAPTER ELEVEN 11

:7

the porch at the door of the Hekhal and a third inside the Hekhal itself. The show-bread, baked on Friday, is left to cool on the marble table ( C). When, on the Sabbath following, it is removed, it is placed on the golden table until the priests divide it up among themselves. Since, during the week that the show-bread is displayed, it has been set on a golden table (E), it is left on another golden table when it is removed ( C, D). The equipment having been described, we proceed to the way in which the priests conduct the rite of displaying the show-bread. Every Sabbath four priests enter the Hekhal. Two carry the two rows of bread, and two carry the two dishes of frankincense. Four other priests go in first, H, two to remove the bread displayed during the past week, two to remove the frankincense. The stationing of each set of four priests is explained at I-J. K is equally clear. The priests who stand at the south draw out the old loaves, and those who stand at the north lay down the new ones. According to L, the new loaf is set so that a handbreadth thereof is up against the old loaf; and thus as the one is removed, the other is drawn in; at no time is the table left without bread. Yose rejects this procedure. 0 repeats the point of C, but is primary to the narrative. The priests who have removed the bread and frankincense put it on the golden table at the door. There the incense is burned, and the old bread divided up. The point of R is that this division will take place on the Sabbath, except when the Sabbath coincides with the Day of Atonement. Then, at the end of the day the bread is divided up-an obvious point. The goat of the additional offering of the Day of Atonement is eaten by the priests (Num. 29:11). It of course must be eaten in the evening, up to midnight ( M. Zeb. 5: 3). It cannot be cooked on the Day of Atonement or on the Sabbath. If, therefore, the Day of Atonement is on Friday, there is a problem. The Babylonians eat it raw. What the natives do is not specified. A. How do they bring in the show-bread? B. On the eve of the Sabbath did one break [the bread} from the mold and put it on the table which was on the porch at the door of the House, on which they set the old show-bread [ vs. M. Men. 11:7C}. T. 11:11 Z p. 530, ls. 14-16 A. How do they bring in the show-bread? B. On the eve of the Sabbath did one break them from the mold, and place it on the table which was on the porch at the door of the house.

MENAHOT CHAPTER ELEVEN 11:7-8

161

C. At dawn, once the blood of the continual offering had been tossed, two priests took two dishes and put into them two handfuls of frankincense. D. All the dishes in the sanctuary did not have sides, except for these, which had sides. E. These draw out [the bread] by a handbreadth, and these insert [the bread] by a handbreadth. The handbreadth of one was within the handbreadth of the other, so that the table should not remain overnight without bread, as it is said, Before me perpetually (Ex. 25:30) [M. Men. 11 :7K-MJ. F. R. Yose says, "Even if one removed the old bread in the morning and put in the new bread at twilight, G. "[and} even on the other days of the year they remove it from the courtyard, H. "and it is no matter. I. "What is the meaning of Scripture's saying Before me perpetually? J. "So that the table should not remain overnight without bread" [M. Men. 11:7NJ. T. 11:12 Z p. 530, ls. 16-23

A. These two priests, in whose hands are the two dishes of frankincense which has been with the old show-bread, would put it on the altar with the limbs of the continual offering. B. Once the two dishes of incense had burned up, they then give half of a loaf to each watch and divide it among themselves. C. R. Judah says, "This one who divided the show-b_read stands on the mosaic pavement of the porch. He divides and leaves [the bread], and each one then comes and takes his share. D. "And the share for the blemished [men} of the priesthood did they take outside, for they cannot enter the area between the porch and the altar." T. 11:13 Z p. 530, ls. 23-28 T. 11:11 and T. ll:12A-B go over the same ground, but the former implicitly disagrees with M., and the latter does not. T. then augments M.'s account, restating Yose's view. At G he refers to the practice of taking the table of show-bread out and showing it to pilgrims (TR II, p. 262). E is not quite verbatim the language of M., but a slight improvement thereon.

11:8 A. [If] one set out the bread on the Sabbath, but [set out} the dishes [ of frankincense} after the Sabbath and burned the dishes [ of frankincense} on the [next} Sabbath, it is invalid. [It was only on the table six days.}

162

MENAHOT CHAFTER ELEVEN 11:8

B. And they are not liable on their account [ the loaves of bread} because of violation of the rules of refuse, remnant, and uncleanness. [The bread is not sanctified.J C. [If} one set out the bread and the dishes [ of frankincense} on the Sabbath and burned the dishes [ of frankincense} after the Sabbath, it is invalid. D. And they are not liable on their account because of violation of the laws of refuse, remnant, and uncleanness. E. [If} one set out the bread and the dishes [ of frankincense} after the Sabbath and burned the dishes on [ the next} Sabbath, it is invalid. (They have not been left from Sabbath to Sabbath.} F. How should one do it? G. Let him leave it for the coming Sabbath {thirteen days in all}, for even if it is on the table for many days, that is of no account. M. 11:8

The proper disposition of the bread and dishes of frankincense already has been spelled out. Both are to be placed on the table together on the Sabbath, and left there for a week. Then they are removed, and on the following Sabbath, the frankincense is burned and the stale bread given to the priests and eaten by them. At the point at which, on the Sabbath, the bread is placed on the table, it is deemed sanctified; from that moment it remains so for one week. Then it must be removed. The problems before us begin with the placing of the bread on the Sabbath-at which point, the bread is sanctified for a week-but the frankincense on Sunday. Then ( C), we set the bread and the frankincense on the Sabbath, but we burn the frankincense on Sunday, not waiting out the week. Finally (E), we set the bread and frankincense on the table not on but after the Sabbath. Now, we note, even the bread itself has not been sanctified at all, because it has not been set on the table on the Sabbath. There is a solution to this problem, which is to leave the bread on the table until the next Sabbath; at that point, it is deemed sanctified. It is left for a week-thirteen days in all-and is then disposed of as valid show-bread. With this in mind, the exposition of the pericope poses no problems. This unitary pericope (A-B, C-D, E+F-G) takes up the problem of improper disposition of the dishes of frankincense. In the first of the three cases ( A, C, and E) of invalid presentation, the man puts out the bread on the Sabbath, then puts the dishes with the bread afterward, offering up the frankincense yet a week later. The mealoffering-inclusive of the bread and the dishes of incense-is invalid, because the offering of bread has not been accompanied by frankincense from one Sabbath to the next, for seven days. In the next case, C, the

MENAHOT CHAPTER ELEVEN

11:8

163

bread and dishes of frankincense are laid out on the Sabbath. The frankincense is burned after the Sabbath. If the reference is to that same Sabbath, then the invalidation is on account of the bread's being left without frankincense after that first day (Rashi, B. Men. 100a). If the meaning is that the frankincense is burned after the next Sabbath (Maimonides, Comm.), then the frankincense has been kept too long, since it should have been removed with the bread and burned. Finally, E, we set out the bread and frankincense after the Sabbath. This is obviously invalid. One should (F-G) validate the offering by leaving the bread and frankincense in place for another week, for the reason given in G. Even if the bread and frankincense are kept for more than a week, that is of no account. The bread is not deemed invalidated by being left overnight; it is deemed sanctified only when in place on the Sabbath. From the Sabbath on which it is deemed the show-bread, it is left for a week, then removed in the ordinary course of events. The liability at B, D, is familiar. It does not apply to an invalid mealoffering. It follows that if one burns the frankincense with the intention of eating the bread the next day, the law of refuse is not invoked, since the frankincense is invalid. If any of the bread is left over to the next day (Sunday) and one ate it, he is not liable. If the bread is made unclean or if someone is unclean and eats it, there is no liability on account of eating holy things in a condition of uncleanness (M. Zeb. 3:4). I. [If] before one broke [the mold], the bread was broken in half, the bread is invalid, and the dishes of frankincense were not burned. J. [If] after the mold was broken, the bread was broken in half, the bread is invalid, but the dishes of frankincense were burned {B. Men. 8a]. K. {If] the dishes of frankincense were offered up, and afterward the bread was broken in half, it is valid. L. [If] its bread was made unclean, whether after it was taken from the mold or before it was taken from the mold, the bread is invalid, and the dishes of frankincense were not offered up. 'I'. 11:16B Z p. 531, ls. 2-5 T. is autonomous of M. Its point is clear as given. If the bread did not emerge unbroken from the mold, it is invalid, and the dishes of frankincense are not offered up. If the bread at the point of removal from the mold is valid, then the dishes of frankincense are offered. If, furthermore, the dishes are offered up and then the bread was broken, it remains valid. L is clear as given. I suppose that, in a general way, M. 11:lC-D are pertinent.

164

MENAHOT CHAPTER ELEVEN

11 :8-9

A. [If] one set out the bread on the Sabbath and the dishes after the Sabbath and offered up the dishes on the Sabbath, it is invalid. And they are not liable on its account because of violation of the laws of refuse, remnant, and uncleanness [M. Men. 11:SA-BJ. T. ll:17Zp.

531,ls. 5-6

A. If one set out the bread and the dishes on the Sabbath and offered up the dishes after the Sabbath, it is invalid. B. And they are liable on its account because of violation of the laws of refuse, remnant, and uncleanness. C. [If] one set out the bread and the dishes of frankincense after the Sabbath and offered up the dishes on the [ next] Sabbath, it is invalid [M. Men. 11:SE}. D. If bread of the choicestquality is there, they may bring it.

E. And if not, let him wait for the next Sabbath [M. Men. 11:SGJ. F. The bread is permitted [at that time] to be eaten. G. And they are liable on its account because of violation of the laws of refuse, remnant, and uncleanness. T. 11:18 Z p. 531, ls. 6-10 After citing, M. Men. 11:SA-B, T. supplies two important cases. In one, T. 11:lSA-B, the dishes of frankincense have been sanctified by being placed alongside the bread on the Sabbath, exactly as is required. Since that is the case, if one then offers up the dishes after the Sabbath, while the show-bread is made invalid, the whole has been sanctified and therefore liability to violation of the specified laws, B, is incurred. To underline this point, T. then goes on to a case in which neither the bread nor the dishes are set out at the proper time ( = M. 11 :SE), and the result is an invalid offering, so we should not invoke the rule of T. 11:lSB. But T. goes on to develop the point of M. 11 :SF-G. The bread is set out, along with the frankincense, after the Sabbath. If the bread remains in good condition, D, it is offered on the next Sabbath, since it has not been on the table on any Sabbath and therefore has not been sanctified to this time, on the one side, nor has it been spoiled by being left overnight-beyond its time-after sanctification, on the other (HY). Then the bread is sanctified, and in due course it may be removed and eaten, and once more we invoke the laws applicable to what has been sanctified.

11:9 A. The two loaves are eaten, neither earlier than two [days] nor later than three [ days after being baked}. B. How so?

MENAHOT CHAPTER ELEVEN

11:9

165

C. '[If] they are baked on the eve of the festival and eaten on the festival, [that would be an example of eating them] two days [after being baked]. D. [If) the festival fell after the Sabbath, they are eaten three days [ after being baked]. E. The show-bread is eaten neither less than nine nor more than eleven days [after being baked). F. Howso? G. [If] it is baked on the eve of the Sabbath and eaten on the Sabbath [in the following week], [that would be an example of eating them] nine days [after they are baked). H. {If] the festival coincided with the eve of the Sabbath, it is eaten ten [ days after being baked]. I. [In the case of] two festival days of the New Year [that is, if the New Year began on Thursday and the Day of Atonement fell on the following Sabbath), it is eaten eleven [days after being baked]. J. And [baking it] does not override either the Sabbath or the festival [ = M. 11:2CJ. K. Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel says in the name of R Simeon, son of the Prefect, "It overrides the festival, but it does not override the fast day." M. 11:9

A restatement of M. ll:2C, M. 11:9A-I form a handsomely articulated, unitary pericope, in two parts, A, which introduces the whole, then B+C-D, and E, spelled out by F+G-I. J-K are appended and entirely relevant. The matter is clear as stated. The two loaves of Shabucot are eaten normally within two days of being baked; e.g., they are baked on Tuesday, Shabucot is on Wednesday, and the loaves are eaten thereon; or they are baked on Friday, then comes the Sabbath, then the festival (D). The show-bread, which is displayed for a week, is baked on Friday, left from Sabbath to Sabbath, and so G follows. The rest is equally clear. I has the bread baked op.Wednesday and eaten at the end of the Day of Atonement, which coincides with the following Sabbath, thus eleven days later. J draws the correct conclusion that baking the Two Loaves and show-bread is not done on the Sabbath or the festival, since the antecedent materials assume that the baking is done on the day before. Simeon b. Gamaliel then will not be able to concur with the antecedent picture. He should maintain that the two loaves are eaten neither earlier than one day, nor later than two days, after being baked, since he can have them baked on the f estival and eaten that day, C, and so for D. He also will concur that the show-bread is eaten no less than nine days after being baked, since he will not

166

MENAHOT CHAPTER ELEVEN

11:9

want it baked on the Sabbath (G, H). But he will not mind having it baked on the festival of the New Year, so he cannot concur with I. So the dispute is properly appended and constitutes a secondary development of the materials of A-I.

CHAPTER TWELVE

MENAHOT CHAPTER TWELVE The present chapter, devoted to a further discussion of vows in connection with meal-offerings (M. 5:8-9), begins with a singleton, then proceeds to two beautifully formed pericopae, one a triplet of doublets, the other five stichs, spelling out rules on the same theme ( M. 12 :2-3). M. 12 :4 is a singleton, but tied to the foregoing through attributions to a single authority. M. 12:5 is yet another singleton. These last two are stated in more general language than the pseudocolloquies of M. 12: 2-3. The relevance of the opening unit, M. 12:1, becomes clear only at M. 12:2. M. 12:1 deals with the meal-offerings which have become unclean before being sanctified in a utensil, which are subject to redemption ( a point on which T. will differ), and those which become unclean after being sanctified in a utensil, which are not subject to redemption. When, at M. 12:2, we come to the discussion of a man who vowed to bring meal-offerings in two utensils, then, when he brought them in one, was reminded that he had vowed to bring them in two, we see the relevance. For the conclusion is that he may indeed correct himself and put them into two. This means that it is not putting the meal-offering into the utensil which completes the sanctificationsurely a refinement of ( or disagreement with) the view of M. 12: land that the matter still is subject ( in the present case) to correction. But the main interest of M. 12:2 should not be inferred from its redactional connection to M. 12:1. Its principal point is that if one vowed to bring one sort of meal-offering and brought some other, the former is a valid offering, but the man has yet to bring a meal-offering in fulfillment of his obligation. This point is made in two doublets of the three. The point of the third doublet is already clear, the connection to M. 12: 1. M. 12:3, formulated in six parts like M. 12:2, presents a dispute between an anonymous authority (whom T. identifies as Judah) and Simeon. The former maintains that if a person vows to bring a barley-meal-offering, since the meal-offering must be of wheat, he is required to bring it of wheat. It follows that his vow is binding, but is subject to correction along the lines of normal practice. After this same

168

MENAHOT

CHAPTER

T\"VELVE

12:1

point is made five times, Simeon rules that in none of these cases is he liable for a meal-offering at all, since his vow to do something which is not normally done is deemed null. T. supplies many more examples of the same moot principle. M. 12:4 is joined to M. 12:3 formally by the use of the language, One volunteers as a freewill-offering; its further link is that it is Simeon's item, like the foregoing. But its rule is of no great interest. The rule is that if one volunteers a meal-offering of sixty-one tenths, he must bring sixty tenths in one utensil, and one tenth in another. Simeon and an anonymous authority debate only the reason for the rule, which both accept. At the end, M. 12 :4J, is an independent rule, which, I shall argue, conforms to Simeon's principle of M. 12:3 and is located where it is on that account. M. 12:5 has a dispute, exhibiting classic, formal perfection, between Tarfon and cAqiba on whether or not one may make a freewill offering of oil, as well as of wine. cAqiba permits wine, but not oil, and, being set up for a fine answer by 'farfon's claim that the two are equivalent, demonstrates that the two are differentiated in an important way. Wine is offered by itself and so may be dedicated as ,l voluntary offering to the altar. 12:1 Meal-offerings and drink-offerings which were made unclean before one has sanctified them in a [ consecrated] utensil C. are subject to redemption [for money, which is deemed consecrated in their stead]. D. [If they are made unclean] after one has sanctified them in a [ consecrated] utensil, E. they are not subject to redemption. F. Fowl and wood and frankincense and a utensil of service are not subject to redemption [ at all], G. for [the rule (Lev. 27:11-13) which permits redemption of a blemished offering] is stated only [in connection with offerings of] cattle. A. B.

M. 12:1

The balanced form of this unitary singleton, A-C against D-E + F-G, yields a triplet. Before one has put the meal-offerings or drink-offerings into a utensil, they are deemed sanctified only by one's statement to that effect. One may therefore redeem them, and the coins received on their account arc deemed set aside for sacred purposes. The unclean substances therefore may be desanctified. But after the actual deed of pouring the meal-offerings or drink-offerings into a utensil has taken

MENAHOT CHAPTER TWELVE

12: 1-2

169

place, they are deemed intrinsically consecrated. If they are made unclean, they must be burned and cannot be redeemed. The items at F, if rendered unclean or otherwise invalid, cannot be redeemed at all. Scripture speaks ( G) of invalid holy things which may be redeemed only in the case of cattle, Lev. 27:11-13. A.· He who sanctifies fowl, and a blemish appears in itB. it is subject to redemption. C. [If} he sanctified it as a blemished [bird}, it is not subject to redemption. D. You have only a beast which requires redemption alone [M. Men. 12:1D}. E. In the case of a firstling, it is said, You will not redeem it (N um. 18: 17), and in the case of tithe [ of cattle}, it is said, It will not be redeemed (Lev. 27:33). T. 12:1 Z p. 531, ls. 11-13

T. subjects fowl to the same rule as M. 12:lA-E, in contrast to M. 12:lF, which is explicit on the matter. Its point, C, is the distinction between fowl before it is blemished, and that which is sanctified with its blemish. In the latter case, of course, there is no basis for redemption. HY corrects T. to conform to M. 12:2

I A. He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself [to bring a meal-offering prepared} in a baking pan," and brought one prepared in a frying pan, B. [or he who says, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring a meal-offering prepared] in a frying pan," and brought one prepared in a baking pan (M. 5:8}C. what he has brought, he has brought [as a separate freewilloffering}. D. But his obligation [for the original pledge} he has not carried out. II E. [He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself to offer} this [ fine flour as a meal-offering prepared] in a baking pan," and brought one prepared in a frying pan, F. [ or he who says, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring this fine flour as a meal-offering prepared} in a frying pan," [and brought one prepared} in a baking panG. lo, this is invalid. Ill H. [He who says,} "Lo, I pledge myself to bring two tenths [of an ephah of fine flour prepared} in a single utensil," and brought [it} in two utensils, I. [ or, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring two tenths of an ephah of fine flour prepared} in two utensils," and he brought [it} in one utensil-

170

MENAHOT CHAPTER T'WELVE

12:2

J.

what he has brought, he has brought. K. But his obligation he has not carried out. IV L. [He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself to offer] these in one utensil," and brought [them] in two utensils, M. [ or he who says, "lo, I pledge myself to offer these] in two utensils," and he brought [them] in one utensilN. lo, these are invalid. [He who says,] "Lo, T pledge myself to bring two tenths V 0. [ of an ephc1h of fine flour] in ,1 single utensil," and brought them in two utensils, P. [if} they said to him, "In a single utensil did you vow [to bring the offering]," Q. and he [then] offered them in a single utensil, R. they are valid. S. And [if he offered them] in two utensils, they are invalid [for they cannot now be deemed a separate freewill-offering). VI T. [He who says,] "Lo, I pledge myself to bring two tenths [e/Jhahs of fine flour] in two utensils," and broughttheminoneutensil, U. [if] they said to him, "In two utensils did you vow [to bring them]," V. [and] he [then] offered them in two utensils, W. they are valid. X. [HJ he gave them in a single utensil, they are deemed to be equivalent to two meal-offerings which were confused [M. 3:3]. M. 12:2

The formal traits of the pericope are clear as indicated, six units, formed into balanced pairs, so we have a unitary pericope made up of three matched doublets. The whole expands greatly the rule of .M. 5 :SA, which dearly distinguishes the rnc,11-offering prepared in a baking pan from one prepared in a frying pan and states that a pledge to bring the one is not fulfilled by the bringing of the other. But our pericope makes two important and original points. First, the offering is deemed acceptable, C, and what has now to be done is for the man to carry out his original pledge, D. Second, if the man speaks of particular flour and states that that specific flour will he prepare in a baking pan, and if he then prepares that flour in a frying pan, it is not valid at all. None of this is to be inferred at, or adduced from M. 5 :8; but why the pericopc is not joined to its natural prologue I cannot say. The same matter i:; repeated at H-K, L-M. As usual in a sizable construction such as this, the third entry, O-X, will make a. fresh point at its conclusion, First, 0-S, if the man pledged two tenths to be brought in one utensil, but then brought them in two, and people reminded him of his original pledge, and he then carried out

MENAHOT CHAPTER TWELVE

12:2

171

his original pledge, the offering is valid ( a point which cannot be made at A-G, H-K). But what happens if at that moment he proceeds to to off er them in two utensils? He has not replied, "Lo, I bring another freewill-meal-offering." We accordingly assume that he has in mind the terms of the original meal-offering which he vowed to bring. But · he obviously does not carry out those terms. So the offering is invalid. I think what is important here is at P-R, since the rest is obvious from the antecedent four items. The second interesting point, T-X, varies the form at X, which attracts our attention. The man pledged two tenths in two utensils but offered them in one utensil. Are they valid? They are deemed equivalent (X) to two meal-offerings which have been mixed together. At M. 3:3, we recall, two-meal-offerings from which the handful has not been taken, which became mixed together, are valid if one can take a handful from one by itself, and from the other by itself. That .rule now is invoked. A. [He who says,] "Lo, I pledge myself to bring [a meal-offering in the form of] loaves," but who brought wafers, B. " ... wafers," but who brought loavesC. what he has brought, he has brought. D. But his obligation he has not carried out [M. Men. 12:2A-D]. E. [He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself] to bring these two tenths {of an ephah of fine flour] in one utensil," but who brought them in two utensilsF. the two utensils have not sanctified them. G. [If he said, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring these two tenths of an ephah of fine flour] in two utensils," but brought them in one utensil, he has not sanctified them in one utensil [M. Men. 12:21). H. [If he said, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring a meal-offering] in one utensil," [and] brought them in two utensil [M. Men. 12:2HJ, I. [and] they said to him, "You have vowed to bring it in one utensil," J. lo, this one should not put it back [the meal-offering]. K. And if he put it back, lo, it is equivalent to two meal-offerings which were confused [M. Men. 12:2KJ. L. [If he said, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring a meal-offering] in two utensils," and brought them in one utensil, M. and they said to him, "In two utensils did you vow [to bring it]," N. lo, this one should not put it back. 0. And if he put it back, lo, these are invalid. T. 12:2 Z p. 531, ls. 13-18

T. does more than go over the ground of M. It also wishes to disagree with M. 12:2 O-X. There we are told that if people tell the man

172

MENAHOT CHAPTER TWELVE

12:2-3

that he had, after all, vowed to bring the meal-offering in one utensil after he has taken the handfuls and put them into two utensils, he may go and put them back into a single utensil. T., by contrast, says the man cannot do anything of the sort. He is not permitted to put the meal-offering back, because it has already been sanctified for its purpose by being put into the utensil. Indeed, even if people reminded the man of the details of the pledge before he has taken the handful, the mealoffering already has been sanctified in the lltensil and the man cannot go and put it back and repeat the action ( ·1'J?.II, p. 262).

12:3 I A. [He who says,] "Lo, I pledge myself [to bring] a mealoffering made of barley," [in any case] must bring one made of wheat. II B. [He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring a meal-offering made} of meal," must bring one made of fine flour. I I I C. [ He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring a meal-offering} without wine and frankincense," must bring one with oil and frankincense. IV D. [He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring a mesJ-offering made of] a half-tenth," must bring one made of a whole tenth. V E. [He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring a meal-offering made of] a tenth and a half-tenth," brings one made of two [whole] tenths [ of an ephdh of fine flour]. VI F. R. Simeon declares free [ of the obligation to bring a mealoffering in any of the foregoing cases], G. for he has not volunteered [a freewill-meal-offering] in the way in which people volunteer [to make a freewill-meal-offering]. M. 12:3

\\7e have a parallel, though not identical, form, that is, a pericope of six units, five closely matched against one another, and a sixth which varies the form and marks the conclusion of the whole. In the five in some cases, the man has vowed to bring a freewill-meal-offering form other than the normal one. The position of A-E is that the man, whatever he has said, must conform to the accepted usage. The offering must be of barley, made into fine flour, accompanied by oil and frankincense; it must be of a tenth, or two tenths of an ephah, of fine flour, but no less than a whole tenth-ephah in either case. Simeon rejects the theory of A-E. In his vie,v, if someone volunteers to in ::ome way different from what is bring a freewill-meal-offering expected under the terms of such a vow, he is exempt from bringing any at all; he has said nothing.

MENAHOT CHAPTER TWELVE

12:3

173

A. (He who says,] "Lo, I pledge myself [to bring] a thankofferingwithout bread," or "a burnt-offeringwithout drink-offerings"B. they force him to bring a thank-offering with its bread, a burntoffering with its drink-offerings. T. 12:3 Z p. 531, ls. 18-19

A. "A priest who said, 'Lo, I pledge myself [to bring] a mealoffering, the handful of which will be taken ,and [the residue of] which will be eaten, by an Israelite'B. "[If] he said, 'Lo, I pledge myself [to bring] a meal-offering, the whole of which will be offered up on the fires'C. "they force him to bring a meal-offering in accord with its requirement," the words of R. Judah. D. And R. Simeon declares [him] exempt, for he has not volunteered [his offering] in the way in which people volunteer [ offerings] [M. Men. 12:3G]. T. 12:4 Z p. 531, ls. 19-22 A. "[He who says,] 'Lo, I pledge myself [to bring] a meal-offering of barley'-they force him to bring one of wheat [M. 12:3A]," the words of R. Judah. B. And R. Simeon declares [him] exempt, for he has not volunteered in the way in which people volunteer. C. "[If he says,] 'Lo, I pledge myself to bring one of wheat,' they force him to bring one of flour (M. 12:3B]," the words of R. Judah. D. And R. Simeon declares [him] exempt, for he has not volunteered in the way in which people volunteer. E. "[He who says,] 'Lo, I pledge myself [to bring a meal-offering made ofj a half tenth,' [M. Men. 12:3D], they force him to bring one of a whole tenth," the words of R. Judah. F. And R. Simeon declares [him] exempt, for he has not volun, leered in the way in which people volunteer. G. "[He who says,] 'Lo, I pledge myself [to bring a meal-offering of] one tenth in two utensils,' they force him to bring two tenths in two utensils,'' the words of R. Judah. H. And R. Simeon declares [him] exempt, for he has not volunteered in the way in which people volunteer. T. 12:5 Z p. 531, ls. 22-27

A. [He who says,] "Lo, I pledge myself to bring a tenth and a half" [M. Men. 12:3EJB. they force him to bring two whole tenths, for they do not volunteer [ as a freewill-offering] half-tenths. T. 12:6 Z p. 531, ls. 27-28

A. [He who says,] "Lo, I pledge myself [to bring a hundred tenths in one utensil],''

174

MENAHOT CHAPTER TWELVE

B.

12:3-4

they force him to bring sixty in one utensil and forty in another

utensil. C. And if he brought half in one utensil and half in another utensil, he has not fulfilled his obligation. D. [If he said, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring a hundred tenths] in two utensils," E. he brings half in one utensil and half in another utensil. F. And if he brought sixty in one utensil and forty in another utensil, he has fulfilled his obligation. T. 12:7 Z p. 531, ls. 28-32

Apart from supplying many more examples of the principle of M. 12:3, T. assigns the anonymous position of M . .to Judah. T. 12:7 leads us directly into M. 12 :4, linking the issues of the two pericopae.

12:4 A. A man volunteers to make a freewill-offering of a meal-offering consisting of sixty tenths and brings it in a single utensil. B. If he said, "Lo, I pledge myself [to bring a meal-offering] of sixty-one [tenths of an ephah ]," he brings sixty in a single utensil, and one in a single utensil. C. For so does the community bring on the first festival day of the Festival [Sukkot] which coincides with the Sabbath sixty-one [tenths]. D. It is enough for the individual to fall short of the community by one [tenth]. E. Said R. Simeon, "And are not these for bullocks, and these for rams, and they are not mixed up with one another [ for the quantity of oil for the tenths is not uniform]? F. "But [the reason is that] up to sixty tenths [of an ephah] can be mixed together [ = Eliezer b. Jacob, M. 9:3]." G. They said to him, "Are sixty mixed together, and sixty-one not mixed together?" H. He said to them, "So it is in all measures [prescribed by] sages: I. "In forty seahs [ of water] one immerses. In forty seahs of water less a single qartob, one cannot immerse. J. "They do not volunteer as a freewill-offering a single log [of wine], two, or five. But they volunteer as a freewill-offering three, four, or six, and any number more than six." M. 12:4 We have a further pericope driving from Simeon, M. 12:4A-I, with an attached, mildly relevant rule, J. A introduces the whole. It is permitted to volunteer sixty-tenths and to bring the whole in a single utensil. B-D then add the proposition, the reason for which is under discussion. One may not do so with sixty-one, for the reason given at C-D, a unitary gloss of B. Simeon disputes C-D, but accepts the rule

MENAHOT CHAPTER TWELVE

12:4

175

of B. The community brings fifty-seven tenths for thirteen bullocks ( 39), two rams ( 4), and fourteen lambs ( 14) brought as additional offerings on Sukkot (Num. 29:14-15 ), two tenths for the two continual offerings (Num. 29:5), and two tenths for the two lambs of the additional offering of the Sabbath (Num. 29:9), suety-one in all. The individual brings one less than that number in a single utensil. Simeon's view is that these are not mixed together, that is, brought in a single utensil (M. 9:4). There must, therefore, be a separate reason for the rule of B. Sixty tenths can be well stirred with the oil; sixty-one cannot. (Or F concurs with Eliezer b. Jacob, M. 9:3 ). G simply expresses surprise at such a minuscule consideraition. Simeon's answer, H-I, is that a small difference does matter. I assume that his thinking is that the measure of forth seahs is exact, because that volume of water suffices to cover the body of a man, but less than that volume does not. J's point is that wine for the drink-offering is volunteered in the stated measure, three, four, six, or more than six logs, but not in the volume of one, two, or five, for these measures of volume are not found in the case of drink-offerings. Three logs apply to the offering of a lamb, four to the ram, and six to the bullock (Num. 14:5-10). This would seem to me pertinent to Simeon's thinking here, in that specific measures are specified by the Torah, but still more to M. 12:3G: one must volunteer in the way in which the matter usually is done. But T. 12:10 assigns Jto cAqiba. A. Said R. Simeon, "My colleagues[B. Men. 103b: Judah b. Ilai] said to me, 'On what account [ is it so thatJ he who says, 'Lo, I pledge myself sixty-tenths' brings them in one utensil, [while he who says,

'Lo, I pledge myself to bring] sixty-one tenths' brings sixty in one utensil and one in another utensil' [M. Men. 12:4A-B]?

B.

"And I said to them, 'You state [the reason].' "They said, 'For so the community brings on the first day of the Festival [Sukkot] which coincides with the Sabbath sixty [tenths], [but no more]' [M. Men. 12:4CJ. D. "I said to them, 'But do they not offer sixty-one?' E. "They said to me, 'The individual falls short of the community by one' [M. Men. 12:4D]. F. "I said to them, 'But are not these offered in the morning, and these are offered at twilight?' G. "Another matter: 'And are there not there a meal-offering of bullocks, one of rams, and one of lambs, and they do not mix the meal-offeringof bullocks,rams, and lambs together [M. Men. 12:4EJ?' H. "They said to me, 'If not, then you state the reason.' T. 12:8 Z p. 531, ls. 32-38 C.

12

176

MENAHOT

CHAPTER TWELVE

12:4-5

A. "I said to them, 'Scripture says, Fine flour mixed with oil (Lev. 2:5)B. "'A meal-offering with which oil mixes for stirring.' C. "They said to me, 'In sixty [tenths] it mixes, and in sixty-one it does not mix?' [M. Men. 12:4GJ. D. "I said to them, 'All the measurements which are in the Torah are fixed [ and absolute]. E. "'In forty seahs [of water] does one immerse. In forty seahs less a single qartob one cannot immerse [M. Men. 12:4]. F. "'Food of the volume of an egg imparts uncleanness as food. [If) it lacks even the volume of a sesame seed, it does not impart uncleanness as food. G. " ' [ A piece of clothJ three by three handbreadths is susceptible to midras-uncleanness. [If] it lacks even a single thread, it is not susceptible to midras-undeanness. H. " 'It follows that all the measures which are in the Torah are fixed.'" T. 12:9 Z p. 531, 1. 38, p. 532, ls. 1-5 T. cites and beautifully expands M.

12:5 A. "They volunteer wine as a freewill-offering, but they do not volunteer oil as a freewill-offering," the words of R. cAqiba. B. R. Tarfon says, "They volunteer oil as a freewill-offering." C. Said R. Tarfon, "Just as we find in the case of wine that it is brought in fulfillment of an obligation, and it [also] is brought as a freewill-offering, so in the case of oil, it is brought in fulfillment of an obligation, and it [also] is brought as a freewill-offering." D. Said to him R. cAqiba, "No. If you have so stated the rule in connection with wine, it is because it is offered in fulfillment of one's obligation entirely by itself. E. "But will you say so in connection with oil, which is not offered in fulfillment of one's obliga.tion entirely by itself?" F. Two people do not volunteer as a freewill-offering a single tenth. G. But they volunteer as a single freewill-offering a burnt-offering and peace-offerings, H. and in the case of fowl, even a single bird. M. 12:5 [ A-E: compare M. Zeb. 10:8) The dispute, A-B, is in perfect balance. The debate then allows cAqiba to distinguish from one another the analogous substances, oil and wine. They are different because wine is offered by itself, but oil is not. It must be mixed with the meal-offering. That is, wine is offered for drink-offerings, without meal and oil, but oil is never offered by itself. Accordingly, in cAqiba's view, oil is essentially different from wine and cannot be offered as a freewill-offering by itself.

MENAHOT CHAPTER TWELVE 12 :5

177

F-H are separate; Fis balanced against G, and H glosses G. A single tenth cannot be offered by two people as a freewill-offering. But the animals can be offered in partnership. A. He who volunteers an offering of wine, in accord with the opinion of [R. cAqiba and (TR II, p. 263)} R. Tarfon, puts it into bowls. B. {He who volunteers] oil, in accord with the opinion of R. Tarfon-it is offered on the altar-fires [M. Men. 12:5A-B]. C. He who volunteers an offering of wine [Delete: in accord with the opinion of R. cAqiba (TR II, p. 263)] brings not one nor two nor five [logs] D. but brings three, so that they may be offered with a lamb, E. four, so that they may be offered with the rams, F. six, so that they may be offered with the bullocks, G. seven, so that they may be offered with the ram and with the lamb [M. Men. 12:41]. H. From that point onward, you can divide it up. T. 12:10 Z p. 531, ls. 5-10

T. augments M. 12:5 and explains M. 12:4J.

12*

CHAPTER THIRTEEN

MENAHOT CHAPTER THIRTEEN The concluding chapter continues the theme and formulary pattern of the foregoing, the donation of meal-offerings to the Temple, stated with an explicit or implied, He who says, Lo, I pledge myself [to bring] .... The only pericope, according to the division of the printed texts and MSS, which does not begin with that language is M. 13:9. But the particular interests of the several units are not identical, and three distinct units arc to be discerned, M. 13:1-2, M. 13:3-8, and M. 13:9, with an appendix at M. 13:10 and a conclusion to the tractate as a whole, M. 13:11. M. 13:1 and M. 13:2 go over the same ground, which is, the interpretation of a person's language when he makes a vo,v of a mealoffering. The next set, M. 13:3-8, involves other kinds of freewillofferings than meal-offerings, specifying, at M. 13:3-5, the quantity of wood, frankincense, gold, silver, copper, wine, and oil, which one brings when he pledges those substances without specification of the quantity. M. 13:6-7 attend to animals, e.g., he who pledges a burntoffering, thank-offering, and peace-offerings, is told whJJt sorts of animals-at a minimum-must be brought in fulfillment of his pledge. M. 13 :8 is a logical conclusion, because it specifies that, in addition, the required drink-offerings are to be brought and determines their value. M. 13:9 speaks of an animal which is devoted to the Temple and then blemished. The subterranean theme of the chapter, occurring in all three units, at M. 13:2, 8, and 9, is Rabbi's view that one must do exactly what he has said, and that if one does more than what he has promised to do, that is not accepted in fulfillment of his pledge. If, for instance, one pledges a ram as a burnt-offering and the ram is blemished and sold, with the proceeds thereof, he may bring a lamb. Rabbi prohibits doing so, or, for example, bringing two instead of the pledged one, and so on. M.'s perspective on his opinion is that one must do exactly what he has promised. But T. to M. 13:9 has a different notion of the matter. Rabbi simply does not deem the two animals to be equivalent to the pledged one, because the meal-offerings accompanying them are different. The appendix, M. 13:10, introduces a quite separate issue, though

MENAHOT CHAPTER THIRTEEN

13:1-2

179

in the standard formulary pattern. A person who pledges a burntoffering is assumed to intend that it be offered in Jerusalem, not in the Temple in Lower Egypt. The same point is made in connection with the Nazirite. If a person pledges a burnt-offering to the Temple of Onias, it is to be offered in Jerusalem, but, in this case, if it actually is offered in Egypt, it is deemed to fulfill the pledge. The pericope concludes with the rule that priests who served in the Temple of Onias are not to serve in Jerusalem. T. explicitly links this rule to the concluding units of M. Zebahim ( Chapter Fourteen) about the points at which high places are pmhibited or permitted (M. Zeb. 14:4-8). M. 13: 11 concludes our tractate, and M. Zebahim as well, with a homily which speaks equally of burnt-offerings of beasts and of fowl and the meal-offering. 13:1 A. [He who says,] "Lo, I pledge myself [to bring] a tenth," brings one [tenth]. B. [He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring] tenths" brings two [tenths]. C. [He who says,J "I expressly said [ a certain number of tenths] but I do not know what I expressly said" brings sixty tenths [the maximum offered by an individual (M. 12:4)]. D. [He who says,] "Lo, I pledge myself [to bring] a meal-offering" brings any one [ of the five kinds] he wants to. E. R. Judah says, ''He brings a meal-offering of fine flour, for it is the distinctive one among [all types of] meal-offerings." M. 13:1

The pericope is in two units, A-C and D-E. A sets the stage for its successors.The point of B is that the smallest plural is two. C completes the thought. If the man states that he promised a specific number of meal-offerings but does not know how many he promised, we now assume he may have promised the maximum number, which is sixty (M. 12:4, 13:5). D-E's dispute is clear enough. If the man promised a meal-offering without specification, he brings any kind. Judah differs, for the stated reason. Lev. 2:1 treats a meal-offering of fine flour as a meal-offering, without further specification; the others have particular names. 13:2 A. [He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring] a meal-offering" [or] "some kind of meal-offering" brings one [ of the five kinds].

180

MENAHOT CHAPTER THIRTEEN

13:2

B. [He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring] meal-offerings" [or] "some kind of meal-offerings" brings two [of the five kinds]. C. [He who says,] ''I expressly said [which kind] but I do not know what I expressly said" brings all five kinds. D. [He who says,} "I expressly said a meal-offering of tenths, but I do not know what I expressly said" brings a meal-offering of sixty tenths. E. Rabbi says, "Let him bring meal-offerings of [ every number] of tenths from one to sixty." M. 13:2

M. 13: 2A brings us back to ,the issue of M. 1 3: 1, which is why we cannot treat it as a continuation of the former. 1 A runs parallel to M. 13:lA, B, to M. 13:lB, and C, to M. 13:lC. The shift, of course, is that the issue is now not the nttmber but the kind ( M. 13: 1CD) meal-offering, and, it follows, M. 13:2C differs from M. 13:lC. M .13:2D repeats M. 13:lC's point, but now with the dispute of Rabbi, E. Accordingly, the whole is simply a version parallel to the foregoing. C's five kinds are ( 1) a meal-offering of fine flour, one baked in an o:ven, which yields either ( 2) loaves or ( 3) wafers, ( 4) a mealoffering prepared in a baking pan, and ( 5) a meal-offering prepared in a frying pan. Rabbi's position, D-E ( = M. 13:lC), is that if one vowed a small meal-offering, one less than sixty tenths, and brought a large one, of sixty tenths, he has not fulfilled his obligation, and he therefore has to bring sixty, one of one tenth, one of two tenths, and so on ( 18 30 in all). Those not covered by the vow then are treated as a freewill-offering. M. 13:8 repeats Rabbi's position on this principle, which is that if one brought a large offering instead of a small one, he has not carried out his obligation. Sixty in one utensil do not suffice. A. [He who says,] "I expressly said a meal-offering, but I do not know what I expressly said," lo, this one brings five meal-offerings, [ one of each of] the five kinds [M. Men. 13: 2CJ. B. [He who says}, "Lo, I pledge myself [to bring] some kind of meal-offerings" brings two meal-offerings of a single kind. C. " ... two kinds of meal-offerings" brings two meal-offerings of two kinds [M. Men. 13:2A-B]. D. [He who says,] "Lo, I pledge myself [to bring] some kind of tenths [ of an ephah ]" brings two tenths of one kind. E. " ... kinds of tenths" brings two tenths of two kinds. T. 12:11 Z p. 532, ls. 10-13 1 "I think the distinction here is too subtle and would view M. 13:1-2 as a single unit." R.S.S.

MENAHOT CHAPTER THIRTEEN

13:2-3

181

A. [He who says,] "I expressly said a meal-offering of tenths, but I do not know which of them I expressly stated," B. lo, this one brings five meal-offerings of five kinds [ of mealoffering] of sixty tenths, which are three hundred tenths [M. Men. 13:2D). T. 12:12 Z p. 532, ls. 13-15 A. "[He who says], 'I expressly said a meal-offering of tenths, but I do not know of how many tenths I expressly stated,' lo, this one brings meal-offerings of tenths, from one up to sixty, which are one thousand and eight [hundred] and thirty tenths," the words of Rabbi (M. Men. 13:2EJ. B. And sages say, "One of sixty tenths" [M. Men. 13:2D). T. 12:13 Z p. 532, ls. 15-17 A. "[He who says,] 'I expressly said a meal-offering of tenths but I do not know which one of them I expressly said, and how many tenths I expressly said,' lo, this one brings five meal-offerings of five kinds, of sixty tenths each, from one to sixty, which are nine thousand and one hundred and fifty tenths [ = 5 X 1830)," the words of Rabbi. B. And sages say, "Five meal-offerings of five kinds, sixty tenths which are three hundred tenths." T. 12:14 Z p. 532, ls. 18-21

T. systematically expands M. 13:2's cases. At T. 12:llA the man does not know which of .the five kinds he promised, so he brings one of each. At B he has promised a single kind of meal-offerings, so brings two offerings of one kind, and C follows. D-E repeat the same principle. T 12:12 continues the same line of thought. T. 12:13-14 go over the dispute of Rabbi and sages at M. 13:2D-E. 13:3

I A. [He who says,] "Lo, I pledge myself {to bring] wood" should not (bring] less than two bundles of wood. II B. [He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring] frankincense" should not [bring] less than a handful. C. They are five sorts of [ rules pertinent to] handfuls: (1) He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself [to bring] frankincense" should not [bring] less than a handful. (2) He who volunteers a freewill-offering of a meal-offering brings with it a handful of frankincense. (3) He who offers up a handful outside is liable. ( 4-5) And two dishes require two handfuls [ of frankincense]. M. 13:3

182

MENAHOT CHAPTER THIRTEEN

13:3-5

A-B, a pair, are clear as stated. C is difficult to interpret. If it intends to introduce a list of five offerings from which a handful is taken, then it obviously will be disappointed, since there are only four items which follow, and one of them, C3, is irrel~ant to the announced topic of the list. Cl tells us a pledge of frankincense requires a handful-that is, B. C2 indeed carries forward Cl; frankincense requires a handful; meal-offering requires a handful of frankincense. C3 is distinct from what precedes and what follows, for it has nothing to do with a pledge of a handful of anything. C4 carries forward C2; if each dish represents one handful, we have the promised five items (Qahaty) which still are not really parallel to one another. A. [He who says,] "Lo, I pledge myrelf [to bring] frankincense" should not [bring] less than a handful [M. Men. 13:3B}. B. R. Judah says, "[He may bring frankincense] of the weight of ten denars." C. R. Yol;iananb. Beroqah says, "A priest sanctifies it in a utensil of service and offers it up." D. Others say, ''He who says, 'Lo, I pledge myself [to bring iron' should not [bring] less than the scarecrow [ an iron sheet studded with spikes (M. Mid. 4:6)] which is in the Hekhal." T. 12:15 Z p. 532, ls. 21-24

After citing M., T. adds a dispute, B. Dis a distinct addition. 13:4-5

III A. [He who says,] "Lo, I pledge myself {to bring} go1d" [for the upkeep of the Temple] should not [bring] less than a golden denar. IV B. {He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring] silver" should not [bring] less than a denar of silver. V C. {He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring} copper" should not bring] less [than {the value of} a silver macah. D. {He who says,] "I expressly said [how much I should give] but I do not know what I expressly said" must bring until he will state, "I did not intend that much." M. 13:4 VI A. {He who says], "Lo, I pledge myself {to bring] wine" must not [bring] less than three logs [those for the drink-offerings of a lamb, the smallest volume]. VII B. {He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring] oil" must not bring less than a log [the smallest volume, that for a tenth of

flour].

MENAHOT CHAPTER THIRTEEN

13:4-7

183

C. Rabbi says, ''Three logs { as at A]." D. [He who says,} "I expressly said [how much I should give} but I do not know what I expressly said" brings in accord with [what is brought on} the day of the most abundant [offering of wine or oil which is the first day of Sukkot when it coincides with the Sabbath (B. Men.

107A)]. M. 13:5

The pericope is clear as stated, following the established pattern. The point of M. 13:5A is familiar from M. 12:4, and of M. 13:5B, M. 12:3, 9:3. B accords with Tarfon, M. 12:5. For D's reference, see M. 12:4: 140 logs of oil, 140 logs of wine.

VIII A. [He who says}, "Lo, I pledge myself [to bring} a burntoffering" brings a lamb [the smallest acceptable burnt-offering]. B. R. Eleazar b. cAzariah says, "Or a turtle-dove, or a pigeon" {a fowl also is acceptable as a burnt-offering]. IX C. [He who says,} "I expressly said [that I should offer a beast] of the herd but I do not know what I expressly said" brings a bullock and a calf. D. {He who says, "I expressly said that I should offer a beast} of the cattle but I do not know what I expressly said" must bring a bullock, a calf, a ram, a goat, and a lamb. E. {He who says,} "I expressly said [what I should offer} but I do not know what I expressly said" adds .to them a turtle-dove and a pigeon. M. 13:6 The familiar pattern continues. A-B's dispute sets the stage for C-E. At C, the man has offered a kind of beast of the herd, at D, some sort of cattle, and at E, any sort of animal, which is to say, C-E = B. 13:7

X A. [He who says,} "Lo, I pledge myself {to bring] a thankoffering and peace-offerings" brings a lamb. XI B. [He who says,J "I expressly said {that I should bring a beast} of the herd but I do not know what I expressly said" brings a bullock, a heifer, a young bullock, and a young heifer. XU C. [He who says}, "I expressly said [that I should bring a beast} of cattle, but I do not know what I expressly said" brings a bullock, a heifer, a young bullock, a young heifer, a ram, a ewe, a lamb, a she-lamb, goat, a she-goat, a young ram, and a ewe-lamb. M. 13:7

a

M. 13: 7 continues the foregoing, M. 13: 7A being paiiallel to M. 13:6A, M. 13:7B = M. 13:6C, M. 13:7C = M. 13:6D, and the

184

MENAHOT CHAPTER THIRTEEN

13:7-8

difference in the specified animals is due to the acceptability for the thank-offering and peace-offerings of animals not used for burnto£ferings. A. [He who says,} "Lo, I pledge myself [to bring] a burnt-offering {M. Men .. 13:6A} from the herd" brings a heifer. B. " ... from the flock" brings a lamb. C. ,[He who says], "Lo, I pledge myself [to bring]a thankoffering and peace-offerings [M. Men .13:7A} from the herd" brings a heifer. D. And" ... from the flock"-brings a lamb. T. 13:1 Z p. 532, ls. 25-6 A. R. Simeon said, "If a man will say to you, 'In accord with the opinion of R. cAqiba, [ one who vows a burnt-offering brings] a heifer,' accept [the tradition} from him; [if he says} 'a ram,' accept [the tradition} from him; 'a lamb,' accept [the tradition J from him. B. "For in the case of all of them did R. cAqiba give the reason [that said animal fulfills the vowsJ : C. "A heifer-for the claim of the All-Highest is overriding. D. "A ram-neither a large nor a small one but a middle-sized one. E. "A lamb-he who makes a claim against his fellow must bring proof { of the validity of his claim for something more expensive}." T. 13:2 Z p. 532, ls. 26-29

T. 13:1 complicates M. 13:6A, 13:7A. The point is that one may bring the smallest sort of animal of .the specified .type (HY).

13:8 I A. [He who says,} "Lo, I pledge myself {to bring} an ox" brings it and its drink-offerings to the value of a maneh. II B. [He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring} a young bullock" brings it and its drink-offerings, to the value of five selas. III C. [He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring] a ram" brings it and its drink-offerings to the value of two selas. IV D. " ... a lamb" brings it and its drink-offerings to the value of a sela. V E. " ... an ox to the value of a man eh" brings one at the value of a maneh, exclusiveof the value of its drink-offerings. VI F. " ... a young bullock to the value of five selas" brings one of the value of five selas, exclusive of the value of 1ts drink-offerings. VII G. '' ... a ram at the value of two selas" brings one for two selas exclusive of the value of its drink-offerings. VI II H. " ... a lamb at the value of a sela" brings one at the value of a sela, exclusiveof the value of its drink-offerings.

MENAHOT CHAPTER THIRTEEN

13:8-9

185

IX I. " ... an ox at the value of a maneh," and he brought two for a maneh has not carried out his obligation, even if this one is worth a maneh less a denar, and the other one is worth a maneh less a denar. J. "... a black one" and he brought a white one, K. "a white one" and he brought a black one, L. "a large one" and he brought a small one" M. he has not carried out his obligation. N. " ... a small one" and he brought a large one-0. he has carried out his obligation. P. Rabbi says, "He has not carried out his obligation." M. 13:8

The pericopeconsists of two units: (1) A-D, E-H, which are matched J-M introduce the dispute of N-P. All parties can concur at J-M, for the man obviously has not done what he promised. The view of N + 0 is that the large ox is acceptable. Rabbi's opinion, familiar from M. 13 :2, is that one must do exactly what he said, in line with J-M.

+ I, a supplement ,to E; ( 2) and J-P.

13:9 A. [He who says,] "This ox is a burnt-offering," and it became blemished, if he wants, he may bring with the proceeds [ for the sale of the ox] two [oxen]. B. [He who says], "These two oxen are a burnt-offering," and they got blemished, if he wants, brings with their proceeds one [ox]. C. Rabbi prohibits [ doing so]. D. [He who says,] "This ram is a burnt-offering," and it became blemished, if he wants, brings with its proceeds a lamb. E. {He who says,] "This lamb is a burnt-offering," and it became blemished, if he wants, brings with its proceeds a ram. F. Rabbi prohibits [ doing so]. I G. He who says, "One of my lambs is dedicated, and "one of my oxen is dedicated"H. { if) he had two, the larger of them is dedicated. II I. [If he had] three, the middle-sized one is dedicated. III J. {If he said,] "I expressly said {which one I should give] but I do not know what I expressly said," K. {if] he said, "Father said to me {which one to give] but I do not know what [he said)"L. the largest among them is dedicated. M. 13:9

A-C and D-F are matched triplets. Rabbi's principle is further illus,tra.ted,so, counting M. 13:8J-P, there are three examples of his view. G-L are separate. In a case of doubt, J-K, we choose the best animal.

186

MENAHOT CHAPTER THIRTEEN

13 :9

A. Just as he who dedicates without explanation, lo, this one brings the largest among them, so he who says, "Lo, I pledge myself" without explanation, lo, this one brings the largest one of them. B. [He who says,] "Lo, I pledge myself [to bring] to the altar" brings frankincense, for dedication without explanation to the altar {refers to J frankincense. C. [He who says,] "I set aside [ something] for the altar and I do not know what I set aside"D. lo, this one continues setting aside until he sets aside [ animals in such wiseJ that one will come from each and every kind of animal which is offered on the altar. T. 13:3 Z p. 532, Is. 29-32

A. {He who says,] "This sela is for the altar" brings with it a heifer. B. [He who says,] "I set aside [ something] for the altar and I do not know for what purpose I set it aside," lo, this one continues to set aside until he will bring something from every sort of thing which is offered on the altar. T. 13:4 Z p. 532, ls. 33-34 A. [He who says], "This heifer is for the altar, this heifer is for the altar" must bring it. B. " ... I set aside a bumt-off ering for the altar, and I do not know wh{ch one I set aside"-it must pasture until it is blemished, and then be sold. C. And let the man continue setting aside [ things for the altar J until he will have brought one of every sort of thing which is offered on the altar. T. 13:5 Z p. 532, ls. 34-36 A. [He who says], "Lo, I pledge myself [to bring] a horned animal" and brought one whose horns are leveled, B. "an animal whose horns are leveled" and brought a horned one-C. what he has brought, he has brought. D. But he has not fulfilled his obligation [M. Men. 12:2]. T. 13:6 Z p. 532, Is. 36-37

A. [He who says], "Lo, I pledge myself [to bring] an ox worth two hundred [ zuz ]" and went and brought two oxen worth a maneh [ a hundred zuz] each has not fulfilled his obligation [ vs. M. Men. 13:9A]. B. [He who says], "Lo, I pledge myself [to bring] an ox worth a maneh [a hundred zuz]" and went and brought an ox worth two hundred [TR II, p. 264: for two hundred, or one worth two hundred for] a maneh, he has carried out his obligation, for included in two hundred [zuz] is a maneh.

MENAHOT CHAPTER THIRTEEN

13:9

187

C. Rabbi says, "He has not fulfilled his obligation" [M. Men. 13:9A-F]. T. 13:7 Z p. 532, ls 37-38, p. 533, 1.1.

A. [He who says,} "An ox, this ox is a burnt-offering," and it was blemished should not bring with its proceeds a ram. But he may bring with its proceeds two rams. B. And Rabbi prohibits. C. For it is not the proper mixture. T. 13:8 Z p. 533, ls. 1-3 A. [He who says}, "This ram is a burnt-offering," and it was blemished, should not bring with its proceeds a lamb. But he brings with its proceeds two lambs. B. And Rabbi prohibits. C. For it is not the proper mixture. D. [He who says}, "This lamb is a burnt-offering," and it was blemished, [ if] he wants, he may bring with its proceeds a ram. E. [He who says], "This ram is a burnt-offering" and it was blemished ,if he wants, does not bring with its proceeds a lamb. F. But he brings with its proceeds two lambs. G. And Rabbi prohibits. H. For it is not the proper mixture. T. 13:9 Z p .533, ls. 3-6 A. [He who says}, "This lamb is a burnt-offering," and it was blemished, if he wants, brings with its proceeds a ram. B. '(He who says,} "This ram is a burnt-offering" and it was blemished, [if] he wants, brings with its proceeds a heifer. C. [He who says}, "This heifer is a burnt-offering" and it was blemished, [ if} he wants, brings with its proceeds an ox. D. {He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring] an ox of one of my oxen"-it is a burnt-offering. T. 13:10 Z p. 533, Is. 6-8 A. And so: An ox set aside as a burnt-offering which was confused with his [ otherJ oxen-lo, this one brings the largest among them as a burnt-offering. B. An the rest are to be sold to those who owe burnt-offerings. C. And the proceeds thereof are unconsecrated. T. 13:11 Z p. 533, ls. 8-9

T. augments M. 13:9. T. 13:3 is clear as stated. The main point is that, if the man has not specified what he will bring, and his language is such that he may have specified any sort of offering, he must -as at M. 13:lC, 13:2C-cover all possibilities. T. 13:4-5 make the same points. T. 13:6 is autonomous but relevant. Rabbi's point, M. 13:9

188

MENAHOT CHAPTER THIRTEEN

13 :9-10

is repeated at T. 13:7. The reason for his objection is specified at T. 13:8C, T. 13:9C and H. The proper mixture refers to the two meal-offerings which accompany the two rams. Ea.ch is brought in a separate vessel. The offering now, therefore, is different from the original one, which was to be one meal-offering (B. Men. 108b, TR II, p. 264. But compare Epstein, Tan., p. 198: J:IBYLH = "one bundle, because two are not one.") T. 13:10D and T. 13:11 for a single unit, which is clear as stated. 13:10 A. {He who says,] "Lo, I pledge myself [to bring] a burnt-offering" offers it in the sanctuary. B. And if he offered it in the House of Onias, he has not carried out his obligation. C. {He who says, "Lo, I pledge myself to bring a burnt-offering] which I shall offer in the House of Onias" offers it in the sanctuary. D. But if he offered it in the House of Onias, he has carried out his obligation. E. R. Simeon says, "This is no burnt-offering." F. i[He who says,] "Lo, I am a Nazirite" shaves (Num. 6:1318} in the sanctuary. G. And if he shaved in the House of Onias, he has not carried out his obligation. H. [If he said, "Lo, I am a Nazirite, and] I shall shave in the House of Onias" shaves in the sanctuary. I. But if he shaved in the House of Onias, he has carried out his obligation. J. R. Simeon says, "This is no Nazirite." K. The priests who served in the House of Onias are not to serve in the sanctuary in Jerusalem. L. And one need not say [that ,this applies to those who have served] for another matter [idolatry], M. as it is said, Nevertheless the priests of the high places came not up to the altar of the Lord in f erusalem, but they ate unleavened bread among their brethren (II Kings 23:9)N. lo, they are like blemished priests, taking a share and eating [it] but not offering up [sacrifices]. M. 13:10

This unitary item is in three parts, A-E, F-J, and K-N. The first two repeat Simeon's position at M. 12 :3. K-N are clear as stated ( compare M. Zeb. 12:1 ). For the context and story of the Temple of Onias, see Rabbinic Traditions about the Pharisees before 70, I, pp. 2459.

MENAHOT CHAPTER THIRTEEN

13:10

189

A. [He who says], "Lo, I pledge myself [to bring] a burntoffering" offers it in the sanctuary. B. And if he offered it in the House of Onias, he has not carried out his obligation [M. Men. 13:lOA-B]. C. And they are liable on account of its animal-sacrifices to extirpation. T. 13:12 Z p. 533, ls. 9-10 A. '[He who says], "Lo, I am Nazirite," shaves in the sanctuary. B. And if he shaved in the House of Onias, he has not fulfilled his obligation [M. Men. 1:lOF-GJ. C. And they are liable on account of its animal-sacrifices to extirpation. T. 13:13 Z p. 533, ls. 10-11

A. The priest(s) who served in the House of Onias or in other places B. at the time of ,the prohibition of the high place[ s]-is prohibited [from serving in Jerusalem]. C. [If he did so] at the time of the permission of the high place[s], he is permitted [M. Men .13:l0K-L]. D. As it is said, Nevertheless the priests of the high places came not up to the altar of the Lord in f erusalem, but they ate unleavened bread among their brethren (II Kings 23:9). T. 13:14 Z p. 533, ls. 11-14 E. May one conclude, If they ate unleavened bread in the midst of their brethren, they should be prohibited, and if not, they should be permitted? [Even if they have officiated? Obviously not!] F. Conclude therefore [that] they are valid to take their share but prohibited to offer [sacrifices], like blemished [priests] [M. Men. 13:l0N]. T. 13:15 Z p. 533, ls. 14-15 T. cites and glosses M. 13:10. A. Lo, if [ a priest] was clean at the time of slaughter and at the time of the tossing of the blood, but at the time of the burning of the fat, he was made unclean, lo, this one takes a share of the flesh. B. R. Nehora'i says, "Even if he was clean at the time of the tossing of the blood, but at the time of the burning of the fat he was made unclean, he does not take a portion in the flesh. C. "Under no circumstances does he take a porion of the flesh unless he is clean at the time of the slaughter and at the time of the tossing of the blood and at the time of the burning of the fat." T. 13:16 Z p. 533, ls. 15-19 A. A priest comes and offers his holy things in a watch which is not his.

MENAHOT CHAPTER THIRTEEN 13: 10

190

The hide and [the fee for] its service belong to him. C. And if he was aged or ill, they give [ the liturgy] to any priest whom he wants. Its hide and its flesh are his. D. But if he was blemished, they give it to the men of that watch. Its hide and {the fee for] its service belongs to them. E. And that which is taken from a gentile belongs to any priest whom he chooses. F. And a field of possession is given to the men of the watch on the New Year which marks the beginning of the Jubilee-year. T. 13:17 Z p. 533, ls. 19-22 B.

A. At first did they bring the hides of Holy Things to the room of the house of Parvah and divided them in the evening to each household which served on that day. But the powerful men of the priesthood would come and take them by force. B. They ordained that they should divide it on Fridays to each and every watch. T. 13:18 Z p. 533, ls. 22-25 A. But still did violent men of the priesthood come and take it away by force. B. The owners went and dedicated them to heaven [T. Zeb. 11:16]. C. They said, The days were not few before the priests covered the face of the entire porch [ of the Temple] with golden trays, a hundred by a hundred [handbreadths], with the thickness of a golden denar. Thus did they lay them together until the festival. And on the festival they remove them. They leave them on the stairs of the Temple Mount, so that the people should see their work, that it is beautiful [and] that there was no imperfection in them. D. After the festival they go and put them up in their place. T. 13:19 Z p. 533, ls. 25-30 A. Abba Saul says, "Beams of sycamore were in Jericho. And strong-fisted men would come and take them by force. B. The owners went and dedicated them to heaven. C. They said, "The owners dedicated to heaven only beams of syacamore alone" [T. Zeb. 11: 17). T. 13:20 Z p. 533, ls. 30-32

A. Concerning these and people like them and people similar to them and people who do deeds like their deeds did Abba Saul b. Bitnit and Abba Yose b. Yol)-ananof Jerusalem say, (1) "Woe is me because of the House of Boethus. Woe is me because of their staves. (2) "Woe is me because of the house of Qadros. Woe is me because of their pen. ( 3) "Woe is me because of the house of Ell)-anan.Woe is me because of their whispering. ( 4) "Woe is me because of the House of Elisha. Woe is me because of their fist. (5) "Woe is rne because of the

MENAHOT CHAPTER THIRTEEN 13:10-11

191

house of Ishmael ben Phiabi, for they are high priests, and their sons, treasurers, and their sons-in-law, supervisors, and their servants come and beat us with staves." T. 13:21 Z p. 533, ls. 32-37

13:11 A. It is said of the burnt-offering of a beast, An offering by fire, a smell of sweet savor (Lev. 1:9), and of the bird-offering, An offering by fire, a smell of sweet savor (Lev. 1:17) and [even] of the mealoffering, An offering by fire, a smell of sweet savor (Lev. 2:9)B. to ,teach that all the same are the one who offers much and the one who offers little, on condition that a man will direct his intention (DcTW-intelligence) to Heaven. M. 13:11

The pericope fittingly concludes both M. Zeb. and M. Men. A. Said R. Yol,ianan b. Torta, "On what account was Shiloh destroyed? Because of the disgraceful disposition of the holy things which were there. B. "As to Jerusalem: the first building, on what account was it destroyed ? Because of idolatry and licentiousness and bloodshed which was in it. C. "But [ as toJ the latter [building] we know that they devoted themselves to Torah and were meticulous about tithes. D. "On what account did they go into exile? Because they love money and hate one another. E. "This teaches you that hatred of one for another is evil before the Omnipresent, and Scripture deems it equivalent to idolatry, licentiousness, and bloodshed.'' T. 13:22 Z p. 533, ls. 37-38, p. 534, ls. 1-4 A. But as to the final building which is destined to be built- in our lifetime and in our days-what is stated? B. And it shall come to pass in the latter days that the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be established as the highest of the mountains, and shall be raised above the hills; and all the nations shall flow to it, and many peoples shall come and say, 'Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of facob' (Is. 2:2-3). C. For there shall be a day when watchmen will call in the hilt country of Ephraim: 'Arise, and let us go up to Zion, to the Lord our God' (Jer. 31:6). T. 13:23 Z p. 534, Is. 4-7

T. is wholly autonomous of M.

APPENDIX

A HISTORY

CORRECTIONS TO OF tl'HE MISHNAIC LAW OF PURITIES PARTS I-III HOWARD

L. APOTHAKER

Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion

Part I

p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p.

20, line 6 from top, read" ( + 2, 3, 4, 5) ." 20, line 11 from top, for "Carrion ( + 6)," read "Carrion ( + 7)." 37, M. Kel. 1:7D, read" (2) The cities ... " 41, top, for "So Tos. B," read "So Tos. C ... " 44, footnote, line 5 from bottom, read "of course." 56, line 3 from bottom, for "why should be," read "why should we." 60, Tos. Kel. B.Q. 2:2G, for "remant," read "remnant." 63, M. Kel. 2:3, between lines 1 and 2 (Kand L), read "And the stool." 66, line 1 from top, for "M., E, the," read "M. E, the ... " 73, Tos. Kel, B.Q. 2 :6C, read "it was split (SDQ) ." 77, M. Kel. 3:lA, for "(scWR)," read "sYcWR)." 78, middle, for "Only D's," read "Only E's ... " 79, line 4 from bottom, for "M. 3:3D-E," read "M. 3:2D-E." 80, M. Kel. 3:2A, read "(1) [As to] a jar ... " 80, M. Kel. 3:2I, read "[As to] a lamp ... " 82, line 1 from top, for "E-F," read "D-E and F." 82, line 11 from top, read "And for I ( + L) :." 84, M. Kel. 3:3B, read "the name of 'vessel' has ceased ... " 101, line 17 from top, for "jar on longer," read "jar no longer." 110, line 2 from bottom, for "M. Kel. 4:2B," read "M. Kel. 4:3B." 122, M. Kel. 5:2E, for "ordinary stove," read "single-stove." 122, M. Kel. 5:2E, for "(KPJ:I)," read "(KWPJ:I)." 122, M. Kel. 5:2F, for "or from an oven," read "or from a doublestove." 129, middle, for "the uncleanness is not of Scriptural," read "the uncleanness, according to Maimonides, is not of Scriptural ... " 142, middle, for "C qualifies," read "E-F qualifies ... "

APPENDIX

193

p. 142, line 5 from bottom, read "Sifra I has taken this element of Tos. and added it to its restatement of M." p. 155, Tos. Kel. B.Q. 4:20D, for "It it is," read "If it is ... " p. 155, line 12 from bottom, for "Tos. Kel. B.Q. 4:20," read "Tos. Kel. B.Q. 4:19-20." p. 161, Tos. Kel. B.Q. 5:1D, for "joined them to it, that it is clean," read "joined them to it, it is clean." p. 166, line 16 from bottom, for "depending on A-C," read "depending on A." p. 172, M. Kel. 7:lA, "(nonetheless] unclean" is followed by a comma. p. 172, M. Kel. 7:lG, read "over the mouth of a cistern or over the mouth of a cellar." p. 174, M. Kel. 7:2A, for "of a stove," read "of a double-stove." p. 174, M. Kel. 7:2C, for "of a stove," read "of a double-stove." p. 176, M. Kel. 7:3D, for "three fingers high," read "three fingerbreadths high." p. 180, M. Kel. 7:5E, for "three fingers high," read "three fingerbreadths high." p. 198, M. Kel. 8:4E, after "( ... as intermingled]," add "and it (the liquid J makes it ( the pot J unclean." p. 205, M. Kel. 8:8D, read "beneath the (place of] setting the cookingpot and outward." p. 238, Tos. Kel. B.Q. 7:3C, for "(McMYDW), it is known that it is so perforated read "(McMYDW), it is known that it is not so perforated . . ." p. 263, M. Kel. 11 :lE, read "of the soul (TWMcT HNPS) which ... does not recur.]." p. 264, line 7 from bottom, read "A before us gives Simeon b. Gamaliel's opinion ... " p. 270, line 13 from bottom, read "presumptive uncleanness of

I;ILMJ... " p. 271, line 22 from top, for "object plates," read "object plated ... " p. 274, M. Kel. 11 :6A, read "A spinner's coil of metal." Part II

p. 3, line 20 from top, for "slug-chaped," read "slug-shaped." p. 6, middle, for "D distinguishes .... Consistent with D, M. 18:3," read "E distinguishes .... Consistent with E, M. 18:3 ... " p. 8, M. Kel. 12:4D, for "grist-dealer," read "grist-dealers."

194

APPENDIX

p. 17, M. Kel. 13:lA, for "and (B) pair of," read "and (B) a pair of ... " p. 19, bottom, for "M. Kel. 13:10," read "M. Kel. 13:1." p. 32, line 8 from top, for "CAquiva," read "CAqiva." p. 37, M. Kel. 14:3B, C, for "surveyers," read "surveyors." p. 39, M. Kel. 14:4A ( 3), read "which hold the straps." p. 42, line 13 from bottom, for "M. 14:Al0," read "M. 14:4A10." p. 50, M. Kel. 15:lH, "in dry measure," is followed by a comma. p. 59, M. Kel. 15:3B, for "that of hair-dressers," read "that of a hairdresser ... " p. 73, M. Kel. 16:4H, for "The pillow (KR) and the mattress (KST) of leather," read "The mattress (KR) and the pillow (KST) of leather ... " p. 75, top, for "D is equivalent to 16:4D-E," read "D is equivalent to 16:4D-F." p. 78, M. Kel. 16:7C13, for "the markof for the song," read "the markof of the singer." p. 78, M. Kel. 16:7C8, for "(B)," read "(8)." p. 82, line 5 from bottom, for "sea now," read "see how ... " p. 83, line 10 from bottom, for "to be receptacle," read "to be a receptacle.'' p. 86, line 15 from bottom, for "gold-refiners," read gold-refiner's." p. 87, M. Kel. 17:lA, for "All [ domestic} utensils," read "All utensils ... " p. 98, Tos. Kel. B.M. 6:10, read "pomegranates of Ba~adan." p. 105, Tos. Kel. B.M. 7:lA, for "includes from joint," read "includes from the joint." p. 106, middle, for "Yose's saying, F, is incomprehensible," read "Yose's saying, E, is incomprehensible ... " p.-107, middle, for" 'utensils from the skin of bones,'" read" 'utensils from skin or bones.' " p. p. 115, M. Kel. 17: 17A, for "base of a goldsmith's anvil," read "base of the anvil of goldsmiths." p. 125, bottom, for "QMRWN of the box (TBH)," read "QMRWN of the box (TBH) ." p. 125, bottom, for "chest (SDH), box (TBH),'' read "chest (SDH), box (TBH)." p. 175, Tos. Kel. B.M. 11 :lB, for "And one of two to logs," read "And one of two logs.'' p. 177, middle, for "In J Yose reports," read "In K Yose reports."

APPENDIX

195

p. 188 Line 11 from top, for "since it will descarded," read "since it will be discarded." p. 190, M. Kel. 21:1A3-4, read "the heddles (NYRYM), and ( 4) the sley (QYRWS)." p. 191, M. Kel. 21 :1B4, for" (cYR=>),"read" ('YRH) ." p. 195, M. Kel. 21:3Bl-2, read "the string, and (2) the cord ... " p. 203, Tos. Kel. B.B. 1:12D, for "one made a wood," read "one made wood." p. 214, M. Kel. 23:lC, for "[But he who touches]," read "But (W) [he who touches]." p. 215, M. Kel. 23:2B2, for "(MTWKH)," read "(MDWKH)." p. 215, M. Kel. 23:2C, for "R. Yose says, '(5) The cloth,'" read "R. Yose says, 'The cloth .. .' " p. 218, Line 8 from bottom, for "D introduces a new item. The pack frame is," read ''D introduces the saddle of Tos. Kel. B.B. 2:7E. It is ... " p. 219, Tos. Kel. B.B. 2:8A, for "the pillow, and the mattress,' read "the mattress, and the pillow ... " p. 224, M. Kel. 24:5A, for "(TRBWSYN or: TRKWs)," read "(TRBWSYN or TRKWS)." p. 228, M. Kel. 24:14D, for "(sic.: THWR),'' read "(sic.:THWRH)." p. 229, line 4 from top, for "I do not know why B,'' read "I do not know why C ... " p. 235, line 15 from top, for "so that if the latter contracts," read "so. that if the former contracts . . .'' p. 241, .M. Kel. 25:3A, for "(Z)WMJLSTRJ)," read "(ZWMJ LYSTRJ).'' p. 262, M. Kel. 26:3A, for "thorn-pickers,'' read "thorn-gatherers." p. 263, line 10 from top, for "'form of utensil,' " read "'form of a utensil.' " p. 273, bottom, for "H thus governs," read "A thus governs ... " p. 274, M. Kel. 26:9D, for "pillows," read "pillow." p. 290, page heading, read "KELIM CHAPTER TWENTY-SEVEN 27:7-8.'' p. 296, M. Kel. 27:12L, for "R. Simson says," read "R. Simeon says ... " p. 302, M. Kel. 28:2A3, for "to wipe of the mill-stones," read "to wipe of the mill-stones ... " p. 306, line 16 from bottom, for "The House of Shammai," read "The House of Hillel.'' p. 311, M. Kel. 28:6F, read "R. Simeon declares clean."

196

APPENDIX

p. 316, line 9 from bottom, for "three by three," read "three-by-three." p. 318, M. Kel. 28:9D, for "A shirt of whores," read "The shirt of a whore.'' p. 320, Tos. Kel. B.B. 5:14, for "fingers," read "fingerbreadths." p. 326, M. Kel. 29:5A, for "storekeepers and [or] of householders," read storekeepers [ and J of householders ... " p. 327, M. Kel. 29:7G, for "stone-trimmer's aze," read "stone cutter's ax."

Part III

We have amended here only those misprints in the translation of M.-T. (Chapter 26) which have not been cited previously. Not all of the items in the various list's and tables have been checked. p. 4, M. Kel. 1 :5C, F, for "become unclean," read "became unclean." p. 12, M. Kel. 2:8D, for "A. Eliezer," read "R. Eliezer." p. 18, top, for "Tos. Kel. B.Q. 3:11," read "Tos. Kel. B.Q. 3:10." p. 18, bottom, for "Tos. Kel. B.Q. 3:11," read "Tos. Kel. B.Q. 3:10-11."

p. 18, paragraph after "J.Any part," read "K. Any part ... " p. 21, Tos. Kel. B.Q. 5:6D, for "three fingersbreadth," read "three fingerbreadths.'' p. 29, M. Kel. 6:2G, for "Nezirim," read "Nazirim." p. 36, Tos. Kel. B.Q. 6:100, for "there is not," read "there is no ... " p. 40, line 10 from bottom, for "Tos. Kel. B.Q. 6:17," read "Tos. Kel. 6:17B." p. 42, M. Kel. 9:lK, for "oposite," read "opposite." p. 46, top, following " ( 2) liquids can filter into it," read "M. Kel. 9 :8." p. 46, Tos. Kel. B.Q. 7:3A, for "examine clay utensils,'' read "examine a day utensil." p. 49, top, for "Tos. Kel. B.Q. 7:lA," read "Tos. Kel. B.Q. 7:lOA." p. 52, after Tos. Kel. B.M. 1:1, add "G. R. Yo):i.ananb. Nuri says, 'He who makes utensils from filings-they are clean.' " p. 59, M. Kel. 12:2C, D, for "peddlars," read "peddlers.'' p. 60, Tos. Kel. B.M. 2:9A, for "peddlars," read "peddlers." p. 72, last line, for "M. Kel. 14:1," read "M. Ke!. 14:5." p. 73, line 11 from top, for "Tos. Kel. 4:13," read "Tos. Kel. 4:12." p. 74, Tos. Kel. B.M. 4:14A, for" '[As to] metal utensil,'" read"'[ As to] a metal utensil ... " p. 85, line 4 from top, read "D. [If] two were broken diagonally." p. 87, Tos. Kel. B.M. 6:12G, read "And what is this?"

APPENDIX

p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p. p.

197

91, Tos. Kel. B.M. 7:7B, read "or which they arranged." 91, Tos, Kel. B.M. 7:8B, for "even not in," read "if in." 97, M. Kel. 18:6B, for "and then," read "and one." 104, Tos. Kel. B.M. 10:3B, for "[it is clean]," read "[so it is clean]." 107, M. Kel. 20:3H, read "a chair on its ... " 111, line 11 from bottom, read "C. sWB McsH B:" 111, line 3 from bottom, read "Tos. Kel. B.B. 1:2-3." 114, middle, after "C.R. Yose says, 'It does not require thought,'" read "D. And so with the side table. M. Kel. 22:2." 114, Tos. Kel. B.B. 1 :14D, read "without its leg being ... " 119, line 5 from bottom, read "Tos. B.B. 2:7." 142, line 5 from bottom, for "M. Kel. 28:1," read "M. Kel. 28:5." 145, M. Kel. 28:8B, read "A cloak ... " 148, Tos. Kel. B.B. 7 :2B, read "And of the carpenters." 150, line 6 from top, read "F. And R. Yose ... " 153, last line, read "Tos. Kel. B.B. 7:11-12." 206, line 5 from bottom, before "112," add "104, Yose b. R. Judah + Eleazar b. R. Simeon." 207, line 5 from top, before "151," read "142, Simeon." 206, line 11 from bottom, for "31," read "33." 233, middle, under Ushan attributions/attestations, add "152." 257, under III, ii, 1, read "The two do not differ from one another; they are merely juxtaposed." 285, Column A, 3, for "peddlars," read peddlers." 289, second line of first full paragmph, for "attribuable,'' read "attributable." 292, Columns A and B, 10, for "peddlars," read "peddlers." 308, line 11 from bottom, for "part," read "parts." 340, lines 11 and 13 from bottom, for "peddlar," read peddler." 375, line 15 from top, for "saying," read "sayings."

Explanations of Corrections which are not self-evident: Vol. I p. 20, aims to correct number sequence which includes a .total of seven items. p. 37, fills out numbering sequence between ( 1) and ( 3). p. 73, The commentary below refers to the root, but it is not recorded in the text of Tos. Kel. B.Q. 2:6. p. 80, the correction is made for the sake of translation's consistency. p. 82, 1. 1, The pattern is repeated twice, once in D-E and once in F. p. 82, 1. 11, Only "lamp" appears in I. The rest is in L.

198

APPENDIX

p. 84, The correction has been made to accord with the translation in M. Kel. 3:3C. p. 110, 4:2B is incorrect, but you may prefer 4:lB which 4:3B restates. p. 129, M. rarely refers a regular difference between the SWPRYM and Scripture. The Rishonim consider it exponentially in their justifications of obvious contradictions. p. 142, line 5 from bottom, The statement is confusing if allowed to stand as is. p. 166, If "F returns to A, ignoring B-E," how can J "also" depend on A-C. p. 198, In 8:4E, the text reads NTM" WTM~H. The translation does not reflect this. p. 264, This correction is made because Simeon is also mentioned, and confusion might result. p. 274, Note T. B.M. 1:5D, p. 273. PYQH is .a "spinner's coil" there, and is listed in Jastrow accordingly. Other problems and Suggestions for Vol. I

p. 66, 1. 6, T. C specifies just one additional item. p. 107, middle, On p. 79: "We have no hint that this is Meir's view, 'with olives,' as glossed into M. Kel. 3:lE. A3-4 + D cite M. 3:3D-E." (See earlier correction of final reference.) Here: "4:3D accords with Meir in 3:1" But 4:3D measures with "olives." So there is a contradiction here. p. 150, middle, The recurring formal pattern which assigns to C and F a unifying influence on the other elements of the pericope escapes me. Certainly they look alike. pp. 263-4, bottom, This is a very difficult problem because the text does not read as the reconstruction of the mnemonic assumes. T ahorin does not occur, even though it is found in 2: 1.

p. p. p. p. p. p.

Explanations of Corrections which are not self-evident: Vol. II 59, all commentators consider hairdresser as singular. 78, ZMR with the M geminated appear to yield this translation. The commentators agree. 87, "domestic" utensils "of householders" is tautologous. 98, the transcription BJDN would yield this reading, to distinguish it from the other readings where both BDJN and BDN are found. 115, "goldsmiths" definitely appears in the plural. 215, (5) isnotanewitem.

APPENDIX

199

Other Problems cmd Suggestions for Vol. II

p. 12, Both MHRYSH in T. B.M. 2:14C and MGRDWT in 12:6B2 are translated as strigil. p. 13, middle, The expression is superfluous. It is apt to to be secondary. General comment: The use of "contradiction" is confusing; sometimes the term is softened to mean "modification;" other times it means "direct conflict.'' p. 105, Why does Ben Battial). show a geminated T. It is not geminated as far as I can tell.

INDEX TO BIBLICAL AND TALMUDIC REFERENCES BIBLE II Chronicles 4:7 157 4:8 157 4:19 158 4:20 158 13:11 157 13:19 112

Deuteronomy 1:11 73 6:4 59 6:4-9 59 6:11 59 6:13-21 59 12:11 112, 114 14:26 109 16:2 108 18:5 16 18:7 16

Exodus 13:1-10 59 13:11-16 59 20:27 117 25:7 62 25:8 73 25:25 157 25:30 153, 159, 161 25:31 60, 62 25:31-32 59 25:33 153 28:5-6 62 28:31 120 29:27 82 30:7 73 30:23-24 71 30:24 123 39:43 72-73 40:22 73 40:23 73 40:24-25 73 40:26-27 73 40:28-29 73

Ezra 2:27

112

Isaiah 2:2-3

191

Jeremiah 31:6

191

Joshua 15:35 15:56 19:19

112 112 112

I Kings 7:48

157

II Kings 23:9

188-89

Leviticus 1:17 191 2:1 80, 179 2:2 51, 89 2:4 41, 80, 86 2:4-5 78 2:5 80, 176 2:6 93 2:7 80 2:8 82-83 2 :9 89, 191 2:9-10 89 2:11 50, 79-80 2:12 l, 50 2:13 120 2:14 135, 139 2:14-15 80 2:14-16 135 2 :16 89 3:2 84 4:6-7 60 4:15 130-31, 133 4:17 60 4:18 60 5:11 2, 11, 80 5:12 89 6:7 83 6:7-9 78, 89 6:8 80, 89

INDEX TO BIBLICAL AND TALMUDIC REFERENCES 6:13-15 75, 94 6:17 80 80 6:20ff 7:12 92, 99, 106 7:12-13 60 7:13 32, 78 6:15 76 6:15-16 90 6:16 2, 17, 89-90 7:14 89-100 7:30 83 8:22 80, 100 8:22-25 99 8:26 80, 84 10:15 82-84 14:4 60 14:5 124 14:10 131 14:12 82 89 H:12-13 14:21 123-25 16:5 60 16:14-15 60 16:21 130-31 23:9-14 80, 135 23:10 112-13 82, 140 23:11 23:13 92 23:14 JLiO, 143 23:15 140 23: 16 143 112-13 23:16-17 23:17 31, 60, 78, 95, 137 23:18 65 67-68 2',:18-19 30, 33, 60 23:19 31 23:19-20 23 :20 33, 83-84, 90 59-60 23:10 24:4 73 24:5 60, 94-96 24:6-7 31 24:7 60, 80, 154-55 24:8 73 24:9 90 27:10 130 168-69 27:11-13 27:33 169

Numbers 2:20 154 5:15 11, 80 5:17 124 5 :25 82-83 5:26 89 6:13-18 188 6:15 60, 100 7:10 58 14:5-10 175 15:2 130 15:3 41 15:4ff 80 15: 5 58 15:6 122 15:9 122 15:15 2 33 15:22ff 15:24 131 15:38 65 18:17 169 19:4 60 19:6 60 23:20 90 24:9 90 28:2 74 28:4 73 28:9 123 65 28:llff 28: 12 122 28:14 123 28:23 118 67 28:27ff 28:31 118 29:5 175 29:9 175 29:11 160 175 29:14-15

Psalms 50:8-13 74 50:14 74 90:17 73

II Samuel 14:2

115

MISHNAH Bt:khorot 9:8 132, 134

llikkurim 2:4

82

3 :6 82-83

201

202

INDEX TO BIBLICAL AND TALMUDIC REFERENCES

I:fallah 1:1 1:3

6, 136, 144 140

I:fullin 1:1

12

Kelim 5:10 78, 86 17:10 153

MeCilah l:lff 1:1-3

58 39

Mena.!;iot 1:1 3, 9-13, 26, 43 1:1-2 10 1:2 3, 9, 13, 15-18, 46, 49, 58, 79 1:2-3 13 1:3 13-14, 17-22, 26, 29, 42, 47, 49 1:3-4 3, 9-10, 18-26, 30, 36-37 1:4 20-22, 26-27, 40 2:1 3, 23, 27-30, 32, 34-35, 37 2:1-2 27 2:2 28, 30-33 2:3 33-34, 67-68, 70, 101 2:3-4 3, 27-28, 32-35 2:4 33-34 2:5 3, 27-28, 30, 34-37, 67-68, 70 3:1 3-4, 25-26, 38-41 3:2 4, 38, 46, 48, 50-53, 122, 127 3:2-3 38, 53 3:2-4 48 3:3 4, 38, 40-41, 51-53, 56, 170-71 3:4 4, 38-39, 54-58 3:4-4:4 4 3:5 39, 58-61 3:5-7 4, 38-39, 58-64 3:6 39, 59-62, 65 3:7 39, 59-60, 62, 64-65 4:1 4, 39, 63-65 4:1-2 65-67 4:1-4 59 4:2 4, 64-68 4:3 4, 64, 67-68, 70-71, 102 4:3-4 67-74 4:4 4, 64, 68-69, 71-72, 74 4:5 4, 64, 74-76, 123, 151 5:1 4, 50, 77-79 5:1-2 77 5:2 4, 77-81

5:3 47, 77, 80-81 5:3-4 4, 80-81 5:4 47, 77, 81 5:5 81-82 5:5-6 4, 40-41, 77, 81-84 5:6 77, 82, 84-85, 139 5:6-7 131 5:7 4, 77, 84-85, 90 5:8 86, 169-70 5:8-9 5, 77, 86-87, 98, 109, 167 5:9 86-87 6:1 5, 88-90 6:2 5, 40-41, 75, 83, 88-90 6:3 5, 40-41, 88, 91-93, 139 6:3-5 88 6:4 5, 40-41, 88, 91-94 6:5 5, 75, 88, 93-96, 151 6:5-7 98, 151 6:6 88, 95-96 6:6-7 5, 88, 95-97, 100, 15,1 7:1 32-33, 78, 94, 99-101, 124 7:1-2 5, 98-101 7:2 98, 100-101, 104-105, 124 7:3 5, 101-106 7:3-4 98 7:4 5, 67, 98, 105-108 7:5 ~ 99, 108-11 7:5-6 98, 108-11 7:6 5, 98-99, 109-11 8:1 5, 68, 112-14 8:1-2 112-13 8:2 5, 112-14, 142 8:3 5, 112-13, 115-18 8:4 116-17 8:4-5 5, 112 8:5 117 8:6 5, 112, 119 8:6-7 112, 118-21 8:7 5, 118-20 9:1 5, 122-24, 128-29 9:1-5 122 9:2 123-26 9:2-3 5, 122-26, 129 9:3 13-14, 41, 122, 124-28, 174-75 9:4 5, 40-41, 122, 126-28, 175 9:5 5, 122-23, 128-30 9:6 122, 130-31 9:6-7 122 9:6-9 6, 122, 130-34 9:7 122, 130-31, 133-34 9:8 122, 131, 133 9:9 122, 131 10:1 6, 135-37

INDEX TO BIBLICAL AND TALMUDK 10:2 10:2-3 10:2-5 10:3 10:3-4 10:3-8 10:4 10:4-5 10:5 10:6 10:7 10:8 10:8-9 10:9 11 :1 11:1-2 11:1-4 l 1:2 11:2-3 11:3 11:4 11:4-5 11:5 11:6 11:7 11:8 11:9 12:1 12:1-2 12:2 l2:2-3 12:3 12:4

6, 136-38,146 135, 145 135 139-40, 142-43, 147 6, 138-40, 149 137 135, 139-40, 142-43 143 140-1/3 135-36, 143-1/5 135-36, 144-15 146-JN 135-%, 116-48 136-37, 142, 146-48 149-52, 163 6 149-53 150-53, 165 149, 151 6, 150-53 16, 149, 151-54 6, 153-56 154-57 6, 149, 156-59 7, 119, 158-61 7, 149, 161-64 7, 150, 164-66 167-69

7

167, 169-76, 186 167 7, 167-68, 172-75, 183 7, 167-68, l.7-i-77, 179, 183 12:5 7, 167-68, 176-77, 183 13:1 7, 178-80, 187 13:1-2 178 13:2 7, 178-81, 185, 187 13:3 7, 13-14, 181-82 13:3-5 178 13:3-8 178 13:4 7, 182 I 3 :-4-5 182-83 13:5 7, 179, 183 13:6 7, 183-84 13:6-7 178 13:7 7, 183-84 13:8 7, 178, 180, 184-85 13:9 7, J 78, 185-88

13:10 13:11

7, 178, 188-91 8, 78-79, 191

Middot 4:6 182 Macaser Sheni 1:7 110 Negaciin 14:lff

135

Parah 3 :6-11 139 3:7 135 3:10 140 Shabbat 19:1 150 Shcqalim 4:1 138 7:6 75 ZebalJim l: 1

1:4

9, 11 3, 9, 11

3, 9, 13

2:1 2:2 2:2-5 2:3-5 2:4-5 2:5 3: l

3 3

J:4 l 4:3

65 33

1

59

'j:

29, 42

9 3, 20 10

J(i-,

5:3 160 5:3-7 65 8:4 53 8:4-6 53 8:12 51 9:2-3 101-102 10:8 176 12: 1 188 l-1:/f_g 7, 179 14:10 76

TOSEFTA Makkot 5:2ff

51

RUFERENCES

Mcnal7ot 1:1 11 1:2 12

203

204

INDEX TO BIBLICAL AND TALMUDIC REFERENCES

1:3 12 1:4 12 1:5 13-14, 17 1:6 14, 17 1:7 14 1:7-8 17 1:8 14 1:9 15 1:9-13 17 1:10 15 1:11 15 1:12 15 1 :13 16 1:14 16-17 1:15 13, 16-17 1:16 16, 151 1:16-17 17 1:17 17 2:1 21 2:2 22, 26 2:3 22, 26 2:4 22 2:5, 23 2:6 23 2:7 23, 26 2:8 24 2:9 24 2:10 24 2:11 24 2:12 25 2:12-16 38 2:13 25 2:14 25 2:15 25 2:16 26-27 3:1 31-32, 35 3:2 31-32 3:2-7 32 3:3 31-32 3:4 31 3:4-5 32 3:5 32 3:6 32 3:7 32 3:8 34 3:9 26-37 3:10 36-37 3:11 36 3:11-12 37 3:12 37 3:13 37 4:1 52 4:2 52-53

4:3 53 4:3-4 53 4:4 5,3 4:5 54 4:6 54 4:7 55 4:8 55 4:9 56 4:9-15 39, 58 4:10 56 4:11 56 4:12 57 4:13 57 4:14 57 4:15 58 5:1 51, 60-61 5:2 61 5:2-3 61 5:3 61 5:4 69 5:4-5 70 5:5 69 5:6-8 48 5:6 42, 48 5:7 42, 48 5:8 43, 48 5:9 43, 48 5:10 43, 48 5:11 43 5:12 44 5:13 44 5:13-14 48 5:13-15 48 'j:15 45, 48 5:14 44, 48 5:16 45 5:17 45 5:18 46, 48 5:19 46 5:20 47 5:21 47 5:22 47 5:23 47 5:24 42, 47 6:1 49, 51 6:2 49 6:3 49 6:4 49 6:5 50-51 6:6 50-51 6:7 50 6:8 50 6:9 50-51

INDEX TO BIBLICAL AND TALMUDIC 6:10 62 6:10-13 63 6: 11 62 6:12 63 6:13 63 6:14 66-67 6:15 66-67 6:16 66-67 6:17 66 6:17-18 67 6:18 66-67, 106 6:19 70 6:20 71 7:1 71, 74 7:2 71, 74 7:3 72 7:3-4 74 7:4 72, 74 7:5 72 7:6 72 7:6-9 74 7:7 73 7:8 73 7:9 74 7:10 75 7:11 75 7:12 76 7:13 80 7:14 76 7:15 76 7:16 125 7:17 85 7:18 85 7:19 83-SJ 7:20 84, 86 8:1 94-95 8:1-2 97 8:2 95 8:3 90 8:4 90 8:5 91 8:6 91 8:6-7 118-21 8:7 92, 120 8:8 92 8:9 92-93 8:10 92 8:11 87 8:12 85 8:13 85 8:11 95-96 8:15 97 8:16 101

8:17 8:18 8:19 8:20 8:21 8:22 8:23 8:24 8:25 8:26 8:27 8:28 8:29 8:30 9:1 9:2 9:3 9:4 9:5 9:6 9:7 9:8 9:9 9:10 9:11 9: 12 9:13 9:14 9:15 9:16 9:17 9:18 9:1() 9:20

REFERENCES

101 102 104 106 107 107 107 107 107 lWl-105

105 110 110-ll 111 114 114 114 114 115 117 117-18 117 119-20 ll9-20 119 120 120 120 120 120 120 121 l21 121 12 l 9:21 9:22 121 9:23 121 10:J 123 10:2

125-26

10:3 10:4 10:5 10:6 10:7 10:8 10:9 10:10 IO: l J

126 126 126 128 129-30 130 132, 134 132 132, 134 133-34 133 133 133 133

10: 12

10:13 10:H 10:15 10:16

205

206

INDEX TO BIBLICAL AND TALMUDIC

10:17 133 10:18 1:A 10:19 137 10:20 137 10:21 138 10:22 138 10:23 142 10:24 142-43 10:25 1•13 10:26 lli3 145 10:27 10:27-28 145 10:28 145 145 10:29 147 10:30 10:31 147-•i8 10:32 147 148 10:32-33 148 10:33 11 :1 152-53 11:2 152 11:3 152 11:4 152 11:5 153 11:6 157 11 :7 157 11:8 157 11:9 157 11 :9-10 158 ll :10 158 11: l l 160-61 11: 12 161 l 1 :13 1(,1 11:14 155 11:15 155 11:16 158, 163 ! I :17 164 n :18 164 12: l 169 12:2 171 12:3 17', 12:4 17:\ 12:5 173 12:6 173 12:7 174 12:8 175 12:9 176 12:10 175. l77 12: 11 180-81 12: 12 181 12: 13 181 181 12:14 182 12:15 13:1 184

13:2

13:3 13 :4 13:5 13:6 13 :7 H:8 13:9 I

10

13: 11 13: 12 l 3: 13 13 :14 I 3: I 5

l:i:16 13:17 13:18 13: 19 13:20 13:21 13:22 13:23

REFERENCES

184 186-87 186-87 186-87 186-87 187-88 187-88 187-88 187-88 187-88 189 189 189 189 189 190 190 190 190 191 191 191

Pesal).im 5:7

61

Yornci I :17

15

1: l 'J

16

Zebal).im 1:5

14, 17 42 2: 1-:l 41 3: 1-5 47-48 2:4 22, 26 2:5 22 2:6 22 2:6-7 23 2:6-8 10, 26 2 (1- I 6 26 2:8 23, 26 2:9 23 20 2:9-16 24 2:10 2:11 24 2:12 24 2: 13 25 2:14 25 2:16 26 4:1 53 4:I-2 4, 39, 54 ,j:{-8 39, 58 11:16 190 2: l

INDEX TO BIBLICAL AND TALMUDIC REFERENCES

PALESTINIAN TALMUD Terumot 2:2 79

BABYLONIAN TALMUD Mena/:iot 6b 13 8a 163 lla 17 13h 29 14b 30 18b 40 53b 79 64b 136 65b-66a 140 74b 91, 100

90a 128-29 96a 151 98a 158 100a 163 103b 175 107a 183 108b 188

Pesa/:iim 55a 147

MAIMONIDES Manner of Offering 9:18 79 12:1-9 1

12:9 90 13:10 93

207

GENERAL INDEX Ab-ba Saul, comer, 137; preparing meal offering, 115, 121; two loaves of Pentecost and showbread, 154-56; vows or free will offerings, 190 Abramsky, Ye]:iezqel, improper intention, invalidation of meal offerings, 11, 32, 37, 49, 76; two loaves of Pentecost and showb-read, 156, 164; vows or free will offerings, 169, 184 Albeck, I;fanokh, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 51; preparing meal offering, 91, 98, 101, 117, 119 Apothaker, Howard L., Mishnaic Laws of Purities, corrections to, Parts I-III, 192-99 cAqiba, miproper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 56-58, 64, 67-68, 7071; comer, 139-40, 142; preparing meal offering, 101, 128-29, 132; two loaves of Pentecost and showb-read, 149-51; vows or free will offerings, 168, 175, 176-77, 184 Ben Betera, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 13, 16-17 Ben Zoma, two loaves of Pentecost and showbread, 153-54 Cashdan, Eli, preparing meal offering, 79 Danb-y, Herbert, preparing meal offering, 95, 128; two loaves of Pentecost and showb-read, 153, 159 Eleazar, preparing meal offering, 120, 125 Eleazar b. cAzariah, vows or free will offerings, 183 Eleazar bar ~adoq, preparing meal offering, 123-26 Eleazar b. Shammuca, two loaves of Pentecost and showbread, 158 Eleazar b. R. Simeon, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 16-17, 26, 32, 44, 48, 54, 58, 69, 71; preparing meal offering, 90, 96

Eliezer, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 4, 14, 17, 26, 3S-39, 52-57; preparing meal offering, 101, 103-104, 124 Eliezer b. Jacob, preparing me.al offering, 82, 115, 124, 127; vows or free will offerings, 174-75 Eliezer b. ~adoq, comer, 142 Epstein, Y. N. H., improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 16. 54, 65; comer, 144; preparing meal offering, 82; two loaves of Pentecost and showbread, 151; vows or free will offerings, 188 I;Iananiah b. Gamaliel, preparing meal offering, 78. 86 I;Iananiah, Prefect of Priests, comer, 135-36 Heller, Yorn Tob Lipmann, two loaves of Pentevost and showbread, 156 I;Iisda, preparing meal offering, 79, 128 Improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 3-76 Ishmael, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 59; comer, 135-37 Jastrow, Marcus, two loaves of Pentecost and showbread, 152 Joshua, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 4, 26, 39, 54; preparing meal offering, 103-104 Judah, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 15, 17, 19, 21-24, 26, 30-31, 40-41, 53, 65-67, 75-76; comer, 136, 140-41, 143, 146-48; preparing meal offering, 78, 86, 88, 9495, 103-104, 115-17, 120, 125-27, 131-32; two loaves of Pentecost and showbread, 149-53, 155, 161; vows or free will offerings, 167, 173-74, 179, 182 Judah the Baker, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 16-17 Judah b. Betera, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 9, 16

GENERAL IND'.EX

Judah the Patriarch, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 15-16, 32; preparing meal offering, 91-92, 119, 121; two loaves of Pentecost and showbread, 155; vows or free will offerings, 178, 180-81, 183, 185, 187 Lieberman, Saul, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 11, 17, 4950, 53, 58, 60-61, 69-71; comer, 145; preparing meal offering, 80, 110, 11415, 117, 119-21, 123, 128, 130, 132; two loaves of Pentecost and show bread, 161; vows or free will offerings, 172, 177, 186, 188 Lightstone, Jack, preparing meal offering, 134 Maimonides, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 40; comer, 140; preparing meal offering, 79, 83-91 Papa, preparing meal offering, 84, 89-90, 93, 119, 128; two loaves of Pentecost and showbread, 151, 154, 163 Materials for meal-offering, sources of, 5, 112-21 Measuring materials, 5-6, 122-34 Meir, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 28, 31-37, 73, 76; comer, 139-43; preparing meal offering, 78, 88, 94-95, 104, 122-23, 132; two loaves of Pentecost and showbread, 149, 153-56 Mishnaic Laws of Purities, corrections to Parts I-III, 192-99 Nel;iemiah, preparing meal offering, 125 NehoraJi, vows or free will offerings, 189

comer, 6, 135-48 Pardo, David, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 11 Preparing meal offering, 4-6, 77-134 Resh Laqish, improper intention, in validation of meal offering, 29 Sarason, Richard S., improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, lln, 13n, 18n, 38n, 49n, 55n, 59n, 65n, 68n; preparing meal offering; 79n, 81n,

209

83n, 89n, 109n, 125n; two loaves of Pentecost and showbread, 154n; vows or free will offering, 180n Simeon, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 9, 11-12, 17, 64-65, 67-70, 72, 74-76; 'Omer, 145-47; preparing meal offering, 77-78, 82-87, 89-90, 92-93, 96, 123-26, 130-32, 134; two loaves of Pentecost and showbread, 149-53; vows or free will offerings, 167-68, 172-75, 184, 188 Simeon b. Eleazar, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 63 Simeon b. Eliezer, 'Omer, 145 Simeon b. Gamaliel, two loaves of Pentecost and showbread, 165 Simeon b. I:Iananiah, two loaves of Pentecost and showbread, 165 Simeon b. Nannos, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 64, 6768, 70 Solomon b. Isaac of Troyes, comer, 14445; preparing meal offering, 82, 89, 112, 119, 124; two loaves of Pentecost and showbread, 154, 163 Tarfon, vows or free will offerings, 168, 176-77, 183 Thank offering, meal-offering accompanying, 5, 98-110 Two loaves of Pentecost and showbread, 6-7, 149-66 Vows or free will offerings, 7-8, 167-91 Yol;ianan b. Beroqah, vows or free will offerings, 182 Yol;ianan b. Torta, vows or free will offerings, 191 Yol;ianan hen Zakkai, comer, 140-41, 143 Y ose, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 28-32, 35, 37, 54, 72; comer, 138; preparing meal offering, 88, 94-95, 128-29; two loaves of Pentecost and showbread, 157, 159-61 Yose the Galilean, preparing meal offering, 78, 86, 132 Y ose hen Hammeshulam, preparing meal offering, 83 Yose b. R. Judah, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 62, 71; preparing meal offering, 118, 121; two

210

GENERAL INDEX

loaves of Pentecost and showbread, 158 Y ose b. Yasin, improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 16-17 Y-0se b. Yol;ianan, vows or free will offerings, 190 Zuckermandel, M. S., improper intention, invalidation of meal offering, 11-12, 14-17, 21-26, 31-32, 34, 36-37, 42-47,

50, 52-58, 60-63, 66, 69-76; comer, 137-38, 142-43, 145, 147-48; preparing meal offering, 80, 83-87, 90-97, 101102, 104-107, 110-11, 114-15, 117-21, 123, 125-26, 128-30, 132-34; two loaves of Pentecost and showbread, 152-53, 155, 157-58, 160-61, 163-64; vows or free will offerings, 169, 171, 173-77, 181-82, 184, 186-87, 189-91

The index was prepared by Mr. Arthur Woodman, Canaan, New Hampshire.