Moed Katan

— which is his [own meal-oblation1 consisting of] one tenth part of an ephah [of fine flour]: These are the words of R. Judah. R. Simeon says, [the wording:] And in the day that he goeth into the sanctuary [into the inner court to minister in the sanctuary], he shall offer his sinoffering2 [implies that only] when he is fit to go into the sanctuary he is fit to offer up [his own oblation]: and when he is not fit to go into the sanctuary, he is not fit to offer up [his own oblation].3 Raba said: Whence do we know4 the regulation that we send a messenger of the Court?5 — From what is written: And Moses sent to call Dathan and Abiram the sons of Eliab.6 And whence do we know that we summon7 him to attend [in person]? — From what is written, And Moses said to Korah, Be thou and all thy congregation before the Lord, thou and Aaron [tomorrow].8 [Whence, to appear] ‘before a great personage’? — From what is written, Before the lord.8 [To name both parties], ‘thou and So-and-so’? — From what is written, Thou and they [that are with thee] and Aaron.8 That we fix a time? — As it is written, To-morrow.8 Time and again?9 — As it is written: They called there,10 Pharaoh the king of Eqypt [the author of] ‘commotion’; he hath let the appointed time pass by. [As I live, saith the King, the Lord of Hosts, surely like Tabor among the mountains and like Carmel by the sea, so shall he come].11 And whence do we know that if one behaves insolently towards the Court's messenger and the latter comes and reports it, this is not deemed slander [on his part]? — As it is written: [And Moses sent to call Dathan and Abiram the sons of Eliab]; And they said: [We will not come up]6 . . . Wilt thou put out the eyes of these men? [We will not come up].12 Whence do we derive that we [may] pronounce a shammetha13 [imprecation]? — From the text: Curse ye Meroz.14 Whence do we derive that it must be according to the considered opinion of some prominent person? — From the text: [Curse ye Meroz] said the angel of the Lord14 [to Barak]. And whence do we derive that we pronounce the herem?15 — Front the [same] text: Curse ye a cursing.16 Whence do we derive that [it falls on one who] eats and drinks with the offender or stands within four cubits of him? — From the same text: [Curse ye a cursing] the inhabitants thereof.17 Whence do we derive that we publish the details of his offence? — From the [same] text: Because they [the denizens of Meroz] came not to the help of the Lord. And, said ‘Ulla, Barak pronounced the shammetha18 against Meroz with [the blast of] four hundred horns. Some say that Meroz was [the name of] a great personage;19 others say that it was [the name of] a star,20 as it is written [there]: They fought from Heaven, the stars in their courses fought against Sisera.21 Whence do we derive that his property may be forfeited?22 — From the text: And whosoever come not within three days, according to the counsel of the princes and the elders, all his substance should be forfeited and himself separated from the congregation of the captivity.23 Whence do we derive that we may quarrel [with an offender], curse him, smite him, pluck his hair and put on him an oath?24 — From the text: And I contended with them, and cursed them, and smote certain of them and plucked off their hair and made them swear by God.25 Whence do we derive that we may fetter, arrest and prosecute them? — From the text: [Let judgment be executed upon him with all diligence], whether it be unto death, or to uprooting, or to confiscation of goods or to imprisonment.26 What is meant by ‘uprooting? Said [R.] Adda Mari, reporting Nehemiah b. Baruch, who said in the name of R. Hiyya b. Abin, who had it from Rab Judah, it mean the hardafah.27 What is denoted by hardafah? — Said Rab Judah son of R. Samuel b. Shelath in the name of Rab: It means, They declare him ‘separated’28 forthwith; then [if he still persists] they repeat [the same declaration] after thirty days,29 and finally they pronounce the herem on him after sixty days. Said R. Huna b. Hinena, This is what R. Hisda said: They [first] warn him on Monday, [then] on the Thursday30 [following] and [again on the] Monday. This rule applies if he disregards a monetary judgment; but in a case of sheer contumacy the ban is imposed forthwith. When a certain butcher had been insolent to R. Tobai b. Mattena, Abaye and Raba were appointed31 to investigate and they pronounced the shammetha on him. In the end, the fellow went and appeased his litigant.32 Said Abaye, What is one to do? Should we absolve him now? The shammetha had not lasted [its] thirty days.33 Shall we not absolve him? The Rabbis want to go in to him!34 Said lie to R. Idi b. Abin: ‘Have you [perchance] heard aught bearing on this?’ He replied: ‘Thus said R. Tahlifa b. Abimi as reporting Samuel: "A toot35 binds and a toot releases!"’ [Said Abaye] to him, Yea, but this obtains only in the case of disregarding a monetary decision, but in a case of contumacy [it holds] until it has rested on him for thirty days! Anyhow, that shows that Abaye was of opinion that if three people had pronounced the shammetha on a man three others cannot come and release him!36 For the question was raised: If three people had pronounced the shammetha on a man, can three others come and remit it for him? — Come and hear: ‘One who has been "separated" [under a ban] by the master is [deemed as] "separated" from the disciple;37 but one who has been "separated" by the disciple is not [considered as] "separated" from the master. One who is "separated" by his own town is also "separated" from another town; but one who is "separated" by another town is not [considered] "separated" from his own town. One who is "separated" by the Nasi [Prince] is "separated" in all Israel; but one who is "separated" by all Israel is not [thereby] "separated" from the "Prince". Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel says that if one of the disciples had "separated" someone and died, his part is not nullified’. From this you derive three points: — [a] That if a disciple ‘separated’ someone in [defence of] his personal dignity,38 the ‘separation’ lies, and you infer [b] that each person revokes his own part, and you infer [c] that if a body of three have pronounced a shammetha on a person, three others may not come and release him.39 Amemar said: ‘The rule in practice is, that if a body of three have laid a shammetha on a person, a body of three others [can] come and release him’. Said R. Ashi to Amemar, But it is taught: ‘Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel says that if one of the disciples "separated" someone and died, his part is not nullified’! Does not this meal, that it cannot be nullified at all? — No, [it means] not until a body of three others come and release him. Our Rabbis taught: No ‘separation’ ban holds less than thirty days and no ‘reproof’40 holds less than seven days; and although there is no direct proof on that point, there is an [indirect] ‘indication’ of it: If her father had but spit in her face, should she41 not hide in shame seven days? [Let her be shut up without the camp seven days and after that he shall be brought in again]. 42 R. Hisda remarked, ‘Our "separation" [in Babylon] corresponds to their "reproof" [in Palestine]’. But is their ‘reproof’ of only seven days’ duration, not more? Is it not a fact that R. Simeon, Rabbi's son, and Bar Kappara were once sitting rehearsing the lesson together when a difficulty arose about a certain passage43 and R. Simeon said to Bar Kappara, ‘This [matter] needs Rabbi [to explain it]’, and Bar Kappara replied: ‘And what forsooth can Rabbi [have to] say on this?’ He went and repeated it to his father, [at which] the latter was vexed, and [when] Bar Kappara next presented himself before Rabbi, he said: ‘Bar Kappara, I have never known you!’44 He realized that he [Rabbi] had taken the matter to heart and submitted himself to the [disability of a] ‘reproof’ for thirty days. Again, on one occasion, Rabbi issued an order that they should not teach disciples in the open public market place. (What was his exposition?45 — How beautiful are thy steps in sandals, O prince's daughter!46 The roundings of thy thighs are like the links of a chain [the work of the hands of a skilled workman].47 As the thigh is covered very day officiate and offer up his own free-gift oblation (v. Men. 73-74a). This proves that as long as he is unclean, whether through contact with dead or through leprosy, he cannot bring his offerings. after his purification and atonement by sacrifices. For a leper had to attend in person to be purified by the stated ceremony (Lev. XIV, 11, 14-18, 20). ‘cursing’ in a Nabatean El-Hejra inscription (Cooke N. Sem. Inscr. No. 80p. 220 line 8); cf. infra 17a note on etymology. Caesarea, Constantinople. popular Babylonian term loosely used for either, and whose legal denotation was the subject of discussion in Talmudic times (e.g., Ned. 7a-b) and later in Geonic responsa; as to its precise meaning, v. B.M. Lewin's Otzar ha-Geonim IV on Mashkin, Responsa 29ff, pp. 17-19. Institutions introduced by Ezra, B.K. 82a (Sonc. ed. p. 466). imposing the ban and who must consequently be present at the absolution, wish to depart and the opportunity of releasing him will thus be lost, v. infra]. imposed in defence of the disciple's own dignity, and not to one for a general transgression.] to mean that it can never be nullified.] well-known master. Kappara clashed with Rabbi on several occasions. The cause, it seems, was not personal, but rather due to the different schools to which they each belonged. B. K. belonged to the ‘Southern Sages’ (Lydda and Caesarea) and was himself the compiler of an often quoted collection of Mishnah (Baraitha). divine) King of Perfection or Peace. Cf. Prov. III, 13-18; VIII, 1 ff.