Megillah 26a — the Talmud in English

They sold

cloths — ![](pamud.bmp "

Exact folio location")

they shall purchase

with their proceeds

books

of the Prophets and Writings .

They sold

books —

they purchase

with their proceeds a

Torah scroll .

But,

one does not lower in holiness. Therefore:

If

they sold

a

Torah scroll —

they may not purchase

with its proceeds

books.

And likewise, if they sold

books —

they may not purchase

with their proceeds

cloths.

They sold

cloths —

they may not purchase

with their proceeds

an ark.

They sold

an ark —

they may not purchase a synagogue.

They sold

a synagogue —

they may not purchase the street.

And likewise —

the same law applies —

to their surplus.

For example, if they sold books and purchased a Torah scroll with their proceeds, and money still remained from the sale of the books, they may not purchase with it an object whose holiness is lesser.

Gemara:

We learned in our Mishna:

The people of the city who sold the city square.

Rabba bar bar Hana said in the name of Rabbi Yohanan: This —

the matter that we say in the Mishna, that if they sold a street, they purchase with its proceeds specifically something in which there is holiness —

is the statement of Rabbi Menahem bar Yosei, the anonymous one

is.

But the Sages say: The street —

has no element of holiness,

and they may do with its proceeds whatever they wish .

And we raise an objection concerning it:

And Rabbi Menahem bar Yosei, what is his reason?

And we explain:

Since the people pray in it [

in the street]

during fasts and ma'amadot,

therefore it has holiness.

And the Sages

can say to you:

That

which they pray in the street —

is merely an incidental occurrence,

for it is not frequent: the ma'amadot would not recur until half a year later, and likewise the fasts are not frequent; therefore the street has no element of holiness.

We learned in our Mishna:

A synagogue —

they purchase an ark.

Rabbi Shmuel bar Nahmani said in the name of Rabbi Yonatan: They taught

that they may sell a synagogue

only

in

a synagogue of villages,

where only the people of the place pray in it.

But as for a synagogue of large cities, since people also come to it from elsewhere

as well

come to it,

and not specifically the people of that place pray in it,

they cannot

the people of the city

sell it,

because

it is

a synagogue

of the many,

and it is not only that of the people of the large city, because even those who come from elsewhere contribute toward its construction and its other needs .

Rav Ashi said: This synagogue of Mata Mehasya, even though people come to it from elsewhere, since they come with the intention of coming to me,

and they give the money to the synagogue so that I may do with it as I wish ,

if I wish —

I shall sell it .

They raised an objection: Rabbi Yehuda said: There was an incident involving the synagogue of the coppersmiths [

coppersmiths]

that was in Jerusalem, which they sold

those coppersmiths

to Rabbi Eliezer, and he did all his needs in it.

But there

the synagogue

was one of the large cities,

and nevertheless they sold it!?

And we answer:

That synagogue was a small one [

small]

and they —

the coppersmiths —

made it

by themselves, and people who came from elsewhere did not participate in it [ because coppersmiths cannot be tolerated by other people, for they are filthy like tanners; therefore they had a synagogue by themselves ].

They raised an objection:

It is written: “And I shall place the plague of leprosy

in a house of the land of your possession,”

and we expound:

Your possession becomes impure through plagues —

but Jerusalem does not become impure through plagues,

because it is not a possession, for this tan­ na holds that Jerusalem was not divided among the tribes [as below].

Rabbi Yehuda said: I heard

that it does not become impure through plagues

except for the place of the Temple alone,

because it is written concerning plagues: “And he who owns the house shall come,” implying that the house must have owners. And the Temple belongs to holiness, and it has no owners .

But the other houses in Jerusalem do become impure through plagues, for Rabbi Yehuda holds that Jerusalem was divided among the tribes, and we apply to it “your possession.”

In any event, we see that Rabbi Yehuda says that specifically the Temple does not become impure through plagues,

but synagogues and study halls

in Jerusalem

do become impure!

And

why? They were synagogues of large cities,

and we said above that the people of the large city are not their owners!?

And the Sages too disagreed only because they hold that Jerusalem was not divided among the tribes. It implies that if it had been divided among the tribes, even the study halls within it would become impure. And they stand in a large city!?

And we answer: Do not say that Rabbi Yehuda’s words are “the place of the Temple,” but

say

this:

Rabbi Yehuda said: I heard only of a “sanctified” place,

which includes even synagogues.

In what do

the first anonymous authority and Rabbi Yehuda

disagree? The first anonymous authority holds: Jerusalem was not divided among the tribes.

And Rabbi Yehuda holds: Jerusalem was divided among the tribes.

And it is in the dispute of these tannaim

below.

For it was taught: What was in the portion of Judah?

All the vacant area from the entrance of

the Temple Mount

on the eastern side, and

the chambers

within the rampart,

and

the three

courts.

Namely: the Women’s Court and the Israelite Court, which are eleven cubits in which Israelites may enter inward from the gate, and the Priests’ Court, which extends from there toward the west for eleven cubits, until the outer altar.

And what was in the portion of Benjamin?

The Vestibule, the Sanctuary, and the Holy of Holies,

which are on the western side.

There still remained thirty-two cubits of the outer altar itself, and twenty-two cubits between the Vestibule and the altar, for it had not yet been explained whose they were. And now the tanna explains:

And a strip extended from the portion of Judah and entered the portion of Benjamin, and in it an altar was built.

That is, in the portion of Judah there was also a width of one cubit along the entire eastern side of the altar [apart from the cubit at the southeastern corner]. And likewise a width of one cubit along the entire southern side of the altar [apart from the cubit at the southwestern corner]. This was the strip that entered from the portion of Judah toward the south, into the portion of Benjamin, and in it was the cubit on the southern side of the altar.

But the rest of the altar, and likewise the twenty-two cubits between the Vestibule and the altar, were in the portion of Benjamin [so it is explained in Rashi in Zevahim 53b. See there].

And Benjamin the righteous

foresaw through the holy spirit that this was destined to be, and

was distressed over it —

over that strip —

every day, to swallow it. As it is stated: “He hovers over him all day” [

for a person who is distressed rubs and chafes against his garments].

Therefore

Benjamin merited and became a host

for the Divine Presence,

for the Ark was in his portion .

And this is the tanna with whom Rabbi Judah agrees, for they hold that Jerusalem was apportioned among the tribes.

And this tanna

below —

holds that Jerusalem was not apportioned among the tribes.

As it was taught: They do not rent

to pilgrims the

houses

that

are in Jerusalem,

but give them entry into them free of charge,

because they do not belong to them,

the homeowners.

We see that Jerusalem was not apportioned among the tribes, for that is why they do not belong to them .

Rabbi Eliezer son of Rabbi Shimon says: They do not even

rent to them

beds

[Tosafot explained that Rabbi Eliezer holds that since the ground upon which the beds stood did not belong to them, they did not have the power to rent them out ].

Therefore,

since they do not rent the houses and the beds, but allow them to dwell in them free of charge, therefore the Sages instituted that

the hides of sacred offerings

[namely, thanksgiving offerings and peace offerings, whose hides belong to the owners] — shall

the innkeepers seize them by force,

so that they will give the pilgrims beds with a pleasant expression [so wrote the Ritva in Yoma].

Abaye said: Learn from here

from here that

proper conduct

[the way of the world]

is to leave

[that he should leave]

a gulfa

[an earthenware jug that he used]

and a mashkha

[the hide of an animal that he slaughtered and ate in the homeowner’s house] —

at the inn

where he lodged, just as we say here that the innkeepers take the hides of the sacred offerings. And since this is the way of the world generally, therefore the Sages said that they should seize them by force [the Ritva in Yoma].

Rava said: They taught this only

that if they sold a synagogue, they do not lower the money from its sanctity, but purchase an ark with it, and the synagogue also remains in its sanctity [analogous to scrolls, with which one purchases a Torah scroll, and the purchaser of the scrolls conducts himself toward them with sanctity] —

but [only when] the seven good men of the city did not sell it

[

in the presence of the people of the city, but the people of the city alone sold it, or the seven good men of the city alone..

.