חולין 137 — Soncino English Talmud

¹(vii) sacred, and (viii) sold, and these have more points in common? — It is preferable to draw the analogy from ordinary animals. THE LAW OF THE FIRST OF THE FLEECE APPLIES ONLY TO SHEEP. Whence is this derived? — R. Hisda said: An inference is made by means of the common expression ‘fleece’; it is written here: The first of the fleece, and it is written there: And if he were not warned with the fleece of my sheep; just as there it is [the fleece of], sheep, so here it refers to [the fleece of] sheep. Should not the inference rather be made by means of the common expression ‘fleece’ from the law of the firstling? For it has been taught: From the verse: Thou shalt do no work with the firstling of thine ox, nor shear the fleece of the firstling of thy sheep, I only know that an ox [may not be put] to any work and that the sheep [may not be] shorn, whence do I know to apply the restriction of the one to the other? The text therefore states: Thou shalt do no work . . . nor shear! — Scripture says: ‘Thou shalt give him’, and not for his sack. If so, then goats’ hair should also be subject to this law, should it not? — It is necessary that it be shorn, which is not the case [with goats’ hair]. But whom, have you heard, holding this view? It is R. Jose, is it not? And R. Jose agrees that what is the general practice [is included]! — As R. Joshua b. Levi said elsewhere, The expression ‘to stand to minister’ indicates something serviceable for ministering, so here too, it must be something serviceable for ministering. What then is the significance of the analogy by reason of the common expression ‘fleece’? — It is in respect of the following teaching of a Tanna of the school of R. Ishmael. For a Tanna of the school of R. Ishmael taught: Sheep with hard wool are exempt from the law of the first of the fleece, since it is written: And if he were not warmed with the fleece of my sheep. One [Baraitha] teaches: If a man shears the [hair of] goats or washes the sheep [and plucks their wool] he is exempt from the first of the fleece. Another [Baraitha] teaches: If a man shears the [hair of] goats he is exempt from the first of the fleece; if he washes the sheep [and then plucks their wool] he is liable. There is, however, no difficulty; for one [Baraitha] sets forth R. Jose's view, the other that of the Rabbis. For it has been taught: Scripture says: The gleaning of thy harvest, but not the gleaning of plucking. R. Jose says: Gleaning is only that which falls at the reaping. Is not R. Jose's view identical with that of the first Tanna? — The whole of the Baraitha sets forth R. Jose s view, render therefore, ‘For R. Jose says: Gleaning is only that which falls at the reaping’. R. Aha the son of Raba said to R. Ashi: R. Jose nevertheless agrees that what is the general practice [is included]. For it has been taught: R. Jose says, [Scripture states:] Harvest from which I only know that reaping [is subject to the law of gleanings]; whence would I know uprooting? The text therefore states: To reap. And whence would I know plucking? The text therefore states: When thou reapest. Rabina said to R. Ashi: We have also learnt the same: If rows of onions are planted among vegetables, R. Jose says: ‘The corner’ must be left in each [row]. But the Sages say: In one for all. WHAT IS MEANT BY ‘MANY’? Now Beth Shammai's view is clear, for [we see that] two sheep are also referred to as zon, but what is the reason for Beth Hillel's view? — R. Kahana answered: The verse says: Five sheep ready dressed, that is, ‘ready’ [now] for the fulfilment of two precepts, viz., the first of the fleece and the priestly dues. But perhaps it refers to the law of the firstling and the priestly dues? — [This cannot be, for] is not one [sheep] subject to the law of the firstling? Then according to your suggestion [it can also be asked:] Is not one [sheep] subject to the priestly dues? — Rather, said R. Ashi, the verse says: ‘Five sheep ready dressed’, that is, they bid their owner to be ready, addressing him, ‘Up, perform the commandment’. It was taught: R. Ishmael son of R. Jose says in the name of his father, Four [sheep are subject to the law of the first of the fleece], as it is written: Four sheep for a sheep. It was taught: Rabbi said: Had their views been based on words from the Torah and Beribbi's view on words from the prophets, we should nevertheless have had to adopt Beribbi's view, how much more now that their views are based on words from the Prophets and Beribbi's view on words of the Torah! But has not a Master said, A compromise of a third [independent opinion] is no true compromise?40^ᵃ^ᵇ^ᶜ^ᵈ^ᵉ^ᶠ^ᵍ^ʰ^ⁱ^ʲ^ᵏ^ˡ^ᵐ^ⁿ^ᵒ^ᵖ^ᵠ^ʳ^ˢ^ᵗ^ᵘ^ᵛ^ʷ^ˣ^ʸ^ᶻ^ᵃᵃ^ᵃᵇ^ᵃᶜ^ᵃᵈ^ᵃᵉ^ᵃᶠ^ᵃᵍ^ᵃʰ^ᵃⁱ^ᵃʲ^ᵃᵏ^ᵃˡ^ᵃᵐ^ᵃⁿ

^ᵃnote:The firstling and the first of the fleece have not to be consecrated, the former because it is sacred from the womb and the latter because it has no sanctity whatsoever, whereas the cattle tithe must be consecrated with the rod.
^ᵇnote:These may be sold by the priest, but the cattle tithe may neither be sold nor exchanged, v. Bek. 320.
^ᶜnote:Rather than from a firstling.
^ᵈnote:Deut. XVIII, 4.
^ᵉnote:Job XXXI, 20.
^ᶠnote:Bek. 250.
^ᵍnote:Deut. XV, 19.
^ʰnote:These verbs stated at the head of the sentence imply that the prohibition is general and not restricted to the specific objects mentioned in the verse. It follows then that it is forbidden to shear ‘the fleece’ (i.e., the hair) of an ox; consequently by analogy with the firstling ‘the fleece’ of an ox should also be subject to the law of the first of the fleece.
^ⁱnote:Deut. XVIII, 4. It must be given to the priest for his use, i.e., for clothing; the fleece of an ox, however, is not usually made into clothing but used for making sacks.
^ʲnote:Since goats’ hair is suitable to be made into cloth.
^ᵏnote:The common practice is to pluck the hair off the goats and not to shear it.
^ˡnote:That the words of the Torah must be given their strictest meaning, so that the word ‘fleece’ from root zzd to shear, implies only what is shorn.
^ᵐnote:V. infra.
^ⁿnote:And since goats’ hair is generally plucked, what is plucked is deemed to be its ‘fleece’ and therefore should be subject to the law of the first of the fleece!
^ᵒnote:Infra 1380.
^ᵖnote:Deut. XVIII, 5. This verse follows immediately after the one enjoining the law of the first fleece.
^ᵠnote:I.e., the fleece referred to in the preceding verse 4 must be such as could be used for the priestly robes of service, and the blue wool in the priestly garments was of sheep's wool and not of goats’ hair.
^ʳnote:Bek. 17a.
^ˢnote:Job. XXXI, 20. Hence only soft wool which gives warmth is subject to the law of the first of the fleece, but not hard wool; this rule is established by reason of the analogy through the expression ‘fleece’.
^ᵗnote:The usual practice is to shear the wool of the sheep, and to pluck the hair of the goats after they have been washed in water so that the hair should come away more easily. Any person who acts contrary to these practices is exempt from giving the first of the fleece.
^ᵘnote:The first Baraitha represents the view of R. Jose who applies the strictest meanings to the terms of Scripture.
^ᵛnote:Lev. XIX, 9.
^ʷnote:If a man harvested his field by plucking with his hand the ears of corn he is not subject to the law of gleanings.
^ˣnote:Lit., ‘which comes on account of the harvest’.
^ʸnote:And with many vegetables, e.g., onions and garlic, plucking is the normal method of ‘ingathering’, and renders the field subject to the law of ‘the corner’.
^ᶻnote:Is also subject to the law of gleanings.
^ᵃᵃnote:Lev. XXIII, 22. This as well as the ‘preceding expression ‘to reap’ is redundant in the verse and serves to include every manner of ‘harvesting’ which is the usual practice with regard to the particular plants.
^ᵃᵇnote:Pe'ah III, 4.
^ᵃᶜnote:Of all vegetables only onions and garlic are subject to the law of ‘the corner’. Here, since the other vegetables separate the rows of onions from each other, each row, maintains R. Jose, is deemed a separate field and therefore each is subject to the law of ‘the corner’. It is clear, however, that that which is usually plucked, as onions, is subject to the law of the corners.
^ᵃᵈnote:itm, ‘flock’; in the verse quoted by him in the Mishnah; Isa. VII, 21.
^ᵃᵉnote:I Sam. XXV, 18.
^ᵃᶠnote:Since there is the required minimum of five sheep.
^ᵃᵍnote:This can only refer to the law of the first of the fleece for which, as is apparent from the verse, there must be a minimum of five sheep; for the law of the firstling and the priestly dues apply even to a single sheep.
^ᵃʰnote:So according to Rashi, Alfasi and MSS. In cur. edd. ‘In the school of R. Ishmael b. R. Jose it was said in the name of his father’.
^ᵃⁱnote:Ex. XXI, 37. Here the word itm is used of four sheep.
^ᵃʲnote:Sc. the views of Beth Shammai and of Beth Hillel in our Mishnah.
^ᵃᵏnote:A title of honour applied to scholars of eminence; here applied to R. Jose. V. supra p. 52, and J.E. III, p. 52.
^ᵃˡnote:Since it is assumed for the present that Beribbi's view is in the nature of a compromise, i.e., not so many as five as Beth Hillel would have it; nor so few as two as Beth Shammai, but four.
^ᵃᵐnote:Pes. 21a; Naz. 53a; B.K. 116a.
^ᵃⁿnote:And cannot be accepted as the final decision. Here Beribbi's view is not a true compromise, for it does not adopt any of the arguments of the conflicting Rabbis, but constitutes a third independent opinion opposed in its entirety to each of the other opinions.

²— R. Johanan said: He had it as a tradition deriving from Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi. R. DOSA B. HARKINAS SAYS . . . [WHATEVER THEIR FLEECES WEIGH]. What is meant by ‘WHATEVER’? — Rab said, [At least] a maneh and a half, provided each supplies [no less than] a fifth [of this quantity]. Samuel said, [At least] sixty [sela's], and he gives thereof one sela’ to the priest. Rabbah b. Bar Hana said in the name of R. Johanan, [At least] six [sela's], and he gives five to the priest and retains one for himself. Ulla said in the name of R. Eleazar: Our Mishnah expressly says: WHATEVER. We have learnt: AND HOW MUCH SHOULD ONE GIVE HIM? THE WEIGHT OF FIVE SELA'S IN JUDAH, WHICH IS EQUAL. TO TEN SELA'S IN GALILEE. Now this is in order according to the views of Rab and R. Johanan, but it surely presents a difficulty, does it not, to Samuel and R. ‘Eleazar? — Then, as you would have it, it also presents a difficulty to Rab? For did not Rab and Samuel both rule that the proper measure for the first of the fleece is one sixtieth part? But the fact is as has already been taught in connection with this [Mishnah] that Rab and Samuel both said; it speaks of the case of an Israelite who has many fleeces and who wishes to distribute them among a number of priests, and we tell him that he must not give less than the weight of five sela's to each. [To turn to] the main text. ‘Rab and Samuel both ruled: The proper measure for the first of the fleece is one sixtieth part, for terumah one sixtieth part, and for the "corner" one sixtieth part’. ‘For terumah one sixtieth part’. But we have learnt: The proper measure for terumah, if a man is liberal, is one fortieth part? — According to the law of the Torah the measure is one sixtieth part, but by Rabbinic enactment it is one fortieth part. But has not Samuel stated that one grain of wheat frees the stack? — The law of the Torah is as Samuel stated it; but the Rabbinic enactment is that in respect of that which is subject [to terumah] by the Torah the measure is one fortieth part, and in respect of that which is subject [to terumah] only by the Rabbis the measure is one sixtieth part. ‘For the "corner" one sixtieth part’. But we have learnt: These are the things which have no fixed measure: the corner [of the field], the firstfruits, and the appearance-offering! — By law of the Torah there is no fixed measure, but by Rabbinic enactment it is fixed as one sixtieth part. Then what does he teach us? We have learnt it: The corner should not be less than one sixtieth part, even though they have said that no fixed measure is prescribed for the corner! — That gives the rule for the Land [of Israel], here [Rab and Samuel] give the rule for outside the Land [of Israel]. When Isi b. Hini went up [to Palestine], R. Johanan found him teaching his son [our Mishnah and using the term] rehelim. He [R. Johanan] said to him, ‘Use the term reheloth’. The other retorted, ‘But it is written: Two hundred rehelim’. He replied: ‘The Torah uses its own language and the Sages their own’. He [R. Johanan] then enquired, ‘Who is the head of the Academy in Babylon’? ‘Abba Arika’, he replied. ‘And you simply call him Abba Arika’! said [R. Johanan]. ‘I remember when I was sitting before Rabbi, seventeen rows behind Rab, seeing sparks of fire leaping from the mouth of Rabbi into the mouth of Rab and from the mouth of Rab into the mouth of Rabbi, and I could not understand what they were saying; and you simply call him Abba Arika!’ Then the other asked, ‘What is the minimum quantity subject to the law of the first of the fleece’? — ‘Sixty [sela's]’, he replied. ‘But’, said the other, ‘we have learnt: WHATEVER [THEIR FLEECES WEIGH]!’ ‘Then what difference is there between me and you’? he retorted. When R. Dimi came [from Palestine] he reported: With regard to the first of the fleece, Rab said: Sixty; R. Johanan said in the name of R. Jannai: Six. Thereupon Abaye said to R. Dimi: One opinion is quite in order, but the other presents to us a difficulty. There is indeed no contradiction between the one opinion of R. Johanan and the other, for one is his own opinions the other that of his master; but surely there is a contradiction between this opinion of Rab and the other, for Rab has said: At least a maneh and a half! — There is also no contradiction between this opinion of Rab and the other, for by ‘a maneh’ he meant [a maneh] of forty sela's, so that [a maneh and a half] is equal to^ᵃᵒ^ᵃᵖ^ᵃᵠ^ᵃʳ^ᵃˢ^ᵃᵗ^ᵃᵘ^ᵃᵛ^ᵃʷ^ᵃˣ^ᵃʸ^ᵃᶻ^ᵇᵃ^ᵇᵇ^ᵇᶜ^ᵇᵈ^ᵇᵉ^ᵇᶠ^ᵇᵍ^ᵇʰ^ᵇⁱ^ᵇʲ^ᵇᵏ^ᵇˡ^ᵇᵐ^ᵇⁿ^ᵇᵒ^ᵇᵖ^ᵇᵠ^ᵇʳ^ᵇˢ

^ᵃᵒnote:R. Jose.
^ᵃᵖnote:And therefore his opinion should be accepted as final.
^ᵃᵠnote:From the five sheep there must be a minimum quantity of wool, of one maneh and a half in order to be subject to the law of the first of the fleece. This quantity equals thirty-seven and a half sela's (one maneh twenty-five sela's).
^ᵃʳnote:No sheep shall supply less than seven and a half sela's of wool.
^ᵃˢnote:Whatever quantity of wool the five sheep produce, even though only one sela’ in all, it is subject to this law.
^ᵃᵗnote:For R. Johanan expressly stated that five sela's weight shall be given to the priest in every case, even out of a total of six sela's! Rab also agrees with the ruling of the Mishnah that five sela's’ weight must be given to the priest, but he merely establishes the minimum quantity of wool that is subject to this law.
^ᵃᵘnote:For according to Samuel the quantity of one sela’ only, and according to Ulla even less, shall be given to the priest.
^ᵃᵛnote:I.e., the amount to be given to the priest shall not be less than one sixtieth part of the whole; whereas now it is suggested, according to Rab, that out of a total of thirty.seven and a half sela's five shall be given to the priest, almost one-seventh!
^ᵃʷnote:The statement of the Mishnah FIVE SELA'S does not purport to establish this amount as the minimum quantity to be given to the priest, for this is fixed at one sixtieth in accordance with the ruling of Rab and Samuel.
^ᵃˣnote:Sc. the sixtieth part.
^ᵃʸnote:V. Ter. IV, 3, where the Mishnah continues: If he is mean it is one sixtieth part. Surely Rab and Samuel would not adopt as the general standard the measure given in the case of a mean person.
^ᵃᶻnote:This is indicated in Ezek. XLV, 13: This is the heave offering (terumah) which ye shall offer; the sixth part of an ephah (i.e., half a se'ah) from an homer of wheat (i.e., thirty se'ah). That is one sixtieth part.
^ᵇᵃnote:The obligation of terumah can be discharged by the removal of one grain from the heap, since the Torah does not prescribe any specific amount.
^ᵇᵇnote:That one grain discharges the obligation of terumah.
^ᵇᶜnote:Viz., corn, wine, and oil; cf. Deut. XVIII, 4.
^ᵇᵈnote:Viz., other fruits (besides the vine) and vegetables.
^ᵇᵉnote:Pe'ah I, 1.
^ᵇᶠnote:Heb. iuhtr. The offerings to be brought on appearing before the Lord at the three Festivals (in accordance with Deut. XVI, 16: They shall not appear before the Lord empty) are not limited in their value; but see Hag. 20.
^ᵇᵍnote:Pe'ah I, 2.
^ᵇʰnote:In the ruling of R. Dosa b. Harkinas. ohkjr, the plural of kjr (a ewe, lamb) with the masculine plural ending im.
^ᵇⁱnote:,ukjr with the feminine plural ending oth.
^ᵇʲnote:Gen. XXXII, 15.
^ᵇᵏnote:In the speech of the Rabbis there is a marked tendency to adopt the plural ending oth in place of the ending im with which the same words are found in the Bible. Cf. the plural of okugw icrew iunvw etc.
^ᵇˡnote:trsx ahr; identified by Zuri (rucmv ypanv ,usku,, pp. 247ff) as the Archi Synagogis, the supreme authority over the synagogues. V. Sot., (Sonc. ed.) p. 202, n. 5.]
^ᵇᵐnote:Sc. Rab. The surname Arika ‘long’ was given to him because of his tall physical stature, cf. Nid. 24b. Others regard Arika as a title of honour; v. Jast. s.v., and Weiss Dor, III, 247.
^ᵇⁿnote:And not by the generally accepted title of ‘Rab’, the Master, par excellence.
^ᵇᵒnote:‘If I do not know the interpretation of the Mishnah, then l am no better than you’. The Mishnah by the expression WHATEVER’ assumed a minimum of sixty sela's so that the priest would receive at least one sela’.
^ᵇᵖnote:The weight of sixty sela's is the minimum quantity subject to the law of the first of the fleece. Or: the amount to be given to the priest must be one sixtieth part of the whole.
^ᵇᵠnote:In MS.M. ‘sixty’. V. Maharam a.l.
^ᵇʳnote:In fact there is an apparent contradiction between two statements of R. Johanan. Above it has been stated: ‘Rabbah b. Bar Hana said in the name of R. Johanan: At least six sela's’, but subsequently we read that R. Johanan told Isi b. Hini that there must be at least sixty sela's in order to be subject to the law of the first of the fleece. The report of R. Dimi however clears up this contradiction, for it is manifest that the former statement was not the personal view of R. Johanan but that of his teacher R. Jannai, and R. Dimi expressly reported it so.
^ᵇˢnote:I.e., there must be a maneh and a half — thirty-seven and a half sela's — to be subject to the law of the first of the fleece, whereas according to R. Dimi Rab ruled that there must be a minimum of sixty sela's. According to the second interpretation (v. p. 790, n. 9) the contradiction between Rab is this: Rab is reported by R. Dimi to have ruled that the measure for the first of the fleece is one sixtieth part, whereas previously Rab ruled that out of thirty-seven and a half sela's, the minimum quantity that is subject to the law of the first of the fleece, one sela’, which is the very least that would constitute ‘giving's must be given to the priest.