Kiddushin

which are eligible to be sacrificed; how do I know to include blemished ones? I include blemished animals, seeing that they are of a fit species. And how do I know to include beasts? I include beasts, because they require shechitah, as domestic animals. How do I know to include birds? Therefore it is stated, and he shall kill it, and he shall kill it, and he shall kill it.1 I might think, One may not kill [hullin in the Temple]; yet if he does, he may cast it to dogs: therefore it is taught, [ye shall not eat any flesh that is torn of beasts in the field], ye shall cast it to the dogs:2 ‘it’ ye may cast to the dogs, but not hullin killed in the Temple Court. Mar Judah met R. Joseph and R. Samuel, son of Rabbah b. Bar Hanah, standing by the door of Rabbah's academy. Said he to them: It was taught: If one betroths [a woman] with the firstling of an ass, meat [seethed] in milk, or hullin killed in the Temple Court, R. Simeon maintained: She is betrothed; while the Sages rule: She is not betrothed. This proves that in R. Simeon's opinion hullin killed in the Temple Court is not Biblically forbidden.3 But the following contradicts it: R. Simeon said: Hullin that was killed in the Temple Court must be burned, and likewise a beast of chase killed in the Temple Court!4 They were silent. When they came before Rabbah [and put the difficulty to him], he exclaimed: That controversialist [Mar Judah] has prompted you! The circumstances here5 are that it was killed and found to be trefa. R. Simeon following his general view. For it was taught: If one kills6 a trefa,7 or if one kills [an animal] and it is discovered to be a trefa, both being hullin in the Temple Court,--R. Simeon holds that benefit is permitted; but the Sages forbid it.8 IF HE SELLS THEM AND BETROTHS HER WITH THE PROCEEDS, SHE IS BETROTHED. How do we know it? — Since the Divine Law revealed in reference to idolatry, [and thou shalt not bring an abomination into thine house,] lest thou be a cursed thing like it,9 [which means,] whatever you produce out of it is as itself,10 it follows that all other objects forbidden in the Torah are permitted.11 Let us [rather] learn from it?12 — Because idolatry and seventh year [produce] are two verses that come with the same teaching, and such do not illumine [others].13 Idolatry, as stated. What about seventh year [produce]? — It is jubilee; it shall be holy unto you:14 just as a holy object stamps its purchase price [with its own sacred character]. so does seventh year [produce] likewise. If so, just as a holy object stamps its purchase price but itself becomes hullin, so does the seventh year [produce] stamp its purchase price and itself becomes hullin?15 Therefore it is stated: ‘it shall be,’ [meaning], it shall remain [be] in its present form. How so? If one buys meat with seventh year produce, both must be removed [from the house] in the seventh year;16 [if he purchases] fish with the meat, the meat passes out [from seventh year provisions] and the fish enters [i.e., takes its place]; [if he barters] the fish for wine, the fish passes out and the wine enters; oil for the wine, the wine passes out and the oil enters. Thus, how is it? The last on each occasion is stamped with [the nature of] the seventh year, while the [original] produce itself remains forbidden. Now, that is well on the view that [two verses with the same teaching] do not illumine [others]; but on the view that they do, what can be said? — Limitations are written. Here it is written: ‘lest thou be a cursed thing like it’;17 and there it is written, it is jubilee: [thus,] only it, but nothing else. 18 MISHNAH. IF ONE BETROTHS [A WOMAN] WITH TERUMOTH,19 TITHES, [PRIESTLY] GIFTS, THE WATER OF PURIFICATION AND THE ASHES OF PURIFICATION,20 SHE IS BETROTHED, EVEN IF AN ISRAELITE.21 GEMARA. ‘Ulla said: The benefit of disposal22 does not rank as money. R. Abba [thereupon] raised an objection against ‘Ulla: IF ONE BETROTHS [A WOMAN] WITH TERUMOTH, TITHES, [PRIESTLY] GIFTS, THE WATER OF PURIFICATION AND THE ASHES OF PURIFICATION, SHE IS BETROTHED, EVEN IF AN ISRAELITE!23 — He answered: This refers to an Israelite who inherited tebalim24 from his maternal grandfather25 [who was] a priest. Now he [Tanna of the Mishnah] holds that unseparated gifts are as though already separated. 26 R. Hiyya b. Abin asked R. Huna: Does the benefit of disposal rank as money or not? — Said he to him: We have learned it: IF ONE BETROTHS [A WOMAN] WITH TERUMOTH, TITHES, [PRIESTLY] GIFTS, THE WATER OF PURIFICATION AND THE ASHES OF PURIFICATION, SHE IS BETROTHED, EVEN IF AN ISRAELITE. But did we not interpret it as referring to an Israelite who inherited tebalim from his maternal grandfather [who was] a priest, he questioned? also shew that they are like it too in that they may not be eaten. something of value, and is betrothed; when the Rabbis then forbid all benefit from it, they cannot thereby nullify a betrothal that is Biblically valid. — The reason of this Rabbinical interdict is that one seeing it may mistake it for a sacrifice that became unfit after it was killed, so that its blood could not be sprinkled, and think that one may benefit from such, whereas that is forbidden. necessary in the case of an animal, which can be mistaken for a sacrifice which became unfit after it was killed (which must be burned, not buried), yet why demand it for a beast of chase, which cannot be mistaken? Hence the interdict must be Biblical: then it is logical that the Rabbis were stringent in the method of disposal. at all, and no interdict which would normally result from the killing takes effect. Therefore one may benefit therefrom and it is valid for betrothal. these, save the indirect one of being able to dispose of them to whatever priest or Levite he desires; and she too has only the same benefit. Since the Mishnah rules that the betrothal is valid, it follows that this benefit of disposal is considered to possess a monetary value. these tebalim belong to the heir, who may sell, since he cannot eat them himself, and so they rank as money. But ordinary gifts which must be given away do not rank as money.