משנה בְּשָׁלֹשׁ קוּפּוֹת שֶׁל שָׁלֹֹש שָׁלֹֹש סְאִין תּוֹרְמִין אֶת הַלִּשְׁכָּה וְכָתוּב בָּהֶן אל״ף בי״ת גימ״ל. רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר יְוָנִית כָּתוּב בָּהֶן אלפ״א בית״א גמל״א. Halakha 2 · MISHNA The funds are collected from the Temple treasury chamber with three baskets, each measuring three se’a. On the baskets is written, respectively, alef, beit, gimmel, based on the order in which the baskets are filled, to indicate from which basket coins should be taken to buy sacrifices. The coins were used in the order of their collection. Rabbi Yishmael says: The letters written on them were in Greek, alfa, beta, gamma.
אֵין הַתּוֹרֵם נִכְנָס לֹא בְּפַרַגּוֹד חָפוּת וְלֹא בְּמִנְעָל וְלֹא בְּסַנְדָּל וְלֹא בִּתְפִילָּה וְלֹא בְּקָמִיעַ שֶׁמָּא יַעֲנִי וִיֹאמְרוּ מֵעֲוֹן הַלִּשְׁכָּה הֶעֱנִי אוֹ שֶׁמָּא יַעֲשִׁיר וְיֹאמְרוּ מִתְּרוּמַת הַלִּשְׁכָּה הֶעֱשִׁיר. The one who collects the funds from the chamber must not enter while wearing a cuffed garment [ḥafut], and not with a shoe, and not with a sandal, and not with phylacteries, and not with an amulet, since all of these have places into which money can be inserted. The concern is that perhaps the one collecting the funds will one day become poor, and people will say that it is because of the sin of stealing the shekels of the chamber that he became poor, as they will suspect that he stole money and hid it in those places. Or perhaps he will become rich and people will say that he became rich from stealing the funds of the chamber, even though he did not actually do so.
שֶׁאָדָם צָרִיךְ לָצֵאת יְדֵי הַבִּרְיּוֹת כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁצָּרִיךְ לָצֵאת יְדֵי הַמָּקוֹם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וִהְיִיתֶם נְקִיִים מֵיְיָ וּמִיִּשְׂרָאֵל וְאוֹמֵר וּמְצָא חֵן וְשֵׂכֶל טוֹב בְּעֵינֵי אֱלֹהִים וְאָדָם: Even though one should not suspect someone of stealing consecrated shekels, the one collecting the funds from the chamber must nevertheless take these precautions, as a person must appear justified before people just as he must appear justified before the Omnipresent [HaMakom], and it is stated: “And you shall be guiltless before the Lord and before Israel” (Numbers 32:22). From here it may be inferred that it is not enough to be innocent before God; one must also be innocent before the Jewish people. Even in situations where there is little concern that one may commit a sin, the proper course is to remain above any possible suspicion of misconduct. And the verse states: “So shall you find grace and good understanding in the sight of God and man” (Proverbs 3:4).
הלכה [רִבִּי זְעוּרָא שָׁאַל לְרִבִּי אוֹשַׁעְיָּה. כַּמָּה שִׁיעוּרָן שֶׁלּ שָׁלֹשׁ קוּפוֹת. GEMARA: The mishna taught that funds are withdrawn from the Temple treasury chamber and collected into three baskets measuring three se’a each. The Gemara records another halakha that is learned from this. We learned elsewhere in a mishna (Shabbat 126b): On Shabbat one may remove even four or five baskets of straw or produce if the place they occupy is needed for guests or for students in the study hall. Rabbi Ze’eira asked Rabbi Yoshiya: What is the measure of the baskets that are permitted to be moved because the place that they occupy is needed? Rabbi Yoshiya said to him:
[דף ח:] אָמַר לֵיהּ. נִלְמוֹד סָתוּם מִן הַמְפוֹרָשׁ. תַּנֵּי.]. בְּשָׁלֹשׁ קוּפּוֹת שֶׁל שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁלֹשׁ סְאִין שֶׁהֵן תִּשְׁעָה סְאִין שֶׁהֵן עֶשְׂרִים וְשֶׁבַע סְאִין תּוֹרְמִין אֶת הַלִֹּשְכָּה וְכָתוּב עֲלֵיהֶן אֲלֶ״ף בֵּי״ת גִּימֶ״ל. [8b] Let us learn the measure that is not clearly stated with respect to the removal of baskets on Shabbat, from the measure that is clearly stated with respect to the collection of funds from the Temple treasury chamber. For it was taught in a baraita: The funds are collected from the Temple treasury chamber with three baskets each measuring three se’a, which are nine se’a altogether, which are twenty-seven se’a in total, as the collection of the chamber ceremony is performed on three different occasions over the course of the year. And on the baskets is written, respectively, alef, beit, gimmel.
מִפְּנֵי מַה כָתוּב עֲלֵיהֶן אֲלֶ״ף בֵּי״ת גִּימֶ״ל. לוֹמַר. אֵין מִסְתַּפֵּק מִן הָרִאשׁוֹנָה קוֹדֶם לַשְּׁנִייָה וְלֹא מִשְּׁנִייָה קוֹדֶם לַשְּׁלִישִׁית. The same baraita explains: Why was alef, beit, gimmel written on the baskets? To indicate which basket contained the shekels that were collected first. Therefore, the treasurer of the chamber would supply himself with shekels from the first basket, which was labeled alef, before taking the shekels from the second basket, which was labeled beit, and from the second basket before taking from the third basket, which was labeled gimmel. Rabbi Yoshiya’s answer to the original question is now clear: Just as the basket that was used to collect funds from the Temple treasury chamber, the measure that was clearly stated, measured three se’a, so too, the basket that may be removed from its place on Shabbat, the measure that was not clearly stated, measures three se’a.
[תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן הַמּוֹצִיא ײִַן כְּדֵי מְזִיגַת הַכּוֹס. § The Gemara brings another instance of a measure that is not clearly stated being learned from a measure that is clearly stated. We learned elsewhere in a mishna (Shabbat 76b): One who carries out undiluted wine from a private domain to a public domain or vice versa is liable only if he carries as much as is needed for the dilution of the cup [mezigat hakos].
רִבִּי זְעירָא שְׁאִיל אֶת רִבִּי יֹאשִׁיָּהוּ. כַּמָּה הָא שִׁעוּרָן שֶׁל כּוֹס. אָמַר לֵיהּ. נִלְמַד סָתוּם מִן הַמְפוֹרָשׁ. דְּתַנֵּי רִבִּי חִייָא. אַרְבָּעָה כוּסוּת שֶׁאָֽמְרוּ יֵשְׁנָן רְבִיעִית יַיִן הָאִיטַלְקִי. On this topic Rabbi Ze’eira asked Rabbi Yoshiya: What is the measure of the cup referred to in the mishna? Rabbi Yoshiya said to him: Let us learn the measure of the cup that is not clearly stated here from the measure of a cup that is clearly stated elsewhere. As Rabbi Ḥiyya taught: The four cups of wine that the Sages said one is obligated to drink on the first night of Passover together contain a quarter-log of raw Italian wine. Each cup of diluted wine must be a quarter-log. Since the proper ratio with regard to diluted wine is three parts water to one part raw wine, each cup of diluted wine contains three quarters of a quarter-log of water and one quarter of a quarter-log of raw wine. Therefore, the four cups together contain one quarter-log. From here it may be learned that one is liable on Shabbat for carrying out raw wine in the measure of one quarter of a quarter-log. Rabbi Yosei bar Avin said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: That mishna dealing with the measure of wine for which one is liable if he carried it on Shabbat was taught in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. For it was taught in a baraita addressing the prohibition against carrying on Shabbat: One who carries water on Shabbat from a private domain to a public domain or vice versa is liable if he carries as much as constitutes a single swallow. Rabbi Yehuda says: He is liable if he carries as much as is required for rubbing eye salve [kilor]. One who carries undiluted wine on Shabbat is liable if he carries as much as constitutes a single swallow. Rabbi Yehuda says: He is liable if he carries as much as is needed to be diluted in a cup.
הַכּוּס מָזוּג בְּכַמָּה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּסֵי בַּר בֵּיבִין מִשּׁוּם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. נִשְׁמְעִינָן מִן הָדָא. מַּיִם כְּדֵי גְמִיעָה. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר. כְּדֵי מְזִיגַת הַכּוֹס. ײִַן כְּדֵי גְמִעָה. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר. כְּדֵי מְזִיגַת הַכּוֹס. הָדָא אָֽמְרָה. מָזוּג כְּדֵי מְזִיגַת הַכּוֹס. The Gemara asks: For what measure is one liable if he carries wine that is already diluted from a private domain to a public domain on Shabbat or vice versa? Let us learn it from this baraita: One who carries water on Shabbat from one domain to another is liable if he carries as much as constitutes a single swallow. Rabbi Yehuda says: He is liable if he carries as much as is required for rubbing eye salve. One who carries undiluted wine on Shabbat is liable if he carries as much as constitutes a single swallow. Rabbi Yehuda says: He is liable if he carries as much as is needed for the dilution of a cup. That is to say that the measure for liability in the case of diluted wine is as much as is in one diluted cup.
כַּמָּה שִׁיעוּרָן שֶׁלְּכוֹסוּת. רִבִּי אָבוּן אָמַר. טֶטְרַטין וּרְבִיעַ. On the topic of the four cups of wine that are drunk on the first night of Passover, the Gemara asks: What is the measure of this cup? Rabbi Avin said: One and a quarter titreton, which is roughly equivalent to a quarter-log. The log was no longer a common measure, so Rabbi Avin offers its rough equivalent, using a more familiar one.
מָהוּ לִשְׁתוֹתָן בְּכֶרֶךְ אֶחָד. מִדְּאָמַר רִבִּי מֵאִיר אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. הַלֵּל אִם שָׁמָעָן בְּבֵית הַכְּנֶסֶת יָצָא. The Gemara asks: What is the ruling? May one drink all four cups at once [bekherekh eḥad], without interruption, or must there be some sort of interval between them? The Gemara answers: From the fact that Rabbi Mana said that Rabbi Yosei said with regard to the hallel that is recited on the first night of Passover, that if one heard it in the synagogue from the prayer leader, he has fulfilled his obligation to recite hallel and need not repeat it at home. That is to say that if one drank all four cups at once without interruption, he has fulfilled his obligation. One who heard hallel in the synagogue may omit the part of the hallel that is recited between the third and fourth cups, as he has already fulfilled his obligation. Doing so leaves no interval between these cups, yet Rabbi Yosei did not regard this as a problem, indicating that one is not required to have some sort of interval between the cups.
הָדָא אָֽמְרָה. אִם שְׁתָאָן בְּכֶרֶךְ אֶחָד יָצָא. מָהוּ לִשְׁתוֹתָן בְּפִיסָקִין. כְּלוּם אָֽמְרוּ שֶׁיִּשְׁתּוּ לוֹ כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּשְׁתַּנֶּה וְלֹא יִשְׁתַּכֵּר. אִם שָׁתָה בְפִסָקִין אַף הוּא אֵינוֹ מִשְׁתַּכֵּר. The Gemara asks: What is the halakha with regard to drinking the four cups of wine little by little, with interruptions? The Gemara answers: When the Sages said that one must drink four cups of wine, didn’t they institute that he must drink them, and not that he should become intoxicated from drinking them? Therefore, if he drank them little by little, with intervals, he too is acting in accordance with the will of the Sages, as he is not becoming intoxicated, and therefore he need not drink the entire quarter-log at once.
מָהוּ לָצֵאת בְּיַיִן שֶׁלִּשְׁבִיעִית. תָּאנָּא רַב אוֹשַׁעְיָה. יוֹצְאִין בְּיַיִן שֶׁלּ שְׁבִיעִית. The Gemara further asks: What is the halakha with regard to fulfilling one’s obligation to drink four cups of wine on the first night of Passover with wine produced from grapes that grew during the Sabbatical Year? Rav Oshaya taught in a baraita: One fulfills his obligation with regard to the four cups with wine of the Sabbatical Year.
מָהוּ לָצֵאת בְּקוֹנְדִּיטוֹן. מִדְתַנֵּי בַּר קַפָּרָא. קוֹנְדִּיטוֹן כְּיַיִן. הָדָא אָֽמְרָה. יוֹצְאִין בְּיֵין קוֹנְדִּיטוֹן. The Gemara raises another question: What is the halakha with regard to fulfilling one’s obligation to drink the four cups with spiced wine? The Gemara answers: From the fact that bar Kappara taught in a baraita that spiced wine is treated like wine, that is to say, one fulfills his obligation with regard to the four cups with spiced wine, as it is wine.
מָהוּ לְצֵאת בְּיַיִן מְזוּגִין. מִדְּתַנֵּי רִבִּי חִייָא. אַרְבָּעָה כוּסוּת שֶׁאָֽמְרוּ יוֹצְאִין בָּהֶן בֵּין חַיִין בֵּין מְזוּגִין וּבִלְּבַד שֶׁיְּהֵא בָהֶן טַעַם וּמַרְאֶה יַיִן. The Gemara asks yet another question: What is the halakha with regard to fulfilling one’s obligation to drink the four cups with diluted wine? The Gemara answers from what Rav Ḥiyya taught in a baraita: With regard to the four cups of wine that the Sages said one must drink on the first night of Passover, one fulfills his obligation whether he drinks them undiluted or diluted, provided that they have the taste and appearance of wine. Undiluted wine should not be so strong that it doesn’t taste like ordinary wine, and diluted wine must preserve the taste and appearance of wine even after the water is added.
אָמַר רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה. מִצְוָה לָצֵאת בְּיַיִן אָדוֹם. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר אַל־תֵּ֥רֶא יַיִן֘ כִּ֪י יִתְאַ֫דָּ֥ם כִּֽי־יִתֵּ֣ן בַּכּוֹסֵינוּ וגו׳. Having mentioned the desired appearance of the wine after it has been diluted, the Gemara notes that Rabbi Yirmeya said: It is a mitzva to fulfill one’s obligation with regard to the four cups with red wine, as it is stated: “Look not upon the wine when it is red, when it gives its color in the cup, when it glides down smoothly” (Proverbs 23:31).
תַּאנֵּי. מְבוּשָּׁל כִּמְטוּבֵּל. מָהוּ לָצֵאת בְּיַיִן מְבוּשָּׁל. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹנָה. יוֹצְאִין בְּיַיִן מְבוּשָּׁל. רִבִּי יוֹנָה לְטַעֲמֵיהּ. דְּרִבִּי יוֹנָה כַּד הֲוֵי שָׁתִי אַרְבַּעְתֵי כַסֵּי דְּפִסְחָא הֲוָה חַזּוּק רֵישֵׁיהּ עַד חַגָּא Having already taught that spiced wine is fit for the four cups, the Gemara cites what we learned in a baraita: Cooked wine is like spiced wine. The Gemara asks: What is the halakha with regard to fulfilling one’s obligation to drink the four cups with cooked wine? Rabbi Yona said: One fulfills his obligation with cooked wine. The Gemara notes that Rabbi Yona conforms to his own reasoning, since when Rabbi Yona would drink four cups of wine for Passover he would have to wrap his head with a bandage until the festival of Shavuot, in order to relieve the headache that the wine caused him. This being the case, he permitted using weaker, cooked wine for the four cups.
חַמְתֵּיהּ חָדָא מַטְרוֹנִיתָא אַפּוֹי נְהִירִין. אָֽמְרָה. סַבָּא סַבָּא. חָדָא מֵהֲנֵי תְלַת מִלָּה אִית בָּךְ. אוֹ שְׁתוּיֵי חֲמְרָא אַתְּ אוֹ דְמַלְוֵי בְרִיבִּית אַתְּ אוֹ דִמְגַדֵּל חֲזִרֵי אַתְּ. אֲמַר לָתּ. תִּיפַּח רוּחָא דְּהַהִיא אִיתָּתָא. וְחָדָא מִן הָלֵין תְּלַת מִילַּייָא לֵית בָּן. אֶלָּא אוּלְפָּן דִּשְׁכִיחָא לֵיהּ. דְּהָכֵין כְּתִיב חָכְמַ֤ת אָדָם֙ תָּאִ֣יר פָּנָ֔יו. The Gemara relates that it once happened that a certain Roman matron [matronita] saw that Rabbi Yona’s face was shining. She said: Old man, old man, one of three things must apply to you. You are either drunk with wine, or else you lend money at interest, and owing to your comfortable income your face shines, or else you raise pigs, which provides you with large profits for little work. He cursed her and said to her: Let despair come upon that woman, as none of these three things apply to me. Rather, my face shines because my learning is with me and it lights my face, as this is what is written: “A man’s wisdom makes his face shine” (Ecclesiastes 8:1).
רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ אֲתִי לְטִיבֵּרְיָּא. חְמוֹנֵַאי תַּלְמִידֵי דְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אַפּוֹי נְהִירִין. אָֽמְרוּן תַּלְמוּדֵיי לְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. אַשְׁכַּח רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ סִימוֹן. אֲתָא לְגַבֵּיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. מַאי חַדְּתָא שְׁמַעְתָּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. תוֹסֶפְתָּא עַתִּיקָא. קְרָא עֲלֵיהּ. חָכְמַ֤ת אָדָם֙ תָּאִ֣יר פָּנָ֔יו. The Gemara further relates that Rabbi Abbahu once came to Tiberias, to the school of Rabbi Yoḥanan. Rabbi Yoḥanan’s students saw that Rabbi Abbahu’s face was shining. The students said to Rabbi Yoḥanan: Rabbi Abbahu has found a treasure. When Rabbi Abbahu came before Rabbi Yoḥanan, Rabbi Yoḥanan said to him: What new words of Torah did you hear? He said to him: I heard an ancient Tosefta, which was new to me. When Rabbi Yoḥanan heard Rabbi Abbahu’s answer, he applied to him the verse: “A man’s wisdom makes his face shine.”
אָמַר רִבִּי תֲִנָן. לוֹגְא דְאוֹרַיְתָא תוֹמַנְיָא עַתִּיקָא דְּמּוּרִיֵסָא דְצִיפּוֹרִי. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹנָה. וַחֲכִמְנָא לָהּ. דְּבֵית שַׁמַּאי הֲוָה מְכִילִין בָהּ דְּבַשׁ. § Rabbi Ḥanin said: A log by Torah law is equal in volume to the old eighth with which they would measure the fish brine [morayesa] in Tzippori. Rabbi Yona said to him: Even though the measuring instruments have changed and different ones are in use today, I am familiar with that measure, as it was with that measure that the members of Rabbi Yannai’s household measured honey.
תַּנֵּי. חֲצִי שְׁמִינִית [דף ט.] תִּבֶּרְיָנִית. It was taught in a baraita: A quarter-log is equal to half of a Tiberian eighth. [9a] This is a measure that was used in the past, but no longer in the present.
אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. הָדָא דִידָן הֲוָה. וְלָמָּה קָרִי לָהּ עַתִּיקָא. מִן בְּגִין דַּהֲוָה בְיוֹמָא. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: This is our measure today and it is not so old. The Gemara asks: Why does the tanna of the baraita call this measure old when it was still being used in his day?
אִית דְּאָֽמְרֵי. דַּהֲוָה זְעִירָא וְרָבַת. וְאִית דְּאָֽמְרֵי. דְאַזְעִירָא אַזְעָרַת קוֹמֵי דַהֲוָה. The Gemara answers: Some say that this measure was originally small and it was made larger, and some say that after it was enlarged it was again made smaller, but not as small as it had been originally. Since this measure was not of the same size at all times, the tanna of the baraita was precise when he said that a quarter-log is equal to the old measure of one-eighth. So too, Rabbi Yoḥanan was precise when he said that this was the measure used in his day.
כַּמָּה הוּא שִׁיעוּרָן שֶׁלּ כּוֹס. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן פָּזִי וְרִבִּי יוּסֵי בַּר בֵּיבִין בְּשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל. אֶצְבָּעַיִם עַל אֶצְבָּעַיִם עַל רוּם אֶצְבַּע וּמֶחֳצָה וּשְׁלִישׁ אֶצְבַּע. The Gemara asks: In terms of the measures currently in use, what is the measure of a cup that holds a quarter-log? Rabbi Yosei in the name of Rabbi Yosei ben Pazi and Rabbi Yosei bar Beivai in the name of Rabbi Shmuel said: Two fingers long by two fingers wide by the height of one and a half fingers and one-third of a finger. The Gemara previously discussed the measure of wine that determines liability if one carries it from one domain to another on Shabbat. There, the Gemara discussed wine in liquid form; here, the Gemara adds a parallel ruling with regard to congealed wine. It was taught in a baraita: The measure that determines liability for carrying from one domain to another congealed wine is an olive-bulk; this is the statement of Rabbi Natan.
רַבָּנִן דְּקַיְסָרִין וְרִבִּי יוֹסֵה בַּר בֵּיבִין בְּשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל. אַתְיָא דְּרִבִּי נָתָן כְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. כְּמוֹ דְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר. בָּרְבִיעָא. כֵּן אָמַר רִבִּי נָתָן. בָּרְבִיעָא. לִכְשֶׁיּקְרַשׁ יְהֵא בוּ כְזַיִת. The Rabbis of Caesarea and Rabbi Yosei bar Beivai said in the name of Shmuel: These words of Rabbi Natan follow the opinion of Rabbi Shimon in a mishna (Shabbat 76b). Just as Rabbi Shimon said there: The measure that determines liability for all liquids, including wine, is a quarter-log, so Rabbi Natan said: When wine is in liquid form, the measure that determines liability for carrying it from one domain to another is a quarter-log; after it has congealed one is liable only if he carries out an olive-bulk, which is equivalent to a quarter-log of wine after it has congealed.
רִבִּי סִימוֹן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. מַעֲשֶׂה בְפִירְדַת רִבִּי שֶׁמֵּתָה. וְטִהֲרוּ אֶת דָּמָהּ מִשּׁוּם נְבֵילָה. וְשָׁאַל רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אֶת רִבִּי סִימוֹן. עַד כַּמַּה. § On a similar matter, Rabbi Simon said in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: An incident is related with regard to the mule of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi that died of a wound, and the Sages deemed its blood ritually pure, i.e., free of the impurity of an unslaughtered animal carcass. They said that the blood of a carcass does not impart ritual impurity as does the carcass itself. And Rabbi Eliezer asked Rabbi Simon, who had reported this ruling: Up to how much blood from an animal carcass does not render one ritually impure? Did they deem it pure because it was less than a quarter-log, but had it been more than a quarter-log they would have deemed it impure?
וְלֹא אַשְׁגַּח בֵּיהּ. וְשָׁאַל לֵיהּ רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי דְאָמַר לֵיהּ. עַד רְבִיעִית טָהוֹר. יוֹתֵר מִכֵּן טָמֵא. וּבְאַט רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר עַד דְּלָא אַחְזַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי סִימוֹן שְׁמַעְתָּא. Rabbi Simon paid Rabbi Eliezer no attention and did not answer him, so Rabbi Eliezer went and asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, who said to him as follows: Up to a quarter-log of blood is pure; more than a quarter-log of blood is impure. Rabbi Elazar was displeased that Rabbi Simon had not fully reported the teaching to him, so that he had to go to Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi to ask about it.
רַב בֵּיבָא הֲוָה יְתִיב מַתְנוּ הָדֵין עוֹבְדָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר בִּיסְנָא. עַד רְבִיעִית טָהוֹר. יוֹתֵר מִיכֵּן טָמֵא. Rav Beivai was sitting and teaching this case of the mule from Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s household, in which the Sages ruled that the blood of a carcass does not render one impure. Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Kahana wished to clarify the issue and said to him: Up to a quarter-log of blood is pure, but more than that is impure? Or did the Sages rule that the blood of a carcass is never ritually impure, whatever the measure may be?
וּבְעִט בֵּיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי זְרִיקָא. בְּגִין דִּשְׁאַל לָךְ אַתְּ בְּעַט בֵּיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. בְּגִין דְלָא הֲוָה דַּעְתִּי בִּי בָּעִיטְנָא בֵיהּ. The Gemara relates: In response to Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Kahana’s question, Rav Beivai kicked him. Rabbi Zerika said to him, i.e., to Rav Beivai: You kicked him because he asked you a question? He said to him: I kicked him because my mind was unsettled, and not because he did anything wrong.
דְּאָמַר רִבִּי חָנָן. וְהָי֣וּ חַיֶּ֔יךָ תְּלוּיִם לְךָ֖ מִנֶּג֑דֶ. זֶה שֶׁלּוֹקֵחַ חִיטִּים לַשָּׁנָה. וּפָֽחַדְתָּ֙ לַ֣יְלָה וְיוֹמָ֔ם. זֶה שֶׁלּוֹקֵחַ מִן הַצִּידָקִי. וְלֹ֥א תַֽאֲמִ֖ין בְּחַיֶּֽיךָ׃ זֶה שֶׁלּוֹקֵחַ מִן הַפַּלְטָר. Rav Beivai tries to explain his conduct: As Rabbi Ḥanan said: “And your life shall hang in doubt before you; and you shall fear night and day, and shall have no assurance of your life” (Deuteronomy 28:66). This verse in the passage of rebuke refers to three increasingly harsh levels of poverty: “And your life shall hang in doubt before you”; this is one who buys wheat for a year, who has no financial security with regard to the following year. “And you shall fear night and day”; this is one who buys small amounts of wheat from a vendor, with the attendant concern that he might not have enough for the morrow. “And you shall have no assurance of your life”; this is one who buys bread from the baker [paltor] and cannot afford to buy wheat in advance to assure even one future meal.
וַאֲנָא סְמִיכְנָא אֲפַלְטָר. Rabbi Beivai concluded: And I am in the harshest state, as I rely on the baker. For this reason I did not have the presence of mind to respond appropriately to Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Kahana’s question.
וּמָהוּ כְדִי. הֵעִיד רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן פְּתוֹרָא עַל דַּם נְבֵלָה שֶׁהוּא טָהוֹר. The Gemara asks: What then is the halakhic ruling regarding the ritual impurity of the blood of an animal carcass? In response, the Gemara quotes a mishna (Eduyyot 8:1): Rabbi Yehoshua ben Petora testified that the blood of an unslaughtered animal carcass is ritually pure, which implies that it is ritually pure regardless of the amount, even more than a quarter-log.
מַה לְטָהוֹר. לְטָהֵר מִן הַבָּשָׂר. הָא לְטַמֵּא אַתָּה מְטַמֵּא. The Gemara rejects this answer: What does the mishna mean by ritually pure? That such blood is ritually pure in that it does not render an item susceptible to impurity. Even though blood is one of the seven liquids that render an item susceptible to ritual impurity, the blood of an animal carcass is not deemed blood for this purpose. But as for imparting ritual impurity by itself, the blood imparts ritual impurity, as does the carcass itself.
תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָא. דַּם הַשֶּׁרֶץ כִּבְשָׂרוֹ מְטַמֵּא וְאֵין מַכְשִׁיר. וְאֵין לָנוּ כַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ׃ The Gemara asks: How can the words of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Petora be understood in this way? Didn’t we learn elsewhere in a mishna (Makhshirin 6:5): The blood of a creeping animal is like its flesh; it imparts ritual impurity to items with which it comes into contact, but it does not render an item susceptible to impurity? And we have nothing else like it, i.e., there is no other liquid that imparts ritual impurity but does not render food susceptible to impurity. The implication is that the blood of an animal carcass would either both impart impurity and render an item susceptible to impurity or neither.
וְשִׁיעוּר טוּמְאָתוֹ שֶׁדָּמוֹ מְטַמֵּא כִּבְשָׂרוֹ. The Gemara answers: When the mishna said that we have nothing else like a creeping animal, it meant that we have nothing else like it with regard to the measure required for its blood to confer impurity; the measure of a creeping animal’s blood is the same for both: The measure required for its imparting ritual impurity is such that its blood imparts ritual impurity like its flesh, i.e., in the measure of a lentil. This is not the case with an unslaughtered animal carcass, the flesh of which imparts ritual impurity in the measure of an olive-bulk, while its blood imparts impurity in the measure of a quarter-log. Consequently, there is no contradiction between the mishna in tractate Makhshirin and the testimony of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Petora.
אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵי פְּלִיגִין בָּהּ תְּרֵין אֲמוֹרָאִין חַד אָמַר. טָמֵא. וְחַד אָמַר. טָהוֹר. מָאן דְּאָמַר טָמֵא. כְּרִבִּי יְהוּדָה. וּמָאן טָהוֹר. כְּרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן פְּתוֹרָה. Rabbi Yosei said: Two amora’im disagree about this matter. One said a quarter-log of this blood renders one ritually impure, and one said that even after contact with this blood, one remains ritually pure. The one who said it is impure follows the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda in a mishna in Eduyyot 5:1. Rabbi Yehuda maintains there that this issue is the subject of a dispute between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel. The halakha would follow the opinion of Beit Hillel, which is that carcass blood does confer impurity. And the one who said ritually pure holds like the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Petora, who testified (Eduyyot 8:1) that the blood of an animal carcass is ritually pure.
רַב אֲבוּהָא דְּאִימָן אַחְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יְהוּדָה מוֹרְייָנָא דְּנָשִׂיא הֲוִה. Rav Avduma of the descenders, i.e., travelers from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, bringing with them the Torah taught in Eretz Yisrael, said to him: And it is right. That which you explained is correct, as Rabbi Yehuda was the halakhic authority for the house of the Nasi. Rabbi Yehuda ruled then that the blood of the dead mule was pure only because there was less than a quarter-log of it.
[שֶׁמָּא יַעֲנִי וְיֹאמְרוּ וכו׳.] תַּנֵּי רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. קִיווֵץ לֹא יִתְרוֹם מִפְּנֵי הַחֲשַׁד. תַּנֵּי. הַגִּיזְבְּרִין הָיוּ מְפַסְפְּסִין בְּקִילִּקִין. § The Mishna taught that the one who collects the funds from the Temple treasury chamber must not enter the chamber wearing clothes that could arouse suspicion, as perhaps one day he will become poor and people will say that he was reduced to poverty because he had stolen shekels from the chamber. Rabbi Yishmael taught a similar halakha in a baraita: One who is curly haired must not collect funds from the Temple treasury chamber because of the suspicion that he will hide shekels from the chamber in his curls. It was taught in another baraita: The Temple treasurers would untangle [mefaspesin] the matted locks of the one who collected the funds from the chamber after he exited the chamber, to ascertain that no coins were hidden in his hair.
תַּנֵּי מְדַבְּרִין הָיוּ עִמּוֹ מִשָּׁעָה שֶׁהוּא נִכְנַס עַד שָׁעָה שֶׁהוּא יוֹצֵא. וִימַלֵּא פּוּמֵיהּ מוֹי. אָמַר רִבִּי תַנְחוּמָא. מִפְּנֵי הַבְּרָכָה. It was taught in yet another baraita that deals with a similar suspicion: They would converse with the one collecting the funds from the chamber from the time he entered the chamber until the time he exited it, so that he should not be able to hide money from the chamber in his mouth. The Gemara asks: Why not let him fill his mouth with water, so that it would be impossible for him to insert money into his mouth, and then he would not have to speak? Rabbi Tanḥuma said: He cannot fill his mouth with water because of the blessing that he must recite before collecting the funds from the chamber.
רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹנָתָן. בַּתּוֹרָה וּבַנְּבִיאים וּבַכְּתובִים מָצָאנוּ שֶׁאָדָם צָרִיךְ לָצֵאת יְדֵי הַבִּרְיוֹת כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁהוּא צָרִיךְ לָצֵאת יְדֵי הַמָּקוֹם. בַּתּוֹרָה מְנַיִין. דִּכְתִיב וִהְיִיתֶם נְקִיִים מֵיְיָ וּמִיִּשְׂרָאֵל. בַּנְּבִיאים מְנַיִין. דִּכְתִיב אֵל֩ ׀ אֱלֹהִ֨ים ׀ יְי אֵ֣ל ׀ אֱלֹהִ֤ים ׀ יְי ה֣וּא יֹוֹדֵעַ וְיִשְׂרָאֵל֭ ה֣וּא יֵדָ֑ע. בַּכְּתובִים מְנַיִין. דִּכְתִיב וּמְצָא חֵן וְשֵׂכֶל טוֹב בְּעֵינֵי אֱלֹהִים וְאָדָם׃ § Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said in the name of Rabbi Yonatan: We find in the Torah, in the Prophets, and in the Writings that a person must appear justified before people as he must appear justified before the Omnipresent. From where in the Torah is this derived? As it is written: “And you shall be guiltless before the Lord and before Israel” (Numbers 32:22). From where in the Prophets is this derived? As it is written: “The mighty One, God, the Lord, He knows, and Israel shall know” (Joshua 22:22). From where in the Writings is this derived? As it is written: “So shall you find grace and good understanding in the sight of God and man (Proverbs 3:4).
גַּמְלִיאֵל זֵוּגָא שָׁאַל לְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. אֵי זֶהוּ הַמְחוּוָר שֶׁבְּכוּלָּן. אָמַר לֵיהּ. וִהְיִיתֶם נְקִיִים מֵיְיָ וּמִיִּשְׂרָאֵל . Gamliel Zuga asked Rabbi Yosei bar Rabbi Bun: Which of these verses is the clearest of all the sources that one must be blameless even in the eyes of man? The three proof texts say more or less the same thing; which is the most unambiguous of the three? Rabbi Yosei bar Rabbi Bun said to him: The verse “And you shall be guiltless before the Lord and before Israel” is the most unequivocal of all.