Bekhorot

An objection was raised: If he had five animals in Kefar Hananiah1 and five in Kefar ‘Uthnai2 [a distance of thirty-two mils], the animals do not combine for tithing until he has one animal in Sepphoris. Shall we say that this confutes Rab? — Samuel explained on the view of Rab [as follows]: [The case here is one] where e.g., there were nine on one side and nine on the other and one in the middle,3 the middle animal being fit to be combined either with the one group or with the other. R. Papa said: According to the opinion of Samuel, even the shepherd himself4 can combine the animals [for tithing] and even the implements of the shepherd.5 R. Ashi inquired: What of the shepherd's dog?6 Do we say that since when he calls it it comes, therefore it, [the dog], cannot help to combine [the animals for tithing],7 or since the dog does not always come [at his bidding], he requires to go and fetch it [and therefore it does help to combine the animals for tithing]? — Let this stand undecided. R. MEIR SAYS: THE [RIVER] JORDAN IS REGARDED AS FORMING A DIVISION WITH REFERENCE TO THE TITHING OF ANIMALS. Said R. Ammi: This is the case only where there is no bridge, but where there is a bridge the bridge combines the animals [for the purpose of tithing]. We see consequently that the reason8 is because they are not in contact with each other. 9 An objection was raised: If he had animals on both sides of the Jordan or in two autonomous cities10 as e.g., Namer and Nemuri11 the animals are not combined [for the purpose of tithing]. And needless to say [that animals] outside the Land [of Israel] and [animals] in the Land [of Israel] [do not combine for tithing purposes]. Now is not outside the Land [of Israel] and in the Land [of Israel] on a par with a place where there is a bridge,12 and yet the [Baraitha] states that they do not combine?13 — Rather said R. Hiyya b. Abba in the name of R. Johanan: The following is the reason of R. Meir: Scripture says: And the Jordan was the border of it on the east side;14 Scripture thus makes it a separate border [boundary] on its own. But on this reasoning, where it says: And the border was drawn there, And the border went up,15 will you also say that the text makes it a separate border on its own?16 — The case is different there, because Scripture says: This shall be unto you the land according to the borders round about,17 [intimating that] the whole of the Land of Israel is [regarded as possessing] one border.18 If this be the case,19 then is not the Jordan too [a part of the Land of Israel]?20 — [Scripture says: ‘According to the border etc.’ with reference to the] ‘land’,21 but not [with reference to] the Jordan. There is no difficulty on the view of R. Hiyya b. Abba,22 for this reason [the Mishnah] specially mentions the Jordan, but on the view of R. Ammi, why does it not mention all the rivers?23 This is indeed a difficulty. May it be said that Tannaim differ on these points24 [Scripture says]: When ye pass over the Jordan into the land of Canaan,25 implying that the ‘land’ is the land of Canaan but that the Jordan is not the land of Canaan. These are the words of R. Judah b. Bathyra. R. Simeon b. Yohai says: Behold Scripture says: On this side the Jordan near Jericho eastwards towards the sun rising,26 implying that just as Jericho is part of the land of Canaan, so is the Jordan part of the land of Canaan. Said Rabbah b. Bar Hana: The real Jordan is only from Jericho and below.27 What is the legal bearing of this remark? Shall I say it is with reference to one who vows?28 Why not be guided by the common parlance of men so that wherever men call it ‘Jordan’ it should be forbidden to him? Rather it must be with reference to the tithing of animals. So indeed it has been taught in a Baraitha: The Jordan issues from the cavern of Paneas,29 flows through the Lake of Sibkay,30 the Lake of Tiberias, and the Lake of Sodom,31 and proceeds to run Into the Mediterranean Ocean. And the real Jordan is from Jericho and below. R. Hiyya b. Abba reported in the name of R. Johanan:32 Why is it called Yarden [Jordan]? Because it comes from Dan.33 Said R. Abba to R. Ashi: You learnt this is from the name, we learn it from here: And they called Leshem Dan after the name of Dan their father,34 [expounding which] R. Isaac said: Leshem is Paneas. And it has been taught: The Jordan issues from the cavern of Paneas. Said Rab Kahana: The chief supply of the Jordan comes from the cavern of Paneas. Where a person says ‘I will not drink waters from the cavern of Paneas’ the water of the entire Jordan is forbidden to him. The liver is the fountain head of the blood, as R. Isaac said. For R. Isaac said: A mashed liver causes tent defilement with a quarter [of a log].35 The chief source of all waters is the Euphrates. For Rab Judah reported in the name of Rab: If one vows forbidding himself to benefit from the waters of the Euphrates, he is forbidden to benefit from all the waters in the world. How am I to understand this? Shall I say that he said: ‘I will not drink from the waters of the Euphrates?’ [Does not this imply that he meant to say:] I will not drink from the waters of the Euphrates but l will drink from any other river?36 Rather he must have said: ‘I will not drink from the waters which come from the Euphrates’. For Rab Judah reported in the name of Rab: All other rivers in the world are lower than the three37 and these three are lower than the Euphrates. 38 But are there not on one side etc. but it refers to where there were nine on one side etc. to fetch his things and we therefore regard the place as being under his observation. regards tithing? combination as regards tithing. sixteen mils. Why then does the Baraitha mention the case of outside Palestine and Palestine as not combining, since this occurs even in Palestine? Jordan. reason why the Jordan forms a division is because there is no contact between the animals on the one side and the shepherd on the other. All rivers, consequently and not only the Jordan divide if they have no bridges. not? Num. XIX, 14).