json/Tosefta/Lieberman Edition/Seder Moed/Tosefta Chagigah (Lieberman)/English/Sefaria Community Translation.json

{
    "language": "en",
    "title": "Tosefta Chagigah (Lieberman)",
    "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org",
    "versionTitle": "Sefaria Community Translation",
    "actualLanguage": "en",
    "languageFamilyName": "english",
    "isSource": false,
    "direction": "ltr",
    "heTitle": "תוספתא חגיגה (ליברמן)",
    "categories": [
        "Tosefta",
        "Lieberman Edition",
        "Seder Moed"
    ],
    "text": [
        [
            "1:1 Unclean individuals do not have the obligation to make an appearance, as dictated in Exodus 23:14 and Deuteronomy 16:16. This provision is derived from Deuteronomy 12:6, which implies that this requirement only applies to those who are suitable to enter the Temple courtyard. Thus, unclean people, who are unsuitable for the courtyard, are exempt. Yoḥanan b. Raḥbai, speaking for R. Judah, adds that blind people are also exempt since they cannot fulfill the \"will see\" requirement from Exodus 23:14. However, Rabbi opposed this interpretation, favoring the interpretation of \"will appear\" rather than \"will see\". Nevertheless, the majority of the Sages leaned towards R. Judah's interpretation. This issue of exemption also pertains to those unable to travel from Jerusalem to the Temple mount, evidenced in the case of Hannah in 1 Sam 1:22.",
            "1:2 With regards to minors, they may rely on the ‘erub prepared by their mother and should observe the commandment of dwelling in a sukkah. They are required to have an ‘erub that consists of enough food for two meals. If the minor knows how to shake an object, he is obliged to observe the commandment of the lulab, and if he can cloak himself, he should observe the commandment of fringes. Once a minor can speak, his father should teach him the Shema‘, Torah, and Hebrew. However, if the minor does not possess these skills, it would be preferable if he had not been born. If the minor is adept at managing his phylacteries, his father should purchase him one. If he is careful about his personal hygiene, they may depend on him for the cleanliness of preserved food. This also applies if he takes care of his hands. To verify that he can take care of himself, he is immersed and given unconsecrated food as if it were a heave-offering. If he is smart enough to wrap the corner of his garment, he is granted a share at the threshing floor. If he is intelligent enough to answer a question, any doubt concerning him in private domain is resolved as unclean, and in public domain as clean. If he is skilled enough to slaughter an animal properly, then his act of slaughter is considered valid. If he can consume an olive’s quantity of grain, his waste should be disposed of at a distance of four cubits from a settlement. If he can consume an olive’s amount of roast meat, they may slaughter the Passover-sacrifice for him. However, R. Judah asserts that this is valid only if he can distinguish between good and bad food. ",
            "1:3 A female or male who has developed two pubic hairs is obliged to observe all the commandments stated in the Torah. A female should carry out the rite of ḥaliṣah or enter into levirate marriage whereas a male is eligible to become a rebellious son. However, it is only when his beard has fully grown that he can be appointed as the community's messenger to pass before the Ark and to raise his hands in priestly benediction. Only after producing two pubic hairs can he obtain a share in the Holy Things of the sanctuary. Rabbi, however, indicates that the person should reach twenty years of age, echoing Ezra 3:8.",
            "1:4 According to the House of Shammai, the requirement for the appearance-offering is more significant than the requirement for the festal-offering, because the appearance-offering is wholly offered to the Most High, whereas the festal-offering is not. On the other hand, the House of Hillel believes the festal-offering commandment is superior, as it was applicable both before and after the revelation of the Torah at Mount Sinai, while the appearance-offering does not share this characteristic. During a festival, three religious requirements involving sacrifices are applicable: the appearance-offering, the festal-offering, and the peace-offerings of rejoicing. The appearance-offering is wholly given to the Most High, unlike the other two offerings. Festal-offering is valid both before and after the revelation of the Torah, again unlike the other two. The requirement of rejoicing on festival days apply to both genders and are valid for all seven days, which is also not the case for the other two. ",
            "1:5 As for Israelites, they fulfill their obligation by means of vowed offerings, thank-offerings, and tithes of cattle. Priests, on the other hand, fulfill their obligation through sin offerings and guilt offerings, the firstborn offerings, and the portions given to them by an Israelite (breast, shoulder, and thigh). They are exempted from fowl or meal-offerings. A Nazir can fulfill his obligation through his ram, regardless of whose it is. This is under the condition that he consumes a part of the sacrificial meat every day of the seven day festival.",
            "1:6 A thank-offering is not made during the festival of unleavened bread or Pentecost due to the leaven that accompanies it and because Pentecost is a festival day. However, it is allowed during the intermediate days of the festival of Tabernacles, which completes the obligation of bringing a festal-offering. This is disputed by R. Simeon, who asserts that since a thank-offering is not brought during the festival of unleavened bread, it should not be brought during Pentecost or the festival of Tabernacles either. In contrast, R. Eleazar b. R. Simeon asserts that a thank-offering can be brought on the festival of Tabernacles and used to complete the obligation of a peace-offering of rejoicing, but it cannot fulfill the obligation of a festal-offering.",
            "1:7 If the festival passes and one has not offered a festal-offering, there is no requirement to make up for it. As per Qohelet 1:16, \"That which is crooked cannot be made straight, and that which is wanting cannot be reckoned.\" As Psalms 37:21 also says, \"The wicked borrows and cannot pay back, but the righteous is generous and gives.” R. Simeon b. Menassia adds, if a man steals or robs, he can restore what was stolen or taken. But, if a man deceitfully sleeps with a married woman, ruining her marriage, his torment is unbearable and he's driven from the world. For him, the aforementioned verse from Qohelet applies.",
            "1:8 R. Simeon b. Yoḥai maintains that we shouldn't waste time checking if an already flawed animal, such as a camel or a pig, has a blemish. Instead, we should focus on the flawless ones. A disciple of a sage who turns away from the Torah would be considered in this category and is referred to in Qohelet 1:15, 'That which is crooked cannot be made straight,' and Psalms 37:21, 'The wicked borrows and does not pay back.' As R. Judah reaffirms, with Jeremiah 2:5 as reference, for those who stray, they embrace worthlessness and tend to mirror it.",
            "1:9 The absolution of vows is categorized as a teaching that 'hovers in the air' because it has no substantial basis in the Torah. However, a sage can dissolve a vow, each one according to its wisdom. Similarly, laws relating to Sabbath, festal-offerings, and sacrilege are like mountains hanging by a string because there is much to be recognized in practice but little scriptural reference. R. Joshua lends an analogy in this context: just as tongs are made by other tongs, asking the question 'who made the first tong,' these laws also originated in a way that is not specifically codified in the scriptures. Civil laws, laws related to the sacrificial cult, purification laws, laws about sources of impurity and prohibited relationships, along with laws concerning valuations, the ḥerem, and things declared sacred, have a strong foundation in the Scripture, replete with exegesis and innumerable laws. As per Abba Yosé b. Ḥanan, these eight areas are the essentials of the Torah's laws."
        ],
        [
            "2:1 They do not discuss the laws of forbidden relationships before three individuals, rather they discuss them before two. It's also inappropriate to discuss the Works of Creation before more than one person. Such topics can be discussed with only one person if he is a wise person who can understand on his own. While Rabban Yoḥanan b. Zakkai was riding on a donkey, R. Eleazar b. ‘Arakh was driving the donkey from behind. Eleazar asked Rabban Yoḥanan to explain him about the works of the Chariot. Rabban Yoḥanan reminded him that they can't discuss this topic unless he was a sage who understands of his own knowledge. Eleazar then asked if he could talk about it and Rabban Yoḥanan allowed him to do so. R. Eleazar b. ‘Arakh began his explanation about the works of the Chariot. Rabban Yoḥanan b. Zakkai stepped off the ass, wrapped himself in his cloak, and the two of them sat under an olive tree where Eleazar explained the matter. Rabban Yoḥanan praised Eleazar for his understanding and ability to discuss the glory of God. He said that while some can only preach nicely or practice nicely, Eleazar can do both. He blessed Abraham for having a descendant like Eleazar who has such understanding.",
            "2:2 R. Yosé b. Judah says that R. Joshua explained matters to Rabban Yoḥanan b. Zakkai. Similarly, R. ‘Aqiba explained to R. Joshua and Ḥananiah b. Kinai to R. ‘Aqiba.",
            "2:3 Four individuals, Ben ‘Azzai, Ben Zoma, the Other [Elisha], and ‘Aqiba, entered Paradise. One looked and died, one looked and was harmed, one looked and cut down the plants, and one went up and came down in peace. Ben ‘Azzai looked and died, which is compared to the saying, \"Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints (Ps. 116:15)\". Ben Zoma looked and was harmed, which is compared to the proverb \"If you have found honey, eat only enough for you, or else you may become overfilled and vomit it (Prov. 25:16)\". Elisha looked and cut down the plants, which is compared to the saying \"Let not your mouth lead you into sin (Qoh. 5:5)\".",
            "2:4 R. ‘Aqiba went up in peace and came down in peace. This is compared to the verse \"Draw me after you, let us run. The king has brought me into his chambers (Song of Songs 1:4)\".",
            "2:5 The situation can be compared to a royal garden with a tower built above it to guard it. It's the duty of the guard to watch but not to take particular pleasure in viewing. Similarly, it's compared to a group walking between paths of fire and ice. If the group shifts to either side, they get harmed. So, the best course of action is to stay in the middle and not divert to either side.",
            "2:6 One day R. Joshua was walking in a public square and noticed Ben Zoma coming toward him. Ben Zoma, however, walked past R. Joshua without offering a greeting. R. Joshua inquired about Ben Zoma's apparent preoccupation, to which Ben Zoma responded that he had been deep in thought, considering the intricacies of divine Creation. Ben Zoma revealed that he had been reflecting on the cosmic dimensions and the relative locations of the earthly and heavenly domains. He posited that there was no significant distance separating the upper and lower waters, using two Biblical verses to support his theory. The first was Genesis 1:2 which describes the spirit of God moving above the surface of the waters and second was Deuteronomy 32:11–12 which compares God’s actions to an eagle hovering over its nest. Upon hearing Ben Zoma’s interpretation, R. Joshua cautioned his disciples, suggesting that Ben Zoma's ideas were leading him outside of mainstream Jewish thought. Indeed, it wasn't long after R. Joshua expressed his concern that Ben Zoma died.",
            "2:7 Those who contemplate four things; what's above, what's below, what's inside, and what's beyond, it would have been better if they weren't born. Scrpiture prohibits investigation in certain areas. One can discuss what happened since the creation of humans on earth. But one must not seek to know what is above, what is below, what is inside, and what is beyond.",
            "2:8 There was only disagreement about the act of laying on hands. According to R. Meir, three earlier authorities did not lay hands but the last two did, and they were patriarchs. The next in order were heads of the court. But R. Judah says differently, that Simeon b. Shaṭaḥ was the patriarch and Judah b. Ṭabbai was the head of the court.",
            "2:9 R. Yosé said there was initially no disagreement in Israel. There were multiple courts in the Land of Israel including on the Temple mount, the Rampart, and several towns. A person would go to the nearest court for a ruling. If they didn't get it, they moved to the next higher court until reaching the court in the chamber of the hewn stones. There, a quorum of at least 23 was always maintained. The court used to be in session from dawn to twilight everyday except on Sabbaths and festive days when they assembled in the study house on the Temple mount. Majority vote decided the ruling. If it became difficult to follow a master's teaching due to increased disciples, disagreements arose and legislation diverged, resulting in two versions of the law. An appropriate candidate was chosen to be a judge based on various qualities including wisdom, humility, fear of sin, experience, and popularity among people. Once established as a judge in his own town, he was promoted step by step until reaching the chamber of hewn stones. There, examinations about priesthood genealogy were conducted. An invalidated priest would wear black and leave while validated ones wore white and served at the altar along other priests. A festive day was celebrated when no invalidation was found in the lineage of Aaron. Such a priest would contribute a tenth part of an ephah of fine flour and prepare it by his own hand for service.",
            "2:10 They had disagreement about the type of offering. The House of Shammai said that laying hands wasn't allowed on the festival day. The House of Hillel allowed them. The House of Hillel argued that if you can make food for an ordinary person, why not for the Most High on a festival day. But the House of Shammai countered with sacrifices linked to vows and thanksgiving that cannot be prepared for the Most High on a festival day. The House of Hillel disagreed, saying some offerings had fixed timings and others didn't.",
            "2:11 Hillel the Elder performed the act of laying hands on a burnt offering in the courtyard which the disciples of Shammai disliked. But Hillel claimed it was a peace offering and distracted them with wordplay. Baba b. Buṭa, a disciple of the House of Shammai but believed in the views of the House of Hillel, helped establish the law according to House of Hillel's views by offering a public sacrifice with laying on of hands. Thus, the law was confirmed according to the House of Hillel and no one complained.",
            "2:12 Another disciple of the House of Hillel performed the act of laying hands which one disciple of Shammai discovered and questioned. But the disciple silenced him with force.",
            "2:13 If Pentecost falls on a Monday, Thursday, or Friday, or any other day of the week, the House of Shammai advises that the day of slaughter should be the next day. Meanwhile, the House of Hillel insists that there is no designated day of slaughter, and burnt-offerings are offered up on the festival day itself, except when Pentecost coincides with the Sabbath. A case in point, Alexa died in Lud and the townsfolk intended to hold a lament for him. However, R. Tarfon told them it was inappropriate to do such on a festival day, indicating that the mourning rituals should be postponed."
        ],
        [
            "3:1: The topic is the case of confirmation [Mishnah Chagigah 2:6]. If one has lifted his feet from the immersion-pool water, which he entered to become clean for a given purpose, he is confirmed clean for that purpose. However, if one's feet are still in the water, and he was immersed for the minor kind of uncleanness but then became confirmed for the most stringent kind of uncleanness, what he has done is done [and is valid].",
            "3:2: The one who immerses in order to rise from uncleanness to cleanness is clean for all purposes. But with the one who immerses, if he had the intent to become clean, he becomes clean. If not, he remains unclean. As for one who immerses his hands, either way, his hands are clean.",
            "3:3: Rabban Gamaliel ate his food in accord with the uncleanness requirements of unconsecrated food all his life, but his handkerchief had the status of uncleanness. Onqelos the proselyte, for his entire life, ate his food in accord with the cleanness requirements for Holy Things, however, his handkerchief was considered unclean for those preparing purification-water.",
            "3:4: A stricter rule applies to Holy Things than to heave-offering. For Holy Things, they immerse utensils within other utensils, cups within cups, dishes within dishes, for purification for use with heave-offering, but not for Holy Things. For utensils to be used for Holy Things, one puts the object to be cleaned in a basket or wickerwork and immerses it. Abba Saul says this is done for utensils for use with heave-offering, but not for Holy Things.",
            "3:5: A distinction is made among outer parts, inside and holding place in the case of utensils for use with heave-offering, but not with Holy Things. R. Yosé says the formulation is redundant. Anything with outer parts and an inner part is subject to the distinction of the holding place as well, and anything without outer parts and an inner part is not subject to the holding place distinction.",
            "3:6: One carrying something affected by uncleanness can carry the heave-offering, but not Holy Things. For instance, if one's sandals were unclean, he may carry a jug of food in the status of heave-offering on his shoulder, but not in the case of food in the status of Holy Things. The clothing of those clean enough to eat heave-offering is considered unclean for the purpose of Holy Things. The rule for immersion for Holy Things is not the same as the rule for heave-offering. For Holy Things, one unties a knot, immerses and dries off, then ties the knot. And for heave-offering, he ties the knot and then immerses. However, both Holy Things belonging to the sanctuary and Holy Things of the provinces are similar in this respect.",
            "3:7: Utensils processed in a state where they're not susceptible to uncleanness when completed are clean, even in the Temple courtyard, but they require immersion for use with Holy Things and not for heave-offering. An example is when flour is mixed in a kneading basin, and a person who still awaits sunset for the completion of his purification process after immersing that day touches part of the mixture. They invalidate the whole mixture for use with Holy Things, but only the touched part in the case of heave-offering. The ground doesn't unite what's on it for either Holy Things or heave-offering's purposes. A utensil unites everything inside it for the purposes of Holy Things but not for heave-offering.",
            "3:8: The fourth remove from the original source of uncleanness invalidates Holy Things, but only the third invalidates heave-offering.",
            "3:9: For heave-offering, if one hand is made unclean, the other remains clean. However, with Holy Things, ones needs to immerse both of them. Both hands are immersed together, not individually.",
            "3:10: According to Rabbi, if one immerses one hand and prepares food requiring cleanness, all the food prepared in cleanness before the second hand's immersion is considered unclean. This is because one hand transfers uncleanness to the other, making it unclean for Holy Things. R. Yosé b. R. Judah counters that it only renders the latter invalid for Holy Things.",
            "3:11: With unclean hands, they eat food that has not been wet down in the case of heave-offering, but not in the case of Holy Things.",
            "3:12: R. Ḥanina b. Antigonos questions whether the rule that dry food is not susceptible to uncleanness applies to Holy Things. He provides an example of spearing a piece of dry food with a spindle or a wood-chip and eating an olive with it, or an onion, which can be done with heave-offering but not with Holy Things.",
            "3:13: A more strict rule applies to Holy Things and heave-offering than the preparation of the purification-water. While everyone is believed in matters relating to the preparation of purification-water, not everyone is believed in matters relating to Holy Things or heave-offering.",
            "3:14: The preparation of purification-water undergoes a more strict rule. A person who is clean for Holy Things and heave-offering is still unclean for the preparation of purification-water.",
            "3:15: There is a counting of removes from the original source of uncleanness in case of Holy Things and heave-offering, however, there is no counting of removes with purification-water. A bereaved person is prohibited to eat food in the status of tithe but is allowed for heave-offering and to participate in burning the red cow for purification water.",
            "3:16: A person who has immersed on the same day is prohibited to touch food in the status of heave-offering, however, he is permitted to touch food in the status of tithe and to touch utensils used in burning the red cow for purification water.",
            "3:17: If one has not completed his rites of atonement, he is prohibited from participating in the preparation of the red cow for purification-water, but he is allowed to touch food in the status of tithe and heave-offering.",
            "3:18: R. Yosé questions how we know that food in the fourth remove from the original source of uncleanness for Holy Things is invalid. He suggests that if one who hasn't completed their atonement rites is invalid for Holy Things but isn't for heave-offering, it is reasonable that the fourth remove, which is invalid for heave-offering, should also be invalid for Holy Things. Using a scriptural reference, he argues that if the third remove is invalid, then a fortiori, the fourth should be.",
            "3:19: R. Neḥemiah asks why everyone is trusted in matters related to purification-water and Holy Things, but not in matters of heave-offering. He suggests it's to prevent individuals from assuming roles restricted for the priesthood, citing Numbers 18:7. He questions whether this restriction extends to heave-offering, heave-offering of tithe, and dough-offering, but concludes these are excluded because they are subject to the knowledge and consent of the Israelites, unlike tasks within the veil.",
            "3:20: R. Judah cites the scripture—\"And [the water] shall be kept for the congregation of the people of Israel for the water for impurity, for the removal of sin\" (Numbers 19:9)—to assert that all are believed in matters connected with protecting the water from uncleanness.",
            "3:21: If there's doubt involving a common person's domain, about him having imparted midras-uncleanness, about his having facilitated the spread of uncleanness, or about his having moved an object thereby imparting uncleanness, the matter is considered clean in the case of unconsecrated food, but unclean in the case of heave-offering.",
            "3:22: Six distinctions apply to purification-water. They fill and mix purification-water with any utensil. They transport purification-water and purification-ash from one place to another. An ordinary person who says, “I am clean for the purification-water” is accepted. Similarly, if he says, “These utensils are clean for purification-water\", they accept that too. If a person immersed intending to sprinkle but did not sprinkle, he can still eat heave-offering in the evening after sunset.",
            "3:23: If they notice purification-water and purification-ashes in his hands, they allow consumption of food prepared in clean conditions based on the cleanliness of his hands, his clothes, or his shoes.",
            "3:24: An ordinary person who brings utensils for his purification-water can sell them for both purification-offering and for heave-offering to an associate.",
            "3:25: However, if he brings them for his heave-offering, an associate does not purchase them for either purification-water or heave-offering.",
            "3:26: If he brings them for an associate’s purification-rite and heave-offering, the associate can purchase the ones brought for the purification-offering for both his purification-offering and heave-offering, but can't purchase the ones procured for the heave-offering for either purpose.",
            "3:27: An associate who asks an ordinary person to bring utensils for his purification-offering, the associate can purchase these utensils for both his purification-rite and heave-offering. But if he asked him to bring them for his heave-offering, the associate cannot purchase them for either purification-offering or heave-offering. Regardless of whether the items were brought for himself or someone else, provided there is no deceit invoked and the associate doesn't ask for utensils for a purification-rite when needed for heave-offerings. If deception is involved, the heave-offering prepared with the aforementioned utensil is unclean.",
            "3:28: If an ordinary person says, “These utensils were meant for my purification-rite, but I've decided to use them for my heave-offering”, they are considered unclean for the purification rite, as they were previously designated for a different purpose.",
            "3:29: Trust is extended to people from Modi'in and inwards towards Jerusalem concerning the status of small clay utensils for use with Holy Things. Outwards from Modi'in, they aren't trusted.",
            "3:30: In Judah, people are trusted regarding maintaining the cleanness of wine and oil all year, but not regarding heave-offering. However, during wine-pressing and olive-crushing periods, they are also deemed trustworthy for heave-offering. Seventy days before the wine and olive-pressing time, they are believed concerning Holy Things, a mixture of heave-offering with unconsecrated produce, and the cleanness of a utensil. But they aren't believed regarding heave-offering, unless during the pressing of grapes and crushing of olives, they're also considered trustworthy regarding heave-offering.",
            "3:31: They are trusted concerning wine during wine-pressing time, and concerning oil during olive-crushing time. However, they are not trusted about wine during olive-oil-crushing time or about oil during wine-pressing time.",
            "3:32: Once the times for pressing the grapes and crushing the olives have passed, the items return to their prohibited status. If someone brought a jug of wine in the status of heave-offering, it should not be accepted unless he specified, “I have set apart in this jug of wine a quarter-log which is in the status of Holy Things”. If it was brought in the next grape-pressing season, even if the jug is recognized, it should not be accepted.",
            "3:33: This passage recounts an occurrence in which R. Tarfon was confronted by an old man who questioned why he accepted heave-offering food throughout the year, since typically, outside of the harvest, wine-pressing and olive-crushing seasons, food is only accepted from an associate. R. Tarfon explained that he had a law from Rabban Yoḥanan b. Zakkai permitting him to accept such food, but in light of the complaints, he would no longer do so unless the food was accompanied by a statement setting apart a quarter-log of wine in the status of Holy Things.",
            "3:34: If tax collectors go into a house and declare that everything in the house remains clean, their words are trusted concerning objects to be used in purification rites but not for objects for heave-offering. However, in Jerusalem, they are trusted with the cleanness of all utensils for Holy Things, but not for heave-offering, except during festivals when they are also trusted for matters related to heave-offering.",
            "3:35: For a person buying utensils from craftsmen who are ordinary folk, or handing over utensils to such craftsmen, the craftsmen are trusted about preserving the cleanness of objects for a purification-rite, but not for those for heave-offering. There is a specific mention of a table used for the Show-Bread of the Temple, which when unclean, is immersed at the suitable time, even on the Sabbath. Similarly, the candelabrum was immersed on a festival day, leading to public remarks about the Pharisees’ thorough observance."
        ]
    ],
    "sectionNames": [
        "Chapter",
        "Halakhah"
    ]
}