Shekalim 7b — the Talmud in English

where they disagreed ![](pamud.bmp "

Exact page location") about

Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yosei

whether it was permitted to move it. And they disagreed to such an extent

that they tore a Torah scroll in their anger.

Before the Gemara—the Talmudic discussion of the Mishna—continues this account, it raises the following question:

What?

Can it enter your mind that they “tore” it!?

Surely matters did not actually reach the point that they themselves tore a Torah scroll.

Rather,

the meaning is

that a Torah scroll was torn,

unintentionally,

in their anger.

The Gemara continues the account:

And there was an elder there, whose name was Rabbi Yosei ben Kisma.

And he said: I would be surprised if this

[will not become]

synagogue

in the future

a house of idolatry!

Because anyone who becomes angry is considered as though he worships idolatry. In this account, they sought to persuade Rabbi Yohanan not to become angry.

And Rabbi Yohanan returned

and

said: “They were colleagues!”

That is, what happened there was because Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yosei were colleagues, and since they were colleagues they should not have become angry with each other. This cannot be compared to my case, in which I am angry with Rabbi Eliezer because he is my student.

Rabbi Yaakov bar Idi entered before him

to appease him, and

said to him:

It is written in the Book of Joshua:

“Just as the Lord commanded Moses His servant, so did Moses command Joshua,

and so did Joshua do. He did not remove anything from all that the Lord had commanded Moses.”

The verse testifies concerning Joshua that everything he did as Moses’ student, he did on the basis of what he had received from Moses. This certainly includes even actions regarding which it was not explicitly stated that Moses had commanded him to do them.

For otherwise,

whenever Joshua sat and expounded, would he say: “Thus said Moses”!?

Rather,

necessarily,

Joshua would sit and expound, and everyone would know that the Torah

that he was expounding

was Moses’ Torah.

So too you

and Rabbi Eliezer:

Eliezer sits and expounds, and everyone knows that the Torah

that he is expounding

is yours.

Rabbi Yohanan was appeased.

He said to them

—to Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi, who had tried to appease him:

Why do you not know how to appease someone as our colleague ben Idi does?

The Gemara asks:

And Rabbi Yohanan,

who had taken offense at Rabbi Eliezer—why

what

had he taken offense

to such an extent?

And it answers:

He wanted them to state the halakhic teaching in his name

[he was particular that it be stated in his name]. For

even

with regard to

David

we find that he

requested mercy concerning it,

that his teachings be quoted in his name.

As it is stated

in Psalms, where David said:

“I shall dwell in Your tent forever; I shall take refuge in the shelter of Your wings, Selah.”

A difficulty is raised: How could David have requested this?

Could it have entered David’s mind that he would live and remain forever?

Rather, David said this before the Holy One, blessed be He: Master of the universe! May it be Your will that I merit having my words recited in synagogues and houses of study

after my death, and this will be as though I am alive.

Shimon ben Nazira said in the name of Rabbi Yitzhak: Whenever a halakhic teaching is quoted from a Torah scholar’s words

[in his name]

in this world—

his lips move

[stir]

with him in the grave.

As it is stated

in the Song of Songs:

“And your palate is like the best wine

that goes directly to my beloved,

moving the lips of those who sleep.”

And we interpret “your palate is like the best wine” as referring to the mouth of a Torah scholar, which is compared to wine:

Just as

a vessel called

a grape press

is used to hold grapes until they become warm and the wine is ready to flow,

and as soon as a person places his finger on it, it immediately flows

and releases wine on its own—

so too, when a halakhic teaching is quoted from the mouths of the righteous, their lips immediately move with them in the grave.

And the Gemara explains: What is the comparison to

what

is the

pleasure

that comes

to him

the righteous person from this?

Bar Nazira said: It is like one who drinks spiced wine,

like someone who drinks a cup containing honey, wine, and pepper.

Rabbi Yitzhak said: It is like one who drinks aged wine.

Like someone who drinks old wine.

Even though

time has passed since

he drank it

[he drank it],

the taste

is still perceptible

in his mouth. And they disagreed about this:

The one who says that it is like drinking spiced wine holds that this applies only to someone who also performed good deeds during his lifetime, just as spiced wine contains additional beneficial spices. The one who says that it is like drinking aged wine holds that merely reciting the halakhic teaching benefits him.

Тот, кто говорит, что это подобно человеку, выпившему кондитон, считает, что это сказано только о том, кто при жизни совершал также добрые дела, подобно кондитону, в котором есть и другие благие пряности.

А тот, кто говорит, что это подобно человеку, выпившему старое вино, считает, что ему достаточно одного лишь произнесения галахического высказывания.

Rav Giddel said: One who cites a teaching in the name of the person who said it—

should see the author of the teaching as though he were standing before him.

For this enables him to state the matter accurately and correctly, since the principal form of learning from one’s teacher is through seeing his face, as it is written: “Your eyes shall see your teacher.”

And he derives this from

what is stated

in Psalms:

“Only in an image does a person walk.”

He explains the verse, “does a person walk,” to mean “does a person conduct himself.” That is, the person who cites a teaching should conduct himself and think as though the image of his teacher were standing before him.

It is written

in Proverbs: “Many people proclaim each other’s kindness, but who can find a trustworthy person?”

And it is explained:

“Many people proclaim each other’s kindness”—

these are all other people.

For most people call a person’s teaching their own and are not particular to state it in the name of the person who said it.

And as for what is stated,

“But who can find a trustworthy person?”—

this is Rabbi Zeira,

who was a trustworthy person: he would not cite a teaching in someone’s name unless it had been verified for him and he knew who had said it.

And similarly, we find that Rabbi Zeira was particular about this.

For Rabbi Zeira said: We need not be concerned with the teachings of Rav Sheshet

[we need not be concerned with teachings that Rav Sheshet stated] in the names of the great sages, because

he was a “sealed man”

[his eyes were closed. Just as a blind person is called by the opposite expression sagi nahor, meaning “one with much light,” so he was called miftacha, from the expression “open”].

Since he could not see the people from whom he heard the teachings, it was possible that he had heard them from someone else and confused one person with another based on his recognition of the voice.

And similarly, we find that

Rabbi Zeira said to Rabbi Asi:

Did

the Master know

[do you know]

Bar Patiya, about whom you cite a teaching in his name?

For if you did not hear it directly from him, there is reason for concern that he did not say it, but that someone else did.

He said to him: Rabbi Yohanan stated it in his name,

and his statements are presumed to be checked and correct.

We also find that

Rabbi Zeira said to Rabbi Asi:

Did

the Master know Rav, about whom you cite a teaching in his name?

He said to him,

Rabbi Asi:

Rav Adda bar Ahava stated it in his name,

and I rely on his words.

From all these examples, we see how particular Rabbi Zeira was about the truth of attributing teachings to their authors. Therefore, the verse “But who can find a trustworthy person?” suits him.

Since the Gemara had spoken about David’s prayer, it also brought this teaching:

There is no generation that does not contain scoffers like the generation of King David.

And what did the corrupt people of the generation

and its scoffers

?

They would go to David’s windows and say

to him: “David, David! When will the Temple be built? When will we go to the House of the Lord?”

They said this in order to anger him, because they knew that the matter depended on David’s death, as the Holy One, blessed be He, had said to him: “Only you shall not build the House.” Thus, it was as though they were saying to him: “When will you die, so that the Temple can be built?”

And David would say: Even though

they intend to anger me,

let there come upon me

a matter [this is an expression of an oath]

if this is not truly my own view: that

I

would rejoice

in their words.

As it is written: “I rejoiced when they said to me, ‘Let us go to the House of the Lord.’”

And we further interpret what is written in the Book of Samuel:

“When your days are fulfilled and you lie with your fathers,

I will raise up your offspring after you. He will build a House for My name.” The words “when your days are fulfilled” seem unnecessary, since it could have written, “when you lie with your fathers.”

Rather, this is what

the Holy One, blessed be He, said to David: I count out complete days for you, and not incomplete days.

That is, I will grant you your full lifespan, day by day.

Even though the building of the Temple would be delayed because of the length of King David’s life, this was because the deeds of King David were more beloved to the Holy One, blessed be He, than the building of the Temple. As the Holy One, blessed be He, said to David:

What,

after all, is it that

your son Solomon will build the Temple

? He will do so

only to offer

there

sacrifices.

The charity and justice that you perform are more beloved to Me than the sacrifice,

as it is stated: “Perform charity and justice—

it is more acceptable to the Lord than an altar.”

We will return to you, chapter “Those Who Combine Shekels.”

Halakha 1 — Mishna:

All the shekels that were donated for the sacrifices were placed in one chamber in the Temple. And three times a year they would take from it the “collection of shekels,” and place them into three small boxes, each of which held three seahs, in order to purchase from them communal sacrifices.

This act is called “the collection of the chamber,” that is, they would “collect” [every taking of a portion from a complete amount is called a collection] a part of the money found in the chamber, and from those coins that they collected they would bring sacrifices.

And through their doing this in the manner of a “collection,” it was considered that the sacrifices that they brought from those collected coins had been brought as though from all the money, and all Israel were partners in the sacrifices.

And they would not take everything at one time for the needs of the entire year, because those living far from Jerusalem had not yet brought their shekels. Therefore, through this division into three periods, it was possible that in the second or third collection the shekels of those living far away would already be included, and the communal sacrifices would come from the shekels of the entire community of Israel, [and even though if those living far away had still not contributed their shekels, the sacrifice is considered to have come also from their shekels, since they collect also on the basis of the shekels that would eventually be collected [Chapter 2, Mishna 4], nevertheless, they wanted, insofar as possible, that the sacrifices should come from their actual shekels, Tiferet Yisrael].

And the Mishna explains in which three periods this was done:

In three periods

[periods]

during the year they collect the chamber,

taking money from the chamber and placing it in the boxes, from which they would take communal sacrifices.

1.

Before Passover.

That is, fifteen days before Passover [and the Gemara explains why fifteen days before the Passover festival is called “before Passover”].

2.

Before Shavuot,

that is, fifteen days before the festival of Shavuot.

3.

And before the festival,

that is, fifteen days before the festival of Sukkot.

And

those three periods

are

also the periods that determine the

“threshing floors” of animal tithe.

For just as with grain, from the time the grain is gathered into the threshing floor it is forbidden to eat until they separate a tithe from it, so too, when those periods arrive, the animals are considered as though they have become a “threshing floor,” and are forbidden to eat until they separate animal tithe from them.

They lead the animals through an opening and count them from one to ten, and they mark the tenth with a red stripe, and that is animal tithe.

And before these periods arrive, it is permitted to slaughter and eat the animals, even though they have not yet tithed them,

the words of Rabbi Akiva.

Ben Azzai says:

The periods are:

1.

On the twenty-ninth of Adar,

which is two weeks before Passover.

And Ben Azzai concedes to Rabbi Akiva that the time of the first collection is fifteen days before Passover; however, he maintains that Adar is always deficient, and contains only twenty-nine days, and consequently, fifteen days before Passover is always the twenty-ninth of Adar.

Whereas Rabbi Akiva maintains that the month of Adar is sometimes full and sometimes deficient, and therefore the time of the threshing floor is sometimes on the twenty-ninth of Adar and sometimes on the thirtieth of Adar.

And therefore he could not give a fixed date.

2.

And on the first of Sivan,

because the reason for instituting the “threshing floors” is so that animals should be available for those ascending for the pilgrimage.

For before they instituted the enactment of the threshing floors, there was no fixed time for tithing the animals, and people would hold back their animals from selling them, because they did not want to sell them before tithing them.

And once they instituted the times of the threshing floors for animal tithe, before the pilgrimage, animals would be available then, at the time of the pilgrimage.

And since not many animals are born between Passover and Shavuot, as it is a short period, therefore, if the time of the threshing floor had been instituted two weeks before Shavuot, the animals would all be gone before the festival. And therefore they instituted the time on the first of Sivan.

3.

And on the twenty-ninth of Av.

Because Ben Azzai was uncertain whether the New Year for animal tithe is on the first of Elul or on the first of Tishrei. Therefore, it is impossible to combine for the count of the tithe animals that were born before the first of Elul with animals that were born after the first of Elul, because perhaps after the first of Elul it is another tithe year, and one does not tithe from animals of one year for animals of another year.

And for this reason they instituted the time of the tithe on the twenty-ninth of Av, for then all the animals belong to the same year of obligation for tithe.

Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon say:

The times of the threshing floor for animal tithe are:

1.

On the first of Nisan,

because they maintain that one asks and expounds the laws of the festival two weeks before the festival, that is, on the first of Nisan, and at that time they established the threshing floor [and they do not maintain that only half of the period for expounding the laws is the time for establishing the threshing floor].

2.

On the first of Sivan.

And its reason is like that of Ben Azzai, which was explained above.

3.

And on the twenty-ninth of Elul.

Because they maintain that the New Year for animal tithe is on the first of Tishrei, and therefore they tithe before this time.

And the Mishna asks: Since the New Year for animal tithe is on the first of Tishrei, then let them tithe on that very day,

and why did they say

that the time of the threshing floor for tithe is

on the twenty-ninth of Elul, and did not say on the first of Tishrei?

And the Mishna explains:

Because

the first of Tishrei

is a festival day,

for it is the New Year,

and it is impossible to tithe on a festival day

because they would mark the tenth with a red rod, and it is forbidden to mark on a festival day.

And therefore they advanced it

and established the time of the tithe

on the twenty-ninth of Elul.

And in the Babylonian Talmud, in tractate Bekhorot 48a, another reason is explained for why they tithed on the twenty-ninth of Elul: if they had tithed on the first of Tishrei, it was possible that they would tithe animals born on that very day from animals born previously, and this would be tithing from one year for another. For Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon maintain that the New Year for animal tithe is on the first of Tishrei.

And the Gemara there explains that the Mishna here stated one of the two reasons, and both are true.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: Three times during the year they collect the chamber: before Passover.

And the Gemara explains what the expression “before” means:

Rabbi Abbahu said: Everywhere

where

we learn “half,”

the intention is

half.

And therefore, that which is stated in our Mishna, “before Passover,” means

half of the thirty days before the festival,

for from the time that is thirty days before the festival, they expound its laws.

And when half of those thirty days have passed, that is the time before Passover. And then they collect the chamber.

We learned in the Mishna:

And they

[those periods in which they collect the chamber], are the times of the

“threshing floors”

of animal tithe.

And the Gemara explains why specifically those periods were established for animal tithe:

Rabbi Yohanan said: Because they are periods of birth.

For during these periods the animals give birth. Some animals are early in giving birth, before Passover; some are late, until between Passover and Shavuot; and some do not give birth until between Shavuot and the festival.

And therefore they established three times for tithing, corresponding to three periods of birth: before Passover, before Shavuot, and before the festival.

Rabbi Aha and Rabbi Tanhum bar Hiyya in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi

explained the reason that they established tithing before the festivals:

so that animals would be available for those ascending for the pilgrimage.

Because, since there is no time at which one is obligated to tithe the animals until before the festivals, people hold back their animals and do not sell or slaughter them until that time, so as not to slaughter or sell them before the tithe.

And even though it is permitted to sell before these periods, even though he has not yet tithed his animals, nevertheless, a person is pleased to perform a mitzva with his money, and afterward sell.

And when they established the times of the threshing floors, so that from those times onward it would be impossible to eat the meat of an animal without separating animal tithe, it follows that they would slaughter their animals only close to the festival, and animals would be available for those ascending for the pilgrimage, both for eating and for sacrifices.

Rabbi Yudan said

to explain the reason for establishing the times of the tithe close to the festivals:

so that he would not come to

the prohibition of

“do not delay,”

which is stated regarding one who delays bringing his sacrifice. For if he separates animal tithe close to the festival, he will not forget to bring the animal and sacrifice it when he ascends for the pilgrimage.

Rabbi Yose said: Anyone who delays his untithed produce

and does not tithe his animals at the times established for this

transgresses

the prohibition of

“do not delay.”

Since the disagreement in the Mishna concerning the time of the threshing floor for animal tithe—whether it is on the twenty-ninth of Av or on the twenty-ninth of Elul—depends on the disagreement as to when the New Year for animal tithe is, the Gemara now explains this disagreement: