diff --git "a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/English/Mischnajot mit deutscher \303\234bersetzung und Erkl\303\244rung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de].json" "b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/English/Mischnajot mit deutscher \303\234bersetzung und Erkl\303\244rung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de].json"
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..09800a6e1b8694cb9ce4e63bf98b24e4fc7fa78c
--- /dev/null
+++ "b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/English/Mischnajot mit deutscher \303\234bersetzung und Erkl\303\244rung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de].json"
@@ -0,0 +1,92 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Arakhin",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.talmud.de/tlmd/die-deutsche-mischna-uebersetzung",
+ "versionTitle": "Mischnajot mit deutscher Übersetzung und Erklärung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de]",
+ "priority": 0.5,
+ "versionNotes": "Ordnung Seraïm, übers. und erklärt von Ascher Samter. 1887.
Ordnung Moed, von Eduard Baneth. 1887-1927.
Ordnung Naschim, von Marcus Petuchowski u. Simon Schlesinger. 1896-1933.
Ordnung Nesikin, von David Hoffmann. 1893-1898.
Ordnung Kodaschim, von John Cohn. 1910-1925.
Ordnung Toharot, von David Hoffmann, John Cohn und Moses Auerbach. 1910-1933.",
+ "actualLanguage": "de",
+ "languageFamilyName": "german",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה ערכין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "Jeder kann einen Erech geloben und der Erech eines jeden kann gelobt werden, jeder kann einen Geldwert geloben und der Geldwert eines jeden kann gelobt werden, sowohl Priester wie Leviten, Israeliten, Frauen und Sklaven. Unbestimmt- und Doppelt-geschlechtliche können einen Geldwert geloben und ihr Geldwert kann gelobt werden, sie können einen Erech geloben, ihr Erech kann aber nicht gelobt werden, denn nur der Erech einer ausgesprochen männlichen oder ausgesprochen weiblichen Person kann gelobt werden. Eines Taubstummen, Geistesschwachen und Unmündigen Geldwert wie Erech können gelobt werden, sie können aber weder einen Geldwert noch einen Erech geloben, weil sie nicht den Verstand dazu haben. Von einem noch nicht einen Monat alten Kinde kann man den Geldwert, nicht aber den Erech geloben.",
+ "Von einem Nichtjuden, sagt R. Meïr, kann man den Erech geloben, er aber kann keinen Erech geloben. R. Jehuda sagt: Er kann einen Erech geloben, sein Erech kann aber nicht gelobt werden. Beide stimmen überein, dass sowohl er einen Geldwert geloben wie sein Geldwert gelobt werden kann.",
+ "Von einem, der im Sterben liegt oder der zur Hinrichtung hinausgeführt wird, kann man weder den Geldwert noch den Erech geloben. R. Chanina, Sohn des Akabia, sagt: Seinen Erech kann man geloben, weil dessen Betrag feststeht, aber seinen Geldwert nicht, weil dessen Betrag nicht feststeht. R. Jose sagt: Er kann sowohl einen Geldwert wie einen Erech geloben wie etwas dem Heiligtum weihen, und er ist verpflichtet, einen Schaden, den er zugefügt hat, zu bezahlen.",
+ "Wenn eine Frau zur Hinrichtung hinausgeführt werden soll, wartet man ihre Niederkunft nicht ab, hat sie bereits auf dem Gebärstuhle gesessen, wartet man ihre Niederkunft ab . Wenn eine Frau hingerichtet worden ist, darf man ihr Haar benutzen, von einem hingerichteten Tier ist [jede] Nutzniessung verboten."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Es gibt keinen niedrigeren Erech als einen Sela und keinen höheren als fünfzig Sela. Wie ist es demnach? Hat er einen Sela entrichtet und ist dann zu Vermögen gekommen, so braucht er nichts weiter zu entrichten; weniger als einen Sela und ist dann zu Vermögen gekommen, so muss er fünfzig Sela geben. Hat er fünf Sela im Vermögen, so sagt R. Meïr, braucht er nur einen zu entrichten; die Weisen sagen: Er muss sie alle geben. Es gibt keinen niedrigeren Erech als einen Sela und keinen höheren als fünfzig Sela. Ist [eine Frau in ihrer Zählung] irre geworden, beginnt eine neue Zählung für sie nicht früher als nach sieben und nicht später als siebzehn Tagen. Bei Aussatzschaden gibt es keine kürzere Abschliessungszeit als eine Woche und keine längere als drei Wochen.",
+ "Keinem Jahre gibt man weniger als vier vollzählige Monate und in keinem erscheinen mehr als acht angebracht. Die zwei Brote wurden nie früher als am zweiten und nie später als am dritten Tage verzehrt. Die Schaubrote wurden nie früher als am neunten und nie später als am elften Tage verzehrt. Ein Knabe wird nicht früher als am achten Tage beschnitten und nicht später als am zwölften Tage.",
+ "Man blies nie weniger als einundzwanzig Töne im Heiligtum und nie mehr als achtundvierzig. Es wurden nie weniger als zwei Leiern gespielt und nie mehr als sechs, nie weniger als zwei Flöten und nie mehr als zwölf. An zwölf Tagen im Jahre wurde die Flöte vor dem Altar gespielt: beim Schlachten des ersten Pessachopfers und beim Schlachten des zweiten Pessachopfers, am ersten Tage des Pessachfestes, am Tage des Wochenfestes und an den acht Tagen des Hüttenfestes. Es wurde nicht auf einer kupfernen Flöte gespielt, sondern auf einer Flöte aus Rohr, weil diese einen angenehmeren Ton gibt. Man liess den Ton nur auf einer Flöte ausklingen, weil dieser so schöner ausklingt.",
+ "Sklaven von Priestern waren es [die spielten], das sind die Worte des R. Meïr; R. Jose sagt: Leute aus den Familien Beth-Happegarim und Beth-Zipporia und aus Emmaus, aus denen die Priester heirateten. R. Chanina, Sohn des Antigonus, sagt: Leviten waren es.",
+ "Es waren nie weniger als sechs untersuchte Lämmer in der Lämmer-Halle, [das sind] so viele wie ausreichten, wenn ein Schabbat und zwei Tage des Neujahrsfestes auf einander folgten, nach oben war die Zahl unbeschränkt. Es durften nie weniger als zwei Trompeten sein, nach oben war die Zahl unbeschränkt, nicht weniger als neun Harfen, nach oben war die Zahl unbeschränkt, die Zimbel war nur ein Mal vertreten.",
+ "Es waren nie weniger als zwölf Leviten, die auf dem Duchan standen, nach oben war die Zahl unbeschränkt. Unmündige wurden nicht in die Tempelhalle zum Opferdienst zugelassen, ausser wenn die Leviten dastanden und sangen, sie begleiteten aber nicht auf der Leier und der Harfe, sondern nur mit dem Munde, um den Gesang lieblicher zu machen. R. Elieser, Sohn des Jakob, sagt: Sie zählten nicht mit, standen auch nicht auf dem Duchan, sondern sie standen auf dem Fussboden, so dass ihre Köpfe zwischen die Füsse der Leviten reichten, man nannte sie die Leviten-plager."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Das Gesetz über den Erech enthält sowohl eine Erleichterung wie eine Erschwerung, das über das erbeigentümliche Feld eine Erleichterung wie eine Erschwerung, das über den stössigen Ochsen, der einen Sklaven getötet hat, eine Erleichterung wie eine Erschwerung, und das über den Notzüchtiger, den Verführer, und den Ausbringer eines schlechten Namens eine Erleichterung wie eine Erschwerung. Das über den Erech enthält eine Erleichterung und eine Erschwerung, wieso? Gleichviel ob jemand den Erech des schönsten Menschen in Israel gelobt hat oder den des hässlichsten, er hat immer fünfzig Sela zu geben. Hat er dagegen gesagt: „Ich verpflichte mich zu seinem Geldwert“, so hat er das, was er wert ist zu geben.",
+ "Das über ein erbeigentümliches Feld enthält eine Erleichterung und eine Erschwerung, wieso? Gleichviel ob jemand [ein Feld] in der Sandsteppe von Machos heiligt oder einen in den Gärten von Sebasto, er hat immer für den Flächenraum der Aussaat eines Chomer Gerste fünfzig Schekel Silber zu geben. Bei einem gekauften Felde dagegen hat er den wirklichen Wert zu geben. R. Elieser sagt: Es ist gleich, ob es ein erbeigentümliches oder ein gekauftes Feld ist. Worin denn unterscheidet sich ein erbeigentümliches von einem gekauften Felde? Darin, dass er bei einem erbeigentümlichen Felde noch ein Fünftel hinzufügen muss, und bei einem gekauften Felde das Fünftel nicht hinzuzufügen braucht.",
+ "Das über den stössigen Ochsen, der einen Sklaven getötet hat, enthält eine Erleichterung und eine Erschwerung, wieso? Gleichviel ob er den schönsten unter den Sklaven oder den hässlichsten unter den Sklaven getötet hat, hat [der Eigentümer] dreissig Sela zu zahlen. Hat er dagegen einen Freien getötet, so hat er dessen Wert zu zahlen. Bei blosser Verwundung hat er in diesem wie in jenem Falle den vollen Schaden zu ersetzen.",
+ "Das über den Notzüchtiger und den Verführer enthält eine Erleichterung und eine Erschwerung, wieso? Gleichviel ob jemand die angesehenste aus dem Priestergeschlechte oder die geringste in Israel vergewaltigt oder verführt hat, immer hat er fünfzig Sela zu geben. Der Ersatz für die Beschämung und die Wertverminderung richtet sich je nach dem, der beschämt hat, und der, die beschämt worden ist.",
+ "Das über den Ausbringer eines schlechten Namens enthält eine Erleichterung und eine Erschwerung, wieso? Gleichviel ob jemand den schlechten Namen über die angesehenste aus dem Priestergeschlechte oder über die geringste in Israel ausgebracht hat, immer hat er hundert Sela zu geben. Das ist ein Fall, wo eine bloß ausgesprochene Beschuldigung höher bestraft wird als die Handlung selbst. So finden wir auch, dass das Strafgericht über unsere Väter in der Wüste erst wegen ihrer bösen Zunge besiegelt worden ist, denn so heisst es: „und die mich jetzt schon zehn Mal versucht und nicht auf meine Stimme gehört haben “."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Für das Zureichen des Vermögens kommt nur der Gelobende in Betracht, für das Alter der, dessen Erech gelobt worden ist, der Erech richtet sich nach dem, dessen Erech gelobt worden ist, und nach der Zeit, da er gelobt worden ist. Für das Zureichen des Vermögens kommt nur der Gelobende in Betracht, wie ist das zu verstehen? Hat ein Armer den Erech eines Reichen gelobt, gibt er nur den Erech wie ein Armer, hat ein Reicher den Erech eines Armen gelobt, gibt er den Erech wie ein Reicher.",
+ "Bei Opfern dagegen ist es nicht so. Hat jemand gesagt: „Ich verpflichte mich zu dem Opfer dieses Aussätzigen “, so hat er, wenn es ein armer Aussätziger war, das Opfer eines armen, wenn es ein reicher war, das Opfer eines reichen zu bringen. Rabbi sagt: Ich sage, das ist auch beim Erech ebenso. Weshalb hat der Arme, der den Erech eines Reichen gelobt, nur den Erech eines Armen zu geben? Weil der Reiche überhaupt nichts schuldig war. Hat dagegen der Reiche gesagt: „Ich gelobe meinen Erech“, und der Arme hat es gehört und gesagt: „Ich verpflichte mich zu dem, was jener gesagt hat“, so muss er auch den Erech wie ein Reicher geben. War er arm und ist dann reich geworden, oder war er reich und ist dann arm geworden, muss er den Erech wie ein Reicher geben; R. Jehuda sagt: Auch wenn er arm war, dann reich geworden, und dann wieder arm geworden ist, muss er den Erech wie ein Reicher geben.",
+ "Bei den Opfern dagegen ist es nicht so. Selbst wenn sein Vater stirbt und ihm Zehntausende hinterlässt, oder er ein Schiff auf dem Meere hat, das ihm Zehntausende einbringt, hat das Heiligtum darauf gar keinen Anspruch.",
+ "Für das Alter der, dessen Erech gelobt worden ist, wie ist das zu verstehen? Hat ein Jugendlicher den Erech eines Alten gelobt, hat er den Erech eines Alten zu gehen, hat ein Alter den Erech eines Jugendlichen gelobt, hat er den Erech eines Jugendlichen zu geben. Der Erech richtet sich nach dem, dessen Erech gelobt worden ist, wie ist das zu verstehen? Hat ein Mann den Erech einer Frau gelobt, hat er den Erech einer Frau zu geben, hat eine Frau den Erech eines Mannes gelobt, hat sie den Erech eines Mannes zu geben. Und der Erech nur nach der Zeit, da der Erech gelobt worden ist, wie ist das zu verstehen? Hat jemand den Erech eines noch nicht fünf Jahre alten Kindes gelobt, und es ist inzwischen über fünf Jahre alt geworden, einer Person unter zwanzig Jahren, und sie ist inzwischen über zwanzig Jahre alt geworden, hat er das zu geben, was er zur Zeit, da er den Erech gelobt hat, zu geben hatte. Der dreissigste Tag zählt noch mit nach unten, ebenso das fünfte Jahr und das zwanzigste Jahr, denn es heisst: „Wenn von sechzig Jahre alt und darüber, wenn es eine männliche Person ist“, von dem sechzigsten Jahre ziehen wir den Schluss auch auf die übrigen: wie das sechzigste Jahr noch nach unten zählt, so zählen auch das fünfte und das zwanzigste Jahr noch nach unten. Wie ? Weil [die Schrift] das sechzigste Jahr noch nach unten zählt, was eine Erschwerung zur Folge hat, sollen wir auch das fünfte und das zwanzigste Jahr nach unten zählen, was doch eine Erleichterung zur Folge hat ? Die Schrift gebraucht aber bei diesen wie bei jenem den Ausdruck „Jahr“ als Wort-Analogie, um damit zu lehren, dass ebenso, wie das beim sechzigsten Jahre erwähnte Jahr noch nach unten zählt, auch das beim fünften und beim zwanzigsten Jahre erwähnte Jahr noch nach unten zählt, dass es gleich ist, ob es eine Erleichterung oder eine Erschwerung zur Folge hat. R. Eleasar sagt: Bis zu einem Monat und einem Tag über die genannten Jahre."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Wenn jemand sagt: „Ich gelobe mein Gewicht“, muss er geben, was er wiegt, wenn in Silber, in Silber, wenn in Gold, in Gold. Der Fall kam vor bei der Mutter der Jirmatja, die gesagt hatte: „Ich gelobe das Gewicht meiner Tochter“, darauf kam diese nach Jerusalem, man wog sie, und sie bezahlte ihr Gewicht in Gold. „Ich gelobe das Gewicht meiner Hand “, so, sagt R. Jehuda, füllt man ein Fass mit Wasser und steckt seine Hand bis zum Ellbogen hinein, wiegt dann Fleisch von einem Esel mit Sehnen und Knochen ab und tut davon soviel hinein, bis es wieder voll wird. Darauf sagte R. Jose : Wie ist es denn möglich abzupassen, dass die Menge des Fleisches gerade der des Fleisches und die der Knochen der der Knochen entspricht? Vielmehr schätzt man die Hand ab, wieviel sie wohl wiegen muss.",
+ "„Ich gelobe den Wert meiner Hand“, so schätzt man ihn ab, wieviel er mit der Hand wert ist und wieviel mit Vorbehalt der Hand; hierin sind Wert-Gelübde mehr verpflichtend als Erech-Gelübde. Es gibt aber auch einen Fall, wo Erech-Gelübde mehr verpflichtend sind als Wert-Gelübde: Wenn jemand sagt: „Ich gelobe meinen Erech“ und er stirbt, müssen die Erben ihn zahlen, „meinen Wert“, und er stirbt, brauchen die Erben nichts zu zahlen, denn Tote haben keinen Wert. „Ich gelobe den Erech meiner Hand“ oder „meines Fusses“, ist es, als hätte er nichts gesagt, „meines Kopfes“ oder „meiner Leber“, muss er seinen vollen Erech zahlen. Dies ist die Regel: Ist es etwas, wovon das Leben abhängt, so muss er den vollen Erech zahlen.",
+ "„Ich gelobe die Hälfte meines Erech“, gibt er die Hälfte seines Erech, „den Erech meiner Hälfte“, muss er seinen ganzen Erech geben. „Ich gelobe die Hälfte meines Wertes“, gibt er die Hälfte seines Wertes, „den Wert meiner Hälfte“, muss er seinen vollen Wert geben. Dies ist die Regel: Ist es etwas, wovon das Leben abhängt, muss er den vollen Wert geben.",
+ "Wenn jemand sagt: „Ich gelobe den Erech jenes“, und es stirbt der, der das Gelübde getan, und der, dessen Erech er gelobt hat, so müssen die Erben zahlen. „Ich gelobe den Wert jenes“, und es stirbt der, der das Gelübde getan, so müssen die Erben zahlen, stirbt der, dessen Wert er gelobt hat, brauchen die Erben nicht zu zahlen, denn Tote haben keinen Wert.",
+ "[Wenn jemand sagt:] „Dieser Ochse soll ein Ganzopfer sein, dieses Haus eine Opfergabe “, und der Ochse stirbt oder das Haus stürzt ein, ist er nicht zum Ersatz verpflichtet; „ich gelobe den Wert dieses Ochsen als Ganzopfer“ oder „den Wert dieses Hauses als Opfergabe“, und der Ochse stirbt oder das Haus stürzt ein, ist er zum Ersatz verpflichtet.",
+ "Die, welche einen Erech schuldig bleiben, pfändet man, die Sündopfer oder Schuldopfer schuldig bleiben, pfändet man nicht, die Ganzopfer oder Friedensopfer schuldig bleiben, pfändet man. Obwohl es ihm nicht zur Sühne angerechnet wird, wenn er sie nicht aus eigenem Willen bringt, dass heisst: „zu seinem Wohlgefallen“, so nötigt man ihn, bis er sagt: „Es ist mein eigener Wille “. Ebenso ist es bei Ehescheidungen gemeint: man nötigt ihn, bis er sagt: „Es ist mein eigener Wille “."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Waisen gehörendes Gut muss nach der Abschätzung dreissig Tage lang ausgeboten werden, dem Heiligtum gehörendes sechzig Tage lang, die Ausbietung muss am Morgen und am Abend geschehen. Wenn jemand seine Güter dem Heiligtum weiht und es ruht auf ihm noch die Haftpflicht für die Ketuba seiner Frau, so muss er, sagt R. Elieser, wenn er sich von ihr scheidet, sich durch Gelübde jeden ferneren Genuss von ihr versagen; R. Josua sagt: Er braucht es nicht. Ein ähnlicher Fall: R. Simon, Sohn des Gamliel, sagt: Auch wenn jemand einer Frau für ihre Ketuba gebürgt hat, muss ihr Mann, wenn er sich von ihr scheidet , sich durch Gelübde jeden ferneren Genuss von ihr versagen, er könnte sonst eine gegen das Vermögen jenes gerichtete Verabredung treffen und seine Frau [dann später] wieder zurlicknehmen.",
+ "Wenn jemand seine Güter dem Heiligtum weiht und es ruht auf ihm noch die Haftpflicht für die Ketuba einer Frau oder gegenüber einem Gläubiger, kann die Frau ihre Ketuba nicht von dem Geheiligten einziehen und der Gläubiger nicht seine Schuld, sondern der es auslöst, löst es mit der Verpflichtung aus, der Frau ihre Ketuba und dem Gläubiger seine Schuld zu bezahlen. Hat das Geheiligte einen Wert von neunzig Minen und seine Schuld betrug hundert Minen, so fügt er noch einen Denar hinzu und er löst damit jene Güter aus mit der Verpflichtung, der Frau ihre Ketuba oder dem Gläubiger seine Schuld zu bezahlen.",
+ "Obwohl die Bestimmung lautet, dass man den, der einen Erech schuldig ist, pfändet, so lässt man ihm doch Nahrungsmittel für dreissig Tage, Kleidung für zwölf Monate, eine Bettstelle mit Gebett, Schuhe und Tefillin, für ihn, aber nicht für seine Frau und nicht für seine Kinder. Ist er ein Handwerker, lässt man ihm zwei Werkzeuge von jeder Sorte, einem Zimmermann lässt man zwei Beile und zwei Sägen. R. Elieser sagt: Ist er ein Landmann, lässt man ihm sein Gespann, ist er ein Eseltreiber, lässt man ihm seinen Esel.",
+ "Hat er von der einen Sorte mehr und von der anderen Sorte weniger, lässt man ihn nicht von der, von der er mehr hat, verkaufen, um dafür von der, von der er weniger hat, sich zu kaufen, sondern man lässt ihm nur zwei Stücke von der, von der er mehr hat, und von der, von der er weniger hat, was er hat. Wer [alle] seine Habe dem Heiligtum weiht, dem versteigert man [selbst] seine Tefillin.",
+ "Einerlei ob jemand seine [ganze] Habe dem Heiligtum geweiht oder seinen eigenen Erech gelobt hat, steht ihm kein Anspruch zu, nicht auf die Kleidung seiner Frau und nicht auf die Kleidung seiner Kinder und nicht auf die gefärbten Kleider, die er für ihren Gebrauch hat färben lassen, und nicht auf neue Schuhe, die er für ihren Gebrauch gekauft hat. Obwohl die Bestimmung lautet, dass man Sklaven in ihrer Bekleidung zum Verkauf stellt, um dadurch einen Vorteil zu erzielen, weil, wenn man einem Sklaven ein Kleid für dreissig Denare kauft, er dadurch um eine Mine höher geschätzt wird, und ebenso eine Kuh, wenn man sie bis zum Markttage stehen lässt, an Wert gewinnt, und ebenso eine Perle, wenn man sie in eine grosse Stadt bringt, an Wert gewinnt, so richtet sich doch der Anspruch des Heiligtums nur nach dem Wert, den es an seiner Stelle und in dem gegebenen Augenblicke hat."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Man heiligt [ein Feld] nicht, wenn nur noch weniger als zwei Jahre bis zum Jobel sind, und man löst es nicht aus, wenn weniger als ein Jahr nach dem [Beginn des] Jobel vergangen ist. Man rechnet dem Heiligtum nicht Monate, [die verstrichen sind], an, aber das Heiligtum kann die [verstrichenen] Monate anrechnen. Wenn jemand sein Feld zu einer Zeit, wo das Jobel-Gesetz Geltung hat, heiligt, muss er für den Flächenraum der Aussaat eines Chomer Gerste fünfzig Schekel Silber geben. Sind Vertiefungen von zehn Handbreiten Tiefe darin oder Felsen von zehn Handbreiten Höhe, werden sie nicht mitgemessen, sind sie weniger tief oder hoch, werden sie mitgemessen. Hat man es zwei oder drei Jahre vor dem Jobel geheiligt, muss man einen Sela und einen Pondion für jedes Jahr geben. Wenn jemand sagt: „Ich will jedes Jahr den auf dasselbe entfallenden Betrag zahlen,“ hört man nicht auf ihn, sondern er muss das Ganze zugleich zahlen.",
+ "Es ist gleich, ob die Eigentümer [auslösen] oder irgend ein anderer Mensch. Was denn ist der Unterschied zwischen den Eigentümern und jedem anderen? Nur der, dass die Eigentümer noch ein Fünftel hinzufügen müssen und jeder andere nicht ein Fünftel hinzuzufügen braucht.",
+ "Wenn jemand es geheiligt und wieder ausgelöst hat, braucht er es im Jobeljahre nicht wieder herauszugeben. Hat sein Sohn es ausgelöst, fällt es im Jobel wieder an den Vater zurück. Hat ein Fremder oder einer von den Verwandten es ausgelöst und er hat es wieder aus dessen Hand ausgelöst, braucht er es im Jobel nicht wieder herauszugeben. Hat es einer von den Priestern ausgelöst und es befindet sich noch in seinem Besitze, kann er nicht sagen, da es doch sonst im Jobel den Priestern zufällt und es jetzt in meinem Besitze ist, so gehört es mir, sondern es fällt allen Priestern, seinen Brüdern, als Eigentum zu.",
+ "Ist das Jobel herangekommen und es ist noch nicht ausgelöst, so nehmen die Priester es in Besitz und bezahlen seinen Wert, dies die Worte des R. Jehuda; R. Simon sagt: Sie nehmen es in Besitz, brauchen aber nichts zu zahlen; R. Elasar sagt: Sie nehmen es nicht in Besitz und zahlen nichts, sondern man heisst es ein „verlassenes “ Feld bis zum zweiten Jobel; ist das zweite Jobel herangekommen und es ist noch nicht ausgelöst, heisst man es ein „doppelt verlassenes “ bis zum dritten Jobel, nicht eher treten die Priester in den Besitz desselben, als bis ein Anderer es ausgelöst hat.",
+ "Wenn jemand ein Feld von seinem Vater kauft und der Vater stirbt und er es dann heiligt, so gilt es als erbeigentümliches Feld, hat er es geheiligt und dann erst ist der Vater gestorben, gilt es als gekauftes Feld, dies die Worte des R. Meïr; R. Jehuda und R. Simon sagen : Es gilt als erbeigentümliches Feld, denn es heisst: „Wenn aber ein von ihm gekauftes Feld, das nicht von dem Felde seines Eigentums ist“, ein Feld, das niemals ihm erbeigentümliches Feld werden konnte, damit ist dieses ausgeschlossen, das ihm als erbeigentümliches zufallen konnte. Ein gekauftes Feld fällt im Jobel nicht den Priestern zu, denn niemand kann etwas heiligen, was ihm nicht gehört. Priester und Leviten können [ihre Felder] jederzeit heiligen und jederzeit auslösen, sowohl vor dem Jobel als nach dem Jobel."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Wenn jemand sein Feld heiligt zu einer Zeit, wo das Jobel-Gesetz nicht in Geltung ist, so sagt man zu ihm: „Mache du den Anfang“ , weil die Eigentümer ein Fünftel hinzugeben, jeder andere Mensch aber nicht ein Fünftel hinzuzugeben braucht. Es war der Fall, dass jemand sein Feld heiligte, weil es zu schlecht war, man sagte zu ihm: „Mache du den Anfang“, da sagte er: „Ich nehme es für einen Issar“, R. Jose sagte: So sagte er nicht, sondern „für ein Ei“ — denn Heiliges kann durch Geld und durch Geldeswert ausgelöst werden —, darauf sagte man zu ihm: „Du hast es dir erstanden“, so hatte er einen Verlust von einem Issar und das Feld war wieder sein.",
+ "Wenn einer sagt: „Ich nehme es für zehn Selaïm“, ein anderer bietet zwanzig, ein anderer dreissig, ein anderer vierzig, ein anderer fünfzig, und nun der, der fünfzig geboten hat, zurücktritt, hält man sich an seinem Vermögen bis zu zehn [Selaïm] schadlos, tritt auch der, der vierzig geboten, zurück, hält man sich wieder an seinem Vermögen bis zu zehn schadlos, tritt auch der, der dreissig geboten, zurück, hält man sich wieder an seinem Vermögen bis zu zehn schadlos, tritt auch der, der zwanzig geboten, zurück, hält man sich wieder an seinem Vermögen bis zu zehn schadlos , tritt auch der, der zehn geboten, zurück, verkauft man es für das, was es wert ist, und macht sich für den Rest an dem, der zehn geboten hat, bezahlt. Bieten die Eigentümer zwanzig und irgend ein anderer zwanzig, haben die Eigentümer den Vorzug, weil sie ein Fünftel hinzufügen.",
+ "Sagt einer: „Ich nehme es für einundzwanzig“, müssen die Eigentümer sechsundzwanzig geben, „für zweiundzwanzig“, müssen die Eigentümer siebenundzwanzig geben, „für dreiundzwanzig“, müssen die Eigentümer achtundzwanzig geben, „für vierundzwanzig“, müssen die Eigentümer neunundzwanzig geben, „für fünfundzwanzig“, müssen die Eigentümer dreissig geben, denn zu dem, was der andere mehr bietet, brauchen sie nicht ein Fünftel hinzuzufügen. Sagt einer: „Ich nehme es für sechsundzwanzig“, haben die Eigentümer, wenn sie einunddreissig und dazu einen Denar geben wollten, den Vorzug, wenn nicht, sagt man zu ihm: „Du hast es dir erstanden“ .",
+ "Als Banngut weihen kann man von seinen Schafen und seinen Rindern, von seinen kanaanitischen Sklaven und Sklavinnen und von seinem erbeigentümlichen Felde, hat man sie im ganzen dem Banngut geweiht, gelten sie nicht als Banngut, dies die Worte des R. Elieser. Darauf sagte R. Elasar, Sohn des Asarja: Wenn selbst, wo es sich um Gottgeweihtes handelt, es dem Menschen nicht erlaubt ist, seinen ganzen Besitz zu bannen, um wieviel mehr ist es sonst Pflicht des Menschen, sein Vermögen nicht zu verschleudern!",
+ "Wenn jemand seinen Sohn oder seine Tochter, seinen hebräischen Sklaven oder seine hebräische Sklavin, oder sein erkauftes Feld als Banngut weiht, gelten sie nicht als Banngut, denn kein Mensch kann etwas bannen, was nicht ihm gehört. Priester und Leviten können nichts als Banngut weihen, dies die Worte des R. Jehuda; R. Simon sagt: Priester können nichts als Banngut weihen, weil das Gebannte ihnen selbst zufällt, Leviten dagegen können als Banngut weihen, da ihnen das Gebannte nicht zufällt. Rabbi sagt: Die Worte des R. Jehuda leuchten ein inbezug auf liegende Güter, weil es heisst: „denn ewiges Eigentum soll es ihnen bleiben“, die Worte des R. Simon dagegen beziehen sich auf bewegliche Güter, [mit der Begründung] weil ihnen das Gebannte nicht zufällt.",
+ "Für die Priester bestimmte Banngüter dürfen nicht ausgelöst werden , sondern müssen den Priestern gegeben werden. R. Jehuda, Sohn des Betera, sagt: Ohne Bestimmung geweihte Banngüter fallen dem Tempelschatz zu, denn es heisst: „alles Banngut gehört als hochheilig dem Ewigen“; die Weisen sagen: Ohne Bestimmung geweihte Banngüter fallen den Priestern zu, denn es heisst: „wie das als Banngut geweihte Feld fällt sein Besitzrecht dem Priester zu“ ; wenn es so ist, warum heisst es denn aber: „alles Banngut gehört als hochheilig dem Ewigen„? [Das weist darauf hin], dass es auch auf hochheilige und auf einfach heilige Tiere seine Anwendung findet.",
+ "Es kann jemand seine dem Heiligtum geweihten Tiere als Banngut weihen, seien es hochheilige, seien es einfach heilige. Ist es ein Gelübde, so muss er den vollen Geldwert desselben geben, ist es eine freiwillige Gabe, so muss er den ideellen Vorteil den er davon hat, bezahlen. [Hatte er nämlich gesagt:] „Diesen Ochsen weihe ich zum Ganzopfer„, so schätzt man ab, wieviel jemand wohl für diesen Ochsen geben würde, ihn als Ganzopfer darzubringen, ohne zu einem solchen verpflichtet zu sein. Die Erstgeburt, sowohl eine fehlerlose wie eine fehlerhafte, kann man als Banngut weihen. Wie löst man sie aus ? Wenn man sie auslöst, schätzt man ab, wieviel jemand wohl für diese Erstgeburt geben würde, dass sie seinem Tochtersohne oder seinem Schwestersohne zugewendet werde. R. Ismael sagt: In einem Schriftverse heisst es: „du sollst [sie] heiligen“ und in einem, dass du sie nicht heiligen sollst ? Man kann nicht sagen, dass man sie heiligen darf, da es ja heisst, dass man sie nicht heiligen soll, man kann auch nicht sagen, dass man sie nicht heiligen darf, da es ja heisst: „du sollst sie heiligen“. Die sich daraus ergebende Deutung ist: Du darfst sie heiligen, dass ihr abgeschätzter Wert dem Heiligtum zufällt, aber du darfst sie nicht heiligen, sie als ein Opfer [anderer Art] auf dem Altar darzubringen."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Wer sein Feld zu einer Zeit, wo das Jobel-Gesetz in Geltung ist, verkauft, darf es nicht vor Ablauf von zwei Jahren wieder einlösen, denn es heisst: „nach der Anzahl der Ertragsjahre soll er es dir verkaufen.“ War darunter ein Jahr des Rostbrands oder des Welkens oder das siebente Jahr, so zählt es nicht mit. Hat er es brachgepflügt oder ganz brach liegen gelassen, so zählt es mit. R. Elieser sagt: Hat er es ihm vor dem Neujahrsfeste verkauft, als es noch voll mit Früchten war, so geniesst er davon drei Erträge in zwei Jahren,",
+ "Hat er es dem Ersten für hundert Denare verkauft und der Erste hat es dem Zweiten für zweihundert Denare verkauft, braucht er nur mit dem Ersten abzurechnen, weil es heisst: „dem Manne, dem er es verkauft hat \". Hat er es dem Ersten für zweihundert verkauft und der Erste hat es dem Zweiten für hundert verkauft, braucht er nur mit dem Letzteren abzurechnen, weil es heisst: „dem Manne\", dem Manne, der es in seinem Besitze hat. Man darf nicht ein entferntes Feld verkaufen, um ein nahes einzulösen, nicht ein schlechtes, um ein gutes einzulösen, nicht geborgt nehmen, um einzulösen, und nicht hälftenweise einlösen. Bei Heiligem dagegen ist alles dieses erlaubt, hiermit ist es also bei Privatbesitz strenger als bei Heiligem.",
+ "Wer ein Haus von den Häusern einer ummauerten Stadt verkauft, kann es sofort wieder einlösen und kann es volle zwölf Monate lang einlösen, es ist dies wie eine Art von Zins und doch kein Zins. Stirbt der Verkäufer, kann sein Sohn es einlösen, stirbt der Käufer, kann er es aus der Hand dessen Sohnes einlösen. Man rechnet das Jahr immer von dem Zeitpunkte, da er es ihm verkauft hat, denn es heisst: „bis ihm ein ganzes Jahr voll geworden ist“. Da es heisst: ein „ganzes“, ist auch ein Schaltmonat miteinbegriffen; Rabbi sagt: Man berechnet ihm das Jahr mit dem auf dasselbe entfallenden Teil des Schaltmonats.",
+ "War der Tag, an dem die zwölf Monate abliefen, herangekommen und es wurde nicht ausgelöst, so gehörte es ihm als bleibendes Eigentum, einerlei ob er es gekauft oder als Geschenk erhalten hatte, denn es heisst: „für immer “. Früher kam es vor, dass er an dem Tage, an dem die zwölf Monate abliefen, sich verborgen hielt, damit es sein bleibendes Eigentum werde, da verordnete Hillel, der Ältere, dass er sein Geld an die Kammer einzahlen und die Tür aufbrechen und hineingehen kann, und jener kann dann, wann er will, kommen und sein Geld in Empfang nehmen.",
+ "Für alles, was innerhalb der Mauer liegt, gilt das Gleiche wie für die Häuser ummauerter Städte, ausgenommen Felder; R. Meïr sagt: Auch für Felder. Für ein in die Stadtmauer eingebautes Haus, sagt R. Jehuda, gilt nicht das Gleiche wie für die Häuser ummauerter Städte; R. Simon sagt: Seine äussere Wand gilt für dasselbe als es umgebende Mauer.",
+ "Für eine Stadt, bei der die Hausdächer die Umgebungsmauer bilden oder die nicht zur Zeit des Josua, Sohnes des Nun, mit einer Mauer umgeben war, gilt nicht das Recht der Häuser von ummauerten Städten. Als Häuser ummauerter Städte gelten: [mindestens] drei Gehöfte mit je zwei Häusern, die zur Zeit des Josua, Sohnes des Nun, mit einer Mauer umgeben waren, wie z. B. das alte Kastell von Sepphoris, die Akra von Gusch-Chalab, das alte Jodaphat, Gamala, Gadud Chadid, Ono, Jerusalem und andere, die ihnen gleichen.",
+ "Die Häuser in offenen Ortschaften geniessen die Vorrechte der Häuser ummauerter Städte und die Vorrechte der Felder, sie dürfen eingelöst werden, und zwar sofort wieder eingelöst werden und volle zwölf Monate lang eingelöst werden wie Häuser, und fallen im Jobeljahre oder durch [Zurückstattung der durch Abzug] verminderten Kaufsumme wieder zurück wie Felder. Als Häuser offener Ortschaften gelten: zwei Gehöfte mit je zwei Häusern, selbst wenn sie zur Zeit des Josua, Sohnes des Nun, mit einer Mauer umgeben waren, gelten sie als Häuser offener Ortschaften.",
+ "Hat ein Israelite den Vater seiner Mutter, der ein Levite war, beerbt, so kann er nicht in der angegebenen Weise einlösen, ebenso kann ein Levite, der den Vater seiner Mutter, der ein Israelite war, beerbt habt, nicht in der angegebenen Weise einlösen, denn es heisst: „denn die Häuser der Städte der Leviten,“ nur wenn er selbst ein Levite ist und in Städten der Leviten, dies die Worte Rabbis; die Weisen sagen: Die Bestimmungen sprechen nur von Städten der Leviten. Man darf nicht Feld zur Flur machen und nicht die Flur zu Feld, nicht Flur zur Stadt schlagen und nicht Stadt zur Flur. Darauf sagte R. Elieser: Wo ist das gesagt? Bei den Städten der Leviten, bei den Städten der Israeliten dagegen darf man Feld zur Flur machen, aber nicht die Flur zu Feld, Flur zur Stadt schlagen, aber nicht Stadt zur Flur, damit die Städte Israels nicht devastiert werden. Die Priester und die Leviten dürfen jederzeit verkaufen und jederzeit wieder einlösen, denn es heisst: „eine jederzeitige Wiedereinlösung soll den Leviten zustehen.“"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/English/Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/English/Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ab19826dc217ed66862c1b4fa2bb173b9591acac
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/English/Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp.json
@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Arakhin",
+ "versionSource": "http://learn.conservativeyeshiva.org/mishnah/",
+ "versionTitle": "Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 1.0,
+ "license": "CC-BY",
+ "shortVersionTitle": "Dr. Joshua Kulp",
+ "actualLanguage": "en",
+ "languageFamilyName": "english",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה ערכין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "All [persons] are fit to evaluate or to be made the subjects of evaluation, are fit to vow [another's worth] or have their worth vowed: priests, Levites and [ordinary] Israelites, women and slaves. The tumtum and the hermaphrodite are fit to vow [another's worth], or to have their worth vowed, and are fit to evaluate, but they are not fit to be made the subjects of evaluation, for the subject of evaluation must be definitely either male or female. A deaf-mute, an imbecile, or a minor are fit to have their worth vowed or be made the subject of evaluation, but they are not fit to make either a vow [of another's worth] or to evaluate, because they have no intelligence. A person less than one month old may have his worth vowed but not his valuation.",
+ "A non-Jew: Rabbi Meir says: he can be evaluated but he cannot evaluate. Rabbi Judah says: he can evaluate but cannot be evaluated. Both agree that he can vow another's worth and have his worth vowed by others.",
+ "One at the point of death or about to be put to death cannot have his worth vowed, nor be evaluated. Rabbi Hanina ben Akavia says: he can be evaluated because his value is fixed, but his worth cannot be vowed because his worth is not fixed. Rabbi Yose says: he may vow, evaluate, and consecrate [to the sanctuary], and if he caused damage, he is obliged to make restitution.",
+ "If a woman is about to be executed, they do not wait for her until she gives birth. But if she had already sat on the birthstool, they wait for her until she gives birth. If a woman has been put to death one may use her hair. If an animal has been put to death it is forbidden to make any use of it."
+ ],
+ [
+ "There is no evaluation less than one sela, nor more than fifty selas. How so? If one paid a sela and became rich, he need not give any [more]. But if he gave less than a sela and became rich, he must pay fifty selas. If he had five selas in his possession: Rabbi Meir says: he need not give more than one; The sages say he must give them all. There is no evaluation less than one sela, nor more than fifty selas. If a woman makes a mistake in her reckoning there is no re-opening for her [of the niddah count] earlier than seven, nor later than after seventeen days. No signs of leprosy are shut up for less than one week and none more than three weeks.",
+ "There are never less than four full months in the year, nor did it seem right to have more than eight. Two loaves were eaten, never earlier than the second day, nor later than the third day. The shewbread was eaten never earlier than the ninth day, nor later than the eleventh day. An infant may never be circumcised earlier than the eighth nor later than the twelfth day.",
+ "There are never less than twenty-one blasts in the Temple and never more than forty-eight. There are never less than two harps, nor more than six. There are never less than two flutes, nor more than twelve. On twelve days in the year the flute was played before the altar: At the slaughtering of the first pesah, At the killing of the second pesah, On the first festival day of Pesah, On the festival day of Atzeret (Shavuot), And on the eight days of Sukkot. And they did not play on a pipe [abuv] of bronze but on a pipe of reed, because its tune is sweeter. Nor was anything but a single pipe used for closing a tune, because it makes a pleasant finale.",
+ "They were slaves of the priests, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yose said: they were of families from Bet Hapegarim, Bet-Zipparya and from Emmaus, places from which priests would marry [women]. Rabbi Hanina ben Antigonos said: they were Levites.",
+ "There were never less than six inspected lambs in the chamber of lambs, enough for Shabbat and the [two] festival days of Rosh Hashanah, and their number could be increased infinitely. There were never less than two trumpets and their number could be increased infinitely. There were never less than nine lyres, and their number could be increased infinitely. But there was only one cymbal.",
+ "There were never less than twelve levites standing on the platform and their number could be increased into infinity. No minor could enter the court of the sanctuary to take part in the service except when the Levites stood up to sing. Nor did they join in the singing with harp and lyre, but with the mouth alone, to add flavor to the music. Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob said: they did not count in the required number, nor did they stand on the platform. Rather they would stand on the ground, so that their heads were between the feet of the levites. And they were called the youth of the Levites."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The law of evaluation is sometimes lenient, and at others times strict. The law of the field of possession is sometimes lenient, and at others times strict. The law concerning a warned ox that has killed a slave is sometimes lenient, and at others times strict. The law of the rapist and the seducer and the defamer is sometimes lenient, and at others times strict. The law of evaluation is sometimes lenient, and at others times strict. How so? Whether one has evaluated the fairest in Israel, or the ugliest in Israel, he must pay fifty selas. But if he said: “Behold, his monetary worth is upon me,” he pays only as much as he is worth.",
+ "“The law of the field of possession is sometimes lenient and sometimes strict.”How so? Whether one dedicates a field in the sandy plain of Mahoz or in the orchards of Savaste, [if he would redeem it] he must pay fifty shekels of silver for [every part of the field sufficient for] the sowing of a homer of barley. But if it was a field which he bought, he must pay what it is worth. Rabbi Eliezer says: it is all the same whether it is a field of possession or one that he bought. What is the difference between the field of possession and one that he bought? A field of possession he must pay the [added] fifth, whereas for a field that he has bought he need not pay the added fifth.",
+ "“The law concerning a warned ox that has killed a slave is sometimes lenient and sometimes strict.”How so? Whether it killed the fine looking slave or an ugly slave, he must pay thirty selas. If it killed a free man he must pay what he is worth. If it wounded, whether this one or the other, he must pay the full damage.",
+ "“The law of the rapist and seducer is sometimes lenient and sometimes strict.”How so? Whether he raped or seduced a girl from among the best of the priestly stock or the humblest in Israel, he must pay fifty selas. But compensation for shaming and for blemish is in accord with the [circumstances] of him who shames and of the one who suffers the shame.",
+ "The law of the defamer is sometimes lenient and sometimes strict.How so? Whether he defamed a girl from among the best of the priestly stock or the humblest in Israel, he must pay one hundred selas. Thus it turns out that he who speaks with his mouth suffers more than he that commits an act. For thus we have also found that the judgment against our fathers in the wilderness was sealed only because of their evil tongue, as it is written: “Yet you have tested me these ten times, and you have not listened to My voice” (Numbers 14:22)."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The sufficiency of means is according to the ability of the vower. And the age is according to the subject of the vow. The evaluation is according to the subject of the evaluation. And the evaluations [shall be paid according to the rate prescribed] at the time of the evaluation. The sufficiency of means is according to the ability of the vower. How so? If a poor man evaluated a rich man, he pays only the valuation of a poor man. But if a rich man evaluated a poor man, he must pay the valuation of a rich man.",
+ "But it is not so with sacrifices. If he said: “I take upon myself the sacrifices of this metzora,” and the metzora was poor, he brings the sacrifices of a poor metzora. But if the metzora was rich, he must bring the sacrifices of a rich man. Rabbi says: I say the same applies with regard to an evaluation. Why is a poor man who evaluated a rich man obliged to pay only the evaluation of a poor man? Because the rich man is not obligated at all. But if the rich man said: “My value is upon me” and the poor man, hearing that, said: “What this man has said, I take upon myself,” then he must pay the evaluation of a rich man. If he was poor and then became rich, or rich and then became poor, he must pay the evaluation of a rich man. Rabbi Judah says: even if he was poor and became rich and then again became poor he must pay the evaluation of a rich man.",
+ "But it is not so with sacrifices. Even if his father was dying [when a man vowed] and left him ten thousand, or if he had a ship on the sea and it brought to him ten thousand, the sanctuary has no claim at all on them.",
+ "“And the age is according to the subject of the vow:” How so? If a child evaluates an old man, he must pay the value of an old man. And if an old man evaluates a child he must pay the value of a child. The evaluation is according to the subject of the evaluation. How so? If a man evaluated a woman, he must pay the value of a woman. And if a woman evaluated a man, she must pay the value of a man. “And the evaluations [shall be paid according to the rate prescribed] at the time of the evaluation.” How so? If he evaluated one who was less than five years of age, and he became [meantime] older than five years of age, or if [he evaluated one] who was less than twenty years of age and he became twenty years old, he must pay [only] in accord with the age at the time of the valuation. The thirtieth day is considered to be under this age. The fifth year or twentieth year is considered to be under this age. For it says: “And if he is from sixty years old and upward” (Leviticus 27:7), thus we can learn thus with regard to all others from what is said about sixty years: just as the sixtieth year is considered to be under this age, so also the fifth and twentieth years are under this age. Is that so! Just because [the Torah] accounts the sixtieth year to be under this age, thereby being more stringent, shall we make the fifth or the twentieth year be considered under this age, in order to be lenient? Scripture says, “Years,” “years” as a gezerah shavah: just as with the sixtieth year the word “years” means that it is considered under this age, so the word “years” with the fifth and with the twentieth year are considered under this age, whether this results in being lenient or being stringent. Rabbi Elazar says: [this rule holds good] until they are a month and a day beyond the year."
+ ],
+ [
+ "One who said: “I vow my weight,” he must pay his weight, in silver [if he had said in] silver, or in gold [if he had said in] gold. It happened with the mother of Yirmatia, who said, “I vow my daughter's weight.” She went up to Jerusalem and weighed her and then paid her weight in gold. [If a man said: “I vow] the weight of my hand,” Rabbi Judah says: let him fill a barrel with water and put it [his hand] in up to the elbow. Then let him weigh the flesh, bones and sinews of a donkey and put it into the barrel until it is filled up again. Rabbi Yose said: “But how is it possible to account exactly one kind of flesh against another kind of flesh, and one kind of bones against another kind of bones? Rather: one estimates what the hand is likely to weigh.",
+ "[If one said] “The worth of my hand is upon me,” they estimate his worth with his hand and [what it would be] without his hand. In this respect vows of worth are more stringent than vows of value. There is an aspect of vows of value that is more stringent than vows of worth. How so? If one said: “My value is upon me” and then he dies, his heirs must pay it. [But if he said:] “My worth is upon me,” and then he dies, his heirs need not pay anything because dead persons have no worth. [If he said,] “The value of my hand or foot is upon me,” he has said nothing, [But if he said,] “The value of my head is upon me,” he must pay his whole value. This is the general rule: Anything upon which his life depends, he must pay his full value.",
+ "[If one said:] “Half my value is upon me,” he must pay half his evaluation. [But if he said,] “The value of one half of me he is upon me,” he must pay his full value. [If he said] “Half of my worth is upon me,” he must pay half his worth. [If he said,] “The worth of half of me is upon me,” he must pay his whole worth. This is the general rule: Anything on which his life depends, he must pay his whole worth.",
+ "If he said: “The value of so-and-so is upon me,” if both the vower and the subject of the vow died, then the heirs must pay it. [If he said,] “The worth of so-and-so is upon me,” and the vower died, the heirs must pay it. But if the subject of the vow died, the heirs need not pay anything because dead persons have no worth.",
+ "[If someone said:] “This ox shall be an olah [a whole burnt offering],” or “This house shall be an olah,” and the ox died or the house fell down, he is not obligated to pay. [But if he said:] “This ox is upon me as an olah” or “this house is upon me as an olah” and the ox died, or the house fell down, he is obligated to pay [their worth].",
+ "With regard to those who made a vow of value: they take a pledge from them. With regard to those obligated to bring a hatat or asham: they do not take a pledge. With regard to those obligated to bring an olah or a shelamim: they do take a pledge. And even though he is not atoned for unless he is willing [to pay his obligation], as it is said: “willingly” (Leviticus 1:3), they coerce him until he says: I agree. The same is true in the case of divorce documents: they coerce him until he says: I agree."
+ ],
+ [
+ "[The property] of orphans which has been evaluated [must be proclaimed for] thirty days. And [the property of] the Sanctuary which has been evaluated, [for] sixty days. They must make the proclamation in the morning and in the evening. If a man dedicates his property to the Sanctuary and he is still liable for his wife’s ketubah: Rabbi Eliezer says: when he divorces her he must vow that he will not derive any further benefit from her. Rabbi Joshua says: he need not do so. Similarly, Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel said: Also if one guarantees a woman's ketubah and her husband divorces her, the husband must vow to derive no benefit from her, lest he make a conspiracy against the property of that man [the guarantor] and take his wife back again.",
+ "A man who dedicates his possessions to the sanctuary while he is still liable for his wife's kethubah or in debt to a creditor, the wife cannot collect her ketubah from the consecrated property nor the creditor his debt. Rather he who redeems them must redeem for the purpose of paying the wife her ketubah or the creditor his debt. If he had dedicated ninety maneh, worth of property, and he owed one hundred maneh, then he [the creditor] must add one dinar more and he redeems the property for the purpose of paying the ketubah to the wife or the debt to the creditor.",
+ "Even though they said: they take pledges from those who owe vows of value, they allow him food for thirty days, clothing for twelve months, bed and bedding, shoes and tefillin. For himself, but not for his wife and children. If he was a craftsman, they leave him two tools of every kind. If he was a carpenter, they leave him two axes and two saws. Rabbi Eliezer says: if he was a farmer, they leave him his yoke [of oxen]. If a donkey driver, they leave him his donkey.",
+ "If he had many [tools] of one kind, and few of another kind, they may not say to him to sell the many and buy some of the few, but one leaves him two of the kind of which he has many and all that he has from those of which he has few. One who consecrates [all] his possessions to the Sanctuary, they count his tefillin in the evaluation.",
+ "Whether one consecrates his property or evaluates himself, it [the Sanctuary] has no claim to his wife's garment or his children's garment or to the dyed clothes which he had dyed for their use or to the new sandals which he has bought for their use. Although they said: “Slaves are sold with their garments to increase their value,” because when a garment for thirty denars is bought for him his value is increased by a maneh. And likewise with a cow, if it is kept waiting to the market-day it increases in value, and similarly a pearl, if brought to a big city increases in value. Nevertheless, the Sanctuary can only claim the value of anything in its own place and at its own time."
+ ],
+ [
+ "One may not consecrate [a field of his possession] less than two years before the Jubilee, nor redeem it less than one year after the Jubilee. One does not reckon months to [the disadvantage of] the Sanctuary, but the Sanctuary does reckon months [to its own advantage]. If a man consecrated his field at a time when the law of the Jubilee is in force, he must pay fifty shekels for [every piece of field sufficient for] the sowing of a homer of barley. If the field contained ravines ten handbreadths deep or rocks ten handbreadths high, they are not included as part of the field. But if less than this, they are included. If he consecrated it two or three years before the Jubilee, he must pay one sela [shekel] and one pondion for each year. If he says: “I shall pay for each year as it comes,” they do not listen to him, rather he must pay for all the years together.",
+ "It is all the same whether the owner or anyone else [redeems the field]. What is the difference between the owner and any other man? The owner must add one fifth, whereas any other man need not add one fifth.",
+ "If a man consecrated [his field] and then redeemed it, it does not go out of his possession in the Jubilee. If his son redeemed it, it reverts to his father in the Jubilee. If another person, or a relative redeemed it, and he redeemed it from his hand, it goes out [to the priests]. If one of the priests redeemed it, and it was still in his possession, he cannot say: “Since it goes out to the priests in the Jubilee, and since it is now in my possession, therefore it belongs to me.” Rather, it goes out of his possession to all his fellow priests.",
+ "If the Jubilee arrived and it was not yet redeemed then the priests enter into possession of the land and they pay its value, the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Shimon says: they enter [into possession] but they do not pay [its value]. Rabbi Eliezer says: they neither enter [into possession] nor pay [its value]. But it is called an abandoned field until the second Jubilee. If the second jubilee has arrived and it was not yet redeemed, it is called a ‘twice abandoned field’ until the third Jubilee. The priests never enter into possession of the field until someone else had redeemed it.",
+ "If one bought a field from his father, and his father died and afterwards he consecrated it, it is considered a field of possession. If he consecrated it and afterwards his father died, then it is considered a field acquired by purchase, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah and Rabbi Shimon say: it is considered a field of possession, as it is said: “And if a field which he has, which is not a field of his possession” (Leviticus 27:22) a field which is not capable of becoming a field of his possession, thus excluding a field which is capable of becoming a field of possession. A field acquired by purchase does not go out to the priests in the year of the Jubilee, for no man can consecrate an object not belonging to him. Priests and Levites may consecrate [their fields] at any time and redeem at any time, both before and after the jubilee."
+ ],
+ [
+ "If one consecrated his field at a time when the [law of the] Jubilee was no longer observed, they say to him: “You open [the bidding]!” because the owner must pay an added fifth, whereas others do not pay an additional fifth. It happened that one consecrated his field because it was bad. They said to him: “You open the bidding.” He said: “I will acquire it for an issar.” Rabbi Yose said: he did say that, but rather “for an egg,” because consecrated objects may be redeemed by either money or money's equivalent. He [the Temple treasurer] said to him: It’s yours. It turns out he lost an issar and the field was his again.",
+ "If one said: I will acquire it for ten selas, and another, [for] twenty, and another for thirty, and another for forty, and another for fifty, If he [that bid] fifty reneged, they take pledges from his property up to ten selas. If he [that bid] forty reneged, they take pledges from his property up to ten selas. If he [that bid] thirty reneged, they take pledges from his property up to ten selas. If he that bid twenty reneged they take pledges from his property up to ten selas. If he that bid ten reneged they sell [the field] for what it is worth, and collect what remains from him who bid ten. If the owner bid twenty and any other man bid twenty, then the owner comes first, because he must add one fifth.",
+ "If one said I will acquire it for twenty-one selas, then the owners must pay twenty-six. [If one said] Twenty-two, the owners must pay twenty-seven. Twenty-three, the owners must pay twenty-eight. Twenty-four, the owners must pay twenty-nine. Twenty-five, the owners must pay thirty, For they need not add one fifth to what the other bids more. If one said: I will acquire it for twenty-six, if the owners want to pay thirty-one and an extra denar, the owner comes first. And if not, we say to the other: It has become yours.",
+ "A man may proscribe [part] of his flock or of his herd, of his Canaanite slaves or female slaves or of his field of possession. But if he proscribed all of them, they are not considered [validly] proscribed, the words of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah said: just as when it comes to the Highest One, one is not permitted to proscribe all of his possessions, how much more so should one be careful with his property.",
+ "If one proscribes his son or his daughter, or his Hebrew slave or female slave, or the field which he acquired by purchase, they are not considered [validly] proscribed, for one can proscribe something that does not belong to him. Priests and Levites cannot proscribe [their belongings], the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Shimon says: the priests cannot proscribe, because things proscribed belong to them. But Levites can proscribe, because things proscribed do not belong to them. Rabbi says: the words of Rabbi Judah seem acceptable in cases of immovable property as it is said: “For that is their perpetual possession,” (Leviticus 25:34) and the words of Rabbi Shimon seem acceptable in cases of movable property, since things proscribed do not fall to them.",
+ "Things proscribed for [the use of] the priests cannot be redeemed but are to be given to the priests. Rabbi Judah ben Batera says: things proscribed without specification fall to [the fund for] Temple repairs, as it was said: “Every proscribed thing is most holy to the Lord” (Leviticus 27:25). But the sages say: things proscribed without specification go to the priests, as it is said: “As a field proscribed: its possession belongs to the priest” (Leviticus 27:21). If so, why is it said: “Every proscribed thing is most holy to the Lord”? This teaches that it applies to most holy and less holy things.",
+ "A man may proscribe his holy things, whether they are most holy things or less holy things. If [they had been] consecrated as a vow, he must give their value, if as a freewill-offering, he must give what it is worth to him. [If he said:] “Let this ox be an olah,” one estimates how much a man would pay for the ox to offer it as an olah, which he was not obliged [to offer]. A first-born, whether unblemished or blemished, may be proscribed. How can it be redeemed? They estimate what a man would give for this first-born in order to give it to the son of his daughter or to the son of his sister. Rabbi Ishmael says: one verse says, [All first-born males] you shall sanctify,” (Deuteronomy 15:19) and another verse says: [“The first-borns among beasts] no man shall sanctify it” (Leviticus 27:26). It is impossible to say: “You shall sanctify,” since it was said already: “No man shall sanctify,” and it is impossible to say: “No man shall sanctify,” since it is also said: “You shall sanctify”? Therefore resolve [thus]: you may sanctify it by consecrating its value [to the owner], but you may not sanctify it by consecrating it to the altar."
+ ],
+ [
+ "If one sold his field [of possession] at the time when the Jubilee was in force, he may not redeem it for two years, as it says: “According to the number of the years of the crops he shall sell to you” (Leviticus 25:15). If there was a year of blight or mildew, or a seventh year, it is not included in the count. If he only broke the ground [without planting] or left it fallow [for a year], that year is included in the count. Rabbi Elazar says: if he sold it to him before Rosh Hashanah year, and it was still full of fruit, he enjoys three crops in two years.",
+ "If he sold it to the first for one hundred [denars] and the first sold it to the second for two hundred, then he need reckon only with the first, as it says, “With the man to whom he sold” (Leviticus 25:27). If he sold it to the first for two hundred, and the first sold it to the second for one hundred, then he need reckon only with the second, as it says: “With the man” (ibid) the man in possession of the field. One may not sell a distant field in order to redeem a near one, or a poor field in order to redeem a good one. One may not borrow [money] in order to redeem, nor redeem it in halves. But in the case of objects consecrated all these things are permitted. In this respect the laws concerning a person’s [property] are more stringent than those concerning sacred things.",
+ "If one sold a house among the houses of a walled city, he may redeem it at once and at any time during twelve months. This is a kind of interest, yet it is not interest. If the seller died, his son may redeem it. If the purchaser died, it may be redeemed from his son. One counts the year only from the time that he sold it, as it is said, “Before a full year has elapsed” (Leviticus 25:30). When it says a “a full” [year] the extra month is included. Rabbi says: he is allowed a year and its extra month.",
+ "If the [last] day of the twelve months has arrived and it was not redeemed, it becomes his permanent [possession]. This applies whether he bought it or received it as a gift, as it is said: “beyond reclaim” (Leviticus 25:30). In earlier times, he [the buyer] would hide on the last day of the twelve months, so that [the house] might become his permanent [possession]. Hillel enacted that he [the seller] could deposit his money in the chamber and break down the door and enter, and that the other [the buyer], whenever he wanted, might come and take his money.",
+ "Whatever is within the [city] wall is regarded as the houses in a walled city, with the exception of fields. Rabbi Meir says: even fields. A house built into the wall: Rabbi Judah says: it is not considered a house within a walled city. Rabbi Shimon says: its outer wall is regarded as its [city] wall.",
+ "A city whose roofs [look as if] they form its wall, Or that was not encompassed by a wall in the days of Joshua ben Nun, is not considered like houses in a walled city. [A house in any of] the following counts a house in a walled city: [those in a city] of no less than three courtyards, having two houses each, which have been encompassed by a wall in the days of Joshua ben Nun, such as the old acroplis of Tzippori, the fort of Gush-Halav, old Yodfat, Gamla, G'dod, Hadid, Ono, Jerusalem and other similar cities.",
+ "Houses in courtyards - we accord to them the advantages of houses in a walled city and the advantages given to fields: They can be redeemed at once, and at any time within the twelve months like houses [in a walled city], and they return [to the owners] in the Jubilee or [at an earlier time] by [payment of a] reduced price like fields. The following are considered houses in courtyards: [a city which has] two courtyards, each having two houses, even though they have been encompassed by a wall since the days of Joshua ben Nun, they count as houses in courtyards.",
+ "If an Israelite inherited from his mother's father who was a Levite, he cannot redeem it according to the order prescribed here. Also if a Levite inherited from his mother's father who was an Israelite, he cannot redeem it according to the order prescribed here, As it says, “As for the houses of the cities of the Levites” (Leviticus 25:32) [this order does not apply] unless he is a Levite and in the cities of the Levites, the words of Rabbi. The sages say: these things apply to the cities of the Levites. One may not turn a field into pasture land, nor pasture land into a field, nor pasture land into a city, nor a city into pasture land. Rabbi Eliezer said: When is this so? When it comes to the cities of the Levites, but when it comes to cities of Israelites one may turn a field into pasture land, pasture land into a field, pasture land into a city, but not a city into pasture land, in order that they should not destroy the cities of Israel. Priests and Levites may sell [a house] at any time and redeem it at any time, as it is said: “The Levites shall forever have the right of redemption” (Leviticus 25:32)."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/English/Sefaria Community Translation.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/English/Sefaria Community Translation.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d481590febb0454546c17b9855bc5d33ced3a05e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/English/Sefaria Community Translation.json
@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Arakhin",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org",
+ "versionTitle": "Sefaria Community Translation",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "license": "CC0",
+ "versionTitleInHebrew": "תרגום קהילת ספריא",
+ "actualLanguage": "en",
+ "languageFamilyName": "english",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה ערכין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "All are fit to evaluate [i.e., pledge one's own worth to the Temple fund], to be evaluated [by another's pledge], to vow [another's worth to the Temple fund] or to have their worth vowed: Priests, Levites, Israelites, women and slaves. The tumtum [person (or animal) with recessed sexual organs whose gender is therefore impossible to determine, presently, by external examination. It is halachically uncertain whether such is male or female], or the androginos [person with both male and female sexual organs. It is halachically uncertain whether such a person is male, female or, perhaps, has a uniquely defined halachic gender.], are fit to vow [on another's worth], to have their worth vowed, and to evaluate, but they are not fit to be evaluated, as only those who are definitely male or definitely female are evaluated. A deaf-mute, a shoteh, and a minor are fit to have their worth vowed, and to be evaluated, but they are not fit to vow [on another's worth] or to evaluate, because they are not considered capable of intent. A baby less than a month old can be vowed, but not evaluated.",
+ "Regarding a non-Jew - Rabbi Meir says: One can be evaluated, but cannot evaluate; Rabbi Yehudah says: One can evaluate but cannot be evaluated. Both agree, that one can vow, and have one's worth vowed.",
+ "One at the point of death or about to be put to death cannot have one's worth vowed, nor can one be evaluated. Rabbi Chanina ben 'Akavia says: One can be evaluated because one's value is fixed, but one's worth cannot be vowed because his worth is not fixed. Rabbi Yose says: he may vow, evaluate, and consecrate [to the sanctuary], and if he caused damage, he is obliged to make restitution.",
+ "If a woman is about to be executed, they do not wait for her until she gives birth. But if she had already sat on the birthstool, they wait for her until she gives birth. If a woman is executed, one may use her hair. If an animal has been executed, it is forbidden to make any use of it."
+ ],
+ [
+ "There is no evaluation less than one sela, nor more than fifty selaim. How so? If one paid a sela and became rich, one need not give any [more]. But if one gave less than a sela and became rich, one must pay fifty selaim. If one had five selaim in one's possession, Rabbi Meir says: One need not give more than one. The Sages say one must give them all. There is no evaluation less than one sela, nor more than fifty selaim. There is no re-opening for a woman who errs [in her reckoning] of the niddah count earlier than seven, nor later than after seventeen days. No signs of leprosy are shut up for less than one week, nor for more than three weeks.",
+ "There are never less than four full months in the year, nor did it seem right [to have] more than eight. Shtei Halechem [The two leavened loaves of wheat brought as offerings on Shavuot, which permitted using the new grain for holy offerings] were eaten, never earlier than the second day, nor later than the third day. The Lechem Hapanim [twelve, specially shaped unleavened loaves offered each Shabbat on the golden table in the Temple] was eaten never earlier than the ninth day, nor later than the eleventh day. An infant may never be circumcised earlier than the eighth, nor later than the twelfth day.",
+ "There are never less than twenty-one [Shofar] blasts in the Temple and never more than forty-eight. There are never less than two harps, nor more than six. There are never less than two flutes, nor more than twelve. On twelve days in the year the flute was played before the altar: At the slaughtering of [the Pesach offering for]the first Pesach, at the slaughtering of [the Pesach offering for] the second Pesach, on the first festival day of Pesach, on the festival day of Shavuot, and on the eight days of Sukkot. And they did not play on a bronze pipe but on a reed pipe of , because its sound is sweeter. Nor was anything but a single pipe used for the finale, because it makes a pleasant finale.",
+ "They [i.e., the Temple musicians] were [taken from] slaves of the priests - [these are] the words of Rabbi Meir; Rabbi Yose said: they were of families from Bet Hapegarim, Bet-Zipparya and from Emmaus, places from which priests would marry [women]; Rabbi Chanina ben Antigonos said: they were Levites.",
+ "There were never less than six inspected lambs in the chamber of lambs, enough for Shabbat and the [two] festival days of Rosh Hashanah, and their number could be increased indefinitely. There were never less than two trumpets and their number could be increased indefinitely. There were never less than nine lyres, and their number could be increased indefinitely. But there was only one cymbal.",
+ "There were never less than twelve Levites standing on the platform and their number could be increased indefinitely. No minor could enter the [Temple] courtyard to take part in the service except when the Levites stood up to sing. Nor did [the minors] join in the singing with harp and lyre, but with the mouth alone, to add flavor to the music. Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob said: they did not count in the required number, nor did they stand on the platform. Rather they would stand on the ground, so that their heads were between the feet of the Levites. And they were called \"the youth of the Levites\"."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The law of evaluation is sometimes lenient, and at others times strict. The law of [dedicating one's] hereditary field is sometimes lenient, and at others times strict. The law concerning a warned ox that has killed a slave is sometimes lenient, and at others times strict. The law of the rapist and the seducer and the defamer is sometimes lenient, and at others times strict. The law of evaluation is sometimes lenient, and at others times strict. How so? Whether one has evaluated the finest-looking [person] in Israel, or the ugliest in Israel, one must pay fifty selaim. But if one said: “Behold, that person's monetary worth is upon me,” one pays only as much as that person is worth.",
+ "The law of [dedicating one's] hereditary field is sometimes lenient and sometimes strict. How so? Whether one dedicates a field in the sandy plain of Mahoz or in the orchards of Savaste, [to redeem it] one must give fifty shekalim of silver for [each section of field sufficient for] the sowing of a homer of barley. But if it was a field [acquired by] purchase, one must give what it is worth. Rabbi Eli'ezer says: it is all the same whether it is a hereditary field or a field [acquired by] purchase. What is the difference between the hereditary field and one [acquired by] purchase? [When redeeming] an hereditary field one must give the [added] fifth, whereas for a field [acquired by] purchase one need not give the added fifth.",
+ "The law concerning a warned ox that has killed a slave is sometimes lenient and sometimes strict. How so? Whether it killed the fine-looking slave or an ugly slave, one must pay thirty selaim. If it killed a free man one must pay what that person is worth. If it only wounded the person, in either case one must pay the full damage.",
+ "The law of the rapist and seducer is sometimes lenient and sometimes strict. How so? Whether he raped or seduced a girl from among the best of the priestly stock or the humblest in Israel, he must pay fifty selaim. But compensation for shaming and for blemish is [assessed] according to the [circumstances] of the one who shames and of the one who suffers the shame.",
+ "The law of the defamer is sometimes lenient and sometimes strict. How so? Whether he defamed a girl from among the best of the priestly stock or the humblest in Israel, he must pay one hundred selaim. Thus it turns out that one who speaks with one's mouth [is fined] more than one that commits an act. For thus we have also found that the judgment against our ancestors in the wilderness was sealed only because of their evil tongue, as it is written: “Yet you have tested Me these ten times, and you have not listened to My voice” (Numbers 14:22)."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The ability to pay is according to [the means of] the one making the vow; the [determination of] age is according to the subject of the vow; the [gender for] the evaluations is according to the subject of the evaluation; the [age for] evaluations [is determined] at the time of the evaluation. \"The sufficiency of means is according to [the means of] the one making the vow\" - how so? If a poor man evaluated a rich man, he pays only the valuation [according to the means] of a poor man. But if a rich man evaluated a poor man, he must pay the valuation [according to the means] of a rich man.",
+ "But it is not so with sacrifices. If a man said: 'I take upon myself the sacrifice of this leper', and the leper was poor, he bring the sacrifice of a poor man; but if the leper was rich, he must bring the sacrifice of a rich man. Rabbi says: I say the same applies with regard to a valuation. Why is a poor man who evaluated a rich man obliged to pay only the valuation of a poor man? Because the rich man had not incurred any liability whatsoever. But if the rich man said: 'I evaluate myself.' and the poor man, hearing that, said: 'What this man said, I take upon myself', then he must pay the valuation of a rich man. Rabbi Judah says, even if he was poor and became rich, and later became poor again, he gives the valuation of a rich man.",
+ "But it is not so with sacrifices. Even if his father was dying [when a man vowed] and left him ten thousand, or if he had a ship on the sea and it brought to him ten thousand, the Temple has no claim at all on them.",
+ "“The [determination of] age is according to the subject of the vow\" - how so? If a child evaluated an old man, he must pay the value of an old man; but, if an old man evaluated a child he must pay the value of a child. \"The [gender for] the evaluations is according to the subject of the evaluation\" - how so? If a man evaluated a woman, he must pay the value of a woman; but if a woman evaluated a man, she must pay the value of a man. “The [age for] evaluations [is determined] at the time of the evaluation\" - how so? If he evaluated one who was less than five years of age, and [in the meantime] he became older than five years of age, or if [he evaluated one] who was less than twenty years of age and he became twenty years old, he must pay [only] according to the age at the time of the evaluation. The thirtieth day is considered to be under this age. The fifth year or twentieth year is considered to be under this age. For it says: “And if he is from sixty years old and upward” (Leviticus 27:7), thus we learn with regard to all others from what is said about sixty years: just as the sixtieth year is considered to be under this age, so also the fifth and twentieth years are under this age. [But] is that so? Just because [the Torah] accounts the sixtieth year to be under this age, thereby being more stringent, shall we account the fifth or the twentieth year to be under this age, in order to be lenient?! Scripture says, “year,” “year” as a gezerah shavah [a technique of halachic interpretation employing an established link between identical or nearly identical words]: just as with the sixtieth year the word “year” means that it is considered under this age, so the word “year” with the fifth and with the twentieth year are considered under this age, whether [this results in] being lenient or being stringent. Rabbi Elazar says: [this rule holds true] until they are a month and a day beyond the year."
+ ],
+ [],
+ [
+ "[The property] of orphans which has been evaluated [must be proclaimed for] thirty days. And [the property of] the Sanctuary which has been evaluated, [for] sixty days. They must make the proclamation in the morning and in the evening. If a man dedicates his property to the Sanctuary and he is still liable for his wife’s ketubah: Rabbi Eliezer says: when he divorces her he must vow that he will not derive any further benefit from her. Rabbi Joshua says: he need not do so. Similarly, Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel said: Also if one guarantees a woman's ketubah and her husband divorces her, the husband must vow to derive no benefit from her, lest he make a conspiracy against the property of that man [the guarantor] and take his wife back again."
+ ],
+ [],
+ [],
+ [
+ "If one sold his field [of possession] at the time when the Jubilee was in force, he may not redeem it for two years, as it says: “According to the number of the years of the crops he shall sell to you” (Leviticus 25:15). If there was a year of blight or mildew, or a seventh year, it is not included in the count. If he only broke the ground [without planting] or left it fallow [for a year], that year is included in the count. Rabbi Elazar says: if he sold it to him before Rosh Hashanah, and it was still full of fruit, he enjoys three crops in two years.",
+ "If he sold it to the first for one hundred [dinar] and the first sold it to the second for two hundred, then he need reckon only with the first, as it says, “With the man to whom he sold” (Leviticus 25:27). If he sold it to the first for two hundred, and the first sold it to the second for one hundred, then he need reckon only with the second, as it says: “With the man” (ibid)— the man in possession of the field. One may not sell a distant field in order to redeem a near one, or a poor field in order to redeem a good one. One may not borrow [money] in order to redeem, nor redeem it in halves. But in the case of objects consecrated, all these [things] are permitted. In this respect the laws concerning a person’s [property] are more stringent than those concerning sacred things.",
+ "If one sold a house among the houses of a walled city, he may redeem it at once and at any time during twelve months. This is a kind of interest, yet it is not interest. If the seller died, his son may redeem it. If the purchaser died, it may be redeemed from his son. One counts the year only from the time that he sold it, as it is said, “Before a full year has elapsed” (Leviticus 25:30). When it says a “a full” [year], an intercalated month is included. Rabbi says: he [always] gives him a year and its intercalation.",
+ "If the [last] day of the twelve months has arrived and it was not redeemed, it becomes his permanent [possession]. This applies whether he bought it or received it as a gift, as it is said: “beyond reclaim” (Leviticus 25:30). In earlier times, he [the buyer] would hide on the last day of the twelve months, so that [the house] might become his permanent [possession]. Hillel enacted that he [the seller] could deposit his money in the [Temple] chamber and break down the door and enter, and that the other [the buyer], whenever he wanted, might come and take his money.",
+ "Whatever is within the [city] wall is regarded as the houses in a walled city, with the exception of fields. Rabbi Meir says: even fields. A house built into the wall: Rabbi Judah says: it is not considered a house within a walled city. Rabbi Shimon says: its outer wall is regarded as its [city] wall.",
+ "A city whose roofs [look as if] they form its wall, or one that was not encompassed by a wall in the days of Joshua ben Nun, is not considered like houses in a walled city. [A house in any of] the following counts a house in a walled city: [those in a city] of no less than three courtyards, having two houses each, which have been encompassed by a wall in the days of Yehoshua bin Nun, such as the old stronghold of Tzippori, the fort of Gush-Halav, old Yodfat, Gamla, G’dod, Hadid, Ono, Jerusalem and other similar cities.",
+ "Houses in unwalled cities—we accord to them the advantages of houses in a walled city and the advantages given to fields: They can be redeemed at once, and at any time within the twelve months like houses [in a walled city], and they return [to the owners] in the Jubilee or [at an earlier time] by [payment of a] reduced price like fields. The following are considered houses in unwalled cities: [a city which has] two courtyards, each having two houses, even though they have been encompassed by a wall since the days of Yehoshua bin Nun, they count as houses in courtyards.",
+ "If an Israelite inherited from his mother's father who was a Levite, he cannot redeem it according to the order prescribed here. Also if a Levite inherited from his mother's father who was an Israelite, he cannot redeem it according to the order prescribed here, as it says, “As for the houses of the cities of the Levites” (Leviticus 25:32)—[this order does not apply] unless he is a Levite and in the cities of the Levites - [these are] the words of Rabbi; The Sages say: these things apply to the cities of the Levites. One may not turn a field into pasture land, nor pasture land into a field, nor pasture land into a city, nor a city into pasture land. Rabbi Elazar said: When is this so? When it comes to the cities of the Levites, but when it comes to cities of Israelites one may turn a field into pasture land, pasture land into a field, pasture land into a city, but not a city into pasture land, in order that they should not destroy the cities of Israel. Priests and Levites may sell [a house] at any time and redeem it at any time, as it is said: “The Levites shall forever have the right of redemption” (Leviticus 25:32)."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/English/Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de].json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/English/Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de].json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f6f9756246993ea3ce4281086d693107121d927c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/English/Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de].json
@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Arakhin",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001042448/NLI",
+ "versionTitle": "Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de]",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 0.25,
+ "license": "Public Domain",
+ "digitizedBySefaria": true,
+ "actualLanguage": "de",
+ "languageFamilyName": "german",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה ערכין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "JEDER KANN SCHÄTZEN UND GESCHÄTZT WERDEN, SEINEN GELDWERT GELOBEN UND GELOBT WERDEN, PRIESTER, LEVITEN, JISRAÉLITEN, WEIBER UND SKLAVEN. DER GESCHLECHTSLOSE UND DER ZWITTER KÖNNEN GELOBEN, GELOBT WERDEN UND SCHÄTZEN, ABER NICHT GESCHÄTZT WERDEN, DENN GESCHÄTZT WERDEN KANN NUR, WER ENTSCHIEDEN MANN ODER WEIB IST. DER TAUBE, DER BLÖDE UND DER MINDERJÄHRIGE KÖNNEN GELOBT UND GESCHÄTZT WERDEN, NICHT ABER GELOBEN UND SCHÄTZEN, WEIL SIE KEINEN VERSTAND HABEN. UNTER EINEM MONAT KANN ERGELOBT, ABER NICHT GESCHÄTZT WERDEN.",
+ "EIN NICHTJUDE KANN, WIE R. MEÍR SAGT, GESCHÄTZT WERDEN, NICHT ABER SCHÄTZEN, UND WIE R. JEHUDA SAGT, SCHÄTZEN, NICHT ABER GESCHÄTZT WERDEN; BEIDE PFLICHTEN BEI, DASS NICHTJUDEN GELOBEN UND GELOBT WERDEN KÖNNEN.",
+ "DER STERBENDE UND DER ZUR HINRICHTUNG HINAUSGEFÜHRTE KANN NICHT GELOBT UND NICHT GESCHÄTZT WERDEN. R. ḤANINA B. A͑QABJA SAGT, ER KÖNNE GESCHÄTZT WERDEN, WEIL SEIN GELDWERT FESTGESETZTIST. R. JOSE SAGT, ER KÖNNE GELOBEN, SCHÄTZEN UND HEILIGEN; HAT ER SCHADEN ANGERICHTET, SO IST ER ERSATZPFLICHTIG.",
+ "WIRD EINE FRAU ZUR HINRICHTUNG HINAUSGEFÜHRT, SO WARTE MAN NICHT, BIS SIE GEBOREN HAT; SITZT SIE AUF DEM GEBÄRSTUHLE, SO WARTE MAN DAMIT, BIS SIE GEBOREN HAT. IST EINE FRAU HINGERICHTET WORDEN, SO DARF MAN IHR HAAR NUTZNIESSEN; IST EIN VIEH HINGERICHTET WORDEN, SO IST ES ZUR NUTZNIESSUNG VERBOTEN."
+ ],
+ [
+ "DIE WERTSCHÄTZUNG BETRÄGT NICHT WENIGER ALS EINEN SELA͑ UND NICHT MEHR ALS FÜNFZIG SELA͑. ZUM BEISPIEL. WENN ER EINEN SELA͑ ENTRICHTET HAT UND REICH GEWORDEN IST, SO BRAUCHT ER NICHTS WEITER ZU ENTRICHTEN; WENN WENIGER ALS EINEN SELA͑ UND REICH GEWORDEN IST, SO ENTRICHTE ER FÜNFZIG SELA͑. HAT ER FÜNF SELA͑ IN SEINEM BESITZE, SO ENTRICHTE ER, WIE R. MEÍR SAGT, NUR EINEN, UND WIE DIE WEISEN SAGEN, ALLE. DIE WERTSCHÄTZUNG BETRÄGT NICHT WENIGER ALS EINEN SELA͑ UND NICHT MEHR ALS FÜNFZIG SELA͑. DERMENSTRUATIONSBEGINNBEI EINER IN WIRKUNG GERATENENERFOLGT FRÜHESTENS NACH SIEBEN UND SPÄTESTENS NACH SIEBZEHN TAGEN. BEI DEN AUSSATZMALEN WÄHRT ESNICHT WENIGER ALS EINE WOCHE UND NICHT MEHR ALS DREI WOCHEN.",
+ "DAS JAHR DARF NICHT WENIGER ALS VIER VOLLMONATEHABEN, UND ES SCHEINT, NICHT MEHR ALS ACHT. DIE ZWEI BROTEWERDEN NICHT VOR ZWEI UND NICHT NACH DREI TAGEN GEGESSEN. DAS SCHAUBROT WIRD NICHT VOR NEUN UND NICHT NACH ELF TAGENGEGESSEN. EIN KIND IST NICHT VOR ACHT UND NICHT NACH ZWÖLF TAGEN ZU BESCHNEIDEN.",
+ "MAN BLIES IM TEMPEL NICHT WENIGER ALS EINUNDZWANZIG TÖNEUND NICHT MEHR ALS ACHTUNDVIERZIG. MAN HATTE DANICHT WENIGER ALS ZWEI UND NICHT MEHR ALS SECHS HARFEN. MAN HATTE DA NICHT WENIDER ALS ZWEI UND NICHT MEHR ALS ZWÖLF FLÖTEN. AN ZWÖLF TAGEN IM JAHRE TÖNTE DIE FLÖTE VOR DEM ALTAR: BEIM SCHLACHTEN DES ERSTEN PESAḤOPFERS, BEIM SCHLACHTEN DES ZWEITEN PESAḤOPFERS, AM ERSTEN TAG DES PESAḤFESTES, AM WOCHENFESTE UND AN DEN ACHT TAGEN DES HÜTTENFESTES. MAN BLIES NICHT AUF EINER PFEIFE AUS KUPFER, SONDERN AUF EINER AUS ROHR, WEIL, DEREN TON ANGENEHMER IST. DER AUSKLANG ERFOLGTE MIT NUR EINER PFEIFE, WEIL ES SO SCHÖNER AUSKLINGT. ES WARENSKLAVEN VON PRIESTERN — SO R. MEÍR.",
+ "R. JOSE SAGT, LEUTE AUS DEN FAMILIEN DER PEGARÄER UND DER ÇIPARÄER UND AUS EMMAUS, DIE MIT DER PRIESTERSCHAFTIN HEIRATSVERBINDUNG STANDEN. R. ḤANINA B. ANTIGONOS SAGT, ES WAREN LEVITEN.",
+ "ES MUSSTEN MINDESTENS SECHS UNTERSUCHTE LÄMMERIM LÄMMERSTALLE SEIN, WIE FÜR EINEN ŠABBATH UND DIE FESTTAGE DES NEUJAHRES, UND MEHR UNBESCHRÄNKT. ES MUSSTEN MINDESTENS ZWEI TROMPETEN SEIN UND NEUN HARFFN, UND MEHR UNBESCHRÄNKT; ZYMBELN NUR EINE.",
+ "ES WAREN NICHT WENIGER ALS ZWÖLF LEVITEN, DIE AUF DER ESTRADE STANDEN, UND MEHR UNBEGRENZT. EIN MINDERJÄHRIGER DURFTE NICHT DEN TEMPELHOF ZUM TEMPELDIENSTE BETRETEN, AUSSER WENN DIE LEVITEN BEIM TEMPELGESANGE WAREN. AUCH DURFTEN SIE NICHT MIT LAUTE UND HARFE BEGLEITEN, SONDERN NUR MIT DEM MUNDE, UM DEM TONE LIEBLICHKEIT ZU VERLEIHEN. R. ELIE͑ZER B. JA͑QOB SAGTE: SIEWURDEN NICHT MITGEZÄHLT, AUCH DURFTEN SIE NICHT DIE ESTRADE BESTEIGEN, VIELMEHR STANDEN SIE AUF DER ERDE UND IHRE KÖPFE REICHTEN ZU DEN FÜSSEN DER LEVITEN: MAN NANNTE SIE DIE LEVITENQUÄLER."
+ ],
+ [
+ "ES GIBT BEI DEN SCHÄTZUNGEN ERLEICHTERUNG UND ERSCHWERUNG, BEIM ERBBESITZFELDE ERLEICHTERUNG UND ERSCHWERUNG, BEIM VERWARNTEN OCHSEN, DER EINEN SKLAVEN GETÖTET HAT, ERLEICHTERUNG UND ERSCHWERUNG, UND BEIM NOTZÜCHTER, BEIM VERFÜHRER UND BEIM VERLEUMDER ERLEICHTERUNG UND ERSCHWERUNG. WIESO ERLEICHTERUNG UND ERSCHWERUNG BEI DEN SCHÄTZUNGEN? WER DIE SCHÄTZUNG DES SCHÖNSTEN IN JISRAÉL ODER DES HÄSSLICHSTEN IN JISRAÉL GELOBT HAT, GEBE FÜNFZIG SELA͑. SAGTE ER ABER: ICH GELOBE SEINEN GELDWERT, SO GEBE ER SEINEN GELDWERT.",
+ "WIESO ERLEICHTERUNG UND ERSCHWERUNG BEIM ERBBESITZFELDE? EINERLEI OB JEMAND EIN FELD IM UMKREISE DER STADT ODER IN DEN OBSTGÄRTEN VON SEBASTE GEWEIHT HAT, ER MUSS FÜNFZIG ŠEQEL FÜR DIE AUSSAATFLÄCHE VON EINEM ḤOMER GERSTE GEBEN; FÜR EIN GEKAUFTES FELD GEBE ER DEN WERT. R. ELIE͑ZER SAGT, EINERLEI OB EIN GEKAUFTES FELD ODER EIN ERBBESITZFELD. WELCHEN UNTERSCHIED GIBT ES DEMNACH ZWISCHEN EINEM ERBBESITZFELDE UND EINEM GEKAUFTEN FELDE? BEI EINEM ERBBESITZFELDE FÜGE ER DAS FÜNFTEL HINZU UND BEI EINEM GEKAUFTEN FELDE FÜGE ER DAS FÜNFTEL NICHT HINZU.",
+ "WIESO ERLEICHTERUNG UND ERSCHWERUNG BEIM VERWARNTEN OCHSEN? EINERLEI, OB ER DEN SCHÖNSTEN UNTER DEN SKLAVEN ODER DEN HÄSSLICHSTEN UNTER DEN SKLAVEN GETÖTET HAT, ZAHLE DER EIGENTÜMER DREISSIG SELA͑ HAT ER EINEN FREIEN GETÖTET, SO ZAHLE ER DESSEN WERT. HAT ER DEN EINEN ODER DEN ANDREN VERLETZT, SO ZAHLE ER DEN VOLLEN SCHADENERSATZ.",
+ "WIESO ERLEICHTERUNG UND ERSCHWERUNG BEIM NOTZÜCHTER UND BEIM VERFÜHRER? EINERLEI, OB ER DIE VORNEHMSTE AUS EINEM PRIESTERHAUSE ODER DIE GERINGSTE AUS EINEM JISRAÉLITENHAUSE GENOTZÜCHTIGT ODER VERFÜHRT HAT, ZAHLE ER FÜNFZIG SELA͑; BESCHÄMUNG UND WERTMINDERUNG NACH DER STELLUNG DES BESCHÄMENDEN UND DES BESCHÄMTEN.",
+ "WIESO ERLEICHTERUNG UND ERSCHWERUNG BEIM VERLEUMDER? WER EINE ÜBLE NACHREDE AUSBRINGT ÜBER DIE VORNEHMSTE AUS EINEM PRIESTERHAUSE ODER ÜBER DIE GERINGSTE AUS EINEM JISRAÉLITENHAUSE, ZAHLE HUNDERT SELA͑. ES ERGIBT SICH ALSO, DASS DAS SPRECHEN MIT DEM MUNDE SCHWERER IST ALS DIE AUSÜBUNG EINER TAT. SO FINDEN WIR AUCH, DASS DAS VERHÄNGNIS ÜBER ONSRE VORFAHREN IN DER WÜSTE ERST WEGEN DER VERLEUMDUNG BESIEGELT WURDE, DENN ES HEISST:und sie versuchten mich nun zehnmal &c."
+ ],
+ [
+ "DIE VERMÖGENSAUSREICHUNG DES GELOBENDEN, DAS ALTER DES GELOBTEN, DER SCHÄTZUNGSWERT DES GESCHÄTZTEN UND DIE SCHÄTZUNG ZUR ZEIT DES SCHÄTZGELÜBDES. DIE VERMÖGENSAUSREICHUNG DES GELOBENDEN, ZUM BEISPIEL: HAT EIN ARMER DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT EINES REICHEN GELOBT, SO GEBE ER DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT EINES ARMEN; HAT EIN REICHER DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT EINES ARMEN GELOBT, SO GEBE ER DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT EINES REICHEN.",
+ "NICHT SO ABER VERHÄLT ES SICH BEI DEN OPFERN. SAGTE JEMAND: ER NEHME AUF SICH DAS OPFER DIESES AUSSÄTZIGEN, SO BRINGE ER, WENN DEH AUSSÄTZIGE EIN ARMER IST, DAS OPFER EINES ARMEN, UND WENN EIN REICHER, DAS OPFER EINES REICHEN. RABBI SAGTE: ICH SAGE, BEIM SCHÄTZGELÜBDE VERHALTE ES SICH EBENSO. DASS EIN ARMER, DER DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT EINES REICHEN GELOBT, NUR DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT EINES ARMEN GIBT, ERFOLGT NUR DESHALB, WEIL DER REICHE NICHTS SCHULDIG IST; WENN ABER EIN REICHER SAGT, ER NEHME AUF SICH SEINE SCHÄTZUNG, UND EIN ARMER ES HÖRT UND SAGT, ER NEHME AUF SICH, WAS DIESER GESAGT HAT, SO HAT ER DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT EINES REICHEN ZU GEBEN. WEEN ER ARM WAR UND REICH GEWORDEN IST, ODER REICH WAR UND ARM GEWORDEN IST, SO GEBE ER DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT EINES REICHEN. R. JEHUDA SAGT, AUCH WENN ER ARM WAR, REICH GEWORDEN, UND WIEDER ARM GEWORDEN IST, GEBE ER DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT EINES REICHEN.",
+ "NICHT SO ABER VERHÄLT ES SICH BEI DEN OPFERN. SELBST WENN SEIN VATER STIRBT UND IHM EINE MYRIADE HINTERLÄSST ODER SEIN SCHIFF AUF DEM MEERE ANKOMMT UND IHM MYRIADEN BRINGT, HAT DAS HEILIGTUM DARAN NICHTS.",
+ "DAS ALTER DES GELOBTEN, ZUM BEISPIEL: HAT EIN JUNGER DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT EINES ALTEN GELOBT, SO GEBE ER DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT EINES ALTEN; HAT EIN ALTER DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT EINES JUNGEN GELOBT, SO GEBE ER DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT EINES JUNGEN. DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT DES GESCHÄTZTEN, ZUM BEISPIEL: HAT EIN MANN DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT EINES WEIBES GELOBT, SO GEBE ER DEN WERT EINES WEIBES; HAT EIN WEIB DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT EINES MANNES GELOBT, SO GEBE SIE DEN WERT EINES MANNES. DIE SCHÄTZUNG ZUR ZEIT DES SCHÄTZGELÜBDES, ZUM BEISPIEL: WENN ER DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT GELOBT HAT, BEVOR ER FÜNF JAHRE ALT WAR UND FÜNF GEWORDEN IST, ODER BEVOR ER ZWANZIG JAHRE ALT WAR UND ZWANZIG GEWORDEN IST, SO GEBE ER NACH DEM ALTER ZUR ZEIT DES GELOBENS. DER DREISSIGSTE TAGZÄHLT NACH UNTEN; DAS FÜNFTE JAHR UND DAS ZWANZIGSTE JAHR ZÄHLEN NACH UNTEN. ES HEISST NÄMLICH:und wenn von sechzig Jahren und darüber, UND WIR FOLGERN VOM SECHZIGSTEN JAHRE AUF DIE ANDREN: WIE DAS SECHZIGSTE JAHR NACH UNTENZÄHLT, EBENSO ZÄHLEN DAS FÜNFTE UND DAS ZWANZIGSTE JAHR NACH UNTEN. ABER SOLLTEN DENN, WEIL DAS SECHZIGSTE JAHR ERSCHWEREND NACH UNTEN ZÄHLT, DAS FÜNFTE JAHR UND DAS ZWANZIGSTE JAHR ERLEICHTERND NACH UNTEN ZÄHLEN!? ES HEISST DA UND DORT Jahr, ALS WORTANALOGIE: WIE DAS BEIM SECHZIGSTEN GENANNTE Jahr NACH UNTEN ZÄHLT, EBENSO ZÄHLT DAS BEIM FÜNFTEN UND BEIM ZWANZIGSTEN GENANNTE Jahr NACH UNTEN, SOWOHL ERLEICHTERND ALS AUCH ERSCHWEREND. R. ELIE͑ZER SAGT, NUR WENN EINEN MONAT UND EINEN TAG ÜBER DIE JAHRE HINAUS."
+ ],
+ [
+ "WENN JEMAND SAGT, ER GELOBE SEIN GEWICHT, SO GEBE EU SEIN GEWICHT, WENN SILBER, IN SILBER, WENN GOLD, IN GOLD. EINST SAGTE DIE MUTTER DER JERMAṬJA, SIE GELOBE DAS GEWICHT IHRER TOCHTER; HIERAUF KAM SIE NACH JERUŠALEM, WO MAN SIE WOG, UND SIE GAB IHR GEWICHT IN GOLD. SAGT JEMAND, ER GELOBE DAS GEWICHT SEINER HAND, SO FÜLLE ER, WIE R. JEHUDA SAGT, EIN FASS MIT WASSER UND STECKE SIE BIS ZUM ELLENBOGEN HINEIN, SODANN WIEGE ER SOVIEL FLEISCH VON EINEM ESEL MIT KNOCHEN UND SEHNEN UND TUE ES HINEIN, BIS ES WIEDER VOLL WIRD. R. JOSE SPRACH: WIE IST ES SO ABZUPASSEN MÖGLICH, DASS DAS FLEISCH DEM FLEISCHE UND DIE KNOCHEN DEN KNOCHEN GENAU ENTSPRECHEN? VIELMEHR SCHÄTZE MAN DIE HAND, WIEVIEL SIE WOHL WIEGEN MAG.",
+ "SAGT JEMAND, ER GELOBE DEN WERT SEINER HAND, SO SCHÄTZE MAN IHN, WIEVIEL ER MIT HAND UND WIEVIEL ER OHNE HAND WERT IST. DIESBEZÜGLICH IST ES BEI GELÜBDEN STRENGER ALS BEI SCHÄTZGELÜBDEN. IN WELCHER HINSICHT IST ES BEI SCHÄTZGELÜBDEN STRENGER ALS BEI GELÜBDEIN? WENN JEMAND GESAGT HAT, ER GELOBE SEINEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT UND GESTORBEN IST, SO MÜSSEN DIE ERBEN ES GEBEN, WENN ABER: SEINEN GELDWERT, END GESTORBEN IST, SO BRAUCHEN DIE ERBEN ES NICUT ZU GEBEN, DENN DIE TOTEN HABEN KEINEN GELDWERT. SAGTE JEMAND, ER GELOBE DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT SEINER HAND ODER SEINES FUSSES, SO HAT ER NICHTS GESAGT, WENN ABER: DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT SEINES KOPFES, ODER: DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT SEINER LEBER, SO GEBE ER SEINEN GANZEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT. DIE REGEL HIERBEI IST: IST ES EINE SACHE, VON DER DAS LEBEN ABHÄNGT, SO GEBE ER SEINEN GANZEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT.",
+ "SAGTE JEMAND, ER GELOBE DIE HÄLFTE SEINES SCHÄTZUNGSWERTES, SO GEBE ER DIE HÄLFTE SEINES SCHÄTZUNGSWERTES, WENN ABER: DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT SEINER HÄLFTE, SO GEBE ER SEINEN GANZEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT. SAGTE JEMAND, ER GELOBE DIE HÄLFTE SEINES GELDWERTES, SO GEBE ER DIE HÄLFTE SEINES GELDWERTES, WENN ABER: DEN GELDWERT SEINER HÄLFTE, SO GEBE ER SEINEN GANZEN GELDWERT. DIE REGEL HIERBEI IST: IST ES EINE SACHE, VON DER DAS LEBEN ABHÄNGT, SO GEBE ER SEINEN GANZEN GELDWERT.",
+ "WENN JEMAND GESAGT HAT, ER GELOBE DEN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT VON JENEM, UND DER GELOBENDE UND DER GELOBTE GESTORBEN SIND, SO MÜSSEN DIE ERBEN ES GEBEN; WENN ABER: DEN GELDWERT VON JENEM, UND DER GELOBENDE GESTORBEN IST, SO MÜSSEN DIE ERBEN ES GEBEN, UND WENN DER GELOBTE GESTORBEN IST, SO BRAUCHEN DIE ERBEN ES NICHT ZU GEBEN, DENN DIE TOTEN HABEN KEINEN GELDWERT.",
+ "WENN JEMAND GESAGT HAT, DIESER OCHS SEI EIN BRANDOPFER, ODER: DIESES HAUS SEI EIN OPFER, UND DER OCHS VERENDET ODER DAS HAUS EINGESTÜRZT IST, SO BRAUCHT ER KEINEN ERSATZ ZU LEISTEN; WENN ABER: ICH NEHME AUF MICH, DIESEN OCHSEN ALS BRANDOPFER ZU SPENDEN, ODER: ICH NEHME AUF MICH, DIESES HAUS ALS OPFER ZU SPENDEN, UND DER OCHS VERENDET ODER DAS HAUS EINGESTÜRZT IST, SO MUSS ER ERSATZ LEISTEN.",
+ "DIE SCHÄTZGELÜBDE SCHULDEN, PFÄNDE MAN; DIE SÜNDOPFER ODER SCHULDOPFER SCHULDEN, PFÄNDE MAN NICHT; DIE BRANDOPFER ODER HEILSOPFER SCHULDEN, PFÄNDE MAN. OBGLEICH ER NICHT EHER SÜHNE ERLANGT, ALS BIS ER ES AUS EIGENEM WILLEN DARBRINGT, DENN ES HEISST: nach seinem Wohlgefallen, SO ZWINGE MAN IHN DENNOCH, BIS ER SAGT, ER WOLLE ES. DASSELBE FINDEST DU BEI EHESCHEIDUNGEN: MAN ZWINGEIHN, BIS ER SAGT, ER WOLLE ES."
+ ],
+ [
+ "DIE SCHÄTZUNG VON WAISENGUT WÄHRT DREISSIG TAGE, DIE SCHÄTZUNG VON HEILIGENGUT WÄHRT SECHZIG TAGE; DIE AUSBIETUNG ERFOLGT MORGENS UND ABENDS. WENN JEMAND SEINE GÜTER DEM HEILIGTUME GEWEIHT UND EU DIE MORGENGABE EINER FRAU ZU BEZAHLEN HAT, SO MUSS ER, WIE R. ELIE͑ZER SAGT, WENN ER SICH VON IHR SCHEIDEN LÄSST, SICH DEN GENUSS VON IHR ABGELOBEN. R. JEHOŠUA͑ SAGT, ER BRAUCHE DIES NICHT. DESGLEICHEN SAGTE AUCH R. ŠIMO͑N B. GAMLIEL, WENN JEMAND EINER FRAU FÜR IHRE MORGENGABE GEBÜRGT HAT, UND IHR MANN SICH VON IHR SCHEIDEN LÄSST, SO MUSS ER SICH JEDEN GENUSS VON IHR ABGELOBEN, DENN SIE KÖNNTEN SONST EINE FRAUDULÖSE ABMACHUNG ÜBER DAS VERMÖGEN VON JENEN TREFFENUND ER SEINE FRAU WIEDER HEIRATEN.",
+ "WENN JEMAND SEINE GÜTER DEM HEILIGTUME GEWEIHT UND SEINER FRAU DIE MORGENGABE ODER EINEN GLÄUBIGER ZU BEZAHLEN HAT, SO KANN DIE FRAU IHRE MORGENGABE NICHT VOM HEILIGEN EINFORDERN, AUCH NICHT DER GLÄUBIGER SEINE SCHULD, VIELMEHR LÖST DER AUSLÖSENDE ES UNTER DER BEDINGUNG AUS, DER FRAU IHRE MORGENGABE UND DEM GLÄUBIGER SEINE SCHULD ZU BEZAHLEN. HAT JEMAND DEM HEILIGTUME NEUNZIG MINEN GEWEIHT, WÄHREND SEINE SCHULD HUNDERT MINEN BETRÄGT, SO FÜGE ERNOCH EINEN DENAR HINZU UND LÖSE DAMIT DIESE GÜTER AUS, UNTER DER BEDINGUNG, DER FRAU IHRE MORGENGABE ODER DEM GLÄUBIGER SEINE SCHULD ZU BEZAHLEN.",
+ "OBGLEICH SIE GESAGT HABEN, DASS MAN SCHULDNER VON SCHÄTZGELÜBDEN PFÄNDE, SO LASSE MAN IHM DENNOCH UNTERHALT FÜR DREISSIG TAGE, KLEIDUNG FÜR ZWÖLF MONATE, EIN HERGERICHTETES BETT, SANDALEN UND TEPHILLIN; FÜR IHN, NICHT ABER FÜR SEINE FRAU UND NICHT FÜR SEINE KINDER. IST ER HANDWERKER, SO LASSE MAN IHM ZWEI HANDWERKSGERÄTE VON JEDER SORTE. EINEM ZIMMERMANN LASSE MAN ZWEI HOBEL UND ZWEI SÄGEN. R. ELIE͑ZER SAGTE: IST ER BAUER, SO LASSE MAN IHM SEIN GESPANN, IST ER ESELTREIBER, SO LASSE MAN IHM SEINEN ESEL.",
+ "HAT ER VON EINER SORTE MEHR UND VON EINER SORTE WENIGER, SO ERLAUBE MAN IHM NICHT ZU VERKAUFEN, VON DER ER MEHR HAT, UM ZU KAUFEN, VON DER ER WENIGER HAT, VIELMEHR LASSE MAN IHM ZWEI, VON DER ER MEHR HAT, UND ALLES, VON DER ER WENIGER HAT. WENN JEMAND ALL SEINE GÜTER DEM HEILIGTUME GEWEIHT HAT, SO VERSTEIGERE MAN SOGAR SEINE TEPHILLIN.",
+ "EINERLEI OB JEMAND SEINE GÜTER DEM HEILIGTUME GEWEIHT ODER EIN SCHÄTZGELÜBDE GELOBT HAT, ERHAT KEIN ANRECHT AUF DIE KLEIDER SEINER FRAU, AUCH NICHT AUF DIE KLEIDER SEINER KINDER, NICHT AUF DIE FÜR SIE GEFÄRBTEN STOFFE UND NICHT AUF DIE NEUEN FÜR SIE GEKAUFTEN SANDALEN. OBGLEICH SIE GESAGT HABEN, SKLAVEN SEIEN IN IHRER KLEIDUNG ZU VERKAUFEN, WEIL DIES VORTEILHAFT IST, DENN WENN MAN IHM EIN KLEID FÜR DREISSIG DENAR KAUFT, WIRD ER UM EINE MINE MEHR BEWERTET, EBENSO IST EINE KUH, WENN MAN MIT IHRAUF DEN VIEHMARKT WARTET, MEHR WERT, UND EBENSO IST EINE PERLE, WENN MAN SIE NACH EINER GROSSTADT BRINGT, MEHR WERT, SO HAT DAS HEILIGTUM DENNOCH ANSPRUCH NUR AUF DEN WERT AM ORTE UND ZUR ZEIT."
+ ],
+ [
+ "MAN HEILIGE NICHT WENIGER ALS ZWEI JAHRE VOR DEM JOBELJAHRE, UND MAN LÖSE NICHT AUS WENIGER ALS EIN JAHR NACH DEM JOBELJAHRE. MAN RECHNE DEM HEILIGTUME NICHT DIE EINZELNEN MONATE AN, WOHL ABER KANN DAS HEILIGTUM DIE EINZELNEN MONATE ANRECHNEN. WENN JEMAND ZUR ZEIT DES JOBELGESETZESSEIN FELD HEILIGT, SO ZAHLE ER FÜR DIE AUSSAATFLÄCHE EINES ḤOMERS GERSTE FÜNFZIG SILBERŠEQEL. SIND DA ZEHN HANDBREITEN TIEFE SPALTEN ODER ZEHN HANDBREITEN HOHE FELSEN VORHANDEN, SO WERDEN SIE NICHT MITGEMESSEN, WENN KLEINERE, SO WERDEN SIE MITGEMESSEN. HAT ER ES ZWEI ODER DHEI JAHRE VOR DEM JOBELJAHRE GEHEILIGT, SO ZAHLE ER EINEN SELA͑ UND EIN PONDIONFÜR DAS JAHR. Sagt jemand, er wolle jährlich den JAHRESBETRAG ZAHLEN, SO HÖRE MAN NICHT AUF IHN, VIELMEHR MUSS ER ALLES ZUSAMMEN BEZAHLEN.",
+ "EINERLEI OB DER EIGENTÜMER ODER IRGEND EIN ANDERER. DER UNTERSCHIED ZWISCHEN DEM EIGENTÜMER UND JEDEM ANDEREN BESTEHT NUR DARIN, DASS DER EIGENTÜMER DAS FÜNFTELHINZGFÜGEN MUSS, WÄHREND EIN ANDERER DAS FÜNFTEL NICHT HINZUZUFÜGEN BRAUCHT.",
+ "HAT ER ES GEHEILIGT UND AUSGELÖST, SO KOMMT ES IM JOBELJAHRE NICHT AUS SEINEM BESITZE; HAT SEIN SOHN ES AUSGELÖST, SO GELANGT ES IM JOBELJAHRE AN SEINEN VATER. WENN EIN FREMDER ODER EINER VON DEN VERWANDTEN ES AUSGELÖST UND ER ES VON DIESEM AUSGELÖST, HAT, SO GELANGT ES IM JOBELJAHRE AN DIE PRIESTER. WENN EINER DER PRIESTER ES AUSGELÖST HAT UND ES SICH IN SEINEM BESITZE BEFINDET, SO KANN ER NICHT SAGEN: DA ES IM JOBELJAHRE AN DIE PRIESTER GELANGT UND ES SICH IN MEINEM BESITZE BEFINDET, SO GEHÖRT ES MIR, VIELMEHR KOMMT ES AUS SEINEM BESITZE UND WIRD AN ALL SEINE PRIESTERBRÜDER VERTEILT.",
+ "WENN DAS JOBELJAHR HERANREICHT UND ES NICHT AUSGELÖST WIRD, SO NEHMEN ES DIE PRIESTER IN BESITZ UND ZAHLEN DEN GELDWERT — SO R. JEHUDA. R. ŠIMO͑N SAGT, SIE NEHMEN ES IN BESITZ UND ZAHLEN NICHTS. R. ELIE͑ZERSAGT, WEDER NEHMEN SIE ES IN BESITZ NOCH ZAHLEN SIE ETWAS, VIELMEHR IIEISST ES ‘VERLASSENES FELD’, BIS ZUM NÄCHSTEN JOBELJAHRE; WENN DAS NÄCHSTE JOBELJAHR HERANREICHT UND ES NICHT AUSGELÖST WIRD, SO HEISST ES ‘WIEDERHOLT VERLASSENES FELD’, BIS ZUM DRITTEN JOBELJAHRE. NICHT EHER NEHMEN DIE PRIESTER ES IN BESITZ, ALS BIS EIN ANDERER ES AUSGELÖST HAT.",
+ "WENN JEMAND VON SEINEM VATER EIN FELD GEKAUFT HAT UND SEIN VATER GESTORBEN IST, UND ER ES NACHHER GEHEILIGT HAT, SO GILT ES ALS ERBBESITZFELD; WENN ER ES ABER GEHEILIGT HAT UND SEIN VATER NACHHER GESTORBEN IST, SO GILT ES ALS GEKAUFTES FELD — SO R. MEÍR. R. JEHUDA UND R. ŠIMO͑N SAGEN, ES GELTE ALS ERBBFSITZFELD, DENN ES HEISST:wenn sein gekauftes Feld, das nicht zu den Feldern seines Erbbesitzes gehört, EIN FELD, DAS ERBBESITZ ZU WERDEN NICHT GEEIGNET WAR, AUSGENOMMEN DIESES, DAS ERBBESITZFELD ZU WERDEN GEEIGNET WAR. EIN GEKAUFTES FELD GELANGT IM JOBELJAHRE NICHT AN DIE PRIESTER, DENN NIEMAND KANN HEILIGEN, WAS NICHT IHMGEHÖRT. PRIESTER UND LEVITEN KÖNNEN IMMER HEILIGEN UND IMMER AUSLÖSEN, OB VOR DEM JOBELJAHRE ODER NACH DEM JOBELJAHRE."
+ ],
+ [
+ "WENN JEMAND SEIN FELD GEHEILIGT HAT ZUR ZEIT, WO DAS JOBEL GESETZ KEINE GELTUNG HAT, SO SAGE MAN ZU IHM, FANGE DU ZUERST AN; DER EIGENTÜMER HAT NÄMLICH DAS FÜNFTEL HINZUZUFÜGEN, JEDER ANDERE ABER HAT DAS FÜNFTEL NICHT HINZUZUFÜGEN. EINST HATTE JEMAND SEIN FELD GEHEILIGT, WEIL ES SCHLECHT WAR, UND ALS MAN ZU IHM SAGTE, DASS ER ZUERST ANFANGE, SPRACH ER: ES SEI MEIN UM EINEN ASSAR. R. JOSE SAGT, DIESER HABE NICHT UM EINEN ASSAR GESAGT, SONDERN UM EIN EI. DAS GEHEILIGTE KANN NÄMLICH DURCH GELD UND GELDESWERT AUSGELÖST WERDEN. DA SPRACH DER SCHATZMEISTER ZU IHM: ES SEI DEIN. ES ERGAB SICH, DASS ER EINEN ASSAR VERLOR UND SEIN FELD BEHIELT.",
+ "WENN EINER SAGT: ES SEI MEIN FÜR ZEHN SELA͑, UND EINER SAGT: FÜR ZWANZIG, UND EINER SAGT: FÜR DREISSIG, UND EINER SAGT: FÜR VIERZIG, UND EINER SAGT: FÜR FÜNFZIG, UND DER FÜNFZIG GEBOTEN HAT, ZURÜCKTRITT, SO PFÄNDE MAN BIS ZEHN VON SEINEN GÜTERN; TRITT DER ZURÜCK, DER VIERZIG GEBOTEN HAT, SO PFÄNDE MAN BIS ZEHN VON SEINEN GÜTERN; TRITT DER ZURÜCK, DER DREISSIG GEBOTEN HAT, SO PFÄNDE MAN BIS ZEHN VON SEINEN GÜTERN; TRITT DER ZURÜCK, DER ZWANZIG GEBOTEN HAT, SO PFÄNDE MAN BIS ZEHN VON SEINEN GÜTERN; TRITT DER ZURÜCK, DER ZEHN GEBOTEN HAT, SO VERKAUFE MAN ES FÜR DEN WERT, UND DEN REST FORDERE MAN EIN VON DEM, DER ZEHN GEBOTEN HAT. WENN DER EIGENTÜMER ZWANZIG BIETET UND EIN ANDERER ZWANZIG BIETET, SO GEHT DER EIGENTÜMER VOR, WEIL ER DAS FÜNFTEL HINZUFÜGT.",
+ "SAGT JEMAND: ES SEI MEIN FÜR EINUNDZWANZIG, SO HAT DER EIGENTÜMER SECHSUNDZWANZIG ZU ZAHLEN; WENN ZWEIUNDZWANZIG, SO HAT DER EIGENTÜMER SIEBENUNDZWANZIG ZU ZAHLEN; WENN DREIUNDZWANZIG, SO HAT DER EIGENTÜMER ACHTUNDZWANZIG ZU ZAHLEN; WENN VTERUNDZWANZIG, SO HAT DER EIGENTÜMER NEUNUNDZWANZIG ZU ZAHLEN; WENN FÜNFUNDZWANZIG, SO HAT DER EIGENTÜMER DREISSIG ZU ZAHLEN; ER BRAUCHT NÄMLICH ZUM MEHRGEBOTE DES ANDEREN DAS FÜNFTEL NICHT HINZUZUFÜGEN. WENN ABER EINER SAGT: ES SEI MEIN FÜR SECHSUNDZWANZIG, SO GEHT DER EIGENTÜMER VOR, WENN ER EINUNDDREISSIG UND EINEN DENAR BIETET, WENN ABER NICHT, SO SAGT MAN ZU JENEM: DU HAST ES ERSTANDEN.",
+ "MAN KANN ALS BANNGUT WEIHEN EINEN TEIL VON SEINEN SCHAFEN, SEINEN RINDERN, SEINEN KENAA͑NITISCHEN SKLAVEN UND SKLAVINNEN UND VON SEINEM ERBBESITZFELDE. HAT JEMAND ALLES ALS BANNGUT GEWEIHT, SO IST ES KEIN BANNGUT — SO R. ELIE͑ZER. R. ELEA͑ZAR B. A͑ZARJA SPRACH: WENN EIN MENSCH NICHT EINMAL DEM HÖCHSTEN ALL SEINE GÜTER ALS BANNGUT WEIHEN DARF, UM WIEVIEL MEHR IST ES SONST PFLICHT EINES MENSCHEN, SEINE GÜTER ZU SCHONEN.",
+ "WENN JEMAND SEINEN SOHN, SEINE TOCHTER, SEINEN HEBRÄISCHEN SKLAVEN, SEINE HEBRÄISCHE SKLAVIN ODER SEIN GEKAUFTES FELD ALS BANNGUT WEIHT, SO SIND SIE KEIN BANNGUT, DENN NIEMAND KANN ALS BANNGUT WEIHEN, WAS NICHT IHM GEHÖRT. PRIESTER UND LEVITEN KÖNNEN NICHTS ALS BANNGUT WEIHEN — SO R. JEHUDA. R. ŠIMO͑N SAGT, PRIESTER KÖNNEN NICHT ALS BANNGUT WEIHEN, WEIL DAS BANNGUT IIINENZUFÄLLT, LEVITEN KÖNNEN ALS BANNGUT WEIHEN, WEIL DAS BANNGUT NICHT IHNEN ZUFÄLLT. RABBI SAGTE: DIE WORTE R. JEHUDAS SIND EINLEUCHTEND BEI GRUNDSTÜCKEN, DENN ES HEISST:denn ein ewiger Erbbesitz ist es ihnen, UND DIE WORTE R. ŠIMO͑NS BEI BEWEGLICHEN SACHEN, DENN DAS BANNGUT GEHÖRT NICHT IHNEN.",
+ "FÜR DAS DEN PRIESTERN ZUFALLENDE BANNGUT GIBT ES KEINE AUSLÖSUNG, VIELMEHR IST ES DEM PRIESTER ZU GEBEN, WIE DIE HEBE. R. JEHUDA B. BETHERA SAGT, BANNGUT SCHLECHTHIN GEHÖRE DEM TEMPELREPARATURFONDS, DENN ES HEISST:alles Gebannte (in Jisraél) ist hochheilig für den Herrn. DIE WEISEN SAGEN, BANNGUT SCHLECHTHIN GEHÖRE DEN PRIESTERN, DENN ES HEISST:wie das Feld des Bannes, dem Priester verbleibe es als sein Erbbesitz. WIESO ABER HEISST ES: alles Gebannte sei hochheilig für den Herrn? DASS ES HOCHHEILIGES UND MINDERHEILIGES ERFASST.",
+ "MAN KANN SEINE OPFERTIERE ALS BANNGUT WEIHEN, OB HOCHHEILIGES, ODER MINDERHEILIGES. IST ES GELOBTES, SO GEBE MAN DEN GELDWERT, UND IST ES EINE FREIWILLIGE SPENDE, SO GEBE MAN DEN WERT DER BEFRIEDIGUNG. HATTE ER GESAGT: DIESER OCHS SEI EIN BRANDOPFER, SO SCHÄTZE MAN, WIEVIEL JEMAND FÜR DIESEN OCHSEN GEBEN WÜRDE, UM IHN ALS BRANDOPFER DARZUBRINGEN, OBGLEICH ER DAZU NICHT VERPFLICHTET IST. MAN KANN DAS ERSTGEBORENE ALS BANNGUT WEIHEN, OB GEBRECHENFREI ODER GEBRECHENBEHAFTET. WIE LÖSE MAN ES AUS? MAN SCHÄTZE, WIEVIEL JEMAND FÜR DIESES ERSTGEBORENE GEBEN WÜRDE, UM ES DEM SOHNE SEINER TOCHTER ODER DEM SOHNE SEINER SCHWESTERZU GEBEN. R. JIŠMA͑ÉL SAGTE: EIN SCHRIFTVERS LAUTET:sollst du heiligen, UND EIN SCHRIFTVERS LAUTET:soll er nicht heiligen; DU KANNST NICHT SAGEN, ES SEI HEILIG, DENN ES HEISST JA: soll er nicht heiligen, UND DU KANNST NICHT SAGEN, ES SEI NICHT HEILIG, DENN ES HEISST JA: Sollst du heiligen; WIE IST ES NUN ZU ERKLÄREN? DU KANNST ES ZUR SCHÄTZUNG HEILIGEN, DU KANNST ES ABER NICHT FÜR DEN ALTAR HEILIGEN."
+ ],
+ [
+ "WER SEIN FELD VERKAUFT ZUR ZEIT, WENN DAS JOBELGESETZ GELTUNG HAT, DARF ES NICHT VOR ZWEI JAHREN EINLÖSEN, DENN ES HEISST: nach der Zahl der Jahre des Ertrages soll er es dir verkaufen. WAR DARUNTER EIN JAHR DES KORNBRANDES, DES ROSTES ODER EIN SIEBENTJAHR, SO ZÄHLT ES NICHT MIT; HAT ER ES NUR AUFGERODET ODER BRACH LIEGEN LASSEN, SO ZÄHLT ES MIT. R. ELIE͑ZER SAGTE: HAT ER ES IHM VOR NEUJAHR VOLL MIT FRUCHT VERKAUFT, SO GENIESST ER DAVON DREI ERNTEN IN ZWEI JAHREN.",
+ "WENN ER ES AN EINEN FÜR EINE MINE, UND IMESER ES AN EINEN ANDEREN FÜR ZWEIHUNDERT ZUZ VERKAUFT HAT, SO HAT ER NUR MIT DEM ERSTEN ABZURECHNEN, DENN ES HEISST:mit dem Manne, an den er es verkauft hat. WENN ER ES AN EINEN FÜR ZWEIHUNDERT ZUZ, UND DIESER ES AN EINEN ANDEREN FÜR EINE MINE VERKAUFT HAT, SO HAT ER NUR MIT DEM ANDEREN ABZURECHNEN, DENN ES HEISST:er rechne die Jahre seit seinem Verkaufe ab und gebe den Überschuß zurück dem Manne, DEM MANNE, DER ES IM BESITZ HATTE. MAN DARF NICHT EIN ENTFERNTES VERKAUFEN UND EIN NAHES EINLÖSEN, EIN SCHLECHTES VERKAUFEN UND EIN GUTES EINLÖSEN, AUCH NICHT BORGEN UND EINLÖSEN, NOCH IN HÄLFTEN EINLÖSEN; BEIM HEILIGEN IST DIES ALLES ERLAUBT. HIERBEI IST ES BEI PROFANEM STRENGER ALS BEIM HEILIGEN.",
+ "WER EIN HAUS (VON HÄUSERN) IN EINER UMMAUERTEN STADTVERKAUFT HAT, KANN ES SOFORT EINLÖSEN UND KANN ES INNERHALB ZWÖLF MONATEN EINLÖSEN; DIES IST EINE ART WUCHERUND DOCH KEIN WUCHER. STIRBT DER VERKÄUFER, SO KANN SEIN SOHN ES EINLÖSEN; STIRBT DER KÄUFER, SO KANN ER ES VON SEINEM SOHNE EINLÖSEN. MAN RECHNE DAS JAHR NUR VON DER STUNDE AN, WO ER ES VERKAUFT HAT, DENN ES HEISST: bis ihm ein Jahr voll ist, UND WENN ES NOCH ganzes HEISST, SO SCHLIESST DIES AUCH DEN SCHALTMONAT EIN. RABBI SAGT, MAN BERECHNE IHM DAS JAHR MIT DEM ÜBERSCHUSSE.",
+ "WENN DER LETZTE TAG DER ZWÖLF MONATE HERANREICHT UND ES NICHT EINGELÖST WIRD, SO VERFÄLLT ES IHM, EINERLEI OB GEKAUFT ODER ALS GESCHENK ERHALTEN, DENN ES HEISST: für immer. FRÜHER KAM ES VOR, DASS ER SICH AM LETZTEN TAGE DER ZWÖLF MONATE VERBORGEN HIELT, DAMIT DAS HAUS IHM VERFALLE, DA ORDNETE HILLEL DER ÄLTERE AN, DASS DER VERKÄUFER DAS GELD IN DER KAMMEREINZAHLE, DIE TÜR EINBRECUE UND HINEINGEHE, UND JENER KANN DANN ZU JEDER IHM BELIEBIGEN ZEIT KOMMEN UND SEIN GELD IN EMPFANG NEHMEN.",
+ "ALLES, WAS SICH INNERHALB DER MAUER BEFINDET, GLEICHT DEN HÄUSERN DER UMMAUERTEN STADT, AUSGENOMMEN DIE FELDER; R. MEÍR SAGT, AUCH DIE FELDER. EIN IN DER MAUER EINGEBAUTES HAUS GLEICHT, WIE R. JEHUDA SAGT, NICHT DEN HÄUSERN EINER UMMAUERTEN STADT; R. ŠIMO͑N SAGT, DIE ÄUSSERE WAND SEI SEINE UMRINGENDE MAUER.",
+ "EINE STADT, BEI DER DIE HAUSDÄCHER IHRE MAUERBILDEN, UND DIE NICHT IN DEN TAGEN JEHOŠUA͑S, DES SOHNES NUNS, MIT EINER MAUER UMGEBEN WAR, GILT NICHT ALS UMMAUERTE STADT, ALS HÄUSER EINER UMMAUERTEN STADT GELTEN SIE, WENN DIESE DREI HÖFE MIT JE ZWEI HÄUSERN HAT, UND IN DEN TAGEN JEHOŠUA͑S, DES SOHNES NUNS, MIT EINER MAUER UMGEBEN WAR, BEISPIELSWEISE DAS ALTE QAÇRABEI SEPPHORIS, ḤAQRA BEI GUŠ ḤALAB, DAS ALTE JOTAPATA, GAMLA, GEDUD, ḤADID, ONO, JERUŠALEM UND IHRESGLEICHEN.",
+ "DEN HÄUSERN IN DEN FLECKENGEWÄHRE MAN DIE VORRECHTE DER HÄUSER EINER UMMAUERTEN STADT UND DIE VORRECHTE DER FELDER; SIE KÖNNEN SOFORT EINGELÖST WERDEN UND DIE GANZEN ZWÖLF MONATE, WIE HÄUSER, UND SIE KEHREN ZURÜCK IM JOBEL ODER NACH ABZUGDES NUTZUNGSGELDES, WIE FELDER. FOLGENDE SIND HÄUSER IN EINEM FLECKEN: ZWEI HÖFE MIT JE ZWEI HÄUSERN; AUCH WENN SIE IN DEN TAGEN JEHOŠUA͑S, DES SOHNES NUNS, MIT EINER MAUER UMGEBEN WAREN, GELTEN SIE ALS HÄUSER IN EINEM FLECKEN.",
+ "WENN EIN JISRAÉLIT DEN VATER SEINER MUTTER, EINEN LEVITEN, BEERBT, SO KANN ER NICHT AUF DIESE WEISE EINLÖSEN. EBENSO KANN EIN LEVITE, DER DEN VATER SEINER MUTTER, EINEN JISRAÉLITEN, BEERBT, NICHT AUF DIESE WEISE EINLÖSEN, DENN ES HEISST:denn die Häuser in den Städten der Leviten sind ihr Besitztum, NUR WENN ER LEVITE IST UND IN STÄDTEN DER LEVITEN — SO RABBI. DIE WEISEN SAGEN, DIESE WORTE GELTEN NUR VON DEN STÄDTEN DER LEVITEN. MAN DARF NICHT EIN FELD ZUR TRIFTODER EINE TRIFT ZUM FELDE MACHEN, NICHT EINE TRIFT ZUR STADT ODER EINE STADT ZUR TRIFT. R. ELEA͑ZAR SAGTE: DIES GILT NUR VON DEN STÄDTEN DER LEVITEN, BEI STÄDTEN VON JISRAÉLITEN ABER DARF MAN EIN FELD ZUR TRIFT MACHEN, NICHT ABER EINE TRIFT ZUM FELDE, EINE TRIFT ZUR STADT, NICHT ABER EINE STADT ZUR TRIFT, UM NICHT DIE STÄDTE JISRAÉLS ZU ZERSTÖREN. PRIESTER UND LEVITEN DÜRFEN EWIG VERKAUFEN UND EWIG EINLÖSEN, DENN ES HEISST: ewiges Einlösungsrecht sei den Leviten."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/English/William Davidson Edition - English.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/English/William Davidson Edition - English.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ea62da1811ebc29522a6cb552b789e66bb3e6755
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/English/William Davidson Edition - English.json
@@ -0,0 +1,95 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Arakhin",
+ "versionSource": "https://korenpub.com/collections/the-noe-edition-koren-talmud-bavli-1",
+ "versionTitle": "William Davidson Edition - English",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 2.0,
+ "license": "CC-BY-NC",
+ "versionNotes": "English from The William Davidson digital edition of the Koren Noé Talmud, with commentary by Rabbi Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz",
+ "shortVersionTitle": "Koren - Steinsaltz",
+ "actualLanguage": "en",
+ "languageFamilyName": "english",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה ערכין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "Everyone takes vows of valuation and is thereby obligated to donate to the Temple treasury the value fixed by the Torah (see Leviticus 27:3–7) for the age and sex of the person valuated. And similarly, everyone is valuated, and therefore one who vowed to donate his fixed value is obligated to pay. Likewise, everyone vows to donate to the Temple treasury the assessment of a person, based on his market value to be sold as a slave, and is thereby obligated to pay; and everyone is the object of a vow if others vowed to donate his assessment. This includes priests, Levites and Israelites, women, and Canaanite slaves. A tumtum, whose sexual organs are concealed, and a hermaphrodite [androginos], vow, and are the object of a vow, and take vows of valuation, but they are not valuated. Consequently, if one says, with regard to a tumtum: The valuation of so-and-so is incumbent upon me to donate to the Temple treasury, he is not obligated to pay anything, as only a definite male or a definite female are valuated. A deaf-mute, an imbecile, and a minor are the object of a vow and are valuated, but neither vow to donate the assessment of a person nor take a vow of valuation, because they lack the presumed mental competence to make a commitment. A child less than one month old is the object of a vow if others vowed to donate his assessment, but is not valuated if one vowed to donate his fixed value, as the Torah did not establish a value for anyone less than a month old.",
+ "With regard to a gentile, Rabbi Meir says: He is valuated in a case where a Jew says: It is incumbent upon me to donate the fixed value of this gentile. But a gentile does not take a vow of valuation to donate his fixed value or the value of others. Rabbi Yehuda says: He takes a vow of valuation, but is not valuated. And both this tanna, Rabbi Meir, and that tanna, Rabbi Yehuda, agree that gentiles vow to donate the assessment of another and are the object of vows, whereby one donates the assessment of a gentile.",
+ "One who is moribund and one who is taken to be executed after being sentenced by the court is neither the object of a vow nor valuated. Rabbi Ḥanina ben Akavya says: He is not the object of a vow, because he has no market value; but he is valuated, due to the fact that one’s value is fixed by the Torah based on age and sex. Rabbi Yosei says: One with that status vows to donate the assessment of another person to the Temple treasury, and takes vows of valuation, and consecrates his property; and if he damages the property of others, he is liable to pay compensation.",
+ "In the case of a pregnant woman who is taken by the court to be executed, the court does not wait to execute her until she gives birth. Rather, she is killed immediately. But with regard to a woman taken to be executed who sat on the travailing chair [hamashber] in the throes of labor, the court waits to execute her until she gives birth. In the case of a woman who was killed through court-imposed capital punishment, one may derive benefit from her hair. But in the case of an animal that was killed through court-imposed execution, e.g., for goring a person, deriving benefit from the animal is prohibited."
+ ],
+ [
+ "One cannot be charged for a valuation less than a sela, nor can one be charged more than fifty sela. How so? If one gave one sela and became wealthy, he is not required to give anything more, as he has fulfilled his obligation. If he gave less than a sela and became wealthy, he is required to give fifty sela, as he has not fulfilled his obligation. If there were five sela in the possession of the destitute person, and the valuation he undertook is more than five sela, how much should he pay? Rabbi Meir says: He gives only one sela and thereby fulfills his obligation. And the Rabbis say: He gives all five. One cannot be charged for a valuation less than a sela; nor can one be charged more than fifty sela. If a woman experienced a discharge of blood and is unsure whether it was during her days of menstruation or during the eleven days that would render her a zava, the alleviation of her state of uncertainty does not occur in fewer than seven clean days, nor in more than seventeen clean days, depending on the number of days that she experiences the discharge. There are symptoms of leprosy that a priest will immediately confirm to be ritually pure or ritually impure, and there are others for which the priest quarantines the leper in order to determine his status. With regard to leprous marks, there is no quarantine that is less than one week and none greater than three weeks.",
+ "No fewer than four full thirty-day months may be established during the course of a year, and it did not seem appropriate to establish more than eight. The two loaves that are brought to the Temple on Shavuot are eaten by the priests not before the second and not after the third day from when they were baked. The shewbread is eaten not before the ninth day from when it was baked, which is the situation in a regular week when the bread is baked on Friday and eaten on the following Shabbat; and not after the eleventh day, when the two Festival days of Rosh HaShana occur on Thursday and Friday, as the shewbread is baked on Wednesday and not eaten until the following Shabbat. A minor boy is not circumcised before the eighth day after his birth and not after the twelfth day. Normally a newborn is circumcised on his eighth day. If he was born during twilight, which an uncertain period of day or night, he is circumcised on what would be the eighth day of his birth if he is was born at night, which is the ninth day if he was born during the day. If he was born during twilight on Shabbat eve, the circumcision cannot be performed on Friday, as he might have been born on Shabbat and therefore Friday is only the seventh day. And the circumcision cannot be on Shabbat, as perhaps he was born on Friday and only circumcision performed on the eighth day overrides Shabbat. Therefore, it is postponed until after Shabbat. If two days of Rosh HaShana occur on Sunday and Monday, the circumcision is postponed until Tuesday, the twelfth day after birth.",
+ "No fewer than twenty-one trumpet blasts are sounded daily in the Temple, as each day three blasts were sounded for the opening of the gates in the morning, nine for the daily morning offering, and nine for the daily afternoon offering, totaling twenty-one. And no more than forty-eight are ever sounded on a single day. This would occur on the Friday of Sukkot, when they would sound an additional twelve blasts during the ritual of drawing the water for the water libation; nine for the additional offerings; three to signal the population to cease their work before Shabbat; and three more to mark the beginning of Shabbat. When accompanying their song with instruments, the Levites do not use fewer than two lyres and do not use more than six. When flutes are played, they do not use fewer than two flutes and do not use more than twelve. And there are twelve days during the year when the flute plays before the altar: At the time of the slaughter of the first Paschal offering, on the fourteenth of Nisan; and at the time of the slaughter of the second Paschal offering, on the fourteenth of Iyyar; and on the first festival day of Passover; and on the festival of Shavuot; and on all eight days of the festival of Sukkot. And one would not play with a copper flute; rather, one would play with a flute of reed, because its sound is more pleasant. And one would conclude the music only with a single flute, because it concludes the music nicely.",
+ "The Temple musicians were slaves of priests; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yosei says: The musicians were not slaves, but Israelites from the family of the house of Pegarim and the family of the house of Tzippara from the city of Emaum, and their lineage was sufficiently pure that they would marry their daughters to members of the priesthood. Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus says: They were Levites.",
+ "One maintains no fewer than six lambs that have been inspected for blemishes in the Chamber of the Lambs, which are sufficient for the offerings of Shabbat and for the two Festival days of Rosh HaShana that may occur adjacent to it. And one may add inspected lambs up to an infinite number. One plays no fewer than two trumpets and no fewer than nine harps in the Temple, and one may add up to an infinite number. And the cymbal was played alone, and none may be added to it.",
+ "In the Temple, there are no fewer than twelve Levites standing on the platform adjacent to the altar and singing, and one may add Levites on the platform up to an infinite number. A minor Levite may enter the Temple courtyard for service only at a time when the Levites are engaging in song, so that he may accompany them. And minors would not engage in playing a lyre and in playing a harp; rather, they would engage in singing with the mouth, in order to provide flavor to the music with their pure, high voices. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: Minors are not tallied in the minimum total of twelve Levites, and they do not ascend to the platform; rather, they would stand on the ground and their heads would reach to between the legs of the Levites, and they were called cadets [tzoarei] of the Levites."
+ ],
+ [
+ "There are halakhot with regard to valuations that are lenient and others that are stringent; and there are halakhot with regard to an ancestral field that are lenient and others that are stringent; and there are halakhot with regard to a forewarned ox that killed a Canaanite slave that are lenient and others that are stringent; and there are halakhot with regard to a rapist, and a seducer, and a defamer that are lenient and others that are stringent. There are halakhot with regard to valuations that are lenient and others that are stringent; how so? Both in the case of one who took a vow of valuation to donate the fixed value of the most attractive among the Jewish people and in the case of one who took a vow of valuation to donate the fixed value of the most unsightly among the Jewish people, he gives the fixed payment of fifty sela, shekels, to the Temple treasury (see Leviticus 27:3). And if one said: It is incumbent upon me to donate the assessment of another to the Temple treasury, he gives the price for that person if sold as a slave, a sum that can be more or less than fifty shekels.",
+ "There are halakhot with regard to an ancestral field that are lenient and others that are stringent. How so? Both one who consecrates an ancestral field in the low-quality sands of the areas surrounding the city and one who consecrates the high-quality orchards of Sebastia gives a redemption payment of fifty silver shekels for every area that he consecrated that is fit for sowing a kor of barley (Leviticus 27:16). And with regard to a purchased field that one consecrates, he gives its value as redemption, a sum that can be more or less than fifty shekels for every area required for sowing one kor of barley. Rabbi Eliezer says: With regard to both a purchased field and an ancestral field, one gives a redemption payment of fifty silver shekels for every area required for sowing a kor of barley that he consecrated. What, then, is the difference between an ancestral field and a purchased field? The difference is that in the case of an ancestral field one gives an additional payment of one-fifth, but in the case of a purchased field one does not give an additional payment of one-fifth.",
+ "There are halakhot with regard to a forewarned ox that killed a Canaanite slave that are lenient and others that are stringent; how so? Both in the case of an ox that killed the most attractive among the slaves, whose value is great, and likewise in the case of one that killed the most unsightly among the slaves, whose value is minimal, its owner gives payment of thirty sela, the fine stated in the Torah (Exodus 21:32), to the owner of the slave. If the ox killed a freeman, its owner gives his price as payment to his heirs. This sum can be more or less than thirty shekels. If the ox injured this slave or that freeman, he gives payment of the full cost of the damage as compensation.",
+ "There are halakhot with regard to a rapist and with regard to a seducer that are lenient and others that are stringent; how so? Both one who raped or seduced a young woman who is the most prominent in the priesthood and one who raped or seduced a young woman who is the lowliest among the Israelites gives the payment of fifty sela, the fine stated in the Torah (see Deuteronomy 22:29). And the payments for humiliation and for degradation resulting from being raped or seduced are assessed differentially; it is all based on the one who humiliates and the one who is humiliated.",
+ "There are halakhot with regard to a defamer, who falsely claims that his bride was not a virgin, that are lenient and others that are stringent. How so? Both one who defamed a young woman who is the most prominent in the priesthood and one who defamed a young woman who is the lowliest among the Israelites gives payment of one hundred sela, the fine stated in the Torah (Deuteronomy 22:19). Based on the relative scope of the fines, with the defamer paying twice the sum of the rapist and the seducer, it is apparent that one who utters malicious speech with his mouth is a more severe transgressor than one who performs an action. And this is corroborated, as we found that the sentence imposed on our ancestors in the wilderness was sealed only due to the malicious speech disseminated by the spies, as it is stated at that time: “All those men that have seen My glory, and My signs, which I wrought in Egypt and in the wilderness, yet they have tried Me these ten times and have not listened to My voice” (Numbers 14:22)."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Affordability, which is written in the Torah: “According to the means of him who vowed shall the priest valuate him” (Leviticus 27:8), is determined in accordance with the means of the one taking the vow, and the sum fixed by the Torah based on the years of age is in accordance with the age of the subject of the vow. And the distinction based on sex that is written in the halakhot of valuations is stated with regard to the one valuated, and the different valuation based on the age of the one valuated is determined at the time one takes the vow of valuation. The mishna elaborates: Affordability is in accordance with the means of the one taking the vow; how so? A destitute person who valuated a wealthy person gives the valuation in accordance with the means of a destitute person, as determined by the priest. And a wealthy person who valuated a destitute person gives the valuation in accordance with the means of a wealthy person, the sum of which is fixed in the Torah.",
+ "But with regard to offerings that is not so, as one who took a vow and said: It is incumbent upon me to provide the offering of this leper, to a leper who requires it for his purification; if the one undergoing purification was a destitute leper, the one who took the vow brings the offering of a destitute leper, which is one male sheep, a tenth of an ephah of fine flour, and two doves or two pigeons (see Leviticus 14:21–22). If the one undergoing purification was a wealthy leper, the one who took the vow brings the offering of a wealthy leper, which is two male sheep, a ewe, and three-tenths of a ephah of fine flour (see Leviticus 14:10). Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: I say: Even with regard to valuations it is so. He explains: For what reason does a destitute person who valuated a wealthy person give the valuation in accordance with the means of a destitute person? It is due to the fact that the wealthy person is not obligated to pay anything, as the debt was generated by the destitute person who vowed to donate the valuation of a wealthy individual. But in a case similar to that of the offerings of a leper, in the case of a wealthy person who said: It is incumbent upon me to donate my valuation, and a destitute person heard him and said: It is incumbent upon me to donate that which he said, the destitute person gives the valuation of a wealthy person. If when one took a vow of valuation he was destitute and he became wealthy, or if he was wealthy and became destitute, he gives the valuation in accordance with the means of a wealthy person. Rabbi Yehuda says: This is the halakha not only in a case where one was wealthy either at the time he took the vow or at the time of payment; even if when one took a vow of valuation he was destitute and he became wealthy and again became destitute, he gives the valuation in accordance with the means of a wealthy person.",
+ "But with regard to the offerings of a leper that is not so, as the offerings that one brings are determined by his status at the time he brings them. Even if it is common knowledge that his father died and left him an inheritance of ten thousand dinars, or that his ship is at sea and merchandise valued at ten thousand dinars is coming into his possession, the Temple treasury has no share in it. His payment is determined solely by his present situation.",
+ "The sum fixed by the Torah based on the years of age is in accordance with the age of the subject of the vow; how so? A youth who valuated an elder gives the valuation of an elder, and an elder who valuated a youth gives the valuation of a youth. And the distinction based on sex that is written in the halakhot of valuations is stated with regard to the one valuated; how so? A man who valuated a woman gives the valuation of a woman, and a woman who valuated a man gives the valuation of a man. And the different valuation based on the age of the one valuated is determined at the time one takes the vow of valuation; how so? If one valuated another when he was less than five years old, when his valuation is five shekels, and before payment to the Temple treasury the subject of the vow became more than five years old, when his valuation is ten shekels; or if one valuated another when he was less than twenty years old, when his valuation is ten shekels, and before payment to the Temple treasury the subject of the vow became more than twenty years old, when his valuation is fifty shekels, in all these cases he gives payment according to the age of the subject of the valuation at the time of the valuation. The Torah provides three age categories that determine the amount of the valuation: From the age of one month until age five, from age five until age twenty, and from age twenty until age sixty. For anyone less than one month old there is no valuation. The halakhic status of the thirtieth day is like that of the period preceding thirty days, and therefore the one who took the vow is exempt. Likewise, the halakhic status of the fifth year and the twentieth year is like that of the period preceding them. As it is stated: “And if it is from sixty years old and upward” (Leviticus 27:7), and we derive all the other age categories from the sixtieth year: Just as the halakhic status of the sixtieth year, where upward is written, is like that of the period preceding it, so too, the halakhic status of the fifth year and the twentieth year is like that of the period preceding them. The mishna asks: Is that so? Can one derive a halakha in this manner? If the Torah rendered the halakhic status of the sixtieth year like that of the period preceding it in order to be stringent and require one who valuated a sixty-year-old person to pay his valuation to the Temple treasury, shall we render the halakhic status of the fifth year and the twentieth year like that of the period preceding them in order to be lenient and pay a lower sum? Therefore, the verse states “year” with regard to the fifth and twentieth years (see Leviticus 27:3–6), and “year” with regard to the sixtieth year (Leviticus 27:7), for a verbal analogy. Just as the halakhic status of the year stated with regard to the sixtieth year is like that of the period preceding it, so too, the halakhic status of the year stated with regard to the fifth year and the twentieth year is like that of the period preceding them, both in order to be lenient and in order to be stringent. Rabbi Eliezer says: Their halakhic status remains like that of the period preceding it, until they will be aged one month and one day beyond the fifth, twentieth, and sixtieth years."
+ ],
+ [
+ "One who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate my weight, gives his weight to the Temple treasury; if he specified silver he donates silver, and if he specified gold he donates gold. There was an incident involving the mother of Yirmatya, who said: It is incumbent upon me to donate the weight of my daughter, and she ascended to Jerusalem and paid her daughter’s weight in gold to the Temple treasury. In the case of one who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate the weight of my forearm, how does he ascertain the weight of his forearm? Rabbi Yehuda says: He fills a barrel with water and inserts his arm up to his elbow into the water. And in order to measure the displacement, he weighs donkey flesh, and bones, and sinews and places it into the barrel until it fills, and the water level reaches the top of the barrel. He then donates the weight of the meat and the bones to the Temple treasury. Rabbi Yosei said: Displacement is according to volume not according to weight, and how then is it possible to match the amount of the donkey flesh with the flesh of a person and the volume of the donkey’s bones with his bones? Rather, the court appraises how much the forearm is likely to weigh.",
+ "If one vows: It is incumbent upon me to donate the assessment of my forearm, the court appraises him to determine how much he is worth with a forearm and how much he is worth without a forearm, and he pays the difference. This is a halakha that is more stringent with regard to vows of assessment than with regard to valuations, as one who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate the valuation of my forearm, is exempt from paying. There are halakhot that are more stringent with regard to valuations than with regard to vows of assessment. How so? In the case of one who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate my valuation, and then dies, his heirs must give his valuation to the Temple treasury. But one who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate my assessment, and then dies, his heirs need not give his assessment to the Temple treasury, as there is no monetary value for the dead. One who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate the valuation of my forearm, or: The valuation of my leg, has not said anything, as there are valuations in the Torah only for a complete person. But if one says: It is incumbent upon me to donate the valuation of my head, or: The valuation of my liver, he gives the valuation of his entire self. This is the principle: One who valuates an item upon which the soul is dependent, i.e., without which one will die, gives the valuation of his entire self.",
+ "One who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate half of my valuation, gives half of his valuation. But one who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate the valuation of half of me, gives the valuation of his entire self. Likewise, one who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate half of my assessment, gives half of his assessment; one who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate the assessment of half of me, gives the assessment of his entire self. This is the principle: One who takes a vow with regard to an item upon which the soul is dependent gives the assessment of his entire self.",
+ "With regard to one who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate the valuation of so-and-so, and both the one who vowed and the object of the vow die, the heirs of the one who vowed must give the valuation of the object of the vow to the Temple treasury. With regard to one who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate the assessment of so-and-so, and the one who vowed dies, his heirs must give his assessment to the Temple treasury. If the object of the vow dies, the heirs of the one who vowed need not give his assessment to the Temple treasury, as there is no monetary value for the dead.",
+ "In the case of one who says: This bull is consecrated as a burnt offering, or: This house is consecrated as an offering, and the bull died or the house collapsed, he is exempt from paying his commitment. But in the case of one who says: It is incumbent upon me to give this bull as a burnt offering, or: It is incumbent upon me to give this house as an offering, if the bull died or the house collapsed, he is obligated to pay its value.",
+ "With regard to those obligated to pay valuations, the court repossesses their property to pay their debt to the Temple treasury. With regard to those obligated to bring sin offerings and guilt offerings, the court does not repossess their property; since one is obligated to bring them for atonement he would not delay bringing them. But with regard to those obligated to bring burnt offerings and peace offerings, the court repossesses their property;since these offerings are not obligatory for atonement, one might delay bringing them. Although one obligated to bring burnt offerings and peace offerings does not achieve atonement until he brings the offering of his own volition, as it is stated: “He shall bring it to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting of his volition” (Leviticus 1:3), nevertheless the court coerces him until he says: I want to do so. And likewise, you say the same with regard to women’s bills of divorce. Although one divorces his wife only of his own volition, in any case where the Sages obligated a husband to divorce his wife the court coerces him until he says: I want to do so."
+ ],
+ [
+ "One proclaims, i.e., publicly announces, the appraisal of the property inherited by minor orphans, which is being sold to repay their father’s debt, for thirty days, in order to receive the maximal price. And one proclaims the appraisal of consecrated property that is being sold by the Temple treasury for sixty days, and one proclaims it in the morning and in the evening. In the case of one who consecrates his property and there was the outstanding debt of the marriage contract of his wife, for whose repayment one’s property is liened, Rabbi Eliezer says: When he divorces her, he shall vow that benefit from her is forbidden to him. This is to prevent collusion, by which he divorces her, she collects payment from the consecrated property, and he then remarries her. Rabbi Yehoshua says: He need not do so. On a similar note, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: Even in the case of the guarantor of a woman for her marriage contract, and her husband was divorcing her and could not pay the debt, the husband shall vow that benefit from her is forbidden to him, lest he and his wife engage in collusion [kinunya] and collect payment from the property of that guarantor, and then the husband will remarry his wife.",
+ "In the case of one who consecrates his property and there was an outstanding debt of the marriage contract of his wife and of a creditor, the woman may not collect the payment of her marriage contract from the Temple treasury, nor may the creditor collect his debt. Rather, the one who redeems the property redeems it for a cheap price in order to give the woman her marriage contract payment and the creditor his debt. For example, if one consecrated property worth nine thousand dinars and his debt was ten thousand dinars, leaving no property for redemption, the creditor lends an additional dinar to the debtor and the debtor redeems the property with that dinar, in order to give the woman her marriage contract payment and the creditor his debt.",
+ "Although the Sages said (21a): With regard to those obligated to pay valuations, the court repossesses their property to pay their debt to the Temple treasury; nevertheless, the treasurer gives him permission to keep food sufficient for thirty days, and garments sufficient for twelve months, and a bed made with linens, and his sandals, and his phylacteries. The treasurer leaves these items for him, but he does not leave items for his wife or for his children. If the one obligated to pay was a craftsman, the treasurer gives him permission to keep two tools of his craft of each and every type, e.g., for a carpenter, the treasurer gives him permission to keep two adzes [matzadin] and two saws. Rabbi Eliezer says: If he was a farmer, the treasurer gives him permission to keep his pair of oxen with which he plows the field. If he was a donkey driver, the treasurer gives him permission to keep his donkey.",
+ "If one had many tools of one type and few tools of one other type, e.g., three adzes and one saw, he may not say to the treasurer to sell one tool of the type of which he has many and to purchase for him one tool of the type of which he has few. Rather, the treasurer gives him two tools of the type of which he has many and he retains whatever he has of the type of which he has few. In contrast to one whose property is repossessed to pay valuations, from one who consecrates all his property, the treasurer takes his phylacteries, as they are included in the category of all his property.",
+ "Both in the case of one who consecrates his property and the case of one who valuates himself, when the Temple treasurer repossesses his property he has the right to repossess neither the garment of his wife nor the garment of his children, nor the dyed garments that he dyed for their sake, even if they have yet to wear them, nor the new sandals that he purchased for their sake. Although the merchants said: Slaves are sold in their garments for profit, as if a fine garment worth thirty dinars would be purchased for him, his sale price appreciates by one hundred dinars; and likewise with regard to a cow, if one waits to sell it until the market [la’itlis] day, when demand is high, its sale price appreciates; and likewise with regard to a pearl, if one brings it to sell it in the city, where demand is high, its sale price appreciates; nevertheless, one does not make such a calculation in this case. Rather, the Temple treasury has the right to collect the item based only on its current location and its price at the present time."
+ ],
+ [
+ "One may neither consecrate an ancestral field, i.e., a field that he inherited, less than two years before the Jubilee Year, nor may one redeem such a field less than one year after the Jubilee Year. When redeeming an ancestral field that has been consecrated, the sum paid to redeem the field is calculated based on the number of years remaining until the Jubilee Year. When performing this calculation, one does not count months of a partial year in order to lower the price to be paid to the Temple treasury; rather, he pays for the entire year. But the Temple treasury may count months in order to raise the price of redemption, as will be explained. In the case of one who consecrates his ancestral field during a period when the Jubilee Year is observed and wishes to redeem it, he gives the Temple treasury fifty sela, a talmudic measure referred to in the Bible as silver shekels, for an area required for sowing a ḥomer, a measure known in talmudic terminology as one kor, of barley seed (see Leviticus 27:16). If there were crevices [neka’im] ten handbreadths deep in the field, or if there were boulders ten handbreadths high, then when calculating the redemption price those areas are not measured with the rest of the field. But if the depth of the crevices, or the height of the boulders, was less than that amount, they are measured with the rest of the field. If he consecrated the field two or three years before the Jubilee Year and wishes to redeem it, he gives the Temple treasury a sela and a pundeyon, a pundeyon being one forty-eighth of a sela, per year remaining until the Jubilee Year. And if he said: I will give the payment for each year during that year, one does not listen to him; rather, he must give the entire sum in one payment. ",
+ "This is the halakha both with regard to a case where the owner redeems the field and a case where any other person redeems the field. What then is the difference between redemption by the owner and redemption by any other person? It is only that the owner gives an extra one-fifth in addition to the payment, and any other person who redeems the field does not give the additional one-fifth. ",
+ "If one consecrated his ancestral field and then redeemed it himself, it is not removed from his possession to be divided among the priests during the Jubilee Year. If his son redeemed it, the field is removed from the son’s possession and returns to his father during the Jubilee Year. But if another person or one of his other relatives redeemed the field and the owner subsequently redeemed it from his possession, the field is removed from the owner’s possession and given to the priests during the Jubilee Year. If one of the priests redeemed the field and when the Jubilee arrived it was in his possession, he may not say: Since it is removed from the possession of the one who redeemed it and given to the priests during the Jubilee Year, and since it is already in my possession, it is mine. Rather, the field is removed from his possession and is divided among all his brethren, the priests. ",
+ "If one consecrated his ancestral field and the Jubilee Year arrived and it was not redeemed by the owner or anyone else, the priests enter into the field and give its redemption payment to the Temple treasury; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Shimon says: They enter into the field, but they do not give its redemption payment to the Temple treasury.Rabbi Eliezer says: The priests do not enter into the field, and they also do not give its redemption payment to the Temple treasury. Rather, the field remains in the possession of the Temple treasury, and it is called: An abandoned field, until the second Jubilee Year. If the second Jubilee arrived and it was still not redeemed, it is called: An abandoned field from among the abandoned fields, meaning one that was abandoned twice, until the third Jubilee. In any case, the priests never enter into a consecrated field during the Jubilee Year until another person redeems it first. ",
+ "One who purchases an ancestral field from his father, and his father subsequently died and afterward the son consecrated it, its halakhic status is like that of an ancestral field, as he inherited his father’s ancestral rights prior to the consecration. Consequently, the field’s redemption price is calculated on the basis of fifty sela per beit kor, and if another redeems it instead of the son, it is given to the priests during the Jubilee Year. But if the son consecrated the field and afterward his father died, its halakhic status is like that of a purchased field, whose redemption price is based on its monetary value, and which will return to the ancestral owner, i.e., the son, at the Jubilee; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon say: Even in a case where the son consecrated the field before his father died, its halakhic status is like that of an ancestral field, as it is stated with regard to a purchased field: “And if he will consecrate unto the Lord a field that he has bought, which is not of his ancestral field” (Leviticus 27:22), indicating that this halakha applies only to a field that is not due to become his ancestral field, thereby excluding this field, which at the time of consecration is due to become his ancestral field in the future, when his father dies. The mishna continues: A purchased field that was consecrated is not removed from the possession of the Temple treasury and given to the priests during the Jubilee Year, as the purchase of the land was valid only until the Jubilee, at which point fields return to their ancestral owners, and a person cannot consecrate an item that is not his. The priests and the Levites may always consecrate their ancestral fields and may always redeem their ancestral fields, both before the Jubilee Year and after the Jubilee Year."
+ ],
+ [
+ "In the case of one who consecrates his ancestral field during a period when the Jubilee Year is not observed, and therefore the field is not redeemed according to a fixed rate of fifty shekels per beit kor but according to its value, when the treasurer announces the sale of the field he says to the owner: You open the bidding first; how much do you offer for its redemption? This method is advantageous for the Temple treasury, as the owner gives an additional payment of one-fifth of the value of the field, and every other person does not give an additional one-fifth payment. There was an incident involving one who consecrated his field due to its inferior quality. The treasurers said to him: You open the bidding first. He said: It is hereby mine for an issar, a small sum. Rabbi Yosei says: That person did not say he would purchase it for an issar; rather, he said he would purchase it for an egg, as consecrated items may be redeemed with money or with the equivalent value of money. The treasurer said to him: The field has come into your possession based on your bid. As a result, he loses an issar and his field remains before him in his possession.",
+ "If one said: The field is hereby mine for ten sela, and one other person said: It is mine for twenty, and one said for thirty, and one said for forty, and one said for fifty; and then the one who bid fifty reneged on his offer, the treasurer repossesses from his property up to ten sela and the field is redeemed by the one who bid forty. This ensures that the Temple treasury does not lose. If the one who bid forty sela subsequently reneged on his offer, the treasurer repossesses from his property up to ten sela and the field is redeemed by the one who bid thirty. If the one who bid thirty subsequently reneged on his offer, the treasurer repossesses from his property up to ten sela and the field is redeemed by the one who bid twenty. If the one who bid twenty reneged on his offer, the treasurer repossesses from his property up to ten sela and it is redeemed by the one who bid ten. If the one who bid ten reneged on his offer, the treasurer sells the field at its value and collects the remainder from the property of the one who bid ten, to complete the sum of ten sela. If the owner says he will pay twenty sela and any other person says he will pay twenty sela, the offer of the owner takes precedence, due to the fact that he adds one-fifth. ",
+ "If the owner says he will pay twenty sela and one other person said: The field is hereby mine for a payment of twenty-one sela, the owner gives twenty-six sela and takes the field. He pays the twenty that he initially offered; plus five sela, which is one-fifth of the total future sum, i.e., one-quarter of his initial offer. In addition, he adds one sela, the difference between his initial offer and that of the other person, so that the Temple treasury will not receive less than the twenty-one sela offer proposed by the other person. If the owner says he will pay twenty sela and another person said: The field is hereby mine for a payment of twenty-two sela, the owner gives twenty-seven sela and takes the field. If the owner says he will pay twenty sela and another said: The field is hereby mine for a payment of twenty-three sela, the owner gives twenty-eight sela and takes the field. If the owner says he will pay twenty sela and another said: The field is hereby mine for a payment of twenty-four sela, the owner gives twenty-nine sela and takes the field. If the owner says he will pay twenty sela and another said: The field is hereby mine for a payment of twenty-five sela, the owner gives thirty sela, as the owner adds one-fifth only to the amount that he bid, and does not add one-fifth to the addition of that other person. If the owner said he will pay twenty sela and one other person said: The field is hereby mine for a payment of twenty-six sela, if the owner wished to pay thirty-one sela and a dinar the owner takes precedence; and if not, the treasurer says to the other person: The field has come into your possession based on your bid, as it is more than the Temple treasury can compel the owner to pay.",
+ "A person may dedicate, for sacred or priestly use, some of his flock and some of his cattle, and some of his Canaanite slaves and maidservants, and some of his ancestral field. But if he dedicated all that he has of any type of property, they are not dedicated, i.e., the dedication does not take effect; this is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya said: If for the Most High a person may not dedicate all his property, it is all the more so the case that a person should spare his property and not give all of it to others.",
+ "In the case of one who dedicates his son or his daughter, or his Hebrew slave or maidservant, or his purchased field, those items are not considered dedicated, as a person may not dedicate an item that is not his. Priests and Levites may not dedicate their property; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Shimon says: Priests may not dedicate their property, as all dedicated property is theirs; it is one of the priestly gifts, as the verse states: “Everything dedicated in Israel shall be yours” (Numbers 18:14). But Levites may dedicate their property, as dedicated property is not theirs. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: The statement of Rabbi Yehuda appears to be correct with regard to land, as it is stated about the land of the Levites: “But the fields of the open land surrounding their cities may not be sold, as that is their perpetual possession” (Leviticus 25:34), and they cannot renounce that land. And the statement of Rabbi Shimon appears to be correct with regard to movable property, which the Levites may dedicate, as dedicated property is not theirs. It is a gift for the priests, not the Levites.",
+ "Dedications of property for priests, unlike consecrations of property for Temple maintenance, have no redemption; rather, one gives it to the priests, and it is their property in every sense, like teruma. Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: Dedications dedicated without specification of their purpose are designated for Temple maintenance, as it is stated: “Every dedicated item is most sacred to the Lord” (Leviticus 27:28). And the Rabbis say: Dedications dedicated without specification of their purpose are designated for priests, as it is stated with regard to one who consecrated a field and did not redeem it: “As a field dedicated; its possession shall be to the priest” (Leviticus 27:21), indicating that a non-specific dedication belongs to the priest. If so, why is it stated: “Every dedicated item is most sacred to the Lord”? This comes to teach that dedication takes effect on offerings of the most sacred order and offerings of lesser sanctity. If one consecrated an animal for sacrifice and then dedicated it, the dedication takes effect. Nevertheless, it does not take effect on the body of the animal; rather, it applies to the owner’s financial stake in the offering.",
+ "As the Sages delineated: A person may dedicate his sacrificial animals, both offerings of the most sacred order and offerings of lesser sanctity. If the offering he dedicated was the object of a vow, e.g., if he said: It is incumbent upon me to sacrifice a burnt offering, since he is obligated to replace such offerings they are considered his property, and therefore he gives their value to the priests. And if the offering he dedicated was a gift offering, e.g., if he said: This animal is a burnt offering, in which case he is not obligated to replace the animal, he gives the monetary benefit that he has in them. For example, if he said: This bull is a burnt offering, one estimates how much money a person would be willing to give in order to sacrifice the animal as a voluntary burnt offering, even though he is not permitted to do so. With regard to a firstborn animal, whether it is unblemished or whether it is blemished, its owner may dedicate it. And how does one assess the payment required to redeem it? One estimates how much an Israelite person would be willing to give in exchange for that firstborn in order to give it to a priest who is his daughter’s son or to a priest who is his sister’s son. Rabbi Yishmael says: One verse states: “All the firstborn males that are born of your herd and of your flock you shall consecrate to the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 15:19), and one verse states: “However, the firstborn among animals that is born first to the Lord, a man shall not consecrate it” (Leviticus 27:26). It is impossible to say: “You shall consecrate,” as it is already stated: “A man shall not consecrate.” It is likewise impossible to say: “A man shall not consecrate,” as it is already stated: “You shall consecrate.” How, then, can these verses be reconciled? You can consecrate the firstborn animal by a consecration of value, i.e., an individual can donate to the Temple treasury the amount he would be willing to pay for the right to give the firstborn to a specific priest; and you cannot consecrate it by a consecration for the altar, as a firstborn may not be sacrificed for the sake of any other offering."
+ ],
+ [
+ "One who sells his field during a period when the Jubilee Year is in effect is not permitted to redeem it less than two years after the sale, as it is stated: “According to the number of years of the crops he shall sell to you” (Leviticus 25:15). The plural form “years” indicates a minimum of two years. If one of those years was a year of blight or mildew, or if it was the Sabbatical Year, when the buyer is unable to derive benefit from the field, that year does not count as part of the tally, and the owner must wait an additional year before redeeming the field. If the buyer plowed the field but did not sow it, or if he left it fallow, that year counts as part of his tally, as it was fit to produce a crop. Rabbi Eliezer says: If the owner of the field sold it to the buyer before Rosh HaShana and the field was full of produce, and the owner redeems the field after two years, that buyer consumes from the field’s produce three crops in two years. Although he received the field with its crop, he is not required to return it in the same state.",
+ "When the Jubilee Year is in effect, one may sell a field only until the Jubilee Year, at which point the field returns to its original owner. If the owner redeems the field before the Jubilee Year, the payment per annum is calculated by dividing the sale price by the number of years from the sale until the Jubilee Year. The owner returns the per annum payment multiplied by the number of years remaining until the Jubilee Year. If the owner of a field sold it to the first buyer for one hundred dinars and the first buyer then sold it to the second buyer for two hundred dinars, when the original owner redeems the field he calculates the payment only according to the price that he set with the first buyer, as it is stated: “And he calculates the years of its sale, and he returns the remainder to the man to whom he sold it” (Leviticus 25:27). If the owner of a field sold it to the first buyer for two hundred dinars and the first buyer then sold it to the second buyer for one hundred dinars, when the original owner redeems the field, he calculates the payment only according to the price that was paid by the last buyer, as it is stated: “And he calculates the years of its sale, and he returns the remainder to the man to whom he sold it.” The superfluous term “to the man” indicates that the verse is referring to the man who is currently in possession of the field. One may not sell his ancestral field that is located in a distant area and redeem with the proceeds a field that he sold in a nearby area. Likewise, he may not sell a low-quality field and redeem with the proceeds a high-quality field. And he may not borrow money and redeem the field, nor may he redeem the field incrementally, half now and half at a later date. But with regard to redeeming a field from the Temple treasury, it is permitted to redeem the field in any of these ways. This is a halakha where greater stringency applies with regard to redeeming a field from an ordinary individual than with regard to redeeming it from the Temple treasury. ",
+ "One who sells a house from among the houses of walled cities may redeem the house immediately, even without the consent of the buyer, and he may redeem the house during the entire twelve months following the sale, but not after that. When he redeems the house within the twelve-month period, he returns the sale price to the buyer, and this is ostensibly like a form of interest, as the buyer has effectively resided in the house for free in exchange for the fact that the buyer’s money was in the possession of the seller. It is not considered interest, because the buyer owned the house during the period in which he resided in it. If the seller died, his son may redeem the house from the buyer. If the buyer died, the seller may redeem it from the possession of the buyer’s son. If the buyer sold the house to another, one calculates the year only from the time that the owner sold the house to the first buyer, as it is stated: “And if it is not redeemed until the passage of a full year for him, then the house that is in the walled city shall stand in possession of the one who bought it in perpetuity” (Leviticus 25:30). The term “for him” indicates that the year is calculated from when the initial owner sold the house. When it says: “A full year,” this serves to include the intercalated month in the year calculated from the sale, if it was a leap year. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: The word “full” serves to give the seller a year and its addition, i.e., the year during which the house may be redeemed is not the 354-day lunar year, but the 365-day solar year. ",
+ "If the final day of the twelve-month period arrived and the house was not redeemed, the house has become the property of the buyer in perpetuity. This is the halakha with regard to both one who buys a house in a walled city and one to whom it is given as a gift, as it is stated: “Then the house that is in the walled city shall stand in possession of the one who bought it in perpetuity” (Leviticus 25:30). At first, the buyer would conceal himself on the final day of the twelve-month period, in order to ensure that it would become his in perpetuity. Hillel instituted that the seller would place [ḥolesh] his money in the chamber of the court and that he will break the door and enter the house, and when the other individual, i.e., the buyer, will wish to do so, he may come to the chamber and take his money.",
+ "The halakhic status of any area that is located within the city wall is like that of the houses of walled cities in terms of its redemption, except for the fields located therein. Rabbi Meir says: Even the fields are included in this category. With regard to a house that is built in the wall itself, Rabbi Yehuda says: Its halakhic status is not like that of the houses of walled cities. Rabbi Shimon says: The outer wall of the house is considered the city wall, and therefore it has the status of a house in a walled city.",
+ "The halakhic status of a house in a city whose houses are attached and their rooftops constitute the top of its wall, and likewise, the status of a house in a city that is not surrounded by a wall from the era of Joshua, son of Nun, even if a surrounding wall was constructed during a later period, is not like that of the houses of walled cities. And these are the houses of walled cities: Any city in which there are at least three courtyards, each containing two houses, and which is surrounded by a wall from the era of Joshua, son of Nun, e.g., the ancient fort [katzra] of Tzippori, and the fortress [ḥakra] of Gush Ḥalav, and ancient Yodfat, and Gamla, and Gedod, and Ḥadid, and Ono, and Jerusalem, and likewise other similar cities.",
+ "With regard to the houses of the unwalled courtyards mentioned in the Torah (see Leviticus 25:31), i.e., houses in villages that are not surrounded by walls, one accords them the exceptional provisions that apply to houses of walled cities and the exceptional provisions that apply to fields. Therefore, they are redeemed immediately and for the entire twelve months following the sale, like in the sale of houses of walled cities, and not like fields, which may be redeemed only after two years. And they leave the possession of the buyer during the Jubilee Year or with a per annum deduction from the money of the sale price, like the sale of fields. By contrast, houses of walled cities become the possession of the buyer in perpetuity after one year, and if they are redeemed within the year, one pays the full sale price. And these are the houses of the unwalled courtyards whose halakha was taught in the previous mishna: Any city in which there are two courtyards each containing two houses, although it is surrounded by a wall from the era of Joshua, son of Nun, their halakhic status is like that of the houses of the unwalled courtyards.",
+ "An Israelite who inherited a house in a walled city from his mother’s father who was a Levite does not redeem the house in accordance with this procedure delineated in the previous mishnayot; rather, if he sold the inherited house, he may redeem it always, like a Levite. And likewise, a Levite who inherited a house in a walled city from his mother’s father who was an Israelite does not redeem the house in accordance with this procedure delineated in the previous mishnayot. The mishna provides the source for these halakhot: As it is stated: “And if a man purchases from the Levites, the house that was sold in the city of his possession shall go out during the Jubilee Year; as the houses of the cities of the Levites are their possession among the children of Israel” (Leviticus 25:33). The verse indicates that the ability to always redeem the house of a Levite does not apply unless the one selling the house will be a Levite and the house is located in the cities of the Levites. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. And the Rabbis say: These matters are stated only with regard to a house in the cities of the Levites, even if the owner was not a Levite. The Levites received two thousand cubits surrounding their cities, one thousand cubits of empty lots and one thousand cubits for fields and vineyards. One may neither render a field an empty lot nor an empty lot a field. Similarly, one may neither incorporate an empty lot into a city nor render part of a city an empty lot. Rabbi Elazar said: In what case is this statement said? It applies in the cities of the Levites. But in the cities of the Israelites one may render a field an empty lot but not an empty lot a field, and one may incorporate an empty lot into a city but not render part of a city an empty lot, in order to ensure that they will not thereby destroy the cities of Israel. The priests and the Levites may sell their fields and houses always and may redeem them always, as it is stated: “The Levites shall have a perpetual right of redemption” (Leviticus 25:32). Priests are also members of the tribe of Levi."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/English/merged.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/English/merged.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..0d2c9c39cec122efa49eb20222aca10752edcc6f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/English/merged.json
@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
+{
+ "title": "Mishnah Arakhin",
+ "language": "en",
+ "versionTitle": "merged",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org/Mishnah_Arakhin",
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "Everyone takes vows of valuation and is thereby obligated to donate to the Temple treasury the value fixed by the Torah (see Leviticus 27:3–7) for the age and sex of the person valuated. And similarly, everyone is valuated, and therefore one who vowed to donate his fixed value is obligated to pay. Likewise, everyone vows to donate to the Temple treasury the assessment of a person, based on his market value to be sold as a slave, and is thereby obligated to pay; and everyone is the object of a vow if others vowed to donate his assessment. This includes priests, Levites and Israelites, women, and Canaanite slaves. A tumtum, whose sexual organs are concealed, and a hermaphrodite [androginos], vow, and are the object of a vow, and take vows of valuation, but they are not valuated. Consequently, if one says, with regard to a tumtum: The valuation of so-and-so is incumbent upon me to donate to the Temple treasury, he is not obligated to pay anything, as only a definite male or a definite female are valuated. A deaf-mute, an imbecile, and a minor are the object of a vow and are valuated, but neither vow to donate the assessment of a person nor take a vow of valuation, because they lack the presumed mental competence to make a commitment. A child less than one month old is the object of a vow if others vowed to donate his assessment, but is not valuated if one vowed to donate his fixed value, as the Torah did not establish a value for anyone less than a month old.",
+ "With regard to a gentile, Rabbi Meir says: He is valuated in a case where a Jew says: It is incumbent upon me to donate the fixed value of this gentile. But a gentile does not take a vow of valuation to donate his fixed value or the value of others. Rabbi Yehuda says: He takes a vow of valuation, but is not valuated. And both this tanna, Rabbi Meir, and that tanna, Rabbi Yehuda, agree that gentiles vow to donate the assessment of another and are the object of vows, whereby one donates the assessment of a gentile.",
+ "One who is moribund and one who is taken to be executed after being sentenced by the court is neither the object of a vow nor valuated. Rabbi Ḥanina ben Akavya says: He is not the object of a vow, because he has no market value; but he is valuated, due to the fact that one’s value is fixed by the Torah based on age and sex. Rabbi Yosei says: One with that status vows to donate the assessment of another person to the Temple treasury, and takes vows of valuation, and consecrates his property; and if he damages the property of others, he is liable to pay compensation.",
+ "In the case of a pregnant woman who is taken by the court to be executed, the court does not wait to execute her until she gives birth. Rather, she is killed immediately. But with regard to a woman taken to be executed who sat on the travailing chair [hamashber] in the throes of labor, the court waits to execute her until she gives birth. In the case of a woman who was killed through court-imposed capital punishment, one may derive benefit from her hair. But in the case of an animal that was killed through court-imposed execution, e.g., for goring a person, deriving benefit from the animal is prohibited."
+ ],
+ [
+ "One cannot be charged for a valuation less than a sela, nor can one be charged more than fifty sela. How so? If one gave one sela and became wealthy, he is not required to give anything more, as he has fulfilled his obligation. If he gave less than a sela and became wealthy, he is required to give fifty sela, as he has not fulfilled his obligation. If there were five sela in the possession of the destitute person, and the valuation he undertook is more than five sela, how much should he pay? Rabbi Meir says: He gives only one sela and thereby fulfills his obligation. And the Rabbis say: He gives all five. One cannot be charged for a valuation less than a sela; nor can one be charged more than fifty sela. If a woman experienced a discharge of blood and is unsure whether it was during her days of menstruation or during the eleven days that would render her a zava, the alleviation of her state of uncertainty does not occur in fewer than seven clean days, nor in more than seventeen clean days, depending on the number of days that she experiences the discharge. There are symptoms of leprosy that a priest will immediately confirm to be ritually pure or ritually impure, and there are others for which the priest quarantines the leper in order to determine his status. With regard to leprous marks, there is no quarantine that is less than one week and none greater than three weeks.",
+ "No fewer than four full thirty-day months may be established during the course of a year, and it did not seem appropriate to establish more than eight. The two loaves that are brought to the Temple on Shavuot are eaten by the priests not before the second and not after the third day from when they were baked. The shewbread is eaten not before the ninth day from when it was baked, which is the situation in a regular week when the bread is baked on Friday and eaten on the following Shabbat; and not after the eleventh day, when the two Festival days of Rosh HaShana occur on Thursday and Friday, as the shewbread is baked on Wednesday and not eaten until the following Shabbat. A minor boy is not circumcised before the eighth day after his birth and not after the twelfth day. Normally a newborn is circumcised on his eighth day. If he was born during twilight, which an uncertain period of day or night, he is circumcised on what would be the eighth day of his birth if he is was born at night, which is the ninth day if he was born during the day. If he was born during twilight on Shabbat eve, the circumcision cannot be performed on Friday, as he might have been born on Shabbat and therefore Friday is only the seventh day. And the circumcision cannot be on Shabbat, as perhaps he was born on Friday and only circumcision performed on the eighth day overrides Shabbat. Therefore, it is postponed until after Shabbat. If two days of Rosh HaShana occur on Sunday and Monday, the circumcision is postponed until Tuesday, the twelfth day after birth.",
+ "No fewer than twenty-one trumpet blasts are sounded daily in the Temple, as each day three blasts were sounded for the opening of the gates in the morning, nine for the daily morning offering, and nine for the daily afternoon offering, totaling twenty-one. And no more than forty-eight are ever sounded on a single day. This would occur on the Friday of Sukkot, when they would sound an additional twelve blasts during the ritual of drawing the water for the water libation; nine for the additional offerings; three to signal the population to cease their work before Shabbat; and three more to mark the beginning of Shabbat. When accompanying their song with instruments, the Levites do not use fewer than two lyres and do not use more than six. When flutes are played, they do not use fewer than two flutes and do not use more than twelve. And there are twelve days during the year when the flute plays before the altar: At the time of the slaughter of the first Paschal offering, on the fourteenth of Nisan; and at the time of the slaughter of the second Paschal offering, on the fourteenth of Iyyar; and on the first festival day of Passover; and on the festival of Shavuot; and on all eight days of the festival of Sukkot. And one would not play with a copper flute; rather, one would play with a flute of reed, because its sound is more pleasant. And one would conclude the music only with a single flute, because it concludes the music nicely.",
+ "The Temple musicians were slaves of priests; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yosei says: The musicians were not slaves, but Israelites from the family of the house of Pegarim and the family of the house of Tzippara from the city of Emaum, and their lineage was sufficiently pure that they would marry their daughters to members of the priesthood. Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus says: They were Levites.",
+ "One maintains no fewer than six lambs that have been inspected for blemishes in the Chamber of the Lambs, which are sufficient for the offerings of Shabbat and for the two Festival days of Rosh HaShana that may occur adjacent to it. And one may add inspected lambs up to an infinite number. One plays no fewer than two trumpets and no fewer than nine harps in the Temple, and one may add up to an infinite number. And the cymbal was played alone, and none may be added to it.",
+ "In the Temple, there are no fewer than twelve Levites standing on the platform adjacent to the altar and singing, and one may add Levites on the platform up to an infinite number. A minor Levite may enter the Temple courtyard for service only at a time when the Levites are engaging in song, so that he may accompany them. And minors would not engage in playing a lyre and in playing a harp; rather, they would engage in singing with the mouth, in order to provide flavor to the music with their pure, high voices. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: Minors are not tallied in the minimum total of twelve Levites, and they do not ascend to the platform; rather, they would stand on the ground and their heads would reach to between the legs of the Levites, and they were called cadets [tzoarei] of the Levites."
+ ],
+ [
+ "There are halakhot with regard to valuations that are lenient and others that are stringent; and there are halakhot with regard to an ancestral field that are lenient and others that are stringent; and there are halakhot with regard to a forewarned ox that killed a Canaanite slave that are lenient and others that are stringent; and there are halakhot with regard to a rapist, and a seducer, and a defamer that are lenient and others that are stringent. There are halakhot with regard to valuations that are lenient and others that are stringent; how so? Both in the case of one who took a vow of valuation to donate the fixed value of the most attractive among the Jewish people and in the case of one who took a vow of valuation to donate the fixed value of the most unsightly among the Jewish people, he gives the fixed payment of fifty sela, shekels, to the Temple treasury (see Leviticus 27:3). And if one said: It is incumbent upon me to donate the assessment of another to the Temple treasury, he gives the price for that person if sold as a slave, a sum that can be more or less than fifty shekels.",
+ "There are halakhot with regard to an ancestral field that are lenient and others that are stringent. How so? Both one who consecrates an ancestral field in the low-quality sands of the areas surrounding the city and one who consecrates the high-quality orchards of Sebastia gives a redemption payment of fifty silver shekels for every area that he consecrated that is fit for sowing a kor of barley (Leviticus 27:16). And with regard to a purchased field that one consecrates, he gives its value as redemption, a sum that can be more or less than fifty shekels for every area required for sowing one kor of barley. Rabbi Eliezer says: With regard to both a purchased field and an ancestral field, one gives a redemption payment of fifty silver shekels for every area required for sowing a kor of barley that he consecrated. What, then, is the difference between an ancestral field and a purchased field? The difference is that in the case of an ancestral field one gives an additional payment of one-fifth, but in the case of a purchased field one does not give an additional payment of one-fifth.",
+ "There are halakhot with regard to a forewarned ox that killed a Canaanite slave that are lenient and others that are stringent; how so? Both in the case of an ox that killed the most attractive among the slaves, whose value is great, and likewise in the case of one that killed the most unsightly among the slaves, whose value is minimal, its owner gives payment of thirty sela, the fine stated in the Torah (Exodus 21:32), to the owner of the slave. If the ox killed a freeman, its owner gives his price as payment to his heirs. This sum can be more or less than thirty shekels. If the ox injured this slave or that freeman, he gives payment of the full cost of the damage as compensation.",
+ "There are halakhot with regard to a rapist and with regard to a seducer that are lenient and others that are stringent; how so? Both one who raped or seduced a young woman who is the most prominent in the priesthood and one who raped or seduced a young woman who is the lowliest among the Israelites gives the payment of fifty sela, the fine stated in the Torah (see Deuteronomy 22:29). And the payments for humiliation and for degradation resulting from being raped or seduced are assessed differentially; it is all based on the one who humiliates and the one who is humiliated.",
+ "There are halakhot with regard to a defamer, who falsely claims that his bride was not a virgin, that are lenient and others that are stringent. How so? Both one who defamed a young woman who is the most prominent in the priesthood and one who defamed a young woman who is the lowliest among the Israelites gives payment of one hundred sela, the fine stated in the Torah (Deuteronomy 22:19). Based on the relative scope of the fines, with the defamer paying twice the sum of the rapist and the seducer, it is apparent that one who utters malicious speech with his mouth is a more severe transgressor than one who performs an action. And this is corroborated, as we found that the sentence imposed on our ancestors in the wilderness was sealed only due to the malicious speech disseminated by the spies, as it is stated at that time: “All those men that have seen My glory, and My signs, which I wrought in Egypt and in the wilderness, yet they have tried Me these ten times and have not listened to My voice” (Numbers 14:22)."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Affordability, which is written in the Torah: “According to the means of him who vowed shall the priest valuate him” (Leviticus 27:8), is determined in accordance with the means of the one taking the vow, and the sum fixed by the Torah based on the years of age is in accordance with the age of the subject of the vow. And the distinction based on sex that is written in the halakhot of valuations is stated with regard to the one valuated, and the different valuation based on the age of the one valuated is determined at the time one takes the vow of valuation. The mishna elaborates: Affordability is in accordance with the means of the one taking the vow; how so? A destitute person who valuated a wealthy person gives the valuation in accordance with the means of a destitute person, as determined by the priest. And a wealthy person who valuated a destitute person gives the valuation in accordance with the means of a wealthy person, the sum of which is fixed in the Torah.",
+ "But with regard to offerings that is not so, as one who took a vow and said: It is incumbent upon me to provide the offering of this leper, to a leper who requires it for his purification; if the one undergoing purification was a destitute leper, the one who took the vow brings the offering of a destitute leper, which is one male sheep, a tenth of an ephah of fine flour, and two doves or two pigeons (see Leviticus 14:21–22). If the one undergoing purification was a wealthy leper, the one who took the vow brings the offering of a wealthy leper, which is two male sheep, a ewe, and three-tenths of a ephah of fine flour (see Leviticus 14:10). Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: I say: Even with regard to valuations it is so. He explains: For what reason does a destitute person who valuated a wealthy person give the valuation in accordance with the means of a destitute person? It is due to the fact that the wealthy person is not obligated to pay anything, as the debt was generated by the destitute person who vowed to donate the valuation of a wealthy individual. But in a case similar to that of the offerings of a leper, in the case of a wealthy person who said: It is incumbent upon me to donate my valuation, and a destitute person heard him and said: It is incumbent upon me to donate that which he said, the destitute person gives the valuation of a wealthy person. If when one took a vow of valuation he was destitute and he became wealthy, or if he was wealthy and became destitute, he gives the valuation in accordance with the means of a wealthy person. Rabbi Yehuda says: This is the halakha not only in a case where one was wealthy either at the time he took the vow or at the time of payment; even if when one took a vow of valuation he was destitute and he became wealthy and again became destitute, he gives the valuation in accordance with the means of a wealthy person.",
+ "But with regard to the offerings of a leper that is not so, as the offerings that one brings are determined by his status at the time he brings them. Even if it is common knowledge that his father died and left him an inheritance of ten thousand dinars, or that his ship is at sea and merchandise valued at ten thousand dinars is coming into his possession, the Temple treasury has no share in it. His payment is determined solely by his present situation.",
+ "The sum fixed by the Torah based on the years of age is in accordance with the age of the subject of the vow; how so? A youth who valuated an elder gives the valuation of an elder, and an elder who valuated a youth gives the valuation of a youth. And the distinction based on sex that is written in the halakhot of valuations is stated with regard to the one valuated; how so? A man who valuated a woman gives the valuation of a woman, and a woman who valuated a man gives the valuation of a man. And the different valuation based on the age of the one valuated is determined at the time one takes the vow of valuation; how so? If one valuated another when he was less than five years old, when his valuation is five shekels, and before payment to the Temple treasury the subject of the vow became more than five years old, when his valuation is ten shekels; or if one valuated another when he was less than twenty years old, when his valuation is ten shekels, and before payment to the Temple treasury the subject of the vow became more than twenty years old, when his valuation is fifty shekels, in all these cases he gives payment according to the age of the subject of the valuation at the time of the valuation. The Torah provides three age categories that determine the amount of the valuation: From the age of one month until age five, from age five until age twenty, and from age twenty until age sixty. For anyone less than one month old there is no valuation. The halakhic status of the thirtieth day is like that of the period preceding thirty days, and therefore the one who took the vow is exempt. Likewise, the halakhic status of the fifth year and the twentieth year is like that of the period preceding them. As it is stated: “And if it is from sixty years old and upward” (Leviticus 27:7), and we derive all the other age categories from the sixtieth year: Just as the halakhic status of the sixtieth year, where upward is written, is like that of the period preceding it, so too, the halakhic status of the fifth year and the twentieth year is like that of the period preceding them. The mishna asks: Is that so? Can one derive a halakha in this manner? If the Torah rendered the halakhic status of the sixtieth year like that of the period preceding it in order to be stringent and require one who valuated a sixty-year-old person to pay his valuation to the Temple treasury, shall we render the halakhic status of the fifth year and the twentieth year like that of the period preceding them in order to be lenient and pay a lower sum? Therefore, the verse states “year” with regard to the fifth and twentieth years (see Leviticus 27:3–6), and “year” with regard to the sixtieth year (Leviticus 27:7), for a verbal analogy. Just as the halakhic status of the year stated with regard to the sixtieth year is like that of the period preceding it, so too, the halakhic status of the year stated with regard to the fifth year and the twentieth year is like that of the period preceding them, both in order to be lenient and in order to be stringent. Rabbi Eliezer says: Their halakhic status remains like that of the period preceding it, until they will be aged one month and one day beyond the fifth, twentieth, and sixtieth years."
+ ],
+ [
+ "One who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate my weight, gives his weight to the Temple treasury; if he specified silver he donates silver, and if he specified gold he donates gold. There was an incident involving the mother of Yirmatya, who said: It is incumbent upon me to donate the weight of my daughter, and she ascended to Jerusalem and paid her daughter’s weight in gold to the Temple treasury. In the case of one who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate the weight of my forearm, how does he ascertain the weight of his forearm? Rabbi Yehuda says: He fills a barrel with water and inserts his arm up to his elbow into the water. And in order to measure the displacement, he weighs donkey flesh, and bones, and sinews and places it into the barrel until it fills, and the water level reaches the top of the barrel. He then donates the weight of the meat and the bones to the Temple treasury. Rabbi Yosei said: Displacement is according to volume not according to weight, and how then is it possible to match the amount of the donkey flesh with the flesh of a person and the volume of the donkey’s bones with his bones? Rather, the court appraises how much the forearm is likely to weigh.",
+ "If one vows: It is incumbent upon me to donate the assessment of my forearm, the court appraises him to determine how much he is worth with a forearm and how much he is worth without a forearm, and he pays the difference. This is a halakha that is more stringent with regard to vows of assessment than with regard to valuations, as one who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate the valuation of my forearm, is exempt from paying. There are halakhot that are more stringent with regard to valuations than with regard to vows of assessment. How so? In the case of one who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate my valuation, and then dies, his heirs must give his valuation to the Temple treasury. But one who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate my assessment, and then dies, his heirs need not give his assessment to the Temple treasury, as there is no monetary value for the dead. One who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate the valuation of my forearm, or: The valuation of my leg, has not said anything, as there are valuations in the Torah only for a complete person. But if one says: It is incumbent upon me to donate the valuation of my head, or: The valuation of my liver, he gives the valuation of his entire self. This is the principle: One who valuates an item upon which the soul is dependent, i.e., without which one will die, gives the valuation of his entire self.",
+ "One who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate half of my valuation, gives half of his valuation. But one who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate the valuation of half of me, gives the valuation of his entire self. Likewise, one who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate half of my assessment, gives half of his assessment; one who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate the assessment of half of me, gives the assessment of his entire self. This is the principle: One who takes a vow with regard to an item upon which the soul is dependent gives the assessment of his entire self.",
+ "With regard to one who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate the valuation of so-and-so, and both the one who vowed and the object of the vow die, the heirs of the one who vowed must give the valuation of the object of the vow to the Temple treasury. With regard to one who says: It is incumbent upon me to donate the assessment of so-and-so, and the one who vowed dies, his heirs must give his assessment to the Temple treasury. If the object of the vow dies, the heirs of the one who vowed need not give his assessment to the Temple treasury, as there is no monetary value for the dead.",
+ "In the case of one who says: This bull is consecrated as a burnt offering, or: This house is consecrated as an offering, and the bull died or the house collapsed, he is exempt from paying his commitment. But in the case of one who says: It is incumbent upon me to give this bull as a burnt offering, or: It is incumbent upon me to give this house as an offering, if the bull died or the house collapsed, he is obligated to pay its value.",
+ "With regard to those obligated to pay valuations, the court repossesses their property to pay their debt to the Temple treasury. With regard to those obligated to bring sin offerings and guilt offerings, the court does not repossess their property; since one is obligated to bring them for atonement he would not delay bringing them. But with regard to those obligated to bring burnt offerings and peace offerings, the court repossesses their property;since these offerings are not obligatory for atonement, one might delay bringing them. Although one obligated to bring burnt offerings and peace offerings does not achieve atonement until he brings the offering of his own volition, as it is stated: “He shall bring it to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting of his volition” (Leviticus 1:3), nevertheless the court coerces him until he says: I want to do so. And likewise, you say the same with regard to women’s bills of divorce. Although one divorces his wife only of his own volition, in any case where the Sages obligated a husband to divorce his wife the court coerces him until he says: I want to do so."
+ ],
+ [
+ "One proclaims, i.e., publicly announces, the appraisal of the property inherited by minor orphans, which is being sold to repay their father’s debt, for thirty days, in order to receive the maximal price. And one proclaims the appraisal of consecrated property that is being sold by the Temple treasury for sixty days, and one proclaims it in the morning and in the evening. In the case of one who consecrates his property and there was the outstanding debt of the marriage contract of his wife, for whose repayment one’s property is liened, Rabbi Eliezer says: When he divorces her, he shall vow that benefit from her is forbidden to him. This is to prevent collusion, by which he divorces her, she collects payment from the consecrated property, and he then remarries her. Rabbi Yehoshua says: He need not do so. On a similar note, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: Even in the case of the guarantor of a woman for her marriage contract, and her husband was divorcing her and could not pay the debt, the husband shall vow that benefit from her is forbidden to him, lest he and his wife engage in collusion [kinunya] and collect payment from the property of that guarantor, and then the husband will remarry his wife.",
+ "In the case of one who consecrates his property and there was an outstanding debt of the marriage contract of his wife and of a creditor, the woman may not collect the payment of her marriage contract from the Temple treasury, nor may the creditor collect his debt. Rather, the one who redeems the property redeems it for a cheap price in order to give the woman her marriage contract payment and the creditor his debt. For example, if one consecrated property worth nine thousand dinars and his debt was ten thousand dinars, leaving no property for redemption, the creditor lends an additional dinar to the debtor and the debtor redeems the property with that dinar, in order to give the woman her marriage contract payment and the creditor his debt.",
+ "Although the Sages said (21a): With regard to those obligated to pay valuations, the court repossesses their property to pay their debt to the Temple treasury; nevertheless, the treasurer gives him permission to keep food sufficient for thirty days, and garments sufficient for twelve months, and a bed made with linens, and his sandals, and his phylacteries. The treasurer leaves these items for him, but he does not leave items for his wife or for his children. If the one obligated to pay was a craftsman, the treasurer gives him permission to keep two tools of his craft of each and every type, e.g., for a carpenter, the treasurer gives him permission to keep two adzes [matzadin] and two saws. Rabbi Eliezer says: If he was a farmer, the treasurer gives him permission to keep his pair of oxen with which he plows the field. If he was a donkey driver, the treasurer gives him permission to keep his donkey.",
+ "If one had many tools of one type and few tools of one other type, e.g., three adzes and one saw, he may not say to the treasurer to sell one tool of the type of which he has many and to purchase for him one tool of the type of which he has few. Rather, the treasurer gives him two tools of the type of which he has many and he retains whatever he has of the type of which he has few. In contrast to one whose property is repossessed to pay valuations, from one who consecrates all his property, the treasurer takes his phylacteries, as they are included in the category of all his property.",
+ "Both in the case of one who consecrates his property and the case of one who valuates himself, when the Temple treasurer repossesses his property he has the right to repossess neither the garment of his wife nor the garment of his children, nor the dyed garments that he dyed for their sake, even if they have yet to wear them, nor the new sandals that he purchased for their sake. Although the merchants said: Slaves are sold in their garments for profit, as if a fine garment worth thirty dinars would be purchased for him, his sale price appreciates by one hundred dinars; and likewise with regard to a cow, if one waits to sell it until the market [la’itlis] day, when demand is high, its sale price appreciates; and likewise with regard to a pearl, if one brings it to sell it in the city, where demand is high, its sale price appreciates; nevertheless, one does not make such a calculation in this case. Rather, the Temple treasury has the right to collect the item based only on its current location and its price at the present time."
+ ],
+ [
+ "One may neither consecrate an ancestral field, i.e., a field that he inherited, less than two years before the Jubilee Year, nor may one redeem such a field less than one year after the Jubilee Year. When redeeming an ancestral field that has been consecrated, the sum paid to redeem the field is calculated based on the number of years remaining until the Jubilee Year. When performing this calculation, one does not count months of a partial year in order to lower the price to be paid to the Temple treasury; rather, he pays for the entire year. But the Temple treasury may count months in order to raise the price of redemption, as will be explained. In the case of one who consecrates his ancestral field during a period when the Jubilee Year is observed and wishes to redeem it, he gives the Temple treasury fifty sela, a talmudic measure referred to in the Bible as silver shekels, for an area required for sowing a ḥomer, a measure known in talmudic terminology as one kor, of barley seed (see Leviticus 27:16). If there were crevices [neka’im] ten handbreadths deep in the field, or if there were boulders ten handbreadths high, then when calculating the redemption price those areas are not measured with the rest of the field. But if the depth of the crevices, or the height of the boulders, was less than that amount, they are measured with the rest of the field. If he consecrated the field two or three years before the Jubilee Year and wishes to redeem it, he gives the Temple treasury a sela and a pundeyon, a pundeyon being one forty-eighth of a sela, per year remaining until the Jubilee Year. And if he said: I will give the payment for each year during that year, one does not listen to him; rather, he must give the entire sum in one payment. ",
+ "This is the halakha both with regard to a case where the owner redeems the field and a case where any other person redeems the field. What then is the difference between redemption by the owner and redemption by any other person? It is only that the owner gives an extra one-fifth in addition to the payment, and any other person who redeems the field does not give the additional one-fifth. ",
+ "If one consecrated his ancestral field and then redeemed it himself, it is not removed from his possession to be divided among the priests during the Jubilee Year. If his son redeemed it, the field is removed from the son’s possession and returns to his father during the Jubilee Year. But if another person or one of his other relatives redeemed the field and the owner subsequently redeemed it from his possession, the field is removed from the owner’s possession and given to the priests during the Jubilee Year. If one of the priests redeemed the field and when the Jubilee arrived it was in his possession, he may not say: Since it is removed from the possession of the one who redeemed it and given to the priests during the Jubilee Year, and since it is already in my possession, it is mine. Rather, the field is removed from his possession and is divided among all his brethren, the priests. ",
+ "If one consecrated his ancestral field and the Jubilee Year arrived and it was not redeemed by the owner or anyone else, the priests enter into the field and give its redemption payment to the Temple treasury; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Shimon says: They enter into the field, but they do not give its redemption payment to the Temple treasury.Rabbi Eliezer says: The priests do not enter into the field, and they also do not give its redemption payment to the Temple treasury. Rather, the field remains in the possession of the Temple treasury, and it is called: An abandoned field, until the second Jubilee Year. If the second Jubilee arrived and it was still not redeemed, it is called: An abandoned field from among the abandoned fields, meaning one that was abandoned twice, until the third Jubilee. In any case, the priests never enter into a consecrated field during the Jubilee Year until another person redeems it first. ",
+ "One who purchases an ancestral field from his father, and his father subsequently died and afterward the son consecrated it, its halakhic status is like that of an ancestral field, as he inherited his father’s ancestral rights prior to the consecration. Consequently, the field’s redemption price is calculated on the basis of fifty sela per beit kor, and if another redeems it instead of the son, it is given to the priests during the Jubilee Year. But if the son consecrated the field and afterward his father died, its halakhic status is like that of a purchased field, whose redemption price is based on its monetary value, and which will return to the ancestral owner, i.e., the son, at the Jubilee; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon say: Even in a case where the son consecrated the field before his father died, its halakhic status is like that of an ancestral field, as it is stated with regard to a purchased field: “And if he will consecrate unto the Lord a field that he has bought, which is not of his ancestral field” (Leviticus 27:22), indicating that this halakha applies only to a field that is not due to become his ancestral field, thereby excluding this field, which at the time of consecration is due to become his ancestral field in the future, when his father dies. The mishna continues: A purchased field that was consecrated is not removed from the possession of the Temple treasury and given to the priests during the Jubilee Year, as the purchase of the land was valid only until the Jubilee, at which point fields return to their ancestral owners, and a person cannot consecrate an item that is not his. The priests and the Levites may always consecrate their ancestral fields and may always redeem their ancestral fields, both before the Jubilee Year and after the Jubilee Year."
+ ],
+ [
+ "In the case of one who consecrates his ancestral field during a period when the Jubilee Year is not observed, and therefore the field is not redeemed according to a fixed rate of fifty shekels per beit kor but according to its value, when the treasurer announces the sale of the field he says to the owner: You open the bidding first; how much do you offer for its redemption? This method is advantageous for the Temple treasury, as the owner gives an additional payment of one-fifth of the value of the field, and every other person does not give an additional one-fifth payment. There was an incident involving one who consecrated his field due to its inferior quality. The treasurers said to him: You open the bidding first. He said: It is hereby mine for an issar, a small sum. Rabbi Yosei says: That person did not say he would purchase it for an issar; rather, he said he would purchase it for an egg, as consecrated items may be redeemed with money or with the equivalent value of money. The treasurer said to him: The field has come into your possession based on your bid. As a result, he loses an issar and his field remains before him in his possession.",
+ "If one said: The field is hereby mine for ten sela, and one other person said: It is mine for twenty, and one said for thirty, and one said for forty, and one said for fifty; and then the one who bid fifty reneged on his offer, the treasurer repossesses from his property up to ten sela and the field is redeemed by the one who bid forty. This ensures that the Temple treasury does not lose. If the one who bid forty sela subsequently reneged on his offer, the treasurer repossesses from his property up to ten sela and the field is redeemed by the one who bid thirty. If the one who bid thirty subsequently reneged on his offer, the treasurer repossesses from his property up to ten sela and the field is redeemed by the one who bid twenty. If the one who bid twenty reneged on his offer, the treasurer repossesses from his property up to ten sela and it is redeemed by the one who bid ten. If the one who bid ten reneged on his offer, the treasurer sells the field at its value and collects the remainder from the property of the one who bid ten, to complete the sum of ten sela. If the owner says he will pay twenty sela and any other person says he will pay twenty sela, the offer of the owner takes precedence, due to the fact that he adds one-fifth. ",
+ "If the owner says he will pay twenty sela and one other person said: The field is hereby mine for a payment of twenty-one sela, the owner gives twenty-six sela and takes the field. He pays the twenty that he initially offered; plus five sela, which is one-fifth of the total future sum, i.e., one-quarter of his initial offer. In addition, he adds one sela, the difference between his initial offer and that of the other person, so that the Temple treasury will not receive less than the twenty-one sela offer proposed by the other person. If the owner says he will pay twenty sela and another person said: The field is hereby mine for a payment of twenty-two sela, the owner gives twenty-seven sela and takes the field. If the owner says he will pay twenty sela and another said: The field is hereby mine for a payment of twenty-three sela, the owner gives twenty-eight sela and takes the field. If the owner says he will pay twenty sela and another said: The field is hereby mine for a payment of twenty-four sela, the owner gives twenty-nine sela and takes the field. If the owner says he will pay twenty sela and another said: The field is hereby mine for a payment of twenty-five sela, the owner gives thirty sela, as the owner adds one-fifth only to the amount that he bid, and does not add one-fifth to the addition of that other person. If the owner said he will pay twenty sela and one other person said: The field is hereby mine for a payment of twenty-six sela, if the owner wished to pay thirty-one sela and a dinar the owner takes precedence; and if not, the treasurer says to the other person: The field has come into your possession based on your bid, as it is more than the Temple treasury can compel the owner to pay.",
+ "A person may dedicate, for sacred or priestly use, some of his flock and some of his cattle, and some of his Canaanite slaves and maidservants, and some of his ancestral field. But if he dedicated all that he has of any type of property, they are not dedicated, i.e., the dedication does not take effect; this is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya said: If for the Most High a person may not dedicate all his property, it is all the more so the case that a person should spare his property and not give all of it to others.",
+ "In the case of one who dedicates his son or his daughter, or his Hebrew slave or maidservant, or his purchased field, those items are not considered dedicated, as a person may not dedicate an item that is not his. Priests and Levites may not dedicate their property; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Shimon says: Priests may not dedicate their property, as all dedicated property is theirs; it is one of the priestly gifts, as the verse states: “Everything dedicated in Israel shall be yours” (Numbers 18:14). But Levites may dedicate their property, as dedicated property is not theirs. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: The statement of Rabbi Yehuda appears to be correct with regard to land, as it is stated about the land of the Levites: “But the fields of the open land surrounding their cities may not be sold, as that is their perpetual possession” (Leviticus 25:34), and they cannot renounce that land. And the statement of Rabbi Shimon appears to be correct with regard to movable property, which the Levites may dedicate, as dedicated property is not theirs. It is a gift for the priests, not the Levites.",
+ "Dedications of property for priests, unlike consecrations of property for Temple maintenance, have no redemption; rather, one gives it to the priests, and it is their property in every sense, like teruma. Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: Dedications dedicated without specification of their purpose are designated for Temple maintenance, as it is stated: “Every dedicated item is most sacred to the Lord” (Leviticus 27:28). And the Rabbis say: Dedications dedicated without specification of their purpose are designated for priests, as it is stated with regard to one who consecrated a field and did not redeem it: “As a field dedicated; its possession shall be to the priest” (Leviticus 27:21), indicating that a non-specific dedication belongs to the priest. If so, why is it stated: “Every dedicated item is most sacred to the Lord”? This comes to teach that dedication takes effect on offerings of the most sacred order and offerings of lesser sanctity. If one consecrated an animal for sacrifice and then dedicated it, the dedication takes effect. Nevertheless, it does not take effect on the body of the animal; rather, it applies to the owner’s financial stake in the offering.",
+ "As the Sages delineated: A person may dedicate his sacrificial animals, both offerings of the most sacred order and offerings of lesser sanctity. If the offering he dedicated was the object of a vow, e.g., if he said: It is incumbent upon me to sacrifice a burnt offering, since he is obligated to replace such offerings they are considered his property, and therefore he gives their value to the priests. And if the offering he dedicated was a gift offering, e.g., if he said: This animal is a burnt offering, in which case he is not obligated to replace the animal, he gives the monetary benefit that he has in them. For example, if he said: This bull is a burnt offering, one estimates how much money a person would be willing to give in order to sacrifice the animal as a voluntary burnt offering, even though he is not permitted to do so. With regard to a firstborn animal, whether it is unblemished or whether it is blemished, its owner may dedicate it. And how does one assess the payment required to redeem it? One estimates how much an Israelite person would be willing to give in exchange for that firstborn in order to give it to a priest who is his daughter’s son or to a priest who is his sister’s son. Rabbi Yishmael says: One verse states: “All the firstborn males that are born of your herd and of your flock you shall consecrate to the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 15:19), and one verse states: “However, the firstborn among animals that is born first to the Lord, a man shall not consecrate it” (Leviticus 27:26). It is impossible to say: “You shall consecrate,” as it is already stated: “A man shall not consecrate.” It is likewise impossible to say: “A man shall not consecrate,” as it is already stated: “You shall consecrate.” How, then, can these verses be reconciled? You can consecrate the firstborn animal by a consecration of value, i.e., an individual can donate to the Temple treasury the amount he would be willing to pay for the right to give the firstborn to a specific priest; and you cannot consecrate it by a consecration for the altar, as a firstborn may not be sacrificed for the sake of any other offering."
+ ],
+ [
+ "One who sells his field during a period when the Jubilee Year is in effect is not permitted to redeem it less than two years after the sale, as it is stated: “According to the number of years of the crops he shall sell to you” (Leviticus 25:15). The plural form “years” indicates a minimum of two years. If one of those years was a year of blight or mildew, or if it was the Sabbatical Year, when the buyer is unable to derive benefit from the field, that year does not count as part of the tally, and the owner must wait an additional year before redeeming the field. If the buyer plowed the field but did not sow it, or if he left it fallow, that year counts as part of his tally, as it was fit to produce a crop. Rabbi Eliezer says: If the owner of the field sold it to the buyer before Rosh HaShana and the field was full of produce, and the owner redeems the field after two years, that buyer consumes from the field’s produce three crops in two years. Although he received the field with its crop, he is not required to return it in the same state.",
+ "When the Jubilee Year is in effect, one may sell a field only until the Jubilee Year, at which point the field returns to its original owner. If the owner redeems the field before the Jubilee Year, the payment per annum is calculated by dividing the sale price by the number of years from the sale until the Jubilee Year. The owner returns the per annum payment multiplied by the number of years remaining until the Jubilee Year. If the owner of a field sold it to the first buyer for one hundred dinars and the first buyer then sold it to the second buyer for two hundred dinars, when the original owner redeems the field he calculates the payment only according to the price that he set with the first buyer, as it is stated: “And he calculates the years of its sale, and he returns the remainder to the man to whom he sold it” (Leviticus 25:27). If the owner of a field sold it to the first buyer for two hundred dinars and the first buyer then sold it to the second buyer for one hundred dinars, when the original owner redeems the field, he calculates the payment only according to the price that was paid by the last buyer, as it is stated: “And he calculates the years of its sale, and he returns the remainder to the man to whom he sold it.” The superfluous term “to the man” indicates that the verse is referring to the man who is currently in possession of the field. One may not sell his ancestral field that is located in a distant area and redeem with the proceeds a field that he sold in a nearby area. Likewise, he may not sell a low-quality field and redeem with the proceeds a high-quality field. And he may not borrow money and redeem the field, nor may he redeem the field incrementally, half now and half at a later date. But with regard to redeeming a field from the Temple treasury, it is permitted to redeem the field in any of these ways. This is a halakha where greater stringency applies with regard to redeeming a field from an ordinary individual than with regard to redeeming it from the Temple treasury. ",
+ "One who sells a house from among the houses of walled cities may redeem the house immediately, even without the consent of the buyer, and he may redeem the house during the entire twelve months following the sale, but not after that. When he redeems the house within the twelve-month period, he returns the sale price to the buyer, and this is ostensibly like a form of interest, as the buyer has effectively resided in the house for free in exchange for the fact that the buyer’s money was in the possession of the seller. It is not considered interest, because the buyer owned the house during the period in which he resided in it. If the seller died, his son may redeem the house from the buyer. If the buyer died, the seller may redeem it from the possession of the buyer’s son. If the buyer sold the house to another, one calculates the year only from the time that the owner sold the house to the first buyer, as it is stated: “And if it is not redeemed until the passage of a full year for him, then the house that is in the walled city shall stand in possession of the one who bought it in perpetuity” (Leviticus 25:30). The term “for him” indicates that the year is calculated from when the initial owner sold the house. When it says: “A full year,” this serves to include the intercalated month in the year calculated from the sale, if it was a leap year. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: The word “full” serves to give the seller a year and its addition, i.e., the year during which the house may be redeemed is not the 354-day lunar year, but the 365-day solar year. ",
+ "If the final day of the twelve-month period arrived and the house was not redeemed, the house has become the property of the buyer in perpetuity. This is the halakha with regard to both one who buys a house in a walled city and one to whom it is given as a gift, as it is stated: “Then the house that is in the walled city shall stand in possession of the one who bought it in perpetuity” (Leviticus 25:30). At first, the buyer would conceal himself on the final day of the twelve-month period, in order to ensure that it would become his in perpetuity. Hillel instituted that the seller would place [ḥolesh] his money in the chamber of the court and that he will break the door and enter the house, and when the other individual, i.e., the buyer, will wish to do so, he may come to the chamber and take his money.",
+ "The halakhic status of any area that is located within the city wall is like that of the houses of walled cities in terms of its redemption, except for the fields located therein. Rabbi Meir says: Even the fields are included in this category. With regard to a house that is built in the wall itself, Rabbi Yehuda says: Its halakhic status is not like that of the houses of walled cities. Rabbi Shimon says: The outer wall of the house is considered the city wall, and therefore it has the status of a house in a walled city.",
+ "The halakhic status of a house in a city whose houses are attached and their rooftops constitute the top of its wall, and likewise, the status of a house in a city that is not surrounded by a wall from the era of Joshua, son of Nun, even if a surrounding wall was constructed during a later period, is not like that of the houses of walled cities. And these are the houses of walled cities: Any city in which there are at least three courtyards, each containing two houses, and which is surrounded by a wall from the era of Joshua, son of Nun, e.g., the ancient fort [katzra] of Tzippori, and the fortress [ḥakra] of Gush Ḥalav, and ancient Yodfat, and Gamla, and Gedod, and Ḥadid, and Ono, and Jerusalem, and likewise other similar cities.",
+ "With regard to the houses of the unwalled courtyards mentioned in the Torah (see Leviticus 25:31), i.e., houses in villages that are not surrounded by walls, one accords them the exceptional provisions that apply to houses of walled cities and the exceptional provisions that apply to fields. Therefore, they are redeemed immediately and for the entire twelve months following the sale, like in the sale of houses of walled cities, and not like fields, which may be redeemed only after two years. And they leave the possession of the buyer during the Jubilee Year or with a per annum deduction from the money of the sale price, like the sale of fields. By contrast, houses of walled cities become the possession of the buyer in perpetuity after one year, and if they are redeemed within the year, one pays the full sale price. And these are the houses of the unwalled courtyards whose halakha was taught in the previous mishna: Any city in which there are two courtyards each containing two houses, although it is surrounded by a wall from the era of Joshua, son of Nun, their halakhic status is like that of the houses of the unwalled courtyards.",
+ "An Israelite who inherited a house in a walled city from his mother’s father who was a Levite does not redeem the house in accordance with this procedure delineated in the previous mishnayot; rather, if he sold the inherited house, he may redeem it always, like a Levite. And likewise, a Levite who inherited a house in a walled city from his mother’s father who was an Israelite does not redeem the house in accordance with this procedure delineated in the previous mishnayot. The mishna provides the source for these halakhot: As it is stated: “And if a man purchases from the Levites, the house that was sold in the city of his possession shall go out during the Jubilee Year; as the houses of the cities of the Levites are their possession among the children of Israel” (Leviticus 25:33). The verse indicates that the ability to always redeem the house of a Levite does not apply unless the one selling the house will be a Levite and the house is located in the cities of the Levites. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. And the Rabbis say: These matters are stated only with regard to a house in the cities of the Levites, even if the owner was not a Levite. The Levites received two thousand cubits surrounding their cities, one thousand cubits of empty lots and one thousand cubits for fields and vineyards. One may neither render a field an empty lot nor an empty lot a field. Similarly, one may neither incorporate an empty lot into a city nor render part of a city an empty lot. Rabbi Elazar said: In what case is this statement said? It applies in the cities of the Levites. But in the cities of the Israelites one may render a field an empty lot but not an empty lot a field, and one may incorporate an empty lot into a city but not render part of a city an empty lot, in order to ensure that they will not thereby destroy the cities of Israel. The priests and the Levites may sell their fields and houses always and may redeem them always, as it is stated: “The Levites shall have a perpetual right of redemption” (Leviticus 25:32). Priests are also members of the tribe of Levi."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "versions": [
+ [
+ "William Davidson Edition - English",
+ "https://korenpub.com/collections/the-noe-edition-koren-talmud-bavli-1"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "heTitle": "משנה ערכין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/Hebrew/Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/Hebrew/Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..841db0cbacb346057e06ee948f78df6c87f432e0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/Hebrew/Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri.json
@@ -0,0 +1,93 @@
+{
+ "language": "he",
+ "title": "Mishnah Arakhin",
+ "versionSource": "https://archive.org/details/MishnaCorrectedKaufman00WHOLE",
+ "versionTitle": "Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "license": "PD",
+ "digitizedBySefaria": true,
+ "actualLanguage": "he",
+ "languageFamilyName": "hebrew",
+ "isSource": true,
+ "isPrimary": true,
+ "direction": "rtl",
+ "heTitle": "משנה ערכין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "א\nהַכֹּל מַעֲרִיכִים וְנֶעֱרָכִין, \nנוֹדְרִים וְנִדָּרִים: \nכֹּהֲנִים וּלְוִיִּם וְיִשְׂרְאֵל, \nנָשִׁים וַעֲבָדִים. \nוְטָמְטוֹם וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינָס, \nנוֹדְרִים וְנִדָּרִים, וּמַעֲרִיכִים, \nאֲבָל לֹא נֶעֱרָכִים, \nשֶׁאֵינוּ נֶעֱרָךְ אֶלָּא זָכָר וַדַּי, \nוּנְקֵבָה וַדָּיִית. \n\nב\nחֵרֵשׁ, שׁוֹטֶה וְקָטָן, \nנִדָּרִים וְנֶעֱרָכִים, \nאֲבָל לֹא נוֹדְרִים וְלֹא מַעֲרִיכִים, \nמִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶן דַּעַת. \nפָּחוּת מִבֶּן חֹדֶשׁ, \nנִדָּר, אֲבָל לֹא נֶעֱרָךְ. \n",
+ "ג\nהַנָּכְרִי, \nרְבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: \nנֶעֱרָךְ, אֲבָל לֹא מַעֲרִיךְ. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nמַעֲרִיךְ, אֲבָל לֹא נֶעֱרָךְ. \nזֶה וָזֶה מוֹדִים, \nשֶׁנּוֹדְרִים וְנִדָּרִים. \n",
+ "ד\nהַגּוֹסֵס וְהַיּוֹצֵא לֵהָרֵג, \nלֹא נִדָּר וְלֹא נֶעֱרָךְ. \nרְבִּי חֲנַנְיָה בֶן עֲקַבְיָה אוֹמֵר: \nנֶעֱרָךְ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁדָּמָיו קְצוּבִין; \nאֲבָל אֵינוּ נִדָּר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין דָּמָיו קְצוּבִין. \nרְבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר: \nנוֹדֵר וּמַעֲרִיךְ, וּמַקְדִּישׁ, \nוְאִם הִזִּיק, חַיָּב בַּתַּשְׁלוּמִין. \n",
+ "ה\nהָאִשָּׁה שֶׁהִיא יוֹצָא לֵהָרֵג, \nאֵין מַמְתִּינִין לָהּ עַד שֶׁתֵּלֵד. \nיָשְׁבָה עַל הַמַּשְׁבֵּר, \nמַמְתִּינִין לָהּ עַד שֶׁתֵּלֵד. \nהָאִשָּׁה שֶׁנֶּהֱרָגָה, נֶהְנִים בִּשְׂעָרָהּ. <בסערה>\nבְּהֵמָה שֶׁנֶּהֱרָגָה, אֲסוּרָה בַהֲנָיָה. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nאֵין בָּעֲרָכִין פָּחוּת מִסֶּלַע, \nוְלֹא יָתֵר עַל חֲמִשִּׁים סֶלַע. \nכֵּיצַד? \nנָתַן סֶלַע, וְהֶעְשִׁיר, \nאֵינוּ נוֹתֵן כְּלוּם; \nפָּחוּת מִסֶּלַע, וְהֶעְשִׁיר,\nנוֹתֵן חֲמִשִּׁים סֶלַע. \nהָיוּ בְיָדָיו חָמֵשׁ סְלָעִים, \nרְבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: \nאֵינוּ נוֹתֵן אֶלָּא אַחַת. \nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: \nנוֹתֵן אֶת כֻּלָּם. \n\nב\nאֵין בָּעֲרָכִין פָּחוּת מִסֶּלַע, \nוְלֹא יָתֵר עַל חֲמִשִּׁים סֶלַע. \nאֵין פֶּתַח בַּטּוֹעָה פָחוּת מִשִּׁבְעָה, \nוְלֹא יָתֵר עַל שִׁבְעָה עָשָׂר. \nאֵין בַּנְּגָעִים פָּחוּת מִשָּׁבוּעַ אֶחָד, \nוְלֹא יָתֵר עַל שְׁלֹשָׁה שָׁבוּעוֹת. \n",
+ "ג\nאֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מֵאַרְבָּעָה חֳדָשִׁים הַמְעֻבָּרִין בַּשָּׁנָה, \nוְלֹא נִרְאֶה יָתֵר עַל שְׁמוֹנָה. <שְׁמוֹנֶה> \nשְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם נֶאֱכָלוֹת, \nאֵין פָּחוּת מִשְּׁנַיִם, \nוְלֹא יָתֵר עַל שְׁלֹשָׁה. \nלֶחֶם הַפָּנִים נֶאֱכָל, \nאֵין פָּחוּת מִתִּשְׁעָה, \nוְלֹא יָתֵר עַל אֶחָד עָשָׂר. \nקָטָן נִמּוֹל, \nאֵין פָּחוּת מִשְּׁמוֹנָה, \nוְלֹא יָתֵר עַל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר. \n",
+ "ד\nאֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מֵעֶשְׂרִים וְאַחַת תְּקִיעָה בַמִּקְדָּשׁ, \nוְלֹא מוֹסִיפִין עַל אַרְבָּעִים וּשְׁמוֹנֶה. \nאֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מִשְּׁנֵי נְבָלִים, \nוְלֹא מוֹסִיפִין עַל שִׁשָּׁה. \nלֹא יִפְחֹת מִשִּׁשָּׁה חֲלִילִים, \nוְלֹא מוֹסִיפִין עַל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר. \nוּבִשְׁנֵים עָשָׂר יוֹם בַּשָּׁנָה, \nהֶחָלִיל מַכֶּה לִפְנֵי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ: \nבִּשְׁחִיטַת פֶּסַח רִאשׁוֹן, \nבִּשְׁחִיטַת פֶּסַח שֵׁנִי, \nבְּיוֹם טוֹב רִאשׁוֹן שֶׁלַּפֶּסַח, \nבְּיוֹם טוֹב שֶׁלָּעֲצֶרֶת, \nוּבִשְׁמוֹנַת יְמֵי הֶחָג. \nלֹא הָיָה מַכֶּה בְאַבּוּב שֶׁלִּנְחֹשֶׁת, \nאֶלָּא בְאַבּוּב שֶׁלַּקָּנֶה, \nמִפְּנֵי שֶׁקּוֹלוֹ עָרֵב. \nלֹא הָיָה מְחַלֵּק בְּאַבּוּב יְחִידִי, \nמִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מְחַלֵּק יָפֶה. \n",
+ "ה\nוְעַבְדֵי כֹהֲנִים הָיוּ. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי מֵאִיר. \nרְבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר: \nמִשְׁפְּחוֹת בֵּית פְּגָרִים וּבֵית צִפְּרַיָּה, \nוּמֵאֶמְאוּס הָיוּ מַשִּׂיאִין לִכְהֻנָּה. \nרְבִּי חֲנַנְיָה בֶן אַנְטִיגְנָס אוֹמֵר: \nלְוִיִּם הָיוּ. \n",
+ "ו\nאֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מִשִּׁשָּׁה טְלָיִים הַמְבֻקָּרִין בְּלִשְׁכַּת הַטְּלָיִים, \nכְּדֵי לַשַּׁבָּת וְלִשְׁנֵי יָמִים טוֹבִים שֶׁלְּרֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה, \nוּמוֹסִיפִין עַד לְעוֹלָם. \nמִשְּׁתֵי חֲצוֹצְרוֹת, \nוּמוֹסִיפִין עַד לְעוֹלָם. \nמִתִּשְׁעָה כִנּוֹרוֹת, \nוּמוֹסִיפִין עַד לְעוֹלָם. \nוְהַצַּלְצֵל לְבַד. \n",
+ "ז\nאֵין פּוֹחֲתִים מִשְּׁנֵים עָשָׂר לְוִיִּם עוֹמְדִין עַל הַדּוּכָן, \nוּמוֹסִיפִין עַד לְעוֹלָם. \nאֵין קָטָן נִכְנָס לַעֲזָרָה לַעֲבוֹדָה, \nאֶלָּא בְשָׁעָה שֶׁהַלְוִיִּם אוֹמְרִין בַּשִּׁיר. \nלֹא הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים בְּנֵבֶל וְכִנּוֹר אֶלָּא בַפֶּה, \nכְּדֵי תָּבֵל בְּנַעֲמָה. \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר: \nאֵין עוֹלִין לְמִנְיָן, \nוְלֹא עוֹמְדִין עַל הַדּוּכָן, \nאֶלָּא בָאָרֶץ הָיוּ עוֹמְדִין, \nוְרָאשֵׁיהֶם כְּבֵין רַגְלֵי הַלְוִיִּם, \nוּצְעִירֵי הַלְוִיִּם הָיוּ נִקְרִין. <וצוערי>\n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nיֵשׁ בָּעֲרָכִים לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחְמִיר, \nוּבִשְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחְמִיר, \nבְּשׁוֹר הַמּוּעָד שֶׁהֵמִית אֶת הָעֶבֶד לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחְמִיר, \nבְּאוֹנֵס וּבִמְפַתֶּה וּבְמוֹצִיא שֵׁם רַע לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחְמִיר. \n\nב\nיֵשׁ בָּעֲרָכִין לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחְמִיר, \nכֵּיצַד? \nאֶחָד שֶׁהֱעֱרִיךְ אֶת הַנָּוֶה שֶׁבְּיִשְׂרָאֵל, \nאֶת הַכָּאוּר שֶׁבְּיִשְׂרָאֵל, \nנוֹתֵן חֲמִשִּׁים סֶלַע. \nאִם אָמַר: \n\"הֲרֵי דָמָיו עָלַי!\" \nנוֹתֵן אֶת שָׁוְיוֹ. \n",
+ "ג\nוּבִשְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחְמִיר, \nכֵּיצַד? \nאֶחָד הַמַּקְדִּישׁ בְּחוֹלַת הַמָּחוֹז, \nוְאֶחָד הַמַּקְדִּישׁ בְּפַרְדְּסוֹת סְבַסְטֵא, \nנוֹתֵן בְּזֶרַע חֹמֶר שְׂעוֹרִים חֲמִשִּׁים שֶׁקֶל כֶּסֶף, \nוּבִשְׂדֵה מִקְנָה, אֶת שָׁוְיוֹ. \nרְבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: \nאֶחָד שְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה וְאֶחָד שְׂדֵה מִקְנָה. \nמַה בֵּין שְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה לִשְׂדֵה מִקְנָה? \nשֶׁבִּשְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה הוּא נוֹתֵן חֹמֶשׁ, \nוּבִשְׂדֵה מִקְנָה אֵינוּ נוֹתֵן חֹמֶשׁ. \n",
+ "ד\nוּבְשׁוֹר הַמּוּעָד שֶׁהֵמִית אֶת הָעֶבֶד, \nלְהָקֵל וּלְהַחְמִיר, כֵּיצַד? \nאֶחָד שֶׁהֵמִית אֶת הַנָּוֶה שֶׁבָּעֲבָדִים, \nוְאֶת הַכָּאוּר שֶׁבָּעֲבָדִים, \nנוֹתֵן שְׁלֹשִׁים סֶלַע. \nהֵמִית בֶּן חוֹרִין, \nנוֹתֵן אֶת שָׁוְיוֹ. \nחָבַל בָּזֶה וּבָזֶה, \nמְשַׁלֵּם נֶזֶק שָׁלֵם. \n",
+ "ה\nוּבָאוֹנֵס וּבַמְפַתֶּה, לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחְמִיר, \nכֵּיצַד? \nאֶחָד שֶׁאָנַס וּפִתָּה אֶת הַגְּדוֹלָה שֶׁבִּכְהֻנָּה, \nוְאֶת הַקְּטַנָּה שֶׁבְּיִשְׂרָאֵל, \nנוֹתֵן חֲמִשִּׁים סֶלַע. \nוּבַבֹּשֶׁת וּבַפְּגָם, \nהַכֹּל לְפִי הַמְבַיֵּשׁ וְהַמִּתְבַּיֵּשׁ. \n",
+ "ו\nוּבַמּוֹצִיא שֵׁם רַע, לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחְמִיר, \nכֵּיצַד? \nאֶחָד שֶׁהוֹצִיא שֵׁם רַע עַל הַגְּדוֹלָה שֶׁבִּכְהֻנָּה, \nוְעַל הַקְּטַנָּה [שֶׁבְּיִשְׂרָאֵל], \nנוֹתֵן מֵאָה סֶלַע. \nנִמְצָא הָאוֹמֵר בְּפִיו חָמוּר יָתֵר מִן הָעוֹשֶׂה מַעֲשֶׂה. \nשֶׁכֵּן מָצִינוּ, <מצאנו>\nשֶׁלֹּא נִתְחַתַּם גְּזַר דִּין עַל אֲבוֹתֵינוּ בַמִּדְבָּר, \nאֶלָּא עַל לְשׁוֹן הָרַע, \nשֶׁנֱּאֱמַר (במדבר יד,כב) \n\"וַיְנַסּוּ אֹתִי זֶה עֶשֶׂר פְּעָמִים וְלֹא שָׁמְעוּ בְּקוֹלִי\". \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nהֶשֵּׂג יָד, בַּנּוֹדֵר, \nוְהַשָּׁנִים, בַּנִּדָּר, \nוַעֲרָכִים, בַּנֶּעֱרָךְ, \nוְהָעֵרֶךְ, בִּזְמַן הָעֶרֶךְ. \nהֶשֵּׂג יָד בַּנּוֹדֵר, כֵּיצַד? \nעָנִי שֶׁהֱעֱרִיךְ אֶת הֶעָשִׁיר, \nנוֹתֵן עֶרֶךְ עָנִי, \nוְעָשִׁיר שֶׁהֱעֱרִיךְ אֶת הֶעָנִי, \nנוֹתֵן עֶרֶךְ עָשִׁיר. \n",
+ "ב\nאֲבָל בַּקָּרְבָּנוֹת אֵינוּ כֵן. \nהֲרֵי שֶׁאָמַר: \n\"קָרְבָּנוֹ שֶׁלִּמְצֹרָע זֶה עָלַי!\" \nאִם הָיָה מְצֹרָע עָנִי, מֵבִיא קָרְבַּן עָנִי; \nעָשִׁיר, מֵבִיא קָרְבַּן עָשִׁיר. \n\nג\nרְבִּי אוֹמֵר: \nאוֹמֵר אֲנִי, אַף בָּעֲרָכִים כֵּן. \nוְכִי מִפְּנֵי מָה \nעָנִי שֶׁהֱעֱרִיךְ אֶת הֶעָשִׁיר נוֹתֵן עֶרֶךְ עָנִי? \nשֶׁאֵין הֶעָשִׁיר חַיָּב כְּלוּם. \nאֲבָל עָשִׁיר שֶׁאָמַר: \n\"עֶרְכִּי עָלַי!\" \nוְשָׁמַע עָנִי וְאָמַר: \n\"מַה שֶּׁאָמַר זֶה עָלַי!\" \nנוֹתֵן עֶרֶךְ עָשִׁיר. \nאִם הָיָה עָנִי וְהֶעְשִׁיר, \nאוֹ עָשִׁיר וְהֶעְנִי, \nנוֹתֵן עֶרֶךְ עָשִׁיר. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nאֲפִלּוּ עָנִי וְהֶעְשִׁיר, וְחָזַר וְהֶעְנִי, \nנוֹתֵן עֶרֶךְ עָשִׁיר. \n",
+ "ד\nאֲבָל בַּקָּרְבָּנוֹת אֵינוּ כֵן. \nאֲפִלּוּ אָבִיו מֵת, \nוְהִנִּיחַ לוֹ רִבּוֹא סְפִינוֹת בַּיָּם וּבָאוּ לוֹ בָרִבּוֹאוֹת, \nאֵין לַהֶקְדֵּשׁ בָּהֶם כְּלוּם. \n",
+ "ה\nוְהַשָּׁנִים בַּנִּדָּר, כֵּיצַד? \nיֶלֶד שֶׁהֱעֱרִיךְ אֶת הַזָּקֵן, \nנוֹתֵן עֶרֶךְ זָקֵן, \nוְזָקֵן שֶׁהֱעֱרִיךְ אֶת הַיֶּלֶד, \nנוֹתֵן עֶרֶךְ יֶלֶד. \n\nו\nוַעֲרָכִים בַּנֶּעֱרָךְ, כֵּיצַד? \nאִישׁ שֶׁהֱעֱרִיךְ אֶת הָאִשָּׁה, \nנוֹתֵן עֶרֶךְ אִשָּׁה, \nוְאִשָּׁה שֶׁהֶעֱרִיכָה אֶת הָאִישׁ, \nנוֹתֶנֶת עֶרֶךְ אִישׁ. \n\nז\nוְהָעֵרֶךְ בִּזְמַן הָעֶרֶךְ, כֵּיצַד? \nהֶעֱרִיכוֹ פָחוּת מִבֶּן חָמֵשׁ, \nוְנֶעֱשָׂה יָתֵר עַל בֶּן חָמֵשׁ; \nפָּחוּת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים, \nוְנֶעֱשָׂה יָתֵר עַל בֶּן עֶשְׂרִים, \nנוֹתֵן כִּזְמַן הָעֶרֶךְ. \n\nח\nיוֹם שְׁלֹשִׁים, כִּלְמַטָּה הֵמֶנּוּ. \nשְׁנַת חָמֵשׁ וּשְׁנַת עֶשְׂרִים, כִּלְמַטָּה הֵמֶנָּה, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (ויקרא כז,ז) \n\"וְאִם מִבֶּן שִׁשִּׁים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה אִם זָכָר\", \nהֲרֵי אָנוּ לְמֵדִים בְּכֻלָּן מִשְּׁנַת שִׁשִּׁים: \nמַה שְּׁנַת שִׁשִּׁים כִּלְמַטָּה הֵמֶנָּה, \nאַף שְׁנַת חָמֵשׁ וּשְׁנַת עֶשְׂרִים כִּלְמַטָּה הֵמֶנָּה. \n\nט\nהִן? \nאִם עָשָׂת שְׁנַת שִׁשִּׁים כִּלְמַטָּה הֵמֶנָּה לְהַחְמִיר, \nנֶעֱשָׂה שְׁנַת חָמֵשׁ וּשְׁנַת עֶשְׂרִים <חֲמִשִּׁים>\nכִּלְמַטָּה הֵמֶנָּה לְהָקֵל? \nתַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: \n\"שָׁנָה\", \"שָׁנָה\" לִגְזֵרָה שָׁוָה: \nמַה \"שָּׁנָה\" הָאֲמוּרָה מִשְּׁנַת שִׁשִּׁים, כִּלְמַטָּה מִמֶּנָּה, \nאַף \"שָׁנָה\" הָאֲמוּרָה שְׁנַת חָמֵשׁ וּשְׁנַת עֶשְׂרִים, \nכִּלְמַטָּה מִמֶּנָּה, בֵּין לְהָקֵל בֵּין לְהַחְמִיר. \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: \nעַד שֶׁיְּהוּ יְתֵרוֹת עַל הַשָּׁנִים חֹדֶשׁ וְיוֹם אֶחָד. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nהָאוֹמֵר \"מִשְׁקָלִי עָלַי!\" \nנוֹתֵן מִשְׁקָלוֹ, אִם כֶּסֶף, כֶּסֶף, אִם זָהָב, זָהָב. \nמַעֲשֶׂה בְאִמָּהּ שֶׁלִּרְמַטְיָה, \nשֶׁאָמְרָה \"מִשְׁקַל בִּתִּי עָלַי!\" \nוְעָלָת לִירוּשָׁלַיִם, וּשְׁקָלוּהָ, \nוְנָתְנָה מִשְׁקָלָהּ זָהָב. \n\"מִשְׁקַל יָדִי עָלַי!\" \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nמְמַלֵּא חָבִית מַיִם, וּמַכְנִיסָהּ עַד מַרְפַּקּוֹ, \nוְשׁוֹקֵל בְּשַׂר חֲמוֹר וְגִידִים וַעֲצָמוֹת, \nוְנוֹתֵן לְתוֹכָהּ עַד שֶׁתִּתְמַלֵּא. \nאָמַר רְבִּי יוֹסֵה: \nוְכִי הֵיאָךְ אֶפְשָׁר לְכַוֵּן בָּשָׂר כְּנֶגֶד בָּשָׂר, \nוַעֲצָמוֹת כְּנֶגֶד עֲצָמוֹת? \nאֶלָּא שָׁמִין אֶת הַיָּד, \nכַּמָּה הִיא רְאוּיָה לִשְׁקֹל. \n",
+ "ב\n\"דְּמֵי יָדִי עָלַי!\" \nשָׁמִין אוֹתוֹ כַּמָּה הוּא שׁוֹוֶה בַיָּד, \nכַּמָּה הוּא שׁוֹוֶה שֶׁלֹּא בְיָד. \nזֶה חֹמֶר בַּנְּדָרִים מִבָּעֲרָכִים, \nוּבָעֲרָכִין מִבַּנְּדָרִים, \nכֵּיצַד? \nהָאוֹמֵר \"עֶרְכִּי עָלַי!\", וּמֵת, \nיִתְּנוּ הַיּוֹרְשִׁין; \n\"דָּמִי עָלַי!\" וּמֵת, \nלֹא יִתְּנוּ הַיּוֹרְשִׁין, \nשֶׁאֵין דָּמִים לַמֵּתִים. \n\nג\nעֶרֶךְ יָדִי וְעֶרֶךְ רַגְלִי עָלַי, \nלֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. \n\"עֶרֶךְ רֹאשִׁי וְעֶרֶךְ כְּבֵדִי עָלַי!\" \nנוֹתֵן עֶרֶךְ כֻּלּוֹ. \nזֶה הַכְּלָל: \nדָּבָר שֶׁהַנְּשָׁמָה תְלוּיָה בוֹ, \nנוֹתֵן עֶרֶךְ כֻּלּוֹ. \n",
+ "ד\n\"חֲצִי עֶרְכִּי עָלַי!\" \nנוֹתֵן חֲצִי עֶרְכּוֹ. \n\"עֶרֶךְ חֲצִי עָלַי!\" \nנוֹתֵן עֶרֶךְ כֻּלּוֹ. \n\"חֲצִי דָמִי עָלַי!\" \nנוֹתֵן חֲצִי דָמָיו. \n\"בִּדְמֵי חֲצִי עָלַי!\" \nנוֹתֵן דְּמֵי כֻלּוֹ. \nזֶה הַכְּלָל: \nדָּבָר שֶׁהַנְּשָׁמָה תְלוּיָה בוֹ, \nנוֹתֵן דְּמֵי כֻלּוֹ. \n",
+ "ה\nהָאוֹמֵר \"עֶרְכּוֹ שֶׁלִּפְלוֹנִי עָלַי!\" \nמֵת הַנּוֹדֵר וְהַנִּדָּר, \nיִתְּנוּ הַיּוֹרְשִׁין. \n\"דָּמָיו שֶׁלִּפְלוֹנִי עָלַי!\" \nמֵת הַנּוֹדֵר, \nיִתְּנוּ הַיּוֹרְשִׁין; \nמֵת הַנִּדָּר, \nלֹא יִתְּנוּ הַיּוֹרְשִׁין, \nשֶׁאֵין דָּמִים לַמֵּתִים. \n",
+ "ו\n\"שׁוֹר זֶה עוֹלָה!\" \nוּ\"בַיִת זֶה קָרְבָּן!\" \nמֵת הַשּׁוֹר אוֹ נָפַל הַבַּיִת, \nאֵינוּ חַיָּב לְשַׁלֵּם. \n\"דְּמֵי שׁוֹר זֶה עָלַי עוֹלָה!\" \nוּ\"דְמֵי בַיִת זֶה עָלַי קָרְבָּן!\" \nמֵת הַשּׁוֹר אוֹ נָפַל הַבַּיִת, \nחַיָּב לְשַׁלֵּם. \n",
+ "ז\nחַיְבֵי עֲרָכִים, מְמַשְׁכְּנִים אוֹתָם. \nחַיְבֵי חַטָּאוֹת וַאֲשָׁמוֹת, אֵין מְמַשְׁכְּנִים אוֹתָם. \nחַיְבֵי עוֹלָה וּשְׁלָמִים, מְמַשְׁכְּנִים אוֹתָם. \nאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוּ מִתְכַּפֵּר לוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּתְרַצֶּה, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר \"לִרְצנוֹ\", (ויקרא א,ג) \nכּוֹפִין אוֹתוֹ עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר \"רוֹצֶה אָנִי\". \nוְכֵן אַתָּה אוֹמֵר בְּגִטֵּי נָשִׁים: \nכּוֹפִין אוֹתוֹ עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר \"רוֹצֶה אָנִי\". \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nשׁוּם הַיְתוֹמִין, שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם, \nשׁוּם הַהֶקְדֵּשׁ, שִׁשִּׁים יוֹם. \nוּמַכְרִיזִין בַּבֹּקֶר וּבָעֶרֶב. \nהַמַּקְדִּישׁ נְכָסָיו, \nוְהָיְתָה עָלָיו כְּתֻבַּת אִשָּׁה, \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: \nכְּשֶׁיְּגָרְשֶׁנָּה, יַדִּיר הֲנָיָה. \nרְבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר: \nאֵינוּ צָרִיךְ. \nכַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ אָמַר רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל: \nהֶעָרֵב לָאִשָּׁה בִכְתֻבָּתָהּ, \nהָיָה בַעְלָהּ מְגָרְשָׁהּ, יַדִּיר הֲנָיָה, \nשֶׁמֵּא יַעֲשׂוּ קְנוֹנְיָה עַל נְכָסָיו שֶׁלָּזֶה, \nוְיַחְזִיר אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ. \n",
+ "ב\nהַמַּקְדִּישׁ נְכָסָיו, \nוְהָיְתָה עָלָיו כְּתֻבַּת אִשָּׁה וּבַעַל חוֹב, \nאֵין הָאִשָּׁה יְכוּלָה לִגְבּוֹת כְּתֻבָּתָהּ מִן הַהֶקְדֵּשׁ, \nוְלֹא בַעַל חוֹב אֶת חוֹבוֹ. \nאֶלָּא הַפּוֹדֶה, \nפּוֹדֶה עַל מְנָת לִתֵּן לָאִשָּׁה כְתֻבָּתָהּ, \nוּלְבַעַל חוֹב אֶת חוֹבוֹ. \nהִקְדִּישׁ תִּשְׁעִים מָנֶא, \nוְהָיָה חוֹבוֹ מֵאָה מָנֶא, \nמוֹסִיף עוֹד דִּינָר, \nוּפוֹדֶה אֶת הַנְּכָסִים אֵלּוּ, \nעַל מְנָת לִתֵּן לָאִשָּׁה כְתֻבָּתָהּ, \nוּלְבַעַל חוֹב אֶת חוֹבוֹ. \n",
+ "ג\nאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָמָרוּ: \nחַיְבֵי עֲרָכִין מְמַשְׁכְּנִים אוֹתָן, \nנוֹתְנִין לוֹ מְזוֹן שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם, \nוּכְסוּת שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ, \nמִטָּה מֻצַּעַת, סַנְדַּלָּיו, וּתְפִלָּיו, \nלוֹ, אֲבָל לֹא לְאִשְׁתּוֹ וּלְבָנָיו. \nאֲבָל אִם הָיָה אֻמָּן, \nנוֹתְנִין לוֹ שְׁנֵי כְלֵי אֻמָּנוּת מִכָּל מִין וּמִין. \nחָרָשׁ, \nנוֹתְנִין לוֹ שְׁנֵי מַעְצָדִים וּשְׁתֵּי מְגֵרוֹת. \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: \nאִם הָיָה אִכָּר, \nנוֹתְנִין לוֹ אֶת צִמְדּוֹ. \nחַמָּר, \nנוֹתְנִין לוֹ חֲמוֹרוֹ. \n",
+ "ד <ה>\nהָיָה לוֹ מִין אֶחָד מְרֻבֶּה, \nוּמִין אֶחָד מְמֻעָט, \nאֵין אוֹמְרִין לִמְכֹּר מִן הַמְרֻבֶּה, \nוְנִקַּח לוֹ מִן הַמְמֻעָט, \nאֶלָּא נוֹתְנִין לוֹ שְׁנֵי מִינִין מִן הַמְרֻבֶּה, \nוְכָל שֶׁיֶּשׁ לוֹ מִן הַמְמֻעָט. \nהַמַּקְדִּישׁ אֶת נְכָסָיו, \nמַעְלִין אֶת תְּפִלָּיו. \n",
+ "ה <ו> \nאֶחָד הַמַּקְדִּישׁ נְכָסָיו, \nוְאֶחָד הַמַּעֲרִיךְ אֶת עַצְמוֹ, \nאֵין לוֹ לֹא בִכְסוּת אִשְׁתּוֹ, \nוְלֹא בִכְסוּת בָּנָיו, \nוְלֹא בְצֶבַע שֶׁצְּבָעָן לִשְׁמָן, \nוְלֹא בְסַנְדַּלִּים חֲדָשִׁים שֶׁלְּקָחָן לִשְׁמָן. \nאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָמָרוּ: \nעֲבָדִים נִמְכָּרִין בִּכְסוּתָן לְשֶׁבַח, \nשֶׁאִם תִּלָּקַח לוֹ כְסוּת בִּשְׁלֹשִׁים דִּינָר, \nמַשְׁבִּיחַ הוּא מָנֶא. \nוְכֵן פָּרָה, \nאִם מַמְתִּינִים אוֹתָהּ לְאַטְלֵס, \nמְשַׁבַּחַת הִיא. \nוְכֵן מַרְגָּלִית, \nאִם מַעְלִים אוֹתָהּ לִכְרַךְ, \nמְשַׁבַּחַת הִיא. \nאֵין לַהֶקְדֵּשׁ אֶלָּא מְקוֹמוֹ וְשַׁעְתוֹ. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nאֵין מַקְדִּישִׁין לִפְנֵי הַיּוֹבֵל פָּחוּת מִשְּׁתֵי שָׁנִים, \nוְלֹא גוֹאֲלִין לְאַחַר הַיּוֹבֵל פָּחוּת מִשָּׁנָה. \nאֵין מְחַשְּׁבִים חֳדָשִׁים לַהֶקְדֵּשׁ, \nאֲבָל הֶקְדֵּשׁ מְחַשֵּׁב חֳדָשִׁים. \n\nב\nהַמַּקְדִּישׁ אֶת שָׂדֵהוּ בְשָׁעַת הַיּוֹבֵל, \nנוֹתֵן בְּזֶרַע חֹמֶר שְׂעוֹרִים חֲמִשִּׁים שֶׁקֶל כֶּסֶף. \nהָיוּ שָׁם נְקָעִים עֲמֻקִּים עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים, \nסְלָעִים גְּבוֹהִין עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים, \nאֵין נִמְדָּדִין עִמָּהּ. \nפָּחוּת מִכֵּן, נִמְדָּדִין עִמָּהּ. \nהִקְדִּישָׁהּ שְׁתַּיִם שָׁלוֹשׁ שָׁנִים לִפְנֵי הַיּוֹבֵל, \nנוֹתֵן סֶלַע וּפַנְדְּיוֹן לַשָּׁנָה. \nאִם אָמַר: \n\"הֲרֵי אֲנִי נוֹתֵן דְּבַר שָׁנָה בְשָׁנָה\", \nאֵין שׁוֹמְעִין לוֹ, \nאֶלָּא נוֹתֵן כֻּלָּם כְּאַחַת. \n",
+ "ג\nאֶחָד הַבְּעָלִים, וְאֶחָד כָּל הָאָדָם. \nמַה בֵּין הַבְּעָלִים לְבֵין כָּל הָאָדָם? \nאֶלָּא שֶׁהַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִין חֹמֶשׁ, \nוְכָל אָדָם אֵינוּ נוֹתֵן חֹמֶשׁ. \n",
+ "ד\nהִקְדִּישָׁהּ וּגְאָלָהּ, \nאֵינָה יוֹצָא מִיָּדוֹ בַיּוֹבֵל. \n(גְּאָלָהּ בְּנוֹ, יוֹצְאָה לְאָבִיו בַּיּוֹבֵל.) \nגְּאָלָהּ אַחֵר, אוֹ אֶחָד מִן הַקְּרוֹבִין, \nוּגְאָלָהּ מִיָּדוֹ, \nאֵינָה יוֹצָא מִיָּדוֹ בַיּוֹבֵל. \nגְּאָלָהּ אֶחָד מִן הַכֹּהֲנִים, \nוַהֲרֵי הִיא תַּחַת יָדוֹ, \nלֹא יֹאמַר: \n\"הוֹאִיל וְהִיא יוֹצָא לַכֹּהֲנִים בַּיּוֹבֵל, \nהֲרֵי הִיא תַּחַת יָדִי, \nוַהֲרֵי הִיא שֶׁלִּי!\" \nאֶלָּא יוֹצָא לְכָל אֶחָיו הַכֹּהֲנִים. \n",
+ "ה\nהִגִּיעַ הַיּוֹבֵל וְלֹא נִגְאָלָה, \nהַכֹּהֲנִים נִכְנָסִים לְתוֹכָהּ, וְנוֹתְנִים דָּמֶיהָ. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי יְהוּדָה. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: \nנִכְנָסִין אֲבָל לֹא נוֹתְנִים. \n(רְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: \nלֹא נִכְנָסִין וְלֹא נוֹתְנִין,) \nאֶלָּא נִקְרֵאת שְׂדֵה רְטוּשִׁין, \nעַד הַיּוֹבֵל הַשֵּׁנִי. \nהִגִּיעַ יוֹבֵל הַשֵּׁנִי וְלֹא נִגְאָלָה, \nנִקְרֵאת רְטוּשֵׁי רְטוּשִׁין, \nעַד הַיּוֹבֵל הַשְּׁלִישִׁי. \nלְעוֹלָם אֵין הַכֹּהֲנִים נִכְנָסִין לְתוֹכָהּ, \nעַד שֶׁיִּגְאָלֶנָּה אַחֵר. \n",
+ "ו <ה>\nהַלּוֹקֵחַ שָׂדֶה מֵאָבִיו, \nמֵת אָבִיו וְאַחַר כָּךְ הִקְדִּישָׁהּ, \nהֲרֵי הִיא כִשְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה. \nהִקְדִּישָׁהּ, וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵת אָבִיו, \nהֲרֵי הִיא כִשְׂדֵה מִקְנָה. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי מֵאִיר. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה וּרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמְרִים: \nכִּשְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (ויקרא כז,כב) \n\"וְאִם אֶת שְׂדֵה מִקְנָתוֹ אֲשֶׁר לֹא מִשְּׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּתוֹ\". \nשָׂדֶה שֶׁאֵינָה רְאוּיָה לִהְיוֹת שְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה, \nיָצְאתָה זוֹ שֶׁהִיא רְאוּיָה לִהְיוֹת שְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה. \nשְׂדֵה מִקְנָה אֵינָה יוֹצָא לַכֹּהֲנִים בַּיּוֹבֵל, \nשֶׁאֵין אָדָם מַקְדִּישׁ דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוּ שֶׁלּוֹ. \nהַכֹּהֲנִים וְהַלְוִיִּם \nמַקְדִּישִׁים לְעוֹלָם וְגוֹאֲלִין לְעוֹלָם, \nבֵּין לִפְנֵי הַיּוֹבֵל וּבֵין לְאַחַר הַיּוֹבֵל. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nהַמַּקְדִּישׁ שָׂדֵהוּ בְשָׁעָה שֶׁאֵינָה יוֹבֵל, \nאוֹמְרִין לוֹ: \nפְּתַח אַתְּ רִאשׁוֹן, <אֶת>\nשֶׁהַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִין חֹמֶשׁ, \nוְכָל אָדָם אֵינוּ נוֹתֵן חֹמֶשׁ. \nמַעֲשֶׂה בְאֶחָד שֶׁהִקְדִּישׁ אֶת שָׂדֵהוּ מִפְּנֵי רָעָתָהּ, \nאָמְרוּ לוֹ: \n\"פְּתַח אַתְּ רִאשׁוֹן!\" <אֶת>\nאָמַר: \n\"הֲרֵי הִיא שֶׁלִּי בְאִסָּר!\" \nאָמַר רְבִּי יוֹסֵה: \nלֹא אָמַר זֶה אֶלָּא ב'ְכַבֵּיצָה', \nשֶׁהַהֶקְדֵּשׁ נִפְדֶּה בְכֶסֶף וּבְשׁוֹוֶה כֶסֶף. \nאוֹמְרִין לוֹ: \n\"הִגִּיעַתְךָ!\" <הִגִּיעַתְכָה>\nנִמְצָא מַפְסִיד אִסָּר, וְשָׂדֵהוּ לְפָנָיו. \n",
+ "ב\nאָמַר אֶחָד: \n\"הֲרֵי הִיא שֶׁלִּי בְעֶשֶׂר סְלָעִים\", \nוְאֶחָד אוֹמֵר: \n\"בְּעֶשְׂרִים\", \nוְאֶחָד אוֹמֵר: \n\"בִּשְׁלֹשִׁים\", \nוְאֶחָד אוֹמֵר: \n\"בְּאַרְבָּעִים\", \nוְאֶחָד אוֹמֵר: \n\"בַּחֲמִשִּׁים\", \nחָזַר בּוֹ שֶׁלַּחֲמִשִּׁים, \nמְמַשְׁכְּנִים מִנְּכָסָיו עַד עֶשֶׂר. \nחָזַר בּוֹ שֶׁלְּאַרְבָּעִים, \nמְמַשְׁכְּנִים מִנְּכָסָיו עַד עֶשֶׂר. \nחָזַר בּוֹ שֶׁלִּשְׁלֹשִׁים, \nמְמַשְׁכְּנִים מִנְּכָסָיו עַד עֶשֶׂר. \nחָזַר בּוֹ שֶׁלְּעֶשְׂרִים, \nמְמַשְׁכְּנִים מִנְּכָסָיו עַד עֶשֶׂר. \nחָזַר בּוֹ שֶׁלְּעֶשֶׂר, \nמוֹכְרִין אוֹתָהּ בְּשׁוֹוֶהָ, \nוְנִפְרָעִין מִשֶּׁלְּעֶשֶׂר אֶת הַמּוֹתָר. \nהַבְּעָלִים אוֹמְרִים: \n\"בְּעֶשְׂרִים\", \nוְכָל אָדָן אוֹמֵר: \n\"בְּעֶשְׂרִים\", \nהַבְּעָלִים קוֹדְמִין, \nמִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן מוֹסִיפִין חֹמֶשׁ. \n",
+ "ג\nאָמַר אֶחָד: \n\"הֲרֵי הִיא שֶׁלִּי בְעֶשְׂרִים וְאַחַת\", \nהַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִים עֶשְׂרִים וָשֵׁשׁ; \n\"בְּעֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁתַּיִם\", \nהַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִים עֶשְׂרִים וָשֶׁבַע; \n\"בְּעֶשְׂרִים וְשָׁלוֹשׁ\", \nהַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִים עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁמוֹנֶה; \n\"בְּעֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע\", \nהַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִים עֶשְׂרִים וָתֵשַׁע; \n\"בְּעֶשְׂרִים וְחָמֵשׁ\", \nהַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִים שְׁלֹשִׁים, \nשֶׁאֵין מוֹסִיפִין חֹמֶשׁ עַל עִלּוּיוֹ שֶׁלַּזֶּה. \nאָמַר אֶחָד: \n\"הֲרֵי הִיא שֶׁלִּי בְעֶשְׂרִים וָשֵׁשׁ\", \nאִם רָצוּ הַבְּעָלִין לִתֵּן שְׁלֹשִׁים וְאֶחָד דִּינָר, \nהַבְּעָלִין קוֹדְמִין; \nוְאִם לָאו, אוֹמְרִים לוֹ: \n\"הִגִּיעַתְךָ!\" <הִגִּיעַתְכָה> \n",
+ "ד\nמַחֲרִים אָדָם מִצֹּאנוֹ וּמִבְּקָרוֹ, \nמֵעֲבָדָיו וּמִשִּׁפְחוֹתָיו הַכְּנַעֲנִים, \nוּמִשְּׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּתוֹ. \nוְאִם הֶחֱרִים אֶת כֻּלָּם, אֵינָן מֻחְרָמִין. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. \nאָמַר רְבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה: \nמָה אִם לַגָּבוֹהַּ, \nשֶׁאֵין אָדָם רַשַּׁי לְהַחֲרִים אֶת כָּל נְכָסָיו, \nעַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה, \nיְהֵא אָדָם חַיָּב לִהְיוֹת חָס עַל נְכָסָיו. \n",
+ "ה\nהַמַּחֲרִים בְּנוֹ וּבִתּוֹ, \nוְעַבְדּוֹ וְשִׁפְחָתוֹ הָעִבְרִים, \nוּשְׂדֵה מִקְנָתוֹ, \nאֵינָן מֻחְרָמִים, \nשֶׁאֵין אָדָם מַחֲרִים דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוּ שֶׁלּוֹ. \nהַכֹּהֲנִים וְהַלְוִיִּם אֵינָן מֻחְרָמִים. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי יְהוּדָה. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: \nהַכֹּהֲנִים אֵינָן מֻחְרָמִין, <מחרימין>\nשֶׁהַחֲרָמִין שֶׁלָּהֶן, \nוְהַלְוִיִּם מֻחְרָמִים, <מחרימים>\nשֶׁאֵין הַחֲרָמִין שֶׁלָּהֶן. \nרְבִּי אוֹמֵר: \nנִרְאִין דִּבְרֵי רְבִּי יְהוּדָה בַקַּרְקָעוֹת, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (ויקרא כה,לד) \n\"כִּי אֲחֻזַּת עוֹלָם הוּא לָהֶם\", \nוּכְדִבְרֵי רְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בַּמִּטַּלְטְלִין, \nשֶׁאֵין הַחֲרָמִין שֶׁלָּהֶן. \n",
+ "[ו]\nוְחֶרְמֵי כֹהֲנִים אֵין לָהֶם פִּדְיוֹן, \nאֶלָּא נִתָּנִין לַכֹּהֲנִים. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶן בְּתִירָה אוֹמֵר: \nסְתָם חֲרָמִים, לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (ויקרא כז,כח) \n\"כָּל חֵרֶם קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים הוּא לַיי\". \nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: \nסְתָם חֲרָמִים, לַכֹּהֲנִים, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (ויקרא כז,כא) \n\"כִּשְׂדֵה הַחֵרֶם לַכֹּהֵן תִּהְיֶה אֲחֻזָּתוֹ\". \nאִם כֵּן, לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר: (ויקרא כז,כח) \n\"כָּל חֵרֶם קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים הוּא לַיי\"? \nשֶׁהוּא חָל עַל קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים וְעַל קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים. \n",
+ "ז\nמַחֲרִים אָדָם אֶת קֳדָשָׁיו, \nבֵּין קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים, \nוּבֵין קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים. \nאִם נֶדֶר, נוֹתֵן אֶת דְּמֵיהֶן, \nאִם נְדָבָה, נוֹתֵן אֶת טוֹבָתָהּ. \n\"שׁוֹר זֶה עוֹלָה\", \nאוֹמְדִין כַּמָּה אָדָם רוֹצֶה לִתֵּן בְּשׁוֹר זֶה, \nלְהַעֲלוֹתוֹ עוֹלָה שֶׁאֵינוּ חַיָּב. \nהַבְּכוֹר, \nבֵּין תָּמִים, בֵּין בַּעַל מוּם, \nמַחֲרִימִין אוֹתוֹ. \nכֵּיצַד פּוֹדִין אוֹתוֹ? \nאוֹמְדִין כַּמָּה אָדָן רוֹצֶה לִתֵּן בִּבְכוֹר זֶה, \nלִתְּנוֹ לְבֶן בִּתּוֹ אוֹ לְבֶן אֲחוֹתוֹ. \n\nח\nרְבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר: \nכָּתוּב אֶחָד אוֹמֵר: \n\"הַקְדֵּשׁ\", \nוְכָתוּב אַחֵר אוֹמֵר: \n\"אַל תַּקְדֵּשׁ\". \nאֵי אֶפְשָׁר לוֹמַר 'הַקְדֵּשׁ', \nשֶׁכְּבָר נֶאֱמַר 'אַל תַּקְדֵּשׁ', \nוְאֵי אֶפְשָׁר לוֹמַר 'אַל תַּקְדֵּשׁ', \nשֶׁכְּבָר נֶאֱמַר 'הַקְדֵּשׁ'!\nאֱמֹר מֵעַתָּה: \nמַקְדִּישׁוֹ אַתָּה הֶקְדֵּשׁ עִלּוּי, \nוְאֵין אַתָּה מַקְדִּישׁוֹ הֶקְדֵּשׁ מִזְבֵּחַ. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nהַמּוֹכֵר אֶת שָׂדֵהוּ בְשָׁעַת הַיּוֹבֵל, \nאֵינוּ מֻתָּר לִגְאֹל פָּחוּת מִשְּׁתֵי שָׁנִים, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (ויקרא כה,טו) \n\"בְּמִסְפַּר שְׁנֵי תְבוּאת יִמְכָּר לָךְ\". \nהָיְתָה שְׁנַת שִׁדָּפוֹן וְיֵרָקוֹן, אוֹ שְׁבִיעִית, \nאֵינָה עוֹלָה לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן. \nנָרָהּ, אוֹ הֵבִירָהּ, \nעוֹלָה לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן. \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: \nמְכָרָהּ לוֹ לִפְנֵי רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה, \nוְהִיא מְלֵאָה פֵרוֹת, \nהֲרֵי זֶה אוֹכֵל מִמֶּנָּה שָׁלוֹשׁ תְּבוּאוֹת לִשְׁתֵּי שָׁנִים. \n",
+ "ב\nמְכָרָהּ לָרִאשׁוֹן בְּמָנֶא, \nוּמָכַר הָרִאשׁוֹן לַשֵּׁנִי בְמָאתַיִם, \nאֵינוּ מְחַשֵּׁב אֶלָּא עִם הָרִאשׁוֹן, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (ויקרא כה,כז) \n\"לָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר מָכַר לוֹ\". <לאשר> \nמְכָרָהּ לָרִאשׁוֹן בְּמָאתַיִם, \nוּמָכַר הָרִאשׁוֹן לַשֵּׁנִי בְמָנֶא, \nאֵינוּ מְחַשֵּׁב אֶלָּא עִם הָאַחֲרוֹן, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: \"לָאִישׁ\", \nלָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר בְּתוֹכָהּ. \nלֹא יִמְכֹּר בְּרָחוֹק וְיִגְאַל בְּקָרוֹב, \nבְּרָע, וְיִגְאֹל בְּיָפֶה. \nלֹא יִלְוֶה וְיִגְאֹל, \nוְלֹא יִגְאֹל חֲצָיִים. \nוּבַהֶקְדֵּשׁ, מֻתָּר בְּכֻלָּם. \nזֶה חֹמֶר בַּהֶדְיוֹט מִבַּהֶקְדֵּשׁ. \n",
+ "ג\nהַמּוֹכֵר בַּיִת בְּבָתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה, \nהֲרֵי זֶה גוֹאֵל מִיָּד, \nוְגוֹאֵל כָּל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ. \nהֲרֵי זוֹ כְמִין רִבִּית, וְאֵינָהּ רִבִּית. \nמֵת הַמּוֹכֵר, יִגְאַל בְּנוֹ. \nמֵת הַלּוֹקֵחַ, יִגְאַל מִיַּד בְּנוֹ, \nוְאֵינוּ מוֹנֶה לוֹ שָׁנָה, \nאֶלָּא מִשָּׁעָה שֶׁמָּכַר לוֹ, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (ויקרא כה,ל) \n\"עַד מְלֹאת לוֹ שָׁנָה תְמִימָה, \nוְקָם הַבַּיִת אֲשֶׁר בָּעִיר אֲשֶׁר לוֹ חֹמָה\". \nוּכְשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר \"תְמִימָה\", \nלְהָבִיא אֶת חֹדֶשׁ הָעִבּוּר. \nרְבִּי אוֹמֵר: \nיִתֵּן לוֹ שָׁנָה וְעִבּוּרָהּ. \n",
+ "ד\nהִגִּיעַ יוֹם שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ, וְלֹא נִגְאָלָה, \nהָיְתָה חָלוּטָה לוֹ. \nאֶחָד הַלּוֹקֵחַ וְאֶחָד שֶׁנִּתַּן לוֹ מַתָּנָה, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר \"לַצְּמִיתֻת\". (ויקרא כה,ל) \nבָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיָה נִטְמָן יוֹם שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ, \nשֶׁתְּהֵא חָלוּטָה לוֹ. \nהִתְקִין הֶלֵּל הַזָּקֵן, \nשֶׁיְּהֵא חוֹלֵשׁ אֶת מָעוֹתָיו בַּלִּשְׁכָּה, \nוִיהֵא שׁוֹבֵר אֶת הַדֶּלֶת וְנִכְנָס. \nאֶמָּתַי שֶׁיִּרְצֶה הַלָּז, \nיָבוֹא וְיִטֹּל אֶת מָעוֹתָיו. \n",
+ "ה\nכָּל שֶׁהוּא לִפְנִים מִן הַחוֹמָה, \nהֲרֵי הוּא כְבָתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה, \nחוּץ מִן הַשָּׂדוֹת. \nרְבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: \nאַף הַשָּׂדוֹת. \nבַּיִת הַבָּנוּי בַּחוֹמָה, \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nאֵינוּ כְבָתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: \nכֹּתֶל הַחִיצוֹן הוּא חוֹמָתוֹ. \n",
+ "ו\nעִיר שֶׁגַּגּוֹתֶיהָ חוֹמָתָהּ, \nוְשֶׁאֵינָה מֻקֶּפֶת חוֹמָה מִימוֹת יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן נוּן, \nאֵינָה כְבָתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה. \nוְאֵלּוּ הֵן בָּתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה: \nשָׁלוֹשׁ חֲצֵרוֹת שֶׁלִּשְׁנֵי שְׁנֵי בָתִּים, \nמֻקָּפוֹת חוֹמָה מִימוֹת יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן נוּן, \nכְּגוֹן: \nקַצְרָה הַיְשָׁנָה שֶׁלְּצִפּוֹרִין, \nוְחָקָרָה שֶׁלְּגַשׁחָלָב, \nוְיוֹתְפַת הַיְשָׁנָה, \nוְגַמְלָא, וּגְדוֹד, וְחָדִיד, וְאוֹנוֹ, וִירוּשָׁלַיִם, \nוְכֵן כַּיּוֹצֵא בָהֶן. \n",
+ "ז\nבָּתֵּי הַחֲצֵרִים, \nנוֹתְנִין לָהֶן כְּכֹחַ יָפֶה שֶׁבְּבָתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה, \nוּכְכֹחַ יָפֶה שֶׁבַּשָּׂדוֹת, \nוְנִגְאָלִין מִיָּד, \nוְנִגְאָלִין כָּל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ כַּבָּתִּים, \nוְיוֹצְאִין בַּיּוֹבֵל וּבְגִרְעוֹן כֶּסֶף כַּשָּׂדוֹת. \nוְאֵלּוּ הֵן בָּתֵּי חֲצֵרִים: \nשְׁתֵּי חֲצֵרוֹת שֶׁלִּשְׁנֵי שְׁנֵי בָתִּים, \nאַף עַל פִּי מֻקָּפִין חוֹמָה מִימוֹת יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן נוּן, \nהֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כְבָתֵּי הַחֲצֵרִים. \n",
+ "ח\nיִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁיָּרַשׁ אֶת אֲבִי אִמּוֹ לֵוִי, \nאֵינוּ גוֹאֵל כַּסֵּדֶר זֶה. \nוְכֵן לֵוִי שֶׁיָּרַשׁ אֶת אֲבִי אִמּוֹ יִשְׂרָאֵל, \nאֵינוּ גוֹאֵל כַּסֵּדֶר זֶה, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (ויקרא כה,לג) \n\"כִּי בָתֵּי עָרֵי הַלְוִיִּם\", \nעַד שֶׁיְּהֵא לֵוִי וּבְעָרֵי הַלְוִיִּם. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי מֵאִיר. \nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: \nאֵין הַדְּבָרִין אֲמוּרִין אֶלָּא בְעָרֵי הַלְוִיִּם. \nאֵין עוֹשִׂין שָׂדֶה מִגְרָשׁ, וְלֹא מִגְרָשׁ שָׂדֶה, \nלֹא מִגְרָשׁ עִיר, וְלֹא עִיר מִגְרָשׁ. \nאָמַר רְבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: \nבַּמֵּי דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים? \nבְּעָרֵי הַלְוִיִּם. \nאֲבָל בְּעָרֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, \nעוֹשִׂים שָׂדֶה מִגְרָשׁ, וְלֹא מִגְרָשׁ שָׂדֶה, \nמִגְרָשׁ עִיר, וְלֹא עִיר מִגְרָשׁ, \nכְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יַחֲרִיבוּ אֶת עָרֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל. \nהַכֹּהֲנִים וְהַלְוִיִּם מוֹכְרִין לְעוֹלָם, \nוְגוֹאֲלִין לְעוֹלָם, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (ויקרא כה,לב) \n\"גְּאֻלַּת עוֹלָם תִּהְיֶה לַלְוִיִּם\". \n\n\n\n\n\n"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/Hebrew/Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/Hebrew/Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ec3db916a60651ecb4839d97bf85038a2afc57f9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/Hebrew/Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913.json
@@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
+{
+ "language": "he",
+ "title": "Mishnah Arakhin",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001741739",
+ "versionTitle": "Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 2.0,
+ "license": "Public Domain",
+ "digitizedBySefaria": true,
+ "heversionSource": "http://primo.nli.org.il/primo_library/libweb/action/dlDisplay.do?vid=NLI&docId=NNL_ALEPH00174173",
+ "versionTitleInHebrew": "משנה, מהדורת בית דפוס ראם, וילנא 1913",
+ "actualLanguage": "he",
+ "languageFamilyName": "hebrew",
+ "isBaseText": true,
+ "isSource": true,
+ "isPrimary": true,
+ "direction": "rtl",
+ "heTitle": "משנה ערכין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "הכל מעריכין. ונערכין. נודרים ונידרים. כהנים ולוים וישראלים. נשים ועבדים. טומטום ואנדרוגינוס נודרים ונידרים ומעריכין אבל לא נערכין. שאינו נערך אלא זכר ודאי ונקבה ודאית. חרש שוטה וקטן נידרין ונערכין אבל לא נודרין ולא מעריכין. מפני שאין בהם דעת. פחות מבן חדש נידר. אבל לא נערך: ",
+ "הנכרי. רבי מאיר אומר נערך אבל לא מעריך. רבי יהודה אומר מעריך אבל לא נערך. זה וזה מודים שנודרין ונידרין. ",
+ "הגוסס והיוצא ליהרג. לא נידר ולא נערך. רבי חנינא בן עקביא אומר. נערך. מפני שדמיו קצובין. אבל אינו נידר. מפני שאין דמיו קצובין. רבי יוסי אומר נודר ומעריך ומקדיש. ואם הזיק חייב בתשלומין: ",
+ "האשה שהיא יוצאה ליהרג. אין ממתינין לה עד שתלד. ישבה על המשבר. ממתינין לה עד שתלד. האשה שנהרגה נהנין בשערה. בהמה שנהרגה אסורה בהנייה: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "אין בערכין פחות מסלע. ולא יתר על חמשים סלע. כיצד נתן סלע והעשיר אינו נותן כלום. פחות מסלע והעשיר נותן חמשים סלע. היה בידיו חמש סלעים. רבי מאיר אומר אינו נותן אלא אחת. וחכמים אומרים נותן את כולם. אין בערכין פחות מסלע. ולא יתר על חמשים סלע. אין פתח בטועה פחות משבעה. ולא יתר על שבעה עשר אין בנגעים פחות משבוע אחד. ולא יתר על שלשה שבועות: \n",
+ "אין פוחתין מארבעה חדשים המעוברים בשנה ולא נראה יתר על שמנה. שתי הלחם נאכלות אין פחות משנים ולא יתר על שלשה. לחם הפנים נאכל אין פחות מתשעה. ולא יתר על אחד עשר. קטן נמול אין פחות משמונה ולא יתר על שנים עשר: \n",
+ "אין פוחתין מעשרים ואחת תקיעה במקדש. ולא מוסיפין על ארבעים ושמונה. אין פוחתין משני נבלין ולא מוסיפין על ששה. אין פוחתין משני חלילין. ולא מוסיפין על שנים עשר. ובשנים עשר יום בשנה החליל מכה לפני המזבח. בשחיטת פסח ראשון. ובשחיטת פסח שני. וביום טוב ראשון של פסח. וביום טוב של עצרת. ובשמנה ימי החג. ולא היה מכה באבוב של נחשת. אלא באבוב של קנה. מפני שקולו ערב. ולא היה מחליק אלא באבוב יחידי. מפני שהוא מחליק יפה: \n",
+ "ועבדי הכהנים היו דברי רבי מאיר. רבי יוסי אומר משפחות בית הפגרים. ובית צפריה. ומאמאום היו משיאין לכהונה. רבי חנניא בן אנטיגנוס אומר לוים היו: \n",
+ "אין פוחתין מששה טלאים המבוקרין בלשכת הטלאים. כדי לשבת ולשני ימים טובים של ראש השנה. ומוסיפין עד לעולם. אין פוחתין משתי חצוצרות. ומוסיפין עד לעולם. אין פוחתין מתשעה כנורות. ומוסיפין עד לעולם. והצלצל לבד: \n",
+ "אין פוחתין משנים עשר לוים עומדים על הדוכן. ומוסיפין עד לעולם. אין קטן נכנס לעזרה לעבודה אלא בשעה שהלוים עומדים בשיר. ולא היו אומרים בנבל וכנור אלא בפה. כדי ליתן תבל בנעימה. רבי אליעזר בן יעקב אומר. אין עולין למנין. ואין עומדים על הדוכן אלא בארץ היו עומדין. וראשיהן מבין רגלי הלוים וצוערי הלוים היו נקראין: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "יש בערכין להקל ולהחמיר. בשדה אחוזה להקל ולהחמיר. בשור המועד שהמית את העבד להקל ולהחמיר. באונס ומפתה ומוציא שם רע להקל ולהחמיר. יש בערכין להקל ולהחמיר כיצד. אחד שהעריך את הנאה שבישראל. ואת הכעור שבישראל. נותן חמשים סלע. ואם אמר הרי דמיו עלי. נותן את שוויו: ",
+ "בשדה אחוזה להקל ולהחמיר כיצד. אחד המקדיש. בחולת המחוז. ואחד המקדיש בפרדסות סבסטי. נותן בזרע חומר שעורים חמשים שקל כסף. ובשדה מקנה נותן את שוויו. רבי אליעזר אומר אחד שדה אחוזה. ואחד שדה מקנה. מה בין שדה אחוזה לשדה מקנה אלא שבשדה אחוזה נותן חומש. ובשדה מקנה אינו נותן חומש: ",
+ "בשור המועד שהמית את העבד להקל ולהחמיר. כיצד. אחד שהמית את הנאה שבעבדים. ואת הכעור שבעבדים. נותן שלשים סלע. המית בן חורין נותן את שוויו. חבל בזה ובזה משלם נזק שלם: ",
+ "באונס ובמפתה להקל ולהחמיר. כיצד. אחד שאנס ופתה את הגדולה שבכהונה ואת הקטנה שבישראל. נותן חמשים סלע. והבשת. והפגם הכל לפי המבייש והמתבייש: ",
+ "במוציא שם רע להקל ולהחמיר. כיצד. אחד שהוציא שם רע. על גדולה שבכהונה ועל קטנה שבישראל. נותן מאה סלע. נמצא האומר בפיו יתר מן העושה מעשה. שכן מצינו שלא נחתם גזר דין על אבותינו במדבר אלא על לשון הרע. שנאמר (במדבר יד, כב) וינסו אותי זה עשר פעמים ולא שמעו בקולי: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "השג יד בנודר והשנים בנידר והערכים בנערך. והערך בזמן הערך. השג יד בנודר כיצד. עני שהעריך את העשיר. נותן ערך עני. ועשיר שהעריך את העני. נותן ערך עשיר: ",
+ "אבל בקרבנות אינו כן. הרי שאמר קרבנו של מצורע זה עלי. אם היה מצורע עני מביא קרבן עני. עשיר מביא קרבן עשיר. רבי אומר אומר אני. אף בערכין כן. וכי מפני מה עני שהעריך את העשיר נותן ערך עני. שאין העשיר חייב כלום. אבל העשיר שאמר ערכי עלי. ושמע העני ואמר מה שאמר זה עלי. נותן ערך עשיר. היה עני והעשיר. או עשיר והעני. נותן ערך עשיר. רבי יהודה אומר. אפילו עני והעשיר וחזר והעני. נותן ערך עשיר: ",
+ "אבל בקרבנות אינו כן. אפילו אביו מת והניח לו רבוא. ספינתו בים ובאו בריבואות. אין להקדש בהן כלום. ",
+ "שנים בנידר. כיצד. ילד שהעריך את הזקן. נותן ערך זקן. וזקן שהעריך את הילד. נותן ערך ילד. וערכים בנערך. כיצד. איש שהעריך את האשה נותן ערך אשה. ואשה שהעריכה את האיש נותנת ערך איש. והערך בזמן הערך. כיצד. העריכו פחות מבן חמש ונעשה יותר על בן חמש. פחות מבן עשרים ונעשה יותר על בן עשרים. נותן כזמן הערך. יום שלשים כלמטה ממנו. שנת חמש ושנת עשרים כלמטה ממנה. שנאמר (ויקרא כז, ז) ואם מבן ששים שנה ומעלה אם זכר הרי אנו למדים בכולם משנת ששים. מה שנת ששים כלמטה ממנה. אף שנת חמש ושנת עשרים כלמטה ממנה. הן אם עשה שנת ששים כלמטה ממנה להחמיר נעשה שנת חמש ושנת עשרים כלמטה ממנה להקל. תלמוד לומר שנה שנה לגזרה שוה מה שנה האמורה בשנת ששים. כלמטה ממנה. אף שנה האמורה בשנת חמש ושנת עשרים. כלמטה ממנה. בין להקל בין להחמיר. רבי אלעזר אומר. עד שיהיו יתרות על השנים. חדש ויום אחד: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "האומר משקלי עלי. נותן משקלו. אם כסף כסף. אם זהב זהב. מעשה באמה של ירמטיה. שאמרה משקל בתי עלי ועלתה לירושלים ושקלוה. ונתנה משקלה זהב. משקל ידי עלי רבי יהודה אומר ממלא חבית מים. ומכניסה עד מרפקו. ושוקל בשר חמור וגידין ועצמות. ונותן לתוכה עד שתתמלא. אמר ר' יוסי וכי היאך אפשר לכוין בשר כנגד בשר. ועצמות כנגד עצמות. אלא שמין את היד כמה היא ראויה לשקול. ",
+ "דמי ידי עלי. שמין אותו כמה הוא שוה ביד. וכמה הוא שוה בלא יד. זה חומר בנדרים מבערכין. וחומר בערכין מבנדרים. כיצד. האומר ערכי עלי ומת. יתנו היורשין. דמי עלי ומת. לא יתנו היורשים. שאין דמים למתים. ערך ידי וערך רגלי עלי לא אמר כלום. ערך ראשי וערך כבדי עלי נותן ערך כולו. זה הכלל. דבר שהנשמה תלויה בו נותן ערך כולו: ",
+ "חצי ערכי עלי נותן חצי ערכו. ערך חציי עלי נותן ערך כולו. חצי דמי עלי נותן חצי דמיו. דמי חציי עלי נותן דמי כולו. זה הכלל דבר שהנשמה תלויה בו נותן ערך כולו: ",
+ "האומר ערכו של פלוני עלי. מת הנודר והנידר. יתנו היורשין. דמיו של פלוני עלי. מת הנודר יתנו היורשין. מת הנידר לא יתנו היורשין שאין דמים למתים: ",
+ "שור זה עולה. בית זה קרבן. מת השור. ונפל הבית. אינו חייב לשלם. דמי שור זה עלי עולה. או דמי בית זה עלי קרבן. מת השור. ונפל הבית. חייב לשלם: ",
+ "חייבי ערכים ממשכנין אותן. חייבי חטאות ואשמות אין ממשכנין אותן חייבי עולות ושלמים ממשכנין אותן. אף על פי שאין מתכפר לו עד שיתרצה. שנאמר (ויקרא א, ג) לרצונו. כופין אותו עד שיאמר רוצה אני. וכן אתה אומר בגטי נשים. כופין אותו עד שיאמר רוצה אני: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "שום היתומים שלשים יום. ושום ההקדש ששים יום. ומכריזין בבקר ובערב. המקדיש נכסיו והיתה עליו כתובת אשה. רבי אליעזר אומר כשיגרשנה ידיר הנאה. רבי יהושע אומר אינו צריך. כיוצא בו אמר רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אף הערב לאשה בכתובתה. והיה בעלה מגרשה ידיר הנאה. שמא יעשה קנוניא על נכסיו של זה. ויחזיר את אשתו: \n",
+ "המקדיש נכסיו והיתה עליו כתובת אשה ובעל חוב. אין האשה יכולה לגבות כתובתה מן ההקדש. ולא בעל חוב את חובו. אלא הפודה פודה על מנת ליתן לאשה כתובתה ולבעל חוב את חובו. הקדיש תשעים מנה. והיה חובו מאה מנה. מוסיף עוד דינר. ופודה בו את הנכסים הללו. על מנת ליתן לאשה כתובתה ולבעל חוב את חובו: \n",
+ "אף על פי שאמרו חייבי ערכין ממשכנין אותן. נותנין לו מזון שלשים יום. וכסות שנים עשר חדש. ומטה מוצעת וסנדלין ותפילין לו אבל לא לאשתו ולא לבניו. אם היה אומן נותנין לו שני כלי אומנות מכל מין ומין. חרש נותנין שני מעצדין ושתי מגרות. רבי אליעזר אומר אם היה אכר נותנין לו את צמדו. חמר נותנין לו את חמורו: \n",
+ "היה מין אחד מרובה. ומין אחד מועט. אין אומרים לו למכור מן המרובה. וליקח לו מן המועט. אלא נותנין לו שני מינין מן המרובה. וכל שיש לו מן המועט. המקדיש את נכסיו. מעלין לו את תפיליו: \n",
+ "אחד המקדיש את נכסיו ואחד המעריך את עצמו אין לו לא בכסות אשתו ולא בכסות בניו. ולא בצבע שצבען לשמן ולא בסנדלים חדשים שלקחן לשמן. אף על פי שאמרו עבדים נמכרים בכסותן לשבח. שאם תלקח לו כסות בשלשים דינר. משביח הוא מנה. וכן פרה אם ממתינים אותה לאטליס. משבחת היא. וכן מרגלית. אם מעלין אותה לכרך. משבחת היא. אין להקדש אלא מקומו ושעתו: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "אין מקדישין לפני היובל פחות משתי שנים. ולא גואלין לאחר היובל פחות משנה. אין מחשבין חדשים להקדש. אבל ההקדש מחשב חדשים. המקדיש את שדהו בשעת היובל. נותן בזרע חומר שעורים. חמשים שקל כסף. היו שם נקעים עמוקים עשרה טפחים. או סלעים גבוהים עשרה טפחים. אין נמדדים עמה. פחות מכאן נמדדים עמה. הקדישה שתים או שלש שנים לפני היובל. נותן סלע ופונדיון לשנה. אם אמר הריני נותן דבר שנה בשנה. אין שומעין לו. אלא נותן את כולו כאחד: ",
+ "אחד הבעלים ואחד כל האדם. מה בין הבעלים לבין כל האדם. אלא שהבעלים נותנים חומש. וכל אדם אינו נותן חומש: ",
+ "הקדישה וגאלה אינה יוצאה מידו ביובל. גאלה בנו יוצאה לאביו ביובל. גאלה אחר או אחד מן הקרובים. וגאלה מידו. אינה יוצאה מידו ביובל. גאלה אחד מן הכהנים. והרי היא תחת ידו. לא יאמר הואיל והיא יוצאה לכהנים ביובל. והרי היא תחת ידי. הרי היא שלי. אלא יוצאה לכל אחיו הכהנים: ",
+ "הגיע היובל ולא נגאלה. הכהנים נכנסים לתוכה ונותנים את דמיה דברי רבי יהודה. רבי שמעון אומר נכנסין. אבל לא נותנין. רבי אליעזר אומר לא נכנסין ולא נותנין אלא נקראת שדה רטושים עד היובל השני. הגיע היובל השני ולא נגאלה. נקראת רטושי רטושין עד היובל השלישי. לעולם אין הכהנים נכנסים לתוכה. עד שיגאלנה אחר: ",
+ "הלוקח שדה מאביו. מת אביו ואחר כך הקדישה הרי היא כשדה אחוזה. הקדישה ואחר כך מת אביו. הרי היא כשדה מקנה. דברי רבי מאיר. ורבי יהודה ורבי שמעון אומרים. כשדה אחוזה שנאמר (ויקרא כז, כב) ואם את שדה מקנתו אשר לא משדה אחוזתו. שדה שאינה ראויה להיות שדה אחוזה. יוצאת זו שהיא ראויה להיות שדה אחיזה. שדה מקנה אינה יוצאה לכהנים ביובל. שאין אדם מקדיש דבר שאינו שלו. כהנים ולוים מקדישים לעולם וגואלין לעולם. בין לפני היובל. בין לאחר היובל: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "המקדיש את שדהו בשעה שאינה יובל. אומרים לו פתח אתה ראשון. שהבעלים נותנים חומש. וכל אדם אינו נותן חומש. מעשה באחד שהקדיש את שדהו מפני רעתה. אמרו לו פתח אתה ראשון. אמר הרי היא שלי באיסר. אמר רבי יוסי לא אמר זה אלא בכביצה. שההקדש נפדה בכסף ובשוה כסף. אמר לו הגיעתך. נמצא מפסיד איסר ושדהו לפניו: ",
+ "אמר אחד הרי היא שלי בעשר סלעים. ואחד אומר בעשרים. ואחד אומר בשלשים. ואחד אומר בארבעים. ואחד אומר בחמשים. חזר בו של חמשים. ממשכנין מנכסיו עד עשר. חזר בו של ארבעים ממשכנין מנכסיו עד עשר. חזר בו של שלשים ממשכנין מנכסיו עד עשר. חזר בו של עשרים ממשכנים מנכסיו עד עשר. חזר בו של עשר. מוכרים אותה בשויה ונפרעים משל עשר את המותר. הבעלים אומרים בעשרים. וכל אדם אומרים בעשרים הבעלים קודמים. מפני שהם מוסיפין חומש: ",
+ "אמר אחד הרי היא שלי בעשרים ואחת. הבעלים נותנים עשרים ושש. בעשרים ושתים. הבעלים נותנים עשרים ושבע. בעשרים ושלש. הבעלים נותנים עשרים ושמונה. בעשרים וארבע הבעלים נותנים תשעה ועשרים בחמשה ועשרים. הבעלים נותנים שלשים. שאין מוסיפין חומש על עלויו של זה. אמר אחד הרי היא שלי בעשרים ושש. אם רצו הבעלים ליתן שלשים ואחד ודינר. הבעלים קודמים. ואם לאו אומרים הגיעתך: ",
+ "מחרים אדם מצאנו ומבקרו מעבדיו ומשפחותיו הכנענים. ומשדה אחוזתו. ואם החרים את כולן. אינן מוחרמין. דברי רבי אלעזר. אמר רבי אלעזר בן עזריה. מה אם לגבוה אין אדם רשאי להחרים את כל נכסיו. על אחת כמה וכמה שיהא אדם חייב להיות חס על נכסיו: ",
+ "המחרים בנו ובתו. עבדו ושפחתו העברים. ושדה מקנתו. אינן מוחרמים. שאין אדם מחרים דבר שאינו שלו. כהנים ולוים אינן מחרימין דברי רבי יהודה. רבי שמעון אומר הכהנים אינן מחרימין שהחרמים שלהם. הלוים מחרימים שאין החרמים שלהן. רבי אומר נראים דברי רבי יהודה בקרקעות. שנאמר (ויקרא כה, לד) כי אחוזת עולם היא להם. ודברי רבי שמעון במטלטלים שאין החרמים שלהם: ",
+ "חרמי כהנים אין להם פדיון. אלא ניתנים לכהנים. רבי יהודה בן בתירא אומר סתם חרמים לבדק הבית. שנאמר (ויקרא כז, כח) כל חרם קדש קדשים הוא לה'. וחכמים אומרים סתם חרמים לכהנים. שנאמר (ויקרא כז, כא) כשדה החרם לכהן תהיה אחוזתו. אם כן למה נאמר כל חרם קדש קדשים הוא לה'. שהוא חל על קדשי קדשים. ועל קדשים קלים: ",
+ "מחרים אדם את קדשיו. בין קדשי קדשים ובין קדשים קלים. אם נדר נותן את הדמים. אם נדבה נותן את טובתו. שור זה עולה אומדים כמה אדם רוצה ליתן בשור זה להעלותו עולה שאינו רשאי. הבכור בין תמים בין בעל מום. מחרימין אותו. כיצד פודין אותו. הפודין אומדים כמה אדם רוצה ליתן בבכור זה. ליתנו לבן בתו. או לבן אחותו. רבי ישמעאל אומר כתוב אחד אומר תקדיש. וכתוב אחד אומר אל תקדיש אי אפשר לומר תקדיש שכבר נאמר אל תקדיש. ואי אפשר לומר אל תקדיש שכבר נאמר תקדיש. אמור מעתה מקדישו אתה הקדש עילוי. ואין אתה מקדישו הקדש מזבח: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "המוכר את שדהו בשעת היובל. אינו מותר לגאול פחות משתי שנים. שנאמר (ויקרא כה, טו) במספר שני תבואות ימכר לך היתה שנת שדפון וירקון או שביעית. אינה עולה לו מן המנין. נרה או הובירה. עולה לו מן המנין. רבי אלעזר אומר מכרה לו לפני ראש השנה והיא מלאה פירות הרי זה אוכל ממנה שלש תבואות לשתי שנים: ",
+ "מכרה לראשון במנה. ומכר הראשון לשני במאתים. אינו מחשב אלא עם הראשון. שנאמר (ויקרא כה, כז) לאיש אשר מכר לו. מכרה לראשון במאתים. ומכר הראשון לשני במנה. אינו מחשב אלא עם האחרון. שנאמר (שם) לאיש. לאיש אשר בתוכה. לא ימכור ברחוק. ויגאול בקרוב. ברע ויגאול ביפה. לא ילוה ויגאל. ולא יגאל לחצאים. ובהקדש מותר בכולן. זה חומר בהדיוט מבהקדש: ",
+ "המוכר בית בבתי ערי חומה. הרי זה גואל מיד. וגואל כל שנים עשר חדש. הרי זה כמין ריבית ואינה ריבית. מת המוכר יגאל בנו. מת הלוקח יגאל מיד בנו. אינו מונה לו שנה אלא משעה שמכר לו. שנאמר (ויקרא, כה, ל) עד מלאת לו שנה תמימה. וכשהוא אומר תמימה להביא חדש העיבור. רבי אומר יתן לו שנה ועיבורה: ",
+ "הגיע יום שנים עשר חדש ולא נגאל. היה חלוט לו. אחד הלוקח ואחד שניתן לו מתנה. שנאמר לצמיתות. בראשונה היה נטמן יום שנים עשר חדש. שיהא חלוט לו. התקין הלל הזקן. שיהא חולש את מעותיו בלשכה ויהא שובר את הדלת ונכנס. אימתי שירצה הלה יבוא ויטול את מעותיו: ",
+ "כל שהוא לפנים מן החומה הרי הוא כבתי ערי חומה חוץ מן השדות. רבי מאיר אומר אף השדות. בית הבנוי בחומה. רבי יהודה אומר אינו כבתי ערי חומה. רבי שמעון אומר כותל החיצון היא חומתו: ",
+ "עיר שגגותיה חומתה. ושאינה מוקפת חומה מימות יהושע בן נון. אינה כבתי ערי חומה. ואלו הן בתי ערי חומה. שלש חצרות של שני שני בתים מוקפות חומה מימות יהושע בן נון. כגון קצרה הישנה של ציפורים וחקרה של גוש חלב. ויודפת הישנה וגמלא וגדוד וחדיד ואונו וירושלים וכן כיוצא בהן: ",
+ "בתי החצרים נותנים להם כח היפה שבבתי ערי חומה. וכח היפה שבשדות. נגאלין מיד. ונגאלין כל שנים עשר חדש כבתים. ויוצאים ביובל. ובגרעון כסף כשדות. ואלו הן בתי חצרים שתי חצרות של שני שני בתים. אף על פי שמוקפין חומה מימות יהושע בן נון. הרי אלו כבתי חצרים: ",
+ "ישראל שירש אבי אמו לוי. אינו גואל כסדר הזה. וכן לוי שירש את אבי אמו ישראל. אינו גואל כסדר הזה. שנאמר (ויקרא כה, לג) כי בתי ערי הלוים עד שיהא לוי ובערי הלוים, דברי רבי. וחכמים אומרים אין הדברים אמורים אלא בערי הלוים. אין עושים שדה מגרש ולא מגרש שדה. ולא מגרש עיר ולא עיר מגרש. אמר רבי אליעזר במה דברים אמורים בערי הלוים. אבל בערי ישראל. עושין שדה מגרש ולא מגרש שדה. מגרש עיר ולא עיר מגרש. כדי שלא יחריבו את ערי ישראל. הכהנים והלוים מוכרים לעולם. וגואלים לעולם. שנאמר (ויקרא כה, לב) גאולת עולם תהיה ללוים: "
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/Hebrew/Torat Emet 357.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/Hebrew/Torat Emet 357.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f08e82dc133046f2f378d5087d47d451a1937f9f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/Hebrew/Torat Emet 357.json
@@ -0,0 +1,95 @@
+{
+ "language": "he",
+ "title": "Mishnah Arakhin",
+ "versionSource": "http://www.toratemetfreeware.com/index.html?downloads",
+ "versionTitle": "Torat Emet 357",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 3.0,
+ "license": "Public Domain",
+ "versionTitleInHebrew": "תורת אמת 357",
+ "actualLanguage": "he",
+ "languageFamilyName": "hebrew",
+ "isBaseText": true,
+ "isSource": true,
+ "isPrimary": true,
+ "direction": "rtl",
+ "heTitle": "משנה ערכין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "הַכֹּל מַעֲרִיכִין וְנֶעֱרָכִין, נוֹדְרִים וְנִדָּרִים, כֹּהֲנִים וּלְוִיִּם וְיִשְׂרְאֵלִים, נָשִׁים וַעֲבָדִים. טֻמְטוּם וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוֹס, נוֹדְרִים וְנִדָּרִים וּמַעֲרִיכִין, אֲבָל לֹא נֶעֱרָכִין, שֶׁאֵינוֹ נֶעֱרָךְ אֶלָּא זָכָר וַדַּאי וּנְקֵבָה וַדָּאִית. חֵרֵשׁ, שׁוֹטֶה וְקָטָן, נִדָּרִין וְנֶעֱרָכִין, אֲבָל לֹא נוֹדְרִין וְלֹא מַעֲרִיכִין, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶם דָּעַת. פָּחוּת מִבֶּן חֹדֶשׁ, נִדָּר אֲבָל לֹא נֶעֱרָךְ: \n",
+ "הַנָּכְרִי, רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר נֶעֱרָךְ אֲבָל לֹא מַעֲרִיךְ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, מַעֲרִיךְ אֲבָל לֹא נֶעֱרָךְ. זֶה וָזֶה מוֹדִים, שֶׁנּוֹדְרִין וְנִדָּרִין: \n",
+ "הַגּוֹסֵס, וְהַיּוֹצֵא לֵהָרֵג, לֹא נִדָּר וְלֹא נֶעֱרָךְ. רַבִּי חֲנִינָא בֶּן עֲקַבְיָא אוֹמֵר, נֶעֱרָךְ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁדָּמָיו קְצוּבִין, אֲבָל אֵינוֹ נִדָּר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין דָּמָיו קְצוּבִין. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, נוֹדֵר וּמַעֲרִיךְ וּמַקְדִּישׁ. וְאִם הִזִּיק, חַיָּב בַּתַּשְׁלוּמִין: \n",
+ "הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁהִיא יוֹצְאָה לֵהָרֵג, אֵין מַמְתִּינִין לָהּ עַד שֶׁתֵּלֵד. יָשְׁבָה עַל הַמַּשְׁבֵּר, מַמְתִּינִין לָהּ עַד שֶׁתֵּלֵד. הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁנֶּהֶרְגָה, נֶהֱנִין בִּשְׂעָרָהּ. בְּהֵמָה שֶׁנֶּהֶרְגָּה, אֲסוּרָה בַהֲנָיָה: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "אֵין בָּעֲרָכִין פָּחוּת מִסֶּלַע, וְלֹא יָתֵר עַל חֲמִשִּׁים סָלַע. כֵּיצַד, נָתַן סֶלַע וְהֶעֱשִׁיר, אֵינוֹ נוֹתֵן כְּלוּם. פָּחוֹת מִסֶּלַע וְהֶעֱשִׁיר, נוֹתֵן חֲמִשִּׁים סָלַע. הָיָה בְיָדָיו חָמֵשׁ סְלָעִים, רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, אֵינוֹ נוֹתֵן אֶלָּא אֶחָת. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, נוֹתֵן אֶת כֻּלָּם. אֵין בָּעֲרָכִין פָּחוּת מִסֶּלַע, וְלֹא יָתֵר עַל חֲמִשִּׁים סֶלַע. אֵין פֶּתַח בַּטּוֹעָה פָּחוּת מִשִּׁבְעָה, וְלֹא יָתֵר עַל שִׁבְעָה עָשָׂר. אֵין בַּנְּגָעִים פָּחוּת מִשָּׁבוּעַ אֶחָד, וְלֹא יָתֵר עַל שְׁלשָׁה שָׁבוּעוֹת: \n",
+ "אֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מֵאַרְבָּעָה חֲדָשִׁים הַמְעֻבָּרִים בְּשָׁנָה, וְלֹא נִרְאֶה יָתֵר עַל שְׁמֹנָה. שְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם נֶאֱכָלוֹת אֵין פָּחוּת מִשְּׁנַיִם וְלֹא יָתֵר עַל שְׁלשָׁה. לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים נֶאֱכָל אֵין פָּחוּת מִתִּשְׁעָה וְלֹא יָתֵר עַל אַחַד עָשָׂר. קָטָן נִמּוֹל אֵין פָּחוּת מִשְּׁמֹנָה וְלֹא יָתֵר עַל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר: \n",
+ "אֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מֵעֶשְׂרִים וְאַחַת תְּקִיעוֹת בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ וְלֹא מוֹסִיפִין עַל אַרְבָּעִים וּשְׁמֹנֶה. אֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מִשְּׁנֵי נְבָלִין וְלֹא מוֹסִיפִין עַל שִׁשָּׁה. אֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מִשְּׁנֵי חֲלִילִין וְלֹא מוֹסִיפִין עַל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר. וּבִשְׁנֵים עָשָׂר יוֹם בַּשָּׁנָה הֶחָלִיל מַכֶּה לִפְנֵי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. בִּשְׁחִיטַת פֶּסַח רִאשׁוֹן, וּבִשְׁחִיטַת פֶּסַח שֵׁנִי, וּבְיוֹם טוֹב רִאשׁוֹן שֶׁל פֶּסַח, וּבְיוֹם טוֹב שֶׁל עֲצֶרֶת, וּבִשְׁמוֹנַת יְמֵי הֶחָג, וְלֹא הָיָה מַכֶּה בְּאַבּוּב שֶׁל נְחשֶׁת אֶלָּא בְּאַבּוּב שֶׁל קָנֶה, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁקּוֹלוֹ עָרֵב. וְלֹא הָיָה מַחֲלִיק אֶלָּא בְאַבּוּב יְחִידִי, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מַחֲלִיק יָפֶה: \n",
+ "וְעַבְדֵי הַכֹּהֲנִים הָיוּ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, מִשְׁפְּחוֹת בֵּית הַפְּגָרִים וּבֵית צְפָרְיָא וּמֵאֶמָּאוֹם הָיוּ מַשִּׂיאִין לַכְּהֻנָּה. רַבִּי חֲנַנְיָא בֶּן אַנְטִיגְנוֹס אוֹמֵר, לְוִיִּם הָיוּ: \n",
+ "אֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מִשִּׁשָּׁה טְלָאִים הַמְבֻקָּרִין בְּלִשְׁכַּת הַטְּלָאִים, כְּדַי לַשַּׁבָּת וְלִשְׁנֵי יָמִים טוֹבִים שֶׁל רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה, וּמוֹסִיפִין עַד לְעוֹלָם. אֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מִשְּׁתֵּי חֲצוֹצְרוֹת, וּמוֹסִיפִין עַד לְעוֹלָם. אֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מִתִּשְׁעָה כִנּוֹרוֹת, וּמוֹסִיפִין עַד לְעוֹלָם. וְהַצִּלְצָל לְבָד: \n",
+ "אֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מִשְּׁנֵים עָשָׂר לְוִיִּם עוֹמְדִים עַל הַדּוּכָן, וּמוֹסִיפִין עַד לְעוֹלָם. אֵין קָטָן נִכְנָס לָעֲזָרָה לַעֲבוֹדָה אֶלָּא בְשָׁעָה שֶׁהַלְוִיִּם עוֹמְדִים בַּשִּׁיר. וְלֹא הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים בְּנֵבֶל וְכִנּוֹר אֶלָּא בַפֶּה, כְּדֵי לִתֵּן תְּבַל בַּנְּעִימָה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר, אֵין עוֹלִין לַמִּנְיָן, וְאֵין עוֹמְדִים עַל הַדּוּכָן, אֶלָּא בָאָרֶץ הָיוּ עוֹמְדִין, וְרָאשֵׁיהֶן מִבֵּין רַגְלֵי הַלְוִיִּם, וְצוֹעֲרֵי הַלְוִיִּם הָיוּ נִקְרָאִין: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "יֵשׁ בָּעֲרָכִין לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר, בִּשְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר, בְּשׁוֹר הַמּוּעָד שֶׁהֵמִית אֶת הָעֶבֶד לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר, בָּאוֹנֵס וּבַמְּפַתֶּה וּבַמּוֹצִיא שֵׁם רָע לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר. יֵשׁ בָּעֲרָכִין לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר. כֵּיצַד. אֶחָד שֶׁהֶעֱרִיךְ אֶת הַנָּאֶה שֶׁבְּיִשְׂרָאֵל וְאֶת הַכָּעוּר שֶׁבְּיִשְׂרָאֵל, נוֹתֵן חֲמִשִּׁים סָלַע. וְאִם אָמַר הֲרֵי דָמָיו עָלָי, נוֹתֵן אֶת שָׁוְיוֹ: \n",
+ "בִּשְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר. כֵּיצַד. אֶחָד הַמַּקְדִּישׁ בְּחוֹלַת הַמָּחוֹז וְאֶחָד הַמַּקְדִּישׁ בְּפַרְדְּסוֹת סְבַּסְטִי, נוֹתֵן בְּזֶרַע חֹמֶר שְׂעֹרִים חֲמִשִּׁים שֶׁקֶל כֶּסֶף. וּבִשְׂדֵה מִקְנָה, נוֹתֵן אֶת שָׁוְיוֹ. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, אֶחָד שְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה וְאֶחָד שְׂדֵה מִקְנָה. מַה בֵּין שְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה לִשְׂדֵה מִקְנָה. אֶלָּא שֶׁבִּשְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה נוֹתֵן חֹמֶשׁ, וּבִשְׂדֵה מִקְנָה אֵינוֹ נוֹתֵן חֹמֶשׁ: \n",
+ "בְּשׁוֹר הַמּוּעָד שֶׁהֵמִית אֶת הָעֶבֶד לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר. כֵּיצַד. אֶחָד שֶׁהֵמִית אֶת הַנָּאֶה שֶׁבָּעֲבָדִים וְאֶת הַכָּעוּר שֶׁבָּעֲבָדִים, נוֹתֵן שְׁלשִׁים סֶלַע. הֵמִית בֶּן חוֹרִין, נוֹתֵן אֶת שָׁוְיוֹ. חָבַל בָּזֶה וּבָזֶה, מְשַׁלֵּם נֶזֶק שָׁלֵם: \n",
+ "בָּאוֹנֵס וּבַמְפַתֶּה לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר. כֵּיצַד. אֶחָד שֶׁאָנַס וּפִתָּה אֶת הַגְּדוֹלָה שֶׁבַּכְּהֻנָּה וְאֶת הַקְּטַנָּה שֶׁבְּיִשְׂרָאֵל, נוֹתֵן חֲמִשִּׁים סֶלַע. וְהַבּשֶׁת וְהַפְּגָם, הַכֹּל לְפִי הַמְבַיֵּשׁ וְהַמִּתְבַּיֵּשׁ: \n",
+ "בַּמּוֹצִיא שֵׁם רָע לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר. כֵּיצַד. אֶחָד שֶׁהוֹצִיא שֵׁם רַע עַל הַגְּדוֹלָה שֶׁבַּכְּהֻנָּה וְעַל הַקְּטַנָּה שֶׁבְּיִשְׂרָאֵל, נוֹתֵן מֵאָה סֶלַע. נִמְצָא הָאוֹמֵר בְּפִיו יָתֵר מִן הָעוֹשֶׂה מַעֲשֶׂה. שֶׁכֵּן מָצִינוּ, שֶׁלֹּא נֶחְתַּם גְּזַר דִּין עַל אֲבוֹתֵינוּ בַמִּדְבָּר אֶלָּא עַל לָשׁוֹן הָרַע, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר יד), וַיְנַסּוּ אֹתִי זֶה עֶשֶׂר פְּעָמִים וְלֹא שָׁמְעוּ בְּקוֹלִי: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "הֶשֵּׂג יָד, בַּנּוֹדֵר. וְהַשָּׁנִים, בַּנִּדָּר. וְהָעֲרָכִים, בַּנֶּעֱרָךְ, וְהָעֵרֶךְ, בִּזְמַן הָעֵרֶךְ. הֶשֵּׂג יָד בַּנּוֹדֵר, כֵּיצַד. עָנִי שֶׁהֶעֱרִיךְ אֶת הֶעָשִׁיר, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ עָנִי. וְעָשִׁיר שֶׁהֶעֱרִיךְ אֶת הֶעָנִי, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ עָשִׁיר: \n",
+ "אֲבָל בַּקָּרְבָּנוֹת אֵינוֹ כֵן. הֲרֵי שֶׁאָמַר, קָרְבָּנוֹ שֶׁל מְצֹרָע זֶה עָלָי. אִם הָיָה מְצֹרָע עָנִי, מֵבִיא קָרְבַּן עָנִי. עָשִׁיר, מֵבִיא קָרְבַּן עָשִׁיר. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר, אוֹמֵר אֲנִי אַף בָּעֲרָכִין כֵּן. וְכִי מִפְּנֵי מָה עָנִי שֶׁהֶעֱרִיךְ אֶת הֶעָשִׁיר נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ עָנִי, שֶׁאֵין הֶעָשִׁיר חַיָּב כְּלוּם. אֲבָל הֶעָשִׁיר שֶׁאָמַר עֶרְכִּי עָלָי, וְשָׁמַע הֶעָנִי וְאָמַר, מַה שֶּׁאָמַר זֶה עָלָי, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ עָשִׁיר. הָיָה עָנִי וְהֶעֱשִׁיר אוֹ עָשִׁיר וְהֶעֱנִי, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ עָשִׁיר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אֲפִלּוּ עָנִי וְהֶעֱשִׁיר וְחָזַר וְהֶעֱנִי, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ עָשִׁיר: \n",
+ "אֲבָל בַּקָּרְבָּנוֹת אֵינוֹ כֵן, אֲפִלּוּ אָבִיו מֵת וְהִנִּיחַ לוֹ רִבּוֹא, סְפִינָתוֹ בַיָּם וּבָאוּ בְרִבּוֹאוֹת, אֵין לַהֶקְדֵּשׁ בָּהֶן כְּלוּם: \n",
+ "שָׁנִים בַּנִּדָּר כֵּיצַד, יֶלֶד שֶׁהֶעֱרִיךְ אֶת הַזָּקֵן, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ זָקֵן. וְזָקֵן שֶׁהֶעֱרִיךְ אֶת הַיֶּלֶד, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ יֶלֶד. וַעֲרָכִים בַּנֶּעֱרָךְ כֵּיצַד, אִישׁ שֶׁהֶעֱרִיךְ אֶת הָאִשָּׁה, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ אִשָּׁה. וְאִשָּׁה שֶׁהֶעֱרִיכָה אֶת הָאִישׁ, נוֹתֶנֶת עֵרֶךְ אִישׁ. וְהָעֵרֶךְ בִּזְמַן הָעֵרֶךְ כֵּיצַד, הֶעֱרִיכוֹ פָּחוּת מִבֶּן חָמֵשׁ וְנַעֲשָׂה יוֹתֵר עַל בֶּן חָמֵשׁ, פָּחוּת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים וְנַעֲשָׂה יוֹתֵר עַל בֶּן עֶשְׂרִים, נוֹתֵן כִּזְמַן הָעֵרֶךְ. יוֹם שְׁלֹשִׁים, כִּלְמַטָּה מִמֶּנּוּ. שְׁנַת חָמֵשׁ וּשְׁנַת עֶשְׂרִים, כִּלְמַטָּה מִמֶּנּוּ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כז), וְאִם מִבֶּן שִׁשִּׁים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה אִם זָכָר, הֲרֵי אָנוּ לְמֵדִים בְּכֻלָּם מִשְּׁנַת שִׁשִּׁים. מַה שְּׁנַת שִׁשִּׁים כִּלְמַטָּה מִמֶּנָּה, אַף שְׁנַת חָמֵשׁ וּשְׁנַת עֶשְׂרִים כִּלְמַטָּה מִמֶּנָּה. הֵן. אִם עָשָׂה שְׁנַת שִׁשִּׁים כִּלְמַטָּה מִמֶּנָּה לְהַחֲמִיר, נַעֲשֶׂה שְׁנַת חָמֵשׁ וּשְׁנַת עֶשְׂרִים כִּלְמַטָּה מִמֶּנָּה לְהָקֵל. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר, שָׁנָה שָׁנָה, לִגְזֵרָה שָׁוָה. מַה שָּׁנָה הָאֲמוּרָה בִשְׁנַת שִׁשִּׁים, כִּלְמַטָּה מִמֶּנָּה, אַף שָׁנָה הָאֲמוּרָה בִשְׁנַת חָמֵשׁ וּשְׁנַת עֶשְׂרִים, כִּלְמַטָּה מִמֶּנָּה, בֵּין לְהָקֵל בֵּין לְהַחֲמִיר. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר, עַד שֶׁיִּהְיוּ יְתֵרוֹת עַל הַשָּׁנִים חֹדֶשׁ וְיוֹם אֶחָד: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "הָאוֹמֵר, מִשְׁקָלִי עָלָי, נוֹתֵן מִשְׁקָלוֹ. אִם כֶּסֶף, כֶּסֶף. אִם זָהָב, זָהָב. מַעֲשֶׂה בְּאִמָּהּ שֶׁל יִרְמַטְיָה שֶׁאָמְרָה, מִשְׁקַל בִּתִּי עָלָי, וְעָלְתָה לִירוּשָׁלַיִם, וּשְׁקָלוּהָ וְנָתְנָה מִשְׁקָלָהּ זָהָב. מִשְׁקַל יָדִי עָלָי, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, מְמַלֵּא חָבִית מַיִם וּמַכְנִיסָהּ עַד מַרְפֵּקוֹ, וְשׁוֹקֵל בְּשַׂר חֲמוֹר וְגִידִין וַעֲצָמוֹת וְנוֹתֵן לְתוֹכָהּ עַד שֶׁתִּתְמַלֵּא. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, וְכִי הֵיאַךְ אֶפְשָׁר לְכַוֵּן בָּשָׂר כְּנֶגֶד בָּשָׂר וַעֲצָמוֹת כְּנֶגֶד עֲצָמוֹת. אֶלָּא שָׁמִין אֶת הַיָּד כַּמָּה הִיא רְאוּיָה לִשְׁקֹל: \n",
+ "דְּמֵי יָדִי עָלָי, שָׁמִין אוֹתוֹ, כַּמָּה הוּא שָׁוֶה בְּיָד, וְכַמָּה הוּא שָׁוֶה בְּלֹא יָד. זֶה חֹמֶר בַּנְּדָרִים מִבָּעֲרָכִין. וְחֹמֶר בָּעֲרָכִין מִבַּנְּדָרִים, כֵּיצַד. הָאוֹמֵר, עֶרְכִּי עָלָי, וָמֵת, יִתְּנוּ הַיּוֹרְשִׁין. דָּמַי עָלָי, וָמֵת, לֹא יִתְּנוּ הַיּוֹרְשִׁים, שֶׁאֵין דָּמִים לַמֵּתִים. עֵרֶךְ יָדִי וְעֵרֶךְ רַגְלִי עָלָי, לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. עֵרֶךְ רֹאשִׁי וְעֵרֶךְ כְּבֵדִי עָלָי, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ כֻּלּוֹ. זֶה הַכְּלָל, דָּבָר שֶׁהַנְּשָׁמָה תְלוּיָה בוֹ, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ כֻּלּוֹ: \n",
+ "חֲצִי עֶרְכִּי עָלָי, נוֹתֵן חֲצִי עֶרְכּוֹ. עֵרֶךְ חֶצְיִי עָלָי, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ כֻּלּוֹ. חֲצִי דָמַי עָלָי, נוֹתֵן חֲצִי דָמָיו. דְּמֵי חֶצְיִי עָלָי, נוֹתֵן דְּמֵי כֻלּוֹ. זֶה הַכְּלָל, דָּבָר שֶׁהַנְּשָׁמָה תְלוּיָה בוֹ, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ כֻּלּוֹ: \n",
+ "הָאוֹמֵר, עֶרְכּוֹ שֶׁל פְּלוֹנִי עָלָי, מֵת הַנּוֹדֵר וְהַנִּדָּר, יִתְּנוּ הַיּוֹרְשִׁין. דָּמָיו שֶׁל פְּלוֹנִי עָלָי, מֵת הַנּוֹדֵר, יִתְּנוּ הַיּוֹרְשִׁין. מֵת הַנִּדָּר, לֹא יִתְּנוּ הַיּוֹרְשִׁין, שֶׁאֵין דָּמִים לַמֵּתִים: \n",
+ "שׁוֹר זֶה עוֹלָה, בַּיִת זֶה קָרְבָּן, מֵת הַשּׁוֹר וְנָפַל הַבַּיִת, אֵינוֹ חַיָּב לְשַׁלֵּם. דְּמֵי שׁוֹר זֶה עָלָי עוֹלָה, אוֹ דְּמֵי בַיִת זֶה עָלָי קָרְבָּן, מֵת הַשּׁוֹר וְנָפַל הַבַּיִת, חַיָּב לְשַׁלֵּם: \n",
+ "חַיָּבֵי עֲרָכִים, מְמַשְׁכְּנִין אוֹתָן. חַיָּבֵי חַטָּאוֹת וַאֲשָׁמוֹת, אֵין מְמַשְׁכְּנִין אוֹתָן. חַיָּבֵי עוֹלוֹת וּשְׁלָמִים, מְמַשְׁכְּנִין אוֹתָן אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין מִתְכַּפֵּר לוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּתְרַצֶּה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא א), לִרְצוֹנוֹ, כּוֹפִין אוֹתוֹ עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר, רוֹצֶה אָנִי. וְכֵן אַתָּה אוֹמֵר בְּגִטֵּי נָשִׁים, כּוֹפִין אוֹתוֹ עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר, רוֹצֶה אָנִי: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "שׁוּם הַיְתוֹמִים, שְׁלשִׁים יוֹם, וְשׁוּם הַהֶקְדֵּשׁ, שִׁשִּׁים יוֹם, וּמַכְרִיזִין בַּבֹּקֶר וּבָעָרֶב. הַמַּקְדִּישׁ נְכָסָיו וְהָיְתָה עָלָיו כְּתֻבַּת אִשָּׁה, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, כְּשֶׁיְּגָרְשֶׁנָּה, יַדִּיר הֲנָאָה. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ. כַּיוֹצֵא בוֹ אָמַר רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, אַף הֶעָרֵב לָאִשָּׁה בִכְתֻבָּתָה וְהָיָה בַעְלָהּ מְגָרְשָׁהּ, יַדִּיר הֲנָאָה, שֶׁמָּא יַעֲשֶׂה קְנוּנְיָא עַל נְכָסָיו שֶׁל זֶה וְיַחֲזִיר אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ: \n",
+ "הַמַּקְדִּישׁ נְכָסָיו וְהָיְתָה עָלָיו כְּתֻבַּת אִשָּׁה וּבַעַל חוֹב, אֵין הָאִשָּׁה יְכוֹלָה לִגְבּוֹת כְּתֻבָּתָהּ מִן הַהֶקְדֵּשׁ, וְלֹא בַעַל חוֹב אֶת חוֹבוֹ, אֶלָּא הַפּוֹדֶה פוֹדֶה עַל מְנָת לִתֵּן לָאִשָּׁה כְּתֻבָּתָהּ וּלְבַעַל חוֹב אֶת חוֹבוֹ. הִקְדִּישׁ תִּשְׁעִים מָנֶה וְהָיָה חוֹבוֹ מֵאָה מָנֶה, מוֹסִיף עוֹד דִּינָר וּפוֹדֶה בוֹ אֶת הַנְּכָסִים הַלָּלוּ, עַל מְנָת לִתֵּן לָאִשָּׁה כְּתֻבָּתָהּ וּלְבַעַל חוֹב אֶת חוֹבוֹ: \n",
+ "אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָמְרוּ, חַיָּבֵי עֲרָכִין מְמַשְׁכְּנִין אוֹתָן, נוֹתְנִין לוֹ מְזוֹן שְׁלשִׁים יוֹם וּכְסוּת שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ וּמִטָּה מֻצַּעַת וְסַנְדָּלִין וּתְפִלִּין. לוֹ, אֲבָל לֹא לְאִשְׁתּוֹ וְלֹא לְבָנָיו. אִם הָיָה אֻמָּן, נוֹתְנִין לוֹ שְׁנֵי כְלֵי אֻמָּנוּת מִכָּל מִין וָמִין. חָרָשׁ, נוֹתְנִין לוֹ שְׁנֵי מַעֲצָדִין וּשְׁתֵּי מְגֵרוֹת. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, אִם הָיָה אִכָּר, נוֹתְנִין לוֹ אֶת צִמְדּוֹ. חַמָּר, נוֹתְנִין לוֹ אֶת חֲמוֹרוֹ: \n",
+ "הָיָה מִין אֶחָד מְרֻבֶּה וּמִין אֶחָד מֻעָט, אֵין אוֹמְרִים לוֹ לִמְכֹּר מִן הַמְרֻבֶּה וְלִקַּח לוֹ מִן הַמֻּעָט, אֶלָּא נוֹתְנִין לוֹ שְׁנֵי מִינִין מִן הַמְרֻבֶּה וְכֹל שֶׁיֶּשׁ לוֹ מִן הַמֻּעָט. הַמַּקְדִּישׁ אֶת נְכָסָיו, מַעֲלִין לוֹ אֶת תְּפִלָּיו: \n",
+ "אֶחָד הַמַּקְדִּישׁ אֶת נְכָסָיו, וְאֶחָד הַמַּעֲרִיךְ אֶת עַצְמוֹ, אֵין לוֹ, לֹא בִכְסוּת אִשְׁתּוֹ, וְלֹא בִכְסוּת בָּנָיו, וְלֹא בַצֶּבַע שֶׁצְּבָעָן לִשְׁמָן, וְלֹא בְסַנְדָּלִים חֲדָשִׁים שֶׁלְּקָחָן לִשְׁמָן. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָמְרוּ, עֲבָדִים נִמְכָּרִים בִּכְסוּתָן לְשֶׁבַח, שֶׁאִם תִּלָּקַח לוֹ כְסוּת בִּשְׁלֹשִׁים דִּינָר, מַשְׁבִּיחַ הוּא מָנֶה, וְכֵן פָּרָה, אִם מַמְתִּינִים אוֹתָהּ לָאִטְלִיס, מַשְׁבַּחַת הִיא, וְכֵן מַרְגָּלִית, אִם מַעֲלִין אוֹתָהּ לַכְּרָךְ, מַשְׁבַּחַת הִיא, אֵין לַהֶקְדֵּשׁ אֶלָּא מְקוֹמוֹ וְשַׁעְתּוֹ: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "אֵין מַקְדִּישִׁין לִפְנֵי הַיּוֹבֵל פָּחוֹת מִשְּׁתֵּי שָׁנִים. וְלֹא גוֹאֲלִין לְאַחַר הַיּוֹבֵל פָּחוֹת מִשָּׁנָה. אֵין מְחַשְּׁבִין חֳדָשִׁים לַהֶקְדֵּשׁ. אֲבָל הַהֶקְדֵּשׁ מְחַשֵּׁב חֳדָשִׁים. הַמַּקְדִּישׁ אֶת שָׂדֵהוּ בִשְׁעַת הַיּוֹבֵל, נוֹתֵן בְּזֶרַע חֹמֶר שְׂעֹרִים חֲמִשִּׁים שֶׁקֶל כָּסֶף. הָיוּ שָׁם נְקָעִים עֲמֻקִּים עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים אוֹ סְלָעִים גְּבוֹהִים עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים, אֵין נִמְדָּדִים עִמָּהּ. פָּחוֹת מִכָּאן, נִמְדָּדִים עִמָּהּ. הִקְדִּישָׁהּ שְׁתַּיִם אוֹ שָׁלשׁ שָׁנִים לִפְנֵי הַיּוֹבֵל, נוֹתֵן סֶלַע וּפֻנְדְיוֹן לְשָׁנָה. אִם אָמַר הֲרֵינִי נוֹתֵן דְּבַר שָׁנָה בְשָׁנָה, אֵין שׁוֹמְעִין לוֹ, אֶלָּא נוֹתֵן אֶת כֻּלּוֹ כְּאֶחָד: \n",
+ "אֶחָד הַבְּעָלִים, וְאֶחָד כָּל הָאָדָם. מַה בֵּין הַבְּעָלִים לְבֵין כָּל הָאָדָם, אֶלָּא שֶׁהַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִים חֹמֶשׁ, וְכָל אָדָם אֵינוֹ נוֹתֵן חֹמֶשׁ: \n",
+ "הִקְדִּישָׁהּ וּגְאָלָהּ, אֵינָהּ יוֹצְאָה מִיָּדוֹ בַּיּוֹבֵל. גְּאָלָהּ בְּנוֹ, יוֹצְאָה לְאָבִיו בַּיּוֹבֵל. גְּאָלָהּ אַחֵר אוֹ אֶחָד מִן הַקְּרוֹבִים וּגְאָלָהּ מִיָּדוֹ, אֵינָהּ יוֹצְאָה מִיָּדוֹ בַּיּוֹבֵל. גְּאָלָהּ אֶחָד מִן הַכֹּהֲנִים וַהֲרֵי הִיא תַּחַת יָדוֹ, לֹא יֹאמַר הוֹאִיל וְהִיא יוֹצְאָה לַכֹּהֲנִים בַּיּוֹבֵל וַהֲרֵי הִיא תַּחַת יָדִי, הֲרֵי הִיא שֶׁלִּי, אֶלָּא יוֹצְאָה לְכָל אֶחָיו הַכֹּהֲנִים: \n",
+ "הִגִּיעַ הַיּוֹבֵל וְלֹא נִגְאֲלָה, הַכֹּהֲנִים נִכְנָסִים לְתוֹכָהּ וְנוֹתְנִים אֶת דָּמֶיהָ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, נִכְנָסִין, אֲבָל לֹא נוֹתְנִין. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, לֹא נִכְנָסִין וְלֹא נוֹתְנִין, אֶלָּא נִקְרֵאת שְׂדֵה רְטוּשִׁים, עַד הַיּוֹבֵל הַשֵּׁנִי. הִגִּיעַ הַיּוֹבֵל הַשֵּׁנִי וְלֹא נִגְאֲלָה, נִקְרֵאת רְטוּשֵׁי רְטוּשִׁין עַד הַיּוֹבֵל הַשְּׁלִישִׁי. לְעוֹלָם אֵין הַכֹּהֲנִים נִכְנָסִין לְתוֹכָהּ, עַד שֶׁיִּגְאָלֶנָּה אַחֵר: \n",
+ "הַלּוֹקֵחַ שָׂדֶה מֵאָבִיו, מֵת אָבִיו וְאַחַר כָּךְ הִקְדִּישָׁהּ, הֲרֵי הִיא כִּשְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה. הִקְדִּישָׁהּ וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵת אָבִיו, הֲרֵי הִיא כִּשְׂדֵה מִקְנָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמְרִים, כִּשְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כז), וְאִם אֶת שְׂדֵה מִקְנָתוֹ אֲשֶׁר לֹא מִשְּׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּתוֹ, שָׂדֶה שֶׁאֵינָהּ רְאוּיָה לִהְיוֹת שְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה, יוֹצֵאת זוֹ, שֶׁהִיא רְאוּיָה לִהְיוֹת שְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה. שְׂדֵה מִקְנָה אֵינָהּ יוֹצְאָה לַכֹּהֲנִים בַּיּוֹבֵל, שֶׁאֵין אָדָם מַקְדִּישׁ דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ שֶׁלּוֹ. כֹּהֲנִים וּלְוִיִּם מַקְדִּישִׁים לְעוֹלָם, וְגוֹאֲלִין לְעוֹלָם, בֵּין לִפְנֵי הַיּוֹבֵל, בֵּין לְאַחַר הַיּוֹבֵל: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "הַמַּקְדִּישׁ אֶת שָׂדֵהוּ בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ יוֹבֵל, אוֹמְרִים לוֹ פְּתַח אַתָּה רִאשׁוֹן, שֶׁהַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִים חֹמֶשׁ, וְכָל אָדָם אֵינוֹ נוֹתֵן חֹמֶשׁ. מַעֲשֶׂה בְאֶחָד שֶׁהִקְדִּישׁ אֶת שָׂדֵהוּ מִפְּנֵי רָעָתָהּ, אָמְרוּ לוֹ, פְּתַח אַתָּה רִאשׁוֹן. אָמַר, הֲרֵי הִיא שֶׁלִּי בְאִסָּר. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, לֹא אָמַר זֶה אֶלָּא בְּכַבֵּיצָה, שֶׁהַהֶקְדֵּשׁ נִפְדֶּה בְכֶסֶף וּבְשָׁוֶה כָסֶף. אָמַר לוֹ, הִגִּיעָתְךָ, נִמְצָא מַפְסִיד אִסָּר, וְשָׂדֵהוּ לְפָנָיו: \n",
+ "אָמַר אֶחָד, הֲרֵי הִיא שֶׁלִּי בְעֶשֶׂר סְלָעִים, וְאֶחָד אוֹמֵר בְּעֶשְׂרִים, וְאֶחָד אוֹמֵר בִּשְׁלשִׁים, וְאֶחָד אוֹמֵר בְּאַרְבָּעִים, וְאֶחָד אוֹמֵר בַּחֲמִשִּׁים. חָזַר בּוֹ שֶׁל חֲמִשִּׁים, מְמַשְׁכְּנִין מִנְּכָסָיו עַד עָשֶׂר. חָזַר בּוֹ שֶׁל אַרְבָּעִים, מְמַשְׁכְּנִין מִנְּכָסָיו עַד עָשֶׂר. חָזַר בּוֹ שֶׁל שְׁלשִׁים, מְמַשְׁכְּנִין מִנְּכָסָיו עַד עָשֶׂר. חָזַר בּוֹ שֶׁל עֶשְׂרִים, מְמַשְׁכְּנִים מִנְּכָסָיו עַד עָשֶׂר. חָזַר בּוֹ שֶׁל עֶשֶׂר, מוֹכְרִים אוֹתָהּ בְּשָׁוְיָהּ וְנִפְרָעִים מִשֶּׁל עֶשֶׂר אֶת הַמּוֹתָר. הַבְּעָלִים אוֹמְרִים בְּעֶשְׂרִים, וְכָל אָדָם אוֹמְרִים בְּעֶשְׂרִים, הַבְּעָלִים קוֹדְמִים, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן מוֹסִיפִין חֹמֶשׁ: \n",
+ "אָמַר אֶחָד, הֲרֵי הִיא שֶׁלִּי בְעֶשְׂרִים וְאַחַת, הַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִים עֶשְׂרִים וְשֵׁשׁ. בְּעֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁתַּיִם, הַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִים עֶשְׂרִים וְשֶׁבַע. בְּעֶשְׂרִים וְשָׁלשׁ, הַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִים עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁמֹנֶה. בְּעֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע, הַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִים תִּשְׁעָה וְעֶשְׂרִים. בַּחֲמִשָּׁה וְעֶשְׂרִים, הַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִים שְׁלֹשִׁים, שֶׁאֵין מוֹסִיפִין חֹמֶשׁ עַל עִלּוּיוֹ שֶׁל זֶה. אָמַר אֶחָד, הֲרֵי הִיא שֶׁלִּי בְּעֶשְׂרִים וָשֵׁשׁ, אִם רָצוּ הַבְּעָלִים לִתֵּן שְׁלֹשִׁים וְאֶחָד וְדִינָר, הַבְּעָלִים קוֹדְמִים. וְאִם לָאו, אוֹמְרִים, הִגִּיעָתְךָ: \n",
+ "מַחֲרִים אָדָם מִצֹּאנוֹ וּמִבְּקָרוֹ, מֵעֲבָדָיו וּמִשִּׁפְחוֹתָיו הַכְּנַעֲנִים, וּמִשְּׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּתוֹ. וְאִם הֶחֱרִים אֶת כֻּלָּן, אֵינָן מֻחְרָמִין, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה, מָה אִם לַגָּבֹהַּ, אֵין אָדָם רַשַּׁאי לְהַחֲרִים אֶת כָּל נְכָסָיו, עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה שֶׁיְּהֵא אָדָם חַיָּב לִהְיוֹת חָס עַל נְכָסָיו: \n",
+ "הַמַּחֲרִים בְּנוֹ וּבִתּוֹ, עַבְדּוֹ וְשִׁפְחָתוֹ הָעִבְרִים, וּשְׂדֵה מִקְנָתוֹ, אֵינָן מֻחְרָמִים, שֶׁאֵין אָדָם מַחֲרִים דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ שֶׁלּוֹ. כֹּהֲנִים וּלְוִיִּם אֵינָן מַחֲרִימִין, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, הַכֹּהֲנִים אֵינָן מַחֲרִימִין, שֶׁהַחֲרָמִים שֶׁלָּהֶם. הַלְוִיִּם מַחֲרִימִים, שֶׁאֵין הַחֲרָמִים שֶׁלָּהֶן. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר, נִרְאִים דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בַּקַּרְקָעוֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כה), כִּי אֲחֻזַּת עוֹלָם הוּא לָהֶם, וְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בְּמִטַּלְטְלִים, שֶׁאֵין הַחֲרָמִים שֶׁלָּהֶם: \n",
+ "חֶרְמֵי כֹהֲנִים אֵין לָהֶם פִּדְיוֹן, אֶלָּא נִתָּנִים לַכֹּהֲנִים. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶן בְּתֵירָא אוֹמֵר, סְתָם חֲרָמִים לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם כז), כָּל חֵרֶם קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים הוּא לַה'. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, סְתָם חֲרָמִים לַכֹּהֲנִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), כִּשְׂדֵה הַחֵרֶם לַכֹּהֵן תִּהְיֶה אֲחֻזָּתוֹ. אִם כֵּן, לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר כָּל חֵרֶם קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים הוּא לַה'. שֶׁהוּא חָל עַל קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים וְעַל קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים: \n",
+ "מַחֲרִים אָדָם אֶת קָדָשָׁיו, בֵּין קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים וּבֵין קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים. אִם נֶדֶר, נוֹתֵן אֶת הַדָּמִים. אִם נְדָבָה, נוֹתֵן אֶת טוֹבָתוֹ. שׁוֹר זֶה עוֹלָה, אוֹמְדִים כַּמָּה אָדָם רוֹצֶה לִתֵּן בְּשׁוֹר זֶה לְהַעֲלוֹתוֹ עוֹלָה, שֶׁאֵינוֹ רַשַּׁאי. הַבְּכוֹר, בֵּין תָּמִים בֵּין בַּעַל מוּם, מַחֲרִימִין אוֹתוֹ. כֵּיצַד פּוֹדִין אוֹתוֹ. הַפּוֹדִין אוֹמְדִים כַּמָּה אָדָם רוֹצֶה לִתֵּן בִּבְכוֹר זֶה, לִתְּנוֹ לְבֶן בִּתּוֹ אוֹ לְבֶן אֲחוֹתוֹ. רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר, כָּתוּב אֶחָד אוֹמֵר תַּקְדִּישׁ, וְכָתוּב אֶחָד אוֹמֵר אַל תַּקְדִּישׁ. אִי אֶפְשָׁר לוֹמַר תַּקְדִּישׁ, שֶׁכְּבָר נֶאֱמַר אַל תַּקְדִּישׁ, וְאִי אֶפְשָׁר לוֹמַר אַל תַּקְדִּישׁ, שֶׁכְּבָר נֶאֱמַר תַּקְדִּישׁ. אֱמוֹר מֵעַתָּה, מַקְדִּישׁוֹ אַתָּה הֶקְדֵּשׁ עִלּוּי, וְאֵין אַתָּה מַקְדִּישׁוֹ הֶקְדֵּשׁ מִזְבֵּחַ: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת שָׂדֵהוּ בִּשְׁעַת הַיּוֹבֵל, אֵינוֹ מֻתָּר לִגְאוֹל פָּחוּת מִשְּׁתֵּי שָׁנִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כה), בְּמִסְפַּר שְׁנֵי תְבוּאֹת יִמְכָּר לָךְ. הָיְתָה שְׁנַת שִׁדָּפוֹן וְיֵרָקוֹן אוֹ שְׁבִיעִית, אֵינָהּ עוֹלָה מִן הַמִּנְיָן. נָרָהּ אוֹ הוֹבִירָהּ, עוֹלָה לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר, מְכָרָהּ לוֹ לִפְנֵי רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה וְהִיא מְלֵאָה פֵרוֹת, הֲרֵי זֶה אוֹכֵל מִמֶּנָּה שָׁלשׁ תְּבוּאוֹת לִשְׁתֵּי שָׁנִים: \n",
+ "מְכָרָהּ לָרִאשׁוֹן בְּמָנֶה, וּמָכַר הָרִאשׁוֹן לַשֵּׁנִי בְּמָאתַיִם, אֵינוֹ מְחַשֵּׁב אֶלָּא עִם הָרִאשׁוֹן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר, לָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר מָכַר לוֹ. מְכָרָהּ לָרִאשׁוֹן בְּמָאתַיִם, וּמָכַר הָרִאשׁוֹן לַשֵּׁנִי בְּמָנֶה, אֵינוֹ מְחַשֵּׁב אֶלָּא עִם הָאַחֲרוֹן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), לָאִישׁ, לָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר בְּתוֹכָהּ. לֹא יִמְכֹּר בְּרָחוֹק וְיִגְאֹל בְּקָרוֹב, בְּרָע וְיִגְאֹל בְּיָפֶה. לֹא יִלְוֶה וְיִגְאַל, וְלֹא יִגְאַל לַחֲצָאִים. וּבַהֶקְדֵּשׁ מֻתָּר בְּכֻלָּן. זֶה חֹמֶר בַּהֶדְיוֹט מִבַּהֶקְדֵּשׁ: \n",
+ "הַמּוֹכֵר בַּיִת בְּבָתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה, הֲרֵי זֶה גוֹאֵל מִיָּד, וְגוֹאֵל כָּל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ, הֲרֵי זֶה כְּמִין רִבִּית וְאֵינָהּ רִבִּית. מֵת הַמּוֹכֵר, יִגְאַל בְּנוֹ. מֵת הַלּוֹקֵחַ, יִגְאַל מִיַּד בְּנוֹ. אֵינוֹ מוֹנֶה לוֹ שָׁנָה אֶלָּא מִשָּׁעָה שֶׁמָּכַר לוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), עַד מְלֹאת לוֹ שָׁנָה תְמִימָה. וּכְשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר תְּמִימָה, לְהָבִיא חֹדֶשׁ הָעִבּוּר. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר, יִתֵּן לוֹ שָׁנָה וְעִבּוּרָהּ: \n",
+ "הִגִּיעַ יוֹם שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ וְלֹא נִגְאַל, הָיָה חָלוּט לוֹ, אֶחָד הַלּוֹקֵחַ וְאֶחָד שֶׁנִּתַּן לוֹ מַתָּנָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר לַצְּמִיתוּת. בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיָה נִטְמָן יוֹם שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ, שֶׁיְּהֵא חָלוּט לוֹ. הִתְקִין הִלֵּל הַזָּקֵן, שֶׁיְּהֵא חוֹלֵשׁ אֶת מְעוֹתָיו בַּלִּשְׁכָּה, וִיהֵא שׁוֹבֵר אֶת הַדֶּלֶת וְנִכְנָס. אֵימָתַי שֶׁיִּרְצֶה הַלָּה, יָבֹא וְיִטֹּל אֶת מְעוֹתָיו: \n",
+ "כֹּל שֶׁהוּא לִפְנִים מִן הַחוֹמָה, הֲרֵי הוּא כְבָתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה, חוּץ מִן הַשָּׂדוֹת. רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, אַף הַשָּׂדוֹת. בַּיִת הַבָּנוּי בַּחוֹמָה, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אֵינוֹ כְבָתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, כֹּתֶל הַחִיצוֹן הִיא חוֹמָתוֹ: \n",
+ "עִיר שֶׁגַּגּוֹתֶיהָ חוֹמָתָהּ, וְשֶׁאֵינָהּ מֻקֶּפֶת חוֹמָה מִימוֹת יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן נוּן, אֵינָהּ כְּבָתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה. וְאֵלּוּ הֵן בָּתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה, שָׁלשׁ חֲצֵרוֹת שֶׁל שְׁנֵי שְׁנֵי בָתִּים, מֻקָּפוֹת חוֹמָה מִימוֹת יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן נוּן, כְּגוֹן קַצְּרָה הַיְשָׁנָה שֶׁל צִפּוֹרִים, וְחַקְרָה שֶׁל גּוּשׁ חָלָב, וְיוֹדְפַת הַיְשָׁנָה, וְגַמְלָא, וּגְדוֹד, וְחָדִיד, וְאוֹנוֹ, וִירוּשָׁלַיִם, וְכֵן כַּיּוֹצֵא בָהֶן: \n",
+ "בָּתֵּי הַחֲצֵרִים, נוֹתְנִים לָהֶם כֹּחַ הַיָּפֶה שֶׁבְּבָתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה וְכֹחַ הַיָּפֶה שֶׁבַּשָּׂדוֹת. נִגְאָלִין מִיָּד, וְנִגְאָלִין כָּל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ כַּבָּתִּים, וְיוֹצְאִים בַּיּוֹבֵל וּבְגִרְעוֹן כֶּסֶף כַּשָּׂדוֹת. וְאֵלּוּ הֵן בָּתֵּי חֲצֵרִים, שְׁתֵּי חֲצֵרוֹת שֶׁל שְׁנֵי שְׁנֵי בָתִּים, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמֻּקָּפִין חוֹמָה מִימוֹת יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן נוּן, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כְבָתֵּי חֲצֵרִים: \n",
+ "יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁיָּרַשׁ אֲבִי אִמּוֹ לֵוִי, אֵינוֹ גוֹאֵל כַּסֵּדֶר הַזֶּה. וְכֵן לֵוִי שֶׁיָּרַשׁ אֶת אֲבִי אִמּוֹ יִשְׂרָאֵל, אֵינוֹ גוֹאֵל כַּסֵּדֶר הַזֶּה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כה), כִּי בָתֵּי עָרֵי הַלְוִיִּם, עַד שֶׁיְהֵא לֵוִי וּבְעָרֵי הַלְוִיִּם, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אֵין הַדְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים אֶלָּא בְעָרֵי הַלְוִיִּם. אֵין עוֹשִׂים שָׂדֶה מִגְרָשׁ וְלֹא מִגְרָשׁ שָׂדֶה, וְלֹא מִגְרָשׁ עִיר וְלֹא עִיר מִגְרָשׁ. אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים. בְּעָרֵי הַלְוִיִּם. אֲבָל בְּעָרֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, עוֹשִׂין שָׂדֶה מִגְרָשׁ וְלֹא מִגְרָשׁ שָׂדֶה, מִגְרָשׁ עִיר וְלֹא עִיר מִגְרָשׁ, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יַחֲרִיבוּ אֶת עָרֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל. הַכֹּהֲנִים וְהַלְוִיִּם מוֹכְרִים לְעוֹלָם וְגוֹאֲלִים לְעוֹלָם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), גְּאֻלַּת עוֹלָם תִּהְיֶה לַלְוִיִּם: \n"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/Hebrew/merged.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/Hebrew/merged.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..de5f8bbf93e2838240a7d5caab972180a14aed86
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Arakhin/Hebrew/merged.json
@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
+{
+ "title": "Mishnah Arakhin",
+ "language": "he",
+ "versionTitle": "merged",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org/Mishnah_Arakhin",
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "הַכֹּל מַעֲרִיכִין וְנֶעֱרָכִין, נוֹדְרִים וְנִדָּרִים, כֹּהֲנִים וּלְוִיִּם וְיִשְׂרְאֵלִים, נָשִׁים וַעֲבָדִים. טֻמְטוּם וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוֹס, נוֹדְרִים וְנִדָּרִים וּמַעֲרִיכִין, אֲבָל לֹא נֶעֱרָכִין, שֶׁאֵינוֹ נֶעֱרָךְ אֶלָּא זָכָר וַדַּאי וּנְקֵבָה וַדָּאִית. חֵרֵשׁ, שׁוֹטֶה וְקָטָן, נִדָּרִין וְנֶעֱרָכִין, אֲבָל לֹא נוֹדְרִין וְלֹא מַעֲרִיכִין, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶם דָּעַת. פָּחוּת מִבֶּן חֹדֶשׁ, נִדָּר אֲבָל לֹא נֶעֱרָךְ: \n",
+ "הַנָּכְרִי, רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר נֶעֱרָךְ אֲבָל לֹא מַעֲרִיךְ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, מַעֲרִיךְ אֲבָל לֹא נֶעֱרָךְ. זֶה וָזֶה מוֹדִים, שֶׁנּוֹדְרִין וְנִדָּרִין: \n",
+ "הַגּוֹסֵס, וְהַיּוֹצֵא לֵהָרֵג, לֹא נִדָּר וְלֹא נֶעֱרָךְ. רַבִּי חֲנִינָא בֶּן עֲקַבְיָא אוֹמֵר, נֶעֱרָךְ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁדָּמָיו קְצוּבִין, אֲבָל אֵינוֹ נִדָּר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין דָּמָיו קְצוּבִין. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, נוֹדֵר וּמַעֲרִיךְ וּמַקְדִּישׁ. וְאִם הִזִּיק, חַיָּב בַּתַּשְׁלוּמִין: \n",
+ "הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁהִיא יוֹצְאָה לֵהָרֵג, אֵין מַמְתִּינִין לָהּ עַד שֶׁתֵּלֵד. יָשְׁבָה עַל הַמַּשְׁבֵּר, מַמְתִּינִין לָהּ עַד שֶׁתֵּלֵד. הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁנֶּהֶרְגָה, נֶהֱנִין בִּשְׂעָרָהּ. בְּהֵמָה שֶׁנֶּהֶרְגָּה, אֲסוּרָה בַהֲנָיָה: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "אֵין בָּעֲרָכִין פָּחוּת מִסֶּלַע, וְלֹא יָתֵר עַל חֲמִשִּׁים סָלַע. כֵּיצַד, נָתַן סֶלַע וְהֶעֱשִׁיר, אֵינוֹ נוֹתֵן כְּלוּם. פָּחוֹת מִסֶּלַע וְהֶעֱשִׁיר, נוֹתֵן חֲמִשִּׁים סָלַע. הָיָה בְיָדָיו חָמֵשׁ סְלָעִים, רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, אֵינוֹ נוֹתֵן אֶלָּא אֶחָת. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, נוֹתֵן אֶת כֻּלָּם. אֵין בָּעֲרָכִין פָּחוּת מִסֶּלַע, וְלֹא יָתֵר עַל חֲמִשִּׁים סֶלַע. אֵין פֶּתַח בַּטּוֹעָה פָּחוּת מִשִּׁבְעָה, וְלֹא יָתֵר עַל שִׁבְעָה עָשָׂר. אֵין בַּנְּגָעִים פָּחוּת מִשָּׁבוּעַ אֶחָד, וְלֹא יָתֵר עַל שְׁלשָׁה שָׁבוּעוֹת: \n",
+ "אֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מֵאַרְבָּעָה חֲדָשִׁים הַמְעֻבָּרִים בְּשָׁנָה, וְלֹא נִרְאֶה יָתֵר עַל שְׁמֹנָה. שְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם נֶאֱכָלוֹת אֵין פָּחוּת מִשְּׁנַיִם וְלֹא יָתֵר עַל שְׁלשָׁה. לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים נֶאֱכָל אֵין פָּחוּת מִתִּשְׁעָה וְלֹא יָתֵר עַל אַחַד עָשָׂר. קָטָן נִמּוֹל אֵין פָּחוּת מִשְּׁמֹנָה וְלֹא יָתֵר עַל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר: \n",
+ "אֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מֵעֶשְׂרִים וְאַחַת תְּקִיעוֹת בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ וְלֹא מוֹסִיפִין עַל אַרְבָּעִים וּשְׁמֹנֶה. אֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מִשְּׁנֵי נְבָלִין וְלֹא מוֹסִיפִין עַל שִׁשָּׁה. אֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מִשְּׁנֵי חֲלִילִין וְלֹא מוֹסִיפִין עַל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר. וּבִשְׁנֵים עָשָׂר יוֹם בַּשָּׁנָה הֶחָלִיל מַכֶּה לִפְנֵי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. בִּשְׁחִיטַת פֶּסַח רִאשׁוֹן, וּבִשְׁחִיטַת פֶּסַח שֵׁנִי, וּבְיוֹם טוֹב רִאשׁוֹן שֶׁל פֶּסַח, וּבְיוֹם טוֹב שֶׁל עֲצֶרֶת, וּבִשְׁמוֹנַת יְמֵי הֶחָג, וְלֹא הָיָה מַכֶּה בְּאַבּוּב שֶׁל נְחשֶׁת אֶלָּא בְּאַבּוּב שֶׁל קָנֶה, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁקּוֹלוֹ עָרֵב. וְלֹא הָיָה מַחֲלִיק אֶלָּא בְאַבּוּב יְחִידִי, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מַחֲלִיק יָפֶה: \n",
+ "וְעַבְדֵי הַכֹּהֲנִים הָיוּ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, מִשְׁפְּחוֹת בֵּית הַפְּגָרִים וּבֵית צְפָרְיָא וּמֵאֶמָּאוֹם הָיוּ מַשִּׂיאִין לַכְּהֻנָּה. רַבִּי חֲנַנְיָא בֶּן אַנְטִיגְנוֹס אוֹמֵר, לְוִיִּם הָיוּ: \n",
+ "אֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מִשִּׁשָּׁה טְלָאִים הַמְבֻקָּרִין בְּלִשְׁכַּת הַטְּלָאִים, כְּדַי לַשַּׁבָּת וְלִשְׁנֵי יָמִים טוֹבִים שֶׁל רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה, וּמוֹסִיפִין עַד לְעוֹלָם. אֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מִשְּׁתֵּי חֲצוֹצְרוֹת, וּמוֹסִיפִין עַד לְעוֹלָם. אֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מִתִּשְׁעָה כִנּוֹרוֹת, וּמוֹסִיפִין עַד לְעוֹלָם. וְהַצִּלְצָל לְבָד: \n",
+ "אֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מִשְּׁנֵים עָשָׂר לְוִיִּם עוֹמְדִים עַל הַדּוּכָן, וּמוֹסִיפִין עַד לְעוֹלָם. אֵין קָטָן נִכְנָס לָעֲזָרָה לַעֲבוֹדָה אֶלָּא בְשָׁעָה שֶׁהַלְוִיִּם עוֹמְדִים בַּשִּׁיר. וְלֹא הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים בְּנֵבֶל וְכִנּוֹר אֶלָּא בַפֶּה, כְּדֵי לִתֵּן תְּבַל בַּנְּעִימָה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר, אֵין עוֹלִין לַמִּנְיָן, וְאֵין עוֹמְדִים עַל הַדּוּכָן, אֶלָּא בָאָרֶץ הָיוּ עוֹמְדִין, וְרָאשֵׁיהֶן מִבֵּין רַגְלֵי הַלְוִיִּם, וְצוֹעֲרֵי הַלְוִיִּם הָיוּ נִקְרָאִין: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "יֵשׁ בָּעֲרָכִין לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר, בִּשְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר, בְּשׁוֹר הַמּוּעָד שֶׁהֵמִית אֶת הָעֶבֶד לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר, בָּאוֹנֵס וּבַמְּפַתֶּה וּבַמּוֹצִיא שֵׁם רָע לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר. יֵשׁ בָּעֲרָכִין לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר. כֵּיצַד. אֶחָד שֶׁהֶעֱרִיךְ אֶת הַנָּאֶה שֶׁבְּיִשְׂרָאֵל וְאֶת הַכָּעוּר שֶׁבְּיִשְׂרָאֵל, נוֹתֵן חֲמִשִּׁים סָלַע. וְאִם אָמַר הֲרֵי דָמָיו עָלָי, נוֹתֵן אֶת שָׁוְיוֹ: \n",
+ "בִּשְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר. כֵּיצַד. אֶחָד הַמַּקְדִּישׁ בְּחוֹלַת הַמָּחוֹז וְאֶחָד הַמַּקְדִּישׁ בְּפַרְדְּסוֹת סְבַּסְטִי, נוֹתֵן בְּזֶרַע חֹמֶר שְׂעֹרִים חֲמִשִּׁים שֶׁקֶל כֶּסֶף. וּבִשְׂדֵה מִקְנָה, נוֹתֵן אֶת שָׁוְיוֹ. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, אֶחָד שְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה וְאֶחָד שְׂדֵה מִקְנָה. מַה בֵּין שְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה לִשְׂדֵה מִקְנָה. אֶלָּא שֶׁבִּשְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה נוֹתֵן חֹמֶשׁ, וּבִשְׂדֵה מִקְנָה אֵינוֹ נוֹתֵן חֹמֶשׁ: \n",
+ "בְּשׁוֹר הַמּוּעָד שֶׁהֵמִית אֶת הָעֶבֶד לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר. כֵּיצַד. אֶחָד שֶׁהֵמִית אֶת הַנָּאֶה שֶׁבָּעֲבָדִים וְאֶת הַכָּעוּר שֶׁבָּעֲבָדִים, נוֹתֵן שְׁלשִׁים סֶלַע. הֵמִית בֶּן חוֹרִין, נוֹתֵן אֶת שָׁוְיוֹ. חָבַל בָּזֶה וּבָזֶה, מְשַׁלֵּם נֶזֶק שָׁלֵם: \n",
+ "בָּאוֹנֵס וּבַמְפַתֶּה לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר. כֵּיצַד. אֶחָד שֶׁאָנַס וּפִתָּה אֶת הַגְּדוֹלָה שֶׁבַּכְּהֻנָּה וְאֶת הַקְּטַנָּה שֶׁבְּיִשְׂרָאֵל, נוֹתֵן חֲמִשִּׁים סֶלַע. וְהַבּשֶׁת וְהַפְּגָם, הַכֹּל לְפִי הַמְבַיֵּשׁ וְהַמִּתְבַּיֵּשׁ: \n",
+ "בַּמּוֹצִיא שֵׁם רָע לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר. כֵּיצַד. אֶחָד שֶׁהוֹצִיא שֵׁם רַע עַל הַגְּדוֹלָה שֶׁבַּכְּהֻנָּה וְעַל הַקְּטַנָּה שֶׁבְּיִשְׂרָאֵל, נוֹתֵן מֵאָה סֶלַע. נִמְצָא הָאוֹמֵר בְּפִיו יָתֵר מִן הָעוֹשֶׂה מַעֲשֶׂה. שֶׁכֵּן מָצִינוּ, שֶׁלֹּא נֶחְתַּם גְּזַר דִּין עַל אֲבוֹתֵינוּ בַמִּדְבָּר אֶלָּא עַל לָשׁוֹן הָרַע, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר יד), וַיְנַסּוּ אֹתִי זֶה עֶשֶׂר פְּעָמִים וְלֹא שָׁמְעוּ בְּקוֹלִי: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "הֶשֵּׂג יָד, בַּנּוֹדֵר. וְהַשָּׁנִים, בַּנִּדָּר. וְהָעֲרָכִים, בַּנֶּעֱרָךְ, וְהָעֵרֶךְ, בִּזְמַן הָעֵרֶךְ. הֶשֵּׂג יָד בַּנּוֹדֵר, כֵּיצַד. עָנִי שֶׁהֶעֱרִיךְ אֶת הֶעָשִׁיר, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ עָנִי. וְעָשִׁיר שֶׁהֶעֱרִיךְ אֶת הֶעָנִי, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ עָשִׁיר: \n",
+ "אֲבָל בַּקָּרְבָּנוֹת אֵינוֹ כֵן. הֲרֵי שֶׁאָמַר, קָרְבָּנוֹ שֶׁל מְצֹרָע זֶה עָלָי. אִם הָיָה מְצֹרָע עָנִי, מֵבִיא קָרְבַּן עָנִי. עָשִׁיר, מֵבִיא קָרְבַּן עָשִׁיר. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר, אוֹמֵר אֲנִי אַף בָּעֲרָכִין כֵּן. וְכִי מִפְּנֵי מָה עָנִי שֶׁהֶעֱרִיךְ אֶת הֶעָשִׁיר נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ עָנִי, שֶׁאֵין הֶעָשִׁיר חַיָּב כְּלוּם. אֲבָל הֶעָשִׁיר שֶׁאָמַר עֶרְכִּי עָלָי, וְשָׁמַע הֶעָנִי וְאָמַר, מַה שֶּׁאָמַר זֶה עָלָי, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ עָשִׁיר. הָיָה עָנִי וְהֶעֱשִׁיר אוֹ עָשִׁיר וְהֶעֱנִי, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ עָשִׁיר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אֲפִלּוּ עָנִי וְהֶעֱשִׁיר וְחָזַר וְהֶעֱנִי, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ עָשִׁיר: \n",
+ "אֲבָל בַּקָּרְבָּנוֹת אֵינוֹ כֵן, אֲפִלּוּ אָבִיו מֵת וְהִנִּיחַ לוֹ רִבּוֹא, סְפִינָתוֹ בַיָּם וּבָאוּ בְרִבּוֹאוֹת, אֵין לַהֶקְדֵּשׁ בָּהֶן כְּלוּם: \n",
+ "שָׁנִים בַּנִּדָּר כֵּיצַד, יֶלֶד שֶׁהֶעֱרִיךְ אֶת הַזָּקֵן, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ זָקֵן. וְזָקֵן שֶׁהֶעֱרִיךְ אֶת הַיֶּלֶד, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ יֶלֶד. וַעֲרָכִים בַּנֶּעֱרָךְ כֵּיצַד, אִישׁ שֶׁהֶעֱרִיךְ אֶת הָאִשָּׁה, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ אִשָּׁה. וְאִשָּׁה שֶׁהֶעֱרִיכָה אֶת הָאִישׁ, נוֹתֶנֶת עֵרֶךְ אִישׁ. וְהָעֵרֶךְ בִּזְמַן הָעֵרֶךְ כֵּיצַד, הֶעֱרִיכוֹ פָּחוּת מִבֶּן חָמֵשׁ וְנַעֲשָׂה יוֹתֵר עַל בֶּן חָמֵשׁ, פָּחוּת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים וְנַעֲשָׂה יוֹתֵר עַל בֶּן עֶשְׂרִים, נוֹתֵן כִּזְמַן הָעֵרֶךְ. יוֹם שְׁלֹשִׁים, כִּלְמַטָּה מִמֶּנּוּ. שְׁנַת חָמֵשׁ וּשְׁנַת עֶשְׂרִים, כִּלְמַטָּה מִמֶּנּוּ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כז), וְאִם מִבֶּן שִׁשִּׁים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה אִם זָכָר, הֲרֵי אָנוּ לְמֵדִים בְּכֻלָּם מִשְּׁנַת שִׁשִּׁים. מַה שְּׁנַת שִׁשִּׁים כִּלְמַטָּה מִמֶּנָּה, אַף שְׁנַת חָמֵשׁ וּשְׁנַת עֶשְׂרִים כִּלְמַטָּה מִמֶּנָּה. הֵן. אִם עָשָׂה שְׁנַת שִׁשִּׁים כִּלְמַטָּה מִמֶּנָּה לְהַחֲמִיר, נַעֲשֶׂה שְׁנַת חָמֵשׁ וּשְׁנַת עֶשְׂרִים כִּלְמַטָּה מִמֶּנָּה לְהָקֵל. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר, שָׁנָה שָׁנָה, לִגְזֵרָה שָׁוָה. מַה שָּׁנָה הָאֲמוּרָה בִשְׁנַת שִׁשִּׁים, כִּלְמַטָּה מִמֶּנָּה, אַף שָׁנָה הָאֲמוּרָה בִשְׁנַת חָמֵשׁ וּשְׁנַת עֶשְׂרִים, כִּלְמַטָּה מִמֶּנָּה, בֵּין לְהָקֵל בֵּין לְהַחֲמִיר. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר, עַד שֶׁיִּהְיוּ יְתֵרוֹת עַל הַשָּׁנִים חֹדֶשׁ וְיוֹם אֶחָד: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "הָאוֹמֵר, מִשְׁקָלִי עָלָי, נוֹתֵן מִשְׁקָלוֹ. אִם כֶּסֶף, כֶּסֶף. אִם זָהָב, זָהָב. מַעֲשֶׂה בְּאִמָּהּ שֶׁל יִרְמַטְיָה שֶׁאָמְרָה, מִשְׁקַל בִּתִּי עָלָי, וְעָלְתָה לִירוּשָׁלַיִם, וּשְׁקָלוּהָ וְנָתְנָה מִשְׁקָלָהּ זָהָב. מִשְׁקַל יָדִי עָלָי, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, מְמַלֵּא חָבִית מַיִם וּמַכְנִיסָהּ עַד מַרְפֵּקוֹ, וְשׁוֹקֵל בְּשַׂר חֲמוֹר וְגִידִין וַעֲצָמוֹת וְנוֹתֵן לְתוֹכָהּ עַד שֶׁתִּתְמַלֵּא. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, וְכִי הֵיאַךְ אֶפְשָׁר לְכַוֵּן בָּשָׂר כְּנֶגֶד בָּשָׂר וַעֲצָמוֹת כְּנֶגֶד עֲצָמוֹת. אֶלָּא שָׁמִין אֶת הַיָּד כַּמָּה הִיא רְאוּיָה לִשְׁקֹל: \n",
+ "דְּמֵי יָדִי עָלָי, שָׁמִין אוֹתוֹ, כַּמָּה הוּא שָׁוֶה בְּיָד, וְכַמָּה הוּא שָׁוֶה בְּלֹא יָד. זֶה חֹמֶר בַּנְּדָרִים מִבָּעֲרָכִין. וְחֹמֶר בָּעֲרָכִין מִבַּנְּדָרִים, כֵּיצַד. הָאוֹמֵר, עֶרְכִּי עָלָי, וָמֵת, יִתְּנוּ הַיּוֹרְשִׁין. דָּמַי עָלָי, וָמֵת, לֹא יִתְּנוּ הַיּוֹרְשִׁים, שֶׁאֵין דָּמִים לַמֵּתִים. עֵרֶךְ יָדִי וְעֵרֶךְ רַגְלִי עָלָי, לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. עֵרֶךְ רֹאשִׁי וְעֵרֶךְ כְּבֵדִי עָלָי, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ כֻּלּוֹ. זֶה הַכְּלָל, דָּבָר שֶׁהַנְּשָׁמָה תְלוּיָה בוֹ, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ כֻּלּוֹ: \n",
+ "חֲצִי עֶרְכִּי עָלָי, נוֹתֵן חֲצִי עֶרְכּוֹ. עֵרֶךְ חֶצְיִי עָלָי, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ כֻּלּוֹ. חֲצִי דָמַי עָלָי, נוֹתֵן חֲצִי דָמָיו. דְּמֵי חֶצְיִי עָלָי, נוֹתֵן דְּמֵי כֻלּוֹ. זֶה הַכְּלָל, דָּבָר שֶׁהַנְּשָׁמָה תְלוּיָה בוֹ, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ כֻּלּוֹ: \n",
+ "הָאוֹמֵר, עֶרְכּוֹ שֶׁל פְּלוֹנִי עָלָי, מֵת הַנּוֹדֵר וְהַנִּדָּר, יִתְּנוּ הַיּוֹרְשִׁין. דָּמָיו שֶׁל פְּלוֹנִי עָלָי, מֵת הַנּוֹדֵר, יִתְּנוּ הַיּוֹרְשִׁין. מֵת הַנִּדָּר, לֹא יִתְּנוּ הַיּוֹרְשִׁין, שֶׁאֵין דָּמִים לַמֵּתִים: \n",
+ "שׁוֹר זֶה עוֹלָה, בַּיִת זֶה קָרְבָּן, מֵת הַשּׁוֹר וְנָפַל הַבַּיִת, אֵינוֹ חַיָּב לְשַׁלֵּם. דְּמֵי שׁוֹר זֶה עָלָי עוֹלָה, אוֹ דְּמֵי בַיִת זֶה עָלָי קָרְבָּן, מֵת הַשּׁוֹר וְנָפַל הַבַּיִת, חַיָּב לְשַׁלֵּם: \n",
+ "חַיָּבֵי עֲרָכִים, מְמַשְׁכְּנִין אוֹתָן. חַיָּבֵי חַטָּאוֹת וַאֲשָׁמוֹת, אֵין מְמַשְׁכְּנִין אוֹתָן. חַיָּבֵי עוֹלוֹת וּשְׁלָמִים, מְמַשְׁכְּנִין אוֹתָן אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין מִתְכַּפֵּר לוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּתְרַצֶּה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא א), לִרְצוֹנוֹ, כּוֹפִין אוֹתוֹ עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר, רוֹצֶה אָנִי. וְכֵן אַתָּה אוֹמֵר בְּגִטֵּי נָשִׁים, כּוֹפִין אוֹתוֹ עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר, רוֹצֶה אָנִי: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "שׁוּם הַיְתוֹמִים, שְׁלשִׁים יוֹם, וְשׁוּם הַהֶקְדֵּשׁ, שִׁשִּׁים יוֹם, וּמַכְרִיזִין בַּבֹּקֶר וּבָעָרֶב. הַמַּקְדִּישׁ נְכָסָיו וְהָיְתָה עָלָיו כְּתֻבַּת אִשָּׁה, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, כְּשֶׁיְּגָרְשֶׁנָּה, יַדִּיר הֲנָאָה. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ. כַּיוֹצֵא בוֹ אָמַר רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, אַף הֶעָרֵב לָאִשָּׁה בִכְתֻבָּתָה וְהָיָה בַעְלָהּ מְגָרְשָׁהּ, יַדִּיר הֲנָאָה, שֶׁמָּא יַעֲשֶׂה קְנוּנְיָא עַל נְכָסָיו שֶׁל זֶה וְיַחֲזִיר אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ: \n",
+ "הַמַּקְדִּישׁ נְכָסָיו וְהָיְתָה עָלָיו כְּתֻבַּת אִשָּׁה וּבַעַל חוֹב, אֵין הָאִשָּׁה יְכוֹלָה לִגְבּוֹת כְּתֻבָּתָהּ מִן הַהֶקְדֵּשׁ, וְלֹא בַעַל חוֹב אֶת חוֹבוֹ, אֶלָּא הַפּוֹדֶה פוֹדֶה עַל מְנָת לִתֵּן לָאִשָּׁה כְּתֻבָּתָהּ וּלְבַעַל חוֹב אֶת חוֹבוֹ. הִקְדִּישׁ תִּשְׁעִים מָנֶה וְהָיָה חוֹבוֹ מֵאָה מָנֶה, מוֹסִיף עוֹד דִּינָר וּפוֹדֶה בוֹ אֶת הַנְּכָסִים הַלָּלוּ, עַל מְנָת לִתֵּן לָאִשָּׁה כְּתֻבָּתָהּ וּלְבַעַל חוֹב אֶת חוֹבוֹ: \n",
+ "אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָמְרוּ, חַיָּבֵי עֲרָכִין מְמַשְׁכְּנִין אוֹתָן, נוֹתְנִין לוֹ מְזוֹן שְׁלשִׁים יוֹם וּכְסוּת שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ וּמִטָּה מֻצַּעַת וְסַנְדָּלִין וּתְפִלִּין. לוֹ, אֲבָל לֹא לְאִשְׁתּוֹ וְלֹא לְבָנָיו. אִם הָיָה אֻמָּן, נוֹתְנִין לוֹ שְׁנֵי כְלֵי אֻמָּנוּת מִכָּל מִין וָמִין. חָרָשׁ, נוֹתְנִין לוֹ שְׁנֵי מַעֲצָדִין וּשְׁתֵּי מְגֵרוֹת. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, אִם הָיָה אִכָּר, נוֹתְנִין לוֹ אֶת צִמְדּוֹ. חַמָּר, נוֹתְנִין לוֹ אֶת חֲמוֹרוֹ: \n",
+ "הָיָה מִין אֶחָד מְרֻבֶּה וּמִין אֶחָד מֻעָט, אֵין אוֹמְרִים לוֹ לִמְכֹּר מִן הַמְרֻבֶּה וְלִקַּח לוֹ מִן הַמֻּעָט, אֶלָּא נוֹתְנִין לוֹ שְׁנֵי מִינִין מִן הַמְרֻבֶּה וְכֹל שֶׁיֶּשׁ לוֹ מִן הַמֻּעָט. הַמַּקְדִּישׁ אֶת נְכָסָיו, מַעֲלִין לוֹ אֶת תְּפִלָּיו: \n",
+ "אֶחָד הַמַּקְדִּישׁ אֶת נְכָסָיו, וְאֶחָד הַמַּעֲרִיךְ אֶת עַצְמוֹ, אֵין לוֹ, לֹא בִכְסוּת אִשְׁתּוֹ, וְלֹא בִכְסוּת בָּנָיו, וְלֹא בַצֶּבַע שֶׁצְּבָעָן לִשְׁמָן, וְלֹא בְסַנְדָּלִים חֲדָשִׁים שֶׁלְּקָחָן לִשְׁמָן. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָמְרוּ, עֲבָדִים נִמְכָּרִים בִּכְסוּתָן לְשֶׁבַח, שֶׁאִם תִּלָּקַח לוֹ כְסוּת בִּשְׁלֹשִׁים דִּינָר, מַשְׁבִּיחַ הוּא מָנֶה, וְכֵן פָּרָה, אִם מַמְתִּינִים אוֹתָהּ לָאִטְלִיס, מַשְׁבַּחַת הִיא, וְכֵן מַרְגָּלִית, אִם מַעֲלִין אוֹתָהּ לַכְּרָךְ, מַשְׁבַּחַת הִיא, אֵין לַהֶקְדֵּשׁ אֶלָּא מְקוֹמוֹ וְשַׁעְתּוֹ: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "אֵין מַקְדִּישִׁין לִפְנֵי הַיּוֹבֵל פָּחוֹת מִשְּׁתֵּי שָׁנִים. וְלֹא גוֹאֲלִין לְאַחַר הַיּוֹבֵל פָּחוֹת מִשָּׁנָה. אֵין מְחַשְּׁבִין חֳדָשִׁים לַהֶקְדֵּשׁ. אֲבָל הַהֶקְדֵּשׁ מְחַשֵּׁב חֳדָשִׁים. הַמַּקְדִּישׁ אֶת שָׂדֵהוּ בִשְׁעַת הַיּוֹבֵל, נוֹתֵן בְּזֶרַע חֹמֶר שְׂעֹרִים חֲמִשִּׁים שֶׁקֶל כָּסֶף. הָיוּ שָׁם נְקָעִים עֲמֻקִּים עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים אוֹ סְלָעִים גְּבוֹהִים עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים, אֵין נִמְדָּדִים עִמָּהּ. פָּחוֹת מִכָּאן, נִמְדָּדִים עִמָּהּ. הִקְדִּישָׁהּ שְׁתַּיִם אוֹ שָׁלשׁ שָׁנִים לִפְנֵי הַיּוֹבֵל, נוֹתֵן סֶלַע וּפֻנְדְיוֹן לְשָׁנָה. אִם אָמַר הֲרֵינִי נוֹתֵן דְּבַר שָׁנָה בְשָׁנָה, אֵין שׁוֹמְעִין לוֹ, אֶלָּא נוֹתֵן אֶת כֻּלּוֹ כְּאֶחָד: \n",
+ "אֶחָד הַבְּעָלִים, וְאֶחָד כָּל הָאָדָם. מַה בֵּין הַבְּעָלִים לְבֵין כָּל הָאָדָם, אֶלָּא שֶׁהַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִים חֹמֶשׁ, וְכָל אָדָם אֵינוֹ נוֹתֵן חֹמֶשׁ: \n",
+ "הִקְדִּישָׁהּ וּגְאָלָהּ, אֵינָהּ יוֹצְאָה מִיָּדוֹ בַּיּוֹבֵל. גְּאָלָהּ בְּנוֹ, יוֹצְאָה לְאָבִיו בַּיּוֹבֵל. גְּאָלָהּ אַחֵר אוֹ אֶחָד מִן הַקְּרוֹבִים וּגְאָלָהּ מִיָּדוֹ, אֵינָהּ יוֹצְאָה מִיָּדוֹ בַּיּוֹבֵל. גְּאָלָהּ אֶחָד מִן הַכֹּהֲנִים וַהֲרֵי הִיא תַּחַת יָדוֹ, לֹא יֹאמַר הוֹאִיל וְהִיא יוֹצְאָה לַכֹּהֲנִים בַּיּוֹבֵל וַהֲרֵי הִיא תַּחַת יָדִי, הֲרֵי הִיא שֶׁלִּי, אֶלָּא יוֹצְאָה לְכָל אֶחָיו הַכֹּהֲנִים: \n",
+ "הִגִּיעַ הַיּוֹבֵל וְלֹא נִגְאֲלָה, הַכֹּהֲנִים נִכְנָסִים לְתוֹכָהּ וְנוֹתְנִים אֶת דָּמֶיהָ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, נִכְנָסִין, אֲבָל לֹא נוֹתְנִין. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, לֹא נִכְנָסִין וְלֹא נוֹתְנִין, אֶלָּא נִקְרֵאת שְׂדֵה רְטוּשִׁים, עַד הַיּוֹבֵל הַשֵּׁנִי. הִגִּיעַ הַיּוֹבֵל הַשֵּׁנִי וְלֹא נִגְאֲלָה, נִקְרֵאת רְטוּשֵׁי רְטוּשִׁין עַד הַיּוֹבֵל הַשְּׁלִישִׁי. לְעוֹלָם אֵין הַכֹּהֲנִים נִכְנָסִין לְתוֹכָהּ, עַד שֶׁיִּגְאָלֶנָּה אַחֵר: \n",
+ "הַלּוֹקֵחַ שָׂדֶה מֵאָבִיו, מֵת אָבִיו וְאַחַר כָּךְ הִקְדִּישָׁהּ, הֲרֵי הִיא כִּשְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה. הִקְדִּישָׁהּ וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵת אָבִיו, הֲרֵי הִיא כִּשְׂדֵה מִקְנָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמְרִים, כִּשְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כז), וְאִם אֶת שְׂדֵה מִקְנָתוֹ אֲשֶׁר לֹא מִשְּׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּתוֹ, שָׂדֶה שֶׁאֵינָהּ רְאוּיָה לִהְיוֹת שְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה, יוֹצֵאת זוֹ, שֶׁהִיא רְאוּיָה לִהְיוֹת שְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה. שְׂדֵה מִקְנָה אֵינָהּ יוֹצְאָה לַכֹּהֲנִים בַּיּוֹבֵל, שֶׁאֵין אָדָם מַקְדִּישׁ דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ שֶׁלּוֹ. כֹּהֲנִים וּלְוִיִּם מַקְדִּישִׁים לְעוֹלָם, וְגוֹאֲלִין לְעוֹלָם, בֵּין לִפְנֵי הַיּוֹבֵל, בֵּין לְאַחַר הַיּוֹבֵל: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "הַמַּקְדִּישׁ אֶת שָׂדֵהוּ בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ יוֹבֵל, אוֹמְרִים לוֹ פְּתַח אַתָּה רִאשׁוֹן, שֶׁהַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִים חֹמֶשׁ, וְכָל אָדָם אֵינוֹ נוֹתֵן חֹמֶשׁ. מַעֲשֶׂה בְאֶחָד שֶׁהִקְדִּישׁ אֶת שָׂדֵהוּ מִפְּנֵי רָעָתָהּ, אָמְרוּ לוֹ, פְּתַח אַתָּה רִאשׁוֹן. אָמַר, הֲרֵי הִיא שֶׁלִּי בְאִסָּר. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, לֹא אָמַר זֶה אֶלָּא בְּכַבֵּיצָה, שֶׁהַהֶקְדֵּשׁ נִפְדֶּה בְכֶסֶף וּבְשָׁוֶה כָסֶף. אָמַר לוֹ, הִגִּיעָתְךָ, נִמְצָא מַפְסִיד אִסָּר, וְשָׂדֵהוּ לְפָנָיו: \n",
+ "אָמַר אֶחָד, הֲרֵי הִיא שֶׁלִּי בְעֶשֶׂר סְלָעִים, וְאֶחָד אוֹמֵר בְּעֶשְׂרִים, וְאֶחָד אוֹמֵר בִּשְׁלשִׁים, וְאֶחָד אוֹמֵר בְּאַרְבָּעִים, וְאֶחָד אוֹמֵר בַּחֲמִשִּׁים. חָזַר בּוֹ שֶׁל חֲמִשִּׁים, מְמַשְׁכְּנִין מִנְּכָסָיו עַד עָשֶׂר. חָזַר בּוֹ שֶׁל אַרְבָּעִים, מְמַשְׁכְּנִין מִנְּכָסָיו עַד עָשֶׂר. חָזַר בּוֹ שֶׁל שְׁלשִׁים, מְמַשְׁכְּנִין מִנְּכָסָיו עַד עָשֶׂר. חָזַר בּוֹ שֶׁל עֶשְׂרִים, מְמַשְׁכְּנִים מִנְּכָסָיו עַד עָשֶׂר. חָזַר בּוֹ שֶׁל עֶשֶׂר, מוֹכְרִים אוֹתָהּ בְּשָׁוְיָהּ וְנִפְרָעִים מִשֶּׁל עֶשֶׂר אֶת הַמּוֹתָר. הַבְּעָלִים אוֹמְרִים בְּעֶשְׂרִים, וְכָל אָדָם אוֹמְרִים בְּעֶשְׂרִים, הַבְּעָלִים קוֹדְמִים, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן מוֹסִיפִין חֹמֶשׁ: \n",
+ "אָמַר אֶחָד, הֲרֵי הִיא שֶׁלִּי בְעֶשְׂרִים וְאַחַת, הַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִים עֶשְׂרִים וְשֵׁשׁ. בְּעֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁתַּיִם, הַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִים עֶשְׂרִים וְשֶׁבַע. בְּעֶשְׂרִים וְשָׁלשׁ, הַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִים עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁמֹנֶה. בְּעֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע, הַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִים תִּשְׁעָה וְעֶשְׂרִים. בַּחֲמִשָּׁה וְעֶשְׂרִים, הַבְּעָלִים נוֹתְנִים שְׁלֹשִׁים, שֶׁאֵין מוֹסִיפִין חֹמֶשׁ עַל עִלּוּיוֹ שֶׁל זֶה. אָמַר אֶחָד, הֲרֵי הִיא שֶׁלִּי בְּעֶשְׂרִים וָשֵׁשׁ, אִם רָצוּ הַבְּעָלִים לִתֵּן שְׁלֹשִׁים וְאֶחָד וְדִינָר, הַבְּעָלִים קוֹדְמִים. וְאִם לָאו, אוֹמְרִים, הִגִּיעָתְךָ: \n",
+ "מַחֲרִים אָדָם מִצֹּאנוֹ וּמִבְּקָרוֹ, מֵעֲבָדָיו וּמִשִּׁפְחוֹתָיו הַכְּנַעֲנִים, וּמִשְּׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּתוֹ. וְאִם הֶחֱרִים אֶת כֻּלָּן, אֵינָן מֻחְרָמִין, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה, מָה אִם לַגָּבֹהַּ, אֵין אָדָם רַשַּׁאי לְהַחֲרִים אֶת כָּל נְכָסָיו, עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה שֶׁיְּהֵא אָדָם חַיָּב לִהְיוֹת חָס עַל נְכָסָיו: \n",
+ "הַמַּחֲרִים בְּנוֹ וּבִתּוֹ, עַבְדּוֹ וְשִׁפְחָתוֹ הָעִבְרִים, וּשְׂדֵה מִקְנָתוֹ, אֵינָן מֻחְרָמִים, שֶׁאֵין אָדָם מַחֲרִים דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ שֶׁלּוֹ. כֹּהֲנִים וּלְוִיִּם אֵינָן מַחֲרִימִין, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, הַכֹּהֲנִים אֵינָן מַחֲרִימִין, שֶׁהַחֲרָמִים שֶׁלָּהֶם. הַלְוִיִּם מַחֲרִימִים, שֶׁאֵין הַחֲרָמִים שֶׁלָּהֶן. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר, נִרְאִים דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בַּקַּרְקָעוֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כה), כִּי אֲחֻזַּת עוֹלָם הוּא לָהֶם, וְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בְּמִטַּלְטְלִים, שֶׁאֵין הַחֲרָמִים שֶׁלָּהֶם: \n",
+ "חֶרְמֵי כֹהֲנִים אֵין לָהֶם פִּדְיוֹן, אֶלָּא נִתָּנִים לַכֹּהֲנִים. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶן בְּתֵירָא אוֹמֵר, סְתָם חֲרָמִים לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם כז), כָּל חֵרֶם קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים הוּא לַה'. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, סְתָם חֲרָמִים לַכֹּהֲנִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), כִּשְׂדֵה הַחֵרֶם לַכֹּהֵן תִּהְיֶה אֲחֻזָּתוֹ. אִם כֵּן, לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר כָּל חֵרֶם קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים הוּא לַה'. שֶׁהוּא חָל עַל קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים וְעַל קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים: \n",
+ "מַחֲרִים אָדָם אֶת קָדָשָׁיו, בֵּין קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים וּבֵין קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים. אִם נֶדֶר, נוֹתֵן אֶת הַדָּמִים. אִם נְדָבָה, נוֹתֵן אֶת טוֹבָתוֹ. שׁוֹר זֶה עוֹלָה, אוֹמְדִים כַּמָּה אָדָם רוֹצֶה לִתֵּן בְּשׁוֹר זֶה לְהַעֲלוֹתוֹ עוֹלָה, שֶׁאֵינוֹ רַשַּׁאי. הַבְּכוֹר, בֵּין תָּמִים בֵּין בַּעַל מוּם, מַחֲרִימִין אוֹתוֹ. כֵּיצַד פּוֹדִין אוֹתוֹ. הַפּוֹדִין אוֹמְדִים כַּמָּה אָדָם רוֹצֶה לִתֵּן בִּבְכוֹר זֶה, לִתְּנוֹ לְבֶן בִּתּוֹ אוֹ לְבֶן אֲחוֹתוֹ. רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר, כָּתוּב אֶחָד אוֹמֵר תַּקְדִּישׁ, וְכָתוּב אֶחָד אוֹמֵר אַל תַּקְדִּישׁ. אִי אֶפְשָׁר לוֹמַר תַּקְדִּישׁ, שֶׁכְּבָר נֶאֱמַר אַל תַּקְדִּישׁ, וְאִי אֶפְשָׁר לוֹמַר אַל תַּקְדִּישׁ, שֶׁכְּבָר נֶאֱמַר תַּקְדִּישׁ. אֱמוֹר מֵעַתָּה, מַקְדִּישׁוֹ אַתָּה הֶקְדֵּשׁ עִלּוּי, וְאֵין אַתָּה מַקְדִּישׁוֹ הֶקְדֵּשׁ מִזְבֵּחַ: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת שָׂדֵהוּ בִּשְׁעַת הַיּוֹבֵל, אֵינוֹ מֻתָּר לִגְאוֹל פָּחוּת מִשְּׁתֵּי שָׁנִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כה), בְּמִסְפַּר שְׁנֵי תְבוּאֹת יִמְכָּר לָךְ. הָיְתָה שְׁנַת שִׁדָּפוֹן וְיֵרָקוֹן אוֹ שְׁבִיעִית, אֵינָהּ עוֹלָה מִן הַמִּנְיָן. נָרָהּ אוֹ הוֹבִירָהּ, עוֹלָה לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר, מְכָרָהּ לוֹ לִפְנֵי רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה וְהִיא מְלֵאָה פֵרוֹת, הֲרֵי זֶה אוֹכֵל מִמֶּנָּה שָׁלשׁ תְּבוּאוֹת לִשְׁתֵּי שָׁנִים: \n",
+ "מְכָרָהּ לָרִאשׁוֹן בְּמָנֶה, וּמָכַר הָרִאשׁוֹן לַשֵּׁנִי בְּמָאתַיִם, אֵינוֹ מְחַשֵּׁב אֶלָּא עִם הָרִאשׁוֹן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר, לָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר מָכַר לוֹ. מְכָרָהּ לָרִאשׁוֹן בְּמָאתַיִם, וּמָכַר הָרִאשׁוֹן לַשֵּׁנִי בְּמָנֶה, אֵינוֹ מְחַשֵּׁב אֶלָּא עִם הָאַחֲרוֹן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), לָאִישׁ, לָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר בְּתוֹכָהּ. לֹא יִמְכֹּר בְּרָחוֹק וְיִגְאֹל בְּקָרוֹב, בְּרָע וְיִגְאֹל בְּיָפֶה. לֹא יִלְוֶה וְיִגְאַל, וְלֹא יִגְאַל לַחֲצָאִים. וּבַהֶקְדֵּשׁ מֻתָּר בְּכֻלָּן. זֶה חֹמֶר בַּהֶדְיוֹט מִבַּהֶקְדֵּשׁ: \n",
+ "הַמּוֹכֵר בַּיִת בְּבָתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה, הֲרֵי זֶה גוֹאֵל מִיָּד, וְגוֹאֵל כָּל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ, הֲרֵי זֶה כְּמִין רִבִּית וְאֵינָהּ רִבִּית. מֵת הַמּוֹכֵר, יִגְאַל בְּנוֹ. מֵת הַלּוֹקֵחַ, יִגְאַל מִיַּד בְּנוֹ. אֵינוֹ מוֹנֶה לוֹ שָׁנָה אֶלָּא מִשָּׁעָה שֶׁמָּכַר לוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), עַד מְלֹאת לוֹ שָׁנָה תְמִימָה. וּכְשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר תְּמִימָה, לְהָבִיא חֹדֶשׁ הָעִבּוּר. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר, יִתֵּן לוֹ שָׁנָה וְעִבּוּרָהּ: \n",
+ "הִגִּיעַ יוֹם שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ וְלֹא נִגְאַל, הָיָה חָלוּט לוֹ, אֶחָד הַלּוֹקֵחַ וְאֶחָד שֶׁנִּתַּן לוֹ מַתָּנָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר לַצְּמִיתוּת. בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיָה נִטְמָן יוֹם שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ, שֶׁיְּהֵא חָלוּט לוֹ. הִתְקִין הִלֵּל הַזָּקֵן, שֶׁיְּהֵא חוֹלֵשׁ אֶת מְעוֹתָיו בַּלִּשְׁכָּה, וִיהֵא שׁוֹבֵר אֶת הַדֶּלֶת וְנִכְנָס. אֵימָתַי שֶׁיִּרְצֶה הַלָּה, יָבֹא וְיִטֹּל אֶת מְעוֹתָיו: \n",
+ "כֹּל שֶׁהוּא לִפְנִים מִן הַחוֹמָה, הֲרֵי הוּא כְבָתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה, חוּץ מִן הַשָּׂדוֹת. רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, אַף הַשָּׂדוֹת. בַּיִת הַבָּנוּי בַּחוֹמָה, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אֵינוֹ כְבָתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, כֹּתֶל הַחִיצוֹן הִיא חוֹמָתוֹ: \n",
+ "עִיר שֶׁגַּגּוֹתֶיהָ חוֹמָתָהּ, וְשֶׁאֵינָהּ מֻקֶּפֶת חוֹמָה מִימוֹת יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן נוּן, אֵינָהּ כְּבָתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה. וְאֵלּוּ הֵן בָּתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה, שָׁלשׁ חֲצֵרוֹת שֶׁל שְׁנֵי שְׁנֵי בָתִּים, מֻקָּפוֹת חוֹמָה מִימוֹת יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן נוּן, כְּגוֹן קַצְּרָה הַיְשָׁנָה שֶׁל צִפּוֹרִים, וְחַקְרָה שֶׁל גּוּשׁ חָלָב, וְיוֹדְפַת הַיְשָׁנָה, וְגַמְלָא, וּגְדוֹד, וְחָדִיד, וְאוֹנוֹ, וִירוּשָׁלַיִם, וְכֵן כַּיּוֹצֵא בָהֶן: \n",
+ "בָּתֵּי הַחֲצֵרִים, נוֹתְנִים לָהֶם כֹּחַ הַיָּפֶה שֶׁבְּבָתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה וְכֹחַ הַיָּפֶה שֶׁבַּשָּׂדוֹת. נִגְאָלִין מִיָּד, וְנִגְאָלִין כָּל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ כַּבָּתִּים, וְיוֹצְאִים בַּיּוֹבֵל וּבְגִרְעוֹן כֶּסֶף כַּשָּׂדוֹת. וְאֵלּוּ הֵן בָּתֵּי חֲצֵרִים, שְׁתֵּי חֲצֵרוֹת שֶׁל שְׁנֵי שְׁנֵי בָתִּים, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמֻּקָּפִין חוֹמָה מִימוֹת יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן נוּן, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כְבָתֵּי חֲצֵרִים: \n",
+ "יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁיָּרַשׁ אֲבִי אִמּוֹ לֵוִי, אֵינוֹ גוֹאֵל כַּסֵּדֶר הַזֶּה. וְכֵן לֵוִי שֶׁיָּרַשׁ אֶת אֲבִי אִמּוֹ יִשְׂרָאֵל, אֵינוֹ גוֹאֵל כַּסֵּדֶר הַזֶּה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כה), כִּי בָתֵּי עָרֵי הַלְוִיִּם, עַד שֶׁיְהֵא לֵוִי וּבְעָרֵי הַלְוִיִּם, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אֵין הַדְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים אֶלָּא בְעָרֵי הַלְוִיִּם. אֵין עוֹשִׂים שָׂדֶה מִגְרָשׁ וְלֹא מִגְרָשׁ שָׂדֶה, וְלֹא מִגְרָשׁ עִיר וְלֹא עִיר מִגְרָשׁ. אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים. בְּעָרֵי הַלְוִיִּם. אֲבָל בְּעָרֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, עוֹשִׂין שָׂדֶה מִגְרָשׁ וְלֹא מִגְרָשׁ שָׂדֶה, מִגְרָשׁ עִיר וְלֹא עִיר מִגְרָשׁ, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יַחֲרִיבוּ אֶת עָרֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל. הַכֹּהֲנִים וְהַלְוִיִּם מוֹכְרִים לְעוֹלָם וְגוֹאֲלִים לְעוֹלָם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), גְּאֻלַּת עוֹלָם תִּהְיֶה לַלְוִיִּם: \n"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "versions": [
+ [
+ "Torat Emet 357",
+ "http://www.toratemetfreeware.com/index.html?downloads"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "heTitle": "משנה ערכין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/Eighteen Treatises from the Mishna.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/Eighteen Treatises from the Mishna.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d399e5590959a4dfad013dc3a38176cac60af129
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/Eighteen Treatises from the Mishna.json
@@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Chullin",
+ "versionSource": "http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/etm/index.htm",
+ "versionTitle": "Eighteen Treatises from the Mishna",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "license": "Public Domain",
+ "versionTitleInHebrew": "שמונה עשרה מסכתות משנה",
+ "shortVersionTitle": "David Aaron Sola and Morris Jacob Raphall, 1845",
+ "actualLanguage": "en",
+ "languageFamilyName": "english",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה חולין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "Everyone [may] slaughter and his slaughter is valid, except [that of] a deafmute, a simpleton or a minor, so that they will not spoil the slaughter [i.e., make a mistake]. But [if they] all slaughter and others see them, their slaughter is valid. The slaughter of a non-Jew - it is a nevelah and has the uncleanness of carry-on. [If] the slaughterer [slaughters] at night and thereby his slaughter is blind, his slaughter is valid. [If] the slaughterer [slaughters] on Shabbat, or on Yom Kippur - even though he is liable for his soul - his slaughter is valid.",
+ "When a person had cut the throat [of an animal] with a hand sickle, a sharp flint stone, or with a reed, it is Cashér. All may slaughter, at any time, and with any instrument, excepting a reaping hook, a saw, the [sharp] teeth [of animals fixed in the maxillary bone], or with the finger nail, because the [first mentioned three] do not cut, but strangle [and tear]. When a person slaughtered an animal with a reaping hook, having teeth or notches, with the first or down stroke or cut only, it is unfit for use according to Beth Shammai, but Beth Hillel hold it to be Cashér; but if the teeth of the reaping hook had been ground away [so as to give it a sharp and even edge] it is the same as a knife.",
+ "Should a person have to cut through the great or top ring of the trachea or windpipe, that but the width of a thread of the whole circumference of the ring remained [on the upper part], the animal so killed is Cashér. R. José bar Jehudah saith, \"It is Cashér when the greatest part of this breadth remained.\"",
+ "An animal which was slaughtered by being cut at either side of the throat is Cashér, but if the neck of a bird brought as a sacrifice was wrung off sideways, it is thereby rendered an unfit sacrifice. If an animal was cut from the neck downwards, it becomes unlawful for use, but a bird whose neck was thus wrung is a valid sacrifice. An animal which was cut below the throat is Cashér, but the wringing off of birds’ heads from below the throat render them unfit sacrifices, because the whole region of the neck is appropriate for the wringing off of the head [of birds], and the whole region of the throat for slaughtering [animals], therefore whatever [in respect to cutting] renders an animal Cashér, must render a bird thus treated an unfit sacrifice, and the same in the reverse case.",
+ "That which makes turtle-doves proper sacrifices, renders young pigeons improper ones, and whilst these are valid as young pigeons, they cannot be used as sacrifices of turtle-doves. When the neck feathers of either kind begin to shine and to turn yellow, they are unfit sacrifices.",
+ "That which constitutes a [red] heifer a proper sacrifice, invalidates the calf [whose neck was to be broken, and also the reverse. That which does not disqualify priests [to minister in the Temple] disqualifies Levites, and the reverse. That which is [legally] clean in earthenware vessels, renders other vessels unclean, and the reverse takes place in other kinds of vessels. That which is considered [legally] clean in a wooden vessel is unclean in one of metal, and the reverse. The degree of ripeness which subjects bitter almonds to tithe, does not yet subject sweet almonds to the same; and when the latter become subject, the bitter ones are already free from the obligation of tithe.",
+ "An infusion of water on grape lees which has not yet fermented, may not be bought for the money of second tithe, and renders a bath, however, unfit [for legal cleansing]; but when it has fermented it may be purchased for the money of second tithe, and its admixture does not render a bath unfit Brothers who, after sharing the inheritance from their parents, have entered into partnership, are not bound to pay the tithe of cattle while they are liable to the Kalbon, but whilst they are liable to the payment of cattle-tithe they are not subject to the Kalbon. While the right of sale is vested in the father [who may during the minority of his daughter sell her as a handmaid] no fine can be imposed, and when damages can be legally claimed the right of sale ceases. Whilst the right of refusal is in force Chalitzah does not take place, and when that ceremony is performed the right of refusal is no longer applicable. When the cornet is sounded no Habdallah is said, and when that is said the cornet is not sounded. When a festival happens on the eve of the Sabbath the cornet is sounded, but the Habdallah is not said. If on the day after the Sabbath, it is said, but the cornet is not sounded. What is the form of the [prayer] Habdallah? [Blessed art thou, &c.] \"who makest a distinction between holy and holy;\" but according to R. Dosa, \"who makest a distinction between the greater and minor degrees of holiness.\""
+ ],
+ [
+ "When one of the pipes has been cut through in killing fowl, and both in killing cattle, they are Cashér; also when the greatest part of these had been cut through. R. Jehudah saith, \"It is necessary that in killing fowl the veins at the side of the throat should also be cut through.\" If but one half [of the trachea] is cut through in fowl, and one and a half [i.e. the trachea, and half of the œsophagus] in cattle, it is unfit; but if the greater part of one tube is cut through in fowl, and the greater part of the two in cattle, it is Cashér.",
+ "One who slaughters two heads in one, his slaughter is valid. When two hold the knife and slaughter, even if one [held it] at the top and one at the bottom, their slaughter is valid.",
+ "If he hewed or chopped off the head at one blow, it is Pasool. If, when killing, he had accidentally cut off the whole head, it is Cashér, if the knife extended the width of a neck [beyond the place cut]. When a person in killing cut off two heads at once: if the knife extends the width of one neck only beyond the places cut, it is Cashér. This is, however, only in case the knife had been passed down the throat of the animal only, without drawing it back, or that the second or back cut was only made without the down [or first] cut; but if the knife in cutting was drawn to and fro, if it exceeded in the least the width of the throat of the animals, even if it was as small as a penknive or lancet, it is Cashér. Should a knife happen to drop accidentally on the throat of an animal, although it was duly slaughtered in consequence, yet it is Pasool; for it is said [Deut. xxvii. 7], \"Thou shalt sacrifice, and thou shalt eat,\" viz. that only which thou [thyself] sacrificest, that shalt thou eat. If whilst in the act of slaughtering, the knife should drop from a person's hand, and he picked it up; or his clothes, and he picked them up; or, that having become exhausted by the exertion of setting or sharpening the knife, it was necessary that another person should finish the cutting; if the delay thereby occasioned was such, that during its duration another similar animal might have been slaughtered, it is Pasool. R. Simeon said, \"When a knife could have been examined during the interval.\"",
+ "When the œsophagus had been duly cut through, but the trachea was torn off, or the reverse; or, that he cut through one of the tubes, and then waited till the animal died; or, that he covered or hid the knife by placing it under the second tube, and cut it off; it must, according to R. Jishbab, he considered as Nebelah [i.e. as an animal which died of itself], but, according to R. Akivah, as Terefá [i.e. an animal torn by wild beasts]. R. Jishbab gave the following rule from the authority of R. Joshua, \"Every animal which, owing to a defect in slaughtering, has become Pasool [or unfit for use], must be considered as Nebelah; but when the slaughtering was duly performed, and it became Pasool through another cause, it must be considered as Terefá.\" Then R. Akivah assented to him [R. Jishbab].",
+ "When a domestic or wild animal or fowl was slaughtered, and no blood followed [the incision], it is Cashér, and may be eaten with unwashed hands; because the absence of blood rendered it unsusceptible of contracting and conveying pollution. R. Simeon saith, \"The slaughtering rendered it susceptible.\"",
+ "If an animal is slaughtered when it is dangerously ill, according to Rabbon Simeon ben Gamaliel, \"It is sufficient [to render it Cashér] when it can move or struggle with its fore and hind legs.\" R. Eleazar saith, \"It suffices if the blood spirted after its throat was cut.\" R. Simeon teaches, \"That even when a person slaughtered such an animal at night, and found in the morning the walls [of the slaughter-house] covered with blood, it is Cashér, agreeable to R. Eleazar's opinion.\" But the sages hold it to be Cashér only, \"when the animal struggled with either his fore or hind leg, or that it wagged its tail;\" this applies to small as well as to large cattle. When a small cattle [a sheep or goat, &c.] is slaughtered [when dangerously ill], and extends its fore-leg, but does not draw it back, it is Pasool, because it only indicates the last throe of parting life. This is to be understood only in case the animal is supposed to be in imminent danger; but when it is considered sound, although it should not have exhibited any of the mentioned symptoms [after being killed], it is Cashér.",
+ "When a person had slaughtered an animal for a heathen, it is Cashér; but R. Eleazar decides it to be Pasool. R. Eleazar teaches, \"That if he slaughtered it with the intention that the heathen should only eat the caul of the liver of the animal, it is Pasool, because the tacit intention of the heathen is to use it for idolatrous purposes.\" R. Joshua argued against this, and demonstrated his opinion by a syllogism from minor to major [קל וחומר], \"If where the intention renders Pasool, as in the case of consecrated things, the matter is determined by the intention of the acting priest, does it not follow that in the present instance, which relates to non-consecrated things, and where the intention does not render them Pasool, it should be determined by the intention of him that slaughtered?\"",
+ "When a person slaughtered an animal in or to the name of mountains, hills, seas, rivers, or deserts, it is Pasool. When one of two persons holding the same knife had killed the animal with the mentioned idolatrous intention, and the other with a lawful intention, the animal so killed is Pasool.",
+ "It is not lawful to slaughter [so that the blood should run] into the sea, or in a river, or to place the animal within a vessel; but it is lawful to slaughter in a wet ditch, or within a utensil on board a ship. It is not permitted to slaughter in any pit at all, but it is lawful to make a pit within the house, that the blood may collect therein; but this is not permitted in the public street, not to countenance the custom of heretics.",
+ "When a person slaughters an animal [for profane use out of the temple] as a burnt offering or [other] sacrifice, or as a doubtful sin offering, or as a Paschal sacrifice, or as a thanksgiving offering, it is Pasool; but R. Simeon considers it Cashér. When two persons take hold of a knife in slaughtering, and one of them did so with the intention of slaughtering it as one of the mentioned sacrifices, and the other with a lawful intention, it is Pasool. When it was slaughtered as a sin-offering, or as a certain trespass-offering, or as a firstborn, or as tithe [of animals], or as an exchanged sacrifice, it is Cashér; for this is the rule, \"If tine animal was slaughtered as a sacrifice that can be offered by voluntary vow, it is Pasool; but if it was slaughtered as any other sacrifice, it is Cashér.\""
+ ],
+ [
+ "The following internal wounds or defects render animals Terefá: when the œsophagus is perforated; when the trachea is split or torn across in its width; when the membrane or thin skin [which is innermost and nearest] to the brain is perforated; when the heart is perforated till within the cavity of its two ventricles; when the spine is broken, and the spinal chord is severed; when the liver is wanting, and not a vestige thereof remains; when there is a perforation through the two membranes covering the lungs; when the lungs are deficient [of any of their lobes]; R. Simeon saith, \"[An animal is only then Terefá] when the lungs are perforated within the bronchial tubes;\" when there is a hole in the maw, or in the gallbladder, or in the thin or small intestines; when there is a hole in the interior or lower stomach, or that the greatest part of the external fleshy part thereof is torn; R. Jehudah saith, \"If a hand-breadth is torn off in large cattle [oxen or cows, it is Terefá], but in a small one [a calf, &c.] when the greatest part thereof is torn; when there is a perforation in the omasum [many plies] and the magnus venter or upper stomach, beyond the place where they are connected; when the animal fell off a roof; when the greater part of its ribs are fractured, or when it had been trampled by a wolf [with its fore-paws or claws]; R. Jehudah saith, \"The trample of a wolf causes small cattle only to become Terefá, but large ones only become so when a lion had struck its claws or fangs in them.\" Small birds are Terefá when a sparrow-hawk had struck its talons in them; and large birds [as fowls, geese, &c.] when they were struck by a [falcon, eagle, or other] large bird of prey. This is the rule. \"When an animal under similar circumstances cannot survive, it is Terefá.\"",
+ "The following cases are Cashér: when the trachea is perforated or split. Of what size may the deficient part be? According to Rabbon Simeon ben Gamaliel, \"As large as an [Italian] asser.\" When the bones of the skull are wounded, but the interior skin of the brain is uninjured; when there is a perforation in the heart, but not quite through to within the ventricles; when the vertebræ of the spine are broken, but the spinal chord was not severed; when the liver is deficient, but a small piece thereof of the size of an olive remained; when the omasum and the upper stomach are pierced one within the other; when the animal is deficient of milt or kidneys, or nether jaw, or matrix, or when through fear [from the appearance of any of the phenomena of nature] caused by the hand of God, its lungs had become dessicated. R. Meir considers also an animal whose skin was stripped off as Cashér, but the other sages consider it Pasool,",
+ "The following defects render fowl Terefá: when the œsophagus is perforated; when the trachea is torn off; when a weasel bit it on the head, in a place where it may render it Terefá [viz. near the brain]; when the stomach or thin intestines are perforated; when it had fallen into the fire; when its viscera had become scorched, if they had turned yellow it is Terefá, but when they remained red it is Cashér; when a person had trodden on it, or knocked it against a wall, or that it was trodden upon by cattle, and it struggles and lives twenty-four hours after the accident [and was then slaughtered], it is Cashér.",
+ "The following cases are Cashér in fowl: when the trachea is perforated or split; when it was bitten by a weasel on its head, in a place where it does not render it Terefá; when the crop is perforated, and, according to Ribi, even when that organ is entirely deficient; when the intestines protruded from the body without being perforated; when its wings or legs are broken, or when its large feathers are plucked off; R. Jehudah saith, \"It is Pasool when stripped of its plumage.\"",
+ "When an animal became ill through plethora of blood, or suffered from a bad state of bile, or viscosity of mucus, or that it had fed on the plant rosebay [or the oleander], or that it had swallowed fowl's dung, or drank noxious water, it is Cashér; but when it had swallowed poison, or had been bitten by a venomous serpent, although it is not prohibited as Terefá, yet it is forbidden to be eaten, on account of the danger it may cause to the persons eating thereof.",
+ "The signs by which the clean animals, domestic and wild, may be distinguished [from the unclean and prohibited ones] are mentioned in the Holy Law, but not those of fowl. The sages have, however, established, \"That every [predaceous] bird, which strikes its talons into its prey, is of the unclean: every bird which has an additional claw, a crop, and of which the internal coat of the stomach may be readily peeled off, is of the clean species.\" R. Eleazar ben Zadok saith, \"Every bird which [when placed on a perch] divides its toes equally, is an unclean one.\"",
+ "Of locusts, all the species are clean which have four feet, four wings, and four leaping legs, and whose wings cover the greatest part of its body; R. Jehudah saith, \"Only then when they are called by the name חגב.\" Of fishes, are clean, those furnished with fins and scales; R. Jehudah saith, \"When they have at least two scales and one fin.\" Scales are attached to the body of the fish, and fins are the organs by which it moves through the water."
+ ],
+ [],
+ [
+ "The prohibition against slaughtering an animal and its young on the same day (Lev. 22:28), is obligatory in the Holy Land, and out of it, during and after the existence of the Temple, with respect to animals slaughtered for profane use [i.e. to eat them], and to those slaughtered as consecrated sacrifices, as follows. When a person slaughtered an animal and its young [on the same day] without the temple-court [not as holy sacrifices, but] as animals slaughtered for profane use though both animals are Kosher, yet in slaughtering the second, he incurred the penalty of the forty stripes. Should he have slaughtered them outside the temple-court as holy sacrifices, he has incurred the penalty of utter excision [כרת] for the slaughter of the first. Both animals are Pasul, and he has moreover incurred the penalty of forty stripes for the slaughtering of each animal. Should he have slaughtered them as חולין [i.e. for profane or ordinary use] within the temple-court, both animals are Pasul; and for the slaughter of the second, he incurred the penalty of forty stripes. If both were consecrated sacrifices, and were slaughtered within the temple-court, the animal first slaughtered is a valid sacrifice, and the person who slaughtered it has not incurred any penalty for so doing; but he incurred the penalty of the forty stripes for the slaughter of the second animal, and that animal is unfit for sacrifice.",
+ "If the animal first slaughtered was חולין, and the other a consecrated sacrifice, and they were slaughtered outside the temple-court, the first animal is Kosher, and the person who slaughtered it has not incurred any penalty; but for the slaughter of the second he incurred that of the forty stripes, and the animal is an unfit sacrifice. If the first animal was consecrated, and the second חולין, and both were slaughtered outside the temple-court, he who slaughtered the first incurred the penalty of utter excision, and the animal is an unfit sacrifice; the second animal is Kosher, and for the slaughtering of each, the penalty of the forty stripes has been incurred. If the first animal was חולין, and the second a consecrated sacrifice, and they were slaughtered inside the temple-court, both are Pasul; and for the slaughter of the second, the penalty of forty stripes has been incurred. If the first animal was consecrated, and the second חולין, and they were slaughtered within the temple-court, the first animal is Kosher, and the person who slaughtered it has not incurred any penalty but that of the forty stripes for the slaughter of the second, and that animal is Pasul. If both animals were חולין, and one of them was slaughtered outside, and the second inside the temple-court, the first animal is Kosher, and he who slaughtered it has not incurred any penalty but that of the forty stripes for the slaughter of the second, and that animal is Pasul. If both animals were consecrated sacrifices, and one of them was slaughtered outside, and the second inside the temple-court, the person who slaughtered them has incurred the penalty of excision for the slaughter of the first [both animals are Pasul], and that of the forty stripes for the slaughter of each. If both animals were חולין, and one of them was slaughtered within, and the second without the temple-court, the first animal is Pasul, and he who slaughtered them has not incurred any penalty but that of the forty stripes for the slaughter of the second, but that animal is Kosher. If both were consecrated animals, and one of them was slaughtered inside, and the other outside of the temple-court, the first animal is Kosher, and the person who slaughtered it has not incurred any penalty but that of the forty stripes for the slaughter of the second, and that animal is an unfit sacrifice.",
+ "When one of the animals was found to be Terefá, or that one had been slaughtered for idolaters, or that one is a cow of a sin-offering, or an ox condemned to death, or a calf whose neck was to be struck off, R. Shimon absolves [the person who slaughtered the second animal on the same day] from any penalty; but the sages hold \"That he incurred that [of the forty stripes].\" When one of the animals becomes Nevelah by being improperly slaughtered; or when it was killed by a knife being thrust up its nostrils; or that the trachea and esophagus were forcibly torn off, the law against slaughtering an animal and its young on the same day is not applicable: When a cow and its calf were bought by two persons, one buying the cow and the other the calf, the first buyer has a right to slaughter his purchase first; but if the other buyer anticipated him in slaughtering his, he has acquired his right. Should a person have slaughtered a cow and her two calves on the same day, he has incurred a penalty of eighty stripes; but if he slaughtered the two calves first, and then the cow, he has only incurred [one] penalty of forty stripes. If he slaughtered [on the same day] a cow and its young, and the calf of that young cow, eighty stripes shall be inflicted on him. If he slaughtered [on the same day] a cow, then the calf of its young, and lastly the young itself, the forty stripes shall be inflicted on him. Somchos, in the name of R. Meir, says, \"eighty [stripes].\" At four periods of the year a seller of cattle is bound to inform the buyer that he had sold the dam or leer young on the same day for the purpose of being slaughtered, viz. on the day preceding the last day of the Feast of Tabernacles, on those preceding the first day of Passover, the Feast of Weeks, and of the New Year; and according to R. Yose the Galilean, also on the day preceding the Day of Atonement in Galilee. R. Yehuda says, \"When is he bound to give that information? Only if there should not be a day's interval between the sale of one of the animals and that of the other; but if there was such an interval, the mentioned information is not required from the seller.\" Yet R. Yehuda admits, \"That in case he sold the dam to a bridegroom, and the young to his bride, he is bound to inform them thereof, because it is to be supposed that both animals will be slaughtered on the same day.\"",
+ "On the mentioned four periods [or days], a butcher can be compelled to slaughter cattle against his will. Even if he had an ox worth a thousand dinars, and there was a purchaser for only a single dinars worth of meat, he will be compelled to slaughter it. Hence, should the animal die meanwhile [naturally], the loss falls on the purchaser; but it is not so at other times, for when the animal then dies of itself, the loss falls on the seller [or butcher].",
+ "The expression of the law, \"One day,\" when treating of the prohibition of slaughtering an animal and its young in one [and the same] day, is to be understood, that the day and the night which preceded it are to be reckoned together [as forming one day]. For thus was it expounded by R. Shimon ben Zomah, \"The term (Genesis 1:5, Leviticus 22:28) 'one day' is used in the Creation story and also in the prohibition of slaughtering an animal and its young, to teach us, that just as in Creation the day followed night, thus also must it be understood in this case.\""
+ ],
+ [
+ "The precept of covering the blood [of wild animals and fowl] (Lev. 17:19), is obligatory in and out of the Holy Land, during and after the existence of the Temple, in animals slaughtered for חולין, but not in those which are consecrated sacrifices. It applies solely to wild animals and fowl, whether these were domesticated, or were caught in a wild state. Also to the כוי, because it is doubtful [whether that animal is to be classed among the domestic or wild animals]. It may therefore not he slaughtered on the festival, but if it was slaughtered [thereon], its blood need not be covered [on that day].",
+ "When an animal was slaughtered and found to be Terefá, or if it was slaughtered for idolatrous purposes, or as חולין within, or as consecrated offerings without the temple-court; or a bird or wild animal condemned to lapidation, R. Meir considers it obligatory [to cover the blood], but the sages hold, \"It is not obligatory to do so.\" When it became Nebelah by being slaughtered, or when it was killed by a knife being thrust up its nostrils, or that the trachea and œsophagus were forcibly torn off, it is not obligatory to cover the blood.",
+ "When a deaf and dumb person, an idiot, or a minor, have slaughtered in the presence of other [i.e. qualified] persons, the latter are bound to cover the blood, but not if the above [disqualified persons] had slaughtered by themselves; and thus also in respect to the precept of not slaughtering an animal and its young [on the same day]: if any of these [unqualified persons] had slaughtered one of the animals in the presence of [qualified] persons, the other animal may not be slaughtered after them [on the same day]. If they had slaughtered one of the animals by themselves, R. Meir permits to slaughter the other after them [on the same day], but the sages decide it to be prohibited; they admit, however, \"That a person who did so slaughter it, is not liable to the punishment of the forty stripes.\"",
+ "Should a person slaughter as many as a hundred wild animals or fowl in one place, one covering will suffice for all of them. If many fowl are killed in one place, one covering suffices for all. If many wild animals and fowl were killed in one place, one covering suffices for both kinds. R. Jehudah saith, \"When a person slaughtered the wild animal, he must cover its blood first, and then slaughter the fowl.\" When a person had slaughtered [a wild animal or fowl], and omitted to cover the blood, if another person had observed that omission, the latter is bound to cover the blood. When the blood, after it was duly covered, became uncovered, it is not necessary to cover it again; but if the wind had covered it [and it was afterwards uncovered], it is required to be again covered.",
+ "When the blood was mixed with water, if the blood is still apparent, the obligation of covering it remains in force. If mixed with [red] wine, [that wine] must be considered as if it were water. If it was mixed with the blood of another domestic or wild animal, that blood must be considered as water; but R. Jehudah observes, \"One kind of blood does not neutralise another kind.\"",
+ "The blood which spirts [from the throat of an animal on its being cut, and bespatters a wall, &c.] and that on the slaughtering knife, it is obligatory to cover. R. Jehudah saith, \"When is this the case? When there is no other blood but that; but when there is other blood besides, it is not required to do so.\"",
+ "With what substances is it lawful to cover the blood, and with what may it not be covered? It is lawful to cover with pulverised manure, with fine sand, with mortar, with potsherds, with bricks, or with the earthenware cover [or bung] of a barrel, viz. when these substances had been pulverised, but not with unpulverised manure, coarse sand, or brick, or earthenware covering, which had not been pounded. Nor may it be covered by merely placing a vessel over it. Rabbon Simeon ben Gamaliel laid it down as a rule, \"That it is lawful to cover with any substance which would sustain vegetation, but not with substances unfit for the growth of plants.\""
+ ],
+ [
+ "The precept concerning the prohibition of eating the \"sinew which shrank\" [גיד הנשה] is obligatory in and out of the Holy Land, during and after the existence of the Temple, in animals slaughtered for profane use [חולין], and in respect also to consecrated sacrifices, and applies to wild and domestic animals, and to both the right and left thighs of the animal; it does not apply to fowl, since these have no \"hollow in the thigh.\" It applies to a fetus in embryo, and its suet [חלב] it is permitted to use. According to R. Meir, \"The assertion of butchers in respect to their having removed the גיד הנשה [sciatic nerve] is not to be relied on;\" but the sages hold, \"That they may be relied on in this respect, and in that of the removal of חלב, or suet.\"",
+ "It is lawful to send to a non-Israelite a thigh having the גיד הנשה [sciatic nerve] yet within it, because its existence is easily ascertained. In removing the גיד הנשה [sciatic nerve] the whole sinew must be carefully cut out. R. Judah saith, \"It suffices if enough was removed so as to fulfill the precept.\"",
+ "A person who eats the quantity of an olive in size of a [sciatic nerve] גיד הנשה, incurs the penalty of forty stripes. Should a person have eaten the whole of that sinew, and it was under the mentioned size, he has nevertheless incurred the same penalty. If a person eat the size of an olive of the sinews of each hip, eighty stripes are to be inflicted on him; but according to R. Judah, forty stripes only.",
+ "If a hip was boiled with the גיד הנשה [sciatic nerve]within it, if that sinew was of sufficient size to impart a flavor to the hip, this latter may not be used. How is this to be calculated? In the same proportion as meat boiled with turnips.",
+ "When the גיד הנשה [sciatic nerve] was boiled with other sinews, if that sinew can be recognized [it must be removed, and] the other sinews are prohibited, if it could have imparted a flavor to them. But when it cannot be recognized, all the sinews are prohibited. The broth [or liquid in which it is boiled] may not be used if the גיד הנשה [sciatic nerve] imparted a flavor to it; and it is even so if a piece of Nebelah, or of a fish prohibited to be eaten, should have been boiled with other pieces of meat or fish allowed to be eaten: if the first mentioned pieces can be recognized, they are to be removed, and if they could have imparted a flavor to the other pieces, the latter may not be used. If they could not be recognized, all the pieces are prohibited; and thus in respect to the broth, which may not be used, if the flavor of the prohibited pieces could have been imparted to it.",
+ "The prohibition of the גיד הנשה [sciatic nerve] applies to clean animals, and not to unclean ones. R. Judah said, \"It must be observed also in respect to unclean animals;\" for he argued thus, \"The גיד הנשה [sciatic nerve] was prohibited since the time of the sons of Jacob [i.e. before the promulgation of the law], when it was not yet prohibited to use unclean animals as food.\" The sages replied, \"This precept was first promulgated at Sinai, but it was written [incidentally] in its place.\""
+ ],
+ [
+ "It is prohibited to boil any kind of flesh in milk, except that of locusts and fish; neither may meat and cheese be brought to table together, except locusts and fish. A person who vowed not to eat meat, may eat locusts and fish. Fowl and cheese may, according to Beth Shammai, be brought to table together, but may not be eaten together; but, according to Beth Hillel, they may neither be brought to table nor be eaten together. R. José saith, \"This is one of the cases in which Beth Shammai decide in a less rigid manner than Beth Hillel.\" What kind of table is here alluded to? The table on which the person is eating; but on the table on which food is prepared [a dresser], both kinds may without apprehension be placed near to each other.",
+ "Meat and cheese may be wrapped up together in one cloth, if they do not touch each other [i.e. are placed in contact]. Rabbon Simeon ben Gamaliel saith, \"Two guests [at an inn or ordinary] may without apprehension eat at the same table, one of them meat, and the other cheese.\"",
+ "When a drop of milk fell upon a piece of meat [in a pan], all the meat therein is prohibited if it could have communicated its flavor to the meat; but if the contents of the pot had been immediately stirred together [after the milk fell into it]: if it imparted its flavor to the whole, the contents of the pot are prohibited. The udder [of a cow or goat, &c.] must be torn, and the milk be pressed out of it; but if it had not been torn, the person who eats it has not transgressed; the heart must also be torn and the blood pressed out. If it had not been torn, the person who eats it thus has not transgressed; and he who has fowl and cheese brought to table together has not transgressed the negative commandment.",
+ "It is prohibited to boil [in milk] or to derive any benefit from the flesh of a clean animal which was boiled in milk of a clean animal, but it is permitted to boil and to reap advantage of flesh of a clean animal boiled in the milk of an unclean one, or, of the flesh of an unclean animal boiled in the milk of a clean one. R. Akivah saith, \"Wild animals and fowl are not specified in the law [as subject to this prohibition]; for it is said, 'Thou shalt not boil a kid in its mother's milk,' but this precept was mentioned three times, to include wild animals, fowl, and unclean animals. R. José the Galilean saith, \"It is said (Deut. 14:21), 'Thou shalt not eat of any thing that dieth of itself' [Nebelah], and it is added immediately, 'Thou shalt not boil a kid in its mother's milk.' Consequently, those animals only which are prohibited as Nebelah may not be boiled in milk, and as it might be supposed that since a fowl may become prohibited as Nebelah, it would therefore be prohibited to boil it in milk, the Scripture uses the expression, 'in its mother's milk,' to except fowl, to which that expression cannot apply.\"",
+ "It is prohibited to use the curdled milk in the maw of an animal slaughtered by a non-Israelite, which is Nebelah. When a person put milk in the interior membrane of the maw of a Cashér killed animal; if the milk can impart a flavor to it, it is prohibited. The milk in the maw of a Cashér animal, which sucked from one that is Terefá, is prohibited; but the milk of a Terefá, which sucked from a Cashér animal, may be used, because the milk remains gathered [enclosed] in the intestines.",
+ "Several laws are more rigid in respect to the prohibition of eating suet [חלב] than they are in that against eating blood, and some, again, which relate to this latter prohibition, are more severe than those in respect to the first mentioned. More severe in respect to suet, inasmuch as a trespass [מעילה] may be thereby incurred, as also the guilt of having brought an abominable [i.e. unfit] sacrifice [פגול], and having eaten of what remained [נותר], and became unclean, which is not the case in respect to the blood. Some laws are more severe as regards blood, since this prohibition applies to the blood of domestic and wild animals, and also to fowl, whether they are of a clean or unclean species, but that against eating suet applies to clean animals exclusively."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The skin [of a slaughtered animal], the broth, the meat dissolved by boiling, that which adheres to the bottom of a saucepan, the fragments of meat adhering to the skin when it is removed from the animal, bones [containing marrow], sinews, horns and hoofs, are computed together to form [with the edible matter or flesh in them] the quantity of the size of an egg, when they are liable to contract and communicate pollution to other edibles, but not the pollution of Nebelah. Thus also, if a person slaughters an unclean animal for a heathen, it pollutes edibles while it struggles, but it does not communicate the pollution of a dead body till life is extinct, or, if its head had been quite chopped off. There are consequently more cases in which edibles contract pollution than there are in respect to pollution by Nebelah. R. Jehudah saith, in reference to the fragments of meat adhering to the skin, \"If any of these, when computed together, are of the size of an olive in any one place, guilt is thereby incurred.\"",
+ "In the following instances the skin is to be considered as flesh:—human skin, that of the domestic swine, and, according to R. José, also that of wild swine, the tender skin on the hump of a young camel, and that of the head of a young calf, the skin [between] the split hoofs, that over the matrix, and that of an animal fœtus in embryo, also that under the tail, and those of the ferret, the chameleon, the lizard, and the snail. R. Jehudah saith, \"That of a lizard must be considered like a weasel[’s skin].\" If any of these had been tanned or converted into leather, or that they had been sufficiently trodden [in the process of converting the skin into leather], they are clean, excepting human skin. R. Jochanan ben Nouri saith, \"The eight creeping things have skins.\"",
+ "When a person removes the skin of a domestic or wild animal, whether clean or unclean, large or small, in order to cover himself therewith, pollution is contracted and communicated when as much skin is removed as can be taken hold of, and if to make a bottle of skin, until the skin over the breast is removed. If the skinning was commenced from the legs, the whole is considered as connecting, and subject to contract and communicate pollution. The skin covering the neck is not considered as connecting by R. Jochanan ben Nouri, but the sages do so consider it until the whole skin is removed.",
+ "When there is the size of an olive of flesh on a skin in one spot, any person who-touches the filaments proceeding therefrom, or the hairs on the skin which are opposite [and touch the said flesh], is unclean. If there were two pieces of flesh of the size of two half olives each, it pollutes by being carried, but not by the mere touching it. Such is the dictum of R. Ishmael, but R. Akivah holds \"That they do not pollute either by being carried or touched,\" but he admits, \"That if the size of two half olives were stuck on a skewer and moved, it is unclean.\" Why, then, does [R. Akivah], in respect to the skin, hold it to be clean? Because the skin prevents their contact.",
+ "Whoever touches a marrow-bone of a dead body, or of a consecrated sacrifice, whether the said bones are open or closed, is unclean. Whoever touches a marrow-bone of an animal that is Nebelah, or of creeping animals, is clean when the bone is closed, but if it is open ever so little, pollution is contracted by contact with it. Whence is it proved that [the marrow-bone of a Nebelah] does also pollute the person carrying it? Because it is said (Lev. 11:24-25), \"Whoever toucheth [the carcase],\" and \"Whoever beareth aught of the carcase,\" &c., which proves that whatever communicates by being touched, does also communicate it by being carried, and that which cannot communicate pollution by contact, cannot communicate it by being carried.",
+ "The egg of a creeping animal, in which the young animal is already developed, is clean, but when it has the smallest perforation it renders unclean. In respect to a mouse which is yet half flesh and half earth, 16 if the flesh is touched it renders unclean, but not if only the earth thereof had been touched. R. Jehudah saith, \"Whoever touches the earth which immediately adjoins the fleshy part is also unclean.\"",
+ "Members, or pieces of flesh which had been forcibly torn off a [live] animal, but which are yet pendant to it, are subject to contract and communicate pollution like other edibles, while they remain thus pendant in their place, but require the susceptibility of contracting pollution to be communicated to them, before they contract it. When the animal was slaughtered they may contract pollution by its blood, according to R. Meir, but R. Simeon saith, \"They do not thereby contract it.\" When the animal dies of itself, it requires the susceptibility of contracting pollution to be communicated to it before it is unclean. The [pendulous] member does, however, pollute as a member taken off an animal while yet alive, but not as Nebelah. Such is the dictum of R. Meir; but R. Simeon saith, \"That member or the pieces of flesh [above mentioned] are clean.\"",
+ "A limb or piece of flesh torn from a human body, but yet pendant to it, is clean [if the person is alive], but should he die, the flesh is clean, but the limb pollutes as a limb severed from a living being, but not as a part of a dead body. Such is the dictum of R. Mein; but R. Simeon holds the said limb to be clean."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The law concerning the [right] shoulder, the two cheeks, and maw, due as oblation to the priest, is obligatory in and out of the Holy Land, during and after the existence of the Temple, and applies to animals for ordinary use [חולין], but not to those used as consecrated sacrifices. For it might have been concluded [thus], If in respect to animals slaughtered for חולין, to which the precept of giving the breast and foreleg [to the priest] does not apply, it is nevertheless obligatory to give the above mentioned oblations: it would follow, a fortiori, that these oblations ought also to be given in respect to consecrated sacrifices which are subject to the gift of the breast and foreleg; but it is written [Leviticus 7:34], \"[For the wave-breast, and fore-leg, &c.] and have given them to Aaron the priest and his sons by a statute for ever.\" Hence we are taught, that the priest obtains only what is specified in the text [viz., the breast, &c.].",
+ "All animals, for sacrifice, which had contracted a permanent [i.e. incurable] blemish before they were consecrated, and were ransomed, are subject to the laws concerning first-born and [the other sacerdotal] oblations, and may, like animals used for חולין, be shorn and used for labor. The young and milk they produce after they were ransomed are also lawful for use, and no guilt is incurred if they were slaughtered outside [the temple]. They do not render an animal substituted for them a valid sacrifice, but they must be ransomed after their death. First-born of animals, and those given as tithe, are excepted. If they had been consecrated before they had contracted the blemish, or that a transitory blemish preceded the consecration, and they had subsequently contracted a permanent one, they are free, after they are ransomed, from the laws relating to first-born and other oblations; but they may not, like animals used for חולין, be shorn nor used to labor with. The young and milk they produce may not be used, even after they were ransomed, and guilt is incurred by any person who slaughtered them outside [of the temple]. They also render an animal substituted for them a valid sacrifice, and must be buried when they die.",
+ "If a blemished first-born animal was sold by a priest to an Israelite, and had become mingled with a hundred other animals; if these were slaughtered by a hundred persons, the firstborn which is among them releases them all [of the obligation of paying the sacerdotal dues]. If they were all slaughtered by one person, one only of these animals is free. A person who slaughters for a priest, or for a non-Israelite, is not bound to pay the oblations; if he had the animals in partnership with one of these, he must mark them. If a priest sold an animal [to an Israelite], reserving the oblations, the Israelite is not bound to give them. Should one [Israelite] say to another, Sell me the entrails of [this] cow,\" and there is yet of the oblations among it [viz. the maw], he [the buyer], must give it himself to the priest, and [the seller] need not allow him any deduction from the purchase-money on that account; but if the animal was bought by weight, the buyer must pay the sacerdotal dues, and may deduct it from the purchase-money.",
+ "If a proselyte had a cow, which he slaughtered before he had embraced Judaism, he is free from the payment of the oblations, but not if the slaughtering took place after his conversion. In a doubtful case he is free, because the onus probandi lies with him who sets up the claim. What are the limits of the shoulder? From the bent of the knee until the hip-bone: this is also the case in respect to the shoulder mentioned in the sacrifice of the Nazarite, as also in respect to the hind-leg down to the hough [in peace-offerings]. The [limits of the] leg are, according to R. Jehudah, from the hip-joint until that of the thigh. The [limits of the] two cheeks are from their joints till the top ring of the trachea."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The precept of giving to the priest the firstling of the fleece (Deut. 18:4) is obligatory in, and out of the Holy Land, 1 during, and after the existence of the Temple, and applies to animals for profane use [חולין], but not to consecrated sacrifices. The precept concerning the oblation of the shoulder, two cheeks, and maw, is more rigid than that which relates to the firstling of the fleece, in as much as the first-mentioned applies both to cattle and flock, but the latter is limited to sheep, and only when there are a number of them.",
+ "What is considered \"a number\"? According to Beth Shammai, two sheep come under this category, since we find it written (Isaiah 7:21), \"A man shall nourish a young cow and two sheep;\" but Beth Hillel say, \"[At least] five, for it is also written (Samuel I 25:18), 'Five sheep ready dressed.'\" R. Dosa ben Arkinar saith, \"When the fleece of each of the five sheep amounts to the [minimum] weight of one half maneh, the obligation of paying the firstling of the wool is incurred;\" but the sages hold, \"That it is incurred as soon as five sheep are shorn, whatever the weight of their fleece may be.\" What quantity must be given to the priest? The weight of five selahim, in Judea, which are equal to ten selahim in Galilee, of white [i.e. clean], but not of dirty wool, and in sufficient quantity as to make therewith the smallest [sacerdotal] garment, for it is said (Deut. 18:5), \"Shalt thou give unto him,\" viz. a sufficient gift [which has some value]. If he could not give it to the priest before it was dyed, he is not bound to give it at all. If the owner of the wool had only bleached, but not yet dyed it, he is bound to give it. If any person buys from a heathen the fleece of sheep [yet to be shorn], he is not bound to pay to the priest the firstling of the fleece. If one Israelite bought it of another, if the seller reserved some of the wool to himself, he is bound to pay this oblation, but if he sold it without such reservation, this obligation is incumbent on the buyer. If he [the seller] had two kinds of wool, gray and white, if he sold the gray but not the white wool, or of rams but not of ewes, each party must pay the oblation to the priest."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The precept of letting the parent bird, found in a nest, fly away (Deut. 22:6) is obligatory, in, and out of the Holy Land, during, and after the existence of the Temple, and applies to non-consecrated birds [חולין], but not to those which are consecrated sacrifices. The law is more rigid in respect to the obligation of covering the blood, than in that of letting the parent bird fly away, in as much as the first-mentioned precept applies to wild animals and fowl, whether ready at hand or not, and the latter applies to fowl only, and to those which are not ready at hand. By this latter expression is understood such as geese or fowls, which make their nest in an open field or orchard; but those which nestled within the house, or in respect to Herodian doves, this obligation does not apply.",
+ "Nor to unclean birds, nor unclean birds incubating the eggs of clean birds, nor these latter hatching the eggs of unclean birds. R. Eleazar holds \"That it is obligatory to set at liberty a cock partridge found in a nest,\" but the sages do not consider this necessary.",
+ "If the dam was fluttering about the nest, if she touched it with her wings, it is obligatory to let her fly away, but not when her wings do not touch it; if there was but one young bird, or one egg, it is nevertheless obligatory to let the dam fly away, because the Scripture uses the term (Deuteronomy 22:6): \"nest,\" i.e. any nest. When some of the young birds are already on the wing, or that the eggs are addled, the precept does not apply, for it is written, \"And the dam sitting upon the young birds, or upon the eggs.\" Even as the young birds are supposed in the text to be live ones, thus also must the eggs be fit for incubation [and to produce life], from which term addled eggs are [of course] excluded; and even as the eggs [to complete the process of incubation] require the care of the dam, thus also must the young bird mentioned in the text yet require the nurture of the dam, consequently those birds which are already able to fly are excluded. Should a person have let the dam fly away, and she returns constantly to the nest, even four or five times [or oftener], he is bound to let her fly away, for it is said, \"Thou shalt surely let the dam go,\" &c. When a person says, \"I take the dam, and set the young birds free,\" he must let the dam go also, since it is written, \"Thou shalt surely let the dam go.\" If he takes the young birds first, and then puts them again in the nest, and the dam returns, he is no longer bound to let her fly away again.",
+ "When a person has taken the dam and the young birds from the nest, he shall, according to R. Jehudah, suffer the punishment of the stripes, but he is not bound to let the dam fly away; but the sages hold, \"That he is bound to let her fly, but is free of the punishment.\" For this is the rule, \"For the transgression of a negative precept, which may be rectified by an act, no punishment is to be inflicted when that rectifying act has been done.\"",
+ "The dam and the young birds are not to be taken from a nest, even to [serve as a sacrifice] to cleanse the leper. If the Holy Law attaches so much importance to this precept, which is so easy to be observed, and though scarcely demanding the sacrifice of the value of an issar, does nevertheless use the expression (Deuteronomy 22:6): \"That it may be well with thee, and that thy days may be prolonged,\" how much more precious must be the reward attached to the observance of other [more difficult] precepts of the Holy Law. "
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git "a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/Mischnajot mit deutscher \303\234bersetzung und Erkl\303\244rung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de].json" "b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/Mischnajot mit deutscher \303\234bersetzung und Erkl\303\244rung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de].json"
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..305587cea324cd0a7d60c4f02c7ff9025fb80b0e
--- /dev/null
+++ "b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/Mischnajot mit deutscher \303\234bersetzung und Erkl\303\244rung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de].json"
@@ -0,0 +1,122 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Chullin",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.talmud.de/tlmd/die-deutsche-mischna-uebersetzung",
+ "versionTitle": "Mischnajot mit deutscher Übersetzung und Erklärung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de]",
+ "priority": 0.5,
+ "versionNotes": "Ordnung Seraïm, übers. und erklärt von Ascher Samter. 1887.
Ordnung Moed, von Eduard Baneth. 1887-1927.
Ordnung Naschim, von Marcus Petuchowski u. Simon Schlesinger. 1896-1933.
Ordnung Nesikin, von David Hoffmann. 1893-1898.
Ordnung Kodaschim, von John Cohn. 1910-1925.
Ordnung Toharot, von David Hoffmann, John Cohn und Moses Auerbach. 1910-1933.",
+ "actualLanguage": "de",
+ "languageFamilyName": "german",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה חולין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "Jeder darf schlachten, und was er geschlachtet hat, ist tauglich, ausgenommen sind ein Taubstummer, ein Geistesschwacher und ein Unmündiger, sie könnten beim Schlachten leicht etwas unrichtig ausführen; haben Andere beim Schlachten zugesehen, so ist es, wer auch immer geschlachtet hat, tauglich. Von einem Heiden Geschlachtetes gilt wie von selbst Gefallenes und verunreinigt, wenn man es trägt. Wenn man bei Nacht schlachtet, und ebenso wenn ein Blinder geschlachtet hat, ist das Geschlachtete tauglich. Wenn man am Sabbat oder am Versöhnungstage schlachtet, ist das Geschlachtete tauglich, trotzdem man dadurch sein Leben verwirkt.",
+ "Wenn jemand mit einer Handsichel, einem scharfen Stein oder Rohr schlachtet, ist das Geschlachtete tauglich. Jeder darf schlachten, und zu jeder Zeit darf man schlachten, und mit jedem Dingo darf man schlachten, ausser mit einer Schnittersichel, einer Säge, mit Zähnen, und mit dem Fingernagel, weil diese reissen. Wenn jemand mit einer Schnittersichel nur hinwärts schlachtet, erklären Bet-Schammai es für untauglich, Bet-Hillel erklären es für tauglich, waren aber die Zähne ausgeschliffen, so ist sie wie ein Messer.",
+ "Wenn man von dem [obersten] Knorpelringe aus schlachtet und von diesem auch nur einen fadenbreiten Rand des ganzen Umfanges übrig gelassen hat, ist das Geschlachtete tauglich; R. Jose, Sohn des R. Jehuda, sagt: Wenn auch nur einen fadenbreiten Rand seiner grösseren Hälfte.",
+ "Wenn man von den Seiten aus schlachtet, ist das Geschlachtete tauglich, wenn man von den Seiten aus abdrückt, ist das Abgedrückte untauglich. Wenn man vom Nacken aus schlachtet, ist das Geschlachtete untauglich, wenn man vom Nacken aus abdrückt, ist das Abgedrückte tauglich. Wenn man vom Halse aus schlachtet, ist das Geschlachtete tauglich, wenn man vom Halse aus abdrückt, ist das Abgedrückte untauglich, denn der ganze Nacken ist für das Abdrücken tauglich, und der ganze Hals ist für das Schlachten tauglich. So ergibt sich, dass was für das Schlachten tauglich, für das Abdrücken untauglich ist, und was für das Abdrücken tauglich, für das Schlachten untauglich ist.",
+ "Was bei den Turteltauben tauglich ist, ist bei den jungen Tauben untauglich, was bei den jungen Tauben tauglich ist, ist bei den Turteltauben untauglich, beim Beginn des Glänzendwerdens sind beide untauglich.",
+ "Was bei der Kuh tauglich ist, ist bei dem Kalbe untauglich, was bei dem Kalbe tauglich ist, ist bei der Kuh untauglich. Was bei den Priestern tauglich ist, ist bei den Leviten untauglich, was bei den Leviten tauglich ist, ist bei den Priestern untauglich. Was bei irdenen Geräten rein ist, ist bei allen anderen Geräten unrein, was bei allen anderen Geräten rein ist, ist bei irdenen Geräten unrein. Was bei hölzernen Geräten rein ist, ist bei metallenen Geräten unrein, was bei metallenen Geräten rein ist, ist bei hölzernen Geräten unrein. Was bei den bitteren Mandeln [Abgaben]-pflichtig ist, ist bei den süssen davon frei, was bei den süssen [Abgaben-] pflichtig ist, ist bei den bitteren frei.",
+ "Tresterwein darf, so lange er nicht fermentiert hat, für Zehnt-Geld nicht gekauft werden und macht das Tauchbad untauglich, hat er fermentiert, darf er für Zehnt-Geld gekauft werden und macht das Tauchbad nicht untauglich. Brüder, die Gesellschafter sind, sind vom Viehzehnt frei, wenn sie zu Aufgeld verpflichtet sind; sind sie zum Viehzehnt verpflichtet, sind sie vom Aufgeld frei. Überall da, wo ein Verkauf zulässig ist, ist kein Strafgeld zu zahlen, wo ein Strafgeld zu zahlen ist, ist kein Verkauf zulässig. Überall, wo eine Weigerungs-Erklärung zulässig ist, kann die Chaliza nicht vollzogen werden, wo die Chaliza vollzogen werden kann, ist keine Weigerungs-Erklärung zulässig. Überall da, wo geblasen wird, wird keine Habdala gemacht, wo Habdala gemacht wird, wird nicht geblasen. Fällt ein Feiertag auf den Freitag, so wird geblasen und keine Habdala gemacht, auf den Sabbat-Ausgang, so wird Habdala gemacht und nicht geblasen. Wie spricht man die Habdala ? „der einen Unterschied macht zwischen Heiligem und Heiligem“; R. Dosa sagt: „zwischen strenger Heiligem und leichter Heiligem“."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Wenn man eine [von den beiden Halsröhren ] beim Geflügel und beide beim Vieh schlachtet, ist das Geschlachtete tauglich, und bei jeder gilt die grössere Hälfte gleich dem Ganzen; R. Jehuda sagt: Nur wenn man auch die Blutadern durchschneidet. Die Hälfte von einer beim Geflügel, und eine und die Hälfte der anderen beim Vieh, so ist das Geschlachtete untauglich; die grössere Hälfte von einer beim Geflügel und die grössere Hälfte von beiden beim Vieh, so ist das Geschlachtete tauglich.",
+ "Wenn man zwei Köpfe zugleich schlachtet, ist das Geschlachtete tauglich. Wenn zwei das Messer anfassen und schlachten, selbst der Eine oben und der Andere unten, ist das Geschlachtete tauglich.",
+ "Hat man den Kopf mit einem Schlage abgetrennt, ist es untauglich. Hat man geschlachtet und dabei den Kopf in einem Zuge abgetrennt, so ist es tauglich, wenn an dem Messer [noch] eine Halsbreite ist. Hat man geschlachtet und dabei zwei Köpfe in einem Zuge abgetrennt, so ist es tauglich, wenn an dem Messer [noch] eine Halsbreite ist. Wann ist dies erforderlich, wenn man hin- aber nicht herwärts geschnitten hat, oder her- aber nicht hinwärts, hat man jedoch hin- und herwärts geschnitten selbst mit einem noch so kleinen, selbst mit einem Beschneidungsmesser, so ist es tauglich. Hat ein Messer im Herunterfallen geschlachtet, selbst wenn es ordnungsgemäss geschlachtet hat, ist es untauglich, denn es heisst: „du sollst schlachten und du sollst essen“, was du schlachtest, das darfst du essen. Ist ihm das Messer entfallen und er hat es wieder aufgehoben, sind seine Kleider heruntergefallen und er hat sie wieder aufgehoben, war er durch das Schleifen des Messers matt geworden und hat ein Anderer kommen und [weiter] schlachten müssen, wenn dadurch eine Pause von der Zeitlänge einer Schlachtung entstanden ist, so ist es untauglich; R. Simon sagt: Eine Pause von der Zeitlänge einer Untersuchung.",
+ "Hat man die Speiseröhre geschlachtet und die Luftröhre losgerissen oder die Luftröhre geschlachtet und die Speiseröhre losgerissen, oder eine von beiden geschlachtet und dann gewartet, bis es von selbst verendet ist, oder dann das Messer unter die zweite gesteckt und sie losgerissen, so ist es nach Ansicht des R. Jeschebab Aas, nach Ansicht des R. Akiba trefa. Als Regel hat R. Jeschebab im Namen des R. Josua gesagt: Alles, was beim Schlachten untauglich geworden ist, ist Aas, Alles, was vorschriftsmässig geschlachtet worden und wo etwas Anderes schuld ist, dass es untauglich geworden, ist trefa, und R. Akiba hat ihm [nachträglich] zugestimmt",
+ "Wenn man ein Vieh, ein Wild oder einen Vogel schlachtet, ohne dass dabei Blut herauskommt, sind sie tauglich, und sie dürfen auch mit nicht gereinigten Händen gegessen werden, weil sie nicht durch das Blut verunreinigungsfähig geworden sind; R. Simon sagt: Sie sind durch das Schlachten verunreinigungsfähig geworden.",
+ "Wenn man ein schwerkrankes Tier schlachtet, so muss es nach Ansicht des R. Simon, Sohn des Gamliel, mit Vorder- und Hinterfuss gezuckt haben; R. Elieser sagt: Es genügt, wenn [das Blut] herausgespritzt ist. Es sagte R. Simon: Auch wenn man es bei Nacht schlachtet und früh am nächsten Tage die Halswände voll mit Blut findet, ist es tauglich, weil das Blut herausgespritzt ist, und zwar gemäss der Entscheidung des R. Elieser. Die Weisen aber sagen: Es muss mit dem Vorder- oder mit dem Hinterfuss gezuckt oder mit dem Schwanz gewedelt haben, es ist gleich, ob es Kleinvieh oder Grossvieh ist. Ein Kleinvieh, das den Vorderfuss ausgestreckt, aber nicht wieder zurückgezogen hat, ist untauglich, weil das nichts weiter ist als ein Zeichen des Verendens. Wo gilt dieses? wenn es in schwerkrankem Zustande war, war es aber in gesundem Zustande, so ist es auch ohne eines von allen diesen Zeichen tauglich.",
+ "Wenn man für einen Heiden schlachtet, ist das Geschlachtete tauglich; R. Elieser erklärt es für untauglich. Es sagte R. Elieser: Selbst wenn man es [mit der Absicht] geschlachtet hat, dass der Heide nur etwas vom Zwerchfell davon essen soll, ist es untauglich, weil die Absicht des Heiden auch unausgesprochen auf den Götzendienst gerichtet ist. Es sagte R. Jose: Von dem Strengeren lässt sich ein Schluss auf das Leichtere ziehen; wenn da, wo die Absicht untauglich macht, nämlich bei Opfertieren, sich Alles nur nach dem richtet, der die Opferhandlung vollzieht, um wieviel mehr muss da, wo eine Absicht nicht untauglich macht, nämlich bei Nichtheiligem, Alles sich nur nach dem richten, der da schlachtet.",
+ "Wenn jemand zu Ehren von Bergen, von Hügeln, von Meeren, von Flüssen oder von Wüsten schlachtet, ist das Geschlachtete untauglich. Wenn zwei das Messer anfassen und schlachten, der Eine zu Ehren eines von allen diesen und der Andere für einen zulässigen Zweck, ist das Geschlachtete untauglich.",
+ "Man darf nicht in Meere hinein schlachten und nicht in Flüsse und nicht in Geräte hinein, dagegen darf man in eine Wassergrube hinein schlachten, auch auf einem Schiff über die Rückseite von Geräten. In eine Grube hinein darf man überhaupt nicht schlachten, aber man darf in seinem Hause eine Grube machen, damit das Blut in sie hineinfliesst, auf der Strasse dagegen darf man es nicht so machen, um die Häretiker nicht in ihrem Gebrauche zu bekräftigen.",
+ "Wenn jemand mit der Bestimmung zum Ganzopfer, Friedensopfer, Zweifels-Schuldopfer, Pesachopfer oder Dankopfer schlachtet, ist das Geschlachtete untauglich; R. Simon erklärt es für tauglich. Wenn zwei das Messer anfassen und schlachten, der Eine mit der Bestimmung zu einem von allen diesen und der Andere für einen zulässigen Zweck, ist das Geschlachtete untauglich. Wenn jemand etwas mit der Bestimmung zum Sündopfer, Gewissheits-Schuldopfer, Erstgeburts-, Zehnt- oder einem für ein anderes eingetauschten Opferschlachtet, ist das Geschlachtete tauglich. Dies ist die Regel: Ist das, wozu man das Geschlachtete beim Schlachten bestimmt hat, etwas, was als Gelübde oder freiwillige Gabe dargebracht werden kann, so ist es untauglich, kann es nicht als Gelübde oder freiwillige Gabe dargebracht werden, so ist es tauglich."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Folgendes ist beim Vieh trefa: Wenn die Speiseröhre ein Loch hat, die Luftröhre abgerissen ist, wenn die Gehirnhaut ein Loch hat, das Herz nach einer Herzkammer hin durchlöchert ist, wenn das Rückgrat gebrochen und das Rückenmark abgerissen ist, wenn die Leber fort und nichts von ihr zurückgeblieben ist, wenn die Lunge ein Loch hat oder etwas von ihr fehlt — R. Simon sagt: Nur wenn das Loch bis zur Lungen-Schlagader geht —, wenn im Labmagen, in der Gallenblase, in den Dünndärmen ein Loch ist, der innere Pansen durchlöchert oder die grössere Hälfte vom äussern zerrissen ist — R. Jehuda sagt: Bei einem grossen [Tiere] eine Handbreite, bei einem kleinen die grössere Hälfte —, wenn der Blättermagen oder der Netzmagen nach aussen durchlöchert ist, wenn es vom Dach heruntergefallen ist, wenn die grössere Hälfte der Rippen gebrochen sind, und wenn es von einem Wolf gepackt worden ist. — R. Jehuda sagt: Kleinvieh, das von einem Wolf gepackt worden ist, und Grossvieh, das von einem Löwen gepackt worden ist, kleines Geflügel, das von einem Habicht gepackt worden ist, und grosses Geflügel, das von einem Geier gepackt worden ist. Dies ist die Regel: Alles, was so nicht lebensfähig wäre, ist trefa.",
+ "Folgendes ist beim Vieh tauglich: Wenn die Luftröhre durchlöchert oder gespalten ist — wie gross darf die Lücke sein ? R. Simon, Sohn des Gamliel, sagt: Bis zu einem italischen Issar —, wenn der Schädel einen Defect hat, die Gehirnhaut aber nicht durchlöchert ist, wenn das Herz durchlöchert ist, aber nicht nach einer Herzkammer hin, wenn das Rückgrat gebrochen, das Rückenmark aber nicht abgerissen ist, wenn die Leber fort, aber eine Olivengrösse von ihr zurückgeblieben ist, wenn Blättermagen und der kleine Netzmagen in einander hinein durchlöchert sind, wenn die Milz fort ist, die Nieren fort sind, der Unterkiefer fort ist, die Gebärmutter fort ist, wenn [die Lunge] infolge höherer Gewalt eingeschrumpft ist. Hat es keine Haut, erklärt es R. Meïr für tauglich, die Weisen sagen: Es ist untauglich.",
+ "Folgendes ist beim Geflügel trefa: Wenn die Speiseröhre ein Loch hat, die Luftröhre abgerissen ist, ein Wiesel es am Kopfe verwundet hat an einer Stelle, wo es dadurch trefa wird, wenn der Magen ein Loch hat, in den Dünndärmen ein Loch ist. Wenn es in’s Feuer gefallen ist und die Eingeweide angesengt sind, ist es untauglich, wenn sie grün geworden sind, sind sie rot geblieben, ist es tauglich. Hat man es getreten oder an die Wand geschlagen oder hat ein Vieh es niedergedrückt, und es rührt sich noch, und man hat es, nachdem es noch 24 Stunden gelebt hat, geschlachtet, so ist es tauglich.",
+ "Folgendes ist beim Geflügel tauglich: Wenn die Luftröhre ein Loch hat odergespalten ist, wenn ein Wiesel es am Kopfe verwundet hat an einer Stelle, wo es dadurch nicht trefa wird, wenn der Kropf ein Loch hat — Rabbi sagt: Selbst wenn er ganz fehlt —, wenn die Eingeweide herausgetreten sind, aber kein Loch an ihnen entstanden ist, wenn die Flügel gebrochen sind, die Füsse gebrochen sind, die Schwungfedern ausgerupft sind; R. Jehuda sagt: Wenn die Flaumfedern fort sind, ist es untauglich.",
+ "[Ein Tier], das an Blutandrang erkrankt ist, an Rauchvergiftung, an Wärme-Entziehung, das Oleander gefressen, Hühner-Kot gefressen oder schädliches Wasser getrunken hat, ist tauglich. Hat es Gift gefressen oder ist es von einer Schlange gebissen worden, ist es in Hinsicht auf trefa erlaubt, es ist aber wegen der Gefahr für das Leben verboten.",
+ "Die Kennzeichen für Vieh und Wild sind von der Tora angegeben, und die Kennzeichen für Geflügel sind nicht angegeben, aber die Weisen haben gesagt: Jeder Vogel, der greift, ist unrein, jeder, der eine überzählige Zehe hat, und der einen Kropf hat, und der einen Magen hat, der sich abschälen lässt, ist rein. R. Elieser, Sohn des Zadok, sagt: Jeder Vogel, der seine Füsse teilt, ist unrein.",
+ "Bei Heuschrecken: Jede, die vier Füsse und vier Flügel und Springfüsse hat, und deren Flügel den grösseren Teil von ihr bedecken; R. Jose sagt: Und die חָגָב wird. Bei Fischen: Jeder, der Flossen und Schuppen hat; R. Jehuda sagt: Zwei Schuppen und eine Flosse. Schuppen heissen die, die fest anliegen, und Flossen die, mit denen er schwimmt."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Wenn ein Vieh schwer wirft und das Junge einen Vorderfuss herausgesteckt und wieder zurückgezogen hat, so darf es gegessen werden, hat es den Kopf heraus gesteckt, so gilt es, auch wenn es ihn wieder zurückgezogen hat, als geboren. Schneidet man etwas von dem Jungen im Mutterleibe ab, darf es gegessen werden, von der Milz oder den Nieren, darf es nicht gegessen werden. Dies ist die Regel: Was vom eigenen Leibe ist, ist verboten, was nicht vom eigenen Leibe ist, ist erlaubt.",
+ "Wenn ein Vieh beim ersten Male schwer wirft, darf man Glied für Glied abschneiden und es den Hunden vorwerfen, ist die grössere Hälfte draussen, muss es vergraben werden, und [das Vieh] ist von der Erstgeburtspflicht frei.",
+ "Wenn ein Junges im Mutterleibe abgestorben ist und der Hirte hat seine Hand hineingesteckt und es berührt, sei es bei einem unreinen Tiere sei es bei einem reinen, so bleibt er rein; R. Jose, der Galiläer, sagt: Bei einem unreinen ist er unrein, bei einem reinen rein. Wenn bei einer Frau das Kind im Mutterleibe abgestorben ist und die Hebamme hat ihre Hand hineingesteckt und es berührt, ist die Hebamme sieben Tage unrein, die Frau ist, bis das Kind herauskommt, rein.",
+ "Wenn ein Vieh schwer wirft und das Junge den Vorderfuss herausgesteckt und man ihn abgeschnitten und die Mutter dann geschlachtet hat, so ist das Fleisch rein. Hat man die Mutter geschlachtet und ihn dann erst abgeschnitten, ist das Fleisch wie solches, das Aas berührt hat, dies die Worte des K. Meir Die Weisen aber sagen: Wie solches, das geschlachtetes Trefa berührt hat; wie wir sehen, dass das Trefa durch das Schlachten rein wird, so wird durch das Schlachten des Viehs auch das Glied rein. Darauf sagte zu ihnen R. Meir: Nein! Wenn das Trefa dadurch, dass es geschlachtet wird, rein wird, so handelt es sich da um das Tier selbst, soll darum auch das Glied rein werden, das doch nicht zu dem Tiere selbst gehört ? Woraus ist zu entnehmen, dass ein Trefa durchs Schlachten rein wird? Ein unreines Vieh darf man nicht essen und ein Trefa darf man nicht essen, wie ein unreines Vieh durchs Schlachten nicht rein wird, so sollte doch auch ein Trefa durchs Schlachten nicht rein werden? Nein! Wenn du vom unreinen Vieh sprichst, das ist zu keiner Zeit tauglich gewesen, willst du daraus auf das Trefa schliessen, das doch eine Zeit hatte, wo es tauglich gewesen ? Zugegeben das, wofür du einen Grund angegeben hast. Wenn aber ein Tier aus dem Mutterleibe als Trefa geboren ist, woraus ist es da zu entnehmen? [Aus der folgenden Erwiderung:] Nein ! Wenn du vom unreinen Vieh sprichst, da gilt für die ganze Art das Schlachten nicht, willst du daraus auf das Trefa schliessen, das zu einer Art gehört, für die das Schlachten gilt ? Ein lebendes Achtmonate-Tier wird durchs Schlachten nicht rein, weil es zu einer Art gehört, für die das Schlachten nicht gilt.",
+ "Wenn man ein Vieh schlachtet und darin ein 8 Monate altes Junges lebend oder tot oder ein 9 Monate altes tot vorfindet, so braucht man es nur aufzuschneiden und das Blut herauszuschaffen. Findet man ein 9 Monate altes Junges lebend darin vor, so muss es geschlachtet werden und man übertritt bei ihm das Verbot von der Mutter samt dem Jungen, dies die Worte des R. Meïr; die Weisen dagegen sagen: durch das Schlachten der Mutter wird es rein. R. Simon aus Schesur sagt: Selbst wenn es 5 Jahre alt ist und auf dem Felde pflügt, wird es durch das Schlachten der Mutter rein. Hat man es aufgeschnitten und ein 9 Monate altes Junges lebend darin vorgefunden, so muss es geschlachtet werden, da ja die Mutter nicht geschlachtet worden ist,",
+ "Sind einem Vieh die Hinterfüsse vom Kniegelenk abwärts abgeschnitten, ist es tauglich, vom Kniegelenk aufwärts, ist es untauglich, ebenso wenn die Sehnen-Verknotung fort ist. ist der Knochen gebrochen, so wird er, wenn das Fleisch daran zum grösseren Teile unverletzt geblieben ist, durch das Schlachten rein, ist nicht der grössere Teil des Fleisches unverletzt, wird es nicht durch das Schlachten rein.",
+ "Schlachtet man ein Vieh und findet darin eine Fruchthaut, darf, wer eine gesunde Natur hat, sie essen, sie nimmt aber keine Unreinheit an, weder eine Speisen-Unreinheit noch eine Aas-Unreinheit, hatte man es auf sie abgesehen, nimmt sie Speisen-Unreinheit an, Aas-Unreinheit dagegen nicht. Ist die Fruchthaut zum Teil herausgetreten, darf sie nicht mehr gegessen werden, sie ist ein Zeichen [für das Vorhandensein] eines Kindes bei der Frau und eines Jungen beim Vieh. Hat ein erstgebärendes Tier eine Fruchthaut geworfen, darf sie den Hunden vorgeworfen werden, bei Opfertieren muss sie vergraben werden, man darf sie nicht an einem Kreuzwege vergraben und nicht an einen Baum aufhängen, weil das Amoriter-Brauch war."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Das Verbot von der Mutter samt dem Jungen gilt innerhalb wie ausserhalb des heiligen Landes, wenn das Heiligtum besteht und wenn es nicht besteht, für Nichtheiliges wie für Heiliges. Wie ist es demnach ? Schlachtet man die Mutter samt dem Jungen von Nichtheiligem draussen, ist beides tauglich, aber der Zweite erhält vierzig Geisselhiebe, von Heiligem draussen, macht sich der Erste der Ausrottungsstrafe schuldig, beides ist untauglich und beide erhalten vierzig Geisselhiebe, von Nichtheiligem drinnen, ist beides untauglich und der Zweite erhält vierzig Geisselhiebe, von Heiligem drinnen, ist das Erste tauglich und er ist straffrei, der Zweite erhält vierzig Geisselhiebe und es ist untauglich.",
+ "Nichtheiliges und Heiliges draussen, ist das Erste tauglich und er ist straffrei, der Zweite erhält vierzig Geisselhiebe und es ist untauglich; Heiliges und Nichtheiliges draussen, macht sich der Erste der Ausrottungsstrafe schuldig und es ist untauglich, das Zweite ist tauglich und beide erhalten vierzig Geisselhiebe. Nichtheiliges und Heiliges drinnen, ist beides untauglich und der Zweite erhält vierzig Geisselhiebe; Heiliges und Nichtheiliges drinnen, ist das Erste tauglich und er ist straffrei, der Zweite erhält vierzig Geisselhiebe und es ist untauglich. Nichtheiliges draussen und drinnen, ist das Erste tauglich und er ist straffrei, der Zweite erhält vierzig Geisselhiebe und es ist untauglich; Heiliges draussen und drinnen, macht sich der Erste der Ausrottungsstrafe schuldig und beides ist untauglich und beide erhalten vierzig Geisselhiebe. Nichtheiliges drinnen und draussen, ist das Erste untauglich und er ist straffrei, der Zweite erhält vierzig Geisselhiebe und es ist tauglich; Heiliges drinnen und draussen, ist das Erste tauglich und er ist straffrei, der Zweite erhält vierzig Geisselhiebe und es ist untauglich.",
+ "Wenn jemand schlachtet und es stellt sich heraus, dass es trefa ist, wenn jemand zu Ehren eines Götzen schlachtet oder eine Sündopfer-Kuh, einen zur Steinigung verurteilten Ochsen, oder ein zum Nackenschnitt bestimmtes Kalb schlachtet, erklärt R. Simon ihn für straffrei, die Weisen erklären ihn für schuldig. Wenn das Tier durch [unvorschriftsmässiges] Schlachten ein Aas geworden ist, wenn man es absticht oder [die zu schlachtenden Teile] losreisst, hat man das Verbot von der Mutter samt dem Jungen nicht übertreten. Wenn Zwei eine Kuh und ihr Junges gekauft haben, darf der, der zuerst gekauft hat, zuerst schlachten; ist ihm der Zweite zuvorgekommen, so ist das sein Vorteil. Hat man eine Kuh und darauf zwei ihrer Jungen geschlachtet, erhält man achtzig Geisselhiebe; hat man zuerst ihre beiden Jungen und danach sie selbst geschlachtet, erhält man nur vierzig Geisselhiebe. Hat man sie und ihr Junges und das Junge von ihrem Jungen geschlachtet, erhält man achtzig Geisselhiebe; hat man sie und das Junge von ihrem Jungen und danach ihr Junges geschlachtet, erhält man nur vierzig Geisselhiebe; Symmachos sagt im Namen des R. Meir: Achtzig Geisselhiebe. Zu vier Zeiten im Jahre muss, wer einem Anderen ein Vieh verkauft, ihm mitteilen, die Mutter habe ich zum Schlachten verkauft, das Junge habe ich zam Schlachten verkauft, und zwar: am Tage vor dem letzten Feiertage des Hüttenfestes, am Tage vor dem ersten Feiertage des Pesachfestes, am Tage vor dem Wochenfeste und am Tage vor dem Neujahrsfeste, und nach der Ansicht R. Jose’s, des Galiläers, in Galiläa auch am Tage vor dem Versöhnungstage. Darauf sagte R. Jehuda: In welchem Falle ? Wenn keine Zwischenzeit vergangen war, war aber eine Zwischenzeit vergangen, braucht er es ihm nicht mitzuteilen. Auch R. Jehuda stimmt aber zu, wenn er die Mutter dem Bräutigam und das Junge der Braut verkauft hat, dass er es mitteilen muss, weil man da weiss, dass sie beide an einem Tage schlachten werden.",
+ "Zu diesen vier Zeiten heisst man den Fleischer auch wider seinen Willen schlachten, selbst wenn der Ochse tausend Denare wert ist und der Käufer nur einen Denar gezahlt hat, zwingt man ihn zu schlachten, ist darum der Ochse gefallen, so ist er auch zum Schaden des Käufers gefallen; an den übrigen Tagen des Jahres dagegen ist es nicht so, ist er darum gefallen, ist er nur zum Schaden des Verkäufers gefallen.",
+ "Unter „an einem Tage“ bei dem Verbot von der Mutter samt dem Jungen ist ein Tag mit der ihm vorangehenden Nacht zu verstehen. Dies hat Simon, Sohn des Soma, folgendermassen begründet: In der Schöpfungsgeschichte wird der Ausdruck „ein Tag“ gebraucht, und bei dem Verbot von der Mutter samt dem Jungen heisst es „an einem Tage“, wie unter dem einen Tage in der Schöpfungsgeschichte der Tag mit der vorangegangenen Nacht zu verstehen ist, so ist auch bei dem Verbot von der Mutter samt dem Jungen unter an einem Tage ein Tag mit der ihm vorangehenden Nacht zu verstehen."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Das Gebot des Zudeckens des Blutes gilt innerhalb wie ausserhalb des heiligen Landes, wenn das Heiligtum besteht und wenn es nicht besteht, für Nichtheiliges, aber nicht für Heiliges, es gilt für Wild und Geflügel, für zur Hand stehendes und nicht zur Hand stehendes, es gilt auch für den Büffel, weil es ein Tier ist, über das Zweifel bestehen, man schlachtet ihn nicht an einem Festtage, hat man ihn geschlachtet, so deckt man das Blot nicht zu.",
+ "Wenn jemand schlachtet und es sich herausstellt, dass es trefa ist, wenn jemand zu Ehren eines Götzen schlachtet, oder Nichtheiliges drinnen, Heiliges draussen, ein Wild oder Geflügel, das zur Steinigung verurteilt ist, so muss nach Ansicht R. Meir’s das Blut zugedeckt werden, nach Ansicht der Weisen braucht es nicht zugedeckt zu werden. Wenn das Tier durch [unvorschriftsmässiges] Schlachten ein Aas geworden ist, wenn man es absticht, oder [die zu schlachtenden Teile] losreisst, braucht man nicht zuzudecken.",
+ "Hat ein Taubstummer, ein Geistesschwacher oder ein Unmündiger geschlachtet und Andere haben ihnen zugesehen, muss es zugedeckt werden, waren sie für sich allein, braucht es nicht zugedeckt zu werden. Ebenso ist es inbezug auf das Verbot von der Mutter samt dem Jungen: Haben sie geschlachtet und Andere haben ihnen zugesehen, ist es verboten, [das andere] nachzuschlachten, waren sie für sich allein, erlaubt R. Meïr, ihnen nachzuschlachten, die Weisen erklären es für verboten, sie stimmen aber zu, dass, wenn man geschlachtet hat, man nicht die vierzig Geisselhiebe dafür erhält.",
+ "Hat man hundert Stück Wild an einer Stelle geschlachtet, so genügt einmaliges Zudecken für alle, hundert Stück Geflügel an einer Stelle, genügt einmaliges Zudecken für alle, Wild und Geflügel an einer Stelle, genügt einmaliges Zudecken für alles; R. Jehuda sagt: Hat man Wild geschlachtet, muss man es zudecken und nachher erst das Geflügel schlachten. Hat jemand geschlachtet und nicht zugedeckt, und ein Anderer hat es gesehen, muss er zudecken. Hat man zugedeckt und es ist wieder aufgedeckt worden, braucht man nicht nochmals zuzudecken, hatte aber der Wind es zugedeckt, muss man es nochmals zudecken.",
+ "Hat das Blut sich mit Wasser vermischt und es hat noch das Aussehen von Blut, muss es zugedeckt werden; hat es sich mit Wein vermischt, betrachtet man diesen, als wäre er Wasser; hat es sich mit Blut von einem Vieh oder von Lebendem vermischt, betrachtet man dieses, als wäre es Wasser; R. Jehuda sagt: Blut hebt niemals Blut auf.",
+ "Verspritztes Blut und das auf dem Messer muss zugedeckt werden; darauf sagte R. Jehuda: Wann? Wenn kein anderes Blut als dieses vorhanden ist, ist aber anderes Blut da, so braucht dieses nicht zugedeckt zu werden.",
+ "Womit darf man zudecken und womit darf man nicht zudecken ? Man darf zudecken mit feinem Dünger, feinem Sand, mit Kalk, mit einer Scherbe, einem Ziegelstein oder Stöpsel, die man zerstossen hat, aber man darf nicht zudecken mit grobem Dünger, grobem Sand oder mit einem Ziegelstein oder Stöpsel, die man nicht zerstossen hat, man darf auch nicht ein Gefäss darüber stülpen. Dies gibt R. Simon, Sohn des Gamliel, als Regel an: Mit Allem, worauf Pflanzen wachsen können, darf man zudecken, worauf keine Pflanzen wachsen können, damit darf man nicht zudecken."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Das Verbot der Spannader gilt innerhalb wie ausserhalb des heiligen Landes, wenn das Heiligtum besteht und wenn es nicht besteht, für Nichtheiliges wie für Heiliges, es gilt für Vieh und für Wild, für die an der rechten und die an der linken Hüfte, es gilt aber nicht für Geflügel, weil das keinen Hüftballen hat, es gilt auch für ein ausgetragenes Junges; R. Jehuda sagt: Für ein ausgetragenes Junges hat es keine Geltung. Das anhaftende Fett ist erlaubt, den Fleischern darf man betreff der Spannader kein Vertrauen schenken, dies die Worte des R. Meïr; die Weisen sagen: Man darf ihnen sowohl ihretwegen wie betreff des Fettes Vertrauen schenken.",
+ "Man darf einem Nichtjuden eine Hüfte schicken, in der die Spannader noch drinnen ist, weil man ihre Lage kennt. Wenn man die Spannader herausnimmt, muss man sie ganz herausnehmen; R. Jehuda sagt: Nur so weit, dass man das Gebot des Herausnehmens damit erfüllt.",
+ "Wer von der Spannader so viel wie eine Olivengrösse isst, erhält vierzig Geisselhiebe; hat er sie gegessen, sie war aber nicht so viel wie eine Olive, ist er schuldig. Hat er von der einen Hüfte so viel wie eine Olive und von der anderen so viel wie eine Olive gegessen, erhält er achtzig Geisselhiebe; R. Jehuda sagt: Er erhält nur vierzig Geisselhiebe.",
+ "Hat man eine Hüfte mit der Spannader gekocht, so ist es verboten, wenn so viel an ihr war, dass es herauszuschmecken sein würde. Wie soll man das bemessen? Als wäre es Fleisch in Rüben.",
+ "Hat man die Spannader mit anderen Adern zusammengekocht und sie ist noch zu erkennen, so richtet es sich danach, ob sie herauszuschmecken sein würde, wenn aber nicht, sind alle verboten, die Brühe aber nur, wenn sie danach schmecken würde. Ebenso ist es, wenn ein Stück von einem Aas oder ein Stück von einem unreinen Fisch mit anderen Stücken zusammen gekocht worden ist; sind sie zu erkennen, so richtet es sich danach, ob sie herauszuschmecken sein würden, wenn aber nicht, sind alle verboten, die Brühe aber nur, wenn sie danach schmecken würde.",
+ "Es gilt nur für reines Vieh, aber nicht für unreines; R. Jehuda sagt: Auch für unreines. Es sagte nämlich R. Jehuda: Die Spannader ist doch schon seit der Zeit der Söhne Jakobs verboten, ihnen war aber unreines Vieh doch noch erlaubt. Darauf erwiderte man ihm: Am Sinai erst ist es geboten worden und nur in der Schrift an der passenden Stelle eingefügt worden."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Fleisch jederlei Art darf nicht in Milch gekocht werden, ausgenommen Fleisch von Fischen und Heuschrecken, es darf auch nicht mit Käse zusammen auf den Tisch gestellt werden, ausgenommen Fleisch von Fischen und Heuschrecken. Wer sich Fleisch durch Gelübde versagt, dem ist Fleisch von Fischen und Heuschrecken erlaubt. Geflügel darf mit Käse zusammen auf den Tisch gestellt, aber nicht gegessen werden, dies die Worte von Bet-Schammai. Bet-Hillel sagen: Es darf nicht zusammen hingestellt und nicht zusammen gegessen werden. Es sagte R. Jose: Es gehört dies zu den Fällen, wo Bet-Schammai erleichtern und Bet Hillel erschweren. Auf welchen Tisch ist gemeint? Auf den Tisch, an welchem man isst, aber auf den Tisch, auf dem man die Speisen anrichtet, darf man ohne Bedenken eines neben das andere stellen.",
+ "Fleisch und Käse darf man zusammen in ein Tuch einschlagen, nur dürfen sie einander nicht berühren. R. Simon, Sohn des Gamliel, sagt: Zwei Fremde dürfen an einem Tisch der eine Fleisch und der andere Käse essen, ohne Bedenken zu tragen.",
+ "Ist ein Tropfen Milch auf ein Fleischstück gefallen, so ist es verboten, wenn [die Milch] auch nur aus dem Stück herausgeschmeckt werden könnte; hat man den Topf angerührt, ist es verboten, wenn es aus dem Inhalte des Topfes herausgeschmeckt werden könnte. Das Euter schneidet man auf und entleert es von der Milch; hat man es nicht aufgeschnitten, so übertritt man doch nicht das Verbot; das Herz schneidet man auf und lässt das Blut heraus, hat man es nicht aufgeschnitten, so übertritt man doch nicht das Verbot. Wer Geflügel mit Käse zusammen auf den Tisch bringt, übertritt kein Verbot.",
+ "Fleisch von einem reinen Vieh in Milch von einem reinen Vieh darf man weder kochen noch benutzen, Fleisch von einem reinen Vieh in Milch von einem unreinen Vieh, Fleisch von einem unreinen Vieh in Milch von einem reinen Vieh darf man kochen und darf man benutzen. R. Akiba sagt: Wild und Geflügel sind nach Toragesetz nicht mit inbegriffen, denn es heisst dreimal: „du sollst ein Böcklein nicht in der Milch seiner Mutter kochen“, um Wild und Geflügel und unreines Vieh auszuschliessen. R. Jose, der Galiläer, sagt: Es heisst: „ihr sollt keinerlei Aas essen“, und es heisst: „du sollst ein Böcklein nicht in der Milch seiner Mutter kochen“, das, worauf sich das Aas-Verbot bezieht, darf man nicht in Milch kochen, Geflügel, auf das sich das Aas-Verbot auch bezieht, dürfte demnach auch nicht in Milch gekocht werden, darum heisst es: „in der Milch seiner Mutter“, das schliesst Geflügel aus, das ja keine Muttermilch hat.",
+ "Die Milch im Magen eines von einem Götzendiener [geschlachteten Tieres] oder eines Aases ist verboten. Wenn man mit der Magenhaut eines tauglichen Tiers [Milch] anstellt, ist sie verboten, wenn jene herausgeschmeckt werden kann. Die Milch im Magen eines tauglichen Tieres, das an einem Tier, das trefa ist, gesaugt hat, ist verboten, die Milch im Magen eines Tiers, das trefa ist, das an einem tauglichen gesaugt hat, ist erlaubt, weil sie nur im Innern des Tieres angesammelt liegt.",
+ "In manchem ist das Fett-Verbot strenger als das Blut-Verbot und in manchem das Blut-Verbot strenger als das Fett-Verbot. Das Fett-Verbot ist insofern strenger, als das Fett der Veruntreuung untersteht und die auf Verworfenes, Übriggelassenes und Unreinheit stehende Strafe bei ihm eintritt, was beim Blut nicht der Fall ist; das Blut-Verbot ist insofern strenger, als es für Vieh, Wild und Geflügel, sowohl für reines wie für unreines, gilt, das Fett-Verbot dagegen gilt ausschliesslich nur für reines Vieh."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Die Haut, der Fleischsaft, der Bodensatz, das Abgeschabte, die Knochen, die Adern, die Hörner und die Klauen werden mit hinzugerechnet, um die Speisen-Unreinheit zu übertragen, aber nicht inbezug auf Aas-Unreinheit. Ebenso, wenn jemand ein unreines Vieh für einen Nichtjuden geschlachtet hat und es zuckt noch, kann Speisen-Unreinheit durch es übertragen werden, Aas-Unreinheit dagegen erst, nachdem es tot ist oder man den Kopf abgetrennt hat. Für die Verunreinigung durch Speisen-Unreinheit sind die Grenzen weiter gezogen als für die Verunreinigung durch Aas-Unreinheit. R. Jehuda sagt: Hat man das Abgeschabte zusammengehäuft,, so dass soviel wie eine Olivengrösse davon an einer Stelle ist, so macht man sich durch dasselbe strafbar.",
+ "Bei den folgenden ist die Haut wie das Fleisch: Die Haut des Menschen, die Haut des Hausschweins — R. Jose sagt: Auch die Haut des Wildschweins —, die Haut des Höckers bei einem jungen Kamel, die Kopfhaut bei einem jungen Kalb, die Haut an den Klauen, die Haut der Schamteile, die Haut eines Fötus, die Haut an der unteren Seite des Fettschwanzes, die Haut des lgels, des Chamäleons, der Eidechse und der Blindschleiche; R. Jehuda sagt: Die Eidechse ist wie das Wiesel. Hat man sie gegerbt oder ist man so viel auf ihnen gegangen, wie es zum Gerben erforderlich ist, sind sie alle rein, mit Ausnahme der Menschenhaut. R. Jochanan, Sohn des Nuri, sagt: Die Haut [aller] 8 Kriechtiere gilt als Haut.",
+ "Beim Abhäuten, sei es bei einem Vieh oder einem Wild, bei einem reinen oder unreinen, bei einem grossen oder kleinen, gilt die Haut noch als [mit dem Körper] verbunden, so dass er durch sie Unreinheit annimmt und überträgt, [wenn man sie abzieht,] um daraus eine Decke zu machen, bis ein zum Angreifen [der Haut] ausreichendes Stück abgezogen ist, wenn, um einen Schlauch daraus zu machen, bis die Brust abgehäutet ist, zieht man sie über die Füsse weg ab, bis sie ganz abgezogen ist. Durch die Haut am Halse gilt nach Ansicht des R. Jochanan, Sohns des Nuri, die Haut nicht mehr als [mit dem Körper] verbunden; nach Ansicht der Weisen gilt sie als verbunden, bis sie ganz abgezogen ist.",
+ "Wenn an der Haut ein olivengrosses Stück Fleisch sitzt und man berührt eine davon ausgehende Faser oder das Haar auf der entgegengesetzten Seite, so ist man unrein. Sind zwei Stücke von je einer halben Olivengrösse daran, so verunreinigt sie durch Tragen, aber nicht durch Berühren, dies die Worte dos R. Ismael; R. Akiba sagt: Weder durch Berühren noch durch Tragen. Auch R. Akiba gibt aber zu, dass, wer zwei Stücke von je einer halben Olivengrösse, die man auf einen Span gesteckt hat, bewegt, unrein ist; weswegen denn bleibt man, wenn sie noch an der Haut haften, nach R. Akiba rein? Weil sie da als zur Haut gehörend betrachtet werden.",
+ "Wer einen Markknochen von einem Toten oder einen Markknochen von Opfertieren berührt, seien sie geschlossen oder durchbohrt, ist unrein. Wer einen Markknochen von einem Aas oder einen Markknochen von einem Kriechtier berührt, bleibt, wenn sie geschlossen sind, rein, haben sie auch nur das kleinste Loch, verunreinigen sie durch Berühren. Woraus folgt, dass dies auch inbezug auf das Tragen gilt ? Weil es heisst: „Wer berührt“ „und wer trägt“, was unter das Gesetz des Verunreinigens durch Berührung fällt, fällt auch unter das des Verunreinigens durch Tragen, was nicht unter das Gesetz des Verunreinigens durch Berührung fällt, fällt auch nicht unter das des Verunreinigens durch Tragen.",
+ "Ein teilweise schon ausgebrütetes Ei eines Kriechtiers ist rein, hat es auch nur das kleinste Loch, ist es unrein. Eine Maus, die zur Hälfte Fleisch, zur Hälfte noch Erde ist, verunreinigt den, der das Fleisch berührt, wer die Erde berührt, bleibt rein. R. Jehuda sagt: Auch wer die dem Fleisch gegenüber liegende Erde berührt, ist unrein.",
+ "Ein Glied und ein Stück Fleisch, die nur noch lose am Vieh hängen, übertragen Speisen-Unreinheit noch an der Stelle [von der sie losgerissen sind] hängend, doch müssen sie erst [für Unreinheit] empfänglich gemacht worden sein. Ist das Vieh geschlachtet worden, sind sie durch das Blut dafür schon empfänglich gemacht worden, dies die Worte des R. Meir; R. Simon sagt: Sie sind dadurch noch nicht dafür empfänglich gemacht worden. Ist das Vieh von selbst verendet, muss das Fleisch erst [für Unreinheit] empfänglich gemacht werden, das Glied verunreinigt als ein von einem noch lebenden Tiere abgetrenntes Glied, aber nicht ale Glied von einem Aas, dies die Worte des R. Meïr; R. Simon erklärt es für rein.",
+ "Ein Glied und ein Stück Fleisch, die nur noch lose an einem Menschen hängen, sind rein, stirbt der Mensch, bleibt das Fleisch rein, das Glied verunreinigt als ein von einem noch Lebenden abgetrenntes Glied, aber nicht als Glied von einem Toten, dies die Worte des R. Meïr; R. Simon erklärt es für rein."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Die Vorschrift über den Bug, die Kinnbacken und den Magen gilt innerhalb und ausserhalb des heiligen Landes, wenn das Heiligtum besteht und wenn es nicht besteht, für nichtheilige Tiere, aber nicht für heilige. Eigentlich wäre zu folgern: wenn man bei nichtheiligen Tieren, von denen man Brust und Schenkel abzugeben nicht verpflichtet ist, zu diesen Abgaben verpflichtet ist, wäre es da nicht folgerichtig, dass man bei heiligen, von denen man Brust und Schenkel abzugeben verpflichtet ist, auch zu diesen Abgaben verpflichtet ist? Darum heisst es: „und sie habe ich dem Priester Aron und seinen Söhnen als eine ewige Gebühr gegeben“, nur das, was hier genannt ist, soll ihm gegeben werden.",
+ "Alle heiligen Tiere, die schon, bevor sie für’s Heiligtum bestimmt worden, einen bleibenden Leibesfehler hatten und ausgelöst worden sind, unterliegen der Erstgeburts- und der Abgabenpflicht, sie dürfen wie nichtheilige geschoren und zur Arbeit verwendet werden, ein von ihnen geworfenes Junges und ihre Milch sind nach der Auslösung erlaubt, wer sie ausserhalb schlachtet, ist straffrei, das gegen sie Ausgetauschte ist nicht heilig, und wenn sie von selbst verenden, dürfen sie ausgelöst werden, ausgenommen sind nur die Erstgeburt und der Zehnt. Sind sie für’s Heiligtum bestimmt worden, bevor sie den Leibesfehler hatten, oder hatten sie nur einen vorübergehenden Leibesfehler, als sie für’s Heiligtum bestimmt wurden, und nachher ist an ihnen ein bleibender Leibesfehler entstanden und sie sind ausgelöst worden, sind sie frei von der Erstgeburts- und der Abgabenpflicht, sie dürfen nicht wie nichtheilige geschoren und zur Arbeit verwendet werden, ein von ihnen geworfenes Junges und ihre Milch sind auch nach der Auslösung verboten, wer sie ausserhalb schlachtet, macht sich schuldig, das gegen sie Ausgetauschte ist heilig, und wenn sie von selbst verendet sind, müssen sie vergraben werden.",
+ "Ist eine Erstgeburt unter hundert [andere Tiere] geraten, so brauchen, wenn sie alle von hundert Personen geschlachtet werden, die Abgaben von keinem entrichtet zu werden, werden sie alle von Einem geschlachtet, brauchen sie von einem Tiere nicht entrichtet zu werden. Wer für einen Priester oder für einen Nichtjuden schlachtet, ist frei von den Abgaben, sind sie nur als Teilhaber daran beteiligt, muss das durch ein Zeichen kenntlich gemacht werden. Hat er gesagt: „Ausser den Abgaben“, ist er frei von den Abgaben. Hat er gesagt: „Verkaufe mir die Eingeweide der Kuh“, und es sind Abgabenteile darunter, muss er sie einem Priester geben, und jener braucht ihm nichts vom Kaufgelde [dafür] abzulassen. Hat er nach Gewicht von ihm gekauft, muss er sie einem Priester geben, und jener muss ihm vom Kaufgelde [dafür] ablassen.",
+ "Ein Proselyt, der beim Übertritt im Besitze einer Kuh war, ist [von den Abgaben] frei, wenn sie vor seinem Übertritt geschlachtet worden ist, ist sie nach seinem Übertritt geschlachtet worden, ist er verpflichtet, ist es zweifelhaft, ist er frei, denn, wer von einem Anderen etwas heraushaben will, dem liegt der Beweis ob. Was ist mit dem Bug gemeint? Vom Kniegelenk bis zur Hüftpfanne des Vorderfusses, ebenso auch beim Nasir, und der entsprechende Teil beim Hinterfuss heisst Schenkel, R. Jehuda sagt: Der Schenkel geht vom Kniegelenk bis zum Muskelgeflecht des Beins. Was versteht man unter den Kinnbacken? Vom Gelenk des Kinnbackens bis zum Ring der Luftröhre."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Die Vorschrift über das Erste der Schur gilt innerhalb und ausserhalb des heiligen Landes, wenn das Heiligtum besteht und wenn es nicht besteht, für nichtheilige Tiere, aber nicht für heilige. Strenger ist die Vorschrift über den Bug, die Kinnbacken und den Magen als die über das Erste der Schur, denn die über den Bug, die Kinnbacken und den Magen gilt bei Rindern und bei Kleinvieh, sei es viel sei es wenig, die über das Erste der Schur dagegen gilt nur bei Schafen und nur, wenn es mehrere sind.",
+ "Was heisst mehrere? Beth-Schammai sagen: Zwei Schafe, denn so heisst es: „Jeder wird sich eine junge Kuh und zwei Stück Kleinvieh halten“. Beth-Hillel sagen: Fünf, denn so heisst es: „Fünf Stück zubereitetes Kleinvieh“. R. Dosa, Sohn des Archinos, sagt: Von fünf Schafen, die je anderthalb Minen liefern, ist man verpflichtet, das Erste der Schur zu geben. Die Weisen sagen: Von fünf Schafen, wenn sie auch nur was immer liefern. Und wieviel hat man ihm zu geben ? Das Gewicht von fünf Selaim in Juda, das ist von zehn Selaim in Galiläa, in gewaschenem und nicht in schmutzigem Zustande, so viel, dass er sich ein kleines Kleidungsstück daraus anfertigen kann, denn so heisst es: „Du sollst ihm geben“, soviel, dass es den Namen einer Gabe verdient. Hat man es versäumt, sie ihm zu geben, bevor man sie gefärbt hat, ist man frei, hat man sie gewaschen, aber noch nicht gefärbt, ist man verpflichtet, sie ihm zu geben. Wer die Schur von Schafen, die einem Nichtjuden gehören, kauft, ist frei von dem Ersten der Schur. Kauft jemand die Schur von Schafen eines anderen Israeliten, so ist, wenn der Verkäufer sich etwas zurückbehalten hat, der Verkäufer, wenn er sich nichts zurückbehalten hat, der Käufer dazu verpflichtet. Hatte er zweierlei Arten, dunkle und weisse, und hat er ihm die von dunklen, aber nicht die von weissen, oder die von männlichen, aber nicht die von weiblichen Tieren verkauft, so hat jeder für sich zu geben."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Die Vorschrift über das Fliegenlassen aus dem Neste gilt innerhalb und ausserhalb des heiligen Landes, wenn das Heiligtum besteht und wenn es nicht besteht, bei nichtheiligen Tieren, aber nicht bei heiligen. Strenger ist die Vorschrift über das Zudecken des Blutes als die über das Fliegenlassen aus dem Neste, denn das Zudecken des Blutes gilt bei Wild und bei Geflügel, bei bereit stehendem und bei nicht bereit stehendem, die über das Fliegenlassen aus dem Neste dagegen gilt nur bei Geflügel, und gilt nur bei nicht bereit stehendem. Was heisst nicht bereit Stehendes? Zum Beispiel: Gänse und Hühner, die sich in einem Park ein Nest gebaut haben. Wenn sie aber im Hause sich ein Nest gemacht haben, und ebenso Herodianische Tauben, braucht man sie nicht fliegen zu lassen.",
+ "Einen unreinen Vogel braucht man nicht fliegen zu lassen. Einen unreinen Vogel, der auf den Eiern eines reinen Vogels brütet, und einen reinen, der auf den Eiern eines unreinen Vogels brütet, braucht man nicht fliegen zu lassen. Bei einem männlichen Rebhuhn ist man nach R. Elieser verpflichtet, nach den Weisen nicht verpflichtet.",
+ "Schwebt sie nur darüber, so ist man, wenn ihre Flügel das Nest berühren, verpflichtet, sie fliegen zu lassen, berühren ihre Flügel das Nest nicht, ist man nicht dazu verpflichtet. Ist auch nur ein Küchlein oder ein Ei da, ist man verpflichtet, sie fliegen zu lassen, denn es heisst: „ein Nest“, jede Art Nest. Enthält es schon flügge gewordene Küchlein oder verdorbene Eier, braucht man sie nicht fliegen zu lassen, denn es heisst: „und die Mutter ruht auf den Küchlein oder auf den Eiern“, wie Küchlein Lebewesen sind, so sind auch nur Eier gemeint, aus denen sich Lebewesen entwickeln können, verdorbene aber ausgeschlossen, und wie die Eier noch der Mutter bedürfen, so sind auch nur Küchlein gemeint, die noch der Mutter bedürfen, schon flügge aber ausgeschlossen. Hat man sie fliegen gelassen und sie ist wieder zurückgekommen, sie wieder fliegen gelassen und sie ist wieder zurückgekommen, und wenn auch vier oder fünf Mal, ist man immer noch verpflichtet, denn es heisst: „fliegen lassen, fliegen lassen sollst du sie“. Sagt jemand: Ich nehme mir die Mutter und lasse die Jungen fliegen, ist er doch verpflichtet, sie fliegen zu lassen, denn es heisst: „fliegen lassen sollst du die Mutter“. Hat man die Jungen genommen und sie dann wieder in das Nest zurückgetragen, und nachher hat sich die Mutter wieder auf sie gesetzt, ist man nicht mehr verpflichtet, sie fliegen zu lassen.",
+ "Wenn jemand die Mutter samt den Jungen nimmt, so, sagt R. Jehuda, bekommt er Geisselhiebe und braucht sie nicht mehr fliegen zu lassen; die Weisen aber sagen: Er mass sie fliegen lassen und bekommt keine Geisselhiebe. Dies ist die Regel: Für jedes Verbot, an das zugleich die Aufforderung zur Erfüllung eines Gebotes geknüpft ist, bekommt man keine Geisselhiebe.",
+ "Man darf nicht die Mutter samt den Jungen nehmen, selbst nicht, wenn man sie zur Reinigung eines Aussätzigen gebraucht. Wenn schon bei einem so leicht zu erfüllenden Gebot, wo es sich nur um den Wert eines Issar handelt, die Tora sagt: „auf dass es dir gut ergehe und du lange lebest“, um wieviel mehr bei den schwer zu erfüllenden Geboten der Tora."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..7f525c8ce3fe8f13b983e7cfe43bc9bb55c96939
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp.json
@@ -0,0 +1,124 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Chullin",
+ "versionSource": "http://learn.conservativeyeshiva.org/mishnah/",
+ "versionTitle": "Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 1.0,
+ "license": "CC-BY",
+ "shortVersionTitle": "Dr. Joshua Kulp",
+ "actualLanguage": "en",
+ "languageFamilyName": "english",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה חולין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "All may slaughter, and their slaughtering is valid, except a deaf-mute, an imbecile or a minor, lest they mess up [the animal] through their slaughtering. And if any of these slaughtered while others were standing over them, their slaughtering is valid. That which is slaughtered by a non-Jew is a nevelah and defiles by carrying. If one slaughtered at night, and also a blind man that slaughtered, the slaughtering is valid. One who slaughtered on Shabbat or Yom Kippur, even though he is liable for his own life, the slaughtering is valid.",
+ "If one slaughtered with [the smooth edge of] a hand sickle, with a flint or with a reed, the slaughtering is valid. All may slaughter; at all times one may slaughter; and with any implement one may slaughter, except a scythe, a saw, teeth or a finger nail, since these strangle. One who slaughtered with a scythe, moving it forward only: Bet Shammai declare it invalid, But Bet Hillel declare it valid. If the teeth of the scythe were filed away it is regarded as an ordinary knife.",
+ "If one slaughtered [by cutting] at the [top] ring [of the trachea] and left a hair's breadth of its entire circumference [towards the head], the slaughtering is valid. Rabbi Yose son of Rabbi Judah says: if there was only left [towards the head] a hair's breadth of the greater part of its circumference, [the slaughtering is valid].",
+ "If one cut at the side [of the neck], the slaughtering is valid. If one nipped off [the head of a bird sacrifice] from the side of the neck, the nipping is invalid. If one cut at the back of the neck, the slaughtering is invalid. If one nipped off [the head] from the back of the neck, the nipping is valid. If one cut at the front of the neck, the slaughtering is valid. If one nipped off [the head] from the front of the neck, the nipping is invalid. For the whole of the back of the neck is the appropriate place for nipping, and the whole of the front of the neck is the appropriate place for slaughtering. It follows, therefore, that the place which is appropriate for slaughtering is inappropriate for nipping, and the place which is appropriate for nipping is inappropriate for slaughtering.",
+ "[The age] which qualifies turtle doves [for sacrifice] disqualifies pigeons, and [the age] which qualifies pigeons [for sacrifice] disqualifies turtle doves. At the period when the neck feathers begin to turn yellow in either kind they are disqualified.",
+ "[The method of killing] which renders the red cow valid renders the heifer invalid, and the method which renders the heifer valid renders the red cow invalid. [The disability] which does not disqualify priests disqualifies Levites, and [the disability] which does not disqualify Levites disqualifies priests. That which cannot be rendered unclean in earthenware vessels can be rendered unclean in all other vessels, and that which cannot be rendered unclean in all other vessels can be rendered unclean in earthenware vessels. That which cannot be rendered unclean in wooden things can be rendered unclean in metal things, and that which cannot be rendered unclean in metal things can be rendered unclean in wooden things. When bitter almonds are subject to tithing sweet almonds are exempt, and when sweet almonds are subject to tithing bitter almonds are exempt.",
+ "Temed: Before it has fermented it may not be bought with second tithe money and it renders a mikveh invalid; After it has fermented it may be bought with second tithe money and it does not render a mikveh invalid. Brothers who are partners [in their inheritance]: When they are liable to pay the kalbon, they are exempt from the cattle tithe, And when they are liable to the cattle tithe, they are exempt from the kalbon. Whenever there is [the power] to sell, there is no fine, and whenever there is a fine there is no power to sell. Whenever there is the right of refusal there can be no halizah, and whenever there can be halizah there is no longer the right of refusal. When the shofar is blown there is no havdalah, and when there is havdalah the shofar is not blown. [Thus], if a festival falls on the day before Shabbat the shofar is blown but there is no havdalah; If it falls on the day following Shabbat there is havdalah but the shofar is not blown. How do they recite havdalah [on a festival that follows Shabbat]? “Who distinguishes between holy and holy.” Rabbi Dosa says: “Who distinguishes between the more holy and less holy day.”"
+ ],
+ [
+ "If one cut one [of the organs of the throat] in the case of a bird, or both organs in the case of cattle, the slaughtering is valid. The greater part of an organ is equivalent to [the whole of] it. Rabbi Judah says: he must cut through the veins. [If one cut] half of one organ in the case of a bird, or one and a half organs in the case of cattle, the slaughtering is invalid. [If one man cut] the greater part of one organ in the case of a bird, or the greater part of each organ in the case of cattle, the slaughtering is valid.",
+ "If one slaughtered two animals simultaneously, the slaughtering is valid. If two persons held the knife and slaughtered, even if one cut higher up and the other cut lower down [in the neck], the slaughtering is valid.",
+ "If he chopped off the head with one stroke, the slaughtering is invalid. He was slaughtering and he cut through the neck with one stroke, if the knife was as long as the neck, the slaughtering is valid. If he was slaughtering and he cut off two heads at the same time, if the knife is as long as the neck it is valid. When is this so? When the slaughterer moved the knife forward and not backward, or backward and not forward; but if he moved the knife to and fro, however small it was, even if it was a scalpel, the slaughtering is valid. If a knife fell down and slaughtered [an animal], even though it slaughtered it in the proper way, the slaughtering is invalid, for it is said, \"And you shall slaughter and eat,\" that which you slaughter, you may eat. If [while slaughtering] the knife fell and he picked it up, if his clothes fell and he picked them up, if he sharpened the knife, or if he got tired and his friend came and [continued] slaughtering, if he delayed the time that it takes to slaughter, it is invalid. Rabbi Shimon says: if he delayed the time it takes to examine the slaughtering.",
+ "If one first sliced the esophagus and then cut away the windpipe, or first cut away the windpipe and then sliced the esophagus; or if he sliced one of these organs and paused until the animal died; or if he thrust the knife underneath the second organ and cut it: [In all these cases] Rabbi Yeshevav says: the animal is nevelah; Rabbi Akiva says: it is terefah. Rabbi Yeshevav stated this general rule in the name of Rabbi Joshua: whenever an animal is rendered invalid by a fault in the slaughtering it is nevelah; whenever an animal has been duly slaughtered but is rendered invalid by some other defect it is terefah. And Rabbi Akiba [ultimately] agreed with him.",
+ "If one slaughtered cattle or a wild beast or a bird and no blood came out, they are valid and may be eaten by him whose hands have not been washed, for they have not been rendered susceptible to impurity by blood. Rabbi Shimon says: they have been rendered susceptible to impurity by the slaughtering.",
+ "One who slaughtered a dying animal: Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: [the slaughtering is invalid] unless it jerked its foreleg and its hind leg. Rabbi Eliezer says: it is enough if it spurted [the blood]. Rabbi Shimon said: even if one slaughtered [a dying animal] by night and the following morning he got up early and found the sides [of the throat] full of blood, the slaughtering is valid, for this proves that it spurted [the blood], as is Rabbi Eliezer's measure. The sages say: [the slaughtering is invalid] unless it jerked either its foreleg or its hind leg, or it moved its tail to and fro. This is the test both with regard to large and small animals. If a small animal stretched out its foreleg [at the end of the slaughtering] but did not withdraw it, [the slaughtering] is invalid, for this was just an indication of the expiration of its life. When do these rules apply? To case of an animal which was believed to be dying. But if it was believed to be sound, even though it did not show any of these signs, the slaughtering is valid.",
+ "If one slaughtered for a non-Jew, the slaughtering is valid. Rabbi Eliezer declares it invalid. Rabbi Eliezer said: even if one slaughtered a beast with the intention that a non-Jew should eat [only] its liver, the slaughtering is invalid, for the thoughts of a non-Jew are usually directed towards idolatry. Rabbi Yose said: is there not a kal vehomer argument? For if in the case of consecrated animals, where a wrongful intention can render invalid, it is established that everything depends solely upon the intention of him who performs the service, how much more in the case of unconsecrated animals, where a wrongful intention cannot render invalid, is it not logical that everything should depend solely upon the intention of him who slaughters!",
+ "If one slaughtered [an animal] as a sacrifice to mountains, hills, seas, rivers, or deserts, the slaughtering is invalid. If two persons held a knife and slaughtered [an animal], one intending it as a sacrifice to one of these things and the other for a legitimate purpose, the slaughtering is invalid.",
+ "One may not slaughter [so that the blood runs] into the sea or into rivers, or into vessels, But one may slaughter into a pool (or vessel) of water. And when on board a ship on to vessels. One may not slaughter at all into a hole, but one may dig a hole in his own house for the blood to run into. In the street, however, he should not do so as not to follow the ways of the heretics.",
+ "If one slaughtered [an unconsecrated animal outside the Temple court] for it to be an olah or a shelamim or an asham for a doubtful sin or as a Pesah or a todah, the slaughtering is invalid. But Rabbi Shimon declares it valid. If two persons held one knife and slaughtered [an unconsecrated animal outside the Temple court], one declaring it to be one of the above and the other intending it for a legitimate purpose, the slaughtering is invalid. If one slaughtered [an unconsecrated animal outside the Temple court] for it to be a hatat or an asham or a first-born or the tithe [of cattle] or a substitute offering, the slaughtering is valid. This is the general rule: if one slaughtered an animal declaring it to be a sacrifice which can be brought either as a voluntary or a freewill-offering it is invalid, but if he declares it to be a sacrifice which cannot be brought either as a votive or a freewill-offering it is valid."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The following [defects] render cattle terefah: If the esophagus was pierced; If the windpipe severed; If the membrane of the brain was pierced; If the heart was pierced as far as its cavity thereof; If the spine was broken and the cord severed; If the liver was gone and none of it remained; If the lung was pierced, Or if part of it was missing. Rabbi Shimon says: only if it was pierced as far as the main bronchi; If the stomach, If the gall-bladder was pierced, If the intestines were pierced; If the innermost stomach was pierced, If the greater part of the outer stomach was pierced. Rabbi Judah says: in a large animal [if it was torn] to the extent of a handbreadth, and in a small animal the greater part. If the omasum (the third stomach of a ruminant) [was pierced]; Or if the second stomach was pierced on the outside; If the animal fell from the roof; If most of its ribs were fractured; Or if it was mauled by a wolf. Rabbi Judah says: small animals [are terefah] if mauled by a wolf, large cattle if mauled by a lion; small fowl if mauled by a hawk, large fowl if mauled by a falcon. This is the rule: if an animal with a similar defect could not continue to live, it is terefah.",
+ "And the following [defects] do not render cattle terefah:If the windpipe was pierced, or cracked [lengthwise]. To what extent may it be deficient? Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: up to an Italian issar. If the skull was cracked but the membrane of the brain was not pierced; If the heart was pierced but not as far as its cavity; If the spine was broken but the cord was not severed; If the liver was removed but an olive's size of it remained. If the omasum or the third stomach were pierced at their juncture; If the spleen was removed, or the kidneys, or the lower jaw-bone or the womb. If [the lung] was shrunken up by an act of Heaven. If an animal was stripped of its hide: Rabbi Meir declares it valid, but the rabbis declare it invalid.",
+ "The following [defects] render birds terefah: If the esophagus was pierced, If the windpipe was severed; If a weasel struck [the bird] on the head in such a place as would render it terefah. If the gizzard was pierced, If the intestines were pierced, If it fell into the fire and its innards were scorched: If they turned green, it is invalid, But if they remained red it is valid. If one trod upon it or knocked it against a wall or if an animal trampled upon it, and it still jerks its limbs, and it remained alive after this for twenty-four hours, and it was thereafter slaughtered, it is valid.",
+ "And the following [defects] do not render birds terefah: If the windpipe was pierced or cracked lengthwise; If a weasel struck it on the head in such a place as would not render it terefah. If the crop was pierced Rabbi says: even if it was gone. If the innards protruded [from the body] but were not pierced. If its wings were broken, or its legs; or if [the wing’s] feathers were plucked. Rabbi Judah says: if its down was gone it is invalid.",
+ "[If an animal] suffered from congestion of the blood, or was overcome by smoke or by a cold, or if it ate oleander or chicken dung, or if it drank noxious water, it is permitted. If it ate poison or was bitten by a snake, it is not forbidden as trefah but it is forbidden as a danger to life.",
+ "The characteristics of cattle and of wild animals are stated in the Torah. The characteristics of birds are not stated, but the sages said: every bird that seizes its prey is unclean. Every bird that has an extra toe, or a crop and a gizzard that can be peeled, is clean. Rabbi Elazar bar Zadok says: every bird that parts its toes is unclean.",
+ "Of locusts: all that have four legs, four wings, leaping legs, and wings covering the greater part of the body, [are clean.] Rabbi Yose says: its name must be locust. Of fishes: all that have fins and scales [are clean]. Rabbi Judah says: there must be [at least] two scales and one fin. The scales are those which are immovable, the fins are those [wings] by which it swims."
+ ],
+ [
+ "If an animal was having difficulty giving birth and the fetus put forth a limb and then put it back in, it may be eaten [when its mother is slaughtered]. If it put forth its head, even though it put it back in, it is considered as born. Whatever is cut off from the fetus within the womb [and left inside] may be eaten, but whatever is cut off from the spleen or kidneys [of the animal and left inside] may not be eaten. This is the rule: that which is from the body of the animal is forbidden, but that which is not from the body of the animal is permitted.",
+ "If an animal giving birth for the first time was having difficulty, one may cut off each limb [as it comes out] and throw it to the dogs. If the greater portion came forth it must be buried, and she is exempt from the law of the firstling.",
+ "If a fetus died within the womb [of its mother] and the shepherd put in his hand and touched it, he is clean, whether it was a clean or unclean animal. Rabbi Yose HaGalili says: if it was an unclean animal he is unclean, and if it was a clean animal he is clean. If the fetus of a woman died within the womb of its mother and the midwife put in her hand and touched it, the midwife is unclean for seven days, but the mother is clean until the fetus comes out.",
+ "If an animal was having difficulty in labor and the fetus put forth its limb and a person immediately cut if off and then slaughtered the mother, the flesh [of the fetus] is clean. If he slaughtered the mother first and then cut if off, the flesh [of the fetus] is unclean like that which had touched nevelah, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say, it is like that which had touched a slaughtered terefah, for just as we find that the slaughtering of a terefah animal renders it clean, so the slaughtering of the animal renders the limb clean. Rabbi Meir said to them: No, for when you say that the slaughtering of a terefah [animal] renders it clean you are concerned with [the animal] itself, but can you say that it will render clean the limb which is not part of [the animal] itself? From where do we learn that the slaughtering of a terefah animal renders it clean? [For we could have argued to the contrary:] An unclean animal may not be eaten, and a terefah also may not be eaten; just as slaughtering does not render an unclean animal clean so slaughtering should not render a terefah animal clean? No, if you said this of an unclean animal for at no time was it fit [for slaughtering]; can you also say this of a terefah animal which had a time when it was fit [for slaughtering]? Take away with this argument that you brought forth! For where would we know this of an animal that was born terefah from the womb? [Substitute therefore this argument]: No, if you said this of an unclean animal for none of its kind may be validly slaughtered; can you also state this of a terefah for whose kind there is valid slaughter? [Accordingly], the slaughtering of a live eight months birth does not render it clean, since there is no slaughtering of its kind.",
+ "If one slaughtered an animal and found in it an eight months’ fetus, either living or dead, or a dead nine months’ fetus, he need only tear it open and take out the blood. If he found in it a living nine months’ fetus it must be slaughtered, and he would thereby [possibly] incur the penalty for “it and its young,” the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: the slaughtering of its mother renders it permitted. Rabbi Shimon Shezuri says: even if it is eight years old and is plowing the field, the slaughtering of its mother renders it permitted. If he ripped open [the mother] and found in it a living nine months’ fetus, it must be slaughtered, since its mother has not been slaughtered.",
+ "If the hind legs of an animal were cut off below the joint, it is permitted; If above the joint, it is terefah. So too if the juncture of the tendons was gone, [it is terefah]. If the bone was broken but the greater part of the flesh [around the fracture] remained, it is rendered clean by the slaughtering; otherwise it is not rendered clean by the slaughtering.",
+ "If a person slaughtered an animal and found in it an amniotic sac, he who is not fastidious may eat it. It does not contract uncleanness, either food uncleanness or the uncleanness of nevelah. If he intended to eat it, it can contract food uncleanness but not the uncleanness of nevelah. If part of the amniotic sac emerged [before the slaughtering of the mother], it may not be eaten; for it is a sign of birth in a woman and also a sign of birth in an animal. If an animal which was pregnant for the first time miscarried an amniotic sac, it may be thrown to dogs. But in the case of a consecrated animal it must be buried. It may not be buried at cross-roads or hung on a tree, for these are amorite practices."
+ ],
+ [
+ "[The law of] “It and its young” applies both within the land of Israel and outside it, both during the existence of the Temple and after it, in respect of both unconsecrated and consecrated animals. How so? If a person slaughtered an animal and its young, both animals being unconsecrated, [and they slaughtered them] outside [the sanctuary], they are both valid, but [he who slaughtered] the second incurs forty lashes. If both animals were consecrated [and they were slaughtered] outside [the sanctuary], [he who slaughtered] the first incurs the penalty of karet, both animals are invalid, and each incurs forty lashes. If both animals were unconsecrated [and they were slaughtered] inside [the sanctuary], both animals are invalid, and [he who slaughtered] the second incurs forty lashes. If both animals were consecrated [and they were slaughtered] inside [the sanctuary], the first is valid and [he who slaughtered it is] not culpable, but [he who slaughtered] the second incurs forty lashes, and it is invalid.",
+ "If [the first animal was] unconsecrated and [the second] consecrated [and they were both slaughtered] outside [the sanctuary], the first is valid and [he who slaughtered it is] not liable, but [he who slaughtered] the second incurs forty lashes and it is invalid. If [the first was] consecrated and [the second] unconsecrated [and they were both slaughtered] outside [the sanctuary], [he who slaughtered] the first incurs the penalty of karet and it is invalid, and the second [animal] is valid, and each incurs forty lashes. If [the first was] unconsecrated and [the second] consecrated [and they were both slaughtered] inside [the sanctuary], they are both invalid, and [he who slaughtered] the second incurs forty lashes. If [the first was] consecrated and [the second] unconsecrated [and they were both slaughtered] inside [the sanctuary], the first animal is valid and [he who slaughtered it is] not liable, but [he who slaughtered] the second incurs forty lashes and it is invalid. If both were unconsecrated and [the first was slaughtered] outside [the sanctuary] and [the second] inside, the first is valid and [he who slaughtered it is] not liable, but [he who slaughtered] the second incurs forty lashes and it is invalid. If both were consecrated and [the first was slaughtered] outside [the sanctuary] and [the second] inside, [he who slaughtered] the first incurs the penalty of karet, each incurs forty lashes, and both animals are invalid. If both were unconsecrated and [the first was slaughtered] inside [the sanctuary] and [the second] outside, the first is invalid and [he who slaughtered it is] not liable, but [he who slaughtered] the second incurs forty lashes and it is valid. If both were consecrated and [the first was slaughtered] inside [the sanctuary] and [the second] outside, the first is valid and [he who slaughtered it is] not liable, but [he who slaughtered] the second incurs forty lashes and it is invalid.",
+ "If a person slaughtered [an animal] and it was found to be terefah, or if he slaughtered [it as an offering] to idols, or if he slaughtered the red cow, or an ox which was condemned to be stoned, or a heifer whose neck was to be broken: Rabbi Shimon exempts [him from having transgressed the law of “it and its young”]; but the sages make him liable. If a person slaughtered [an animal] and it became nevelah under his hand, or if he stabbed it, or tore away [the organs of the throat], he does not thereby transgress the law of it and its young. If two people bought a cow and its young, he who bought first can slaughter first; but if the second preceded him, he holds his advantage. If a person slaughtered a cow and then two of its calves, he is liable for eighty lashes. If he slaughtered its two calves and then the cow, he is liable for forty lashes. If he slaughtered it and then its calf and then the calf's offspring, he is liable for eighty lashes. If he slaughtered it and then its calf's offspring and then the calf, he is liable for forty lashes. Symmachos says in the name of Rabbi Meir: he is liable for eighty lashes. At four periods in the year he who sells a beast to another must inform him, “I sold today its mother to be slaughtered,” or “I sold today its young to be slaughtered,” and these are they: on the eve of the last day of the feast [of Sukkot], on the eve of the first day of Pesah, on the eve of Shavuot, and on the eve of Rosh Hashanah. According to Rabbi Yose the Galilean, also on the eve of Yom Kippur, in the Galilee. Rabbi Judah says, this is so, only when there was no time in between the sales, but if there was time, he need not inform him. Rabbi Judah agrees that if he sold the mother to the bridegroom and the young to the bride, he must inform them of it, for it is certain that they will each slaughter on the same day.",
+ "At these four periods a butcher can be compelled to slaughter against his will. Even if the ox was worth a thousand dinars and the purchaser has only [paid] a dinar, they can force the butcher to slaughter it. Therefore if the animal died, the loss is upon the purchaser. At other times of the year it is not so, therefore if the animal died, the loss is upon the seller.",
+ "The “one day” mentioned in connection with the law of “it and its young” means the day and the night preceding it. This was how Rabbi Shimon ben Zoma expounded (darash): it says “one day” (Genesis 1:5) in connection with the creation and it also says “one day” (Leviticus 22:28) in connection with “it and its young” Just as the “one day” mentioned in connection with the creation means the day and the night preceding it, so too the “one day” mentioned in connection with “it and its young” means the day and the night preceding it."
+ ],
+ [
+ "[The law of] “covering up the blood” applies both within the land of Israel and outside it, both during the existence of the Temple and after it, It applies to unconsecrated animals but not to consecrated animals. It applies [only] to wild animals and birds, whether they are at one's disposal or not. It applies also to a koy, for it is an animal about which there is a doubt. It may [therefore] not be slaughtered on a festival; and if it was slaughtered [on a festival] one may not cover up its blood.",
+ "If a person slaughtered [a wild animal or a bird] and it was found to be terefah, or if he slaughtered [it as an offering] to idols, or if he slaughtered that which was unconsecrated inside the sanctuary or that which was consecrated outside, or if he slaughtered a wild animal or a bird that was condemned to be stoned: Rabbi Meir makes him liable to cover up the blood; but the sages make him exempt. If he slaughtered [a wild animal or a bird] and it became nevelah under his hand, or if he stabbed it, or tore away [the organs of the throat], he is exempt from covering up [the blood].",
+ "If a deaf-mute, an imbecile or a minor slaughtered while others watched them, one must cover up the blood; but if they were alone, they are exempt from covering it up. Similarly for the matter of “it and its young”: if they slaughtered while others watched them, it is forbidden to slaughter after them [the mother/young], but if they were alone: Rabbi Meir permits to slaughter after them [the mother/young]. But the rabbis forbid it. They agree, that if a person did slaughter [after them], he has not incurred forty lashes.",
+ "If a person slaughtered a hundred wild animals in one place, one covering suffices for all. If [he slaughtered] a hundred birds in one place, one covering suffices for all. If [he slaughtered] a wild animal and a bird in one place, one covering suffices for both. Rabbi Judah says: if he slaughtered a wild animal he should cover up its blood and then slaughter the bird [and cover it up also]. If a person slaughtered and did not cover up the blood and another person saw it, the other must cover it up. If he covered it up and it became uncovered, he need not cover it up again. If the wind covered it up, he must cover it up again.",
+ "If the blood became mixed with water and it still has the color of blood, it must be covered up. If it became mixed with wine, [the wine] is to be regarded as though it was water. If it became mixed with the blood of a beast or with the blood of a wild animal, it is to be regarded as though it was water. Rabbi Judah says: blood does not annul other blood.",
+ "The blood which spurted out and that which is upon the knife must also be covered up. Rabbi Judah says: when is this the case? When there is no other blood but that; but when there is other blood besides this, it need not be covered up.",
+ "With what may one cover up [the blood] and with what may one not cover it up? One may cover it up with fine dung, with fine sand, with lime, with white clay, or a brick or an earthenware stopper [of a cask] that have been ground into powder. But one may not cover it up with coarse dung or coarse sand, or with a brick or an earthenware stopper [of a cask] that have not been ground into powder. Nor may one cover it with a vessel. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel stated a general rule: one may cover it with anything in which plants would grow; but one may not cover it with anything in which plants would not grow."
+ ],
+ [
+ "[The prohibition of] the sciatic nerve is in force both within the land and outside it, both during the existence of the Temple and after it, in respect of both unconsecrated and consecrated [animals]. It applies to cattle and to wild animals, to the right and left hip. But it does not apply to a bird because it does not have a socket [on its hip]. It applies to a fetus. Rabbi Judah says: it does not apply to a fetus. And its [forbidden] fat is permitted. Butchers are not trustworthy with regard to the [removal of the] sciatic nerve, the words of Rabbi Meir. The sages say: they are trustworthy with regard to it as well as with regard to the [forbidden] fat.",
+ "One may send to a non-Jew a thigh in which the sciatic nerve has not been removed, because its place is known. When a person removes the sciatic nerve he must remove all of it. Rabbi Judah says: only so much as is necessary to fulfill the mitzvah of removing it.",
+ "If a person ate an olive’s bulk of the sciatic nerve, he incurs forty stripes. If he ate all of it and it was not as much as an olive’s bulk, he is liable. If he ate an olive’s bulk of it from one thigh and another olive’s bulk of it from the other thigh, he incurs eighty stripes. Rabbi Judah says: he incurs only forty stripes.",
+ "If a thigh was cooked together with the sciatic nerve and there was enough [of the nerve] as to impart a flavor [to the thigh], it is forbidden. How does one measure this? As if it were meat [cooked] with turnips.",
+ "A sciatic nerve which was cooked with other [permitted] nerves: If it can still be recognized, [then all the nerves are prohibited] if [the sciatic nerve] imparts a flavor. But if it can no longer [be recognized] then they are all forbidden. And the broth [is prohibited] if it [the sciatic nerve] imparts a flavor. And so it is with a piece of nevelah, or a piece of an unclean fish that was cooked together with other pieces of flesh [or fish]: If it can still be recognized, [then all are prohibited] if it imparts a flavor. But if it can no longer [be recognized] then they are all forbidden. And the broth [is prohibited] if it [the sciatic nerve] imparts a flavor.",
+ "It applies to clean animals but not to unclean. Rabbi Judah says, even to unclean animals. Rabbi Judah said: was not the sciatic nerve prohibited from the time of the sons of Jacob, and at that time unclean animals were still permitted to them? They replied, this law was ordained at Sinai but was written in its proper place."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Every kind of flesh is forbidden to be cooked in milk, except for the flesh of fish and of locusts. And it is also forbidden to place it upon the table with cheese, except for the flesh of fish and of locusts. One who vows not to eat meat, he is allowed to eat the flesh of fish and locusts. Fowl may be placed upon the table together with cheese but may not be eaten with it, the words of Bet Shammai. Bet Hillel say: it may neither be placed [upon the table together with cheese] nor eaten with it. Rabbi Yose said: this is one of the leniencies of Bet shammai and the stringencies of Bet Hillel. Concerning what table did they speak? Concerning the table upon which one eats; but on the table whereon the food is set out one may place the one beside the other, and not be concerned.",
+ "A person may wrap up meat and cheese in one cloth, provided they do not touch one another. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: two people at an inn may eat at the same table, the one meat and the other cheese, without concern.",
+ "If a drop of milk fell on a piece of meat and it imparted a flavor into that piece, it is forbidden. If he stirred up the pot, then it is forbidden only if [the drop of milk] imparted a flavor into [all that was in] the pot. The udder: he must cut it open and empty it of its milk; if he did not cut it open he has not transgressed the law on its account. The heart: he must cut it open and empty it of its blood; if he did not cut it open he has not transgressed the law on its account. One who puts fowl onto a table with cheese has not transgressed a negative commandment.",
+ "It is forbidden to cook the meat of a clean animal in the milk of a clean animal or to derive any benefit from it. But it is permitted to cook the meat of a clean animal in the milk of an unclean animal or the meat of an unclean animal in the milk of a clean animal and to derive benefit from it. Rabbi Akiva says: wild animals and fowls are not included in the prohibition of the Torah, for it is written three times, “You shall not seethe a kid in its mother's milk;” to exclude wild animals, fowl, and unclean animals. Rabbi Yose the Galilean says, it is said, “You shall not eat any nevelah” and [in the same verse] it says, “You shall not seethe a kid in its mother's milk” (Deuteronomy 14:21) anything that is prohibited because of nevelah it is forbidden to cook in milk. Fowl which is prohibited because of nevelah, it might also be forbidden to cook in milk, Scripture says, “In its mother’s milk;” this excludes fowl which has no mother's milk.",
+ "The [milk in the] stomach [of an animal] of a Gentile or [in the stomach of] a nevelah is forbidden. If a man curdled milk with the skin of the stomach of an animal that was validly slaughtered and it imparted its flavor [to the milk] it is forbidden. The [milk in the] stomach of a validly slaughtered animal which had suckled from a terefah animal is forbidden. The [milk in the] stomach of a terefah animal which had suckled from a kosher animal is permitted, because the milk is collected inside.",
+ "In certain respects the prohibition of the fat is stricter than the prohibition of the blood, and in certain respects the prohibition of the blood is stricter than the prohibition of the fat. The prohibition of the fat is stricter, in that the fat is subject to the law of sacrilege, and one is obligated over it for piggul, notar, and uncleanness which is not the case with the blood. And the prohibition of the blood is stricter, for it applies to cattle, wild animals and fowl, whether clean or unclean; but the prohibition of the fat applies to clean cattle only."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The hide, meat juice, sediment, dried-up meat, bones, sinews, horns and hooves join together [to make up the minimum quantity in order] to convey food-uncleanness, but not to [make up the minimum quantity in order to] convey nevelah-uncleanness. Similarly, if a man slaughtered an unclean animal for a Gentile and it still has convulsions, it can convey food-uncleanness, but it conveys nevelah-uncleanness only after it is dead, or its head has been chopped off. [Scripture] has [thus] made more cases that convey food-uncleanness than those that convey nevelah-uncleanness. Rabbi Judah says: if an olive’s bulk of dried-up meat was gathered in one place, one would thereby become liable [for nevelah-uncleanness].",
+ "In the following cases the skin is considered flesh: The skin of a person, The skin of the domesticated pig. Rabbi Yose says: even the skin of the wild pig. The skin of the hump of a young camel. The skin of the head of a young calf. The skin around the hooves. The skin of the pudenda. The skin of a fetus. The skin beneath the fat tail. The skin of the gecko, the monitor, the lizard and the skink. Rabbi Judah says: the lizard is like the weasel. If any of these skins was tanned or trampled upon as much as [was usual] for tanning, it becomes clean, excepting the skin of a man. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri says: the eight reptiles have [real] skins.",
+ "One who was flaying cattle or wild animals, clean or unclean, small or large: In order to use the hide for a covering, if he stripped as can be taken hold of [the hide is no longer considered as connected to the flesh.] In order to make a water-skin, until the breast has been flayed. If he was flaying from the feet upwards, until the whole hide [has been flayed]. [All of these measures apply] for both conveying uncleanness and becoming unclean. As for the skin that is on the neck: Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri says: it is not connected. But the sages say it is connected until the whole hide has been flayed.",
+ "A hide which had an olive’s bulk of [unclean] flesh clinging to it, one who touches a shred hanging from it, or a hair that was opposite to it, he becomes unclean. If there were two pieces of flesh attached to it, each the size of half an olive, they convey uncleanness by carrying but not by contact, the words of Rabbi Ishmael. Rabbi Akiva says: neither by contact nor by carrying. Rabbi Akiva agrees that if there were two pieces of flesh, each the size of half of an olive, that he stuck on a twig and he waved them, he becomes unclean. Why then does Rabbi Akiva declare him clean in the [case where they cling to the] hide? Because the hide renders them negligible.",
+ "With regard to a thigh-bone of a corpse or a thigh-bone of a consecrated animal, he who touches it, whether it be stopped up or pierced, becomes unclean. With regard to a thighbone of a nevelah or of a [dead] sheretz, if it was stopped up, he who touches it remains clean, but if it was at all pierced it conveys uncleanness by contact. From where do we know [the same rules apply] for carrying? Scripture says, “He that touches and he that carries” (Leviticus 11:39-40), anything that [can become unclean] by contact [can become unclean] by carrying. And anything that cannot [become unclean] by contact, cannot become [unclean] by carrying.",
+ "The egg of a sheretz in which there has formed an embryo is clean. If it was pierced, however small the hole was, it is unclean. A mouse which is half flesh and half earth, if a man touched the flesh he becomes unclean, but if he touched the earth he remains clean. Rabbi Judah says: even if he touched the earth that is over against the flesh he becomes unclean.",
+ "Limbs or pieces of flesh which hang loose from a [living] animal are susceptible to food uncleanness while they are in their place. And [in order to become unclean] they must be first rendered susceptible to uncleanness. If the animal was slaughtered, they have by the blood [of the slaughtering] become susceptible to uncleanness, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Shimon says: they have not become susceptible to uncleanness. If the animal died, the hanging flesh must be rendered susceptible to uncleanness. The limb is unclean as a limb severed from a living creature, but is not unclean as the limb of a nevelah (carcass), the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Shimon declares it clean.",
+ "A limb or a piece of flesh which hangs loose from a person are clean. If the man died, the flesh is clean, the limb is unclean as a limb severed from the living body but is not unclean as a limb severed from a corpse, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Shimon declares it clean."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The [law of] the shoulder and the cheeks and the stomach is in force both within the Land and outside it, both during the existence of the Temple and after it, in respect of unconsecrated animals but not consecrated animals. For it might have been argued thus: if unconsecrated animals, which are not subject to the law of the breast and the thigh, are subject to these dues, how much more are consecrated animals, with are subject to the law of the breast and the thigh, subject also to these dues! Scripture states, “And I have given them to Aaron the priest and his sons as a due for ever” (Leviticus 7:34) only what is mentioned in this passage shall be his.",
+ "All consecrated animals whose permanent physical blemish preceded their consecration and were then redeemed: Are subject to the law of the firstling and to the priestly gifts, And when they become like hullin [by being redeemed] they may be shorn and may be put to work. And their young and their milk are permitted after they have been redeemed. And he who slaughtered them outside the sanctuary is not liable. And they do not render what is substituted for them [holy]. And if they died they may be redeemed, except for the firstling and the tithe of cattle. All [consecrated animals] whose consecration preceded their permanent, or their impermanent blemish [preceded] their consecration and subsequently they contracted a permanent blemish, and they were redeemed: Are exempt from the law of the firstling, and from priestly gifts; And they are not like unconsecrated animals to be shorn or put to work; And [even] after they have been redeemed their young and their milk are forbidden; And he who slaughtered them outside the sanctuary is liable; And they render what was substituted for them [holy], And if they died they must be buried.",
+ "A first-born got mixed up with a hundred other animals: If a hundred [and one] persons slaughtered them all, they are all exempt from the gifts. If one person slaughtered them all, only one animal is exempt from the gifts. If a man slaughtered an animal for a priest or a non-Jew, he is exempt from the gifts. If he had a share [in the animal] with them, he must indicate this by some sign. If he said, “Except the gifts” he is exempt from giving the gifts. If he said, “Sell me the entrails of a cow” and among them were the gifts, he must give them to a priest and [the seller] does not need to reduce the price. But if he bought them from him by weight, he must give them to a priest, and [the seller] must reduce the price.",
+ "A convert who converted and owned a cow: If he slaughtered it before he converted, he is exempt from giving the gifts. If [he slaughtered it] after he converted, he is liable. If there was a doubt about it, he is exempt, for the burden of proof lies upon the claimant. What is ‘the shoulder’? From the joint up to the shoulder-socket of the forelimb, and this is the same for the nazirite. The corresponding part of the hind leg is called the thigh. Rabbi Judah says: the thigh extends from the joint up to the fleshy part of the leg. What counts as ‘the cheek? From the joint of the jaw to the last protrusion of the windpipe."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The law of the first of the fleece is in force both within the Land and outside it, both during the existence of the Temple and after it, in respect of unconsecrated animals but not consecrated animals. The law of the shoulder and the cheeks and the stomach is of stricter application than the law of the first of the fleece; for the law of the shoulder and the cheeks and the stomach applies both to herds and flocks, whether they are many or few, whereas the law of the first of the fleece applies only to sheep, and only when there are many.",
+ "How much is “many”? Bet Shammai say: [at least] two sheep, as it is said, “A man shall rear a young cow and two sheep (tzon)” (Isaiah 7:21). Bet Hillel say: five, as it is said, “Five dressed sheep (tzon)” (I Samuel 28:18). Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas says: five sheep, which each produce [a fleece which weighs] a maneh and a half, are subject to the law of the first of the fleece. But the sages say: five sheep, whatever their fleeces weigh. And how much should one give him? The weight of five selas in Judah, which is equal to ten selas in Galilee. Bleached wool and not dirty wool, sufficient to make from it a small garment, for it is written, “Give him,” when there is enough to be considered a gift. If the owner did not manage to give [the fleece to the priest] until he dyed it, he is exempt. If he bleached it but did not dye it, he is still liable. If a man bought the fleeces of a flock belonging to a non-Jew, he is exempt from the law of the first of the fleece. If a man bought the fleeces of a flock belonging to his neighbor: If the seller kept some back, the seller is liable, But if he did not withhold anything, the buyer is liable. If he had two kinds of wool, grey and white, and he sold the grey but not the white, or [if he sold the wool] of the males but not of the females, each must give [the first of the fleece] for himself."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The law of letting [the mother bird] go from the nest is in force both within the holy land and outside it, both during the existence of the Temple and after it, in respect of unconsecrated birds but not consecrated birds. The law of covering up the blood is of broader application than the law of letting [the mother bird] go; for the law of covering up the blood applies to wild animals as well as to birds, whether they are at one's disposal or not, whereas the law of letting [the mother bird] go from the nest applies only to birds and only to those which are not at one's disposal. Which are they that are not at one's disposal? Such as geese and fowls that made their nests in the open field. But if they made their nests within a house or in the case of Herodian doves, one is not bound to let [the mother bird] go.",
+ "An unclean bird one is not obligated to let it go. If an unclean bird was sitting on the eggs of a clean bird, or a clean bird on the eggs of an unclean bird, one is not obligated to let it go. As to a male partridge: Rabbi Eliezer obligates [one to let it go]. But the sages exempt.",
+ "If the mother was hovering [over the nest]: If her wings touch the nest, one is obligated to let her go; if her wings do not touch the nest, one is not obligated to let her go. If there was but one young bird or one egg [in the nest], one is still obligated to let the mother go, for it is written: “A nest,” [implying], any nest whatsoever. If there were there young birds able to fly or spoiled eggs, one is not obligated to let [the mother] go, for it is written, “And the mother sitting up on the young or upon the eggs:” Just as the young are living beings so the eggs must be such as [would produce] living beings; this excludes spoiled eggs. And just as the eggs need the care of the mother so the young must be such as need the care of the mother; this excludes those that are able to fly. If one let [the mother] go and she returned, even four of five times, he is still obligated [to let her go again], for it is written, “You shall surely let the mother go.” If one said, “I will take the mother and let the young go,” he is still obligated [to let her go], for it is written, “You shall surely let the mother go.” If one took the young and brought them back again to the nest, and afterwards the mother returned to them, he is not obligated to let her go.",
+ "If one took the mother with the young: Rabbi Judah says: he has incurred [forty] lashes and he need not now let her go. But the sages say: he must let her go, and he does not incur lashes. This is the general rule: [For the transgression of] any negative commandment which has of a remedy by the subsequent fulfillment of a positive commandment one does not incur lashes.",
+ "One may not take the mother with the young even for the sake of purifying the metzora. If in respect of so light a commandment, which deals with that which is but worth an issar, the Torah said, “In order that you may fare well and have a long life”, how much more [must be the reward] for the observance of the more difficult commandments in the Torah!"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/Sefaria Community Translation.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/Sefaria Community Translation.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..289c4d2fb9b9d6aa70073ebce3c2fa9498ecd4da
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/Sefaria Community Translation.json
@@ -0,0 +1,123 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Chullin",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org",
+ "versionTitle": "Sefaria Community Translation",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "license": "CC0",
+ "versionTitleInHebrew": "תרגום קהילת ספריא",
+ "actualLanguage": "en",
+ "languageFamilyName": "english",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה חולין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "Anyone [may] slaughter - and his slaughter is valid - except for a deaf-mute, a shoteh [a person who exhibits signs demonstrating a lack of ability to think clearly], or a minor, lest they spoil the slaughter. But all who slaughter while others are watching them: their slaughter is valid. The slaughter of a non-Jew is a nevelah [an improperly slaughtered animal of a permitted species] and renders impure through carrying. One who slaughters at night, and so too a blind person who slaughters, his slaughter is valid. One who slaughters on Shabbat, or on Yom Kippur, even though he is liable for death, his slaughter is valid.",
+ "If one slaughters with a hand sickle, a flint stone, or with a reed, his slaughter is valid. All [may] slaughter, they may slaughter at any time, and they may slaughter with anything, except a reaping sickle, a saw, teeth, or a finger nail, because they strangle. One who slaughters with a reaping sickle along the direction [of the teeth], Beit Shammai invalidates, but Beit Hillel validated. If its teeth were smoothed, it is like a knife.",
+ "One who slaughters through the ring of the windpipe and left on it a thread's breadth around the whole of it [the circumference], his slaughter is valid. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Yehuda says, \"[Even] a thread's breadth around the majority of it.\"",
+ "One who slaughters from the sides, his slaughter is valid. One who performs melikah [a slaughtering method used for bird sacrifices, employing the thumbnail instead of a knife] from the sides, his melikah is invalid. One who slaughters from the back of the neck, his slaughter is invalid. One who performs melikah from the back of the neck, his melikah is valid. One who slaughters from the throat, his slaughter is valid. One who performs melikah from the throat, his melikah is invalid, for the entire back of the neck is valid for melikah, and the entire throat is valid for slaughtering. As a result, [that which is] valid regarding slaughter is invalid regarding melikah and [that which is] valid regarding melikah is invalid regarding slaughter.",
+ "[That which is] valid regarding pigeons is invalid regarding turtle-doves. [That which is] valid regarding turtle-doves is invalid regarding pigeons. [At] the beginning of yellowing [of the feathers] with either this or that, they [become] invalid [as sacrifices].",
+ "[That which is] valid for the red heifer is invalid for the eglah arufah [a calf whose neck is broken to atone for an unsolved murder]. [That which is] valid for the eglah arufah is invalid for the red heifer. [That which is] valid for Kohanim [member of the priestly caste, a subgroup of tribe of Levi, which is uniquely responsible for maintaining and carrying out the sacrificial services in the Temple] is invalid for Levites. [That which is] valid regarding Levites is invalid regarding Kohanim. [That which is] pure for earthenware vessels is impure for all the [other] vessels. [That which is] pure for all the [other] vessels is impure for earthenware vessels. [That which is] pure for wooden vessels is impure for metal vessels. [That which is] pure for metal vessels, is impure for wooden vessels. The [conditions] which obligate bitter almonds [for tithes], exempt for sweet ones. Those which obligate for sweet almonds, exempt for bitter ones.",
+ "An infusion of grape by-products, while it has not yet fermented, is not purchased with the money of ma'aser [sheni] [the second tithe of produce, which must be taken to Jerusalem and consumed there] and invalidates a mikveh [water collected by natural means used to cleanse ritual impurity]. From the time that it has fermented, it may be purchased with the money of ma'aser [sheni], and does not invalidate a mikveh. Brothers who are partners, when they are obligated for the kalbon [a surcharge added to the half a shekel given to the Temple due to exchanging a full shekel], they are exempt regarding ma'aser behemah [the tithe of every tenth animal from the flock or cattle, which is brought as a sacrifice]. When they are obligated for ma'aser behemah they are exempt for the kalbon. Any place there is a right of sale [for a father with his daughter], there are no fine [for raping or seducing the daughter]. And any place there is a fine, there is no right of sale. Any place there is mi'un [the refusal of a marriage by a fatherless child married off by her mother or brother , retroactively annulling the marriage], there is no chalitzah [the ceremony performed to release a widow of a childless man from the obligation of Levirate marriage]. And any place where there is chalitzah, there is no mi'un. Any place where there is a [shofar] blast [on the eve of Shabbat], there is no havdalah [ceremony marking the transition from sacred time to secular or less sacred time]. And any place where there is havdalah, there is no blast. [For] a festival which falls out on the eve of the Shabbat, we sound a blast and do not make havdalah. [If it falls out] at the end of Shabbat, havdalah is said, but the blast is not sounded. How is havdalah said [when a festival falls out on the day after Shabbat]? \"Who makes a distinction between holy and holy.\" Rabbi Dosa says, \"Between heavy holiness and light holiness.\""
+ ],
+ [
+ "One who slaughters one [of either the trachea or esophagus] for a bird, and both for cattle, his slaughter is valid. The majority of one [of the trachea or esophagus] is like [all of] it. Rabbi Yehuda says, \"[Not] until he cuts the jugular veins.\" [If he cut] one half of one for a bird, and one and a half for cattle, his slaughter is unfit. [If he cut] the majority of one for a bird, and the majority of two for cattle, his slaughter is valid.",
+ "One who slaughters two heads in one, his slaughter is valid. When two hold the knife and slaughter, even if one [held it] at the top and one at the bottom, their slaughter is valid.",
+ "[If] one decapitated the head in one blow, it is invalid. [If] one was slaughtering and one decapitated the head in one blow: if the knife has a neck's width [outside of the neck], it is valid. [If] one was slaughtering and cut off two heads in one blow, if the knife has a neck's width [outside of the cut necks], it is valid. What case is being discussed? At a time when one extends [the knife] but does not bring it back [down the throat], or one brings it back but does not extend. But, if one extended and brought it back, any amount [of knife], even with a surgeon's knife, it is valid. A knife that falls and slaughters, even if it slaughtered in its [proper] manner, [the slaughter] is invalid. For it is said \"Then you shall slaughter and then you shall eat,\" (Deuteronomy 27:7). That which you slaughter, you eat. If the knife fell and he picked it up; or his clothes fell and he picked them up; or he sharpened the knife and became weary; and then his fellow came and slaughtered: if he delayed the amount of time it takes to slaughter, [the slaughter] is invalid. Rabbi Shimon said, \"If he delayed the amount of time it takes to investigate [the knife].\"",
+ "[If] he cut the esophagus and tore the trachea; or cut the trachea and tore the esophagus; or cut one of the them and left it until it dies; or he hid the knife under the second and ripped it: Rabbi Yishbav says, “It is a nevelah [an improperly slaughtered animal of a permitted species].” Rabbi Akiva says, “It is a tereifah [an animal with a mortal condition such that it would die within one year]. A general principle said by Rabbi Yishbav in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua: “Anything invalidated in its slaughtering is a nevelah; anything where its slaughtering is proper but another issue caused it to become invalid is a terefah.” Then Rabbi Akiva agreed with him.",
+ "One who slaughters cattle, a wild animal, or a bird, and no blood came out, they are valid and are eaten with unclean hands for they are not made fit to contract impurity by blood. Rabbi Shimon says, they are made fit by the slaughter.",
+ "One who slaughters a gravely ill animal, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says, “As long as it struggles with its fore and hind leg.” Rabbi Eliezer says, “It is sufficient if it squirts [blood].” Said Rabbi Shimon, “Even one who slaughters at night and the next day gets up and finds the walls covered in blood, it is valid, for it squirted [blood] and is like the principle of Rebbi Eliezer.” The Sages say, “Until it struggles with either its fore or hind leg, or until shakes its tail, whether for small cattle or big cattle.” Small cattle which extended its fore leg but did not withdraw it is invalid, for that is only the leaving of its life. What case is being discussed? When it is previously held to be gravely ill. But if it was previously held to be healthy, even if did not have one of these signs, it is valid.",
+ "One who slaughters for a non-Jew, his slaughtering is valid. And Rabbi Eliezer declares it invalid. Said Rabbi Eliezer, “Even if he slaughtered it so that the non-Jew will eat from the edge of its liver, it is invalid, for the usual thought of a non-Jew is towards idolatry.” Said Rabbi Yose, “These matters are [solved by] an a fortiori argument. Just as in a place where thought invalidates for mukdashim [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption] everything only follows the work, in a place where thought does not invalidate for chulin [produce or food permitted for general consumption], should it not be the rule that everything only follows the slaughtering?”",
+ "One who slaughters for the sake of mountains, for the sake of valleys, for the sake of seas, for the sake of rivers, for the sake of deserts, his slaughter is invalid. [If] two grasp the knife and slaughter, one for the sake of one from all of these and one for the sake of something fitting, his slaughter is invalid.",
+ "We may not slaughter into seas, nor into rivers, nor into vessels. But one may slaughter into a pool of water, and onto vessels [when] on a boat. We do not slaughter into a pit at all, but one makes a pit within his house so that the blood will go into it. But in the marketplace, one may not do as such so as to not imitate the heretics.",
+ "One who slaughters for the sake of an olah [offering that is entirely burnt], for the sake of other sacrifices, for the sake of an asham talui [an offering brought to expiate a sin one is unsure of committing], for the sake of the pesach sacrifice, or for the sake of a thanksgiving offering, his slaughtering is invalid; and Rabbi Shimon validates. [If] two hold the knife and slaughter, one for the sake of one of these and one for the sake of something fitting, his slaughter is unfit. One who slaughters for the sake of a sin offering, for the sake of a guilt offering, for the sake of a first born offering, for the sake of a tithe, for the sake of temurah [an animal which has been substituted, wrongfully, for a sacrificial animal, and which thereby becomes sanctified for certain purposes], his slaughter is permitted. This is the general principle: anything which is vowed or voluntarily offered, when one slaughters for its sake, it is prohibited. For that which is neither vowed or voluntarily offered, when one slaughters for its sake, it is permitted."
+ ],
+ [
+ "These are the terefot [an animal with a mortal condition such that it would die within one year] for cattle: a puncture of the esophagus; and a split [width-wise] of the trachea; the membrane of the brain is perforated; the heart chamber is perforated; the spine is broken and its cord is split; the liver is removed and none of it remains; the lung which is punctured or missing - Rabbi Shimon says, \"Only when it is punctured through the bronchial tubes;\" the stomach was pierced; the abomasum was pierced; the gall-bladder was pierced; the small intestines were pierced; the inner rumen was pierced; or if the majority of the outer was ripped - Rabbi Yehuda says, \"[For] the larger [animals] a tefach [a specific unit of length] and for the smaller [animals] the majority; the omasum or reticulum which were punctured to the outside; fallen from a roof; most of its ribs were fractured; or clawed by a wolf. Rabbi Yehuda says, \"Clawed by a wolf for small cattle and clawed by a lion for large cattle. Clawed by a hawk for a small bird and clawed by a large bird for a large bird.\" This is the general rule: anything where something similar to it cannot live is a terefah.",
+ "These are permitted for cattle: the trachea was perforated or if it was split [lengthwise]. Up to how much can it lack? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says, \"Up to an Italian issar [a specific unit of money].\" The skull is chipped but the membrane of the brain is not perforated; the heart is perforated but not through to its chamber; the spine is broken but its cord is not split; the liver is removed but an olive's size of it remains; the omasum and reticulum which we perforated from this to the other; the spleen is removed; the kidneys are removed; the lower jaw is removed; its womb is removed; or dried up [lungs] at the hands of Heaven. The flayed [animal]: Rabbi Meir declares valid, but the Sages invalidate.",
+ "These are the terefot for a bird: a puncture of the esophagus; a split [width-wise] of the trachea; a weasel hit it on the head in a place that makes it a terefah; the gizzard is perforated; the small intestines are perforated; it fell into a fire and its intestines were scorched - if they are green, they are invalid, if they are red they are valid; or [if it was] trampled on, torn on a wall, or cattle ran over it and it jerks and then waits twenty-four hours and one slaughtered it, it is valid.",
+ "The following are permitted for a bird: the trachea was perforated or it was split [length-wise]; a weasel hit it on its head in a place which does not make it a terefah; the crop was perforated - Rebbi says, \"Even if it was removed;\" its insides came out but they were not perforated; its wing was broken; its leg was broken; or its wing feathers were plucked. Rabbi Yehuda says, \"If the down was removed, it is invalid.\"",
+ "Congestion of blood, one that inhaled smoke, one that became sick from cold; one that ate oleander; or one that ate chicken feces or drank poor water is fit. [If] it ate poison or a snake bit it, it is permissible in regards to [the category of] terefah, and forbidden in regards [to the category of] endangering lives.",
+ "The signs of cattle and a wild animal are stated from the Torah, but the signs of a bird are not stated. But the Sages said, \"Any bird which attacks [prey] is prohibited. Any that has an extra digit, a crop, and gizzard that peels [away] is permitted.\" Rabbi Eliezer ben Rebbi Tzadok says, \"Every bird which parts its toes is prohibited.\"",
+ "And for locusts, any which has four legs, four wings, and jointed legs, and its wings cover the majority of it [is permitted]. Rabbi Yose says, \"And [if] its name is [the] 'Arbeh.'\" And for fish, any which has a fin and scales. Rabbi Yehuda says, \"Two scales and one fin.\" These are they [types] of scales: those attached to it. And fins: the ones by which it swims. "
+ ],
+ [
+ "[If] an animal has difficulty giving birth, and the fetus protruded its fore-leg and withdrew it, [the fetus] is permitted for eating. [If] it protruded its head, even if it withdrew it, it is as if it were born. A cut piece from the fetus in its womb is permitted for eating; from the spleen or kidney [of the mother] is forbidden for eating. This is the general rule is: anything which is part of its [the animal giving birth’s] body is forbidden. That which is not of its body is permitted.",
+ "[For] an animal pregnant with its firstborn which is having difficulty giving birth, one [may] cut limb by limb [from the fetus] and cast it to the dogs. [If] the majority of it protruded, it must be buried and [the mother] is exempt from [laws regarding] the firstborn. ",
+ "An animal whose fetus died within its womb and the shepherd placed his hand inside and touched it, whether it is an impure animal or pure animal, he is pure. Rabbi Yose Ha'Gelilli says, “For an impure [animal], he is impure, but for a pure [animal], he is pure.” A woman whose fetus died in her womb and the midwife placed her hand inside and touched it, the midwife is impure with a seven day impurity, and the mother is pure until the fetus comes out.",
+ "“[For] an animal that has difficulty giving birth, and the fetus protruded its fore-leg, someone cut it off, and afterward slaughtered its mother, the flesh [removed from the fetus] is pure. [If] someone slaughtered its mother and afterwards cut [the fore-leg off], the flesh [has the impurity level] of touching a nevelah [an improperly slaughtered animal of a permitted species],” in the words of Rabbi Meir. The Sages say, \"[The impurity level] of touching a slaughtered terefah [an animal with a mortal condition such that it would die within one year]. Just as we find for a terefah that its slaughtering purifies it, so too the slaughtering of an animal purifies the [protruding] limb.” Rabbi Meir said to them, \"Not so, for if the slaughtering of a terefah renders clean that which is part of its body, does it render clean the limb which is not of its body?” From where is it derived for a terefah that its slaughtering purifies it? An unfit animal is forbidden for eating [and] so too a terefah is forbidden for eating. Just as an impure animal is not purified by its slaughter, so should a terefah not be purified by its slaughter? No. If you say [so] about an unfit animal which did not have a moment of validity, would you say [as such] about a terefah which had a time of validity? Take away what [the argument] you brought. Behold, if it is born as a terefah from the womb, from where would we derive this? [Rather], no. If you say about an unclean animal that for its kind is not [affected] by slaughtering, would you say it for a terefah whose kind [affecting] by slaughtering? Born alive at eight [months], its slaughtering does not render it pure, for its kind is not [affected] by slaughtering.",
+ "\"One who slaughtered an animal and found within it an eight month old fetus - alive or dead, or a nine month old dead fetus, one tears it up so the blood comes out. If one found a nine month old live fetus, it requires slaughtering, and is under the obligation of it and its offspring [the prohibition against killing an animal and its child on the same day],\" in the words of Rabbi Meir. But the Sages say, \"The slaughtering of the mother permits it [the fetus without slaughter].\" Rabbi Shimon Shazuri says, \"Even [if the fetus reached the age of] eight years and is plowing in the field, the slaughtering of its mother permits it.\" [If] one ripped apart [an animal] and found in it a nine-month old [fetus], it requires slaughter, for its mother was not slaughtered.",
+ "An animal whose legs were cut off from the knee and below is permitted; from the knee and above it is prohibited, and so too when the junction of the sinews is interrupted. [If] the bone was broken, if most of the flesh is extant, its slaughter permits it. But if not, its slaughter does not permit.",
+ "[If] one slaughtered an animal and found a placenta inside of it, a hearty person may eat it. And it does not contract impurity as food, nor as the impurity of nevelot. [If] one regarded it [as edible], it contracts impurity as food, but not the impurity of nevelot. A placenta, some of which protruded, is forbidden to be eaten. It [the protruding placenta] is the sign of an offspring for a woman and the sign of an offspring for an animal. [For] an animal which has never given birth and miscarried a placenta, [the placenta] is cast to the dogs. For mukdashim [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption] it is buried. And we do not bury it at a cross roads and we do not hang it up in a tree due [to the prohibition against following] the ways of the Amorites."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Oto ve'et beno [the prohibition against killing an animal and its offspring on the same day] applies whether in the land [of Israel] or outside the land, during the time of the Temple and not during the time of the Temple, with chulin [animals or food permitted for general consumption] or mukdashim [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption]. How [does this work]? One who slaughters it and its offspring as chulin outside [of the Temple courtyard], both [slaughters] are valid, and the [slaughterer of the] second receives forty lashes. [As] kodashim [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption] outside [of the Temple courtyard]: the first [slaughterer] is liable for karet [Divinely imposed punishment consisting in severance from Heaven and/or the Jewish people], both [of the animals] are invalid, and both [slaughterers] receive forty lashes. [As] kodashim inside [the Temple courtyard]: the first [animal] is fit and [the first slaughterer] exempt, and the second [slaughterer] receives forty lashes and [the slaughter] is unfit.",
+ "[As] chulin and [then] kodashim outside: the first is fit and is exempt, and the second receives forty and is unfit. kodashim and [then] chulin outside: the first is liable for karet and is unfit, the second is fit. Chulin and kodashim inside: both are invalid and the second receives forty. Kodashim and chulin inside: the first is fit and is exempt, and the second receives forty and is unfit. Chulin outside and inside: the first is fit and is exempt, and the second receives forty and is unfit. Kodashim outside and inside: the first is liable for karet, both are unfit, and both receive forty. Chulin inside and outside: the first is unfit and exempt, and the second receives forty and is fit. Kodashim inside and outside: the first is fit and exempt, and the second receives forty and is unfit.",
+ "One who slaughters [as part of oto ve'et beno] and it is found terefah [an animal with a mortal condition such that it would die within one year], one who slaughters for idolatry, one who slaughters the red heifer, or a an ox which is to be stoned [because it killed a person], or an eglah arufah [a calf whose neck is broken by elders of the closest town to atone for an unsolved murder], Rabbi Shimon exempts and the Sages obligate. One who slaughters [as part of oto ve'et beno] and it becomes a nevelah [an improperly slaughtered animal of a permitted species] by his hand, one who [kills by] stabbing, one who tears off [the trachea or esophagus] is exempt from [violation of] oto ve'et beno. Two who purchased an animal and its offspring, whoever purchased first slaughters first. If the second went ahead, he is gains the right. One who slaughtered a cow and after that its two offspring, he receives eighty [lashes]. One who slaughtered its two offspring and after that slaughtered it, receives forty. One who slaughtered it and its grand daughter, and after its daughter, receives forty. Sumkhus says, in the name of Rabbi Meir, \"He receives eighty.\" At four periods during the year one who sells an animal to his fellow needs to inform him [either], \"Its mother I sold for slaughter,\" [or], \"Its offspring I sold for slaughter.\" These are them: the eve of Shemini Atseret, the eve of the first day of Pesach, the eve of Shavuot, and the eve of Rosh Hashanah. And in the words of Rabbi Yose HaGelili, even the eve of Yom Kippur in the Galilee. Said Rabbi Yehudah, \"When? At a time when [the seller] doesn't have a gap [between the sales]. But if he has a gap, he does not need to inform him [the buyer].\" And Rabbi Yehudah agrees when one sells the mother to a groom and the offspring to the bride that one needs to inform him, since it is known that both will slaughter on one day. ",
+ "During these four periods we force the butcher to slaughter against his will. Even an ox worth one thousand dinarim [a specific unit of money], and he only has a buyer for one dinar, we force him to slaughter. Therefore, if it dies, the death [is a monetary loss] for the purchaser. But for the other days of the year, this is not so, and therefore if it dies, the death [is a monetary loss] for the seller.",
+ "The one day spoken about for oto ve'et beno, the day follows after the night. This Shimon ben Zoma expounded, \"It says in the story of Creation,'One day' (Genesis 1:5), and it says for oto ve'et beno, 'One day' (Leviticus 22:28). Just as for the 'one day' mentioned in the story of Creation the day follows after the night, so too for the 'one day' mentioned in oto ve'et beno the day follows after the night."
+ ],
+ [
+ "[The law of] covering the blood [after the slaughter of fowl or wild animals] applies in the land [of Israel] and outside of the land, during the time of the Temple and not during the time of the Temple, for chulin [animals or food permitted for general consumption] but not for mukdashim [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption]. It applies for wild animals and fowl, whether in possession or not in possession. And it applies to a koi [an animal whose domesticated status is ambiguous], since it is in doubt. And we do not slaughter it on a holiday. And if one did slaughter it, we do not cover its blood.",
+ "One who slaughters and it is found to be a terefah [an animal with a mortal condition such that it would die within a year], one who slaughters for idolatry, one who slaughters chulin inside [the Temple courtyard] or kodashim [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption] outside [of the Temple courtyard], or a wild animal or bird which was stoned [for killing a person by goring or similar means, which is forbidden from consumption even if slaughtered before the stoning], Rabbi Meir obligates [the covering of the blood], and the Sages exempt. One who slaughters and it became a nevelah [an improperly slaughtered animal of a permitted species] by his hand, one who [kills by] stabbing, and one who tears off [the trachea or esophagus] is exempt from having to cover.",
+ "A deaf-mute, a shoteh [a person who exhibits signs which demonstrate mental deficiency], or a minor who slaughtered and others watched them, are obligated to cover. [If one of them slaughtered] among themselves, he is exempt [from having to] cover. So too in the matter of oto ve'et beno [the prohibition against killing an animal and its offspring on the same day], where they slaughtered and others watched them, it is forbidden to slaughter [the mother or the offspring] after them. Among themselves, Rabbi Meir permits slaughtering after them, but the Sages prohibit. But they agree that if one slaughtered, one does not receive forty [lashes].",
+ "[If one] killed one hundred wild animals in one place, [one may use] one covering for all of them; one hundred fowl in one place, [one may use] one covering for all of them; a wild animal and a bird in one place, [one may use] one covering for all of them. Rabbi Yehuda says, \"[If] one slaughtered a wild animal, he covers it [the blood], and after slaughters the fowl.\" [If] one slaughtered a wild animal and didn't cover and another saw him, [the other] is obligated to cover. [If] one covered it and it became uncovered, he is exempt from covering [again]. If the wind covered it, one is [still] obligated to cover. ",
+ "Blood which was mixed with water, if it has the appearance of blood, one is obligated to cover [it]. If it was mixed with wine, we view it [the wine] as if it were water. If it was mixed with the blood of a domesticated animal or the blood of a wild animal, we view it as if it [the second blood] were water. Rabbi Yehuda says, \"Blood cannot neutralize blood.\"",
+ "Blood which squirted out and is on the knife one is obligated to cover. Said Rabbi Yehuda, \"When [is this the case]? At a time when there is no blood but that. But when there is blood which is not that, he is exempt from covering [the blood on the knife].\"",
+ "With what may we cover and with what may we not cover? We cover with fine manure, with fine sand, with plaster, with clay, and with brick or with sealing clay that was crushed. But we may not cover with bulky manure, nor bulky sand, nor brick or sealing clay which was not crushed. And one may not turn a vessel over on it. A general principle said [by] Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, \"A thing in which plants grow, we may cover with it. And in which plants do not grow, we do not cover with it.\""
+ ],
+ [
+ "[The prohibition against eating] the sciatic nerve applies in the land [of Israel] and outside of the land, during the time of the Temple and not during the time of the Temple, for chulin [animals or food permitted for general consumption] and for mukdashim [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption]. And it applies to domesticated and wild animals, for the right thigh and the left thigh. But it does not apply to a bird since it does not have a spoon [shaped hip]. And it applies to a fetus. Rabbi Yehuda says, \"It does not apply for a fetus. And its chelev [fats around the stomach, intestines, and kidneys of some animals which are forbidden for eating] is permissible.\" \"And the butchers are not believed regarding [the removal] of the sciatic nerve,\" in the words of Rabbi Meir. But the Sages say, \"They are believed about it and about chelev.\"",
+ "A person [may] send a thigh to a non-Jew with the sciatic nerve inside of it, since its location is recognized. One who removes the sciatic nerve needs to remove all of it. Rabbi Yehuda says, \"In order to fulfill the commandment of removal.\"",
+ "One who eats an olive-sized [volume] from the sciatic nerve receives forty [lashes]. [If] he ate from it but it did not have an olive-sized [volume], he is liable. [If] he ate from this one an olive size and from this an olive size, he receives eighty [lashes]. Rabbi Yehuda says, \"He only receives forty.\" ",
+ "A thigh in which the sciatic nerve was cooked, if it has [enough] to give flavor [to the thigh], this [thigh] is forbidden. How do we measure it? Like meat [cooked] with a turnip.",
+ "A sciatic nerve that was cooked with other nerves, at a time when one [still] recognizes it, [the standard for forbidding] is when it gives flavor. If [it is] not [recognized], all of it is forbidden. And [in] broth, when it gives flavor. And so too with a piece of a nevelah [an improperly slaughtered animal of a permitted species], and so too with a piece of prohibited fish which was cooked with [other] pieces: at a time when one recognized them, [the standard] is when it gives flavor; and if [it is] not [recognized], they are all forbidden. And for the broth [the standard] is when it gives flavor. ",
+ "[The prohibition against eating the sciatic nerve] applies for permitted [animals] but does not apply for prohibited ones. Rabbi Yehuda says, \"Even for prohibited ones.\" Said Rabbi Yehuda,\"For from the [time of] the sons of Ya'akov the sciatic nerve was forbidden, and prohibited animals were still permitted to them.\" They said to him, \"[The prohibition] was stated at Sinai, but it was written [about] in its place.\""
+ ],
+ [
+ "All meat is forbidden to cook with milk, except for the meat of fish and locusts. And it is forbidden to place it with cheese on the table, except for the meat of fish and locusts. One who vows [to abstain] from meat, is permitted to [eat] fish and locusts. \"A bird may go on with cheese on the table, but is not eaten,\" in the words of Beit Shammai. And Beit Hillel says, \"It does not go and it is not eaten.\" Said Rabbi Yose, \"This is [one] of the lenient rulings of Beit Shammai and stringent rulings of Beit Hillel.\" About which table were they speaking? About a table on which one eats. But for a table where one sets dishes on it, one puts this next to this and does not worry.",
+ "A person may bundle meat and cheese in one napkin, a long as they do not touch one another. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says, \"Two lodgers [may] eat on one table - this one [eating meat] and this one cheese, and we are not troubled.\"",
+ "A drop of milk which fell on a piece [of meat], if there is enough of it to give flavor into that piece, it is forbidden. [If] one stirred the pot, if there is enough of it to give flavor to the [contents] of that pot, it is forbidden. The udder: one tears it open and removes its milk. [If] one did not tear it, one does not transgress through it. The heart: one tears it and removes its blood. [If] one did not tear it, one does not transgress through it. One who places a bird with cheese on the table does not transgress on a negative precept.",
+ "[A mixture of] the meat of a permitted animal with the milk of a permitted animal is forbidden to cook and forbidden from benefit. [A mixture of] the meat of a permitted animal with the milk of a prohibited animal, [or] [a mixture] of the meat of a prohibited animal with the milk of a permitted animal is permissible to cook and permissible for benefit. Rabbi Akiva says, \"Wild animals and birds are not [forbidden in mixtures with milk] from the Torah, as it says, 'You may not cook a kid in its mother's milk,' three times. It exempts the wild animal, the bird, and the prohibited domesticated animal.\" Rabbi Yose HaGelili says, \"It is stated, 'You may not eat any nevelah [an improperly slaughtered animal of a permitted species],' (Deuteronomy 14:21) and it is stated, 'You may not cook a kid in its mother's milk,' (Ibid.). That which [may become] forbidden as nevelah is forbidden to cook with milk. A bird, which [may become] forbidden as a nevelah, one might think that it should be forbidden to cook with milk, [but] the Torah says, \"In its mother's milk.\" This excludes a bird, which does not have mother's milk.",
+ "[Milk in] the stomach of [an animal slaughtered] by a non-Jew and of a nevelah is forbidden. One who curdles [milk] in the skin of the stomach of a valid animal, if it [the stomach] has [a sufficient amount] to give flavor, it [the milk] is forbidden. A valid animal which nursed from a terefah [an animal with a mortal condition such that it would die within one year], [the milk in] its stomach is forbidden. A terefah which nursed from a valid animal, [the milk in] its stomach is permitted since it is collected in its insides.",
+ "The stringency of chelev [fats around the stomach, intestines, and kidneys of some animals which are forbidden for eating] over blood and the stringency of blood over chelev: the stringency of chelev is that one may commit me'ilah [misuse of consecrated property] with it, and one is liable for it [under the laws] of piggul [a sacrifice that becomes unfit, due to the intention of the officiating priest, while offering it, to consume it after its permitted time], notar [a sacrifice that becomes unfit, due to being left unconsumed until after the time limit for its consumption], and impurity, which is not the case with blood. The stringency of blood is that [the prohibition of eating] blood applies to a domesticated animal, a wild animal, and a bird, whether permitted or prohibited, while [the prohibition of eating] chelev only applies to permitted, domesticated animals."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The hide, the juice, the sediment, the offal, the bones, the sinews, the horns, and the hooves combine [to become the minimum size] to render food impure, but not to impart nevelah [an improperly slaughtered animal of a permitted species] impurity. Similarly, one who slaughters an unclean animal for a non-Jew and it is [still] kicking, it renders food impure. But it does not impart nevelah impurity until it dies or its head is cut off. [The Torah] increased those which render food impure over the amount it increased those which impart nevelah impurity. Rabbi Yehuda says, \"Offal which combines, if it has an olive's volume in one place, one is liable for it [for nevelah impurity].\"",
+ "[For] these their skin is like their flesh [in regards to impurity]: the skin of a person and the skin of a domestic pig. Rabbi Yose says, \"Even the skin of a wild pig.\" And the skin of the hump of a soft camel, the skin of the head of a soft calf, the skin of the hooves, the skin of the genitals, the skin of the fetus, the skin under the tail, and the skin of the gecko, the crocodile, the lizard, and the sand-lizard [four of the eight types of sherets, small animals, such as insects, reptiles, or rodents, which move by scurrying, creeping, slithering, etc., the vast majority of which are prohibited for consumption]. Rabbi Yehuda says, \"The lizard is like a weasel.\" And all of them which one dressed, or one trampled on for the sake of dressing, are pure, except for the skin of a person. Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri says, \"The eight sheratsim have skin [not like their flesh].\"",
+ "[If] one flays a domesticated animal or a wild animal -whether permitted [to eat] or prohibited, small or large - to [use as a] cover , [until] enough to grip [is flayed, it is regarded as connected to the body]. For a waterskin, until one flays the breast. [If] one flays from the limbs, it is all [considered] connected [for matters] of impurity, becoming impure, and imparting impurity. The skin which is on the neck, Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri says, \"It is not connected.\" But the Sages say, \"It is connected, until one flays all of it.\" ",
+ "[For] skin which has on it an olive's volume of flesh, one who touches some fluff coming out from it, or a hair opposite it is impure. \"If it had two half-olive's volume [pieces] on it, it causes impurity through carrying but not touched,\" in the words of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiva says, \"Neither through carrying nor through touching.\" But Rabbi Akiva agrees for two half olive's volume [pieces] where one places a wood chip under them and removes them, that the person is impure. So for what [reason] did Rabbi Akiva declare pure [for the case] of skin? Because the skin renders them void.",
+ "The thigh-bone of a corpse or thigh-bone of mukdashim [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption], one who touches them, whether stopped up or pierced, is impure. The thigh-bone of a nevelah or the thigh-bone of a sherets one who touches them when they are stopped up is pure. [If] they are are pierced at all, they render impure through touch. From where [do we learn they render impure] even through carrying? The Scripture says, \"The one who touches,\" (Leviticus 11:24), and, \"The one who carries,\" (Leviticus 11:25). That which comes under the regime of touching [impurity] comes under the regime of carrying [impurity]. If it does not come under the regime of touching, it does not come under the regime of carrying.",
+ "The developed egg of a sherets is pure. If it is pierced at all, it is impure. A mouse which is half flesh and half dirt, one who touches the flesh is impure; the dirt, [the person] is pure. Rabbi Yehuda says, \"Even one who touches the dirt which is opposite the flesh is impure.\" ",
+ "The limb and the flesh which are loosely connected to an animal impart food impurity in their place, and require being made fit [to contract impurity]. \"[If] the animal was slaughtered, it is made fit through its blood,\" in the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Shimon says, \"[The blood] does not make them fit.\" If the animal died, the meat requires being made fit. \"A limb renders impure due to [the regime of] 'a limb from a a living animal,' but does not render impure due to the limb of a nevelah,\" in the words of Rabbi Meir. But Rabbi Shimon declares pure.",
+ "A limb and flesh which are loosely connected to a person are pure. [If] the person died, the flesh is pure. \"A limb renders impure due to 'a limb from a living animal,' but does not render impure due to the limb from a corpse,\" in the words of Rabbi Meir. But Rabbi Shimon declares pure."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The shoulder, the cheeks, and the stomach [which must be given as gifts to the kohen [member of priestly caste, subgroup of tribe of Levi, uniquely responsible for maintaining and carrying out the sacrificial services in the Temple]] apply in the land [of Israel] and outside of the land, at the time of Temple and not at the time of the Temple, for chulin [produce or food permitted for general consumption], but not for mukdashim [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption]. For it would have been by a fortiori argument: just a with chulin which are not obligated in [gifts of the] breast and thigh, for kodashim [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption] should they not have a rule of the gifts [of the shoulder, cheeks and stomach]? [So] the Scripture says, \"I have given them to Aharon the Kohen, and his sons as a statute forever,\" (Leviticus 7:34). It only [has an obligation] for what is stated in the passage.",
+ "All kodashim for whom a fixed wound precedes their sanctification, and they were redeemed, are liable as a first-born [to be sanctified as such] and for the gifts. And they emerge as chulin [for purposes of] being sheared and being worked. And their offspring and their milk are permitted after their redemption, and one who slaughters them outside [the Temple courtyard] is exempt. And one may not perform temurah [an animal which has been substituted, wrongfully, for a sacrificial animal, and which thereby becomes sanctified for certain purposes] with them, and if they died they may be redeemed, aside from the first born and the tithe. All for whom their sanctification precedes their blemish, or a passing blemish [precedes] their sanctification, and after that a permanent blemish occurs in them and they are redeemed, are exempt from [liability as a first-born] and from the gifts. And they do not emerge as chulin [for purposes of] being sheared and being worked. And their offspring and their milk are forbidden after their redemption. And one who slaughters them outside is liable, and one uses [them for] temurah. And if they died, they are buried.",
+ "A first-born [animal] which was mixed-up with one hundred: at a time when one hundred slaughter all of them, it exempts them all. [If] one slaughters all of them, one is exempt for him. One who slaughters for a kohen or for a non-Jew, is exempt from the gifts. One who partners with them, needs to mark them [the animals]. And if he said [in a sale from a kohen], \"Except for the gifts,\" he is exempt from the gifts. [If] he said, \"Sell me the innards of a cow,\" and within them are the gifts, he gives them to the kohen and he does not deduct for him from the price. If he purchased from him by weight, he gives them to the kohen and deducts it from the price.",
+ "A non-Jew who converted and had a cow: if it was slaughtered when he had not yet converted, it is exempt [from the gifts]. [If it was slaughtered] from when he converted, it is obligated. [If] it is in doubt, it is exempt, for one who extracts from his fellow, upon his is the [burden] of proof. Which is the shoulder? From the joint until the shoulder. And that is [the same] for a nazir [a person who swears abstention from all grape products like wine, from cutting his hair, and avoidance of corpse impurity]. And opposite it on the leg is the thigh. Rabbi Yehuda says, \"The thigh is from the joint until the calf of the leg.\" Which is the cheek? From the joint of the jaw until the protruding cartilage of the trachea."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The [law of giving] the first sheared fleece applies in the land [of Israel] and outside of the land, at the time of the Temple and not at the time of the Temple, for chulin [produce or food permitted for general consumption], but not for mukdashim [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption]. The stringency of [giving gifts of] the shoulder, the cheeks, and the stomach over the first sheared fleece is that the shoulder, the cheeks and the stomach apply for cattle and for flock, for many or a for a few. But the first sheared fleece only applies for sheep, and only applies for many.",
+ "And how many is \"many?\" Beit Shammai says, \"Two sheep, as it says, 'A man will raise a calf and two sheep,' (Isaiah 7:21).\" And Beit Hillel says, \"Five, as it says, 'Five prepared sheep,' (2 Samuel 25:18).\" Rabbi Dosa ben Hurkinos says, \"Five sheep, [from which] their fleece is a maneh [a specific unit of weight] and a half, are obligated in the first shearing.\" But the Sages say, \"Five sheep of any amount [of fleece].\" And how much do we give to him [the kohen]? The weight of five sela'im [a specific unit of weight] in Judah - which are ten sela'im in the Galilee - whitened and not dirty, in order to make from it a small garment. As it says, \"give to him,\" (Deuteronomy 18:4), that there will be [enough] in it for a gift [the words for \"gift\" and \"give\" coming from the same root]. [If] one did not succeed to give it to him by the time one colored it, one is exempt. If one whitened it and did not color it, one is obligated. One who purchases the fleece of a sheep of a non-Jews is exempt from [the law] of first sheared fleece. One who purchases the shearing of a sheep of his fellow, if [the seller] keeps some, the seller is obligated [for the first shearing]. [If the seller] did not keep some, the buyer is obligated. [If] one had two types, gray and white, and sold to another gray but not white [fleece], [or] male but not female, this one gives for himself and this one gives for himself."
+ ],
+ [
+ "[The law of] sending [away the mother bird from] the nest [before taking the eggs] applies in the land [of Israel] and outside of the land, at the time of the Temple and not during the time of the Temple, for chulin [produce or food permitted for general consumption] but not for for mukdashim [animals or food which are holy and not available for general consumption]. The stringency of [the law] of covering the blood over sending [the mother bird from] the nest is that covering the blood applies for wild animals and birds, for those in possession and not in possession. And sending [the mother bird from] the nest only applies for a bird, and only applies when it is not in possession. Which one is not in possession? For example, geese and chickens which nested in the field. But if they nested in the house, and also Herodian doves, one is exempt from sending them.",
+ "A bird prohibited [from eating] is exempt from sending. [If] a prohibited bird is sitting on the eggs of a permitted bird, or a permitted one is sitting on the eggs of a prohibited bird, it is exempt from sending. The male partridge [which nests]: Rabbi Eliezer obligates [sending it away], but the Sages exempt.",
+ "[If] it was flying, at the time when its wings touch the nest, one is obligated to send it away. [If] its wings do not touch the nest, one is exempt from sending. If there is only one young bird or one egg, one is obligated to send, as it says, \"Nest,\" (Deuteronomy 22:6) in any case. [If] there were young birds flying or damaged eggs, one is exempt from sending, as it says, \"And the mother is sitting on the young birds or on the eggs,\" (Deuteronomy 22:6). Just as young birds are viable, so too [the] eggs [must be] viable [to fall under the law], excluding damages ones. Just as eggs need their mother, so too the young birds [must] need their mother, which excludes ones which fly. If one sent her away and she returned, sent her away and she returned - even four or five times - one is obligated [to send her away again], as it says, \"Send you shall send,\" (Deuternomy 22:7). [If] one said, \"Here I take the mother and send off the offspring,\" one is [still] required to send, as it says, \"Send you shall send the mother,\" (Deuteronomy 22:7). [If] one took the offspring and then returned them to the nest, and after the mother returned to them, one is exempt from sending. ",
+ "One who took a mother with the offspring, Rabbi Yehuda says, \"He is lashed and does not send [the mother away].\" But the Sages say, \"He sends away and is not lashed.\" This is the general rule: any negative commandment that has a proactive positive [part], one is not lashed for it.",
+ "A person may not take a mother with its offspring, even to purify the leper. And just as a light commandment that is like an issar [a specific, small, unit of money], the Torah said [about it], \"In order to be good for you and you will lengthen your days,\" (Deuteronomy 22:7), a fortiori for weighty commandments which are in the Torah."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de].json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de].json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..38e803817e8046e97ab48253486eea236b4bb345
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de].json
@@ -0,0 +1,124 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Chullin",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001042448/NLI",
+ "versionTitle": "Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de]",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 0.25,
+ "license": "Public Domain",
+ "digitizedBySefaria": true,
+ "actualLanguage": "de",
+ "languageFamilyName": "german",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה חולין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "JEDER DARF SCHLACHTEN UND SEINE SCHLACHTUNG IST GÜLTIG, AUSGENOMMEN EIN TAUBER, EIN BLÖDER UND EIN MINDERJÄHRIGER, WEIL SIE DIE SCHLACHTUNG VERDERBEIN KÖNNTEN. HABEN SIE ALLE GESCHLACHTET UND ANDERE SIE BEOBACHTET, SO IST IHRE SCHLACHTUNG GÜLTIG. DAS VON EINEM NICHTJUDEN GESCHLACHTETE IST AAS UND DURCH DAS TRAGEN VERUNREINIGEND. HAT JEMAND NACHTS GESCHLACHTET, ODER HAT EIN BLINDER GESCHLACHTET, SO IST DIE SCHLACHTUNG GÜLTIG. HAT MAN AM ŠABBATH ODER AM VERSÖHNUNGSTAGE GESCHLACHTET, SO IST, OBGLEICH MAN DAS LEBEN VERWIRKT HAT, DIE SCHLACHTUNG GÜLTIG.",
+ "HAT MAN MIT EINER HANDSICHEL, EINEM STEINE ODER EINEM ROHR GESCHLACHTET, SO IST DIE SCHLACHTUNG GÜLTIG. ES DÜRFEN ALLE SCHLACHTEN, JEDERZEIT SCHLACHTEN UND MIT ALLEM SCHLACHTEN, AUSGENOMMEN DIE SENSE, DIE SÄGE, DIE ZÄHNEUND DER FINGERNAGEL, WEIL DIESE NUR WÜRGEN. HAT MAN MIT EINER SENSE HINFAHRENDGESCHLACHTET, SO IST ES NACH DER SCHULE ŠAMMAJS UNGÜLTIG UND NACH DER SCHULE HILLELS GÜLTIG. SIND DIE ZÄHNE GEGLÄTTET, SO GLEICIIT SIE EINEM MESSER.",
+ "HAT MAN DEN RINGSO DURCHSCHNITTEN, DASS NUR EIN FADEN BREITUM DEN GANZEN ZURÜCKBLEIBT, SO IST DIE SCHLACHTUNG GÜLTIG. R. JOSE B. R. JEHUDA SAGT, EIN FADEN BREIT UM DIE GRÖSSERE HÄLFTE.",
+ "SCHLACHTET MAN VON DER SEITE, SO IST DIE SCHLACHTUNG GÜLTIG ; KNEIFT MAN VON DER SEITE DEN KOPF AB, SO ISTDAS ABKNEIFEN UNGÜLTIG. SCHLACHTET MAN VOM GENICK AUS, SO IST DIE SCHLACHTUNG UNGÜLTIG; KNEIFT MAN VOM GENICK AUS DEN KOPF AB, SO IST DAS ABKNEIFEN GÜLTIG. SCHLACHTET MAN VOM HALSE AUS, SO IST DIE SCHLACHTUNG GÜLTIG ; KNEIFT MAN VOM HALSE AUS DEN KOPF AB, SO IST DAS ABKNEIFEN UNGÜLTIG. DER GANZE NACKENIST FÜR DAS ABKNEIFEN GEEIGNET UND DER GANZE HALS IST FÜR DIE SCHLACHTUNG GEEIGNET. SOMIT IST DAS, WAS BEIM SCHLACHTEN GÜLTIG IST, BEIM ABKNEIFEN UNGÜLTIG, UND WAS BEIM ABKNEIFEN GÜLTIG IST, BEIM SCHLACHTEN UNGÜLTIG.",
+ "WAS BEI TURTELTAUBEN TAUGLICH IST, IST BEI JUNGEN TAUBEN UNTAUGLICH, UND WAS BEI JUNGEN TAUBEN TAUGLICH IST, IST BEI TURTELTAUBEN UNTAUGLICH. BEI BEGINN DER GLANZFÄRBUNGSIND DIE EINEN UND DIE ANDEREN UNTAUGLICH.",
+ "WAS BEI DER KUHTAUGLICH IST, IST BEIM KALBEUNTAUGLICH, UND WAS BEIM KALBE TAUGLICH IST, IST BEI DER KUH UNTAUGLICH. WAS BEI PRIESTERN TAUGLICH IST, IST BEI LEVITEN UNTAUGLICH, UND WAS BEI LEVITEN TAUGLICH IST, IST BEI PRIESTERN UNTAUGLICH. WAS BEIM TONGEFÄSSE REIN IST, IST BEI ALLEN ANDEREN GEFÄSSEN UNREIN, UND WAS BEI ALLEN ANDEREN GEFÄSSEN REIN IST, IST BEIM TONGEFÄSSE UNREIN. WAS BEI HOLZGERÄTEN REINIST, IST BEI METALLGERÄTEN UNREIN, UND WAS BEI METALEGERÄTEN REIN IST, IST BEI HOLZGERÏTEN UNREIN. WAS BEI BITTEREN MANDELN PFLICHTIGIST, IST BEI SÜSSEN FREI, UND WAS BEI SÜSSEN PFLICHTIG IST, IST BEI BITTEREN FREI.",
+ "DER LAUERWEIN DARF, BEVOR ER GEZOGENHAT, NICHT FÜR DEN ERLÖS DES ZEHNTENGEKAUFT WERDEN, AUCH MACHT ER DAS QUELTBADUNTAUGLICH; NACHDEM ER GEZOGEN HAT, DARF ER FÜR DEN ERLÖS DES ZEHNTEN GEKAUFT WERDEN, AUCH MACHT ERDAS QUELLBAD NICHT UNTAUGLICH. BRÜDER, DIE GESELLSCHAFTERSIND, SIND, WENN SIE ZUM AUFGELDVERPFLICHTET SIND, VOM VIEHZEHNTENFREI, UND WENN SIE ZUM VIEHZEHNTEN VERPFLICHTETSIND, VOM AUFGELD FREI. WO ES EINEN VERKAUFGIBT, GIBT ES KEINE GELDBUSSE, UND WO ES EINE GELDBUSSE GIBT, GIBT ES KEINEN VERKAUF. WENN DIE WEIGERUNGSERKLÄRUNG ERFOLGEINKANN, DANN NICHT DIE ḤALIÇA, UND WENN DIE ḤALIÇA, DANN NICHT DIE WEIGERUNGSERKEÄRUNG. WENN DAS BLASENSTATTFINDET WIRD DER UNTERSCHEIDUNGSSEGEN NICHT GESPROCHEN, UND WENN DER UNTERSCHEIDUNGSSEGEN GESPROCHEN WIRD, FINDET DAS BLASEN NICHT STATT. WENN EIN FESTTAG AUF DEN VORABEND DES ŠABBATHS FÄLLT, SO BLASE MAN UND SPRECHE NICHT DEN UNTERSCHEIDUNGSSEGEN, UND WENNN AUF DEN AUSGANG DES ŠABBATHS, SO SPRECHE MAN DEN UNTERSCHEIDUNGSSEGEN UND BLASE NICHT. DER UNTERSCHEIDUNGSSEGEN LAUTET DANN WIE FOLGT :‘DER ZWISCHEN HEILIG UND HEILIG SCHEIDET’. R. DOSA SAGT : ‘ZWISCHEN STRENGHEILIG UND LEICHTHEILIG’."
+ ],
+ [
+ "WENN MAN EIN HALSORGAN BEIM GEFLÜGEL ODER BEIDE BEIM VIEH DURCHGESCHNITTEN HAT, SO IST DIE SCHLACHTUNG GÜLTIG; DER GRÖSSERE TEIL VON EINEM GLEICHT DEM GANZEN. R. JEHUDA SAGT, NUR WENN MAN DIE ARTERIEN DURCHGESCHNITTEN HAT. WENN DIE HÄLFTE VON EINEM BEIM GEFLÜGEL ODER EINES UND DIE HÄLFTE VOM ANDEREN BEIM VIEH, SO IST DIE SCHLACHTUNG UNGÜLTIG; WENN DEN GRÖSSEREN TEIL VON EINEM BEIM GEFLÜGEL ODER DEN GRÖSSEREN TEIL VON BEIDEN BEIM VIEH, SO IST DIE SCHLACHTUNG GÜLTIG.",
+ "HAT MAN ZWEI KÖPFE MIT EINEM MALE GESCHLACHTET, SO IST DIE SCHLACHTUNG GÜLTIG. HABEN ZWEI DAS MESSER GEHALTEN UND GESCHLACHTET, SELBST EINER OBEN UND DER ANDERE UNTEN, SO IST DIE SCHLACHTUNG GÜLTIG.",
+ "HAT MAN DEN KOPF MIT EINEM HIEBE ABGETRENNT, SO IST ES UNGÜLTIG; HAT MAN BEIM SCHLACHTEN DEN KOPF IN EINEM ZUGE ABGETRENNT, SO IST ES, WENN DAS MESSER EINE HALSLÄNGE HAT, GÜLTIG. HAT MAN BEIM SCHLACHTEN MIT EINEM ZUGE ZWEI KÖPFE ABGETRENNT, SO IST ES, WENN DAS MESSER EINE HALSLÄNGE HAT, GÜLTIG. DIES NUR IN DEM FALLE, WENN MANHIN- UND NICHT HER- ODER HER- UND NICHT HINGEFAHREN IST, WENN MAN ABER HIN- UND HERGEFAHREN IST, SO IST ES, WOMIT ES AUCH IST, SELBST MIT EINEM SCHNITZMESSERCHEN, GÜLTIG. HAT EIN MESSER IM HERABFALLEN GESCHLACHTET, SO IST ES, SELBST WENN ES RICHTIG GESCHLACHTET HAT, UNGÜLTIG, DENN ES HEISST :sollst du schlachten und essen, WAS du SCHLACHTEST, DARFST DU ESSEN. WENN IHM DAS MESSER HERABGEFALLEN IST UND ER ES AUFGEHOBENHAT, ODER IHM EIN KLEIDUNGSSTÜCK HERABGEFALLEN IST UND ER ES AUFGEHOBEN HAT, ODER ER BEIM MESSERSCHLEIFEN SCHWACH GEWORDENUND EIN ANDERER GEKOMMEN IST UND DIE SCHLACHTUNG VOLLENDET HAT, SO IST SIE, WENN ER DIE DAUER EINER SCHLACHTUNG UNTERBROCHEN HAT, UNGÜLTIG. R. ŠIMO͑N SAGT, WENN ER DIE DAUER DER UNTERSUCHUNG UNTERBROCHEN HAT.",
+ "HAT MAN DIE SPEISERÖHRE DURCHGESCHNITTEN UND DIE GURGEL DURCHGERISSEN ODER DIE GURGEL DURCHGERISSEN UND NACHHER DIE SPEISERÖHRE DURCHGESCHNITTEN, ODER EINE DURCHGESCHNITTEN UND GEWARTET, BIS DAS VIEH VERENDET IST, ODER DAS MESSER UNTER DIE ANDERE GESTOSSEN UND SIE DURCHGERISSEN, SO IST ES, WIE R. JEŠEBAB SAGT, AAS, UND WIE R. A͑QIBA SAGT, TOTVERLETZTES. R. JESEBAB SAGTE IM NAMEN R. JEHOŠUA͑S EINE REGEL: ALLES, WAS BEIM SCHLACHTEN UNTAUGLICH WIRD, IST AAS, UND WAS NACH VORSCHRIFT GESCHLACHTET WORDEN, ABER DURCH EINEN ANDEREN UMSTAND UNTAUGLICH IST, IST TOTVERLETZTES. UND R. A͑QIBA PFLICHTETE IHM BEI.",
+ "WENN MAN EIN VIEH, EIN WILD ODER EINEN VOGEL GESCHLACHTET HAT UND AUS IHNEN KEIN BLUT GEKOMMEN IST, SO SIND SIE TAUGLICH; SIE DÜRFEN MIT UNREINEN HÄNDENGEGESSEN WERDEN, WEIL SIE NICHT DURCH BLUT BEFÄHIGT WORDENSIND. R. ŠIMO͑N SAGT, SIE SEIEN DURCH DIE SCHLACHTUNG BEFÄHIGT WORDEN.",
+ "HAT MAN EIN TOTKRANKES GESCHLACHTET, SO MUSS ES, WIE R. ŠIMO͑N B. GAMALIÉL SAGT, MIT EINEM VORDER- UND HINTERFUSS GEZUCKTHABEN. R. ELIE͑ZER SAGT, ES GENÜGE, WENN ES BLUT AUSGESTRÖMT HAT. R. ŠIMO͑N SAGTE: WENN MAN EIN SOLCHES NACHTS GESCHLACHTET HATUND AM FOLGENDEN TAGE DIE FLÄCHENVOLL BLUT FINDET, SO IST ES TAUGLICH, DENN ES HAT BLUT AUSGESTRÖMT; NACH DER ANSICHT R. ELIE͑ZERS. DIE WEISEN SAGEN, NUR WENN ES MIT EINEM VORDER- ODER HINTERFUSSE GEZUCKT ODER MIT DEM SCHWANZE GEWEDELT HAT, GLEICHVIEL OB EIN KLEINVIEH ODER EIN GROSSVIEH. HAT EIN KLEINVIEH DEN VORDERFUSS AUSGESTRECKT UND NLCHTZURÜCKGEZOGEN, SO IST ES UNTAUGLICH, DENN DAS IST NICHTS WEITER ALS EIN ZEICHEN DES VERENDENS. DIES NUR VON DEM FALLE, WENN ES SICH IM ZUSTANDE EINES TOTKRANKEN BEFAND, WAR ES ABER GESUND, SO IST ES AUCH OHNE EINES DIESER LEBENSZEICHEN TAUGLICH.",
+ "HAT MAN FÜR EINEN NICHTJUDEN GESCHLACHTET, SO IST DIE SCHLACHTUNG GÜLTIG, NACH R. ELIE͑ZEA ABER UNGÜLTIG. R. ELIE͑ZER SAGTE: SELBST WENN MAN ES GESCHLACHTET HAT, DAMIT DER NICHTJUDE NUR VOM LEBERLAPPEN ESSE, IST ES UNTAUGLICH, DENN DER NICHTJUDE DENKT GEWÖHNLICH AN SEINEN GÖTZEN. R. JOSE SPRACH: ES IST JA EIN SCHLUSS VOM SCHWEREREN AUF DAS LEICHTERE ZU FOLGERN: WENN MAN SICH IN EINEM FALLE, WO DIE ABSICHTUNTAUGLICH MACHT, BEI DEN OPFERN, NUR NACH DEM DIENSTTUENDENRICHTE, UM WIEVIEL MEHR RICHTE MAN SICH IN EINEM FALLE, WO DIE ABSICHT NICHT UNTAUGLICH MACHT, BEI PROFANEM, NUR NACH DEM SCHLACHTENDEN.",
+ "HAT JEMAND AUF DEN NAMEN VON BERGEN, HÜGELN, SEEN, FLÜSSEN ODER WÜSTENGESCHLACHTET, SO IST SEINE SCHLACHTUNG UNGÜLTIG. HABEN ZWEI DAS MESSER GEHALTEN UND GESCHLACHTET, EINER AUF DEN NAMEN EINES DIESER DINGE UND EINER AUF EINEN ZULÄSSIGEN NAMEN, SO IST DIE SCHLACHTUNG UNGÜLTIG.",
+ "MAN DARF NICHT IN SEEN, FLÜSSE ODER GERÄTE HINEINSCHLACHTEN, WOHL ABER DARF MAN IN EINE WASSERGRUBE HINEINSCHLACHTEN UND AUF EINEM SCHIFFE AUF EIN GERÄT. IN EINE GRUBE HINEIN DARF MAN ÜBERHAUPT NICHT SCHLACHTEN; JEDOCH DARF MAN IN SEINEM HAUSE EINE GRUBE MACHEN, DAMIT DAS BLUT DA HINEINFLIESSE; AUF DER STRASSE TUE MAN MAN DIES NICHT, MAN DIES NICHT, UM NICHT DEN MINÄERN NACHZUAHMEN.",
+ "HAT MANAUF DEN NAMEN EINES BRANDOPFERS, EINES SCHLACHTOPFERS, EINES SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFERS, EINES PESAḤOPFERS ODER EINES DANKOPFERS GESCHLACHTET, SO IST DIE SCHLACHTUNG UNGÜLTIG UND NACH R. ŠIMON GÜLTIG. HABEN ZWEI DAS MESSER GEHALTEN UND GESCHLACHTET, EINER AUF DEN NAMEN EINES VON DIESEN UND EINER AUF EINEN ZULÄSSIGEN NAMEN, SO IST DIE SCHLACHTUNG UNGÜLTIG. HAT MAN AUF DEN NAMEN EINES SÜNDOPFERS, EINES GEWISSHEITS-SCHULDOPFERS, EINES ERSTGEBORENEN, EINES ZEHNTENODER EINES EINGETAUSCHTENGESCHLACHTET, SO IST DIE SCHLACHTUNG GÜLTIG. DIE REGEL HIERBEI IST: WAS MAN AUF DEN NAMEN EINES OPFERS, DAS GELOBT UND GESPENDET WERDEN KANN, GESCHLACHTET HAT, 1ST UNGÜLTIG, UND WAS MAN AUF DEN NAMEN EINES OPFERS, DAS NICHT GELOBT UND GESPENDET WERDEN KANN, GESCHLACHTET HAT, IST GÜLTIG."
+ ],
+ [
+ "FOLGENDE SIND TOTVERLETZUNGEN BEIM VIEH: WENN DIE SPEISERÖHRE DURCHLÖCHERT IST, DIE GURGEL DURCHGERISSEN IST, DIE HIRNHAUT DURCHLÖCHERT IST, DAS HERZ BIS ZUR KAMMER DURCHLÖCHERT IST, DAS RÜCKGRAT GEBROCHEN UND DER MARKFADEN DESSELBEN DURCHGERISSEN IST, DIE LEBER FORT UND NICHTS ZURÜCKGEBLIEBEN IST, DIE LUNGE DURCHLÖCHERT IST ODER DAVON ETWAS FEHLT; R. ŠIM͑ON SAGT, NUR WENN SIE BIS ZUM LUFTRÖHRENRAUME DURCHLÖCHERT IST. WENN DER LABMAGEN DURCHLÖCHERT IST, DIE GALLENBLASE DURCHLÖCHERT IST, DIE DÄRME DURCHLÖCHERT SIND, DER INNERE PANSEN DURCHLÖCHERT ODER DER GRÖSSERE TEIL DES ÄUSSEREN AUFGERISSEN IST; R. JEHUDA SAGT, BEI EINEM GROSSEN VIEH EINE HANDBREITE UND BEI EINEM KLEINEN DER GRÖSSERE TEIL. WENN DER BLÄTTERMAGEN ODER DER NETZMAGEN NACH AUSSEN DURCHLÖCHERT IST, DAS VIEH VOM DACHE ABGESTÜRZT IST, DIE MEISTEN RIPPEN GEBROCHEN SIND, ODER ES VON EINEM WOLFE ANGEPACKT WORDEN IST; R. JEHUDA SAGT, EIN KLEINVIEH VON EINEM WOLFE UND EIN GROSSVIEH VON EINEM LÖWEN. WENN KLEINES GEFLÜGEL VON EINEM HABICHT ODER GROSSES VON EINEM GROSSEN RAUBVOGEL ANGEPACKT WORDEN IST. DIE REGEL HIERBEI IST: ALLES, DESGLEICHEN NICHT LEBENSFÄHIG IST, GILT ALS TOTVERLETZTES.",
+ "FOLGENDES IST BEIM VIEH TAUGLICH: WENN DIE GURGEL DURCHLÖCHERT ODER GESPALTENIST. WIEVIEL DARF FEHLEN? R. ŠIMO͑N B. GAMLIÉL SAGT, BIS ZUR GRÖSSE EINES ITALISCHEN ASSARS. WENN DER SCHÄDEL BESCHÄDIGT, ABER DIE HIRNHAUT NICHT DURCHLÖCHERT IST, DAS HERZ DURCHLÖCHERT IST, ABER NICHT BIS ZUR KAMMER, DAS RÜCKGRAT GEBROCHEN, DER MARKFADEN ABER NICHT DURCHGERISSEN IST, DIE LEBER FORT UND EIN OLIVENGROSSES STÜCK ZURÜCKGEBLIEBEN IST, DER BLÄTTERMAGEN UND DER NETZMAGEN IN EINANDERDURCHLÖCHERT SIND, DIE MILZ FORT IST, DIE NIEREN FORT SIND, DIE UNTERE KINNLADE FORT IST, DIE GEBÄRMUTTER FORT IST, UND WENN ES AUF NATÜRLICHE WEISE MIT DER LUNGENSKLEROSE BEHAFTET IST. DAS HAUTLOSE IST NACH R. MEÍR TAUGLICH UND NACH DEN WEISEN UNTAUGLICH.",
+ "FOLGENDE SIND TOTVERLETZUNGEN BEIM GEFLÜGEL: WENN DIE SPEISERÖHRE DURCHLÖCHERT IST, DIE GURGEL DURCHGERISSEN IST, EIN WIESEL IHM DEN KOPF GEBISSEN HAT AN EINER STELLE, WO ES TOTVERLETZT WIRD, DER MAGEN DURCHLÖCHERT IST ODER DIE DÄRME DURCHLÖCHERT SIND. WENN ES AUF FEUER GEFALLEN UND DAS EINGEWEIDE ANGESENGT WORDEN IST, SO IST ES, WENN ES GELB IST, UNTAUGLICH, UND WENN ROT, TAUGLICH. WENN ES GETRETEN, AN DIE WAND GESCHLAGEN ODER VON EINEM VIEH GESTOSSEN WORDEN IST UND NOCH ZAPPELT, SO IST ES, WENN ES EINEN STUNDENTAG GELEBT UND MAN ES GESCHLACHTET HAT, TAUGLICH.",
+ "FOLGENDES IST BEIM GEFLÜGEL TAUGLICH: WENN DIE GURGEL DURCHLÖCHERT ODER GESPALTEN IST, EIN WIESEL IHM DEN KOPF GEBISSEN HAT AN EINER STELLE, WO ES NICHT TOTVERLETZT WIRD, DER KOPF DURCHLÖCHERT IST, WIE RABBI SAGT, AUCH WENN ER GANZ FORT IST, DIE DÄRME HERAUSGETRETEN UND NICHT DURCHLÖCHERT SIND, DIE FLÜGEL GEBROCHEN SIND, DIE FÜSSE GEBROCHEN SIND, ODER DIE FEDERN AUSGERUPFT SIND. R. JEHUDA SAGT, SIND DIE FLAUMFEDERN FORT, SEI ES UNTAUGLICH.",
+ "IST EIN VIEH VON BLUTANDRANG BEFALLEN, ANGERÄUCHERTODER ERKÄLTET, HAT ES LORBEERROSE ODER HÜHNERKOT GEFRESSEN ODER FAULES WASSER GESOFFEN, SO IST ES TAUGLICH. HAT ES GIFT GEFRESSEN ODER EINE SCHLANGE ES GEBISSEN, SO IST ES NICHT ALS TOTVERLETZTES, JEDOCH WEGEN DER LEBENSGEFAHR VERBOTEN.",
+ "DIE KENNZEICHENBEI VIEH UND WILD SIND IN DER TORA ANGEGEBEN, NICHT ABER DIE KENNZEICHEN BEIM GEFELÜGEL; JEDOCH SAGTEN DIE WEISEN: JEDER ANPACKENDE VOGELIST UNREIN, JEDER, DER EINEN SPORN UND EINEN KROPF HAT UND DESSEN MAGENHAUT SICH ABLÖSEN LÄSST, IST REIN. R. ELIE͑ZER B. R. ÇADOQ SAGT, JEDER VOGEL, DER DIE ZEHENTEILT, SEI UNREIN.",
+ "VON DEN HEUSCHRECKENJEDE, DIE VIER FÜSSE, VIER FLÜGEL UND SPRINGFÜSSE HAT, UND DEREN FLÜGEL DEN GHÖSSEREN TEIL DES KÖRPERS BEDECKEN; R. JoSE SAGT, WENN SIE HEUSCHRECKEHEISST. VON DEN FISCHEN: JEDER, DER FLOSSEN UND SCHUPPEN HAT. R. JEHUDA SAGT, ZWEI SCHUPPEN UND EINE FLOSSE. SCHUPPEN SIND DIE, DIE IHM ANHAFTEN, UND FLOSSEN SIND DIE, WOMIT ER SICH FORTBEWEGT."
+ ],
+ [
+ "WENN EIN VIEH EINEN SCHWEREN WURF HAT UND DIE GEBURT EIN VORDERBEIN HERAUSGESTRECKT UND ZURÜCKGEZOGEN HAT, SO IST ES ZUM ESSEN ERLAUBT; HAT SIE DEN KOPF HERAUSGESTRECKT, SO GILT SIE, AUCH WENN SIE IHN ZURÜCKGEZOGEN HAT, ALS BEREITS GEWORFEN. HAT MAN ETWAS VON DER GEBURT IM MUTTERLEIBE ABGESCHNITTEN, SO IST ES ZUM ESSEN ERLAUBT, WENN ABER VON DER MILZ ODER DEN NIEREN, SO IST ESZUM ESSEN VERBOTEN. DIE REGEL HIERBEI IST: WAS ZUM KÖRPER GEHÖRT, IST VERBOTEN, WAS NICHT ZUM KÖRPER GEHÖRT, IST ERLAUBT.",
+ "WENN EIN VIEH BEI DER ERSTEN GEBURT SCHWER WIRFT, SO DARF MAN GLIEDEREINZELN ABSCHNEIDEN UND VOR DIE HUNDE WERFEN; IST DER GRÖSSERE TEIL HERVORGEKOMMEN, SO IST DIE GEBURT ZU BEGRABEN, UND DAS VIEH IST DER ERSTGEBURTSPFLICHT ENTHOBEN.",
+ "WENN DIE GEBURT IM LEIBE DES VIEHS VERENDET IST UND DER HIRT DIE HAND HINEINGESTECKT UND SIE BERÜHRT HAT, SO IST ER, EINERLEI OB ES EIN UNREINES ODER EIN REINES VIEH IST, REIN. R. JOSE DER GALILÄER SAGT, BEI EINEM UNREINEN SEI ER UNREIN UND BEI EINEM REINEN REIN. WENN EINEM WEIBE DAS KIND IM LEIBE GESTORBEN IST UND DIE HEBAMME DIE HAND HINEINGESTECKT UND ES BERÜHRT HAT, SO IST DIE HEBAMME SIEBEN TAGE UNREIN UND DAS WEIB REIN, BIS DAS KINND HERAUSGEKOMMEN IST.",
+ "WENN EIN VIEH EINEN SCHWEBEN WURF HAT UND DIE GEBURT EIN VORDEBBEIN HERAUSGESTRECKT UND MAN ES ABGESCHNITTEN UND DARAUF DIE MUTTER GESCHLACHTET HAT, SO IST DAS FLEISCHREIN; HAT MAN ZUERST DIE MUTTER GESCHLACHTET UND ES NACHHER ABGESCHNITTEN, SO IST DAS FLEISCH VON AASBERÜHRT — SO R. MEÍR. DIE WEISEN SAGEN, VON TOTVERLETZT GESCHLACHTETEM BERÜHRT. WIE WIR BEIM TOTVERLETZTEN FINDEN, DASS DAS SCHLACHTEN ES REINMACHT, EBENSO MACHT DAS SCHLACHTEN DES VIEHS DAS GLIED REIN. R. MEÍR ERWIDERTE IHNEN: NEIN, SOLLTE DENN DAS SCHLACHTEN, DAS BEIM TOTVERLETZTEN DIESES SELBST RELN MACHT, AUCH DAS GLIED REIN MACHEN, DAS NICHT ZU DIESEM SELBST GEHÖRT! WOHER, DASS DAS TOTVERLETZTE DURCH DAS SCHLACHTEN REIN WIRD: DAS UNREINE VIEH IST ZUM ESSEN VERBOTEN, UND DAS TOTVERLETZTE IST ZUM ESSEN VERBOTEN, WIE DAS SCHLACHTEN DAS UNREINE VIEH NICHT REIN MACHT, EBENSO SOLLTE DAS SCHLACHTEN DAS TOTVERLETZTE NICHT REIN MACHEN? NEIN, WENN DIES VOM UNREINEN VIEH GILT, DAS NIEMALS TAUGLICH WAR, SOLLTE DIES AUCH VOM TOTVERLETZTEN GELTEN, DAS TAUGLICH WAR!? NIMM DIR, WAS DU GEHOLTHAST. WOHER DIES VON DEM, WAS TOTVERLETZT AUS DEM MUTTERLEIBE GEKOMMENIST? NEIN, WENN DIES VOM UNREINEN VIEH GILT, BEI DESSEN ART ES KEIN SCHLACHTEN GIBT, SOLLTE ES AUCH VOM TOTVERLETZTEN GELTEN, BEI DESSEN ART ES EIN SCHLACHTEN GIBT!? DIE LEBENDE ACHTMONATGEBURT WIRD DURCH DAS SCHLACHTEN NICHT REIN, WEIL ES BEI DESSEN ART KEIN SCHLACHTEN GIBT.",
+ "WENN MAN SIE VIEH SCHLACHTET UND DARINN EINE LEBENDE ODER TOTE ACHTMONATGEBURT ODER EINE TOTE NEUNMONATGEBURT FINDET, SO SCHLITZE MAN SIE AUFUND ENTLEERE SIEVOM BLUTE. FINDET MAN DARIN EINE LEBENDE NEUNMONATGEBURT, SO BENÖTIGT SIE DES SCHLACHTENS, AUCH UNTERLIEGT SIE DEM VERBOTE VON MUTTER UND JUNGEM– SO R. MEÍR. DIE WEISEN SAGEN, DAS SCHLACHTEN DER MUTTER REINIGESIE. R. ŠIMO͑N ŠEZORI SAGT, SELBST WENN SIE FÜNF JAHRE ALT IST UND AUF DEM FELDE PFLÜGT, SEI SIE DURCH DAS SCHLACHTEN IHRER MUTTER REIN. WENN MAN EIN VIEH AUFSCHLITZTUND DARIN EINE LEBENDE NEUNMONATGEBURT FINDET, SO BENÖTIGE SIE DES SCHLACHTENS, WEIL DIE MUTTER NICHT GESCHLACHTET WORDEN IST.",
+ "SIND EINEM VIEH DIE BEINE UNTERHALB DES SPRUNGGELENKES ABGESCHNITTEN,SO IST ES TAUGLICH, WENN OBERHALB DES SPRUNGGELENKES, SO IST ES UNTAUGLICH; EBENSO AUCH, WENN DIE ACHILLESSEHNE FORTIST. IST DER KNOCHENGEBROCHEN, SO MACHT DAS SCHLACHTEN, WENN DER GRÖSSERE TEIL DES FLEISCHES UNVERSEHRT IST, ESREIN, WENN ABER NICHT, SO MACHT DAS SCHLACHTEN ES NICHT REIN.",
+ "WENN MAN EIN VIEH SCHLACHTET UND DARIN EINE EIHAUT FINDET, SO DARF, WER SICH NICHT EKELT, SIE ESSEN. DIEBE IST WEDER ALS SPEISE VERUNREINIGUNGSFÄHIG NOCH ALS AASVERUNREINIGEND. HAT MAN DIES BEABSICHTIGT, SO IST SIE ALS SPEISE VERUNREINIGUNGSFÄHIG, NICHT ABER ALS AAS VERUNREINIGEND. IST EINE EIHAUT ZUM TEIL HERAUSGETRETEN, SO IST SIE ZUM ESSEN VERBOTEN, DENN DIESE IST EIN ZEICHEN DER GEBURT SOWOHL BEI EINEM WEIBE ALS AUCH BEI EINEM VIEH. HAT EIN ERSTGEBÄRENDES VIEH EINE EIHAUT AUSGESTOSSEN, SO DARF MAN SIEHUNDEN VORWERFEN; WENN EIN OPFERTIER, SO IST SIE ZU BEGRABEN. MAN DARF SIE NICHT AN EINEM SCHEIDEWEG BEGRABEN ODER AN EINEN BAUM HÄNGEN, WEIL DIES EIN EMORITISCHER BRAUCH IST."
+ ],
+ [
+ "DAS GESETZ VOM VIEH UND SEINEM JUNGEN HAT GELTUNG SOWOHL IM JISRAÉLLANDE ALS AUCH AUSSERHALB DES LANDES, WENN DER TEMPEL BESTEHT UND WENN DER TEMPEL NICHT BESTEHT, BEI PROFANEM UND BEI HEILIGEM. UND ZWAR: HAT JEMAND EIN VIEH UND SEIN JUNGES AUSSERHALB ALS PROFANES GESCHLACHTET, SO SIND BEIDE TAUGLICH, UND WEGEN DES ANDEREN ERHÄLT ER DIE VIERZIG GEISSELHIEBE; WENN AUSSERHALB ALS HEILIGES, SO IST ER WEGEN DES ERSTEN DER AUSROTTUNG SCHULDIG, BEIDE SIND UNTAUGLICH, UND WEGEN BEIDER ERHÄLT ER DIE VIERZIG GEISSELHIEBE; WENN INNERHALB ALS PROFANES, SO SIND BEIDE UNTAUGLICH, UND WEGEN DES ANDEREN ERHÄLT ER DIE VIERZIG GEISSELHIEBE; WENN INNERHALB ALS HEILIGES, SO IST DAS ERSTE TAUGLICH UND ER IST FREI, UND WEGEN DES ANDEREN ERHÄLT ER DIE VIERZIG GEISSELHIEBE UND ES IST UNTAUGLICH.",
+ "WENN AUSSERHALB ALS PROFANES UND ALS HEILIGES, SO IST DAS ERSTE TAUGLICH UND ER IST FREI, UND WEGEN DES ANDEREN ERHÄLT ER DIE VIERZIG GEISSELHIEBE UND ES IST UNTAUGLICH; WENN AUSSERHALB ALS HEILIGES UND ALS PROFANES, SO IST ER WEGEN DES ERSTEN DER AUSROTTUNG SCHULDIG, UND ES IST UNTAUGLICH, DAS ANDERE IST TAUGLICH, UND WEGEN BEIDER ERHÄLT ER DIE VIERZIG GEISSELHIEBE; WENN INNERHALB ALS PROFANES UND ALS HEILIGES, SO SIND BEIDE UNTAUGLICH, UND WEGEN DES ANDEREN ERHÄLT ER DIE VIERZIG GEISSELHIEBE; WENN INNERHALB ALS HEILIGES UND PROFANES, SO IST DAS ERSTE TAUGLICH UND ER IST FREI, UND WEGEN DES ANDEREN ERHÄLT ER DIE VIERZIG GEISSELHIEBE UND ES IST UNTAUGLICH. WENN AUSSERHALB UND INNERHALBALS PROFANES, SO IST DAS ERSTE TAUGLICH UND ER IST FREI, UND WEGEN DES ANDEREN ERHÄLT ER DIE VIERZIG GEISSELHIEBE UND ES IST UNTAUGLICH; WENN AUSSERHALB UND INNERHALB ALS HEILIGES, SO IST ER WEGEN DES ERSTEN DER AUSROTTUNG SCHULDIG, WEGEN BEIDER ERHÄLT ER DIE VIERZIG GEISSELHIEBE, UND BEIDE SIND UNTAUGLICH; WENN INNERHALB UND AUSSERHALB ALS PROFANES, SO IST BAS ERSTE UNTAUGLICH UND ER IST FREI, UND WEGEN DES ANDEREN ERHÄLT ER DIE VIERZIG GEISSELHIEBE UND ES IST TAUGLICH; WENN INNERHALB UND AUSSERHALB ALS HEILIGES, SO IST DAS ERSTE TAUGLICH UND ER IST FREI, UND WEGEN DES ANDEREN ERHÄLT ER DIE VIERZIG GEISSELHIEBE UND ES IST UNTAUGLICH.",
+ "WENN JEMAND GESCHLACHTET HAT UND ESTOTVERLETZT BEFUNDEN WIRD, FÜR EINEN GÖTZEN GESCHLACHTET HAT, DIE KUHDER ENTSÜNDIGUNG, EIN ZU STEINIGENDES RINDODER DAS GENICKBROCHENE KALB GESCHLACHTET HAT, SO IST ER NACH R. ŠIMO͑N FREIUND NACH DEN WEISEN SCHULDIG. IST ES BEIM SCHLACHTEN UNTER SEINER HAND AAS GEWORDEN, ODER HAT ER ES GEMETZELT ODER IHM DIE HALSORGANE AUSGERISSEN, SO IST ER NICHT SCHULDIG WEGEN ÜBERTRETUNG DES GESETZES VOM VIEH UND SEINEM JUNGEN. HABEN ZWEI PERSONEN EINE KUH UND IHR KALB GEKAUFT, SO SCHLACHTE DER ZUERST, DER ZUERST GEKAUFT HAT; IST IHM DER ANDERE ZUVORGEKOMMEN, SO HAT ER DEN VORTEIL. AN VIER ZEITENIM JAHRE MUSS MAN, WENN MAN JEMANDEM EIN VIEH VERKAUFT, IHM MITTEILEN, DASS MAN DIE MUTTER, BEZIEHUNGSWEISE DAS JUNGE ZUM SCHLACHTEN VERKAUFT HABE, UND ZWAR: AM VORABEND DES LETZTEN TAGES DES HÜTTENFESTES, AM VORABEND DES ERSTEN TAGES DES PESAḤFESTES, AM VORABEND DES WOCHENFESTES UND AM VORABEND DES NEUJAHRSFESTES; R. JOSE DER GALILÄER SAGT, IN GALILÄA AUCH AM VORABEND DES VERSÖHNUNGSTAGES. R. JEHUDA SAGTE: NUR DANN, WENN KEIN SPIELRAUM VORHANDEN IST, IST ABER SPIELRAUMVORHANDEN, SO BRAUCHT MAN ES NICHT MITZUTEILEN. JEDOCH PFLICHTET R. JEHUDA BEI, DASS, WENN MAN DIE MUTTER AN DEN BRÄUTIGAM UND DAS JUNGE AN DIE BRAUT VERKAUFT, MAN ES MITTEILEN MÜSSE, DENN BEIDE SCHLACHTEN SICHER AM SELBEN TAGE.",
+ "AN DIESEN VIER ZEITEN IM JAHRE KANN MAN DEN SCHLÄCHTERANHALTEN, GEGEN SEINEN WILLEN ZU SCHLACHTEN; SELBST WENN DAS RIND TAUSEND DENARE WERT IST UND DER KÄUFER DARAN MIT NUR EINEM DENAR BETEILIGT IST, KANN ER IHN ZUM SCHLACHTEN ZWINGEN; DAHER IST ES, WENN ES VERENDET, DEM KÄUFER VERENDET. ANDERS IST ESIN DEN ÜBRIGEN TAGEN DES JAHRES; DAHER IST ES, WENN ES VERENDET, DEM VERKÄUFER VERENDET.",
+ "BEI DEM ‘EINEN TAG’, VON DEM BEIM GESETZE VOM TIER UND SEINEM JUNGEN GESPROCHEN WIRD, FOLGT DER TAG DER NACHT. FOLGENDES TRUG R. ŠIMO͑N B. ZOMA VOR: BEIM SCHÖPFUNGSWERKE HEISST ESein Tag UND BEIM GESETZE VOM VIEH UND SEINEM JUNGEN HEISST ESeinem Tage, WIE DER EINE TAG, VON DEM BEIM SCHÖPFUNGSWERKE GESPROCHEN WIRD, DER NACHTFOLGTE, EBENSO FOLGT DER TAG, VON DEM BEIM GESETZE VOM VIEH UND SEINEM JUNGEN GESPROCHEN WIRD, DER NACHT."
+ ],
+ [
+ "DAS GESETZ VOM BEDECKEIN DES BLUTESHAT GELTUNG IM JISRAÉLLANDE UND AUSSERHALB DES LANDES, WENN DER TEMPEL BESTEHT UND WENN DER TEMPEL NICHT BESTEHT, NUR BEI PROFANEM UND NICHT BEI HEILIGEM. ES HAT GELTUNG BEIM WILDE UND BEIM GEFLÜGEL, BEI VORHANDENEM UND BEI NICHT VORHANDENEM. ES HAT GELTUNG BEIM KOJ, WEIL ÜBER IHN EIN ZWEIFEL BESTEHT. MAN DARF IHN AM FESTE NICHT SCHLACHTEN; HAT MAN IHN GESCHLACHTET, SO BEDECKE MAN DAS BLUT NICHT.",
+ "WENN MAN ESGESCHLACHTET HAT UND ES TOTVERLETZT BEFUNDEN WIRD, ODER WENN MAN FÜR EINEN GÖTZEN PROFANES INNERHALB, HEILIGES AUSSERHALBODER EIN ZU STEINIGENDES WILD ODER GEFLÜGELGESCHLACHTET HAT, SO IST MAN NACH R. MEÍR VERPFLICHTETUND NACH DEN WEISEN FREI. WENN MAN ES SCHLACHTET UND ES AAS UNTER SEINER HANDWIRD, ODER WENN MAN ES METZELT ODER IHM DIE GURGEL AUSREISST, SO BRAUCHT MAN ES NICHT ZU BEDECKEN.",
+ "WENN EIN TAUBER, EIN BLÖDER UND EIN MINDERJÄHRIGER GESCHLACHTET UND ANDERE SIE BEOBACHTET HABEN, SO MUSS MANDAS BLUT BEDECKEN; WENN ABER UNTER SICH, SO BRAUCHT MAN ES NICHT ZU BEDECKEN. DIES GILT AUCH BEIM GESETZE VOM VIEH UND SEINEM JUNGEN: WENN SIE DAS EINE GESCHLACHTET UND ANDERE SIE BEOBACHTET HABEN, SO DARF MAN HINTERHER DAS ANDERE NICHT SCHLACHTEN, WENN ABER UNTER SICH, SO IST DAS SCHLACHTEN HINTERHER NACH R. MEÍR ERLAUBT UND NACH DEN WEISEN VERBOTEN. SIE PFLICHTEN JEDOCH BEI, DASS MAN, WENN MAN GESCHLACHTET HAT, DIE VIERZIG GEISSELHIEBE NICHT ERHALTE.",
+ "HAT MAN HUNDERT STÜCK WILD AN EINER STELLE GESCHLACHTET, SO GENÜGT EIN EINZIGES BEDECKEN FÜR ALLE; WENN HUNDERT STÜCK GEFLÜGEL AN EINER STELLE, SO GENÜGT EIN EINZIGES BEDECKEN FÜR ALLE; WENN WILD UND GEFLÜGEL AN EINER STELLE, SO GENÜGT EIN EINZIGES BEDECKEN FÜR ALLE. R. JEHUDA SAGT, HAT MAN WILD GESCHLACHTET, SO BEDECKE MAN DAS BLUT, UND NACHHER SCHLACHTE MAN DAS GEFLÜGEL. WENN JEMAND GESCHLACHTET UND DAS BLUT NICHT BEDECKT HAT UND EIN ANDERER ES SIEHT, SO IST DIESER ES ZU BEDECKEN VEUPFLICHTET. WENN MAN ES BEDECKT HAT UND ES AUFGEDECKT WORDEN IST, SO BRAUCHT MAN ES NICHT MEHR ZU BEDECKEN; HATTE DER WIND ES BEDECKT, SO MUSS MAN ESBEDECKEN.",
+ "IST DAS BLUT MIT WASSER VERMISCHT WORDEN, SO IST MAN, WENN ES DAS AUSSEHEN VON BLUT HAT, ES ZU BEDECKEN VERPFLICHTET; IST ES MIT WEINVERMISCHT WORDEN, SO BETRACHTE MAN IHN ALS WASSER; IST ES MIT BLUT VON EINEM VIEH ODER MIT BLUT VON EINEM WILDEVERMISCHT WORDEN, SO BETRACHTE MAN ES ALS WASSER. R. JEHUDA SAGT, BLUT GEHE IN BLUT NICHTAUF. VERSPRITZTES BLUT, UND WAS SICH AM MESSER BEFINDET, IST MAN ZU BEDECKEN VERPFLICHTET. R. JEHUDA SAGTE: NUR DANN, WENN NUR DIESES BLUT VORHANDEN IST, IST ABER AUCH ANDERES BLUT VORHANDEN, SO BRAUCHT MAN ES NICHT ZU BEDECKEN.",
+ "VERSPRITZTES BLUT, UND WAS SICH AM MESSER BEFINDET, IST MAN ZU BEDECKEN VERPFLICHTET. R. JEHUDA SAGTE: NUR DANN, WENN NUR DIESES BLUT VORHANDEN IST, IST ABER AUCH ANDERES BLUT VORHANDEN, SO BRAUCHT MAN ES NICHT ZU BEDECKEN.\r\n",
+ "WOMIT DARF MAN DAS BLUT BEDECKEN UND WOMIT DARF MAN ES NICHT BEDECKEN? MAN DARF ES BEDECKEN MIT DÜNNEM MISTE, FEINEM SANDE, KALK ODER SCHERBEN, ZIEGELSTEIN UND SPUNDMASSE, DIE ZERSTOSSEN SIND, NICHT ABER MIT GROBEM MISTE, GROBEM SANDE ODER ZIEGELSTEIN UND SPUNDMASSE, DIE NICHT ZERSTOSSEN SIND; AUCH DARF MAN DARÜBER KEIN GEFÄSS STÜLPEN. R. ŠIMO͑N B. GAMLIÉL SAGTE EINE REGEL: MIT ALLEM, WORAUF PFLANZEN WACHSEN, DARF MAN BEDECKEN, UND WORAUF KEINE PFLANZEN WACHSEN, DARF MAN NICHT BEDECKEN."
+ ],
+ [
+ "DAS VERBOT DER SPANNADER HAT GELTUNG IM JISRAÉLLANDE UND AUSSERHALB DES LANDES, WENN DER TEMPEL BESTEHT UND WENN DER TEMPEL NICHT BESTEHT, BEI PROFANEM UND BEI HEILIGEM. ES HAT GELTUNG BEIM VIEH UND BEIM WILDE, BEI DER RECHTEN HÜFTE UND BEI DER LINKEN HÜFTE, NICHT ABER BEIM GEFLÜGEL, WEIL ES KEINEN HÜFTENBALLEN HAT. ES HAT GELTUNG BEIM EMBRYO; R. JEHUDA SAGT, ES HABE BEIM EMBRYO KEINE GELTUNG. SEIN TALG IST ERLAUBT. DIE SCHLÄCHTER SIND INBETREFF DER SPANNADER NICHT GLAUBWÜRDIG – SO R. MEÍR; DIE WEISEN SAGEN, SIE SEIEN INBETREFF DESSEN UND INBETREFF DES TALGES GLAUBWÜRDIG.",
+ "NIMMT MAN DIE SPANNADER HERAUS, SO MUSS MAN SIE VOLLSTÄNDIG HERAUSNEHMEN; R. JEHUDA SAGT, NUR DASS MAN DAS GEBOT DLS HERAUSNEHMENS AUSÜBT.",
+ "WER EINE OLIVE VON DER SPANNADER GEGESSEN HAT, ERHÄLT DIE VIERZIG GEISSELHIEBE; WENN SIE KEINE OLIVE HATTE UND ER SIE GEGESSEN HAT, SO IST ER SCHULDIG. WER EINE OLIVE VON DER EINEN UND EINE OLIVE VON DER ANDEREN GEGESSEN HAT, ERHÄLT ACHTZIG GEISSELHIEBE; R. JEHUDA SAGT, ER ERHALTE NUR VIERZIG.",
+ "IST EINE HÜFTE MIT DER SPANNADER GEKOCHT WORDEN, SO IST SIE, WENN SOVIEL DARAN WAR, DASS EIN GESCHMACK ÜBERTRAGEN WIRD, VERBOTEN.",
+ "WIE BEMISST MAN DIES? NACH VERHÄLTNIS VON FLEISCH MIT RÜBEN. IST DIE SPANNADER MIT ANDEREN ADERNGEKOCHT WORDEN, SO IST, WENN SIE ZU ERKENNEN IST, DIE GESCHMACKSÜBERTRAGUNG EINTSCHEIDEND, WENN ABER NICHT, SO SIND ALLE VERBOTEN; DIE BRÜHE ABER NUR BEI GESCHMACKSÜBERTRAGUNG. EBENSO IST, WENN EIN STÜCK VON EINEM AASE ODER EIN STÜCK VON EINEM UNREINEN FISCHE MIT ANDEREN STÜCKEN GEKOCHT WORDEN IST, WENN ES ZU ERKENNEN IST, DIE GESCHMACKSÜBERTRAGUNG ENTSCHEIDEND, WENN ABER NICHT, SO SIND ALI,E VERBOTEN; BRÜHE ABER NUR BEI GESCHMACKSÜBERTRAGUNG.",
+ "ESHAT GELTUNG NUR BEIM REINEN VIEH, NICHT ABERBEIM UNREINEN; R. JEHUDA SAGT, AUCH BEIM UNREINEN. R. JEHUDA SPRACH: DIE SPANNADER IST JA SCHON DEN KINDERN JA͑QOBSVERBOTEN WORDEN, WO DAS UNREINE VIEH NOCH ERLAUBT WAR! SIE ERWIDERTEN IHM: DIES IST ERST AM SINAJ VERBOTEN WORDEN, JEDOCH AN DER PASSENDEN STELLENIEDERGESCHRIEBEN. KEINERLEI FLEISCH DARF GEKOCHT WERDEN MIT MILCH, AUSGENOMMEN DAS FLEISCH VON FISCHEN UND HEUSCHRECKEN; ES DARF AUCH NICHT MIT KÄSE AUF DEN TISCH AUFGETRAGEN WERDEN, AUSGENOMMEN DAS FLEISCH VON FISCHEN UND HEUSCHRECKEN. WER SICH FLEISCH ABGELOBT HAT, DEM IST DAS FLEISCH VON FISCHEN UND HEUSCHRECKEN ERLAUBT."
+ ],
+ [
+ "GEFLÜGEL DARF MIT KÄSE AUF DEN TISCH AUFGETRAGEN, NICHT ABER ZUSAMMEN GEGESSEN WERDEN – SO DIE SCHULE ŠAMMAJS; DIE SCHULE HILLELS SAGT, WEDER AUFGETRAGEN NOCH GEGESSEN WERDEN. R. JOSE SAGTE: DIES GEHÖRT ZU DEN ERLEICHTERUNGENDER SCHULE ŠAMMAJS UND DEN ERSCHWERUNGEN DER SCHULE HILLELS. VON WELCHEM TISCHE SPRECHEN SIE? AN DEM MAN ISST; AUF DEN TISCH ABER, AUF DEM MAN DIE SPEISEN ANRICHTET, DARF MAN OHNE BEDENKEN EINES NEBEN DAS ANDERE STELLEN.",
+ "MAN DARF FLEISCH UND KÄSE IN EIN TUCH EINWICKELN, NUR DÜRFEN SIE EINANDER NICHT BERÜHREN. R. ŠIMO͑N B. GAMLIÉL SAGT, ZWEI GÄSTE DÜRFEN OHNE BEDENKEN AN EINEM TISCHE ESSEN, EINER FLEISCH UND EINER KÄSE.",
+ "IST EIN TROPFEN MILCH AUF EIN STÜCK FLEISCHGEFALLEN, SO IST DAS STÜCK, WENN ES SO GROSSIST, DASS EIN GESCHMACK ÜBERTRAGEN WIRD, VERBOTEN; HAT MAN DEN TOPFUMGERÜHRT, SO IST DER TOPF, WENN DARIN SOVIEL VORHANDEN IST, DASS EIN GESCHMACK ÜBERTRAGEN WIRD, VERBOTEN. DAS EUTER REISSE MAN AUF UND LASSE DIE MILCH HERAUS; HAT MAN ES NICHT AUFGERISSEN, SO HAT MAN DADURCH NICHTS ÜBERTRETEN. DAS HERZ REISSE MAN AUF UND LASSE DAS BLUT HERAUS; HAT MAN ES NICHT AUFGERISSEN, SO HAT MAN DADURCH NICHTS ÜBERTRETEN. WER GEFLÜGEL UND KÄSE AUF DEN TISCH AUFTRÄGT, ÜBERTRITT KEIN VERBOT.",
+ "FLEISCH VON EINEM REINEN VIEH MIT MILCH VON EINEM REINEN VIEH IST ZU KOCHEN UND ZUR NUTZNIESSUNG VERBOTEN. FLEISCH VON EINEM REINEN VIEH MIT MILCH VON EINEM UNREINEN VIEH ODER FLEISCH VON EINEM UNREINEN VIEH MIT MILCH VON EINEM REINEN VIEH IST ZU KOCHEN UND ZUR NUTZNIESSUNG ERLAUBT. R. A͑QIBA SAGTE: BEI WILD UND GEFLÜGEL 1ST DIESES VERBOT NICHT AUS DER TORA, DENN ES HEISST DREIMAL:du sollst nicht ein Böckchen mit der Milch seiner Matter kochen, DIES SCHLIESST DAS WILD, DAS GEFLÜGEL UND DAS UNREINE VIEH AUS. R. JOSE DER GALILÄER SAGTE: ES HEISST:ihr sollt keinerlei Aas essen, UND ES HEISST: du sollst nicht ein Böckchen mit der Milch seiner Mutter kochen, WAS ALS AAS VERBOTEN IST, DARF MAN NICHT MIT MILCH KOCHEN; MAN KÖNNTE NUN GLAUBEN, MAN DÜRFE AUCH DAS GEFLÜGEL, DAS ALS AAS VERBOTEN IST, NICHT MIT MILCH KOCHEN, SO HEISST ES: mit der Milch seiner Mutter, AUSGENOMMEN DAS GEFLÜGEL, DAS KEINE MUTTERMILCH HAT.",
+ "DAS LAB VON EINEM VIEH EINES NICHTJUDEN UND VON AAS IST VERBOTEN. LÄSST MAN MILCH MIT DER LABHAUT (EINES TAUGLICHEN VIEHS) GERINNEN, SO IST SIE, WENN EIN GESCHMACK ÜBERTRAGEN WIRD, VERBOTEN. HAT EIN TAUGLICHES VIEH VON EINEM TOT VERLETZTEN GESOGEN, SO IST DAS LAB VERBOTEN; HAT EIN TOTVERLETZTES VON EINEM TAUGLICHEN GESOGEN, SO IST DAS LAB ERLAUBT, WEIL ES DARIN ANGESAMMELT BLEIBT.",
+ "IN MANCHER HINSICHT IST ES BEIM TALGE STRENGER ALS BEIM BLUTE UND IN MANCHER IST ES BEIM BLUTE STRENGER ALS BEIM TALGE. STRENGER IST ES BEIM TALGE, DENN BEIM TALGE GIBT ES EINE VERUNTREUUNGUND MAN IST WEGEN DESSEN SCHULDIG WEGEN VERWERFLICHEM, ÜBRIGGEBLIEBENEM UND UNREINHEIT, WAS ABER BEIM BLUTE NICHT DER FALL IST. STRENGER IST ES BEIM BLUTE, DENN DAS VERBOT DES BLUTES HAT GELTUNG BEIM VIEH, BEIM WILD UND BEIM GEFLÜGEL, SOWOHL BEI UNREINEN ALS AUCH BEI REINEN, WÄHREND DAS DES TALGES NUR BEIM REINEN VIEHGELTUNG HAT."
+ ],
+ [
+ "DIE HAUT, DIE GALLERTE, DER BODENSATZ, DER ABFALL, DIE KNOCHEN, DIE SEHNEN, DIE HÖRNER UND DIE KLAUEN WERDEN VEREINIGT HINSICHTLICH DER VERUNREINIGUNGSFÄHIGKEIT VON SPEISEN, NICHT ABER HINSICHTLICH DER UNREINHEIT DES AASES. DESGLEICHEN IST EIN UNREINES VIEH, DAS MAN FÜR EINEN NICHTJUDEN GESCHLACHTET HAT UND NOCH ZUCKT, VERUNREINIGUNGSFÄHIG HINSICHTLICH DER UNREINHEIT VON SPEISEN, ALS AAS ABER NICHT EHER VERUNREINIGEND, ALS BIS ES VERENDET IST ODER MAN IHM DEN KOPF ABGESCHLAGEN HAT. DIE UNREINHEIT DER SPEISEN IST SOMIT UMFASSENDER ALS DIE UNREINHEIT DES AASES. R. JEHUDA SAGT, WEGEN DES ZUSAMMENGELESENEN ABFALLS SEI MAN, WENN EINE OLIVE AN EINER STELLE VORHANDEN IST, SCHULDIG.",
+ "BEI FOLGENDEM GLEICHT DIE HAUTDEM FLEISCHE: DIE HAUT DES MENSCHEN, DIE HAUT DES HAUSSCHWEINES, R. JEHUDA SAGT, AUCH DIE HAUT DES WILDSCHWEINES, DIE HÖCKERHAUT DES JUNGEN KAMELS, DIE KOPFHAUT DES JUNGEN KALBES, DIE HAUT AN DEN KLAUEN, DIE HAUT AN DER SCHAM, DIE HAUT DES EMBRYOS, DIE HAUT UNTER DEM FETTSCHWANZE; FERNER DIE HAUT DES IGELS, DES CHAMÄLEONS, DER EIDECHSE UND DER SCHNECKE. R. JEHUDA SAGT, DIE EIDECHSE GLEICHE DEM WIESEL. DIESE ALLE SIND, WENN MAN SIE GERBT ODER ZUR GERBUNG GENÜGEND DARAUF GETRETEN HAT, REIN, AUSGENOMMEN DIE HAUT DES MENSCHEN. R. JOḤANAN B. NURI SAGT, DIE ACHT KRIECHTIEREHABEN EINE RICHTIGE HAUT.",
+ "WENN MAN VON EINEM VIEH ODER EINEM WILDE, OB REIN ODER UNREIN, OB KLEIN ODER GROSS, DIE HAUT ZU EINER DECKE ABZIEHT, SO ERFOLGT ESBIS ZU EINER HANDHABE, UND WENN ZU EINEM SCHLAUCHE, BIS DIE BRUST ABGEZOGEN IST; BEGINNT MAN MIT DEN HINTERFÜSSEN, SO IST DIE GANZE EINE VERBINDUNG FÜR DIE UNREINHEIT, ZUM UNREINWERDEN UND ZUM UNREINMACHEN. DIE HAUT AM HALSEIST, WIE R. JOḤANAN B. NURI SAGT, KEINE VERBINDUNG, UND WIE DIE WEISEN SAGEN, SOLANGE EINE VERBINDUNG BIS SIE VOLLSTÄNDIG ABGEZOGEN IST.",
+ "IST AN DER HAUT EINE OLIVE FLEISCH, SO IST, WER EINE HERVORSTEHENDE FASER ODER EIN GEGENÜBER BEFINDLICHES HAAR BERÜHRT, UNREIN. SIND DARAN ZWEI HALBE OLIVEN, SO IST SIE VERUNREINIGEND DURCH TRAGEN, NICHT ABER DURCH BERÜHREN – SO R. JIŠMA͑ÉL; R. A͑QIBA SAGT, WEDER DURCH BERÜHREN NOCH DURCH TRAGEN. R. A͑QIBA PFLICHTET JEDOCH BEI, DASS MAN, WENN MAN ZWEI HALBE OLIVEN MIT EINEM SPANE ZUSAMMENGESTOCHEN UND SIE GESCHÜTTELT HAT, UNREIN SEI. NACH R. A͑QIBA SIND SIE AN DER HAUT DESHALB REIN, WEIL SIE SICH DURCH DIE HAUT VERLIEREN.",
+ "WER DEN SCHENKELKNOCHEN VON EINER LEICHE ODER VON HEILIGEM BERÜHRT, EINERLEI OB GESCHLOSSEN ODER DURCHLÖCHERT, IST UNREIN; WENN DEN SCHENKELKNOCHEN VON EINEM AASODER VON EINEM KRIECHTIERE, SO IST ER, WENN SIE GESCHLOSSEN SIND, REIN, UND WENN IRGENDWIE DURCHLÖCHERT, UNREIN DURCH BERÜHREN. WOHER, DASS AUCH DURCH TRAGEN? ES HEISST: berührt, trägt; WOBEI DAS BERÜHRENGILT, GILT AUCH DAS TRAGEN, UND WOBEI DAS BERÜHREN NICHT GILT, GILT AUCH NICHT DAS TRAGEN.",
+ "DAS ENTWICKELTE EIEINES KRIECHTIERES IST REIN; IST ES ETWAS DURCHLÖCHERT, SO IST ES UNREIN. WER EINE ZUR HÄLFTE AUS FLEISCH UND ZUR HÄLFTE AUS ERDEBESTEHENDE MAUS BERÜHRT, IST, WENN DAS FLEISCH, UNREIN, UND WENN DIE ERDE, REIN; R. JEHUDA SAGT, AUCH WENN ER DIE ERDE GEGENÜBER DEM FLEISCHE BERÜHRT, SEI ER UNREIN.",
+ "DAS AN EINEM VIEH NACHHÄNGENDE GLIED ODER FLEISCH IST AN SEINER STELLE ALS SPEISE VERUNREINIGUNGSFÄHIG UND BENÖTIGTDER BEFÄHIGUNG. IST DAS VIEH GESCHLACHTET ORDEN, SO IST ES DURCH DAS BLUT BEFÄHIGT – SO R. MEÍR; R. ŠIMO͑N SAGT, ES SEI DARDURCH NICHT BEFÄHIGT. IST DAS VIEH VERENDET, SO BENÖTIGT DAS FLEISCH DER BEFÄHIGUNG UND DAS GLIED IST ALS GLIED VON LEBENDEM VERUNREINIGEND, NICHT ABER ALS GLIED VON EINEM AASE – SO R. MEÍR; NACH R. ŠIMO͑N IST ES REIN.",
+ "DAS AN EINEM MENSCHEN NACHHÄNGENDE GLIED ODER FLEISCH IST REIN; IST DER MENSCH GESTORBEN, SO IST DAS FLEISCH REIN, DAS GLIED ABER ALS GLIED VON EINEM LEBENDEN VERUNREINIGEND, NICHT ABER ALS GLIED VON EINER LEICHE SO R. MEÍR; NACH R. ŠIMO͑N IST ES REIN."
+ ],
+ [
+ "DAS GESETZ VON BUG, KINNBACKEN UND MAGEN HAT GELTUNG IM JISRAÉLLANDE UND AUSSERHALB DES LANDES, WENN DER TEMPEL BESTEHT UND WENN DER TEMPEL NICHT BESTEHT, NUR BEI PROFANEM UND NICHT BEI HEILIGEM. MAN KÖNNTE FOLGERN: WENN VON PROFANEM, VON DEM BRUST UND SCHENKEL NICHT ZU ENTRICHTEN SIND, DIE PRIESTERGABEN ZU ENTRICHTEN SIND, UM WIEVIEL MEHR SIND VON HEILIGEM, VON DEM BRUST UND SCHENKEL ZU ENTRICHTEN SIND, DIE PRIESTERGABEN ZU ENTRICHTEN; DAHER HEISST ES: diese habe ich dem Priester Ahron und seinen Söhnen gegeben, zur ewigen Satzung; ER ERHÄLT NUR DAS, WAS IM ABSCHNITTE GENANNT IST.",
+ "ALLE HEILIGEN TIERE, DIE EINEN BLEIBENDEN LEIBESFEHLER VOR IHRER HEILIGUNG HATTEN UND AUSGELÖST WORDEN SIND, UNTERLIEGEN DEM GESETZE VON DER ERSTGEBURT UND DER PRIESTERGABEN, DÜRFEN ALS PROFAN ZUR SCHUR UND ZUR ARBEIT VERWANDT WERDEN, IHRE JUNGEN UND IHRE MILCH NACH DER AUSLÖSUNG SIND ERLAUBT, WER SIE AUSSERHALB SCHLACHTET, IST FREI, SIE ÜBERTRAGEN NICHT DIE HEILIGKEIT AUF DAS ELNGETAUSCHTE, UND WENN SIE VERENDEN, DÜRFEN SIE AUSGELÖST WERDEN; AUSGENOMMEN DAS ERSTGEBORENE UND DER ZEHNT. IST DIE HEILIGUNG VOR DEM GEBRECHEN ERFOLGT, ODER WENN SIE VOR DER HEILIGUNG EINEN VORÜBERGEHENDEN LEIBESFEHLER HATTEN UND NACHHER EINEN DAUERNDEN LEIBESFEHLER BEKOMMEN HABEN, UND AUSGELÖST WORDEN SIND, SO SIND SIE VON DER ERSTGEBURT UND DEN PRIESTERGABEN FREI, NICHT PROFAN, UM ZUR SCHUR UND ZUR ARBEIT VERWANDT ZU WERDEN, IHRE JUNGEN UND IHRE MILCH NACH DER AUSLÖSUNG SIND VERBOTEN, WER SIE AUSSERHALB SCHLACHTET, IST SCHULDIG, SIE ÜBERTRAGEN DIE HEILIGKEIT AUF DAS EINGETAUSCHTE, UND WENN SIE VERENDEN, SIND SIE ZU BEGRABEN.",
+ "IST EIN ERSTGEBORENESUNTER HUNDERT TIERE VERMISCHT WORDEN, SO SIND, WENN HUNDERT PERSONEN SIE SCHLACHTEN, ALLE FREI, WENN ABER EINER ALLE SCHLACHTET, SO IST NUR EINES FREI. WER FÜR EINEN PRIESTER ODER EINEN NICHTJUDEN SCHLACHTET, IST VON DEN PRIESTERGABEN FREI; WER SICH MIT IHNEN BETEILIGT, MUSS ESKENNZEICHNEN. SAGTE ER: MIT AUSNAHME DER PRIESTERGABEN, SO IST ER VON DEN PRIESTERGABEN FREI. WENN JEMAND ZU EINEM SCHLÄCHTER SAGTE, DASS ER IHM DAS EINGEWEIDE EINER KUH VERKAUFE, UND DARUNTER SICU DIE PRIESTERGABEN BEFINDEN, SO GEBE ER SIE DEM PRIESTER UND ZIEHE SIE IHM NICHT VOM PREISE AB; KAUFTE ER SIE NACH GEWICHT, SO GEBE ER SIE DEM PRIESTER UND ZIEHE SIE IHM VOM PREISE AB.",
+ "HAT EIN PROSELYT, DER SICH BEKEHRT HAT, EINE KUH, SO IST ER, WENN SIE VOR SEINER BEKEHRUNG GESCULACHTET WORDEN IST, FREI, UND WENN NACH SEINER BEKEHRUNG, VERPFLICHTET; IST DIES ZWEIFELHAFT, SO IST ER FREI, DENN WER VON SEINEM NÄCHSTEN FORDERT, HAT DEN BEWEIS ANZUTRETEN.WAS HEISST BUG? VOM GELENKE DES SCHIENBEINES BIS ZUM SCHULTER BLATTE. DIES GILT AUCH BEIM NAZIR. DEM ENTSPRECHEND AM HINTERFUSSE HEISST SCHENKEL. R. JEHUDA SAGT, DER SCHENKEL REICHE VOM GELENKE DES SCHIENBEINES BIS ZUR VERZWEIGUNG DES FUSSES. WAS HEISST KINNBACKE? VOM BACKENGELENKE BIS ZUM GURGELRINGE."
+ ],
+ [
+ "DIE ERSTSCHUR HAT GELTUNG IM JISRAÉLLANDE UND AUSSERHALBDES LANDES, WENN DER TEMPEL BESTEHT UND WENN DER TEMPEL NICHT BESTEHT, BEI PROFANEM UND NICHT BEI HEILIGEM. STRENGER IST DAS GESETZ VON BUG, KINNBACKEN UND MAGEN ALS DAS DER ERSTSCHUR, DENN DAS GESETZ VON BUG, KINNBACKEN UND MAGEN HAT GELTUNG BEI RINDERN UND BEI SCHAFEN, BEI VIELEM UND BEI WENIGEM, WÄHREND DAS DER ERSTSCHUR NUR BEI SCHAFEN UND NUR BEI VIELEM GELTUNG HAT.",
+ "WAS HEISST VIEL? DIE SCHULE ŠAMMAJS SAGT, ZWEI SCHAFE, DENN ES HEISST: wird jeder eine junge Kuh und zwei Schafe halten. DIE SCHULE HILLELS SAGT FÜNF, DENN ES HEISST:fünf hergerichtete Schafe. R. DOSA B. ARCHINOS SAGT, WENN BEI DER SCHUR VON FÜNF SCHAFEN JEDES ANDERTHALB MINE WOLLE LIEFERT, SO HAT BEI DIESEN DAS GESETZ VON DER ERSTSCHUR GELTUNG: DIE WEISEN SAGEN, BEI FÜNF SCHAFEN, SO VIEL ES AUCH IST. WIEVIEL GEBE MAN IHM? DAS GEWICHT VON FÜNF SELA͑ IN JUDÄA, GLEICH ZEHN IN GALILÄA, GEBLEICHT UND NICHT SCHMUTZIG, UM DARAUS EIN KLEINES KLEIDUNGSSTÜCK MACHEN ZU KÖNNEN, DENN ES HEISST: sollst du ihm geben, DASS ES EINE GABE SEI. KAM MAN NICHT DAZU, SIE IHM ZU GEBEN, BIS MAN SIE GEFÄRBT HAT, SO IST MAN FREI; WENN ABER NUR GEBLEICHT UND NICHT GEFÄRBT, SO IST MAN VERPFLICHTET. KAUFT JEMAND DIE SCHAFSCHUR EINES NICHTJUDEN, SO IST ER VON DER ERSTSCHUR FREI. KAUFT JEMAND DIE SCHAFSCHUR SEINES NÄCHSTEN, SO IST, WENN DIESER ETWAS ZURÜCKBEHÄLT, DER VERKÄUFER VERPFLICHTET, UND WENN ER NICHTS ZURÜCKBEHÄLT, DER KÄUFER VERPFLICHTET. WENN ER ZWEI ARTEN HATTE, DUNKLE UND WEISSE, UND IHM DIE DUNKLE UND NICHT DIE WEISSE VERKAUFT HAT, ODER DIE DER MÄNNCHEN UND NICHT DIE DER WEIBCHEN, SO ENTRICHTE SIE DER EINE BESONDERS UND DER ANDERE BESONDERS."
+ ],
+ [
+ "DAS GESETZ VOM FLIEGENLASSEN DES NESTVOGELS HAT GELTUNG IM JISRAÉLLANDE UND AUSSERHALB DES LANDES, WENN DER TEMPEL BESTEHT UND WENN DER TEMPEL NICHT BESTEHT, BEI PROFANEM UND NICHT BEI HEILIGEM. STRENGER IST DAS GESETZ VOM BEDECKEN DES BLUTES ALS DAS GESETZ VOM FLIEGENLASSEN DES NESTVOGELS, DENN DAS GESETZ VOM BEDECKEN DES BLUTES HAT GELTUNG BEIM WILDE UND BEIM GEFLÜGEL, BEI VORRÄTIGEM UND BEI NICHTVORRÄTIGEM, WÄHREND DAS GESETZ VOM FLIEGENLASSEN DES NESTVOGELS GELTUNG HAT NUR BEIM GEFLÜGEL UND NUR BEI NICHT VORRÄTIGEM. WAS HEISST NICHT VORRÄTIG? WENN BEISPIELSWEISE GÄNSE ODER HÜHNER IN EINEM OBSTGARTEN NISTEN; BEI SOLCHEN ABER, DIE IN EINEM HAUSE NISTEN UND EBENSO BEI HAUSTAUBEN IST MAN VOM FLIEGENLASSEN FREI. BEI EINEM UNREINEN VOGEL IST MAN VOM FLIEGENLASSEN FREI.",
+ "BRÜTET EIN UNREINER VOGEL AUF EIERN EINES REINEN ODER EIN REINER AUF EIERN EINES UNREINEN, SO IST MAN VOM FLIEGENLASSEN FREI. BEI EINEM MÄNNLICHEN REBHUHNE IST MAN NACH R. ELIE͑ZER VERPFLICHTET UND NACH DEN WEISEN FREI.",
+ "WENN DIE MUTTER DARÜBER NUR SCHWEBT, SO IST MAN, WENN DIE FLÜGEL DAS NEST BERÜHREN, ZUM FLIEGENLASSEN VERPFLICHTET, UND WENN DIE FLÜGEL DAS NEST NICHT BERÜHREN, VOM FLIEGENLASSEN FREI. BEFINDET SICH DARIN NUR EIN KÜCHLEIN ODER NUR EIN EI, SO IST MAN ZUM FLIEGENLASSEN VERPFLICHTET, DENN ES HEISST Nest, JEDE ART NEST. BEFINDEN SICH DARIN FLÜGGE KÜCHLEIN ODER VERDORBENE BIER, SO IST MAN VOM FLIEGENLASSEN FREI, DENN ES HEISST:und die Mutter auf den Küchlein oder den Eiern liegt, WIE KÜCHLEIN LEBENSFÄHIG SIND, EBENSO EIER, WENN SIE LEBENSFÄHIG SIND, AUSGENOMMEN VERDORBENE; UND WIE FERNER DIE EIER DER MUTTER BENÖTIGEN, EBENSO KÜCHLEIN, DIE DER MUTTER BENÖTIGEN, AUSGENOMMEN FLÜGGE. WENN MAN SIE FLIEGEN LÄSST UND SIE ZURÜCKKEHRT, SELBST VIERODER FÜNFMAL, SO IST MANVERPFLICHTET, DENN ES HEISST:fort schicken, fortschicken sollst du die Mutter. SAGT JEMAND, ER WOLLE DIE MUTTER BEHALTEN UND DIE JUNGEN FLIEGEN LASSEN, SO IST ER SCHULDIG, DENN ES HEISST: fortschicken, fortschicken sollst du die Mutter. WENN MAN DIE JUNGEN GENOMMEN UND SIE ZURÜCK IN DAS NEST GESETZT HAT, UND DIE MUTTER ZU IHNEN ZURÜCHGEKEHRT IST, SO IST MAN VOM FLIEGENLASSEN FREI.",
+ "WER DIE MÜTTER SAMT DEN JUNGEN GENOMMEN HAT, IST, WIE R. JEHUDA SAGT, ZU GEISSELN, UND ER LASSE SIE NICHT MEHR FLIEGEN; DIE WEISEN SAGEN, ER LASSE SIE FLIEGEN UND SEI NICHT ZU GEISSELN. DIE REGEL HIERBEI IST: WEGEN EINES VERBOTES, DEM EIN GEBOTSICH ANSCHLIESST, IST NICHT ZU GEISSELN.",
+ "MAN DARF NICHT DIE MUTTER MIT DEN JUNGEN NEHMEN, SELBST ZUR REINIGUNG EINES AUSSÄTZIGEN. WENN DIE TORA VON EINEM LEICHTEN GEBOTE IM WERTE EINES ASSARSSAGT:damit es dir wohl gehe und du lange lebst, UM WIEVIEL MEHR GILT DIES VON DEN STRENGEN GEBOTEN DER TORA."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/William Davidson Edition - English.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/William Davidson Edition - English.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1fc9479d35389095c0631e2229c29cada9d69ac7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/William Davidson Edition - English.json
@@ -0,0 +1,125 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Chullin",
+ "versionSource": "https://korenpub.com/collections/the-noe-edition-koren-talmud-bavli-1",
+ "versionTitle": "William Davidson Edition - English",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 2.0,
+ "license": "CC-BY-NC",
+ "versionNotes": "English from The William Davidson digital edition of the Koren Noé Talmud, with commentary by Rabbi Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz",
+ "shortVersionTitle": "Koren - Steinsaltz",
+ "actualLanguage": "en",
+ "languageFamilyName": "english",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה חולין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "Everyone slaughters an animal, i.e., can perform halakhically valid slaughter, and their slaughter is valid, except for a deaf-mute, an imbecile, and a minor, lest they ruin their slaughter because they lack competence. And for all of them, when they slaughtered an animal and others see and supervise them, their slaughter is valid. Slaughter performed by a gentile renders the animal an unslaughtered carcass, and the carcass imparts ritual impurity through carrying. In the case of one who slaughters an animal at night, and likewise in the case of the blind person who slaughters an animal, his slaughter is valid. In the case of one who slaughters an animal on Shabbat or on Yom Kippur, although he is liable to receive the death penalty, his slaughter is valid.",
+ "In the case of one who slaughters an animal with the smooth side of a hand sickle, which has both a smooth and a serrated side, or with a sharpened flint, or with a reed that was cut lengthwise and sharpened, his slaughter is valid. All slaughter [hakkol shoḥatin], and one may always slaughter, and one may slaughter with any item that cuts, except for the serrated side of the harvest sickle, a saw, the teeth of an animal when attached to its jawbone, and a fingernail, because they are serrated and they consequently strangle the animal and do not cut its windpipe and gullet as required. In the case of one who slaughters an animal with a harvest sickle, which is serrated with its teeth inclined considerably in one direction, in a forward direction, where the serrations do not tear the flesh, Beit Shammai deem the slaughter not valid and Beit Hillel deem it valid. And they both agree that if they smoothed its serrations so that they do not tear the flesh, its halakhic status is like that of a knife and one may slaughter with it.",
+ "With regard to one who slaughters an animal from within the cricoid cartilage that forms a complete ring at the top of the windpipe and left a thread breadth over the surface of the ring in its entirety intact, as the knife did not go beyond the ring toward the head of the animal, his slaughter is valid. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: It is valid even if he left a thread breadth over the majority of the surface of the ring.",
+ "One who slaughters from the sides of the throat, his slaughter is valid. One who pinches the neck of a bird offering from the sides, his pinching is not valid.One who slaughters from the nape [oref] of the neck, his slaughter is not valid. One who pinches a bird offering from the nape of the neck, his pinching is valid. One who slaughters from the throat, his slaughter is valid. One who pinches a bird offering from the throat, his pinching is not valid, as the entire nape is valid for pinching and the entire throat is valid for slaughter. It is found that that which is valid for slaughter is not valid for pinching and that which is valid for pinching is not valid for slaughter.",
+ "It is written with regard to bird offerings: “He shall bring his offering of doves, or of young pigeons” (Leviticus 1:14). The age that is fit for sacrifice in doves, mature birds, is unfit for sacrifice in pigeons, immature birds;the age that is fit for sacrifice in pigeons is unfit for sacrifice in doves. At the intermediate stage of the beginning of the yellowing of its plumage (see 22b), a bird is unfit both as this, a pigeon, and as that, a dove, since it is no longer a fledgling but is not yet a mature bird.",
+ "That which is fit in a red heifer is unfit in a heifer whose neck is broken; that which is fit in a heifer whose neck is broken is unfit in a red heifer. There is an element with which priests remain fit and Levites are unfit, and there is also an element with which Levites remain fit and priests are unfit. That which is ritually pure in an earthenware vessel is ritually impure in all the other types of vessels; that which is ritually pure in all the other types of vessels is ritually impure in an earthenware vessel. That which is ritually pure in wooden vessels is ritually impure in metal vessels; that which is ritually pure in metal vessels is ritually impure in wooden vessels. With regard to the obligation of separating teruma and tithes, the stage of development that is obligated in bitter almonds is exempt in sweet almonds; and the stage in development that is obligated in sweet almonds is exempt in bitter almonds.",
+ "Temed, a beverage produced from grape residue soaked in water, until it fermented, may not be purchased with second-tithe money to be drunk in Jerusalem, because it is not wine. And if three log of it fall into a ritual bath, its halakhic status is that of drawn water and it invalidates the ritual bath. Once it fermented, it is wine, and therefore it may be purchased with second-tithe money and it does not invalidate the ritual bath. With regard to brothers who are partners in the inheritance of their father, when they are obligated to add the premium [kalbon] to their annual half-shekel payment to the Temple, they are exempt from animal tithe; when they are obligated to separate animal tithe, they are exempt from adding the premium. Partners who pay the half-shekel are required to add the premium and are exempt from animal tithe. If they are not true partners, but their inheritance remains the property of the father, the sons are exempt from paying the premium, and they are obligated to separate animal tithe. Any situation where there is sale of one’s daughter as a Hebrew maidservant, i.e., when she is a minor, there is no fine of fifty sela paid to her father if she is raped or seduced, as that fine is paid to her father only when she is a young woman. And any situation where there is a fine paid to the father there is no sale. Any situation where there is the right of refusal for a minor girl married by her mother or brothers, enabling her to opt out of the marriage, there is no ḥalitza, as a minor girl whose husband died without children cannot perform ḥalitza. And any situation where there is ḥalitza, once she has reached majority, there is no right of refusal. Any situation where there is a shofar blast sounded on the eve of Shabbat or a Festival to stop the people from performing labor and to demarcate between the sacred and the profane, there is no havdala recited at the conclusion of the Shabbat or Festival in prayer and over a cup of wine. And any situation where there is havdala recited, there is no shofar blast sounded. How so? On a Festival that occurs on Shabbat eve, one sounds the shofar to stop the people from performing labor that is permitted on the Festival and prohibited on Shabbat and to demarcate between one sacred day and another; and one does not recite havdala, as that is recited only when the transition is from a sacred day to a profane day or from a day of greater sanctity to a day of lesser sanctity. The sanctity of Shabbat is greater than the sanctity of the Festival, and therefore havdala is not recited in this case. On a Festival that occurs at the conclusion of Shabbat, one recites havdala, but one does not sound the shofar. How does one recite havdala in that case; i.e., what is the formula of the blessing? It concludes: Who distinguishes between sacred and sacred, as opposed to the standard blessing at the conclusion of Shabbat: Who distinguishes between sacred and profane. Rabbi Dosa says that the formula is: Who distinguishes between greater sanctity and lesser sanctity."
+ ],
+ [
+ "In the case of one who slaughters by cutting one siman, i.e., the windpipe or the gullet, in a bird, and two simanim in an animal, his slaughter is valid, and the halakhic status of the majority of one siman is like that of the entire siman. Rabbi Yehuda says: The slaughter is not valid until he cuts the veins [haveridin], i.e., the major blood vessels in the neck. If one cut half of one siman in a bird or one and a half simanim in an animal, his slaughter is not valid. If one cut the majority of one siman in a bird or the majority of two simanim in an animal, his slaughter is valid.",
+ "With regard to one who slaughters by cutting two animals’ heads simultaneously, his slaughter is valid. If two people are grasping a knife and slaughtering one animal, even if each is holding a knife and slaughtering one above and one below, with each one slaughtering at a different point in the neck, their slaughter is valid.",
+ "If one decapitated the animal in one motion and did not slaughter the animal in the standard manner of drawing the knife back and forth, the slaughter is not valid. In a case where one was in the process of slaughtering the animal in the standard manner and he decapitated the animal in one motion, if the length of the knife is equivalent to the breadth of the animal’s entire neck, the slaughter is valid. If one was in the process of slaughtering two animals simultaneously, and he decapitated two heads in one motion, if the length of the knife is equivalent to the breadth of an entire neck of one of the animals, the slaughter is valid. In what case is this statement, that one must be concerned about the length of the knife, said? It is when one drew the knife back and did not draw it forth, or drew it forth and did not draw it back; but if he drew it back and forth, even if the knife was of any length, even if he slaughtered with a scalpel [be’izemel], the slaughter is valid. If a knife fell and slaughtered an animal, although the knife slaughtered the animal in the standard manner, the slaughter is not valid, as it is stated: “And you shall slaughter…and you shall eat” (Deuteronomy 27:7), from which it is derived: That which you slaughter you may eat, and that which was slaughtered on its own, you may not eat. If, when one was in the middle of slaughtering an animal, the knife fell and he lifted it and then completed the slaughter, or if his garments fell and he lifted them and then completed the slaughter, or if he had honed the knife and grew weary before completing the slaughter and another came and slaughtered the animal, if he interrupted the slaughter in one of these ways or in a different way for an interval equivalent to the duration of an act of slaughter, the slaughter is not valid. Rabbi Shimon says: The slaughter is not valid if he interrupted the slaughter for an interval equivalent to the duration of an examination.",
+ " If one cut the gullet in the standard manner of slaughter with a back-and-forth movement, and he severed the windpipe not in the standard manner, or if one severed the windpipe and thereafter cut the gullet, or if one cut one of the simanim and waited until the animal died, or if one cut one siman and concealed the knife beneath the second siman and severed it from below, Rabbi Yeshevav says: The animal is an unslaughtered carcass and imparts ritual impurity through contact with it and carrying it. Rabbi Akiva says: The animal is a tereifa, and although eating it is prohibited, it does not transmit ritual impurity. Rabbi Yeshevav stated a principle in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua: Any animal that was rendered unfit during its slaughter because the slaughter was not performed properly is an unslaughtered carcass; any animal whose slaughter was performed properly and another matter caused it to become unfit is a tereifa. And Rabbi Akiva conceded to his opinion.",
+ "In the case of one who slaughters a domesticated animal, an undomesticated animal, or a bird, and blood did not emerge from them during the slaughter, all of these are permitted for consumption and do not require the ritual washing of the hands as they may be eaten with ritually impure [mesoavot] hands, because they were not rendered susceptible to ritual impurity through contact with blood, which is one of the seven liquids that render food susceptible to impurity. Rabbi Shimon says: They were rendered susceptible to ritual impurity by means of the slaughter itself. ",
+ "In the case of one who slaughters an animal that is in danger of imminent death, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: The slaughter is valid only in a case where after the slaughter it convulses with its foreleg and with its hind leg. Rabbi Eliezer says: It is sufficient if blood spurted from the neck. Rabbi Shimon says: In the case of one who slaughters at night and the next day he awoke and found walls full of blood, the slaughter is valid, as it is clear that the blood spurted, and this is in accordance with the rule of Rabbi Eliezer. And the Rabbis say: It is valid only in a case where it convulses with its foreleg or with its hind leg, or in a case where it wags its tail. This is the halakha with regard to both a small animal, e.g., a sheep, and a large animal, e.g., a cow, that is in danger of imminent death. The slaughter of a small animal that when being slaughtered extended its foreleg that was bent and did not restore it to the bent position is not valid, as extending the foreleg is only part of the natural course of removal of the animal’s soul from its body and not a convulsion indicating life. In what case is this statement said? It is in a case where the presumptive status of the animal was that it was in danger of imminent death. But if its presumptive status was that it was healthy, then even if there were none of these indicators, the slaughter is valid.",
+ "In the case of a Jew who slaughters the animal of a gentile for a gentile, his slaughter is valid, and Rabbi Eliezer deems it not valid. Rabbi Eliezer says: Even if the Jew slaughtered the animal with the intent to feed the gentile from its diaphragm [meḥatzar kaved], its slaughter is not valid, as the unspecified intent of a gentile is to slaughter the animal for idol worship, and it is prohibited to derive benefit from it. Rabbi Yosei says: The matter of the intent of the gentile is irrelevant in this case, as can be derived by means of an a fortiori inference. If in a place where intent while slaughtering the animal invalidates the slaughter, i.e., in sacrificial animals, such as when slaughtering an offering with the intent to sacrifice it beyond its designated time, everything follows only the intent of the priest performing the service and not the intent of the owner, then in a place where intent does not invalidate the slaughter, i.e., in non-sacred animals, is it not right that everything should follow only the intent of the one who slaughters the animal?",
+ "In the case of one who slaughters an animal for the sake of, i.e., to worship, mountains, for the sake of hills, for the sake of seas, for the sake of rivers, or for the sake of wildernesses, his slaughter is not valid. If there were two people grasping a knife together and slaughtering an animal, one slaughtering for the sake of one of all those enumerated in the first clause of the mishna and one slaughtering for the sake of a legitimate matter, their slaughter is not valid.",
+ "One may not slaughter an animal and have its blood flow, neither into seas, nor into rivers, nor into vessels, as in all those cases it appears that he is slaughtering the animal in the manner of idolaters. But one may slaughter an animal and have its blood flow into a round excavation containing water. And on a ship, one may slaughter an animal onto vessels as it is clear that his objective is to avoid sullying the ship. One may not slaughter an animal and have its blood flow into a small hole in the ground at all, but one may fashion a small hole inside his house so that the blood will enter into it. And in the marketplace one may not do so, so that he will not appear to emulate [yeḥakkeh] the heretics.",
+ "In the case of one who slaughters an animal and asserts that he is slaughtering it for the sake of a burnt offering, for the sake of a peace offering, for the sake of a provisional guilt offering, for the sake of a Paschal offering, or for the sake of a thanks offering, his slaughter is not valid, as it appears that he is consecrating animals and slaughtering sacrificial animals outside the Temple. And Rabbi Shimon deems his slaughter valid. If there were two people grasping a knife together and slaughtering an animal, one slaughtering for the sake of one of all those enumerated in the first clause of the mishna and one slaughtering for the sake of a legitimate matter, their slaughter is not valid. With regard to one who slaughters an animal for the sake of a sin offering, for the sake of a guilt offering for a definite transgression, for the sake of the offering of a firstborn, for the sake of the offering of animal tithe, or for the sake of a substitute for a sacrificial animal, his slaughter is valid. All of these offerings may be brought only as obligations and not as gifts. Therefore, there is no concern that he consecrated the animals. This is the principle: For any item, i.e., offering, which is consecrated as a voluntary vow or gift, in the case of one who slaughters for its sake the animal is forbidden. And for any offering that is not consecrated as a voluntary vow or gift but is an obligation that is incumbent upon him, in the case of one who slaughters for its sake the animal is permitted."
+ ],
+ [
+ "These wounds constitute tereifot in an animal, rendering them prohibited for consumption: A perforated gullet, where the perforation goes through the wall of the gullet, or a cut windpipe. If the membrane of the brain was perforated, or if the heart was perforated to its chamber; if the spinal column was broken and its cord was cut; if the liver was removed and nothing remained of it, any of these render the animal a tereifa. Additionally, a lung that was perforated or that was missing a piece renders the animal a tereifa. Rabbi Shimon says: It is not a tereifa unless it is perforated through to the bronchi. If the abomasum was perforated, or the gallbladder was perforated, or the small intestines were perforated, it is a tereifa. It is also a tereifa in a case where the internal rumen was perforated or where the majority of the external rumen was torn. Rabbi Yehuda says: For a large animal, a tear of one handbreadth renders it a tereifa, while for a small animal, it is a tereifa only if the majority of it was torn. And it is a tereifa where the omasum [hemses] or the reticulum was perforated to the outside, i.e., to the abdominal cavity, but not if the perforation was between the two. Likewise, if an animal fell from the roof, or if the majority of its ribs were fractured, or if it was clawed by a wolf, it is a tereifa. Rabbi Yehuda says: If it was clawed by a wolf in the case of a small animal, i.e., a sheep or goat; or clawed by a lion in the case of a large animal, i.e., cattle; or if it was clawed by a hawk in the case of a small bird; or if it was clawed by a large bird of prey in the case of a large bird, then it is a tereifa. This is the principle: Any animal that was injured such that an animal in a similar condition could not live for an extended period is a tereifa, the consumption of which is forbidden by Torah law.",
+ "And these, despite their condition, are kosher in an animal: If its windpipe was perforated or cracked lengthwise. How much can the windpipe be missing and still be kosher? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Until the perforation is the same size as the Italian issar. If the skull was fractured but the membrane of the brain was not perforated, it is kosher. If the heart was perforated and the perforation did not reach its chamber, or if the spinal column was broken but its cord was not cut, or if the liver was removed and an olive-bulk of it remained, it is kosher. Additionally, it is kosher if the omasum or the reticulum was perforated one into the other. If the spleen was removed, or the kidneys were removed, or if its lower jaw was removed, or if its womb was removed, or if its lung shriveled by the hand of Heaven, the animal is kosher. In the case of an animal whose hide was removed, Rabbi Meir deems it kosher, and the Rabbis deem it a tereifa and unfit for consumption.",
+ "And these are tereifot in a bird: One with a perforated gullet, or with a cut windpipe that was cut across its width; or if a weasel struck the bird on its head in a place that renders it a tereifa, as one must be concerned that the membrane of the brain was perforated; or if the gizzard was perforated; or if the small intestines were perforated. In a case where a bird fell into the fire and its innards were singed [neḥmeru], if they turned green they are unfit, and the bird is a tereifa, but if they are red the bird is kosher. If a person trampled the bird, or slammed it against a wall, or if an animal crushed it and it is twitching, it is a tereifa because its limbs were shattered. But if the bird lasted for a twenty-four-hour period, and then one slaughtered it, it is kosher.",
+ "And these are kosher among birds: If a bird’s windpipe was perforated or cracked lengthwise; or if a weasel struck the bird on its head in a place that does not render it a tereifa; or if the crop was perforated. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: It is kosher even if the crop was removed. If the bird’s intestines emerged from the abdominal wall but were not perforated, or if its wings were broken, or if its legs were broken, or if the feathers on its wings were plucked, the bird is kosher. Rabbi Yehuda says: If the down covering its body was removed, it is a tereifa and unfit for consumption.",
+ "With regard to an animal that is congested with excess blood, or that was smoked, i.e., that suffered from smoke inhalation, or that was chilled and subsequently became sick, or that ate oleander, which is poisonous, or that ate the excrement of chickens, or that drank foul water, although in all these cases the animal is in danger, it is kosher. By contrast, if the animal ate deadly poison, or if a snake bit the animal, with regard to the prohibition of tereifa, consumption of the animal would be permitted, but it is prohibited due to the threat to one’s life if he eats it.",
+ "The signs that indicate that a domesticated animal and an undomesticated animal are kosher were stated in the Torah, and the signs of a kosher bird were not explicitly stated. But the Sages stated certain signs in a bird: Any bird that claws its prey and eats it is non-kosher. Any bird that has an extra digit behind the leg slightly elevated above the other digits, and a crop, which is a sack alongside the gullet in which food is stored prior to digestion, and for which the yellowish membrane inside its gizzard can be peeled, is kosher. Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says: Any bird that splits the digits of its feet when standing on a string, placing two digits on one side of the string and two on the other, is non-kosher.",
+ "And with regard to grasshoppers, whose signs were also not stated in the Torah, the Sages stated: Any grasshopper that has four legs, and four wings, and two additional jumping legs, and whose wings cover most of its body, is kosher. Rabbi Yosei says: And this applies only if the name of its species is grasshopper. And with regard to fish, the signs are explicitly stated in the Torah: Any fish that has a fin and a scale is kosher; Rabbi Yehuda says: Two scales and one fin. And these are scales: Those that are fixed to its body; and fins are those with which the fish swims."
+ ],
+ [
+ "When a pregnant kosher animal is slaughtered, the slaughter also renders the consumption of its fetus permitted. Even if an animal was encountering difficulty giving birth and meanwhile the fetus extended its foreleg outside the mother animal’s womb and then brought it back inside, and then the mother animal was slaughtered, the consumption of the fetus is permitted by virtue of the slaughter of the mother animal. But if the fetus extended its head outside the womb, even if it then brought it back inside, the halakhic status of that fetus is like that of a newborn, and the slaughter of the mother animal does not permit the consumption of the fetus. Rather, it requires its own slaughter. If, prior to slaughtering an animal, one severs pieces from a fetus that is in the womb and leaves those pieces in the womb, their consumption is permitted by virtue of the slaughter of the mother animal. By contrast, if one severs pieces of the spleen or of the kidneys of an animal and then slaughters it, then even if those pieces are left inside the animal their consumption is prohibited, because an organ severed from a living being is not permitted by the subsequent slaughter of the animal. This is the principle: An item that is part of an animal’s body that was severed prior to its slaughter is prohibited even after slaughter, and an item that is not part of its body, i.e., its fetus, is permitted by virtue of its slaughter.",
+ "Upon its birth, the firstborn male offspring of a domesticated animal is automatically consecrated with firstborn status, and it is prohibited to derive benefit from it. Furthermore, if it dies, it may not be discarded, but must be buried. If an animal that was giving birth to a firstborn male was encountering difficulty giving birth, and in order to alleviate the difficulty one wishes to terminate the birth, he may cut up the fetus limb by limb and cast it to the dogs. Since the fetus was not born, it is non-sacred and does not require burial. If a majority of the fetus had already emerged, it is considered to have been born and is therefore consecrated; consequently, if one cut it up it must be buried, and the mother animal is exempted from having firstborn status conferred on any future offspring.",
+ "With regard to an animal whose fetus died in its womb and the shepherd reached his hand into the womb and touched the fetus, both in the case of a non-kosher animal and in the case of a kosher animal the fetus does not have the status of an animal carcass that imparts ritual impurity, and the shepherd remains ritually pure. Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says: In the case of a non-kosher animal it is impure, and in the case of a kosher animal it is pure. With regard to a woman whose fetus died in her womb and the midwife extended her hand into the womb and touched the fetus, the midwife is thereby rendered impure with the seven-day impurity imparted by a corpse, and the woman remains ritually pure until the offspring emerges from the womb.",
+ "If an animal was encountering difficulty giving birth and as a result the fetus extended its foreleg outside the mother’s womb, and someone severed it and afterward slaughtered the mother animal, the flesh of the fetus is ritually pure. If one first slaughtered the mother animal and afterward severed the foreleg, the flesh of both the mother animal and the fetus are ritually impure due to having been in contact with a carcass. Since the foreleg was not permitted to be consumed through the act of slaughtering, it is regarded as a carcass with the associated ritual impurity. The rest of the flesh, which was permitted to be consumed by the slaughter, was in contact with it and so was rendered ritually impure from it; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: The flesh has the ritual impurity of having been in contact with a tereifa that was slaughtered, as the limb is regarded as a tereifa that was slaughtered. By Torah law, although it is prohibited to consume it, it does not impart ritual impurity. Nevertheless, the Sages decreed that a tereifa that was slaughtered, as well as anything that comes in contact with it, is regarded as ritually impure to the extent that it disqualifies sacrificial foods that come in contact with it. The Rabbis explain the rationale behind their opinion: Just as we found in the case of a tereifa that its slaughter renders it ritually pure according to Torah law, i.e., ritual slaughter prevents it from having the ritual impurity of a carcass despite not rendering the animal permitted for consumption, so too, the slaughter of the mother animal should render the limb of its fetus that left the womb ritually pure, despite the fact that its consumption is prohibited. Rabbi Meir said to them: No, if the slaughter of a tereifa renders the body of the animal ritually pure, it is because the slaughter is performed on something that is part of its body, i.e., its throat. Does it necessarily follow that you should also render the limb that left the womb pure, given that it is something that is not part of the mother’s body? Certainly not. The mishna asks: From where is it derived with regard to a tereifa that its slaughter renders it ritually pure, i.e., prevents it from having the ritual impurity of a carcass? The mishna notes there is a reason to say the slaughter should not render it pure, as one can compare a tereifa with a non-kosher animal: A non-kosher animal is prohibited for consumption; so too, a tereifa is prohibited for consumption. Therefore, conclude: Just as with regard to a non-kosher animal, its slaughter does not render it ritually pure, so too with regard to a tereifa, its slaughter should not render it ritually pure. The mishna questions the comparison: No, if you said that slaughtering cannot prevent an animal from having the ritual impurity of a carcass in the case of a non-kosher animal, which is distinct in that it did not have a period of potential fitness when slaughtering it could have rendered its consumption permitted, does it necessarily follow that you should also say this in the case of a tereifa, which did have a period of potential fitness? Perhaps, since the animal had a period of potential fitness its slaughter remains effective in preventing it from having the ritual impurity of a carcass. The mishna rejects this distinction: Take back to yourself this claim that you brought, as it is insufficient. What about a case where an animal was born as a tereifa from the womb, and so it never had a period of potential fitness? For such a case, from where is it derived that its slaughter renders it ritually pure? The mishna reformulates the distinction: No, if you say that slaughtering cannot prevent a prohibited animal from having the ritual impurity of a carcass with regard to a non-kosher animal, which is distinct in that there are no animals of its kind that are permitted through slaughtering, as the Torah states the concept of slaughtering only with regard to kosher animals, does it necessarily follow that you should also say this with regard to a tereifa kosher animal, given that there are other animals of its kind that are permitted through slaughtering, i.e., kosher animals that are not tereifa? Perhaps, since the concept of slaughtering is relevant to that kind of animal it can serve to prevent the animal from having the ritual impurity of a carcass even if the slaughter cannot render it permitted for consumption. The mishna notes: Based on this reasoning, one must conclude that with regard to an eight-month-old fetus that was born alive, slaughter does not render it ritually pure, as there are no animals of its kind that are permitted through slaughtering. The Torah applies the concept of slaughter only with regard to animals that were born full term.",
+ "In the case of one who slaughtered an animal and found within it an eight-month-old fetus, i.e., one that was not full term, whether it was alive or dead, or a nine-month-old fetus, i.e., one that was full term, that was dead, that fetus is permitted by virtue of the slaughter of its mother, as it is considered part of its mother. Therefore, its blood is considered part of its mother’s blood and is prohibited, so one must tear the fetus and remove its blood before it may be consumed. If he found within it a live nine-month-old fetus, it requires its own slaughter, as it is considered an independent full-fledged animal, and if one slaughters both the mother and fetus on the same day, one is liable for violating the prohibition against slaughtering an animal itself and its offspring on the same day; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: Even when the fetus is nine months old, it is still considered part of its mother, and the slaughter of its mother renders it permitted for consumption. Rabbi Shimon Shezuri says: Even if the fetus emerged alive and is now five years old and plowing in the field, the earlier slaughter of its mother rendered it permitted and it does not require slaughter before it is eaten. But if one tore an animal, i.e., he killed it without slaughtering it, and inside he found a live nine-month-old fetus, everyone agrees that the fetus requires its own slaughter because its mother was not slaughtered.",
+ "With regard to an animal whose hind legs were severed, if they were severed from the leg joint and below, the animal is kosher; from the leg joint and above, the animal is thereby rendered a tereifa and is not kosher. And likewise, an animal whose convergence of sinews in the thigh was removed is a tereifa and is not kosher. If the bone of a limb was broken but the limb was not completely severed, and the animal was then slaughtered, if the majority of the flesh surrounding the bone is intact, the slaughter of the animal renders it permitted; but if not, its slaughter does not render it permitted.",
+ "In the case of one who slaughters an animal and finds a placenta in its womb, one with a hearty soul [nefesh hayafa], i.e., who is not repulsed by it, may eat it, as its consumption was permitted by virtue of the slaughter of the mother. Nevertheless, since generally speaking, people do not consume such placentas, it is not regarded as food and so it cannot become impure with the ritual impurity of food even were it to come into contact with a source of impurity. And furthermore, it does not impart the ritual impurity of animal carcasses as it was permitted by virtue of the slaughter of the mother. But if one intended to eat it, one thereby elevated it to the status of food, and the placenta becomes impure with the ritual impurity of food if it comes into contact with a source of impurity. But even so, it still does not impart the ritual impurity of animal carcasses. With regard to a placenta, part of which emerged from the womb before the mother was slaughtered, its consumption is prohibited even after the mother animal is slaughtered because the emergence of the placenta is an indication of a fetus in a woman and an indication of a fetus in an animal. Accordingly, there is a concern that the head of the fetus might have emerged in that part of the placenta, thereby rendering the fetus as having been born, a status that precludes it from being permitted by the slaughter of its mother. Since the offspring is prohibited, its placenta is likewise prohibited. If an animal that was giving birth to its firstborn expelled a placenta, one may cast it to the dogs, and one does not need to be concerned that the placenta came from a male fetus that has the consecrated status of a firstborn. But in the case of sacrificial animals the placenta must be buried, because it came from a fetus that is assumed to have been sacred. The mishna adds: But one may neither bury it at an intersection, nor may one hang it on a tree, superstitious rites intended to prevent the animal from miscarrying again, due to the prohibition against following the ways of the Amorite, which prohibits Jews from practicing the superstitious rites observed by gentiles."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The prohibition against slaughtering an animal itself and its offspring applies both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael, both in the presence, i.e., the time, of the Temple and not in the presence of the Temple, and it applies with regard to non-sacred animals and with regard to sacrificial animals. How so? In the case of one who slaughters an animal itself and its offspring, both of which are non-sacred, and slaughters them outside the Temple courtyard, both of the animals are fit for consumption, but for slaughtering the second animal, one incurs [sofeg] the forty lashes for violating the prohibition: “You shall not slaughter it and its offspring both in one day” (Leviticus 22:28). If both animals were sacrificial animals slaughtered outside the Temple courtyard, then for slaughtering the first animal, one is liable to receive excision from the World-to-Come [karet]. For slaughtering the second animal one is not liable to receive karet. The second animal was not fit for sacrifice, since one may not slaughter an animal and its offspring on the same day. And both animals are disqualified for use as offerings, and for the slaughter of both of them, one incurs forty lashes apiece: The first being a sacrificial animal slaughtered outside the courtyard and the second being the offspring of an animal slaughtered that day. If both animals were non-sacred and slaughtered inside the Temple courtyard, both of them are unfit to be sacrificed, being non-sacred animals slaughtered in the courtyard. And for slaughter of the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes for slaughtering an animal and its offspring on a single day. If both animals were sacrificial animals slaughtered inside the Temple courtyard, the first is fit for sacrifice, and one who slaughters it is exempt from any punishment. But for slaughter of the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes for slaughtering an animal and its offspring on a single day, and it is unfit for sacrifice, because one was not allowed to slaughter it on that day.",
+ "If the first animal was non-sacred and the second a sacrificial animal, and both were slaughtered outside the Temple courtyard, the first is fit for consumption and one who slaughters it is exempt from any punishment. But for slaughtering the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes for slaughtering an animal and its offspring on a single day, and the animal is unfit for sacrifice. If the first animal was a sacrificial animal and the second was non-sacred and both were slaughtered outside the Temple courtyard, for the first animal, one is liable to receive karet for slaughtering a sacrificial animal outside the courtyard, and the animal is unfit for sacrifice. And the second is fit for consumption; and for the slaughter of both of them one incurs forty lashes apiece: The first being a sacrificial animal slaughtered outside the courtyard and the second being the offspring of an animal slaughtered that day. If the first animal was non-sacred and the second was a sacrificial animal and both were slaughtered inside the Temple courtyard, both of them are unfit for sacrifice. And for slaughtering the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes. If the first animal was a sacrificial animal and the second was non-sacred and both were slaughtered inside the Temple courtyard, the first is fit for sacrifice and one who slaughters it is exempt from any punishment. And for slaughtering the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes, and the animal is unfit for sacrifice, as it is non-sacred. If both animals were non-sacred, and one slaughters them, the first outside the Temple courtyard and the second inside the Temple courtyard, the first is fit for consumption and one who slaughters it is exempt from any punishment. And for slaughtering the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes for slaughtering an animal and its offspring on a single day, and the animal is unfit for sacrifice as it is non-sacred. If both animals were sacrificial animals, and one slaughters them, the first outside the Temple courtyard and the second inside the Temple courtyard, for slaughtering the first animal one is liable to receive karet, and for slaughtering both of them one incurs forty lashes apiece. One set of lashes is given because the first was a sacrificial animal slaughtered outside the courtyard, and the second set of lashes is given because the second animal is the offspring of an animal slaughtered that day. And both of them are unfit for sacrifice. If both animals were non-sacred, and one slaughters them, the first inside the Temple courtyard and the second outside the Temple courtyard, the first is unfit for sacrifice, as it is non-sacred, and the one who slaughters it is exempt. And for the second, one incurs the forty lashes and the animal is fit for consumption. If both animals were sacrificial animals, and one slaughters them, the first inside the Temple courtyard and the second outside the Temple courtyard, the first is fit for sacrifice and one who slaughters it is exempt. And for the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes, and the animal is unfit for sacrifice because its requisite time has not yet arrived.",
+ "With regard to one who slaughters an animal and its offspring and one of them is discovered to be an animal with a wound that would have caused it to die within twelve months [tereifa] and may not be eaten, or one who slaughters one of the animals for the sake of idol worship, from which deriving benefit is prohibited, or one who slaughters the red heifer of purification, or an ox that was to have been stoned, or a heifer whose neck was to have been broken, all of which are animals from which deriving benefit is prohibited, Rabbi Shimon deems one who slaughters them exempt from lashes for the slaughter of a mother and its offspring, as in his opinion, slaughter that does not render the animal fit for consumption is not considered slaughter and does not violate the prohibition. And the Rabbis deem him liable, as the slaughter need not render the animal fit for consumption in order to violate the prohibition. All agree that one who slaughters an animal and it becomes a carcass by his hand because the slaughter was invalid, or one who stabs an animal, or one who uproots the windpipe and the gullet, is exempt with regard to the prohibition against slaughtering a mother and its offspring, as it is written: “You shall not slaughter it and its offspring both in one day” (Leviticus 22:28), and in these cases, no ritual slaughter was performed. With regard to two people who purchased a cow and its offspring, where each purchased one of the animals, whoever purchased his animal first shall slaughter it first, and the second one must wait until the next day to slaughter his animal, so as not to violate the prohibition of: It and its offspring. But if the second one preceded him and slaughtered his animal first, he benefitted, and the one who purchased the animal first may not slaughter it until the next day. If one slaughtered a cow and thereafter slaughtered its two offspring on the same day, he incurs eighty lashes for two separate actions violating the prohibition against slaughtering the mother and the offspring on the same day. If one slaughtered its two offspring and thereafter slaughtered the mother cow, he incurs the forty lashes, as he performed a single prohibited act. If one slaughtered the mother and its daughter, and, later that day, slaughtered its daughter’s daughter, he incurs eighty lashes, as he has performed the act of slaughtering a mother and its offspring twice. But if one slaughtered the mother and its daughter’s daughter and thereafter slaughtered its daughter, he incurs the forty lashes, as he performed a single prohibited act. Sumakhos says in the name of Rabbi Meir: He incurs eighty lashes for slaughtering the daughter on the same day as its calf and its mother, as that act comprises two separate violations of the prohibition. On four occasions during the year one who sells an animal to another is required to inform him: I sold the mother of this animal today for the buyer to slaughter it,or: I sold the daughter of this animal today for the buyer to slaughter it. And those four occasions are: The eve of the last day of the festival of Sukkot, the eve of the first day of the festival of Passover, and the eve of Shavuot, and the eve of Rosh HaShana. And according to the statement of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, the eve of Yom Kippur in the Galilee is included as well. Rabbi Yehuda said: When must he inform the buyer on those days? He must do so at a time when the seller has no interval between the sale of the mother and the offspring, as they were both sold on that day. But if the seller has an interval between the sales, he does not need to inform the buyer, as presumably each buyer purchased the animal to slaughter it on the day he purchased it. And Rabbi Yehuda concedes that in a case where one sells the mother animal to the groom and the offspring to the bride, that even if he did not sell them on the same day, he must inform the buyer, as it is obvious that they are both planning to slaughter their animal on one day, for their wedding feast.",
+ "On those four occasions, one compels the butcher to slaughter animals even against his will; even if there is a bull worth one thousand dinars and the buyer has only one dinar worth of meat, i.e., he already paid the butcher for one dinar’s worth of meat, one compels him to slaughter the animal and give him a dinar’s worth of meat. Therefore, if the bull dies before slaughter, although no act of acquisition was performed, it dies at the expense of the buyer, and he loses his dinar. But during the rest of the days of the year it is not so. On other days, until the buyer performs the act of pulling to assume ownership of the portion of the bull that he is purchasing, the bull remains in the butcher’s possession. Therefore, if the bull dies before the transaction is complete, it dies at the expense of the seller, who returns the buyer’s money.",
+ "With regard to the phrase “one day” that is stated with regard to the prohibition against slaughtering an animal itself and its offspring, the day follows the night. Therefore, one may slaughter an animal during the day and slaughter its offspring that night, but one may not slaughter an animal at night and slaughter its offspring the following day. Rabbi Shimon ben Zoma derived this by means of a verbal analogy. It is stated in the act of Creation: “One day” (Genesis 1:5), and it is stated with regard to the slaughter of an animal itself and its offspring: “One day” (Leviticus 22:28). Just as concerning the phrase “one day” that is stated in the act of Creation, the day follows the night, so too concerning the phrase “one day” that is stated with regard to the slaughter of an animal itself and its offspring, the day follows the night."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The mitzva of covering the blood after slaughter is in effect both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael, both in the presence, i.e., the time, of the Temple and not in the presence of the Temple. And it is in effect with regard to non-sacred animals, but it is not in effect with regard to sacrificial ones. And it is in effect with regard to the slaughter of an undomesticated animal and a bird, with regard to animals and birds that are readily available in his home, and with regard to those that are not readily available and are hunted in the wild. And it is in effect with regard to a koy, because it is uncertain whether a koy is a domesticated animal and one is exempt from the covering of its blood or whether it is an undomesticated animal and one is obligated to cover it. And one may not slaughter a koy on a Festival, because covering its blood entails the performance of prohibited labor that is permitted only if there is a definite obligation to cover the blood. And if one slaughtered a koy on a Festival after the fact, one does not cover its blood until after the Festival.",
+ "In the case of one who slaughters an undomesticated animal or a bird and it is discovered to be an animal with a wound that would have caused it to die within twelve months [tereifa]; and in the case of one who slaughters an undomesticated animal or a bird for the sake of idol worship; and in the case of one who slaughters a non-sacred animal or bird inside the Temple courtyard or a sacrificial bird outside the Temple courtyard; or in the case of one who slaughters an undomesticated animal or a bird that was sentenced to be stoned, e.g., for killing a person; in all these cases, even though it is prohibited to eat any of these animals or birds, Rabbi Meir deems one obligated to cover their blood, and the Rabbis deem one exempt from doing so because, in their opinion, slaughter that is not fit to render the meat permitted for consumption is not considered an act of slaughter. One who slaughters an animal or bird and it became a carcass by his hand, i.e., the slaughter was performed incorrectly, and one who stabs the animal or bird, and one who tears loose the windpipe and the gullet, are exempt from covering the blood, as no act of slaughter took place, and one is obligated to cover blood only after a valid slaughter.",
+ "In the case of a deaf-mute, an imbecile, or a minor who slaughtered an undomesticated animal or a bird, and others saw them and ensured that the slaughter was properly performed, in which case the slaughter is valid (see 2a), one who oversaw the slaughter is obligated to cover the blood. If they slaughtered the animals among themselves without supervision, one is exempt from the obligation to cover the blood. And likewise with regard to the matter of slaughtering a mother and its offspring on the same day, if a deaf-mute, an imbecile, or a minor slaughtered an undomesticated mother animal and others saw them, it is prohibited to slaughter its offspring after them. If they slaughtered the mother animal among themselves, Rabbi Meir deems it permitted to slaughter its offspring after them and the Rabbis deem it prohibited. And the Rabbis concede that if one slaughtered the offspring thereafter that he does not incur the forty lashes, as it is possible the mother was not properly slaughtered.",
+ "If one slaughtered one hundred undomesticated animals in one place, one covering of the blood suffices for all the animals and there is no obligation to cover the blood of each animal separately. Likewise, if one slaughtered one hundred birds in one place, one covering of the blood suffices for all the birds. If one slaughtered an undomesticated animal and a bird in one place, one covering for all of the blood is sufficient. Rabbi Yehuda says: If one slaughtered an undomesticated animal, he should cover its blood immediately and only thereafter he should slaughter the bird. If one slaughtered an undomesticated animal or bird and did not cover the blood, and another person saw the uncovered blood, the second person is obligated to cover the blood. If one covered the blood and it was then uncovered, he is exempt from covering it again. If the wind blew earth on the blood and covered it, and it was consequently uncovered, he is obligated to cover the blood.",
+ "In a case of the blood of an undomesticated animal or bird that was mixed with water, if there is in the mixture the appearance of blood one is obligated to cover it. If the blood was mixed with wine one views the wine as though it is water, and if a mixture with that amount of water would have the appearance of blood one is obligated to cover it. Likewise, if the blood of an undomesticated animal or a bird was mixed with the blood of a domesticated animal, which one does not have to cover, or with blood of the undomesticated animal that did not flow from the neck and does not require covering, one views the blood as though it is water. Rabbi Yehuda says: Blood does not nullify blood. Therefore, even if the undomesticated animal’s blood, which one must cover, is not recognizable in this mixture, he is obligated to cover the mixture nevertheless.",
+ "With regard to blood that spurts outside the pit over which the animal was slaughtered, or onto a wall, and blood that remained on the slaughtering knife, one is obligated to cover it. Rabbi Yehuda said: When is this the halakha? When no blood remains there from the slaughter except that blood. But if blood remains there from the slaughter that is not that blood, he is exempt from covering it.",
+ "With what substances may one cover the blood and with what substances may one not cover the blood? One may cover the blood with fine granulated manure, with fine sand, with lime, with crushed potsherd, and with a brick or the lid of an earthenware barrel that one crushed. But one may not cover the blood with thick manure, nor with thick, clumped sand, nor with a brick or the lid of an earthenware barrel that one did not crush. Neither may one merely turn a vessel over the blood. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel stated a principle: With regard to a substance in which plants grow, one may cover blood with it; and with regard to a substance in which plants do not grow, one may not cover blood with it."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve applies both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael, in the presence of, i.e., the time of, the Temple and not in the presence of the Temple, and with regard to non-sacred animals and with regard to sacrificial animals. And it applies to domesticated animals and to undomesticated animals, to the thigh of the right leg and to the thigh of the left leg. But it does not apply to a bird, due to the fact that the verse makes reference to the sciatic nerve as being “upon the spoon of the thigh” (Genesis 32:33), and a bird has no spoon of the thigh. And the prohibition applies to a late-term animal fetus [shalil] in the womb. Rabbi Yehuda says: It does not apply to a fetus; and similarly, its fat is permitted. And butchers are not deemed credible to say that the sciatic nerve was removed; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: They are deemed credible about the sciatic nerve and about the forbidden fat.",
+ "Although it is prohibited for Jews to eat the sciatic nerve, a Jewish person may send the thigh of an animal to a gentile with the sciatic nerve in it, without concern that the gentile will then sell the thigh to a Jew and the Jew will eat the sciatic nerve. This leniency is due to the fact that the place of the sciatic nerve is conspicuous in the thigh. One who removes the sciatic nerve must scrape away the flesh in the area surrounding the nerve to ensure that he will remove all of it. Rabbi Yehuda says: Scraping is not required; it is sufficient to excise it from the area above the rounded protrusion in order to thereby fulfill the mitzva of removal of the sciatic nerve.",
+ "One who eats an olive-bulk of the sciatic nerve incurs forty lashes. If one eats an entire sciatic nerve and it does not constitute an olive-bulk, he is nevertheless liable to receive lashes, because a complete sciatic nerve is a complete entity. If one ate an olive-bulk from this sciatic nerve in the right leg, and an olive-bulk from that sciatic nerve in the left leg, he incurs [sofeg] eighty lashes. Rabbi Yehuda says: He incurs only forty lashes, for eating the olive-bulk from the right leg, and he is exempt for eating the olive-bulk from the left leg.",
+ "In the case of a thigh that was cooked with the sciatic nerve in it, if there is enough of the sciatic nerve in it to impart its flavor to the thigh, the entire thigh is forbidden for consumption. How does one measure whether there is enough sciatic nerve to impart flavor to the meat of the entire thigh? One relates to it as though the sciatic nerve were meat imparting flavor to a turnip. If meat the volume of the sciatic nerve would impart flavor to a turnip the volume of the thigh when they were cooked together, then the entire thigh is forbidden.",
+ "With regard to a sciatic nerve that was cooked with other sinews, when one identifies the sciatic nerve and removes it, the other sinews are forbidden if the sciatic nerve was large enough to impart flavor. And if he does not identify it, all the sinews are forbidden because each one could be the sciatic nerve; but the broth is forbidden only if the sciatic nerve imparts flavor to the broth. And similarly, in the case of a piece of an animal carcass or a piece of non-kosher fish that was cooked with similar pieces of kosher meat or fish, when one identifies the forbidden piece and removes it, the rest of the meat or fish is forbidden only if the forbidden piece was large enough to impart flavor to the entire mixture. And if he does not identify and remove the forbidden piece, all the pieces are forbidden, due to the possibility that each piece one selects might be the forbidden piece; but the broth is forbidden only if the forbidden piece imparts flavor to the broth.",
+ "The prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve applies to a kosher animal and does not apply to a non-kosher animal. Rabbi Yehuda says: It applies even to a non-kosher animal. Rabbi Yehuda said in explanation: Wasn’t the sciatic nerve forbidden for the children of Jacob, as it is written: “Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sciatic nerve” (Genesis 32:33), yet the meat of a non-kosher animal was still permitted to them? Since the sciatic nerve of non-kosher animals became forbidden at that time, it remains forbidden now. The Rabbis said to Rabbi Yehuda: The prohibition was stated in Sinai, but it was written in its place, in the battle of Jacob and the angel despite the fact that the prohibition did not take effect then."
+ ],
+ [
+ "It is prohibited to cook any meat of domesticated and undomesticated animals and birds in milk, except for the meat of fish and grasshoppers, whose halakhic status is not that of meat. And likewise, the Sages issued a decree that it is prohibited to place any meat together with milk products, e.g., cheese, on one table. The reason for this prohibition is that one might come to eat them after they absorb substances from each other. This prohibition applies to all types of meat, except for the meat of fish and grasshoppers. And one who takes a vow that meat is prohibited to him is permitted to eat the meat of fish and grasshoppers. The meat of birds may be placed with cheese on one table but may not be eaten together with it; this is the statement of Beit Shammai. And Beit Hillel say: It may neither be placed on one table nor be eaten with cheese. Rabbi Yosei said: This is one of the disputes involving leniencies of Beit Shammai and stringencies of Beit Hillel. The mishna elaborates: With regard to which table are these halakhot stated? It is with regard to a table upon which one eats. But on a table upon which one prepares the cooked food, one may place this meat alongside that cheese or vice versa, and need not be concerned that perhaps they will be mixed and one will come to eat them together.",
+ "A person may bind meat and cheese in one cloth, provided that they do not come into contact with each other. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Two unacquainted guests [akhsena’in] may eat together on one table, this one eating meat and that one eating cheese, and they need not be concerned lest they come to violate the prohibition of eating meat and milk by partaking of the food of the other.",
+ "In the case of a drop of milk that fell on a piece of meat, if the drop contains enough milk to impart flavor to that piece of meat, i.e., the meat is less than sixty times the size of the drop, the meat is forbidden. If one stirred the contents of the pot and the piece was submerged in the gravy before it absorbed the milk, if the drop contains enough milk to impart flavor to the contents of that entire pot, the contents of the entire pot are forbidden. One who wants to eat the udder of a slaughtered animal tears it and removes its milk, and only then is it permitted to cook it. If he did not tear the udder before cooking it, he does not violate the prohibition against cooking and eating meat and milk and does not receive lashes for it, as the halakhic status of the milk in the udder is not that of milk. One who wants to eat the heart of a slaughtered animal tears it and removes its blood, and only then may he cook and eat it. If he did not tear the heart before cooking and eating it, he does not violate the prohibition against consuming blood and is not liable to receive karet for it. One who places the meat of birds with cheese on the table upon which he eats does not thereby violate a Torah prohibition.",
+ "It is prohibited to cook the meat of a kosher animal in the milk of any kosher animal, not merely the milk of its mother, and deriving benefit from that mixture is prohibited. It is permitted to cook the meat of a kosher animal in the milk of a non-kosher animal, or the meat of a non-kosher animal in the milk of a kosher animal, and deriving benefit from that mixture is permitted. Rabbi Akiva says: Cooking the meat of an undomesticated animal or bird in milk is not prohibited by Torah law, as it is stated: “You shall not cook a kid in its mother’s milk” (Exodus 23:19, 34:26; Deuteronomy 14:21) three times. The repetition of the word “kid” three times excludes an undomesticated animal, a bird, and a non-kosher animal. Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says that it is stated: “You shall not eat of any animal carcass” (Deuteronomy 14:21), and in the same verse it is stated: “You shall not cook a kid in its mother’s milk.” This indicates that meat of an animal that is subject to be prohibited due to the prohibition of eating an unslaughtered carcass is prohibited for one to cook in milk. Consequently, with regard to meat of birds, which is subject to be prohibited due to the prohibition of eating an unslaughtered carcass, one might have thought that it would be prohibited to cook it in milk. Therefore, the verse states: “In its mother’s milk,” excluding a bird, which has no mother’s milk.",
+ "The congealed milk in the stomach of the animal of a gentile and of an unslaughtered animal carcass is prohibited. With regard to one who curdled milk by using the skin of the stomach of a kosher animal as a coagulant to make cheese, which may then have the taste of meat cooked in milk, if the measure of the skin is enough to impart flavor to the milk, that cheese is prohibited. In the case of a kosher animal that suckled milk from a tereifa, the milk in its stomach is prohibited, as the milk is from the tereifa. If it was a tereifa that suckled milk from a kosher animal, the milk in its stomach is permitted, as the milk is from the kosher animal. In both cases, the milk that an animal suckles has the status of the animal from which it was suckled, and not that of the animal which suckled, because the milk is collected in its innards and is not an integral part of its body.",
+ "Although animal fats and blood are similar in that they are both prohibited by Torah law and punishable by karet, there are elements more stringent in the prohibition of fat than in that of blood, and likewise there are elements more stringent in the prohibition of blood than in that of fat. The elements more stringent in the prohibition of fat are the following: The first is that with regard to fat of an offering, one who derives benefit from it is liable for misuse of consecrated property. And second, one is liable for eating it due to violation of the prohibition of piggul, if it was from an offering that was slaughtered with the intent to sprinkle its blood or partake of it beyond its designated time, and due to the prohibition of notar, if it was from an offering whose period for consumption has expired. And third, if one is ritually impure, he is liable due to the prohibition of partaking of it while impure. This is not so with regard to blood, as one is not liable in these cases for violating the prohibitions of piggul, notar, and partaking of offerings while impure, but rather is liable only for violating the prohibition of consuming blood. And the more stringent element in the prohibition of blood is that the prohibition of blood applies to domesticated animals, undomesticated animals, and birds, both kosher and non-kosher, but the prohibition of forbidden fat applies only to a kosher domesticated animal."
+ ],
+ [
+ "All foods that became ritually impure through contact with a source of impurity transmit impurity to other food and liquids only if the impure foods measure an egg-bulk. In that regard, the Sages ruled that even if a piece of meat itself is less than an egg-bulk, the attached hide, even if it is not fit for consumption, joins together with the meat to constitute an egg-bulk. And the same is true of the congealed gravy attached to the meat, although it is not eaten; and likewise the spices added to flavor the meat, although they are not eaten; and the meat residue attached to the hide after flaying; and the bones; and the tendons; and the lower section of the horns, which remains attached to the flesh when the rest of the horn is removed; and the upper section of the hooves, which remains attached to the flesh when the rest of the hoof is removed. All these items join together with the meat to constitute the requisite egg-bulk to impart the impurity of food. Although if any of them was an egg-bulk they would not impart impurity of food, when attached to the meat they complete the measure. But they do not join together to constitute the measure of an olive-bulk required to impart the impurity of animal carcasses. Similarly, there is another item that imparts impurity of food but not impurity of animal carcasses: In the case of one who slaughters a non-kosher animal for a gentile and the animal is still twitching and comes into contact with a source of impurity, the animal becomes impure with impurity of food and imparts impurity of food to other food, but does not impart impurity of animal carcasses until it dies, or until one severs its head. The mishna summarizes: The Torah included certain items to impart impurity of food beyond those which it included to impart impurity of animal carcasses. Rabbi Yehuda says: With regard to the meat residue attached to the hide after flaying that was collected, if there is an olive-bulk of it in one place it imparts impurity of an animal carcass, and one who contracts impurity from it and then eats consecrated foods or enters the Temple is liable to receive karet. By collecting it in one place, the person indicates that he considers it as meat.",
+ "These are the entities whose skin has the same halakhic status as their flesh: The skin of a dead person, which imparts impurity like his flesh; and the skin of a domesticated pig, which is soft and eaten by gentiles, and imparts the impurity of an animal carcass like its flesh. Rabbi Yehuda says: Even the skin of a wild boar has the same status. And the halakhic status of the skin of all of the following animals is also like that of their flesh: The skin of the hump of a young camel that did not yet toughen; and the skin of the head of a young calf; and the hide of the hooves; and the skin of the womb; and the skin of an animal fetus in the womb of a slaughtered animal; and the skin beneath the tail of a ewe; and the skin of the gecko [anaka], and the desert monitor [ko’aḥ], and the lizard [leta’a], and the skink [ḥomet], four of the eight creeping animals that impart ritual impurity after death. Rabbi Yehuda says: The halakhic status of the skin of the lizard is like that of the skin of the weasel and is not like that of its flesh. And with regard to all of these skins, in a case where one tanned them or spread them on the ground and trod upon them for the period of time required for tanning, they are no longer classified as flesh and are ritually pure, except for the skin of a person, which maintains the status of flesh. Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri says: All eight creeping animals enumerated in the Torah have skins whose halakhic status is not that of flesh.",
+ "The halakhic status of the hide of an animal after it was flayed is no longer like its flesh in terms of becoming impure and imparting impurity. Nevertheless, in the case of one who flays either a domesticated animal or an undomesticated animal; a ritually pure animal that was slaughtered properly and afterward came in contact with impurity, e.g., the one flaying it is impure, or a ritually impure unslaughtered carcass; a small animal, e.g., sheep, or a large animal, e.g., cattle; and even after flaying the animal’s hide is still partially attached to the flesh, the hide’s halakhic status remains that of flesh in some circumstances. These circumstances are: If he is flaying the animal for the purpose of using the hide as a carpet, a tablecloth, or to drape over a couch, in which case he would cut the hide along the length of the animal from head to tail and then remove the hide from both sides, its halakhic status remains that of flesh until he has flayed the measure of grasping the hide, i.e., two handbreadths. And if he is flaying the animal for the purpose of crafting a leather jug, in which case he cuts a circle near the animal’s neck and removes the hide in a downward movement, its halakhic status remains that of flesh until he flays the animal’s entire breast. In the case of one who seeks to fashion a jug and begins flaying from the legs, until he removes the animal’s hide in its entirety, the entire hide is considered as having a connection with the flesh and its halakhic status remains that of flesh with regard to impurity, i.e., with regard to becoming impure and with regard to imparting impurity. If one removed the entire hide except for the hide over the neck, Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri says: It is not considered to have a connection to the flesh, and the Rabbis say: It is considered to have a connection to the flesh until he removes the animal’s hide in its entirety, including the neck.",
+ "In the case of a hide of an unslaughtered carcass upon which there is an olive-bulk of flesh, one who touches a strand of flesh emerging from the flesh or a hair that is on the side of the hide opposite the flesh is ritually impure. Although he did not touch an olive-bulk of the flesh, he is rendered impure with the impurity of an unslaughtered carcass. The reason is that the strand of flesh has the same status as the flesh itself, and the hair is considered protection to the flesh, which also has the same status as the flesh with regard to one who touches it. If upon the hide there were two half olive-bulks, the hide imparts the impurity of an unslaughtered carcass by means of carrying, because one moves them together, but not by means of contact with the flesh, because one touches them separately; this is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiva says: The hide does not impart impurity, neither by means of contact nor by means of carrying. And Rabbi Akiva concedes in the case of two half olive-bulks where one skewered them with a wood chip and moved them that he is impure. And for what reason does Rabbi Akiva deem one ritually pure in a case where he moved both half olive-bulks with the hide, as in that case, too, he moved them together? It is because the hide separates between them and nullifies them.",
+ "With regard to the thigh bone of a human corpse, and the thigh bone of a sacrificial animal that was rendered unfit as piggul, i.e., an offering that was sacrificed with the intent to consume it after its designated time, or notar, i.e., part of an offering left over after the time allotted for its consumption, whether these thigh bones were sealed and there was no access to the marrow, or whether they were perforated and there was access to the marrow, one who touches them is ritually impure. The reason is that a piece of bone of a corpse the size of a barley grain imparts impurity, and the bone of a sacrificial animal that was disqualified in this manner imparts impurity by rabbinic decree via contact. With regard to the thigh bone of an unslaughtered carcass and the thigh bone of a creeping animal, one who touches them when they are sealed remains ritually pure. If one of these thigh bones was perforated at all, it imparts impurity via contact, as in that case contact with the bone is tantamount to contact with the marrow. From where is it derived that even with regard to impurity transmitted via carrying there is a distinction between sealed and perforated thigh bones? It is derived from a verse, as the verse states: “One who touches the carcass thereof shall be impure until the evening; and one who carries the carcass thereof shall be impure until the evening” (Leviticus 11:39–40), indicating: That which enters the category of impurity via contact, enters the category of impurity via carrying; that which does not enter the category of impurity via contact, does not enter the category of impurity via carrying.",
+ "The egg of a creeping animal in which tissue of an embryo developed and one who comes into contact with the egg are ritually pure, as the impure creeping animal is hermetically sealed. But if one perforated the egg with a hole of any size, one who comes in contact with the egg is ritually impure. In the case of a mouse that grows from the ground and is half-flesh half-earth, one who touches the half that is flesh is impure; one who touches the half that is earth is pure. Rabbi Yehuda says: Even one who touches the half that is earth where it is adjacent to the flesh is ritually impure.",
+ "The limb of an animal, with flesh, sinews, and bones, and the flesh of an animal, that were partially severed and remain hanging from the animal do not have the halakhic status of a limb severed from a living animal, which imparts impurity like an unslaughtered carcass, or of flesh severed from a living animal, which is ritually pure, respectively. If one had intent to eat the limb or the flesh, the limb or flesh becomes impure if it comes in contact with a source of impurity, and they impart impurity as food to other foods and liquids, although they remain in their place attached to the animal. But in order for them to become impure, they need to be rendered susceptible to impurity through contact with one of the seven liquids that facilitate susceptibility. If the animal was slaughtered, although this act of slaughter does not render it permitted for consumption by a Jew (see 73b), the limb and the flesh were thereby rendered susceptible to impurity by coming in contact with the blood of the slaughtered animal, as blood is one of the seven liquids; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Shimon says: They were not rendered susceptible to impurity through the animal’s own blood; they are rendered susceptible only once they have been wet with another liquid. If the animal died without slaughter, the hanging flesh needs to be rendered susceptible to impurity in order to become impure, as its halakhic status is that of flesh severed from a living animal, which is ritually pure and does not have the status of an unslaughtered carcass. The hanging limb imparts impurity as a limb severed from a living animal but does not impart impurity as the limb of an unslaughtered carcass; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And Rabbi Shimon deems the limb ritually pure.",
+ "The limb and the flesh of a person that were partially severed and remain hanging from a person are ritually pure, although there is no potential for healing. If the person died, the hanging flesh is ritually pure, as its halakhic status is that of flesh severed from a living person. The hanging limb imparts impurity as a limb severed from the living and does not impart impurity as a limb from a corpse; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And Rabbi Shimon deems the flesh and the limb ritually pure."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The mitzva to give the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw of slaughtered animals to the priests, known as the gifts of the priesthood, applies both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael, in the presence of the Temple and not in the presence of the Temple, and it applies to non-sacred animals, but not to sacrificial animals. It is necessary to emphasize that it does not apply to sacrificial animals, as by right it should be inferred a fortiori: If non-sacred animals, which are not obligated to have the breast and thigh taken from them and given to the priest, are obligated to have gifts of the priesthood given from them, then with regard to sacrificial animals, which are obligated to have the breast and thigh given from them, is it not right that they should be obligated to have gifts of the priesthood given from them? Therefore, the verse states: “For the breast of waving and the thigh of giving I have taken of the children of Israel from the sacrifice of the peace offerings, and have given them to Aaron the priest and to his sons as a due forever from the children of Israel” (Leviticus 7:34), from which it is derived that the priest has only that which is stated with regard to that matter, i.e., the breast and the thigh, and not the foreleg, the jaw and the maw.",
+ "All sacrificial animals in which a permanent blemish preceded their consecration do not assume inherent sanctity, and only their value is consecrated. And once they were redeemed, they are obligated in the mitzva of a firstborn, i.e., their offspring are subject to being counted a firstborn, and in the gifts of the priesthood, and they can emerge from their sacred status and assume non-sacred status with regard to being shorn and with regard to being utilized for labor, as it is prohibited to shear animals with sacred status or utilize them for labor. And their offspring and their milk are permitted after their redemption. And one who slaughters these animals outside the Temple courtyard is exempt from karet, and those animals do not render an animal that was a substitute for them consecrated. And if these animals died before they were redeemed, they may be redeemed and fed to dogs. Although typically sacrificial animals that were redeemed may not be fed to the dogs, in this case it is permitted. This is the halakha with regard to all animals except for the firstborn animal and the animal tithe, whose sanctity is inherent, even when a permanent blemish preceded their consecration. With regard to all sacrificial animals whose consecration preceded their blemish, or who had a temporary blemish prior to their consecration and afterward developed a permanent blemish and they were redeemed, they are exempt from the mitzva of a firstborn, and from the gifts of the priestood, and they do not emerge from their sacred status and assume non-sacred status with regard to being shorn and with regard to being utilized for labor. And their offspring, which were conceived prior to redemption, and their milk, are prohibited after their redemption. And one who slaughters them outside the Temple courtyard is liable to receive karet, and those animals render an animal that was a substitute for them consecrated. And if these animals died before they were redeemed, they may not be redeemed and fed to dogs; rather, they must be buried.",
+ "With regard to a blemished firstborn animal, which one may slaughter and eat without being required to give the foreleg, jaw, and maw to the priest, that was intermingled with one hundred non-sacred animals, from which one is required to give those gifts, in a case when one hundred different people slaughter all of them, each slaughtering one animal, one exempts them all from giving the gifts, as each could claim that the animal that he slaughtered was the firstborn. If one person slaughtered them all, one exempts one of the animals for him. One who slaughters the animal of a priest for the priest or the animal of a gentile for the gentile is exempt from the obligation to give the gifts of the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw. And an Israelite who enters into partnership with a priest or a gentile must mark the animal to indicate that it is jointly owned and exempt from the obligation to give the gifts. And if a priest sold his animal to an Israelite and said: The animal is sold except for the gifts with it, the Israelite is exempt from the obligation to give the gifts, as they are not his. If the Israelite said to the one slaughtering the animal: Sell me the innards of a cow, and there were gifts included with it, i.e., the maw, the purchaser gives them to the priest and he does not deduct the value of the gifts from the money that he pays him. If he bought the innards from the slaughterer by weight, the purchaser gives the gifts, i.e., the maw, to the priest and deducts the value of the gifts from the money that he pays him.",
+ "In the case of a convert who converted and he had a cow, if the cow was slaughtered before he converted, he is exempt from giving the gifts to the priest. If the animal was slaughtered after he converted, the convert is obligated to give the gifts. If there is uncertainty whether it was slaughtered before or after the conversion, the convert is exempt, as the burden of proof rests upon the claimant. What is the definition of the foreleg that is given to the priests as one of the gifts? It is the part of the leg from the joint of the lower knee until the rounded protrusion surrounding the thigh bone of the foreleg; and that is the foreleg mentioned in the Torah with regard to the nazirite: “And the priest shall take the foreleg of the ram when it is cooked” (Numbers 6:19). And the parallel in the hind leg is the thigh that is given to the priest from the peace offering, which is also from the joint of the lower knee until the rounded protrusion surrounding the thigh bone. Rabbi Yehuda says: The thigh is from the joint of the lower knee until the upper knee joint, which connects the middle and upper parts of the leg. What is the definition of the jaw? It is from the joint of the lower jaw beneath the temples and downward until the upper ring of the windpipe."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The mitzva of the first sheared wool that every Jew must give to the priest, as stated in the verse: “And the first sheared wool of your flock [tzonekha] shall you give him” (Deuteronomy 18:4), applies both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael, in the presence of the Temple and not in the presence of the Temple, and with regard to non-sacred animals. But it does not apply to sacrificial animals. There are more stringent elements in the mitzva of the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw (see 130a) than in the halakha of the first sheared wool in that the mitzva of the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw applies to cattle and to sheep, as it is written: “Whether it be ox or sheep, that he shall give unto the priest the foreleg, and the jaw, and the maw” (Deuteronomy 18:3); and it applies to numerous animals and to few animals. But by contrast, the mitzva of the first sheared wool applies only to sheep and not to goats and cattle, and applies only to numerous animals.",
+ "And how many are numerous? Beit Shammai say: It is at least two sheep, as it is stated: “That a man shall rear a young cow, and two sheep [tzon]” (Isaiah 7:21), indicating that two sheep are characterized as tzon; and the mitzva of the first sheared wool is written using the term “your flock [tzonekha].” And Beit Hillel say: It is at least five sheep, as it is stated: “And five sheep [tzon] made” (I Samuel 25:18). Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas says: When shearing five sheep, the sheared wool of each sheep weighing one hundred dinars each and half [peras] of one hundred dinars each, i.e., one hundred and fifty dinars each, are subject to the obligation of the first sheared wool, i.e., they render the owner obligated to give the first sheared wool to the priests. And the Rabbis say: Any five sheep, each of whose sheared wool weighs any amount, render the owner obligated in the mitzva. And how much of the sheared wool does one give to the priest? One gives him sheared wool of the weight of five sela in Judea, which are the equivalent of ten sela in the Galilee, as the weight of the Galilean sela is half that of the Judean sela. Furthermore, although one may give the wool to the priest without laundering it, this must be the weight of the wool once laundered and not when sullied, as is characteristic of wool when sheared. The measure that must be given to the priest is enough to fashion a small garment from it, as it is stated: “Shall you give him” (Deuteronomy 18:4), indicating that the sheared wool must contain enough for a proper gift. If the owner of the shearing did not manage to give it to the priest until he dyed it, the owner is exempt from the mitzva of the first sheared wool, as this constitutes a change in the wool by which means he acquires ownership of it. If he laundered it but did not dye it, he is obligated to give the first sheared wool, as laundering does not constitute a change in the wool. One who purchases the fleece of the sheep of a gentile is exempt from the obligation of giving the first sheared wool to the priest. With regard to one who purchases the fleece of the sheep of another Jew, if the seller kept some of the wool, then the seller is obligated to give the first sheared wool to the priest. If the seller did not keep any of the wool, the buyer is obligated to give it. If the seller had two types of sheep, gray and white, and he sold the buyer the gray fleece but not the white fleece, or if he sold the fleece of the male sheep but not of the female sheep, then this one, the seller, gives the first sheared wool for himself to the priest from the wool that he kept, and that one, the buyer, gives the first sheared wool for himself to the priest from the wool that he bought."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The mitzva of sending away the mother bird from the nest applies both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael, and in the presence of the Temple and not in the presence of the Temple. It applies to non-sacred birds, but it does not apply to sacrificial birds. There are more stringent elements in the covering of the blood than in the sending away of the mother bird from the nest, as the covering of the blood applies to undomesticated animals and birds, to animals and birds that are readily available in one’s home, and to animals and birds that are not readily available and are hunted in the wild; and the sending of the mother bird from the nest applies only to birds, and applies only to birds that are not readily available. What are considered birds that are not readily available? They are any birds, even domesticated, that may fly away at any time, such as geese or chickens that nested in the orchard [pardes]. But if geese or chickens nested in the house, and likewise, with regard to domesticated pigeons [yonei hardisei’ot], one is exempt from sending away the mother bird.",
+ " With regard to the nest of a non-kosher bird, one is exempt from sending away the mother bird. In a case where a non-kosher bird is resting upon the eggs of a kosher bird, or a kosher bird is resting upon the eggs of a non-kosher bird, one is exempt from sending away the bird. With regard to a male pheasant [korei], which is known to sit upon the eggs like the female of its species, Rabbi Eliezer deems one obligated to send it away, and the Rabbis deem one exempt from sending it away.",
+ "If the mother bird was hovering over the eggs or fledglings in the nest, when its wings are touching the eggs or fledglings in the nest, one is obligated to send away the mother. When its wings are not touching the eggs or fledglings in the nest, one is exempt from sending away the mother. Even if there is only one fledgling or one egg, one is obligated to send away the mother, as it is stated: “If a bird’s nest happens before you” (Deuteronomy 22:6), indicating that one is obligated to send away the mother bird from the nest in any case. If there were fledglings capable of flying, or unfertilized eggs from which a fledgling will not hatch, one is exempt from sending away the mother bird from the nest, as it is stated in the same verse: “And the mother is resting upon the fledglings or upon the eggs.” From the juxtaposition of the fledglings and the eggs one derives: Just as the fledglings are living, so too, the eggs must be capable of producing living fledglings. This excludes unfertilized eggs, which cannot produce a living fledgling. And furthermore, just as the eggs need their mothers to hatch them, so too, the fledglings must be those that need their mothers. This excludes fledglings that are capable of flying. If one sent away the mother bird and it returned to rest on the eggs, even if it returned four or five times, one is obligated to send it away again, as it is stated: “You shall send [shalle’aḥ teshallaḥ] the mother” (Deuteronomy 22:7). The doubled verb indicates that one must send away the mother bird multiple times if needed. If one said: I am hereby taking the mother and sending away the offspring, he is still obligated to send away the mother even if he sent away the offspring, as it is stated: “You shall send the mother.” If one sent away the mother and took the offspring and then returned them to the mother’s nest, and thereafter the mother returned and rested upon them, one is exempt from sending away the mother bird.",
+ "With regard to one who takes the mother bird with its fledglings, Rabbi Yehuda says: He is flogged for taking the mother bird, and he does not send away the mother. And the Rabbis say: He sends away the mother and is not flogged, as this is the principle: With regard to any prohibition that entails a command to arise and perform a mitzva, one is not flogged for its violation.",
+ "A person may not take the mother bird with the offspring even if he takes the mother for use as part of the ritual to purify the leper. The mishna compares the reward for performing the mitzva of sending away the mother bird from the nest to the reward for performing other mitzvot: And if with regard to the sending away of the mother bird, which is a mitzva whose performance is simple, as it entails a loss of no more than an issar, i.e., the value of the mother bird, the Torah says: “That it may be well with you, and that you may prolong your days” (Deuteronomy 22:7), it may be derived by a fortiori inference that the reward is no less for the fulfillment of the mitzvot in the Torah whose performance is demanding."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/merged.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/merged.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..20be4fea192ce098171c6e302fd0309ae89b5224
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/English/merged.json
@@ -0,0 +1,121 @@
+{
+ "title": "Mishnah Chullin",
+ "language": "en",
+ "versionTitle": "merged",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org/Mishnah_Chullin",
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "Everyone slaughters an animal, i.e., can perform halakhically valid slaughter, and their slaughter is valid, except for a deaf-mute, an imbecile, and a minor, lest they ruin their slaughter because they lack competence. And for all of them, when they slaughtered an animal and others see and supervise them, their slaughter is valid. Slaughter performed by a gentile renders the animal an unslaughtered carcass, and the carcass imparts ritual impurity through carrying. In the case of one who slaughters an animal at night, and likewise in the case of the blind person who slaughters an animal, his slaughter is valid. In the case of one who slaughters an animal on Shabbat or on Yom Kippur, although he is liable to receive the death penalty, his slaughter is valid.",
+ "In the case of one who slaughters an animal with the smooth side of a hand sickle, which has both a smooth and a serrated side, or with a sharpened flint, or with a reed that was cut lengthwise and sharpened, his slaughter is valid. All slaughter [hakkol shoḥatin], and one may always slaughter, and one may slaughter with any item that cuts, except for the serrated side of the harvest sickle, a saw, the teeth of an animal when attached to its jawbone, and a fingernail, because they are serrated and they consequently strangle the animal and do not cut its windpipe and gullet as required. In the case of one who slaughters an animal with a harvest sickle, which is serrated with its teeth inclined considerably in one direction, in a forward direction, where the serrations do not tear the flesh, Beit Shammai deem the slaughter not valid and Beit Hillel deem it valid. And they both agree that if they smoothed its serrations so that they do not tear the flesh, its halakhic status is like that of a knife and one may slaughter with it.",
+ "With regard to one who slaughters an animal from within the cricoid cartilage that forms a complete ring at the top of the windpipe and left a thread breadth over the surface of the ring in its entirety intact, as the knife did not go beyond the ring toward the head of the animal, his slaughter is valid. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: It is valid even if he left a thread breadth over the majority of the surface of the ring.",
+ "One who slaughters from the sides of the throat, his slaughter is valid. One who pinches the neck of a bird offering from the sides, his pinching is not valid.One who slaughters from the nape [oref] of the neck, his slaughter is not valid. One who pinches a bird offering from the nape of the neck, his pinching is valid. One who slaughters from the throat, his slaughter is valid. One who pinches a bird offering from the throat, his pinching is not valid, as the entire nape is valid for pinching and the entire throat is valid for slaughter. It is found that that which is valid for slaughter is not valid for pinching and that which is valid for pinching is not valid for slaughter.",
+ "It is written with regard to bird offerings: “He shall bring his offering of doves, or of young pigeons” (Leviticus 1:14). The age that is fit for sacrifice in doves, mature birds, is unfit for sacrifice in pigeons, immature birds;the age that is fit for sacrifice in pigeons is unfit for sacrifice in doves. At the intermediate stage of the beginning of the yellowing of its plumage (see 22b), a bird is unfit both as this, a pigeon, and as that, a dove, since it is no longer a fledgling but is not yet a mature bird.",
+ "That which is fit in a red heifer is unfit in a heifer whose neck is broken; that which is fit in a heifer whose neck is broken is unfit in a red heifer. There is an element with which priests remain fit and Levites are unfit, and there is also an element with which Levites remain fit and priests are unfit. That which is ritually pure in an earthenware vessel is ritually impure in all the other types of vessels; that which is ritually pure in all the other types of vessels is ritually impure in an earthenware vessel. That which is ritually pure in wooden vessels is ritually impure in metal vessels; that which is ritually pure in metal vessels is ritually impure in wooden vessels. With regard to the obligation of separating teruma and tithes, the stage of development that is obligated in bitter almonds is exempt in sweet almonds; and the stage in development that is obligated in sweet almonds is exempt in bitter almonds.",
+ "Temed, a beverage produced from grape residue soaked in water, until it fermented, may not be purchased with second-tithe money to be drunk in Jerusalem, because it is not wine. And if three log of it fall into a ritual bath, its halakhic status is that of drawn water and it invalidates the ritual bath. Once it fermented, it is wine, and therefore it may be purchased with second-tithe money and it does not invalidate the ritual bath. With regard to brothers who are partners in the inheritance of their father, when they are obligated to add the premium [kalbon] to their annual half-shekel payment to the Temple, they are exempt from animal tithe; when they are obligated to separate animal tithe, they are exempt from adding the premium. Partners who pay the half-shekel are required to add the premium and are exempt from animal tithe. If they are not true partners, but their inheritance remains the property of the father, the sons are exempt from paying the premium, and they are obligated to separate animal tithe. Any situation where there is sale of one’s daughter as a Hebrew maidservant, i.e., when she is a minor, there is no fine of fifty sela paid to her father if she is raped or seduced, as that fine is paid to her father only when she is a young woman. And any situation where there is a fine paid to the father there is no sale. Any situation where there is the right of refusal for a minor girl married by her mother or brothers, enabling her to opt out of the marriage, there is no ḥalitza, as a minor girl whose husband died without children cannot perform ḥalitza. And any situation where there is ḥalitza, once she has reached majority, there is no right of refusal. Any situation where there is a shofar blast sounded on the eve of Shabbat or a Festival to stop the people from performing labor and to demarcate between the sacred and the profane, there is no havdala recited at the conclusion of the Shabbat or Festival in prayer and over a cup of wine. And any situation where there is havdala recited, there is no shofar blast sounded. How so? On a Festival that occurs on Shabbat eve, one sounds the shofar to stop the people from performing labor that is permitted on the Festival and prohibited on Shabbat and to demarcate between one sacred day and another; and one does not recite havdala, as that is recited only when the transition is from a sacred day to a profane day or from a day of greater sanctity to a day of lesser sanctity. The sanctity of Shabbat is greater than the sanctity of the Festival, and therefore havdala is not recited in this case. On a Festival that occurs at the conclusion of Shabbat, one recites havdala, but one does not sound the shofar. How does one recite havdala in that case; i.e., what is the formula of the blessing? It concludes: Who distinguishes between sacred and sacred, as opposed to the standard blessing at the conclusion of Shabbat: Who distinguishes between sacred and profane. Rabbi Dosa says that the formula is: Who distinguishes between greater sanctity and lesser sanctity."
+ ],
+ [
+ "In the case of one who slaughters by cutting one siman, i.e., the windpipe or the gullet, in a bird, and two simanim in an animal, his slaughter is valid, and the halakhic status of the majority of one siman is like that of the entire siman. Rabbi Yehuda says: The slaughter is not valid until he cuts the veins [haveridin], i.e., the major blood vessels in the neck. If one cut half of one siman in a bird or one and a half simanim in an animal, his slaughter is not valid. If one cut the majority of one siman in a bird or the majority of two simanim in an animal, his slaughter is valid.",
+ "With regard to one who slaughters by cutting two animals’ heads simultaneously, his slaughter is valid. If two people are grasping a knife and slaughtering one animal, even if each is holding a knife and slaughtering one above and one below, with each one slaughtering at a different point in the neck, their slaughter is valid.",
+ "If one decapitated the animal in one motion and did not slaughter the animal in the standard manner of drawing the knife back and forth, the slaughter is not valid. In a case where one was in the process of slaughtering the animal in the standard manner and he decapitated the animal in one motion, if the length of the knife is equivalent to the breadth of the animal’s entire neck, the slaughter is valid. If one was in the process of slaughtering two animals simultaneously, and he decapitated two heads in one motion, if the length of the knife is equivalent to the breadth of an entire neck of one of the animals, the slaughter is valid. In what case is this statement, that one must be concerned about the length of the knife, said? It is when one drew the knife back and did not draw it forth, or drew it forth and did not draw it back; but if he drew it back and forth, even if the knife was of any length, even if he slaughtered with a scalpel [be’izemel], the slaughter is valid. If a knife fell and slaughtered an animal, although the knife slaughtered the animal in the standard manner, the slaughter is not valid, as it is stated: “And you shall slaughter…and you shall eat” (Deuteronomy 27:7), from which it is derived: That which you slaughter you may eat, and that which was slaughtered on its own, you may not eat. If, when one was in the middle of slaughtering an animal, the knife fell and he lifted it and then completed the slaughter, or if his garments fell and he lifted them and then completed the slaughter, or if he had honed the knife and grew weary before completing the slaughter and another came and slaughtered the animal, if he interrupted the slaughter in one of these ways or in a different way for an interval equivalent to the duration of an act of slaughter, the slaughter is not valid. Rabbi Shimon says: The slaughter is not valid if he interrupted the slaughter for an interval equivalent to the duration of an examination.",
+ " If one cut the gullet in the standard manner of slaughter with a back-and-forth movement, and he severed the windpipe not in the standard manner, or if one severed the windpipe and thereafter cut the gullet, or if one cut one of the simanim and waited until the animal died, or if one cut one siman and concealed the knife beneath the second siman and severed it from below, Rabbi Yeshevav says: The animal is an unslaughtered carcass and imparts ritual impurity through contact with it and carrying it. Rabbi Akiva says: The animal is a tereifa, and although eating it is prohibited, it does not transmit ritual impurity. Rabbi Yeshevav stated a principle in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua: Any animal that was rendered unfit during its slaughter because the slaughter was not performed properly is an unslaughtered carcass; any animal whose slaughter was performed properly and another matter caused it to become unfit is a tereifa. And Rabbi Akiva conceded to his opinion.",
+ "In the case of one who slaughters a domesticated animal, an undomesticated animal, or a bird, and blood did not emerge from them during the slaughter, all of these are permitted for consumption and do not require the ritual washing of the hands as they may be eaten with ritually impure [mesoavot] hands, because they were not rendered susceptible to ritual impurity through contact with blood, which is one of the seven liquids that render food susceptible to impurity. Rabbi Shimon says: They were rendered susceptible to ritual impurity by means of the slaughter itself. ",
+ "In the case of one who slaughters an animal that is in danger of imminent death, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: The slaughter is valid only in a case where after the slaughter it convulses with its foreleg and with its hind leg. Rabbi Eliezer says: It is sufficient if blood spurted from the neck. Rabbi Shimon says: In the case of one who slaughters at night and the next day he awoke and found walls full of blood, the slaughter is valid, as it is clear that the blood spurted, and this is in accordance with the rule of Rabbi Eliezer. And the Rabbis say: It is valid only in a case where it convulses with its foreleg or with its hind leg, or in a case where it wags its tail. This is the halakha with regard to both a small animal, e.g., a sheep, and a large animal, e.g., a cow, that is in danger of imminent death. The slaughter of a small animal that when being slaughtered extended its foreleg that was bent and did not restore it to the bent position is not valid, as extending the foreleg is only part of the natural course of removal of the animal’s soul from its body and not a convulsion indicating life. In what case is this statement said? It is in a case where the presumptive status of the animal was that it was in danger of imminent death. But if its presumptive status was that it was healthy, then even if there were none of these indicators, the slaughter is valid.",
+ "In the case of a Jew who slaughters the animal of a gentile for a gentile, his slaughter is valid, and Rabbi Eliezer deems it not valid. Rabbi Eliezer says: Even if the Jew slaughtered the animal with the intent to feed the gentile from its diaphragm [meḥatzar kaved], its slaughter is not valid, as the unspecified intent of a gentile is to slaughter the animal for idol worship, and it is prohibited to derive benefit from it. Rabbi Yosei says: The matter of the intent of the gentile is irrelevant in this case, as can be derived by means of an a fortiori inference. If in a place where intent while slaughtering the animal invalidates the slaughter, i.e., in sacrificial animals, such as when slaughtering an offering with the intent to sacrifice it beyond its designated time, everything follows only the intent of the priest performing the service and not the intent of the owner, then in a place where intent does not invalidate the slaughter, i.e., in non-sacred animals, is it not right that everything should follow only the intent of the one who slaughters the animal?",
+ "In the case of one who slaughters an animal for the sake of, i.e., to worship, mountains, for the sake of hills, for the sake of seas, for the sake of rivers, or for the sake of wildernesses, his slaughter is not valid. If there were two people grasping a knife together and slaughtering an animal, one slaughtering for the sake of one of all those enumerated in the first clause of the mishna and one slaughtering for the sake of a legitimate matter, their slaughter is not valid.",
+ "One may not slaughter an animal and have its blood flow, neither into seas, nor into rivers, nor into vessels, as in all those cases it appears that he is slaughtering the animal in the manner of idolaters. But one may slaughter an animal and have its blood flow into a round excavation containing water. And on a ship, one may slaughter an animal onto vessels as it is clear that his objective is to avoid sullying the ship. One may not slaughter an animal and have its blood flow into a small hole in the ground at all, but one may fashion a small hole inside his house so that the blood will enter into it. And in the marketplace one may not do so, so that he will not appear to emulate [yeḥakkeh] the heretics.",
+ "In the case of one who slaughters an animal and asserts that he is slaughtering it for the sake of a burnt offering, for the sake of a peace offering, for the sake of a provisional guilt offering, for the sake of a Paschal offering, or for the sake of a thanks offering, his slaughter is not valid, as it appears that he is consecrating animals and slaughtering sacrificial animals outside the Temple. And Rabbi Shimon deems his slaughter valid. If there were two people grasping a knife together and slaughtering an animal, one slaughtering for the sake of one of all those enumerated in the first clause of the mishna and one slaughtering for the sake of a legitimate matter, their slaughter is not valid. With regard to one who slaughters an animal for the sake of a sin offering, for the sake of a guilt offering for a definite transgression, for the sake of the offering of a firstborn, for the sake of the offering of animal tithe, or for the sake of a substitute for a sacrificial animal, his slaughter is valid. All of these offerings may be brought only as obligations and not as gifts. Therefore, there is no concern that he consecrated the animals. This is the principle: For any item, i.e., offering, which is consecrated as a voluntary vow or gift, in the case of one who slaughters for its sake the animal is forbidden. And for any offering that is not consecrated as a voluntary vow or gift but is an obligation that is incumbent upon him, in the case of one who slaughters for its sake the animal is permitted."
+ ],
+ [
+ "These wounds constitute tereifot in an animal, rendering them prohibited for consumption: A perforated gullet, where the perforation goes through the wall of the gullet, or a cut windpipe. If the membrane of the brain was perforated, or if the heart was perforated to its chamber; if the spinal column was broken and its cord was cut; if the liver was removed and nothing remained of it, any of these render the animal a tereifa. Additionally, a lung that was perforated or that was missing a piece renders the animal a tereifa. Rabbi Shimon says: It is not a tereifa unless it is perforated through to the bronchi. If the abomasum was perforated, or the gallbladder was perforated, or the small intestines were perforated, it is a tereifa. It is also a tereifa in a case where the internal rumen was perforated or where the majority of the external rumen was torn. Rabbi Yehuda says: For a large animal, a tear of one handbreadth renders it a tereifa, while for a small animal, it is a tereifa only if the majority of it was torn. And it is a tereifa where the omasum [hemses] or the reticulum was perforated to the outside, i.e., to the abdominal cavity, but not if the perforation was between the two. Likewise, if an animal fell from the roof, or if the majority of its ribs were fractured, or if it was clawed by a wolf, it is a tereifa. Rabbi Yehuda says: If it was clawed by a wolf in the case of a small animal, i.e., a sheep or goat; or clawed by a lion in the case of a large animal, i.e., cattle; or if it was clawed by a hawk in the case of a small bird; or if it was clawed by a large bird of prey in the case of a large bird, then it is a tereifa. This is the principle: Any animal that was injured such that an animal in a similar condition could not live for an extended period is a tereifa, the consumption of which is forbidden by Torah law.",
+ "And these, despite their condition, are kosher in an animal: If its windpipe was perforated or cracked lengthwise. How much can the windpipe be missing and still be kosher? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Until the perforation is the same size as the Italian issar. If the skull was fractured but the membrane of the brain was not perforated, it is kosher. If the heart was perforated and the perforation did not reach its chamber, or if the spinal column was broken but its cord was not cut, or if the liver was removed and an olive-bulk of it remained, it is kosher. Additionally, it is kosher if the omasum or the reticulum was perforated one into the other. If the spleen was removed, or the kidneys were removed, or if its lower jaw was removed, or if its womb was removed, or if its lung shriveled by the hand of Heaven, the animal is kosher. In the case of an animal whose hide was removed, Rabbi Meir deems it kosher, and the Rabbis deem it a tereifa and unfit for consumption.",
+ "And these are tereifot in a bird: One with a perforated gullet, or with a cut windpipe that was cut across its width; or if a weasel struck the bird on its head in a place that renders it a tereifa, as one must be concerned that the membrane of the brain was perforated; or if the gizzard was perforated; or if the small intestines were perforated. In a case where a bird fell into the fire and its innards were singed [neḥmeru], if they turned green they are unfit, and the bird is a tereifa, but if they are red the bird is kosher. If a person trampled the bird, or slammed it against a wall, or if an animal crushed it and it is twitching, it is a tereifa because its limbs were shattered. But if the bird lasted for a twenty-four-hour period, and then one slaughtered it, it is kosher.",
+ "And these are kosher among birds: If a bird’s windpipe was perforated or cracked lengthwise; or if a weasel struck the bird on its head in a place that does not render it a tereifa; or if the crop was perforated. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: It is kosher even if the crop was removed. If the bird’s intestines emerged from the abdominal wall but were not perforated, or if its wings were broken, or if its legs were broken, or if the feathers on its wings were plucked, the bird is kosher. Rabbi Yehuda says: If the down covering its body was removed, it is a tereifa and unfit for consumption.",
+ "With regard to an animal that is congested with excess blood, or that was smoked, i.e., that suffered from smoke inhalation, or that was chilled and subsequently became sick, or that ate oleander, which is poisonous, or that ate the excrement of chickens, or that drank foul water, although in all these cases the animal is in danger, it is kosher. By contrast, if the animal ate deadly poison, or if a snake bit the animal, with regard to the prohibition of tereifa, consumption of the animal would be permitted, but it is prohibited due to the threat to one’s life if he eats it.",
+ "The signs that indicate that a domesticated animal and an undomesticated animal are kosher were stated in the Torah, and the signs of a kosher bird were not explicitly stated. But the Sages stated certain signs in a bird: Any bird that claws its prey and eats it is non-kosher. Any bird that has an extra digit behind the leg slightly elevated above the other digits, and a crop, which is a sack alongside the gullet in which food is stored prior to digestion, and for which the yellowish membrane inside its gizzard can be peeled, is kosher. Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says: Any bird that splits the digits of its feet when standing on a string, placing two digits on one side of the string and two on the other, is non-kosher.",
+ "And with regard to grasshoppers, whose signs were also not stated in the Torah, the Sages stated: Any grasshopper that has four legs, and four wings, and two additional jumping legs, and whose wings cover most of its body, is kosher. Rabbi Yosei says: And this applies only if the name of its species is grasshopper. And with regard to fish, the signs are explicitly stated in the Torah: Any fish that has a fin and a scale is kosher; Rabbi Yehuda says: Two scales and one fin. And these are scales: Those that are fixed to its body; and fins are those with which the fish swims."
+ ],
+ [
+ "When a pregnant kosher animal is slaughtered, the slaughter also renders the consumption of its fetus permitted. Even if an animal was encountering difficulty giving birth and meanwhile the fetus extended its foreleg outside the mother animal’s womb and then brought it back inside, and then the mother animal was slaughtered, the consumption of the fetus is permitted by virtue of the slaughter of the mother animal. But if the fetus extended its head outside the womb, even if it then brought it back inside, the halakhic status of that fetus is like that of a newborn, and the slaughter of the mother animal does not permit the consumption of the fetus. Rather, it requires its own slaughter. If, prior to slaughtering an animal, one severs pieces from a fetus that is in the womb and leaves those pieces in the womb, their consumption is permitted by virtue of the slaughter of the mother animal. By contrast, if one severs pieces of the spleen or of the kidneys of an animal and then slaughters it, then even if those pieces are left inside the animal their consumption is prohibited, because an organ severed from a living being is not permitted by the subsequent slaughter of the animal. This is the principle: An item that is part of an animal’s body that was severed prior to its slaughter is prohibited even after slaughter, and an item that is not part of its body, i.e., its fetus, is permitted by virtue of its slaughter.",
+ "Upon its birth, the firstborn male offspring of a domesticated animal is automatically consecrated with firstborn status, and it is prohibited to derive benefit from it. Furthermore, if it dies, it may not be discarded, but must be buried. If an animal that was giving birth to a firstborn male was encountering difficulty giving birth, and in order to alleviate the difficulty one wishes to terminate the birth, he may cut up the fetus limb by limb and cast it to the dogs. Since the fetus was not born, it is non-sacred and does not require burial. If a majority of the fetus had already emerged, it is considered to have been born and is therefore consecrated; consequently, if one cut it up it must be buried, and the mother animal is exempted from having firstborn status conferred on any future offspring.",
+ "With regard to an animal whose fetus died in its womb and the shepherd reached his hand into the womb and touched the fetus, both in the case of a non-kosher animal and in the case of a kosher animal the fetus does not have the status of an animal carcass that imparts ritual impurity, and the shepherd remains ritually pure. Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says: In the case of a non-kosher animal it is impure, and in the case of a kosher animal it is pure. With regard to a woman whose fetus died in her womb and the midwife extended her hand into the womb and touched the fetus, the midwife is thereby rendered impure with the seven-day impurity imparted by a corpse, and the woman remains ritually pure until the offspring emerges from the womb.",
+ "If an animal was encountering difficulty giving birth and as a result the fetus extended its foreleg outside the mother’s womb, and someone severed it and afterward slaughtered the mother animal, the flesh of the fetus is ritually pure. If one first slaughtered the mother animal and afterward severed the foreleg, the flesh of both the mother animal and the fetus are ritually impure due to having been in contact with a carcass. Since the foreleg was not permitted to be consumed through the act of slaughtering, it is regarded as a carcass with the associated ritual impurity. The rest of the flesh, which was permitted to be consumed by the slaughter, was in contact with it and so was rendered ritually impure from it; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: The flesh has the ritual impurity of having been in contact with a tereifa that was slaughtered, as the limb is regarded as a tereifa that was slaughtered. By Torah law, although it is prohibited to consume it, it does not impart ritual impurity. Nevertheless, the Sages decreed that a tereifa that was slaughtered, as well as anything that comes in contact with it, is regarded as ritually impure to the extent that it disqualifies sacrificial foods that come in contact with it. The Rabbis explain the rationale behind their opinion: Just as we found in the case of a tereifa that its slaughter renders it ritually pure according to Torah law, i.e., ritual slaughter prevents it from having the ritual impurity of a carcass despite not rendering the animal permitted for consumption, so too, the slaughter of the mother animal should render the limb of its fetus that left the womb ritually pure, despite the fact that its consumption is prohibited. Rabbi Meir said to them: No, if the slaughter of a tereifa renders the body of the animal ritually pure, it is because the slaughter is performed on something that is part of its body, i.e., its throat. Does it necessarily follow that you should also render the limb that left the womb pure, given that it is something that is not part of the mother’s body? Certainly not. The mishna asks: From where is it derived with regard to a tereifa that its slaughter renders it ritually pure, i.e., prevents it from having the ritual impurity of a carcass? The mishna notes there is a reason to say the slaughter should not render it pure, as one can compare a tereifa with a non-kosher animal: A non-kosher animal is prohibited for consumption; so too, a tereifa is prohibited for consumption. Therefore, conclude: Just as with regard to a non-kosher animal, its slaughter does not render it ritually pure, so too with regard to a tereifa, its slaughter should not render it ritually pure. The mishna questions the comparison: No, if you said that slaughtering cannot prevent an animal from having the ritual impurity of a carcass in the case of a non-kosher animal, which is distinct in that it did not have a period of potential fitness when slaughtering it could have rendered its consumption permitted, does it necessarily follow that you should also say this in the case of a tereifa, which did have a period of potential fitness? Perhaps, since the animal had a period of potential fitness its slaughter remains effective in preventing it from having the ritual impurity of a carcass. The mishna rejects this distinction: Take back to yourself this claim that you brought, as it is insufficient. What about a case where an animal was born as a tereifa from the womb, and so it never had a period of potential fitness? For such a case, from where is it derived that its slaughter renders it ritually pure? The mishna reformulates the distinction: No, if you say that slaughtering cannot prevent a prohibited animal from having the ritual impurity of a carcass with regard to a non-kosher animal, which is distinct in that there are no animals of its kind that are permitted through slaughtering, as the Torah states the concept of slaughtering only with regard to kosher animals, does it necessarily follow that you should also say this with regard to a tereifa kosher animal, given that there are other animals of its kind that are permitted through slaughtering, i.e., kosher animals that are not tereifa? Perhaps, since the concept of slaughtering is relevant to that kind of animal it can serve to prevent the animal from having the ritual impurity of a carcass even if the slaughter cannot render it permitted for consumption. The mishna notes: Based on this reasoning, one must conclude that with regard to an eight-month-old fetus that was born alive, slaughter does not render it ritually pure, as there are no animals of its kind that are permitted through slaughtering. The Torah applies the concept of slaughter only with regard to animals that were born full term.",
+ "In the case of one who slaughtered an animal and found within it an eight-month-old fetus, i.e., one that was not full term, whether it was alive or dead, or a nine-month-old fetus, i.e., one that was full term, that was dead, that fetus is permitted by virtue of the slaughter of its mother, as it is considered part of its mother. Therefore, its blood is considered part of its mother’s blood and is prohibited, so one must tear the fetus and remove its blood before it may be consumed. If he found within it a live nine-month-old fetus, it requires its own slaughter, as it is considered an independent full-fledged animal, and if one slaughters both the mother and fetus on the same day, one is liable for violating the prohibition against slaughtering an animal itself and its offspring on the same day; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: Even when the fetus is nine months old, it is still considered part of its mother, and the slaughter of its mother renders it permitted for consumption. Rabbi Shimon Shezuri says: Even if the fetus emerged alive and is now five years old and plowing in the field, the earlier slaughter of its mother rendered it permitted and it does not require slaughter before it is eaten. But if one tore an animal, i.e., he killed it without slaughtering it, and inside he found a live nine-month-old fetus, everyone agrees that the fetus requires its own slaughter because its mother was not slaughtered.",
+ "With regard to an animal whose hind legs were severed, if they were severed from the leg joint and below, the animal is kosher; from the leg joint and above, the animal is thereby rendered a tereifa and is not kosher. And likewise, an animal whose convergence of sinews in the thigh was removed is a tereifa and is not kosher. If the bone of a limb was broken but the limb was not completely severed, and the animal was then slaughtered, if the majority of the flesh surrounding the bone is intact, the slaughter of the animal renders it permitted; but if not, its slaughter does not render it permitted.",
+ "In the case of one who slaughters an animal and finds a placenta in its womb, one with a hearty soul [nefesh hayafa], i.e., who is not repulsed by it, may eat it, as its consumption was permitted by virtue of the slaughter of the mother. Nevertheless, since generally speaking, people do not consume such placentas, it is not regarded as food and so it cannot become impure with the ritual impurity of food even were it to come into contact with a source of impurity. And furthermore, it does not impart the ritual impurity of animal carcasses as it was permitted by virtue of the slaughter of the mother. But if one intended to eat it, one thereby elevated it to the status of food, and the placenta becomes impure with the ritual impurity of food if it comes into contact with a source of impurity. But even so, it still does not impart the ritual impurity of animal carcasses. With regard to a placenta, part of which emerged from the womb before the mother was slaughtered, its consumption is prohibited even after the mother animal is slaughtered because the emergence of the placenta is an indication of a fetus in a woman and an indication of a fetus in an animal. Accordingly, there is a concern that the head of the fetus might have emerged in that part of the placenta, thereby rendering the fetus as having been born, a status that precludes it from being permitted by the slaughter of its mother. Since the offspring is prohibited, its placenta is likewise prohibited. If an animal that was giving birth to its firstborn expelled a placenta, one may cast it to the dogs, and one does not need to be concerned that the placenta came from a male fetus that has the consecrated status of a firstborn. But in the case of sacrificial animals the placenta must be buried, because it came from a fetus that is assumed to have been sacred. The mishna adds: But one may neither bury it at an intersection, nor may one hang it on a tree, superstitious rites intended to prevent the animal from miscarrying again, due to the prohibition against following the ways of the Amorite, which prohibits Jews from practicing the superstitious rites observed by gentiles."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The prohibition against slaughtering an animal itself and its offspring applies both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael, both in the presence, i.e., the time, of the Temple and not in the presence of the Temple, and it applies with regard to non-sacred animals and with regard to sacrificial animals. How so? In the case of one who slaughters an animal itself and its offspring, both of which are non-sacred, and slaughters them outside the Temple courtyard, both of the animals are fit for consumption, but for slaughtering the second animal, one incurs [sofeg] the forty lashes for violating the prohibition: “You shall not slaughter it and its offspring both in one day” (Leviticus 22:28). If both animals were sacrificial animals slaughtered outside the Temple courtyard, then for slaughtering the first animal, one is liable to receive excision from the World-to-Come [karet]. For slaughtering the second animal one is not liable to receive karet. The second animal was not fit for sacrifice, since one may not slaughter an animal and its offspring on the same day. And both animals are disqualified for use as offerings, and for the slaughter of both of them, one incurs forty lashes apiece: The first being a sacrificial animal slaughtered outside the courtyard and the second being the offspring of an animal slaughtered that day. If both animals were non-sacred and slaughtered inside the Temple courtyard, both of them are unfit to be sacrificed, being non-sacred animals slaughtered in the courtyard. And for slaughter of the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes for slaughtering an animal and its offspring on a single day. If both animals were sacrificial animals slaughtered inside the Temple courtyard, the first is fit for sacrifice, and one who slaughters it is exempt from any punishment. But for slaughter of the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes for slaughtering an animal and its offspring on a single day, and it is unfit for sacrifice, because one was not allowed to slaughter it on that day.",
+ "If the first animal was non-sacred and the second a sacrificial animal, and both were slaughtered outside the Temple courtyard, the first is fit for consumption and one who slaughters it is exempt from any punishment. But for slaughtering the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes for slaughtering an animal and its offspring on a single day, and the animal is unfit for sacrifice. If the first animal was a sacrificial animal and the second was non-sacred and both were slaughtered outside the Temple courtyard, for the first animal, one is liable to receive karet for slaughtering a sacrificial animal outside the courtyard, and the animal is unfit for sacrifice. And the second is fit for consumption; and for the slaughter of both of them one incurs forty lashes apiece: The first being a sacrificial animal slaughtered outside the courtyard and the second being the offspring of an animal slaughtered that day. If the first animal was non-sacred and the second was a sacrificial animal and both were slaughtered inside the Temple courtyard, both of them are unfit for sacrifice. And for slaughtering the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes. If the first animal was a sacrificial animal and the second was non-sacred and both were slaughtered inside the Temple courtyard, the first is fit for sacrifice and one who slaughters it is exempt from any punishment. And for slaughtering the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes, and the animal is unfit for sacrifice, as it is non-sacred. If both animals were non-sacred, and one slaughters them, the first outside the Temple courtyard and the second inside the Temple courtyard, the first is fit for consumption and one who slaughters it is exempt from any punishment. And for slaughtering the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes for slaughtering an animal and its offspring on a single day, and the animal is unfit for sacrifice as it is non-sacred. If both animals were sacrificial animals, and one slaughters them, the first outside the Temple courtyard and the second inside the Temple courtyard, for slaughtering the first animal one is liable to receive karet, and for slaughtering both of them one incurs forty lashes apiece. One set of lashes is given because the first was a sacrificial animal slaughtered outside the courtyard, and the second set of lashes is given because the second animal is the offspring of an animal slaughtered that day. And both of them are unfit for sacrifice. If both animals were non-sacred, and one slaughters them, the first inside the Temple courtyard and the second outside the Temple courtyard, the first is unfit for sacrifice, as it is non-sacred, and the one who slaughters it is exempt. And for the second, one incurs the forty lashes and the animal is fit for consumption. If both animals were sacrificial animals, and one slaughters them, the first inside the Temple courtyard and the second outside the Temple courtyard, the first is fit for sacrifice and one who slaughters it is exempt. And for the second animal, one incurs the forty lashes, and the animal is unfit for sacrifice because its requisite time has not yet arrived.",
+ "With regard to one who slaughters an animal and its offspring and one of them is discovered to be an animal with a wound that would have caused it to die within twelve months [tereifa] and may not be eaten, or one who slaughters one of the animals for the sake of idol worship, from which deriving benefit is prohibited, or one who slaughters the red heifer of purification, or an ox that was to have been stoned, or a heifer whose neck was to have been broken, all of which are animals from which deriving benefit is prohibited, Rabbi Shimon deems one who slaughters them exempt from lashes for the slaughter of a mother and its offspring, as in his opinion, slaughter that does not render the animal fit for consumption is not considered slaughter and does not violate the prohibition. And the Rabbis deem him liable, as the slaughter need not render the animal fit for consumption in order to violate the prohibition. All agree that one who slaughters an animal and it becomes a carcass by his hand because the slaughter was invalid, or one who stabs an animal, or one who uproots the windpipe and the gullet, is exempt with regard to the prohibition against slaughtering a mother and its offspring, as it is written: “You shall not slaughter it and its offspring both in one day” (Leviticus 22:28), and in these cases, no ritual slaughter was performed. With regard to two people who purchased a cow and its offspring, where each purchased one of the animals, whoever purchased his animal first shall slaughter it first, and the second one must wait until the next day to slaughter his animal, so as not to violate the prohibition of: It and its offspring. But if the second one preceded him and slaughtered his animal first, he benefitted, and the one who purchased the animal first may not slaughter it until the next day. If one slaughtered a cow and thereafter slaughtered its two offspring on the same day, he incurs eighty lashes for two separate actions violating the prohibition against slaughtering the mother and the offspring on the same day. If one slaughtered its two offspring and thereafter slaughtered the mother cow, he incurs the forty lashes, as he performed a single prohibited act. If one slaughtered the mother and its daughter, and, later that day, slaughtered its daughter’s daughter, he incurs eighty lashes, as he has performed the act of slaughtering a mother and its offspring twice. But if one slaughtered the mother and its daughter’s daughter and thereafter slaughtered its daughter, he incurs the forty lashes, as he performed a single prohibited act. Sumakhos says in the name of Rabbi Meir: He incurs eighty lashes for slaughtering the daughter on the same day as its calf and its mother, as that act comprises two separate violations of the prohibition. On four occasions during the year one who sells an animal to another is required to inform him: I sold the mother of this animal today for the buyer to slaughter it,or: I sold the daughter of this animal today for the buyer to slaughter it. And those four occasions are: The eve of the last day of the festival of Sukkot, the eve of the first day of the festival of Passover, and the eve of Shavuot, and the eve of Rosh HaShana. And according to the statement of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, the eve of Yom Kippur in the Galilee is included as well. Rabbi Yehuda said: When must he inform the buyer on those days? He must do so at a time when the seller has no interval between the sale of the mother and the offspring, as they were both sold on that day. But if the seller has an interval between the sales, he does not need to inform the buyer, as presumably each buyer purchased the animal to slaughter it on the day he purchased it. And Rabbi Yehuda concedes that in a case where one sells the mother animal to the groom and the offspring to the bride, that even if he did not sell them on the same day, he must inform the buyer, as it is obvious that they are both planning to slaughter their animal on one day, for their wedding feast.",
+ "On those four occasions, one compels the butcher to slaughter animals even against his will; even if there is a bull worth one thousand dinars and the buyer has only one dinar worth of meat, i.e., he already paid the butcher for one dinar’s worth of meat, one compels him to slaughter the animal and give him a dinar’s worth of meat. Therefore, if the bull dies before slaughter, although no act of acquisition was performed, it dies at the expense of the buyer, and he loses his dinar. But during the rest of the days of the year it is not so. On other days, until the buyer performs the act of pulling to assume ownership of the portion of the bull that he is purchasing, the bull remains in the butcher’s possession. Therefore, if the bull dies before the transaction is complete, it dies at the expense of the seller, who returns the buyer’s money.",
+ "With regard to the phrase “one day” that is stated with regard to the prohibition against slaughtering an animal itself and its offspring, the day follows the night. Therefore, one may slaughter an animal during the day and slaughter its offspring that night, but one may not slaughter an animal at night and slaughter its offspring the following day. Rabbi Shimon ben Zoma derived this by means of a verbal analogy. It is stated in the act of Creation: “One day” (Genesis 1:5), and it is stated with regard to the slaughter of an animal itself and its offspring: “One day” (Leviticus 22:28). Just as concerning the phrase “one day” that is stated in the act of Creation, the day follows the night, so too concerning the phrase “one day” that is stated with regard to the slaughter of an animal itself and its offspring, the day follows the night."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The mitzva of covering the blood after slaughter is in effect both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael, both in the presence, i.e., the time, of the Temple and not in the presence of the Temple. And it is in effect with regard to non-sacred animals, but it is not in effect with regard to sacrificial ones. And it is in effect with regard to the slaughter of an undomesticated animal and a bird, with regard to animals and birds that are readily available in his home, and with regard to those that are not readily available and are hunted in the wild. And it is in effect with regard to a koy, because it is uncertain whether a koy is a domesticated animal and one is exempt from the covering of its blood or whether it is an undomesticated animal and one is obligated to cover it. And one may not slaughter a koy on a Festival, because covering its blood entails the performance of prohibited labor that is permitted only if there is a definite obligation to cover the blood. And if one slaughtered a koy on a Festival after the fact, one does not cover its blood until after the Festival.",
+ "In the case of one who slaughters an undomesticated animal or a bird and it is discovered to be an animal with a wound that would have caused it to die within twelve months [tereifa]; and in the case of one who slaughters an undomesticated animal or a bird for the sake of idol worship; and in the case of one who slaughters a non-sacred animal or bird inside the Temple courtyard or a sacrificial bird outside the Temple courtyard; or in the case of one who slaughters an undomesticated animal or a bird that was sentenced to be stoned, e.g., for killing a person; in all these cases, even though it is prohibited to eat any of these animals or birds, Rabbi Meir deems one obligated to cover their blood, and the Rabbis deem one exempt from doing so because, in their opinion, slaughter that is not fit to render the meat permitted for consumption is not considered an act of slaughter. One who slaughters an animal or bird and it became a carcass by his hand, i.e., the slaughter was performed incorrectly, and one who stabs the animal or bird, and one who tears loose the windpipe and the gullet, are exempt from covering the blood, as no act of slaughter took place, and one is obligated to cover blood only after a valid slaughter.",
+ "In the case of a deaf-mute, an imbecile, or a minor who slaughtered an undomesticated animal or a bird, and others saw them and ensured that the slaughter was properly performed, in which case the slaughter is valid (see 2a), one who oversaw the slaughter is obligated to cover the blood. If they slaughtered the animals among themselves without supervision, one is exempt from the obligation to cover the blood. And likewise with regard to the matter of slaughtering a mother and its offspring on the same day, if a deaf-mute, an imbecile, or a minor slaughtered an undomesticated mother animal and others saw them, it is prohibited to slaughter its offspring after them. If they slaughtered the mother animal among themselves, Rabbi Meir deems it permitted to slaughter its offspring after them and the Rabbis deem it prohibited. And the Rabbis concede that if one slaughtered the offspring thereafter that he does not incur the forty lashes, as it is possible the mother was not properly slaughtered.",
+ "If one slaughtered one hundred undomesticated animals in one place, one covering of the blood suffices for all the animals and there is no obligation to cover the blood of each animal separately. Likewise, if one slaughtered one hundred birds in one place, one covering of the blood suffices for all the birds. If one slaughtered an undomesticated animal and a bird in one place, one covering for all of the blood is sufficient. Rabbi Yehuda says: If one slaughtered an undomesticated animal, he should cover its blood immediately and only thereafter he should slaughter the bird. If one slaughtered an undomesticated animal or bird and did not cover the blood, and another person saw the uncovered blood, the second person is obligated to cover the blood. If one covered the blood and it was then uncovered, he is exempt from covering it again. If the wind blew earth on the blood and covered it, and it was consequently uncovered, he is obligated to cover the blood.",
+ "In a case of the blood of an undomesticated animal or bird that was mixed with water, if there is in the mixture the appearance of blood one is obligated to cover it. If the blood was mixed with wine one views the wine as though it is water, and if a mixture with that amount of water would have the appearance of blood one is obligated to cover it. Likewise, if the blood of an undomesticated animal or a bird was mixed with the blood of a domesticated animal, which one does not have to cover, or with blood of the undomesticated animal that did not flow from the neck and does not require covering, one views the blood as though it is water. Rabbi Yehuda says: Blood does not nullify blood. Therefore, even if the undomesticated animal’s blood, which one must cover, is not recognizable in this mixture, he is obligated to cover the mixture nevertheless.",
+ "With regard to blood that spurts outside the pit over which the animal was slaughtered, or onto a wall, and blood that remained on the slaughtering knife, one is obligated to cover it. Rabbi Yehuda said: When is this the halakha? When no blood remains there from the slaughter except that blood. But if blood remains there from the slaughter that is not that blood, he is exempt from covering it.",
+ "With what substances may one cover the blood and with what substances may one not cover the blood? One may cover the blood with fine granulated manure, with fine sand, with lime, with crushed potsherd, and with a brick or the lid of an earthenware barrel that one crushed. But one may not cover the blood with thick manure, nor with thick, clumped sand, nor with a brick or the lid of an earthenware barrel that one did not crush. Neither may one merely turn a vessel over the blood. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel stated a principle: With regard to a substance in which plants grow, one may cover blood with it; and with regard to a substance in which plants do not grow, one may not cover blood with it."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve applies both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael, in the presence of, i.e., the time of, the Temple and not in the presence of the Temple, and with regard to non-sacred animals and with regard to sacrificial animals. And it applies to domesticated animals and to undomesticated animals, to the thigh of the right leg and to the thigh of the left leg. But it does not apply to a bird, due to the fact that the verse makes reference to the sciatic nerve as being “upon the spoon of the thigh” (Genesis 32:33), and a bird has no spoon of the thigh. And the prohibition applies to a late-term animal fetus [shalil] in the womb. Rabbi Yehuda says: It does not apply to a fetus; and similarly, its fat is permitted. And butchers are not deemed credible to say that the sciatic nerve was removed; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: They are deemed credible about the sciatic nerve and about the forbidden fat.",
+ "Although it is prohibited for Jews to eat the sciatic nerve, a Jewish person may send the thigh of an animal to a gentile with the sciatic nerve in it, without concern that the gentile will then sell the thigh to a Jew and the Jew will eat the sciatic nerve. This leniency is due to the fact that the place of the sciatic nerve is conspicuous in the thigh. One who removes the sciatic nerve must scrape away the flesh in the area surrounding the nerve to ensure that he will remove all of it. Rabbi Yehuda says: Scraping is not required; it is sufficient to excise it from the area above the rounded protrusion in order to thereby fulfill the mitzva of removal of the sciatic nerve.",
+ "One who eats an olive-bulk of the sciatic nerve incurs forty lashes. If one eats an entire sciatic nerve and it does not constitute an olive-bulk, he is nevertheless liable to receive lashes, because a complete sciatic nerve is a complete entity. If one ate an olive-bulk from this sciatic nerve in the right leg, and an olive-bulk from that sciatic nerve in the left leg, he incurs [sofeg] eighty lashes. Rabbi Yehuda says: He incurs only forty lashes, for eating the olive-bulk from the right leg, and he is exempt for eating the olive-bulk from the left leg.",
+ "In the case of a thigh that was cooked with the sciatic nerve in it, if there is enough of the sciatic nerve in it to impart its flavor to the thigh, the entire thigh is forbidden for consumption. How does one measure whether there is enough sciatic nerve to impart flavor to the meat of the entire thigh? One relates to it as though the sciatic nerve were meat imparting flavor to a turnip. If meat the volume of the sciatic nerve would impart flavor to a turnip the volume of the thigh when they were cooked together, then the entire thigh is forbidden.",
+ "With regard to a sciatic nerve that was cooked with other sinews, when one identifies the sciatic nerve and removes it, the other sinews are forbidden if the sciatic nerve was large enough to impart flavor. And if he does not identify it, all the sinews are forbidden because each one could be the sciatic nerve; but the broth is forbidden only if the sciatic nerve imparts flavor to the broth. And similarly, in the case of a piece of an animal carcass or a piece of non-kosher fish that was cooked with similar pieces of kosher meat or fish, when one identifies the forbidden piece and removes it, the rest of the meat or fish is forbidden only if the forbidden piece was large enough to impart flavor to the entire mixture. And if he does not identify and remove the forbidden piece, all the pieces are forbidden, due to the possibility that each piece one selects might be the forbidden piece; but the broth is forbidden only if the forbidden piece imparts flavor to the broth.",
+ "The prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve applies to a kosher animal and does not apply to a non-kosher animal. Rabbi Yehuda says: It applies even to a non-kosher animal. Rabbi Yehuda said in explanation: Wasn’t the sciatic nerve forbidden for the children of Jacob, as it is written: “Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sciatic nerve” (Genesis 32:33), yet the meat of a non-kosher animal was still permitted to them? Since the sciatic nerve of non-kosher animals became forbidden at that time, it remains forbidden now. The Rabbis said to Rabbi Yehuda: The prohibition was stated in Sinai, but it was written in its place, in the battle of Jacob and the angel despite the fact that the prohibition did not take effect then."
+ ],
+ [
+ "It is prohibited to cook any meat of domesticated and undomesticated animals and birds in milk, except for the meat of fish and grasshoppers, whose halakhic status is not that of meat. And likewise, the Sages issued a decree that it is prohibited to place any meat together with milk products, e.g., cheese, on one table. The reason for this prohibition is that one might come to eat them after they absorb substances from each other. This prohibition applies to all types of meat, except for the meat of fish and grasshoppers. And one who takes a vow that meat is prohibited to him is permitted to eat the meat of fish and grasshoppers. The meat of birds may be placed with cheese on one table but may not be eaten together with it; this is the statement of Beit Shammai. And Beit Hillel say: It may neither be placed on one table nor be eaten with cheese. Rabbi Yosei said: This is one of the disputes involving leniencies of Beit Shammai and stringencies of Beit Hillel. The mishna elaborates: With regard to which table are these halakhot stated? It is with regard to a table upon which one eats. But on a table upon which one prepares the cooked food, one may place this meat alongside that cheese or vice versa, and need not be concerned that perhaps they will be mixed and one will come to eat them together.",
+ "A person may bind meat and cheese in one cloth, provided that they do not come into contact with each other. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Two unacquainted guests [akhsena’in] may eat together on one table, this one eating meat and that one eating cheese, and they need not be concerned lest they come to violate the prohibition of eating meat and milk by partaking of the food of the other.",
+ "In the case of a drop of milk that fell on a piece of meat, if the drop contains enough milk to impart flavor to that piece of meat, i.e., the meat is less than sixty times the size of the drop, the meat is forbidden. If one stirred the contents of the pot and the piece was submerged in the gravy before it absorbed the milk, if the drop contains enough milk to impart flavor to the contents of that entire pot, the contents of the entire pot are forbidden. One who wants to eat the udder of a slaughtered animal tears it and removes its milk, and only then is it permitted to cook it. If he did not tear the udder before cooking it, he does not violate the prohibition against cooking and eating meat and milk and does not receive lashes for it, as the halakhic status of the milk in the udder is not that of milk. One who wants to eat the heart of a slaughtered animal tears it and removes its blood, and only then may he cook and eat it. If he did not tear the heart before cooking and eating it, he does not violate the prohibition against consuming blood and is not liable to receive karet for it. One who places the meat of birds with cheese on the table upon which he eats does not thereby violate a Torah prohibition.",
+ "It is prohibited to cook the meat of a kosher animal in the milk of any kosher animal, not merely the milk of its mother, and deriving benefit from that mixture is prohibited. It is permitted to cook the meat of a kosher animal in the milk of a non-kosher animal, or the meat of a non-kosher animal in the milk of a kosher animal, and deriving benefit from that mixture is permitted. Rabbi Akiva says: Cooking the meat of an undomesticated animal or bird in milk is not prohibited by Torah law, as it is stated: “You shall not cook a kid in its mother’s milk” (Exodus 23:19, 34:26; Deuteronomy 14:21) three times. The repetition of the word “kid” three times excludes an undomesticated animal, a bird, and a non-kosher animal. Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says that it is stated: “You shall not eat of any animal carcass” (Deuteronomy 14:21), and in the same verse it is stated: “You shall not cook a kid in its mother’s milk.” This indicates that meat of an animal that is subject to be prohibited due to the prohibition of eating an unslaughtered carcass is prohibited for one to cook in milk. Consequently, with regard to meat of birds, which is subject to be prohibited due to the prohibition of eating an unslaughtered carcass, one might have thought that it would be prohibited to cook it in milk. Therefore, the verse states: “In its mother’s milk,” excluding a bird, which has no mother’s milk.",
+ "The congealed milk in the stomach of the animal of a gentile and of an unslaughtered animal carcass is prohibited. With regard to one who curdled milk by using the skin of the stomach of a kosher animal as a coagulant to make cheese, which may then have the taste of meat cooked in milk, if the measure of the skin is enough to impart flavor to the milk, that cheese is prohibited. In the case of a kosher animal that suckled milk from a tereifa, the milk in its stomach is prohibited, as the milk is from the tereifa. If it was a tereifa that suckled milk from a kosher animal, the milk in its stomach is permitted, as the milk is from the kosher animal. In both cases, the milk that an animal suckles has the status of the animal from which it was suckled, and not that of the animal which suckled, because the milk is collected in its innards and is not an integral part of its body.",
+ "Although animal fats and blood are similar in that they are both prohibited by Torah law and punishable by karet, there are elements more stringent in the prohibition of fat than in that of blood, and likewise there are elements more stringent in the prohibition of blood than in that of fat. The elements more stringent in the prohibition of fat are the following: The first is that with regard to fat of an offering, one who derives benefit from it is liable for misuse of consecrated property. And second, one is liable for eating it due to violation of the prohibition of piggul, if it was from an offering that was slaughtered with the intent to sprinkle its blood or partake of it beyond its designated time, and due to the prohibition of notar, if it was from an offering whose period for consumption has expired. And third, if one is ritually impure, he is liable due to the prohibition of partaking of it while impure. This is not so with regard to blood, as one is not liable in these cases for violating the prohibitions of piggul, notar, and partaking of offerings while impure, but rather is liable only for violating the prohibition of consuming blood. And the more stringent element in the prohibition of blood is that the prohibition of blood applies to domesticated animals, undomesticated animals, and birds, both kosher and non-kosher, but the prohibition of forbidden fat applies only to a kosher domesticated animal."
+ ],
+ [
+ "All foods that became ritually impure through contact with a source of impurity transmit impurity to other food and liquids only if the impure foods measure an egg-bulk. In that regard, the Sages ruled that even if a piece of meat itself is less than an egg-bulk, the attached hide, even if it is not fit for consumption, joins together with the meat to constitute an egg-bulk. And the same is true of the congealed gravy attached to the meat, although it is not eaten; and likewise the spices added to flavor the meat, although they are not eaten; and the meat residue attached to the hide after flaying; and the bones; and the tendons; and the lower section of the horns, which remains attached to the flesh when the rest of the horn is removed; and the upper section of the hooves, which remains attached to the flesh when the rest of the hoof is removed. All these items join together with the meat to constitute the requisite egg-bulk to impart the impurity of food. Although if any of them was an egg-bulk they would not impart impurity of food, when attached to the meat they complete the measure. But they do not join together to constitute the measure of an olive-bulk required to impart the impurity of animal carcasses. Similarly, there is another item that imparts impurity of food but not impurity of animal carcasses: In the case of one who slaughters a non-kosher animal for a gentile and the animal is still twitching and comes into contact with a source of impurity, the animal becomes impure with impurity of food and imparts impurity of food to other food, but does not impart impurity of animal carcasses until it dies, or until one severs its head. The mishna summarizes: The Torah included certain items to impart impurity of food beyond those which it included to impart impurity of animal carcasses. Rabbi Yehuda says: With regard to the meat residue attached to the hide after flaying that was collected, if there is an olive-bulk of it in one place it imparts impurity of an animal carcass, and one who contracts impurity from it and then eats consecrated foods or enters the Temple is liable to receive karet. By collecting it in one place, the person indicates that he considers it as meat.",
+ "These are the entities whose skin has the same halakhic status as their flesh: The skin of a dead person, which imparts impurity like his flesh; and the skin of a domesticated pig, which is soft and eaten by gentiles, and imparts the impurity of an animal carcass like its flesh. Rabbi Yehuda says: Even the skin of a wild boar has the same status. And the halakhic status of the skin of all of the following animals is also like that of their flesh: The skin of the hump of a young camel that did not yet toughen; and the skin of the head of a young calf; and the hide of the hooves; and the skin of the womb; and the skin of an animal fetus in the womb of a slaughtered animal; and the skin beneath the tail of a ewe; and the skin of the gecko [anaka], and the desert monitor [ko’aḥ], and the lizard [leta’a], and the skink [ḥomet], four of the eight creeping animals that impart ritual impurity after death. Rabbi Yehuda says: The halakhic status of the skin of the lizard is like that of the skin of the weasel and is not like that of its flesh. And with regard to all of these skins, in a case where one tanned them or spread them on the ground and trod upon them for the period of time required for tanning, they are no longer classified as flesh and are ritually pure, except for the skin of a person, which maintains the status of flesh. Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri says: All eight creeping animals enumerated in the Torah have skins whose halakhic status is not that of flesh.",
+ "The halakhic status of the hide of an animal after it was flayed is no longer like its flesh in terms of becoming impure and imparting impurity. Nevertheless, in the case of one who flays either a domesticated animal or an undomesticated animal; a ritually pure animal that was slaughtered properly and afterward came in contact with impurity, e.g., the one flaying it is impure, or a ritually impure unslaughtered carcass; a small animal, e.g., sheep, or a large animal, e.g., cattle; and even after flaying the animal’s hide is still partially attached to the flesh, the hide’s halakhic status remains that of flesh in some circumstances. These circumstances are: If he is flaying the animal for the purpose of using the hide as a carpet, a tablecloth, or to drape over a couch, in which case he would cut the hide along the length of the animal from head to tail and then remove the hide from both sides, its halakhic status remains that of flesh until he has flayed the measure of grasping the hide, i.e., two handbreadths. And if he is flaying the animal for the purpose of crafting a leather jug, in which case he cuts a circle near the animal’s neck and removes the hide in a downward movement, its halakhic status remains that of flesh until he flays the animal’s entire breast. In the case of one who seeks to fashion a jug and begins flaying from the legs, until he removes the animal’s hide in its entirety, the entire hide is considered as having a connection with the flesh and its halakhic status remains that of flesh with regard to impurity, i.e., with regard to becoming impure and with regard to imparting impurity. If one removed the entire hide except for the hide over the neck, Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri says: It is not considered to have a connection to the flesh, and the Rabbis say: It is considered to have a connection to the flesh until he removes the animal’s hide in its entirety, including the neck.",
+ "In the case of a hide of an unslaughtered carcass upon which there is an olive-bulk of flesh, one who touches a strand of flesh emerging from the flesh or a hair that is on the side of the hide opposite the flesh is ritually impure. Although he did not touch an olive-bulk of the flesh, he is rendered impure with the impurity of an unslaughtered carcass. The reason is that the strand of flesh has the same status as the flesh itself, and the hair is considered protection to the flesh, which also has the same status as the flesh with regard to one who touches it. If upon the hide there were two half olive-bulks, the hide imparts the impurity of an unslaughtered carcass by means of carrying, because one moves them together, but not by means of contact with the flesh, because one touches them separately; this is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiva says: The hide does not impart impurity, neither by means of contact nor by means of carrying. And Rabbi Akiva concedes in the case of two half olive-bulks where one skewered them with a wood chip and moved them that he is impure. And for what reason does Rabbi Akiva deem one ritually pure in a case where he moved both half olive-bulks with the hide, as in that case, too, he moved them together? It is because the hide separates between them and nullifies them.",
+ "With regard to the thigh bone of a human corpse, and the thigh bone of a sacrificial animal that was rendered unfit as piggul, i.e., an offering that was sacrificed with the intent to consume it after its designated time, or notar, i.e., part of an offering left over after the time allotted for its consumption, whether these thigh bones were sealed and there was no access to the marrow, or whether they were perforated and there was access to the marrow, one who touches them is ritually impure. The reason is that a piece of bone of a corpse the size of a barley grain imparts impurity, and the bone of a sacrificial animal that was disqualified in this manner imparts impurity by rabbinic decree via contact. With regard to the thigh bone of an unslaughtered carcass and the thigh bone of a creeping animal, one who touches them when they are sealed remains ritually pure. If one of these thigh bones was perforated at all, it imparts impurity via contact, as in that case contact with the bone is tantamount to contact with the marrow. From where is it derived that even with regard to impurity transmitted via carrying there is a distinction between sealed and perforated thigh bones? It is derived from a verse, as the verse states: “One who touches the carcass thereof shall be impure until the evening; and one who carries the carcass thereof shall be impure until the evening” (Leviticus 11:39–40), indicating: That which enters the category of impurity via contact, enters the category of impurity via carrying; that which does not enter the category of impurity via contact, does not enter the category of impurity via carrying.",
+ "The egg of a creeping animal in which tissue of an embryo developed and one who comes into contact with the egg are ritually pure, as the impure creeping animal is hermetically sealed. But if one perforated the egg with a hole of any size, one who comes in contact with the egg is ritually impure. In the case of a mouse that grows from the ground and is half-flesh half-earth, one who touches the half that is flesh is impure; one who touches the half that is earth is pure. Rabbi Yehuda says: Even one who touches the half that is earth where it is adjacent to the flesh is ritually impure.",
+ "The limb of an animal, with flesh, sinews, and bones, and the flesh of an animal, that were partially severed and remain hanging from the animal do not have the halakhic status of a limb severed from a living animal, which imparts impurity like an unslaughtered carcass, or of flesh severed from a living animal, which is ritually pure, respectively. If one had intent to eat the limb or the flesh, the limb or flesh becomes impure if it comes in contact with a source of impurity, and they impart impurity as food to other foods and liquids, although they remain in their place attached to the animal. But in order for them to become impure, they need to be rendered susceptible to impurity through contact with one of the seven liquids that facilitate susceptibility. If the animal was slaughtered, although this act of slaughter does not render it permitted for consumption by a Jew (see 73b), the limb and the flesh were thereby rendered susceptible to impurity by coming in contact with the blood of the slaughtered animal, as blood is one of the seven liquids; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Shimon says: They were not rendered susceptible to impurity through the animal’s own blood; they are rendered susceptible only once they have been wet with another liquid. If the animal died without slaughter, the hanging flesh needs to be rendered susceptible to impurity in order to become impure, as its halakhic status is that of flesh severed from a living animal, which is ritually pure and does not have the status of an unslaughtered carcass. The hanging limb imparts impurity as a limb severed from a living animal but does not impart impurity as the limb of an unslaughtered carcass; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And Rabbi Shimon deems the limb ritually pure.",
+ "The limb and the flesh of a person that were partially severed and remain hanging from a person are ritually pure, although there is no potential for healing. If the person died, the hanging flesh is ritually pure, as its halakhic status is that of flesh severed from a living person. The hanging limb imparts impurity as a limb severed from the living and does not impart impurity as a limb from a corpse; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And Rabbi Shimon deems the flesh and the limb ritually pure."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The mitzva to give the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw of slaughtered animals to the priests, known as the gifts of the priesthood, applies both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael, in the presence of the Temple and not in the presence of the Temple, and it applies to non-sacred animals, but not to sacrificial animals. It is necessary to emphasize that it does not apply to sacrificial animals, as by right it should be inferred a fortiori: If non-sacred animals, which are not obligated to have the breast and thigh taken from them and given to the priest, are obligated to have gifts of the priesthood given from them, then with regard to sacrificial animals, which are obligated to have the breast and thigh given from them, is it not right that they should be obligated to have gifts of the priesthood given from them? Therefore, the verse states: “For the breast of waving and the thigh of giving I have taken of the children of Israel from the sacrifice of the peace offerings, and have given them to Aaron the priest and to his sons as a due forever from the children of Israel” (Leviticus 7:34), from which it is derived that the priest has only that which is stated with regard to that matter, i.e., the breast and the thigh, and not the foreleg, the jaw and the maw.",
+ "All sacrificial animals in which a permanent blemish preceded their consecration do not assume inherent sanctity, and only their value is consecrated. And once they were redeemed, they are obligated in the mitzva of a firstborn, i.e., their offspring are subject to being counted a firstborn, and in the gifts of the priesthood, and they can emerge from their sacred status and assume non-sacred status with regard to being shorn and with regard to being utilized for labor, as it is prohibited to shear animals with sacred status or utilize them for labor. And their offspring and their milk are permitted after their redemption. And one who slaughters these animals outside the Temple courtyard is exempt from karet, and those animals do not render an animal that was a substitute for them consecrated. And if these animals died before they were redeemed, they may be redeemed and fed to dogs. Although typically sacrificial animals that were redeemed may not be fed to the dogs, in this case it is permitted. This is the halakha with regard to all animals except for the firstborn animal and the animal tithe, whose sanctity is inherent, even when a permanent blemish preceded their consecration. With regard to all sacrificial animals whose consecration preceded their blemish, or who had a temporary blemish prior to their consecration and afterward developed a permanent blemish and they were redeemed, they are exempt from the mitzva of a firstborn, and from the gifts of the priestood, and they do not emerge from their sacred status and assume non-sacred status with regard to being shorn and with regard to being utilized for labor. And their offspring, which were conceived prior to redemption, and their milk, are prohibited after their redemption. And one who slaughters them outside the Temple courtyard is liable to receive karet, and those animals render an animal that was a substitute for them consecrated. And if these animals died before they were redeemed, they may not be redeemed and fed to dogs; rather, they must be buried.",
+ "With regard to a blemished firstborn animal, which one may slaughter and eat without being required to give the foreleg, jaw, and maw to the priest, that was intermingled with one hundred non-sacred animals, from which one is required to give those gifts, in a case when one hundred different people slaughter all of them, each slaughtering one animal, one exempts them all from giving the gifts, as each could claim that the animal that he slaughtered was the firstborn. If one person slaughtered them all, one exempts one of the animals for him. One who slaughters the animal of a priest for the priest or the animal of a gentile for the gentile is exempt from the obligation to give the gifts of the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw. And an Israelite who enters into partnership with a priest or a gentile must mark the animal to indicate that it is jointly owned and exempt from the obligation to give the gifts. And if a priest sold his animal to an Israelite and said: The animal is sold except for the gifts with it, the Israelite is exempt from the obligation to give the gifts, as they are not his. If the Israelite said to the one slaughtering the animal: Sell me the innards of a cow, and there were gifts included with it, i.e., the maw, the purchaser gives them to the priest and he does not deduct the value of the gifts from the money that he pays him. If he bought the innards from the slaughterer by weight, the purchaser gives the gifts, i.e., the maw, to the priest and deducts the value of the gifts from the money that he pays him.",
+ "In the case of a convert who converted and he had a cow, if the cow was slaughtered before he converted, he is exempt from giving the gifts to the priest. If the animal was slaughtered after he converted, the convert is obligated to give the gifts. If there is uncertainty whether it was slaughtered before or after the conversion, the convert is exempt, as the burden of proof rests upon the claimant. What is the definition of the foreleg that is given to the priests as one of the gifts? It is the part of the leg from the joint of the lower knee until the rounded protrusion surrounding the thigh bone of the foreleg; and that is the foreleg mentioned in the Torah with regard to the nazirite: “And the priest shall take the foreleg of the ram when it is cooked” (Numbers 6:19). And the parallel in the hind leg is the thigh that is given to the priest from the peace offering, which is also from the joint of the lower knee until the rounded protrusion surrounding the thigh bone. Rabbi Yehuda says: The thigh is from the joint of the lower knee until the upper knee joint, which connects the middle and upper parts of the leg. What is the definition of the jaw? It is from the joint of the lower jaw beneath the temples and downward until the upper ring of the windpipe."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The mitzva of the first sheared wool that every Jew must give to the priest, as stated in the verse: “And the first sheared wool of your flock [tzonekha] shall you give him” (Deuteronomy 18:4), applies both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael, in the presence of the Temple and not in the presence of the Temple, and with regard to non-sacred animals. But it does not apply to sacrificial animals. There are more stringent elements in the mitzva of the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw (see 130a) than in the halakha of the first sheared wool in that the mitzva of the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw applies to cattle and to sheep, as it is written: “Whether it be ox or sheep, that he shall give unto the priest the foreleg, and the jaw, and the maw” (Deuteronomy 18:3); and it applies to numerous animals and to few animals. But by contrast, the mitzva of the first sheared wool applies only to sheep and not to goats and cattle, and applies only to numerous animals.",
+ "And how many are numerous? Beit Shammai say: It is at least two sheep, as it is stated: “That a man shall rear a young cow, and two sheep [tzon]” (Isaiah 7:21), indicating that two sheep are characterized as tzon; and the mitzva of the first sheared wool is written using the term “your flock [tzonekha].” And Beit Hillel say: It is at least five sheep, as it is stated: “And five sheep [tzon] made” (I Samuel 25:18). Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas says: When shearing five sheep, the sheared wool of each sheep weighing one hundred dinars each and half [peras] of one hundred dinars each, i.e., one hundred and fifty dinars each, are subject to the obligation of the first sheared wool, i.e., they render the owner obligated to give the first sheared wool to the priests. And the Rabbis say: Any five sheep, each of whose sheared wool weighs any amount, render the owner obligated in the mitzva. And how much of the sheared wool does one give to the priest? One gives him sheared wool of the weight of five sela in Judea, which are the equivalent of ten sela in the Galilee, as the weight of the Galilean sela is half that of the Judean sela. Furthermore, although one may give the wool to the priest without laundering it, this must be the weight of the wool once laundered and not when sullied, as is characteristic of wool when sheared. The measure that must be given to the priest is enough to fashion a small garment from it, as it is stated: “Shall you give him” (Deuteronomy 18:4), indicating that the sheared wool must contain enough for a proper gift. If the owner of the shearing did not manage to give it to the priest until he dyed it, the owner is exempt from the mitzva of the first sheared wool, as this constitutes a change in the wool by which means he acquires ownership of it. If he laundered it but did not dye it, he is obligated to give the first sheared wool, as laundering does not constitute a change in the wool. One who purchases the fleece of the sheep of a gentile is exempt from the obligation of giving the first sheared wool to the priest. With regard to one who purchases the fleece of the sheep of another Jew, if the seller kept some of the wool, then the seller is obligated to give the first sheared wool to the priest. If the seller did not keep any of the wool, the buyer is obligated to give it. If the seller had two types of sheep, gray and white, and he sold the buyer the gray fleece but not the white fleece, or if he sold the fleece of the male sheep but not of the female sheep, then this one, the seller, gives the first sheared wool for himself to the priest from the wool that he kept, and that one, the buyer, gives the first sheared wool for himself to the priest from the wool that he bought."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The mitzva of sending away the mother bird from the nest applies both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael, and in the presence of the Temple and not in the presence of the Temple. It applies to non-sacred birds, but it does not apply to sacrificial birds. There are more stringent elements in the covering of the blood than in the sending away of the mother bird from the nest, as the covering of the blood applies to undomesticated animals and birds, to animals and birds that are readily available in one’s home, and to animals and birds that are not readily available and are hunted in the wild; and the sending of the mother bird from the nest applies only to birds, and applies only to birds that are not readily available. What are considered birds that are not readily available? They are any birds, even domesticated, that may fly away at any time, such as geese or chickens that nested in the orchard [pardes]. But if geese or chickens nested in the house, and likewise, with regard to domesticated pigeons [yonei hardisei’ot], one is exempt from sending away the mother bird.",
+ " With regard to the nest of a non-kosher bird, one is exempt from sending away the mother bird. In a case where a non-kosher bird is resting upon the eggs of a kosher bird, or a kosher bird is resting upon the eggs of a non-kosher bird, one is exempt from sending away the bird. With regard to a male pheasant [korei], which is known to sit upon the eggs like the female of its species, Rabbi Eliezer deems one obligated to send it away, and the Rabbis deem one exempt from sending it away.",
+ "If the mother bird was hovering over the eggs or fledglings in the nest, when its wings are touching the eggs or fledglings in the nest, one is obligated to send away the mother. When its wings are not touching the eggs or fledglings in the nest, one is exempt from sending away the mother. Even if there is only one fledgling or one egg, one is obligated to send away the mother, as it is stated: “If a bird’s nest happens before you” (Deuteronomy 22:6), indicating that one is obligated to send away the mother bird from the nest in any case. If there were fledglings capable of flying, or unfertilized eggs from which a fledgling will not hatch, one is exempt from sending away the mother bird from the nest, as it is stated in the same verse: “And the mother is resting upon the fledglings or upon the eggs.” From the juxtaposition of the fledglings and the eggs one derives: Just as the fledglings are living, so too, the eggs must be capable of producing living fledglings. This excludes unfertilized eggs, which cannot produce a living fledgling. And furthermore, just as the eggs need their mothers to hatch them, so too, the fledglings must be those that need their mothers. This excludes fledglings that are capable of flying. If one sent away the mother bird and it returned to rest on the eggs, even if it returned four or five times, one is obligated to send it away again, as it is stated: “You shall send [shalle’aḥ teshallaḥ] the mother” (Deuteronomy 22:7). The doubled verb indicates that one must send away the mother bird multiple times if needed. If one said: I am hereby taking the mother and sending away the offspring, he is still obligated to send away the mother even if he sent away the offspring, as it is stated: “You shall send the mother.” If one sent away the mother and took the offspring and then returned them to the mother’s nest, and thereafter the mother returned and rested upon them, one is exempt from sending away the mother bird.",
+ "With regard to one who takes the mother bird with its fledglings, Rabbi Yehuda says: He is flogged for taking the mother bird, and he does not send away the mother. And the Rabbis say: He sends away the mother and is not flogged, as this is the principle: With regard to any prohibition that entails a command to arise and perform a mitzva, one is not flogged for its violation.",
+ "A person may not take the mother bird with the offspring even if he takes the mother for use as part of the ritual to purify the leper. The mishna compares the reward for performing the mitzva of sending away the mother bird from the nest to the reward for performing other mitzvot: And if with regard to the sending away of the mother bird, which is a mitzva whose performance is simple, as it entails a loss of no more than an issar, i.e., the value of the mother bird, the Torah says: “That it may be well with you, and that you may prolong your days” (Deuteronomy 22:7), it may be derived by a fortiori inference that the reward is no less for the fulfillment of the mitzvot in the Torah whose performance is demanding."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "versions": [
+ [
+ "William Davidson Edition - English",
+ "https://korenpub.com/collections/the-noe-edition-koren-talmud-bavli-1"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "heTitle": "משנה חולין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/Hebrew/Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/Hebrew/Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c10b4ec100a5a4acda2fbeac44c021dae6af841c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/Hebrew/Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri.json
@@ -0,0 +1,123 @@
+{
+ "language": "he",
+ "title": "Mishnah Chullin",
+ "versionSource": "https://archive.org/details/MishnaCorrectedKaufman00WHOLE",
+ "versionTitle": "Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "license": "PD",
+ "digitizedBySefaria": true,
+ "actualLanguage": "he",
+ "languageFamilyName": "hebrew",
+ "isSource": true,
+ "isPrimary": true,
+ "direction": "rtl",
+ "heTitle": "משנה חולין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "א\nהַכֹּל שׁוֹחֲטִין, וּשְׁחִיטָתָן כְּשֵׁרָה, \nחוּץ מֵחֵרֵשׁ, שׁוֹטֶה וְקָטָן, \nשֶׁמֵּא יְקַלְקְלוּ בִשְׁחִיטָתָן. \nוְכֻלָּם שֶׁשָּׁחֲטוּ וַאֲחֵרִים רוֹאִים אוֹתָן, \nשְׁחִיטָתָן כְּשֵׁרָה. \nשְׁחִיטַת נָכְרִי נְבֵלָה, וּמְטַמָּא בַמַּשָּׂא. \nהַשּׁוֹחֵט בַּלַּיְלָה, וְכֵן הַסּוֹמֵא שֶׁשָּׁחַט, \nשְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. \nהַשּׁוֹחֵט בַּשַּׁבָּת, וּבְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, \nאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא מִתְחַיֵּב בְּנַפְשׁוֹ, \nשְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. \n",
+ "ב\nהַשּׁוֹחֵט בְּמַגַּל יָד, וּבַצּוּר, וּבַקָָּנֶה, \nשְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. \nהַכֹּל שׁוֹחֲטִין, וּלְעוֹלָם שׁוֹחֲטִין, \nוּבַכֹּל שׁוֹחֲטִין, חוּץ מִמַּגַּל קָצִיר, \nוְהַמְּגֵרָה, וְהַשִּׁנַּיִם, וְהַצִּפֹּרֶן, \nמִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן חוֹנְקִין. \nהַשּׁוֹחֵט בְּמַגַּל קָצִיר כְּדֶרֶךְ הוֹלָכָתָהּ, \nבֵּית שַׁמַּי פּוֹסְלִין, \nוּבֵית הֶלֵּל מַכְשִׁירִין. \nוְאִם הֶחֱלִיקוּ שִׁנֶּיהָ, \nהֲרֵי זוֹ כִסְכִין. \n",
+ "ג\nהַשּׁוֹחֵט מִתּוֹךְ הַטַּבַּעַת, \nוְשִׁיֵּר בָּהּ מְלֹא הַחוּט עַל פְּנֵי כֻלָּהּ, \nשְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. \nרְבִּי יוֹסֵה בִרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nמְלֹא הַחוּט עַל פְּנֵי רֻבָּהּ. \n",
+ "ד\nהַשּׁוֹחֵט מִן הַצְּדָדִין, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. \nהַמּוֹלֵק מִן הַצְּדָדִין, מְלִיקָתוֹ פְסוּלָה. \nהַשּׁוֹחֵט מִן הָעֹרֶף, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְסוּלָה. \nהַמּוֹלֵק מִן הָעֹרֶף, מְלִיקָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. \nהַשּׁוֹחֵט מִן הַצַּוָּאר, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. \nהַמּוֹלֵק מִן הַצַּוָּאר, מְלִיקָתוֹ פְסוּלָה; \nשֶׁכָּל הָעֹרֶף כָּשֵׁר לִמְלִיקָה, \nוְכָל הַצַּוָּאר כָּשֵׁר לִשְׁחִיטָה. \nה\nנִמְצָא הַכָּשֵׁר בִּשְׁחִיטָה, פָּסוּל בִּמְלִיקָה; \nהַכָּשֵׁר בִּמְלִיקָה, פָּסוּל בִּשְׁחִיטָה. \n",
+ "הַכָּשֵׁר בַּתּוֹרִין, פָּסוּל בִּבְנֵי יוֹנָה; \nהַכָּשֵׁר בִּבְנֵי יוֹנָה, פָּסוּל בַּתּוֹרִין. \nתְּחִלַּת הַצֵּהוּב, בָּזֶה וּבָזֶה פָסוּל. \n",
+ "ז\nהַכָּשֵׁר בַּפָּרָה, פָּסוּל בָּעֲגָלָה; \nהַכָּשֵׁר בָּעֲגָלָה, פָּסוּל בַּפָּרָה. \nהַכָּשֵׁר בַּכֹּהֲנִים, פָּסוּל בַּלְוִיִּם; \nהַכָּשֵׁר בַּלְוִיִּם, פָּסוּל בַּכֹּהֲנִים. \nהַטָּהוֹר בִּכְלִי חֶרֶשׂ, טָמֵא בְכָל הַכֵּלִים; \nהַטָּהוֹר בְּכָל הַכֵּלִים, טָמֵא בִכְלִי חֶרֶשׂ. \nהַטָּהוֹר בִּכְלִי עֵץ, טָמֵא בִּכְלֵי מַתְּכוֹת; \nהַטָּהוֹר בִּכְלֵי מַתְּכוֹת, טָמֵא בִכְלִי עֵץ. \nהַחַיָּב בַּשְּׁקֵדִים הַמָּרִים, פָּטוּר בַּמְּתוּקִים; \nהַחַיָּב בַּמְּתוּקִים, פָּטוּר בַּמָּרִים. \n",
+ "ח\nהַתָּמָד, \nעַד שֶׁלֹּא הֶחְמִיץ, אֵינוּ נִלְקָח בְּכֶסֶף מַעֲשֵׂר, \nמִשֶּׁהֶחְמִיץ, נִלְקָח בְּכֶסֶף מַעֲשֵׂר. \nהָאַחִים הַשּׁוּתָפִים שֶׁחַיָּבִין בַּקָּלְבּוֹן, \nפְּטוּרִין מִמַּעְשַׂר בְּהֵמָה, \nוְשֶׁחַיָּבִין בְּמַעְשַׂר בְּהֵמָה, \nפְּטוּרִין מִן הַקָּלְבּוֹן. \nכָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ קְנָס, אֵין מֶכֶר, \nוְכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ מֶכֶר, אֵין קְנָס. \nכָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ מֵאוּן, אֵין חֲלִיצָה, \nוְכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ חֲלִיצָה, אֵין מֵאוּן. \nכָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ תְּקִיעָה, אֵין הַבְדָּלָה, \nוְכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ הַבְדָּלָה, אֵין תְּקִיעָה. \nכֵּיצַד?\nיוֹם טוֹב שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת עֶרֶב שַׁבָּת, \nתּוֹקְעִין וְלֹא מַבְדִּילִין; \nלְאַחַר הַשַּׁבָּת, מַבְדִּילִין וְלֹא תוֹקְעִין. \nכֵּיצַד מַבְדִּילִין? \n\"בֵּין קֹדֶשׁ לְקֹדֶשׁ\". \nרְבִּי דוֹסָה אוֹמֵר: \n\"בֵּין קֹדֶשׁ הֶחָמוּר לְקֹדֶשׁ הַקַּל\". \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nהַשּׁוֹחֵט אֶחָד בָּעוֹף וּשְׁנַיִם בַּבְּהֵמָה, \nשְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. \nוְרֻבּוֹ שֶׁלְּאֶחָד כָּמוֹהוּ. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nעַד שֶׁיִּשְׁחֹט אֶת הַוָּרִידִין. \n\nב\nחֲצִי אֶחָד בָּעוֹף, אֶחָד וָחֵצִי בַבְּהֵמָה, \nשְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְסוּלָה. \nרֹב אֶחָד בָּעוֹף וְרֹב שְׁנַיִם בַּבְּהֵמָה, \nשְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. \n",
+ "ג\nהַשּׁוֹחֵט שְׁנֵי רָאשִׁין כְּאַחַת, \nשְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. \nשְׁנַיִם אוֹחֲזִין בַּסְּכִין וְשׁוֹחֲטִין, \nאֲפִלּוּ אֶחָד מִלְּמַעְלָן וְאֶחָד מִלְּמַטָּן, \nשְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. \n",
+ "ד\nהִתִּיז אֶת הָרֹאשׁ בְּבַת אַחַת, \nפְּסוּלָה. \nהָיָה שׁוֹחֵט, \nוְהִתִּיז אֶת הָרֹאשׁ בְּבַת אַחַת, \nאִם יֵשׁ בַּסְּכִין מְלֹא צַוָּאר, \nכָּשֵׁר. \nהָיָה שׁוֹחֵט, \nוְהִתִּיז שְׁנֵי הָרָאשִׁים כְּאַחַת, \nאִם יֵשׁ בַּסְּכִין מְלֹא צַוָּאר אֶחָד, \nכָּשֵׁר. \nבַּמֵּי דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים? \nבִּזְמַן שֶׁהוֹלִיךְ וְלֹא הֵבִיא, \nאוֹ הֵבִיא וְלֹא הוֹלִיךְ, \nאֲבָל אִם הוֹלִיךְ וְהֵבִיא, \nאֲפִלּוּ כָל שֶׁהוּא, אֲפִלּוּ בְאֻזְמֵל, \nכָּשֵׁר. \n\nה\nנָפְלָה סְכִין וְשָׁחֲטָה, \nאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁשָּׁחֲטָה כְדַרְכָּהּ, \nפְּסוּלָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (דברים יב,כא) \n\"וְזָבַחְתָּ... וְאָכַלְתָּ\", \nמַה שֶּׁאַתָּה זוֹבֵחַ, אַתָּה אוֹכֵל. \n\nו\nנָפְלָה סְכִין וְהִגְבִּיהָהּ, \nנָפְלוּ כֵלָיו וְהִגְבִּיהָן, \nהִשְׁחִיז אֶת הַסְּכִין, עָף, \nוּבָא חֲבֵרוֹ וְשָׁחַט, \nאִם שָׁהָא כְדֵי שְׁחִיטָה אַחַת, \nפְּסוּלָה. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: \nאִם שָׁהָא כְדֵי בִקּוּר. \n",
+ "ז\nשָׁחַט אֶת הַוֵּשֶׁט וּפָסַק אֶת הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת, \nשָׁחַט אֶת הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת וּפָסַק אֶת הַוֵּשֶׁט, \nשָׁחַט אֶת אֶחָד מֵהֶן וְהִמְתִּין לָהּ עַד שֶׁמֵּתָה, \nאוֹ שֶׁהֶחֱלִיד אֶת הַסְּכִין תַּחַת הַשֵּׁנִי וּפְסָקוֹ, \nרְבִּי יִשְׁבְּאָב אוֹמֵר: \nנְבֵלָה. \nרְבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר: \nטְרֵפָה. \nכְּלָל אָמַר רְבִּי יִשְׁבְּאָב מִשֵּׁם רְבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: \nכָּל שֶׁנִּפְסָלָה מִשְּׁחִיטָתָהּ, נְבֵלָה. \nכָּל שֶׁשְּׁחִיטָתָהּ כָּרָאוּי, \nוְדָבָר אַחֵר גָּרַם לָהּ לְהִפָּסֵל, טְרֵפָה. \nוְהוֹדָה לוֹ רְבִּי עֲקִיבָה. \n",
+ "ח\nהַשּׁוֹחֵט בְּהֵמָה חַיָּה וָעוֹף, \nוְלֹא יָצָא מֵהֶן דָּם, כְּשֵׁרִים, \nנֶאֱכָלִים בְּיָדַיִם מְסֹאָבוֹת, \nלְפִי שֶׁלֹּא הָכְשָׁרוּ בַדָּם. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: \nהָכְשָׁרוּ בִשְׁחִיטָה. \n",
+ "ט\nהַשּׁוֹחֵט אֶת הַמְסֻכֶּנֶת, \nרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: \nעַד שֶׁתְּפַרְכֵּס בַּיָּד וּבָרֶגֶל. \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: \nדַּיָּהּ אִם זִנֵּקָה. \nאָמַר רְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: \nאַף הַשּׁוֹחֵט בַּלַּיְלָה, \nוּבַשַּׁחַר עָמַד וּמָצָא כֳתָלִים מְלֵאִים דָּם, \nכְּשֵׁרָה, שֶׁזִּנֵּקָה כְמִדַּת רְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. \nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: \nעַד שֶׁתְּפַרְכֵּס בַּיָּד וּבָרֶגֶל. \nאוֹ עַד שֶׁתְּכַשְׁכֵּשׁ בִּזְנָבָהּ. \nאֶחָד בְּהֵמָה דַקָּה וְאֶחָד בְּהֵמָה גַסָּה. \nבְּהֵמָה דַקָּה שֶׁפָּשְׁטָה אֶת יָדָהּ וְלֹא הֶחֱזִירָהּ, \nפְּסוּלָה, \nשֶׁאֵינָה אֶלָּא הוֹצָאַת נֶפֶשׁ. \nבַּמֵּי דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים? \nשֶׁהָיְתָה בְחֶזְקַת מְסֻכֶּנֶת, \nאֲבָל אִם הָיְתָה בְחֶזְקַת בְּרִיָה, \nאֲפִלּוּ לֹא הָיוּ בָהּ אֶחָד מִן הַסִּימָנִים הַלָּלוּ, \nכְּשֵׁרָה. \n",
+ "י\nהַשּׁוֹחֵט לַנָּכְרִי, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה. \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר פּוֹסֵל. \nאָמַר רְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר: \nאֲפִלּוּ שְׁחָטָהּ \nשֶׁיֹּאכַל הַנָּכְרִי מֵחֲצַר הַכָּבֵד שֶׁלָּהּ, \nפְּסוּלָה, \nשֶׁמַּחְשֶׁבֶת הַנָּכְרִי לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. \n\nיא\nאָמַר רְבִּי יוֹסֵה: \nקַל וָחֹמֶר הַדְּבָרִים: \nמָה אִם בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁהַמַּחֲשָׁבָה פוֹסֶלֶת בַּמֻּקְדָּשִׁין, \nאֵין הַכֹּל הוֹלֵךְ אֶלָּא לְאַחַר הָעוֹבֵר, \nמְקוֹם שֶׁאֵין הַמַּחֲשָׁבָה פוֹסֶלֶת בַּחֻלִּין, \nלֹא יְהֵא הַכֹּל הוֹלֵךְ אֶלָּא לְאַחַר הַשּׁוֹחֵט? \n",
+ "יב\nהַשּׁוֹחֵט לְשֵׁם הָרִים, לְשֵׁם גְּבָעוֹת, \nלְשֵׁם יַמִּים, לְשֵׁם נְהָרוֹת, \nלְשֵׁם מִדְבָּרוֹת, \nשְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְסוּלָה. \nשְׁנַיִם אוֹחֲזִין בַּסְּכִין וְשׁוֹחֲטִין, \nאֶחָד לְשֵׁם אֶחָד מִכָּל אֵלּוּ, \nוְאֶחָד לְשֵׁם דָּבָר כָּשֵׁר, \nשְׁחִיטָתָן פְּסוּלָה. \n",
+ "יג\nאֵין שׁוֹחֲטִין לֹא לְתוֹךְ הַיַּמִּים, \nוְלֹא לְתוֹךְ הַנְּהָרוֹת, \nוְלֹא לְתוֹךְ הַכֵּלִים, \nאֲבָל שׁוֹחֵט הוּא לְתוֹךְ הָעֹגֶל שֶׁלַּמַּיִם, \nוּבַסְּפִינָה עַל גַּבֵּי כֵלִים. \nאֵין שׁוֹחֲטִין בַּגּוּמָא, \nאֲבָל עוֹשֶׂה הוּא אָדָן גּוּמָא לְתוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ, \nבִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁיִּכָּנֵס הַדָּם לְתוֹכָהּ. \nוּבַשּׁוּק לֹא יַעֲשֶׂה כֵן, \nשֶׁלֹּא יְחַקֶּה אֶת הַמִּינִים. \n",
+ "יד\nהַשּׁוֹחֵט לְשֵׁם עוֹלָה, \nלְשֵׁם שְׁלָמִים, \nלְשֵׁם אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, \nלְשֵׁם פֶּסַח, \nלְשֵׁם תּוֹדָה, \nשְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְסוּלָה. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מַכְשִׁיר. \nשְׁנַיִם אוֹחֲזִין בַּסְּכִין וְשׁוֹחֲטִין, \nאֶחָד לְשֵׁם אֶחָד מִכָּל אֵלּוּ, \nוְאֶחָד לְשֵׁם דָּבָר כָּשֵׁר, \nשְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְסוּלָה. \n\nטו\nהַשּׁוֹחֵט לְשֵׁם חַטָּאת, \nלְשֵׁם אָשָׁם וַדַּאי, \nלְשֵׁם בְּכוֹר, \nלְשֵׁם מַעֲשֵׂר, \nלְשֵׁם תְּרוּמָה, \nשְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. \nזֶה הַכְּלָל: \nדָּבָר שֶׁהוּא נִדָּר וְנִדָּב, \nהַשּׁוֹחֵט לִשְׁמוֹ פָסוּל. \nוְדָבָר שֶׁאֵינוּ לֹא נִדָּר וְלֹא נִדָּב, \nהַשּׁוֹחֵט לִשְׁמוֹ כָּשֵׁר. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nאֵלּוּ טְרֵפוֹת בַּבְּהֵמָה: \nנְקוּבַת הַוֵּשֶׁט, \nוּפְסוּקַת הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת, \nנִקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁלַּמֹּחַ, \nנִקַּב הַלֵּב לְבֵית חֲלָלוֹ, \nנִפְסַק חוּט שֶׁלַּשִּׁזְרָה, \nנִטְּלָה הַכָּבֵד וְלֹא נִשְׁתַּיַּר מִמֶּנָּה כְלוּם, \nהָרֵיאָה שֶׁנִּקָּבָה, \nאוֹ שֶׁחָסָרָה. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: \nעַד שֶׁתִּנָּקֵב לְבֵית הַסִּיפוֹנוֹת. \n\nב\nנִקְּבָה הַקֵּבָה, \nנִקְּבָה הַמָּרָה, \nנִקְּבוּ הַדַּקִּים, \nהַכֶּרֶס הַפְּנִימִית שֶׁנִּקָּבָה, \nאוֹ שֶׁנִּקְרַע רֹב הַחִיצוֹנָה. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nבִּגְדוֹלָה טֶפַח, וּבִקְטַנָּה רֻבָּהּ. \n\nג\nהֶמְסֵס וּבֵית הַכּוֹסוֹת שֶׁנִּקָּבוּ לַחוּץ. \nנָפְלָה מִן הַגַּג וְנִשְׁתַּבְּרוּ רֹב צְלָעוֹתֶיהָ, \nוּדְרוּסַת הַזְּאֵב. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nדְּרוּסַת הַזְּאֵב, בַּדַּקָּה, \nוּדְרוּסַת הָאֲרִי, בַּגַּסָּה. \nדְּרוּסַת הַנֵּץ, בְּעוֹף הַדַּק, \nוּדְרוּסַת הַגֵּז, בְּעוֹף הַגַּס. \nזֶה הַכְּלָל, \nכָּל שֶׁאֵין כָּמוֹהָ חָיָה, טְרֵפָה. \n",
+ "ד\nאֵלּוּ כְשֵׁרוֹת בַּבְּהֵמָה: \nנִקְּבָה הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת, אוֹ שֶׁנִּסְדָּקָה. \nעַד כַּמָּה תֶחְסַר? \nרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: \nעַד כְּאִסַּר הָאִיטַלְקִי. \n\nה\nנִפְחָתָה הַגֻּלְגּלֶת וְלֹא נִקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁלַּמֹּחַ, \nנִקַּב הַלֵּב וְלֹא לְבֵית חֲלָלוֹ, \nנִשְׁבְּרָה הַשִּׁזְרָה וְלֹא נִפְסַק הַחוּט שֶׁלָּהּ, \nנִטְּלָה הַכָּבֵד וְנִשְׁתַּיַּר מִמֶּנָּה כָל שֶׁהוּא, \nהֶמְסֵס וּבֵית הַכּוֹסוֹת שֶׁנִּקָּבוּ זֶה לְתוֹךְ זֶה, \nנִטַּל הַטְּחוֹל, \nנִטְּלוּ הַכְּלָיוֹת, \nנִטַּל לֶחִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן, \nנִטְּלָה הָאוֹם שֶׁלָּהּ, \nוַחֲרוּתָה בִידֵי שָׁמַיִם, \nכְּשֵׁרָה.\nהַגְּלוּדָה, \nרְבִּי מֵאִיר מַכְשִׁיר, \nוַחֲכָמִים פּוֹסְלִין. \n",
+ "ו\nאֵלּוּ טְרֵפוֹת בָּעוֹף: \nנְקוּבַת הַוֵּשֶׁט, \nוּפְסוּקַת הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת. \nהִכַּתָּהּ חֻלְדָּה עַל רֹאשָׁהּ, \nמָקוֹם שֶׁהִיא עוֹשָׂה אוֹתָהּ טְרֵפָה. \nנִקַּב הַקָּרְקֳבָן, \nנִקְּבוּ הַדַּקִּין. \nנָפְלָה לָאוּר וְנֶחְמְרוּ בְנֵי מֵעֶיהָ, \nאִם יְרֻקִּים, פְּסוּלָה, \nוְאִם אֲדֻמִּין, כְּשֵׁרָה. \nדְּרָסָהּ, \nוּטְרָפָהּ לַכֹּתֶל, \nאוֹ שֶׁרְצָצַתָּהּ בְּהֵמָה וְהִיא מְפַרְכֶּסֶת, \nאִם שָׁהָת מֵעֵת לְעֵת וּשְׁחָטָהּ, \nכְּשֵׁרָה. \n",
+ "ז\nאֵלּוּ כְשֵׁרוֹת בָּעוֹף: \nנִקְּבָה הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת, \nאוֹ שֶׁנִּסְדָּקָה. \nהִכַּתָּהּ חֻלְדָּה עַל רֹאשָׁהּ, \nמָקוֹם שֶׁאֵינָה עוֹשָׂהּ טְרֵפָה. \nנִקַּב הַזְּפָק. \nרְבִּי אוֹמֵר: \nאֲפִלּוּ נִטַּל. \nיָצְאוּ בְנֵי מֵעֶיהָ וְלֹא נִקָּבוּ. \nנִשְׁתַּבְּרוּ אֲגַפֶּיהָ, \nנִמְרְטוּ כְנָפֶיהָ. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nאִם נִטְּלָה הַנּוֹצָה, פְסוּלָה. \n",
+ "ח\nאֲחוּזַת הַדָּם, \nוְהַמְעֻשֶּׁנֶת, \nשֶׁאָכְלָה רֹדַפְנִי, \nשֶׁאָכְלָה צוֹאַת תַּרְנָגְלִים, \nוְשֶׁשָּׁתָת הַמַּיִם הָרָעִים, \nפְסוּלָה. \nאָכְלָה סַם הַמָּוֶת, \nאוֹ שֶׁנְּשָׁכָׁהּ נָחָשׁ, \nמֻתֶּרֶת מִשֵּׁם טְרֵפָה, \nוַאֲסוּרָה מִפְּנֵי סַכָּנַת נְפָשׁוֹת. \n",
+ "ט\nסִימָנֵי בְהֵמָה וְחַיָּה נֶאֶמְרוּ מִן הַתּוֹרָה, \nוְסִימָנֵי הָעוֹף לֹא נֶאֶמְרוּ. \nאָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים: \nכָּל עוֹף הַדּוֹרֵס, טָמֵא. \nכָּל שֶׁיֶּשׁ לוֹ אֶצְבַּע יְתֵרָה, \nוּזְפָק וְקָרְקֳבָן נִקְלָף, טָהוֹר. \nרְבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בַּר צָדוֹק אוֹמֵר: \nכָּל עוֹף חוֹלֵק אֶת רַגְלָיו, טָמֵא. \n",
+ "י\nוּבַחֲגָבִין: \nכָּל שֶׁיֶּשׁ לוֹ אַרְבַּע רַגְלַיִם, \nאַרְבַּע כְּנָפַיִם וְקַרְסֻלַּיִם, \nוּכְנָפָיו חוֹפוֹת אֶת רֻבּוֹ. \nרְבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר: \nשְׁמוֹ חָגָב. \nוּבַדָּגִים: \nכָּל שֶׁיֶּשׁ לוֹ סְנַפִּיר וְקַשְׂקֶשֶׂת. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nשְׁנֵי קַשְׂקַשִּׂין וּסְנַפִּיר אֶחָד. \nאֵלּוּ הֵן הַקַּשְׂקַשִּׂין? \nהַקְּבוּעִין בּוֹ. \nוּסְנַפִּירִין? \nשֶׁיְּהֵא פוֹרֵחַ בָּהֶן. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nבְּהֵמָה שֶׁהִיא מְקַשָּׁה לֵילֵד, \nהוֹצִיא הָעֹבֶר אֶת יָדוֹ וְהֶחֱזִירָהּ, מֻתָּר. \nהוֹצִיא אֶת רֹאשׁוֹ, \nאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֶחֱזִירוֹ, הֲרֵי זֶה כְיָלוּד. \nחֻתַּךְ מִן הָעֹבֶר בְּמֵעֶיהָ, מֻתָּר בַּאֲכִילָה. \nמִן הַטְּחוֹל וּמִן הַכְּלָיוֹת, אָסוּר בַּאֲכִילָה. \nזֶה הַכְּלָל: \nדָּבָר שֶׁהוּא גוּפָהּ, אָסוּר, \nוְדָבָר שֶׁאֵינוּ גוּפָהּ, מֻתָּר. \n",
+ "ב\nמְבַכֶּרֶת שֶׁהִיא מְקַשָּׁה לֵילֵד, \nמְחַתֵּךְ אֵבֶר אֵבֶר וּמַשְׁלִיךְ לַכְּלָבִים. \nיָצָא רֻבּוֹ, הֲרֵי זֶה יִקָּבֵר, \nוְנִפְטְרָה מִן הַבְּכוֹרָה. \n",
+ "ג\nבְּהֵמָה שֶׁמֵּת עֳבָרָהּ בְּתוֹךְ מֵעֶיהָ, <עוֹבָרָהּ>\nהוֹשִׁיט הָרוֹעֶה אֶת יָדוֹ וְנָגַע בּוֹ, \nבֵּין בִּבְהֵמָה טְמֵאָה, \nבֵּין בִּבְהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה, טָהוֹר. \nרְבִּי יוֹסֵה הַגָּלִילִי אוֹמֵר: \nבִּטְמֵאָה, טָמֵא; \nוּבִטְהוֹרָה, טָהוֹר. \n\nד\nהָאִשָּׁה שֶׁמֵּת וַלְדָהּ בְּתוֹךְ מֵעֶיהָ, \nהוֹשִׁיטָה הַחָיָה אֶת יָדָהּ וְנָגְעָה בוֹ, \nהַחָיָה טְמֵאָה טֻמְאַת שִׁבְעָה, \nוְהָאִשָּׁה טְהוֹרָה עַד שֶׁיֵּצֵא הַוֶּלֶד. \n",
+ "ה\nבְּהֵמָה שֶׁהִיא מְקַשָּׁה לֵילֵד, \nהוֹצִיא הָעֹבֶר אֶת יָדוֹ וַחֲתָכָהּ, \nוְאַחַר כָּךְ שָׁחַט אֶת אִמּוֹ, \nהַבָּשָׂר טָהוֹר. \nשָׁחַט אֶת אִמּוֹ, \nוְאַחַר כָּךְ חֲתָכָהּ, \nהַבָּשָׂר מַגַּע נְבֵלָה. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי מֵאִיר. \nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: \nמַגַּע טְרֵפָה שְׁחוּטָה. \nמַה מָּצִינוּ בִּטְרֵפָה שֶׁשְּׁחִיטָתָהּ מְטַהֲרַתָּה, \nאַף שְׁחִיטַת בְּהֵמָה תְטַהֵר אֶת הָעֹבֶר. \n\nו\nאָמַר לָהֶם רְבִּי מֵאִיר: \nלֹא! \nאִם טִהֲרָה שְׁחִיטַת טְרֵפָה אוֹתָהּ בְּדָבָר שֶׁהוא גּוּפָהּ, \nתְּטַהֵר אֶת הָעֹבֶר, דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוּ גוּפָהּ! \nוּמְנַיִן לִטְרֵפָה שֶׁשְּׁחִיטָתָהּ מְטַהֲרַתָּה? \nבְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה אֲסוּרָה בַאֲכִילָה, \nוּטְרֵפָה אֲסוּרָה בַאֲכִילָה; \nמַה בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה, אֵין שְׁחִיטָתָהּ מְטַהֲרַתָּה, \nאַף טְרֵפָה, לֹא תְטַהֲרֶנָּה שְׁחִיטָתָהּ? \n\nז\nאָמְרוּ לוֹ: \nלֹא! \nאִם בִבְהֵמָה טְמֵאָה, \nשֶׁלֹּא הָיְתָה לָהּ שָׁעַת כֹּשֶׁר, \nתֹּאמַר בִּטְרֵפָה, \nשֶׁהָיְתָה לָהּ שָׁעַת כֹּשֶׁר? \nטֹל לָךְ מַה שֶּׁהֵבֵאתָ! \nהֲרֵי שֶׂנּוֹלְדָה טְרֵפָה מִן הַבֶּטֶן מְנַיִן? \nלֹא! \nאִם אָמַרְתָּ בִבְהֵמָה טְמֵאָה, \nשֶׁאֵין לְמִינָהּ שְׁחִיטָה, \nתֹּאמַר בִּטְרֵפָה, \nשֶׁיֵּשׁ לְמִינָהּ שְׁחִיטָה? \nבֶּן שְׁמוֹנָה חַי, \nאֵין שְׁחִיטָתוֹ מְטַהֲרַתּוּ, <שְׁחִיטָתָהּ>\nשֶׁאֵין לְמִינוֹ שְׁחִיטָה. \n",
+ "ח\nהַשּׁוֹחֵט אֶת הַבְּהֵמָה, \nוּמָצָא בָהּ בֶּן שְׁמוֹנָה חַי אוֹ מֵת, \nאוֹ בֶן תִּשְׁעָה מֵת, \nקוֹרְעוֹ וּמוֹצִיא אֶת דָּמוֹ. \nמָצָא בָהּ בֶּן תִּשְׁעָה חַי, \nטָעוּן שְׁחִיטָה, \nוְחַיָּב מִשֵּׁם 'אֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ'. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי מֵאִיר. \nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: \nשְׁחִיטַת אִמּוֹ מְטַהֲרַתּוּ. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הַשֵּׁזוּרִי [אוֹמֵר]: \nאֲפִלּוּ בֶן חָמֵשׁ שָׁנִים וְהוּא חוֹרֵשׁ בַּשָּׂדֶה, \nשְׁחִיטַת אִמּוֹ מְטַהֲרַתּוּ. \nקְרָעָהּ וּמָצָא בָהּ בֶּן תִּשְׁעָה חַי, \nטָעוּן שְׁחִיטָה, \nלְפִי שֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁחָטָה אִמּוֹ. \n",
+ "ט\nבְּהֵמָה שֶׁנֶּחְתְּכוּ רַגְלֶיהָ, \nמִן הָאַרְכּוּבָה וּלְמַטָּן, כְּשֵׁרָה; \nמִן הָאַרְכּוּבָה וּלְמַעְלָן, פְּסוּלָה. \nוְכֵן שֶׁנִּטַּל צֹמֶת הַגִּידִים. \nנִשְׁבַּר לוֹ הָעֶצֶם, \nאִם רֹב הַבָּשָׂר קַיָּם, \nשְׁחִיטָתָהּ מְטַהֲרַתּוּ; \nאִם אֵין רֹב הַבָּשָׂר קַיָּם, \nאֵין שְׁחִיטָתָהּ מְטַהֲרַתּוּ. \n",
+ "י\nהַשּׁוֹחֵט אֶת הַבְּהֵמָה וּמָצָא בָהּ שִׁלְיָה, \nנֶפֶשׁ הַיָּפָה תֹאכַל. \nאֵינָה מְטַמָּא טֻמְאַת אֳכָלִין, \nוְלֹא טֻמְאַת נְבֵלוֹת. \nחִשֵּׁב עָלֶיהָ, \nמְטַמָּא טֻמְאַת אֳכָלִין, \nאֲבָל לֹא טֻמְאַת נְבֵלוֹת. \nשִׁלְיָה [שֶׁיָּצְתָה] מִקְצָתָהּ, \nאֲסוּרָה בַאֲכִילָה. \nכְּסִימַן הַוֶּלֶד בָּאִשָּׁה, \nכָּךְ סִימַן הַוֶּלֶד בַּבְּהֵמָה. \nמְבַכֶּרֶת שֶׁהִפִּילָה שִׁלְיָה, \nיַשְׁלִיכֶנָּה לַכְּלָבִין. \nוּבַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין, תִּקָּבֵר. \nלֹא הָיוּ קוֹבְרִין אוֹתָהּ בְּפָרָשַׁת הַדְּרָכִים, \nוְאֵין תּוֹלִין אוֹתָהּ בָּאִילָן, \nמִשֵּׁם דַרְכֵי הָאֱמֹרִי. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\n\"אֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ\" \nנוֹהֵג בָּאָרֶץ וּבְחוּץ לָאָרֶץ, \nבִּפְנֵי הַבַּיִת וְשֶׁלֹּא בִפְנֵי הַבַּיִת, \nבַּחֻלִּין וּבַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין. \nכֵּיצַד? \nהַשּׁוֹחֵט אֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ חֻלִּין בַּחוּץ, \nשְׁנֵיהֶם כְּשֵׁרִים, \nוְהַשֵּׁנִי סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים; \nקָדָשִׁים בַּחוּץ, \nהָרִאשׁוֹן חַיָּב כָּרֵת, \nוּשְׁנֵיהֶן פְּסוּלִין, \nוּשְׁנֵיהֶן סוֹפְגִין אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים. \n\nב\nחֻלִּים בִּפְנִים, שְׁנֵיהֶן פְּסוּלִין, \nוְהַשֵּׁנִי סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים. \nקָדָשִׁים בִּפְנִים, \nהָרִאשׁוֹן כָּשֵׁר, וּפָטוּר, \nוְהַשֵּׁנִי סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים, וּפָסוּל. \n",
+ "ג\nחֻלִּין וְקָדָשִׁים בַּחוּץ, \nהָרִאשׁוֹן כָּשֵׁר, וּפָטוּר, \nוְהַשֵּׁנִי סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים, ּפָסוּל. \n\nד\nקָדָשִׁין וְחֻלִּין בַּחוּץ, \nהָרִאשׁוֹן חַיָּב כָּרֵת, וּפָסוּל, \nוְהַשֵּׁנִי כָשֵׁר, \nוּשְׁנֵיהֶן סוֹפְגִין אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים. \n\nה\nחֻלִּים וְקָדָשִׁין בִּפְנִים, \nשְׁנֵיהֶן פְּסוּלִין, \nוְהַשֵּׁנִי סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים. \nקָדָשִׁין וְחֻלִּין בִּפְנִים, \nהָרִאשׁוֹן כָּשֵׁר, וּפָטוּר, \nוְהַשֵּׁנִי סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים, וּפָסוּל. \n\nו\nחֻלִּין בַּחוּץ וּבִפְנִים, \nהָרִאשׁוֹן כָּשֵׁר, וּפָטוּר, \nוְהַשֵּׁנִי סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים, וּפָסוּל. \n\nז\nקָדָשִׁים בַּחוּץ וּבִפְנִים, \nהָרִאשׁוֹן חַיָּב כָּרֵת, \nוּשְׁנֵיהֶן פְּסוּלִין, \nוּשְׁנֵיהֶן סוֹפְגִין אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים. \n\nח\nחֻלִּים בִּפְנִים וּבַחוּץ, \nהָרִאשׁוֹן פָּסוּל, וּפָטוּר, \nוְהַשֵּׁנִי סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים, וְכָשֵׁר. \n\nט\nקָדָשִׁים בִּפְנִים וּבַחוּץ, \nהָרִאשׁוֹן כָּשֵׁר, וּפָטוּר, \nוְהַשֵּׁנִי סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים, וּפָסוּל. \n",
+ "י\nהַשּׁוֹחֵט וְנִמְצָא טְרֵפָה, \nהַשּׁוֹחֵט לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, \nהַשּׁוֹחֵט פָּרַת חַטָּאת, \nוְשׁוֹר הַנִּסְקָל, וְעֶגְלָה עֲרוּפָה, \nרְבִּי מֵאִיר מְחַיֵּב. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן פּוֹטֵר. \nהַשּׁוֹחֵט וְנִתְנַבְּלָה בְיָדוֹ, \nהַנּוֹחֵר, וְהַמְעַקֵּר, \nפָּטוּר מִשֵּׁם 'אֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ'. \n\nיא\nשְׁנַיִם שֶׁלָּקְחוּ פָרָה וּבְנָהּ, \nזֶה שֶׁלָּקַח רִאשׁוֹן יִשְׁחַט רִאשׁוֹן, \nוְאִם קָדַם הַשֵּׁנִי, זָכָה. \nהַשּׁוֹחֵט פָּרָה וּשְׁנֵי בָנֶיהָ, \nסוֹפֵג שְׁמוֹנִים. \nשָׁחַט שְׁנֵי בָנֶיהָ וְאַחַר כָּךְ שְׁחָטָהּ, \nסוֹפֵג אַרְבָּעִים. \nשְׁחָטָהּ וְאֶת בִּתָּהּ וְאֶת בַּת בִּתָּהּ, \nסוֹפֵג שְׁמוֹנִים. \nשְׁחָטָהּ וְאֶת בַּת בִּתָּהּ, \nוְאַחַר כָּךְ שָׁחַט בִּתָּהּ, \nסוֹפֵג אַרְבָּעִים. \nסוּמְכוֹס אָמַר מִשֵּׁם רְבִּי מֵאִיר: \nסוֹפֵג שְׁמוֹנִים. \n\n[יב] <יא>\nבְּאַרְבָּעָה פְרָקִים בַּשָּׁנָה, \nהַמּוֹכֵר בְּהֵמָה לַחֲבֵרוֹ צָרִיךְ לְהוֹדִיעַ: \n\"אִמָּהּ מָכַרְתִּי לִשְׁחוֹט\", \n\"בִּתָּהּ מָכַרְתִּי לִשְׁחוֹט\", \nוְאֵלּוּ הֵן: \nעֶרֶב יוֹם טוֹב הָאַחֲרוֹן שֶׁלֶּחָג, \nעֶרֶב יוֹם טוֹב הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁלַּפֶּסַח, \nעֶרֶב הָעֲצֶרֶת, \nוְעֶרֶב רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה. \nוּכְדִבְרֵי רְבִּי יוֹסֵה הַגָּלִילִי: \nאַף עֶרֶב יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים בַּגָּלִיל. \nאָמַר רְבִּי יְהוּדָה: \nאֵמָתַי? בִּזְמַן שֶׁאֵין לוֹ רֶוַח, \nאֲבָל אִם יֵשׁ לוֹ רֶוַח, \nאֵינוּ צָרִיךְ לְהוֹדִיעַ. \nמוֹדֶה רְבִּי יְהוּדָה \nבַמּוֹכֵר אֶת הָאֵם לֶחָתָן וְאֶת הַבַּת לַכַּלָּה, \nשֶׁהוּא צָרִיךְ לְהוֹדִיעַ, \nשֶׁהַדָּבָר יָדוּעַ שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶן שׁוֹחֲטִין בְּיוֹם אֶחָד. \n",
+ "[יג] <יב>\nבְּאַרְבָּעָה פְרָקִים הָאֵלּוּ, \nמַשְׁחִיטִין אֶת הַטַּבָּח עַל כָּרְחוֹ. \nאֲפִלּוּ שׁוֹר שׁוֹוֶה אֶלֶף דִּינָרִין, \nוְאֵין לַלּוֹקֵחַ אֶלָּא דִינָר, \nכּוֹפִין אוֹתוֹ לִשְׁחֹט. \nלְפִיכָךְ, אִם מֵת, מֵת לַלּוֹקֵחַ. <'מת' שני מחוק> \nאֲבָל בִּשְׁאָר יְמוֹת הַשָּׁנָה אֵינוּ כֵן, \nלְפִיכָךְ, אִם מֵת, מֵת לַמּוֹכֵר. \n",
+ "[יד] <יג>\n\"יוֹם אֶחָד\" הָאָמוּר בְּ'אֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ', \nהַיּוֹם הוֹלֵךְ אַחַר הַלַּיְלָה. \nאֶת זוֹ דָרַשׁ רְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן זוֹמָא: \nנֶאֱמַר בְּמַעֲשֵׂה בְרֵאשִׁית: (בראשית א,ה) \n\"יוֹם אֶחָד\", \nוְנֶאֱמַר בְּ'אֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ' (ויקרא כב,כח) \n\"יוֹם אֶחָד\", \nמָה \"יוֹם אֶחָד\" הָאָמוּר בְּמַעֲשֶׂה בְרֵאשִׁית, \nהַיּוֹם הוֹלֵךְ אַחַר הַלַּיְלָה, \nאַף \"יוֹם אֶחָד\" הָאָמוּר בְּ'אֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ', \nהַיּוֹם הוֹלֵךְ אַחַר הַלַּיְלָה. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nכְּסוּי הַדָּם נוֹהֵג בָּאָרֶץ וּבְחוּץ לָאָרֶץ, \nבִּפְנֵי הַבַּיִת וְשֶׁלֹּא בִפְנֵי הַבַּיִת, \nבַּחֻלִּין אֲבָל לֹא בַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין. \nוְנוֹהֵג בַּחַיָּה וּבָעוֹף, \nבִּמְזֻמָּן וּבְשֶׁאֵינוּ מְזֻמָּן. \nוְנוֹהֵג בַּכּוֹי, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא סָפֵק. \nוְאֵין שׁוֹחֲטִין אוֹתוֹ בְיוֹם טוֹב. \nוְאִם שְׁחָטוֹ, אֵין מְכַסִּין אֶת דָּמוֹ. \n",
+ "הַשּׁוֹחֵט וְנִמְצָא טְרֵפָה, \nהַשּׁוֹחֵט לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, \nהַשּׁוֹחֵט חֻלִּין בִּפְנִים, \nוְקָדָשִׁין בַּחוּץ, \nחַיָּה וָעוֹף הַנִּסְקָלִים, \nרְבִּי מֵאִיר מְחַיֵּב, \nוַחֲכָמִים פּוֹטְרִין. \nהַשּׁוֹחֵט וְנִתְנַבְּלָה בְיָדוֹ, \nהַנּוֹחֵר, וְהַמְעַקֵּר, \nפָּטוּר מִלְּכַסּוֹת. \n",
+ "ב\nחֵרֵשׁ שׁוֹטֶה וְקָטָן שֶׁשָּׁחֲטוּ, \nוַאֲחֵרִין רוֹאִין אוֹתָם, \nחַיָּבִין לְכַסּוֹת. \nבֵּינָן לְבֵין עַצְמָם, \nפְּטוּרִין מִלְּכַסּוֹת. \nוְכֵן לְעִנְיַן 'אֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ', \nשֶׁשָּׁחֲטוּ וַאֲחֵרִין רוֹאִין אוֹתָן, \nאָסוּר לִשְׁחוֹט אַחֲרֵיהֶן. \nבֵּינָן לְבֵין עַצְמָן, \nרְבִּי מֵאִיר מַתִּיר לִשְׁחוֹט אַחֲרֵיהֶן, \nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹסְרִין. \nוּמוֹדִים שֶׁאִם שָׁחָטוּ, \nשֶׁאֵינָן סוֹפְגִין אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים. \n",
+ "ג\nשָׁחַט מֵאָה חַיָּה בְמָקוֹם אֶחָד, \nכִּסּוּי אֶחָד לְכֻלָּם; \nמֵאָה עוֹפוֹת בְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד, \nכִּסּוּי אֶחָד; \nחַיָּה וָעוֹף בְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד, \nכִּסּוּי אֶחָד לְכֻלָּם. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nשָׁחַט חַיָּה, יְכַסֶּה, \nוְאַחַר כָּךְ יִשְׁחֹט אֶת הָעוֹף. \nשָׁחַט וְלֹא כִסָּה, וְרָאָהוּ אַחֵר, \nחַיָּב לְכַסּוֹת. \nכִּסָּה וְנִתְגַּלָּה, פָּטוּר מִלְּכַסּוֹת. \nכִּסַּתּוּ הָרוּחַ, חַיָּב לְכַסּוֹת. \n",
+ "ד\nדָּם שֶׁנִּתְעָרַב בַּמַּיִם, \nאִם יֶשׁ בּוֹ מַרְאֵה דָם, \nחַיָּב לְכַסּוֹת. \nנִתְעָרַב בְּיַיִן, \nרוֹאִין אוֹתוֹ כְאִלּוּ הוּא מַיִם. \nנִתְעָרַב בְּדָם, \nרוֹאִין אוֹתוֹ כְאִלּוּ הוּא מַיִם. \nנִתְעָרַב בְּדַם בְּהֵמָה אוֹ בְדַם חַיָּה, \nרוֹאִין אוֹתוֹ כְאִלּוּ הוּא מַיִם. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nאֵין דָּם מְבַטֵּל דָּם. \n",
+ "ה\nדָּם הַנִּתָּז וְשֶׁעַל הַסְּכִין, \nחַיָּב לְכַסּוֹת. \nאָמַר רְבִּי יְהוּדָה: \nאֶמָּתַי? \nבִּזְמַן שֶׁאֵין שָׁם דָּם אֶלָּא הוּא, \nאֲבָל אִם יֶשׁ שָׁם דָּם אֶלָּא הוּא, \nפָּטוּר מִלְּכַסּוֹת. \n",
+ "ו\nבַּמָּה מְכַסִּים וּבַמָּה אֵין מְכַסִּים? \nמְכַסִּין בְּזֶבֶל דַּק, וּבְחוֹל דַּק, \nבַּסִּיד, וּבַחַרְסִית, \nוּבִלְבֵנָה וּבִמְגוּפָה שֶׁכְּתָשָׁהּ. \nאֲבָל אֵין מְכַסִּין לֹא בְזֶבֶל גַּס, \nוְלֹא בְחוֹל גַּס, \nוְלֹא בִלְבֵנָה וְלֹא בִמְגוּפָה שֶׁלֹּא כְתָשָׁהּ. \nוְלֹא יִכְפֶּה עָלָיו אֶת הַכֶּלִי. \nכְּלָל אָמַר רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל: \nדָּבָר שֶׁהוּא מְגַדֵּל צְמָחִין, \nמְכַסִּין בּוֹ; \nשֶׁאֵינוּ מְגַדֵּל צְמָחִין, \nאֵין מְכַסִּין בּוֹ. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nגִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה נוֹהֵג בָּאָרֶץ וּבְחוּץ לָאָרֶץ, \nבִּפְנֵי הַבַּיִת, וְשֶׁלֹּא בִפְנֵי הַבַּיִת, \nבַּחֻלִּין, וּבַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין. \nוְנוֹהֵג בַּבְּהֵמָה וּבַחַיָּה, \nוּבְיָרֵךְ שֶׁלַּיָּמִין וּבְיָרֵךְ שֶׁלַּשְּׂמֹאל. \nוְאֵינוּ נוֹהֵג בָּעוֹף, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין לוֹ כַף. \nנוֹהֵג בַּשְּׁלִיל. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nאֵינוּ נוֹהֵג בַּשְּׁלִיל. \nוְחֶלְבּוֹ מֻתָּר. \nאֵין הַטַּבָּחִים נֶאֱמָנִין עַל גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי מֵאִיר. \nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: \nנֶאֱמָנִין עָלָיו וְעַל הַחֵלֶב. \n",
+ "ב\nשׁוֹלֵחַ הוּא אָדָם לַנָּכְרִי \nיָרֵךְ שֶׁגִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה בְתוֹכָהּ, \nמִפְּנֵי שֶׁמְּקוֹמוֹ נִכָּר. <שֶׁמְּקוֹמָהּ> \nהַנּוֹטֵל גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה, \nצָרִיךְ שֶׁיִטֹּל אֶת כֻּלּוֹ. <כֻּלָּהּ> \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nיְקַיֵּם בּוֹ מִצְוַת נְטִילָה. \n",
+ "ג\nהָאוֹכֵל מִגִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה כַזַּיִת, \nסוֹפֵג אַרְבָּעִין. \nאֲכָלוֹ וְאֵין בּוֹ כַזַּיִת, חַיָּב. \nאָכַל מִזֶּה כַזַּיִת וּמִזֶּה כַזַּיִת, \nסוֹפֵג שְׁמוֹנִים. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nאֵינוּ סוֹפֵג אֶלָּא אַרְבָּעִים. \n",
+ "ד\nיָרֵךְ שֶׁנִּתְבַּשַּׁל בָּהּ גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה, \nאִם יֶשׁ בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם, \nהֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה. \nכֵּיצַד מְשַׁעֲרִין אוֹתָהּ? \nכְּבָשָׂר בַּלֶּפֶת. \n",
+ "ה\nגִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה שֶׁנִּתְבַּשַּׁל עִם הַגִּידִים, \nבִּזְמַן שֶׁהוּא מַכִּירוֹ, \nבְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם. \nאִם אֵינוּ מַכִּירוֹ, \nכֻּלָּן אֲסוּרִין, \nוְהָרֹטֶב, בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם. \n(וְכֵן חֲתִכָּה שֶׁל נְבֵלָה, \nוְכֵן חֲתִכָּה שֶׁל דָּג טָמֵא שֶׁנִּתְבַּשְּׁלוּ עִם הַחֲתִיכוֹת, \nבִּזְמַן שֶׁמַּכִּירָן, בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם; \nוְאִם לָאו, כֻּלָּן אֲסוּרוֹת, \nוְהָרֹטֶב בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם.) \n",
+ "ו\nנוֹהֵג בְּטַהֲרָה, וְאֵינוּ נוֹהֵג בְּטֻמְאָה. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: <יודה>\nאַף בְּטֻמְאָה. \nאָמַר רְבִּי יְהוּדָה: \nוַהֲלֹא עַל בְּנֵי יַעֲקֹב נֶאֱסַר גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה, \nוְאָדַיִן בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה מֻתֶּרֶת לָהֶם? \nאָמְרוּ לוֹ: \nמִסִּינַי נֶאֱמַר, \nאֶלָּא שֶׁנִּכְתַּב בִּמְקוֹמוֹ. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nכָּל הַבָּשָׂר אָסוּר לְבַשֵּׁל בֶּחָלָב, \nחוּץ מִבְּשַׂר דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים. \nאָסוּר לְהַעֲלוֹתוֹ עִם הַגְּבִנָּה עַל הַשֻּׁלְחָן, \nחוּץ מִבְּשַׂר דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים. \nהַנּוֹדֵר מִן הַבָּשָׂר, \nמֻתָּר בִּבְשַׂר דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים. \nהָעוֹף עוֹלֶה עִם הַגְּבִנָּה עַל הַשֻּׁלְחָן, \nוְאֵינוּ נֶאֱכָל, \nכְּדִבְרֵי בֵית שַׁמַּי. \nוּבֵית הֶלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: \nלֹא עוֹלֶה וְלֹא נֶאֱכָל. \nאָמַר רְבִּי יוֹסֵה: \nזוֹ מִקָּלֵּי בֵית שַׁמַּי, \nוּמֵחֻמְרֵי בֵית הֶלֵּל. \nבְּאֵי זֶה שֻׁלְחָן אָמָרוּ? \nבְּשֻׁלְחָן שֶׁהוּא אוֹכֵל עָלָיו, \nאֲבָל בְּשֻׁלְחָן שֶׁהוּא סוֹדֵר עָלָיו אֶת הַתַּבְשִׁיל, \nנוֹתֵן זֶה בְצַד זֶה וְאֵינוּ חוֹשֵׁשׁ. \n",
+ "ב\nצוֹרֵר אָדָם בָּשָׂר וּגְבִנָּה בְמִטְפַּחַת אַחַת, \nוּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ נוֹגְעִים זֶה בָזֶה. \nרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: \nשְׁנֵי אַכְסְנָיִים אוֹכְלִין עַל שֻׁלְחָן אֶחָד, \nזֶה בָשָׂר וְזֶה גְבִנָּה וְאֵינָן חוֹשְׁשִׁין. \n",
+ "ג\nטִפַּת חָלָב שֶׁנָּפְלָה לַחֲתִכָּה, \nאִם יֶשׁ בָּהּ בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם בְּאוֹתָהּ הַחֲתִכָּה, \nנוֹעֵר אֶת הַקְּדֵרָה. <ניער>\nאִם יֶשׁ בָּהּ בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם בְּאוֹתָהּ הַקְּדֵרָה, \n[אָסוּר]. \nהַכַּחַל, \nקוֹרְעוֹ וּמוֹצִיא אֶת חֲלָבוֹ. \nלֹא קְרָעוֹ, אֵינוּ עוֹבֵר עָלָיו. \nהַלֵּב, \nקוֹרְעוֹ וּמוֹצִיא אֶת דָּמוֹ. \nלֹא קְרָעוֹ, אֵינוּ עוֹבֵר עָלָיו. \nהַמַּעֲלֶה אֶת הָעוֹף עִם הַגְּבִינָה עַל הַשֻּׁלְחָן, \nאֵינוּ עוֹבֵר בְּ'לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה'. \n",
+ "ד\nבְּשַׂר בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה וַחֲלֵב בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה, \nאָסוּר לְבַשֵּׁל וְאָסוּר בַּהֲנָיָה. \nבְּשַׂר בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה וַחֲלֵב בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה, \nאוֹ בְשַׂר בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה וַחֲלֵב בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה, \nמֻתָּר לְבַשֵּׁל וּמֻתָּר בַּהֲנָיָה. \nרְבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר: \nחַיָּה וָעוֹף אֵינָן מִן הַתּוֹרָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: \n\"לֹא תְבַשֵּׁל גְּדִי בַּחֲלֵב אִמּוֹ\", \n\"לֹא תְבַשֵּׁל גְּדִי בַּחֲלֵב אִמּוֹ\", \nשְׁלֹשָׁה פְעָמִים (שמות כג,יט; לד,כו; דברים יד,כא) \nפְּרָט לַחַיָּה וְלָעוֹף וְלִבְהֵמָה טְמֵאָה. \n\nה\nרְבִּי יוֹסֵה הַגָּלִילִי אוֹמֵר: \nנֶאֱמַר (דברים יד,כא) \"לֹא תֹאכְלוּ כָל נְבֵלָה\", \nוְנֶאֱמַר: \"לֹא תְבַשֵּׁל גְּדִי בַּחֲלֵב אִמּוֹ\", \nאֶת שֶׁהוּא אָסוּר מִשֵּׁם נְבֵלָה, \nאָסוּר לְבַשֵּׁל בֶּחָלָב. \nעוֹף, שֶׁהוּא מִשֵּׁם נְבֵלָה, \nאֵינוּ דִין שֶׁיְּהֵא אָסוּר מִלְּבַשֵּׁל בֶּחָלָב? \nתַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר \"בַּחֲלֵב אִמּוֹ\", \nיָצָא הָעוֹף, שֶׁאֵין לוֹ חֲלֵב אֵם. \n",
+ "ו\nקֵבַת הַנָּכְרִי וְשֶׁלַּנְּבֵלָה, \nהֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה. \nהַמַּעֲמִיד בְּעוֹרָהּ שֶׁלַּקֵּבָה, \nאִם יֵשׁ בָּהּ בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם, \nהֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה. \nכְּשֵׁרָה שֶׁיָּנְקָה מִן הַטְּרֵפָה, \nקֵבָתָהּ אֲסוּרָה. \nוּטְרֵפָה שֶׁיָּנְקָה מִן הַכְּשֵׁרָה, \nקֵבָתָהּ מֻתֶּרֶת, \nמִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא כָנוּס בְּמֵעֶיהָ. <כַנּוּס>\n",
+ "ז\nחֹמֶר בַּחֵלֶב מִבַּדָּם, וּבַדָּם מִבַּחֵלֶב. \nשֶׁהַחֵלֶב, \nמוֹעֲלִין בּוֹ, וְחַיָּבִין עָלָיו מִשֵּׁם פִּגּוּל וְנוֹתָר וְטָמֵא, \nמַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בַּדָּם. \nחֹמֶר בַּדָּם, \nשֶׁהַדָּם נוֹהֵג בַּבְּהֵמָה וּבַחַיָּה וּבָעוֹפוֹת, \nבֵּין טְמֵאִין בֵּין טְהוֹרִין, \nוְהַחֵלֶב אֵינוּ נוֹהֵג \nאֶלָּא בִבְהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה בִלְבַד. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nהָעוֹר, וְהָרֹטֶב, וְהַקּוֹפֶה, וְהָאַלָּל, \nוְהָעֲצָמוֹת, וְהַגִּידִין, וְהַקְּרָנַיִם, וְהַטְּלָפַיִם, \nמִצְטָרְפִים לְטַמֵּא טֻמְאַת אֳכָלִים, \nאֲבָל לֹא טֻמְאַת נְבֵלוֹת. \nכַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ, \nהַשּׁוֹחֵט בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה לַנָּכְרִי וְהִיא מְפַרְכֶּסֶת, \nמְטַמָּא טֻמְאַת אֳכָלִין, \nאֲבָל לֹא טֻמְאַת נְבֵלוֹת עַד שֶׁתָּמוּת, \nאוֹ עַד שֶׁיַּתִּיז אֶת רֹאשָׁהּ. \nרִבָּה לְטַמֵּא טֻמְאַת אֳכָלִין, \nמַה שֶּׁרִבָּה לְטַמֵּא טֻמְאַת נְבֵלוֹת. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nהָאַלָּל הַמְכֻנָּס, \nאִם יֶשׁ כַּזַּיִת בְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד, \nחַיָּבִין עָלָיו. \n",
+ "ב\nאֵלּוּ שֶׁעוֹרוֹתֵיהֶן כִּבְשָׂרָן: \nעוֹר הָאָדָם, \nעוֹר חֲזִיר שֶׁלַּיִּשּׁוּב. \nרְבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר: \nאַף עוֹר חֲזִיר שֶׁלַַּבָּר; \nוְעוֹר חֲטַרְת גָּמָל הָרַכָּה, \nעוֹר הָרֹאשׁ שֶׁלָּעֵגֶל הָרַךְ, \nעוֹר בֵּית הַפְּרָסוֹת, \nעוֹר בֵּית הַבֹּשֶׁת, \nעוֹר הַשְּׁלִיל, \nעוֹר שֶׁתַּחַת הָאַלְיָה, \nעוֹר הָאֲנָקָה וְהַכֹּחַ וְהַלְּטָאָה וְהַחֹמֶט. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nהַלְּטָאָה כְחֻלְדָּה. \nוְכֻלָּם, \nשֶׁעִבְּדָן, אוֹ שֶׁהִלֵּךְ בָּהֶן כְּדֵי עֲבָדָה, \nטְהוֹרִין, \nחוּץ מִעוֹר הָאָדָם. \nרְבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי אוֹמֵר: \nשְׁמוֹנָה שְׁרָצִים, יֵשׁ לָהֶן עוֹרוֹת. \n",
+ "ג\nהַמַּפְשִׁיט בַּבְּהֵמָה, בַחַיָּה וּבָעוֹף, \nבַּטְּמֵאָה וּבַטְּהוֹרָה, \nבַּדַּקָּה וּבַגַּסָּה, \nלַשְׁטִיחַ, כְּדֵי אֲחִיזָה; \nוְלַחֵמֶת, עַד שֶׁיּוֹצִיא אֶת כָּל הֶחָזֶה; \nהַמַּרְגִיל לְכֻלּוֹ חִבּוּר לַטֻּמְאָה; \nלִטַּמֵּא וּלְטַמֵּא. \n\nד\nעוֹר שֶׁעַל הַצַּוָּאר, \nרְבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי אוֹמֵר: \nאֵינוּ חִבּוּר. \nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: \nחִבּוּר, עַד שֶׁיַּפְשִׁיט אֶת כֻּלּוֹ. \n",
+ "עוֹר שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלָיו כַּזַּיִת בָּשָׂר, \nהַנּוֹגֵעַ בַּצִּיב וְהַיּוֹצֵא מִמֶּנּוּ בִשְׂעָרָה שֶׁכְּנֶגְדּוֹ, \nטָמֵא. <טַמֵּא> \nהָיוּ עָלָיו כִּשְׁנֵי חֲצָיֵי זֵיתִים, \nמְטַמְּאִין בְּמַגָּע אֲבָל לֹא בְמַשָּׂא. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. \nרְבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר: \nלֹא בְמַגָּע, וְלֹא בְמַשָּׂא. \nוּמוֹדֶה רְבִּי עֲקִיבָה, \nבְּכִשְׁנֵי חֲצָיֵי זֵיתִים שֶׁהֵן תְּחוּבִין בַּקֵּיסָם, \nוְהִסִּיטָן כָּל שֶׁהוּא טָהוֹר. \nמִפְּנֵי מָה רְבִּי עֲקִיבָה מְטַהֵר בָּעוֹר? \nמִפְּנֵי שֶׁהָעוֹר מְבַטְּלָן. \n",
+ "ה\nקוֹלִית הַמֵּת וְקוֹלִית הַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין, \nהַנּוֹגֵעַ בָּהֶן, \nבֵּין נְקוּבִין, בֵּין סְתוּמִין, טָמֵא. \nקוֹלִית הַנְּבֵלָה, קוֹלִית הַשֶּׁרֶץ, \nהַנּוֹגֵעַ בָּהֶן, \nסְתוּמִין, טָהוֹר, \nנִקָבוּ כָל שֶׁהֵן, מְטַמִּין בְּמַגָּע. \nמְנַיִן אַף בְּמַשָּׂא? \nתַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (ויקרא יא, לט-מ) \n\"הַנֹּגֵעַ. . . \nוְהַנּשֵׂא\", \nאֶת שֶׁבָּא לִכְלַל מַגָּע, בָּא לִכְלַל מַשָּׂא; \nלֹא בָא לִכְלַל מַגָּע, לֹא בָא לִכְלַל מַשָּׂא. \n",
+ "ו\nבֵּיצַת הַשֶּׁרֶץ הַמְרֻקֶּמֶת, טְהוֹרָה; \nנִקָּבָה כָל שֶׁהוּא, טְמֵאָה. \nשֶׁרֶץ שֶׁחֶצְיוֹ בָשָׂר וְחֶצְיוֹ אֲדָמָה, \nהַנּוֹגֵעַ בַּבָּשָׂר, טָמֵא, \nוּבָאֲדָמָה, טָהוֹר. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nאַף הַנּוֹגֵעַ בָּאֲדָמָה שֶׁכְּנֶגֶד הַבָּשָׂר, \nטָמֵא. \n",
+ "ז\nהָאֵבֶר וְהַבָּשָׂר הַמְדֻלְדָּלִין בַּבְּהֵמָה, \nמְטַמִּין טֻמְאַת אֳכָלִין בִּמְקוֹמָן, \nוּצְרִיכִין הֶכְשֵׁר. \nנִשְׁחָטָה הַבְּהֵמָה, \nהֻכְשָׁרוּ דָמֶיהָ. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי מֵאִיר. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: \nלֹא הֻכְשָׁרוּ. \nמֵתָה הַבְּהֵמָה, \nהַבָּשָׂר צָרִיךְ הֶכְשֵׁר, \nהָאֵבֶר מְטַמֵּא מִשֵּׁם אֵבֶר מִן הַחַי, \nוְאֵינוּ מְטַמֵּא מִשֵּׁם אֵבֶר מִן הַנְּבֵלָה. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי מֵאִיר. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מְטַהֵר. \n",
+ "ח\nהָאֵבֶר וְהַבָּשָׂר הַמְדֻלְדָּלִין בָּאָדָם, \nטְהוֹרִין. \nמֵת הָאָדָם, \nהַבָּשָׂר טָהוֹר, \nאֵבֶר מְטַמֵּא מִשֵּׁם אֵבֶר מִן הַחַי, \nוְאֵינוּ מְטַמֵּא מִשֵּׁם אֵבֶר מִן הַמֵּת. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי מֵאִיר. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מְטַהֵר. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nהַזְּרוֹעַ וְהַלְּחָיַיִם וְהַקֵּבָה \nנוֹהֲגִין בָּאָרֶץ וּבְחוּץ לָאָרֶץ, \nבִּפְנֵי הַבַּיִת, וְשֶׁלֹּא בִפְנֵי הַבַּיִת, \nבַּחֻלִּין אֲבָל לֹא בַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין. \nשֶׁהָיָה בַדִּין, \nמָה אִם הַחֻלִּין, \nשֶׁאֵינָן חַיָּבִין בֶּחָזֶה וּבַשּׁוֹק, \nחַיָּבִין בַּמַּתָּנוֹת, <בְּמַתְּנוֹת>\nקָדָשִׁין, \nשֶׁהֵן חַיָּבִין בֶּחָזֶה וּבַשּׁוֹק, \nאֵינוּ דִין שֶׁיְּהוּ חַיָּבִין בַּמַּתָּנוֹת? <שֶׁיְּהֵא>\nתַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: (ויקרא ז,לד) \n\"וָאֶתֵּן אֹתָם לְאַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן וּלְבָנָיו לְחָק עוֹלָם\", \nאֵין לָךְ אֶלָּא מַה שֶּׁאָמוּר בָּעִנְיָן. \n",
+ "ב\nכָּל קָדָשִׁים שֶׁקָּדַם מוּם קָבוּעַ לְהֶקְדֵּשָׁן, וְנִפְדּוּ, \nחַיָּבִין בַּבְּכוֹרָה וּבַמַּתָּנוֹת, \nוְיוֹצְאִין לַחֻלִּין לִגָּזֵז וְלֵעָבֵד, \nוְלָדָן וַחֲלָבָן מֻתָּר לְאַחַר פִּדְיוֹנָן, \nוְהַשּׁוֹחֵט בַּחוּץ פָּטוּר, \nוְאֵינָן עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה, \nוְאִם מֵתוּ יִפָּדוּ, \nחוּץ מִן הַבְּכוֹר וּמִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר. \n\nג\nכָּל שֶׁקָּדַם הֶקְדֵּשָׁן אֶת מוּמָן, \nאוֹ מוּם עוֹבֵר לְהֶקְדֵּשָׁן, \nלְאַחַר מִכָּאן נוֹלַד לָהֶם מוּם קָבוּעַ לְהֶקְדֵּשָׁן וְנִפְדּוּ, \nפְּטוּרִין מִן הַבְּכוֹרָה וּמִן הַמַּתָּנוֹת, \nוְאֵינָן יוֹצְאִין לַחֻלִּין לִגָּזֵז וְלֵעָבֵד, \nוְלָדָן וַחֲלָבָן אָסוּר לְאַחַר פִּדְיוֹנָן, \nוְהַשּׁוֹחֲטָן בַּחוּץ חַיָּב, \nוְעוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה, \nוְאִם מֵתוּ, יִקָּבֵרוּ. \n",
+ "ד\nבְּכוֹר שֶׁנִּתְעָרַב בְּמֵאָה, \nבִּזְמַן שֶׁמֵּאָה שׁוֹחֲטִין אֶת כֻּלָּם, \nפּוֹטְרִין אֶת כֻּלָּם. \nאֶחָד שׁוֹחֵט אֶת כֻּלָּם, \nפְּטוּרִין לוֹ אֶחָד. \nהַשּׁוֹחֵט לַכֹּהֵן, וְלַנָּכְרִי, \nפָּטוּר מִן הַמַּתָּנוֹת. \nוְהַמִּשְׁתַּתֵּף עִמָּהֶם, \nצָרִיךְ שֶׁיִּרְשֹׁם. \nאִם אָמַר \"חוּץ מִן הַמַּתָּנוֹת\", \nפָּטוּר מִן הַמַּתָּנוֹת. \nאָמַר לוֹ: \n\"מְכֹר לִי בְנֵי מֵעֶיהָ שֶׁלַּפָּרָה\", \nוְהָיוּ בָהֶם מַתָּנוֹת, \nנוֹתְנָן לַכֹּהֵן, \nוְאֵינוּ מְנַכֶּה לוֹ מִן הַדָּמִין. \nלְקָחָן מִמֶּנּוּ בַמִּשְׁקָל, \nנוֹתְנָן לַכֹּהֵן, \nוּמְנַכֶּה לוֹ מִן הַדָּמִין. \n",
+ "ה\nגֵּר שֶׁנִּתְגַּיַּר, \nוְהָיְתָה לוֹ פָרָה נִשְׁחֶטֶת עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִתְגַּיַּר, \nפָּטוּר; \nמִשֶּׁנִּתְגַּיַּר, חַיָּב; \nאִם סָפֵק, פָּטוּר, \nשֶׁהַמּוֹצִיא מֵחֲבֵרוֹ, עָלָיו הָרְאָיָה. \n\nו\nאֵי זֶה הוּא הַזְּרוֹעַ? \nמִפֶּרֶק שֶׁלְּאַרְכֻּבָּה עַד כַּף שֶׁלַּיָּד, \nוְהוּא שֶׁלַּנָּזִיר. \nכְּנֶגְדּוֹ בָרֶגֶל, שׁוֹק. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nשׁוֹק, \nמִפֶּרֶק שֶׁלְּאַרְכֻּבָּה עַד סֹבֶךְ שֶׁלָּרֶגֶל. \nאֵי זֶה הוּא לֶחִי? \nמִפֶּרֶק שֶׁלַּלֶּחִי עַד פִּיקָה שֶׁלַּגַּרְגֶּרֶת. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nרֵאשִׁית הַגֵּז נוֹהֵג בָּאָרֶץ וּבְחוּץ לָאָרֶץ, \nבִּפְנֵי הַבַּיִת וְשֶׁלֹּא בִפְנֵי הַבַּיִת, \nבַּחֻלִּין, אֲבָל לֹא בַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין. \nחֹמֶר בַּזְּרוֹעַ וּבַלְּחָיַיִם וּבַקֵּבָה מֵרֵאשִׁית הַגֵּז, \nשֶׁהַזְּרוֹעַ וְהַלְּחָיַיִם וְהַקֵּבָה נוֹהֲגִים בַּבָּקָר וּבַצּאן, \nבֵּין מְרֻבֶּה בֵּין מְמֻעָט, \nוְרֵאשִׁית הַגֵּז אֵינוּ נוֹהֵג אֶלָּא בָרְחֵלִים, \nאֵינוּ נוֹהֵג אֶלָּא בִמְרֻבֶּה. \n",
+ "ב\nוְכַמָּה הוּא מְרֻבֶּה? \nבֵּית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים: \nשְׁתֵּי רְחֵלִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (ישעיה ז,כא) \n\"יְחַיֶּה אִישׁ עֶגְלַת בָּקָר וּשְׁתֵּי צֹאן\". \nוּבֵית הֶלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: \nחָמֵשׁ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (שמואל א כה,יח) \n\"חָמֵשׁ צֹאן עֲשׁוּיוֹת\". \nחָמֵשׁ רְחֵלוֹת גּוֹזְזוֹת מָנֶה מָנֶה וָפֶרֶס, \nחַיָּבוֹת בְּרֵאשִׁית הַגֵּז. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי דוֹסָה.\nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: \nחָמֵשׁ רְחֵלוֹת גּוֹזְזוֹת כָּל שֶׁהֵן. \n\nג\nוּמָה הוּא נוֹתֵן לוֹ? \nמִשְׁקַל חָמֵשׁ סְלָעִים בִּיהוּדָה, <חֲמִשִּׁים>\nשֶׁהֵן עוֹשִׂין עֶשֶׂר בַּגָּלִיל; \nמְלֻבָּן לֹא צוֹי, \nכְּדֵי לַעֲשׁוֹת מִמֶּנּוּ בֶגֶד קָטָן, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (דברים יח,ד) \n\"תִּתֶּן לוֹ\", כְּדֵי שֶׁיְּהֵא לוֹ מַתָּנָה. \n\nד\nלֹא הִסְפִּיק לִתְּנוֹ לוֹ עַד שֶׁצְּבָעוֹ, \nפָּטוּר. \nלִבְּנוֹ וְלֹא צְבָעוֹ, \nחַיָּב. \nהַלּוֹקֵחַ גֵּז צֹאנוֹ שֶׁלַּנָּכְרִי, \nפָּטוּר מֵרֵאשִׁית הַגֵּז. \nלָקַח עֵז שֶׁלַּחֲבֵרוֹ, \nאִם שִׁיֵּר הַמּוֹכֵר, הַמּוֹכֵר חַיָּב. \nוְאִם לָאו, הַלּוֹקֵחַ חַיָּב. \n\nה\nהָיוּ לוֹ שְׁנֵי מִינִים, טְחוּפוֹת וּלְבָנוֹת, \nמָכַר לוֹ טְחוּפוֹת אֲבָל לֹא לְבָנוֹת, \nזְכָרִים אֲבָל לֹא נְקֵבוֹת, \nזֶה נוֹתֵן לְעַצְמוֹ וְזֶה נוֹתֵן לְעַצְמוֹ. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nשִׁלּוּחַ הַקֵּן נוֹהֵג בָּאָרֶץ וּבְחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ, \nבִּפְנֵי הַבַּיִת, וְשֶׁלֹּא בִפְנֵי הַבַּיִת, \nבַּחֻלִּין, אֲבָל לֹא בַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין. \nחֹמֶר בְּכִסּוּי הַדָּם מִשִּׁלּוּחַ הַקֵּן, \nשֶׁכִּסּוּי הַדָּם נוֹהֵג בַחַיָּה וּבָעוֹף, \nבִּמְזֻמָּן וּבְשֶׁאֵינוּ מְזֻמָּן, \nוְשִׁלּוּחַ הַקֵּן אֵינוּ נוֹהֵג אֶלָּא בָעוֹף, \nוְאֵינוּ נוֹהֵג אֶלָּא בְּשֶׁאֵינוּ מְזֻמָּן. \n\nב\nאֵי זֶה הוּא שֶׁאֵינוּ מְזֻמָּן? \nכְּגוֹן אֲוָזִים וְתַרְנָגְלִים שֶׁקִּנְּנוּ בְפַרְדֵּס. <אֲבָזִים>\nקִנְּנוּ בְתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת, \nוְכֵן יוֹנִים רוֹדָסִיּוֹת, פָּטוּר מִלְּשַׁלַּח. \n",
+ "ג\nעוֹף טָמֵא, פָּטוּר מִלְּשַׁלַּח. \nעוֹף טָמֵא רוֹבֵץ עַל בֵּיצֵי עוֹף טָהוֹר, \nוְטָהוֹר רוֹבֵץ עַל בֵּיצֵי עוֹף טָמֵא, \nפָּטוּר מִלְּשַׁלַּח. \nקוֹרֵא זָכָר, \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵּב, \nוַחֲכָמִים פּוֹטְרִין. \n",
+ "ד\nהָיְתָה מְעַפְעֶפֶת, \nבִּזְמַן שֶׁכְּנָפֶיהָ נוֹגְעוֹת בַּקֵּן, \nחַיָּב לְשַׁלַּח; \nאֵין כְּנָפֶיהָ נוֹגְעוֹת בַּקֵּן, \nפָּטוּר מִלְּשַׁלַּח. \nאֵין שָׁם אֶלָּא אֶפְרוֹחַ אֶחָד, אוֹ בֵיצָה אַחַת, \nחַיָּב לְשַׁלַּח, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (דברים כב,ו) \n\"קַן\", קַן מִכָּל מָקוֹם. \n\nה\nהָיוּ שָׁם אֶפְרוֹחִים מַפְרִיחִים, \nאוֹ בֵיצִים מוּזָרוֹת, \nפָּטוּר מִלְּשַׁלַּח, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (דברים כב,ו) \n\"וְהָאֵם רֹבֶצֶת עַל הָאֶפְרחִים אוֹ עַל הַבֵּיצִים\", \nמָה אֶפְרוֹחִים בְּנֵי קַיָּמָה, \nאַף בֵּיצִים בְּנוֹת קַיָּמָה, \nיָצְאוּ מוּזָרוֹת; \nמָה בֵּיצִים צְרִיכוֹת לְאִמָּן, \nאַף אֶפְרוֹחִים צְרִיכִין לְאִמָּן, \nיָצְאוּ מַפְרִיחִין. \n\nו\nשִׁלְּחָהּ וְחָזְרָה, שִׁלְּחָהּ וְחָזְרָה, \nאֲפִלּוּ אַרְבָּעָה פְעָמִים, \nחַיָּב לְשַׁלַּח, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (דברים כב,ז) \n\"שַׁלֵּחַ תְּשַׁלַּח אֶת הָאֵם\". \nאָמַר: \n\"אֲנִי נוֹטֵל אֶת הָאֵם וּמְשַׁלֵּחַ אֶת הַבָּנִים\", \nחַיָּב לְשַׁלַּח, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (דברים כב,ז) \n\"שַׁלֵּחַ תְּשַׁלַּח אֶת הָאֵם וְאֶת הַבָּנִים תִּקַּח לָךְ\". \nנָטַל אֶת הַבָּנִים וְהֶחְזִירָן לַקֵּן, \nוְאַחַר כָּךְ חָזְרָה הָאֵם עֲלֵיהֶן, \nפָּטוּר מִלְּשַׁלַּח. \n",
+ "ז\nהַנּוֹטֵל אֵם עַל הַבָּנִים, \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nלוֹקֶה וְאֵינוּ מְשַׁלֵּחַ. \nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: \nמְשַׁלֵּחַ וְאֵינוּ לוֹקֶה. \nזֶה הַכְּלָל: \nכָּל מִצְוָה בְ'לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה' שֶׁיֶּשׁ בָּהּ 'קוּם וַעֲשֵׂה', \nאֵין חַיָּבִין עָלֶיהָ. \n",
+ "ח\nלֹא יִטֹּל אָדָם אֵם עַל הַבָּנִים, \nאֲפִלּוּ לְטַהֵר בָּהּ אֶת הַמְצֹרָע. \nמָה, אִם מִצְוָה קַלָּה, שֶׁהִיא בְאִסָּר, \nאָמְרָה תוֹרָה: (דברים כב,ז) \n\"לְמַעַן יִיטַב לָךְ, וְהַאֲרַכְתָּ יָמִים\", \nקַל וָחֹמֶר עַל מִצְווֹת חֲמוּרוֹת שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה. \n\nחסל שחיטת חולין \n\n\n\n"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/Hebrew/Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/Hebrew/Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2ad84007ed6f88689769b3f10b964fad75c755fe
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/Hebrew/Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913.json
@@ -0,0 +1,127 @@
+{
+ "language": "he",
+ "title": "Mishnah Chullin",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001741739",
+ "versionTitle": "Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 2.0,
+ "license": "Public Domain",
+ "digitizedBySefaria": true,
+ "heversionSource": "http://primo.nli.org.il/primo_library/libweb/action/dlDisplay.do?vid=NLI&docId=NNL_ALEPH00174173",
+ "versionTitleInHebrew": "משנה, מהדורת בית דפוס ראם, וילנא 1913",
+ "actualLanguage": "he",
+ "languageFamilyName": "hebrew",
+ "isBaseText": true,
+ "isSource": true,
+ "isPrimary": true,
+ "direction": "rtl",
+ "heTitle": "משנה חולין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "הכל שוחטין ושחיטתן כשרה. חוץ מחרש שוטה וקטן שמא יקלקלו בשחיטתן. וכולן ששחטו. ואחרים רואין אותן שחיטתן כשרה. שחיטת נכרי נבלה. ומטמאה במשא. השוחט בלילה. וכן הסומא ששחט. שחיטתו כשרה. השוחט בשבת וביום הכפורים. אף על פי שמתחייב בנפשו. שחיטתו כשרה: ",
+ "השוחט במגל יד. בצור ובקנה. שחיטתו כשרה. הכל שוחטין. ולעולם שוחטין. ובכל שוחטין. חוץ ממגל קציר. והמגירה. והשינים. והציפורן. מפני שהן חונקין. השוחט במגל קציר בדרך הליכתה. בית שמאי פוסלין. ובית הלל מכשירין. ואם החליקו שיניה. הרי היא כסכין: ",
+ "השוחט מתוך הטבעת. ושייר בה מלא החוט על פני כולה. שחיטתו כשרה. רבי יוסי בר יהודה אומר. מלא החוט על פני רובה: ",
+ "השוחט מן הצדדין. שחיטתו כשרה. המולק מן הצדדין. מליקתו פסולה. השוחט מן העורף. שחיטתו פסולה. המולק מן העורף. מליקתו כשרה. השוחט מן הצואר. שחיטתו כשרה. המולק מן הצואר. מליקתו פסולה. שכל העורף כשר למליקה. וכל הצואר כשר לשחיטה. נמצא כשר בשחיטה. פסול במליקה. כשר במליקה. פסול בשחיטה: ",
+ "כשר בתורין פסול בבני יונה. כשר בבני יונה פסול בתורין. תחלת הציהוב. בזה ובזה פסול: ",
+ "כשר בפרה. פסול בעגלה. כשר בעגלה פסול בפרה. כשר בכהנים. פסול בלוים. כשר בלוים פסול בכהנים. טהור בכלי חרש טמא בכל הכלים. טהור בכל הכלים טמא בכלי חרש. טהור בכלי עץ. טמא בכלי מתכות. טהור בכלי מתכות. טמא בכלי עץ. החייב בשקדים המרים פטור במתוקים. החייב במתוקים פטור במרים: ",
+ "התמד. עד שלא החמיץ. אינו ניקח בכסף מעשר. ופוסל את המקוה. משהחמיץ. ניקח בכסף מעשר. ואינו פוסל את המקוה. האחין השותפין. כשחייבין בקלבון. פטורין ממעשר בהמה. כשחייבין במעשר בהמה. פטורים מן הקלבון. כל מקום שיש מכר אין קנס. וכל מקום שיש קנס. אין מכר. כל מקום שיש מיאון. אין חליצה. וכל מקום שיש חליצה. אין מיאון. כל מקום שיש תקיעה. אין הבדלה. וכל מקום שיש הבדלה. אין תקיעה. יום טוב שחל להיות בערב שבת. תוקעין. ולא מבדילין. במוצאי שבת. מבדילין ולא תוקעין. כיצד מבדילין. המבדיל בין קדש לקדש. רבי דוסא אומר. בין קדש חמור לקדש הקל: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "השוחט אחד בעוף. ושנים בבהמה. שחיטתו כשרה. ורובו של אחד כמוהו. רבי יהודה אומר. עד שישחוט את הוורידין. חצי אחד בעוף. ואחד וחצי בבהמה. שחיטתו פסולה. רוב אחד בעוף. ורוב שנים בבהמה. שחיטתו כשרה: ",
+ "השוחט שני ראשין כאחד שחיטתו כשרה. שנים אוחזין בסכין ושוחטין. אפילו אחד למעלה ואחד למטה. שחיטתו כשרה: ",
+ "התיז את הראש בבת אחת. פסולה. היה שוחט והתיז את הראש בבת אחת. אם יש בסכין מלא צואר. כשרה. היה שוחט והתיז שני ראשים בבת אחת. אם יש בסכין מלא צואר אחד כשרה. במה דברים אמורים בזמן שהוליך ולא הביא. או הביא ולא הוליך. אבל אם הוליך והביא. אפילו כל שהוא. אפילו באיזמל. כשרה. נפלה סכין ושחטה. אף על פי ששחטה כדרכה. פסולה. שנאמר (דברים כז, ז) וזבחת ואכלת מה שאתה זובח אתה אוכל. נפלה סכין והגביהה. נפלו כליו והגביהן. השחיז את הסכין ועף. ובא חבירו ושחט. אם שהה כדי שחיטה. פסולה. רבי שמעון אומר אם שהה כדי ביקור: ",
+ "שחט את הוושט. ופסק את הגרגרת. או שחט את הגרגרת ופסק את הושט. או ששחט אחד מהן והמתין לה עד שמתה. או שהחליד את הסכין תחת השני ופסקו. רבי ישבב אומר. נבילה. רבי עקיבא אומר. טריפה. כלל אמר רבי ישבב משום רבי יהושע כל שנפסלה בשחיטתה. נבלה. כל ששחיטתה כראוי. ודבר אחר גרם לה ליפסל. טריפה. והודה לו רבי עקיבא: ",
+ "השוחט בהמה חיה ועוף ולא יצא מהן דם. כשרים ונאכלים בידים מסואבות. לפי שלא הוכשרו בדם. רבי שמעון אומר. הוכשרו בשחיטה: ",
+ "השוחט את המסוכנת רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר. עד שתפרכס ביד וברגל רבי אליעזר אומר דיה אם זינקה. אמר רבי שמעון אף השוחט בלילה ולמחר השכים ומצא כתלים מלאים דם כשרה. שזינקה וכמדת רבי אליעזר. וחכמים אומרים עד שתפרכס. או ביד או ברגל. או עד שתכשכש בזנבה. אחד בהמה דקה. ואחד בהמה גסה. בהמה דקה שפשטה ידה ולא החזירה פסולה. שאינה אלא הוצאת נפש בלבד. במה דברים אמורים שהיתה בחזקת מסוכנת. אבל אם היתה בחזקת בריאה אפילו אין בה אחד מכל הסימנים הללו כשרה: ",
+ "השוחט לנכרי. שחיטתו כשרה. ורבי אליעזר פוסל. אמר רבי אליעזר אפילו שחטה שיאכל הנכרי מחצר כבד שלה פסולה. שסתם מחשבת נכרי לעבודה זרה. אמר רבי יוסי. קל וחומר הדברים ומה במקום שהמחשבה פוסלת במוקדשין. אין הכל הולך אלא אחר העובד. מקום שאין מחשבה פוסלת בחולין. אינו דין שלא יהא הכל הולך אלא אחר השוחט: ",
+ "השוחט לשם הרים. לשם גבעות. לשם ימים. לשם נהרות. לשם מדברות. שחיטתו פסולה. שנים אוחזים בסכין ושוחטין. אחד לשם אחד מכל אלו. ואחד לשם דבר כשר. שחיטתו פסולה: ",
+ "אין שוחטין לא לתוך ימים. ולא לתוך נהרות. ולא לתוך כלים. אבל שוחט הוא לתוך עוגא של מים. ובספינה על גבי כלים. אין שוחטין לגומא כל עיקר. אבל עושה גומא בתוך ביתו בשביל שיכנס הדם לתוכה. ובשוק לא יעשה כן שלא יחקה את המינין: ",
+ "השוחט לשם עולה. לשם זבחים. לשם אשם תלוי. לשם פסח. לשם תודה. שחיטתו פסולה. ורבי שמעון מכשיר. שנים אוחזין בסכין ושוחטין. אחד לשם אחד מכל אלו. ואחד לשם דבר כשר. שחיטתו פסולה. השוחט לשם חטאת. לשם אשם ודאי. לשם בכור. לשם מעשר. לשם תמורה. שחיטתו כשרה. זה הכלל כל דבר שנידר ונידב. השוחט לשמו. אסור. ושאינו נידר ונידב השוחט לשמו. כשר: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "אלו טרפות בבהמה. נקובת הוושט. ופסוקת הגרגרת. ניקב קרום של מוח. ניקב הלב לבית חללו. נשברה השדרה ונפסק החוט שלה. ניטל הכבד ולא נשתייר הימנו כלום. הריאה שניקבה. או שחסרה. רבי שמעון אומר. עד שתינקב לבית הסמפונות. ניקבה הקיבה. ניקבה המרה. ניקבו הדקין. הכרס הפנימית שניקבה או שנקרע רוב החיצונה. רבי יהודה אומר. הגדולה טפח. והקטנה ברובה. המסס ובית הכוסות שניקבו לחוץ. נפלה מן הגג. נשתברו רוב צלעותיה. ודרוסת הזאב. רבי יהודה אומר דרוסת הזאב בדקה. ודרוסת ארי בגסה. דרוסת הנץ בעוף הדק. ודרוסת הגס. בעוף הגס. זה הכלל. כל שאין כמוה חיה. טרפה: ",
+ "ואלו כשרות בבהמה. ניקבה הגרגרת או שנסדקה. עד כמה תחסר. רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר. עד כאיסר האיטלקי. נפחתה הגלגלת ולא ניקב קרום של מוח. ניקב הלב ולא לבית חללו. נשברה השדרה ולא נפסק החוט שלה. ניטלה הכבד ונשתייר הימנה כזית. המסס ובית הכוסות שניקבו זה לתוך זה. ניטל הטחול. ניטלו הכליות. ניטל לחי התחתון. ניטל האם שלה. וחרותה בידי שמים. הגלודה. רבי מאיר מכשיר. וחכמים פוסלין: ",
+ "ואלו טרפות בעוף. נקובת הוושט. פסוקת הגרגרת. הכתה חולדה על ראשה מקום שעושה אותה טרפה. ניקב הקורקבן. ניקבו הדקין. נפלה לאור ונחמרו בני מעיה. אם ירוקים פסולין. אם אדומים כשרים. דרסה. וטרפה בכותל. או שריצצתה בהמה. ומפרכסת ושהתה מעת לעת ושחטה. כשרה: ",
+ "ואלו כשרות בעוף. ניקבה הגרגרת או שנסדקה. הכתה חולדה על ראשה. מקום שאינו עושה אותה טרפה. ניקב הזפק. רבי אומר אפילו ניטל. יצאו בני מעיה ולא נקבו. נשתברו גפיה. נשתברו רגליה. נמרטו כנפיה. רבי יהודה אומר אם נטלה הנוצה פסולה: ",
+ "אחוזת הדם. והמעושנת. והמצוננת. ושאכלה הרדופני. ושאכלה צואת תרנגולים. או ששתת מים הרעים כשרה. אכלה סם המות או שהכישה נחש. מותרת משום טרפה. ואסורה משום סכנת נפשות: ",
+ "סימני בהמה וחיה נאמרו מן התורה. וסימני העוף לא נאמרו. אבל אמרו חכמים. כל עוף הדורס טמא. כל שיש לו אצבע יתירה. וזפק. וקורקבנו נקלף טהור. רבי אליעזר בר צדוק אומר כל עוף החולק את רגליו טמא: ",
+ "ובחגבים. כל שיש לו ארבע רגלים. וארבע כנפים. וקרסולים. וכנפיו חופין את רובו. רבי יוסי אומר ושמו חגב. ובדגים. כל שיש לו סנפיר וקשקשת. רבי יהודה אומר שני קשקשין וסנפיר אחד. ואלו הן קשקשין הקבועין בו. וסנפירין. הפורח בהן: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "בהמה המקשה לילד. והוציא העובר את ידו והחזירו. מותר באכילה. הוציא את ראשו אף על פי שהחזירו. הרי זה כילוד. חותך מעובר שבמעיה. מותר באכילה. מן הטחול ומן הכליות. אסור באכילה. זה הכלל דבר שגופה אסור. שאינו גופה מותר: \n",
+ "המבכרת המקשה לילד. מחתך אבר אבר. ומשליך לכלבים. יצא רובו הרי זה יקבר ונפטרה מן הבכורה: \n",
+ "בהמה שמת עוברה בתוך מעיה. והושיט הרועה את ידו ונגע בו. בין בבהמה טמאה בין בבהמה טהורה. טהור. רבי יוסי הגלילי אומר בטמאה טמא. ובטהורה טהור. האשה שמת ולדה בתוך מעיה. ופשטה חיה את ידה ונגעה בו. החיה טמאה טומאת שבעה. והאשה טהורה עד שיצא הולד: \n",
+ "בהמה המקשה לילד והוציא עובר את ידו וחתכה. ואחר כך שחט את אמו הבשר טהור. שחט את אמו ואחר כך חתכה. הבשר מגע נבלה. דברי רבי מאיר. וחכמים אומרים מגע טרפה שחוטה. מה מצינו בטרפה ששחיטתה מטהרתה. אף שחיטת בהמה תטהר את האבר. אמר להם רבי מאיר. לא. אם טיהרה שחיטת טרפה אותה. דבר שגופה. תטהר את האבר דבר שאינו גופה. מנין לטרפה ששחיטתה מטהרתה בהמה טמאה אסורה באכילה אף טרפה אסורה באכילה. מה בהמה טמאה אין שחיטתה מטהרתה אף טרפה לא תטהרנה שחיטתה. לא. אם אמרת בבהמה טמאה שלא היתה לה שעת הכושר תאמר בטרפה שהיתה לה שעת הכושר. טול לך מה שהבאת. הרי שנולדה טרפה מן הבטן מנין. לא אם אמרת בבהמה טמאה שכן אין במינה שחיטה תאמר בטרפה שיש במינה שחיטה. בן שמנה חי אין שחיטתו מטהרתו. לפי שאין במינו שחיטה: \n",
+ "השוחט את הבהמה. ומצא בה בן שמנה חי או מת. או בן תשעה מת. קורעו ומוציא את דמו. מצא בן תשעה חי טעון שחיטה. וחייב באותו ואת בנו. דברי רבי מאיר. וחכמים אומרים שחיטת אמו מטהרתו. רבי שמעון שזורי אומר. אפילו בן שמנה שנים וחורש בשדה שחיטת אמו מטהרתו. קרעה ומצא בה בן תשעה חי טעון שחיטה. לפי שלא נשחטה אמו: \n",
+ "בהמה שנחתכו רגליה מן הארכובה ולמטה. כשרה. מן הארכובה ולמעלה. פסולה. וכן שניטל צומת הגידין. נשבר העצם. אם רוב הבשר קיים. שחיטתו מטהרתו. ואם לאו אין שחיטתו מטהרתו: \n",
+ "השוחט את הבהמה ומצא בה שליא. נפש היפה תאכלנה. ואינה מטמאה לא טומאת אוכלין ולא טומאת נבלות. חישב עליה מטמאה טומאת אוכלין אבל לא טומאת נבלות. שליא שיצתה מקצתה. אסורה באכילה. סימן ולד באשה וסימן ולד בבהמה. המבכרת שהפילה שליא ישליכנה לכלבים. ובמוקדשין תקבר. ואין קוברין אותה בפרשת דרכים. ואין תולין אותה באילן. מפני דרכי האמורי: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "אותו ואת בנו. נוהג בין בארץ בין בחוצה לארץ. בפני הבית ושלא בפני הבית. בחולין ובמוקדשין. כיצד. השוחט אותו ואת בנו. חולין בחוץ. שניהם כשרים. והשני סופג את הארבעים. קדשים בחוץ הראשון חייב כרת. ושניהם פסולים. ושניהם סופגים את הארבעים. חולין בפנים שניהם פסולים. והשני סופג את הארבעים. קדשים בפנים הראשון כשר ופטור. והשני סופג את הארבעים ופסול: ",
+ "חולין וקדשים בחוץ הראשון כשר ופטור והשני סופג את הארבעים ופסול. קדשים וחולין בחוץ הראשון חייב כרת ופסול. והשני כשר. ושניהם סופגים את הארבעים. חולין וקדשים בפנים שניהם פסולים והשני סופג את הארבעים. קדשים וחולין בפנים הראשון כשר ופטור. והשני סופג את הארבעים ופסול. חולין בחוץ ובפנים הראשון כשר ופטור. והשני סופג את הארבעים ופסול. קדשים בחוץ ובפנים הראשון חייב כרת ושניהם פסולים ושניהם סופגים את הארבעים. חולין בפנים ובחוץ הראשון פסול ופטור והשני סופג את הארבעים וכשר. קדשים בפנים ובחוץ. הראשון כשר ופטור. והשני סופג את הארבעים ופסול: ",
+ "השוחט ונמצא טרפה. השוחט לעבודה זרה. והשוחט פרת חטאת. ושור הנסקל. ועגלה ערופה. רבי שמעון פוטר. וחכמים מחייבין. השוחט ונתנבלה בידו. והנוחר והמעקר. פטור משום אותו ואת בנו. שנים שלקחו פרה ובנה. איזה שלקח ראשון ישחוט ראשון. ואם קדם השני זכה. שחט פרה ואחר כך שני בניה סופג שמונים. שחט שני בניה ואחר כך שחטה. סופג את הארבעים. שחטה ואת בתה ואת בת בתה סופג שמונים. שחטה ואת בת בתה ואחר כך שחט בתה. סופג את הארבעים. סומכוס אומר משום רבי מאיר סופג שמונים. בארבעה פרקים בשנה המוכר בהמה לחבירו צריך להודיעו. אמה מכרתי לשחוט. בתה מכרתי לשחוט. ואלו הן ערב יום טוב האחרון של חג. וערב יום טוב הראשון של פסח. וערב עצרת. וערב ראש השנה. וכדברי רבי יוסי הגלילי אף ערב יום הכפורים בגליל. אמר רבי יהודה אימתי בזמן שאין לו ריוח. אבל יש לו ריוח. אין צריך להודיעו. ומודה רבי יהודה במוכר את האם לחתן ואת הבת לכלה שצריך להודיע בידוע ששניהם שוחטין ביום אחד: ",
+ "בארבעה פרקים אלו משחיטין את הטבח בעל כרחו. אפילו שור שוה אלף דינרין ואין לו ללוקח אלא דינר. כופין אותו לשחוט. לפיכך אם מת. מת ללוקח. אבל בשאר ימות השנה אינו כן. לפיכך אם מת. מת למוכר: ",
+ "יום אחד האמור באותו ואת בנו היום הולך אחר הלילה. את זו דרש שמעון בן זומא. נאמר במעשה בראשית (בראשית א, ה) יום אחד. ונאמר באותו ואת בנו (ויקרא כב) יום אחד. מה יום אחד האמור במעשה בראשית היום הולך אחר הלילה. אף יום אחד האמור באותו ואת בנו היום הולך אחר הלילה: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "כיסוי הדם. נוהג בארץ ובחוצה לארץ. בפני הבית ושלא בפני הבית. בחולין אבל לא במוקדשין. ונוהג בחיה ובעוף. במזומן. ובשאינו מזומן. ונוהג בכוי מפני שהוא ספק. ואין שוחטין אותו ביום טוב. ואם שחטו אין מכסין את דמו: ",
+ "השוחט ונמצא טרפה. והשוחט לעבודה זרה. והשוחט חולין בפנים. וקדשים בחוץ. חיה ועוף הנסקלים. רבי מאיר מחייב וחכמים פוטרין. השוחט ונתנבלה בידו. הנוחר והמעקר. פטור מלכסות. ",
+ "חרש שוטה וקטן ששחטו ואחרים רואין אותם חייב לכסות. בינן לבין עצמם. פטור מלכסות. וכן לענין אותו ואת בנו ששחטו. ואחרים רואין אותן. אסור לשחוט אחריהם. בינן לבין עצמן. רבי מאיר מתיר לשחוט אחריהן. וחכמים אוסרים. ומודים שאם שחט שאינו סופג את הארבעים: ",
+ "שחט מאה חיות במקום אחד. כיסוי אחד לכולן. מאה עופות במקום אחד. כיסוי אחד לכולן. חיה ועוף במקום אחד. כיסוי אחד לכולן. רבי יהודה אומר שחט חיה יכסנה ואחר כך ישחוט את העוף. שחט ולא כסה וראהו אחר חייב לכסות. כסהו ונתגלה פטור מלכסות. כסהו הרוח חייב לכסות: ",
+ "דם שנתערב במים. אם יש בו מראית דם חייב לכסות. נתערב ביין רואין אותו כאילו הוא מים. נתערב בדם הבהמה. או בדם החיה רואין אותו כאילו הוא מים. רבי יהודה אומר אין דם מבטל דם: ",
+ "דם הניתז. ושעל הסכין. חייב לכסות. אמר רבי יהודה אימתי בזמן שאין שם דם אלא הוא. אבל יש שם דם שלא הוא. פטור מלכסות: ",
+ "במה מכסין ובמה אין מכסין. מכסין בזבל הדק. ובחול הדק. בסיד ובחרסית ובלבנה ובמגופה שכתשן. אבל אין מכסין לא בזבל הגס. ולא בחול הגס. ולא בלבנה ומגופה שלא כתשן. ולא יכפה עליו את הכלי. כלל אמר רבן שמעון בן גמליאל. דבר שמגדל בו צמחין מכסין בו. ושאינו מגדל צמחין. אין מכסין בו: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "גיד הנשה נוהג בארץ ובחוצה לארץ. בפני הבית ושלא בפני הבית. בחולין ובמוקדשים. ונוהג בבהמה ובחיה. בירך של ימין ובירך של שמאל. ואינו נוהג בעוף. מפני שאין לו כף. ונוהג בשליל. רבי יהודה אומר אינו נוהג בשליל. וחלבו מותר. ואין הטבחין נאמנין על גיד הנשה. דברי רבי מאיר. וחכמים אומרים נאמנין עליו ועל החלב: ",
+ "שולח אדם ירך לנכרי. שגיד הנשה בתוכה. מפני שמקומו ניכר. הנוטל גיד הנשה. צריך שיטול את כולו. רבי יהודה אומר. כדי לקיים בו מצות נטילה: ",
+ "האוכל מגיד הנשה כזית. סופג ארבעים. אכלו ואין בו כזית. חייב. אכל מזה כזית. ומזה כזית. סופג שמונים. רבי יהודה אומר אינו סופג אלא ארבעים: ",
+ "ירך שנתבשל בה גיד הנשה. אם יש בה בנותן טעם. הרי זו אסורה. כיצד משערין אותה. כבשר בלפת: ",
+ "גיד הנשה שנתבשל עם הגידים. בזמן שמכירו בנותן טעם. ואם לאו כולן אסורין. והרוטב בנותן טעם. וכן חתיכה של נבלה. וכן חתיכה של דג טמא. שנתבשלו עם החתיכות. בזמן שמכירן בנותן טעם. ואם לאו כולן אסורות. והרוטב בנותן טעם: ",
+ "נוהג בטהורה ואינו נוהג בטמאה. רבי יהודה אומר אף בטמאה. אמר רבי יהודה והלא מבני יעקב נאסר גיד הנשה. ועדיין בהמה טמאה מותרת להן. אמרו לו בסיני נאמר. אלא שנכתב במקומו: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "כל הבשר אסור לבשל בחלב. חוץ מבשר דגים וחגבים. ואסור להעלותו עם הגבינה על השלחן. חוץ מבשר דגים וחגבים. הנודר מן הבשר. מותר בבשר דגים וחגבים. העוף עולה עם הגבינה על השלחן. ואינו נאכל. דברי בית שמאי. ובית הלל אומרים. לא עולה ולא נאכל. אמר רבי יוסי זו מקולי בית שמאי. ומחומרי בית הלל. באיזה שלחן אמרו. בשולחן שאוכל עליו. אבל בשולחן שסודר עליו את התבשיל. נותן זה בצד זה ואינו חושש. ",
+ "צורר אדם בשר וגבינה במטפחת אחת. ובלבד שלא יהו נוגעין זה בזה. רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר שני אכסנאין אוכלין על שלחן אחד. זה בשר. וזה גבינה. ואין חוששין: ",
+ "טיפת חלב שנפלה על החתיכה. אם יש בה בנותן טעם באותה חתיכה אסור. ניער את הקדרה. אם יש בה בנותן טעם באותה קדרה. אסור. הכחל. קורעו ומוציא את חלבו. לא קרעו אינו עובר עליו. הלב קורעו ומוציא את דמו. לא קרעו. אינו עובר עליו. המעלה את העוף עם הגבינה על השלחן. אינו עובר בלא תעשה: ",
+ "בשר בהמה טהורה בחלב בהמה טהורה. אסור לבשל ואסור בהנאה. בשר בהמה טהורה בחלב בהמה טמאה. בשר בהמה טמאה בחלב בהמה טהורה. מותר לבשל ומותר בהנאה. רבי עקיבא אומר חיה ועוף אינם מן התורה שנאמר. לא תבשל גדי בחלב אמו שלש פעמים. פרט לחיה ולעוף ולבהמה טמאה. רבי יוסי הגלילי אומר נאמר (דברים יד, כא) לא תאכלו כל נבלה. ונאמר (שם) לא תבשל גדי בחלב אמו. את שאסור משום נבלה אסור לבשל בחלב. עוף שאסור משום נבלה יכול יהא אסור לבשל בחלב. תלמוד לומר בחלב אמו יצא עוף שאין לו חלב אם: ",
+ "קבת נכרי ושל נבלה. הרי זו אסורה. המעמיד בעור של קבה כשרה. אם יש בנותן טעם הרי זו אסורה. כשרה שינקה מן הטרפה קבתה אסורה. טרפה שינקה מן הכשרה קבתה מותרת. מפני שכנוס במיעיה: ",
+ "חומר בחלב מבדם וחומר בדם מבחלב. חומר בחלב שהחלב מועלין בו. וחייבין עליו משום פגול ונותר וטמא. מה שאין כן בדם. וחומר בדם שהדם נוהג בבהמה וחיה ועוף. בין טמאים ובין טהורים. וחלב אינו נוהג אלא בבהמה טהורה בלבד: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "העור והרוטב והקיפה. והאלל. והעצמות. והגידין. והקרנים. והטלפים. מצטרפין לטמא טומאת אוכלים אבל לא טומאת נבלות. כיוצא בו. השוחט בהמה טמאה לנכרי ומפרכסת. מטמאה טומאת אוכלין אבל לא טומאת נבלות. עד שתמות. או עד שיתיז את ראשה. ריבה לטמא טומאת אוכלין ממה שריבה לטמא טומאת נבלות. רבי יהודה אומר האלל המכונס. אם יש בו כזית במקום אחד. חייב עליו: ",
+ "אלו שעורותיהן כבשרן. עור האדם. ועור חזיר של ישוב. רבי יוסי אומר. אף עור חזיר הבר. ועור חטוטרת של גמל הרכה. ועור הראש של עגל הרך. ועור הפרסות. ועור בית הבושת. ועור השליל. ועור שתחת האליה. ועור האנקה והכח. והלטאה. והחומט. רבי יהודה אומר הלטאה כחולדה. וכולן שעיבדן או שהילך בהן כדי עבודה טהורין. חוץ מעור האדם. רבי יוחנן בן נורי אומר שמנה שרצים יש להן עורות: ",
+ "המפשיט בבהמה ובחיה. בטהורה ובטמאה. בדקה ובגסה. לשטיח כדי אחיזה. ולחמת עד שיפשיט את החזה. המרגיל כולו חבור לטומאה. ליטמא ולטמא. עור שעל הצואר. ר' יוחנן בן נורי אומר אינו חבור. וחכמים אומרים חבור. עד שיפשיט את כולו: ",
+ "עור שיש עליו כזית בשר. הנוגע בציב היוצא ממנו ובשערה שכנגדו. טמא. היו עליו כשני חצאי זיתים מטמא במשא ולא במגע. דברי רבי ישמעאל. רבי עקיבא אומר. לא במגע ולא במשא. ומודה רבי עקיבא. בשני חצאי זיתים שתחבן בקיסם והסיטן. שהוא טמא. ומפני מה רבי עקיבא מטהר בעור. מפני שהעור מבטלן: ",
+ "קולית המת וקולית המוקדשים. הנוגע בהן בין סתומים בין נקובים. טמא. קולית נבלה וקולית השרץ הנוגע בהן. סתומים טהורים. נקובים כל שהוא מטמא במגע. מנין שאף במשא. תלמוד לומר הנוגע והנושא. את שבא לכלל מגע בא לכלל משא. לא בא לכלל מגע לא בא לכלל משא: ",
+ "ביצת השרץ המרוקמת טהורה. ניקבה כל שהוא טמאה. עכבר שחציו בשר וחציו אדמה. הנוגע בבשר. טמא. באדמה. טהור. רבי יהודה אומר אף הנוגע באדמה שכנגד הבשר. טמא: ",
+ "האבר והבשר המדולדלין בבהמה מטמאין טומאת אוכלין במקומן. וצריכין הכשר. נשחטה בהמה הוכשרו בדמיה. דברי רבי מאיר. ורבי שמעון אומר לא הוכשרו. מתה הבהמה. הבשר צריך הכשר. האבר מטמא משום אבר מן החי. ואינו מטמא משום אבר נבלה. דברי רבי מאיר. ורבי שמעון מטהר: ",
+ "האבר והבשר המדולדלין באדם. טהורין. מת האדם. הבשר טהור. האבר מטמא משום אבר מן החי. ואינו מטמא משום אבר מן המת. דברי רבי מאיר. ורבי שמעון מטהר: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "הזרוע והלחיים והקבה. נוהגין בארץ ובחוצה לארץ. בפני הבית ושלא בפני הבית. בחולין אבל לא במוקדשין. שהיה בדין. ומה אם החולין שאינן חייבין בחזה ושוק. חייבין במתנות. קדשים שחייבין בחזה ושוק. אינו דין שחייבין במתנות. תלמוד לומר (ויקרא ז, לד) ואתן אותם לאהרן הכהן ולבניו לחק עולם. אין לו אלא מה שאמור בענין: ",
+ "כל הקדשים שקדם מום קבוע להקדשן ונפדו. חייבין בבכורה ובמתנות. ויוצאין לחולין להגזז ולהעבד. וולדן וחלבן מותר לאחר פדיונן והשוחטן בחוץ פטור. ואין עושין תמורה. ואם מתו יפדו. חוץ מן הבכור ומן המעשר. כל שקדם הקדשן את מומן. או מום עובר להקדישן. ולאחר מכאן נולד להם מום קבוע. ונפדו. פטורין מן הבכורה ומן המתנות. ואינן יוצאין לחולין להגזז ולהעבד. וולדן וחלבן אסור לאחר פדיונן. והשוחטן בחוץ חייב. ועושין תמורה. ואם מתו יקברו. ",
+ "בכור שנתערב במאה. בזמן שמאה שוחטין את כולן פוטרין את כולן. אחד שוחט את כולן פוטרין לו אחד. השוחט לכהן ולנכרי פטור מן המתנות. והמשתתף עמהן צריך שירשום. ואם אמר חוץ מן המתנות פטור מן המתנות. אמר מכור לי בני מעיה של פרה. והיו בהן מתנות. נותנן לכהן. ואינו מנכה לו מן הדמים. לקח הימנו במשקל. נותנן לכהן. ומנכה לו מן הדמים: ",
+ "גר שנתגייר והיתה לו פרה. נשחטה עד שלא נתגייר פטור. משנתגייר חייב. ספק. פטור. שהמוציא מחבירו עליו הראיה. איזהו הזרוע. מן הפרק של ארכובה עד כף של יד. והוא של נזיר. וכנגדו ברגל. שוק. רבי יהודה אומר. שוק מן הפרק של ארכובה. עד סובך של רגל. איזהו לחי. מן הפרק של לחי עד פיקה של גרגרת: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "ראשית הגז נוהג בארץ ובחוצה לארץ בפני הבית ושלא בפני הבית. בחולין אבל לא במוקדשין. חומר בזרוע ובלחיים ובקיבה. מראשית הגז. שהזרוע והלחיים והקיבה נוהגים בבקר ובצאן. במרובה ובמועט. וראשית הגז אינו נוהג אלא ברחלות. ואינו נוהג אלא במרובה: ",
+ "וכמה הוא מרובה. בית שמאי אומרים שתי רחלות. שנאמר (ישעיה ז, כא) יחיה איש עגלת בקר ושתי צאן. ובית הלל אומרים חמש שנאמר (שמואל א' כה, יח) חמש צאן עשיות. רבי דוסא בן הרכינס אומר חמש רחלות גוזזות מנה מנה ופרס חייבות בראשית הגז. וחכמים אומרים חמש רחלות גוזזות כל שהן. וכמה נותנין לו. משקל חמש סלעים ביהודה שהן עשר סלעים בגליל. מלובן ולא צואי. כדי לעשות ממנו בגד קטן. שנאמר (דברים יח, ד) תתן לו שיהא בו כדי מתנה. לא הספיק ליתנו לו עד שצבעו. פטור. לבנו ולא צבעו חייב. הלוקח גז צאנו של נכרי פטור מראשית הגז. הלוקח גז צאנו של חברו. אם שייר המוכר. המוכר חייב. לא שייר. הלוקח חייב. היו לו שני מינים. שחופות ולבנות. מכר לו שחופות אבל לא לבנות. זכרים אבל לא נקבות. זה נותן לעצמו וזה נותן לעצמו: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "שלוח הקן. נוהג בארץ ובחוצה לארץ. בפני הבית ושלא בפני הבית. בחולין אבל לא במוקדשין. חומר בכסוי הדם משלוח הקן. שכסוי הדם נוהג בחיה ובעוף. במזומן ובשאין מזומן. ושלוח הקן אינו נוהג אלא בעוף. ואינו נוהג אלא בשאינו מזומן. איזהו שאינו מזומן. כגון אווזין ותרנגולין שקננו בפרדס. אבל אם קננו בבית. וכן יוני הרדסיאות. פטור משילוח: ",
+ "עוף טמא פטור מלשלח. עוף טמא רובץ על ביצי עוף טהור וטהור רובץ על ביצי עוף טמא. פטור מלשלח. קורא זכר רבי אליעזר מחייב. וחכמים פוטרין: ",
+ "היתה מעופפת בזמן שכנפיה נוגעות בקן. חייב לשלח. אין כנפיה נוגעות בקן. פטור מלשלח. אין שם אלא אפרוח אחד. או ביצה אחת. חייב לשלח. שנאמר (דברים כב, ו) קן קן מכל מקום. היו שם אפרוחין מפריחין או ביצים מוזרות. פטור מלשלח. שנאמר (שם) והאם רובצת על האפרוחים או על הביצים. מה אפרוחין בני קיימא אף ביצים בני קיימא. יצאו מוזרות. ומה הביצים צריכין לאמן. אף האפרוחים צריכין לאמן. יצאו מפריחין. שלחה וחזרה. שלחה וחזרה. אפילו ארבעה וחמשה פעמים. חייב. שנאמר (דברים כב, ז) שלח תשלח. אמר הריני נוטל את האם ומשלח את הבנים. חייב לשלח. שנאמר שלח תשלח את האם. נטל הבנים והחזירן לקן. ואחר כך חזרה האם עליהם. פטור מלשלח: ",
+ "הנוטל אם על הבנים. רבי יהודה אומר לוקה ואינו משלח. וחכמים אומרים משלח ואינו לוקה. זה הכלל. כל מצות לא תעשה שיש בה קום עשה. אין לוקין עליה: ",
+ "לא יטול אדם אם על בנים. אפילו לטהר את המצורע. ומה אם מצוה קלה שהיא כאיסר אמרה תורה (דברים כב, ז) למען ייטב לך והארכת ימים. קל וחומר על מצות חמורות שבתורה: "
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/Hebrew/merged.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/Hebrew/merged.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fe9fb311731b43955bcc3a69bd66feaed4b03e73
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Chullin/Hebrew/merged.json
@@ -0,0 +1,121 @@
+{
+ "title": "Mishnah Chullin",
+ "language": "he",
+ "versionTitle": "merged",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org/Mishnah_Chullin",
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "הַכֹּל שׁוֹחֲטִין וּשְׁחִיטָתָן כְּשֵׁרָה, חוּץ מֵחֵרֵשׁ, שׁוֹטֶה, וְקָטָן, שֶׁמָּא יְקַלְקְלוּ בִשְׁחִיטָתָן. וְכֻלָּן שֶׁשָּׁחֲטוּ וַאֲחֵרִים רוֹאִין אוֹתָן, שְׁחִיטָתָן כְּשֵׁרָה. שְׁחִיטַת נָכְרִי, נְבֵלָה, וּמְטַמְּאָה בְמַשָּׂא. הַשּׁוֹחֵט בַּלַּיְלָה, וְכֵן הַסּוּמָא שֶׁשָּׁחַט, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. הַשּׁוֹחֵט בְּשַׁבָּת, וּבְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמִּתְחַיֵּב בְּנַפְשׁוֹ, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה: \n",
+ "הַשּׁוֹחֵט בְּמַגַּל יָד, בְּצוֹר, וּבְקָנֶה, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. הַכֹּל שׁוֹחֲטִין וּלְעוֹלָם שׁוֹחֲטִין, וּבַכֹּל שׁוֹחֲטִין, חוּץ מִמַּגַּל קָצִיר, וְהַמְּגֵרָה, וְהַשִּׁנַּיִם, וְהַצִּפֹּרֶן, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן חוֹנְקִין. הַשּׁוֹחֵט בְּמַגַּל קָצִיר בְּדֶרֶךְ הֲלִיכָתָהּ, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי פּוֹסְלִין, וּבֵית הִלֵּל מַכְשִׁירִין. וְאִם הֶחֱלִיקוּ שִׁנֶּיהָ, הֲרֵי הִיא כְסַכִּין: \n",
+ "הַשּׁוֹחֵט מִתּוֹךְ הַטַּבַּעַת וְשִׁיֵּר בָּהּ מְלֹא הַחוּט עַל פְּנֵי כֻלָּהּ, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, מְלֹא הַחוּט עַל פְּנֵי רֻבָּהּ: \n",
+ "הַשּׁוֹחֵט מִן הַצְּדָדִין שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. הַמּוֹלֵק מִן הַצְּדָדִין, מְלִיקָתוֹ פְסוּלָה. הַשּׁוֹחֵט מִן הָעֹרֶף, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְסוּלָה. הַמּוֹלֵק מִן הָעֹרֶף, מְלִיקָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. הַשּׁוֹחֵט מִן הַצַּוָּאר, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. הַמּוֹלֵק מִן הַצַּוָּאר, מְלִיקָתוֹ פְסוּלָה, שֶׁכָּל הָעֹרֶף כָּשֵׁר לִמְלִיקָה, וְכָל הַצַּוָּאר כָּשֵׁר לִשְׁחִיטָה. נִמְצָא, כָּשֵׁר בִּשְׁחִיטָה, פָּסוּל בִּמְלִיקָה. כָּשֵׁר בִּמְלִיקָה, פָּסוּל בִּשְׁחִיטָה: \n",
+ "כָּשֵׁר בַּתּוֹרִין, פָּסוּל בִּבְנֵי יוֹנָה. כָּשֵׁר בִּבְנֵי יוֹנָה, פָּסוּל בַּתּוֹרִין. תְּחִלַּת הַצִּהוּב, בָּזֶה וּבָזֶה פָּסוּל: \n",
+ "כָּשֵׁר בַּפָּרָה, פָּסוּל בָּעֶגְלָה. כָּשֵׁר בָּעֶגְלָה, פָּסוּל בַּפָּרָה. כָּשֵׁר בַּכֹּהֲנִים, פָּסוּל בַּלְוִיִּם. כָּשֵׁר בַּלְוִיִּם, פָּסוּל בַּכֹּהֲנִים. טָהוֹר בִּכְלֵי חֶרֶשׂ, טָמֵא בְכָל הַכֵּלִים. טָהוֹר בְּכָל הַכֵּלִים, טָמֵא בִכְלֵי חָרֶשׂ. טָהוֹר בִּכְלֵי עֵץ, טָמֵא בִכְלֵי מַתָּכוֹת. טָהוֹר בִּכְלֵי מַתָּכוֹת, טָמֵא בִכְלֵי עֵץ. הַחַיָּב בַּשְּׁקֵדִים הַמָּרִים, פָּטוּר בַּמְּתוּקִים. הַחַיָּב בַּמְּתוּקִים, פָּטוּר בַּמָּרִים: \n",
+ "הַתֶּמֶד, עַד שֶׁלֹּא הֶחֱמִיץ, אֵינוֹ נִקָּח בְּכֶסֶף מַעֲשֵׂר, וּפוֹסֵל אֶת הַמִּקְוֶה. מִשֶּׁהֶחֱמִיץ, נִקָּח בְּכֶסֶף מַעֲשֵׂר וְאֵינוֹ פוֹסֵל אֶת הַמִּקְוֶה. הָאַחִין הַשֻּׁתָּפִין, כְּשֶׁחַיָּבִין בַּקָּלְבּוֹן, פְּטוּרִין מִמַּעְשַׂר בְּהֵמָה. כְּשֶׁחַיָּבִין בְּמַעְשַׂר בְּהֵמָה, פְּטוּרִין מִן הַקָּלְבּוֹן. כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ מֶכֶר, אֵין קְנַס. וְכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ קְנַס, אֵין מָכֶר. כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ מֵאוּן, אֵין חֲלִיצָה. וְכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ חֲלִיצָה, אֵין מֵאוּן. כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ תְּקִיעָה, אֵין הַבְדָּלָה. וְכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ הַבְדָּלָה, אֵין תְּקִיעָה. יוֹם טוֹב שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בְּעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת, תּוֹקְעִין וְלֹא מַבְדִּילִין. בְּמוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת, מַבְדִּילִין וְלֹא תוֹקְעִין. כֵּיצַד מַבְדִּילִין, הַמַּבְדִּיל בֵּין קֹדֶשׁ לְקֹדֶשׁ. רַבִּי דוֹסָא אוֹמֵר, בֵּין קֹדֶשׁ חָמוּר לְקֹדֶשׁ הַקַּל: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "הַשּׁוֹחֵט אֶחָד בָּעוֹף, וּשְׁנַיִם בַּבְּהֵמָה, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. וְרֻבּוֹ שֶׁל אֶחָד, כָּמוֹהוּ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, עַד שֶׁיִּשְׁחֹט אֶת הַוְּרִידִין. חֲצִי אֶחָד בָּעוֹף, וְאֶחָד וָחֵצִי בַּבְּהֵמָה, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְסוּלָה. רֹב אֶחָד בָּעוֹף וְרֹב שְׁנַיִם בַּבְּהֵמָה, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה: \n",
+ "הַשּׁוֹחֵט שְׁנֵי רָאשִׁין כְּאֶחָד, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. שְׁנַיִם אוֹחֲזִין בַּסַּכִּין וְשׁוֹחֲטִין, אֲפִלּוּ אֶחָד לְמַעְלָה וְאֶחָד לְמַטָּה, שְׁחִיטָתָן כְּשֵׁרָה: \n",
+ "הִתִּיז אֶת הָרֹאשׁ בְּבַת אַחַת, פְּסוּלָה. הָיָה שׁוֹחֵט וְהִתִּיז אֶת הָרֹאשׁ בְּבַת אַחַת, אִם יֵשׁ בַּסַּכִּין מְלֹא צַוָּאר, כְּשֵׁרָה. הָיָה שׁוֹחֵט וְהִתִּיז שְׁנֵי רָאשִׁים בְּבַת אַחַת, אִם יֵשׁ בַּסַּכִּין מְלֹא צַוָּאר אֶחָד, כְּשֵׁרָה. בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים. בִּזְמַן שֶׁהוֹלִיךְ וְלֹא הֵבִיא, אוֹ הֵבִיא וְלֹא הוֹלִיךְ. אֲבָל אִם הוֹלִיךְ וְהֵבִיא, אֲפִלּוּ כָל שֶׁהוּא, אֲפִלּוּ בְאִזְמֵל, כְּשֵׁרָה. נָפְלָה סַכִּין וְשָׁחֲטָה, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁשָּׁחֲטָה כְדַרְכָּהּ, פְּסוּלָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יב), וְזָבַחְתָּ וְאָכַלְתָּ, מַה שֶּׁאַתָּה זוֹבֵחַ, אַתָּה אוֹכֵל. נָפְלָה הַסַּכִּין וְהִגְבִּיהָהּ, נָפְלוּ כֵלָיו וְהִגְבִּיהָן, הִשְׁחִיז אֶת הַסַּכִּין וְעָף, וּבָא חֲבֵרוֹ וְשָׁחַט, אִם שָׁהָה כְדֵי שְׁחִיטָה, פְּסוּלָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, אִם שָׁהָה כְדֵי בִקּוּר: \n",
+ "שָׁחַט אֶת הַוֶּשֶׁט וּפָסַק אֶת הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת, אוֹ שָׁחַט אֶת הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת וּפָסַק אֶת הַוֶּשֶׁט, אוֹ שֶׁשָּׁחַט אַחַד מֵהֶן וְהִמְתִּין לָהּ עַד שֶׁמֵּתָה, אוֹ שֶׁהֶחֱלִיד אֶת הַסַּכִּין תַּחַת הַשֵּׁנִי וּפְסָקוֹ, רַבִּי יְשֵׁבָב אוֹמֵר, נְבֵלָה. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, טְרֵפָה. כְּלָל אָמַר רַבִּי יְשֵׁבָב מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, כֹּל שֶׁנִּפְסְלָה בִשְׁחִיטָתָהּ, נְבֵלָה. כֹּל שֶׁשְּׁחִיטָתָהּ כָּרָאוּי וְדָבָר אַחֵר גָּרַם לָהּ לִפָּסֵל, טְרֵפָה. וְהוֹדָה לוֹ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא: \n",
+ "הַשּׁוֹחֵט בְּהֵמָה חַיָּה וְעוֹף וְלֹא יָצָא מֵהֶן דָּם, כְּשֵׁרִים, וְנֶאֱכָלִים בְּיָדַיִם מְסֹאָבוֹת, לְפִי שֶׁלֹּא הֻכְשְׁרוּ בְדָם. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, הֻכְשְׁרוּ בַשְּׁחִיטָה: \n",
+ "הַשּׁוֹחֵט אֶת הַמְסֻכֶּנֶת, רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, עַד שֶׁתְּפַרְכֵּס בַּיָּד וּבָרָגֶל. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, דַּיָּהּ אִם זִנְּקָה. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, אַף הַשּׁוֹחֵט בַּלַּיְלָה וּלְמָחָר הִשְׁכִּים וּמָצָא כְתָלִים מְלֵאִים דָּם, כְּשֵׁרָה, שֶׁזִּנְּקָה, וּכְמִדַּת רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, עַד שֶׁתְּפַרְכֵּס אוֹ בַיָּד אוֹ בָרֶגֶל אוֹ עַד שֶׁתְּכַשְׁכֵּשׁ בִּזְנָבָהּ, אֶחָד בְּהֵמָה דַקָּה וְאֶחָד בְּהֵמָה גַסָּה. בְּהֵמָה דַקָּה שֶׁפָּשְׁטָה יָדָהּ וְלֹא הֶחֱזִירָה, פְּסוּלָה, שֶׁאֵינָהּ אֶלָּא הוֹצָאַת נֶפֶשׁ בִּלְבָד. בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים, שֶׁהָיְתָה בְחֶזְקַת מְסֻכֶּנֶת. אֲבָל אִם הָיְתָה בְחֶזְקַת בְּרִיאָה, אֲפִלּוּ אֵין בָּהּ אַחַד מִכָּל הַסִּימָנִים הַלָּלוּ, כְּשֵׁרָה: \n",
+ "הַשּׁוֹחֵט לְנָכְרִי, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר פּוֹסֵל. אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, אֲפִלּוּ שְׁחָטָהּ שֶׁיֹּאכַל הַנָּכְרִי מֵחֲצַר כָּבֵד שֶׁלָּהּ, פְּסוּלָה, שֶׁסְּתָם מַחֲשֶׁבֶת נָכְרִי לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, קַל וָחֹמֶר הַדְּבָרִים, וּמַה בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁהַמַּחֲשָׁבָה פוֹסֶלֶת, בְּמֻקְדָּשִׁין, אֵין הַכֹּל הוֹלֵךְ אֶלָּא אַחַר הָעוֹבֵד, מְקוֹם שֶׁאֵין מַחֲשָׁבָה פוֹסֶלֶת, בְּחֻלִּין, אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא הַכֹּל הוֹלֵךְ אֶלָּא אַחַר הַשּׁוֹחֵט: \n",
+ "הַשּׁוֹחֵט לְשֵׁם הָרִים, לְשֵׁם גְּבָעוֹת, לְשֵׁם יַמִּים, לְשֵׁם נְהָרוֹת, לְשֵׁם מִדְבָּרוֹת, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְסוּלָה. שְׁנַיִם אוֹחֲזִין בְּסַכִּין וְשׁוֹחֲטִין, אֶחָד לְשֵׁם אַחַד מִכָּל אֵלּוּ, וְאֶחָד לְשֵׁם דָּבָר כָּשֵׁר, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְסוּלָה: \n",
+ "אֵין שׁוֹחֲטִין לֹא לְתוֹךְ יַמִּים, וְלֹא לְתוֹךְ נְהָרוֹת, וְלֹא לְתוֹךְ כֵּלִים. אֲבָל שׁוֹחֵט הוּא לְתוֹךְ עוּגָא שֶׁל מַיִם, וּבִסְפִינָה, עַל גַּבֵּי כֵלִים. אֵין שׁוֹחֲטִין לְגֻמָּא כָּל עִקָּר, אֲבָל עוֹשֶׂה גֻמָּא בְתוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁיִּכָּנֵס הַדָּם לְתוֹכָהּ. וּבַשּׁוּק לֹא יַעֲשֶׂה כֵן, שֶׁלֹּא יְחַקֶּה אֶת הַמִּינִין: \n",
+ "הַשּׁוֹחֵט לְשֵׁם עוֹלָה, לְשֵׁם זְבָחִים, לְשֵׁם אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, לְשֵׁם פֶּסַח, לְשֵׁם תּוֹדָה, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְסוּלָה. וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מַכְשִׁיר. שְׁנַיִם אוֹחֲזִין בְּסַכִּין וְשׁוֹחֲטִין, אֶחָד לְשֵׁם אַחַד מִכָּל אֵלּוּ, וְאֶחָד לְשֵׁם דָּבָר כָּשֵׁר, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ פְסוּלָה. הַשּׁוֹחֵט לְשֵׁם חַטָּאת, לְשֵׁם אָשָׁם וַדַּאי, לְשֵׁם בְּכוֹר, לְשֵׁם מַעֲשֵׂר, לְשֵׁם תְּמוּרָה, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. זֶה הַכְּלָל, כָּל דָּבָר שֶׁנִּדָּר וְנִּדָּב, הַשּׁוֹחֵט לִשְׁמוֹ, אָסוּר, וְשֶׁאֵינוֹ נִדָּר וְנִדָּב, הַשּׁוֹחֵט לִשְׁמוֹ, כָּשֵׁר: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "אֵלּוּ טְרֵפוֹת בַּבְּהֵמָה. נְקוּבַת הַוֶּשֶׁט, וּפְסוּקַת הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת, נִקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מֹחַ, נִקַּב הַלֵּב לְבֵית חֲלָלוֹ, נִשְׁבְּרָה הַשִּׁדְרָה וְנִפְסַק הַחוּט שֶׁלָּהּ, נִטַּל הַכָּבֵד וְלֹא נִשְׁתַּיֵּר הֵימֶנּוּ כְלוּם, הָרֵאָה שֶׁנִּקְּבָה, אוֹ שֶׁחָסְרָה, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, עַד שֶׁתִּנָּקֵב לְבֵית הַסִּמְפּוֹנוֹת. נִקְּבָה הַקֵּבָה, נִקְּבָה הַמָּרָה, נִקְּבוּ הַדַּקִּין, הַכֶּרֶס הַפְּנִימִית שֶׁנִּקְּבָה, אוֹ שֶׁנִּקְרַע רֹב הַחִיצוֹנָה, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, הַגְּדוֹלָה טֶפַח, וְהַקְּטַנָּה בְּרֻבָּהּ. הַמְסֵס וּבֵית הַכּוֹסוֹת שֶׁנִּקְּבוּ לַחוּץ, נָפְלָה מִן הַגַּג, נִשְׁתַּבְּרוּ רֹב צַלְעוֹתֶיהָ, וּדְרוּסַת הַזְּאֵב. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, דְּרוּסַת הַזְּאֵב בַּדַּקָּה, וּדְרוּסַת אֲרִי בַּגַּסָּה, דְּרוּסַת הַנֵּץ בָּעוֹף הַדַּק, וּדְרוּסַת הַגַּס בָּעוֹף הַגָּס. זֶה הַכְּלָל, כֹּל שֶׁאֵין כָּמוֹהָ חַיָּה, טְרֵפָה: \n",
+ "וְאֵלּוּ כְשֵׁרוֹת בַּבְּהֵמָה. נִקְּבָה הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת אוֹ שֶׁנִּסְדְּקָה. עַד כַּמָּה תֶּחְסַר. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, עַד כָּאִסָּר הָאִיטַלְקִי. נִפְחֲתָה הַגֻּלְגֹּלֶת וְלֹא נִקַּב קְרוּם שֶׁל מֹחַ, נִקַּב הַלֵּב וְלֹא לְבֵית חֲלָלוֹ, נִשְׁבְּרָה הַשִּׁדְרָה וְלֹא נִפְסַק הַחוּט שֶׁלָּהּ, נִטְּלָה הַכָּבֵד וְנִשְׁתַּיֵּר הֵימֶנָּה כַזָּיִת, הַמְסֵס וּבֵית הַכּוֹסוֹת שֶׁנִּקְּבוּ זֶה לְתוֹךְ זֶה, נִטַּל הַטְּחוֹל, נִטְּלוּ הַכְּלָיוֹת, נִטַּל לְחִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן, נִטַּל הָאֵם שֶׁלָּהּ, וַחֲרוּתָה בִידֵי שָׁמָיִם. הַגְּלוּדָה, רַבִּי מֵאִיר מַכְשִׁיר, וַחֲכָמִים פּוֹסְלִין: \n",
+ "וְאֵלּוּ טְרֵפוֹת בָּעוֹף. נְקוּבַת הַוֶּשֶׁט, פְּסוּקַת הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת, הִכַּתָּהּ חֻלְדָּה עַל רֹאשָׁהּ, מְקוֹם שֶׁעוֹשֶׂה אוֹתָהּ טְרֵפָה, נִקַּב הַקֻּרְקְבָן, נִקְּבוּ הַדַּקִּין, נָפְלָה לָאוּר וְנֶחְמְרוּ בְנֵי מֵעֶיהָ, אִם יְרֻקִּים, פְּסוּלִין. אִם אֲדֻמִּים, כְּשֵׁרִים. דְּרָסָהּ, וּטְרָפָהּ בַּכֹּתֶל, אוֹ שֶׁרִצְּצַתָּהּ בְּהֵמָה וּמְפַרְכֶּסֶת, וְשָׁהֲתָה מֵעֵת לְעֵת וּשְׁחָטָהּ, כְּשֵׁרָה: \n",
+ "וְאֵלּוּ כְשֵׁרוֹת בָּעוֹף. נִקְּבָה הַגַּרְגֶּרֶת אוֹ שֶׁנִּסְדְּקָה, הִכַּתָּהּ חֻלְדָּה עַל רֹאשָׁהּ, מְקוֹם שֶׁאֵינוֹ עוֹשֶׂה אוֹתָהּ טְרֵפָה, נִקַּב הַזֶּפֶק. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר, אֲפִלּוּ נִטָּל. יָצְאוּ בְנֵי מֵעֶיהָ וְלֹא נִקְּבוּ, נִשְׁתַּבְּרוּ גַפֶּיהָ, נִשְׁתַּבְּרוּ רַגְלֶיהָ, נִמְרְטוּ כְנָפֶיהָ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אִם נִטְּלָה הַנּוֹצָה, פְּסוּלָה: \n",
+ "אֲחוּזַת הַדָּם, וְהַמְּעֻשֶּׁנֶת, וְהַמְצֻנֶּנֶת, וְשֶׁאָכְלָה הַרְדֻּפְנִי, וְשֶׁאָכְלָה צוֹאַת תַּרְנְגוֹלִים, אוֹ שֶׁשָּׁתְתָה מַיִם הָרָעִים, כְּשֵׁרָה. אָכְלָה סַם הַמָּוֶת אוֹ שֶׁהִכִּישָׁהּ נָחָשׁ, מֻתֶּרֶת מִשּׁוּם טְרֵפָה, וַאֲסוּרָה מִשּׁוּם סַכָּנַת נְפָשׁוֹת: \n",
+ "סִימָנֵי בְהֵמָה וְחַיָּה נֶאֶמְרוּ מִן הַתּוֹרָה, וְסִימָנֵי הָעוֹף לֹא נֶאֱמָרוּ. אֲבָל אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים, כָּל עוֹף הַדּוֹרֵס, טָמֵא. כֹּל שֶׁיֶּשׁ לוֹ אֶצְבַּע יְתֵרָה, וְזֶפֶק, וְקֻרְקְבָנוֹ נִקְלָף, טָהוֹר. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בַּר צָדוֹק אוֹמֵר, כָּל עוֹף הַחוֹלֵק אֶת רַגְלָיו, טָמֵא: \n",
+ "וּבַחֲגָבִים, כֹּל שֶׁיֶּשׁ לוֹ אַרְבַּע רַגְלַיִם, וְאַרְבַּע כְּנָפַיִם, וְקַרְסֻלַּיִם, וּכְנָפָיו חוֹפִין אֶת רֻבּוֹ. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, וּשְׁמוֹ חָגָב. וּבַדָּגִים, כֹּל שֶׁיֶּשׁ לוֹ סְנַפִּיר וְקַשְׂקָשֶׂת. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, שְׁנֵי קַשְׂקַשִּׂין וּסְנַפִּיר אֶחָד. וְאֵלּוּ הֵן קַשְׂקַשִּׂין, הַקְּבוּעִין בּוֹ. וּסְנַפִּירִין, הַפּוֹרֵחַ בָּהֶן: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "בְּהֵמָה הַמַּקְשָׁה לֵילֵד, וְהוֹצִיא הָעֻבָּר אֶת יָדוֹ וְהֶחֱזִירָהּ, מֻתָּר בַּאֲכִילָה. הוֹצִיא אֶת רֹאשׁוֹ, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֱחֱזִירוֹ, הֲרֵי זֶה כְיָלוּד. חוֹתֵךְ מֵעֻבָּר שֶׁבְּמֵעֶיהָ, מֻתָּר בַּאֲכִילָה. מִן הַטְּחוֹל וּמִן הַכְּלָיוֹת, אָסוּר בַּאֲכִילָה. זֶה הַכְּלָל, דָּבָר שֶׁגּוּפָהּ, אָסוּר. שֶׁאֵינוֹ גוּפָהּ, מֻתָּר: \n",
+ "הַמְבַכֶּרֶת הַמַּקְשָׁה לֵילֵד, מְחַתֵּךְ אֵבָר אֵבָר וּמַשְׁלִיךְ לַכְּלָבִים. יָצָא רֻבּוֹ, הֲרֵי זֶה יִקָּבֵר, וְנִפְטְרָה מִן הַבְּכוֹרָה: \n",
+ "בְּהֵמָה שֶׁמֵּת עֻבָּרָהּ בְּתוֹךְ מֵעֶיהָ וְהוֹשִׁיט הָרוֹעֶה אֶת יָדוֹ וְנָגַע בּוֹ, בֵּין בִּבְהֵמָה טְמֵאָה, בֵּין בִּבְהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה, טָהוֹר. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי אוֹמֵר, בִּטְמֵאָה, טָמֵא, וּבִטְהוֹרָה, טָהוֹר. הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁמֵּת וְלָדָהּ בְּתוֹךְ מֵעֶיהָ וּפָשְׁטָה חַיָּה אֶת יָדָהּ וְנָגְעָה בוֹ, הַחַיָּה טְמֵאָה טֻמְאַת שִׁבְעָה, וְהָאִשָּׁה טְהוֹרָה עַד שֶׁיֵּצֵא הַוָּלָד: \n",
+ "בְּהֵמָה הַמַּקְשָׁה לֵילֵד, וְהוֹצִיא עֻבָּר אֶת יָדוֹ וַחֲתָכָהּ וְאַחַר כָּךְ שָׁחַט אֶת אִמּוֹ, הַבָּשָׂר טָהוֹר. שָׁחַט אֶת אִמּוֹ וְאַחַר כָּךְ חֲתָכָהּ, הַבָּשָׂר מַגַּע נְבֵלָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, מַגַּע טְרֵפָה שְׁחוּטָה. מַה מָּצִינוּ בַטְּרֵפָה שֶׁשְּׁחִיטָתָהּ מְטַהַרְתָּהּ, אַף שְׁחִיטַת בְּהֵמָה תְּטַהֵר אֶת הָאֵבָר. אָמַר לָהֶם רַבִּי מֵאִיר, לֹא, אִם טִהֲרָה שְׁחִיטַת טְרֵפָה אוֹתָהּ, דָּבָר שֶׁגּוּפָהּ, תְּטַהֵר אֶת הָאֵבָר, דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ גוּפָהּ. מִנַּיִן לַטְּרֵפָה שֶׁשְּׁחִיטָתָהּ מְטַהַרְתָּהּ. בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה אֲסוּרָה בַאֲכִילָה, אַף טְרֵפָה אֲסוּרָה בַאֲכִילָה. מַה בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה אֵין שְׁחִיטָתָהּ מְטַהַרְתָּהּ, אַף טְרֵפָה לֹא תְטַהֲרֶנָּה שְׁחִיטָתָהּ. לֹא, אִם אָמַרְתָּ בִּבְהֵמָה טְמֵאָה שֶׁלֹּא הָיְתָה לָהּ שְׁעַת הַכֹּשֶׁר, תֹּאמַר בִּטְרֵפָה שֶׁהָיְתָה לָהּ שְׁעַת הַכֹּשֶׁר. טֹל לְךָ מַה שֶּׁהֵבֵאתָ, הֲרֵי שֶׁנּוֹלְדָה טְרֵפָה מִן הַבֶּטֶן מִנַּיִן. לֹא, אִם אָמַרְתָּ בִּבְהֵמָה טְמֵאָה שֶׁכֵּן אֵין בְּמִינָהּ שְׁחִיטָה, תֹּאמַר בִּטְרֵפָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּמִינָהּ שְׁחִיטָה. בֶּן שְׁמֹנָה חַי, אֵין שְׁחִיטָתוֹ מְטַהַרְתּוֹ, לְפִי שֶׁאֵין בְּמִינוֹ שְׁחִיטָה: \n",
+ "הַשּׁוֹחֵט אֶת הַבְּהֵמָה וּמָצָא בָהּ בֶּן שְׁמֹנָה חַי אוֹ מֵת, אוֹ בֶן תִּשְׁעָה מֵת, קוֹרְעוֹ וּמוֹצִיא אֶת דָּמוֹ. מָצָא בֶן תִּשְׁעָה חַי, טָעוּן שְׁחִיטָה, וְחַיָּב בְּאוֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, שְׁחִיטַת אִמּוֹ מְטַהַרְתּוֹ. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן שְׁזוּרִי אוֹמֵר, אֲפִלּוּ בֶן שְׁמֹנֶה שָׁנִים וְחוֹרֵשׁ בַּשָּׂדֶה, שְׁחִיטַת אִמּוֹ מְטַהַרְתּוֹ. קְרָעָהּ וּמָצָא בָהּ בֶּן תִּשְׁעָה חַי, טָעוּן שְׁחִיטָה, לְפִי שֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁחֲטָה אִמּוֹ: \n",
+ "בְּהֵמָה שֶׁנֶּחְתְּכוּ רַגְלֶיהָ מִן הָאַרְכֻּבָּה וּלְמַטָּה, כְּשֵׁרָה. מִן הָאַרְכֻּבָּה וּלְמַעְלָה, פְּסוּלָה. וְכֵן שֶׁנִּטַּל צֹמֶת הַגִּידִין. נִשְׁבַּר הָעֶצֶם, אִם רֹב הַבָּשָׂר קַיָּם, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ מְטַהַרְתּוֹ. וְאִם לָאו, אֵין שְׁחִיטָתוֹ מְטַהַרְתּוֹ: \n",
+ "הַשּׁוֹחֵט אֶת הַבְּהֵמָה וּמָצָא בָהּ שִׁלְיָא, נֶפֶשׁ הַיָּפָה תֹּאכְלֶנָּה, וְאֵינָהּ מְטַמְּאָה לֹא טֻמְאַת אֳכָלִין וְלֹא טֻמְאַת נְבֵלוֹת. חִשֵּׁב עָלֶיהָ, מְטַמְּאָה טֻמְאַת אֳכָלִין אֲבָל לֹא טֻמְאַת נְבֵלוֹת. שִׁלְיָא שֶׁיָּצְתָה מִקְצָתָהּ, אֲסוּרָה בַאֲכִילָה. סִימַן וָלָד בָּאִשָּׁה, וְסִימַן וָלָד בַּבְּהֵמָה. הַמְבַכֶּרֶת שֶׁהִפִּילָה שִׁלְיָא, יַשְׁלִיכֶנָּה לִכְלָבִים. וּבַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין, תִּקָּבֵר. וְאֵין קוֹבְרִין אוֹתָהּ בְּפָרָשַׁת דְּרָכִים, וְאֵין תּוֹלִין אוֹתָהּ בְּאִילָן, מִפְנֵי דַּרְכֵי הָאֱמֹרִי: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "אוֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ, נוֹהֵג בֵּין בָּאָרֶץ בֵּין בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ, בִּפְנֵי הַבַּיִת וְשֶׁלֹּא בִפְנֵי הַבַּיִת, בְּחֻלִּין וּבְמֻקְדָּשִׁין. כֵּיצַד. הַשּׁוֹחֵט אוֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ חֻלִּין בַּחוּץ, שְׁנֵיהֶם כְּשֵׁרִים, וְהַשֵּׁנִי סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים. קָדָשִׁים בַּחוּץ, הָרִאשׁוֹן חַיָּב כָּרֵת, וּשְׁנֵיהֶם פְּסוּלִים, וּשְׁנֵיהֶם סוֹפְגִים אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים. חֻלִּין בִּפְנִים, שְׁנֵיהֶם פְּסוּלִים, וְהַשֵּׁנִי סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים. קָדָשִׁים בִּפְנִים, הָרִאשׁוֹן כָּשֵׁר וּפָטוּר, וְהַשֵּׁנִי סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים וּפָסוּל: \n",
+ "חֻלִּין וְקָדָשִׁים בַּחוּץ, הָרִאשׁוֹן כָּשֵׁר וּפָטוּר, וְהַשֵּׁנִי סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים וּפָסוּל. קָדָשִׁים וְחֻלִּין בַּחוּץ, הָרִאשׁוֹן חַיָּב כָּרֵת וּפָסוּל, וְהַשֵּׁנִי כָּשֵׁר, וּשְׁנֵיהֶם סוֹפְגִין אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים. חֻלִּין וְקָדָשִׁים בִּפְנִים, שְׁנֵיהֶם פְּסוּלִים, וְהַשֵּׁנִי סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים. קָדָשִׁים וְחֻלִּין בִּפְנִים, הָרִאשׁוֹן כָּשֵׁר וּפָטוּר, וְהַשֵּׁנִי סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים וּפָסוּל. חֻלִּין בַּחוּץ וּבִפְנִים, הָרִאשׁוֹן כָּשֵׁר וּפָטוּר, וְהַשֵּׁנִי סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים וּפָסוּל. קָדָשִׁים בַּחוּץ וּבִפְנִים, הָרִאשׁוֹן חַיָּב כָּרֵת, וּשְׁנֵיהֶם פְּסוּלִים, וּשְׁנֵיהֶם סוֹפְגִים אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים. חֻלִּין בִּפְנִים וּבַחוּץ, הָרִאשׁוֹן פָּסוּל וּפָטוּר, וְהַשֵּׁנִי סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים וְכָשֵׁר. קָדָשִׁים בִּפְנִים וּבַחוּץ, הָרִאשׁוֹן כָּשֵׁר וּפָטוּר, וְהַשֵּׁנִי סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים וּפָסוּל: \n",
+ "הַשּׁוֹחֵט וְנִמְצָא טְרֵפָה, הַשּׁוֹחֵט לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, וְהַשּׁוֹחֵט פָּרַת חַטָּאת, וְשׁוֹר הַנִּסְקָל, וְעֶגְלָה עֲרוּפָה, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן פּוֹטֵר, וַחֲכָמִים מְחַיְּבִין. הַשּׁוֹחֵט וְנִתְנַבְּלָה בְיָדוֹ, וְהַנּוֹחֵר, וְהַמְּעַקֵּר, פָּטוּר מִשּׁוּם אוֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ. שְׁנַיִם שֶׁלָּקְחוּ פָרָה וּבְנָהּ, אֵיזֶה שֶׁלָּקַח רִאשׁוֹן, יִשְׁחֹט רִאשׁוֹן. וְאִם קָדַם הַשֵּׁנִי, זָכָה. שָׁחַט פָּרָה וְאַחַר כָּךְ שְׁנֵי בָנֶיהָ, סוֹפֵג שְׁמוֹנִים. שָׁחַט שְׁנֵי בָנֶיהָ וְאַחַר כָּךְ שְׁחָטָהּ, סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים. שְׁחָטָהּ וְאֶת בִּתָּהּ וְאֶת בַּת בִּתָּהּ, סוֹפֵג שְׁמוֹנִים. שְׁחָטָהּ וְאֶת בַּת בִּתָּהּ וְאַחַר כָּךְ שָׁחַט אֶת בִּתָּהּ, סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים. סוּמְכוֹס אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי מֵאִיר, סוֹפֵג שְׁמוֹנִים. בְּאַרְבָּעָה פְרָקִים בַּשָּׁנָה הַמּוֹכֵר בְּהֵמָה לַחֲבֵרוֹ צָרִיךְ לְהוֹדִיעוֹ, אִמָּהּ מָכַרְתִּי לִשְׁחֹט, בִּתָּהּ מָכַרְתִּי לִשְׁחֹט. וְאֵלּוּ הֵן, עֶרֶב יוֹם טוֹב הָאַחֲרוֹן שֶׁל חָג, וְעֶרֶב יוֹם טוֹב הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁל פֶּסַח, וְעֶרֶב עֲצֶרֶת, וְעֶרֶב רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה, וּכְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי, אַף עֶרֶב יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים בַּגָּלִיל. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, אֵימָתַי, בִּזְמַן שֶׁאֵין לוֹ רֶוַח. אֲבָל יֶשׁ לוֹ רֶוַח, אֵין צָרִיךְ לְהוֹדִיעוֹ. וּמוֹדֶה רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בְּמוֹכֵר אֶת הָאֵם לֶחָתָן וְאֶת הַבַּת לַכַּלָּה, שֶׁצָּרִיךְ לְהוֹדִיעַ, בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶם שׁוֹחֲטִין בְּיוֹם אֶחָד: \n",
+ "בְּאַרְבָּעָה פְרָקִים אֵלּוּ מַשְׁחִיטִין אֶת הַטַּבָּח בְּעַל כָּרְחוֹ. אֲפִלּוּ שׁוֹר שָׁוֶה אֶלֶף דִּינָרִין וְאֵין לוֹ לַלּוֹקֵחַ אֶלָּא דִינָר, כּוֹפִין אוֹתוֹ לִשְׁחֹט, לְפִיכָךְ, אִם מֵת, מֵת לַלּוֹקֵחַ. אֲבָל בִּשְׁאָר יְמוֹת הַשָּׁנָה, אֵינוֹ כֵן. לְפִיכָךְ, אִם מֵת, מֵת לַמּוֹכֵר: \n",
+ "יוֹם אֶחָד הָאָמוּר בְּאוֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ, הַיּוֹם הוֹלֵךְ אַחַר הַלָּיְלָה. אֶת זוֹ דָרַשׁ שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן זוֹמָא. נֶאֱמַר בְּמַעֲשֵׂה בְרֵאשִׁית (בראשית א), יוֹם אֶחָד, וְנֶאֱמַר בְּאוֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ (ויקרא כב), יוֹם אֶחָד. מַה יּוֹם אֶחָד הָאָמוּר בְּמַעֲשֵׂה בְרֵאשִׁית הַיּוֹם הוֹלֵךְ אַחַר הַלַּיְלָה, אַף יוֹם אֶחָד הָאָמוּר בְּאוֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ, הַיוֹם הוֹלֵךְ אַחַר הַלָּיְלָה: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "כִּסּוּי הַדָּם נוֹהֵג בָּאָרֶץ וּבְחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ, בִּפְנֵי הַבַּיִת וְשֶׁלֹּא בִפְנֵי הַבַּיִת, בְּחֻלִּין אֲבָל לֹא בְמֻקְדָּשִׁים. וְנוֹהֵג בְּחַיָּה וּבְעוֹף, בִּמְזֻמָּן וּבְשֶׁאֵינוֹ מְזֻמָּן. וְנוֹהֵג בְּכוֹי, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא סָפֵק. וְאֵין שׁוֹחֲטִין אוֹתוֹ בְיוֹם טוֹב. וְאִם שְׁחָטוֹ, אֵין מְכַסִּין אֶת דָּמוֹ: \n",
+ "הַשּׁוֹחֵט וְנִמְצָא טְרֵפָה, וְהַשּׁוֹחֵט לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, וְהַשּׁוֹחֵט חֻלִּין בִּפְנִים, וְקָדָשִׁים בַּחוּץ, חַיָּה וָעוֹף הַנִּסְקָלִים, רַבִּי מֵאִיר מְחַיֵּב, וַחֲכָמִים פּוֹטְרִין. הַשׁוֹחֵט וְנִתְנַבְּלָה בְיָדוֹ, הַנּוֹחֵר, וְהַמְעַקֵּר, פָּטוּר מִלְּכַסּוֹת: \n",
+ "חֵרֵשׁ, שׁוֹטֶה וְקָטָן שֶׁשָּׁחֲטוּ וַאֲחֵרִים רוֹאִין אוֹתָן, חַיָּב לְכַסּוֹת. בֵּינָן לְבֵין עַצְמָם, פָּטוּר מִלְּכַסּוֹת. וְכֵן לְעִנְיַן אוֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ, שֶׁשָּׁחֲטוּ וַאֲחֵרִים רוֹאִין אוֹתָן, אָסוּר לִשְׁחֹט אַחֲרֵיהֶם. בֵּינָן לְבֵין עַצְמָן, רַבִּי מֵאִיר מַתִּיר לִשְׁחֹט אַחֲרֵיהֶן, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹסְרִים. וּמוֹדִים שֶׁאִם שָׁחַט, שֶׁאֵינוֹ סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים: \n",
+ "שָׁחַט מֵאָה חַיּוֹת בְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד, כִּסּוּי אֶחָד לְכֻלָּן. מֵאָה עוֹפוֹת בְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד, כִּסּוּי אֶחָד לְכֻלָּן. חַיָּה וָעוֹף בְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד, כִּסּוּי אֶחָד לְכֻלָּן. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, שָׁחַט חַיָּה, יְכַסֶּנָּה, וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִשְׁחֹט אֶת הָעוֹף. שָׁחַט וְלֹא כִסָּה וְרָאָהוּ אַחֵר, חַיָּב לְכַסּוֹת. כִּסָּהוּ וְנִתְגַּלָּה, פָּטוּר מִלְּכַסּוֹת. כִּסָּהוּ הָרוּחַ, חַיָּב לְכַסּוֹת: \n",
+ "דָּם שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בְּמַיִם, אִם יֶשׁ בּוֹ מַרְאִית דָּם, חַיָּב לְכַסּוֹת. נִתְעָרֵב בְּיַיִן, רוֹאִין אוֹתוֹ כְאִלּוּ הוּא מָיִם. נִתְעָרֵב בְּדַם הַבְּהֵמָה אוֹ בְדַם הַחַיָּה, רוֹאִין אוֹתוֹ כְאִלּוּ הוּא מָיִם. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אֵין דָּם מְבַטֵּל דָּם: \n",
+ "דָּם הַנִּתָּז וְשֶׁעַל הַסַּכִּין, חַיָּב לְכַסּוֹת. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, אֵימָתַי, בִּזְמַן שֶׁאֵין שָׁם דָּם אֶלָּא הוּא. אֲבָל יֵשׁ שָׁם דָּם שֶׁלֹּא הוּא, פָּטוּר מִלְּכַסּוֹת: \n",
+ "בַּמֶּה מְכַסִּין, וּבַמָּה אֵין מְכַסִּין. מְכַסִּין בְּזֶבֶל הַדַּק, וּבְחֹל הַדַּק, בְּסִיד, וּבְחַרְסִית, וּבִלְבֵנָה וּבִמְגוּפָה שֶׁכְּתָשָׁן. אֲבָל אֵין מְכַסִּין לֹא בְזֶבֶל הַגַּס, וְלֹא בְחוֹל הַגַּס, וְלֹא בִלְבֵנָה וּמְגוּפָה שֶׁלֹא כְתָשָׁן, וְלֹא יִכְפֶּה עָלָיו אֶת הַכֶּלִי. כְּלָל אָמַר רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, דָּבָר שֶׁמְּגַדֵּל בּוֹ צְמָחִין, מְכַסִּין בּוֹ. וְשֶׁאֵינוֹ מְגַדֵּל צְמָחִין, אֵין מְכַסִּין בּוֹ: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה נוֹהֵג בָּאָרֶץ וּבְחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ, בִּפְנֵי הַבַּיִת וְשֶׁלֹּא בִפְנֵי הַבַּיִת, בְּחֻלִּין וּבְמֻקְדָּשִׁים. וְנוֹהֵג בִּבְהֵמָה וּבְחַיָּה, בְּיָרֵךְ שֶׁל יָמִין וּבְיָרֵךְ שֶׁל שְׂמֹאל. וְאֵינוֹ נוֹהֵג בְּעוֹף, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין לוֹ כָף. וְנוֹהֵג בְּשָׁלִיל. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אֵינוֹ נוֹהֵג בְּשָׁלִיל. וְחֶלְבּוֹ מֻתָּר. וְאֵין הַטַּבָּחִין נֶאֱמָנִין עַל גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, נֶאֱמָנִין עָלָיו וְעַל הַחֵלֶב: \n",
+ "שׁוֹלֵחַ אָדָם יָרֵךְ לְנָכְרִי שֶׁגִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה בְתוֹכָהּ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמְּקוֹמוֹ נִכָּר. הַנּוֹטֵל גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה, צָרִיךְ שֶׁיִּטֹּל אֶת כֻּלּוֹ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, כְּדֵי לְקַיֵּם בּוֹ מִצְוַת נְטִילָה: \n",
+ "הָאוֹכֵל מִגִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה כַזַּיִת, סוֹפֵג אַרְבָּעִים. אֲכָלוֹ וְאֵין בּוֹ כַזַּיִת, חַיָּב. אָכַל מִזֶּה כַזַּיִת וּמִזֶּה כַזַּיִת, סוֹפֵג שְׁמוֹנִים. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אֵינוֹ סוֹפֵג אֶלָּא אַרְבָּעִים: \n",
+ "יָרֵךְ שֶׁנִּתְבַּשֵּׁל בָּהּ גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה, אִם יֶשׁ בָּהּ בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם, הֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה. כֵּיצַד מְשַׁעֲרִין אוֹתָהּ. כְּבָשָׂר בְּלָפֶת: \n",
+ "גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה שֶׁנִּתְבַּשֵּׁל עִם הַגִּידִים, בִּזְמַן שֶׁמַּכִּירוֹ, בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם, וְאִם לָאו, כֻּלָּן אֲסוּרִין. וְהָרֹטֶב, בְּנוֹתֵן טָעַם. וְכֵן חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל נְבֵלָה, וְכֵן חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל דָּג טָמֵא, שֶׁנִּתְבַּשְּׁלוּ עִם הַחֲתִיכוֹת, בִּזְמַן שֶׁמַּכִּירָן, בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם. וְאִם לָאו, כֻּלָּן אֲסוּרוֹת. וְהָרֹטֶב, בְּנוֹתֵן טָעַם: \n",
+ "נוֹהֵג בִּטְהוֹרָה, וְאֵינוֹ נוֹהֵג בִּטְמֵאָה. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אַף בִּטְמֵאָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, וַהֲלֹא מִבְּנֵי יַעֲקֹב נֶאֱסַר גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה, וַעֲדַיִן בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה מֻתֶּרֶת לָהֶן. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, בְּסִינַי נֶאֱמַר, אֶלָּא שֶׁנִּכְתַּב בִּמְקוֹמוֹ: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "כָּל הַבָּשָׂר אָסוּר לְבַשֵּׁל בְּחָלָב, חוּץ מִבְּשַׂר דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים. וְאָסוּר לְהַעֲלוֹתוֹ עִם הַגְּבִינָה עַל הַשֻּׁלְחָן, חוּץ מִבְּשַׂר דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים. הַנּוֹדֵר מִן הַבָּשָׂר, מֻתָּר בִּבְשַׂר דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים. הָעוֹף עוֹלֶה עִם הַגְּבִינָה עַל הַשֻּׁלְחָן וְאֵינוֹ נֶאֱכָל, דִּבְרֵי בֵית שַׁמַּאי. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, לֹא עוֹלֶה וְלֹא נֶאֱכָל. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, זוֹ מִקֻּלֵּי בֵית שַׁמַּאי וּמֵחֻמְרֵי בֵית הִלֵּל. בְּאֵיזֶה שֻׁלְחָן אָמְרוּ, בַּשֻּׁלְחָן שֶׁאוֹכֵל עָלָיו. אֲבָל בַּשֻּׁלְחָן שֶׁסּוֹדֵר עָלָיו אֶת הַתַּבְשִׁיל, נוֹתֵן זֶה בְצַד זֶה וְאֵינוֹ חוֹשֵׁשׁ: \n",
+ "צוֹרֵר אָדָם בָּשָׂר וּגְבִינָה בְּמִטְפַּחַת אַחַת, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ נוֹגְעִין זֶה בָזֶה. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, שְׁנֵי אַכְסְנָאִין אוֹכְלִין עַל שֻׁלְחָן אֶחָד, זֶה בָּשָׂר וָזֶה גְּבִינָה, וְאֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁין: \n",
+ "טִפַּת חָלָב שֶׁנָּפְלָה עַל הַחֲתִיכָה, אִם יֶשׁ בָּהּ בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם בְּאוֹתָהּ חֲתִיכָה, אָסוּר. נִעֵר אֶת הַקְּדֵרָה, אִם יֶשׁ בָּהּ בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם בְּאוֹתָהּ קְדֵרָה, אָסוּר. הַכְּחָל, קוֹרְעוֹ וּמוֹצִיא אֶת חֲלָבוֹ. לֹא קְרָעוֹ, אֵינוֹ עוֹבֵר עָלָיו. הַלֵּב, קוֹרְעוֹ וּמוֹצִיא אֶת דָּמוֹ. לֹא קְרָעוֹ, אֵינוֹ עוֹבֵר עָלָיו. הַמַּעֲלֶה אֶת הָעוֹף עִם הַגְּבִינָה עַל הַשֻּׁלְחָן, אֵינוֹ עוֹבֵר בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה: \n",
+ "בְּשַׂר בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה בַּחֲלֵב בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה, אָסוּר לְבַשֵּׁל וְאָסוּר בַּהֲנָאָה. בְּשַׂר בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה בַּחֲלֵב בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה, בְּשַׂר בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה בַּחֲלֵב בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה, מֻתָּר לְבַשֵּׁל וּמֻתָּר בַּהֲנָאָה. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, חַיָּה וָעוֹף אֵינָם מִן הַתּוֹרָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר, לֹא תְבַשֵּׁל גְּדִי בַּחֲלֵב אִמּוֹ, שָׁלשׁ פְּעָמִים, פְּרָט לְחַיָּה וּלְעוֹף וְלִבְהֵמָה טְמֵאָה. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי אוֹמֵר, נֶאֱמַר (דברים יד), לֹא תֹאכְלוּ כָל נְבֵלָה, וְנֶאֱמַר (שם), לֹא תְבַשֵּׁל גְּדִי בַּחֲלֵב אִמּוֹ. אֶת שֶׁאָסוּר מִשּׁוּם נְבֵלָה, אָסוּר לְבַשֵּׁל בְּחָלָב. עוֹף, שֶׁאָסוּר מִשּׁוּם נְבֵלָה, יָכוֹל יְהֵא אָסוּר לְבַשֵּׁל בְּחָלָב, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר בַּחֲלֵב אִמּוֹ, יָצָא עוֹף, שֶׁאֵין לוֹ חֲלֵב אֵם: \n",
+ "קֵבַת נָכְרִי וְשֶׁל נְבֵלָה, הֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה. הַמַּעֲמִיד בְּעוֹר שֶׁל קֵבָה כְשֵׁרָה, אִם יֵשׁ בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם, הֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה. כְּשֵׁרָה שֶׁיָּנְקָה מִן הַטְּרֵפָה, קֵבָתָהּ אֲסוּרָה. טְרֵפָה שֶׁיָּנְקָה מִן הַכְּשֵׁרָה, קֵבָתָהּ מֻתֶּרֶת, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁכָּנוּס בְּמֵעֶיהָ: \n",
+ "חֹמֶר בַּחֵלֶב מִבַּדָּם, וְחֹמֶר בַּדָּם מִבַּחֵלֶב. חֹמֶר בַּחֵלֶב, שֶׁהַחֵלֶב מוֹעֲלִין בּוֹ, וְחַיָּבִין עָלָיו מִשּׁוּם פִּגּוּל וְנוֹתָר וְטָמֵא, מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בַּדָּם. וְחֹמֶר בַּדָּם, שֶׁהַדָּם נוֹהֵג בִּבְהֵמָה וְחַיָּה וָעוֹף, בֵּין טְמֵאִים וּבֵין טְהוֹרִים, וְחֵלֶב אֵינוֹ נוֹהֵג אֶלָּא בִּבְהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה בִלְבָד: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "הָעוֹר, וְהָרֹטֶב, וְהַקִּפָּה, וְהָאֱלָל, וְהָעֲצָמוֹת, וְהַגִּידִין, וְהַקַּרְנַיִם, וְהַטְּלָפַיִם, מִצְטָרְפִין לְטַמֵּא טֻמְאַת אֳכָלִים, אֲבָל לֹא טֻמְאַת נְבֵלוֹת. כַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ, הַשּׁוֹחֵט בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה לְנָכְרִי וּמְפַרְכֶּסֶת, מְטַמְּאָה טֻמְאַת אֳכָלִין, אֲבָל לֹא טֻמְאַת נְבֵלוֹת, עַד שֶׁתָּמוּת אוֹ עַד שֶׁיַּתִּיז אֶת רֹאשָׁהּ. רִבָּה לְטַמֵּא טֻמְאַת אֳכָלִין מִמַּה שֶׁרִבָּה לְטַמֵּא טֻמְאַת נְבֵלוֹת. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, הָאֱלָל הַמְכֻנָּס, אִם יֶשׁ בּוֹ כַזַּיִת בְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד, חַיָּב עָלָיו: \n",
+ "אֵלּוּ שֶׁעוֹרוֹתֵיהֶן כִּבְשָׂרָן, עוֹר הָאָדָם, וְעוֹר חֲזִיר שֶׁל יִשּׁוּב. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אַף עוֹר חֲזִיר הַבָּר. וְעוֹר חֲטוֹטֶרֶת שֶׁל גָּמָל הָרַכָּה, וְעוֹר הָרֹאשׁ שֶׁל עֵגֶל הָרַךְ, וְעוֹר הַפְּרָסוֹת, וְעוֹר בֵּית הַבֹּשֶׁת, וְעוֹר הַשָּׁלִיל, וְעוֹר שֶׁתַּחַת הָאַלְיָה, וְעוֹר הָאֲנָקָה וְהַכֹּחַ וְהַלְּטָאָה וְהַחֹמֶט. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, הַלְּטָאָה כַחֻלְדָּה. וְכֻלָּן שֶׁעִבְּדָן אוֹ שֶׁהִלֵּךְ בָּהֶן כְּדֵי עֲבוֹדָה, טְהוֹרִין, חוּץ מֵעוֹר הָאָדָם. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי אוֹמֵר, שְׁמֹנָה שְׁרָצִים יֵשׁ לָהֶן עוֹרוֹת: \n",
+ "הַמַּפְשִׁיט בַּבְּהֵמָה וּבַחַיָּה, בַּטְּהוֹרָה וּבַטְּמֵאָה, בַּדַּקָּה וּבַגַּסָּה, לְשָׁטִיחַ, כְּדֵי אֲחִיזָה. וּלְחֵמֶת, עַד שֶׁיַּפְשִׁיט אֶת הֶחָזֶה. הַמַּרְגִּיל, כֻּלּוֹ חִבּוּר לַטֻּמְאָה, לִטָּמֵא וּלְטַמֵּא. עוֹר שֶׁעַל הַצַּוָּאר, רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי אוֹמֵר, אֵינוֹ חִבּוּר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, חִבּוּר, עַד שֶׁיַּפְשִׁיט אֶת כֻּלּוֹ: \n",
+ "עוֹר שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלָיו כַּזַּיִת בָּשָׂר, הַנּוֹגֵע בְּצִיב הַיּוֹצֵא מִמֶּנּוּ, וּבְשַׂעֲרָה שֶׁכְּנֶגְדּוֹ, טָמֵא. הָיוּ עָלָיו כִּשְׁנֵי חֲצָאֵי זֵיתִים, מְטַמֵּא בְמַשָּׂא וְלֹא בְמַגָּע, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, לֹא בְמַגָּע וְלֹא בְמַשָּׂא. וּמוֹדֶה רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא בִּשְׁנֵי חֲצָאֵי זֵיתִים שֶׁתְּחָבָן בְּקֵיסָם וֶהֱסִיטָן, שֶׁהוּא טָמֵא. וּמִפְּנֵי מָה רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא מְטַהֵר בָּעוֹר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהָעוֹר מְבַטְּלָן: \n",
+ "קוּלִית הַמֵּת וְקוּלִית הַמֻּקְדָּשִׁים, הַנּוֹגֵעַ בָּהֶן, בֵּין סְתוּמִים בֵּין נְקוּבִים, טָמֵא. קוּלִית נְבֵלָה וְקוּלִית הַשֶּׁרֶץ, הַנּוֹגֵעַ בָּהֶן סְתוּמִים, טְהוֹרִים. נְקוּבִים כָּל שֶׁהוּא, מִטַּמֵּא בְמַגָּע. מִנַּיִן שֶׁאַף בְּמַשָּׂא, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (ויקרא יא), הַנֹּגֵעַ וְהַנֹּשֵׂא, אֶת שֶׁבָּא לִכְלָל מַגָּע, בָּא לִכְלָל מַשָּׂא, לֹא בָא לִכְלָל מַגָּע, לֹא בָא לִכְלָל מַשָּׂא: \n",
+ "בֵּיצַת הַשֶּׁרֶץ הַמְרֻקֶּמֶת, טְהוֹרָה. נִקְּבָה כָל שֶׁהוּא, טְמֵאָה. עַכְבָּר שֶׁחֶצְיוֹ בָשָׂר וְחֶצְיוֹ אֲדָמָה, הַנּוֹגֵעַ בַּבָּשָׂר, טָמֵא. בָּאֲדָמָה, טָהוֹר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אַף הַנּוֹגֵעַ בָּאֲדָמָה שֶׁכְּנֶגֶד הַבָּשָׂר, טָמֵא: \n",
+ "הָאֵבָר וְהַבָּשָׂר הַמְדֻלְדָּלִין בִּבְהֵמָה, מְטַמְּאִין טֻמְאַת אֳכָלִין בִּמְקוֹמָן, וּצְרִיכִין הֶכְשֵׁר. נִשְׁחֲטָה בְהֵמָה, הֻכְשְׁרוּ בְדָמֶיהָ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, לֹא הֻכְשָׁרוּ. מֵתָה הַבְּהֵמָה, הַבָּשָׂר צָרִיךְ הֶכְשֵׁר. הָאֵבָר מְטַמֵּא מִשּׁוּם אֵבָר מִן הַחַי וְאֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא מִשּׁוּם אֵבַר נְבֵלָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מְטַהֵר: \n",
+ "הָאֵבָר וְהַבָּשָׂר הַמְדֻלְדָּלִין בָּאָדָם, טְהוֹרִין. מֵת הָאָדָם, הַבָּשָׂר טָהוֹר. הָאֵבָר מְטַמֵּא מִשּׁוּם אֵבָר מִן הַחַי וְאֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא מִשּׁוּם אֵבָר מִן הַמֵּת, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מְטַהֵר: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "הַזְּרוֹעַ וְהַלְּחָיַיִם וְהַקֵּבָה נוֹהֲגִין בָּאָרֶץ וּבְחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ, בִּפְנֵי הַבַּיִת וְשֶׁלֹּא בִפְנֵי הַבַּיִת, בְּחֻלִּין אֲבָל לֹא בְמֻקְדָּשִׁין. שֶׁהָיָה בַדִּין, וּמָה אִם הַחֻלִּין, שֶׁאֵינָן חַיָּבִין בְּחָזֶה וָשׁוֹק, חַיָּבִין בַּמַּתָּנוֹת, קָדָשִׁים שֶׁחַיָּבִין בְּחָזֶה וָשׁוֹק, אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁחַיָּבִין בַּמַּתָּנוֹת. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (ויקרא ז), וָאֶתֵּן אֹתָם לְאַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן וּלְבָנָיו לְחָק עוֹלָם, אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא מַה שֶּׁאָמוּר בָּעִנְיָן: \n",
+ "כָּל הַקֳּדָשִׁים שֶׁקָּדַם מוּם קָבוּעַ לְהֶקְדֵּשָׁן וְנִפְדּוּ, חַיָּבִין בַּבְּכוֹרָה וּבַמַּתָּנוֹת, וְיוֹצְאִין לְחֻלִּין, לְהִגָּזֵז וּלְהֵעָבֵד, וּוְלָדָן וַחֲלָבָן מֻתָּר לְאַחַר פִּדְיוֹנָן, וְהַשּׁוֹחֲטָן בַּחוּץ פָּטוּר, וְאֵין עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה, וְאִם מֵתוּ יִפָּדוּ, חוּץ מִן הַבְּכוֹר וּמִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר. כֹּל שֶׁקָּדַם הֶקְדֵּשָׁן אֶת מוּמָן, אוֹ מוּם עוֹבֵר לְהֶקְדֵּשָׁן, וּלְאַחַר מִכָּאן נוֹלַד לָהֶם מוּם קָבוּעַ וְנִפְדּוּ, פְּטוּרִין מִן הַבְּכוֹרָה וּמִן הַמַּתָּנוֹת, וְאֵינָן יוֹצְאִין לְחֻלִּין לְהִגָּזֵז וּלְהֵעָבֵד, וּוְלָדָן וַחֲלָבָן אָסוּר לְאַחַר פִּדְיוֹנָן, וְהַשּׁוֹחֲטָן בַּחוּץ חַיָּב, וְעוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה, וְאִם מֵתוּ, יִקָּבֵרוּ: \n",
+ "בְּכוֹר שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בְּמֵאָה, בִּזְמַן שֶׁמֵּאָה שׁוֹחֲטִין אֶת כֻּלָּן, פּוֹטְרִין אֶת כֻּלָּן. אֶחָד שׁוֹחֵט אֶת כֻּלָּן, פּוֹטְרִין לוֹ אֶחָד. הַשּׁוֹחֵט לְכֹהֵן וּלְנָכְרִי, פָּטוּר מִן הַמַּתָּנוֹת. וְהַמִּשְׁתַּתֵּף עִמָּהֶן, צָרִיךְ שֶׁיִּרְשֹׁם. וְאִם אָמַר חוּץ מִן הַמַּתָּנוֹת, פָּטוּר מִן הַמַּתָּנוֹת. אָמַר, מְכֹר לִי בְנֵי מֵעֶיהָ שֶׁל פָּרָה, וְהָיוּ בָהֶן מַתָּנוֹת, נוֹתְנָן לְכֹהֵן וְאֵינוֹ מְנַכֶּה לוֹ מִן הַדָּמִים. לָקַח הֵימֶנּוּ בְמִשְׁקָל, נוֹתְנָן לְכֹהֵן וּמְנַכֶּה לוֹ מִן הַדָּמִים: \n",
+ "גֵּר שֶׁנִּתְגַּיֵּר וְהָיְתָה לוֹ פָרָה, נִשְׁחֲטָה עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִתְגַּיֵּר, פָּטוּר. מִשֶּׁנִּתְגַּיֵּר, חַיָּב. סָפֵק, פָּטוּר, שֶׁהַמּוֹצִיא מֵחֲבֵרוֹ עָלָיו הָרְאָיָה. אֵיזֶהוּ הַזְּרוֹעַ, מִן הַפֶּרֶק שֶׁל אַרְכֻּבָּה עַד כַּף שֶׁל יָד. וְהוּא שֶׁל נָזִיר. וּכְנֶגְדּוֹ בָרֶגֶל, שׁוֹק. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, שׁוֹק, מִן הַפֶּרֶק שֶׁל אַרְכֻּבָּה עַד סֹבֶךְ שֶׁל רָגֶל. אֵיזֶהוּ לְחִי, מִן הַפֶּרֶק שֶׁל לְחִי עַד פִּקָּה שֶׁל גַּרְגָּרֶת: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "רֵאשִׁית הַגֵּז נוֹהֵג בָּאָרֶץ וּבְחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ, בִּפְנֵי הַבַּיִת וְשֶׁלֹּא בִפְנֵי הַבַּיִת, בְּחֻלִּין אֲבָל לֹא בְמֻקְדָּשִׁין. חֹמֶר בַּזְּרוֹעַ וּבַלְּחָיַיִם וּבַקֵּבָה מֵרֵאשִׁית הַגֵּז, שֶׁהַזְּרוֹעַ וְהַלְּחָיַיִם וְהַקֵּבָה נוֹהֲגִים בְּבָקָר וּבְצֹאן, בִּמְרֻבֶּה וּבְמֻעָט, וְרֵאשִׁית הַגֵּז אֵינוֹ נוֹהֵג אֶלָּא בִרְחֵלוֹת, וְאֵינוֹ נוֹהֵג אֶלָּא בִמְרֻבֶּה: \n",
+ "וְכַמָּה הוּא מְרֻבֶּה. בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, שְׁתֵּי רְחֵלוֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ישעיה ז), יְחַיֶּה אִישׁ עֶגְלַת בָּקָר וּשְׁתֵּי צֹאן. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, חָמֵשׁ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמואל א כה), חָמֵשׁ צֹאן עֲשׂוּיוֹת. רַבִּי דוֹסָא בֶּן הַרְכִּינָס אוֹמֵר, חָמֵשׁ רְחֵלוֹת גּוֹזְזוֹת מָנֶה מָנֶה וּפְרָס, חַיָּבוֹת בְּרֵאשִׁית הַגֵּז. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, חָמֵשׁ רְחֵלוֹת גּוֹזְזוֹת כָּל שֶׁהֵן. וְכַמָּה נוֹתְנִין לוֹ. מִשְׁקַל חָמֵשׁ סְלָעִים בִּיהוּדָה, שֶׁהֵן עֶשֶׂר סְלָעִים בַּגָּלִיל, מְלֻבָּן וְלֹא צוֹאִי, כְּדֵי לַעֲשׂוֹת מִמֶּנּוּ בֶגֶד קָטָן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יח), תִּתֶּן לוֹ, שֶׁיְּהֵא בוֹ כְדֵי מַתָּנָה. לֹא הִסְפִּיק לִתְּנוֹ לוֹ עַד שֶׁצְּבָעוֹ, פָּטוּר. לִבְּנוֹ וְלֹא צְבָעוֹ, חַיָּב. הַלּוֹקֵחַ גֵּז צֹאנוֹ שֶׁל נָכְרִי, פָּטוּר מֵרֵאשִׁית הַגֵּז. הַלּוֹקֵחַ גֵּז צֹאנוֹ שֶׁל חֲבֵרוֹ, אִם שִׁיֵּר הַמּוֹכֵר, הַמּוֹכֵר חַיָּב. לֹא שִׁיֵּר, הַלּוֹקֵחַ חַיָּב. הָיוּ לוֹ שְׁנֵי מִינִים, שְׁחוּפוֹת וּלְבָנוֹת, מָכַר לוֹ שְׁחוּפוֹת אֲבָל לֹא לְבָנוֹת, זְכָרִים אֲבָל לֹא נְקֵבוֹת, זֶה נוֹתֵן לְעַצְמוֹ וְזֶה נוֹתֵן לְעַצְמוֹ: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "שִׁלּוּחַ הַקֵּן, נוֹהֵג בָּאָרֶץ וּבְחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ, בִּפְנֵי הַבַּיִת וְשֶׁלֹּא בִפְנֵי הַבַּיִת, בְּחֻלִּין אֲבָל לֹא בְמֻקְדָּשִׁין. חֹמֶר בְּכִסּוּי הַדָּם מִשִּׁלּוּחַ הַקֵּן, שֶׁכִּסּוּי הַדָּם נוֹהֵג בְּחַיָּה וּבְעוֹף, בִּמְזֻמָּן וּבְשֶׁאֵינוֹ מְזֻמָּן. וְשִׁלּוּחַ הַקֵּן, אֵינוֹ נוֹהֵג אֶלָּא בְעוֹף, וְאֵינוֹ נוֹהֵג אֶלָּא בְשֶׁאֵינוֹ מְזֻמָּן. אֵיזֶהוּ שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְזֻמָּן. כְּגוֹן אַוָּזִין וְתַרְנְגוֹלִין שֶׁקִּנְּנוּ בְפַרְדֵּס. אֲבָל אִם קִנְּנוּ בְּבַיִת, וְכֵן יוֹנֵי הַרְדְּסִיאוֹת, פָּטוּר מִשִּׁלּוּחַ: \n",
+ "עוֹף טָמֵא, פָּטוּר מִלְּשַׁלֵּחַ. עוֹף טָמֵא רוֹבֵץ עַל בֵּיצֵי עוֹף טָהוֹר, וְטָהוֹר רוֹבֵץ עַל בֵּיצֵי עוֹף טָמֵא, פָּטוּר מִלְּשַׁלֵּחַ. קוֹרֵא זָכָר, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵּב, וַחֲכָמִים פּוֹטְרִין: \n",
+ "הָיְתָה מְעוֹפֶפֶת, בִּזְמַן שֶׁכְּנָפֶיהָ נוֹגְעוֹת בַּקֵּן, חַיָּב לְשַׁלֵּחַ. אֵין כְּנָפֶיהָ נוֹגְעוֹת בַּקֵּן, פָּטוּר מִלְּשַׁלֵּחַ. אֵין שָׁם אֶלָּא אֶפְרוֹחַ אֶחָד אוֹ בֵיצָה אַחַת, חַיָּב לְשַׁלֵּחַ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כב), קַן, קֵן מִכָּל מָקוֹם. הָיוּ שָׁם אֶפְרוֹחִין מַפְרִיחִין אוֹ בֵיצִים מוּזָרוֹת, פָּטוּר מִלְּשַׁלֵּחַ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), וְהָאֵם רֹבֶצֶת עַל הָאֶפְרֹחִים אוֹ עַל הַבֵּיצִים, מָה אֶפְרוֹחִין בְּנֵי קְיָמָא, אַף בֵּיצִים בְּנֵי קְיָמָא, יָצְאוּ מוּזָרוֹת. וּמָה הַבֵּיצִים צְרִיכִין לְאִמָּן, אַף הָאֶפְרוֹחִין צְרִיכִין לְאִמָּן, יָצְאוּ מַפְרִיחִין. שִׁלְּחָהּ וְחָזְרָה, שִׁלְּחָהּ וְחָזְרָה, אֲפִלּוּ אַרְבָּעָה וַחֲמִשָּׁה פְעָמִים, חַיָּב, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), שַׁלֵּחַ תְּשַׁלַּח. אָמַר, הֲרֵינִי נוֹטֵל אֶת הָאֵם וּמְשַׁלֵּחַ אֶת הַבָּנִים, חַיָּב לְשַׁלֵּחַ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), שַׁלֵּחַ תְּשַׁלַּח אֶת הָאֵם. נָטַל הַבָּנִים וְהֶחֱזִירָן לַקֵּן וְאַחַר כָּךְ חָזְרָה הָאֵם עֲלֵיהֶם, פָּטוּר מִלְּשַׁלֵּחַ: \n",
+ "הַנּוֹטֵל אֵם עַל הַבָּנִים, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, לוֹקֶה וְאֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּחַ. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, מְשַׁלֵּחַ וְאֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה. זֶה הַכְּלָל, כָּל מִצְוַת לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁיֶּשׁ בָּהּ קוּם עֲשֵׂה, אֵין לוֹקִין עָלֶיהָ: \n",
+ "לֹא יִטֹּל אָדָם אֵם עַל הַבָּנִים, אֲפִלּוּ לְטַהֵר אֶת הַמְּצֹרָע. וּמָה אִם מִצְוָה קַלָּה שֶׁהִיא כְאִסָּר, אָמְרָה תוֹרָה (דברים כב), לְמַעַן יִיטַב לָךְ וְהַאֲרַכְתָּ יָמִים, קַל וָחֹמֶר עַל מִצְוֹת חֲמוּרוֹת שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה: \n"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "versions": [
+ [
+ "Torat Emet 357",
+ "http://www.toratemetfreeware.com/index.html?downloads"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "heTitle": "משנה חולין",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git "a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/Mischnajot mit deutscher \303\234bersetzung und Erkl\303\244rung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de].json" "b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/Mischnajot mit deutscher \303\234bersetzung und Erkl\303\244rung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de].json"
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5d4ab1d8285b66a95b793f43771c794323c93dec
--- /dev/null
+++ "b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/Mischnajot mit deutscher \303\234bersetzung und Erkl\303\244rung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de].json"
@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Keritot",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.talmud.de/tlmd/die-deutsche-mischna-uebersetzung",
+ "versionTitle": "Mischnajot mit deutscher Übersetzung und Erklärung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de]",
+ "priority": 0.5,
+ "versionNotes": "Ordnung Seraïm, übers. und erklärt von Ascher Samter. 1887.
Ordnung Moed, von Eduard Baneth. 1887-1927.
Ordnung Naschim, von Marcus Petuchowski u. Simon Schlesinger. 1896-1933.
Ordnung Nesikin, von David Hoffmann. 1893-1898.
Ordnung Kodaschim, von John Cohn. 1910-1925.
Ordnung Toharot, von David Hoffmann, John Cohn und Moses Auerbach. 1910-1933.",
+ "actualLanguage": "de",
+ "languageFamilyName": "german",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה כריתות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "Auf sechsunddreissig Vergehungen hat die Tora die Ausrottungsstrafe gesetzt: Wer seiner Mutter, der Frau seines Vaters, seiner Schwiegertochter, einem Manne oder einem Vieh beiwohnt, ein Weib, das Vieh über sich kommen lässt, wer einer Frau und ihrer Tochter, einer Ehefrau, seiner Schwester, der Schwester seines Vaters, der Schwester seiner Mutter, der Schwester seiner Frau, der Frau seines Bruders, der Frau des Bruders seines Vaters oder einem Weibe während ihrer Periode beiwohnt, wer eine Gotteslästerung ausspricht, einen Götzendienst begeht, von seinem Samen dem Molech hingibt oder Tote beschwört, wer den Schabbat entweiht, wer in Unreinheit Heiliges geniesst oder das Heiligtum betritt, wer Unschlitt, Blut, Übriggelassenes oder Verworfenes geniesst, wer [Opfer] ausserhalb schlachtet oder darbringt, wer Gesäuertes am Pessach geniesst, wer am Versöhnungstage etwas geniesst oder eine Arbeit verrichtet, wer das Salböl nachmacht, das Räucherwerk nachmacht oder sich mit dem Salböle salbt, und von Geboten [auf Unterlassung der über] das Pessachopfer und die Beschneidung.",
+ "Durch diese Übertretungen macht man sich im Falle der Vorsätzlichkeit der Ausrottungsstrafe schuldig, sind sie unabsichtlich begangen worden, muss man ein Sündopfer, und ist man sich ihrer nicht mit Bestimmtheit bewusst, muss man ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer bringen, ausser für die Verunreinigung des Heiligtums und des Heiligen, weil man dafür ein auf- und absteigendes Sündopfer zu bringen hat, dies die Worte des R. Meïr. Die Weisen sagen: Auch der Gotteslästerer [ist auszunehmen ], denn es heisst: „Ein Gesetz soll es für euch sein, für den, der die Tat unabsichtlich begeht,“ damit ist der Gotteslästerer ausgeschlossen, der keine Tat begeht.",
+ "Manche Frauen bringen ein Opfer und es wird verzehrt, manche bringen eines und es wird nicht verzehrt, und manche brauchen gar keines zu bringen. Folgende bringen ein Opfer und es wird verzehrt: Eine Frau, die etwas Vieh-, Wild- oder Vogelartiges abortiert — dies die Worte des R. Meïr, die Weisen sagen: Nur wenn es etwas Menschen-ähnliches an sich hat —, die einen Sandal, eine Fruchthaut, eine äusserlich entwickelte Hautblase abortiert, oder wenn das Kind zerschnitten herausgezogen worden ist. Ebenso bringt eine Sklavin, die abortiert hat, ein Opfer und es wird verzehrt.",
+ "Folgende bringen eines und es wird nicht verzehrt: Eine Frau, die abortiert hat, ohne dass man weiss, was sie abortiert hat, ebenso zwei Frauen, von denen eine etwas abortiert hat, das nicht zum Opfer verpflichtet, und die andere etwas, das zum Opfer verpflichtet. Darauf sagte R. Jose: In welchem Falle? Wenn sie sich die eine nach Osten und die andere nach Westen entfernt haben. Wenn sie aber beide zusammen da sind, bringen sie ein Opfer und es wird verzehrt.",
+ "Folgende bringen gar keines: Eine Frau, die eine Blase voll Wasser, voll Blut, voll sonstiger Gebilde, oder etwas Fisch-, Heuschrecken-, Insekten- oder Reptil-artiges abortiert, die am vierzigsten Tage abortiert und der das Kind seitwärts herausgezogen worden ist. R. Simon sagt: Für eine seitwärts erfolgte Geburt ist sie ein Opfer zu bringen verpflichtet.",
+ "Eine Frau, die in der Nacht zum einundachtzigsten Tage abortiert, ist nach Beth-Schammai nicht verpflichtet, ein Opfer zu bringen, nach Beth-Hillel ist sie dazu verpflichtet. Es sagten Beth-Hillel zu Beth-Schammai: „Was ist der Unterschied zwischen der Nacht zum einundachtzigsten Tage und dem einundachtzigsten Tage ? Wenn sie inbezug auf das Unreinwerden einander gleichstehen, sollen sie sich nicht auch inbezug auf die Opferverpflichtung einander gleichstehen?“ Darauf sagten zu ihnen Beth-Schammai: „Das ist nicht richtig! Wenn ihr von einer Fehlgeburt am einundachtzigsten Tage sprechet, die zu einer Zeit zur Welt gekommen ist, wo sie bereits ihr Opfer hätte darbringen können, wollt ihr daraus auf eine Fehlgeburt in der Nacht zum einundachtzigsten Tage schliessen, die nicht zu einer Zeit zur Welt gekommen ist, wo sie bereits ihr Opfer hätte darbringen können “? Darauf sagten zu ihnen Beth-Hillel: „Eine Fehlgeburt am einundachtzigsten Tage, der auf einen Schabbat fällt, mag den Gegenbeweis liefern, die ist nicht zu einer Zeit zur Welt gekommen, wo sie ihr Opfer hätte darbringen können, und doch ist sie verpflichtet, dafür ein Opfer zu bringen.“ Darauf sagten zu ihnen Beth-Schammai: „Das ist nicht richtig! Wenn ihr von einer Fehlgeburt am einundachtzigsten Tage, der auf einen Schabbat fällt, sprechet, wo man, wenn auch kein Privatopfer, so doch ein Gemeindeopfer darbringen kann, wollt ihr daraus auf eine Fehlgeburt in der Nacht zum einundachtzigsten Tage schliessen, wo man doch in der Nacht weder ein Privatopfer noch ein Gemeindeopfer darbringen kann? Die Blutunreinheit ist kein Beweis, denn abortiert eine Frau vor Ablauf der Tage ihrer Reinheit, ist ihr Blut unrein und sie braucht dennoch kein Opfer zu bringen.“",
+ "Eine Frau, die fünf zweifelhafte Blutflüsse oder fünf zweifelhafte Geburten hinter sich hat, bringt ein Opfer, dann darf sie von den Opfern essen, die übrigen darzubringen hat sie keine Verpflichtung. Waren es fünf unzweifelhafte Geburten oder fünf unzweifelhafte Blutflüsse, bringt sie auch e i n Opfer, dann darf sie von den Opfern essen, ist aber verpflichtet, auch noch die übrigen darzubringen. Einst stellten sich Taubenpaare in Jerusalem auf je einen Golddenar, da sagte R. Simon, Sohn des Gamliel: „Bei dieser Gotteswohnung ! Ich lasse die Nacht nicht vergehen, bis sie auf einen Silberdenar zu stehen kommen. Er begab sich zum Gerichtshöfe und lehrte: Eine Frau, die fünf unzweifelhafte Geburten oder fünf unzweifelhafte Blutflüsse hinter sich hat, bringt nur ein Opfer, dann darf sie von den Opfern essen, die übrigen darzubringen hat sie keine Verpflichtung. An demselben Tage noch kamen Taubenpaare auf je ¼ Silberdenar zu stehen."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Vier gelten [bis sie ihr Opfer dargebracht haben] als unvollkommen gesühnt, und vier bringen ein Opfer für das vorsätzlich Begangene wie für unvorsätzlich Begangenes. Folgende gelten als unvollkommen gesühnt: Der durch einen Ausfluss unrein gewordene Mann, die durch einen Ausfluss unrein gewordene Frau, die Wöchnerin und der Aussätzige. R. Elieser, Sohn des Jakob, sagt: Ein Proselyt ist unvollkommen gesühnt, bis für ihn das Blut gesprengt worden ist, und ein Nasir inbezug auf den Weingenuss, das Scheren der Haare und die Verunreinigung.",
+ "Folgende bringen ein Opfer für das vorsätzlich Begangene wie für unvorsätzlich Begangenes: Wer einer [einem Manne angetrauten] Sklavin beigewohnt hat, ein Nasir, der sich verunreinigt hat, wer einen [falschen] Zeugnis - Eid und wer einen [falschen] Verwahrguts-Eid abgelegt hat.",
+ "Fünf bringen für wiederholte Übertretung nur ein Opfer und fünf bringen ein auf- und absteigendes Opfer. Folgende bringen für wiederholte Übertretung nur ein Opfer: Wer einer [einem Manne angetrauten] Sklavin wiederholt beigewohnt hat, ein Nasir, der sich wiederholt verunreinigt hat, wer seine Frau der Untreue mit mehreren Männern verdächtigt und ein Aussätziger, der [nacheinander] von mehreren Aussatzschäden befallen worden ist. Hat er sein Vogelpaar gebracht und ist dann wieder aussätzig geworden, werden sie ihm nicht angerechnet, bis er sein Sündopfer gebracht hat; R. Jehuda sagt: Bis er sein Schuldopfer gebracht hat.",
+ "Eine Frau, die mehrere Geburten hinter sich hat, wenn sie [zum Beispiel] innerhalb der achtzig Tage eine weibliche Fehlgeburt und dann wieder innerhalb der achtzig Tage eine weibliche Fehlgeburt, oder wenn sie Mehrlinge in mehreren Fehlgeburten geboren hat; R Jehuda sagt: Sie bringt ein Opfer für die erste, für die zweite bringt sie keines, dann bringt sie wieder eines für die dritte und für die vierte bringt sie keines. Folgende bringen ein auf- und absteigendes Opfer: Für einen falschen Zeugnis-Eid, für Übertretung eines Ausspruch-Eides, für Verunreinigung des Heiligtums und des Heiligen , die Wöchnerin und der Aussätzige. Worin unterscheiden sieb die Bestimmungen [über den Beischlaf] einer feinem Manne an getrauten ] Sklavin von den bei allen anderen Beischlaf-Verboten? Sie sind sich nicht gleich, weder betreff der Bestrafung noch betreff des Opfers. Denn für jeden anderen verbotenen Beischlaf ist ein Sündopfer zu bringen, für den der Sklavin ein Schuldopfer, [für jeden anderen ein weibliches Tier, für den der Sklavin ein männliches,] bei jedem anderen sind der Mann und die Frau einander gleichgestellt sowohl betreff der Geisselstrafe wie betreff des Opfers, bei dem der Sklavin ist betreff der Geisselstrafe der Mann nicht der Frau gleichgestellt, die Frau nicht dem Manne inbetreff des Opfers, bei jedem anderen gilt schon die geschlechtliche Berührung dem vollendeten Beischlafe gleich und macht man sich durch jede einzelne Beischlafsvollziehung besonders strafbar, dagegen besteht für den der Sklavin die strengere Bestimmung, dass dabei die vorsätzliche Tat der unvorsätzlichen gleichsteht.",
+ "Was für eine Sklavin ist gemeint ? Eine solche, die halb Sklavin und halb frei ist, denn so heisst es: „und vollständig ist sie noch nicht ausgelöst,„ dies die Worte des R. Akiba. R. Ismael sagt: Es ist eine Voll-Sklavin damit gemeint. R. Eleasar, Sohn des Asarja, sagt: Alle Beischlafsverbote sind ausdrücklich ausgesprochen, es ist nur das eine übrig, das mit einer, die halb Sklavin und halb frei ist.",
+ "Bei allen anderen Beischlafsverboten ist, wenn der eine Teil grossjährig und der andere minderjährig ist, [nur] der minderjährige straffrei, wenn der eine in wachem und der andere in schlafendem Zustande war, nur der, der in schlafendem Zustande war, straffrei, und wenn der eine ohne Vorsatz und der andere mit Vorsatz gehandelt hat, hat derjenige, der ohne Vorsatz gehandelt hat, ein Sündopfer zu bringen, und den, der mit Vorsatz gehandelt hat, trifft die Ausrottungsstrafe."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Wenn man zu jemand sagt: Du hast Unschlitt gegessen ! muss er ein Sündopfer bringen. Sagt ein Zeuge, dass er es gegessen, und ein Zeuge, dass er es nicht gegessen hat, sagt eine Frau, dass er es gegessen, und eine Frau, dass er es nicht gegessen hat, bringt er ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer. Sagt ein Zeuge, dass er es gegessen hat, und er selbst sagt: Ich habe es nicht gegessen ! braucht er keines zu bringen. Sagen zwei, dass er es gegessen hat, und er selbst sagt: Ich habe es nicht gegessen! muss er nach R. Meir eines bringen. Es sagte R. Meir: Wenn zwei [Zeugen] die schwerere Todesstrafe über ihn bringen können, sollen sie ihn zu der leichteren Verpflichtung, ein Opfer zu bringen, nicht verpflichten? Darauf sagte man zu ihm: Wie aber, wenn er sagen wollte: Ich habe es mit Vorsatz getan ?",
+ "Hat jemand Unschlitt und noch ein Mal Unschlitt in einem [ununterbrochenen] Nichtwissen gegessen, braucht er nur ein Sündopfer zu bringen, hat er Unschlitt und Blut und Übriggelassenes und Verworfenes in einem Nichtwissen gegessen, muss er für jedes besonders ein Opfer bringen, das ist eine Bestimmung, die bei Verschiedenartigem erschwerender ist als bei Gleichartigem. Dagegen ist etwas bei Gleichartigem erschwörender als bei Verschiedenartigem, dass nämlich, wenn man eine halbe Olivengrösse und noch eine halbe Olivengrösse von einer und derselben Art gegessen hat, man schuldig, wenn dagegen von zwei verschiedenen Arten, man nicht schuldig ist.",
+ "Innerhalb welcher Zeit muss man sie beide verzehrt haben ? In der man ein gleiches Mass gerösteten Korns verzehrt, dies die Worte des R. Meir; die Weisen sagen: Es darf vom Anfang bis zum Ende nur die Zeit verstrichen sein, in der man ein halbes Brot verzehrt. Wenn jemand unreine Speisen gegessen oder unreine Getränke getrunken hat, oder ein Viertel-Log Wein getrunken hat und in das Heiligtum gegangen ist, [gilt als Zeitmass ] die Zeit, in der man ein halbes Brot verzehrt. R. Eleasar sagt: Wenn er nur dabei abgesetzt hat oder etwas Wasser hineingetan ist, ist er straffrei.",
+ "Es kann jemand für das Verzehren einer Speise vier Sündopfer und ein Schuldopfer zu bringen haben: wenn ein Unreiner Unschlitt, das von Opfern übriggeblieben ist, am Versöhnungstage geniesst. R. Meïr sagt: Wenn es an einem Schabbat war, und er es im Munde herausgetragen hat, ist er [auch dafür] schuldig; darauf sagte man zu ihm: Das gehört aber nicht zu derselben Verbotsklasse.",
+ "Es kann jemand für das Vollziehen eines Beischlafs sechs Sündopfer zu bringen haben: wenn er seiner Tochter beiwohnt, kann er sich dadurch schuldig machen [der Beiwohnung] seiner Tochter, seiner Schwester, seiner Brudersfrau, seiner Vaterbrudersfrau, einer Ehefrau und einer Menstruierenden, und wenn er seiner Tochterstochter beiwohnt, kann er sich dadurch schuldig machen [der Beiwohnung] seiner Tochterstochter, seiner Schwiegertochter, der Schwester seiner Frau, seiner Brudersfrau, seiner Vaterbrudersfrau, einer Ehefrau und einer Menstruierenden. R. Jose sagt: Wenn der Alte sich über das Verbot hinweggesetzt und sie geheiratet hat, macht er sich auch [der Beiwohnung] der Frau seines Vaters schuldig. Ebenso wenn jemand der Tochter seiner Frau oder der Tochterstochter seiner Frau beiwohnt.",
+ "Wenn jemand seiner Schwiegermutter beiwohnt, kann er sich dadurch schuldig machen der Beiwohnung seiner Schwiegermutter, Seiner Schwiegertochter, der Schwester seiner Frau, seiner Brudersfrau, seiner Vaterbrudersfrau, einer Ehefrau u. einer Menstruierenden, ebenso wenn er der Mutter seiner Schwiegermutter oder der Mutter seines Schwiegervaters beiwohnt. R. Jochanan, Sohn des Nuri, sagt: Wenn jemand seiner Schwiegermutter beiwohnt, kann er sich dadurch zugleich schuldig machen der Beiwohnung seiner Schwiegermutter, der Mutter seiner Schwiegermutter und der Mutter seines Schwiegervaters. Darauf sagte man zu ihm: Bei allen drei übertritt er das gleiche Verbot.",
+ "Es sagte R. Akiba: Ich fragte den R. Gamliel und den R. Josua auf dem Markte von Emmaus, sie waren hingegangen, Vieh zum Hochzeitsmahl des Sohnes (des R. Gamliel ) einzukaufen: Wenn jemand seiner Schwester und seiner Vatersschwester und seiner Muttersschwester in einem Nichtwissen beigewohnt hat, wie ist es da, ist er für alle [Übertretungen] nur ein Opfer schuldig oder für jede ein besonderes? Darauf sagten sie zu mir: Darüber haben wir nichts gehört. Wir haben aber gehört, dass, wer seinen fünf Frauen während ihres Menstruierens in einem Nichtwissen beigewohnt hat, für jede Übertretung ein besonderes Opfer schuldig ist, und wir sehen, dass daraus durch den Schluss vom Leichteren auf das Schwerere die Folgerung zu ziehen ist.",
+ "Weiter fragte sie R. Akiba: Wie ist es mit einem Gliede, das nur noch lose an einem Tiere hängt ? Darauf sagten sie zu ihm: Darüber haben wir nichts gehört. Wir haben aber gehört, dass ein nur noch lose an einem Menschen hängendes Glied rein ist, denn so pflegten es die an Beulenpest Leidenden in Jerusalem zu machen: der Betreffende ging am Vortage des Pessach zum Arzt, dieser schnitt es bis auf eine Haarbreite, die er daran liess, ab und steckte es dann auf einen Dorn, dann riss sich jener davon los, so konnte jener sein Pessachopfer darbringen und der Arzt konnte sein Pessachopfer darbringen, und wir sehen, dass daraus durch den Schluss vom Schwereren auf das Leichtere die Folgerung zu ziehen ist.",
+ "Weiter fragte sie R. Akiba: Wenn jemand fünf Opfertiere ausserhalb in einem Nichtwissen schlachtet, wie ist es da, bat er für alle nur ein Sündopfer zu bringen oder für jedes ein besonderes? Darauf sagten sie zu ihm: Darüber haben wir nichts gehört. Darauf sagte R. Josua: Ich habe gehört, dass, wenn jemand von einem Opfertiere aus fünf Schüsseln in einem Nichtwissen etwas geniesst, er für jedes ein besonderes Veruntreuungs - Schuldopfer zu bringen hat, und ich sehe, dass daraus durch den Schluss vom Leichteren auf das Schwerere die Folgerung zu ziehen ist. Darauf sagte R. Simon: Nicht so lautete die Frage R. Akibas, sondern wie es ist, wenn jemand Übriggelassenes von fünf Opfertieren in einem Nichtwissen isst, ob er da für alles nur ein Sündopfer zu bringen hat, oder für jedes ein besonderes. Darauf sagten sie zu ihm: Wir haben darüber nichts gehört. Darauf sagte R. Josua: Ich habe gehört, dass, wenn jemand von einem Opfertiere aus fünf Schüsseln in einem Nichtwissen etwas geniesst, er für jedes ein besonderes Veruntreuungs-Schuldopfer zu bringen hat, und ich sehe, dass daraus durch den Schluss vom Leichteren auf das Schwerere die Folgerung zu ziehen ist. Darauf sagte R. Akiba: Wenn das eine überlieferte Satzung ist, so müssen wir sie annehmen, wenn es sich aber nur um eine Schlussfolgerung handelt, so gibt es dagegen eine Einwendung. Darauf sagte er zu ihm: So wende ein! Da erwiderte er ihm: Das ist nicht richtig! Wenn du von Veruntreuung sprichst, wo derjenige, der etwas einem anderen zu essen gibt, [schuldig] ist, als wenn er selbst es essen würde, und der es von einem anderen benutzen lässt, als wenn er selbst es benutzen würde, auch die in langen Zwischenräumen erfolgte Veruntreuung zusammengerechnet wird, willst du daraus einen Schluss auf Übriggelassenes ziehen, wo nicht eines von allem diesen der Fall ist?",
+ "Es sagte R. Akiba: Ich fragte den R. Elieser: Wenn jemand mehrere Arbeiten von einer und derselben Hauptart an mehreren Schabbaten in einem Nichtwissen verrichtet hat, wie ist es da, ist er für alle nur ein Opfer schuldig, oder für jede ein besonderes ? Darauf sagte er zu mir: Er ist für jede ein besonderes schuldig nach dem Schluss vom Leichteren auf das Schwerere: Wenn bei der Menstruierenden, wo es nicht mehrere Arten [von Verboten] und nicht mehrere Weisen der Versündigung gibt, man für jede ein besonderes schuldig ist, ist es da nicht folgerichtig, dass heim Schabbat, wo es mehrere Arten [von Verboten] und mehrere Weisen der Versündigung gibt, man für jede ein besonderes schuldig ist ? Darauf sagte ich zu ihm: Das ist nicht richtig! Wenn du von der Menstruierenden sprichst, wo es sich um ein doppeltes Verbot handelt, da ihm der Beischlaf mit der Menstruierenden und der Menstruierenden der Beischlaf mit ihm verboten ist, willst du daraus auf den Schabbat folgern, wo nur ein Verbot vorliegt? Darauf sagte er zu mir: Der Beischlaf mit minder jährigen [Menstruierenden] mag den Gegenbeweis liefern, denn da handelt es sich ja nur um ein Verbot, und doch ist er für jede ein besonderes schuldig. Darauf sagte ich zu ihm: Das ist nicht richtig! Wenn du vom Beischlaf mit Minderjährigen sprichst, wo es, wenn auch zur Zeit nicht, so doch später zutrifft, willst du daraus auf den Schabbat folgern, wo es nicht zur Zeit und auch später nicht zutrifft? Darauf sagte er zu mir: So mag der Beischlaf mit einem Vieh den Gegenbeweis liefern. Darauf sagte ich zu ihm: Beim [Beischlaf mit einem] Vieh steht es ebenso wie mit der Schabbatverletzung."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Wenn jemand im Zweifel ist, ob er Unschlitt gegessen hat oder nicht gegessen hat, oder wenn er es selbst bestimmt gegessen hat, aber im Zweifel ist ob es die entsprechende Grösse hatte oder sie nicht hatte, wenn Unschlitt und Fett vor ihm gelegen haben, er hat eines von beiden gegessen und weiss nicht, welches er gegessen hat, wenn seine Frau und seine Schwester bei ihm im Hause waren, er hat einer von ihnen beigewohnt und weiss nicht, welcher von beiden, Schabbat und Wochentag, er hat an einem von beiden eine Arbeit getan und weiss nicht, an welchem von beiden, so bringt er ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer.",
+ "Ebenso wie man, wenn man Unschlitt und noch ein Mal Unschlitt in einem Nichtwissen gegessen hat, nur ein Sündopfer zu bringen hat, so hat man, wenn man [im gleichen Falle] sich der Übertretungen nicht mit Bestimmtheit bewusst ist, nur ein [Zweifel-] Schuldopfer zu bringen, und ebenso wie man, wenn einem in der dazwischen liegenden Zeit das Begangene zum Bewusstsein gekommen ist, für jedes ein besonderes Sündopfer zu bringen hat, so hat man auch [im gleichen Falle ] für jedes ein besonderes Zweifel-Schuldopfer zu bringen. Ebenso wie man, wenn man Unschlitt und Blut und Übriggelassenes und Verworfenes in einem Nichtwissen gegessen hat, für jedes ein besonderes Opfer zu bringen hat, so hat man, wenn man sich der Übertretungen nicht mit Bestimmtheit bewusst ist, für jedes ein besonderes Zweifel-Schuldopfer zu bringen. Wenn Unschlitt und Übriggelassenes vor ihm gelegen haben, er hat eines von beiden gegessen und weise nicht, welches von ihnen er gegessen hat, wenn seine menstruierende Frau und seine Schwester bei ihm im Hause waren, er hat sich unvorsätzlich mit einer von beiden vergangen und weiss nicht, mit welcher von ihnen er sich vergangen hat, Schabbat und Versöhnungstag, er hat in der Abend-Dämmerung eine Arbeit getan und weiss nicht, an welchem von beiden, so muss er, sagt R. Elieser, ein Sündopfer bringen; R. Josua spricht ihn davon frei. Darauf sagte R. Jose: Darin gehen ihre Ansichten nicht auseinander, dass jemand, der in der Dämmerung eine Arbeit getan, keines zu bringen braucht, da nehme ich an, dass er einen Teil der Arbeit an dem einen Tage und einen Teil an dem folgenden getan hat. Worin sind sie verschiedener Ansicht? Wenn er sie mitten am Tage getan hat und nicht weiss, ob er sie am Schabbat getan hat oder am Versöhnungstage, oder wenn er eine Arbeit getan hat und nicht weiss, welche Art Arbeit er getan hat, da sagt R. Elieser, dass er ein Sündopfer zu bringen hat, und R. Josua spricht ihn davon frei. Darauf sagte R. Jehuda: R. Josua spricht ihn auch von einem Zweifel-Schuldopfer frei.",
+ "R. Simon aus Schesur und R. Simon sagen: Sie sind nicht verschiedener Ansicht bei etwas, das den gleichen Namen hat, worin sind sie verschiedener Ansicht? Bei etwas, das zwei verschiedene Namen hat, da sagt R. Elieser, dass er ein Sündopfer zu bringen bat, und R. Josua spricht ihn davon frei. Darauf sagte R. Jehuda: Selbst wenn er die Absicht hatte, Feigen zu pflücken, und er hat Trauben gepflückt, oder Trauben zu pflücken, und er hat Feigen gepflückt, schwarze zu pflücken, und er hat weisse gepflückt, oder weisse zu pflücken und er hat schwarze gepflückt, sagt R. Elieser, dass er ein Sündopfer bringen muss, und R. Josua spricht ihn davon frei. Darauf sagte R. Jehuda: Es soll mich wundern, wenn R. Josua ihn in diesem Falle freispricht. Ist es so, was bedeutet denn das: „wodurch er sich versündigt hat“? Das schliesst etwas gedankenlos Getanes aus."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Durch [den Genuss von] Blut, das beim Schlachten von Vieh, Wild oder Geflügel herausgeflossen ist, sei es von unreinen sei es von reinen Tieren, durch Blut, das beim Abstechen, Blut, das beim Losreissen [der zu schlachtenden Teile], Blut, das beim Aderlass herausgeflossen ist, durch das ein Verbluten eintritt, macht man sich schuldig. Durch Blut aus der Milz, Blut aus dem Herzen, Blut aus den Eiern, Blut von Fischen, Blut von Heuschrecken und herausgepresstes Blut macht man sich nicht schuldig. R. Jehuda sagt: Durch herausgepresstes Blut macht man sich schuldig.",
+ "R. Akiba sagt, dass man für eine zweifelhafte Veruntreuung ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer zu bringen hat, die Weisen sagen, dass man dafür keines zu bringen hat. Auch R. Akiba gesteht aber zu, dass er das Veruntreute nicht zu erstatten braucht, bis ihm [seine Schuld] zur Gewissheit geworden ist, und dann bringt er zugleich ein Gewissheits-Schuldopfer dazu. Darauf sagte R. Tarfon: Warum soll dieser zwei Schuldopfer bringen? Er bat vielmehr das Veruntreute mit dem Fünftel dazu zu erstatten und ein Schuldopfer für zwei Selaim zu bringen, indem er dabei sagt: Wird es festgestellt, dass ich eine Veruntreuung begangen habe, so ist hier das von mir Veruntreute und hier mein Schuldopfer, bleibt es aber im Zweifel, so sei das Geld eine freiwillige Spende und das Schuldopfer ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer, da er ja die gleiche Opferart im Falle der Gewissheit wie der Ungewissheit zu bringen hat.",
+ "Darauf sagte zu ihm R. Akiba: Das, was du sagst, leuchtet ein, wenn die Veruntreuung eine geringwertige war. Ist aber von jemand eine zweifelhafte Veruntreuung im Werte von hundert Minen begangen worden, ist es da nicht vorteilhafter für ihn, er bringt ein Schuldopfer für zwei Selaim, als dass er die zweifelhafte Veruntreuung mit hundert Minen erstattet ? Bei einer geringwertigen Veruntreuung stimmt demnach auch R. Akiba dem R. Tarfon zu. Wenn eine Frau ihr Vogel-Sündopfer in einem zweifelhaften Falle dargebracht hat und, bevor es abgedrückt worden ist, wird es ihr zur Gewissheit, dass es eine unzweifelhafte Geburt war, so bringt sie es wie ein für eine unzweifelhafte [Geburt] gebrachtes dar, da sie die gleiche Opferart im Falle der Ungewissheit wie der Gewissheit zu bringen hat.",
+ "Ein Stück von Nichtheiligem und ein Stück von Heiligem, eines von beiden hat jemand gegessen, es ist aber ungewiss, welches von ihnen er gegessen hat, so ist er frei; R. Akiba sagt: er muss ein Zweifel - Schuldopfer bringen. Hat er auch das zweite gegessen, bringt er ein Gewissheits-Schuldopfer. Hat einer das erste gemessen, und dann ist ein anderer gekommen und hat das zweite gegessen, bringt dieser ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer und jener ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer, dies die Worte des R. Akiba; R. Simon sagt: Beide bringen ein Schuldopfer. R. Jose sagt: Zwei können nicht ein Schuldopfer bringen.",
+ "Ein Stück von Nichtheiligem und ein Stück Unschlitt, eines von beiden hat jemand gegessen, es ist aber ungewiss, welches von ihnen er gegessen hat, so bringt er ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer. Hat er auch das zweite gegessen, bringt er ein Sündopfer. Hat Einer das erste gegessen, und dann ist ein Anderer gekommen und hat das zweite gegessen, bringt dieser ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer und jener ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer, dies die Worte des R. Akiba; R. Simon sagt: Beide bringen ein Sündopfer, R. Jose sagt: Zwei können nicht ein Sündopfer bringen.",
+ "Ein Stück Unschlitt und ein Stück von Heiligem, eines von beiden hat jemand gegessen, es ist aber ungewiss, welches von ihnen er gegessen hat, so bringt er ein Zweifel - Schuldopfer. Hat er auch das zweite gegessen, bringt er ein Sündopfer und ein Gewissheits-Schuldopfer. Hat einer das erste gegessen, und dann ist ein Anderer gekommen und hat das zweite gegessen, bringt dieser ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer und jener ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer; R. Simon sagt: Beide bringen ein Sündopfer und ein Schuldopfer. R. Jose sagt: Zwei können nicht ein Sündopfer und ein Schuldopfer bringen.",
+ "Ein Stück Unschlitt und ein Stück von heiligem Unschlitt, eines von beiden hat jemand gegessen, es ist aber ungewiss, welches von ihnen er gegessen hat, so bringt er ein Sündopfer; R. Akiba sagt: Er bringt [dazu auch ] ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer. Hat er auch das zweite gegessen, bringt er zwei Sündopfer und ein Gewissheits-Schuldopfer. Hat einer das erste gegessen, und dann ist ein anderer gekommen und hat das zweite gegessen, bringt dieser ein Sündopfer und jener ein Sündopfer; R. Akiba sagt: Dieser bringt ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer und jener ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer. R. Simon sagt: Dieser ein Sündopfer und jener ein Sündopfer und beide zusammen bringen ein Schuldopfer. R. Jose sagt: Zwei können nicht ein Schuldopfer bringen.",
+ "Ein Stück Unschlitt und ein Stück von übriggelassenem Unschlitt, eines von beiden hat jemand gegessen, es ist aber ungewiss, welches von ihnen er gegessen hat, so bringt er ein Sündopfer und ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer. Hat er auch das zweite gegessen, bringt er drei Sundopter. Hat Einer das erste gegessen, und dann ist ein Anderer gekommen und hat das zweite gegessen, bringt dieser ein Sündopfer und ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer und jener ein Sündopfer und ein Zweifel - Schuldopfer. R. Simon sagt: Dieser ein Sündopfer und jener ein Sündopfer und beide zusammen bringen ein Sündopfer. R. Jose sagt: Jedes Sündopfer, das für eine Sünde dargebracht wird, kann nicht von zweien gemeinsam dargebracht werden."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Wenn jemand ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer bringt, und dann kommt es ihm zur Kenntnis, dass er nicht gesündigt hat, wenn, bevor es geschlachtet worden ist, lässt man es wieder heraus und unter der Herde weiden, dies die Worte des R. Meïr: die Weisen sagen: man lässt es weiden, bis es einen Leibesfehler bekommt, dann wird es verkauft und das Geld fällt in die Spendenkasse; R. Elieser sagt: Es wird dargebracht, denn wenn es nicht für diese Sünde dargebracht wird, wird es für irgend eine andere Sünde dargebracht. Wenn es ihm erst, nachdem es geschlachtet ist, zur Kenntnis gekommen ist, wird das Blut fortgegossen und das Fleisch wird nach dem Verbrennungsraum geschafft. Ist das Blut bereits gesprengt worden, wird das Fleisch gegessen. R. Jose sagt: Auch wenn das Blut noch im Becher ist, wird es gesprengt und das Fleisch wird gegessen.",
+ "Beim Gewissheits-Schuldopfer ist es nicht so. Wenn, bevor es geschlachtet worden ist, lässt man es wieder heraus und unter der Herde weiden, wenn, nachdem es geschlachtet ist, wird es vergraben. Ist das Blut bereits gesprengt worden, schafft man das Fleisch nach dem Verbrennungsraum. Beim zur Steinigung verurteilten Ochsen ist es nicht so. Wenn, bevor er gesteinigt worden, lässt man ihn frei und wieder unter der Herde weiden, wenn, nachdem er gesteinigt worden, ist Nutzniessung von ihm erlaubt. Bei der durch den Genickschlag zu tötenden Färse ist es nicht so. Wenn, bevor sie durch den Genickschlag getötet ist, lässt man sie wieder frei und wieder unter der Herde weiden, wenn, nachdem sie durch den Genickschlag getötet ist, wird sie an der Stelle vergraben, denn, da sie vom Anfang an für eine unbekannt von wem begangene Tat gebracht worden ist, hat sie, nachdem sie diese gesühnt, ihre Bestimmung erfüllt.",
+ "R. Elieser sagt: Man kann ein Zweifels-Schuldopfer jeden Tag und zu jederzeit, wann man will, freiwillig geloben, ein solches Opfer neontinan: Gewissenhaftigkeits-Schuldopfer. Man sagte von Baba, Sohn des Buti, dass er jeden Tag ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer freiwillig darbrachte, ausser an dem Tage nach dem Versöhnungstage, er sagte: Bei dem Heiligtume hier! Wenn man mich lassen würde, würde ich auch da eines bringen, aber man wendet mir ein: Warte, bis du wieder in einen Zweifel hast kommen können. Die Weisen aber sagen: Ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer darf man nur für etwas bringen, auf dessen absichtliches Begehen die Ausrottungsstrafe steht und für dessen unabsichtliches Besehen ein Sündopfer zu bringen ist.",
+ "Die, welche Sündopfer oder Gewissheits-Schuldopfer zu bringen haben, sind verpflichtet, auch wenn der Versöhnungstag darüber hingegangen ist, sie nach dem Versöhnungstage darzubringen, die, welche Zweifel - Schuldopfer zu bringen haben, sind nicht dazu verpflichtet. Wer in Zweifel gerät, am Versöhnungstage selbst eine Sünde begangen zu haben, und sei es selbst kurz vor Eintritt der Nacht, ist nicht dazu verpflichtet, weil der ganze Tag sühnt.",
+ "Eine Frau, die ein Zweifel-Vogel-Sündopfer zu bringen hat, ist verpflichtet, auch wenn der Versöhnungstag darüber hingegangen ist, es nach dem Versöhnungstage zu bringen, weil es sie erst wieder in die Lage versetzt, von den Opfern zu essen. Ein Vogel-Sündopfer, das für einen Zweifelsfall gebracht worden ist, muss, wenn es ihr erst, nachdem es abgedrückt worden, zur Kenntnis gekommen ist, [dass sie keines zu bringen hatte,] vergraben werden.",
+ "Wenn jemand zwei Selaim für ein Schuldopfer abgesondert und dafür zwei Widder zu Schuldopfern gekauft hat, so wird, wenn der eine von ihnen zwei Selaim wert ist, dieser als sein Schuldopfer dargebracht, und den anderen lässt man weiden, bis er einen Leibesfehler bekommt, dann wird er verkauft und das Geld fällt der Spendenkasse zu. Hat er dafür zwei Widder zu nichtheiligem Gebrauch gekauft, von denen der eine zwei Selaim und der andere zehn Sus wert ist, so wird der, der zwei Selaim wert ist, als sein Schuldopfer dargebracht, und der zweite für das von ihm Veruntreute. Einen zum Schuldopfer und einen zu nichtheiligen Gebrauch, so wird, wenn der zum Schuldopfer gekaufte zwei Selaim wert ist, dieser als sein Schuldopfer dargebracht und der zweite für seine Veruntreuung, und er bringt dazu noch einen Sela und sein Fünftel.",
+ "Wenn jemand ein Sündopfer abgesondert hat und gestorben ist, darf es nach ihm nicht sein Sohn darbringen, auch darf man nicht das von einer Sünde für eine andere Sünde bringen, selbst nicht das für Unschlitt, das man gestern gegessen hat, für Unschlitt, das man heute gegessen hat, denn es heisst: „sein Opfer für seine Sünde“, es muss sein für seine Sünde bestimmtes Opfer sein.",
+ "Man darf für das für ein Schaf Geheiligte eine Ziege, für das für eine Ziege Geheiligte ein Schaf, für das für ein Schaf oder für eine Ziege Geheiligte Turteltauben oder junge Tauben, für das für Turteltauben oder junge Tauben Geheiligte ein Zehntel Efa darbringen. Wie ist das? Hat man [Geld] für ein Schaf oder für eine Ziege abgesondert und ist verarmt, kann man dafür Geflügel bringen, ist man [noch mehr] verarmt, kann man dafür ein Zehntel Efa bringen. Hat man [Geld] für ein Zehntel Efa abgesondert und ist vermögend geworden, kann man dafür Geflügel bringen, ist man [noch] vermögender geworden, kann man dafür ein Schaf oder eine Ziege bringen. Hat man ein Schaf oder eine Ziege abgesondert und es ist fehlerhaft geworden, so kann man, wenn man will, für den Erlös Geflügel bringen. Hat man Geflügel abgesondert und es ist fehlerhaft geworden, kann man nicht für den Erlös ein Zehntel Efa bringen, da Geflügel nicht ausgelöst werden darf.",
+ "R. Simon sagt: Überall werden Schafe vor den Ziegen genannt, daraus könnte man folgern, [es geschehe darum,] weil sie ihnen vorzuziehen sind, darum heisst es: „wenn er ein Schaf als sein Opfer zum Sündopfer bringt“ , das lehrt, dass sich beide gleichwertig sind. Überall werden Turteltauben vor den jungen Tauben genannt, daraus könnte man folgern, [es geschehe darum,] weil sie ihnen vorzuziehen sind, darum heisst es: „und eine junge Taube oder eine Turteltaube zum Sündopfer“, das lehrt, dass beide gleichwertig sind. Überall wird der Vater vor der Mutter genannt, daraus könnte man folgern, dass die Pflicht, den Vater zu ehren, eine weitergehende ist als die, die Mutter zu ehren, darum heisst es: „ihr sollt ein jeder seine Mutter und seinen Vater ehrfürchten“, das lehrt, dass sich beide gleichstehen, die Weisen aber haben gesagt: Der Vater geht der Mutter überall vor, weil er und seine Mutter verpflichtet sind, den Vater zu ehren. Ebenso ist es inbezug auf Torakenntnis, wenn der Sohn sie von dem Lehrer erlangt hat, geht der Lehrer überall dem Vater vor, weil er und sein Vater verpflichtet sind, seinen Lehrer zu ehren."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3260a6445ce5206c681c59dd6bd0a5a978e20322
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp.json
@@ -0,0 +1,81 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Keritot",
+ "versionSource": "http://learn.conservativeyeshiva.org/mishnah/",
+ "versionTitle": "Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 1.0,
+ "license": "CC-BY",
+ "shortVersionTitle": "Dr. Joshua Kulp",
+ "actualLanguage": "en",
+ "languageFamilyName": "english",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה כריתות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "There are in the Torah thirty-six [transgressions which are punishable with] karet:When one has intercourse with his mother, His father's wife; Or his daughter-in-law; When a man has intercourse with a male, Or with a beast, Or when a woman brings a beast upon herself; When one has intercourse with a woman and her daughter; Or with a married woman; Or with his sister; Or with his father's sister; Or his mother's sister; Or his wife's sister; Or his brother's wife; Or the wife of his father's brother; Or with a menstruating woman; One who blasphemes [the Lord]; One who worships idols; Or dedicates his children to Molech; Or has a ba’al ov; Or desecrates the Shabbat; When an unclean person eats of sacred food; Or when one enters the precincts of the Temple in an unclean state; When one eats forbidden fat, Or blood; Notar; Or piggul; When one slaughters Or offers up [a consecrated animal] outside [the Temple]; One who eats anything leavened on Pesah; One who eats Or works on Yom Kippur; One who compounds the oil [of anointing]; Or compounds incense; Or uses [unlawfully] oil of anointing; And [when one transgresses the laws of] the pesah, And circumcision from among positive commandments.",
+ "For these [transgressions] one is liable to karet if committed intentionally, and if committed unwittingly to a hatat. If there is a doubt whether he had committed the transgression to an asham talui, except in the case of one who defiled the Temple or its consecrated things, for in that case one is liable in this case to a sliding-scale sacrifice, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: also the blasphemer [is an exception], as it says: “You shall have one law for one that acts in error” (Numbers 15:29), this excludes the blasphemer who performs no action.",
+ "Some women [after childbirth] bring an offering which is eaten; some bring one which is not eaten, and some bring no offering at all. These bring an offering which is eaten: If a woman miscarries a fetus which has the shape of beast, or a wild animal or a bird, the words of Rabbi Meir; but the sages say: only if it has a human shape. Or if a woman miscarries a sandal-like fetus or a placenta or a fully formed fetus, or one that comes out in pieces. Similarly, if a female slave miscarries, she brings an offering which is eaten.",
+ "The following bring an offering which is not eaten:A woman who miscarries but does not know what the miscarriage was, Or if two women who have a miscarriage, one of a kind which did not render her liable [to an offering], and the other of a kind that does render her liable [to an offering]. Rabbi Yose said: When is this so? This applies only if one went towards the east and the other towards the west, but if both remained together they bring [together] one offering which is eaten.",
+ "The following do not bring a sacrifice:A woman who discharges a sac filled with water or with blood or with pieces of flesh; Or if the miscarriage was in the shape of fish, locust, unclean animals or reptiles; Or if the miscarriage took place on the fortieth day [after the conception], Or if it was extracted by means of a caesarean section. Rabbi Shimon declares her liable [to an offering] in the case of a caesarean section.",
+ "If a woman miscarries on the eve of the eighty-first day: Bet Shammai say: she is exempted from an offering. But Bet Hillel say: she is liable. Bet Hillel said to Bet Shammai: what is the difference between the eve of the eighty-first day and the eighty-first day itself? Since these are considered equal with regard to [blood] uncleanness, why should they not be considered equal also with reference to the offerings? Bet Shammai said to them: No; if you said this in the case where she miscarries on the eighty-first day where it occurred at a time when she was fit to bring an offering, can you say this where she miscarries on the eve of the eighty-first day, where it did not occur at a time when she was fit to bring an offering? Bet Hillel said to them: the case of a woman who miscarries on the eighty-first day which fell on a Shabbat shall prove it, where it did not take place at a time when she was fit to bring an offering and yet she is liable to bring a [new] offering. Bet Shammai said to them: No; if you says this of the eighty-first day which fell on a Shabbat for although it is not fit for offerings of an individual, it is at least fit for communal offerings, would you maintain this concerning a woman who miscarries on the eve of the eighty-first day, seeing that the night is fit neither for offerings of the individual nor for communal offerings? As to [your argument of the uncleanness of] the blood, it proves nothing, for if she aborted within the period of cleanness the blood is unclean, and yet she is exempted from an offering.",
+ "If a woman had five doubtful genital discharges or five doubtful births, she needs to bring only one offering, and she may eat sacrifices [immediately], and she is not liable to bring the other [offerings]. If a woman had five certain births, or five certain genital discharges, she brings one offering and may then eat sacrifices [immediately], and she is liable to bring the other offerings. It once happened in Jerusalem that the price of a pair of doves rose to a golden denar. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel said: By this sanctuary, I shall not go to sleep tonight before they cost but a [silver] denar! Then he entered the court and taught: if a woman had five certain births or five certain genital discharges she needs to bring only one offering, and she may then eat sacrifices, and she is not liable to bring the other [offerings]. Thereupon the price of a pair of birds stood at a quarter of a [silver] denar each."
+ ],
+ [
+ "There are four persons who require a ceremony of atonement, and there are four who bring a sacrifice for willful as well as for inadvertent transgression. The following are those who require a ceremony of atonement: the zav, the zavah, the woman who gave birth and the metzora. Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob said: also a convert is regarded as a person who still requires a ceremony of atonement until the blood has been sprinkled for him; the same applies to the nazirite with reference to wine, haircutting and uncleanness.",
+ "The following bring a sacrifice for willful as well as for inadvertent transgressions:One who has intercourse with a female slave, A nazirite who has become unclean, For a false oath concerning testimony; And for a false oath concerning a deposit.",
+ "There are five persons who bring one sacrifice for multiple transgressions, and five who bring a sacrifice of higher or lesser value. The following bring one sacrifice for multiple transgressions:One who has intercourse with a female slave several times, A nazirite who became unclean several times. One who warns his wife in regard to several men, And a metzora who has contracted skin disease several times. If he has offered the birds and then contracted the disease again, they do not count for him until he has offered his hatat. Rabbi Judah says: until he has offered his asham.",
+ "A woman who has had several births. If she miscarried a female within eighty days of the birth of a girl, and then she again miscarried a female within eighty days of the previous [miscarriage]; or if she miscarried twins. Rabbi Judah says: she brings an offering for the first and not for the second, for the third again but not for the fourth. The following persons bring an offering of higher or lesser value: One who hears the voice (see Leviticus 5:1); One who has broken the word of his lips (Leviticus 5:4); One who while unclean has entered the sanctuary or [has partaken] of holy things, A woman after childbirth And a metzora. What is the difference between [intercourse] with a female slave and the other forbidden sexual relations? For they are not equivalent in regard to the punishment nor the sacrifice. In the case of all other forbidden sexual relations a hatat is brought, in that of a female slave an asham; In the case of the other forbidden sexual relations a female animal is brought, in that of the female slave a male; In the case of the other forbidden sexual relations man and woman are alike with respect to lashes and the sacrifice; in that of the female slave the man is unlike the woman regarding the lashes, and the woman is unlike the man regarding the sacrifice. In the case of all other forbidden sexual relations sexual contact is punishable as well as consummation, and one is liable for each act of intercourse separately. For in this the case of the female slave is more stringent in that intentional transgression is of the same status as unwitting transgression.",
+ "To which type of female slave [does this refer]?To one who is half a slave and half a free person, as it is written: “And she has been redeemed and not redeemed” (Leviticus 19:20), the words of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Ishmael says: to a full female slave. Rabbi Elazar ben Azaria says: all other forbidden sexual relations are stated explicitly, and of the remainder there is only one who can be half a slave and half a free person.",
+ "In the case of all forbidden relations, if one partner was an adult and the other a minor, the minor is exempt; If one is awake and the other asleep, the one asleep is exempt; If one is an inadvertent and the other intentional, the former is liable to a hatat, the latter to karet."
+ ],
+ [
+ "If they said to him: you ate forbidden fat, he is liable to a hatat; If one witness says: he ate, and another says: he did not eat, or if one woman says, he ate, and another says, he did not eat, he is liable to an asham talui. If one witness says, he ate, and he himself says, I did not eat, he is exempt. If two [witnesses] say, he ate, and he himself says, I did not eat: Rabbi Meir says he is liable. Rabbi Meir said: if two witnesses are capable of bringing upon him severe penalty of death, can they not impose the less severe punishment of a sacrifice? They replied: suppose he said, I did it intentionally, would he not be exempted?",
+ "If one twice ate forbidden fat in one spell of unawareness, he is liable to but one hatat. If one ate forbidden fat, blood, piggul and notar in one spell of unawareness, he is liable for each kind. This is an instance where different kinds [of food] are more stringent than one kind. In the following instance, however, one kind [of food] is more stringent than several kinds: if one ate half an olive-size and then again half an olive-size, both in one spell of unawareness, if of one kind he is liable, if of two kinds, he is exempted.",
+ "Within what time must he eat them [for him to be liable]? [The time he would need] if he ate a similar amount of parched grains of corn, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the rabbis say: he must take from the beginning to the end [of his eating] no more time than is required for the eating of a peras (a half a loaf of bread) [to be liable]. If one eats unclean food or drinks unclean drinks, or if he drinks a quarter [of a log] of wine and then enters the Temple [he is liable if it takes less time] than it takes to eat a peras. Rabbi Eliezer says: if the drinking was interrupted or if he diluted it, he is exempt.",
+ "It is possible that by one act of eating a person could become liable to four hatats and one asham:If an unclean person eats forbidden fat, which was at the same time notar of an offering, and [it was on] Yom Kippur. Rabbi Meir says: if it was on Shabbat and he carried it out, he is liable [to yet another hatat]. But they said to him: this is a different name.",
+ "By one act of intercourse one may become liable for six hatats: If one had intercourse with his daughter, he can be guilty of incest with her because she is his daughter, his sister, his brother's wife, the wife of his father's brother, and [he can also be guilty] of intercourse with a married woman and a menstruant. If one had intercourse with his daughter’s daughter he can be guilty of incest with her because she is his daughter's daughter, his daughter-in-law, his brother's wife, the wife of his father's brother, his wife's sister, a married woman, and a menstruant. Rabbi Yose said: if the grandfather transgressed and married her first, he may thereby become guilty for offending with his father's wife. So too, if one had intercourse with his wife's daughter or her daughter's daughter.",
+ "If one had relations with his mother-in-law he may thereby become guilty for [having relations] with his mother-in-law, his daughter-in-law, his brother's wife, the wife of his father's brother, his wife's sister, a married woman, and a menstruant. And so too, if one had intercourse with the mother of his father-in-law or of his mother-in-law. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri said: if one had intercourse with his mother-in-law he may thereby become guilty for [having relations] with his mother-in-law, the mother of his mother-in-law, and the mother of his father-in-law. They said to him: all these three are the same name.",
+ "Rabbi Akiva said: I asked Rabban Gamaliel and Rabbi Joshua at the meat-market of Emmaus, where they went to buy meat for the wedding feast of Rabban Gamaliel's son: What [is the law concerning] a man who had intercourse with his sister, his father's sister and his mother's sister? Is he liable for one sacrifice for all of them, or to one [separate sacrifice] for each of them? They replied: we have heard nothing [about this], but we have heard that if one had intercourse with five menstruants in one spell of unawareness, he is liable to a sacrifice for each [act], and it seems to us that the case [you asked about] may be derived by an a fortiori conclusion (kal vehomer).",
+ "Rabbi Akiva further asked: If a limb hangs loose from the body of a living beast, what is the law? They replied: We have heard nothing about this, but we have heard about a limb hanging loose from the body of a man, that it is clean. And thus those that were afflicted with boils used to do in Jerusalem. He would go on the eve of Pesah to the doctor, and he would cut the limb until only contact of a hairbreadth was left; he then stuck it on a thorn and then tore himself away from it. In this manner both that man and the physician could make their pesah offering. And it seems to us that your case may be derived from this by a kal vehomer.",
+ "Rabbi Akiba asked again: If a man slaughtered five sacrifices outside [the Temple] in one spell of unawareness, what is the law? Is he liable to a separate offering for each act or only to one for them all? They replied: we have heard nothing about this. Rabbi Joshua: I have heard that if one eats an offering from five different dishes in one spell of unawareness, he is guilty of sacrilege for each of them; and it seems to me that the case in question may be inferred from this by a kal vehomer. Rabbi Shimon said: Rabbi Akiba did not ask this, but rather concerning one who ate of notar (remnant) from five sacrifices in one spell of unawareness what is the law? Is he liable only to one [offering] for all of them, or is he liable to one for each of them? They replied: we have heard nothing about this. Rabbi Joshua: I have heard that if one eats an offering from five different dishes in one spell of unawareness, he is guilty of sacrilege for each of them; and it seems to me that the case in question may be inferred from this by a kal vehomer. Rabbi Akiba replied: if this is a received tradition we accept it; but if it is only a logical deduction, there is a rebuttal. He [Rabbi Joshua] said: rebut it. He replied: It is not so. For if you hold the view with regard to sacrilege, for in this case one who gives food to another is as guilty as the one who eats it himself, and the person who causes others to derive a benefit from them is as guilty as the person who himself made use of them; furthermore, [small quantities are] reckoned together in the case of sacrilege even after the lapse of a long period, can you say it in connection with notar (remnant) where not one of these laws applies.",
+ "Rabbi Akiba said: I asked Rabbi Eliezer: if one performed many acts of forbidden work of the same category on different Shabbats but in one spell of unawareness, what is the law? Is he liable only to one [offering] for all of them, or to a separate one for each of them? He replied to me: he is liable to a separate one for each of them. And this can be derived by through a kal vehomer. If with regard to relations with a menstruant, for which there are neither many categories nor many ways of sinning, one is still liable for each act, how much more must one be liable to separate offerings in the case of Shabbat, for which there are many categories [of work] and many ways of sinning! I said to him: No, you may hold this view in the case of the menstruant, since in that case there are two warnings: the man is warned with regard to the menstruant woman, and the menstruant woman is warned with a man; but can you hold the same in the case of the Shabbat where there is only one warning? He said to me: One who has relations with [menstruant] minors can prove the point, where there is but one warning, and yet one is liable for each act. I responded to him: No, you may hold this view in the case of minors because although no prohibition now applies, it will apply later; but can you hold the same view with regard to Shabbat where neither now nor later [is there more than one warning]? He said to me: Let the law concerning intercourse with an animal prove my point. I replied to him: the law concerning intercourse with an animal is indeed comparable to [that concerning] Shabbat."
+ ],
+ [
+ "If [a person was] in doubt whether he had eaten forbidden fat or not, or even if he had certainly eaten [of it] but [was] in doubt as to whether it had the requisite quantity or less; or [if there were] before him permitted fat as well as forbidden fat, and he ate of one of them and does not know of which of them he ate; Or if his wife and his sister were with him in the house and he unwittingly [had sex] with one of them and does not know with which of them he unwittingly [had sex]; Or if he did forbidden labor and does not know whether it was on Shabbat or on a weekday, He is liable for an asham talui.",
+ "Just as a person who ate forbidden fat twice in one spell of unawareness is liable to only one hatat, so too, when the transgression is in doubt, he is liable to only one asham talui. If in the meantime he became aware [of the possible sin] he is liable to a separate asham talui for each act, just as he would [in similar circumstances] be liable to a separate hatat for each act. Just as one is liable to separate hatats if he ate, in one spell of unawareness, forbidden fat and blood and piggul and notar, so, too, when the transgression is in doubt, he is liable to an asham talui for each different act. [If both] forbidden fat and notar lay before a person and he ate one of them but does not know which; Or if his menstruant wife and his sister were with him in his house and he has sex unwittingly with one of them and does not know with which, Or if Shabbat and Yom Kippur [followed each other] and he did forbidden work at twilight and does not know on which day: Rabbi Eliezer declares him liable to a hatat; But Rabbi Joshua exempts him. Rabbi Yose said: they did not dispute about a person that did work at twilight, for he is certainly exempt, for I may assume that part of the work was done on the one day and part on the following day. About what did they dispute? About one who did work during the day itself but he did not know whether he did it on Shabbat or on Yom Kippur, or if he did work and did not know what manner of work he did: Rabbi Eliezer declares him liable to a hatat; But Rabbi Joshua exempts him. Rabbi Judah said: Rabbi Joshua exempts him even from an asham talui.",
+ "Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Shimon Shezuri say: They did not dispute regarding transgression of the same name, that in that case he is liable. About what did they dispute? About transgressions of different names: Rabbi Eliezer declares him liable to a hatat, And Rabbi Joshua declares him exempt. Rabbi Judah said: even if he intended to pick figs and he picked grapes, or grapes and he picked figs, white [grapes] and he picked black ones, or black and he picked white ones Rabbi Eliezer declares him liable to a hatat. And Rabbi Joshua declares him exempt. Rabbi Judah said: I wonder whether Rabbi Joshua indeed declared him exempt in such a case. For then why is it written, “with which he has sinned” (Leviticus 4:23)? To exclude mindless action."
+ ],
+ [
+ "If one ate blood of a slaughtered beast, a wild animal or a bird, either clean or unclean, or blood of an animal stabbed in his throat or neck, or of the blood of an animal slaughtered by having his throat ripped, or of the blood of the arteries whereby life-force escapes, he is liable. But [if he ate] the blood of the spleen or of the heart, or blood found in eggs, or blood of fish, or of locusts, or secondary blood, he is not liable. Rabbi Judah says: he is liable for secondary blood.",
+ "Rabbi Akiva declares one liable to an asham talui for sacrilege; But the sages declare him exempt. Rabbi Akiba admits that he does not bring his restitution money until he becomes aware [of his trespass], when he must bring with it a certain asham. Rabbi Tarfon: Why should he bring two ashams? Rather, let him set aside the principal with an added fifth, and bring an asham the value of two sela's and stipulate: “If I did commit sacrilege, here is my restitution and this my asham; and if the sacrilege was doubtful, let the money be a freewill gift and the [offering an] asham talui;” since the same type of sacrifice he brings for a case where he doesn’t know, he brings for one where he does know.",
+ "Rabbi Akiba: Your words seem plausible in the case of a minor amount of sacrilege; but if it was a case of doubtful sacrilege of a hundred manehs, would it not be more advantageous for him to bring an asham for two sela's rather than restore out of doubt the sum of a hundred manehs? Rabbi Akiba agrees with Rabbi Tarfon in the case of a minor amount of sacrilege. If a woman brought a bird hatat for a case of a doubtful miscarriage, and prior to the pinching of its neck she learned that the birth was a certainty, she can offer it as a certain hatat, for that which she offers in the case of certainty is of the same kind as that which she offers in the case of doubt.",
+ "[If there was] a piece of hullin meat and a piece of sacred meat, and a person ate one of them and does not know which of them he ate, he is exempt. Rabbi Akiba declares him liable for an asham talui. If he then ate the second [piece], he is liable to a certain asham. If he ate one [piece] and another came and ate the other, each of them is liable to an asham talui, the words of Rabbi Akiba. Rabbi Shimon says: they together bring one asham. Rabbi Yose said: Two people cannot bring one asham.",
+ "If there was a piece of forbidden fat and a piece of hullin [permitted fat], and a person ate one of them and does not know which, he is liable to an asham talui. If he then ate the second piece, he is brings a hatat. If he ate the one [piece] and another came and ate the other, each of them is liable to an asham talui. Rabbi Shimon says: they together bring one hatat. Rabbi Yose says: two people cannot bring one hatat.",
+ "If there was a piece of forbidden fat and a piece of consecrated [permitted fat], and a person ate one of them and does not know which, he is liable to an asham talui; If he then ate the second piece, he is liable to a hatat and a certain asham. If he ate the one piece and another came and ate the other, each of them brings an asham talui. Rabbi Shimon holds: they together bring a hatat and an asham. Rabbi Yose: two people cannot together bring one hatat and one asham.",
+ "If there was a piece of unconsecrated forbidden fat and a piece of consecrated forbidden fat, and a person ate one of them and does not know which, he is liable to a hatat. Rabbi Akiva says: also to an asham talui. If he then ate the second piece, he is liable to two hatats and one certain asham. If he ate one piece and another came and ate the other, each of them is liable to a hatat. Rabbi Akiva says: each of them brings [in addition] an asham talui. Rabbi Shimon holds: each of them brings a hatat and together they bring one asham. Rabbi Yose: two people cannot bring one asham.",
+ "If there was a piece of forbidden fat and another piece of forbidden fat [which was at the same time] notar, and a person ate one of them and does not know which, he is liable to a hatat and to an asham talui. If he then ate the second piece, he is liable to three hatats. If he ate one piece and another came and ate the other, each of them brings a hatat and an asham talui. Rabbi Shimon says: each of them brings a hatat and together they bring another hatat. Rabbi Yose says: any hatat that is brought for the expiation of sin cannot be offered by two people."
+ ],
+ [
+ "If a person brought an asham talui and then found out that he did not sin: If it was before the animal was slaughtered, it may go out to pasture among the flock, the words of Rabbi Meir. The sages say: it goes out to pasture until it becomes blemished and it is then sold, and the money goes for freewill-offerings. Rabbi Eliezer says: it shall be offered up, for if it does not expiate this sin, it will expiate another sin. If he learns of it after it was slaughtered, the blood shall be spilled out and the flesh is removed to the place of burning. If the blood had already been tossed [onto the altar], the flesh may be eaten. Rabbi Yose says: even if the blood is still in the vessel, it should be tossed and the flesh then eaten.",
+ "The law is different with a certain asham: If before the animal was slaughtered, it may go out to pasture among the flock; If after it was slaughtered, it shall be buried; If after the blood was tossed, the flesh must be removed to the place of burning. The law is also different regarding an ox to be stoned: If before it was stoned, it may go out to pasture among the flock; If after it was stoned, it is permitted for use. The law is also different regarding the heifer whose neck is to be broken: If before its neck was broken, it may go out to pasture among the flock. If after its neck was broken, it shall be buried on the spot, for it was from the outset brought in a matter of doubt, it has atoned for the doubt, and so has served its purpose.",
+ "Rabbi Eliezer says: one may freely offer an asham talui every day and at any time he pleases and such a sacrifice is called the asham of the pious. They said of Bava ben Buti that he used to freely offer an asham talui every day, except on the day after Yom Kippur. He declared: By this temple! Had they allowed me, I would have offered one even then, but they said to me, wait until you have come to a state of doubt.” But the sages say one may not bring an asham talui except for a sin that [is punished by] karet [when done intentionally and for which one brings a hatat [when done unwittingly.",
+ "Those that are liable to hatats or to certain ashams and Yom Kippur passes over them, are still liable to bring them after Yom Kippur. Those that are liable to asham talui’s are exempt. He who has committed a doubtful sin on Yom Kippur, even at twilight, is exempt, because the whole of the day effects atonement.",
+ "If a woman is liable to a bird hatat brought in a case of doubt and Yom Kippur intervenes, she is still bound to offer it after Yom Kippur, because it renders her fit to eat sacrifices. If a hatat of a bird was brought for a matter of doubt and, after the pinching of its neck it became known [that there was no need for it], it must be buried.",
+ "A man set apart two sela's for an asham:If he bought with it two rams for an asham; if one was of the value of two sela's, it may be offered for his asham, and the other must be let out to pasture until it becomes blemished when it is sold and its value goes for freewill-offerings. If he had bought with the money two rams for hullin use, one worth two sela's and the other worth ten zuz, that which is worth two sela's should be offered for his asham and the other for his sacrilege. [If he had bought with the money] one for an asham and the other for ordinary use, if that for the asham was worth two sela's it should be offered for his asham and the other for his sacrilege, and with it he shall bring a sela and its fifth.",
+ "If a man set aside his hatat and then died, his son should not offer it after him. A man may not offer [what was set apart] for one sin for another sin. Even if he had set apart [the hatat] for forbidden fat that he had eaten yesterday, he may not offer it for forbidden fat that he has eaten today, for it is said, “His offering ... for his sin” (Leviticus 4:28) the offering must be for that particular sin.",
+ "One may bring with [money] dedicated to buy a lamb [for a hatat] a goat, or with [what was] dedicated to buy a goat [one may bring] a lamb; Or with [what was] dedicated to buy a lamb or a goat [one may bring] turtle-doves or young pigeons; Or with [what was] dedicated to buy turtle-doves or young pigeons [one may bring] the tenth of an ephah. How so? If a man set apart [money] for a lamb or a goat [for a hatat] and he became poor, he may bring a bird-offering; If he became still poorer he may bring the tenth of an ephah. If a man set apart [money] for the tenth of an ephah and he became richer, he must bring a bird-offering; If he became still richer he must bring a lamb or a goat. If a man set apart a lamb or a goat and they became blemished, he may bring with their price a bird-offering; But if he set apart a bird-offering and it became blemished, he may not bring with its price the tenth of an ephah, since a bird-offering cannot be redeemed.",
+ "Rabbi Shimon says: lambs are mentioned before goats in all places. You might think that it is because they are choicer, therefore Scripture states, “And if he brings a lamb as his offering,” (Leviticus 4:32) to teach that both are equal. Turtle-doves are mentioned before young pigeons in all places. You might think that it is because they are choicer, therefore Scripture states, “A young pigeon or a turtle-dove for a hatat,” (Leviticus 12:6) to teach that both are equal. The father comes before the mother in all places. You might think that it is because the honor due a father is greater than the honor due a mother, therefore Scripture states, “A man shall fear his mother and his father,” (Leviticus 19: to teach that both are equal. But the sages have said: the father comes before the mother in all places, because both a son and his mother are obligated to honor the father. And so it is also with the study of Torah; if the son has been worthy [to sit] before the teacher, the teacher comes before the father in all places, because both a man and his father are obligated to honor the teacher."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/Open Mishnah.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/Open Mishnah.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d4b6a31c73a93bf601a1b22a41f23ff26b5f83cf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/Open Mishnah.json
@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Keritot",
+ "versionSource": "http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Mishnah",
+ "versionTitle": "Open Mishnah",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "license": "CC-BY-SA",
+ "versionTitleInHebrew": "משנה פתוחה",
+ "actualLanguage": "en",
+ "languageFamilyName": "english",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה כריתות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [],
+ [],
+ [],
+ [],
+ [],
+ [
+ "",
+ "",
+ "",
+ "",
+ "",
+ "",
+ "",
+ "",
+ "Rabbi Shimon says: Lambs come before goats in all places [in Scripture]. You might think [that it is] because they are choicer. [Therefore,] Scripture states, “And if he bring a lamb as his offering” (Leviticus 4:32), To teach [us] that both are equal. Turtledoves come before young pigeons in all places [in Scripture]. You might think [that it is] because they are choicer. [Therefore,] Scripture states, “A young pigeon or a turtledove for a sin-offering” (Leviticus 12:6), To teach [us] that both are equal. The father comes before the mother in all places [in Scripture]. You might think [that it is because] the honor due to the father exceeds the honor due to the mother. [Therefore,] Scripture states, “You shall fear every man his mother and his father” (Leviticus 19:3), To teach [us] that both are equal. But the Sages have said: The father comes before the mother in all places, Because both he and his mother are bound to honor the father. And so it is also with the study of the Torah; If the son has been worthy [to sit and study] before the teacher, The teacher comes before the father in all places, Because [both] he and his father are bound to honor the teacher."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/Sefaria Community Translation.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/Sefaria Community Translation.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5f7e2e537cdeba6c28e7b248711b781102f7f996
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/Sefaria Community Translation.json
@@ -0,0 +1,80 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Keritot",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org",
+ "versionTitle": "Sefaria Community Translation",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "license": "CC0",
+ "versionTitleInHebrew": "תרגום קהילת ספריא",
+ "actualLanguage": "en",
+ "languageFamilyName": "english",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה כריתות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "[There are] thirty-six acts for which the Torah [prescribes] Karet [excision at the hands of Heaven. It is a punishment for]: One who has relations with his mother, or with his father's wife, or with his daughter-in-law, or with a man, or with an animal, or a woman who has an animal have relations with her, or one who has relations with a woman and her daughter, or with a married woman, or with his sister, or with his paternal aunt, or with his maternal aunt, or with his wife's sister, or with his brother's wife, or with the wife of his father's brother, or with a Niddah [a woman who has menstruated and is thereby impure]. [Other individuals who are subject to Karet are]: One who blasphemes [curses God], or who worships idols, or who sacrifices his children to Molekh [a type of idolatry wherein one passes his child through fire or between flames],or a necromancer, or one who violates Shabbat, or an impure person who eats consecrated food, one who enters the Temple when impure, or one who eats forbidden fat, or who eats blood, or who eats Notar [a sacrifice that becomes unfit due to being unconsumed past the permitted time], or who eats Piggul [a sacrifice that becomes unfit due to the intention of the officiating priest while offering it, to consume it after its permitted time], or one who slaughters a sacrifice outside [the Temple precincts], or who offers up a sacrifice outside [the Temple precincts], or who eats leavened bread on Pesach, or who eats on Yom Kippur, or who does Melakhah [a constructive activity forbidden on Shabbat and festivals] on Yom Kippur, or one who prepares oil [after the manner of the Temple's anointing oil], or who prepares Ketoret [holy incense offered twice a day on the golden altar inside the Temple], or who anoints [himself] with the anointing oil. Positive commandments [whose neglect warrants Karet are]: The Passover offering, and circumcision. ",
+ "One is liable for Karet for intentionally [performing] these [sins listed in the previous Mishnah], and is obligated to bring a Chattat [an offering brought to expiate sin, if he performs] them unintentionally. [If one is unsure whether he committed one of] these he brings an Asham Talui [a guilt-offering brought upon possible commission of a sin]. [The latter] is not so [if one] entered the Temple while impure or ate holy food when impure, since he is liable to bring an Oleh veYored [a sliding-scale Chattat offering where the economic status of the individual determines whether he brings an animal, a bird, or flour], these are the words of Rabbi Meir. And the Sages say: The blasphemer [is also exempt from the Chattat and the Asham Talui], as it says (Numbers 15:29): \"You shall have one set of laws for those who act unintentionally\", which excludes the blasphemer who does not perform an act [speech is not considered action].",
+ "Some women bring a sacrifice which is eaten; and some women bring a sacrifice which is not eaten; and some do not bring [a sacrifice] at all. The following bring a sacrifice which is eaten: One who miscarries a fetus resembling a kind of animal, a wild beast, or fowl. These are the words of Rabbi Meir; whereas the Sages say: [No sacrifice is brought] unless the fetus has human form. [A woman] who miscarries a sandal-shaped fetus or a placenta, or a clearly-shaped fetus, or one which emerges in pieces; likewise a maidservant who has miscarried, bring sacrifices which are eaten.",
+ "These [women] bring sacrifices which are not eaten. One who miscarries but doesn't know what form she miscarried; similarly two women who miscarried, [where] one [miscarried] a type that is exempt from [a sacrifice] and one [miscarried] a type that demands [a sacrifice, and the two were mixed up]. Rabbi Yose says: When is this so? When one goes to the east and the other to the west; however if the two remain together, they each bring a sacrifice which is eaten.",
+ "These [women] do not bring [sacrifices]: One who miscarries an amnion full of water, blood, or varied material. One who miscarries the form of a fish, or the form of locusts, or creeping and crawling things, or one who miscarries [within] forty days [of her pregnancy], or who gives birth through Caesarean section. Rabbi Shimon deems liable [a woman] who gives birth through Caesarean section. ",
+ "[If] a woman miscarries on the eighty-first night [after giving birth], Beit Shammai exempt her from a sacrifice, [but] Beit Hillel obligate her. Beit Shammai said to Beit Hillel: How is the eighty-first night different from the eighty-first day; if they are the same with regard to one's purity, should they not be the same with regard to the sacrifice? Beit Shammai said to them: No, if you argue such when a woman miscarries on the eighty-first day which is a period when she could bring a sacrifice, would you also say [that] when she miscarries on the eighty-first night, a period when she cannot bring her sacrifice? Beit Hillel said to them: [The case of] a woman who miscarries on the eighty-first day which falls on Shabbat will prove [the point] since it [the miscarriage] did not occur at a period when she is fit to bring a sacrifice, and she is [nevertheless] liable for a sacrifice. Beit Shammai said to them: No, if you argue such when a woman miscarries on the eighty-first day that falls on Shabbat [that is] because even though that [time] is not fit for a personal offering, it is fit for a public offering; would you also say so of a miscarriage on the eighty-first night, when night is not fit for either a personal or a public offering? The blood also does not prove [the point] because the blood of one who miscarries during her time [after giving birth] is impure, but she is exempt from a sacrifice. ",
+ "[If] a woman had five doubtful blood discharges or five doubtful births, she brings one sacrifice, and she may eat sacrificial meat, and the others [pose] no obligation for her. [If a woman had] five certain births, [or] five certain blood discharges, she brings one sacrifice and may eat sacrificial meat, and the others [do pose further] obligations for her. It once happened in Jerusalem that the price of nest [a pair of sacrificial birds] stood at a golden Dinar [a specific unit of money]. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel said: By this sanctuary! I shall not sleep tonight until it costs a [silver] Dinar! He entered the court and taught:[If a woman] had five certain births, [or] five certain blood discharges, she brings one sacrifice and may eat sacrificial meat, and the others [pose] no obligations for her. And the price of a nest stood at a quarter of a [silver] Dinar. "
+ ],
+ [
+ "[There are] four [persons] who are [considered] Mechusar Kippurim [one who has purified himself via immersion but who still needs to bring a sacrifice before eating sacrificial meat], and [there are] four [persons] who bring a sacrifice for intentional transgressions as [they would] for unintentional transgressions. The following are Mechusar Kippurim: A Zav [a male who has certain types of atypical genital discharges, which render him impure], a Zavah [a female who has certain types of atypical genital discharges, distinct from her menses, which render her impure], a woman who has given birth, and a Metzora [one rendered severely impure from an unsightly skin disease; upon recovery and purification he must bring offerings]. Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov says: A convert [has the status of] a Mechusar Kapparah until the blood has been sprinkled [on the altar] for him; and Nazir [a person who swears abstention from all grape products like wine, from cutting his hair, and avoidance of corpse impurity] [depends on his sacrifices to be permitted] his wine, his hair-cutting and his impurity. ",
+ "The following bring a sacrifice for intentional transgression [of a sin] as [they would] for unintentional transgression: One who has relations with a Shifchah Charufah [a non-Jewish female slave partially freed, and betrothed to a Jewish slave]; and a Nazir who has become impure; and [one who has given a false] oath [denying knowledge of] testimony; and [one who has given a false] oath [denying possession of] a deposit. ",
+ "[There are] five [persons] who bring one sacrifice for multiple transgressions, and five [persons] who bring an Oleh veYored [a sliding-scale Chattat offering where the economic status of the individual determines whether he brings an animal, a bird, or flour]. The following bring one sacrifice for multiple transgressions: One who has relations with a Shifchah Charufah several times; and a Nazir who becomes impure multiple times; one who warns his wife [against being alone] with several [different] men; and a Metzora who is afflicted several times. If [the Metzora] has offered his birds and then become afflicted again, they do not fulfill his obligation until he has offered his Chattat [an offering brought to expiate sin]. Rabbi Yehudah says: [They do not fulfill his obligation] until he has offered his Asham [an offering brought to alleviate guilt]. ",
+ "[If] a woman has had multiple births and miscarried a female [fetus] within eighty days of the birth of a female [live child], and then she again miscarried a female within eighty days of the previous [miscarriage]; or if she miscarried twins, Rabbi Yehudah says: She brings [a sacrifice] for the first and not for the second, for the third but not for the fourth. The following [persons] bring an Oleh veYored: [One who] utters a [false] voice [oath denying testimony]; [one who makes] a false oath; one who [enters] the Temple [precincts] when impure or [who eats] sacred [food] when impure; a woman who has given birth; and the Metzora. What is the difference between [relations with] a Shifchah Charufah and all [other] forbidden unions? [The Torah] does not equate them either with regard to punishment or with regard to sacrifice. [Unintentional commission of] other forbidden unions [demands] a Chattat; and [relations with] a Shifchah Charufah [demands] an Asham. [The sacrifices brought in cases of] all forbidden unions [are] female animals; and [the sacrifice brought in the case of] a Shifchah Charufah is male. [In cases of] all forbidden unions both the man and the woman are equal with respect to lashes and the sacrifice; [in the case of] the Shifchah Charufah [the Torah] does not equate the man and the woman regarding the lashes, and [does not equate] the woman to the man regarding the sacrifice. [In cases of] all other forbidden unions sexual contact [is considered like] consummation, and one is liable for each act of intercourse. This a stringency that was applied to the Shifchah Charufah in that intentional transgression is [treated] like unintentional transgression. ",
+ "Who is a Shifchah Charufah? A woman who is half a slave and half free, as it is written: “And she has been redeemed and not redeemed” (Leviticus 19:20), these are the words of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Yishmael says: This [a Shifchah Charufah] is a full slave. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah says: All forbidden unions are stated explicitly [in the Torah], and what remains? We have only [a case] of one who is half a slave and half free. ",
+ "[In] all [cases of] forbidden unions, [if] one [partner] is an adult and the other a minor, the minor is exempt; if one is awake and the other asleep, the one asleep is exempt; if one [acts] unintentionally and the other intentionally, the one [acting] unintentionally is liable for a Chattat, and the one [acting] intentionally is liable for Karet [excision at the hands of Heaven]. "
+ ],
+ [
+ "If they [witnesses] said to an individual: You ate forbidden fat, he is liable for a Chattat [an offering brought to expiate sin]. If one witness says he ate, and [another] witness says he did not eat; or if a woman says he ate, and [another] woman says he did not eat, he is liable for an Asham Talui [a guilt-offering brought upon possible commission of a sin]. If one witness says he ate, and he [himself] says, \"I did not eat,\" he is exempt. [If] two [witnesses] say he ate, and he [himself] says, \"I did not eat,\" Rabbi Meir deems him is liable. Rabbi Meir said: Since two [witnesses are capable of] bringing upon him the severe [penalty] of death, can they not bring upon him the less severe [punishment of] a sacrifice? They [the Sages] said to him: Could he not argue, \"I did it intentionally\"? ",
+ "[If] one ate forbidden fat twice under one spell of unawareness, he is liable for one Chattat. If he ate forbidden fat, and blood, and Notar [a sacrifice that becomes unfit due to being unconsumed past the permitted time], and Piggul [a sacrifice that becomes unfit due to the intention of the officiating priest while offering it, to consume it after its permitted time] under one spell of unawareness, he is liable for each kind. This is [an instance] where different kinds [of material] are more stringent than one kind. And [there is] a stringency with one kind [of material] compared to several kinds such that if [one] ate half an olive-bulk [of forbidden material], and then again half an olive-size of the same kind, he is liable; [if the two pieces were] of two kinds, he is exempt. ",
+ "And how much time can elapse between eating them [for the pieces to be combined]? [The time it takes to] eat parched grains, these are the words of Rabbi Meir. But the Sages say: [They are combined if he waits up to] the time it takes to eat half a loaf of bread. If one ate impure foods or drank impure beverages, or if one drank a quarter [of a Log - a biblical unit of liquid measurement] of wine, and entered the Temple [precincts, he is liable if his consumption] took the amount of time it takes to eat half a loaf of bread. Rabbi Elazar says: If he interrupted [the drinking] or if he put even a trace amount of water in it, he is exempt. ",
+ "There is [a case where] one who does a single [act of] eating can become liable to four chata'ot and one Asham [an offering brought to alleviate guilt]: [If] an impure person ate forbidden fat which was Notar from a sacrifice, and it was Yom Kippur. Rabbi Meir says: If it was on Shabbat and he carried it out in his mouth he is liable [to yet another Chatat]. But they [the Sages] said to him: That is not in the same category [of sin, not being an eating infraction]. ",
+ "There is [a case where] one who commits a single [act of] intercourse can become liable for six chata'ot: One who has relations with his daughter, can be liable [if she is simultaneously] his daughter, and his sister, and his brother's wife, and his father's brother's wife, and a married woman, and a Niddah [a woman who has menstruated and is thereby impure]. One who has relations with his daughter’s daughter, can be liable [if she is simultaneously] his daughter's daughter, and his daughter-in-law, and his wife's sister, and his brother's wife, and his father's brother's wife, and a married woman, and a Niddah. Rabbi Yose said: If the grandfather transgressed [the law] and married her, he is liable because she is his father's wife. So too, if one had relations with his wife's daughter, or with his wife's daughter's daughter. ",
+ "[If] one had relations with his mother-in-law, he can be liable [if she is simultaneously] his mother-in-law, and his daughter-in-law, and his wife's sister, and his brother's wife, and his father's brother's wife, and a married woman, and a Niddah. And so too, if one had relations with the mother of his mother-in-law, or with the mother of his father-in-law. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri says: [If] one had relations with his mother-in-law, he can be liable due to her [being] his mother-in-law, and the mother of his mother-in-law, and the mother of his father-in-law. They [the Sages] said to him: All three are in the same category. ",
+ "Rabbi Akiva said: I asked Rabban Gamaliel and Rabbi Yehoshua at the meat-market of Emmaus where they went to buy beef for the wedding feast of Rabban Gamaliel's son: What [is the ruling if] one had relations with his sister, and his father's sister, and his mother's sister under one spell of unawareness? Is he liable for one [sacrifice] for all of them, or one [sacrifice each] for each of them? And they said to me: We have not heard [any teaching about this matter], but we have heard that if one had relations with his five wives who were Niddot under one spell of unawareness, he is liable for each [act], and it seems to us that [your case may be understood by employing] a fortiori reasoning. ",
+ "Rabbi Akiva further asked them: What [is the ruling regarding impurity] of a limb hanging loose from [the body of a living] animal? They said to him: We have not heard [any teaching about this matter], but we have heard that a limb hanging loose from [the body of] a man is pure. This is what one afflicted with boils would do in Jerusalem. On the eve of Pesach he would go to the doctor who would cut [the limb] until only a barley-corn [size of flesh] remained. He then stuck it on a thorn and tore himself away from it. Both he [the patient] and the doctor could [subsequently] bring their Passover offerings. And it seems to us that [your case may be understood by employing] a fortiori reasoning. ",
+ "Rabbi Akiva further asked them: What [is the ruling if] one slaughtered five sacrifices outside [the Temple precincts] under one spell of unawareness? Is he liable for one [sacrifice] for all of them, or one [sacrifice each] for each of them? They said to him: We have not heard [any teaching about this matter]. Rabbi Yehoshua said: I have heard that [if] one eats five dishes from one sacrifice under one spell of unawareness, he is liable for a [sacrifice] of Me'ilah [misuse of consecrated property] for each one of them, and it seems to me that [your case may be understood by employing] a fortiori reasoning. Rabbi Shimon said: This was not what Rabbi Akiva asked, but rather: What [is the ruling if] one ate Notar from five sacrifices under one spell of unawareness? Is he liable for one [sacrifice] for all of them, or one [sacrifice each] for each of them? They said to him: We have not heard [any teaching about this matter]. Rabbi Yehoshua said: I have heard that [if] one eats five dishes from one sacrifice under one spell of unawareness, he is liable for a [sacrifice] of Me'ilah for each one of them, and it seems to me that [your case may be understood by employing] a fortiori reasoning. Rabbi Akiva said: If this is a [received] law we shall accept it; but if it is a logical deduction, there is a rebuttal. He said to him: Rebut then! He said to him: No, though you say this with regard to Me'ilah where one who feeds another is as [responsible] as the one who eats, and the one who leads others to benefit is as [responsible] as the one who benefits; [and furthermore, small quantities are] reckoned together in [a case of] Me'ilah [even after the lapse of time]; can you say so with [regard to] Notar where none of these [laws applies]? ",
+ "Rabbi Akiva said: I asked Rabbi Eliezer: What [is the ruling] if one performs many acts within the same category of Melakhah [a constructive activity forbidden on Shabbat and festivals] on many Shabbatot under one spell of unawareness? Is he liable for one [sacrifice] for all of them, or one [sacrifice each] for each of them? He said to me: [We can reason through] a fortiori reasoning [that] he is liable for one [sacrifice] for each of them. If with regard to a Niddah [a woman who has menstruated and is thereby impure], for whom there are neither many categories nor many [possibilities to be liable for] chata'ot, one is still liable for each [act of congress with her, in the case of] Shabbat for which there are many categories [of activity] and many [possibilities to be liable for] chata'ot, is it not logical that one should be liable for each one? I said to him: No, though you say so regarding Niddah, that has two warnings, for he is warned regarding the Niddah, and the Niddah is warned regarding the man; can you say so regarding Shabbat which has just one warning? He said to me: One who has relations with [Niddah] minors [which is a prohibition] with just one warning will prove [the point since] he is liable for each one. I said to him: No, though you say so regarding one who has relations with minors, there even though there is no [prohibition] for them [that is, from the girls' perspective] now, there is [a prohibition] for them later; will you say so regarding Shabbat where there is no [second warning] either now nor later? He said to me: One who has relations with with an animal will prove [the point]. I said to him: [The reasoning regarding] an animal is comparable to [that regarding] Shabbat. "
+ ],
+ [
+ "[If] one was in doubt whether he ate forbidden fat or not; [or] even [if] one was in doubt whether he ate the minimum amount [in a case where he certainly] did eat; [or if there were] permitted fat and forbidden fat before him, and he ate one of them and does not know which of them he ate; [or if] his wife and his sister were with him in the house and he unthinkingly [had relations] with one of them and does not know with which of them he unthinkingly [had relations]; or if he performed a Melakhah [a constructive activity forbidden on Shabbat and festivals] and does not know whether he did it on Shabbat or a weekday; he brings an Asham Talui [a guilt-offering brought upon possible commission of a sin].",
+ "Just like a person who ate forbidden fat twice under one spell of unawareness is liable for only one Chattat [an offering brought to expiate sin], so too, when they are not known [the individual is not certain he sinned], he is liable for only one Asham Talui. If he became aware in the interim [between the two acts, that he might have sinned] he brings a separate Asham Talui for each [act], just as he would bring a separate Chattat for each [act]. Just like if one ate forbidden fat, and blood, and Notar [a sacrifice that becomes unfit due to being unconsumed past the permitted time], and Piggul [a sacrifice that becomes unfit due to the intention of the officiating priest while offering it, to consume it after its permitted time] under one spell of unawareness, he is liable for [a Chattat] for each one; so too, when they are not known, one brings a separate Asham Talui for each [forbidden food]. [If] forbidden fat and Notar [sat] before an individual and he ate one of them but does not know which one of them he ate; [or if] one's Niddah [a woman who has menstruated and is thereby impure] wife and his sister were with him in his house, and he unthinkingly had relations with one of them and does not know with whom he unthinkingly had relations; [or if] Shabbat and Yom Kippur [fell on consecutive days] and one performed Melakhah at dusk [between the days] and does not know on which day he acted: Rabbi Eliezer deems [him] liable for a Chattat, but Rabbi Yehoshua exempts [him]. Rabbi Yose said: They do not disagree that [a person] who did Melakhah at dusk is exempt since I can say that he performed part of the Melakhah on one day and part on the following day. About what do they disagree? About one who did Melakhah during the day [itself] but does not know whether he did it on Shabbat or he did it on Yom Kippur; or where he did [Melakhah] and does not know what category the Melakhah he did [falls into]: Rabbi Eliezer deems him liable for a Chattat, but Rabbi Yehoshua exempts [him]. Rabbi Yehudah said: Rabbi Yehoshua even exempts him from an Asham Talui",
+ "Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Shimon Shezuri say: They do not disagree regarding transgressions of the same type that an individual is liable. About what do they disagree? About transgressions of two different types: Rabbi Eliezer deems him liable for a Chattat, but Rabbi Yehoshua exempts [him]. Rabbi Yehudah said: Even if he intended to pick figs and he picked grapes, [or] grapes and he picked figs; [or he intended to pick] black [fruit] and he picked white ones; [or] white ones and he picked black ones, Rabbi Eliezer deems him liable for a Chattat, but Rabbi Yehoshua exempts [him]. Rabbi Yehudah said: I wonder whether Rabbi Yehoshua would exempt him [in such a case]. Why then is it written, “With which he has sinned” (Leviticus 4:23)? To exclude accidental action. "
+ ],
+ [
+ "One is liable [for ingesting] the blood [which emerges from] slaughtering an animal, a wild beast, or birds, whether [the blood is] pure or impure; [one is similarly liable for ingesting] blood [which emerges from] stabbing, [or from] tearing, [or from] bloodletting through which life escapes. One is not liable [for ingesting] the blood of the spleen, [or] the heart, [or] blood [found in] eggs, [or] blood of fish, [or] of locusts, or blood squeezed out. Rabbi Yehudah deems one liable for blood squeezed out. ",
+ "Rabbi Akiva deems one liable for an Asham Talui [a guilt-offering brought upon possible commission of a sin] for doubtful Me'ilah [misuse of consecrated property], but the Sages exempt [him]. And Rabbi Akiva admits that one does not pay his Me'ilah restitution until he becomes aware, whereupon he brings a certain Asham [an offering brought to alleviate guilt] with it. Rabbi Tarfon said: Why should he have to bring two Ashamot? Rather, let him bring the principal of the Me'ilah restitution [the value of the object he misused] with an [added fifth], and bring an Asham [a ram] worth two Sela [a Sela is a coin worth four Dinar] and say: If I committed Me'ilah, here is my restitution and this is my Asham; and if it [remains] uncertain, let the money be a donation and the [offering an] Asham Talui. [This is possible] since one brings the same type [of animal] for a case where [his behavior] is not known as one does where [his behavior] is known. ",
+ "Rabbi Akiva said to him: Your approach seems reasonable where the [value of the] Me'ilah is low; [but if] he happened to engage in doubtful Me'ilah with [an object worth] a hundred Maneh [a coin worth one hundred Dinar], would it not be worth his while to bring an Asham worth two Sela rather than bring a doubtful Me'ilah of a hundred Maneh? Thus Rabbi Akiba agrees with Rabbi Tarfon in a case where the [value of the] Me'ilah is low. [If] a woman brought a bird [for a] Chattat [an offering brought to expiate sin] out of doubt, then if prior to the piercing [of its neck] it became known to her that it was a certain birth, she offers it as a certain [Chattat]. [This is possible] since she brings the same type [of sacrifice] for a certain [birth] as she does for an uncertain [birth]. ",
+ "[If] a piece of non-sacred meat and a piece of sacred meat [sat before an individual and] he ate one of them but does not know which of them he ate, he is exempt. Rabbi Akiva deems him liable for an Asham Talui. [If] he [subsequently] ate the second [piece], he brings a certain Asham. If one person ate the first [piece] and another person came and ate the second one, each of them brings an Asham Talui, these are the words of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Shimon says: The two of them bring one Asham. Rabbi Yose says: Two people cannot bring one Asham. ",
+ "[If] a piece of non-sacred meat and a piece of forbidden fat [sat before an individual and] he ate one of them but does not know which of them he ate, he brings an Asham Talui. [If] he [subsequently] ate the second [piece], he brings a Chattat. [If] one person ate the first [piece] and another person came and ate the second one, each of them brings an Asham Talui, these are the words of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Shimon says: The two of them bring one Chattat. Rabbi Yose says: Two people cannot bring one Chattat. ",
+ "[If] a piece of forbidden fat and a piece of consecrated [permitted fat sat before an individual and] he ate one of them but does not know which of them he ate, he brings an Asham Talui. [If] he [subsequently] ate the second [piece], he brings a Chattat and a certain Asham. [If] one person ate the first [piece] and another came and ate the second one, each of them brings an Asham Talui. Rabbi Shimon says: The two of them bring one Chattat and one Asham. Rabbi Yose: Two people cannot bring one Chattat and one Asham. ",
+ "[If] a piece of forbidden fat and a piece of consecrated forbidden fat [sat before an individual and] he ate one of them but does not know which of them he ate, he brings a Chattat. Rabbi Akiva says: He brings an Asham Talui. [If] he [subsequently] ate the second piece, he brings two chata'ot and a certain Asham. [If] one person ate the first [piece] and another came and ate the second one, each of them brings a Chatat. Rabbi Akiva says: Each of them brings an Asham Talui. Rabbi Shimon says: Each of them brings a Chatat and the two of them bring one Asham. Rabbi Yose: Two people cannot bring one Asham. ",
+ "A piece of forbidden fat and another piece of forbidden fat [which was at the same time] remnant, and a person ate one of them and does not know which, he is liable to a sin offering and to a hanging guilt offering. If he then ate the second piece, he is liable to three sin offerings. If he ate one piece and another came and ate the other, each of them brings a sin offering and a hanging guilt offering. Rabbi Shimon says: this one brings a sin offering and this one brings a sin offering, and together they bring another sin offering. Rabbi Yose says: any sin offering that is brought for a sin two people cannot bring it. "
+ ],
+ [
+ "[If] one brings an Asham Talui [a guilt-offering brought upon possible commission of a sin] and it then becomes known to him that he did not sin: If it was before the animal was slaughtered, it goes out to graze among the flock, these are the words of Rabbi Meir. And the Sages say: It goes out to graze until it becomes blemished, whereupon it is sold, and the money goes for freewill-offerings. Rabbi Eliezer says: It is offered up, for if it does not come [atone] for this sin, it can come [atone] for another sin. If it becomes known [that he did not sin] after it was slaughtered, the blood is spilled out and the flesh goes out to the place of burning. If the blood has already been dashed [at the altar], the flesh may be eaten. Rabbi Yose says: Even if the blood is [still] in the vessel, it is dashed and the flesh is eaten. ",
+ "This is not so with a certain Asham [an offering brought to alleviate guilt]: If [the facts became known] before [the animal] was slaughtered, it goes out to graze among the flock; if after it was slaughtered, it is buried; if after the blood was dashed [at the altar], the flesh goes out to the place of burning. This is [also] not so with an ox [designated to be] stoned: If [it was discovered to be guilt-less] before it was stoned, it goes out to graze among the flock; if after it was stoned, benefit of its carcass is permitted. This is [also] not so with the Eglah Arufah [a calf whose neck is broken by elders of the closest town to atone for an unsolved murder]: If [the murderer was discovered] before its neck was broken, it goes out to graze among the flock; if after its neck was broken, it is buried at the place [of the ceremony]. [The calf] was brought from the outset as a matter of doubt, and since it has atoned for the doubt, it has served its purpose. ",
+ "Rabbi Eliezer says: One may freely donate an Asham Talui every day and at any time he pleases, and such an offering is called \"the Asham of the pious.\" They said of Bava ben Buti that he used to donate an Asham Talui every day except on the day after Yom Kippur. He used to say: By this Temple! Were they to allow me, I would offer one [even then], but they say to me: Wait until you reach a state of doubt. But the Sages say: One only brings an Asham Talui for a sin that warrants Karet [excision at the hands of Heaven, when the sin is committed] intentionally, and that warrants a Chattat [an offering brought to expiate sin, if he performs such a sin] unintentionally. ",
+ "[If] Yom Kippur passes [before] those who owe Chatta'ot or certain Ashamot [fulfill their obligations, they are still] required to bring them after Yom Kippur. Those who owe Ashamot Teluiyim are relieved [of their obligations]. [If] an individual possibly committed a sin on Yom Kippur, even at twilight, he is exempt, because the entire day atones. ",
+ "[If] a woman is liable for a bird Chattat out of doubt and Yom Kippur passes [before she brings it], she is required to bring it after Yom Kippur because it renders her fit to eat sacrificial meat. [In the case of] a bird Chattat brought out of doubt, [if the true facts] became known after the piercing of its neck, it is buried. ",
+ "[If] one designated two Sela [a Sela is a coin worth four Dinar] for an Asham and with them bought two rams for an Asham: if one was worth two Sela it is offered for his Asham, and the second one grazes until it becomes blemished, whereupon it is sold and the money is used for freewill-offerings. [If with the two designated Sela] he bought two rams for non-sacred use, one worth two Sela and the other worth ten Zuz [ten Zuz being equal to 2.5 Sela], that which is worth two Sela is offered for his Asham and the second one for his Me'ilah [misuse of consecrated property]. [If with the two designated Sela he bought two rams] one for an Asham and one for ordinary use, if the one for the Asham was worth two Sela it is offered for his Asham and the second one [is offered] for his Me'ilah and with it he brings a Sela and its [additional] fifth. ",
+ "[If an individual] set aside his Chattat and then died, his son cannot offer it after him [to atone for his own sin]. And one may not offer [an offering that was set aside to atone] for one sin for [atonement of] another sin, even if he had set aside [a Chattat] for forbidden fat that he had eaten yesterday, he may not offer it for forbidden fat that he has eaten today, for it states, “His offering... for his sin” (Leviticus 4:28) - his offering must be for the sake of his [specific] sin. ",
+ "[If one] set aside money to buy a lamb [for a Chattat, he may use the money to buy] a goat; [if he set aside money] to buy a goat [he may use the money to buy] a lamb. [If one] set aside money to buy a lamb or a goat, [he may use the money to buy] turtle-doves or pigeons. [If one] set aside money to buy turtle-doves or pigeons, [he may use the money to buy] a tenth of an Eifah [of flour, such a measure weighing about two kilograms]. How so? [If] one set aside [money] for a lamb or for a goat and becomes poor [before bringing the Chattat], he brings a bird [with the money]; if he becomes poorer still [before bringing the Chattat] he brings a tenth of an Eifah [with the money]. [Conversely, if] one set aside [money] for the tenth of an Eifah and becomes rich [before bringing the Chattat], he brings a bird-offering [with the money]; if he becomes richer still [before bringing the Chattat], he brings a lamb or a goat. [If one] set aside a lamb or a goat which became blemished, if he wants he may [redeem the animal by selling it and] use the money to bring a bird-offering.[If one] set aside a bird-offering which became blemished, he may [redeem it to] use the money to bring a tenth of an Eifah since a bird-offering cannot be redeemed. ",
+ "Rabbi Shimon says: Lambs precede goats in all places [in the Torah]. You might think [that is] because they are choicer than those are, [therefore] the Torah states, “And if he bring a lamb as his Chattat offering” (Leviticus 4:32), which teaches that both are equal. Turtle-doves precede pigeons in all places [in the Torah]. You might think [that is] because they are choicer than those are, [therefore] the Torah states, “A pigeon or a turtle-dove for a Chattat” (Leviticus 12:6), which teaches that both are equal. The father precedes the mother in all places [in the Torah]. You might think [that is because] the honor due to a father exceeds the honor due to a mother, [therefore] the Torah states, “Every man shall fear his mother and his father” (Leviticus 19:3), which teaches that both are equal. But the Sages say: The father precedes the mother in all places, because both he [the child] and his mother are bound to honor the father. And similarly with the study of the Torah: if a son has the privilege [to study] before a teacher, the teacher precedes the father in all places, because [both the child] and his father are bound to honor the teacher."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de].json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de].json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..809336fa2b0dac3c3003d94952b225cd3e6aa8b0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de].json
@@ -0,0 +1,81 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Keritot",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001042448/NLI",
+ "versionTitle": "Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de]",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 0.25,
+ "license": "Public Domain",
+ "digitizedBySefaria": true,
+ "actualLanguage": "de",
+ "languageFamilyName": "german",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה כריתות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "SECHSUNDDREISSIG MIT DER AUSROTTUNG BELEGTE VERGEHEN GIBT ES IN DER TORA. WER SEINER MUTTER, DER FRAU SEINES VATERS ODER SEINER SCHWIEGERTOCHTER BEIWOHNT, WER EINEN MANN ODER EIN VIEH BESCHLÄFT, ODER WENN EIN WEIB SICH VON EINEM VIEH BESCHLAFEN LÄSST, WER EINER FRAU UND IHRER TOCHTER, EINER EHEFRAU, SEINER SCHWESTER, DER SCHWESTER SEINES VATERS, DER SCHWESTER SEINER MUTTER, DER SCHWESTER SEINER FRAU, DER FRAU SEINES BRUDERS, DER FRAU DES BRUDERS SEINES VATERS, DER FRAU DES BRUDERS SEINER MUTTER ODER EINER MENSTRUIERENDEN BEIWOHNT, WER GOTT LÄSTERT, GÖTZEN DIENT, VON SEINEM SAMEN DEM MOLEKH HINGIBT, TOTE BESCHWÖRT, DEN ŠABBATH ENTWEIHT, UNREIN GEHEILIGTES ISST ODER UNREIN DAS HEILIGTUM BETRITT, WER TALG, BLUT, ÜBRIGGEBLIEBENES ODER VERWERFLICHES ISST, WER AUSSERHALB SCHLACHTET UND DARBRINGT, WER GESÄUERTES AM PESAḤFESTE ISST, WER AM VERSÖHNUNGSTAGE ISST ODER EINE ARBEIT VERRICHTET, WER DAS SALBÖL MENGT, DAS RÄUCHERWERK MENGT, ODER SICH MIT DEM SALBÖL SCHMIERT, WER DAS GEBOT DES PESAḤOPFERS UND DER BESCHNEIDUNG ÜBERTRITT.",
+ "WEGEN DIESER MACHT MAN SICH BEI VORSÄTZLICHKEIT DER AUSROTTUNG SCHULDIG, BEI UNVORSÄTZLICHKEIT IST EIN SÜNDOPFER DARZUBRINGEN, UND IST MAN SICH DESSEN NICHT SICHER BEWUSST, EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER, AUSGENOMMEN IST DIE VERUNREINIGUNG DES HEILIGTUMES UND DES GEHEILIGTEN, WEGEN WELCHER EIN AUFUND ABSTEIGENDES OPFER DARZUBRINGEN IST – SO R. MEÍR; DIE WEISEN SAGEN, AUCH DER GOTTESLÄSTERER, DENN ES HEISST ein Gesetz Sei euch für den, der aus Versehen etwas tut, AUSGENOMMEN DER GOTTESLÄSTERER, DER KEINE TÄTIGKEIT AUSÜBT.",
+ "MANCHE WÖCHNERINNEN BRINGEN EIN OPFER, UND ES IST ZU ESSEN, MANCHE BRINGEN EIN OPFER, UND ES IST NICHT ZU ESSEN, UND MANCHE BRINGEN ÜBERHAUPT KEINES. MANCHE BRINGEN EIN OPFER, UND ES IST ZU ESSEN: DIE ETWAS VIEH-, WILD- ODER VOGELARTIGES ABORTIERT HAT – SO R. MEÍR; DIE WEISEN SAGEN, NUR WENN ETWAS MENSCHENÄHNLICHES DARAN WAR. DIE EINEN SANDEL, EINE NACHGEBURT ODER EINE ENTWICKELTE EIHAUT ABORTIERT HAT, ODER WENN DIE GEBURT ZERSTÜCKELT HERAUSKAM. EBENSO BRINGT EINE SKLAVIN, DIE ABORTIERT HAT, EIN OPFER, UND ES IST ZU ESSEN.",
+ "FOLGENDE BRINGEN EINES UND ES IST NICHT ZU ESSEN: DIE ABORTIERT HAT UND NICHT WEISS, WAS SIE ABORTIERT HAT, UND ZWEI FRAUEN, DIE ABORTIERT HABEN, EINE, WAS ZUM OPFER NICHT VERPFLICHTET, UND EINE, WAS DAZU VERPFLICHTET. R. JOSE SAGTE: NUR DANN, WENN EINE NACH OSTEN UND EINE NACH WESTEN GEGANGEN IST, WENN ABER BEIDE DASTEHEN, SO BRINGEN BEIDE EIN OPFER, UND ES IST ZU ESSEN.",
+ "FOLGENDE BRINGEN KEINES: DIE EINE EIHAUT VOLL WASSER, VOLL BLUT ODER VOLL VERSCHIEDENER GEBILDE ABORTIERT HAT, DIE ETWAS FISCH-, HEUSCHREKKEN-, EKELTIER- ODER KRIECHTIERARTIGES ABORTIERT HAT, DIE AM VIERZIGSTEN TAGEEINE FEHLGEBURT ABORTIERT HAT, UND DIE EINE SEITENGEBURT ZUR WELT GEBRACHT HAT. R. ŠIMO͑N VERPFLICHTET DAZU BEI EINER SEITENGEBURT.",
+ "WENN EINE FRAU IN DER NACHT ZUM EINUNDACHTZIGSTEN TAGEFEHLGEBIERT, SO IST SIE NACH DER SCHULE ŠAMMAJS VON EINEM OPFER FREI UND NACH DER SCHULE HILLELS DAZUVERPFLICHTET. DIE SCHULE HILLELS SPRACH ZU DER SCHULE ŠAMMAJS: WELCHEN UNTERSCHIED GIBT ES DENN ZWISCHEN DER NACHT ZUM EINUNDACHTZIGSTEN TAGE UND DEM EINUNDACHTZIGSTEN TAGE, WENN SIE IHM HINSICHTLICH DER UNREINHEITGLEICHT, WIESO SOLLTE SIE IHM NICHT HINSICHTLICH DES OPFERS GLEICHEN!? DIE SCHULE ŠAMMAJS ERWIDERTE: NEIN, WENN IHR DIES VON DER FEHLGEBURT AM EINUNDACHTZIGSTEN TAGE SAGT, DIE ZU EINER FÜR DIE DARBRINGUNG DES OPFERS GEEIGNETEN ZEIT GEKOMMEN IST, WOLLT IHR DIES AUCH VON DER FEHLGEBURT IN DER NACHT ZUM EINUNDACHTZIGSTEN TAGE SAGEN, DIE NICHT ZU EINER FÜR DIE DARBRINGUNG DES OPFERS GEEIGNETEN ZEIT GEKOMMEN IST!? DIE SCHULE HILLELS ENTGEGNETE: DIE FEHLGEBURT AM EINUNDACHTZIGSTEN TAGE, DER AUF EINEN ŠABBATH FÄLLT, BEWEIST DAS ENTGEGENGESETZTE: SIE IST NICHT ZU EINER FÜR DIE DARBRINGUNG DES OPFERS GEEIGNETEN ZEITGEKOMMEN, DENNOCH IST DIE FRAU ZU EINEM OPFER VERPFLICHTET. DIE SCHULE ŠAMMAJS ERWIDERTE: NEIN, WENN IHR DIES VON DER FEHLGEBURT AM EINUNDACHTZIGSTEN TAGE SAGT, DER AUF EINEN ŠABBATH FÄLLT, DER, WENN AUCH NICHT FÜR PRIVATOPFER, IMMERHIN FÜR GEMEINDEOPFER GEEIGNET IST, WOLLT IHR DIES AUCH VON DER FEHLGEBURT IN DER NACHT ZUM EINUNDACHTZIGSTEN TAGE SAGEN, WO DOCH DIE NACHT WEDER FÜR PRIVATOPFER NOCH FÜR GEMEINDEOPFER GEEIGNET IST!? DIE BLUTUNREINHEITBEWEIST ABER NICHTS; AUCH WENN SIE INNERHALB DER REINHEITSTAGEABORTIERT, 1ST DAS BLUT UNREIN, DENNOCH IST SIE VOM OPFER BEFREIT.",
+ "HAT EINE FRAU FÜNF ZWEIFELHAFTE GEBURTSFÄLLEODER FÜNF ZWEIFELHAFTE FLUSSFÄLLE, SO BRINGE SIE EIN OPFER, UND SIE DARF VON SCHLACHTOPFERN ESSEN, UND WEGEN DER ÜBRIGEN BESTEHT FÜR SIE KEINE PFLICHT. WENN FÜNF ZWEIFELLOSE FLUSSFÄLLE ODER ZWEIFELLOSE GEBURTSFÄLLE, SO BRINGE SIE EIN OPFER, UND SIE DARF VON SCHLACHTOPFERN ESSEN, UND AUCH WEGEN DER ÜBRIGEN OPFER BESTEHT FÜR SIE EINE PFLICHT. EINST EREIGNETE ES SICH, DASS IN JERUŠALEM TAUBENPAAREAUF GOLDDENARE GESTIEGEN WAREN. DA SPRACH R. ŠIMO͑N B. GAMLIÉL: BEI DIESEM TEMPEL, ICH GEHE DIESE NACHT NICHT EHER SCHLAFEN, ALS BIS SIE FÜR SILBERDENARE ZU HABEN SIND. HIERAUF BEGAB ER SICH ZUM GERICHTSHÖFE UND LEHRTE: WENN EINE FRAU FÜNF ZWEIFELLOSE GEBURTSFÄLLE ODER FÜNF ZWEIFELLOSE FLUSSFÄLLE HAT, SO BRINGE SIE EIN OPFER DAR, UND SIE DARF VON SCHLACHTOPFERN ESSEN, UND WEGEN DER ÜBRIGEN BESTEHT FÜR SIE KEINE PFLICHT. AN JENEM TAGE FIEL DAS TAUBENPAAR AUF EIN VIERTEL SILBERDENAR."
+ ],
+ [
+ "VIER BENÖTIGEN DER SÜHNE UND VIER HABEN EIN OPFER DARZUBRINGEN BEI VORSÄTZLICHKEIT WIE BEI UNVORSÄTZLICHKEIT. FOLGENDE BENÖTIGEN DER SÜHNE: DER FLUSSBEHAFTETE, DIE FLUSSBEHAFTETE, DIE WÖCHNERIN UND (DER) AUSSÄTZIGE. R. ELIE͑ZER B. JA͑QOB SAGT, EIN PROSELYT ERLANGE SÜHNE ERST WENN MAN FÜR IHN DAS BLUT GESPRENGT HAT, EBENSO EIN NAZIRÄER HINSICHTLICH DES WEINTRINKENS, DES HAARSCHNEIDENS UND DER VERUNREINIGUNG.",
+ "FOLGENDE BRINGEN EIN OPFER BEI VORSÄTZLICHKEIT WIE BEI UNVORSÄTZLICHKEIT: WER EINER SKLAVINBEIGEWOHNT HAT, EIN NAZIRÄER, DER SICH VERUNREINIGT HAT, UND WER EINEN ZEUGENEID ODER EINEN DEPOSITENEID FALSCH GESCHWOREN HAT.",
+ "FÜNF BRINGEN EIN OPFER WEGEN MEHRERER SÜNDEN, UND FÜNF BRINGEN EIN AUF- UND ABSTEIGENDESOPFER. FOLGENDE BRINGEN EIN OPFER WEGEN MEHRERER SÜNDEN: WER EINER SKLAVIN MEHRMALS BEIGEWOHNT HAT, UND EIN NAZIRÄER, DER SICH WIEDERHOLT VERUNREINIGT HAT. WERSEINE FRAU WEGEN MEHRERER MÄNNER VERWARNTHAT, UND EIN AUSSÄTZIGER, DER WIEDERHOLT VOM AUSSATZE BEFALLENWORDEN IST. WENN ER DIE VÖGEL GEBRACHT HAT UND WIEDERUM AUSSÄTZIG GEWORDEN IST, SO WERDEN SIE IHM NICHT ANGERECHNET, BIS ER SEIN SÜNDOPFER GEBRACHT HAT; R. JEHUDA SAGT, BIS ER SEIN SCHULDOPFER GEBRACHT HAT.",
+ "WELCHEN UNTERSCHIED GIBT ES ZWISCHEN EINER SKLAVINUND ALLEN ANDEREN INZESTUÖSEN, DENEN SIE NICHT GLEICHT, WEDER HINSICHTLICH DER STRAFE NOCH HINSICHTLICH DES OPFERS? WEGEN ALLER ANDEREN INZESTUÖSEN IST EIN SÜNDOPFER DARZUBRINGEN, WEGEN EINER SKLAVIN ABER EIN SCHULDOPFER; WEGEN ALLER ANDEREN INZESTUÖSEN EIN MÄNNLICHES TIER, WEGEN EINER SKLAVIN ABER EIN WEIBLICHES; BEI ALLEN ANDEREN INZESTFÄLLEN GLEICHEN DER MANN UND DAS WEIB EINANDER HINSICHTLICH DER GEISSELUNGUND HINSICHTLICH DES OPFERS, BEI DER SKLAVIN ABER GLEICHT DER MANN NICHT DEM WEIBE HINSICHTLICH DER GEISSELUNG, UND DAS WEIB NICHT DEM MANNEHINSICHTLICH DES OPFERS; BEI ALLEN ANDEREN INZESTFÄLLEN GLEICHT DIE ANSCHMIEGUNGDEM VOLLENDETEN BEISCHLAF UND MAN IST WEGEN JEDES GESCHLECHTSAKTES BESONDERSSCHULDIG; ENDLICH IST ES BEI DER SKLAVIN STRENGER, INDEM BEIDIESER DIE VORSÄTZLICHKEITDER VERSEHENTLICHKEIT GLEICHT.",
+ "VON WELCHER SKLAVIN SPRICHT ER? DIE HALB SKLAVIN UND HALB FREIE IST, DENN ES HEISST:und ganz ausgelöst ist sie noch nicht worden – SO R. JEHUDA. R. JIŠMA͑ÉL SAGT, DIE EINE RICHTIGE SKLAVIN IST. R. ELIE͑ZER B. JA͑QOBSAGTE: BEI ALLEN ANDEREN INZESTUÖSEN IST DIESKLAR, UND BEI EINER SKLAVIN BLEIBT DER FALL ZURÜCK, WENN SIE HALB SKLAVIN UND HALB FREIE IST.",
+ "BEI ALLEN ANDEREN INZESTFÄLLEN IST, WENN EIN TEIL GROSSJÄHRIG UND EINER MINDERJÄHRIG IST, DER MINDERJÄHRIGEFREI; WENN EINER WACH UND EINER IM SCHLAFE WAR, DER IM SCHLAFE WAR, FREI; WENN EINER VERSEHENTLICH UND EINER VORSÄTZLICH, DER VERSEHENTLICH GEHANDELT HAT, EIN SÜNDORFER, UND DER VORSÄTZLICH, DER AUSROTTUNG SCHULDIG."
+ ],
+ [
+ "WENN SIE ZU EINEM SAGEN: DU HAST TALG GEGESSEN, SO MUSS ER EIN SÜNDOPFER BRINGEN. WENN EIN ZEUGE SAGT, ER HABE GEGESSEN, UND EIN ZEUGE SAGT, ER HABE NICHT GEGESSEN, WENN EINE FRAU SAGT, ER HABE GEGESSEN, UND EINE FRAU SAGT, ER HABE NICHT GEGESSEN, SO MUSS ER EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER BRINGEN. WENN EIN ZEUGE SAGT, ER HABE GEGESSEN, UND ER SELBER SAGT, ER HABE NICHT GEGESSEN, SO IST ER FREI; WENN ZWEI SAGEN, ER HABE GEGESSEN, UND ER SELBER SAGT, ER HABE NICHT GEGESSEN, SO IST ER NACH R. MEÍR SCHULDIG. R. MEÍR SPRACH: WENN ZWEI IHN ZUR SCHWEREN TODESSTRAFE BRINGEN, WIE SOLLTEN SIE IHN NICHT ZUM LEICHTEREN OPFER BRINGEN KÖNNEN. SIE ERWIDERTEN IHM: WIE ABER, WENN ER SAGT, ER HABE ES VORSÄTZLICH GETAN; DANN IST ER JA FREI.",
+ "HAT ER BEI EINEM ENTFALLEN TALG GEGESSEN UND ABERMALS TALG GEGESSEN, SO IST ER NUR EINMAL SCHULDIG; HAT ER TALG, BLUT, VERWERFLICHES UND ÜBRIGGEBLIEBENES BEI EINEM ENTFALLEN GEGESSEN, SO IST ER WEGEN JEDES BESONDERS SCHULDIG. HIERIN IST ES BEI MEHREREN ARTEN STRENGER ALS BEI EINER ART, IN FOLGENDEM ABER IST ES BEI EINER ART STRENGER ALS BEI MEHREREN. ARTEN: HAT MAN BEI EINEM ENTFALLEN EINE HALBE OLIVE GEGESSEN UND WIEDERUM EINE HALBE OLIVE GEGESSEN, SO IST MAN, WENN VON EINER ART, SCHULDIG, UND WENN VON ZWEI ARTEN, FREI.",
+ "WIE LANGE KANN, DER SIE GEGESSEN HAT, DABEI VERBRACHTHABEN? ALS WENN MAN GERÖSTETE ÄHRENISST – SO R. MEÍR. DIE WEISEN SAGEN, NUR WENN ER VOM ANFANG BIS ZUM ENDE DABEI SOLANGE VERBRACHT HAT, ALS MAN EIN PERAS ISST, SEI ER SCHULDIG. WER UNREINE SPEISEN GEGESSEN ODER UNREINE GETRANKE GETRUNKEN HAT, ODER WEREIN VIERTELLOG WEIN GETRUNKEN HAT, UND IN DAS HEILIGTUM GETRETEN ISTUND DA SOLANGE VERWEILT HAT, ALS MAN EIN PERAS ISST, IST SCHULDIG. R. ELEA͑ZAU SAGT, HAT ERDABEI UNTERBROCHEN ODER ETWAS WASSER HINEINGETAN, SEI ER FREI.",
+ "MANCHER ISST EINE SPEISE UND IST DIESERHALB VIER SÜNDOPFER UND EIN SCHULDOPFER SCHULDIG: WENN EIN UNREINER VON OPFERN ÜBRIGGEBLIEBENEN TALG AM VERSÖHNUNGSTAGE GEGESSEN HAT. R. MEÍR SAGTE: WENN ES AN EINEM ŠABBATH WAR UND ER IHN IM MUNDE HINAUSGEBRACHT HAT, IST ER AUCH DIESERHALB SCHULDIG. SIE ERWIDERTEN IHM: DIES GEHÖRT NICHT ZU DIESEM RUBRUM.",
+ "MANCHER VOLLZIEHT EINEN BEISCHLAF UND IST DIESERHALB SECHS SÜNDOPFER SCHULDIG, UND ZWAR: WENN JEMAND SEINER TOCHTERBEIWOHNT, SO KANN ER SICH SCHULDIG MACHEN WEGEN INZESTES MIT SEINER TOCHTER, SEINER SCHWESTER, DER FRAU SEINES BRUDERS, DER FRAU DES BRUDERS SEINES VATERS, EINES EHEWEIBES UND EINER MENSTRUIERENDEN. WENN JEMAND DER TOCHTER SEINER TOCHTER BEIWOHNT, SO KANN ER SICH SCHULDIG MACHEN WEGEN INZESTES MIT DER TOCHTER SEINER TOCHTER, SEINER SCHWIEGERTOCHTER, DER FRAU SEINES BRUDERS, DER FRAU DES BRUDERS SEINES VATERS, DER SCHWESTER SEINER FRAU, EINES EHEWEIBES UND EINER MENSTRUIERENDEN. R. JOSE SAGT, HAT DER ALTE DAS VERBOT ÜBERTRETEN UND SIE GEHEIRATET, SEI ER SCHULDIG AUCH WEGEN EINER FRAU SEINES VATERS. DESGLEICHEN AUCH,WENN JEMAND DER TOCHTER SEINER FRAU ODER DER TOCHTER IHRER TOCHTER BEIWOHNT.",
+ "WENN JEMAND SEINER SCHWIEGERMUTTER BEIWOHNT, SO KANN ER SICH SCHULDIG MACHEN WEGEN INZESTES MIT SEINER SCHWIEGERMUTTER, SEINER SCHWIEGERTOCHTER, DER FRAU SEINES BRUDERS, DER FRAU DES BRUDERS SEINES VATERS, DER SCHWESTER SEINER FRAU, EINES EHEWEIBES UND EINER MENSTRUIERENDEN. DESGLEICHEN AUCH, WENN JEMAND DER MUTTER SEINES SCHWIEGERVATERS ODER DER MUTTER SEINER SCHWIEGERMUTTER BEIWOHNT. R. JOḤANAN B. NURI SAGT, WER SEINER SCHWIEGERMUTTER BEIWOHNT, SEI SCHULDIG WEGEN SEINER SCHWIEGERMUTTER, DER MUTTER SEINER SCHWIEGERMUTTERUND DER MUTTER SEINES SCHWIEGERVATERS. SIE SPRACHEN ZU IHM: BEI ALLEN DREIEN IST ES DAS GLEICHE VERBOT.",
+ "R. A͑QIBA SAGTE: ICH FRAGTE R. GAMLIÉL, UND R. JEHOŠUA͑ AUF DEM FLEISCHMARKTE ZU EMMAUS, WO SIE GEGANGEN WAREN, EIN VIEH FÜR DAS HOCHZEITSMAHL DES SOHNES R. GAMLIÉLS ZU KAUFEN: WIE IST ES, WENN JEMAND SEINER SCHWESTER, DER SCHWESTER SEINES VATERS UND DER SCHWESTER SEINER MUTTER BEIGEWOHNTHAT: IST ER WEGEN ALLER ZUSAMMEN SCHULDIG, ODER IST ER WEGEN JEDER BESONDERS SCHULDIG? SIE ERWIDERTEN MIR: WIR HAREN DARÜBER NICHTS GEHÖRT; WIR HABEN ABER GEHÖRT, WER SEINEN FÜNF MENSTRUIERENDEN FRAUEN BEI EINEM ENTFALLEN BEIGEWOHNT HAT, SEI WEGEN JEDER BESONDERS SCHULDIG, UND ES SCHEINT UNS, DASS HIERVON EIN SCHLUSS VOM LEICHTEREN AUF DAS SCHWEREREZU FOLGERN IST.",
+ "FERNER FRAGTE R. A͑QIBA: WIE VERHÄLT ES SICH MIT EINEM AN EINEM TIERE LOSEHÄNGENDEN GLIEDE? SIE ERWIDERTEN IHM: WIR HABEN DARÜBER NICHTS GEHÖRT; WIR HABEN ABER GEHÖRT, DASS EIN AN EINEM MENSCHEN LOSE HÄNGENDES GLIED REIN SEI. DIE GRINDIGENIN JERUŠALEM VERFUHREN NÄMLICH WIE FOLGT. DER ERKRANKTE GING AM VORABEND DES PESAḤFESTESZUM ARZTE, UND DIESER SCHNITT IHM DAS GLIED AB BIS AUF EINE HAARBREITE, DIE ER ZURÜCKLIESS, SODANN BEFESTIGTE ER ES AN EINEN DORN UND JENER RISS SICH DAVON LOS. SO KONNTE DIESER SEIN PESAḤOPFER HERRICHTEN UND DER ARZT SEIN PESAḤOPFER HERRICHTEN. UND UNS SCHEINT, DASS HIERVON EIN SCHLUSS VOM SCHWEREREN AUF DAS LEICHTERE ZU FOLGERN IST.",
+ "FERNER FRAGTE SIE R. A͑QIBA: WIE IST ES, WENN JEMAND AUSSERHALB FÜNF SCHLACHTOPFER BEI EINEM ENTFALLEN GESCHLACHTET HAT: IST ER WEGEN EINES JEDEN BESONDERS SCHULDIG ODER EINMAL WEGEN ALLER? SIE ERWIDERTEN IHM: WIR HABEN DARÜBER NICHTS GEHÖRT. HIERAUF SPRACH R. JEHOŠUA͑: ICH HABE GEHÖRT, DASS, WENN JEMAND VON EINEM SCHLACHTOPFER AUS FÜNF SCHÜSSELN BEI EINEM ENTFALLEN GEGESSEN HAT, ER WEGEN JEDES BESONDERS WEGEN VERUNTREUUNG SCHULDIG SEI; UND MIR SCHEINT ES, DASS HIERVON EIN SCHLUSS VOM LEICHTEREN AUF DAS SCHWEREREZU FOLGERN IST. R. ŠIMO͑N SPRACH: NICHT DIES FRAGTE R. A͑QIBA, SONDERN WIE ES SEI, WENN JEMAND ÜBRIGGEBLIEBENES VON FÜNF SCHLACHTOPFERN BEI EINEM ENTFALLEN GEGESSEN HAT; IST ER EINMAL WEGEN ALLER SCHULDIG, ODER IST ER WEGEN JEDES BESONDERS SCHULDIG? SIE ERWIDERTEN IHM: WIR HABEN DARÜBER NICHTS GEHÖRT. HIERAUF SPRACH R. JEHOŠUA͑: ICH HABE GEHÖRT, DASS, WENN JEMAND VON EINEM SCHLACHTOPFER AUS FÜNF SCHÜSSELN BEI EINEM ENTFALLEN GEGESSEN HAT, ER WEGEN JEDES BESONDERS WEGEN VERUNTREUUNG SCHULDIG SEI; UND MIR SCHEINT ES, DASS HIERVON EIN SCHLUSS VOM LEICHTEREN AUF DAS SCHWEREREZU FOLGERN IST. DA SPRACH R. A͑QIBA ZU IHM: IST ES EINE ÜBERLIEFERTE HALAKHA, SO MÜSSEN WIR ES ANERKENNEN, WENN ABER EINE SCHLUSSFOLGERUNG, SO GIBT ES EINE EINWENDUNG. JENER SPRACH: SO WENDE EIN. DIESER ERWIDERTE: NEIN, WENN DIES VON DER VERUNTREUUNG GILT, WOBEI DERJENIGE, DER ANDEREN ZU ESSEN GIBT, DEM ESSENDEN GLEICHT, WOBEI DERJENIGE, DER ANDEREN ZUR NUTZNIESSUNG GIBT, DEM NUTZNIESSENDEN GLEICHT, UND WOBEI FERNER DIE VERUNTREUUNGEN WÄHREND EINER LÄNGEREN ZEITVEREINIGT WERDEN, SOLLTE DIES AUCH VOM ÜBRIGGEBLIEBENEN GELTEN, WOBEI KEINES DAVON DER FALL IST!?",
+ "R. A͑QIBA SAGTE: ICH FRAGTE R. ELIE͑ZER: WIE IST ES, WENN JEMAND MEHRERE ZU EINER HAUPTARBEITGEHÖRENDE ARBEITEN AN MEHREREN ŠABBATHEN BEI EINEM ENTFALLEN ENTRICHTET HAT: IST ER EINMAL WEGEN ALLER SCHULDIG, ODER IST ER WEGEN JEDER BESONDERS SCHULDIG? ER ERWIDERTE MIR: ER IST WEGEN JEDER BESONDERS SCHULDIG. DIES IST DURCH EINEN SCHLUSS VOM LEICHTEREN AUF DAS SCHWERERE ZU FOLGERN: WENN MAN WEGEN EINER MENSTRUIERENDEN, BEI DER ES KEINE VERSCHIEDENEN ABARTENUND KEINE VERSCHIEDENEN SÜNDOPFERGIBT, WEGEN JEDER BEIWOHNUNG BESONDERS SCHULDIG IST, UM WIEVIEL MEHR IST MAN BEIM ŠABBATH, WOBEI ES VERSCHIEDENE ABARTEN UND VERSCHIEDENE SÜNDOPFERGIBT, WEGEN JEDER ARBEIT BESONDERS SCHULDIG. ICH ENTGEGNETE IHM: WENN DIES BEI DER MENSTRUIERENDEN GILT, BEI DER ES ZWEI VERBOTE SIND, DENN IHM IST DIE MENSTRUIERENDE VERBOTEN UND DER MENSTRUIERENDEN IST ER VERBOTEN, SOLLTE DIES AUCH BEIM ŠABBATE GELTEN, WOBEI ES NUR EIN VERBOT IST!? ER ERWIDERTE MIR: DIE BEIWOHNUNG VON MINDERJAHRIGENBEWEIST DAS ENTGEGENGESETZTE: HIERBEI IST ES NUR EIN VERBOT, UND ER IST WEGEN JEDER BESONDERS SCHULDIG. ICH ENTGEGNETE IHM: WENN DIES BEI MINDERJÄHRIGEN GILT, BEI DENEN DIES ZWAR ZUR ZEIT NICHT ZUTRIFFT, ABER IMMERHIN SPÄTER ZUTRIFFT, SOLLTE DIES AUCH BEIM ŠABBATH GELTEN, WOBEI DIES WEDER ZUR ZEIT NOCH SPÄTER ZUTRIFFT!? ER ERWIDERTE MIR: DIE BESCHLAFUNG EINES VIEHSBEWEIST DAS ENTGEGENGESETZTE. ICH ERWIDERTE IHM: BEIM VIEH IST ES EBENSO WIE BEIM ŠABBATHGESETZE."
+ ],
+ [
+ "IST ER IM ZWEIFEL, OB ER TALG GEGESSEN ODER NICHT GEGESSEN HAT, UND SELBST WENN ER SICHER GEGESSEN HAT, ABER IM ZWEIFEL IST, OB ES DAS QUANTUM HATTE ODER NICHT, WENN FETT UND TALG VOR IHM WAREN UND ER EINES VON IHNEN GEGESSEN HAT, UND NICHT WEISS, WELCHES VON IHNEN ER GEGESSEN HAT, WENN SEINE FRAU UND SEINE SCHWESTER MIT IHM IM HAUSE WAREN, UND ER SICH AN EINE VON IHNEN VERIRRT HAT, UND NICHT WEISS, AN WELCHE VON IHNEN ER SICH VERIRRT HAT, WENN ER VON ŠABBATH UND WOCHENTAG AN EINEM VON IHNEN EINE ARBEIT VERRICHTET HAT, UND NICHT WEISS, AN WELCHEM VON IHNEN ER SIE VERRICHTET HAT, SO BRINGE ER EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER.",
+ "WIE MAN NUR EIN SÜNDOPFER SCHULDIG IST, WENN MAN BEI EINEM ENTFALLEN TALG UND TALG GEGESSEN HAT, EBENSO BRINGE MAN WEGEN DIESER BEI UNGEWISSHEIT NUR EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER. IST DAZWISCHEN EIN BEWUSSTWERDEN ERFOLGT, SO MUSS MAN, WIE MAN WEGEN JEDES BESONDERS EIN SÜNDOPFER BRINGEN MUSS, AUCH WEGEN JEDES BESONDERS EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER BRINGEN. WIE MAN, WENN MAN TALG, BLUT, VERWERFLICHES UND ÜBRIGGEBLIEBENES BEI EINEM ENTFALLEN GEGESSEN HAT, WEGEN JEDES BESONDERS SCHULDIG IST, EBENSO MUSS MAN BEI UNGEWISSHEIT WEGEN JEDES BESONDERS EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER BRINGEN. WENN TALG UND ÜBRIGGEDLIEBENES VOR IHM WAREN UND ER EINES VON IHNEN GEGESSEN HAT UND NICHT WEISS, WELCHES VON IHNEN ER GEGESSEN HAT, WENN SEINE MENSTRUIERENDE FRAUUND SEINE SCHWESTER MIT IHM IM HAUSE WAREN UND ER SICH AN EINE VON IHNEN VERIRRT HAT UND NICHT WEISS, AN WELCHE VON IHNEN ER SICH VERIRRT HAT, WENN ER BEI DÄMMERUNG ZWISCHEN ŠABBATH UND DEM VERSÖHNUNGSTAGEEINE ARBEIT VERRICHTET HAT UND NICHT WEISS, AN WELCHEM VON IHNEN ER SIE VERRICHTET HAT, SO IST ER NACH R. ELIE͑ZER EIN SÜNDOPFER SCHULDIG UND NACH R. JEHOŠUA͑ FREI. R. JOSE SPRACH: SIE STIMMEN ÜBEREIN, DASS ER FREI IST, WENN ER DIE ARBEIT BEI DÄMMERUNG VERRICHTET HAT, DENN ICH SAGE, ER HABE EINEN TEIL DER ARBEIT AN DIESEM TAGE UND EINEN TEIL AM FOLGENDEN TAGE VERRICHTET, SIE STREITEN NUR ÜBER DEN FALL, WENN ER DIE ARBEIT IN DER MITTE DES TAGES VERRICHTET HAT UND NICHT WEISS, OB ER SIE AM ŠABBATH VERRICHTET HAT ODER ER SIE AM VERSÖHNUNGSTAGE VERRICHTET HAT, ODER WENN ER EINE ARBEIT VERRICHTET HAT UND NICHT WEISS, WELCHE ART VON ARBEITER VERRICHTET HAT; NACH R. ELIE͑ZER IST ER EIN SÜNDOPFER SCHULDIG UND NACH R. JEHOŠUA͑ IST ER FREI. R. JEHUDA SAGTE: R. JEHOŠUA͑ BEFREIT IHN SOGAR VON EINEM SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER. R. ŠIMO͑N UND R. ŠIMO͑N ŠEZORI SAGTEN: SIE STIMMEN ÜBEREIN, DASS ER SCHULDIG IST, WENN ES SICH UM DEN GLEICHEN NAMENHANDELT, SIE STREITEN NUR ÜBER DEN FALL, WENN ES ZWEI VERSCHIEDENE NAMEN SIND; NACH R. ELIE͑ZER IST ER EIN SÜNDOPFER SCHULDIG UND NACH R. JEHOŠUA͑ IST ER FREI. R. JEHUDA SAGTE: SELBST WENN ER FEIGEN ZU SAMMELN BEABSICHTIGT HATTE UND TRAUBEN GESAMMELT HAT, TRAUBEN ZU SAMMELN, UND FEIGEN GESAMMELT HAT, SCHWARZE ZU SAMMELN, UND WEISSE GESAMMELT HAT, ODER WEISSE ZU SAMMELN, UND SCHWARZE GESAMMELT HAT, IST ER NACH R. ELIE͑ZER EIN SÜNDOPFER SCHULDIG UND NACH R. JEHOŠUA͑ FREI. ES SOLLTE MICH WUNDERN, WENN R. JEHOŠUA͑ IHN IN DIESEM FALLEBEFREIT. WORAUF DEUTEN DEMNACH DIE WORTEwodurcher gesündigt hat? AUSGENOMMEN DER FALL, WENN ER SICH DAMIT NUR BESCHÄFTIGT.",
+ "R. ŠIMO͑N UND R. ŠIMO͑N ŠEZORI SAGTEN: SIE STIMMEN ÜBEREIN, DASS ER SCHULDIG IST, WENN ES SICH UM DEN GLEICHEN NAMENHANDELT, SIE STREITEN NUR ÜBER DEN FALL, WENN ES ZWEI VERSCHIEDENE NAMEN SIND; NACH R. ELIE͑ZER IST ER EIN SÜNDOPFER SCHULDIG UND NACH R. JEHOŠUA͑ IST ER FREI. R. JEHUDA SAGTE: SELBST WENN ER FEIGEN ZU SAMMELN BEABSICHTIGT HATTE UND TRAUBEN GESAMMELT HAT, TRAUBEN ZU SAMMELN, UND FEIGEN GESAMMELT HAT, SCHWARZE ZU SAMMELN, UND WEISSE GESAMMELT HAT, ODER WEISSE ZU SAMMELN, UND SCHWARZE GESAMMELT HAT, IST ER NACH R. ELIE͑ZER EIN SÜNDOPFER SCHULDIG UND NACH R. JEHOŠUA͑ FREI. ES SOLLTE MICH WUNDERN, WENN R. JEHOŠUA͑ IHN IN DIESEM FALLEBEFREIT. WORAUF DEUTEN DEMNACH DIE WORTEwodurcher gesündigt hat? AUSGENOMMEN DER FALL, WENN ER SICH DAMIT NUR BESCHÄFTIGT."
+ ],
+ [
+ "WER DAS BLUT, DAS BEIM SCHLACHTEN VON VIEH, WILD UND GEFLÜGEL ABFLIESST, OB UNREIN ODER REIN, DAS BLUT, DAS BEIM ABSTECHEN, DAS BLUT, DAS BEIM DURCHREISSEN, ODER DAS BLUT, DAS BEIM ADERLASSE, MIT DEM DIE SEELE AUSGEHT, ABFLIESST, GEGESSEN HAT, IST SCHULDIG. WEGEN DES BLUTES DER MILZ, DES BLUTES DES HERZENS, DES BLUTES DER EIER, DES BLUTES DER HEUSCHRECKEN UND DES NACHFLIESSENDEN BLUTES IST MAN NICHT SCHULDIG; NACH R. JEHUDA IST MAN WEGEN DES NACHFLIESSENDEN BLUTES SCHULDIG.",
+ "R. A͑QIBA VERPFLICHTET WEGEN EINER ZWEIFELHAFTEN VERUNTREUUNG ZU EINEM SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER, DIE WEISEN BEFREIEN DAVON. JEDOCH PFLICHTET R. A͑QIBA BEI, DASS ER DAS VERUNTREUTE NUR DANN ZU ERSETZEN BRAUCHE, WENN ER SICH DESSEN BEWUSST WIRD UND DAZU EIN ZWEIFELLOSES SCHULDOPFER BRINGT. R. TRYPHON SPRACH: WESHALB SOLL DIESER ZWEI SCHULDOPFERBRINGEN!? VIELMEHR ERSTATTE ER DAFÜR DAS VERUNTREUTE MIT DEM FÜNFTEL, SODANN BRINGE ER EIN SCHULDOPFER FÜR ZWEI SELA͑ UND SAGE: HABE ICH SICHER EINE VERUNTREUUNG BEGANGEN, SO SEI DIES MEINE ERSTATTUNG FÜR DIE VERUNTREUUNG UND JENES MEIN SCHULDOPFER, IST ABER MEINE VERUNTREUUNG ZWEIFELHAFT, SO SEI DER GELDBETRAG NUR FREIWILLIGE SPENDE UND DAS SCHULDOPEFR EIN SCHWEBENDES. VON DERSELBEN ART NÄMLICH, VON DER ER DAS OPFER BRINGT, WENN ER SICH DER SÜNDE BEWUSST WIRD, BRINGT ER ES AUCH, WENN ER SICH NICHT BEWUSST WIRD.",
+ "R. A͑QIBA SPRACH: SEINE WORTE SIND EINLEUCHTEND BEI EINER GERINGFÜGIGEN VERUNTREUUNG, IST ES ABER EINE ZWEIFELHAFTE VERUNTREUUNG VON HUNDERT MINEN, SO IST ES FÜR IHN VORTEILHAFTER, EIN SCHULDOPFER FÜR ZWEI SELA͑ ZU BRINGEN, ALS EINEN ZWEIFELHAFTEN VERUNTREUUNGSERSATZ FÜR HUNDERT MINEN. R. A͑QIBA PFLICHTET ALSO R. TRYPHON BEI EINER GERINGFÜGIGEN VERUNTREUUNG BEI. WENN EINE FRAUDAS VOGEL-SÜNDOPFER GEBRACHTHAT, SO RICHTE SIE ES, WENN SIE VOR DEM KOPFABKNEIFENSICH BEWUSST WIRD, DASS SIE SICHER GEBOREN HAT, ALS ZWEIFELLOSES OPFER HER, DENN VON DERSELBEN ART, VON DER SIE ES BRINGT, WENN SIE SICH BEWUSST WIRD, BRINGT SIE ES AUCH, WENN SIE SICH NICHT BEWUSST WIRD. WER VON EINEM STÜCKE PROFANES UND EINEM STÜCKE HEILIGES EINES VON IHNEN GEGESSEN HAT UND NICHT WEISS, WELCHES VON IHNEN ER GEGESSEN HAT, IST FREI, UND NACH R. A͑QIBA ZU EINEM SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER VERPFLICHTET; HAT ER AUCH DAS ANDERE GEGESSEN, SO BRINGE ER EIN ZWEIFELLOSES SCHULDOPFER. WENN EINER DAS EINE GEGESSEN HAT UND DARAUF EIN ANDERER GEKOMMEN IST UND DAS ANDERE GEGESSEN HAT, SO BRINGE DIESEREIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER UND JENER EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER – SO R. A͑QIBA. R. ŠIMO͑N SAGT, BEIDE ZUSAMMEN BRINGEN EIN SCHULDOPFER. R. JOSE SAGT, ZWEI KÖNNEN NICHT ZUSAMMEN EIN SCHULDOPFER BRINGEN.",
+ "WER VON EINEM STÜCKE PROFANES UND EINEM STÜCKE HEILIGES EINES VON IHNEN GEGESSEN HAT UND NICHT WEISS, WELCHES VON IHNEN ER GEGESSEN HAT, IST FREI, UND NACH R. A͑QIBA ZU EINEM SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER VERPFLICHTET; HAT ER AUCH DAS ANDERE GEGESSEN, SO BRINGE ER EIN ZWEIFELLOSES SCHULDOPFER. WENN EINER DAS EINE GEGESSEN HAT UND DARAUF EIN ANDERER GEKOMMEN IST UND DAS ANDERE GEGESSEN HAT, SO BRINGE DIESEREIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER UND JENER EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER – SO R. A͑QIBA. R. ŠIMO͑N SAGT, BEIDE ZUSAMMEN BRINGEN EIN SCHULDOPFER. R. JOSE SAGT, ZWEI KÖNNEN NICHT ZUSAMMEN EIN SCHULDOPFER BRINGEN.",
+ "WER VON EINEM STÜCKE TALG UND EINEM STÜCKE PROFANES EINES VON IHNEN GEGESSEN HAT UND NICHT WEISS, WELCHES VON IHNEN ER GEGESSEN HAT, BRINGE EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER; HAT ER AUCH DAS ANDERE GEGESSEN, SO BRINGE ER EIN SÜNDOPFER. WENN EINER DAS EINE GEGESSEN HAT UND DARAUF EIN ANDERER GEKOMMEN IST UND DAS ANDERE GEGESSEN HAT, SO BRINGE DIESER EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER UND JENER EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER – SO R. AQIBA. R. ŠIMO͑N SAGT, BEIDE ZUSAMMEN BRINGEN EIN SÜNDOPFER. R. JOSE SAGT, ZWEI KÖNNEN NICHT ZUSAMMEN EIN SÜNDOPFER BRINGEN.",
+ "WER VON EINEM STÜCKE TALG UND EINEM STÜCKE HEILIGES EINES VON IHNEN GEGESSEN HAT UND NICHT WEISS, WELCHES VON IHNEN ER GEGESSEN HAT, BRINGE EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER; HAT ER AUCH DAS ANDERE GEGESSEN, SO BRINGE ER EIN SÜNDOPFER UND EIN ZWEIFELLOSES SCHULDOPFER. WENN EINER DAS EINE GEGESSEN UND DARAUF EIN ANDERER GEKOMMEN IST UND DAS ANDERE GEGESSEN HAT, SO BRINGE DIESER EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER UND JENER EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER. R. ŠIMO͑N SAGT, BEIDE ZUSAMMEN BRINGEN EIN SÜNDOPFER UND EIN SCHULDOPFER. R. JOSE SAGT, ZWEI KÖNNEN NICHT ZUSAMMEN EIN SÜNDOPFER UND EIN SCHULDOPFER BRINGEN.",
+ "WER VON EINEM PROFANEN STÜCKE TALG UND EINEM HEILIGEN STÜCKE TALG EINES VON IHNEN GEGESSEN HAT UND NICHT WEISS, WELCHES VON IHNEN ER GEGESSEN HAT, BRINGE EIN SÜNDOPFER; R. AQIBA SAGT, AUCH EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER; HAT ER AUCH DAS ANDERE GEGESSEN, SO BRINGE ER ZWEI SÜNDOPFER UND EIN ZWEIFELLOSES SCHULDOPFER. WENN EINER DAS EINE GEGESSEN HAT UND DARAUF EIN ANDERER GEKOMMEN IST UND DAS ANDERE GEGESSEN HAT, SO BRINGE DIESER EIN SÜNDOPFER UND JENER EIN SÜNDOPFER. R. A͑QIBA SAGT, DIESER BRINGE EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER UND JENER BRINGE EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER. R. ŠIMO͑N SAGT, DIESER BRINGE EIN SÜNDOPFER UND JENER BRINGE EIN SÜNDOPFER, UND BEIDE ZUSAMMEN BRINGEN EIN SCHULDOPFER. R. JOSE SAGT, ZWEI KÖNNEN NICHT ZUSAMMEN EIN SCHULDOPFER BRINGEN.",
+ "WER VON EINEM PROFANEN STÜCKE TALG UND EINEM STÜCKE TALG VON ÜBRIGGEBLIEBENEM EINES VON IHNEN GEGESSEN HAT UND NICHT WEISS, WELCHES VON IHNEN ER GEGESSEN HAT, BRINGE EIN SÜNDOPFER UND EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER; HAT ER AUCH DAS ANDERE GEGESSEN, SO BRINGE ER DREI SÜNDOPFER. WENN EINER DAS EINE GEGESSEN HAT UND DARAUF EIN ANDERER GEKOMMEN IST UND DAS ANDERE GEGESSEN HAT, SO BRINGE DIESER EIN SÜNDOPFER UND EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER UND JENER EIN SÜNDOPFER UND EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER. R. ŠIMO͑N SAGT, DIESER BRINGE EIN SÜNDOPFER UND JENER BRINGE EIN SÜNDOPFER, UND BEIDE BRINGEN ZUSAMMEN EIN SÜNDOPFER. R. JOSE SAGT, ZWEI KÖNNEN NICHT ZUSAMMEN EIN SÜNDOPFER BRINGEN, DAS WEGEN EINER SÜNDEDARZUBRINGEN IST."
+ ],
+ [
+ "WENN JEMAND EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER GEBRACHT HAT UND SICH BEWUSST WIRD, DASS ER NICHT GESÜNDIGT HAT, SO IST DAS OPFERTIER, WENN ES NOCH NICHT GESCHLACHTET WORDEN IST, HERAUSZULASSEN UND WIEDER MIT DER HERDE WEIDEN ZU LASSEN – SO R. MEÍR. DIE WEISEN SAGEN, ES IST WEIDEN ZU LASSEN, BIS ES EIN GEBRECHEN BEKOMMT, UND ZU VERKAUFEN, UND DER ERLÖS FÄLLT DER FREIWILLIGEN SPENDENKASSE ZU. R. ELIE͑ZER SAGT, ES SEI DARZUBRINGEN, DENN WIRD ES AUCH NICHT FÜR DIESE SÜNDE DARGEBRACHT, SO WIRD ES FÜR IRGEND EINE ANDERE SÜNDE DARGEBRACHT. WIRD ER SICH BEWUSST, NACHDEM ES GESCHLACHTET WORDEN IST, SO IST DAS BLUT FORTZUSCHÜTTEN UND DAS FLEISCH KOMME IN DEN VERBRENNUNGSRAUM. IST DAS BLUT BEREITS GESPRENGT WORDEN UND DAS FLEISCH VORHANDEN, SO DARF ES GEGESSEN WERDEN. R. JOSE SAGT, AUCH WENN DAS BLUT NOCH IM BECHER IST, IST ES ZU SPRENGEN UND DAS FLEISCH ZU ESSEN.",
+ "NICHT SO ABER IST ES BEIM ZWEIFELLOSEN SCHULDOPFER; WENNBEVOR ES GESCHLACHTET WORDEN IST, SO IST ES HERAUSZULASSEN UND WIEDER MIT DER HERDE WEIDEN ZU LASSEN, WENN NACHDEM ES GESCHLACHTET WORDEN IST, SO IST ES ZU BEGRABEN, UND IST DAS BLUT BEREITS GESPRENGT WORDEN, SO KOMME DAS FLEISCH IN DEN VERBRENNUNGSRAUM. NICHT SO IST ES BEIM ZU STEINIGENDEN RINDE; WENN BEVOR ES GESTEINIGT WORDEN IST, SO IST ES HERAUSZULASSEN UND WIEDER MIT DER HERDE WEIDEN ZU LASSEN, UND WENN NACHDEM ES GESTEINIGT WORDEN IST, SO IST ES ZUR NUTZNIESSUNG ERLAUBT. NICHT SO IST ES BEIM GENICKBROCHENEN KALBE; WENN BEVOR IHM DAS GENICK GEBROCHEN WORDEN IST, SO IST ES HERAUSZULASSEN UND WIEDER MIT DER HERDE WEIDEN ZU LASSEN, UND WENN NACHDEM IHM DAS GENICK GEBROCHEN WORDEN IST, SO IST ES AN ORT UND STELLE ZU BEGRABEN, DENN ES WURDE VON VORNHEREIN WEGEN EINES ZWEIFELS GEBRACHT; ES HAT NUN DIE SÜHNE DES ZWEIFELS VOLLZOGEN.",
+ "R. ELIE͑ZER SAGTE: MAN KANN BELIEBIG JEDEN TAG UND ZU JEDER ZEIT EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER FREIWILLIG SPENDEN. EIN SOLCHES NANNTE MAN SCHULDOPFER DER FROMMEN. MAN ERZÄHLT VON BABA B. BUṬA, DASS ER JEDEN TAG EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER FREIWILLIG ZU SPENDEN PFLEGTE, MIT AUSNAHME DES TAGES NACH DEM VERSÖHNUNGSTAGE. ER SPRACH: BEI DIESEM TEMPEL, WÜRDE MAN MICH LASSEN, SO WÜRDE ICH ES AUCH AN DIESEM BRINGEN, ABER SIE SAGEN ZU MIR: WARTE, BIS DU ZU EINEM ZWEIFELKOMMST. DIE WEISEN SAGEN, MAN DÜRFE EIN SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER BRINGEN NUR WEGEN EINER SÜNDE, DIE BEI VORSATZ MIT DER AUSROTTUNG UND BEI VERSEHEN MIT EINEM SÜNDOPFER BELEGT IST.",
+ "DIE SÜNDOPFER ODER ZWEIFELLOSE SCHULDOPFER SCHULDEN, SIND VERPFLICHTET, WENN DER VERSÖHNUNGSTAG VORÜBERIST, DIESE NACH DEM VERSÖHNUNGSTAGE ZU BRINGEN; DIE SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER SCHULDEN, SIND FREI. WER AM VERSÖHNUNGSTAGE IN EINEN ZWEIFEL EINER SÜNDE GERÄT, SELBST BEIM DUNKELWERDEN, IST FREI, DENN DER GANZE TAG SÜHNT.",
+ "WENN EINE FRAU EIN ZWEIFELHAFTES VOGEL-SÜNDOPFER ZU BRINGENHAT, UND DER VERSÖHNUNGSTAG VORÜBER IST, SO MUSS SIE ES NACH DEM VERSÖHNUNGSTAGE BRINGEN, WEIL ES ZUM ESSEN VON SCHLACHTOPFERNGEEIGNET MACHT. WENN EIN VOGEL-SÜNDOPFER WEGEN EINES ZWEIFELS GEBRACHT WORDEN IST, UND ES SICH NACH DEM KOPFABKNEIFEN HERAUSSTELLT, SO IST ES ZU BEGRABEN.",
+ "WENN JEMAND ZWEI SELA͑ FÜR EIN SCHULDOPFERRESERVIERT UND DAFÜR ZWEI WIDDER ZU SCHULDOPFERN GEKAUFT HAT, SO IST, WENN EINER VON IHNEN ZWEI SELA͑ WERT IST, DIESER ALS SCHULDOPFER DARZUBRINGEN, UND DER ANDERE IST WEIDEN ZU LASSEN, BIS ER EIN GEBRECHEN BEKOMMT, UND ZU VERKAUFEN, UND DAS GELD FÄLLT DER FREIWILLIGEN SPENDENKASSE ZU. HAT ER DAFÜR ZWEI WIDDER FÜR PROFANE ZWECKE GEKAUFT, VON DENEN EINER ZWEI SELA͑ WERT IST UND EINER ZEHN ZUZ WERT IST, SO IST, DER ZWEI SELA͑ WERT IST, ALS SCHULDOPFERDARZUBRINGEN UND DER ANDERE ALS ERSATZ FÜR DIE VERUNTREUUNG. WENN EINEN ALS SCHULDOPFER UND EINEN FÜR PROFANE ZWECKE, SO IST, WENN DER ZUM SCHULDOPFER BESTIMMTE ZWEI SELA͑ WERT IST, DIESER ALS SCHULDOPFER DARZUBRINGEN UND DER ANDERE WEGEN SEINER VERUNTREUUNG, UND DAZU BRINGE ER EINEN SELA͑MIT DEM FÜNFTEL.",
+ "WENN JEMAND SEIN SÜNDOPFER ABGESONDERT HAT UND GESTORBEN IST, SO DARF SEIN SOHN ES NICHT SEINERSTATTBRINGEN. MAN DARF ES FERNER NICHT VON EINER SÜNDE FÜR EINE ANDERE SÜNDE BRINGEN; SELBST WENN MAN EINES ABGESONDERT HAT WEGEN TALGES, DEN MAN GESTERN GEGESSEN HAT, DARF MAN ES NICHT BRINGEN WEGEN TALGES, DEN MAN HEUTE GEGESSEN HAT, DENN ES HEISST: sein Opfer &c. wegen seiner Sünde, SEIN OPFER MUSS AUF DEN NAMEN DIESER SÜNDE SEIN.",
+ "MAN DARF FÜR DAS FÜR EIN SCHAF GEHEILIGTE GELD EINE ZIEGE BRINGEN, FÜR DAS FÜR EINE ZIEGE GEHEILIGTE EIN SCHAF BRINGEN, FÜR DAS FÜR EIN SCHAF ODER EINE ZIEGE GEHEILIGTE TURTELTAUBEN ODER JUNGE TAUBEN BRINGEN, UND FÜR DAS FÜR TURTELTAUBEN ODER JUNGE TAUBEN GEHEILIGTE EIN ZEHNTEL EPHABRINGEN. ZUM BEISPIEL: WENN JEMAND GELD FÜR EIN SCHAF ODER EINE ZIEGE RESERVIERT HAT UND VERARMT IST, SO BRINGE ER DAFÜREINEN VOGEL; IST ER ÄRMER GEWORDEN, SO BRINGE ER DAFÜREIN ZEHNTEL EPHA. HAT ER GELD FÜR EIN ZEHNTEL EPHA ABGESONDERT UND IST REICH GEWORDEN, SO BRINGE ER DAFÜREINEN VOGEL; IST ER REICHER GEWORDEN, SO BRINGE ER DAFÜREIN SCHAF ODER EINE ZIEGE.",
+ "R. ŠIMO͑N SAGTE: SCHAFE WERDEN ÜBERALL VOR ZIEGEN GENANNT, MAN KÖNNTE NUN GLAUBEN, WEIL SIE BEVORZUGTER SIND ALS DIESE, SO HEISST ES:wenn er ein Schaf als sein Sündopfer bringt, DIES LEHRT, DASS SIE EINANDER GLEICHEN. TURTELTAUBEN WERDEN ÜBERALL VOR JUNGEN TAUBEN GENANNT; MAN KÖNNTE NUN GLAUBEN, WEIL SIE BEVORZUGTER SIND ALS DIESE, SO HEISST ES:eine junge Taube oder eine Turteltaube als Sündopfer, DIES LEHRT, DASS SIE EINANDER GLEICHEN. DER VATER WIRD ÜBERALL VOR DER MUTTER GENANNT, MAN KÖNNTE NUN GLAUBEN, WEIL DIE EHRUNG DES VATERS DER EHRUNG DER MUTTER VORGEHT, SO HEISST ES: ihr sollt jeder Mutter und Vater fürchten, DIES LEHRT, DASS SIE EINANDER GLEICHEN. JEDOCH SAGTEN DIE WEISEN, DER VATER GEHE STETS DER MUTTER VOR, WEIL ER UND SEINE MUTTER ZUR EHRUNG SEINES VATERS VERPFLICHTET SIND. DASSELBE GILT AUCH VON DER GESETZESKUNDE: IST SIE DEM SOHNE VOM LEHRER BESCHIEDEN, SO GEHT DER LEHRER STETS DEM VATER VOR, WEIL ER UND SEIN VATER ZUR EHRUNG SEINES LEHRERS VERPFLICHTET SIND."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/William Davidson Edition - English.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/William Davidson Edition - English.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6e8bfd8fa5f3e8f8a3d2caf25717fe6345733824
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/William Davidson Edition - English.json
@@ -0,0 +1,82 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Keritot",
+ "versionSource": "https://korenpub.com/collections/the-noe-edition-koren-talmud-bavli-1",
+ "versionTitle": "William Davidson Edition - English",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 2.0,
+ "license": "CC-BY-NC",
+ "versionNotes": "English from The William Davidson digital edition of the Koren Noé Talmud, with commentary by Rabbi Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz",
+ "shortVersionTitle": "Koren - Steinsaltz",
+ "actualLanguage": "en",
+ "languageFamilyName": "english",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה כריתות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "There are thirty-six cases in the Torah with regard to which one who performs a prohibited action intentionally is liable to receive excision from the World-to-Come [karet]. They are: One who engages in sexual intercourse with his mother; or with the wife of his father, even if she is not his mother; or with his daughter-in-law. The same punishment is imposed on a man who engages in intercourse with another male [hazekhur], or who copulates with an animal; and a woman who brings an animal upon her to engage in bestiality. The same punishment is imposed on one who engages in intercourse with a woman and her daughter, or with a married woman. The same punishment is imposed on one who engages in intercourse with his sister, or with his father’s sister, or with his mother’s sister, or with his wife’s sister, or with his brother’s wife, or with the wife of his father’s brother, or with the wife of his mother’s brother, or with a menstruating woman. And these too are liable to receive karet: One who blasphemes the name of Heaven, and one who worships an idol, and one who gives of his children to Molekh (see Leviticus 20:1–5), and a necromancer, and one who desecrates Shabbat. And the same is the punishment of one who is ritually impure who ate sacrificial food; and one who enters the Temple while ritually impure; and one who eats forbidden fat, or consumes blood, or eats meat left over from an offering after the time allotted for its consumption [notar], or eats meat of an offering that was sacrificed with the intent to consume it after its designated time [piggul]; and one who slaughters offerings and offers them up outside the Temple. And these too are liable to receive karet: One who eats leavened bread on Passover, and one who eats or performs prohibited labor on Yom Kippur. And the same is the punishment of one who blends the anointing oil according to the specifications of the oil prepared by Moses in the wilderness (see Exodus 30:22–33); and one who blends the incense according to the specifications of the incense used in the Temple service for purposes other than use in the Temple; and one who applies the anointing oil to his skin. And one is liable to receive karet for failure to fulfill the mitzva of bringing the Paschal offering and the mitzva of circumcision, which unlike the cases of prohibitions enumerated in the mishna, are positive mitzvot.",
+ "For any of these prohibitions, one is liable to receive karet for its intentional violation and to bring a sin offering for its unwitting violation. And for their violation in a case where it is unknown to him whether or not he transgressed, he is liable to bring a provisional guilt offering, which provides provisional atonement until he discovers whether or not he transgressed. This is the halakha for all of the transgressions listed above except for one who defiles the Temple, i.e., he enters the Temple while ritually impure, or partakes of its consecrated items while ritually impure. In these cases he does not bring a provisional guilt offering because he is obligated to bring a sliding-scale offering for a definite transgression. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: The halakha is the same even with regard to the one who blasphemes, as it is stated with regard to the sin offering: “You shall have one law for him who performs the action unwittingly” (Numbers 15:29), excluding one who blasphemes, as he does not perform an action but sins with speech.",
+ "There are some women who bring a sin offering of a woman after childbirth and the offering is eaten by the priests. And there are some women who bring a sin offering but it is not eaten. And there are some women who do not bring a sin offering at all. The mishna elaborates: The following women bring a sin offering and it is eaten by the priests: One who miscarries a fetus with a form similar to a domesticated animal, one who miscarries a fetus with a form similar to an undomesticated animal, or one who miscarries a fetus with a form similar to a bird; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: She does not bring a sin offering unless the fetus has the form of a person. With regard to a woman who miscarries a sandal fetus, i.e., one that has the form of a flat fish; or if she miscarries the placenta; or an amniotic sac in which tissue developed; or a fetus that emerged cut, i.e., in pieces; and likewise a Canaanite maidservant, owned by a Jew, who miscarried; in all these cases she brings a sin offering and it is eaten by the priests.",
+ "And these women bring sin offerings but their sin offerings are not eaten: One who miscarries and does not know the nature of what she miscarried; and two women who miscarried, in a case where one miscarried a fetus of a type for which a woman is exempt from bringing an offering and the other one miscarried a fetus of a type for which a woman is liable to bring an offering, and they do not know which miscarried which type. Rabbi Yosei said: When is their sin offering not eaten? It is when both women went to different places within the Temple to bring their offerings, e.g., this woman went to the east and that woman went to the west. But if both of them were standing together, both of them together bring one sin offering, and it is eaten.",
+ "These women do not bring a sin offering: A woman who miscarries an amniotic sac full of water, or one full of blood, or one full of different colors; and likewise a woman who miscarries a fetus with a form similar to fish, or grasshoppers, or repugnant creatures, or creeping animals; and a woman who miscarries on the fortieth day of her pregnancy; and a woman who gives birth by caesarean section. Rabbi Shimon deems a woman liable to bring a sin offering in the case where she gives birth by caesarean section.",
+ "A woman who gives birth to a daughter counts fourteen days during which she is ritually impure. That is followed by sixty-six days during which she remains ritually pure even if she experiences a flow of blood. The Torah obligates a woman to bring her offering on the eighty-first day (see Leviticus 12:1–6). If the woman miscarries another fetus before that day, she is not required to bring an additional offering. In the case of a woman who miscarries a fetus on the night of, i.e., preceding, the eighty-first day, Beit Shammai deem her exempt from bringing a second offering and Beit Hillel deem her liable to bring a second offering. Beit Hillel said to Beit Shammai: What is different between the night of the eighty-first and the day of the eighty-first? If they are equal with regard to the halakhot of ritual impurity, i.e., the blood flow of this woman on the eighty-first night renders her ritually impure and all the standard strictures of ritual impurity apply to her, will the two time periods not be equal with regard to liability to bring an additional offering as well? Beit Shammai said to Beit Hillel: No, there is a difference between that night and the following day. If you said with regard to a woman who miscarries on the eighty-first day that she is obligated to bring an additional offering, this is logical, as she emerged into a period that is fit for her to bring her offering. Would you say the same with regard to a woman who miscarries on the night of the eighty-first day, where she did not emerge into a period that is fit for her to bring her offering, as offerings are not sacrificed at night? Beit Hillel said to Beit Shammai: But let the case of a woman who miscarries on the eighty-first day that occurs on Shabbat prove that this distinction is incorrect, as she did not emerge into a period that is fit for her to bring her offering because individual offerings are not sacrificed on Shabbat, and nevertheless she is obligated to bring an additional offering. Beit Shammai said to Beit Hillel: No, there is a difference between these cases. If you said this ruling with regard to a woman who miscarries on the eighty-first day that occurs on Shabbat, the reason is that although Shabbat is unfit for the sacrifice of an individual offering, it is fit for the sacrifice of a communal offering whose time is fixed, e.g., the daily offering. Would you say the same with regard to a woman who miscarries on the night of the eighty-first day, as the night is completely unfit, since neither an individual offering nor a communal offering is sacrificed at night? Beit Shammai add: And as for the ritual impurity status of the blood, i.e., Beit Hillel’s opinion that the two time periods are equal with regard to the halakhot of ritual impurity, this does not prove what the halakha should be with regard to offerings, as with regard to a woman who miscarries before the completion of the term of eighty days, her blood is impure like the blood of a woman after childbirth, and nevertheless she is exempt from bringing the offering.",
+ "With regard to a woman who has in her case uncertainty concerning five births, and likewise a woman with regard to whom there is uncertainty concerning five irregular discharges of blood from the uterus [ziva], she brings one offering, and then she may partake of the meat of offerings. And the remaining offerings are not an obligation for her. If she experienced five definite discharges of a zava or five definite births, she brings one offering, and then she may partake of the meat of offerings. And the remaining offerings are an obligation for her. There was an incident where the price of nests, i.e., pairs of birds, stood in Jerusalem at one gold dinar, as the great demand for birds for the offerings of a woman after childbirth and a zava led to an increase in the price. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: I swear by this abode of the Divine Presence that I will not lie down tonight until the price of nests will be in silver dinars. Ultimately, he entered the court and taught: A woman who has in her case five definite discharges of a zava or five definite births brings one offering, and then she may partake of the meat of offerings. And the remaining offerings are not an obligation for her. And as a result, the price of the nests stood that day at one-quarter of a silver dinar, as the demand for nests decreased."
+ ],
+ [
+ "There are four individuals whose halakhic status is defined as: Lacking atonement [khappara], which means they had been in a state of ritual impurity and underwent rituals to purify themselves, but since they have not yet brought the requisite atonement offering to complete the purification process, they may not partake of sacrificial meat. And there are also four individuals who bring an offering for an intentional transgression in the same manner as they do for an unwitting transgression. And these are the four individuals who lack atonement: The man who experiences a gonorrhea-like discharge [zav], the woman who experiences a discharge of uterine blood after her menstrual period [zava], the woman after childbirth, and the leper. In all four of these cases, although the individual has completed all of the other steps of the purification process, the process is not complete until the atonement offering has been brought. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: A convert also lacks atonement, even after he has been circumcised and has immersed in a ritual bath, until the priest sprinkles the blood of his offering on the altar on his behalf. A nazirite also lacks atonement with regard to his permission for drinking wine, and cutting his hair, and his exposure to ritual impurity imparted by a corpse, until his offerings are sacrificed.",
+ "These individuals bring an offering for an intentional transgression in the same manner as they do for an unwitting transgression: One who engages in intercourse with an espoused maidservant, who is liable to bring a guilt offering (see Leviticus 19:20–22); and a nazirite who became ritually impure, who is required to bring a sheep as a guilt offering and two doves or two pigeons, one as a sin offering and one as a burnt offering (see Numbers 6:9–12); and one who falsely takes the oath of testimony, asserting that he does not have any testimony to provide on a given issue (see Leviticus 5:1); and one who falsely takes the oath on a deposit, asserting that an item belonging to another is not in his possession (see Leviticus 5:21–26).",
+ "There are five individuals who bring one offering for several transgressions, i.e., for violating the same transgression several times; and there are five individuals who bring a sliding-scale offering, which is determined based on the financial status of the sinner. These are the five individuals who bring one offering for several transgressions: First, one who engages in several acts of intercourse with an espoused maidservant, and second, a nazirite who became ritually impure due to several instances of contact with ritual impurity. The mishna continues to list the five situations in which one offering is brought to atone for several transgressions: Third, one who issues a warning to his wife declaring himself jealous with regard to several different men with whom he suspects her of committing adultery, and forbidding her to be alone with them. If the wife was then found separately in seclusion with each of the men, he brings her to the Temple with one single meal offering of jealousy. And fourth, a leper who was afflicted with several instances of leprosy, meaning that he was purified from his leprosy, and before he brought his offerings, he suffered a relapse of the leprosy. When he is finally purified, he brings only one set of offerings. If a leper brought the two requisite birds on the first day of his purification (see Leviticus 14:4–7), and prior to bringing his offerings on the eighth day of his purification he was afflicted with a relapse of leprosy, those birds do not satisfy his obligation until he brings his sin offering. Rabbi Yehuda says: Until he brings his guilt offering.",
+ "The mishna continues with the last of the five situations in which one offering is brought to atone for several transgressions: A woman who gave birth to several offspring. This is a case where a woman gave birth to a daughter, after which she is ritually impure for fourteen days and then enters a period of sixty-six days of ritual purity, even if she experiences uterine bleeding. Nevertheless, during this interim period, she is still somewhat impure, and it is therefore prohibited for her to enter the Temple or to partake of consecrated food, and at the end of the period she must bring an offering. And during those days of ritual purity, she became pregnant again and then miscarried a female fetus within the eighty days, and then became pregnant again and miscarried another female fetus within eighty days of the first miscarriage. In this situation, when she ultimately completes her process of purification, she brings one single offering for all the births and miscarriages. And a similar halakha applies to a woman who miscarries multiple fetuses from a single pregnancy at different points in time, miscarrying each fetus before completing the purification period of forty days for a male or eighty days for a female for the previous fetus. When she finally completes her process of purification, she brings one single offering for all of the miscarriages. Rabbi Yehuda says: In these cases, a single offering does not suffice for all the births or miscarriages. Rather, she brings an offering for the first birth or miscarriage and does not bring an offering for the second miscarriage, as it took place before the completion of the purification period for the first. She then brings an offering for the third miscarriage and does not bring an offering for the fourth fetus, as it was miscarried before the completion of the purification period for the third fetus.
These are the five situations mentioned in the mishna (9a) in which one brings a sliding-scale offering: For hearing the voice of an oath, i.e., where one took a false oath that he does not have any testimony to provide on a given issue; and for the utterance of the lips, which is a case where one took a false oath about a different matter; and for the defiling of the Temple, by entering it while ritually impure, or defiling its sacrificial foods, by partaking of them while ritually impure; and a woman after childbirth; and a leper at the end of his purification process.
What are the differences between an espoused maidservant and all those others with whom relations are forbidden? The difference is that the status of the maidservant is not equal to their status, neither with regard to punishment nor with regard to an offering, as one who unwittingly engages in intercourse with any of those with whom relations are forbidden is liable to bring a sin offering, and by contrast, one who unwittingly engages in intercourse with an espoused maidservant is liable to bring a guilt offering. One who unwittingly engages in intercourse with any of those with whom relations are forbidden brings a female animal, and one who unwittingly engages in intercourse with an espoused maidservant brings a male animal, as a sin offering is a female and a guilt offering is a male.
Furthermore, with regard to engaging in intercourse with any of those with whom relations are forbidden, both the man and the woman are equal with regard to liability to receive lashes if they were forewarned, and with regard to liability to bring an offering if they did so unwittingly. And in the case of one who engages in intercourse with a maidservant, the Torah did not equate the man with the woman with regard to lashes, as she alone is flogged, as will be explained, and the Torah did not equate the woman with the man with regard to bringing an offering, as she does not bring an offering.
With regard to intercourse with any of those with whom relations are forbidden, the Torah rendered the halakhic status of one who engages in the initial stage of intercourse [hame’areh] to be like that of one who completes the act, and one is liable to bring a sin offering for each and every act of intercourse that he performs unwittingly. By contrast, in the case of relations with an espoused maidservant, one is liable only for completing the act of intercourse, and the man brings a single offering for several transgressions.
This is a stringency that the Torah imposed with regard to the maidservant relative to other individuals with whom relations are forbidden:
That the Torah established her status so that the one who engages in intercourse with her intentionally is like the one who does so unwittingly, as both are liable to bring a guilt offering, whereas one who engages in intercourse with those with whom relations are forbidden is liable to bring a sin offering only when he does so unwittingly.",
+ "Who is the espoused maidservant in question? It is any woman who is half-maidservant half-free woman, i.e., a maidservant who belonged to two masters, one of whom liberated her, as it is stated: “And she was redeemed and not redeemed” (Leviticus 19:20), which means that she was partially but not completely redeemed. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yishmael says: An espoused maidservant is a full-fledged maidservant whose status is certain, as the language of the verse does not mean redeemed and not redeemed; it is simply a way of stating that she was not redeemed. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: All those with whom relations are forbidden are enumerated in the Torah, and we have no exception other than one who is half-maidservant half-free woman.",
+ "This mishna cites an additional difference between the status of an espoused maidservant and the status of forbidden relatives. In all cases of intercourse with those with whom relations are forbidden, if one is an adult and one is a minor, the minor is exempt; if one is awake and one is sleeping, the sleeping one is exempt; if one commits the act unwittingly and one does so intentionally, the one who did so unwittingly is liable to bring a sin offering and the one who did so intentionally is liable to be punished with karet. By contrast, in a case of intercourse with an espoused maidservant, the man is liable to bring a guilt offering only if the woman is flogged, and that is the case only if she was an adult, awake, and committed the sin intentionally."
+ ],
+ [
+ "If witnesses said to a person: We saw that you ate forbidden fat, he is liable to bring a sin offering if he did so unwittingly. If a witness says: He ate forbidden fat, and a witness says: He did not eat forbidden fat, or if a woman says: He ate forbidden fat, and a woman says: He did not eat forbidden fat, he is liable to bring a provisional guilt offering, brought by one who is uncertain as to whether he committed a sin that requires a sin offering. If a witness says: He ate forbidden fat, and the person himself says: I did not eat forbidden fat, he is exempt. If two witnesses say: He ate forbidden fat, and the person himself says: I did not eat forbidden fat, Rabbi Meir deems him liable to bring a sin offering. Rabbi Meir said: This conclusion can be derived a fortiori: If two witnesses could have brought him liability to receive the severe punishment of death, can they not bring him liability to sacrifice an offering, which is relatively lenient? The Rabbis said to him: Witnesses are unable to render another person liable to bring an offering contrary to his statement, as what if he wishes to say: I did so intentionally, in which case he would be exempt from bringing an offering?",
+ "If one unwittingly ate an olive-bulk of forbidden fat and then ate another olive-bulk of forbidden fat during one lapse of awareness, i.e., in a case where he did not discover in the interim that fat is forbidden, or that the food he is eating is forbidden fat, he is liable to bring only one sin offering. If one ate forbidden fat, and blood, and piggul, and notar in one lapse of awareness, he is liable to bring a sin offering for each and every one of them. This is a stringency that applies to one who eats several types of forbidden food and does not apply to one who eats one type of forbidden food. And a stringency that applies to one who eats one type of forbidden food and not to one who eats several types of forbidden food is that if one ate half an olive-bulk and then ate another half an olive-bulk during one lapse of awareness, in a case where they were both from one type of forbidden food, he is liable to bring a sin offering. If they were from two types, he is exempt, because he did not eat an olive-bulk of any specific forbidden food.",
+ "How much time can one expend while eating an olive-bulk of forbidden food and still be liable for violating the prohibition? The duration is calculated as though he were eating toasted grain, which one eats one kernel at a time. If he eats the olive-bulk of forbidden food within the amount of time it would take to eat an olive-bulk of toasted grain, he is liable. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: Unless the amount of time he expends from beginning to end is more than the time it takes to eat a half-loaf [peras] of bread, he is liable. Likewise, one who ate a quarter-loaf of ritually impure foods or drank a quarter-log of ritually impure liquids within the amount of time it takes to eat a half-loaf of bread is rendered unfit to partake of teruma, the portion of the produce designated for priests, until he becomes pure. Similarly, if one drank a quarter-log of wine and entered the Temple, and he remained there for the time it takes to eat a half-loaf of bread, he is liable. Rabbi Elazar says: If he interrupted his drinking of the quarter-log of wine or if he placed any amount of water into the wine, he is exempt.",
+ "There is a case where one can perform a single act of eating an olive-bulk of food and be liable to bring four sin offerings and one guilt offering for it. How so? This halakha applies to one who is ritually impure who ate forbidden fat, and it was left over from a consecrated offering after the time allotted for its consumption [notar], on Yom Kippur. He is liable to bring sin offerings for eating forbidden fat and notar, for eating the meat of an offering while impure, and for eating on Yom Kippur. He is also liable to bring a guilt offering for misuse of consecrated property. Rabbi Meir says: If it was Shabbat and he carried it out from a private domain to a public domain while eating it, he would be liable to bring an additional sin offering for performing prohibited labor on Shabbat. The Rabbis said to him: That liability is not from the same type of prohibition, as it is not due to the act of eating, and therefore, it should not be counted.",
+ "There is a case where one can engage in a single act of intercourse and be liable to bring six sin offerings for it. How so? It is possible for one who engages in intercourse with his daughter to be liable due to having violated the prohibitions of engaging in intercourse with his daughter, his sister, the wife of his brother, the wife of his father’s brother, a married woman, and a menstruating woman. It is possible for one who engages in intercourse with his daughter’s daughter to be liable to bring sin offerings due to the unwitting violation of the prohibitions of engaging in intercourse with his daughter’s daughter, and his daughter-in-law, and the wife of his brother, and the wife of his father’s brother, and his wife’s sister, and a married woman, and a menstruating woman. Rabbi Yosei says: If the elder, i.e., the man’s father, who is the woman’s great-grandfather, transgressed and married her, the man would also be liable for engaging in intercourse with her due to the prohibition of intercourse with the wife of his father. And likewise, it is possible for one who engages in intercourse with the daughter of his wife to be liable to bring six sin offerings, similar to one who engages in intercourse with his own daughter, for violating the prohibitions against engaging in intercourse with his wife’s daughter, his sister, the wife of his brother, the wife of his father’s brother, a married woman, and a menstruating woman. And it is possible for one who engages in intercourse with his wife’s daughter’s daughter to be liable to bring seven sin offerings, similar to one who engages in intercourse with his own daughter’s daughter, for violating the following prohibitions: Engaging in intercourse with his wife’s daughter’s daughter, his daughter-in-law, the wife of his brother, the wife of his father’s brother, his wife’s sister, a married woman, and a menstruating woman.",
+ "It is possible for one who engages in intercourse with his mother-in-law to be liable to bring seven sin offerings for doing so, due to the unwitting violation of the prohibitions of engaging in intercourse with his mother-in-law, and his daughter-in-law, and the wife of his brother, and the wife of his father’s brother, and his wife’s sister, and a married woman, and a menstruating woman. And likewise, the same applies with regard to one who engages in intercourse with the mother of his father-in-law or with the mother of his mother-in-law. Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri says: It is possible for one who engages in intercourse with his mother-in-law to be liable due to the unwitting violation of the prohibitions of engaging in intercourse with his mother-in-law, and the mother of his mother-in-law, and the mother of his father-in-law. The Rabbis said to him: Those three prohibitions are all one category of prohibition, derived from the same verse: “You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter; you shall not take her son’s daughter, or her daughter’s daughter” (Leviticus 18:17). Consequently, one is not liable to bring separate sin offerings for violating these prohibitions. ",
+ "Rabbi Akiva said: I asked Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Yehoshua in the meat market [itlis] in Emmaus, where they went to purchase an animal for the wedding feast of the son of Rabban Gamliel: In the case of one who unwittingly engages in intercourse with his sister, and the sister of his father, and the sister of his mother, during one lapse of awareness, what is the halakha? Is he liable to bring one sin offering for all three prohibitions, or is he liable to bring a separate sin offering for each and every one of the prohibitions? They said to Rabbi Akiva: We did not hear a ruling from our teachers about that case, but we heard the following ruling: One who engages in intercourse with each of his five wives while they are menstruating, during one lapse of awareness, we heard that he is liable to bring a separate sin offering for having engaged in intercourse with each and every one of them. And it appears to me that these matters can be derived from an a fortiori inference: If he is liable to bring separate sin offerings for having engaged in intercourse with five menstruating women, who are forbidden by one prohibition, he should certainly be liable to bring separate sin offerings for having engaged in intercourse with his sister, the sister of his father, and the sister of his mother, who are forbidden by three separate prohibitions. ",
+ "And furthermore, Rabbi Akiva asked Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Yehoshua in the meat market of Emmaus: What is the status of a dangling limb of an animal? Does it impart ritual impurity like a severed limb? They said to Rabbi Akiva: We have not heard a ruling from our teachers in that specific case, but we have heard with regard to a dangling limb of a person that it is ritually pure. And in this manner would the people afflicted with boils, whose limbs were dangling due to their affliction, act in Jerusalem: Each of them would go on Passover eve to the doctor, who would cut the affected limb almost completely until he would leave it connected by a hairbreadth of flesh, so that neither the doctor nor the afflicted would be rendered ritually impure by a severed limb. Then, the doctor would impale the limb on a thorn attached to the floor or the wall, and the afflicted would pull away from the thorn, thereby completely severing the limb. And that person afflicted with boils would perform the rite of his Paschal offering, and the doctor would perform the rite of his Paschal offering, as neither had come into contact with the limb once it was severed. In any case, as long as it was dangling, the limb did not impart impurity. And I consider that these matters can be derived from an a fortiori inference. If a person’s limb, the impurity of which when amputated is severe, does not impart impurity when it is dangling, it is all the more so logical that an animal’s limb, the impurity of which when amputated is lenient, does not impart impurity when it is dangling. ",
+ "And furthermore, Rabbi Akiva asked Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Yehoshua: With regard to one who unwittingly slaughters five offerings outside the Temple during one lapse of awareness, what is the halakha? Is he liable to bring five sin offerings, one for each and every act of slaughter, or is he liable to bring one sin offering for all the acts of slaughter? They said to Rabbi Akiva: We have not heard a ruling from our teachers in that specific case. Rabbi Yehoshua said: I have heard with regard to one who eats meat from one offering from five different pots in which they were prepared, during one lapse of awareness, that he is liable to bring five guilt offerings, which are for the meat prepared in each and every pot, due to misuse of consecrated property. And I consider that these matters can be derived from an a fortiori inference: If one is liable to bring five guilt offerings for one offering prepared in five pots, all the more so is he liable to bring five sin offerings for slaughtering five offerings outside the Temple. Rabbi Shimon said: It was not that question that Rabbi Akiva asked them. Rather, it was with regard to one who eats notar from five offerings during one lapse of awareness. What is the halakha? Is he liable to bring one sin offering for all the offerings from which he ate notar, or is he liable to bring five sin offerings, one for each and every one of the offerings from which he ate notar? They said to Rabbi Akiva: We have not heard a ruling from our teachers in that specific case. Rabbi Yehoshua said: I have heard with regard to one who eats meat from one offering that was prepared in five different pots, during one lapse of awareness, that he is liable to bring separate guilt offerings for the meat prepared in each and every pot, due to misuse of consecrated property. And I consider that these matters can be derived from an a fortiori inference: If one is liable to bring five guilt offerings for one offering prepared in five pots, all the more so is he liable to bring five sin offerings for eating the notar of five separate offerings. Rabbi Akiva said to Rabbi Yehoshua: If you are reporting a halakha that you received from your teachers with regard to one who eats notar from five offerings, we will accept it, but if it is based merely on the a fortiori inference from misuse of consecrated property, there is a response that refutes the inference. Rabbi Yehoshua said to Rabbi Akiva: Respond. Rabbi Akiva said: And no; one cannot derive the halakha of notar through an a fortiori inference from misuse of consecrated property: If you said with regard to misuse of consecrated property that one is liable to bring five guilt offerings, perhaps that is because there are additional stringent elements unique to misuse. As, with regard to misuse, the Torah established that the status of one who feeds another person sacrificial meat is like that of one who eats sacrificial meat, and the status of one who gives benefit to another from consecrated property that is not food is like that of one who derives benefit himself, in that each is liable to bring a guilt offering for misuse. In addition, the Torah joined the misuse of consecrated property that was performed over an extended period, i.e., if one derived benefit worth half a peruta one day and half a peruta the next, he is liable to bring a guilt offering for misuse. Would you say the same with regard to notar, which has none of these halakhot?",
+ "Rabbi Akiva said: I asked Rabbi Eliezer with regard to one who performs multiple prohibited labors on several Shabbatot, and all those labors were subsumed as subcategories of one primary category of prohibited labor, and he performed them during one lapse of awareness. What is the halakha? Is he liable to bring one sin offering for unwitting performance of all these labors or is he liable to bring a sin offering for violation of each and every one of the labors? Rabbi Eliezer said to Rabbi Akiva: He is liable to bring a sin offering for violation of each and every one of the labors, and this is derived from an a fortiori inference: Just as in the case of a menstruating woman, with regard to whom there are not multiple actions that result in transgression and that result in multiple sin offerings, but rather only the prohibition against engaging in intercourse with her, and nevertheless one is liable to bring a separate sin offering for each and every one of his acts of unwitting intercourse; in the case of Shabbat, with regard to which there are multiple primary categories and subcategories of labor that result in transgression and that result in multiple death penalties or sin offerings, is it not right that he will be liable to bring a sin offering for performance of each and every one of the prohibited labors? Rabbi Akiva continues: I said to Rabbi Eliezer that the inference is not valid: If you said one is liable to bring multiple sin offerings in the case of a menstruating woman, with regard to whom there are two prohibitions, as the man is prohibited from engaging in intercourse with the menstruating woman and the menstruating woman is prohibited from engaging in intercourse with him, would you say the same in the case of Shabbat, with regard to which there is only one prohibition? Rabbi Eliezer said to me: The halakha of one who engages in intercourse with minor menstruating girls will prove this refutation is not valid, as in that case there is only one prohibition, because the minor is exempt from the mitzvot, and nevertheless the man is liable to bring a separate sin offering for intercourse for each and every one of the acts of intercourse. Rabbi Akiva said: I said to Rabbi Eliezer that the cases of Shabbat and minor menstruating girls are not comparable. If you said in the case of minor girls that although it is not prohibited for them at present it is prohibited for them after the passage of time, when they reach majority, would you say the same in the case of Shabbat, with regard to which there are neither two prohibitions at present, nor will there be after the passage of time? Rabbi Eliezer said to me: The halakha of one who copulates with an animal will prove this refutation is not valid, as there are never two prohibitions in that case, and nevertheless the person is liable to bring a sin offering for each and every act. Rabbi Akiva said: I said to Rabbi Eliezer that no proof can be cited from the case of an animal, as in my opinion the case of the animal is like that of Shabbat; there is uncertainty with regard to both cases."
+ ],
+ [
+ "If there is uncertainty whether one ate forbidden fat and uncertainty whether one did not eat forbidden fat, or even if one ate forbidden fat and there is uncertainty whether there is the measure that determines liability in the piece he ate and uncertainty whether there is not the measure that determines liability in the piece he ate, he must bring a provisional guilt offering. If one has a piece of permitted fat and a piece of forbidden fat before him and he ate one of them and he does not know which of them he ate; or if his wife and his sister were with him in the house and he unwittingly engaged in intercourse with one of them and he does not know with which of them he unwittingly engaged in intercourse; or if he confused Shabbat and a weekday and he performed labor prohibited on Shabbat on one of the days and he does not know on which of them he performed the labor, in all of those cases he is liable to bring a provisional guilt offering.",
+ "Just as in a case where one unknowingly ate a piece of forbidden fat and then another piece of forbidden fat in a single lapse of awareness he is liable to bring only one sin offering, so too, in a case where their status is unknown to him and he ate them both unwittingly during a single lapse in awareness, he is liable to bring only one provisional guilt offering. But if he had gained knowledge between the first and second instance of eating that there is a possibility the fat might be prohibited, then the halakha is different: Just as he would be liable to bring a sin offering for each and every piece when he gained knowledge of their prohibited status in between each act of consumption, so too, he must bring a provisional guilt offering for each and every instance in which he consumed food that might be forbidden after learning of their uncertain status in between each unwitting act of consumption. Just as in a case where one ate forbidden fat, and blood, and piggul, and notar in one lapse of awareness he is liable to bring a sin offering for each and every one, so too, with regard to a case where their status is unknown to him and he ate them unwittingly during one lapse of awareness, he must bring a provisional guilt offering for each and every item. If one has pieces of forbidden fat and notar before him and he ate one of them and he does not know which of them he ate; or if his menstruating wife and his sister were with him in the house and he unwittingly engaged in intercourse with one of them and he does not know with which of them he unwittingly engaged in intercourse; or if Shabbat and Yom Kippur occurred adjacent to one another and he performed prohibited labor during the intervening twilight period and he does not know on which of the days he performed the labor, in all of these cases, Rabbi Eliezer deems the transgressor liable to bring a sin offering, as he certainly sinned, and Rabbi Yehoshua deems the transgressor exempt, as he does not know the nature of his sin. Rabbi Yosei said: Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua did not disagree with regard to one who performs prohibited labor during the intervening twilight period because they concur that he is exempt, as I say: He performed part of the labor today, and he performed part of the labor the following day. With regard to what case did they disagree? With regard to the case of one who performs prohibited labor in the midst of the day, and he does not know whether it was on Shabbat that he performed the labor or whether it was on Yom Kippur that he performed the labor; or with regard to one who performs a prohibited labor and he does not know which labor he performed. As, in those cases Rabbi Eliezer deems him liable to bring a sin offering and Rabbi Yehoshua deems him exempt. Rabbi Yehuda said: Rabbi Yehoshua would deem him exempt even from bringing a provisional guilt offering.",
+ "Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Shimon Shezuri say: Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua did not disagree with regard to a case involving a matter where his lack of knowledge involves items from one category, e.g., he picked a grape from a vine on Shabbat and does not know which vine it was, as in that case they both agree that he is liable, since he knows the nature of his sin. With regard to what case did they disagree? With regard to a case involving a matter where his lack of knowledge involves items from two categories, e.g., he picked fruit from a tree on Shabbat and does not know whether it was from a vine or from a fig tree. As, in that case Rabbi Eliezer deems him liable to bring a sin offering, since he certainly sinned, and Rabbi Yehoshua deems him exempt, as he does not know the nature of his sin. Rabbi Yehuda said: Even if one intended to pick figs and he picked grapes, or to pick grapes and he picked figs, or to pick black figs and he picked white figs, or to pick white figs and he picked black figs, Rabbi Eliezer deems him liable to bring a sin offering and Rabbi Yehoshua deems him exempt. Rabbi Yehuda added: I wonder if Rabbi Yehoshua deemed him exempt in that case, as even in his opinion the person intended to perform a prohibited labor. The mishna asks: If it is so, that he is not exempt according to Rabbi Yehuda, why is it stated: “If his sin, wherein he has sinned” (Leviticus 4:23), from which it is derived that one is liable only if the object of the sin was the one that he intended? The mishna answers: This serves to exclude one who acts unawares and does not intend to perform a prohibited action at all."
+ ],
+ [
+ "If one consumed an olive-bulk of blood that spurted during the slaughter of a domesticated animal, an undomesticated animal, or a bird, whether it is a kosher or non-kosher species; or if one consumed blood that flowed after stabbing an animal or killing it in a manner other than by ritual slaughter, or blood that spurted after ripping the animal’s windpipe or gullet, or blood that spurted during bloodletting with which the soul departs, one is liable to receive karet for consuming it intentionally or to bring a sin offering for consuming it unwittingly. But with regard to blood of the spleen, blood of the heart, blood of eggs, blood of grasshoppers, or blood of exudate [tamtzit], i.e., that oozes from the neck of the animal after the initial spurt of its slaughter concludes,one is not liable for consuming it. Rabbi Yehuda deems one liable in the case of blood of exudate.",
+ "This mishna resumes discussion of the provisional guilt offering addressed in the previous chapter. Rabbi Akiva deems one liable to bring a provisional guilt offering for a case where he is uncertain whether he is guilty of misuse of consecrated property, a transgression that renders one liable to bring a definite guilt offering (see Leviticus 5:15). And the Rabbis deem him exempt, as one brings a provisional guilt offering only in a case of uncertainty as to whether he is liable to bring a sin offering, not a guilt offering. And Rabbi Akiva concedes that one does not bring payment for his misuse until it becomes definitely known to him that he is guilty of misuse, as then he will bring a definite guilt offering with his payment. Rabbi Tarfon said: For what purpose does that person bring two guilt offerings, one provisional and one definite? Rather, at the outset one brings the payment for misuse of consecrated property and its additional payment of one-fifth, as mandated by Torah law, and he will then bring a guilt offering worth two sela and say: If it is certain that I misused consecrated property, this is payment for my misuse and this is my definite guilt offering. And if it is uncertain whether I misused consecrated property, the money is a contribution to the Temple fund for the purchase of communal offerings and the guilt offering is provisional, as from the same type of animal that one brings a guilt offering for a case where it is known to him that he is guilty of misuse, he likewise brings a guilt offering for a case where it is unknown to him.",
+ "Rabbi Akiva says: The statement of Rabbi Tarfon appears correct in the case of minimal misuse, but in a case where he is confronted with a case of uncertainty with regard to misuse valued at ten thousand dinars, would it not be preferable for him that he will now bring a provisional guilt offering valued at two sela and he will not bring payment now for uncertain misuse valued at ten thousand dinars? The mishna concludes: Apparently, Rabbi Akiva concedes to Rabbi Tarfon in the case of minimal misuse. He agrees that at the outset one brings payment for misuse and its additional payment of one-fifth, and conditionally brings a guilt offering. Apropos the previous case in which one brings the same type of animal when liability is certain as when liability is uncertain, this mishna teaches: With regard to a woman who brought a bird sin offering in a case of uncertainty whether she miscarried a fetus that would have rendered her liable to bring a sin offering or whether what she expelled would not render her liable to bring an offering, in which case this sin offering may not be eaten by priests, the halakha is as follows: If before the nape of the neck of the bird was pinched it became known to her that she certainly gave birth, i.e., miscarried, in a manner that obligates her to bring a sin offering, she should render the offering a definite sin offering, as from the same type of animal that she brings a sin offering for a case where it is known to her that she miscarried, she brings a sin offering for a case where it is unknown to her.",
+ "The mishna resumes discussion of the provisional guilt offering. If one had a piece of non-sacred meat and a piece of sacrificial meat, and he ate one of them and does not know which of them he ate, he is exempt from the obligation to bring a guilt offering for misuse of consecrated property. Rabbi Akiva deems him liable to bring a provisional guilt offering, in accordance with his opinion in the previous mishna that one brings a provisional guilt offering even in a case of uncertainty with regard to misuse. If he then ate the second piece, he brings a definite guilt offering, as it is certain that he ate the sacrificial meat. If one person ate the first piece and another person came and ate the second piece, this first person brings a provisional guilt offering and that second person brings a provisional guilt offering; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Shimon says: Both of them bring one definite guilt offering as partners, and they stipulate that the one who ate the non-sacred meat grants his share of the animal to the one who ate the sacrificial meat, and the guilt offering is sacrificed on his behalf. Rabbi Yosei says: Two people do not bring one guilt offering, as one may not sacrifice atonement offerings conditionally.",
+ "If one had a piece of forbidden fat and a piece of non-sacred meat, and he ate one of them and does not know which of them he ate, he brings a provisional guilt offering, as perhaps he ate the forbidden fat. If he then ate the second piece, he brings a sin offering, as it is certain that he ate the fat. If one person ate the first piece and another person came and ate the second piece, this person brings a provisional guilt offering and that person brings a provisional guilt offering; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Shimon says: Both of them bring one sin offering as partners, and they stipulate that the sin offering should be credited to the one who ate the fat. Rabbi Yosei says: Two people do not bring one sin offering.",
+ "If one had a piece of forbidden fat and a piece of sacrificial permitted fat and he ate one of them and does not know which of them he ate, he brings a provisional guilt offering, as perhaps he ate the forbidden fat. If he then ate the second piece, he brings a sin offering, as he certainly ate the fat, and a definite guilt offering for misuse of consecrated property. If one person ate the first piece and another person came and ate the second piece, this person brings a provisional guilt offering and that person brings a provisional guilt offering. Rabbi Shimon says: Both of them bring a sin offering and a guilt offering as partners, and they stipulate that each offering should be credited to the one who is liable to bring it. Rabbi Yosei says: Two people do not bring one sin offering and one guilt offering.",
+ "If one had a piece of forbidden fat and a piece of sacrificial forbidden fat and he ate one of them and does not know which of them he ate, he brings a sin offering as he certainly ate forbidden fat. Rabbi Akiva says: He also brings a provisional guilt offering, as perhaps he ate the sacrificial fat, in accordance with his opinion that one brings a provisional guilt offering even in the case of uncertainty with regard to misuse of consecrated property. If he then ate the second piece, he brings two sin offerings, as he ate two pieces of forbidden fat, and a definite guilt offering for misuse of consecrated property. If one person ate the first piece and another person came and ate the second piece, this person brings a sin offering and that person brings a sin offering. Rabbi Akiva says: This person and that person each bring a provisional guilt offering as well, due to the uncertainty as to which of them ate the sacrificial fat. Rabbi Shimon says: This person brings a sin offering and that person brings a sin offering and both of them bring one guilt offering as partners, and they stipulate that the offering should be credited to the one who ate the sacrificial fat. Rabbi Yosei says: The two of them do not bring one guilt offering.",
+ "If one had a piece of forbidden fat and a piece of forbidden fat that is notar, an offering whose designated time has passed for which one is liable to receive karet if he ate it intentionally and liable to bring a sin offering if he ate it unwittingly, and he ate one of them and does not know which of them he ate, he brings a sin offering, as he certainly ate forbidden fat, and a provisional guilt offering, due to the possibility that he ate the notar. If he then ate the second piece, he brings three sin offerings, two for the forbidden fat and one for the prohibition against eating notar. If one person ate the first piece and another person came and ate the second piece, this person brings a sin offering and a provisional guilt offering, as he certainly ate forbidden fat and it is uncertain whether he ate the notar, and that person brings a sin offering and a provisional guilt offering. Rabbi Shimon says: This person brings a sin offering and that person brings a sin offering and both of them bring one additional sin offering as partners, and they stipulate that the offering should be credited to the one who ate the notar. Rabbi Yosei says: Two people do not bring any sin offering that comes as atonement for a sin."
+ ],
+ [
+ "In the case of one who brings a provisional guilt offering due to uncertainty as to whether he sinned, and it became known to him that he did not sin, if he made that discovery before the ram was slaughtered, it shall emerge and graze with the flock as a non-sacred animal, since its consecration was in error. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: Its status is not that of a non-sacred animal; rather it is that of a guilt offering that was disqualified for sacrifice. Therefore, it shall graze until it becomes blemished; and then it shall be sold, and the money received for it shall be allocated for the purchase of communal gift offerings by the Temple treasury. Rabbi Eliezer says: It shall be sacrificed as a provisional guilt offering, as if it does not come to atone for this sin that he initially thought, it comes to atone for another sin of which he is unaware. If it became known to him that he did not sin after the ram was slaughtered and its blood collected in a container, the blood shall be poured into the canal that flows through the Temple courtyard, and the flesh shall go out to the place of burning, like any disqualified offering. If the blood was sprinkled before he discovered that he did not sin, and the meat is intact, the meat may be eaten by the priests like any other sin offering, as from the moment that its blood was sprinkled the meat is permitted to the priests. Rabbi Yosei says: Even if the blood was still in the cup when he discovered that he did not sin, the blood shall be sprinkled and the meat may be eaten.",
+ "In the case of a definite guilt offering, it is not so, i.e., the halakha is different than with regard to a provisional guilt offering. If he made the discovery that he did not sin before the ram was slaughtered, it shall go out and graze among the flock, as it is not consecrated. If it became known to him that he did not sin after the ram was slaughtered, it shall be buried like a non-sacred animal that was slaughtered in the Temple courtyard, and its blood is poured. If he discovered that he did not sin after the blood was sprinkled, the flesh shall go out to the place of burning, like any disqualified offering. In the case of an ox that is sentenced to be stoned (see Exodus 21:28–32), e.g., for killing a person, it is not so, i.e., it also does not have the same halakhic status as a provisional guilt offering. If it is discovered that the testimony with regard to the ox was false before it was stoned, it shall go out and graze among the flock as it never had the status of an ox sentenced to be stoned. If this was discovered after the ox was stoned, its halakhic status is as though it had not been sentenced, and therefore deriving benefit from its carcass is permitted. In the case of a heifer whose neck is broken, when a corpse is found between two cities and the identity of the murderer is unknown (see Deuteronomy 21:1–9), it is not so i.e., the halakha is different than with regard to a provisional guilt offering. If the identity of the murderer is discovered before the heifer’s neck was broken, it shall go out and graze among the flock, as it is not consecrated. But if the identity of the murderer was discovered after the heifer’s neck was broken, it shall be buried in its place, like any other heifer whose neck is broken. The reason is that from the outset the heifer whose neck is broken comes to atone for a situation of uncertainty. Once its neck was broken before the identity of the murderer was revealed, its mitzva was fulfilled, as it atoned for its uncertainty and that uncertainty is gone.",
+ "Rabbi Eliezer says: A person may volunteer to bring a provisional guilt offering every day and at any time that he chooses, even if there is no uncertainty as to whether he sinned, and this type of offering was called the guilt offering of the pious, as they brought it due to their constant concern that they might have sinned. They said about Bava ben Buta that he would volunteer to bring a provisional guilt offering every day except for one day after Yom Kippur, when he would not bring the offering. Bava ben Buta said: I take an oath by this abode of the Divine Presence that if they would have allowed me, I would have brought a guilt offering even on that day. But they would say to me: Wait until you enter into a situation of potential uncertainty. And the Rabbis say: One brings a provisional guilt offering only in a case where there is uncertainty as to whether he performed a sin for whose intentional performance one is liable to receive karet and for whose unwitting performance one is liable to bring a sin offering.",
+ "Those liable to bring sin offerings and definite guilt offerings for whom Yom Kippur has passed are liable to bring them after Yom Kippur.By contrast, those liable to bring provisional guilt offerings are exempt from bringing them after Yom Kippur. With regard to one who encountered uncertainty as to whether he performed a sin on Yom Kippur, even if it was at nightfall at the end of the day, he is exempt, as the entire day atones for uncertain sins.",
+ "A woman upon whom it is incumbent to bring a bird sin offering due to uncertainty, e.g., uncertainty with regard to whether or not her miscarriage obligated her to bring the sin offering of a woman who gave birth, for whom Yom Kippur has passed, is liable to bring it after Yom Kippur. This is because the offering does not come as atonement for a sin; rather, it renders her eligible to partake of the meat of offerings. With regard to this bird sin offering that is brought due to uncertainty, if it became known to her that she was exempt from bringing the offering after the nape of the neck of the bird was pinched, the bird must be buried.",
+ "With regard to one who designates two sela, which is the minimal value of a guilt offering,to purchase a ram for a guilt offering,and he purchased two rams for a guilt offering with the two sela, if one of them is now worth two sela, he shall sacrifice it for his guilt offering. And the second ram that he purchased with the money he designated does not become non-sacred. Rather, it shall graze until it becomes blemished; and then it shall be sold, and the money received for it shall be allocated for communal gift offerings. If he purchased two rams for non-sacred use with those two sela designated for a guilt offering, he has misused consecrated property. He is therefore liable to bring a guilt offering and to compensate the Temple treasury for those two sela and add one-fifth to the sum for a total of ten dinars, as there are four dinars in a sela. If one of the rams is now worth two sela, and the other one is now worth ten dinars, i.e., two and a half sela, the one that is worth two sela shall be sacrificed as his guilt offering for misuse of the two sela, and the second one shall be sacrificed for his initial misuse, as it is worth two sela plus one-fifth. In a case where he purchased two rams with those two sela designated for a guilt offering, one for a guilt offering and one for non-sacred use, if the ram for the guilt offering is now worth two sela, it shall be sacrificed for his initial guilt offering. And with regard to the second ram that he purchased for non-sacred use, if it is now worth two sela, it shall be sacrificed as a guilt offering for his present misuse, and he brings with it the sum of one sela and one-fifth to the Temple treasury as payment for his misuse.",
+ "In the case of one who designates a sin offering for his performance of an unwitting sin and dies, his son shall not bring it in his stead, neither on behalf of his father nor for his own unwitting sin, even if it was the same transgression. Likewise, one may not bring a sin offering by reassigning it from the sin for which it is designated to atone and sacrificing it for atonement of another sin. Even if he designated a sin offering as atonement for forbidden fat that he unwittingly ate yesterday, he may not bring it as atonement for forbidden fat that he unwittingly ate today, as it is stated: “And he shall bring his sin offering, an unblemished female goat, for his sin that he has sinned” (Leviticus 4:28), indicating that he does not satisfy his obligation until his offering is brought for the sake of the sin for which he designated it.",
+ "One may bring a female goat from money consecrated for a sin offering of a female lamb, and a female lamb from money consecrated for a sin offering of a female goat. And likewise, one may bring doves and pigeons from money consecrated for a sin offering of a female lamb and a female goat; and one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour from money consecrated for a sin offering of doves and pigeons. How so? If one unwittingly performed a sin for which he is liable to bring a sliding-scale sin offering, which varies based on economic status (see Leviticus 5:1–13; see also 9a), and he designated money to purchase a female lamb or for a female goat and then became poorer, he may bring a bird, and the remaining money is non-sacred. If he became yet poorer, he may bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour. Likewise, if he designated money to purchase one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour and became wealthier, he shall bring a bird. If he became yet wealthier, he shall bring a female lamb or a female goat. If one designated a female lamb or goat as an offering and it developed a blemish, he must redeem the animal and bring another offering with the money. If he became poorer, he may bring a bird with its money. But if one designated a bird as an offering and it developed a blemish, he may not bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour with its money, as there is no possibility of redemption for birds.",
+ "Rabbi Shimon says: Lambs precede goats almost everywhere in the Torah that they are both mentioned, as in the verse: “You shall take it from the lambs or from the goats” (Exodus 12:5). One might have thought that it is due to the fact that sheep are more select than goats. Therefore, the verse states: “And he shall bring for his offering a goat” (Leviticus 4:28), after which it is written: “And if he bring a lamb as his offering for a sin offering” (Leviticus 4:32), which teaches that both of them are equal. Similarly, doves precede pigeons almost everywhere in the Torah, as in the verse: “And he shall bring his guilt offering…two doves, or two pigeons” (Leviticus 5:7). One might have thought that it is due to the fact that doves are more select than pigeons. Therefore, the verse states: “And a pigeon or a dove for a sin offering” (Leviticus 12:6), with the usual order reversed, which teaches that both of them are equal. Likewise, mention of the father precedes that of the mother almost everywhere in the Torah, as in the verse: “Honor your father and your mother” (Exodus 20:12). One might have thought that it is due to the fact that the honor of the father takes precedence over the honor of the mother. Therefore, the verse states: “Every man shall fear his mother and his father” (Leviticus 19:3), with the order reversed, which teaches that both of them are equal. But the Sages said: Honor of the father takes precedence over honor of the mother everywhere, due to the fact that both the son and his mother are obligated in the honor of his father. And likewise with regard to Torah study, if the son was privileged to acquire most of his Torah knowledge from studying before the teacher, honor of the teacher takes precedence over honor of the father, due to the fact that both the son and his father are obligated in the honor of his teacher, as everyone is obligated in the honor of Torah scholars."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/merged.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/merged.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..265c90bf4a8f49c8c9624e465af7c720cce6f57a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/English/merged.json
@@ -0,0 +1,78 @@
+{
+ "title": "Mishnah Keritot",
+ "language": "en",
+ "versionTitle": "merged",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org/Mishnah_Keritot",
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "There are thirty-six cases in the Torah with regard to which one who performs a prohibited action intentionally is liable to receive excision from the World-to-Come [karet]. They are: One who engages in sexual intercourse with his mother; or with the wife of his father, even if she is not his mother; or with his daughter-in-law. The same punishment is imposed on a man who engages in intercourse with another male [hazekhur], or who copulates with an animal; and a woman who brings an animal upon her to engage in bestiality. The same punishment is imposed on one who engages in intercourse with a woman and her daughter, or with a married woman. The same punishment is imposed on one who engages in intercourse with his sister, or with his father’s sister, or with his mother’s sister, or with his wife’s sister, or with his brother’s wife, or with the wife of his father’s brother, or with the wife of his mother’s brother, or with a menstruating woman. And these too are liable to receive karet: One who blasphemes the name of Heaven, and one who worships an idol, and one who gives of his children to Molekh (see Leviticus 20:1–5), and a necromancer, and one who desecrates Shabbat. And the same is the punishment of one who is ritually impure who ate sacrificial food; and one who enters the Temple while ritually impure; and one who eats forbidden fat, or consumes blood, or eats meat left over from an offering after the time allotted for its consumption [notar], or eats meat of an offering that was sacrificed with the intent to consume it after its designated time [piggul]; and one who slaughters offerings and offers them up outside the Temple. And these too are liable to receive karet: One who eats leavened bread on Passover, and one who eats or performs prohibited labor on Yom Kippur. And the same is the punishment of one who blends the anointing oil according to the specifications of the oil prepared by Moses in the wilderness (see Exodus 30:22–33); and one who blends the incense according to the specifications of the incense used in the Temple service for purposes other than use in the Temple; and one who applies the anointing oil to his skin. And one is liable to receive karet for failure to fulfill the mitzva of bringing the Paschal offering and the mitzva of circumcision, which unlike the cases of prohibitions enumerated in the mishna, are positive mitzvot.",
+ "For any of these prohibitions, one is liable to receive karet for its intentional violation and to bring a sin offering for its unwitting violation. And for their violation in a case where it is unknown to him whether or not he transgressed, he is liable to bring a provisional guilt offering, which provides provisional atonement until he discovers whether or not he transgressed. This is the halakha for all of the transgressions listed above except for one who defiles the Temple, i.e., he enters the Temple while ritually impure, or partakes of its consecrated items while ritually impure. In these cases he does not bring a provisional guilt offering because he is obligated to bring a sliding-scale offering for a definite transgression. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: The halakha is the same even with regard to the one who blasphemes, as it is stated with regard to the sin offering: “You shall have one law for him who performs the action unwittingly” (Numbers 15:29), excluding one who blasphemes, as he does not perform an action but sins with speech.",
+ "There are some women who bring a sin offering of a woman after childbirth and the offering is eaten by the priests. And there are some women who bring a sin offering but it is not eaten. And there are some women who do not bring a sin offering at all. The mishna elaborates: The following women bring a sin offering and it is eaten by the priests: One who miscarries a fetus with a form similar to a domesticated animal, one who miscarries a fetus with a form similar to an undomesticated animal, or one who miscarries a fetus with a form similar to a bird; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: She does not bring a sin offering unless the fetus has the form of a person. With regard to a woman who miscarries a sandal fetus, i.e., one that has the form of a flat fish; or if she miscarries the placenta; or an amniotic sac in which tissue developed; or a fetus that emerged cut, i.e., in pieces; and likewise a Canaanite maidservant, owned by a Jew, who miscarried; in all these cases she brings a sin offering and it is eaten by the priests.",
+ "And these women bring sin offerings but their sin offerings are not eaten: One who miscarries and does not know the nature of what she miscarried; and two women who miscarried, in a case where one miscarried a fetus of a type for which a woman is exempt from bringing an offering and the other one miscarried a fetus of a type for which a woman is liable to bring an offering, and they do not know which miscarried which type. Rabbi Yosei said: When is their sin offering not eaten? It is when both women went to different places within the Temple to bring their offerings, e.g., this woman went to the east and that woman went to the west. But if both of them were standing together, both of them together bring one sin offering, and it is eaten.",
+ "These women do not bring a sin offering: A woman who miscarries an amniotic sac full of water, or one full of blood, or one full of different colors; and likewise a woman who miscarries a fetus with a form similar to fish, or grasshoppers, or repugnant creatures, or creeping animals; and a woman who miscarries on the fortieth day of her pregnancy; and a woman who gives birth by caesarean section. Rabbi Shimon deems a woman liable to bring a sin offering in the case where she gives birth by caesarean section.",
+ "A woman who gives birth to a daughter counts fourteen days during which she is ritually impure. That is followed by sixty-six days during which she remains ritually pure even if she experiences a flow of blood. The Torah obligates a woman to bring her offering on the eighty-first day (see Leviticus 12:1–6). If the woman miscarries another fetus before that day, she is not required to bring an additional offering. In the case of a woman who miscarries a fetus on the night of, i.e., preceding, the eighty-first day, Beit Shammai deem her exempt from bringing a second offering and Beit Hillel deem her liable to bring a second offering. Beit Hillel said to Beit Shammai: What is different between the night of the eighty-first and the day of the eighty-first? If they are equal with regard to the halakhot of ritual impurity, i.e., the blood flow of this woman on the eighty-first night renders her ritually impure and all the standard strictures of ritual impurity apply to her, will the two time periods not be equal with regard to liability to bring an additional offering as well? Beit Shammai said to Beit Hillel: No, there is a difference between that night and the following day. If you said with regard to a woman who miscarries on the eighty-first day that she is obligated to bring an additional offering, this is logical, as she emerged into a period that is fit for her to bring her offering. Would you say the same with regard to a woman who miscarries on the night of the eighty-first day, where she did not emerge into a period that is fit for her to bring her offering, as offerings are not sacrificed at night? Beit Hillel said to Beit Shammai: But let the case of a woman who miscarries on the eighty-first day that occurs on Shabbat prove that this distinction is incorrect, as she did not emerge into a period that is fit for her to bring her offering because individual offerings are not sacrificed on Shabbat, and nevertheless she is obligated to bring an additional offering. Beit Shammai said to Beit Hillel: No, there is a difference between these cases. If you said this ruling with regard to a woman who miscarries on the eighty-first day that occurs on Shabbat, the reason is that although Shabbat is unfit for the sacrifice of an individual offering, it is fit for the sacrifice of a communal offering whose time is fixed, e.g., the daily offering. Would you say the same with regard to a woman who miscarries on the night of the eighty-first day, as the night is completely unfit, since neither an individual offering nor a communal offering is sacrificed at night? Beit Shammai add: And as for the ritual impurity status of the blood, i.e., Beit Hillel’s opinion that the two time periods are equal with regard to the halakhot of ritual impurity, this does not prove what the halakha should be with regard to offerings, as with regard to a woman who miscarries before the completion of the term of eighty days, her blood is impure like the blood of a woman after childbirth, and nevertheless she is exempt from bringing the offering.",
+ "With regard to a woman who has in her case uncertainty concerning five births, and likewise a woman with regard to whom there is uncertainty concerning five irregular discharges of blood from the uterus [ziva], she brings one offering, and then she may partake of the meat of offerings. And the remaining offerings are not an obligation for her. If she experienced five definite discharges of a zava or five definite births, she brings one offering, and then she may partake of the meat of offerings. And the remaining offerings are an obligation for her. There was an incident where the price of nests, i.e., pairs of birds, stood in Jerusalem at one gold dinar, as the great demand for birds for the offerings of a woman after childbirth and a zava led to an increase in the price. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: I swear by this abode of the Divine Presence that I will not lie down tonight until the price of nests will be in silver dinars. Ultimately, he entered the court and taught: A woman who has in her case five definite discharges of a zava or five definite births brings one offering, and then she may partake of the meat of offerings. And the remaining offerings are not an obligation for her. And as a result, the price of the nests stood that day at one-quarter of a silver dinar, as the demand for nests decreased."
+ ],
+ [
+ "There are four individuals whose halakhic status is defined as: Lacking atonement [khappara], which means they had been in a state of ritual impurity and underwent rituals to purify themselves, but since they have not yet brought the requisite atonement offering to complete the purification process, they may not partake of sacrificial meat. And there are also four individuals who bring an offering for an intentional transgression in the same manner as they do for an unwitting transgression. And these are the four individuals who lack atonement: The man who experiences a gonorrhea-like discharge [zav], the woman who experiences a discharge of uterine blood after her menstrual period [zava], the woman after childbirth, and the leper. In all four of these cases, although the individual has completed all of the other steps of the purification process, the process is not complete until the atonement offering has been brought. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: A convert also lacks atonement, even after he has been circumcised and has immersed in a ritual bath, until the priest sprinkles the blood of his offering on the altar on his behalf. A nazirite also lacks atonement with regard to his permission for drinking wine, and cutting his hair, and his exposure to ritual impurity imparted by a corpse, until his offerings are sacrificed.",
+ "These individuals bring an offering for an intentional transgression in the same manner as they do for an unwitting transgression: One who engages in intercourse with an espoused maidservant, who is liable to bring a guilt offering (see Leviticus 19:20–22); and a nazirite who became ritually impure, who is required to bring a sheep as a guilt offering and two doves or two pigeons, one as a sin offering and one as a burnt offering (see Numbers 6:9–12); and one who falsely takes the oath of testimony, asserting that he does not have any testimony to provide on a given issue (see Leviticus 5:1); and one who falsely takes the oath on a deposit, asserting that an item belonging to another is not in his possession (see Leviticus 5:21–26).",
+ "There are five individuals who bring one offering for several transgressions, i.e., for violating the same transgression several times; and there are five individuals who bring a sliding-scale offering, which is determined based on the financial status of the sinner. These are the five individuals who bring one offering for several transgressions: First, one who engages in several acts of intercourse with an espoused maidservant, and second, a nazirite who became ritually impure due to several instances of contact with ritual impurity. The mishna continues to list the five situations in which one offering is brought to atone for several transgressions: Third, one who issues a warning to his wife declaring himself jealous with regard to several different men with whom he suspects her of committing adultery, and forbidding her to be alone with them. If the wife was then found separately in seclusion with each of the men, he brings her to the Temple with one single meal offering of jealousy. And fourth, a leper who was afflicted with several instances of leprosy, meaning that he was purified from his leprosy, and before he brought his offerings, he suffered a relapse of the leprosy. When he is finally purified, he brings only one set of offerings. If a leper brought the two requisite birds on the first day of his purification (see Leviticus 14:4–7), and prior to bringing his offerings on the eighth day of his purification he was afflicted with a relapse of leprosy, those birds do not satisfy his obligation until he brings his sin offering. Rabbi Yehuda says: Until he brings his guilt offering.",
+ "The mishna continues with the last of the five situations in which one offering is brought to atone for several transgressions: A woman who gave birth to several offspring. This is a case where a woman gave birth to a daughter, after which she is ritually impure for fourteen days and then enters a period of sixty-six days of ritual purity, even if she experiences uterine bleeding. Nevertheless, during this interim period, she is still somewhat impure, and it is therefore prohibited for her to enter the Temple or to partake of consecrated food, and at the end of the period she must bring an offering. And during those days of ritual purity, she became pregnant again and then miscarried a female fetus within the eighty days, and then became pregnant again and miscarried another female fetus within eighty days of the first miscarriage. In this situation, when she ultimately completes her process of purification, she brings one single offering for all the births and miscarriages. And a similar halakha applies to a woman who miscarries multiple fetuses from a single pregnancy at different points in time, miscarrying each fetus before completing the purification period of forty days for a male or eighty days for a female for the previous fetus. When she finally completes her process of purification, she brings one single offering for all of the miscarriages. Rabbi Yehuda says: In these cases, a single offering does not suffice for all the births or miscarriages. Rather, she brings an offering for the first birth or miscarriage and does not bring an offering for the second miscarriage, as it took place before the completion of the purification period for the first. She then brings an offering for the third miscarriage and does not bring an offering for the fourth fetus, as it was miscarried before the completion of the purification period for the third fetus.
These are the five situations mentioned in the mishna (9a) in which one brings a sliding-scale offering: For hearing the voice of an oath, i.e., where one took a false oath that he does not have any testimony to provide on a given issue; and for the utterance of the lips, which is a case where one took a false oath about a different matter; and for the defiling of the Temple, by entering it while ritually impure, or defiling its sacrificial foods, by partaking of them while ritually impure; and a woman after childbirth; and a leper at the end of his purification process.
What are the differences between an espoused maidservant and all those others with whom relations are forbidden? The difference is that the status of the maidservant is not equal to their status, neither with regard to punishment nor with regard to an offering, as one who unwittingly engages in intercourse with any of those with whom relations are forbidden is liable to bring a sin offering, and by contrast, one who unwittingly engages in intercourse with an espoused maidservant is liable to bring a guilt offering. One who unwittingly engages in intercourse with any of those with whom relations are forbidden brings a female animal, and one who unwittingly engages in intercourse with an espoused maidservant brings a male animal, as a sin offering is a female and a guilt offering is a male.
Furthermore, with regard to engaging in intercourse with any of those with whom relations are forbidden, both the man and the woman are equal with regard to liability to receive lashes if they were forewarned, and with regard to liability to bring an offering if they did so unwittingly. And in the case of one who engages in intercourse with a maidservant, the Torah did not equate the man with the woman with regard to lashes, as she alone is flogged, as will be explained, and the Torah did not equate the woman with the man with regard to bringing an offering, as she does not bring an offering.
With regard to intercourse with any of those with whom relations are forbidden, the Torah rendered the halakhic status of one who engages in the initial stage of intercourse [hame’areh] to be like that of one who completes the act, and one is liable to bring a sin offering for each and every act of intercourse that he performs unwittingly. By contrast, in the case of relations with an espoused maidservant, one is liable only for completing the act of intercourse, and the man brings a single offering for several transgressions.
This is a stringency that the Torah imposed with regard to the maidservant relative to other individuals with whom relations are forbidden:
That the Torah established her status so that the one who engages in intercourse with her intentionally is like the one who does so unwittingly, as both are liable to bring a guilt offering, whereas one who engages in intercourse with those with whom relations are forbidden is liable to bring a sin offering only when he does so unwittingly.",
+ "Who is the espoused maidservant in question? It is any woman who is half-maidservant half-free woman, i.e., a maidservant who belonged to two masters, one of whom liberated her, as it is stated: “And she was redeemed and not redeemed” (Leviticus 19:20), which means that she was partially but not completely redeemed. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yishmael says: An espoused maidservant is a full-fledged maidservant whose status is certain, as the language of the verse does not mean redeemed and not redeemed; it is simply a way of stating that she was not redeemed. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: All those with whom relations are forbidden are enumerated in the Torah, and we have no exception other than one who is half-maidservant half-free woman.",
+ "This mishna cites an additional difference between the status of an espoused maidservant and the status of forbidden relatives. In all cases of intercourse with those with whom relations are forbidden, if one is an adult and one is a minor, the minor is exempt; if one is awake and one is sleeping, the sleeping one is exempt; if one commits the act unwittingly and one does so intentionally, the one who did so unwittingly is liable to bring a sin offering and the one who did so intentionally is liable to be punished with karet. By contrast, in a case of intercourse with an espoused maidservant, the man is liable to bring a guilt offering only if the woman is flogged, and that is the case only if she was an adult, awake, and committed the sin intentionally."
+ ],
+ [
+ "If witnesses said to a person: We saw that you ate forbidden fat, he is liable to bring a sin offering if he did so unwittingly. If a witness says: He ate forbidden fat, and a witness says: He did not eat forbidden fat, or if a woman says: He ate forbidden fat, and a woman says: He did not eat forbidden fat, he is liable to bring a provisional guilt offering, brought by one who is uncertain as to whether he committed a sin that requires a sin offering. If a witness says: He ate forbidden fat, and the person himself says: I did not eat forbidden fat, he is exempt. If two witnesses say: He ate forbidden fat, and the person himself says: I did not eat forbidden fat, Rabbi Meir deems him liable to bring a sin offering. Rabbi Meir said: This conclusion can be derived a fortiori: If two witnesses could have brought him liability to receive the severe punishment of death, can they not bring him liability to sacrifice an offering, which is relatively lenient? The Rabbis said to him: Witnesses are unable to render another person liable to bring an offering contrary to his statement, as what if he wishes to say: I did so intentionally, in which case he would be exempt from bringing an offering?",
+ "If one unwittingly ate an olive-bulk of forbidden fat and then ate another olive-bulk of forbidden fat during one lapse of awareness, i.e., in a case where he did not discover in the interim that fat is forbidden, or that the food he is eating is forbidden fat, he is liable to bring only one sin offering. If one ate forbidden fat, and blood, and piggul, and notar in one lapse of awareness, he is liable to bring a sin offering for each and every one of them. This is a stringency that applies to one who eats several types of forbidden food and does not apply to one who eats one type of forbidden food. And a stringency that applies to one who eats one type of forbidden food and not to one who eats several types of forbidden food is that if one ate half an olive-bulk and then ate another half an olive-bulk during one lapse of awareness, in a case where they were both from one type of forbidden food, he is liable to bring a sin offering. If they were from two types, he is exempt, because he did not eat an olive-bulk of any specific forbidden food.",
+ "How much time can one expend while eating an olive-bulk of forbidden food and still be liable for violating the prohibition? The duration is calculated as though he were eating toasted grain, which one eats one kernel at a time. If he eats the olive-bulk of forbidden food within the amount of time it would take to eat an olive-bulk of toasted grain, he is liable. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: Unless the amount of time he expends from beginning to end is more than the time it takes to eat a half-loaf [peras] of bread, he is liable. Likewise, one who ate a quarter-loaf of ritually impure foods or drank a quarter-log of ritually impure liquids within the amount of time it takes to eat a half-loaf of bread is rendered unfit to partake of teruma, the portion of the produce designated for priests, until he becomes pure. Similarly, if one drank a quarter-log of wine and entered the Temple, and he remained there for the time it takes to eat a half-loaf of bread, he is liable. Rabbi Elazar says: If he interrupted his drinking of the quarter-log of wine or if he placed any amount of water into the wine, he is exempt.",
+ "There is a case where one can perform a single act of eating an olive-bulk of food and be liable to bring four sin offerings and one guilt offering for it. How so? This halakha applies to one who is ritually impure who ate forbidden fat, and it was left over from a consecrated offering after the time allotted for its consumption [notar], on Yom Kippur. He is liable to bring sin offerings for eating forbidden fat and notar, for eating the meat of an offering while impure, and for eating on Yom Kippur. He is also liable to bring a guilt offering for misuse of consecrated property. Rabbi Meir says: If it was Shabbat and he carried it out from a private domain to a public domain while eating it, he would be liable to bring an additional sin offering for performing prohibited labor on Shabbat. The Rabbis said to him: That liability is not from the same type of prohibition, as it is not due to the act of eating, and therefore, it should not be counted.",
+ "There is a case where one can engage in a single act of intercourse and be liable to bring six sin offerings for it. How so? It is possible for one who engages in intercourse with his daughter to be liable due to having violated the prohibitions of engaging in intercourse with his daughter, his sister, the wife of his brother, the wife of his father’s brother, a married woman, and a menstruating woman. It is possible for one who engages in intercourse with his daughter’s daughter to be liable to bring sin offerings due to the unwitting violation of the prohibitions of engaging in intercourse with his daughter’s daughter, and his daughter-in-law, and the wife of his brother, and the wife of his father’s brother, and his wife’s sister, and a married woman, and a menstruating woman. Rabbi Yosei says: If the elder, i.e., the man’s father, who is the woman’s great-grandfather, transgressed and married her, the man would also be liable for engaging in intercourse with her due to the prohibition of intercourse with the wife of his father. And likewise, it is possible for one who engages in intercourse with the daughter of his wife to be liable to bring six sin offerings, similar to one who engages in intercourse with his own daughter, for violating the prohibitions against engaging in intercourse with his wife’s daughter, his sister, the wife of his brother, the wife of his father’s brother, a married woman, and a menstruating woman. And it is possible for one who engages in intercourse with his wife’s daughter’s daughter to be liable to bring seven sin offerings, similar to one who engages in intercourse with his own daughter’s daughter, for violating the following prohibitions: Engaging in intercourse with his wife’s daughter’s daughter, his daughter-in-law, the wife of his brother, the wife of his father’s brother, his wife’s sister, a married woman, and a menstruating woman.",
+ "It is possible for one who engages in intercourse with his mother-in-law to be liable to bring seven sin offerings for doing so, due to the unwitting violation of the prohibitions of engaging in intercourse with his mother-in-law, and his daughter-in-law, and the wife of his brother, and the wife of his father’s brother, and his wife’s sister, and a married woman, and a menstruating woman. And likewise, the same applies with regard to one who engages in intercourse with the mother of his father-in-law or with the mother of his mother-in-law. Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri says: It is possible for one who engages in intercourse with his mother-in-law to be liable due to the unwitting violation of the prohibitions of engaging in intercourse with his mother-in-law, and the mother of his mother-in-law, and the mother of his father-in-law. The Rabbis said to him: Those three prohibitions are all one category of prohibition, derived from the same verse: “You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter; you shall not take her son’s daughter, or her daughter’s daughter” (Leviticus 18:17). Consequently, one is not liable to bring separate sin offerings for violating these prohibitions. ",
+ "Rabbi Akiva said: I asked Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Yehoshua in the meat market [itlis] in Emmaus, where they went to purchase an animal for the wedding feast of the son of Rabban Gamliel: In the case of one who unwittingly engages in intercourse with his sister, and the sister of his father, and the sister of his mother, during one lapse of awareness, what is the halakha? Is he liable to bring one sin offering for all three prohibitions, or is he liable to bring a separate sin offering for each and every one of the prohibitions? They said to Rabbi Akiva: We did not hear a ruling from our teachers about that case, but we heard the following ruling: One who engages in intercourse with each of his five wives while they are menstruating, during one lapse of awareness, we heard that he is liable to bring a separate sin offering for having engaged in intercourse with each and every one of them. And it appears to me that these matters can be derived from an a fortiori inference: If he is liable to bring separate sin offerings for having engaged in intercourse with five menstruating women, who are forbidden by one prohibition, he should certainly be liable to bring separate sin offerings for having engaged in intercourse with his sister, the sister of his father, and the sister of his mother, who are forbidden by three separate prohibitions. ",
+ "And furthermore, Rabbi Akiva asked Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Yehoshua in the meat market of Emmaus: What is the status of a dangling limb of an animal? Does it impart ritual impurity like a severed limb? They said to Rabbi Akiva: We have not heard a ruling from our teachers in that specific case, but we have heard with regard to a dangling limb of a person that it is ritually pure. And in this manner would the people afflicted with boils, whose limbs were dangling due to their affliction, act in Jerusalem: Each of them would go on Passover eve to the doctor, who would cut the affected limb almost completely until he would leave it connected by a hairbreadth of flesh, so that neither the doctor nor the afflicted would be rendered ritually impure by a severed limb. Then, the doctor would impale the limb on a thorn attached to the floor or the wall, and the afflicted would pull away from the thorn, thereby completely severing the limb. And that person afflicted with boils would perform the rite of his Paschal offering, and the doctor would perform the rite of his Paschal offering, as neither had come into contact with the limb once it was severed. In any case, as long as it was dangling, the limb did not impart impurity. And I consider that these matters can be derived from an a fortiori inference. If a person’s limb, the impurity of which when amputated is severe, does not impart impurity when it is dangling, it is all the more so logical that an animal’s limb, the impurity of which when amputated is lenient, does not impart impurity when it is dangling. ",
+ "And furthermore, Rabbi Akiva asked Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Yehoshua: With regard to one who unwittingly slaughters five offerings outside the Temple during one lapse of awareness, what is the halakha? Is he liable to bring five sin offerings, one for each and every act of slaughter, or is he liable to bring one sin offering for all the acts of slaughter? They said to Rabbi Akiva: We have not heard a ruling from our teachers in that specific case. Rabbi Yehoshua said: I have heard with regard to one who eats meat from one offering from five different pots in which they were prepared, during one lapse of awareness, that he is liable to bring five guilt offerings, which are for the meat prepared in each and every pot, due to misuse of consecrated property. And I consider that these matters can be derived from an a fortiori inference: If one is liable to bring five guilt offerings for one offering prepared in five pots, all the more so is he liable to bring five sin offerings for slaughtering five offerings outside the Temple. Rabbi Shimon said: It was not that question that Rabbi Akiva asked them. Rather, it was with regard to one who eats notar from five offerings during one lapse of awareness. What is the halakha? Is he liable to bring one sin offering for all the offerings from which he ate notar, or is he liable to bring five sin offerings, one for each and every one of the offerings from which he ate notar? They said to Rabbi Akiva: We have not heard a ruling from our teachers in that specific case. Rabbi Yehoshua said: I have heard with regard to one who eats meat from one offering that was prepared in five different pots, during one lapse of awareness, that he is liable to bring separate guilt offerings for the meat prepared in each and every pot, due to misuse of consecrated property. And I consider that these matters can be derived from an a fortiori inference: If one is liable to bring five guilt offerings for one offering prepared in five pots, all the more so is he liable to bring five sin offerings for eating the notar of five separate offerings. Rabbi Akiva said to Rabbi Yehoshua: If you are reporting a halakha that you received from your teachers with regard to one who eats notar from five offerings, we will accept it, but if it is based merely on the a fortiori inference from misuse of consecrated property, there is a response that refutes the inference. Rabbi Yehoshua said to Rabbi Akiva: Respond. Rabbi Akiva said: And no; one cannot derive the halakha of notar through an a fortiori inference from misuse of consecrated property: If you said with regard to misuse of consecrated property that one is liable to bring five guilt offerings, perhaps that is because there are additional stringent elements unique to misuse. As, with regard to misuse, the Torah established that the status of one who feeds another person sacrificial meat is like that of one who eats sacrificial meat, and the status of one who gives benefit to another from consecrated property that is not food is like that of one who derives benefit himself, in that each is liable to bring a guilt offering for misuse. In addition, the Torah joined the misuse of consecrated property that was performed over an extended period, i.e., if one derived benefit worth half a peruta one day and half a peruta the next, he is liable to bring a guilt offering for misuse. Would you say the same with regard to notar, which has none of these halakhot?",
+ "Rabbi Akiva said: I asked Rabbi Eliezer with regard to one who performs multiple prohibited labors on several Shabbatot, and all those labors were subsumed as subcategories of one primary category of prohibited labor, and he performed them during one lapse of awareness. What is the halakha? Is he liable to bring one sin offering for unwitting performance of all these labors or is he liable to bring a sin offering for violation of each and every one of the labors? Rabbi Eliezer said to Rabbi Akiva: He is liable to bring a sin offering for violation of each and every one of the labors, and this is derived from an a fortiori inference: Just as in the case of a menstruating woman, with regard to whom there are not multiple actions that result in transgression and that result in multiple sin offerings, but rather only the prohibition against engaging in intercourse with her, and nevertheless one is liable to bring a separate sin offering for each and every one of his acts of unwitting intercourse; in the case of Shabbat, with regard to which there are multiple primary categories and subcategories of labor that result in transgression and that result in multiple death penalties or sin offerings, is it not right that he will be liable to bring a sin offering for performance of each and every one of the prohibited labors? Rabbi Akiva continues: I said to Rabbi Eliezer that the inference is not valid: If you said one is liable to bring multiple sin offerings in the case of a menstruating woman, with regard to whom there are two prohibitions, as the man is prohibited from engaging in intercourse with the menstruating woman and the menstruating woman is prohibited from engaging in intercourse with him, would you say the same in the case of Shabbat, with regard to which there is only one prohibition? Rabbi Eliezer said to me: The halakha of one who engages in intercourse with minor menstruating girls will prove this refutation is not valid, as in that case there is only one prohibition, because the minor is exempt from the mitzvot, and nevertheless the man is liable to bring a separate sin offering for intercourse for each and every one of the acts of intercourse. Rabbi Akiva said: I said to Rabbi Eliezer that the cases of Shabbat and minor menstruating girls are not comparable. If you said in the case of minor girls that although it is not prohibited for them at present it is prohibited for them after the passage of time, when they reach majority, would you say the same in the case of Shabbat, with regard to which there are neither two prohibitions at present, nor will there be after the passage of time? Rabbi Eliezer said to me: The halakha of one who copulates with an animal will prove this refutation is not valid, as there are never two prohibitions in that case, and nevertheless the person is liable to bring a sin offering for each and every act. Rabbi Akiva said: I said to Rabbi Eliezer that no proof can be cited from the case of an animal, as in my opinion the case of the animal is like that of Shabbat; there is uncertainty with regard to both cases."
+ ],
+ [
+ "If there is uncertainty whether one ate forbidden fat and uncertainty whether one did not eat forbidden fat, or even if one ate forbidden fat and there is uncertainty whether there is the measure that determines liability in the piece he ate and uncertainty whether there is not the measure that determines liability in the piece he ate, he must bring a provisional guilt offering. If one has a piece of permitted fat and a piece of forbidden fat before him and he ate one of them and he does not know which of them he ate; or if his wife and his sister were with him in the house and he unwittingly engaged in intercourse with one of them and he does not know with which of them he unwittingly engaged in intercourse; or if he confused Shabbat and a weekday and he performed labor prohibited on Shabbat on one of the days and he does not know on which of them he performed the labor, in all of those cases he is liable to bring a provisional guilt offering.",
+ "Just as in a case where one unknowingly ate a piece of forbidden fat and then another piece of forbidden fat in a single lapse of awareness he is liable to bring only one sin offering, so too, in a case where their status is unknown to him and he ate them both unwittingly during a single lapse in awareness, he is liable to bring only one provisional guilt offering. But if he had gained knowledge between the first and second instance of eating that there is a possibility the fat might be prohibited, then the halakha is different: Just as he would be liable to bring a sin offering for each and every piece when he gained knowledge of their prohibited status in between each act of consumption, so too, he must bring a provisional guilt offering for each and every instance in which he consumed food that might be forbidden after learning of their uncertain status in between each unwitting act of consumption. Just as in a case where one ate forbidden fat, and blood, and piggul, and notar in one lapse of awareness he is liable to bring a sin offering for each and every one, so too, with regard to a case where their status is unknown to him and he ate them unwittingly during one lapse of awareness, he must bring a provisional guilt offering for each and every item. If one has pieces of forbidden fat and notar before him and he ate one of them and he does not know which of them he ate; or if his menstruating wife and his sister were with him in the house and he unwittingly engaged in intercourse with one of them and he does not know with which of them he unwittingly engaged in intercourse; or if Shabbat and Yom Kippur occurred adjacent to one another and he performed prohibited labor during the intervening twilight period and he does not know on which of the days he performed the labor, in all of these cases, Rabbi Eliezer deems the transgressor liable to bring a sin offering, as he certainly sinned, and Rabbi Yehoshua deems the transgressor exempt, as he does not know the nature of his sin. Rabbi Yosei said: Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua did not disagree with regard to one who performs prohibited labor during the intervening twilight period because they concur that he is exempt, as I say: He performed part of the labor today, and he performed part of the labor the following day. With regard to what case did they disagree? With regard to the case of one who performs prohibited labor in the midst of the day, and he does not know whether it was on Shabbat that he performed the labor or whether it was on Yom Kippur that he performed the labor; or with regard to one who performs a prohibited labor and he does not know which labor he performed. As, in those cases Rabbi Eliezer deems him liable to bring a sin offering and Rabbi Yehoshua deems him exempt. Rabbi Yehuda said: Rabbi Yehoshua would deem him exempt even from bringing a provisional guilt offering.",
+ "Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Shimon Shezuri say: Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua did not disagree with regard to a case involving a matter where his lack of knowledge involves items from one category, e.g., he picked a grape from a vine on Shabbat and does not know which vine it was, as in that case they both agree that he is liable, since he knows the nature of his sin. With regard to what case did they disagree? With regard to a case involving a matter where his lack of knowledge involves items from two categories, e.g., he picked fruit from a tree on Shabbat and does not know whether it was from a vine or from a fig tree. As, in that case Rabbi Eliezer deems him liable to bring a sin offering, since he certainly sinned, and Rabbi Yehoshua deems him exempt, as he does not know the nature of his sin. Rabbi Yehuda said: Even if one intended to pick figs and he picked grapes, or to pick grapes and he picked figs, or to pick black figs and he picked white figs, or to pick white figs and he picked black figs, Rabbi Eliezer deems him liable to bring a sin offering and Rabbi Yehoshua deems him exempt. Rabbi Yehuda added: I wonder if Rabbi Yehoshua deemed him exempt in that case, as even in his opinion the person intended to perform a prohibited labor. The mishna asks: If it is so, that he is not exempt according to Rabbi Yehuda, why is it stated: “If his sin, wherein he has sinned” (Leviticus 4:23), from which it is derived that one is liable only if the object of the sin was the one that he intended? The mishna answers: This serves to exclude one who acts unawares and does not intend to perform a prohibited action at all."
+ ],
+ [
+ "If one consumed an olive-bulk of blood that spurted during the slaughter of a domesticated animal, an undomesticated animal, or a bird, whether it is a kosher or non-kosher species; or if one consumed blood that flowed after stabbing an animal or killing it in a manner other than by ritual slaughter, or blood that spurted after ripping the animal’s windpipe or gullet, or blood that spurted during bloodletting with which the soul departs, one is liable to receive karet for consuming it intentionally or to bring a sin offering for consuming it unwittingly. But with regard to blood of the spleen, blood of the heart, blood of eggs, blood of grasshoppers, or blood of exudate [tamtzit], i.e., that oozes from the neck of the animal after the initial spurt of its slaughter concludes,one is not liable for consuming it. Rabbi Yehuda deems one liable in the case of blood of exudate.",
+ "This mishna resumes discussion of the provisional guilt offering addressed in the previous chapter. Rabbi Akiva deems one liable to bring a provisional guilt offering for a case where he is uncertain whether he is guilty of misuse of consecrated property, a transgression that renders one liable to bring a definite guilt offering (see Leviticus 5:15). And the Rabbis deem him exempt, as one brings a provisional guilt offering only in a case of uncertainty as to whether he is liable to bring a sin offering, not a guilt offering. And Rabbi Akiva concedes that one does not bring payment for his misuse until it becomes definitely known to him that he is guilty of misuse, as then he will bring a definite guilt offering with his payment. Rabbi Tarfon said: For what purpose does that person bring two guilt offerings, one provisional and one definite? Rather, at the outset one brings the payment for misuse of consecrated property and its additional payment of one-fifth, as mandated by Torah law, and he will then bring a guilt offering worth two sela and say: If it is certain that I misused consecrated property, this is payment for my misuse and this is my definite guilt offering. And if it is uncertain whether I misused consecrated property, the money is a contribution to the Temple fund for the purchase of communal offerings and the guilt offering is provisional, as from the same type of animal that one brings a guilt offering for a case where it is known to him that he is guilty of misuse, he likewise brings a guilt offering for a case where it is unknown to him.",
+ "Rabbi Akiva says: The statement of Rabbi Tarfon appears correct in the case of minimal misuse, but in a case where he is confronted with a case of uncertainty with regard to misuse valued at ten thousand dinars, would it not be preferable for him that he will now bring a provisional guilt offering valued at two sela and he will not bring payment now for uncertain misuse valued at ten thousand dinars? The mishna concludes: Apparently, Rabbi Akiva concedes to Rabbi Tarfon in the case of minimal misuse. He agrees that at the outset one brings payment for misuse and its additional payment of one-fifth, and conditionally brings a guilt offering. Apropos the previous case in which one brings the same type of animal when liability is certain as when liability is uncertain, this mishna teaches: With regard to a woman who brought a bird sin offering in a case of uncertainty whether she miscarried a fetus that would have rendered her liable to bring a sin offering or whether what she expelled would not render her liable to bring an offering, in which case this sin offering may not be eaten by priests, the halakha is as follows: If before the nape of the neck of the bird was pinched it became known to her that she certainly gave birth, i.e., miscarried, in a manner that obligates her to bring a sin offering, she should render the offering a definite sin offering, as from the same type of animal that she brings a sin offering for a case where it is known to her that she miscarried, she brings a sin offering for a case where it is unknown to her.",
+ "The mishna resumes discussion of the provisional guilt offering. If one had a piece of non-sacred meat and a piece of sacrificial meat, and he ate one of them and does not know which of them he ate, he is exempt from the obligation to bring a guilt offering for misuse of consecrated property. Rabbi Akiva deems him liable to bring a provisional guilt offering, in accordance with his opinion in the previous mishna that one brings a provisional guilt offering even in a case of uncertainty with regard to misuse. If he then ate the second piece, he brings a definite guilt offering, as it is certain that he ate the sacrificial meat. If one person ate the first piece and another person came and ate the second piece, this first person brings a provisional guilt offering and that second person brings a provisional guilt offering; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Shimon says: Both of them bring one definite guilt offering as partners, and they stipulate that the one who ate the non-sacred meat grants his share of the animal to the one who ate the sacrificial meat, and the guilt offering is sacrificed on his behalf. Rabbi Yosei says: Two people do not bring one guilt offering, as one may not sacrifice atonement offerings conditionally.",
+ "If one had a piece of forbidden fat and a piece of non-sacred meat, and he ate one of them and does not know which of them he ate, he brings a provisional guilt offering, as perhaps he ate the forbidden fat. If he then ate the second piece, he brings a sin offering, as it is certain that he ate the fat. If one person ate the first piece and another person came and ate the second piece, this person brings a provisional guilt offering and that person brings a provisional guilt offering; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Shimon says: Both of them bring one sin offering as partners, and they stipulate that the sin offering should be credited to the one who ate the fat. Rabbi Yosei says: Two people do not bring one sin offering.",
+ "If one had a piece of forbidden fat and a piece of sacrificial permitted fat and he ate one of them and does not know which of them he ate, he brings a provisional guilt offering, as perhaps he ate the forbidden fat. If he then ate the second piece, he brings a sin offering, as he certainly ate the fat, and a definite guilt offering for misuse of consecrated property. If one person ate the first piece and another person came and ate the second piece, this person brings a provisional guilt offering and that person brings a provisional guilt offering. Rabbi Shimon says: Both of them bring a sin offering and a guilt offering as partners, and they stipulate that each offering should be credited to the one who is liable to bring it. Rabbi Yosei says: Two people do not bring one sin offering and one guilt offering.",
+ "If one had a piece of forbidden fat and a piece of sacrificial forbidden fat and he ate one of them and does not know which of them he ate, he brings a sin offering as he certainly ate forbidden fat. Rabbi Akiva says: He also brings a provisional guilt offering, as perhaps he ate the sacrificial fat, in accordance with his opinion that one brings a provisional guilt offering even in the case of uncertainty with regard to misuse of consecrated property. If he then ate the second piece, he brings two sin offerings, as he ate two pieces of forbidden fat, and a definite guilt offering for misuse of consecrated property. If one person ate the first piece and another person came and ate the second piece, this person brings a sin offering and that person brings a sin offering. Rabbi Akiva says: This person and that person each bring a provisional guilt offering as well, due to the uncertainty as to which of them ate the sacrificial fat. Rabbi Shimon says: This person brings a sin offering and that person brings a sin offering and both of them bring one guilt offering as partners, and they stipulate that the offering should be credited to the one who ate the sacrificial fat. Rabbi Yosei says: The two of them do not bring one guilt offering.",
+ "If one had a piece of forbidden fat and a piece of forbidden fat that is notar, an offering whose designated time has passed for which one is liable to receive karet if he ate it intentionally and liable to bring a sin offering if he ate it unwittingly, and he ate one of them and does not know which of them he ate, he brings a sin offering, as he certainly ate forbidden fat, and a provisional guilt offering, due to the possibility that he ate the notar. If he then ate the second piece, he brings three sin offerings, two for the forbidden fat and one for the prohibition against eating notar. If one person ate the first piece and another person came and ate the second piece, this person brings a sin offering and a provisional guilt offering, as he certainly ate forbidden fat and it is uncertain whether he ate the notar, and that person brings a sin offering and a provisional guilt offering. Rabbi Shimon says: This person brings a sin offering and that person brings a sin offering and both of them bring one additional sin offering as partners, and they stipulate that the offering should be credited to the one who ate the notar. Rabbi Yosei says: Two people do not bring any sin offering that comes as atonement for a sin."
+ ],
+ [
+ "In the case of one who brings a provisional guilt offering due to uncertainty as to whether he sinned, and it became known to him that he did not sin, if he made that discovery before the ram was slaughtered, it shall emerge and graze with the flock as a non-sacred animal, since its consecration was in error. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: Its status is not that of a non-sacred animal; rather it is that of a guilt offering that was disqualified for sacrifice. Therefore, it shall graze until it becomes blemished; and then it shall be sold, and the money received for it shall be allocated for the purchase of communal gift offerings by the Temple treasury. Rabbi Eliezer says: It shall be sacrificed as a provisional guilt offering, as if it does not come to atone for this sin that he initially thought, it comes to atone for another sin of which he is unaware. If it became known to him that he did not sin after the ram was slaughtered and its blood collected in a container, the blood shall be poured into the canal that flows through the Temple courtyard, and the flesh shall go out to the place of burning, like any disqualified offering. If the blood was sprinkled before he discovered that he did not sin, and the meat is intact, the meat may be eaten by the priests like any other sin offering, as from the moment that its blood was sprinkled the meat is permitted to the priests. Rabbi Yosei says: Even if the blood was still in the cup when he discovered that he did not sin, the blood shall be sprinkled and the meat may be eaten.",
+ "In the case of a definite guilt offering, it is not so, i.e., the halakha is different than with regard to a provisional guilt offering. If he made the discovery that he did not sin before the ram was slaughtered, it shall go out and graze among the flock, as it is not consecrated. If it became known to him that he did not sin after the ram was slaughtered, it shall be buried like a non-sacred animal that was slaughtered in the Temple courtyard, and its blood is poured. If he discovered that he did not sin after the blood was sprinkled, the flesh shall go out to the place of burning, like any disqualified offering. In the case of an ox that is sentenced to be stoned (see Exodus 21:28–32), e.g., for killing a person, it is not so, i.e., it also does not have the same halakhic status as a provisional guilt offering. If it is discovered that the testimony with regard to the ox was false before it was stoned, it shall go out and graze among the flock as it never had the status of an ox sentenced to be stoned. If this was discovered after the ox was stoned, its halakhic status is as though it had not been sentenced, and therefore deriving benefit from its carcass is permitted. In the case of a heifer whose neck is broken, when a corpse is found between two cities and the identity of the murderer is unknown (see Deuteronomy 21:1–9), it is not so i.e., the halakha is different than with regard to a provisional guilt offering. If the identity of the murderer is discovered before the heifer’s neck was broken, it shall go out and graze among the flock, as it is not consecrated. But if the identity of the murderer was discovered after the heifer’s neck was broken, it shall be buried in its place, like any other heifer whose neck is broken. The reason is that from the outset the heifer whose neck is broken comes to atone for a situation of uncertainty. Once its neck was broken before the identity of the murderer was revealed, its mitzva was fulfilled, as it atoned for its uncertainty and that uncertainty is gone.",
+ "Rabbi Eliezer says: A person may volunteer to bring a provisional guilt offering every day and at any time that he chooses, even if there is no uncertainty as to whether he sinned, and this type of offering was called the guilt offering of the pious, as they brought it due to their constant concern that they might have sinned. They said about Bava ben Buta that he would volunteer to bring a provisional guilt offering every day except for one day after Yom Kippur, when he would not bring the offering. Bava ben Buta said: I take an oath by this abode of the Divine Presence that if they would have allowed me, I would have brought a guilt offering even on that day. But they would say to me: Wait until you enter into a situation of potential uncertainty. And the Rabbis say: One brings a provisional guilt offering only in a case where there is uncertainty as to whether he performed a sin for whose intentional performance one is liable to receive karet and for whose unwitting performance one is liable to bring a sin offering.",
+ "Those liable to bring sin offerings and definite guilt offerings for whom Yom Kippur has passed are liable to bring them after Yom Kippur.By contrast, those liable to bring provisional guilt offerings are exempt from bringing them after Yom Kippur. With regard to one who encountered uncertainty as to whether he performed a sin on Yom Kippur, even if it was at nightfall at the end of the day, he is exempt, as the entire day atones for uncertain sins.",
+ "A woman upon whom it is incumbent to bring a bird sin offering due to uncertainty, e.g., uncertainty with regard to whether or not her miscarriage obligated her to bring the sin offering of a woman who gave birth, for whom Yom Kippur has passed, is liable to bring it after Yom Kippur. This is because the offering does not come as atonement for a sin; rather, it renders her eligible to partake of the meat of offerings. With regard to this bird sin offering that is brought due to uncertainty, if it became known to her that she was exempt from bringing the offering after the nape of the neck of the bird was pinched, the bird must be buried.",
+ "With regard to one who designates two sela, which is the minimal value of a guilt offering,to purchase a ram for a guilt offering,and he purchased two rams for a guilt offering with the two sela, if one of them is now worth two sela, he shall sacrifice it for his guilt offering. And the second ram that he purchased with the money he designated does not become non-sacred. Rather, it shall graze until it becomes blemished; and then it shall be sold, and the money received for it shall be allocated for communal gift offerings. If he purchased two rams for non-sacred use with those two sela designated for a guilt offering, he has misused consecrated property. He is therefore liable to bring a guilt offering and to compensate the Temple treasury for those two sela and add one-fifth to the sum for a total of ten dinars, as there are four dinars in a sela. If one of the rams is now worth two sela, and the other one is now worth ten dinars, i.e., two and a half sela, the one that is worth two sela shall be sacrificed as his guilt offering for misuse of the two sela, and the second one shall be sacrificed for his initial misuse, as it is worth two sela plus one-fifth. In a case where he purchased two rams with those two sela designated for a guilt offering, one for a guilt offering and one for non-sacred use, if the ram for the guilt offering is now worth two sela, it shall be sacrificed for his initial guilt offering. And with regard to the second ram that he purchased for non-sacred use, if it is now worth two sela, it shall be sacrificed as a guilt offering for his present misuse, and he brings with it the sum of one sela and one-fifth to the Temple treasury as payment for his misuse.",
+ "In the case of one who designates a sin offering for his performance of an unwitting sin and dies, his son shall not bring it in his stead, neither on behalf of his father nor for his own unwitting sin, even if it was the same transgression. Likewise, one may not bring a sin offering by reassigning it from the sin for which it is designated to atone and sacrificing it for atonement of another sin. Even if he designated a sin offering as atonement for forbidden fat that he unwittingly ate yesterday, he may not bring it as atonement for forbidden fat that he unwittingly ate today, as it is stated: “And he shall bring his sin offering, an unblemished female goat, for his sin that he has sinned” (Leviticus 4:28), indicating that he does not satisfy his obligation until his offering is brought for the sake of the sin for which he designated it.",
+ "One may bring a female goat from money consecrated for a sin offering of a female lamb, and a female lamb from money consecrated for a sin offering of a female goat. And likewise, one may bring doves and pigeons from money consecrated for a sin offering of a female lamb and a female goat; and one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour from money consecrated for a sin offering of doves and pigeons. How so? If one unwittingly performed a sin for which he is liable to bring a sliding-scale sin offering, which varies based on economic status (see Leviticus 5:1–13; see also 9a), and he designated money to purchase a female lamb or for a female goat and then became poorer, he may bring a bird, and the remaining money is non-sacred. If he became yet poorer, he may bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour. Likewise, if he designated money to purchase one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour and became wealthier, he shall bring a bird. If he became yet wealthier, he shall bring a female lamb or a female goat. If one designated a female lamb or goat as an offering and it developed a blemish, he must redeem the animal and bring another offering with the money. If he became poorer, he may bring a bird with its money. But if one designated a bird as an offering and it developed a blemish, he may not bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour with its money, as there is no possibility of redemption for birds.",
+ "Rabbi Shimon says: Lambs precede goats almost everywhere in the Torah that they are both mentioned, as in the verse: “You shall take it from the lambs or from the goats” (Exodus 12:5). One might have thought that it is due to the fact that sheep are more select than goats. Therefore, the verse states: “And he shall bring for his offering a goat” (Leviticus 4:28), after which it is written: “And if he bring a lamb as his offering for a sin offering” (Leviticus 4:32), which teaches that both of them are equal. Similarly, doves precede pigeons almost everywhere in the Torah, as in the verse: “And he shall bring his guilt offering…two doves, or two pigeons” (Leviticus 5:7). One might have thought that it is due to the fact that doves are more select than pigeons. Therefore, the verse states: “And a pigeon or a dove for a sin offering” (Leviticus 12:6), with the usual order reversed, which teaches that both of them are equal. Likewise, mention of the father precedes that of the mother almost everywhere in the Torah, as in the verse: “Honor your father and your mother” (Exodus 20:12). One might have thought that it is due to the fact that the honor of the father takes precedence over the honor of the mother. Therefore, the verse states: “Every man shall fear his mother and his father” (Leviticus 19:3), with the order reversed, which teaches that both of them are equal. But the Sages said: Honor of the father takes precedence over honor of the mother everywhere, due to the fact that both the son and his mother are obligated in the honor of his father. And likewise with regard to Torah study, if the son was privileged to acquire most of his Torah knowledge from studying before the teacher, honor of the teacher takes precedence over honor of the father, due to the fact that both the son and his father are obligated in the honor of his teacher, as everyone is obligated in the honor of Torah scholars."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "versions": [
+ [
+ "William Davidson Edition - English",
+ "https://korenpub.com/collections/the-noe-edition-koren-talmud-bavli-1"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "heTitle": "משנה כריתות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/Hebrew/Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/Hebrew/Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2bc6c479a06eb5268f03ba02be82c2e3b62f1028
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/Hebrew/Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri.json
@@ -0,0 +1,80 @@
+{
+ "language": "he",
+ "title": "Mishnah Keritot",
+ "versionSource": "https://archive.org/details/MishnaCorrectedKaufman00WHOLE",
+ "versionTitle": "Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "license": "PD",
+ "digitizedBySefaria": true,
+ "actualLanguage": "he",
+ "languageFamilyName": "hebrew",
+ "isSource": true,
+ "isPrimary": true,
+ "direction": "rtl",
+ "heTitle": "משנה כריתות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "א\nשְׁלֹשִׁים וְשֵׁשׁ כָּרֵתוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה: \nהַבָּא עַל הָאֵם, \nוְעַל אֵשֶׁת הָאָב, \nוְעַל הַכַּלָּה; \nהַבָּא עַל הַזָּכָר, \nוְעַל הַבְּהֵמָה, \nוְהָאִשָּׁה מְבִיאָה אֶת הַבְּהֵמָה; \nהַבָּא עַל אִשָּׁה וּבִתָּהּ, \nוְעַל אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ; \nהַבָּא עַל אֲחוֹתוֹ, \nוְעַל אֲחוֹת אָבִיו, \nוְעַל אֲחוֹת אִמּוֹ, \nוְעַל אֲחוֹת אִשְׁתּוֹ, \nוְעַל אֵשֶׁת אָחִיו, \nוְעַל אֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו, \nוְעַל הַנִּדָּה; \nוְהַמְגַדֵּף, \nוְהָעוֹבֵד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, \nוְהַנּוֹתֵן מִזַּרְעוֹ לַמּלֶךְ, \nוּבַעַל אוֹב וְיִדְּעוֹנִי; \nוְהַמְחַלֵּל אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת; \nוְטָמֵא שֶׁאָכַל אֶת הַקֹּדֶשׁ, \nוְהַבָּא אֶל הַמִּקְדָּשׁ טָמֵא; \nהָאוֹכֵל חֵלֶב, וְדָם, וְנוֹתָר, וּפִגּוּל; \nוְהַשּׁוֹחֵט וְהַמַּעֲלֶה בַחוּץ; \nוְהָאוֹכֵל חָמֵץ בַּפֶּסַח, \nוְהָאוֹכֵל וְעוֹשֶׂה מְלָאכָה בְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים; \nוְהַמְפַטֵּם אֶת הַשֶּׁמֶן, \nוְהַמְפַטֵּם אֶת הַקְּטֹרֶת, \nוְהַסָּךְ שֶׁמֶן הַמִּשְׁחָה; \nהַפֶּסַח וְהַמִּילָה מִצְווֹת עֲשֵׂה. \n",
+ "ב\nעַל אֵלּוּ חַיָּבִים עַל זְדוֹנָם כָּרֵת, \nוְעַל שִׁגְגָתָן חַטָּאת, \nוְעַל לֹא הוֹדַע שֶׁלָּהֶן אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, \nחוּץ מִן הַמְטַמֵּא מִקְדָּשׁ וְקָדָשָׁיו, \nמִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא בְעוֹלֶה וְיוֹרֵד. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי מֵאִיר. \nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: \nאַף הַמְגַדֵּף, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (במדבר טו,כט) \n\"תּוֹרָה אַחַת יִהְיֶה לָכֶם לָעשֶׂה בִשְׁגָגָה\", \nיָצָא מְגַדֵּף, שֶׁאֵינוּ מַעֲשֶׂה. \n",
+ "ג\nיֵשׁ מְבִיאוֹת קָרְבָּן וְנֶאֱכָל, \nמְבִיאוֹת וְאֵינוּ נֶאֱכָל, \nוְיֵשׁ שֶׁאֵינָן מְבִיאוֹת. \nאֵלּוּ מְבִיאוֹת קָרְבָּן וְנֶאֱכָל: \nהַמַּפֶּלֶת כְּמִין בְּהֵמָה, חַיָּה וָעוֹף. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי מֵאִיר. \nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: \nעַד שֶׁיְּהֵא מִצּוּרַת הָאָדָם. \nהַמַּפֶּלֶת סַנְדָּל, אוֹ שִׁלְיָה וְשָׁפִיר מְרֻקָּם, \nוְהַיּוֹצֵא מְחֻתָּךְ. \nוְכֵן שִׁפְחָה שֶׁהִפִּילָה, \nמְבִיאָה קָרְבָּן וְנֶאֱכָל. \n",
+ "ד\nאֵלּוּ מְבִיאוֹת וְאֵינוּ נֶאֱכָל: \nהַמַּפֶּלֶת, וְאֵין יָדוּעַ מַה הִפִּילָה, \nוְכֵן שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים שֶׁהִפִּילוּ, \nאַחַת מִמִּין פְּטוּר וְאַחַת מִמִּין חוֹבָה. \nאָמַר רְבִּי יוֹסֵה: \nאֶמָּתַי? \nבִּזְמַן שֶׁהָלְכוּ זוֹ לַמִּזְרָח וְזוֹ לַמַּעֲרָב. \nאֲבָל אִם הָיוּ שְׁתֵּיהֶן עוֹמְדוֹת, \nמְבִיאוֹת קָרְבָּן וְנֶאֱכָל. \n",
+ "ה\nאֵלּוּ שֶׁאֵינָן מְבִיאוֹת: \nהַמַּפֶּלֶת שָׁפִיר מָלֵא מַיִם, \nמָלֵא דָם, מָלֵא גְנִינִים, \nהַמַּפֶּלֶת כְּמִין דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים, שְׁקָצִים וּרְמָשִׂים, \nהַמַּפֶּלֶת יוֹם אַרְבָּעִים, \nוְיוֹצֵא דֹפֶן. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מְחַיֵּב בְּיוֹצֵא דֹפֶן. \n",
+ "ו\nהַמַּפֶּלֶת אוֹר לִשְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד, \nבֵּית שַׁמַּי פּוֹטְרִין מִן הַקָּרְבָּן, \nבֵּית הֶלֵּל מְחַיְּבִין. \nאָמְרוּ בֵית הֶלֵּל לְבֵית שַׁמַּי: \nמַה שָּׁנָה אוֹר לִשְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד מִיּוֹם שְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד? \nאִם שָׁוֶה לוֹ לַטֻּמְאָה, \nלֹא יִשְׁוֶה לּוֹ לַקָּרְבָּן? \nאָמְרוּ לָהֶם בֵּית שַׁמַּי: \nלֹא! אִם אֲמַרְתֶּם בְּמַפֶּלֶת יוֹם שְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד, \nשֶׁכֵּן יָצָא בְשָׁעָה שֶׁהִיא רְאוּיָה לְהָבִיא בָהּ קָרְבָּן, \nתֹּאמְרוּ בְמַפֶּלֶת אוֹר לִשְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד, \nשֶׁלֹּא יָצָא בְשָׁעָה שֶׁהִיא רְאוּיָה לְהָבִיא בָהּ קָרְבָּן! \nאָמְרוּ לָהֶן בֵּית הֶלֵּל: \nוַהֲרֵי הַמַּפֶּלֶת יוֹם שְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בַּשַּׁבָּת תּוֹכִיחַ, \nשֶׁלֹּא יָצָא בְשָׁעָה שֶׁהִיא רְאוּיָה לְהָבִיא בָהּ קָרְבָּן, \nוְחַיֶּבֶת בַּקָּרְבָּן. \nאָמְרוּ לָהֶן בֵּית שַׁמַּי: \nלֹא! אִם אֲמַרְתֶּם \nבְּמַפֶּלֶת יוֹם שְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד [שֶׁ]חָל לִהְיוֹת בַּשַּׁבָּת, \nשֶׁאַף עַל [פִּי] שֶׁאֵינוּ רָאוּי לְקָרְבַּן יָחִיד, \nרָאוּי לְקָרְבַּן צִבּוּר, \nתֹּאמְרוּ בְמַפֶּלֶת אוֹר לִשְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד, \nשֶׁאֵין הַלַּיְלָה רָאוּי, \nלֹא לְקָרְבַּן יָחִיד וְלֹא לְקָרְבַּן צִבּוּר! \nהַדָּמִין אֵינָן מוֹכִיחִין, \nשֶׁהַמַּפֶּלֶת בְּתוֹךְ מְלֹאת, \nדָּמֶיהָ טְמֵאִין, \nוּפְטוּרָה מִן הַקָּרְבָּן. \n",
+ "ז\nהָאִשָּׁה שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלֶיהָ סְפֵק חָמֵשׁ לֵדוֹת, \nסְפֵק חָמֵשׁ זִיבוֹת, \nמְבִיאָה קָרְבָּן אֶחָד, \nוְאוֹכֶלֶת בִּזְבָחִים, \nוְאֵין הַשְּׁאָר עָלֶיהָ חוֹבָה. \nחָמֵשׁ לֵדוֹת וַדָּיוֹת, \nחָמֵשׁ זִיבוֹת וַדָּיוֹת, \nמְבִיאָה קָרְבָּן אֶחָד, \nוְאוֹכֶלֶת בִּזְבָחִים, \nוְהַשְּׁאָר עָלֶיהָ חוֹבָה. \nמַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁעָמְדוּ קִנִּים בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם בְּדִינַר זָהָב. \nאָמַר רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל: \nהַמָּעוֹן הַזֶּה! לֹא אָלִין הַלַּיְלָה, \nעַד שֶׁיְּהוּ בְדִינָרִים. \nוְנִכְנַס לְבֵית דִּין, וְלִמֵּד: \n[הָאִשָּׁה] שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלֶיהָ חָמֵשׁ לֵדוֹת וַדָּיוֹת, \nחָמֵשׁ זִיבוֹת וַדָּיוֹת, \nמְבִיאָה קָרְבָּן אֶחָד, \nוְאוֹכֶלֶת בִּזְבָחִים, \nוְאֵין הַשְּׁאָר עָלֶיהָ חוֹבָה. \nוְעָמְדוּ קִנִּים בּוֹ בַיּוֹם בִּרְבַעְתַּיִם. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nאַרְבָּעָה מְחֻסְּרֵי כִפּוּרִים, \nאַרְבָּעָה מְבִיאִין עַל הַזָּדוֹן כִּשְׁגָגָה. \nאֵלּוּ הֵן מְחֻסְּרֵי כִפּוּרִין: \nהַזָּב, וְהַזָּבָה, וְהַיּוֹלֶדֶת, וְהַמְצֹרָע. \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר: \nגֵּר מְחֻסַּר כִּפּוּרִין, \nעַד שֶׁיִּזָּרֵק עָלָיו הַדָּם, \nוְנָזִיר, יֵינוֹ וְתִגְלַחְתּוֹ וְטֻמְאָתוֹ. \n",
+ "ב\nאֵלּוּ מְבִיאִין עַל הַזָּדוֹן כִּשְׁגָגָה: \nהַבָּא עַל הַשִּׁפְחָה, \nוְנָזִיר שֶׁנִּטַּמָּא, \nוּשְׁבוּעַת הָעֵדוּת, \nוּשְׁבוּעַת הַפִּקָּדוֹן. \n",
+ "ג\nחֲמִשָּׁה מְבִיאִין קָרְבָּן אֶחָד עַל עֲבֵרוֹת הַרְבֵּה, \nוַחֲמִשָּׁה מְבִיאִין קָרְבָּן עוֹלֶה וְיוֹרֵד. \nאֵלּוּ מְבִיאִין קָרְבָּן אֶחָד עַל עֲבֵרוֹת הַרְבֵּה: \nהַבָּא עַל הַשִּׁפְחָה בִּיאוֹת הַרְבֵּה, \nוְנָזִיר שֶׁנִּטַּמָּא טֻמְאוֹת הַרְבֵּה, \nוְהַמְקַנֵּא לְאִשְׁתּוֹ עַל יְדֵי אֲנָשִׁים הַרְבֵּה, \nוּמְצֹרָע שֶׁנִּתְנַגַּע נְגָעִים הַרְבֵּה. \nהֵבִיא צִפֳּרָיו וְנִתְנַגַּע, הֵבִיא צִפֳּרָיו וְנִתְנַגַּע, \nלֹא עָלָה לוֹ, \nעַד שֶׁיָּבִיא אֶת חַטָּאתוֹ. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nעַד שֶׁיָּבִיא אֶת אֲשָׁמוֹ. \n",
+ "ד <ה>\nהָאִשָּׁה שֶׁיָּלְדָה וְלָדוֹת הַרְבֵּה: \nהִפִּילָה בְתוֹךְ שְׁמוֹנִים נְקֵבָה, \nחָזְרָה וְהִפִּילָה בְתוֹךְ שְׁמוֹנִים נְקֵבָה, \nוְהַמַּפֶּלֶת תְּאוֹמִים, \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nמְבִיאָה עַל הָרִאשׁוֹן, \nוְאֵינָה מְבִיאָה עַל הַשֵּׁנִי, \nמְבִיאָה עַל הַשְּׁלִישִׁי, \nוְאֵינָה מְבִיאָה עַל הָרְבִיעִי. \n\nה <ו>\nאֵלּוּ מְבִיאִין קָרְבָּן עוֹלֶה וְיוֹרֵד: \nעַל שְׁמִיעַת קוֹל, \nוְעַל בִּטּוּי שְׂפָתַיִם, \nוְעַל טֻמְאַת מִקְדָּשׁ וְקָדָשָׁיו, \nוְהַיּוֹלֶדֶת, \nוְהַמְצֹרָע. \nמַה בֵּין שִׁפְחָה לְבֵין כָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת? \nשֶׁלֹּא שָׁוָת לָהֶם לֹא בָעֹנֶשׁ וְלֹא בַקָּרְבָּן: \nשֶׁכָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת בַּחַטָּאת, \nוְהַשִּׁפְחָה בָאָשָׁם; \nכָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת, \nאֶחָד הָאִישׁ וְאֶחָד הָאִשָּׁה שָׁוִים בַּמַּכּוֹת וּבַקָּרְבָּן, \nוְהַשִּׁפְחָה לֹא הָשְׁוָה אֶת הָאִישׁ לָאִשָּׁה בַמַּכּוֹת, <הישווה>\nוְלֹא אֶת הָאִשָּׁה לָאִישׁ בַּקָּרְבָּן. \nכָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת, \nעָשָׂה בָהֶם אֶת הַמְעָרֶה כַגּוֹמֵר, \nוְחַיָּב עַל כָּל בִּיאָה וּבִיאָה. \nהֶחְמִיר בַּשִּׁפְחָה, \nשֶׁעָשָׂה בָהּ אֶת הַמֵּזִיד כַּשּׁוֹגֵג. \n",
+ "אֵי זוֹ הִיא שִׁפְחָה? \nכָּל שֶׁחֶצְיָהּ שִׁפְחָה וְחֶצְיָהּ בַּת חוֹרִין, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (ויקרא יט,כ) \n\"וְהָפְדֵּה לֹא נִפְדָּתָה אוֹ חֻפְשָׁה לֹא נִתַּן לָהּ\", \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי עֲקִיבָה. \nרְבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר: \nאֵי זוֹ הִיא? \nשִׁפְחָה וַדַּי. \nרְבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה אוֹמֵר: \nכָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת הַמְּפֹרָשׁוֹת, \nמִשִּׁיּוּר אֵין לָנוּ אֶלָּא \nשֶׁחֶצְיָהּ שִׁפְחָה וְחֶצְיָהּ בַּת חֹרִין. \n",
+ "ו <ז>\nכָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת: \nאֶחָד גָּדוֹל וְאֶחָד קָטֹן, \nקָטָן פָּטוּר. \nאֶחָד עֵר וְאֶחָד יָשֵׁן, \nהַיָּשֵׁן פָּטוּר. \nאֶחָד שׁוֹגֵג וְאֶחָד מֵזִיד, \nהַשּׁוֹגֵג בַּחַטָּאת וְהַמֵּזִיד בַּהִכָּרֵת. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nאָמְרוּ לוֹ \"אָכַלְתָּ חֵלֶב\",\n מֵבִיא חַטָּאת. \nעֵד אוֹמֵר \"אָכַל\", \nוְעֵד אוֹמֵר \"לֹא אָכַל\", \nאִשָּׁה אוֹמֶרֶת \"אָכַל\", \nוְאִשָּׁה אוֹמֶרֶת \"לֹא אָכַל\", \nמֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. \nעֵד אוֹמֵר \"אָכַל\", \nוְהוּא אוֹמֵר \"לֹא אָכַלְתִּי\", \nפָּטוּר. \nשְׁנַיִם אוֹמְרִין \"אָכַל\", \nוְהוּא אוֹמֵר \"לֹא אָכַלְתִּי\", \nרְבִּי מֵאִיר מְחַיֵּב. \nאָמַר רְבִּי מֵאִיר: \nאִם הֱבִיאוּהוּ שְׁנַיִם לְמִיתָה חֲמוּרָה, \nלֹא יְבִיאוּהוּ לְקָרְבָּן הַקַּל? \nאָמְרוּ לוֹ: \nמָה, אִם יִרְצֶה, \nיוֹמַר \"מֵזִיד הָיִיתִי!\" \n",
+ "ב\nאָכַל חֵלֶב וְחֵלֶב בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, \nאֵינוּ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת. \nאָכַל חֵלֶב וְדָם וְנוֹתָר וּפִגּוּל בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, \nחַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת. \nזֶה חֹמֶר בְּמִינִים הַרְבֵּה מִמִּין אֶחָד. \nחֹמֶר בְּמִין אֶחָד מִמִּינִים הַרְבֵּה, \nשֶׁאִם אָכַל כַּחֲצִי זַיִת, \nוְחָזַר וְאָכַל כַּחֲצִי זַיִת, \nמִמִּין אֶחָד, חַיָּב, \nמִשְּׁנֵי מִינִים, פָּטוּר. \n",
+ "ג\nכַּמָּה יִשְׁהֶה אוֹכְלָן? \nכְּאִלּוּ אוֹכְלָן קָלִיּוֹת. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי מֵאִיר. \nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: \nעַד שֶׁיְּהֵא מִתְּחִלָּה וְעַד סוֹף כְּדֵי אֲכִילַת פֶּרֶס. \nאָכַל אֳכָלִין טְמֵאִין, שָׁתָה מַשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין, \nשָׁתָה רְבִיעִית יַיִן, נִכְנַס לַמִּקְדָּשׁ \nוְשָׁהָא כְדֵי אֲכִילַת פֶּרֶס. \nרְבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: \nאִם הִפְסִיק בָּהּ, \nאוֹ שֶׁנָּתַן לְתוֹכָהּ מַיִם כָּל שֶׁהֵן, פָּטוּר. \n",
+ "ד\nיֵשׁ אוֹכֵל אֲכִילָה אַחַת, \nחַיָּב עָלֶיהָ אַרְבַּע חַטָּאוֹת וְאָשָׁם אֶחָד: \nטָמֵא שֶׁאָכַל אֶת הַחֵלֶב, \nוְהָיָה נוֹתָר מִן הַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין, \nבְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִין. \nרְבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: \nאִם הָיְתָה שַׁבָּת וְהוֹצִיאוֹ בַשַּׁבָּת. \nאָמְרוּ לוֹ: \nאֵינוּ הַשֵּׁם. \n",
+ "ה\nיֵשׁ בָּא בִיאָה אַחַת, \nחַיָּב עָלֶיהָ שֵׁשׁ חַטָּאוֹת: \nהַבָּא עַל בִּתּוֹ, \nחַיָּב עָלֶיהָ מִשֵּׁם בִּתּוֹ, \nוַאֲחוֹתוֹ, \nוְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו, \nוְאֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו, \nוְאֵשֶׁת אִישׁ, \nוְנִדָּה. \nוְהַבָּא עַל בַּת בִּתּוֹ, \nחַיָּב עָלֶיהָ מִשֵּׁם בַּת בִּתּוֹ, \nוְכַלָּתוֹ, \nוַאֲחוֹת אִשְׁתּוֹ, \nוְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו, \nוְאֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו, \nוְאֵשֶׁת אִישׁ, \nוְנִדָּה. \nרְבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר: \nאִם עָבַר זָקֵן וּנְשָׂאָהּ, \nחַיָּב עָלֶיהָ מִשֵּׁם אֵשֶׁת אָב. \nוְכֵן הַבָּא עַל בַּת אִשְׁתּוֹ, \nוְעַל בַּת בַּת אִשְׁתּוֹ. \n",
+ "ו\nהַבָּא עַל חֲמוֹתוֹ, \nחַיָּב עָלֶיהָ מִשֵּׁם חֲמוֹתוֹ, \nוְכַלָּתוֹ, \nוַאֲחוֹת אִשְׁתּוֹ, \nוְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו, \nוְאֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו, \nוְאֵשֶׁת אִישׁ, \nוְנִדָּה. \nוְכֵן הַבָּא עַל אֵם חֲמוֹתוֹ, \nוְעַל אֵם חָמִיו. \nרְבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי אוֹמֵר: \nהַבָּא עַל חֲמוֹתוֹ, \nחַיָּב עָלֶיהָ מִשֵּׁם חֲמוֹתוֹ, \n[וְאֵם חֲמוֹתוֹ], \nוְאֵם חָמִיו. \nאָמְרוּ לוֹ: \nשְׁלָשְׁתָּן שֵׁם אֶחָד הֵן. \n",
+ "ז\nאָמַר רְבִּי עֲקִיבָה: \nשָׁאַלְתִּי אֶת רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְאֶת רְבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, \nבָּאַטְלֵס שֶׁלְּאֶמָּאוּס, <שֶׁלֹּא מָאוּס>\nשֶׁהָלְכוּ לִקַּח בְּהֵמָה לְמִשְׁתֵּה בְנוֹ: \n\"הַבָּא עַל אֲחוֹתוֹ וְעַל אֲחוֹת אָבִיו \nוְעַל אֲחוֹת אִמּוֹ בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, מַה הוּא? \nחַיָּב אַחַת עַל כֻּלָּם, \nאוֹ אַחַת עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת?\" \nאָמְרוּ לִי: \n\"לֹא שָׁמַעְנוּ. \nאֲבָל שָׁמַעְנוּ בַבָּא עַל חָמֵשׁ נָשָׁיו נִדּוֹת בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, \n\n<חסר עמוד בכתב יד קאופמן. \nעד סוף החסר, הושווה עם פרמה דה רוסי 138>\n\n[שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת. \nוְרוֹאִין אָנוּ, שֶׁהַדְּבָרִים קַל וָחֹמֶר.\" <בפרמה א, תמיד \"קוֹל וָחוֹמֶר\">\n",
+ "ח\nשְׁאָלָן רְבִּי עֲקִיבָה: \n\"אֵבֶר הַמְדֻלְדָּל בַּבְּהֵמָה מַה הוּא?\" \nאָמְרוּ לוֹ: \n\"לֹא שָׁמַעְנוּ. \nאֲבָל שָׁמַעְנוּ בְאֵבֶר הַמְדֻלְדָּל בְּאָדָם, \nשֶׁהוּא טָהוֹר. \nכָּךְ הָיוּ מֻכֵּי שְׁחִין שֶׁבִּירוּשָׁלַיִם עוֹשִׂין: \nהוֹלֵךְ לוֹ עֶרֶב פְּסָחִים אֵצֶל הָרוֹפֵא, \nוְחוֹתְכוֹ עַד שֶׁהוּא מַנִּיחַ בּוֹ כִשְׂעוֹרָה, \nוְתוֹחֲבוֹ בַּסִּירָה, \nוְנִמְשָׁךְ מִמֶּנּוּ, \nוְהַלָּה עוֹשֶׂה פִסְחוֹ, \nוְהָרוֹפֵא עוֹשֶׂה פִסְחוֹ. \nוְרוֹאִין אָנוּ שֶׁהַדְּבָרִים קַל וָחֹמֶר.\" \n",
+ "ט\nוְעוֹד שְׁאָלָן רְבִּי עֲקִיבָה: \n\"הַשּׁוֹחֵט חֲמִשָּׁה זְבָחִים בַּחוּץ בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, \nמַה הוּא? \nחַיָּב אַחַת עַל כֻּלָּם, \nאוֹ אַחַת עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד?\" \nאָמְרוּ לוֹ: \n\"לֹא שָׁמַעְנוּ.\" \nאָמַר רְבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: \n\"שָׁמַעְתִּי בָאוֹכֵל מִזֶּבַח אֶחָד בַּחֲמִשָּׁה תַמְחוּיִין בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, \nשֶׁהוּא חַיָּב עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מִשֵּׁם מְעִילָה. \nוְרוֹאֶה אֲנִי שֶׁהַדְּבָרִים קַל וָחֹמֶר.\" \n\nי\nאָמַר רְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: \nלֹא כָּךְ שְׁאָלָן רְבִּי עֲקִיבָה, \nאֶלָּא: \n\"בָאוֹכֵל נוֹתָר מֵחֲמִשָּׁה זְבָחִים בַּחוּץ בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, \nמַה הוּא? \nחַיָּב אַחַת עַל כֻּלָּן, \nאוֹ אַחַת עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת?\" \nאָמְרוּ לוֹ: \n\"לֹא שָׁמַעְנוּ.\" \nאָמַר רְבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: \n\"שָׁמַעְתִּי בָּאוֹכֵל מִזֶּבַח אֶחָד בַּחֲמִשָּׁה תַמְחוּיִים בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, \nשֶׁהוּא חַיָּב עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מִשֵּׁם מְעִילָה. \nוְרוֹאֶה אֲנִי שֶׁהַדְּבָרִים קַל וָחֹמֶר.\" \n\nיא\nאָמַר רְבִּי עֲקִיבָה: \n\"אִם הֲלָכָה, נְקַבֵּל. \nוְאִם לָדִין, יֵשׁ תְּשׁוּבָה.\" \nאָמַר לוֹ: \n\"הָשֵׁב!\" \nאָמַר לוֹ: \n\"לֹא! אִם אָמַרְתָּ בִמְעִילָה, \nשֶׁעָשָׂה בָהּ אֶת הַמַּאֲכִיל כָּאוֹכֵל, \nוְאֶת הַמַּהֲנֶה כַנֶּהְנֶה, \nצָרַף אֶת הַמְּעִילָה לִזְמַן מְרֻבֶּה, \nתֹּאמַר בַּנּוֹתָר, \nשֶׁאֵין בּוֹ אַחַת מִכָּל אֵלּוּ?\" \n",
+ "יב\nאָמַר רְבִּי עֲקִיבָה: \nשָׁאַלְתִּי אֶת רְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר: \n\"הָעוֹשֶׂה מְלָאכוֹת הַרְבֵּה בְּשַׁבָּתוֹת הַרְבֵּה \nמֵעֵין מְלָאכָה אַחַת בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, \nמַה הוּא? \nחַיָּב אַחַת עַל כֻּלָּן, \nאוֹ אַחַת עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת?\" \nאָמַר לִי: \n\"חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת, מִקַּל וָחֹמֶר: \nוּמָה, אִם הַנִּדָּה, \nשֶׁאֵין בָּהּ תּוֹצָאוֹת הַרְבֵּה וְחַטָּאוֹת הַרְבֵּה, \nחַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת, \nשַׁבָּת, \nשֶׁיֶּשׁ בָּהּ תּוֹצָאוֹת הַרְבֵּה וְחַטָּאוֹת הַרְבֵּה, \nאֵינוּ דִין שֶׁיְּהֵא חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת?\" \nאָמַרְתִּי לוֹ: \n\"לֹא! אִם אָמַרְתָּ בַנִּדָּה, שֶׁיֶּשׁ בָּהּ שְׁתֵּי אַזְהָרוֹת, \nשֶׁהוּא מֻזְהָר עַל הַנִּדָּה, וְהִיא מֻזְהֶרֶת עָלָיו, \nתֹּאמַר בַּשַּׁבָּת, \nשֶׁאֵין בָּהּ אֶלָּא אַזְהָרָה אַחַת?\" \nאָמַר לִי: \n\"הַבָּא עַל הַקְּטַנּוֹת יוֹכִיחַ, \nשֶׁאֵין בָּהֶן אֶלָּא אַזְהָרָה אַחַת, \nוְחַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת.\" \nאָמַרְתִּי לוֹ: \n\"לֹא! אִם אָמַרְתָּ בַבָּא עַל הַקְּטַנּוֹת, \nשֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין לָהֶן עַכְשָׁיו, \nיֵשׁ לָהֶן לְאַחַר זְמַן, \nתֹּאמַר בַּשַּׁבָּת, \nשֶׁאֵין בָּהּ לֹא עַכְשָׁיו וְלֹא לְאַחַר זְמַן?\" \nאָמַר לִי: \n\"הַבָּא עַל הַבְּהֵמָה יוֹכִיחַ.\" \nאָמַרְתִּי לוֹ: \n\"הַבְּהֵמָה כַשַּׁבָּת.\" \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nסָפֵק אָכַל חֵלֶב, סָפֵק לֹא אָכַל, \nוַאֲפִלּוּ אָכַל, \nסָפֵק יֶשׁ בּוֹ כַשֵּׁעוּר, סָפֵק שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ; \nחֵלֶב וְשֻׁמָּן לְפָנָיו, <וְשׁוּמֶן>\nאָכַל אֶת אֶחָד מֵהֶן, \nוְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵי זֶה מֵהֶן אָכַל; \nאִשְׁתּוֹ וַאֲחוֹתוֹ עִמּוֹ בַבַּיִת, \nשָׁגַג בְּאַחַת מֵהֶן, \nוְאֵין יָדוּעַ בְּאֵי זוֹ מֵהֶן שָׁגַג; \nשַׁבָּת וְיוֹם טוֹב, \nוְעָשָׂה מְלָאכָה בְאֶחָד מֵהֶן, \nוְאֵין יָדוּעַ בְּאֵי זֶה מֵהֶן עָשָׂה, \nמֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. \n",
+ "ב\nכַּשֵּׁם שֶׁאִם אָכַל חֵלֶב וְחֵלֶב בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, \nאֵינוּ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת, \nכָּךְ עַל לֹא הוֹדַע שֶׁלָּהֶן, \nאֵינוּ מֵבִיא אֶלָּא אָשָׁם אֶחָד. \nאִם הָיְתָה יְדִיעָה בִנְתַּיִם, \nכַּשֵּׁם שֶׁהוּא מֵבִיא חַטָּאת עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד, \nכָּךְ הוּא מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד. \n\nג\nכַּשֵּׁם שֶׁאִם אָכַל חֵלֶב וְדָם וְנוֹתָר וּפִגּוּל בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, \nחַיָּב עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד, \nכָּךְ עַל לֹא הוֹדַע שֶׁלָּהֶן, \nמֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד. \nחֵלֶב וְנוֹתָר לְפָנָיו, \nאָכַל אֶת אֶחָד מֵהֶם, \nוְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵי זֶה מֵהֶן אָכַל; \nאִשְׁתּוֹ נִדָּה וַאֲחוֹתוֹ עִמּוֹ בַבַּיִת, \nשָׁגַג בְּאַחַת מֵהֶן, \nוְאֵין יָדוּעַ בְּאֵי זוֹ מֵהֶן שָׁגַג; \nשַׁבָּת וְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, \nוְעָשָׂה מְלָאכָה בֵין הַשְּׁמָשׁוֹת, \nוְאֵין יָדוּעַ בְּאֵי זֶה מֵהֶן עָשָׂה, \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵּב חַטָּאת, \nוּרְבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ פּוֹטֵר. \n\nד\nאָמַר רְבִּי יוֹסֵה: \nלֹא נֶחְלְקוּ עַל הָעוֹשֶׂה מְלָאכָה בֵין הַשְּׁמָשׁוֹת, \nשֶׁהוּא פָּטוּר, \nשֵׁנִי אוֹמֵר: <=שֶׁאֲנִי>\nמִקְצָת מְלָאכָה עָשָׂה מֵהַיּוֹם, וּמִקְצָתָהּ לְמָחָר. \nוְעַל מַה נֶּחְלָקוּ? \nעַל הָעוֹשֶׂה בְתוֹךְ הַיּוֹם, \nוְאֵין יָדוּעַ אִם בַּשַּׁבָּת עָשָׂה, \nוְאִם בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים עָשָׂה; \nאוֹ עַל הָעוֹשֶׂה, \nוְאֵין יָדוּעַ מֵעֵין אֵי זוֹ מְלָאכָה עָשָׂה, \nרְבִּי לִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵּב חַטָּאת, \nוּרְבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ פּוֹטֵר. \nאָמַר רְבִּי יְהוּדָה: \nפּוֹטְרוֹ הָיָה רְבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אַף מֵאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. \n",
+ "ה\nרְבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל הַשְּׁזוּרִי וּרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמְרִים: \nלֹא נֶחְלְקוּ עַל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא מִשֵּׁם אֶחָד, \nשֶׁהוּא חַיָּב. \nוְעַל מַה נֶּחְלְקוּ? \nעַל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא מִשֵּׁם שְׁנֵי שֵׁמוֹת. \nשֶׁרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵּב חַטָּאת, \nוּרְבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ פּוֹטֵר. \nאָמַר רְבִּי יְהוּדָה: \nאֲפִלּוּ נִתְכַּוַּן לִלְקֹט תְּאֵנִים, וְלָקַט עֲנָבִים, \nעֲנָבִים, וְלָקַט תְּאֵנִים, \nשְׁחוֹרוֹת, וְלָקַט לְבָנוֹת, \nלְבָנוֹת, וְלָקַט שְׁחוֹרוֹת, \nרְבִּי לִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵּב חַטָּאת, \nוּרְבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ פּוֹטֵר. \nתָּמֵהַּ אֲנִי אִם יִפְטֹר בָּהּ רְבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ ? \nאִם כֵּן, לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר: (ויקרא ד,כג) \n\"אֲשֶׁר חָטָא בָהּ\"? \nפְּרָט לַמִּתְעַסֵּק. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nדַּם שְׁחִיטָה בַבְּהֵמָה וּבַחַיָּה וּבָעוֹפוֹת, \nבֵּין טְמֵאִים, בֵּין טְהוֹרִים, \nדַּם נְחִירָה, \nדַּם עִקּוּר, \nדַּם הַקֵּז, שֶׁהַנֶּפֶשׁ יוֹצְאָה בוֹ, \nחַיָּבִין עָלָיו. \nדַּם הַטְּחוֹל, \nדַּם הַלֵּב, \nדַּם בֵּיצִים, \nדַּם חֲגָבִים, \nדַּם דָּגִים, \nדַּם תַּמְצִית, \nאֵין חַיָּבִין עָלָיו. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה מְחַיֵּב בְּדַם תַּמְצִית. \n",
+ "ב\nרְבִּי עֲקִיבָה מְחַיֵּב עַל סְפֵק מְעִילוֹת אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. \nוַחֲכָמִים פּוֹטְרִין. \nוּמוֹדֶה רְבִּי עֲקִיבָה, \nבְּשֶׁאֵינוּ מֵבִיא אֶת מְעִילָתוֹ עַד שֶׁתִּוָּדַע לוֹ, \nשֶׁמֵּבִיא עִמָּהּ אָשָׁם וַדַּאי. \n\nג\nאָמַר רְבִּי טַרְפוֹן: \nמַה לָּזֶה מֵבִיא שְׁנֵי אֲשָׁמוֹת? \nאֶלָּא, יָבִיא מְעִילָה וְחֻמְשָׁהּ, \nוְיָבִיא אָשָׁם וּשְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים, וְיֹאמַר: \n\"אִם וַדַּי מָעַלְתִּי, \nזוֹ מְעִילָתִי, וְזֶה אֲשָׁמִי. \nוְאִם סָפֵק, \nהַמָּעוֹת נְדָבָה, וְהָאָשָׁם תָּלוּי, <מכאן ממשיך כ\"י קאופמן>\nשֶׁמִּמִּין שֶׁהוּא מֵבִיא עַל הוֹדַע, \nמֵבִיא עַל לֹא הוֹדַע. \n",
+ "ד\nאָמַר רְבִּי עֲקִיבָה: \nנִרְאִין דְּבָרֶיךָ בִמְעִילָה מְעוּטָה. <דְּבָרִיך>\nהֲרֵי שֶׁבָּא עַל יָדוֹ סְפֵק מְעִילָה בְמֵאָה מָנֶא, \nלֹא יָפֶה לוֹ שֶׁיָּבִיא אָשָׁם בִּשְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים, \nוְאַל יָבִיא סְפֵק מְעִילָה בְמֵאָה מָנֶא? \nהָא מוֹדֶה רְבִּי עֲקִיבָה לִרְבִּי טַרְפוֹן בִּמְעִילָה מְעוּטָה. \n\nה\nהָאִשָּׁה שֶׁהֵבִיאָה חַטַּאת הָעוֹף בְּסָפֵק, \nאִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִמְלָקָה נוֹדַע לָהּ שֶׁיָּלָדָה וַדַּי, \nתַּעֲשֶׂנָּה <'וודי' מחוק> \nשֶׁמִּמִּין שֶׁהִיא מְבִיאָה עַל לֹא הוֹדַע, \nמְבִיאָה עַל הוֹדַע. \n",
+ "ו\nחֲתִכָּה שֶׁלַּחֻלִּין וַחֲתִכָּה שֶׁלַּקֹּדֶשׁ, \nאָכַל אֶת אֶחָד מֵהֶן, \nוְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵי זוֹ מֵהֶן אָכַל, \nפָּטוּר. \nרְבִּי עֲקִיבָה מְחַיֵּב אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. \nאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, \nמֵבִיא אָשָׁם וַדַּי. \nאָכַל אֶחָד אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, \nוּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, \nזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, \nוְזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי עֲקִיבָה. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: \nשְׁנֵיהֶן מְבִיאִין אָשָׁם אֶחָד. \nרְבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר: \nאֵין שְׁנַיִם מְבִיאִין אָשָׁם אֶחָד. \n",
+ "ז\nחֲתִכָּה שֶׁלַּחֻלִּין וַחֲתִכָּה שֶׁלַּחֵלֶב, \nאָכַל אֶת אֶחָד מֵהֶן, \nוְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֶת אֵי זֶה מֵהֶן אָכַל, \nמֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. \nאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, \nמֵבִיא חַטָּאת. \nאָכַל אֶחָד אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, \nוּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, \nזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, \nוְזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: \nשְׁנֵיהֶם מְבִיאִים חַטָּאת אַחַת. \nרְבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר: \nאֵין מְבִיאִין שְׁנַיִם חַטָּאת אַחַת. \n",
+ "ח\nחֲתִכָּה שֶׁלַּחֵלֶב וַחֲתִכָּה שֶׁלַּקֹּדֶשׁ, \nאָכַל אֶת אַחַת מֵהֶן, \nוְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֶת אֵי זֶה מֵהֶן אָכַל, \nמֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. \nאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, \nמֵבִיא חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם וַדַּי. \nאָכַל אֶחָד אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, \nוּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, \nזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, \nוְזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: \nשְׁנֵיהֶם מְבִיאִין חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם. \nרְבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר: \nאֵין שְׁנַיִם [מְבִיאִין] חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם. \n",
+ "ט\nחֲתִכָּה שֶׁלַּחֵלֶב וַחֲתִכָּה שֶׁלְּחֵלֶב קֹדֶשׁ, \nאָכַל אֶת אַחַת מֵהֶן, \nוְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֶת אֵי זוֹ מֵהֶן אָכַל, \nמֵבִיא חַטָּאת. \nרְבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר: \nאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. \nאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, \nמֵבִיא שְׁתֵּי חַטָּאוֹת וְאָשָׁם וַדַּי. \nאָכַל אֶחָד אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, \nוּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, \nזֶה מֵבִיא חַטָּאת וְזֶה מֵבִיא חַטָּאת. \nרְבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר: \nזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, \nוְזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: \nזֶה חַטָּאת, וְזֶה חַטָּאת, \nוּשְׁנֵיהֶם מְבִיאִין אָשָׁם אֶחָד. \nרְבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר: \nאֵין שְׁנַיִם מְבִיאִין אָשָׁם אֶחָד. \n",
+ "י\nחֲתִכָּה שֶׁלַּחֵלֶב וַחֲתִכָּה שֶׁלְּחֵלֶב נוֹתָר, \nאָכַל אֶת אַחַת מֵהֶן, \nוְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֶת אֵי זוֹ מֵהֶן אָכַל, \nמֵבִיא חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. \nאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, \nמֵבִיא שָׁלוֹשׁ חַטָּאוֹת. \nאָכַל אֶחָד אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, \nוּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, \nזֶה מֵבִיא חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם תָּלוּי, \nוְזֶה מֵבִיא חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: \nזֶה חַטָּאת, וְזֶה חַטָּאת, \nשְׁנֵיהֶן מְבִיאִין חַטָּאת אַחַת. \nרְבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר: \nכָּל חַטָּאת שֶׁהִיא בָאָה עַל חֵט, \nאֵין שְׁנַיִם מְבִיאִין אוֹתָהּ. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nהַמֵּבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, \nוְנוֹדַע לוֹ שֶׁלֹּא חָטָא, \nאִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁחַט, \nיֵצֵא וְיִרְעֶה בָעֵדֶר. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי מֵאִיר. \nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: \nיִרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֵב, \nוְיִמָּכֵר, וְיִפְּלוּ דָמָיו לִנְדָבָה. \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: \nיִקָרֵב, \nשֶׁאִם אֵינוּ בָא עַל חֵטְא זֶה, \nהֲרֵי הוּא בָּא עַל חֵטְא אַחֵר. \n\nב\nאִם מִשֶּׁנִּשְׁחַט נוֹדַע לוֹ, \nהַדָּם יִשָּׁפֵךְ, \nוְהַבָּשָׂר יֵצֵא לְבֵית הַשְּׂרִיפָה. \nנִזְרַק הַדָּם, הַבָּשָׂר יֵאָכֵל. \nרְבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר: \nאֲפִלּוּ הַדָּם בַּכּוֹס, יִזָּרֵק, \nוְהַבָּשָׂר יֵאָכֵל. \n",
+ "ג\nאָשָׁם וַדַּי אֵינוּ כֵן. \nאִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁחַט, \nיֵצֵא וְיִרְעֶה בָעֵדֶר; \nאִם מִשֶּׁנִּשְׁחַט, \nהֲרֵי זֶה יִקָּבֵר; \nנִזְרַק הַדָּם, \nהַבָּשָׂר יֵצֵא לְבֵית הַשְּׂרִיפָה. \n\nד\nשׁוֹר הַנִּסְקָל אֵינוּ כֵן. \nאִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִסְקַל, \nיֵצֵא וְיִרְעֶה בָעֵדֶר; \nאִם מִשֶּׁנִּסְקַל, \nמֻתָּר בַּהֲנָיָה. \nעֶגְלָה עֲרוּפָה אֵינָהּ כֵּן, \nאִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נֶעְרְפָה, \nתֵּצֵא וְתִרְעֶה בָעֵדֶר; \nאִם מִשֶּׁנֶּעְרְפָה, \nתִּקָּבֵר בִּמְקוֹמָהּ, \nשֶׁעַל סָפֵק בָּאת מִתְּחִלָּתָהּ, \nכִּפְּרָה סְפֵקָהּ וְהָלְכָה לָהּ. \n",
+ "ה\nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: \nמִתְנַדֵּב אָדָם אָשָׁם תָּלוּי בְּכָל יוֹם, \nוּבְכָל שָׁעָה שֶׁיִּרְצֶה. \nהוּא הָיָה נִקְרֵא \"אֲשַׁם חֲסִידִין\". \nאָמְרוּ עָלָיו עַל בָּבָא בֶן בּוֹטָא, \nשֶׁהָיָה מִתְנַדֵּב אָשָׁם תָּלוּי בְּכָל יוֹם, \nחוּץ מֵאַחַר יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים יוֹם אֶחָד. \nאָמַר: \n\"הַמָּעוֹן הַזֶּה! \nאִלּוּ הָיוּ מַנִּיחִין לִי, הָיִיתִי מֵבִיא, \nאֶלָּא אוֹמְרִים לִי: \nהַמְתֵּן עַד שֶׁתִּכָּנֵס לְסָפֵק!\" \nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: \nאֵין מְבִיאִין אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, \nאֶלָּא עַל דָּבָר שֶׁזְּדוֹנוֹ כָרֵת, \nוְשִׁגְגָתוֹ חַטָּאת. \n\n",
+ "ו\nחַיְבֵי חַטָּאוֹת וַאֲשָׁמוֹת וַדָּיִין, \nשֶׁעָבַר עֲלֵיהֶן יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, \nחַיָּבִין לְהָבִיא לְאַחַר יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים. \nוְחַיְבֵי אֲשָׁמוֹת תְּלוּיִים, \nפְּטוּרִים. \nמִי שֶׁבָּא עַל יָדוֹ סְפֵק עֲבֵרָה בְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִין, \nאֲפִלּוּ עִם חֲשֵׁכָה, \nפָּטוּר, שֶׁכָּל יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים מְכַפֵּר. \n",
+ "ז\nהָאִשָּׁה שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלֶיהָ חַטַּאת הָעוֹף בְּסָפֵק, \nוְעָבַר עָלֶיהָ יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, \nחַיֶּבֶת לְהָבִיא לְאַחַר יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, \nמִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא מַכְשְׁרַתָּהּ לֹאכַל בִּזְבָחִים. \nחַטַּאת הָעוֹף הַבָּאָה עַל סָפֵק, \nאִם מִשֶּׁנִּמְלָקָה נוֹדַע לָהּ, \nהֲרֵי זוֹ תִקָּבֵר. <זה>\n",
+ "ח\nהַמַּפְרִישׁ שְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים לְאָשָׁם, \nוְלָקַח בָּהֶן שְׁנֵי אֵילִים לְאָשָׁם, \nאִם הָיָה אֶחָד מֵהֶן יָפֶה שְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים, \nיִקְרַב לַאֲשָׁמוֹ, \nוְהַשֵּׁנִי יִרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֵב, \nוְיִמָּכֵר, וְיִפְּלוּ דָמָיו לִנְדָבָה. \nלָקַח בָּהֶן שְׁנֵי אֵילִים לַחֻלִּין, \nאֶחָד יָפֶה שְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים, \nוְאֶחָד יָפֶה עֲשָׂרָה זוּז, <זִין>\nהַיָּפֶה שְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים יִקָּרֵב לַאֲשָׁמוֹ, \nוְהַשֵּׁנִי לִמְעִילָתוֹ. \nאֶחָד לְאָשָׁם וְאֶחָד לַחֻלִּין, \nאִם הָיָה שֶׁלָּאָשָׁם יָפֶה שְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים, \nיִקָּרֵב לַאֲשָׁמוֹ, \nוְהַשֵּׁנִי לִמְעִילָתוֹ, \nוְיָבִיא עִמָּהּ סֶלַע וְחָמְשָׁהּ. \n",
+ "ט\nהַמַּפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ, וּמֵת, \nלֹא יְבִיאֶנָּה בְנוֹ אַחֲרָיו. \nוְלֹא יְבִיאֶנָּה מֵחֵט עַל חֵטְא, \nאֲפִלּוּ [עַל חֵלֶב שֶׁאָכַל אֶמֶשׁ, \nלֹא יְבִיאֶנָּה] עַל חֵלֶב שֶׁאָכַל הַיּוֹם, \nתַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: (ויקרא ד,כח) \n\"קָרְבָּנוֹ... עַל חַטָּאתוֹ\", \nשֶׁיְּהֵא קָרְבָּנוֹ עַל שֵׁם חַטָּאתוֹ. \n",
+ "י\nמְבִיאִין מֵהֶקְדֵּשׁ כִּשְׂבָה, שְׂעִירָה, \nמֵהֶקְדֵּשׁ כִּשְׂבָה שְׂעִירָה, \nתּוֹרִין וּבְנֵי יוֹנָה וַעֲשִׂירִית הָאֵיפָה. \n\nיא\nכֵּיצַד? \nהִפְרִישׁ לְכִשְׂבָה אוֹ לִשְׂעִירָה, \nהֶעְנִי, יָבִיא עוֹף; \nהֶעְנִי, יָבִיא עֲשִׂירִית הָאֵיפָה. \nהִפְרִישׁ לַעֲשִׂירִית הָאֵיפָה, \nהֶעְשִׂיר, יָבִיא הָעוֹף; \nהֶעְשִׂיר, יָבִיא כִשְׂבָה אוֹ שְׂעִירָה. \nהִפְרִישׁ כִּשְׂבָה אוֹ שְׂעִירָה, וְנִסְתָּאָבוּ, \nאִם רָצָה, יָבִיא בְדָמֶיהָ עוֹף. \nהִפְרִישׁ עוֹף, וְנִסְתָּאַב, \nיָבִיא בְדָמָיו עֲשִׂירִית הָאֵיפָה, \nשֶׁאֵין לָעוֹף פִּדָּיוֹן. \n",
+ "יב\nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: \nכְּבָשִׂים קוֹדְמִין לָעִזִּים בְּכָל מָקוֹם. \nיָכוֹל מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן מֻבְחָרִין מֵהֶן? \nתַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: (ויקרא ד,לב) \n\"וְאִם כֶּבֶשׁ יָבִיא קָרְבָּנוֹ לְחַטָּאת\", \nמְלַמֵּד שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶם שְׁקוּלִים. \n\nיג\nתּוֹרִין קוֹדְמִין לִבְנֵי יוֹנָה בְכָל מָקוֹם. \nיָכוֹל מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן מֻבְחָרִין מֵהֶן? \nתַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: (ויקרא יב,ו) \n\"וּבֶן יוֹנָה אוֹ תֹר לְחַטָּאת\", \nמְלַמֵּד שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶן שְׁקוּלִים. \n\nיד\nהָאָב קוֹדֵם לָאֵם בְּכָל מָקוֹם. \nיָכוֹל שֶׁכְּבוֹד הָאָב עוֹדֵף עַל כְּבוֹד הָאֵם? \nתַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: (ויקרא יט,ג) \n\"אִישׁ אִמּוֹ וְאָבִיו תִּירָאוּ\", \nמְלַמֵּד שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶם שְׁקוּלִים. \nאֲבָל אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים: \nהָאָב קוֹדֵם לָאֵם בְּכָל מָקוֹם, \nמִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא וְאִמּוֹ חַיָּבִין בִּכְבוֹד אָבִיו. \n\nיה\nוְכֵן בְּתַלְמוּד תּוֹרָה: \nאִם זָכָה הַבֵּן לִפְנֵי הָרַב, \nהָרַב קוֹדֵם אֶת הָאָב בְּכָל מָקוֹם, \nמִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא וְאָבִיו חַיָּבִין בִּכְבוֹד רַבּוֹ. \n\nחסל כריתות \n\n \n\n"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/Hebrew/Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/Hebrew/Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dbb90e9592ca2a027e8445430f852b7c20b56086
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/Hebrew/Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913.json
@@ -0,0 +1,84 @@
+{
+ "language": "he",
+ "title": "Mishnah Keritot",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001741739",
+ "versionTitle": "Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 2.0,
+ "license": "Public Domain",
+ "digitizedBySefaria": true,
+ "heversionSource": "http://primo.nli.org.il/primo_library/libweb/action/dlDisplay.do?vid=NLI&docId=NNL_ALEPH00174173",
+ "versionTitleInHebrew": "משנה, מהדורת בית דפוס ראם, וילנא 1913",
+ "actualLanguage": "he",
+ "languageFamilyName": "hebrew",
+ "isBaseText": true,
+ "isSource": true,
+ "isPrimary": true,
+ "direction": "rtl",
+ "heTitle": "משנה כריתות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "שלשים ושש כריתות בתורה. הבא על האם. ועל אשת האב. ועל הכלה. הבא על הזכור ועל הבהמה. והאשה המביאה את הבהמה עליה. הבא על אשה ובתה. ועל אשת איש. הבא על אחותו. ועל אחות אביו. ועל אחות אמו. ועל אחות אשתו. ועל אשת אחיו. ועל אשת אחי אביו. ועל הנדה. המגדף. והעובד עבודה זרה והנותן מזרעו למולך. ובעל אוב. המחלל את השבת. וטמא שאכל את הקדש. והבא למקדש טמא. האוכל חלב ודם נותר פגול השוחט והמעלה בחוץ. האוכל חמץ בפסח. והאוכל. והעושה מלאכה ביום הכפורים. המפטם את השמן. והמפטם את הקטורת. והסך בשמן המשחה. הפסח והמילה במצות עשה: ",
+ "על אלו חייבים על זדונם כרת. ועל שגגתם חטאת. ועל לא הודע שלהן אשם תלוי. חוץ מן המטמא מקדש וקדשיו. מפני שהוא בעולה ויורד. דברי רבי מאיר. וחכמים אומרים אף המגדף. שנאמר (במדבר טו, כט) תורה אחת יהיה לכם. לעושה בשגגה. יצא מגדף שאינו עושה מעשה: ",
+ "יש מביאות קרבן ונאכל. ויש מביאות ואינו נאכל. ויש שאינן מביאות. אלו מביאות קרבן ונאכל. המפלת כמין בהמה חיה ועוף דברי רבי מאיר. וחכמים אומרים עד שיהא בו מצורת האדם. המפלת סנדל. או שליא. ושפיר מרוקם. והיוצא מחותך. וכן שפחה שהפילה. מביאה קרבן ונאכל: ",
+ "אלו מביאות ואינו נאכל. המפלת ואין ידוע מה הפילה וכן שתי נשים שהפילו. אחת ממין פטור. ואחת ממין חובה. אמר רבי יוסי אימתי בזמן שהלכו זו למזרח וזו למערב. אבל אם היו שתיהן עומדות כאחת. מביאות קרבן ונאכל: ",
+ "אלו שאינן מביאות. המפלת שפיר מלא מים. מלא דם מלא גנינים. המפלת כמין דגים וחגבים שקצים ורמשים. המפלת יום ארבעים. ויוצא דופן. רבי שמעון מחייב ביוצא דופן. ",
+ "המפלת אור לשמנים ואחד. בית שמאי פוטרין מן הקרבן. בית הלל מחייבים. אמרו בית הלל לבית שמאי. מאי שנא אור לשמנים ואחד מיום שמנים ואחד. אם שוה לו לטומאה לא ישוה לו לקרבן. אמרו להם בית שמאי לא. אם אמרתם במפלת יום שמנים ואחד. שכן יצאה בשעה שהיא ראויה להביא בה קרבן. תאמרו במפלת אור לשמנים ואחד שלא יצאה בשעה שהיא ראויה להביא בה קרבן. אמרו להן בית הלל. והרי המפלת יום שמנים ואחד שחל להיות בשבת. תוכיח. שלא יצאה בשעה שהיא ראויה להביא בה קרבן. וחייבת בקרבן. אמרו להם בית שמאי. לא. אם אמרתם במפלת יום שמנים ואחד שחל להיות בשבת. שאף על פי שאינו ראוי לקרבן יחיד. ראוי לקרבן צבור. תאמרו במפלת אור לשמנים ואחד. שאין הלילה ראוי. לא לקרבן יחיד. ולא לקרבן צבור. הדמים אינן מוכיחין. שהמפלת בתוך מלאת. דמיה טמאין. ופטורה מן הקרבן: ",
+ "האשה שיש עליה ספק חמשה זיבות וספק חמשה לידות. מביאה קרבן אחד. ואוכלת בזבחים. ואין השאר עליה חובה. חמש לידות ודאות. חמש זיבות ודאות. מביאה קרבן אחד. ואוכלת בזבחים והשאר עליה חובה. מעשה שעמדו קינים בירושלים בדינרי זהב. אמר רבן שמעון בן גמליאל. המעון הזה. לא אלין הלילה. עד שיהו בדינרין. נכנס לבית דין ולימד האשה שיש עליה. חמש לידות ודאות. חמש זיבות ודאות. מביאה קרבן אחד. ואוכלת בזבחים. ואין השאר עליה חובה. ועמדו קינים בו ביום ברבעתים: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "ארבעה מחוסרי כפורים. וארבעה מביאין על הזדון כשגגה. אלו הן מחוסרי כפורים. הזב. והזבה. והיולדת. והמצורע. רבי אליעזר בן יעקב אומר גר מחוסר כפרה עד שיזרק עליו הדם. ונזיר ליינו ותגלחתו וטומאתו: ",
+ "אלו מביאין על הזדון כשגגה. הבא על השפחה. ונזיר שנטמא. ועל שבועת העדות. ועל שבועת הפקדון: ",
+ "חמשה מביאין קרבן אחד על עבירות הרבה. וחמשה מביאים קרבן עולה ויורד. אלו מביאין קרבן אחד על עבירות הרבה. הבא על השפחה ביאות הרבה. ונזיר שנטמא טומאות הרבה. והמקנא לאשתו. על ידי אנשים הרבה. ומצורע שנתנגע נגעים הרבה. הביא צפוריו ונתנגע לא עלו לו עד שיביא את חטאתו. רבי יהודה אומר עד שיביא את אשמו: ",
+ "האשה שילדה ולדות הרבה הפילה בתוך שמנים נקבה וחזרה והפילה בתוך שמנים נקבה. והמפלת תאומים. רבי יהודה אומר מביאה על הראשון. ואינה מביאה על השני. מביאה על השלישי. ואינה מביאה על הרביעי. אלו מביאין קרבן עולה ויורד. על שמיעת הקול. ועל ביטוי שפתים. ועל טומאת מקדש וקדשיו. והיולדת. והמצורע. ומה בין השפחה לבין כל העריות שלא שוותה להן לא בעונש ולא בקרבן. שכל העריות בחטאת. והשפחה באשם. כל העריות בנקבה ושפחה בזכר. כל העריות אחד האיש ואחד האשה שווין במכות ובקרבן. ובשפחה לא השוה את האיש לאשה במכות. ולא את האשה לאיש בקרבן. כל העריות עשה בהן את המערה כגומר. וחייב על כל ביאה וביאה זה חומר החמיר בשפחה. שעשה בה את המזיד כשוגג: ",
+ "איזו היא שפחה. כל שחציה שפחה וחציה בת חורין. שנאמר (ויקרא יט, כ) והפדה לא נפדתה דברי רבי עקיבא. רבי ישמעאל אומר. זו היא שפחה ודאית. רבי אלעזר בן עזריה אומר כל העריות מפורשות. ומה שיור. אין לנו אלא שחציה שפחה וחציה בת חורין: ",
+ "כל העריות אחד גדול ואחד קטן הקטן פטור. אחד ער ואחד ישן. הישן פטור. אחד שוגג ואחד מזיד. השוגג בחטאת. והמזיד בהכרת: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "אמרו לו אכלת חלב מביא חטאת. עד אומר אכל ועד אומר לא אכל. אשה אומרת אכל. ואשה אומרת לא אכל. מביא אשם תלוי. עד אומר אכל. והוא אומר לא אכלתי. פטור. שנים אומרים אכל. והוא אומר לא אכלתי. רבי מאיר מחייב. אמר רבי מאיר אם הביאוהו שנים למיתה חמורה לא יביאוהו לקרבן הקל. אמרו לו מה אם ירצה לומר מזיד הייתי: ",
+ "אכל חלב וחלב בהעלם אחד. אינו חייב אלא חטאת אחת. אכל חלב ודם ונותר ופיגול בהעלם אחד. חייב על כל אחד ואחד. זה חומר במינין הרבה ממין אחד. וחומר במין אחד ממינין הרבה. שאם אכל כחצי זית. וחזר ואכל כחצי זית ממין אחד. חייב. משני מינין פטור: ",
+ "וכמה ישהה האוכלן. כאילו אכלן קליות. דברי רבי מאיר. וחכמים אומרים עד שישהה מתחלה ועד סוף כדי אכילת פרס. אכל אוכלין טמאין ושתה משקין טמאין. שתה רביעית יין. ונכנס למקדש. ושהה כדי אכילת פרס. רבי אליעזר אומר אם הפסיק בה. או שנתן לתוכו מים כל שהוא. פטור: ",
+ "יש אוכל אכילה אחת. וחייב עליה ארבע חטאות ואשם אחד. טמא שאכל את החלב והיה נותר. מן מוקדשים. וביום הכפורים. רבי מאיר אומר אם היתה שבת. והוציאו בפיו חייב. אמרו לו אינו מן השם: ",
+ "יש בא ביאה אחת. וחייב עליה שש חטאות. הבא על בתו. חייב עליה משום בתו. ואחותו. ואשת אחיו. ואשת אחי אביו. ואשת איש. ונדה. והבא על בת בתו. חייב עליה משום בת בתו. וכלתו. ואחות אשתו. ואשת אחיו. ואשת אחי אביו. ואשת איש ונדה. רבי יוסי אומר. אם עבר הזקן ונשאה. חייב עליה משום אשת אב. וכן הבא על בת אשתו. ועל בת בת אשתו: ",
+ "הבא על חמותו חייב עליה משום חמותו. וכלתו. ואחות אשתו ואשת אחיו. ואשת אחי אביו. ואשת איש. ונדה. וכן הבא על אם חמותו. ועל אם חמיו. רבי יוחנן בן נורי אומר. הבא על חמותו. חייב עליה משום חמותו. ואם חמותו. ואם חמיו. אמרו לו שלשתן שם אחד הן: ",
+ "אמר רבי עקיבא שאלתי את רבן גמליאל ואת רבי יהושע באטלס של אמאום שהלכו ליקח בהמה למשתה בנו של רבן גמליאל הבא על אחותו. ועל אחות אביו. ועל אחות אמו. בהעלם אחד. מהו. חייב אחת על כולן. או אחת על כל אחת ואחת. ואמרו לי לא שמענו. אבל שמענו הבא על חמש נשיו נדות. בהעלם אחד. שהוא חייב על כל אחת ואחת. ורואין אנו שהדברים קל וחומר: ",
+ "ועוד שאלן רבי עקיבא אבר המדולדל בבהמה מהו. אמרו לו לא שמענו אבל שמענו באבר המדולדל באדם שהוא טהור. שכך היו מוכי שחין בירושלים עושין. הולך לו ערב פסח אצל הרופא. וחותכו עד שהוא מניח בו כשעורה. ותוחבו בסירה. והוא נמשך ממנו. והלה עושה פסחו. והרופא עושה פסחו ורואין אנו שהדברים קל וחומר: ",
+ "ועוד שאלן רבי עקיבא השוחט חמשה זבחים בחוץ בהעלם אחד. מהו. חייב אחת על כולם. או אחת על כל אחת ואחת. אמרו לו לא שמענו. אמר רבי יהושע שמעתי באוכל מזבח אחד בחמשה תמחויים בהעלם אחד. שהוא חייב על כל אחד ואחד. משום מעילה. ורואה אני שהדברים קל וחומר. אמר רבי שמעון לא כך שאלן רבי עקיבא. אלא באוכל נותר מחמשה זבחים. בהעלם אחד. מהו. חייב אחת על כולן. או אחת על כל אחת ואחת. אמרו לו לא שמענו. אמר רבי יהושע שמעתי באוכל מזבח אחד בחמשה תמחויים. בהעלם אחד. שהוא חייב על כל אחת ואחת. משום מעילה. ורואה אני שהדברים קל וחומר. אמר רבי עקיבא אם הלכה נקבל. ואם לדין יש תשובה. אמר לו השב. אמר לו. לא אם אמרת ממעילה. שעשה בה את המאכיל כאוכל. ואת המהנה כנהנה. צירף המעילה לזמן מרובה. תאמר בנותר. שאין בו אחד מכל אלו: ",
+ "אמר רבי עקיבא. שאלתי את רבי אליעזר העושה מלאכות הרבה. בשבתות הרבה מעין מלאכה אחת בהעלם אחת. מה הוא. חייב אחת על כולן. או אחת על כל אחת ואחת. אמר לי חייב על כל אחת ואחת. מקל וחומר. ומה אם הנדה שאין בה תוצאות הרבה וחטאות הרבה. חייב על כל אחת ואחת. שבת שיש בה תוצאות הרבה וחטאות הרבה. אינו דין שיהא חייב על כל אחת ואחת. אמרתי לו. לא. אם אמרת בנדה שיש בה שתי אזהרות. שהוא מוזהר על הנדה. והנדה מוזהרת עליו. תאמר בשבת שאין בה אלא אזהרה אחת. אמר לי הבא על הקטנות יוכיח שאין בהם אלא אזהרה אחת. וחייב על כל אחת ואחת. אמרתי לו. לא. אם אמרת בבא על הקטנות. שאף על פי שאין בהן עכשיו. יש בהן לאחר זמן. תאמר בשבת שאין בה לא עכשיו ולא לאחר זמן. אמר לי הבא על הבהמה יוכיח. אמרתי לו בהמה כשבת: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "ספק אכל חלב. ספק לא אכל. ואפילו אכל. ספק יש בו כשיעור. ספק שאין בו. חלב ושומן לפניו. אכל את אחד מהן. ואין ידוע איזו מהן אכל. אשתו ואחותו עמו בבית. שגג באחת מהן. ואין ידוע באיזו מהן שגג. שבת ויום חול ועשה מלאכה באחת מהן. ואין ידוע באיזו מהם עשה מביא אשם תלוי: ",
+ "כשם שאם אכל חלב וחלב בהעלם אחת אינו חייב אלא חטאת אחת. כך על לא הודע שלהן. אינו מביא אלא אשם אחד. אם היתה ידיעה בינתים. כשם שהוא מביא חטאת על כל אחת ואחת. כך הוא מביא אשם תלוי על כל אחת ואחת. כשם שאם אכל חלב ודם נותר ופיגול בהעלם אחת. חייב על כל אחת ואחת. כך על לא הודע שלהן. מביא אשם תלוי על כל אחד ואחד. חלב ונותר לפניו. אכל אחד מהם. ואין ידוע איזה מהם אכל. אשתו נדה ואחותו עמו בבית. שגג באחת מהן ואין ידוע באיזה מהן שגג. שבת ויום הכפורים. ועשה מלאכה בין השמשות. ואין ידוע באיזה מהם עשה. רבי אליעזר מחייב חטאת. ורבי יהושע פוטר. אמר רבי יוסי לא נחלקו על העושה מלאכה בין השמשות שהוא פטור. שאני אומר מקצת מלאכה עשה מהיום ומקצתה למחר. ועל מה נחלקו. על העושה בתוך היום. ואין ידוע אם בשבת עשה. ואם ביום הכפורים עשה. או על העושה ואין ידוע מעין איזו מלאכה עשה. רבי אליעזר מחייב חטאת. ורבי יהושע פוטר. אמר רבי יהודה פוטרו היה רבי יהושע. אף מאשם תלוי: ",
+ "רבי שמעון שזורי ורבי שמעון אומרים. לא נחלקו על דבר שהוא משום שם אחד. שהוא חייב. ועל מה נחלקו. על דבר שהוא משום שני שמות. שרבי אליעזר מחייב חטאת. ורבי יהושע פוטר. אמר רבי יהודה. אפילו נתכוון ללקט תאנים ולקט ענבים. ענבים ולקט תאנים. שחורות ולקט לבנות. לבנות ולקט שחורות. רבי אליעזר מחייב חטאת. ורבי יהושע פוטר. אמר רבי יהודה תמה אני אם יפטר בה רבי יהושע. אם כן למה נאמר אשר חטא בה. פרט למתעסק: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "דם שחיטה בבהמה. בחיה. ובעופות. בין טמאים. ובין טהורים. דם נחירה. ודם עיקור. ודם הקזה שהנפש יוצאה בו. חייבים עליו. דם הטחול. דם הלב. דם ביצים. דם דגים. דם חגבים. דם התמצית. אין חייבין עליהן. רבי יהודה מחייב בדם התמצית: ",
+ "רבי עקיבא מחייב על ספק מעילות אשם תלוי וחכמים פוטרים. ומודה רבי עקיבא שאין מביא את מעילתו עד שתתודע לו. ויביא עמה אשם ודאי. אמר רבי טרפון מה לזה מביא שתי אשמות. אלא יביא מעילה וחומשה. ויביא אשם בשני סלעים. ויאמר. אם ודאי מעלתי. זו מעילתי. וזה אשמי. ואם ספק. המעות נדבה. ואשם תלוי. שממין שהוא מביא על הודע. מביא על לא הודע: ",
+ "אמר לו רבי עקיבא נראים דבריך במעילה מעוטה. הרי שבא על ידו ספק מעילה במאה מנה. לא יפה לו שיביא אשם בשתי סלעים. ואל יביא ספק מעילה במאה מנה. הא מודה רבי עקיבא לרבי טרפון במעילה מועטת. האשה שהביאה חטאת העוף ספק. אם עד שלא נמלקה נודע לה שילדה ודאי. תעשנה ודאי. שממין שהיא מביאה על לא הודע מביאה על הודע: ",
+ "חתיכה של חולין וחתיכה של קדש. אכל אחת מהן ואין ידוע איזו מהן אכל. פטור. רבי עקיבא מחייב באשם תלוי. אכל את השניה. מביא אשם ודאי. אכל אחד הראשונה ובא אחר ואכל את השניה. זה מביא אשם תלוי. וזה מביא אשם תלוי דברי רבי עקיבא. רבי שמעון אומר שניהם מביאים אשם אחד. רבי יוסי אומר אין שנים מביאים אשם אחד: ",
+ "חתיכה של חולין. וחתיכה של חלב. אכל אחת מהן. ואין ידוע איזו מהן אכל. מביא אשם תלוי. אכל את השניה מביא חטאת. אכל אחד את הראשונה ובא אחר ואכל את השניה. זה מביא אשם תלוי וזה מביא אשם תלוי דברי ר' עקיבא. רבי שמעון אומר שניהם מביאים חטאת אחת. רבי יוסי אומר. אין שנים מביאים חטאת אחת. ",
+ "חתיכה של חלב וחתיכה של קדש. אכל את אחת מהן. ואין ידוע איזו מהן אכל. מביא אשם תלוי. אכל את השניה מביא חטאת ואשם ודאי. אכל אחד את הראשונה. ובא אחר ואכל את השניה. זה מביא אשם תלוי וזה מביא אשם תלוי. רבי שמעון אומר שניהם מביאים חטאת ואשם. רבי יוסי אומר אין שנים מביאים חטאת ואשם: ",
+ "חתיכה של חלב. וחתיכה של חלב קדש. אכל את אחת מהן. ואין ידוע איזו מהן אכל. מביא חטאת. רבי עקיבא אומר מביא אשם תלוי. אכל את השניה. מביא שתי חטאות. ואשם ודאי. אכל אחד את הראשונה. ובא אחר ואכל את השניה. זה מביא חטאת. וזה מביא חטאת. רבי עקיבא אומר זה מביא אשם תלוי. וזה מביא אשם תלוי רבי שמעון אומר זה חטאת. וזה חטאת. ושניהם מביאים אשם אחד. רבי יוסי אומר אין שנים מביאין אשם אחד: ",
+ "חתיכה של חלב וחתיכה של חלב נותר. אכל את אחת מהן. ואין ידוע את איזו מהם אכל. מביא חטאת ואשם תלוי. אכל את השניה. מביא שלש חטאות. אכל אחד את הראשונה. ובא אחר ואכל את השניה. זה מביא חטאת ואשם תלוי. וזה מביא חטאת ואשם תלוי. רבי שמעון אומר זה חטאת וזה חטאת. ושניהם מביאים חטאת אחת. רבי יוסי אומר כל חטאת שהיא באה על חטא אין שנים מביאים אותה: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "המביא אשם תלוי. ונודע לו שלא חטא. אם עד שלא נשחט. יצא וירעה בעדר. דברי רבי מאיר. וחכמים אומרים ירעה עד שיסתאב. וימכר ויפלו דמיו לנדבה. רבי אליעזר אומר יקרב. שאם אינו בא על חטא זה. הרי הוא בא על חטא אחר. אם משנשחט נודע לו. הדם ישפך. והבשר יצא לבית השרפה. נזרק הדם. הבשר יאכל. רבי יוסי אומר אפילו הדם בכוס יזרק. והבשר יאכל: ",
+ "אשם ודאי אינו כן. אם עד שלא נשחט יצא וירעה בעדר. משנשחט הרי זה יקבר. נזרק הדם. הבשר יצא לבית השרפה. שור הנסקל אינו כן. אם עד שלא נסקל יצא וירעה בעדר. משנסקל. מותר בהנאה. עגלה ערופה אינה כן. אם עד שלא נערפה תצא ותרעה בעדר. משנערפה תקבר במקומה שעל ספק באה מתחלתה. כפרה ספיקה. והלכה לה. ",
+ "רבי אליעזר אומר מתנדב אדם אשם תלוי בכל יום. ובכל שעה שירצה. והיא נקראת אשם חסידים. אמרו עליו על בבא בן בוטי. שהיה מתנדב אשם תלוי בכל יום. חוץ מאחר יום הכפורים יום אחד. אמר המעון הזה. אלו היו מניחים לי הייתי מביא אלא אומרים לי המתן עד שתכנס לספק. וחכמים אומרים. אין מביאין אשם תלוי אלא על דבר שזדונו כרת. ושגגתו חטאת: ",
+ "חייבי חטאות ואשמות ודאין. שעבר עליהן יום הכפורים. חייבין להביא לאחר יום הכפורים. חייבי אשמות תלויין. פטורים. מי שבא על ידו ספק עברה ביום הכפורים. אפילו עם חשכה. פטור. שכל היום מכפר. ",
+ "האשה שיש עליה חטאת העוף ספק. שעבר עליה יום הכפורים. חייבת להביא לאחר יום הכפורים. מפני שמכשרתה לאכול בזבחים. חטאת העוף הבאה על ספק. אם משנמלקה נודע לה. הרי זו תקבר: ",
+ "המפריש שתי סלעים לאשם. ולקח בהן שני אילים לאשם. אם היה אחד מהן. יפה שתי סלעים. יקרב לאשמו. והשני ירעה עד שיסתאב. וימכר. ויפלו דמיו לנדבה. לקח בהן שני אילים לחולין. אחד יפה שתי סלעים ואחד יפה עשרה זוז. היפה שתי סלעים יקרב לאשמו. והשני למעילתו. אחד לאשם ואחד לחולין. אם היה של אשם יפה שתי סלעים. יקרב לאשמו. והשני למעילתו. ויביא עמה סלע וחומשה: ",
+ "המפריש חטאתו ומת. לא יביאנה בנו אחריו. ולא יביאנה מחטא על חטא. אפילו על חלב שאכל אמש לא יביאנו על חלב שאכל היום. שנאמר (ויקרא ד, לב) קרבנו על חטאתו. שיהא קרבנו לשם חטאו: ",
+ "מביאין מהקדש כשבה. שעירה. מהקדש שעירה. כשבה. מהקדש כשבה ושעירה. תורין ובני יונה. מהקדש תורין ובני יונה. עשירית האיפה. כיצד הפריש לכשבה או לשעירה. העני. יביא עוף. העני. יביא עשירית האיפה. הפריש לעשירית האיפה. העשיר יביא עוף. העשיר. יביא כשבה ושעירה. הפריש כשבה או שעירה. ונסתאבו. אם רצה יביא בדמיהן עוף הפריש עוף ונסתאב. לא יביא בדמיו עשירית האיפה. שאין לעוף פדיון. ",
+ "רבי שמעון אומר כבשים קודמין לעזים בכל מקום. יכול מפני שהן מובחרין מהן. תלמוד לומר (ויקרא ד, לב) ואם כבש יביא קרבנו לחטאת. מלמד ששניהם שקולין. תורין קודמין לבני יונה בכל מקום. יכול מפני שהן מובחרין מהן. תלמוד לומר (ויקרא יב, ו) ובן יונה או תור לחטאת. מלמד ששניהן שקולין. האב קודם לאם בכל מקום. יכול שכבוד האב עודף על כבוד האם. תלמוד לומר (ויקרא יט, ג) איש אמו ואביו תיראו. מלמד ששניהם שקולים. אבל אמרו חכמים. האב קודם לאם בכל מקום מפני שהוא ואמו חייבין בכבוד אביו. וכן בתלמוד תורה. אם זכה הבן לפני הרב. קודם את האב בכל מקום. מפני שהוא ואביו חייבין בכבוד רבו: "
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/Hebrew/Torat Emet 357.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/Hebrew/Torat Emet 357.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c28abe04839d87c8b9127e7ceb4776a21c53fe41
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/Hebrew/Torat Emet 357.json
@@ -0,0 +1,82 @@
+{
+ "language": "he",
+ "title": "Mishnah Keritot",
+ "versionSource": "http://www.toratemetfreeware.com/index.html?downloads",
+ "versionTitle": "Torat Emet 357",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 3.0,
+ "license": "Public Domain",
+ "versionTitleInHebrew": "תורת אמת 357",
+ "actualLanguage": "he",
+ "languageFamilyName": "hebrew",
+ "isBaseText": true,
+ "isSource": true,
+ "isPrimary": true,
+ "direction": "rtl",
+ "heTitle": "משנה כריתות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "שְׁלשִׁים וָשֵׁשׁ כְּרֵתוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה. הַבָּא עַל הָאֵם, וְעַל אֵשֶׁת הָאָב, וְעַל הַכַּלָּה, הַבָּא עַל הַזְּכוּר, וְעַל הַבְּהֵמָה, וְהָאִשָּׁה הַמְבִיאָה אֶת הַבְּהֵמָה עָלֶיהָ, הַבָּא עַל אִשָּׁה וּבִתָּהּ, וְעַל אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ, הַבָּא עַל אֲחוֹתוֹ, וְעַל אֲחוֹת אָבִיו, וְעַל אֲחוֹת אִמּוֹ, וְעַל אֲחוֹת אִשְׁתּוֹ, וְעַל אֵשֶׁת אָחִיו, וְעַל אֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו, וְעַל הַנִּדָּה, הַמְגַדֵּף, וְהָעוֹבֵד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, וְהַנּוֹתֵן מִזַּרְעוֹ לַמֹּלֶךְ, וּבַעַל אוֹב, הַמְחַלֵּל אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת, וְטָמֵא שֶׁאָכַל אֶת הַקֹּדֶשׁ, וְהַבָּא לַמִּקְדָּשׁ טָמֵא, הָאוֹכֵל חֵלֶב, וְדָם, נוֹתָר, וּפִגּוּל, הַשּׁוֹחֵט וְהַמַּעֲלֶה בַּחוּץ, הָאוֹכֵל חָמֵץ בְּפֶסַח, וְהָאוֹכֵל וְהָעוֹשֶׂה מְלָאכָה בְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, הַמְפַטֵּם אֶת הַשֶּׁמֶן, וְהַמְפַטֵּם אֶת הַקְּטֹרֶת, וְהַסָּךְ בְּשֶׁמֶן הַמִּשְׁחָה. הַפֶּסַח וְהַמִּילָה בְּמִצְוֹת עֲשֵׂה: \n",
+ "עַל אֵלּוּ חַיָּבִים עַל זְדוֹנָם כָּרֵת, וְעַל שִׁגְגָתָם חַטָּאת, וְעַל לֹא הוֹדַע שֶׁלָּהֶן אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, חוּץ מִן הַמְטַמֵּא מִקְדָּשׁ וְקָדָשָׁיו, מִפְנֵי שֶׁהוּא בְעוֹלֶה וְיוֹרֵד, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אַף הַמְגַדֵּף, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר טו), תּוֹרָה אַחַת יִהְיֶה לָכֶם לָעֹשֶׂה בִּשְׁגָגָה, יָצָא מְגַדֵּף, שֶׁאֵינוֹ עוֹשֶׂה מַעֲשֶׂה: \n",
+ "יֵשׁ מְבִיאוֹת קָרְבָּן וְנֶאֱכָל, וְיֵשׁ מְבִיאוֹת וְאֵינוֹ נֶאֱכָל, וְיֵשׁ שֶׁאֵינָן מְבִיאוֹת. אֵלּוּ מְבִיאוֹת קָרְבָּן וְנֶאֱכָל. הַמַּפֶּלֶת כְּמִין בְּהֵמָה חַיָּה וָעוֹף, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא בוֹ מִצּוּרַת הָאָדָם. הַמַּפֶּלֶת סַנְדָּל, אוֹ שִׁלְיָא, וְשָׁפִיר מְרֻקָּם, וְהַיּוֹצֵא מְחֻתָּךְ. וְכֵן שִׁפְחָה שֶׁהִפִּילָה, מְבִיאָה קָרְבָּן וְנֶאֱכָל: \n",
+ "אֵלּוּ מְבִיאוֹת וְאֵינוֹ נֶאֱכָל. הַמַּפֶּלֶת וְאֵין יָדוּעַ מַה הִפִּילָה, וְכֵן שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים שֶׁהִפִּילוּ, אַחַת מִמִּין פְּטוּר וְאַחַת מִמִּין חוֹבָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, אֵימָתַי, בִּזְמַן שֶׁהָלְכוּ זוֹ לְמִזְרָח וְזוֹ לְמַעֲרָב. אֲבָל אִם הָיוּ שְׁתֵּיהֶן עוֹמְדוֹת כְּאַחַת, מְבִיאוֹת קָרְבָּן וְנֶאֱכָל: \n",
+ "אֵלּוּ שֶׁאֵינָן מְבִיאוֹת. הַמַּפֶּלֶת שָׁפִיר מָלֵא מַיִם, מָלֵא דָם, מָלֵא גְנִינִים, הַמַּפֶּלֶת כְּמִין דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים שְׁקָצִים וּרְמָשִׂים, הַמַּפֶּלֶת יוֹם אַרְבָּעִים, וְיוֹצֵא דֹפֶן. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מְחַיֵּב בְּיוֹצֵא דֹפֶן: \n",
+ "הַמַּפֶּלֶת אוֹר לִשְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי פּוֹטְרִין מִן הַקָּרְבָּן, בֵּית הִלֵּל מְחַיְּבִים. אָמְרוּ בֵית הִלֵּל לְבֵית שַׁמַּאי, מַאי שְׁנָא אוֹר לִשְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד מִיּוֹם שְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד. אִם שָׁוֶה לוֹ לַטֻּמְאָה, לֹא יִשְׁוֶה לוֹ לַקָּרְבָּן. אָמְרוּ לָהֶם בֵּית שַׁמַּאי, לֹא, אִם אֲמַרְתֶּם בְּמַפֶּלֶת יוֹם שְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד, שֶׁכֵּן יָצְאָה בְשָׁעָה שֶׁהִיא רְאוּיָה לְהָבִיא בָהּ קָרְבָּן, תֹּאמְרוּ בְמַפֶּלֶת אוֹר לִשְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד, שֶׁלֹּא יָצְאָה בְשָׁעָה שֶׁהִיא רְאוּיָה לְהָבִיא בָהּ קָרְבָּן. אָמְרוּ לָהֶן בֵּית הִלֵּל, וַהֲרֵי הַמַּפֶּלֶת יוֹם שְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת תּוֹכִיחַ, שֶׁלֹּא יָצְאָה בְשָׁעָה שֶׁהִיא רְאוּיָה לְהָבִיא בָהּ קָרְבָּן וְחַיֶּבֶת בַּקָּרְבָּן. אָמְרוּ לָהֶם בֵּית שַׁמַּאי, לֹא, אִם אֲמַרְתֶּם בְּמַפֶּלֶת יוֹם שְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת, שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לְקָרְבַּן יָחִיד, רָאוּי לְקָרְבַּן צִבּוּר, תֹּאמְרוּ בְמַפֶּלֶת אוֹר לִשְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד, שֶׁאֵין הַלַּיְלָה רָאוּי לֹא לְקָרְבַּן יָחִיד וְלֹא לְקָרְבַּן צִבּוּר. הַדָּמִים אֵינָן מוֹכִיחִין, שֶׁהַמַּפֶּלֶת בְּתוֹךְ מְלֹאת, דָּמֶיהָ טְמֵאִין, וּפְטוּרָה מִן הַקָּרְבָּן: \n",
+ "הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלֶיהָ סְפֵק חֲמִשָּׁה זִיבוֹת וּסְפֵק חֲמִשָּׁה לֵדוֹת, מְבִיאָה קָרְבָּן אֶחָד, וְאוֹכֶלֶת בַּזְּבָחִים, וְאֵין הַשְּׁאָר עָלֶיהָ חוֹבָה. חָמֵשׁ לֵדוֹת וַדָּאוֹת, חָמֵשׁ זִיבוֹת וַדָּאוֹת, מְבִיאָה קָרְבָּן אֶחָד, וְאוֹכֶלֶת בַּזְּבָחִים, וְהַשְּׁאָר עָלֶיהָ חוֹבָה. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁעָמְדוּ קִנִּים בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם בְּדִינְרֵי זָהָב. אָמַר רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, הַמָּעוֹן הַזֶּה, לֹא אָלִין הַלַּיְלָה, עַד שֶׁיְּהוּ בְדִינָרִין. נִכְנַס לְבֵית דִּין וְלִמֵּד, הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלֶיהָ חָמֵשׁ לֵדוֹת וַדָּאוֹת, חָמֵשׁ זִיבוֹת וַדָּאוֹת, מְבִיאָה קָרְבָּן אֶחָד, וְאוֹכֶלֶת בַּזְּבָחִים, וְאֵין הַשְּׁאָר עָלֶיהָ חוֹבָה. וְעָמְדוּ קִנִּים בּוֹ בַיּוֹם בְּרִבְעָתָיִם: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "אַרְבָּעָה מְחֻסְּרֵי כִפּוּרִים וְאַרְבָּעָה מְבִיאִין עַל הַזָּדוֹן כִּשְׁגָגָה. אֵלּוּ הֵן מְחֻסְּרֵי כִפּוּרִים. הַזָּב, וְהַזָּבָה, וְהַיּוֹלֶדֶת, וְהַמְצֹרָע. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר, גֵּר, מְחֻסַּר כַּפָּרָה עַד שֶׁיִּזָּרֵק עָלָיו הַדָּם. וְנָזִיר, לְיֵינוֹ וְתִגְלַחְתּוֹ וְטֻמְאָתוֹ: \n",
+ "אֵלּוּ מְבִיאִין עַל הַזָּדוֹן כִּשְׁגָגָה. הַבָּא עַל הַשִּׁפְחָה, וְנָזִיר שֶׁנִּטְמָא, וְעַל שְׁבוּעַת הָעֵדוּת, וְעַל שְׁבוּעַת הַפִּקָּדוֹן: \n",
+ "חֲמִשָּׁה מְבִיאִין קָרְבָּן אֶחָד עַל עֲבֵרוֹת הַרְבֵּה, וַחֲמִשָּׁה מְבִיאִים קָרְבָּן עוֹלֶה וְיוֹרֵד. אֵלּוּ מְבִיאִין קָרְבָּן אֶחָד עַל עֲבֵרוֹת הַרְבֵּה. הַבָּא עַל הַשִּׁפְחָה בִּיאוֹת הַרְבֵּה, וְנָזִיר שֶׁנִּטְמָא טֻמְאוֹת הַרְבֵּה, וְהַמְקַנֵּא לְאִשְׁתּוֹ עַל יְדֵי אֲנָשִׁים הַרְבֵּה, וּמְצֹרָע שֶׁנִּתְנַגַּע נְגָעִים הַרְבֵּה. הֵבִיא צִפֳּרָיו וְנִתְנַגַּע, לֹא עָלוּ לוֹ, עַד שֶׁיָּבִיא אֶת חַטָּאתוֹ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, עַד שֶׁיָּבִיא אֶת אֲשָׁמוֹ: \n",
+ "הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁיָּלְדָה וְלָדוֹת הַרְבֵּה, הִפִּילָה בְתוֹךְ שְׁמוֹנִים נְקֵבָה וְחָזְרָה וְהִפִּילָה בְתוֹךְ שְׁמוֹנִים נְקֵבָה, וְהַמַּפֶּלֶת תְּאוֹמִים, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, מְבִיאָה עַל הָרִאשׁוֹן וְאֵינָהּ מְבִיאָה עַל הַשֵּׁנִי. מְבִיאָה עַל הַשְּׁלִישִׁי וְאֵינָהּ מְבִיאָה עַל הָרְבִיעִי. אֵלּוּ מְבִיאִין קָרְבָּן עוֹלֶה וְיוֹרֵד. עַל שְׁמִיעַת הַקּוֹל, וְעַל בִּטּוּי שְׂפָתַיִם, וְעַל טֻמְאַת מִקְדָּשׁ וְקָדָשָׁיו, וְהַיֹּלֶדֶת, וְהַמְצֹרָע. וּמַה בֵּין הַשִּׁפְחָה לְבֵין כָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת. שֶׁלֹּא שָׁוְתָה לָהֶן לֹא בָעֹנֶשׁ וְלֹא בַקָּרְבָּן, שֶׁכָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת בְּחַטָּאת וְהַשִּׁפְחָה בְּאָשָׁם. כָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת בִּנְקֵבָה, וְשִׁפְחָה בְּזָכָר. כָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת, אֶחָד הָאִישׁ וְאֶחָד הָאִשָּׁה שָׁוִין בַּמַּכּוֹת וּבַקָּרְבָּן, וּבַשִּׁפְחָה לֹא הִשְׁוָה אֶת הָאִישׁ לָאִשָּׁה בַּמַּכּוֹת וְלֹא אֶת הָאִשָּׁה לָאִישׁ בַּקָּרְבָּן. כָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת, עָשָׂה בָהֶן אֶת הַמְעָרֶה כַגּוֹמֵר, וְחַיָּב עַל כָּל בִּיאָה וּבִיאָה. זֶה חֹמֶר הֶחְמִיר בַּשִּׁפְחָה, שֶׁעָשָׂה בָהּ אֶת הַמֵּזִיד כַּשּׁוֹגֵג: \n",
+ "אֵיזוֹ הִיא שִׁפְחָה. כֹּל שֶׁחֶצְיָהּ שִׁפְחָה וְחֶצְיָהּ בַּת חוֹרִין, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יט), וְהָפְדֵּה לֹא נִפְדָּתָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר, זוֹ הִיא שִׁפְחָה וַדָּאִית. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה אוֹמֵר, כָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת מְפֹרָשׁוֹת, וּמַה שִּׁיּוּר, אֵין לָנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁחֶצְיָהּ שִׁפְחָה וְחֶצְיָהּ בַּת חוֹרִין: \n",
+ "כָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת, אֶחָד גָּדוֹל וְאֶחָד קָטָן, הַקָּטָן פָּטוּר. אֶחָד עֵר וְאֶחָד יָשֵׁן, הַיָּשֵׁן פָּטוּר. אֶחָד שׁוֹגֵג וְאֶחָד מֵזִיד, הַשּׁוֹגֵג בְּחַטָּאת וְהַמֵּזִיד בְּהִכָּרֵת: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "אָמְרוּ לוֹ אָכַלְתָּ חֵלֶב, מֵבִיא חַטָּאת. עֵד אוֹמֵר אָכַל וְעֵד אוֹמֵר לֹא אָכַל, אִשָּׁה אוֹמֶרֶת אָכַל וְאִשָּׁה אוֹמֶרֶת לֹא אָכַל, מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. עֵד אוֹמֵר אָכַל וְהוּא אוֹמֵר לֹא אָכַלְתִּי, פָּטוּר. שְׁנַיִם אוֹמְרִים אָכַל וְהוּא אוֹמֵר לֹא אָכַלְתִּי, רַבִּי מֵאִיר מְחַיֵּב. אָמַר רַבִּי מֵאִיר, אִם הֱבִיאוּהוּ שְׁנַיִם לְמִיתָה חֲמוּרָה, לֹא יְבִיאוּהוּ לְקָרְבָּן הַקַּל. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, מָה אִם יִרְצֶה לוֹמַר מֵזִיד הָיִיתִי: \n",
+ "אָכַל חֵלֶב וְחֵלֶב בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אֶחָת. אָכַל חֵלֶב וְדָם וְנוֹתָר וּפִגּוּל בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, חַיָּב עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד. זֶה חֹמֶר בְּמִינִין הַרְבֵּה מִמִּין אֶחָד. וְחֹמֶר בְּמִין אֶחָד מִמִּינִין הַרְבֵּה, שֶׁאִם אָכַל כַּחֲצִי זַיִת וְחָזַר וְאָכַל כַּחֲצִי זַיִת מִמִּין אֶחָד, חַיָּב. מִשְּׁנֵי מִינִין, פָּטוּר: \n",
+ "וְכַמָּה יִשְׁהֶה הָאוֹכְלָן. כְּאִלּוּ אֲכָלָן קְלָיוֹת, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, עַד שֶׁיִּשְׁהֶה מִתְּחִלָּה וְעַד סוֹף כְּדֵי אֲכִילַת פְּרָס. אָכַל אֳכָלִין טְמֵאִין, וְשָׁתָה מַשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין, שָׁתָה רְבִיעִית יַיִן וְנִכְנַס לַמִּקְדָּשׁ, וְשָׁהָה כְּדֵי אֲכִילַת פְּרָס. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, אִם הִפְסִיק בָּהּ אוֹ שֶׁנָּתַן לְתוֹכוֹ מַיִם כָּל שֶׁהוּא, פָּטוּר: \n",
+ "יֵשׁ אוֹכֵל אֲכִילָה אַחַת וְחַיָּב עָלֶיהָ אַרְבַּע חַטָּאוֹת וְאָשָׁם אֶחָד. טָמֵא שֶׁאָכַל אֶת הַחֵלֶב, וְהָיָה נוֹתָר, מִן מֻקְדָּשִׁים, וּבְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים. רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, אִם הָיְתָה שַׁבָּת וְהוֹצִיאוֹ בְפִיו, חַיָּב. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, אֵינוֹ מִן הַשֵּׁם: \n",
+ "יֵשׁ בָּא בִיאָה אַחַת וְחַיָּב עָלֶיהָ שֵׁשׁ חַטָּאוֹת. הַבָּא עַל בִּתּוֹ, חַיָּב עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם בִּתּוֹ וַאֲחוֹתוֹ וְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו וְאֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו וְאֵשֶׁת אִישׁ וְנִדָּה. וְהַבָּא עַל בַּת בִּתּוֹ, חַיָּב עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם בַּת בִּתּוֹ וְכַלָּתוֹ וַאֲחוֹת אִשְׁתּוֹ וְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו וְאֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו וְאֵשֶׁת אִישׁ וְנִדָּה. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אִם עָבַר הַזָּקֵן וּנְשָׂאָהּ, חַיָּב עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אָב. וְכֵן הַבָּא עַל בַּת אִשְׁתּוֹ, וְעַל בַּת בַּת אִשְׁתּוֹ: \n",
+ "הַבָּא עַל חֲמוֹתוֹ, חַיָּב עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם חֲמוֹתוֹ וְכַלָּתוֹ וַאֲחוֹת אִשְׁתּוֹ וְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו וְאֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו וְאֵשֶׁת אִישׁ וְנִדָּה. וְכֵן הַבָּא עַל אֵם חֲמוֹתוֹ, וְעַל אֵם חָמִיו. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי אוֹמֵר, הַבָּא עַל חֲמוֹתוֹ, חַיָּב עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם חֲמוֹתוֹ וְאֵם חֲמוֹתוֹ וְאֵם חָמִיו. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, שְׁלָשְׁתָּן שֵׁם אֶחָד הֵן: \n",
+ "אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, שָׁאַלְתִּי אֶת רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְאֶת רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בָּאִטְלִיס שֶׁל אֶמָּאוֹם, שֶׁהָלְכוּ לִקַּח בְּהֵמָה לְמִשְׁתֵּה בְנוֹ שֶׁל רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, הַבָּא עַל אֲחוֹתוֹ וְעַל אֲחוֹת אָבִיו וְעַל אֲחוֹת אִמּוֹ בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד מַהוּ, חַיָּב אַחַת עַל כֻּלָּן, אוֹ אַחַת עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת, וְאָמְרוּ לִי, לֹא שָׁמָעְנוּ. אֲבָל שָׁמַעְנוּ, הַבָּא עַל חָמֵשׁ נָשָׁיו נִדּוֹת בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת. וְרוֹאִין אָנוּ שֶׁהַדְּבָרִים קַל וָחֹמֶר: \n",
+ "וְעוֹד שְׁאָלָן רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. אֵבָר הַמְדֻלְדָּל בִּבְהֵמָה, מַהוּ. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, לֹא שָׁמַעְנוּ. אֲבָל שָׁמַעְנוּ בְּאֵבָר הַמְדֻלְדָּל בְּאָדָם, שֶׁהוּא טָהוֹר. שֶׁכָּךְ הָיוּ מֻכֵּי שְׁחִין שֶׁבִּירוּשָׁלַיִם עוֹשִׂין, הוֹלֵךְ לוֹ עֶרֶב פֶּסַח אֵצֶל הָרוֹפֵא וְחוֹתְכוֹ עַד שֶׁהוּא מַנִּיחַ בּוֹ כִשְׂעֹרָה, וְתוֹחֲבוֹ בְסִירָה, וְהוּא נִמְשָׁךְ מִמֶּנּוּ, וְהַלָּה עוֹשֶׂה פִסְחוֹ, וְהָרוֹפֵא עוֹשֶׂה פִסְחוֹ. וְרוֹאִין אָנוּ שֶׁהַדְּבָרִים קַל וָחֹמֶר: \n",
+ "וְעוֹד שְׁאָלָן רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. הַשּׁוֹחֵט חֲמִשָּׁה זְבָחִים בַּחוּץ בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, מַהוּ. חַיָּב אַחַת עַל כֻּלָּם, אוֹ אַחַת עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, לֹא שָׁמָעְנוּ. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, שָׁמַעְתִּי בְאוֹכֵל מִזֶּבַח אֶחָד בַּחֲמִשָּׁה תַמְחוּיִין בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מִשּׁוּם מְעִילָה, וְרוֹאֶה אֲנִי שֶׁהַדְּבָרִים קַל וָחֹמֶר. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, לֹא כָךְ שְׁאָלָן רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. אֶלָּא, בְּאוֹכֵל נוֹתָר מֵחֲמִשָּׁה זְבָחִים בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, מַהוּ. חַיָּב אַחַת עַל כֻּלָּן, אוֹ אַחַת עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, לֹא שָׁמָעְנוּ. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, שָׁמַעְתִּי בְאוֹכֵל מִזֶּבַח אֶחָד בַּחֲמִשָּׁה תַמְחוּיִים בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת מִשּׁוּם מְעִילָה, וְרוֹאֶה אֲנִי שֶׁהַדְּבָרִים קַל וָחֹמֶר. אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, אִם הֲלָכָה, נְקַבֵּל. וְאִם לָדִין, יֵשׁ תְּשׁוּבָה. אָמַר לוֹ, הָשֵׁב. אָמַר לוֹ, לֹא, אִם אָמַרְתָּ בִמְעִילָה שֶׁעָשָׂה בָהּ אֶת הַמַּאֲכִיל כָּאוֹכֵל וְאֶת הַמְהַנֶּה כַּנֶּהֱנֶה, צֵרַף הַמְּעִילָה לִזְמָן מְרֻבֶּה, תֹּאמַר בְּנוֹתָר, שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ אַחַד מִכָּל אֵלּוּ: \n",
+ "אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, שָׁאַלְתִּי אֶת רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, הָעוֹשֶׂה מְלָאכוֹת הַרְבֵּה בְּשַׁבָּתוֹת הַרְבֵּה מֵעֵין מְלָאכָה אַחַת, בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, מַה הוּא. חַיָּב אַחַת עַל כֻּלָּן, אוֹ אַחַת עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. אָמַר לִי, חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת, מִקַּל וָחֹמֶר, וּמָה אִם הַנִּדָּה, שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ תּוֹצָאוֹת הַרְבֵּה וְחַטָּאוֹת הַרְבֵּה, חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת, שַׁבָּת, שֶׁיֶּשׁ בָּהּ תּוֹצָאוֹת הַרְבֵּה וְחַטָּאוֹת הַרְבֵּה, אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁיְּהֵא חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ, לֹא, אִם אָמַרְתָּ בַנִּדָּה, שֶׁיֶּשׁ בָּהּ שְׁתֵּי אַזְהָרוֹת, שֶׁהוּא מֻזְהָר עַל הַנִּדָּה וְהַנִּדָּה מֻזְהֶרֶת עָלָיו, תֹּאמַר בַּשַּׁבָּת, שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ אֶלָּא אַזְהָרָה אֶחָת. אָמַר לִי, הַבָּא עַל הַקְּטַנּוֹת יוֹכִיחַ, שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶן אֶלָּא אַזְהָרָה אַחַת וְחַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ, לֹא, אִם אָמַרְתָּ בַּבָּא עַל הַקְּטַנּוֹת, שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶן עַכְשָׁיו, יֵשׁ בָּהֶן לְאַחַר זְמָן, תֹּאמַר בַּשַּׁבָּת, שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ לֹא עַכְשָׁיו וְלֹא לְאַחַר זְמָן. אָמַר לִי, הַבָּא עַל הַבְּהֵמָה יוֹכִיחַ. אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ, בְּהֵמָה כַשַּׁבָּת: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "סָפֵק אָכַל חֵלֶב, סָפֵק לֹא אָכַל. וַאֲפִלּוּ אָכַל, סָפֵק יֵשׁ בּוֹ כַשִּׁעוּר, סָפֵק שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ. חֵלֶב וְשֻׁמָּן לְפָנָיו, אָכַל אֶת אַחַד מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן אָכַל. אִשְׁתּוֹ וַאֲחוֹתוֹ עִמּוֹ בַבַּיִת, שָׁגַג בְּאַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ בְּאֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן שָׁגָג. שַׁבָּת וְיוֹם חֹל, וְעָשָׂה מְלָאכָה בְאַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ בְּאֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן עָשָׂה. מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי: \n",
+ "כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאִם אָכַל חֵלֶב וְחֵלֶב בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת, כָּךְ עַל לֹא הוֹדַע שֶׁלָּהֶן אֵינוֹ מֵבִיא אֶלָּא אָשָׁם אֶחָד. אִם הָיְתָה יְדִיעָה בֵינְתַיִם, כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהוּא מֵבִיא חַטָּאת עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת, כָּךְ הוּא מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאִם אָכַל חֵלֶב וְדָם נוֹתָר וּפִגּוּל בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, חַיָּב עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד, כָּךְ עַל לֹא הוֹדַע שֶׁלָּהֶן מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד. חֵלֶב וְנוֹתָר לְפָנָיו, אָכַל אַחַד מֵהֶם וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵיזֶה מֵהֶם אָכַל. אִשְׁתּוֹ נִדָּה וַאֲחוֹתוֹ עִמּוֹ בַבַּיִת, שָׁגַג בְּאַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ בְּאֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן שָׁגָג. שַׁבָּת וְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים וְעָשָׂה מְלָאכָה בֵּין הַשְּׁמָשׁוֹת וְאֵין יָדוּעַ בְּאֵיזֶה מֵהֶם עָשָׂה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵּב חַטָּאת, וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ פּוֹטֵר. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ עַל הָעוֹשֶׂה מְלָאכָה בֵּין הַשְּׁמָשׁוֹת, שֶׁהוּא פָטוּר, שֶׁאֲנִי אוֹמֵר, מִקְצָת מְלָאכָה עָשָׂה מֵהַיּוֹם, וּמִקְצָתָהּ לְמָחָר. וְעַל מַה נֶּחְלְקוּ, עַל הָעוֹשֶׂה בְּתוֹךְ הַיּוֹם וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אִם בְּשַׁבָּת עָשָׂה וְאִם בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים עָשָׂה. אוֹ עַל הָעוֹשֶׂה וְאֵין יָדוּעַ מֵעֵין אֵיזוֹ מְלָאכָה עָשָׂה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵּב חַטָּאת, וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ פּוֹטֵר. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, פּוֹטְרוֹ הָיָה רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אַף מֵאָשָׁם תָּלוּי: \n",
+ "רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן שְׁזוּרִי וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמְרִים, לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ עַל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא מִשּׁוּם שֵׁם אֶחָד, שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב. וְעַל מַה נֶּחְלְקוּ. עַל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא מִשּׁוּם שְׁנֵי שֵׁמוֹת, שֶׁרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵּב חַטָּאת וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ פּוֹטֵר. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, אֲפִלּוּ נִתְכַּוֵּן לְלַקֵּט תְּאֵנִים וְלִקֵּט עֲנָבִים, עֲנָבִים וְלִקֵּט תְּאֵנִים, שְׁחוֹרוֹת וְלִקֵּט לְבָנוֹת, לְבָנוֹת וְלִקֵּט שְׁחוֹרוֹת, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵּב חַטָּאת, וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ פּוֹטֵר. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, תָּמֵהַּ אֲנִי אִם יִפְטֹר בָּהּ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ. אִם כֵּן, לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר (ויקרא ד), אֲשֶׁר חָטָא בָּהּ. פְּרָט לְמִתְעַסֵּק: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "דַּם שְׁחִיטָה בִּבְהֵמָה, בְּחַיָּה וּבְעוֹפוֹת, בֵּין טְמֵאִים וּבֵין טְהוֹרִים, דַּם נְחִירָה, וְדַם עִקּוּר, וְדַם הַקָּזָה שֶׁהַנֶּפֶשׁ יוֹצְאָה בוֹ, חַיָּבִים עָלָיו. דַּם הַטְּחוֹל, דַּם הַלֵּב, דַּם בֵּיצִים, דַּם דָּגִים, דַּם חֲגָבִים, דַּם הַתַּמְצִית, אֵין חַיָּבִין עֲלֵיהֶן. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה מְחַיֵּב בְּדַם הַתַּמְצִית: \n",
+ "רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא מְחַיֵּב עַל סְפֵק מְעִילוֹת אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, וַחֲכָמִים פּוֹטְרִים. וּמוֹדֶה רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, שֶׁאֵין מֵבִיא אֶת מְעִילָתוֹ עַד שֶׁתִּתְוַדַּע לוֹ, וְיָבִיא עִמָּהּ אָשָׁם וַדָּאי. אָמַר רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן, מַה לָּזֶה מֵבִיא שְׁתֵּי אֲשָׁמוֹת. אֶלָּא יָבִיא מְעִילָה וְחֻמְשָׁהּ, וְיָבִיא אָשָׁם בִּשְׁנֵי סְלָעִים, וְיֹאמַר, אִם וַדַּאי מָעַלְתִּי, זוֹ מְעִילָתִי וְזֶה אֲשָׁמִי. וְאִם סָפֵק, הַמָּעוֹת נְדָבָה וְאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. שֶׁמִּמִּין שֶׁהוּא מֵבִיא עַל הוֹדַע, מֵבִיא עַל לֹא הוֹדַע: \n",
+ "אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, נִרְאִים דְּבָרֶיךָ בִּמְעִילָה מְעֻטָּה. הֲרֵי שֶׁבָּא עַל יָדוֹ סְפֵק מְעִילָה בְּמֵאָה מָנֶה, לֹא יָפֶה לוֹ שֶׁיָּבִיא אָשָׁם בִּשְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים וְאַל יָבִיא סְפֵק מְעִילָה בְּמֵאָה מָנֶה. הָא מוֹדֶה רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא לְרַבִּי טַרְפוֹן בִּמְעִילָה מֻעָטֶת. הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁהֵבִיאָה חַטַּאת הָעוֹף סָפֵק, אִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִמְלְקָה נוֹדַע לָהּ שֶׁיָּלְדָה וַדַּאי, תַּעֲשֶׂנָּה וַדַּאי. שֶׁמִּמִּין שֶׁהִיא מְבִיאָה עַל לֹא הוֹדַע, מְבִיאָה עַל הוֹדַע: \n",
+ "חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֻלִּין וַחֲתִיכָה שֶׁל קֹדֶשׁ, אָכַל אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן אָכַל, פָּטוּר. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא מְחַיֵּב בְּאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, מֵבִיא אָשָׁם וַדָּאי. אָכַל אֶחָד אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, זֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי וְזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, שְׁנֵיהֶם מְבִיאִים אָשָׁם אֶחָד. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אֵין שְׁנַיִם מְבִיאִים אָשָׁם אֶחָד: \n",
+ "חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֻלִּין וַחֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֵלֶב, אָכַל אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן אָכַל, מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, מֵבִיא חַטָּאת. אָכַל אֶחָד אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, זֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי וְזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, שְׁנֵיהֶם מְבִיאִים חַטָּאת אֶחָת. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אֵין שְׁנַיִם מְבִיאִים חַטָּאת אֶחָת: \n",
+ "חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֵלֶב וַחֲתִיכָה שֶׁל קֹדֶשׁ, אָכַל אֶת אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן אָכַל, מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, מֵבִיא חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם וַדָּאי. אָכַל אֶחָד אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, זֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, וְזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, שְׁנֵיהֶם מְבִיאִים חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אֵין שְׁנַיִם מְבִיאִים חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם: \n",
+ "חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֵלֶב וַחֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֵלֶב קֹדֶשׁ, אָכַל אֶת אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן אָכַל, מֵבִיא חַטָּאת. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, מֵבִיא שְׁתֵּי חַטָּאוֹת וְאָשָׁם וַדָּאי. אָכַל אֶחָד אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, זֶה מֵבִיא חַטָּאת וְזֶה מֵבִיא חַטָּאת. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, זֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי וְזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, זֶה חַטָּאת וְזֶה חַטָּאת, וּשְׁנֵיהֶם מְבִיאִים אָשָׁם אֶחָד. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אֵין שְׁנַיִם מְבִיאִין אָשָׁם אֶחָד: \n",
+ "חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֵלֶב וַחֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֵלֶב נוֹתָר, אָכַל אֶת אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֶת אֵיזֶה מֵהֶן אָכַל, מֵבִיא חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, מֵבִיא שָׁלֹשׁ חַטָּאוֹת. אָכַל אֶחָד אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, זֶה מֵבִיא חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם תָּלוּי וְזֶה מֵבִיא חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, זֶה חַטָּאת וְזֶה חַטָּאת, וּשְׁנֵיהֶם מְבִיאִים חַטָּאת אֶחָת. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, כָּל חַטָּאת שֶׁהִיא בָאָה עַל חֵטְא, אֵין שְׁנַיִם מְבִיאִים אוֹתָהּ: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "הַמֵּבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי וְנוֹדַע לוֹ שֶׁלֹּא חָטָא, אִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁחַט, יֵצֵא וְיִרְעֶה בָעֵדֶר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, יִרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֵב, וְיִמָּכֵר, וְיִפְּלוּ דָמָיו לִנְדָבָה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, יִקְרַב, שֶׁאִם אֵינוֹ בָא עַל חֵטְא זֶה, הֲרֵי הוּא בָא עַל חֵטְא אַחֵר. אִם מִשֶּׁנִּשְׁחַט נוֹדַע לוֹ, הַדָּם יִשָּׁפֵךְ וְהַבָּשָׂר יֵצֵא לְבֵית הַשְּׂרֵפָה. נִזְרַק הַדָּם, הַבָּשָׂר יֵאָכֵל. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אֲפִלּוּ הַדָּם בַּכּוֹס, יִזָּרֵק, וְהַבָּשָׂר יֵאָכֵל: \n",
+ "אָשָׁם וַדַּאי אֵינוֹ כֵן. אִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁחַט, יֵצֵא וְיִרְעֶה בָעֵדֶר. מִשֶּׁנִּשְׁחַט, הֲרֵי זֶה יִקָּבֵר. נִזְרַק הַדָּם, הַבָּשָׂר יֵצֵא לְבֵית הַשְּׂרֵפָה. שׁוֹר הַנִּסְקָל אֵינוֹ כֵן. אִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִסְקַל, יֵצֵא וְיִרְעֶה בָעֵדֶר. מִשֶּׁנִּסְקַל, מֻתָּר בַּהֲנָאָה. עֶגְלָה עֲרוּפָה אֵינָהּ כֵּן. אִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נֶעֶרְפָה, תֵּצֵא וְתִרְעֶה בָעֵדֶר. מִשֶּׁנֶּעֶרְפָה, תִּקָּבֵר בִּמְקוֹמָהּ, שֶׁעַל סָפֵק בָּאָה מִתְּחִלָּתָהּ, כִּפְּרָה סְפֵקָהּ וְהָלְכָה לָהּ: \n",
+ "רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, מִתְנַדֵּב אָדָם אָשָׁם תָּלוּי בְּכָל יוֹם וּבְכָל שָׁעָה שֶׁיִּרְצֶה, וְהִיא נִקְרֵאת אֲשַׁם חֲסִידִים. אָמְרוּ עָלָיו עַל בָּבָא בֶן בּוּטִי, שֶׁהָיָה מִתְנַדֵּב אָשָׁם תָּלוּי בְּכָל יוֹם, חוּץ מֵאַחַר יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים יוֹם אֶחָד. אָמַר, הַמָּעוֹן הַזֶּה, אִלּוּ הָיוּ מַנִּיחִים לִי, הָיִיתִי מֵבִיא, אֶלָּא אוֹמְרִים לִי, הַמְתֵּן עַד שֶׁתִּכָּנֵס לְסָפֵק. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אֵין מְבִיאִים אָשָׁם תָּלוּי אֶלָּא עַל דָּבָר שֶׁזְּדוֹנוֹ כָרֵת וְשִׁגְגָתוֹ חַטָּאת: \n",
+ "חַיָּבֵי חַטָּאוֹת וַאֲשָׁמוֹת וַדָּאִין שֶׁעָבַר עֲלֵיהֶן יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, חַיָּבִין לְהָבִיא לְאַחַר יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים. חַיָּבֵי אֲשָׁמוֹת תְּלוּיִין, פְּטוּרִים. מִי שֶׁבָּא עַל יָדוֹ סְפֵק עֲבֵרָה בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, אֲפִלּוּ עִם חֲשֵׁכָה, פָּטוּר, שֶׁכָּל הַיּוֹם מְכַפֵּר: \n",
+ "הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלֶיהָ חַטַּאת הָעוֹף סָפֵק, שֶׁעָבַר עָלֶיהָ יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, חַיֶּבֶת לְהָבִיא לְאַחַר יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמַּכְשְׁרַתָּהּ לֶאֱכֹל בַּזְּבָחִים. חַטַּאת הָעוֹף הַבָּאָה עַל סָפֵק, אִם מִשֶּׁנִּמְלְקָה נוֹדַע לָהּ, הֲרֵי זוֹ תִקָּבֵר: \n",
+ "הַמַּפְרִישׁ שְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים לְאָשָׁם וְלָקַח בָּהֶן שְׁנֵי אֵילִים לְאָשָׁם, אִם הָיָה אַחַד מֵהֶן יָפֶה שְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים, יִקְרַב לַאֲשָׁמוֹ, וְהַשֵּׁנִי יִרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֵב, וְיִמָּכֵר, וְיִפְּלוּ דָמָיו לִנְדָבָה. לָקַח בָּהֶן שְׁנֵי אֵילִים לְחֻלִּין, אֶחָד יָפֶה שְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים וְאֶחָד יָפֶה עֲשָׂרָה זוּז, הַיָּפֶה שְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים יִקְרַב לַאֲשָׁמוֹ, וְהַשֵּׁנִי לִמְעִילָתוֹ. אֶחָד לְאָשָׁם וְאֶחָד לְחֻלִּין, אִם הָיָה שֶׁל אָשָׁם יָפֶה שְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים, יִקְרַב לַאֲשָׁמוֹ, וְהַשֵּׁנִי לִמְעִילָתוֹ, וְיָבִיא עִמָּהּ סֶלַע וְחֻמְשָׁהּ: \n",
+ "הַמַּפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ, וּמֵת, לֹא יְבִיאֶנָּה בְנוֹ אַחֲרָיו. וְלֹא יְבִיאֶנָּה מֵחֵטְא עַל חֵטְא, אֲפִלּוּ עַל חֵלֶב שֶׁאָכַל אֶמֶשׁ לֹא יְבִיאֶנָּה עַל חֵלֶב שֶׁאָכַל הַיּוֹם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ד), קָרְבָּנוֹ עַל חַטָּאתוֹ, שֶׁיְּהֵא קָרְבָּנוֹ לְשֵׁם חֶטְאוֹ: \n",
+ "מְבִיאִין מֵהֶקְדֵּשׁ כִּשְׂבָּה, שְׂעִירָה. מֵהֶקְדֵּשׁ שְׂעִירָה, כִּשְׂבָּה. מֵהֶקְדֵּשׁ כִּשְׂבָּה וּשְׂעִירָה, תּוֹרִין וּבְנֵי יוֹנָה. מֵהֶקְדֵּשׁ תּוֹרִין וּבְנֵי יוֹנָה, עֲשִׂירִית הָאֵיפָה. כֵּיצַד. הִפְרִישׁ לְכִשְׂבָּה אוֹ לִשְׂעִירָה, הֶעֱנִי, יָבִיא עוֹף. הֶעֱנִי, יָבִיא עֲשִׂירִית הָאֵיפָה. הִפְרִישׁ לַעֲשִׂירִית הָאֵיפָה, הֶעֱשִׁיר, יָבִיא עוֹף. הֶעֱשִׁיר, יָבִיא כִשְׂבָּה וּשְׂעִירָה. הִפְרִישׁ כִּשְׂבָּה אוֹ שְׂעִירָה וְנִסְתָּאֲבוּ, אִם רָצָה יָבִיא בִדְמֵיהֶן עוֹף. הִפְרִישׁ עוֹף וְנִסְתָּאֵב, לֹא יָבִיא בְדָמָיו עֲשִׂירִית הָאֵיפָה, שֶׁאֵין לָעוֹף פִּדְיוֹן: \n",
+ "רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, כְּבָשִׂים קוֹדְמִין לָעִזִּים בְּכָל מָקוֹם. יָכוֹל מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן מֻבְחָרִין מֵהֶן. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (ויקרא ד), וְאִם כֶּבֶשׂ יָבִיא קָרְבָּנוֹ לְחַטָּאת, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶם שְׁקוּלִין. תּוֹרִין קוֹדְמִין לִבְנֵי יוֹנָה בְכָל מָקוֹם. יָכוֹל מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן מֻבְחָרִים מֵהֶן. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (שם יב), וּבֶן יוֹנָה אוֹ תֹר לְחַטָּאת, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶן שְׁקוּלִין. הָאָב קוֹדֵם לָאֵם בְּכָל מָקוֹם. יָכוֹל שֶׁכְּבוֹד הָאָב עוֹדֵף עַל כְּבוֹד הָאֵם, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (שם יט), אִישׁ אִמּוֹ וְאָבִיו תִּירָאוּ, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶם שְׁקוּלִים. אֲבָל אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים, הָאָב קוֹדֵם לָאֵם בְּכָל מָקוֹם, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא וְאִמּוֹ חַיָּבִין בִּכְבוֹד אָבִיו. וְכֵן בְּתַלְמוּד תּוֹרָה, אִם זָכָה הַבֵּן לִפְנֵי הָרַב, קוֹדֵם אֶת הָאָב בְּכָל מָקוֹם, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא וְאָבִיו חַיָּבִין בִּכְבוֹד רַבּוֹ: \n"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/Hebrew/merged.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/Hebrew/merged.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9116ba8eb39373019a5bbfc1a7a1439d0ce03ec0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Keritot/Hebrew/merged.json
@@ -0,0 +1,78 @@
+{
+ "title": "Mishnah Keritot",
+ "language": "he",
+ "versionTitle": "merged",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org/Mishnah_Keritot",
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "שְׁלשִׁים וָשֵׁשׁ כְּרֵתוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה. הַבָּא עַל הָאֵם, וְעַל אֵשֶׁת הָאָב, וְעַל הַכַּלָּה, הַבָּא עַל הַזְּכוּר, וְעַל הַבְּהֵמָה, וְהָאִשָּׁה הַמְבִיאָה אֶת הַבְּהֵמָה עָלֶיהָ, הַבָּא עַל אִשָּׁה וּבִתָּהּ, וְעַל אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ, הַבָּא עַל אֲחוֹתוֹ, וְעַל אֲחוֹת אָבִיו, וְעַל אֲחוֹת אִמּוֹ, וְעַל אֲחוֹת אִשְׁתּוֹ, וְעַל אֵשֶׁת אָחִיו, וְעַל אֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו, וְעַל הַנִּדָּה, הַמְגַדֵּף, וְהָעוֹבֵד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, וְהַנּוֹתֵן מִזַּרְעוֹ לַמֹּלֶךְ, וּבַעַל אוֹב, הַמְחַלֵּל אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת, וְטָמֵא שֶׁאָכַל אֶת הַקֹּדֶשׁ, וְהַבָּא לַמִּקְדָּשׁ טָמֵא, הָאוֹכֵל חֵלֶב, וְדָם, נוֹתָר, וּפִגּוּל, הַשּׁוֹחֵט וְהַמַּעֲלֶה בַּחוּץ, הָאוֹכֵל חָמֵץ בְּפֶסַח, וְהָאוֹכֵל וְהָעוֹשֶׂה מְלָאכָה בְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, הַמְפַטֵּם אֶת הַשֶּׁמֶן, וְהַמְפַטֵּם אֶת הַקְּטֹרֶת, וְהַסָּךְ בְּשֶׁמֶן הַמִּשְׁחָה. הַפֶּסַח וְהַמִּילָה בְּמִצְוֹת עֲשֵׂה: \n",
+ "עַל אֵלּוּ חַיָּבִים עַל זְדוֹנָם כָּרֵת, וְעַל שִׁגְגָתָם חַטָּאת, וְעַל לֹא הוֹדַע שֶׁלָּהֶן אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, חוּץ מִן הַמְטַמֵּא מִקְדָּשׁ וְקָדָשָׁיו, מִפְנֵי שֶׁהוּא בְעוֹלֶה וְיוֹרֵד, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אַף הַמְגַדֵּף, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר טו), תּוֹרָה אַחַת יִהְיֶה לָכֶם לָעֹשֶׂה בִּשְׁגָגָה, יָצָא מְגַדֵּף, שֶׁאֵינוֹ עוֹשֶׂה מַעֲשֶׂה: \n",
+ "יֵשׁ מְבִיאוֹת קָרְבָּן וְנֶאֱכָל, וְיֵשׁ מְבִיאוֹת וְאֵינוֹ נֶאֱכָל, וְיֵשׁ שֶׁאֵינָן מְבִיאוֹת. אֵלּוּ מְבִיאוֹת קָרְבָּן וְנֶאֱכָל. הַמַּפֶּלֶת כְּמִין בְּהֵמָה חַיָּה וָעוֹף, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא בוֹ מִצּוּרַת הָאָדָם. הַמַּפֶּלֶת סַנְדָּל, אוֹ שִׁלְיָא, וְשָׁפִיר מְרֻקָּם, וְהַיּוֹצֵא מְחֻתָּךְ. וְכֵן שִׁפְחָה שֶׁהִפִּילָה, מְבִיאָה קָרְבָּן וְנֶאֱכָל: \n",
+ "אֵלּוּ מְבִיאוֹת וְאֵינוֹ נֶאֱכָל. הַמַּפֶּלֶת וְאֵין יָדוּעַ מַה הִפִּילָה, וְכֵן שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים שֶׁהִפִּילוּ, אַחַת מִמִּין פְּטוּר וְאַחַת מִמִּין חוֹבָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, אֵימָתַי, בִּזְמַן שֶׁהָלְכוּ זוֹ לְמִזְרָח וְזוֹ לְמַעֲרָב. אֲבָל אִם הָיוּ שְׁתֵּיהֶן עוֹמְדוֹת כְּאַחַת, מְבִיאוֹת קָרְבָּן וְנֶאֱכָל: \n",
+ "אֵלּוּ שֶׁאֵינָן מְבִיאוֹת. הַמַּפֶּלֶת שָׁפִיר מָלֵא מַיִם, מָלֵא דָם, מָלֵא גְנִינִים, הַמַּפֶּלֶת כְּמִין דָּגִים וַחֲגָבִים שְׁקָצִים וּרְמָשִׂים, הַמַּפֶּלֶת יוֹם אַרְבָּעִים, וְיוֹצֵא דֹפֶן. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מְחַיֵּב בְּיוֹצֵא דֹפֶן: \n",
+ "הַמַּפֶּלֶת אוֹר לִשְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי פּוֹטְרִין מִן הַקָּרְבָּן, בֵּית הִלֵּל מְחַיְּבִים. אָמְרוּ בֵית הִלֵּל לְבֵית שַׁמַּאי, מַאי שְׁנָא אוֹר לִשְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד מִיּוֹם שְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד. אִם שָׁוֶה לוֹ לַטֻּמְאָה, לֹא יִשְׁוֶה לוֹ לַקָּרְבָּן. אָמְרוּ לָהֶם בֵּית שַׁמַּאי, לֹא, אִם אֲמַרְתֶּם בְּמַפֶּלֶת יוֹם שְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד, שֶׁכֵּן יָצְאָה בְשָׁעָה שֶׁהִיא רְאוּיָה לְהָבִיא בָהּ קָרְבָּן, תֹּאמְרוּ בְמַפֶּלֶת אוֹר לִשְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד, שֶׁלֹּא יָצְאָה בְשָׁעָה שֶׁהִיא רְאוּיָה לְהָבִיא בָהּ קָרְבָּן. אָמְרוּ לָהֶן בֵּית הִלֵּל, וַהֲרֵי הַמַּפֶּלֶת יוֹם שְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת תּוֹכִיחַ, שֶׁלֹּא יָצְאָה בְשָׁעָה שֶׁהִיא רְאוּיָה לְהָבִיא בָהּ קָרְבָּן וְחַיֶּבֶת בַּקָּרְבָּן. אָמְרוּ לָהֶם בֵּית שַׁמַּאי, לֹא, אִם אֲמַרְתֶּם בְּמַפֶּלֶת יוֹם שְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת, שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לְקָרְבַּן יָחִיד, רָאוּי לְקָרְבַּן צִבּוּר, תֹּאמְרוּ בְמַפֶּלֶת אוֹר לִשְׁמוֹנִים וְאֶחָד, שֶׁאֵין הַלַּיְלָה רָאוּי לֹא לְקָרְבַּן יָחִיד וְלֹא לְקָרְבַּן צִבּוּר. הַדָּמִים אֵינָן מוֹכִיחִין, שֶׁהַמַּפֶּלֶת בְּתוֹךְ מְלֹאת, דָּמֶיהָ טְמֵאִין, וּפְטוּרָה מִן הַקָּרְבָּן: \n",
+ "הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלֶיהָ סְפֵק חֲמִשָּׁה זִיבוֹת וּסְפֵק חֲמִשָּׁה לֵדוֹת, מְבִיאָה קָרְבָּן אֶחָד, וְאוֹכֶלֶת בַּזְּבָחִים, וְאֵין הַשְּׁאָר עָלֶיהָ חוֹבָה. חָמֵשׁ לֵדוֹת וַדָּאוֹת, חָמֵשׁ זִיבוֹת וַדָּאוֹת, מְבִיאָה קָרְבָּן אֶחָד, וְאוֹכֶלֶת בַּזְּבָחִים, וְהַשְּׁאָר עָלֶיהָ חוֹבָה. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁעָמְדוּ קִנִּים בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם בְּדִינְרֵי זָהָב. אָמַר רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, הַמָּעוֹן הַזֶּה, לֹא אָלִין הַלַּיְלָה, עַד שֶׁיְּהוּ בְדִינָרִין. נִכְנַס לְבֵית דִּין וְלִמֵּד, הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלֶיהָ חָמֵשׁ לֵדוֹת וַדָּאוֹת, חָמֵשׁ זִיבוֹת וַדָּאוֹת, מְבִיאָה קָרְבָּן אֶחָד, וְאוֹכֶלֶת בַּזְּבָחִים, וְאֵין הַשְּׁאָר עָלֶיהָ חוֹבָה. וְעָמְדוּ קִנִּים בּוֹ בַיּוֹם בְּרִבְעָתָיִם: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "אַרְבָּעָה מְחֻסְּרֵי כִפּוּרִים וְאַרְבָּעָה מְבִיאִין עַל הַזָּדוֹן כִּשְׁגָגָה. אֵלּוּ הֵן מְחֻסְּרֵי כִפּוּרִים. הַזָּב, וְהַזָּבָה, וְהַיּוֹלֶדֶת, וְהַמְצֹרָע. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר, גֵּר, מְחֻסַּר כַּפָּרָה עַד שֶׁיִּזָּרֵק עָלָיו הַדָּם. וְנָזִיר, לְיֵינוֹ וְתִגְלַחְתּוֹ וְטֻמְאָתוֹ: \n",
+ "אֵלּוּ מְבִיאִין עַל הַזָּדוֹן כִּשְׁגָגָה. הַבָּא עַל הַשִּׁפְחָה, וְנָזִיר שֶׁנִּטְמָא, וְעַל שְׁבוּעַת הָעֵדוּת, וְעַל שְׁבוּעַת הַפִּקָּדוֹן: \n",
+ "חֲמִשָּׁה מְבִיאִין קָרְבָּן אֶחָד עַל עֲבֵרוֹת הַרְבֵּה, וַחֲמִשָּׁה מְבִיאִים קָרְבָּן עוֹלֶה וְיוֹרֵד. אֵלּוּ מְבִיאִין קָרְבָּן אֶחָד עַל עֲבֵרוֹת הַרְבֵּה. הַבָּא עַל הַשִּׁפְחָה בִּיאוֹת הַרְבֵּה, וְנָזִיר שֶׁנִּטְמָא טֻמְאוֹת הַרְבֵּה, וְהַמְקַנֵּא לְאִשְׁתּוֹ עַל יְדֵי אֲנָשִׁים הַרְבֵּה, וּמְצֹרָע שֶׁנִּתְנַגַּע נְגָעִים הַרְבֵּה. הֵבִיא צִפֳּרָיו וְנִתְנַגַּע, לֹא עָלוּ לוֹ, עַד שֶׁיָּבִיא אֶת חַטָּאתוֹ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, עַד שֶׁיָּבִיא אֶת אֲשָׁמוֹ: \n",
+ "הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁיָּלְדָה וְלָדוֹת הַרְבֵּה, הִפִּילָה בְתוֹךְ שְׁמוֹנִים נְקֵבָה וְחָזְרָה וְהִפִּילָה בְתוֹךְ שְׁמוֹנִים נְקֵבָה, וְהַמַּפֶּלֶת תְּאוֹמִים, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, מְבִיאָה עַל הָרִאשׁוֹן וְאֵינָהּ מְבִיאָה עַל הַשֵּׁנִי. מְבִיאָה עַל הַשְּׁלִישִׁי וְאֵינָהּ מְבִיאָה עַל הָרְבִיעִי. אֵלּוּ מְבִיאִין קָרְבָּן עוֹלֶה וְיוֹרֵד. עַל שְׁמִיעַת הַקּוֹל, וְעַל בִּטּוּי שְׂפָתַיִם, וְעַל טֻמְאַת מִקְדָּשׁ וְקָדָשָׁיו, וְהַיֹּלֶדֶת, וְהַמְצֹרָע. וּמַה בֵּין הַשִּׁפְחָה לְבֵין כָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת. שֶׁלֹּא שָׁוְתָה לָהֶן לֹא בָעֹנֶשׁ וְלֹא בַקָּרְבָּן, שֶׁכָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת בְּחַטָּאת וְהַשִּׁפְחָה בְּאָשָׁם. כָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת בִּנְקֵבָה, וְשִׁפְחָה בְּזָכָר. כָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת, אֶחָד הָאִישׁ וְאֶחָד הָאִשָּׁה שָׁוִין בַּמַּכּוֹת וּבַקָּרְבָּן, וּבַשִּׁפְחָה לֹא הִשְׁוָה אֶת הָאִישׁ לָאִשָּׁה בַּמַּכּוֹת וְלֹא אֶת הָאִשָּׁה לָאִישׁ בַּקָּרְבָּן. כָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת, עָשָׂה בָהֶן אֶת הַמְעָרֶה כַגּוֹמֵר, וְחַיָּב עַל כָּל בִּיאָה וּבִיאָה. זֶה חֹמֶר הֶחְמִיר בַּשִּׁפְחָה, שֶׁעָשָׂה בָהּ אֶת הַמֵּזִיד כַּשּׁוֹגֵג: \n",
+ "אֵיזוֹ הִיא שִׁפְחָה. כֹּל שֶׁחֶצְיָהּ שִׁפְחָה וְחֶצְיָהּ בַּת חוֹרִין, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יט), וְהָפְדֵּה לֹא נִפְדָּתָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר, זוֹ הִיא שִׁפְחָה וַדָּאִית. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה אוֹמֵר, כָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת מְפֹרָשׁוֹת, וּמַה שִּׁיּוּר, אֵין לָנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁחֶצְיָהּ שִׁפְחָה וְחֶצְיָהּ בַּת חוֹרִין: \n",
+ "כָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת, אֶחָד גָּדוֹל וְאֶחָד קָטָן, הַקָּטָן פָּטוּר. אֶחָד עֵר וְאֶחָד יָשֵׁן, הַיָּשֵׁן פָּטוּר. אֶחָד שׁוֹגֵג וְאֶחָד מֵזִיד, הַשּׁוֹגֵג בְּחַטָּאת וְהַמֵּזִיד בְּהִכָּרֵת: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "אָמְרוּ לוֹ אָכַלְתָּ חֵלֶב, מֵבִיא חַטָּאת. עֵד אוֹמֵר אָכַל וְעֵד אוֹמֵר לֹא אָכַל, אִשָּׁה אוֹמֶרֶת אָכַל וְאִשָּׁה אוֹמֶרֶת לֹא אָכַל, מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. עֵד אוֹמֵר אָכַל וְהוּא אוֹמֵר לֹא אָכַלְתִּי, פָּטוּר. שְׁנַיִם אוֹמְרִים אָכַל וְהוּא אוֹמֵר לֹא אָכַלְתִּי, רַבִּי מֵאִיר מְחַיֵּב. אָמַר רַבִּי מֵאִיר, אִם הֱבִיאוּהוּ שְׁנַיִם לְמִיתָה חֲמוּרָה, לֹא יְבִיאוּהוּ לְקָרְבָּן הַקַּל. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, מָה אִם יִרְצֶה לוֹמַר מֵזִיד הָיִיתִי: \n",
+ "אָכַל חֵלֶב וְחֵלֶב בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אֶחָת. אָכַל חֵלֶב וְדָם וְנוֹתָר וּפִגּוּל בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, חַיָּב עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד. זֶה חֹמֶר בְּמִינִין הַרְבֵּה מִמִּין אֶחָד. וְחֹמֶר בְּמִין אֶחָד מִמִּינִין הַרְבֵּה, שֶׁאִם אָכַל כַּחֲצִי זַיִת וְחָזַר וְאָכַל כַּחֲצִי זַיִת מִמִּין אֶחָד, חַיָּב. מִשְּׁנֵי מִינִין, פָּטוּר: \n",
+ "וְכַמָּה יִשְׁהֶה הָאוֹכְלָן. כְּאִלּוּ אֲכָלָן קְלָיוֹת, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, עַד שֶׁיִּשְׁהֶה מִתְּחִלָּה וְעַד סוֹף כְּדֵי אֲכִילַת פְּרָס. אָכַל אֳכָלִין טְמֵאִין, וְשָׁתָה מַשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין, שָׁתָה רְבִיעִית יַיִן וְנִכְנַס לַמִּקְדָּשׁ, וְשָׁהָה כְּדֵי אֲכִילַת פְּרָס. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, אִם הִפְסִיק בָּהּ אוֹ שֶׁנָּתַן לְתוֹכוֹ מַיִם כָּל שֶׁהוּא, פָּטוּר: \n",
+ "יֵשׁ אוֹכֵל אֲכִילָה אַחַת וְחַיָּב עָלֶיהָ אַרְבַּע חַטָּאוֹת וְאָשָׁם אֶחָד. טָמֵא שֶׁאָכַל אֶת הַחֵלֶב, וְהָיָה נוֹתָר, מִן מֻקְדָּשִׁים, וּבְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים. רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, אִם הָיְתָה שַׁבָּת וְהוֹצִיאוֹ בְפִיו, חַיָּב. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, אֵינוֹ מִן הַשֵּׁם: \n",
+ "יֵשׁ בָּא בִיאָה אַחַת וְחַיָּב עָלֶיהָ שֵׁשׁ חַטָּאוֹת. הַבָּא עַל בִּתּוֹ, חַיָּב עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם בִּתּוֹ וַאֲחוֹתוֹ וְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו וְאֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו וְאֵשֶׁת אִישׁ וְנִדָּה. וְהַבָּא עַל בַּת בִּתּוֹ, חַיָּב עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם בַּת בִּתּוֹ וְכַלָּתוֹ וַאֲחוֹת אִשְׁתּוֹ וְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו וְאֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו וְאֵשֶׁת אִישׁ וְנִדָּה. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אִם עָבַר הַזָּקֵן וּנְשָׂאָהּ, חַיָּב עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אָב. וְכֵן הַבָּא עַל בַּת אִשְׁתּוֹ, וְעַל בַּת בַּת אִשְׁתּוֹ: \n",
+ "הַבָּא עַל חֲמוֹתוֹ, חַיָּב עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם חֲמוֹתוֹ וְכַלָּתוֹ וַאֲחוֹת אִשְׁתּוֹ וְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו וְאֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו וְאֵשֶׁת אִישׁ וְנִדָּה. וְכֵן הַבָּא עַל אֵם חֲמוֹתוֹ, וְעַל אֵם חָמִיו. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי אוֹמֵר, הַבָּא עַל חֲמוֹתוֹ, חַיָּב עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם חֲמוֹתוֹ וְאֵם חֲמוֹתוֹ וְאֵם חָמִיו. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, שְׁלָשְׁתָּן שֵׁם אֶחָד הֵן: \n",
+ "אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, שָׁאַלְתִּי אֶת רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְאֶת רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בָּאִטְלִיס שֶׁל אֶמָּאוֹם, שֶׁהָלְכוּ לִקַּח בְּהֵמָה לְמִשְׁתֵּה בְנוֹ שֶׁל רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, הַבָּא עַל אֲחוֹתוֹ וְעַל אֲחוֹת אָבִיו וְעַל אֲחוֹת אִמּוֹ בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד מַהוּ, חַיָּב אַחַת עַל כֻּלָּן, אוֹ אַחַת עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת, וְאָמְרוּ לִי, לֹא שָׁמָעְנוּ. אֲבָל שָׁמַעְנוּ, הַבָּא עַל חָמֵשׁ נָשָׁיו נִדּוֹת בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת. וְרוֹאִין אָנוּ שֶׁהַדְּבָרִים קַל וָחֹמֶר: \n",
+ "וְעוֹד שְׁאָלָן רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. אֵבָר הַמְדֻלְדָּל בִּבְהֵמָה, מַהוּ. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, לֹא שָׁמַעְנוּ. אֲבָל שָׁמַעְנוּ בְּאֵבָר הַמְדֻלְדָּל בְּאָדָם, שֶׁהוּא טָהוֹר. שֶׁכָּךְ הָיוּ מֻכֵּי שְׁחִין שֶׁבִּירוּשָׁלַיִם עוֹשִׂין, הוֹלֵךְ לוֹ עֶרֶב פֶּסַח אֵצֶל הָרוֹפֵא וְחוֹתְכוֹ עַד שֶׁהוּא מַנִּיחַ בּוֹ כִשְׂעֹרָה, וְתוֹחֲבוֹ בְסִירָה, וְהוּא נִמְשָׁךְ מִמֶּנּוּ, וְהַלָּה עוֹשֶׂה פִסְחוֹ, וְהָרוֹפֵא עוֹשֶׂה פִסְחוֹ. וְרוֹאִין אָנוּ שֶׁהַדְּבָרִים קַל וָחֹמֶר: \n",
+ "וְעוֹד שְׁאָלָן רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. הַשּׁוֹחֵט חֲמִשָּׁה זְבָחִים בַּחוּץ בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, מַהוּ. חַיָּב אַחַת עַל כֻּלָּם, אוֹ אַחַת עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, לֹא שָׁמָעְנוּ. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, שָׁמַעְתִּי בְאוֹכֵל מִזֶּבַח אֶחָד בַּחֲמִשָּׁה תַמְחוּיִין בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מִשּׁוּם מְעִילָה, וְרוֹאֶה אֲנִי שֶׁהַדְּבָרִים קַל וָחֹמֶר. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, לֹא כָךְ שְׁאָלָן רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. אֶלָּא, בְּאוֹכֵל נוֹתָר מֵחֲמִשָּׁה זְבָחִים בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, מַהוּ. חַיָּב אַחַת עַל כֻּלָּן, אוֹ אַחַת עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, לֹא שָׁמָעְנוּ. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, שָׁמַעְתִּי בְאוֹכֵל מִזֶּבַח אֶחָד בַּחֲמִשָּׁה תַמְחוּיִים בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת מִשּׁוּם מְעִילָה, וְרוֹאֶה אֲנִי שֶׁהַדְּבָרִים קַל וָחֹמֶר. אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, אִם הֲלָכָה, נְקַבֵּל. וְאִם לָדִין, יֵשׁ תְּשׁוּבָה. אָמַר לוֹ, הָשֵׁב. אָמַר לוֹ, לֹא, אִם אָמַרְתָּ בִמְעִילָה שֶׁעָשָׂה בָהּ אֶת הַמַּאֲכִיל כָּאוֹכֵל וְאֶת הַמְהַנֶּה כַּנֶּהֱנֶה, צֵרַף הַמְּעִילָה לִזְמָן מְרֻבֶּה, תֹּאמַר בְּנוֹתָר, שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ אַחַד מִכָּל אֵלּוּ: \n",
+ "אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, שָׁאַלְתִּי אֶת רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, הָעוֹשֶׂה מְלָאכוֹת הַרְבֵּה בְּשַׁבָּתוֹת הַרְבֵּה מֵעֵין מְלָאכָה אַחַת, בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, מַה הוּא. חַיָּב אַחַת עַל כֻּלָּן, אוֹ אַחַת עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. אָמַר לִי, חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת, מִקַּל וָחֹמֶר, וּמָה אִם הַנִּדָּה, שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ תּוֹצָאוֹת הַרְבֵּה וְחַטָּאוֹת הַרְבֵּה, חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת, שַׁבָּת, שֶׁיֶּשׁ בָּהּ תּוֹצָאוֹת הַרְבֵּה וְחַטָּאוֹת הַרְבֵּה, אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁיְּהֵא חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ, לֹא, אִם אָמַרְתָּ בַנִּדָּה, שֶׁיֶּשׁ בָּהּ שְׁתֵּי אַזְהָרוֹת, שֶׁהוּא מֻזְהָר עַל הַנִּדָּה וְהַנִּדָּה מֻזְהֶרֶת עָלָיו, תֹּאמַר בַּשַּׁבָּת, שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ אֶלָּא אַזְהָרָה אֶחָת. אָמַר לִי, הַבָּא עַל הַקְּטַנּוֹת יוֹכִיחַ, שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶן אֶלָּא אַזְהָרָה אַחַת וְחַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ, לֹא, אִם אָמַרְתָּ בַּבָּא עַל הַקְּטַנּוֹת, שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶן עַכְשָׁיו, יֵשׁ בָּהֶן לְאַחַר זְמָן, תֹּאמַר בַּשַּׁבָּת, שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ לֹא עַכְשָׁיו וְלֹא לְאַחַר זְמָן. אָמַר לִי, הַבָּא עַל הַבְּהֵמָה יוֹכִיחַ. אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ, בְּהֵמָה כַשַּׁבָּת: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "סָפֵק אָכַל חֵלֶב, סָפֵק לֹא אָכַל. וַאֲפִלּוּ אָכַל, סָפֵק יֵשׁ בּוֹ כַשִּׁעוּר, סָפֵק שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ. חֵלֶב וְשֻׁמָּן לְפָנָיו, אָכַל אֶת אַחַד מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן אָכַל. אִשְׁתּוֹ וַאֲחוֹתוֹ עִמּוֹ בַבַּיִת, שָׁגַג בְּאַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ בְּאֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן שָׁגָג. שַׁבָּת וְיוֹם חֹל, וְעָשָׂה מְלָאכָה בְאַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ בְּאֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן עָשָׂה. מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי: \n",
+ "כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאִם אָכַל חֵלֶב וְחֵלֶב בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת, כָּךְ עַל לֹא הוֹדַע שֶׁלָּהֶן אֵינוֹ מֵבִיא אֶלָּא אָשָׁם אֶחָד. אִם הָיְתָה יְדִיעָה בֵינְתַיִם, כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהוּא מֵבִיא חַטָּאת עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת, כָּךְ הוּא מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאִם אָכַל חֵלֶב וְדָם נוֹתָר וּפִגּוּל בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, חַיָּב עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד, כָּךְ עַל לֹא הוֹדַע שֶׁלָּהֶן מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד. חֵלֶב וְנוֹתָר לְפָנָיו, אָכַל אַחַד מֵהֶם וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵיזֶה מֵהֶם אָכַל. אִשְׁתּוֹ נִדָּה וַאֲחוֹתוֹ עִמּוֹ בַבַּיִת, שָׁגַג בְּאַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ בְּאֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן שָׁגָג. שַׁבָּת וְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים וְעָשָׂה מְלָאכָה בֵּין הַשְּׁמָשׁוֹת וְאֵין יָדוּעַ בְּאֵיזֶה מֵהֶם עָשָׂה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵּב חַטָּאת, וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ פּוֹטֵר. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ עַל הָעוֹשֶׂה מְלָאכָה בֵּין הַשְּׁמָשׁוֹת, שֶׁהוּא פָטוּר, שֶׁאֲנִי אוֹמֵר, מִקְצָת מְלָאכָה עָשָׂה מֵהַיּוֹם, וּמִקְצָתָהּ לְמָחָר. וְעַל מַה נֶּחְלְקוּ, עַל הָעוֹשֶׂה בְּתוֹךְ הַיּוֹם וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אִם בְּשַׁבָּת עָשָׂה וְאִם בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים עָשָׂה. אוֹ עַל הָעוֹשֶׂה וְאֵין יָדוּעַ מֵעֵין אֵיזוֹ מְלָאכָה עָשָׂה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵּב חַטָּאת, וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ פּוֹטֵר. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, פּוֹטְרוֹ הָיָה רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אַף מֵאָשָׁם תָּלוּי: \n",
+ "רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן שְׁזוּרִי וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמְרִים, לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ עַל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא מִשּׁוּם שֵׁם אֶחָד, שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב. וְעַל מַה נֶּחְלְקוּ. עַל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא מִשּׁוּם שְׁנֵי שֵׁמוֹת, שֶׁרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵּב חַטָּאת וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ פּוֹטֵר. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, אֲפִלּוּ נִתְכַּוֵּן לְלַקֵּט תְּאֵנִים וְלִקֵּט עֲנָבִים, עֲנָבִים וְלִקֵּט תְּאֵנִים, שְׁחוֹרוֹת וְלִקֵּט לְבָנוֹת, לְבָנוֹת וְלִקֵּט שְׁחוֹרוֹת, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵּב חַטָּאת, וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ פּוֹטֵר. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, תָּמֵהַּ אֲנִי אִם יִפְטֹר בָּהּ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ. אִם כֵּן, לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר (ויקרא ד), אֲשֶׁר חָטָא בָּהּ. פְּרָט לְמִתְעַסֵּק: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "דַּם שְׁחִיטָה בִּבְהֵמָה, בְּחַיָּה וּבְעוֹפוֹת, בֵּין טְמֵאִים וּבֵין טְהוֹרִים, דַּם נְחִירָה, וְדַם עִקּוּר, וְדַם הַקָּזָה שֶׁהַנֶּפֶשׁ יוֹצְאָה בוֹ, חַיָּבִים עָלָיו. דַּם הַטְּחוֹל, דַּם הַלֵּב, דַּם בֵּיצִים, דַּם דָּגִים, דַּם חֲגָבִים, דַּם הַתַּמְצִית, אֵין חַיָּבִין עֲלֵיהֶן. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה מְחַיֵּב בְּדַם הַתַּמְצִית: \n",
+ "רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא מְחַיֵּב עַל סְפֵק מְעִילוֹת אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, וַחֲכָמִים פּוֹטְרִים. וּמוֹדֶה רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, שֶׁאֵין מֵבִיא אֶת מְעִילָתוֹ עַד שֶׁתִּתְוַדַּע לוֹ, וְיָבִיא עִמָּהּ אָשָׁם וַדָּאי. אָמַר רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן, מַה לָּזֶה מֵבִיא שְׁתֵּי אֲשָׁמוֹת. אֶלָּא יָבִיא מְעִילָה וְחֻמְשָׁהּ, וְיָבִיא אָשָׁם בִּשְׁנֵי סְלָעִים, וְיֹאמַר, אִם וַדַּאי מָעַלְתִּי, זוֹ מְעִילָתִי וְזֶה אֲשָׁמִי. וְאִם סָפֵק, הַמָּעוֹת נְדָבָה וְאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. שֶׁמִּמִּין שֶׁהוּא מֵבִיא עַל הוֹדַע, מֵבִיא עַל לֹא הוֹדַע: \n",
+ "אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, נִרְאִים דְּבָרֶיךָ בִּמְעִילָה מְעֻטָּה. הֲרֵי שֶׁבָּא עַל יָדוֹ סְפֵק מְעִילָה בְּמֵאָה מָנֶה, לֹא יָפֶה לוֹ שֶׁיָּבִיא אָשָׁם בִּשְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים וְאַל יָבִיא סְפֵק מְעִילָה בְּמֵאָה מָנֶה. הָא מוֹדֶה רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא לְרַבִּי טַרְפוֹן בִּמְעִילָה מֻעָטֶת. הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁהֵבִיאָה חַטַּאת הָעוֹף סָפֵק, אִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִמְלְקָה נוֹדַע לָהּ שֶׁיָּלְדָה וַדַּאי, תַּעֲשֶׂנָּה וַדַּאי. שֶׁמִּמִּין שֶׁהִיא מְבִיאָה עַל לֹא הוֹדַע, מְבִיאָה עַל הוֹדַע: \n",
+ "חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֻלִּין וַחֲתִיכָה שֶׁל קֹדֶשׁ, אָכַל אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן אָכַל, פָּטוּר. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא מְחַיֵּב בְּאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, מֵבִיא אָשָׁם וַדָּאי. אָכַל אֶחָד אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, זֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי וְזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, שְׁנֵיהֶם מְבִיאִים אָשָׁם אֶחָד. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אֵין שְׁנַיִם מְבִיאִים אָשָׁם אֶחָד: \n",
+ "חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֻלִּין וַחֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֵלֶב, אָכַל אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן אָכַל, מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, מֵבִיא חַטָּאת. אָכַל אֶחָד אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, זֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי וְזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, שְׁנֵיהֶם מְבִיאִים חַטָּאת אֶחָת. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אֵין שְׁנַיִם מְבִיאִים חַטָּאת אֶחָת: \n",
+ "חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֵלֶב וַחֲתִיכָה שֶׁל קֹדֶשׁ, אָכַל אֶת אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן אָכַל, מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, מֵבִיא חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם וַדָּאי. אָכַל אֶחָד אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, זֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, וְזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, שְׁנֵיהֶם מְבִיאִים חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אֵין שְׁנַיִם מְבִיאִים חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם: \n",
+ "חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֵלֶב וַחֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֵלֶב קֹדֶשׁ, אָכַל אֶת אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵיזוֹ מֵהֶן אָכַל, מֵבִיא חַטָּאת. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, מֵבִיא שְׁתֵּי חַטָּאוֹת וְאָשָׁם וַדָּאי. אָכַל אֶחָד אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, זֶה מֵבִיא חַטָּאת וְזֶה מֵבִיא חַטָּאת. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, זֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי וְזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, זֶה חַטָּאת וְזֶה חַטָּאת, וּשְׁנֵיהֶם מְבִיאִים אָשָׁם אֶחָד. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אֵין שְׁנַיִם מְבִיאִין אָשָׁם אֶחָד: \n",
+ "חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֵלֶב וַחֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֵלֶב נוֹתָר, אָכַל אֶת אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֶת אֵיזֶה מֵהֶן אָכַל, מֵבִיא חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, מֵבִיא שָׁלֹשׁ חַטָּאוֹת. אָכַל אֶחָד אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה, זֶה מֵבִיא חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם תָּלוּי וְזֶה מֵבִיא חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, זֶה חַטָּאת וְזֶה חַטָּאת, וּשְׁנֵיהֶם מְבִיאִים חַטָּאת אֶחָת. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, כָּל חַטָּאת שֶׁהִיא בָאָה עַל חֵטְא, אֵין שְׁנַיִם מְבִיאִים אוֹתָהּ: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "הַמֵּבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי וְנוֹדַע לוֹ שֶׁלֹּא חָטָא, אִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁחַט, יֵצֵא וְיִרְעֶה בָעֵדֶר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, יִרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֵב, וְיִמָּכֵר, וְיִפְּלוּ דָמָיו לִנְדָבָה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, יִקְרַב, שֶׁאִם אֵינוֹ בָא עַל חֵטְא זֶה, הֲרֵי הוּא בָא עַל חֵטְא אַחֵר. אִם מִשֶּׁנִּשְׁחַט נוֹדַע לוֹ, הַדָּם יִשָּׁפֵךְ וְהַבָּשָׂר יֵצֵא לְבֵית הַשְּׂרֵפָה. נִזְרַק הַדָּם, הַבָּשָׂר יֵאָכֵל. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אֲפִלּוּ הַדָּם בַּכּוֹס, יִזָּרֵק, וְהַבָּשָׂר יֵאָכֵל: \n",
+ "אָשָׁם וַדַּאי אֵינוֹ כֵן. אִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁחַט, יֵצֵא וְיִרְעֶה בָעֵדֶר. מִשֶּׁנִּשְׁחַט, הֲרֵי זֶה יִקָּבֵר. נִזְרַק הַדָּם, הַבָּשָׂר יֵצֵא לְבֵית הַשְּׂרֵפָה. שׁוֹר הַנִּסְקָל אֵינוֹ כֵן. אִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִסְקַל, יֵצֵא וְיִרְעֶה בָעֵדֶר. מִשֶּׁנִּסְקַל, מֻתָּר בַּהֲנָאָה. עֶגְלָה עֲרוּפָה אֵינָהּ כֵּן. אִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נֶעֶרְפָה, תֵּצֵא וְתִרְעֶה בָעֵדֶר. מִשֶּׁנֶּעֶרְפָה, תִּקָּבֵר בִּמְקוֹמָהּ, שֶׁעַל סָפֵק בָּאָה מִתְּחִלָּתָהּ, כִּפְּרָה סְפֵקָהּ וְהָלְכָה לָהּ: \n",
+ "רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, מִתְנַדֵּב אָדָם אָשָׁם תָּלוּי בְּכָל יוֹם וּבְכָל שָׁעָה שֶׁיִּרְצֶה, וְהִיא נִקְרֵאת אֲשַׁם חֲסִידִים. אָמְרוּ עָלָיו עַל בָּבָא בֶן בּוּטִי, שֶׁהָיָה מִתְנַדֵּב אָשָׁם תָּלוּי בְּכָל יוֹם, חוּץ מֵאַחַר יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים יוֹם אֶחָד. אָמַר, הַמָּעוֹן הַזֶּה, אִלּוּ הָיוּ מַנִּיחִים לִי, הָיִיתִי מֵבִיא, אֶלָּא אוֹמְרִים לִי, הַמְתֵּן עַד שֶׁתִּכָּנֵס לְסָפֵק. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אֵין מְבִיאִים אָשָׁם תָּלוּי אֶלָּא עַל דָּבָר שֶׁזְּדוֹנוֹ כָרֵת וְשִׁגְגָתוֹ חַטָּאת: \n",
+ "חַיָּבֵי חַטָּאוֹת וַאֲשָׁמוֹת וַדָּאִין שֶׁעָבַר עֲלֵיהֶן יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, חַיָּבִין לְהָבִיא לְאַחַר יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים. חַיָּבֵי אֲשָׁמוֹת תְּלוּיִין, פְּטוּרִים. מִי שֶׁבָּא עַל יָדוֹ סְפֵק עֲבֵרָה בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, אֲפִלּוּ עִם חֲשֵׁכָה, פָּטוּר, שֶׁכָּל הַיּוֹם מְכַפֵּר: \n",
+ "הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלֶיהָ חַטַּאת הָעוֹף סָפֵק, שֶׁעָבַר עָלֶיהָ יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, חַיֶּבֶת לְהָבִיא לְאַחַר יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמַּכְשְׁרַתָּהּ לֶאֱכֹל בַּזְּבָחִים. חַטַּאת הָעוֹף הַבָּאָה עַל סָפֵק, אִם מִשֶּׁנִּמְלְקָה נוֹדַע לָהּ, הֲרֵי זוֹ תִקָּבֵר: \n",
+ "הַמַּפְרִישׁ שְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים לְאָשָׁם וְלָקַח בָּהֶן שְׁנֵי אֵילִים לְאָשָׁם, אִם הָיָה אַחַד מֵהֶן יָפֶה שְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים, יִקְרַב לַאֲשָׁמוֹ, וְהַשֵּׁנִי יִרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֵב, וְיִמָּכֵר, וְיִפְּלוּ דָמָיו לִנְדָבָה. לָקַח בָּהֶן שְׁנֵי אֵילִים לְחֻלִּין, אֶחָד יָפֶה שְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים וְאֶחָד יָפֶה עֲשָׂרָה זוּז, הַיָּפֶה שְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים יִקְרַב לַאֲשָׁמוֹ, וְהַשֵּׁנִי לִמְעִילָתוֹ. אֶחָד לְאָשָׁם וְאֶחָד לְחֻלִּין, אִם הָיָה שֶׁל אָשָׁם יָפֶה שְׁתֵּי סְלָעִים, יִקְרַב לַאֲשָׁמוֹ, וְהַשֵּׁנִי לִמְעִילָתוֹ, וְיָבִיא עִמָּהּ סֶלַע וְחֻמְשָׁהּ: \n",
+ "הַמַּפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ, וּמֵת, לֹא יְבִיאֶנָּה בְנוֹ אַחֲרָיו. וְלֹא יְבִיאֶנָּה מֵחֵטְא עַל חֵטְא, אֲפִלּוּ עַל חֵלֶב שֶׁאָכַל אֶמֶשׁ לֹא יְבִיאֶנָּה עַל חֵלֶב שֶׁאָכַל הַיּוֹם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ד), קָרְבָּנוֹ עַל חַטָּאתוֹ, שֶׁיְּהֵא קָרְבָּנוֹ לְשֵׁם חֶטְאוֹ: \n",
+ "מְבִיאִין מֵהֶקְדֵּשׁ כִּשְׂבָּה, שְׂעִירָה. מֵהֶקְדֵּשׁ שְׂעִירָה, כִּשְׂבָּה. מֵהֶקְדֵּשׁ כִּשְׂבָּה וּשְׂעִירָה, תּוֹרִין וּבְנֵי יוֹנָה. מֵהֶקְדֵּשׁ תּוֹרִין וּבְנֵי יוֹנָה, עֲשִׂירִית הָאֵיפָה. כֵּיצַד. הִפְרִישׁ לְכִשְׂבָּה אוֹ לִשְׂעִירָה, הֶעֱנִי, יָבִיא עוֹף. הֶעֱנִי, יָבִיא עֲשִׂירִית הָאֵיפָה. הִפְרִישׁ לַעֲשִׂירִית הָאֵיפָה, הֶעֱשִׁיר, יָבִיא עוֹף. הֶעֱשִׁיר, יָבִיא כִשְׂבָּה וּשְׂעִירָה. הִפְרִישׁ כִּשְׂבָּה אוֹ שְׂעִירָה וְנִסְתָּאֲבוּ, אִם רָצָה יָבִיא בִדְמֵיהֶן עוֹף. הִפְרִישׁ עוֹף וְנִסְתָּאֵב, לֹא יָבִיא בְדָמָיו עֲשִׂירִית הָאֵיפָה, שֶׁאֵין לָעוֹף פִּדְיוֹן: \n",
+ "רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, כְּבָשִׂים קוֹדְמִין לָעִזִּים בְּכָל מָקוֹם. יָכוֹל מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן מֻבְחָרִין מֵהֶן. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (ויקרא ד), וְאִם כֶּבֶשׂ יָבִיא קָרְבָּנוֹ לְחַטָּאת, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶם שְׁקוּלִין. תּוֹרִין קוֹדְמִין לִבְנֵי יוֹנָה בְכָל מָקוֹם. יָכוֹל מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן מֻבְחָרִים מֵהֶן. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (שם יב), וּבֶן יוֹנָה אוֹ תֹר לְחַטָּאת, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶן שְׁקוּלִין. הָאָב קוֹדֵם לָאֵם בְּכָל מָקוֹם. יָכוֹל שֶׁכְּבוֹד הָאָב עוֹדֵף עַל כְּבוֹד הָאֵם, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (שם יט), אִישׁ אִמּוֹ וְאָבִיו תִּירָאוּ, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶם שְׁקוּלִים. אֲבָל אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים, הָאָב קוֹדֵם לָאֵם בְּכָל מָקוֹם, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא וְאִמּוֹ חַיָּבִין בִּכְבוֹד אָבִיו. וְכֵן בְּתַלְמוּד תּוֹרָה, אִם זָכָה הַבֵּן לִפְנֵי הָרַב, קוֹדֵם אֶת הָאָב בְּכָל מָקוֹם, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא וְאָבִיו חַיָּבִין בִּכְבוֹד רַבּוֹ: \n"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "versions": [
+ [
+ "Torat Emet 357",
+ "http://www.toratemetfreeware.com/index.html?downloads"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "heTitle": "משנה כריתות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git "a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/English/Mischnajot mit deutscher \303\234bersetzung und Erkl\303\244rung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de].json" "b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/English/Mischnajot mit deutscher \303\234bersetzung und Erkl\303\244rung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de].json"
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..c0ab3ace9cde0564ab931a7bfc98f004484639b4
--- /dev/null
+++ "b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/English/Mischnajot mit deutscher \303\234bersetzung und Erkl\303\244rung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de].json"
@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Middot",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.talmud.de/tlmd/die-deutsche-mischna-uebersetzung",
+ "versionTitle": "Mischnajot mit deutscher Übersetzung und Erklärung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de]",
+ "priority": 0.5,
+ "versionNotes": "Ordnung Seraïm, übers. und erklärt von Ascher Samter. 1887.
Ordnung Moed, von Eduard Baneth. 1887-1927.
Ordnung Naschim, von Marcus Petuchowski u. Simon Schlesinger. 1896-1933.
Ordnung Nesikin, von David Hoffmann. 1893-1898.
Ordnung Kodaschim, von John Cohn. 1910-1925.
Ordnung Toharot, von David Hoffmann, John Cohn und Moses Auerbach. 1910-1933.",
+ "actualLanguage": "de",
+ "languageFamilyName": "german",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה מדות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "An drei Stellen hielten die Priester im Heiligtum Wache, im Abtinasraum, im Zündfeuerraum und im Erwärmungsraum, und die Leviten an einundzwanzig Stellen: fünf an den fünf Toren des Tempelberges, vier an seinen vier Ecken drinnen, fünf an fünf Toren des Tempelhofes, vier an seinen vier Ecken draussen, einer an der Opferkammer, einer an der Vorhangskammer und einer auf der Rückseite des Allerheiligsten.",
+ "Der Tempelbergsvorsteher machte die Runde bei allen Wachen, brennende Fackeln wurden ihm vorangetragen. Stand der Wächter nicht aufrecht, sprach ihn der Tempelbergs-Vorsteher mit den Worten an: „Frieden über dich“. Stellte sich heraus, dass er schlief, schlug er ihn mit seinem Stock, es stand ihm auch das Recht zu, ihm sein Gewand zu verbrennen. Die, [die ihn schreien hörten], sagten: „Was ist das für ein Geschrei im Tempelhofe“? „Die Stimme eines Leviten, der geschlagen wird und dem die Kleider verbrannt werden, weil er auf seinem Posten geschlafen hat“! R. Elieser, Sohn des Jakob, sagt: Den Bruder meiner Mutter hat man einmal schlafend getroffen und ihm sein Gewand verbrannt.",
+ "Fünf Tore hatte der Tempelberg: die beiden Hulda-Tore auf der Südseite, sie dienten als Eingang und Ausgang, das Kiphonos-Tor auf der Westseite, es diente als Eingang und Ausgang, das Tadi-Tor auf der Nordseite, es war garnicht zum Gebrauch bestimmt, das Ost-Tor, über dem sich ein Bild der Residenz Susa befand, durch dieses gingen der Hohepriester, der die [rote] Kuh verbrannte, die Kuh, und alle, die bei ihr Hilfe leisteten, zum Ölberg hinaus.",
+ "Sieben Tore hatte der Tempelhof, drei auf der Nordseite, drei auf der Südseite und eines auf der Ostseite. Auf der Südseite: das Brennholz-Tor, als zweites danach das Erstgeburten-Tor, als drittes danach das Wassertor. Auf der Ostseite: das Nikanor-Tor, dort befanden sich zwei Kammern, eine zur Rechten und eine zur Linken, die eine war die Kammer des Kleideraufsehers Pinchas, die andere die Kammer der Hersteller des Pfannenopfers.",
+ "Auf der Nordseite: Das Zündfeuertor, es war wie eine Art Vorbau, darüber war ein Oberstock aufgebaut, die Priester hielten oben Wache und die Leviten unten, eine Tür führte von ihm zum Zwinger, das zweite danach war das Opfertor, das dritte das [Tor] des Erwärmungsraums.",
+ "Vier Kammern waren in dem Erwärmungsraum, in der Art von Nebenzimmern, deren Türen nach einem Saale führen, zwei davon gehörten zu den geheiligten, zwei zu den nichtheiligen Räumen, vorstehende Mauerbalken bezeichneten die Grenze zwischen dem Heiligen und dem Nichtheiligen. Wozu dienten sie? Die südwestliche war die Opferkammer, die südöstliche die Kammer für die Hersteller der Schaubrote, in der nordöstlichen haben die Hasmonäer-Söhne die Steine des Altars verwahrt, die die Könige von Syrien entweiht hatten, durch die nordwestliche ging man zum Tauchbad hinunter.",
+ "Zwei Tore hatte der Erwärmungsraum, das eine führte nach dem Zwinger, das andere führte nach dem Tempelhof. R. Jehuda sagte: Das nach dem Tempelhof führende hatte eine kleine Nebenpforte, durch die man eintrat, um im Tempelhof Umschau zu halten.",
+ "Der Erwärmungsraum war überwölbt, es war ein grosser Raum, ringsherum waren stufenartige Mauer-Vorsprünge aus Stein, dort schliefen die Ältesten der Priester-Abteilung, in ihrer Hand waren die Schlüssel zum Tempelhof, die jüngeren Priester hatten jeder ihr Lager auf der Erde.",
+ "Eine Stelle war dort, eine Elle im Geviert, auf der eine Marmorplatte lag, daran war ein Ring befestigt, und eine Kette, an der die Schlüssel hingen. War die Zeit gekommen, [die Tore] zu schliessen, hob man mit Hilfe des Ringes die Platte in die Höhe und nahm die Schlüssel von der Kette herunter, der Priester schloss von innen ab, während der Levite draussen schlief. Hatte er alles abgeschlossen, tat er die Schlüssel wieder an die Kette und die Platte wieder an ihre Stelle, legte sein Kissen darauf und legte sich schlafen. Stiess einem von ihnen ein [nächtlicher] Zufall zu, so ging er durch den Rundgang hinaus, der unter dem Tempelgebäude entlang führte, Lampen brannten dort zu beiden Seiten, bis er an das Tauchbad kam; R. Elieser, Sohn des Jakob, sagt: Durch den Rundgang, der unter dem Zwinger entlang führte, ging er [sodann] durch das Tadi -Tor hinaus."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Der Tempelberg war fünfhundert Ellen lang und fünfhundert Ellen breit, davon war der Platz auf der Südseite der grösste, der zweitgrosse der auf der Ostseite, der drittgrosse der auf der Nordseite, der kleinste war auf der Westseite. Auf der Seite, auf der seine Ausdehnung am grössten war, dort war er auch am meisten benutzt.",
+ "Jeder, der den Tempelberg betrat, wandte sich beim Eintritt nach rechts, ging herum und dann zur Linken wieder hinaus, ausser wem etwas zugestossen war, der wandte sich zur Linken. „Was ist dir, dass du dich zur Linken wendest “? „Weil ich Trauer habe“. „Der in diesem Hause wohnt, tröste dich“! „Weil ich in den Bann getan bin“. „Der in diesem Hause wohnt, gebe es ihnen ins Herz, dass sie dich wieder aufnehmen“! Dies sind die Worte des R. Meïr. Darauf sagte zu ihm R. Jose: Du stellst sie hin, als wenn sie widerrechtlich gegen ihn verfahren wären ! Sondern: „Der in diesem Hause wohnt, gebe es dir ins Herz, dass du auf die Worte deiner Genossen hörst und sie dich wieder aufnehmen“.",
+ "Nach innen zu folgte dann ein Gitter, zehn Handbreiten hoch, an dreizehn Stellen war es durchbrochen worden, die syrischen Könige hatten es durchbrochen, man hatte die Lücken dann aber wieder ausgefüllt und ihnen entsprechend ein dreizehnmaliges Sichverbeugen eingeführt ). Weiter nach innen folgte dann der Zwinger, zehn Ellen, zwölf Stufen waren da, jede Stufe war eine halbe Elle hoch und eine halbe Elle breit. Alle Stufen, die dort waren, waren eine halbe Elle hoch und eine halbe Elle breit, ausgenommen die am Ulam. Alle Eingänge und Tore, die dort waren, waren zwanzig Ellen hoch und zehn Ellen breit, ausgenommen die des Ulam. Alle Eingänge, die dort waren, hatten Türen, ausgenommen der zum Ulam. Alle Tore, die dort waren, hatten Oberschwellen, ausgenommen das Tadi-Tor, an diesem waren an deren Stelle zwei aufeinander geneigte Steine. Alle Tore, die dort waren, waren in goldene umgewandelt worden, ausgenommen das Nikanor-Tor, wegen des mit ihm geschehenen Wunders, andere sagen, weil das Erz desselben wie Gold glänzte.",
+ "Alle Mauern, die dort waren, waren hoch, ausgenommen die Ostmauer, weil der Priester, der die [rote] Kuh verbrannte, oben auf dem Ölberge stand und es abpassen musste, dass er in den Eingang zum Hechal hineinsah, während er das Blut sprengte.",
+ "Der Frauen-Vorhof war 135 [Ellen] lang und 135 breit, vier Kammern waren an seinen vier Ecken, jede von 40 Ellen, sie waren nicht überdacht, so werden sie auch in Zukunft sein, denn so heisst es: „und er führte mich hinaus zu dem äusseren Vorhof und führte mich zu den vier Ecken des Vorhofes, und siehe, in jeder Ecke dos Vorhofes war ein Hof, an den vier Ecken des Vorhofes umzäunte Hofräume“, der Ausdruck „umzäunte“ bedeutet, dass sie nicht überdacht waren. Wozu dienten sie? Die südöstliche war die Kammer der Nasiräer, dort kochten die Nasiräer ihr Friedensopfer und schoren sich ihr Haar und legten es unter den Kessel. Die nordöstliche war die Holzkammer, dort suchten die fehlerbehafteten Priester die wurmstichigen Hölzer heraus, jedes Holz, in dem ein Wurmfrass gefunden wurde, war untauglich für den Altar. Die nordwestliche war die Kammer der Aussätzigen, die südwestliche, von ihr sagte R. Elieser, Sohn des Jakob, ich habe vergessen, wozu sie diente. Abba Saul sagt: Dorthin tat man den Wein und das Öl, sie wurde die Ölhaus-Kammer genannt. Anfangs war er ganz frei, dann umgab man ihn ringsum mit einer Galerie, damit die Frauen von oben Zusehen konnten und die Männer von unten, dass sie sich nicht untereinander mischten. Fünfzehn Stufen führten von ihm zum Männer-Vorhof herauf, entsprechend den fünfzehn Stufenliedern in den Psalmen, auf ihnen stimmten die Leviten ihren Gesang an, sie waren nicht eckig, sondern rund herum sich ziehend, wie das halbe Rund einer Tenne.",
+ "Unter dem Männer-Vorhof waren Kammern mit dem Eingang vom Frauen-Vorhof, dorthin taten die Leviten ihre Harfen, Leiern, Zimbeln und alle Musik-Instrumente. Der Männer-Vorhof war 135 Ellen lang und 11 breit, ebenso war der Priester-Vorhof 135 Ellen lang und 11 breit, vorstehende Mauerbalken bezeichneten die Grenze zwischen dem Männer-Vorhof und dem Priester-Vorhof. R. Elieser, Sohn des Jakob, sagt: Eine Stufe befand sich dort, eine Elle hoch, über dieser war der Duchan, an dem drei Stufen von je einer halben Elle waren, so ergibt sich, dass der Priester-Vorhof zweieinhalb Ellen höher lag als der Männer-Vorhof. Der ganze Tempelhof war 187 [Ellen] lang und 135 breit, dreizehn Mal vorneigte man sich dort. Abba Jose, Sohn des Chanan, sagt: Entsprechend den dreizehn Toren. Die südlichen Tore waren von Westen aus gerechnet: das oberste Tor, das Brennholz-Tor, das Erstgeburten-Tor, das Wassertor. Warum nannte man es das Wassertor? Weil man durch dieses den Krug mit Wasser zum Wasseropfer am Hüttenfeste hereinbrachte. R. Elieser. Sohn des Jakob, sagt: Und weil hier das Wasser sprudelte, das einst unter der Schwelle hervorquellen wird. Ihnen gegenüber auf der Nordseite, von Westen aus gerechnet: das Jechonja-Tor, das Opfer-Tor, das Frauen-Tor, das Musik-Tor. Warum wurde es Jechonja-Tor genannt? Weil Jechonja aus ihm herausging, als er in die Verbannung geführt wurde. Im Osten das Nikanor-Tor, es hatte zwei Seitenpforten, eine zur Rechten und eine zur Linken. Zwei Tore waren im Westen, diese hatten keine besonderen Namen."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Der Altar hatte eine Länge von 32 und eine Breite von 32 Ellen. In der Höhe von einer Elle trat er um eine Elle [ringsum] zurück, dieser Teil hiess der „Grund“, so blieb ein Quadrat von 30 Ellen. Nachdem er weitere fünf Ellen sich erhoben, trat er wieder um eine Elle zurück, dieser Teil hiess „der Rundgang “, so blieb ein Quadrat von 28 Ellen. Der Raum, auf dem die Hörner sich erhoben, eine Elle auf jeder Seite, so blieb ein Quadrat von 26 Ellen. Der Platz, den die Priester beim Gehen [auf dem Altar] brauchten, eine Elle auf jeder Seite, so blieb ein Quadrat von 24 Ellen als Platz für das Altarfeuer. Darauf sagte R. Jose: Ursprünglich hatte er nur 28 Ellen im Quadrat, trat dann beim Hinaufsteigen in der angegebenen Weise zurück, so dass als Platz für das Altarfeuer nur ein Quadrat von 20 Ellen blieb, nach der Rückkehr aus dem Exil fügte man noch vier Ellen auf der Südseite und vier Ellen auf der Westseite in der Form eines Gamma hinzu, denn so heisst es: „und der Ariel, zwölf [Ellen] die Länge in der Breite von zwölf, viereckig“, danach könnte es scheinen, als wenn nur zwölf Ellen im Quadrat gemeint seien, da es aber heisst: „nach seinen vier Seiten hin“, das beweist, dass von der Mitte aus gemessen gemeint ist, zwölf Ellen nach jeder Richtung hin. Ein roter Streifen zog sich in der Mitte um ihn herum, um zwischen dem oben und dem unten zu sprengenden Blut zu scheiden. Der Grund zog sich an der ganzen Nordseite und der ganzen Westseite entlang, griff dann nach der Südseite um eine Elle herum, und nach der Ostseite um eine Elle.",
+ "Auf der Südwest-Ecke waren zwei Löcher, wie zwei feine Nasenlöcher, durch sie floss das auf den westlichen Grund und das auf den südlichen Grund gegossene Blut ab, vermischte sich mit dem Wassergraben und floss nach dem Bach Kidron hinaus.",
+ "Unten auf dem Fussboden befand sich an derselben Ecke eine Stelle, eine Elle im Quadrat, mit einer Marmorplatte, an der ein Ring befestigt war, hier stieg man in die Abzugsgrube hinunter und reinigte sie. Eine Rampe war auf der Südseite des Altars, 32 [Ellen] lang und 16 breit, eine Einbuchtung befand sich auf ihrer Westseite, in die tat man die untauglich gewordenen Vogel-Sündopfer.",
+ "Sowohl die Steine zur Rampe wie die Steine zum Altar holte man von der Ebene von Beth-Kerem, man grub bis unter die jungfräuliche Erde und brachte von dort unversehrte Steine, über die noch kein Eisen geschwungen worden, denn das Eisen machte schon durch bloße Berührung untauglich, eine Beschädigung auch durch jeden anderen Gegenstand. War einer von ihnen beschädigt worden, war dieser untauglich, alle anderen blieben tauglich. Man weisste sie zweimal im Jahre, das eine Mal zum Pessach- und das andere Mal zum Hüttenfeste, den Hechal ein Mal, zum Pessachfeste; Rabbi sagt: Man weisste sie jeden Freitag mit einem Tuch wegen der Blutflecke. Man bestrich sie nicht mit einer eisernen Kelle, um sie nicht damit zu berühren und untauglich zu machen, denn das Eisen ist geschaffen worden, das Leben des Menschen zu verkürzen, und der Altar ist geschaffen worden, um das Leben des Menschen zu verlängern, es gebührt sich nicht, dass das [das Leben] Verkürzende über das es Verlängernde geschwungen werde.",
+ "Nördlich von dem Altare befanden sich Ringe, sechs Reihen von je vier, einige sagen, vier von je sechs, an ihnen schlachtete man die Opfertiere. Die Schlachtstelle befand sich nördlich vom Altare, auf ihr standen acht niedrige Säulen, diese hatten viereckige Aufsätze aus Zedernholz, an denen eiserne Haken befestigt waren, an jedem drei Reihen, um daran [die Opfertiere] aufzuhängen. Das Abhäuten geschah auf Marmortischen, die zwischen den Säulen standen.",
+ "Das Waschbecken stand zwischen dem Ulam und dem Altar mehr nach Süden hin. Zwischen dem Ulam und dem Altar waren 22 Ellen, zwölf Stufen waren dort, jede Stufe eine halbe Elle hoch und eine Elle breit, eine Elle, eine Elle, und ein Absatz von drei Ellen, eine Elle, eine Elle, und wieder ein Absatz von drei Ellen, und zu oberst eine Elle, eine Elle, und ein Absatz von vier Ellen; R. Jehuda sagt: Zu oberst eine Elle, eine Elle, und ein Absatz von fünf Ellen.",
+ "Der Eingang zum Ulam war vierzig Ellen hoch und zwanzig Ellen breit. Fünf Gesimse aus Eschenholzbalken waren darüber, das unterste ging über den Eingang auf dieser Seite um eine Elle und auf jener Seite um eine Elle hinaus, das darüber liegende ging wieder über dieses auf dieser Seite um eine Elle und auf jener um eine Elle hinaus, so dass das oberste dreissig Ellen lang war, zwischen einem und dem anderen war je eine Lage aus Steinen.",
+ "Stangen aus Zedernholz waren zwischen der Mauer des Hechal und der Mauer des Ulam befestigt, damit sie nicht nachgebe, und goldene Ketten waren an dem Gebälke des Ulam befestigt, an ihnen zogen sich die Priesterjünglinge hinauf und sahen die Kronen, von denen es heisst: „Und die Kronen sollen dem Helam, dem Tobia, dem Jedaja und dem Chen, Sohne des Zefanja, zum Andenken sein im Hechal des Ewigen.” Ein goldener Weinstock stand am Eingänge zum Hechal, der sich über Stangen rankte, jeder, der ein Blatt oder eine Beere oder eine Traube spendete, brachte sie und man hängte sie daran auf. Es sagte R. Elieser, Sohn des Zadok: Einmal kam es vor, dass dreihundert Priester dazu bestellt wurden."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Der Eingang zum Hechal war zwanzig Ellen hoch und zehn Ellen breit, er hatte vier Türen, zwei drinnen und zwei draussen, denn so heisst es: „zwei Türen zum Hechal und zum Heiligtum“. Die äusseren öffneten sich nach dem Innern des Eingangs, die Dicke der Mauer zu verdecken, und die inneren öffneten sich nach dem Innern des Raumes, die Stellen hinter den Türen zu verdecken, denn das ganze Innere war mit Gold belegt ausser den Stellen hinter den Türen. R. Jehuda sagt: Sie befanden sich innerhalb des Eingangs, es waren Doppeltüren, die zusammengelegt zurückgeschlagen wurden, diese [bedeckten] zweieinhalb Ellen und jene zweieinhalb Ellen, eine halbe Elle war die Pfoste auf dieser Seite und eine halbe Elle auf jener, denn so heisst es: „Und zwei Türteile hatten die Türen, zwei drehbare Türteile, zwei an der einen Tür und zwei Türteile an der anderen“.",
+ "Zwei Seitenpforten waren bei dem grossen Tor eine auf der Nordseite und eine auf der Südseite, die südliche wurde nie von einem Menschen benutzt, auf sie bezieht sich der Ausspruch in Jecheskel: „Und der Ewige sprach zu mir: Dieses Tor soll geschlossen bleiben, es soll nicht geöffnet werden und niemand dadurch eintreten, denn der Ewige, der Gott Israels, tritt durch dasselbe ein, geschlossen soll es bleiben“. Er nahm den Schlüssel, öffnete die Pforte und trat in den Seitenraum ein, und von dem Seitenraum in den Hechal; R. Jehuda sagt: Er ging den durch die Dicke der Mauer führenden Gang entlang, bis ersieh zwischen den beiden Toren befand, dann öffnete er die äusseren [Türen] von innen und die inneren von aussen.",
+ "Achtunddreissig Seitenräume waren dort, fünfzehn auf der Nordseite, fünfzehn auf der Südseite und acht auf der Westseite; auf der Nordseite und auf der Südseite fünf unten, fünf darüber, und fünf über diesen, auf der Westseite drei unten, drei darüber, und über diesen zwei. Jeder hatte drei Eingänge, einen nach dem Seitenraume zur Rechten, einen nach dem zur Linken und einen nach dem über ihn liegenden, der an der Nordost-Ecke gelegene hatte fünf Eingänge, einen nach dem Seitenraume zur Rechten, einen nach dem über ihm liegenden, einen nach dem Rundgang, einen nach der Seitenpforte und einen nach dem Hechal.",
+ "Der untere war fünf [Ellen breit] und die Decke sechs, der mittlere sechs und die Decke sieben, der obere sieben, denn so heisst es: „Der untere Anbau war fünf Ellen breit, der mittlere sechs Ellen breit und der dritte sieben Ellen breit.“",
+ "Ein Rundgang führte von der Nordostecke aufwärts zur Nordwestecke, auf ihm stieg man zu den Dächern der Seitenräume hinauf, man ging den Rundgang hinauf das Gesicht nach Westen, so ging man die ganze Nordseite entlang, bis man nach der Westseite kam, war man zur Westseite gekommen, wandte man das Gesicht nach Süden, ging die ganze Westseite entlang, bis man nach der Südseite kam, war man zur Südseite gekommen, wandte man das Gesicht nach Osten, ging die Südseite entlang, bis man an den Eingang zum Oberstock gelangte, denn der Eingang zum Oberstock war auf der Südseite. Beim Eingänge zum Oberstock befanden sich zwei Stangen aus Zedernholz, an ihnen stieg man zum Dach des Oberstocks hinauf. Vorstehende Mauerbalken bezeichneten im Oberstock die Grenze zwischen dem Heiligen und dem Allerheiligsten, und nach dem Allerheiligsten führende Öffnungen waren im [Fussboden des] Stockwerks, durch die man die Arbeiter in Kasten herunterliess, damit ihre Augen sich nicht an dem Anblick des Allerheiligsten weideten.",
+ "Der Hechal war hundert Ellen lang, hundert breit und hundert hoch. Das Fundament war sechs Ellen [hoch], die Mauerhöhe vierzig Ellen, eine Elle die Täfelung, zwei Ellen das Bindegebälk, eine Elle die Decke und eine Elle der Estrich, die Höhe des Stockwerkes vierzig Ellen, eine Elle, die Täfelung, zwei Ellen das Bindegebölk, eine Elle die Decke, eine Elle der Estrich, drei Ellen das Schutz-Geländer und eine Elle die Rabenscheuche; R. Jehuda sagt: Die Rabenscheuche ist hei der Höhenangabe nicht mitgerechnet, sondern das Schutzgeländer war vier Ellen hoch.",
+ "Von Osten nach Westen waren 100 Ellen: die Mauer des Ulam 5, der Ulam 11, die Mauer des Hechal 6, sein Innenraum 40 Ellen, eine Elle der Zwischenraum, 20 Ellen das Allerheiligste, die Mauer des Hechal 6, der Seitenraum 6 und die Mauer des Seitenraums 5. Von Norden nach Süden waren 70 Ellen: die Mauer des Rundgangs 5, der Rundgang 3, die Mauer des Seitenraums 5, der Seitenraum 6, die Mauer des Hechal 6, sein Innenraum 20 Ellen, die Mauer des Hechal 6, der Seitenraum 6, die Mauer des Seitenraums 5, der Raum für die abfliessenden Wasser 3 Ellen und die Mauer 5 Ellen. Der Ulam ragte darüber 15 Ellen auf der Nordseite und 15 Ellen auf der Südseite hinaus und wurde hier Schlachtmesser -Raum genannt, weil man dort, die Messer verwahrte. Der Hechal war in seinem hinteren Teil schmal, in seinem vorderen breit, so glich er einem Löwen, wie es heisst: „Wehe Gotteslöwe, Gotteslöwe, in dessen Stadt David lagerte,“ wie der Löwe hinten schmal und vorne breit ist, so war auch der Hechal hinten schmal und vorne breit."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Der ganze Tempelhof war 187 Ellen lang und 135 Ellen breit. Von Osten nach Westen 187: der den Israeliten zugängliche Raum 11 Ellen, der nur den Priestern zugängliche 11 Ellen, der Altar 32, zwischen dem Ulam und dem Altar 22 Ellen, der Hechal 100 Ellen und 11 Ellen hinter dem Allerheiligsten.",
+ "Von Norden nach Süden 135: die Rampe und der Altar 62, vom Altar bis zu den Ringen 8 Ellen, der Platz, auf dem die Ringe waren, 24, von den Ringen bis zu den Tischen 4, von den Tischen bis zu den niedrigen Säulen 4, von den Säulen bis zur Mauer des Tempelhofes 8 Ellen, der Rest zwischen der Rampe und der Mauer und der Platz, auf dem die Säulen standen.",
+ "Sechs Kammern waren im Tempelhofe, drei auf der Nordseite und drei auf der Südseite. Auf der Nordseite: die Salzkammer, die Parwa -Kammer und die Abwasch-Kammer. Die Salzkammer, dorthin tat man das Salz für die Opfer, die Parwa-Kammer, dort salzte man die Häute der Opfertiere, auf dem Dach derselben war das Tauchbad für den Hohepriester am Versöhnungstage, die Abwasch-Kammer, dort reinigte man die Eingeweide der Opfertiere, und von dort führte ein Rundgang zum Dach der Parwa-Kammer hinauf.",
+ "Auf der Südseite: die Holzkammer, die Gola-Kammer, die Quader-Kammer. Von der Holzkammer sagte R. Elieser, Sohn des Jakob, habe ich vergessen, wozu sie diente: Abba Saul sagt: das war die Kammer des Hohepriesters, sie lag hinter den beiden anderen, das Dach der drei bildete eine gerade Fläche. Die Gola-Kammer, dort war der Gola-Brunnen angebracht, darüber befand sich das Schöpfrad, von dort versah man den ganzen Tempelhof mit Wasser. Die Quader-Kammer, dort hatte das grosse Synedrium Israels seinen Sitz und traf seine Entscheidungen über die Priesterschaft, wurde an einem Priester ein Makel gefunden, kleidete er sich in schwarz und hüllte sich in schwarz, ging hinaus und entfernte sich, wurde kein Makel an ihm gefunden, kleidete er sich in weiss und hüllte sich in weiss, ging hinein und versah den Dienst mit seinen Priester-Brüdern, und man beging einen Feiertag, dass kein Makel an dem Nachkommen des Priesters Aron gefunden worden war, und so sprach man: Gelobt sei Gott, gelobt sei er, dass sich kein Makel an dem Nachkommen Arons gefunden hat, und gelobt sei er, der Aron und seine Söhne erwählt hat, zu stehen und zu dienen vor dem Ewigen im Hause des Allerheiligsten."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/English/Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/English/Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2b31e317af95c0d9a948766e5a0b2d345006dc0a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/English/Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp.json
@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Middot",
+ "versionSource": "http://learn.conservativeyeshiva.org/mishnah/",
+ "versionTitle": "Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 1.0,
+ "license": "CC-BY",
+ "shortVersionTitle": "Dr. Joshua Kulp",
+ "actualLanguage": "en",
+ "languageFamilyName": "english",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה מדות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "In three places the priests keep watch in the Temple: in the chamber of Avtinas, in the chamber of the spark, and in the fire chamber. And the Levites in twenty-one places: Five at the five gates of the Temple Mount; Four at its four corners on the inside; Five at five of the gates of the courtyard; Four at its four corners on the outside; One at the offering chamber; One at the chamber of the curtain, And one behind the place of the kapporet.",
+ "The officer of the Temple Mount used to go round to every watch, with lighted torches before him, and if any watcher did not rise [at his approach] and say to him, “Shalom to you, officer of the Temple Mount, it was obvious that he was asleep. Then he used to beat him with his rod. And he had permission to burn his clothes. And the others would say: What is the noise in the courtyard? It is the cry of a Levite who is being beaten and whose clothes are being burned, because he was asleep at his watch. Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob said: once they found my mother's brother asleep, and they burnt his clothes.",
+ "There were five gates to the Temple Mount: The two Huldah gates on the south were used both for entrance and exit; The Kiponus gate on the west was used both for entrance and exit. The Taddi gate on the north was not used at all. The Eastern gate over which was a representation of the palace of Shushan and through which the high priest who burned the red heifer and all who assisted with it would go out to the Mount of Olives.",
+ "There were seven gates in the courtyard: three in the north and three in the south and one in the east. In the south: the Gate of Kindling, and next to it the Gate of the First-borns, and then the Water Gate. In the east: the Gate of Nicanor. It had two chambers, one on its right and one on its left. One was the chamber of Pinchas the dresser and one the other the chamber of the griddle cake makers.",
+ "On the north was the Gate of the Sparks which was shaped like a portico. It had an upper chamber built on it, and the priests used to keep watch above and the Levites below, and it had a door opening into the Hel. Next to it was the Gate of the Sacrifice and next to that the fire chamber.",
+ "There were four chambers inside the fire chamber, like sleeping chambers opening into a hall, two in sacred ground and two in non-holy, and there was a row of mosaic stones separating the holy from the non-holy. For what were they used? The one on the southwest was the chamber of sacrificial lambs, The one on the southeast was the chamber of the showbread. In the one to the northeast the Hasmoneans deposited the stones of the altar which the kings of Greece had defiled. Through the one on the northwest they used to go down to the bathing place.",
+ "The fire chamber had two gates, one opening on to the Hel and one on to the courtyard. Rabbi Judah says: the one that opened on to the courtyard had a small opening through which they went in to search the courtyard.",
+ "The fire chamber was vaulted and it was a large room surrounded with stone projections, and the elders of the clan [serving in the Temple] used to sleep there, with the keys of the Temple courtyard in their hands. The priestly initiates used to place their bedding on the ground.",
+ "There was a place there [in the fire chamber] one cubit square on which was a slab of marble. In this was fixed a ring and a chain on which the keys were hung. When closing time came, the priest would raise the slab by the ring and take the keys from the chain. Then the priest would lock up within while the Levite was sleeping outside. When he had finished locking up, he would replace the keys on the chain and the slab in its place and put his garment on it and sleep there. If one of them had a seminal emission, he would go out by the winding stair which went under the Birah, and which was lighted with lamps on both sides, until he reached the bathing place. Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob says: he descended by the winding stair which went under the Hel and he went out by the Taddi gate."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The Temple Mount was five hundred cubits by five hundred cubits. The greater part of it was on the south; next to that on the east; next to that on the north; and the smallest part on the west. The part which was most extensive was the part most used.",
+ "All who entered the Temple Mount entered by the right and went round [to the right] and went out by the left, save for one to whom something had happened, who entered and went round to the left. [He was asked]: “Why do you go round to the left?” [If he answered] “Because I am a mourner,” [they said to him], “May He who dwells in this house comfort you.” [If he answered] “Because I am excommunicated” [they said]: “May He who dwells in this house inspire them to draw you near again,” the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yose to him: you make it seem as if they treated him unjustly. Rather [they should say]: “May He who dwells in this house inspire you to listen to the words of your colleagues so that they may draw you near again.”",
+ "Within it was the Soreg, ten handbreadths high. There were thirteen breaches in it, which had been originally made by the kings of Greece, and when they repaired them they enacted that thirteen prostrations should be made facing them. Within this was the Hel, which was ten cubits [broad]. There were twelve steps there. The height of each step was half a cubit and its tread was half a cubit. All the steps in the Temple were half a cubit high with a tread of half a cubit, except those of the Porch. All the doorways in the Temple were twenty cubits high and ten cubits broad except those of the Porch. All the doorways there had doors in them except those of the Porch. All the gates there had lintels except that of Taddi which had two stones inclined to one another. All the original gates were changed for gates of gold except the gates of Nicanor, because a miracle happened with them. Some say: because their copper gleamed like gold.",
+ "All the walls that were there [in the Temple] were high except the eastern wall, for the priest who burned the red heifer would stand on the top of the Mount of Olives and direct his gaze carefully to see the opening of the Sanctuary at the time of the sprinkling of the blood.",
+ "The courtyard of the women was a hundred and thirty-five cubits long by a hundred and thirty-five wide. It had four chambers in its four corners, each of which was forty cubits. They were not roofed, and so they will be in the time to come, as it says, “Then he brought me forth into the outer court, and caused me to pass by the four corners of the court, and behold in every corner of the court there was a court. In the four corners of the court there were keturot courts” (Ezekiel 46:21-22) and keturot means that they were not roofed. For what were they used? The southeastern one was the chamber of the Nazirites where the Nazirites used to boil their shelamim and shave their hair and throw it under the pot. The northeastern one was the wood chamber where priests with physical defects used to pick out the wood which had worms, every piece with a worm in it being unfit for use on the altar. The northwestern one was the chamber of those with skin disease. The southwestern one: Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob said: I forget what it was used for. Abba Shaul says: they used to store there wine and oil, and it was called the chamber of oil. It [the courtyard of the women] had originally been smooth [without protrusions in the walls] but subsequently they surrounded it with a balcony so that the women could look on from above while the men were below, and they should not mix together. Fifteen steps led up from it to the courtyard of Israel, corresponding to the fifteen [songs of] ascents mentioned in the Book of Psalms, and upon which the Levites used to sing. They were not rectangular but circular like the half of a threshing floor.",
+ "There were chambers underneath the Court of Israel which opened into the Court of Women, where the Levites used to keep lyres and lutes and cymbals and all kinds of musical instruments. The Court of Israel was a hundred and thirty-five cubits in length by eleven in breadth. Similarly the Court of the Priests was a hundred and thirty-five cubits in length by eleven in breadth. And a row of mosaic stones separated the Court of Israel from the Court of the Priests. Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob says: there was a step a cubit high on which a platform was placed, and it had three steps each of half a cubit in height. In this way the Court of the Priests was made two and a half cubits higher than that of Israel. The whole of the Court was a hundred and eighty-seven cubits in length by a hundred and thirty-five in breadth. And thirteen prostrations were made there. Abba Yose ben Hanan says: they were made facing the thirteen gates. On the south beginning from the west there were the upper gate, the gate of burning, the gate of the firstborn, and the water gate. And why was it called the water gate? Because they brought in through it the pitcher of water for libation on the festival. Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob says: in it the water welled up, and in the time to come from there it will come out from under the threshold of the Temple. Corresponding to them in the north beginning in the west were the gate of Yehoniah, the gate of the offering, the women's gate, the gate of song. Why was it called the gate of Yehoniah? Because Yehoniah went forth into captivity through it. On the east was the gate of Nicanor; it had two doors, one on its right and one on its left. There were further two gates in the west which had no special name."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The altar was thirty-two cubits by thirty-two. It rose a cubit and went in a cubit, and this formed the foundation, leaving thirty cubits by thirty. It then rose five cubits and went in one cubit, and this formed the surround, leaving twenty-eight cubits by twenty-eight. The horns extended a cubit in each direction, thus leaving twenty-six by twenty-six. A cubit on every side was allowed for the priests to go round, thus leaving twenty-four by twenty-four as the place for the wood pile [for the altar fire]. Rabbi Yose said: Originally, the complete area [occupied by the altar] was only twenty-eight cubits by twenty-eight, and it rose with the dimensions mentioned until the space left for the altar pile was only twenty by twenty. When, however, the children of the exile returned, they added four cubits on the north, and four on the west like a gamma, since it is said: “Now the hearth shall be twelve cubits long by twelve broad, square” (Ezekiel 43:16). Is it possible that it was only twelve cubits by twelve? When it says, “With four equal sides” (ibid), this shows that he was measuring from the middle, twelve cubits in every direction. A line of red paint ran round it in the middle to divide between the upper and the lower blood. The foundation ran the whole length of the north and of the west sides, and it took up one cubit on the south and one on the east.",
+ "At the southwestern corner [of the foundation] there were two openings like two small nostrils through which the blood which was poured on the western side of the foundation and on the southern side flowed down till the two streams became mingled in the channel, through which they made their way out to the Kidron wadi.",
+ "On the floor beneath at that corner there was a place a cubit square on which was a marble slab with a ring fixed in it, and through this they used to go down to the pit to clean it out. There was an ascent on the south side of the altar, thirty-two cubits [long] by sixteen broad. It had a square window in its western side where disqualified sin-offerings of birds were placed.",
+ "The stones both of the ascent and of the altar were taken from the valley of Bet Kerem. They dug into virgin soil and brought from there whole stones on which no iron had been lifted, since iron disqualifies by mere touch, though a flaw made by anything could disqualify. If one of them received a flaw, it was disqualified, but the rest were not. They were whitewashed twice a year, once at Pesah and once at Hag, and the Sanctuary was whitewashed once a year, at Pesah. Rabbi says: they were whitewashed every Friday with a cloth on account of the blood stains. The plaster was not laid on with an iron trowel, for fear that it might touch and disqualify. Since iron was created to shorten man's days and the altar was created to prolong man's days, and it is not right therefore that that which shortens should be lifted against that which prolongs.",
+ "There were rings to the north of the altar, six rows of four each. And some say, four rows of six each. Upon them they used to slaughter the sacrificial animals. The slaughter house was to the north of the altar, and on it were eight small pillars on top of which were blocks of cedar wood, in which were fixed hooks of iron, three rows in each, upon which they would hang [the sacrifice] and they would strip its hide on tables of marble that stood between the pillars. ",
+ "The laver was between the porch and the altar, a little to the south. Between the porch and the altar there were twenty-two cubits. There were twelve steps there, each step being half a cubit high and a cubit broad. There was a cubit, a cubit and a level space of three cubits, then a cubit, a cubit and a level space of three cubits, then at the top a cubit, a cubit and a level space of four cubits. Rabbi Judah says that at the top there was a cubit, a cubit and a level space of five cubits.",
+ "The doorway of the porch was forty cubits high and its breadth was twenty cubits. Over it were five main beams of ash [wood]. The lowest projected a cubit on each side beyond the doorway. The one above projected beyond this one a cubit on each side. Thus the topmost one was thirty cubits long. There was a layer of stones between each one and the next.",
+ "There were poles of cedar wood stretching from the wall of the Sanctuary to the wall of the Porch to prevent it from bulging. There were chains of gold fixed in the roof beams of the Porch by which the priestly initiates used to ascend and see the crowns, as it says, “And the crowns shall be to Helem and to Toviyah and to Yedaya and to Hen the son of Zephaniah as a memorial in the Temple of the Lord” (Zechariah 6:14). A golden vine stood at the door of the Sanctuary trained on poles, and anyone who offered a leaf or a grape or a bunch used to bring it and hang it there. Rabbi Eliezer bar Zadok said: on one occasion three hundred priests were commissioned [to clear it]."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The doorway of the Hekhal was twenty cubits high and ten broad. It had four doors, two on the inner side, and two on the outer, as it says, “And the Hekhal and the Sanctuary had two doors” (Ezekiel 41:23). The outer ones opened into the interior of the doorway so as to cover the thickness of the wall, while the inner ones opened into the Temple so as to cover the space behind the doors, because the whole of the Temple was overlaid with gold except the space behind the doors. Rabbi Judah says: they stood within the doorway, and they resembled folding doors. These were two cubits and a half [of the wall] and these were two cubits and a half, leaving half a cubit as a doorpost at the one end and half a cubit as a doorpost at the other end, as it says, “And the doors had two leaves apiece, two turning leaves, two leaves for the one door and two leaves for the other” (Ezekiel 41:24).",
+ "The great gate had two small doors, one to the north and one to the south. By the one to the south no one ever went in, and concerning it was stated explicitly be Ezekiel, as it says, “And the Lord said to me: this gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, neither shall any man enter in by it, for the Lord God of Israel has entered in by it; therefore it shall be shut” (Ezekiel 44:2). He [the priest] took the key and opened the [northern] door and went in to the cell, and from the cell he went into the Hekhal. Rabbi Judah says: he used to walk along in the thickness of the wall until he came to the space between the two gates. He would open the outer doors from within and the inner doors from without.",
+ "There were thirty-eight cells there, fifteen on the north, fifteen on the south, and eight on the west. On the north and on the south there were five over five and five again over these; On the west there were three over three and two over these. Each had three openings, one to the cell on the right and one to the cell on the left and one to the cell above. In the [one at the] northeastern corner there were five openings, one to the cell on the right, one to the cell above, one to the mesibbah, one to the door, and one to the Hekhal.",
+ "The [chamber] of the lowest [story] was five cubits wide and at the ceiling six cubits. The [chamber] of the middle [story] was six cubits wide and at the ceiling of seven. The [chamber] of the top [story] was seven cubits wide, as it says, \"The lowest story was five cubits wide, the middle one 6 cubits wide and the third 7 cubits wide\" (I Kings 6:6).",
+ "The mesibbah (a winding walkway) went up from the north-east corner to the north-west corner by which they used to go up to the roofs of the cells. One would ascend the messibah facing the west, traversing the whole of the northern side till he reached the west. When he reached the west he turned to face south and then traversed whole of the west side till he reached the south. When he reached the south he turned to face eastwards and then traversed the south side till he reached the door of the upper chamber, since the door of the upper chamber opened to the south. In the doorway of the upper chamber were two columns of cedar by which they used to climb up to the roof of the upper chamber, and at the top of them was a row of stones showing the division in the upper chamber between the holy part and the Holy of Holies. There were trap doors in the upper chamber opening into the Holy of Holies by which the workmen were let down in baskets so that they should not feast their eyes on the Holy of Holies.",
+ "The Hekhal was a hundred cubits by a hundred with a height of a hundred. The foundation was six cubits, then it rose forty, then a cubit for the ornamentation, two cubits for the guttering, a cubit for the ceiling and a cubit for the plastering. The height of the upper chamber was forty cubits, there was a cubit for its ornamentation, two cubits for the guttering, a cubit for the ceiling, a cubit for the plastering, three cubits for the parapet and a cubit for the spikes. Rabbi Judah says the spikes were not included in the measurement, but the parapet was four cubits.",
+ "From east to west was a hundred cubits: The wall of the porch five cubits, the porch itself eleven, the wall of the Hekhal six cubits and its interior forty, a cubit for the space between, and twenty cubits for the Holy of Holies, the wall of the Hekhal six cubits, the cell six cubits and the wall of the cell five. From north to south was seventy cubits: The wall of the mesibbah five cubits, the mesibbah itself three, the wall of the cell five and the cell itself six, the wall of the Hekhal six cubits and its interior twenty, then the wall of the Hekhal again six and the cell six and its wall five, then the place of the water descent three cubits and its wall five cubits. The Porch extended beyond this fifteen cubits on the north and fifteen cubits on the south, and this space was called the House of the slaughter-knives where they used to store the knives. The Hekhal was narrow behind and broad in front, resembling a lion, as it says, \"Ah, Ariel, Ariel, the city where David encamped\" (Isaiah 29:1): Just as a lion is narrow behind and broad in front, so the Hekhal was narrow behind and broad in front."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The whole of the courtyard was a hundred and eighty-seven cubits long by a hundred and thirty-five broad. From east to west it was a hundred and eighty-seven. The space in which the Israelites could go was eleven cubits. The space in which the priests could go was eleven cubits. The altar took up thirty-two. Between the Porch and the altar was twenty-two cubits. The Hekhal took up a hundred cubits, and there were eleven cubits behind the kapporet.",
+ "From north to south was a hundred and thirty-five cubits.The ascent and the altar took up sixty-two; From the altar to the rings was eight cubits. The rings took up twenty-four cubits. From the rings to the tables was four cubits, From the tables to the dwarf pillars four, And from the dwarf pillars to the wall of the courtyard eight cubits, And the remainder was between the ascent and the wall and the space occupied by the dwarf pillars.",
+ "There were six chambers in the courtyard, three on the north and three on the south. On the north were the salt chamber, the parvah chamber and the washer's chamber. In the salt chamber they used to keep the salt for the offerings. In the parvah chamber they used to salt the skins of the animal-offerings. On its roof was the bath used by the high priest on Yom Kippur. In the washers’ chamber they used to wash the entrails of the sacrificial animals, and from it a winding way went up to the roof of the parvah chamber.",
+ "On the south were the wood chamber, the chamber of the exile and the chamber of hewn stones. The wood chamber: Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob says: I forget what it was used for. Abba Shaul says: It was the chamber of the high priest, and it was behind the two of them, and one roof covered all three. In the chamber of the exile there was a fixed cistern, with a wheel over it, and from there water was provided for all of the courtyard. In the chamber of hewn stone the great Sanhedrin of Israel used to sit and judge the priesthood. A priest in whom was found a disqualification used to put on black garments and wrap himself in black and go away. One in whom no disqualification was found used to put on white garments and wrap himself in white and go in and serve along with his brother priests. They used to make a feast because no blemish had been found in the seed of Aaron the priest, and they used to say: Blessed is the Omnipresent, blessed is He, for no blemish has been found in the seed of Aaron. Blessed is He who chose Aaron and his sons to stand to minister before the Lord in the Holy of Holies."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/English/Sefaria Community Translation.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/English/Sefaria Community Translation.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e4abc726af88673bd8cb24d7253a9ca310557f8e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/English/Sefaria Community Translation.json
@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Middot",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org",
+ "versionTitle": "Sefaria Community Translation",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "license": "CC0",
+ "versionTitleInHebrew": "תרגום קהילת ספריא",
+ "actualLanguage": "en",
+ "languageFamilyName": "english",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה מדות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "In three places the Kohanim stood guard in the Temple: in the Chamber of Avtinas, in the Chamber of Nitsots [sparks] and in the Chamber of Fire. The Levites would [guard] in twenty one places: five [Levites] on the five gates of the Temple Mount, four [Levites] on the four corners [of the Temple Mount walls] from the inside, five [Levites] , on the five gates of the courtyard, four [Levites] on the four corners [of the courtyard] from the outside, one in the Chamber of the Sacrifices, one in the Chamber of the Curtain, and one behind in the Chamber of the Cover [the holy of holies].",
+ "The man [who is in charge] of the Temple Mount would go around to each and every guard. In front of him there were lit torches and any guard who was not standing [on guard], the man of the Temple Mount would say to him [the sleeping guard] \"Peace onto you.\" If it was apparent that he [the guard] was sleeping he would hit him with his stick. He even had permission to burn his [the sleeping guard's] clothes. [If that occurred] they [the people on the outsde] would say \"What is that noise in the Temple Courtyard?\" [They were told that] it is the voice of a Levi being beaten and whose clothes are being burned because he slept on guard duty. Rebbi Eliezer ben Yaakov says: \"They once, found my mother's brother sleeping and they burned his cloak.\"",
+ "There were five gates to the Temple Mount. [The] two Chulda gates in the south, used as entrance and as an exit. Kiponos in the west, used as an entrance and an exit. Tadi in the north, was not used at all. The Eastern Gate, was decorated with Shushan the capital [of Persia], and through it [the gate] the Kohen Gadol would burn the [red] heifer [for the purification ritual] and all those attending to it would exit to the Mount of Anointing [Mount of Olives].",
+ "There were seven gates in the Temple Courtyard. Three to the north and three to the south and one to the east. In the south was the Fuel Gate [the wood for the altar was bought in through there]. Second to it was the Gate of the Sacrifice. Third to it was the Water Gate. In the east was the Nikanor gate, and it had two chambers, one on its right and one on its left. One was the chamber of Pinchas the Outfitter, and one was the Chamber of the Makers of the Chavitin [for the Kohen Gadol's daily offering].",
+ "And in the north, the Gate of Nitsots. And it was [built] like a portico and upon it was built an upper story, where from that the Kohanim guarded from above and the Levites from below. It had a door to the Cheil [a low fence around the Temple, which served as a boundary, beyond which entry to those impure was prohibited]. Second to it, the Gate of Sacrifice. Third to it,was the Hall of Fire.",
+ "And there were four chambers in the Hall of Fire, like alcoves opening into an auditorium. Two [of the alcoves] were in a consecrated part [of the Hall of Fire] and two in an unconsecrated part, and the ends of the beams [indicating the boundary] separated between consecrated and unconsecrated. And what were they used for? The southwestern one was the Chamber of the Sacrificial Lambs [blemish-free lambs were stored there]. The southeastern one was the Chamber of the Lechem HaPanim [showbread]. [In] the northeastern one the Hasmoneans hid the stones of the altar that were defiled by the kings of Greece. [Through] the northwestern one they [the Kohanim descended to the Room of Immersion [mikvah].",
+ "The Hall of Fire had two gates, one opened to the Cheil and one opened to the courtyard. Rabbi Judah said: the one that was open to the courtyard had a small doorway that they [the Kohanim] would enter through it to observe the courtyard.",
+ "The Hall of Fire was domed, and was a large room, surrounded with ledges of stone, and the elders of the heads of the household would sleep there with the keys to the courtyard in their hands, and the young Kohanim [slept] with their clothing on the ground.",
+ "There was a space there [in the Hall of Fire], one amah [measurement of size] by one amah and there was a tile of marble with a ring installed in it, and a chain that the keys [to the Courtyard] were hanging from. When the time for closing the gates had arrived, [the Kohen] would lift the tile with the ring, and take the keys from the chain, the Kohen would lock the gates from the inside, and a Levite would sleep on the outside. When he had finished locking all the gates, he returned the keys to the chain, and the tile to it's place. He would place his clothes on it [the tile] and go to sleep. If one of them [the Kohanim] experienced a seminal emission [and became impure], he would exit via a tunnel which went under the building, and there were candles lit here and there, until he arrived at the Room of Immersion. Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov says: [They would exit] via the tunnel that went under the Cheil, and would exit through the Tedi [Gate]."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The temple mount was five hundred amah [cubit] by five hundred amah, with most of it [its chambers] in the south, second to it [number of chambers] was in the east, third it [number of chambers] was in the north, and the least were in the west. The area which had the most measure [number of chambers] had the most use.",
+ "All who would enter the temple mount entered toward the right, and would encircle it and exit through the left, aside for one to which something [unfavorable] has occurred, that he would encircle it towards the left [even when he entered]. [If he was asked] \"Why are you encircling towards the left?\" [If he answered] \"Because I am a mourner, [they would respond] \"He who rests in this house should comfort you\". [If he answered] \"Because I am excommunicated\", [they would respond] \"He who dwells in this house should put into their [the judges'] hearts and they will draw you near\". These are the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yosi said to him [Rabbi Meir] \"You have made as if they [the judges] have exceeded the law [in their excommunication] against him. Rather [they would say] \"He who dwells in this house should put into your heart that you will listen to the words of your colleagues and they will draw you near\".",
+ "Inside of it [the wall of the Temple Mount] was the Soreg [a low fence around the Temple, which served as a boundary, beyond which entry to those impure was prohibited] ten tefachim [hand-breadths] high. There were thirteen breaches in it, made originally by the Greek kings, and when the Jews fixed these breaches, they enacted thirteen prostrations equivalent to them. Inside the Soreg was the Cheil [a low fence around the Temple, which served as a boundary, beyond which entry to those impure was prohibited], [which was] ten amot [wide]. There were twelve steps there, and the height of each step was half an amah, and its tread was half an amah. All the steps that were there [in the Temple] had a height of half an amah and a tread of a half an amah, except those into the Antechamber. All the entrances that were there were twenty amot high and ten amot wide except to the Antechamber. All entrances that were there had doors except for of the Antechamber. All the gates that were there had lintels, except for the Tadi [gate], which had two stones leaning one on top of the other. All the [doors of the] gates were changed to gold [from copper] except the gates of Nikanor, since a miracle happened with them. Some say it is because its copper shone [like gold]. ",
+ "All of the walls that were there [around the Temple] were high except for the Eastern wall, so that the Kohen who would burn the [red] heifer could stand on top of Mount of Anointing [Olives] and see the opening of the vestibule [over the eastern wall] the time that he sprinkled the blood [of the red heifer]. ",
+ "The Woman's Courtyard was one hundred and thirty five [ amah] by one hundred and thirty five [ amah]. And there were four chambers in its four corners each forty amot [long] and they did not have a roof. And this is the way they will be in the future [in the Third Temple], as is stated \"And he took me to the outer Courtyard and passed me around the four corners of the Courtyard, and an enclosure in the corner of the Courtyard etc. And at the four corners of the Courtyard were enclosures that were keturot.(Ezekiel 46:21-22). The word keturot means nothing but without roofs. And what were these chambers used for? In the southeastern corner was the chamber of the Nezirim where the Nezirim would cook their peace offerings, shave their heads, and throw [the hair] underneath the pot. The Northeastern chamber was the chamber of the wood, where the Kohanim who were [physically] blemished would check the wood [to be used on the alter] for worms. Any piece of wood containing a worm was unfit for use on the alter. In the Northwestern corner was the chamber of the lepers. The Southwestern corner, Rabbi Eliezer son of Yaakov said \"I forgot what it was used for.\" Abba Shaul said it was used to store the wine and oil. It was called the Chamber of the House of Oil. [The wall around the Women's Courtyard] was originally smooth [with no protrusions from it] but later a balcony was built around it, so that the women could watch from above with the men from below so they would not intermingle. There were fifteen steps going up [from the Women's Courtyard] to the Courtyard of the Israelites, equivalent to the fifteen songs of Ascent in psalms, and upon them the Levites would sing their songs. They [the fifteen steps] were not straight but rounded like a semi circular threshing floor. ",
+ "There were chambers underneath the Israelite courtyard that opened to the Women's Courtyard, which is where the Levites would put their harps, lyres and cymbals and all other musical instruments. The Israelites' Courtyard was one hundred and thirty five amot long and eleven [amot] wide. Similarly the Kohanim's Courtyard was one hundred and thirty five amot long and eleven [amot] wide. The tops of beams [stuck in the ground] separated between the Israelites' Courtyard and the Kohanim's Courtyard. Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov said that there was a step [the length of the Kohanim's Courtyard] one amah high and a platform [where the Levites stood when they sang] was placed on it. It [the one amah step] had three steps [leading to the platform], each was one half amah [high]. As a result we find that the Kohanim's Courtyard was two and a half amot higher than the Israelite's Courtyard. The entire courtyard was one hundred and eighty seven [amot] long and one hundred thirty five [amot] wide. There were thirteen prostrations there [in the Courtyard]. Abba Yosi ben Chanan says, [these prostrations] corresponded to the thirteen gates [of the Courtyard]. [The names of the gates] The southern [gates] that were close to the west [were called] the Upper Gate, the Kindling Gate, the Firstborn's Gate and the Water Gate. Why was it called the Water Gate? Because it was through that gate that the jug of water was carried for the libation of the festival [Sukkot]. Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov says, because there the water became a stream and in the future it will come out from underneath the Temple. And opposite [the southern gate] on the northern [side] close to the west was the Gate of Yechoniah, the Gate of the Sacrifices, the Gate of the Women and the Gate of Song. Why was it called the gate of Yechonia? Because it was through that gate that [King] Yechoniah left [the Temple] on his way into exile. On the eastern side was the Gate of Nikanor, and there were two smaller doors next to it one on its right and the other on its left. There were also two gates in the west that had no name."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The altar was thirty two [ amah] by thirty two [amah]. It rose up one amah and indented one amah. This [tier] was called the yesod [base]. We thus find [that at this level, the altar was] thirty by thirty [amot]. It rose another five [amot] and indented one [amah]. This was called the sovev [ledge]. We thus find [that at this level, the altar was] twenty eight by twenty eight [ amot]. The area for the horns [on the corners of the altar] was one amah on this side and one amah on this side. We thus find [that at this level, the altar was] twenty six by twenty six [amot]. The area designated for the Kohanim to walk around [the top of the alter] was one amah on this side and one amah on this side. We thus find [that at this level, the altar was] twenty four by twenty four [amot] which was the area of the pyre. Rabbi Yosi said, in the initially [in the first Temple] the base [of the altar] was only twenty eight by twenty eight [amot], rising and indenting in the same pattern until we find that the area of the pyre was twenty by twenty [amot]. When the Jews returned from [the Babylonian] exile they added four amot to the south and four amot to the west in the shape of [the Greek letter] gamma [L shaped], as its stated \"And the hearth was twelve amot wide and twelve amot long, a square\" (Ezekiel 43:16) . We might have thought that it [the altar] was only twelve by twelve [amot]. However when it says \"to its four quadrants,\" it teaches us that the measurement was taken from the center of the altar and it was twelve [amot] in every direction. And there was a red line that circled [the altar] which was the dividing line [midway] between where blood [that needed to be placed] on the upper half of the altar and [those that had to be placed] on the lower half [of the altar]. The base went around the entire northern side and western side of the altar and took up [only] one amah on the southern side and one amah on the eastern side. ",
+ "On the southwestern corner [of the base] there were two holes like two thin nostrils where the bloods placed on the western base and on the southern base would channel through them and mix in the stream [that flowed in the Courtyard] and then go out to the Kidron Valley. ",
+ "Beneath the floor at that [the southwestern] corner, there was a [underground] place [a tunnel] one amah by one amah which had a marble tile with a ring attached to it, through which they would go down to the pit [where the blood would collect] and clean it. There was a ramp on the southern side of the altar which was thirty two amah [long] by sixteen amah wide. There was a little compartment on the western side where they would place the invalid bird sin-offerings.",
+ "Both the stones of the ramp and the stones for the altar [came] from the valley of Beit Kerem. They would dig below [the stones] virgin soil and would bring complete stones that were never touched by iron, because iron renders them [the stones] unfit by just touch. [They are also unfit] if they are chipped through any means. If one of them were chipped, it is rendered unfit, but the rest [of the sones] are not. The [walls and the top of the altar] were whitewashed twice a year, once on Pesach and once on Sukkot. The vestibule [was whitewashed] once a year, on Pesach. Rebbi says, every Friday they would be whitewashed with a cloth because of the blood stains. The whitewash was not applied with an iron trowel, out of the concern that the iron trowel would touch the stones, and render them unfit, since iron was created to shorten man's days, and the altar was created to extend man's days, and it is improper that that which shortens be placed upon that which extends. ",
+ "There were rings [in the floor] to the north of the altar. [They were set] six rows with four rings [in each], while some say [there were] four rows with six rings [in each], through which they would slaughter the holy [sacrifices]. The slaughtering area was north of the altar. There were eight low stone pillars there, and squares of cedar wood were placed on top of them. Hooks of iron were attached to them and [each block] had three rows of hooks from where they hung and skinned the animals, [then placing the meat] on tables of marble [that were] between the pillars. ",
+ "The laver was between the vestibule and the altar, drawn towards the south. Between the Sanctaury and the altar there were twenty two amot and there were twelve steps there. The height of each step was half an amah with a tread of one [amah]. [They were divided ino three sets of four steps each]. [The first set rose] one amah and one amah [a total of two amot] with a landing of three amot. [The second set also rose] one amah and one amah [a total of two amot] with a landing of three [amot]. The top [set rose] one amah and one amah [a total of two amot] with a landing of four [amot]. Rabbi Yehuda says that at the top [set rose] one amah and amah [a total of two amot] with a landing of five [amot]. ",
+ "The entrance to the Antechamber had a height of forty amot, and a width of twenty amot. There were five decorated beams of milas [cedar] wood on top of it [as a lintel]. The lowest [beam of the lintel] was wider [than the entrance] one amah on this side and one amah on this side. And the one above it was was wider [than the one below it] one amah on this side and one amah on this side. So, it was found that the one on top was thirty amot [wide]. There was a layer of stones between each beam.",
+ "Poles of cedar were attached from the wall of the Sanctuary to the wall of the vestibule, to prevent it from collapsing. Gold chains were attached to the ceiling beams of the Sanctuary [from] where the young Kohanim would climb and see the crowns, as it says \"The crowns will be be a remembrance for Helem, for Tuviah, for Yedayah and for Chen the son of Tzefaniah in the Sanctuary of Hashem. (Zechariah 6:11) There was a golden vine at the doorway to the Sanctuary, supported by poles, and anyone who offered a donation of a [gold] leaf, a grape, or a cluster would hang them on it [the vine]. Rabbi Eliezer ben Rabbi Tsadok said: Once, three hundred Kohanim were commissioned to clear it away [to someplace else]. "
+ ],
+ [
+ "The entrance of the Sanctuary was twenty amot high and ten amot wide. It had four doors, two on the inside [of the entrance], and two on the outside, as it says, \"There were two doors to the Sanctuary and to the Holy of Holies\" (Ezekiel 41:23) The outer ones [doors] open into the opening [of the entrance] to cover the walls, while the inner ones open into the Sanctuary as to cover the behind the doors, for the entire Sanctuary was covered with gold, except for behind the doors. Rabbi Yehuda says, [the doors] were placed in the middle of the entrance way, and looked like folding doors, these [the outer doors] cover two and a half amot and these [the inner doors] cover two and a half amot, [leaving] half an amah and a doorpost at one end, and half an amah and a doorpost at the other end, as it says, There were two doors for [each] door, two swinging doors, two for one door, and two for the other.\" (Ezekiel 41:24) ",
+ "The great gate had two small doorways, one on the north, and one on the south. No person ever entered from the southern doorway, and the reason was spelled out by Ezekiel, as it says \"And Hashem said unto me: 'This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, neither shall any man enter in by it, for Hashem, the God of Israel, will come through it, it shall be shut.\"' (Ezekiel 44:2) He [the Kohen] took the key and opened the small door, and he entered the cell, and from the cell, he entered into the Sanctuary. Rabbi Yehuda says, he would walk along in the thickness of the wall, until he found himself standing between the two doors [to the space between the two gates]. He opened the outer doors from the inside, and the inner doors from the outside. ",
+ "There were thirty-eight cells [within the walls of the Sanctuary], fifteen in the north, fifteen in the south, and eight in the west. On the north and on the south, [there were three levels] five cells [built] on top of five cells and five more on top of them. In the west there were three [cells were built] on top of three and two on top of them. Each cell had three openings; one to the cell on the right, one to the cell on the left, and one to the cell on top. [to the cell] in the northeastern corner there was five openings: one to the cell on the right, one to the cell above it, one to the Mesibah [a winding ramp within the walls of the Sanctuary], one to the small doorway, and one to the Sanctuary. ",
+ "The [cell] on the bottom [row] were five amot wide and [they formed] a ledge six amot wide, and the middle [cells formed] a ledge of seven amot and the [cells] on top [were] seven [amot wide], as it says , \"The lowest cell was five amot wide, and the middle was six amot wide, and the third was seven amot wide.\" (I Kings 6:6) ",
+ "The Winding Ramp rose from the northeast corner to the northwest corner, by which they used to go up to the roofs of the cells. He would go up the Winding Ramp facing west and traverse the entire northern [side of the building], until reaching the west [side of the building]. When he reached the west, he turned to face south, and then traversed the west side until reaching the south. When he reached the south, he turned to face the east, and he then traversed the south side, until he reached the opening of the upper story, for the door of the upper story opened to the south. In the opening of the upper story, there were two poles of cedar, which they used to climb to the roof of the upper story. The ends of the beams divided the upper story between [the area above] the Holy [part] and the Holy of Holies . There were shafts open in the upper story into the Holy of Holies by which artisans were lowered down in boxes, so that their eyes should not gain pleasure of the Holy of Holies. ",
+ "The Sanctuary was a hundred [amot] by a hundred [amot] with a height of a hundred [amot]: The base was six amot, and the height [of the lowest story of the Sanctuary reached an height of] forty amot, one amah for its ornamentation, two amot for the supporting [beams], one amah for the ceiling, and one amah for the pavement. The height of the upper chamber was forty amot, one amah for its ornamentation, two amot for its supporting [beams], one amah for the ceiling, and one amah for the pavement. Three amot [were taken up by the] fence [around the roof], and an amah for the raven-chaser [spikes]. Rabbi Yehuda says, the spikes were not included in the measurement; rather, the fence was four amot. ",
+ "From east to west [the Sanctuary was] one hundred [amot] by one hundred [amot]: The [eastern wall of the] vestibule was five [amot thick]; the vestibule was eleven [amot wide]; the [eastern] wall of the Sanctuary was six [amot thick] and its interior was forty [amot long]; one amah for the [place of] the partition between the Holy of Holies and the Sanctuary; and twenty amot was the Holy of Holies. The [western] wall of the Sanctuary was six [amot thick]; the cell [in back of it] was six [amot wide]; and the [outer] wall of the cell was five [amot thick]. From north to south the Sanctuary was seventy amot. The wall of the Winding Ramp was five [amot thick] and the Winding Ramp [itself] was three [amot wide]; the wall of the cell was five [amot thick] and the cell was five [amot wide]. The [southern] wall of the Sanctuary was six [amot thick]; the cell was six [amot wide] and the wall of the cell was five [amot thick]. The [place known as] the House of Lowering the Water was three [amot wide] and its wall was five [amot thick]. The vestibule was longer than it [the Sanctuary] fifteen amot to the north, and fifteen amot to the south. This [longer section] was called the Chamber of the Knives [for that is where] that the knives were stored. The Sanctuary was narrow in the back [the eastern side] and wide at the front [the eastern side], like a lion, as it says, \"Ah, Ariel [lit. Lion of God] Ariel, the city where David encamped.\" (Isaiah 29:1) Just as a lion is narrow in his back and wide in front, so too was the Sanctuary narrow in the back and wide in the front. "
+ ],
+ [
+ "The whole courtyard was one hundred and eighty seven [amot] long by one hundred and thirty five [amot] wide: From east to west it was one hundred and eighty seven [amot], the place where Israelites were permitted to walk was eleven amot; the place where the Kohanim could walk was eleven amot; the altar was thirty two [amot]; between the vestibule and the altar was twenty two amot; the Sanctuary was one hundred amot and there were eleven amot behind the Holy of Holies. ",
+ "From north to south [the courtyard] was one hundred and thirty five [amot]: The ramp and the altar [together] were sixty two [amot]; between the altar and the rings were eight amot; the space of the rings was twenty four [amot]; between the rings and the tables were four [amot]; between the tables and the low stone pillars [from where they hung the animals to skin them] were four [amot]; between the low stone pillars and the [northern] wall of the courtyard was eight amot. The remaining [twenty five amot] were taken up by the space between the ramp and the [southern] wall [of the Courtyard] and the space of the low stone pillars. ",
+ "There were six chambers in the Courtyard, three on the north side and three on the south side. The ones on the north side were the Chamber of Salt; the Chamber of Parvah, and the Chamber of Rinsing. The Chamber of Salt was where they stored the salt for the sacrifices. The Chamber of Parvah was where they would salt the hides of the sacrifices and on its roof was a Room of Immersion, [mikveh], which the Kohen Gadol used on Yom Kippur. The Chamber of Rinsing was where they would rinse the innards of the sacrifices, and within this chamber, a spiral staircase went up to the roof of the [nearby] Chamber of Parvah. ",
+ "On the south side was the Chamber of Wood, the Chamber of Diaspora and the Chamber of Hewn Stone. [Concerning] the Chamber of Wood, Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov said,\"I forgot what it was used for.\" Abba Shaul said, the Chamber of the Kohen Gadolwas behind the two other chambers [the Chamber of Exile and the Chamber of Hewn Stone] and all three roofs were even. In the Chamber of Diaspora there was a well, upon which a wheel was placed and from there they drew [drinking] water to supply [the people] the Courtyard. The Chamber of Hewn Stone was where the Grand Sanhedrin [highest court, charged with deciding cases and appeals that had national significance. It was comprised of 71 scholars who had received the full traditional rabbinical ordination, and its decisions fixed Jewish practice for subsequent generations.] of Israel sat and judged the Kohanim [if they are fit to serve]. A Kohen who was found to be unfit would don a black [robe] and wrap his head in black and leave [the Temple Mount]. If he was found to fit, he would don a white [robe] and wrap his head in white and enter the Courtyard to serve with the other Kohanim. They [those found to be fit] would make a day of celebration [to celebrate] that nobody unfit was found in the children of Aaron the Kohen. And this is what they said: \"Blessed is Hashem that nobody unfit was found in the children of Aharon. And Blessed is Hashem who chose Aaron and his children to stand and serve before Hashem in the Holy Temple.\" "
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/English/Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de].json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/English/Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de].json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2528dd94b25f3800b7dc53579ef72f1c6a34281b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/English/Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de].json
@@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Middot",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001042448/NLI",
+ "versionTitle": "Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de]",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 0.25,
+ "license": "Public Domain",
+ "versionNotes": "",
+ "digitizedBySefaria": true,
+ "shortVersionTitle": "Lazarus Goldschmidt, 1929 ",
+ "actualLanguage": "de",
+ "languageFamilyName": "german",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה מדות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "AN DREI STELLEN HIELTEN DIE PRIESTER IM TEMPEL WACHE: IM EUNOSRACME, IM FUNKENRAUME UND IM BRANDRAUME, DIE LEVITEN AN EINUNDZWANZIG STELLEN: FÜNF AN DEN FÜNF TOREN DES TEMPELBERGES UND VIER AN SEINEN VIER ECKEN INNEN, FÜNF AN DEN FÜNF TOREN DES TEMPELHOFES UND VIER AN SEINEN VIER ECKEN DRAUSSEN, EINER AN DER OPFERKAMMER, EINER AN DER VORHANGKAMMER UND EINER HINTER DEM SÜHNERAUME.",
+ "DER VORSTEHER DES TEMPELBERGES MACHTE EINE RUNDE BEI ALLEN WACHEN, UND BRENNENDE FACKELN VOR IHM, UND WENN EIN WACHTMANN NICHT AUFSTAND UND ZU IHM SPRACH ‘FRIEDE MIT DIR, AUFSEHER DES TEMPELBERGES’, SO WUSSTE ER, DASS ER SCHLAFE, UND SCHLUG IHN MIT SEINEM STOCKE; ER HATTE AUCH DAS RECHT, IHM SEIN GEWAND ZU VERBRENNEN. DIE ANDEREN FRAGTEN DANN: WAS IST DAS FÜR EIN LÄRM IM TEMPELHOFE? – ES IST DAS GESCHREI EINES LEVITEN, DER GEPRÜGELT WIRD, UND SEINE KLEIDER WERDEN VERBRANNT, WEIL ER BEI DER WACHE GESCHLAFEN HAT. R. ELIE͑ZER B. JA͑QOB ERZÄHLTE: EINST FANDEN SIE DEN BRUDER MEINER MUTTER SCHLAFEND, UND SIE VERBRANNTEN IHM SEIN GEWAND.",
+ "DER TEMPELBERG HATTE FÜNF TORE: DIE BEIDEN ḤULDATORE AUF DER SÜDSEITE, SIE DIENTEN ALS EINGANG UND AUSGANG, DAS QIPHONOSTOR AUF DER WESTSEITE, ES DIENTE ALS EINGANG UND AUSGANG, DAS ṬADITOR AUF DER NORDSEITE, ES WAR UNBENUTZT, UND DAS OSTTOR, AUF DEM DIE HAUPTSTADT ŠUŠAN ABGEBILDET WAR, UND DURCH WELCHES DER DIE [ROTE] KUH VERBRENNENDE HOCHPRIESTER UND ALLE, DIE DABEI HILFE LEISTETEN, ZUM ÖLBERGE HINAUSGINGEN.",
+ "DER TEMPELHOF HATTE SIEBEN TORE: DREI AUF DER NORDSEITE, DREI AUF DER SÜDSEITE UND EINES AUF DER OSTSEITE. AUF DER SÜDSEITE DAS BRANDTOR, ALS ZWEITES DANEBEN DAS OPFERTOR UND ALS DRITTES DANEBENN DAS WASSERTOR. AUF DER OSTSEITE DAS NIKANORTOR, UND DIESES HATTE ZWEI KAMMERN, EINE RECHTS UND EINE LINKS; EINE WAR DIE KAMMER DES KLEIDERAUFSEHERS PINḤAS UND EINE WAR DIE KAMMER DER HERSTELLER DES PFANNENOPFERS.",
+ "AUF DER NORDSEITE DAS FUNKENTOR, ES WAR WIE EINE ART HALLE UND DARÜBER EIN SÖLLER GEBAUT; OBEN HIELTEN DIE PRIESTER WACHE UND DIE LEVITEN UNTEN, UND ES HATTE EINE TÜR ZUM ZWINGER. ALS ZWEITES DANEBEN DAS OPFERTOR UND ALS DRITTES DANEBEN DAS BRANDTOR.",
+ "DER BRANDRAUM HATTE VIER KAMMERN, WIE NEBENZIMMER, DIE ZU EINEM SAALE FÜHREN, ZWEI AUF HEILIGEM GEBIET UND ZWEI AUF PROFANEM, UND STEINVORSPRÜNGE TRENNTEN ZWISCHEN HEILIG UND PROFAN. WOFÜR DIENTEN SIE? DIE SÜDWESTLICHE WAR DIE OPFERKAMMER, DIE SÜDÖSTLICHE WAR DIE SCHAUBROTKAMMER, IN DER NORDÖSTLICHEN VERSTECKTEN DIE ḤASMONÄER DIE STEINE DES ALTARS, DIE DIE GRIECHISCHEN KÖNIGE BESUDELT HATTEN, UND DURCH DIE NORDWESTLICHE GING MAN ZUM TAUCHBADE HINUNTER.",
+ "DER BRANDRAUM HATTE ZWEI TORE: EINES FÜHRTE ZUM ZWINGER UND EINES FÜHRTE ZUM TEMPELHOFE. R. JEHUDA SAGTE: DER ZUM TEMPELHOFE FÜHRTE, HATTE EINE KLEINE PFORTE, DURCH DIE MAN IM TEMPELHOF UMSCHAU HALTEN GING.",
+ "DER BRANDRAUM WAR EIN GEWÖLBE, EIN GROSSER RAUM, UND RINGSUM VON STEINERNEN STUFENABSÄTZEN UMGEBEN; DA SCHLIEFEN DIE ÄLTESTEN DER TAGESWACHE, IN DEREN HAND DIE SCHLÜSSEL DES TEMPELHOFES WAREN; DIE JUNGPRIESTER ABER HATTEN JEDER SEIN GEWAND AUF DER ERDE.",
+ "DA WAR EINE STELLE, EINE ELLE ZU EINER ELLE, WO EINE MARMOR PLATTE LAG, AN DER EIN RING ANGEBRACHT WAR, AUCH EINE KETTE, AN DER DIE SCHLÜSSEL HINGEN. WAR DIE ZEIT ZUM ABSCHLIESSEN HERANGEKOMMEN, SO HOB ER AM RINGE DIE PLATTE HOCH, NAHM DIE SCHLÜSSEL VON DER KETTE, UND DER PRIESTER SCHLOSS VON INNEN AB, WÄHREND DER LEVITE DRAUSSEN SCHLIEF. WAR ER MIT DEM ABSCHLIESSEN FERTIG, SO HÄNGTE ER DIE SCHLÜSSEL AN DIE KETTE, LEGTE DIE PLATTE ZURÜCK AUF IHREN PLATZ, BREITETE SEIN KLEID DARÜBER UND LEGTE SICH SCHLAFEN. HATTE JEMAND VON IHNEN SAMENERGUSS, SO GING ER DIE WENDELTREPPE HINUNTER, DIE UNTER DAS BAUWERK FÜHRTE, WO LAMPEN AN DER EINEN UND AN DER ANDEREN SEITE BRANNTEN, BIS ER ZUM BADERAUME GELANGTE. R. ELIE͑ZER B. JA͑QOB SAGTE: ÜBER DIE WENDELTREPPE, DIE UNTER DEN ZWINGER FÜHRTE, GING ER DANN DURCH DAS ṬADI[TOR] HINAUS."
+ ],
+ [
+ "DER TEMPELBERG HATTE FÜNFHUNDERT ELLEN ZU FÜNFHUNDERT ELLEN, GRÖSSTENTEILS IN DER SÜDSEITE, ZWEITGRÖSSTENS IN DER OSTSEITE, DRITTGRÖSSTENS IN DER NORDSEITE UND AM WENIGSTEN IN DER WESTSEITE. WO ER SEINE GRÖSSTE AUSDEHNUNG HATTE, DA HATTE ER AUCH DIE GRÖSSTE BENUTZUNG.",
+ "ALLE, DIE DEN TEMPELBERG BETRATEN, HIELTEN SICH BEIM BETRETEN RECHTS UND GINGEN SICH LINKS HALTEND HINAUS, AUSGENOMMEN DERJENIGE, DEM ETWAS ZUGESTOSSEN WAR, DER SICH LINKS HIELT. – ‘WAS IST DIR, DASS DU DICH LINKS HÄLTST?’ – ‘ICH HABE TRAUER.’ – ‘DER IN DIESEM HAUSE WOHNT, MÖGE DICH TRÖSTEN.’ – ‘ICH BIN IN DEN BANN GETAN WORDEN.’ – ‘DER IN DIESEM HAUSE WOHNT, MÖGE IHR HERZ WENDEN, DASS SIE DICH WIEDER AUFNEHMEN’ – SO R. MEÍR: R. JOSE SPRACH ZU IHM: DU STELLST SIE HIN, ALS HÄTTEN SIE GEGEN IHN UNRECHT GEHANDELT. VIELMEHR [SAGEN SIE]: DER IN DIESEM HAUSE WOHNT, MÖGE DEIN HERZ WENDEN, DASS DU AUF DIE WORTE DEINER GENOSSEN HÖREST, UND SIE DICH WIEDER AUFNEHMEN.",
+ "INNERHALB DERSELBEN WAR EIN ZEHN HANDBREITEN HOHES Fol.35 GITTER. DIESES HATTE EINST DREIZEHN RISSE, DIE DIE GRIECHISCHEN KÖNIGE DARAN GEBROCHEN HATTEN, DIE ABER SPÄTER VERBAUT WURDEN; DIESEN ENTSPRECHEND ORDNETE MAN DREIZEHN NIEDERWERFUNGEN AN. INNERHALB DESSELBEN WAR DER ZWINGER, ZEHN ELLEN, UND DA WAREN ZWÖLF STUFEN, JEDE STUFE HATTE EINE HALBE ELLE HÖHE UND EINE HALBE ELLE TIEFE. ALLE STUFEN, DIE DA WAREN, WAREN EINE HALBE ELLE HOCH UND EINE HALBE ELLE TIEF, AUSGENOMMEN DIE DER TEMPELHALLE. ALLE TÜRÖFFNUNGEN, DIE DA WAREN, HATTEN EINE HÖHE VON ZWANZIG ELLEN UND EINE BREITE VON ZEHN ELLEN, AUSGENOMMEN DIE DER VORHALLE. ALLE TÜRÖFFNUNGEN, DIE DA WAREN, HATTEN TÜREN, AUSGENOMMEN DIE DER VORHALLE. ALLE TORE, DIE DA WAREN, HATTEN OBERSCHWELLEN, AUSGENOMMEN DAS ṬADITOR, DAS ZWEI ANEINANDER NEIGENDE STEINEHATTE. ALLE TORFLÜGEL, DIE DA WAREN, WURDEN SPÄTERIN GOLD ABGEÄNDERT, AUSGENOMMEN DAS NIKANORTOR, WEGEN DES MIT IHNEN GESCHEHENEN WUNDERS. MANCHE SAGEN, WEIL IHR KUPFER GOLDGLÄNZTE.",
+ "ALLE MAUERWÄNDE, DIE DA WAREN, WAREN HOCH, AUSGENOMMEN DIE ÖSTLICHE MAUERWAND, WEIL DER DIE [ROTE] KUH VERBRENNENDE PRIESTER BEIM BLUTSPRENGEN AUF DEM GIPFEL DES ÖLBERGES STAND UND GENAU IN DIE TÜR DES TEMPELS HINEINSAH.",
+ "DER FRAUENVORHOF HATTE EINE LÄNGE VON HUNDERTFÜNFUNDDREISSIG ZU EINER BREITE VON HUNDERTFÜNFUNDDREISSIG [ELLEN]. ER HATTE AN SEINEN VIER ECKEN VIER KAMMERN VON JE VIERZIG ELLEN, UND SIE WAREN NICHT ÜBERDACHT. SO WERDEN SIE AUCH DEREINST SEIN, DENN ES HEISST: und er brachte mich in den äußeren Hof hinaus und fährte mich an den vier Winkeln des Vorhofes vorüber, und siehe, ein [kleiner] Vorhof in jedem Winkel des Vorhofes &c. an den vier Winkeln des Vorhofes, abgeschlossene Vorhöfe, UND UNTER ‘ABGESCHLOSSEN’ IST ZU VERSTEHEN, NICHT ÜBERDACHT. WOFÜR DIENTEN SIE? DIE SÜDÖSTLICHE WAR DIE NAZIRÄERKAMMER, WOSELBST DIE NAZIRÄER IHRE HEILSOPFER KOCHTEN UND SICH DAS HAAR SCHOREN, DAS SIE UNTER DEN KESSEL LEGTEN. DIE NORDÖSTLICHE WAR DIE HOLZKAMMER, WOSELBST DIE GEBRECHENBEHAFTETEN PRIESTER DAS WURMSTICHIGE HOLZ HERAUSSUCHTEN; JEDES HOLZ NÄMLICH, AN DEM WURM[FRASS] GEFUNDEN WURDE, WAR FÜR DEN ALTAR UNTAUGLICH. DIE NORDWESTLICHE WAR DIE AUSSÄTZIGENKAMMER. VON DER SÜDWESTLICHEN SAGTE R. ELIE͑ZER B. JA͑QOB, ER HABE VERGESSEN, WOFÜR SIE DIENTE. ABBA ŠAÚL SAGTE: DA VERWAHRTE MAN WEIN UND ÖL, UND SIE HIESS AUCH ÖLKAMMER. URSPRÜNGLICH WAR SIEGLATT, SPÄTER ABER UMGAB MAN SIE MIT EINER GALERIE, SODASS DIE FRAUEN OBEN UND DIE MÄNNER UNTEN ZUSCHAUENKONNTEN, UND SIE NICHT GEMISCHT WAREN. VON DIESEM FÜHRTEN FÜNFZEHN STUFEN ZUM JISRAÉLITENVORHOFE, ENTSPRECHEND DEN FÜNFZEHN STUFEN[LIEDERN] IM [BUCHE DER] PSALMEN, AUF DENEN DIE LEVITEN DEN GESANG ANSTIMMTEN; SIE WAREN NICHT ECKIG, SONDERN WIE EIN HALBKREIS.",
+ "UNTER DEM JISRAÉLITENVORHOFE WAREN KAMMERN MIT DEN TÜREN Col.b ZUM FRAUENVORHOFE, WOSELBST DIE LEVITEN HARFEN, ZITHERN, ZIMBELN UND ALLERLEI MUSIKINSTRUMENTE VERWAHRTEN. DER JISRAÉLITENVORHOF HATTE EINE LÄNGE VON HUNDERTFÜNFUNDDREISSIG ZU EINER BREITE VON ELF ELLEN, UND EBENSO HATTE DER PRIESTERVORHOF EINE LÄNGE VON HUNDERTFÜNFUNDDREISSIG ZU EINER BREITE VON ELF ELLEN, UND STEINVORSPRÜNGE TRENNTEN ZWISCHEN DEM JISRAÉLITENVORHOFE UND DEM PRIESTERVORHOFE. R. ELIE͑ZER B. JA͑QOB SAGT, DA WAR EINE STUFE, EINE ELLE HOCH. AUF DIESER [ERHÖHUNG] BEFAND SICH DIE ESTRADE, DIE DREI STUFEN VON JE EINER HALBEN ELLE HATTE, UND SO ERGIBT ES SICH, DASS DER PRIESTERVORHOF ZWEIEINHALB ELLEN HÖHER WAR ALS DER JISRAÉLITENVORHOF. DER GANZE TEMPELHOFHATTE EINE LÄNGE VON HÜNDERTSIEBENUNDACHTZIG ZU EINER BREITE VON HUNDERTFÜNFUNDDREISSIG ELLEN. DA ERFOLGTEN DREIZEHN NIEDERWERFUNGEN. ABBA JOSE B. ḤANAN SAGTE: ENTSPRECHEND DEN DREIZEHN TOREN. IN DER SÜDSEITE, VON WESTEN AUS: DAS OBERSTE TOR, DAS BRANDTOR, DAS ERSTGEBORENENTOR, DAS WASSERTOR. WESHALB HIESS ES WASSERTOR? WEIL MAN DURCH DIESES DEN KRUG WASSER FÜR DIE WISSERPROZESSION AM HÜTTENFESTEBRACHTE. R. ELIE͑ZER B. JA͑QOB SAGT, DURCH DIESES ERGOSS SICH DAS WASSER, UND DEREINST WERDE ES UNTER DER SCHWELLE DES TEMPELS HERAUSSTRÖMEN. JENEN GEGENÜBER IN DER NORDSEITE, VON WESTEN AUS: DAS JEKHONJATOR, DAS OPFERTOR, DAS FRAUENTOR, DAS MUSIKTOR. WESHALB HIESS ES JEKHONJATOR? WEIL DURCH DIESES JEKHONJAIN DIE VERBANNUNG GING. IN DER OSTSEITE: DAS NIKANORTOR, DAS ZWEI PFORTENHATTE, EINE RECHTS UND EINE LINKS. ZWEI IN DER WESTSEITE, DIE KEINEN NAMEN HATTEN."
+ ],
+ [
+ "DER ALTAR HATTE ZWEIUNDDREISSIG ZU ZWEIUNDDREISSIG [ELLEN], DANN EINE ELLE HÖHE UND EINE ELLE EINZUG; DAS WAR DAS FUNDAMENT, UND ES BLIEBEN DREISSIG ZU DREISSIG [ELLEN]. FÜNF ELLEN HÖHE UND EINE ELLE EINZUG; DAS WAR DER RUNDGANG, UND ES BLIEBEN ACHTUNDZWANZIG ZU ACHTUNDZWANZIG [ELLEN]. DER RAUM, DEN DIE HÖRNER EINNAHMEN, BETRUG EINE ELLE AUF DER EINEN SEITE UND EINE ELLE AUF DER ANDEREN SEITE, UND ES BLIEBEN SECHSUNDZWANZIG ZU SECHSUNDZWANZIG [ELLEN]. DER RAUM, DEN DIE PRIESTER ZUM GEHEN BRAUCHTEN, BETRUG EINE ELLE AUF DER EINEN SEITE UND EINE ELLE AUF DER ANDEREN SEITE, UND ES BLIEBEN VIERUNDZWANZIG ELLEN ZU VIERUNDZWANZIG ELLEN ALS HERRICHTUNGSPLATZ. R. JOSE SAGTE: URSPRÜNGLICH HATTE ER NUR ACHTUNDZWANZIG ZU ACHTUNDZWANZIG ELLEN, EINZUG UND HÖHE IN DENSELBEN MASSEN, SODASS DER HERRICHTUNGSPLATZ NUR ZWANZIG ZU ZWANZIG [ELLEN] HATTE. ALS ABER DIE EXULANTEN HINAUFZOGEN, FÜGTEN SIE NOCH VIER ELLEN AUF DER NORDSEITE UND VIER ELLEN AUF DER WESTSEITE IN DER FORM EINES GAMMA HINZU. ES HEISST NÄMLICH: und der Ariél hatte zwölf Länge zu zwölf Breite, viereckig. MAN KÖNNTE GLAUBEN, NUR ZWÖLF ZU ZWÖLF [ELLEN], SO HEISST ES: an seinen vier Seiten, DIES LEHRT, DASS ER VON DER MITTE AUS GEMESSEN ZWÖLF ELLEN AUF JEDER SEITE HATTE. EIN ROTER STRICH UMGAB IHN IN DER MITTE, UM ZWISCHEN DEN OBEREN BLUT[SPRENGUNGEN] UND DEN UNTEREN BLUT[SPRENGUNGEN]ZU SCHEIDEN. DAS FUNDAMENT ZOG SICH AN DER GANZEN NORDSEITE UND AN DER GANZEN WESTSEITE ENTLANG, SODASS ER EINE ELLE IN DER SÜDSEITE UND EINE ELLE IN DER OSTSEITE EINNAHM.",
+ "AN DER SÜDWESTLICHEN ECKEWAREN ZWEI LÖCHER, WIE ZWEI FEINE DILLEN, DURCH DIE DAS AUF DAS WESTLICHE FUNDAMENT UND DAS AUF DAS SÜDLICHE FUNDAMENT GEGOSSENE BLUT ABFLOSS, SICH IM KANAL VERMISCHTE UND IN DEN QIDRONBACH SICH ERGOSS.",
+ "AN DERSELBEN ECKE WAR UNTEN AUF DEM ESTRICH EINE STELLE VON EINER ELLE ZU EINER ELLE, WO EINE MARMORPLATTE LAG, AN DER EIN RING BEFESTIGT WAR, WO MAN IN DIE GULLY HINABSTIEG UND SIE REINIGTE. AUF DER SÜDSEITE DES ALTARS WAR EINE RAMPE, ZWEIUNDDREISSIG [ELLEN] LANG UND SECHZEHN BREIT, UND AN DER WESTSEITE HATTE SIE EINE VERTIEFUNG, WO MAN DIE UNTAUGLICH GEWORDENEN VOGEL-SÜNDOPFER HINTAT.",
+ "SOWOHL DIE STEINE ZUR RAMPE ALS AUCH DIE STEINE ZUM ALTAR WAREN AUS DER EBENE BETH KEREM; MAN GRUB BIS UNTER DIE JUNGFRÄULICHE ERDE UND HOLTE VON DA GANZE STEINE, ÜBER DIE NOCH NIE EIN EISEN GESCHWUNGEN WURDE, DENN DAS EISEN MACHTE SIE UNTAUGLICH SCHON DURCH BERÜHRUNG, EINE BESCHÄDIGUNG AUCH ALLES ANDERE. WAR EINER VON IHNENBESCHÄDIGT WORDEN, SO WAR ER UNTAUGLICH, ALLE ÜBRIGEN ABER TAUGLICH. ZWEIMAL IM JAHRE WEISSTEMAN SIE, EINMAL ZUM PESAḤFESTE UND EINMAL ZUM HÜTTENFESTE, DEN TEMPEL EINMAL, ZUM PESAḤFESTE. RABBI SAGTE, MAN WEISSTE SIE JEDEN VORABEND DES ŠABBATHS MIT EINEM TUCHE, WEGEN DES BLUTES. MAN KALKTE SIE NICHT MIT EINER EISERNEN KELLE, WEIL SIE SIE BERÜHREN UND UNTAUGLICH MACHEN KÖNNTE. DAS EISEN WURDE GESCHAFFEN, DIE TAGE DES MENSCHEN ZU KÜRZEN, DER ALTAR ABER WURDE GESCHAFFEN, DIE TAGE DES MENSCHEN ZU VERLÄNGERN, UND ES GEBÜHRT SICH NICHT, DAS [DAS LEBEN] KÜRZENDE ÜBER DAS [DAS LEBEN] VERLÄNGERNDE ZU SCHWINGEN.",
+ "AN DER NORDSEITE DES ALTARS WAREN RINGE, SECHS REIHEN JE VIER, MANCHE SAGEN, VIER JE SECHS, AN DENENMAN DIE OPFERTIERE SCHLACHTETE. DER SCHLACHTRAUM LAG NÖRDLICH VOM ALTAR, UND DA WAREN ACHT NIEDRIGE PFEILER, DIE OBEN VIERECKE AUS ZEDERNHOLZ HATTEN, IN DIE EISERNE HAKEN EINGELASSEN WAREN, DREI REIHEN AN JEDEM, DARAN [DIE OPFERTIERE] AUFZUHÄNGEN; ABGEHÄUTET WURDEN SIE AUF MARMORTISCHEN, DIE ZWISCHEN DEN PFEILERN [STANDEN].",
+ "DAS WASCHBECKEN BEFAND SICH ZWISCHEN DER VORHALLE UND DEM ALTAR, MEHR NACH SÜDEN HIN. ZWISCHEN DER VORHALLE UND DEM ALTAR WAREN ZWEIUNDZWANZIG ELLEN, UND ZWÖLF STUFEN WAREN DA, JEDE STUFE HATTE EINE HALBE ELLE HÖHE UND EINE ELLE TIEFE; EINE ELLE, EINE ELLE UND EIN ABSATZ VON DREI [ELLEN], EINE ELLE, EINE ELLE UND EIN ABSATZ VON DREI [ELLEN], UND ZU OBERST EINE ELLE, EINE ELLE UND EIN ABSATZ VON VIER [ELLEN]. R. JEHUDA SAGT, ZU OBERST EINE ELLE, EINE ELLE UND EIN ABSATZ VON FÜNF [ELLEN].",
+ "DIE TÜR DER VORHALLE HATTE EINE HÖHE VON VIERZIG ELLEN UND EINE BREITE VON ZWANZIG ELLEN, UND FÜNF SIMSE AUS ESGHENHOLZ DARÜBER. DAS UNTERSTE ÜBERRAGTE DIE TÜR EINE ELLE AUF DER EINEN SEITE UND EINE ELLE AUF DER ANDEREN SEITE, EBENSO ÜBERRAGTE [JEDES] DARÜBERLIEGENDE [DAS UNTERE] EINE ELLE AUF DER EINEN SEITE UND EINE ELLE AUF DER ANDEREN SEITE, SODASS DAS OBERSTE DREISSIG ELLEN [LANG WAR], UND ZWISCHEN DEM EINEN UND DEM ANDEREN WAR EINE SCHICHT STEINE.",
+ "ZWISCHEN DER WAND DES TEMPELSCHIFFES UND DER WAND DER VORHALLEWAREN STANGEN AUS ZEDERNHOLZEINGEBAUT, DAMIT SIE NICHT WANKEN, UND AM GEBÄLK DER VORHALLE WAREN GOLDENE KETTEN BEFESTIGT, AN DENEN DIE JUNGPRIESTER EMPORSTIEGEN UND DIE KRONEN BESAHEN, WIE ES HEISST:die Kronen sollen für Ḥelem und Ṭobija und Jeda͑ja und Ḥen, den Sohn Çephanjas, zum Andenken sein im Tempel des Herrn. AN DER TÜR DES TEMPELSCHIFFES STAND EIN GOLDENER WEINSTOCK, DER VON STÜTZEN GETRAGEN WURDE, UND WER EIN BLATT, EINE BEERE ODER EINE TRAUBE SPENDETE, BRACHTE SIE UND HÄNGTE SIE DARAN. R. ELIE͑ZER B. R. ÇADOQ ERZÄHLTE: EINST TATEN SICH DREIHUNDERT PRIESTER ZUSAMMEN, UM IHN FORTZUBRINGEN."
+ ],
+ [
+ "DIE TÜR DES TEMPELSCHIFFES HATTE EINE HÖHE VON ZWAINZIG ELLEN UND EINE BREITE VON ZEHN [ELLEN], UND SIE HATTE VIER TÜRFLÜGEL, ZWEI VON INNEN UND ZWEI VON AUSSEN, DENN ES HEISST: zwei Türen zum Tempel, und zum Heiligen; DIE ÄUSSEREN ÖFFNETEN SICH NACH DER TÜRHÖHLUNG, DIE DICKE DER WAND BEDECKEND, UND DIE INNERN ÖFFNETEN SICH NACH DEM INNERN DES HAUSES, [DIE WAND] HINTER DER TÜR BEDECKEND. DAS GANZE HAUS WAR NÄMLICH MIT GOLD VERKLEIDET, NUR NICHT HINTER DEN TÜREN. R. JEHUDA SAGT, SIE BEFANDEN SICH IN DER MITTE DER TÜRHÖHLUNG; ES WAREN KLAPPTÜREN UND WURDEN NACH RÜCKWÄRTS ZUSAMMENGEKLAPPT, DIESE ZWEIEINHALB ELLEN UND JENE ZWEIEINHALB ELLEN, DER TÜRPFOSTEN AN DER EINEN SEITE EINE HALBE ELLE UND DER TÜRPFOSTEN AN DER ANDEREN SEITE EINE HALBE ELLE, DENN ES HEISST: und zwei Türflügel an den Türen, zwei drehbare Türflügel, zwei an der einen Tür und zwei Türflügel an der anderen.",
+ "DAS GROSSE TOR HATTE ZWEI PFORTEN, EINE NÖRDLICH UND EINE SÜDLICH; DURCH DIE SÜDLICHE IST NOCH NIE EIN MENSCH GEGANGEN, UND DIESE IST ES, VON DER JEḤEZQEL SAGTE: und der Herr sprach zu mir: Dieses Tor bleibe verschlossen und werde nie geöffnet, niemand trete da ein, denn durch dieses geht der Herr, der Gott Jisraéls, verschlossen bleibe es. ER NAHM DEN SCHLÜSSEL, ÖFFNETE DIE PFORTE UND TRAT IN DEN SEITENRAUM, UND VON DEM SEITENRAUME IN DAS TEMPELSCHIFF. R. JEHUDA SAGT, ER GING DURCH DIE DICKE DER WAND, BIS ER SICH ZWISCHEN DEN BEIDEN TORFLÜGELN BEFAND, DANN ÖFFNETE ER DIE ÄUSSEREN VON INNEN UND DIE INNEREN VON AUSSEN.",
+ "DAWAREN ACHTUNDDREISSIG SEITENRÄUME, FÜNFZEHN IN DER Fol.37 NORDSEITE, FÜNFZEHN IN DER SÜDSEITE UND ACHT IN DER WESTSEITE. IN DER NORDSEITE UND IN DER SÜDSEITE JE FÜNF ÜBER FÜNF UND FÜNF DARÜBER, IN DER WESTSEITE DREI ÜBER DREI UND ZWEI DARÜBER. JEDER HATTE DREI TÜREN, EINE NACH DEM SEITENRAUME RECHTS, EINE NACH DEM SEITENRAUME LINKS UND EINE NACH DEM SEITENRAUME DARÜBER; DIE DER NORDOSTECKE HATTEN FÜNF TÜREN, EINE NACH DEM SEITENRAUME RECHTS, EINE NACH DEM SEITENRAUME DARÜBER, EINE NACH DER WENDELTREPPE, EINE NACH DER PFORTEUND EINE NACH DEM TEMPELSCHIFFE.",
+ "DER UNTERE HATTE FÜNF [ELLEN]UND DIE DECKESECHS, DER MITTELSTE SECHS UND DIE DECKE SIEBEN, UND DER OBERE SIEBEN, WIE ES HEISST:der unterste Anbau hatte fünf Ellen Breite, der mittelste sechs Ellen Breite und der dritte sieben Ellen Breite.",
+ "VON DER NORDOSTECKE FÜHRTE EINE WENDELTREPPEZUR NORDWESTECKE HINAUF, VON WO AUS MAN ZU DEN DÄCHERN DER SEITENRÄUME GELANGTE. MAN STIEG AUF DIE WENDELTREPPE, UND MIT DEM GESICHTE NACH WESTEN GING MAN DIE GANZE NORDSEITE, BIS MAN ZUR WESTSEITE GELANGTE; WAR MAN AN DER WESTSEITE ANGELANGT, SO WANDTE MAN DAS GESICHT NACH SÜDEN UND GING DIE WESTSEITE, BIS MAN ZUR SÜDSEITE GELANGTE; WAR MAN AN DER SÜDSEITE ANGELANGT, SO WANDTE MAN DAS GESICHT NACH OSTEN UND GING DIE SÜDSEITE, BIS MAN ZUR TÜR DES SÖLLERS GELANGTE, DENN DIE TÜR DES SÖLLERS WAR AUF DER SÜDSEITE. AN DER TÜR DES SÖLLERS WAREN ZWEI STANGENAUS ZEDERNHOLZ, AN DENEN MAN ZUM DACHE DES SÖLLERS GELANGTE, UND STEINVORSPRÜNGE TRENNTEN AUF DEM SÖLLER ZWISCHEN DEM HEILIGEN UND DEM ALLERHEILIGSTEN. IM SÖLLER WAREN LUKEN, DIE ZUM ALLERHEILIGSTEN FÜHRTEN, DURCH DIE MAN DIE ARBEITER IN KÄSTEN HERUNTERLIESS, DAMIT SICH IHRE AUGEN NICHT AM [GLÄNZE DES] ALLERHEILIGSTEN WEIDEN.",
+ "DER TEMPEL WAR HUNDERT ZU HUNDERT [ELLEN GROSS], BEI EINER HÖHE VON HUNDERT [ELLEN]: SECHS ELLEN BASIS, VIERZIG ELLEN [WAND]HÖHE, EINE ELLE ORNAMENT, ZWEI ELLEN TRAUFE, EINE ELLE GEBÄLK, EINE ELLE ESTRICH, VIERZIG ELLEN [WAND]HÖHE DES SÖLLERS, EINE ELLE ORNAMENT, ZWEI ELLEN TRAUFE, EINE ELLE GEBÄLK, EINE ELLE ESTRICH, DREI ELLEN GELÄNDER UND EINE ELLE RABENSCHEUCHE. R. JEHUDA SAGT, DIE RABENSCHEUCHE SEI NICHT MITZURECHNEN, VIELMEHR HATTE DAS GELÄNDER VIER ELLEN.",
+ "HUNDERT ELLEN VON OSTEN NACH WESTEN: FÜNF ELLEN DIE WAND DER VORHALLE, ELF DIE VORHALLE, SECHS DIE WAND DES TEMPELSCHIFFES, VIERZIG ELLEN SEIN INNENRAUM, EINE ELLE DIE WANDDICKE, ZWANZIG ELLEN DAS ALLERHEILIGSTE, SECHS DIE WAND DES TEMPELS, SECHS DER SEITENRAUM UND FÜNF DIE WAND DES SEITENRAUMES. VON NORDEN NACH SÜDEN WAREN ES SIEBZIG ELLEN: FÜNF DIE TREPPENWAND, DREI DIE WENDELTREPPE, FÜNF DIE WAND DES SEITENRAUMES, SECHS DER SEITENRAUM, SECHS DIE WAND DES TEMPELS, ZWANZIG ELLEN SEIN INNENRAUM, SECHS DIE WAND DES TEMPELS, SECHS DER SEITENRAUM, FÜNF DIE WAND DES SEITENRAUMES, DREI ELLEN DER WASSERABFLUSSRAUM UND FÜNF ELLEN DIE WAND. DIE VORHALLE ÜBERRAGTE [DIE BREITE] FÜNFZEHN ELLEN AUF DER NORDSEITE UND FÜNFZEHN ELLEN AUF DER SÜDSEITE. DIESEN [TEIL] NANNTE MAN SCHLACHTMESSERRAUM, WEIL DA DIE MESSER VERWAHRT WURDEN. DER TEMPEL WAR HINTEN SCHMAL UND VORN BREIT, SODASS ER EINEM [LAGERNDEN] LÖWEN GLICH, WIE ES HEISST:O Gotteslöwe, du Stadt, wo David gelagert. WIE EIN LÖWE HINTEN SCHMAL UND VORN BREIT IST, SO WAR AUCH DER TEMPEL HINTEN SCHMAL UND VORN BREIT."
+ ],
+ [
+ "DER GANZE TEMPELHOF HATTE EINE LÄNGE VON Col.b HUNDERTSIEBENUNDACHTZIG ZU EINER BREITE VON HUNDERTFÜNFUNDDREISSIG [ELLEN]. HUNDERTSIEBENUNDACHTZIG VON OSTEN NACH WESTEN: ELF ELLEN DER JISRAÉLITEN ZUGÄNGLICHE RAUM, ELF ELLEN DER PRIESTERN ZUGÄNGLICHE RAUM, ZWEIUNDDREISSIG DER ALTAR, ZWEIUNDZWANZIG ELLEN [DER RAUM] ZWISCHEN DER VORHALLE UND DEM ALTAR, HUNDERT ELLEN DER TEMPEL UND ELF ELLEN HINTER DEM SÜHNERAUME.",
+ "HUNDERTFÜNFUNDDREISSIG ELLEN VON NORDEN NACH SÜDEN: ZWEIUNDSECHZIG DIE RAMPE UND DER ALTAR, ACHT ELLEN VOM ALTAR BIS ZU DEN RINGEN, VIERUNDZWANZIG DER RAUM FÜR DIE RINGE, VIER VON DEN RINGEN BIS ZU DEN TISCHEN, VIER VON DEN TISCHEN BIS ZU DEN PFEILERN, ACHT ELLEN VON DEN PFEILERN BIS ZUR WAND DES TEMPELHOFES, UND DER REST ENTFÄLLT AUF [DEN RAUM] ZWISCHEN DER RAMPE UND DER WAND UND DEN RAUM DER PFEILER.",
+ "[NOCH] SECHS KAMMERN WAREN IM TEMPELHOFE, DREI AUF DER NORDSEITE UND DREI AUF DER SÜDSEITE. AUF DER NORDSEITE: DIE SALZKAMMER, DIE PARVAKAMMER UND DIE SPÜLKAMMER. IN DER SALZKAMMER VERWAHRTE MAN DAS SALZ FÜR DIE OPFER, IN DER PARVAKAMMER SALZTE MAN DIE HÄUTE DER OPFERTIERE, AUF DEREN DACH BEFAND SICH DAS TAUCHBAD FÜR DEN HOCHPRIESTER AM VERSÖHNUNGSTAGE, UND IM SPÜLRAUME SPÜLTE MAN DAS GEWEIDE DER OPFERTIERE. VON DA FÜHRTE EINE WENDELTREPPE ZUM DACHE DER PARVAKAMMER HINAUF.",
+ "AUF DER SÜDSEITE: DIE HOLZKAMMER, DIE WINDEKAMMER UND DIE QUADERKAMMER. VON DER HOLZKAMMER SAGTE R. ELIE͑ZER B. JA͑QOB, ER HABE VERGESSEN, WOFÜR SIE DIENTE. ABBA ŠAÚL SAGTE, ES WAR DIE KAMMER DES HOCHPRIESTERS UND LAG HINTER DEN BEIDEN ANDEREN. DAS DACH DIESER DREI WAR GLEICHMÄSSIG. IN DER BRUNNENKAMMER BEFAND SICH EIN BRUNNEN MIT EINEM WINDERADE DARÜBER; AUS DIESEM VERSORGTE MAN DEN GANZEN TEMPELHOF MIT WASSER. IN DER QUADERKAMMER HATTE DAS GROSSE SYNEDRIUM JISRAÉLS SEINEN SLTZ UND HIELT GERICHT ÜBER DIE PRIESTERSCHAFT. WURDE AN EINEM PRIESTER EIN MAKEL GEFUNDEN, SO KLEIDETE ER SICH SCHWARZ UND HÜLLTE SICH SCHWARZ, ENTFERNTE SICH UND GING FORT. AN DEM ABER KEIN MAKEL GEFUNDEN WURDE, DER KLEIDETE SICH WEISS UND HÜLLTE SICH WEISS, TRAT EIN UND TAT DIENST MIT SEINEN PRIESTERBRÜDERN. UND SIE VERANSTALTETEN EIN FEST, DASS AN DEN NACHKOMMEN DES PRIESTERS AHRON KEIN MAKEL GEFUNDEN WORDEN WAR, UND SIE SPRACHEN ALSO: GEPRIESEN SEI GOTT, GEPRIESEN SEI ER, DASS AN DEN NACHKOMMEN AHRONS KEIN MAKEL GEFUNDEN WORDEN IST. UND GEPRIESEN SEI ER, DER AHRON AUSERWÄHLT HAT UND SEINE SÖHNE, VOR DEM HERRN ZU STEHEN UND DIENST ZU TUN IM HAUSE DES ALLERHEILIGSTEN."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/English/merged.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/English/merged.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1888debf842d6564e51b9e62b61ab38522dd70c7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/English/merged.json
@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+{
+ "title": "Mishnah Middot",
+ "language": "en",
+ "versionTitle": "merged",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org/Mishnah_Middot",
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "In three places the priests keep watch in the Temple: in the chamber of Avtinas, in the chamber of the spark, and in the fire chamber. And the Levites in twenty-one places: Five at the five gates of the Temple Mount; Four at its four corners on the inside; Five at five of the gates of the courtyard; Four at its four corners on the outside; One at the offering chamber; One at the chamber of the curtain, And one behind the place of the kapporet.",
+ "The officer of the Temple Mount used to go round to every watch, with lighted torches before him, and if any watcher did not rise [at his approach] and say to him, “Shalom to you, officer of the Temple Mount, it was obvious that he was asleep. Then he used to beat him with his rod. And he had permission to burn his clothes. And the others would say: What is the noise in the courtyard? It is the cry of a Levite who is being beaten and whose clothes are being burned, because he was asleep at his watch. Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob said: once they found my mother's brother asleep, and they burnt his clothes.",
+ "There were five gates to the Temple Mount: The two Huldah gates on the south were used both for entrance and exit; The Kiponus gate on the west was used both for entrance and exit. The Taddi gate on the north was not used at all. The Eastern gate over which was a representation of the palace of Shushan and through which the high priest who burned the red heifer and all who assisted with it would go out to the Mount of Olives.",
+ "There were seven gates in the courtyard: three in the north and three in the south and one in the east. In the south: the Gate of Kindling, and next to it the Gate of the First-borns, and then the Water Gate. In the east: the Gate of Nicanor. It had two chambers, one on its right and one on its left. One was the chamber of Pinchas the dresser and one the other the chamber of the griddle cake makers.",
+ "On the north was the Gate of the Sparks which was shaped like a portico. It had an upper chamber built on it, and the priests used to keep watch above and the Levites below, and it had a door opening into the Hel. Next to it was the Gate of the Sacrifice and next to that the fire chamber.",
+ "There were four chambers inside the fire chamber, like sleeping chambers opening into a hall, two in sacred ground and two in non-holy, and there was a row of mosaic stones separating the holy from the non-holy. For what were they used? The one on the southwest was the chamber of sacrificial lambs, The one on the southeast was the chamber of the showbread. In the one to the northeast the Hasmoneans deposited the stones of the altar which the kings of Greece had defiled. Through the one on the northwest they used to go down to the bathing place.",
+ "The fire chamber had two gates, one opening on to the Hel and one on to the courtyard. Rabbi Judah says: the one that opened on to the courtyard had a small opening through which they went in to search the courtyard.",
+ "The fire chamber was vaulted and it was a large room surrounded with stone projections, and the elders of the clan [serving in the Temple] used to sleep there, with the keys of the Temple courtyard in their hands. The priestly initiates used to place their bedding on the ground.",
+ "There was a place there [in the fire chamber] one cubit square on which was a slab of marble. In this was fixed a ring and a chain on which the keys were hung. When closing time came, the priest would raise the slab by the ring and take the keys from the chain. Then the priest would lock up within while the Levite was sleeping outside. When he had finished locking up, he would replace the keys on the chain and the slab in its place and put his garment on it and sleep there. If one of them had a seminal emission, he would go out by the winding stair which went under the Birah, and which was lighted with lamps on both sides, until he reached the bathing place. Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob says: he descended by the winding stair which went under the Hel and he went out by the Taddi gate."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The Temple Mount was five hundred cubits by five hundred cubits. The greater part of it was on the south; next to that on the east; next to that on the north; and the smallest part on the west. The part which was most extensive was the part most used.",
+ "All who entered the Temple Mount entered by the right and went round [to the right] and went out by the left, save for one to whom something had happened, who entered and went round to the left. [He was asked]: “Why do you go round to the left?” [If he answered] “Because I am a mourner,” [they said to him], “May He who dwells in this house comfort you.” [If he answered] “Because I am excommunicated” [they said]: “May He who dwells in this house inspire them to draw you near again,” the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yose to him: you make it seem as if they treated him unjustly. Rather [they should say]: “May He who dwells in this house inspire you to listen to the words of your colleagues so that they may draw you near again.”",
+ "Within it was the Soreg, ten handbreadths high. There were thirteen breaches in it, which had been originally made by the kings of Greece, and when they repaired them they enacted that thirteen prostrations should be made facing them. Within this was the Hel, which was ten cubits [broad]. There were twelve steps there. The height of each step was half a cubit and its tread was half a cubit. All the steps in the Temple were half a cubit high with a tread of half a cubit, except those of the Porch. All the doorways in the Temple were twenty cubits high and ten cubits broad except those of the Porch. All the doorways there had doors in them except those of the Porch. All the gates there had lintels except that of Taddi which had two stones inclined to one another. All the original gates were changed for gates of gold except the gates of Nicanor, because a miracle happened with them. Some say: because their copper gleamed like gold.",
+ "All the walls that were there [in the Temple] were high except the eastern wall, for the priest who burned the red heifer would stand on the top of the Mount of Olives and direct his gaze carefully to see the opening of the Sanctuary at the time of the sprinkling of the blood.",
+ "The courtyard of the women was a hundred and thirty-five cubits long by a hundred and thirty-five wide. It had four chambers in its four corners, each of which was forty cubits. They were not roofed, and so they will be in the time to come, as it says, “Then he brought me forth into the outer court, and caused me to pass by the four corners of the court, and behold in every corner of the court there was a court. In the four corners of the court there were keturot courts” (Ezekiel 46:21-22) and keturot means that they were not roofed. For what were they used? The southeastern one was the chamber of the Nazirites where the Nazirites used to boil their shelamim and shave their hair and throw it under the pot. The northeastern one was the wood chamber where priests with physical defects used to pick out the wood which had worms, every piece with a worm in it being unfit for use on the altar. The northwestern one was the chamber of those with skin disease. The southwestern one: Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob said: I forget what it was used for. Abba Shaul says: they used to store there wine and oil, and it was called the chamber of oil. It [the courtyard of the women] had originally been smooth [without protrusions in the walls] but subsequently they surrounded it with a balcony so that the women could look on from above while the men were below, and they should not mix together. Fifteen steps led up from it to the courtyard of Israel, corresponding to the fifteen [songs of] ascents mentioned in the Book of Psalms, and upon which the Levites used to sing. They were not rectangular but circular like the half of a threshing floor.",
+ "There were chambers underneath the Court of Israel which opened into the Court of Women, where the Levites used to keep lyres and lutes and cymbals and all kinds of musical instruments. The Court of Israel was a hundred and thirty-five cubits in length by eleven in breadth. Similarly the Court of the Priests was a hundred and thirty-five cubits in length by eleven in breadth. And a row of mosaic stones separated the Court of Israel from the Court of the Priests. Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob says: there was a step a cubit high on which a platform was placed, and it had three steps each of half a cubit in height. In this way the Court of the Priests was made two and a half cubits higher than that of Israel. The whole of the Court was a hundred and eighty-seven cubits in length by a hundred and thirty-five in breadth. And thirteen prostrations were made there. Abba Yose ben Hanan says: they were made facing the thirteen gates. On the south beginning from the west there were the upper gate, the gate of burning, the gate of the firstborn, and the water gate. And why was it called the water gate? Because they brought in through it the pitcher of water for libation on the festival. Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob says: in it the water welled up, and in the time to come from there it will come out from under the threshold of the Temple. Corresponding to them in the north beginning in the west were the gate of Yehoniah, the gate of the offering, the women's gate, the gate of song. Why was it called the gate of Yehoniah? Because Yehoniah went forth into captivity through it. On the east was the gate of Nicanor; it had two doors, one on its right and one on its left. There were further two gates in the west which had no special name."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The altar was thirty-two cubits by thirty-two. It rose a cubit and went in a cubit, and this formed the foundation, leaving thirty cubits by thirty. It then rose five cubits and went in one cubit, and this formed the surround, leaving twenty-eight cubits by twenty-eight. The horns extended a cubit in each direction, thus leaving twenty-six by twenty-six. A cubit on every side was allowed for the priests to go round, thus leaving twenty-four by twenty-four as the place for the wood pile [for the altar fire]. Rabbi Yose said: Originally, the complete area [occupied by the altar] was only twenty-eight cubits by twenty-eight, and it rose with the dimensions mentioned until the space left for the altar pile was only twenty by twenty. When, however, the children of the exile returned, they added four cubits on the north, and four on the west like a gamma, since it is said: “Now the hearth shall be twelve cubits long by twelve broad, square” (Ezekiel 43:16). Is it possible that it was only twelve cubits by twelve? When it says, “With four equal sides” (ibid), this shows that he was measuring from the middle, twelve cubits in every direction. A line of red paint ran round it in the middle to divide between the upper and the lower blood. The foundation ran the whole length of the north and of the west sides, and it took up one cubit on the south and one on the east.",
+ "At the southwestern corner [of the foundation] there were two openings like two small nostrils through which the blood which was poured on the western side of the foundation and on the southern side flowed down till the two streams became mingled in the channel, through which they made their way out to the Kidron wadi.",
+ "On the floor beneath at that corner there was a place a cubit square on which was a marble slab with a ring fixed in it, and through this they used to go down to the pit to clean it out. There was an ascent on the south side of the altar, thirty-two cubits [long] by sixteen broad. It had a square window in its western side where disqualified sin-offerings of birds were placed.",
+ "The stones both of the ascent and of the altar were taken from the valley of Bet Kerem. They dug into virgin soil and brought from there whole stones on which no iron had been lifted, since iron disqualifies by mere touch, though a flaw made by anything could disqualify. If one of them received a flaw, it was disqualified, but the rest were not. They were whitewashed twice a year, once at Pesah and once at Hag, and the Sanctuary was whitewashed once a year, at Pesah. Rabbi says: they were whitewashed every Friday with a cloth on account of the blood stains. The plaster was not laid on with an iron trowel, for fear that it might touch and disqualify. Since iron was created to shorten man's days and the altar was created to prolong man's days, and it is not right therefore that that which shortens should be lifted against that which prolongs.",
+ "There were rings to the north of the altar, six rows of four each. And some say, four rows of six each. Upon them they used to slaughter the sacrificial animals. The slaughter house was to the north of the altar, and on it were eight small pillars on top of which were blocks of cedar wood, in which were fixed hooks of iron, three rows in each, upon which they would hang [the sacrifice] and they would strip its hide on tables of marble that stood between the pillars. ",
+ "The laver was between the porch and the altar, a little to the south. Between the porch and the altar there were twenty-two cubits. There were twelve steps there, each step being half a cubit high and a cubit broad. There was a cubit, a cubit and a level space of three cubits, then a cubit, a cubit and a level space of three cubits, then at the top a cubit, a cubit and a level space of four cubits. Rabbi Judah says that at the top there was a cubit, a cubit and a level space of five cubits.",
+ "The doorway of the porch was forty cubits high and its breadth was twenty cubits. Over it were five main beams of ash [wood]. The lowest projected a cubit on each side beyond the doorway. The one above projected beyond this one a cubit on each side. Thus the topmost one was thirty cubits long. There was a layer of stones between each one and the next.",
+ "There were poles of cedar wood stretching from the wall of the Sanctuary to the wall of the Porch to prevent it from bulging. There were chains of gold fixed in the roof beams of the Porch by which the priestly initiates used to ascend and see the crowns, as it says, “And the crowns shall be to Helem and to Toviyah and to Yedaya and to Hen the son of Zephaniah as a memorial in the Temple of the Lord” (Zechariah 6:14). A golden vine stood at the door of the Sanctuary trained on poles, and anyone who offered a leaf or a grape or a bunch used to bring it and hang it there. Rabbi Eliezer bar Zadok said: on one occasion three hundred priests were commissioned [to clear it]."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The doorway of the Hekhal was twenty cubits high and ten broad. It had four doors, two on the inner side, and two on the outer, as it says, “And the Hekhal and the Sanctuary had two doors” (Ezekiel 41:23). The outer ones opened into the interior of the doorway so as to cover the thickness of the wall, while the inner ones opened into the Temple so as to cover the space behind the doors, because the whole of the Temple was overlaid with gold except the space behind the doors. Rabbi Judah says: they stood within the doorway, and they resembled folding doors. These were two cubits and a half [of the wall] and these were two cubits and a half, leaving half a cubit as a doorpost at the one end and half a cubit as a doorpost at the other end, as it says, “And the doors had two leaves apiece, two turning leaves, two leaves for the one door and two leaves for the other” (Ezekiel 41:24).",
+ "The great gate had two small doors, one to the north and one to the south. By the one to the south no one ever went in, and concerning it was stated explicitly be Ezekiel, as it says, “And the Lord said to me: this gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, neither shall any man enter in by it, for the Lord God of Israel has entered in by it; therefore it shall be shut” (Ezekiel 44:2). He [the priest] took the key and opened the [northern] door and went in to the cell, and from the cell he went into the Hekhal. Rabbi Judah says: he used to walk along in the thickness of the wall until he came to the space between the two gates. He would open the outer doors from within and the inner doors from without.",
+ "There were thirty-eight cells there, fifteen on the north, fifteen on the south, and eight on the west. On the north and on the south there were five over five and five again over these; On the west there were three over three and two over these. Each had three openings, one to the cell on the right and one to the cell on the left and one to the cell above. In the [one at the] northeastern corner there were five openings, one to the cell on the right, one to the cell above, one to the mesibbah, one to the door, and one to the Hekhal.",
+ "The [chamber] of the lowest [story] was five cubits wide and at the ceiling six cubits. The [chamber] of the middle [story] was six cubits wide and at the ceiling of seven. The [chamber] of the top [story] was seven cubits wide, as it says, \"The lowest story was five cubits wide, the middle one 6 cubits wide and the third 7 cubits wide\" (I Kings 6:6).",
+ "The mesibbah (a winding walkway) went up from the north-east corner to the north-west corner by which they used to go up to the roofs of the cells. One would ascend the messibah facing the west, traversing the whole of the northern side till he reached the west. When he reached the west he turned to face south and then traversed whole of the west side till he reached the south. When he reached the south he turned to face eastwards and then traversed the south side till he reached the door of the upper chamber, since the door of the upper chamber opened to the south. In the doorway of the upper chamber were two columns of cedar by which they used to climb up to the roof of the upper chamber, and at the top of them was a row of stones showing the division in the upper chamber between the holy part and the Holy of Holies. There were trap doors in the upper chamber opening into the Holy of Holies by which the workmen were let down in baskets so that they should not feast their eyes on the Holy of Holies.",
+ "The Hekhal was a hundred cubits by a hundred with a height of a hundred. The foundation was six cubits, then it rose forty, then a cubit for the ornamentation, two cubits for the guttering, a cubit for the ceiling and a cubit for the plastering. The height of the upper chamber was forty cubits, there was a cubit for its ornamentation, two cubits for the guttering, a cubit for the ceiling, a cubit for the plastering, three cubits for the parapet and a cubit for the spikes. Rabbi Judah says the spikes were not included in the measurement, but the parapet was four cubits.",
+ "From east to west was a hundred cubits: The wall of the porch five cubits, the porch itself eleven, the wall of the Hekhal six cubits and its interior forty, a cubit for the space between, and twenty cubits for the Holy of Holies, the wall of the Hekhal six cubits, the cell six cubits and the wall of the cell five. From north to south was seventy cubits: The wall of the mesibbah five cubits, the mesibbah itself three, the wall of the cell five and the cell itself six, the wall of the Hekhal six cubits and its interior twenty, then the wall of the Hekhal again six and the cell six and its wall five, then the place of the water descent three cubits and its wall five cubits. The Porch extended beyond this fifteen cubits on the north and fifteen cubits on the south, and this space was called the House of the slaughter-knives where they used to store the knives. The Hekhal was narrow behind and broad in front, resembling a lion, as it says, \"Ah, Ariel, Ariel, the city where David encamped\" (Isaiah 29:1): Just as a lion is narrow behind and broad in front, so the Hekhal was narrow behind and broad in front."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The whole of the courtyard was a hundred and eighty-seven cubits long by a hundred and thirty-five broad. From east to west it was a hundred and eighty-seven. The space in which the Israelites could go was eleven cubits. The space in which the priests could go was eleven cubits. The altar took up thirty-two. Between the Porch and the altar was twenty-two cubits. The Hekhal took up a hundred cubits, and there were eleven cubits behind the kapporet.",
+ "From north to south was a hundred and thirty-five cubits.The ascent and the altar took up sixty-two; From the altar to the rings was eight cubits. The rings took up twenty-four cubits. From the rings to the tables was four cubits, From the tables to the dwarf pillars four, And from the dwarf pillars to the wall of the courtyard eight cubits, And the remainder was between the ascent and the wall and the space occupied by the dwarf pillars.",
+ "There were six chambers in the courtyard, three on the north and three on the south. On the north were the salt chamber, the parvah chamber and the washer's chamber. In the salt chamber they used to keep the salt for the offerings. In the parvah chamber they used to salt the skins of the animal-offerings. On its roof was the bath used by the high priest on Yom Kippur. In the washers’ chamber they used to wash the entrails of the sacrificial animals, and from it a winding way went up to the roof of the parvah chamber.",
+ "On the south were the wood chamber, the chamber of the exile and the chamber of hewn stones. The wood chamber: Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob says: I forget what it was used for. Abba Shaul says: It was the chamber of the high priest, and it was behind the two of them, and one roof covered all three. In the chamber of the exile there was a fixed cistern, with a wheel over it, and from there water was provided for all of the courtyard. In the chamber of hewn stone the great Sanhedrin of Israel used to sit and judge the priesthood. A priest in whom was found a disqualification used to put on black garments and wrap himself in black and go away. One in whom no disqualification was found used to put on white garments and wrap himself in white and go in and serve along with his brother priests. They used to make a feast because no blemish had been found in the seed of Aaron the priest, and they used to say: Blessed is the Omnipresent, blessed is He, for no blemish has been found in the seed of Aaron. Blessed is He who chose Aaron and his sons to stand to minister before the Lord in the Holy of Holies."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "versions": [
+ [
+ "Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp",
+ "http://learn.conservativeyeshiva.org/mishnah/"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "heTitle": "משנה מדות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/Hebrew/Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/Hebrew/Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a62494edd7c0a5e7e47928d98b3aa22609db2473
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/Hebrew/Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri.json
@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
+{
+ "language": "he",
+ "title": "Mishnah Middot",
+ "versionSource": "https://archive.org/details/MishnaCorrectedKaufman00WHOLE",
+ "versionTitle": "Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "license": "PD",
+ "digitizedBySefaria": true,
+ "actualLanguage": "he",
+ "languageFamilyName": "hebrew",
+ "isSource": true,
+ "isPrimary": true,
+ "direction": "rtl",
+ "heTitle": "משנה מדות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "א\nבִּשְׁלֹשָׁה מְקוֹמוֹת הַכֹּהֲנִים שׁוֹמְרִין בְּבֵית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ: \nבְּבֵית אַבְטִינָס, וּבְבֵית הַנִּיצוֹץ, וּבְבֵית הַמּוֹקֵד. \nוְהַלְוִיִּם בְּעֶשְׂרִים וְאֶחָד מָקוֹם: \nחֲמִשָּׁה, עַל חֲמִשָּׁה מִשַּׁעֲרֵי הַר הַבַּיִת; \nאַרְבָּעָה, עַל אַרְבַּע פִּנּוֹתָיו מִתּוֹכוֹ; <אַרְבַּע>\nחֲמִשָּׁה, עַל חֲמִשָּׁה מִשַּׁעֲרֵי הָעֲזָרָה; \nאַרְבָּעָה, בְּאַרְבַּע פִּנּוֹתֶיהָ מִבַּחוּץ; <בְּאַרְבָּעָה>\nאֶחָד בְּלִשְׁכַּת הַקָּרְבָּן, \nוְאֶחָד בְּלִשְׁכַּת הַפָּרֹכֶת, \nוְאֶחָד לַאֲחוֹרֵי בֵית הַכַּפֹּרֶת. <לְאֲחוֹרֵי>\n",
+ "ב\nאִישׁ הַר הַבַּיִת \nהָיָה מְחַזֵּר עַל כָּל מִשְׁמָר וּמִשְׁמָר, \nוַאֲבוּקוֹת דּוֹלְקִין לְפָנָיו, \nוְכָל מִשְׁמָר שֶׁאֵינוּ עוֹמֵד, וְאוֹמֵר לוֹ: \n\"אִישׁ הַר הַבַּיִת, שָׁלוֹם עָלֶיךָ!\" \nנִכָּר שֶׁהוּא יָשֵׁן, חוֹבְטוֹ בְמַקְלוֹ. \nוּרְשׁוּת הָיָה לוֹ לִשְׂרוֹף אֶת כְּסוּתוֹ. \nוְהֵן אוֹמְרִים: \n\"מַה קּוֹל בָּעֲזָרָה? <מכו>\nקוֹל בֶּן לֵוִי לוֹקֶה וּבְגָדָיו נִשְׂרָפִין, <וכל>\nשֶׁיָּשֵׁן לוֹ עַל מִשְׁמָרוֹ.\" \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר: \nפַּעַם אַחַת מָצְאוּ אֶת אֲחִי אִמָּה יָשֵׁן, \nוְשָׂרְפוּ אֶת כְּסוּתוֹ. \n",
+ "ג\nחֲמִשָּׁה שְׁעָרִים הָיוּ לְהַר הַבַּיִת: \nשְׁנֵי שַׁעֲרֵי חֻלְדָּה מִן הַדָּרוֹם, \nמְשַׁמְּשִׁין כְּנִיסָה וִיצִיאָה; \nקִפּוֹנוֹס מִן הַמַּעֲרָב, \nמְשַׁמֵּשׁ כְּנִיסָה וִיצִיאָה; \nטְדֵי מִן הַצָּפוֹן, \nלֹא הָיָה מְשַׁמֵּשׁ כְּלוּם; \nשַׁעַר הַמִּזְרָחִי, עָלָיו שׁוּשַׁן הַבִּירָה צוּרָה, \nשֶׁבּוֹ כֹהֵן שׂוֹרֵף אֶת הַפָּרָה, \nוּפָרָה וְכָל מְסַעֲדֶיהָ יוֹצְאִין לְהַר הַמִּשְׁחָה. \n",
+ "ד\nשִׁבְעָה שְׁעָרִים הָיוּ בָעֲזָרָה: \nשְׁלֹשָׁה בַצָּפוֹן, \nוּשְׁלֹשָׁה בַדָּרוֹם, \nוְאֶחָד בַּמִּזְרָח. \nשֶׁבַּדָּרוֹם, שַׁעַר הַדָּלֶק; \nשֵׁנִי לוֹ, שַׁעַר קָרְבָּן; \nשְׁלִישִׁי לוֹ, שַׁעַר הַמַּיִם. \nשֶׁבַּמִּזְרָח, שַׁעַר נִיקָנוֹר. \nשְׁתֵּי לְשָׁכוֹת הָיוּ לוֹ, \nאַחַת מִימִינוֹ וְאַחַת מִשְּׂמאלוֹ: \nאַחַת לִשְׁכַּת פִּנְחָס הַמַּלְבִּישׁ, \nוְאַחַת לִשְׁכַּת עוֹשֵׂה חֲבִתִּים. \n",
+ "ה\nוְשֶׁבַּצָּפוֹן, שַׁעַר נִצוֹץ, \nוּכְמִין אַכְסַדְרָה הָיָה, \nוַעֲלִיָּה בְנוּיָה עַל גַּבָּיו, \nשֶׁהַכֹּהֲנִים שׁוֹמְרִים מִלְּמַעְלָה, \nוְהַלְוִיִּם מִלְּמַטָּן, \nוּפֶתַח הָיָה לוֹ לַחַיִל. \nשֵׁנִי לוֹ, שַׁעַר קָרְבָּן; \nשְׁלִישִׁי לוֹ, בֵּית הַמּוֹקֵד. \n",
+ "ו\nאַרְבַּע לְשָׁכוֹת הָיוּ בְבֵית הַמּוֹקֵד, \nכְּקִיטוֹנוֹת פְּתוּחוֹת לִטְרִיקְלִין, \nשְׁתַּיִם בַּקֹּדֶשׁ, שְׁתַּיִם בַּחוֹל, \nוְרִאשָׁן פְּסֶפְסִין מַבְדִּיל בֵּין קֹדֶשׁ לְחֹל. \nוּמָה הָיוּ מְשַׁמְּשׁוֹת? \nמַעֲרָבִית דְּרוֹמִית \nהָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת טְדֵי קָרְבָּן; \nדְּרוֹמִית מִזְרָחִית, \nהִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת עוֹשֵׂה לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים; \nמִזְרָחִית צְפוֹנִית, \nבָּהּ גָּנְזוּ בְנֵי חַשְׁמוּנַּי אֶת אַבְנֵי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, \nשֶׁשִּׁקְּצוּם מַלְכֵי יָוָן; \nצְפוֹנִית מַעֲרָבִית, \nבָּהּ יוֹרְדִין לְבֵית הַטְּבִילָה. \n",
+ "ז\nשְׁנֵי שְׁעָרִים הָיוּ בְּבֵית הַמּוֹקֵד: \nאֶחָד פָּתוּחַ לְחַיִל, \nוְאֶחָד פָּתוּחַ לַעֲזָרָה. \nאָמַר רְבִּי יְהוּדָה: \nזֶה הוּא שֶׁפָּתוּחַ לַעֲזָרָה, \nפְּשֶׁפֶשׁ קָטָן הָיָה לוֹ, \nשֶׁבּוֹ נִכְנָסִין לִבְלוֹשׁ אֶת הָעֲזָרָה. \n",
+ "ח\nבֵּית הַמּוֹקֵד, כִּפָּה, \nוּבַיִת גָּדוֹל הָיָה, \nמֻקָּף רוֹבֵדִין שֶׁלָּאֶבֶן; \nוְזִקְנֵי בֵית אָב יְשֵׁנִים שָׁם, \nוּמַפְתְּחוֹת הָעֲזָרָה בְיָדָן, \nוּפִרְחֵי כְהֻנָּה אִישׁ כְּסֻתוֹ בָאָרֶץ. <כְּסתוֹ>\n",
+ "וּמָקוֹם הָיָה שָׁם אַמָּה עַל אַמָּה, \nוְטַבְלָה שֶׁלַּשַּׁיִשׁ וְטַבַּעַת הָיְתָה קְבוּעָה בָהּ, \n(וְשַׁלְשֶׁלֶת שֶׁהַמַּפְתְּחוֹת הָיוּ תְלוּיוֹת בָּהּ.) \nהִגִּיעַ זְמַן הַנְּעִילָה, \nהִגְבִּיהַּ אֶת הַטַּבְלָה מִן הַטַּבַּעַת, \nוְנָטַל אֶת הַמַּפְתְּחוֹת מִן הַשַּׁלְשֶׁלֶת, \nוְנָעַל הַכֹּהֵן מִבִּפְנִים, \nוּבֶן לֵוִי יָשֵׁן לוֹ מִבַּחוּץ. \nגָּמַר מִלִּנְעוֹל, \nהֶחְזִיר אֶת הַמַּפְתְּחוֹת לַשַּׁלְשֶׁלֶת, \nוְאֶת הַטַּבְלָה לִמְקוֹמָהּ, \nוְנָתַן כְּסוּתוֹ עָלֶיהָ, וְיָשֵׁן לוֹ. \nאֵרַע קֶרִי בְאֶחָד מֵהֶם, <בְאַחַד>\nיוֹצֵא וְהוֹלֵךְ לוֹ בִמְּסִבָּה הַהוֹלֶכֶת תַּחַת הַבִּירָה, \nוְהַנֵּרוֹת דּוֹלְקִין מִכָּן וּמִכָּן, \nעַד שֶׁהוּא מַגִּיעַ לְבֵית הַטְּבִילָה. \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר: \nבִּמְּסִבָּה הַהוֹלֶכֶת תַּחַת הַחַיִל, \nיוֹצֵא וְהוֹלֵךְ לוֹ בִטְדֵי. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nהַר הַבַּיִת הָיָה חֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת אַמָּה עַל חֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת אַמָּה. \nרֻבּוֹ מִן הַדָּרוֹם, \nשֵׁנִי לוֹ מִן הַמִּזְרָח, \nשְׁלִישִׁי לוֹ מִן הַצָּפוֹן, \nוּמֵעוּטוֹ מִן הַמַּעֲרָב. \nמָקוֹם שֶׁהָיָה רֹב מִדָּתוֹ, \nשָׁם הָיָה רֹב תַּשְׁמִישׁוֹ. \n",
+ "[ב] <ג>\nכָּל הַנִּכְנָסִין לְהַר הַבַּיִת, \nנִכְנָסִין דֶּרֶךְ יָמִין, \nוּמַקִּיפִין דֶּרֶךְ שְׂמאל, \nחוּץ מִמִּי שֶׁאֵרְעוֹ דָבָר, \nשֶׁהוּא מַקִּיף לִשְׂמאל, \n\"מַה לָּךְ מַקִּיף לִשְׂמאל?\" <מְהַלֵּךְ>\n\"שֵׁנִי אָבֵל.\" \n\"הַשּׁוֹכֵן בַּבַּיִת הַזֶּה יְנַחֲמָךְ!\" \n\"שֵׁנִי מְנֻדֶּה.\" \n\"הַשּׁוֹכֵן בַּבַּיִת הַזֶּה יִתֵּן בְּלִבָּם וִיקָרְבוּךָ!\" \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי מֵאִיר. \nאָמַר לוֹ רְבִּי יוֹסֵה: \nעֲשִׂיתָן כְּאִלּוּ עִבְּרוּ עָלָיו אֶת הַדִּין! <עֲשִׂיָּתָן>\nאֶלָּא: \n\"הַשּׁוֹכֵן בַּבַּיִת הַזֶּה יִתֵּן בְּלִבָּךְ, \nוְתִשְׁמַע לְדִבְרֵי חֲבֵרֶיךָ וִיקָרְבוּךָ!\" \n",
+ "[ג]\nלִפְנִים מִמֶּנּוּ, סוֹרֵג גָּבוֹהַּ עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים. \nשְׁלֹשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה פְרָצוֹת הָיוּ בוֹ, \nשֶׁפְּרָצוּם מַלְכֵי יָוָן. \nוְחָזְרוּ וּגְדָרוּם, \nוְגָזְרוּ כְנֶגְדָּם שְׁלֹשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה הַשְׁתַּחֲוָיוֹת. \n\nד\nלִפְנִים מִמֶּנּוּ, הַחַיִל עֶשֶׂר אַמּוֹת, \nוּשְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה מַעֲלוֹת שָׁם. \nרוּם מַעֲלָה חֲצִי אַמָּה, <מַעֲלֶה>\nוְשִׁלְחָהּ חֲצִי אַמָּה. \nכָּל הַמַּעֲלוֹת שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם, \nרוּם מַעֲלָה חֲצִי אַמָּה, <מַעֲלֶה>\nוְשִׁלְחָהּ חֲצִי אַמָּה, \nחוּץ מִשֶּׁלָּאוּלָם. \nכָּל הַפְּתָחִים שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם, \nגָּבְהָן עֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה וְרָחְבָּן עֶשֶׂר אַמּוֹת, \nחוּץ מִשֶּׁלָּאוּלָם. \nכָּל הַפְּתָחִים שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם, \nהָיוּ לָהֶם דְּלָתוֹת, \nחוּץ מִשֶּׁלָּאוּלָם. \nכָּל הַשְּׁעָרִים שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם, \nהָיוּ לָהֶן שְׁקוּפוֹת, \nחוּץ מִשַּׁעַר טְדֵי, \nשֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם שְׁתֵּי אֲבָנִים מֻטּוֹת זוֹ עַל זוֹ. \nכָּל הַשְּׁעָרִים שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם, \nנִשְׁתַּנּוּ לִהְיוֹת שֶׁלַּזָּהָב, \nחוּץ מִשַּׁעֲרֵי נִיקָנוֹר, \nמִפְּנֵי שֶׁנֶּעֱשָׂה בָהֶן נֵס. \nוְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים: \nמִפְּנֵי שֶׁנְּחֻשְׁתָּן מַצְהִיב. \n",
+ "ה\nכָּל הַכֳּתָלִים שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם גְּבוֹהִין, \nחוּץ מִכֹּתֶל הַמִּזְרָחִי, \nשֶׁהַכֹּהֵן הַשּׂוֹרֵף אֶת הַפָּרָה \nעוֹמֵד בְּהַר הַמִּשְׁחָה, \nמִתְכַּוֵּן וְרוֹאֶה פִתְחוֹ שֶׁלַּהֵיכָל \nבְּשָׁעַת הַזָּיַת הַדָּם. \n",
+ "ו\nעֲזָרַת הַנָּשִׁים הָיְתָה \nאֹרֶךְ מֵאָה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ, \nעַל רֹחַב מֵאָה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ. \nוְאַרְבַּע לְשָׁכוֹת הָיוּ בְאַרְבַּע מִקְצוֹעוֹת, \nשֶׁלְּאַרְבָּעִים אַרְבָּעִים אַמָּה. \nלֹא הָיוּ מְקוּרוֹת. \nוְכֵן הֵן עֲתִידוֹת לִהְיוֹת, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (יחזקאל מו,כא-כב) \n\"וַיּוֹצִיאֵנִי אֶל הֶחָצֵר הַחִיצוֹנָה, \nוַיַּעֲבִרֵנִי אֶל אַרְבַּעַת מִקְצוֹעֵי הֶחָצֵר, \nוְהִנֵּה חָצֵר בְּמִקְצֹעַ הֶחָצֵר, \nחָצֵר בְּמִקְצעַ הֶחָצֵר, \nבְּאַרְבַּעַת מִקְצֹעֹת הֶחָצֵר חֲצֵרוֹת קְטֻרוֹת\". \nוְאֵין \"קְטֻרוֹת\" אֶלָּא שֶׁאֵינָן מְקוּרוֹת. \n\nז\nוּמָה הָיוּ מְשַׁמְּשׁוֹת? \nדְּרוֹמִית מִזְרָחִית, \nהִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת הַנְּזִירִים, \nשֶׁשָּׁם הַנְּזִירִים מְבַשְּׁלִים אֶת שַׁלְמֵיהֶם, \nוּמְגַלְּחִין אֶת שְׂעָרָם, \nוּמְשַׁלְּחִים תַּחַת הַדּוּד. \nמִזְרָחִית צְפוֹנִית, \nהִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת דֵּיר הָעֵצִים, \nשֶׁשָּׁם הַכֹּהֲנִים בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין מַתַלְּעִים בָּעֵצִים. \nכָּל עֵץ שֶׁנִּמְצָא בוֹ תוֹלַעַת, \nפָּסוּל מֵעַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. \nצְפוֹנִית מַעֲרָבִית, \nהִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת הַמְּצֹרָעִין. \nמַעֲרָבִית דְּרוֹמִית, \nאָמַר רְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב: \nשָׁכַחְתִּי מָה הָיְתָה מְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת. \nאַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר: \nשָׁם הָיוּ נוֹתְנִין יַיִן וָשֶׁמֶן, \nוְהִיא הָיְתָה נִקְרֵאת לִשְׁכַּת בֵּית שְׁמַנְיָה. \n\nח\nוַחֲלָקָה הָיְתָה בָרִאשׁוֹנָה, \nוְהִקִּיפוּהָ כְצוֹצְטְרָה, \nשֶׁהַנָּשִׁים רוֹאוֹת מִלְמַעְלָה, \nוְהָאֲנָשִׁים מִלְּמַטָּה, \nכְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּא מְעֹרָבִים. \nוַחֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה מַעֲלוֹת \nעוֹלוֹת מִתּוֹכָהּ לַעֲזָרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל, \nכְּנֶגֶד חֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה שִׁיר הַמַּעֲלוֹת שֶׁבַּתִּלִּים, <שֶׁבַּתְּילִּים>\nשֶׁעֲלֵיהֶם הַלְוִיִּם אוֹמְרִים בַּשִּׁיר. \nלֹא הָיוּ תְרוּטוֹת, \nאֶלָּא מֻקָּפוֹת כַּחֲצִי גֹרֶן עֲגֻלָּה. \n",
+ "ט\nוּלְשָׁכוֹת הָיוּ תַחַת עֲזָרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל, \nפְּתוּחוֹת לַעֲזָרַת הַנָּשִׁים, \nשֶׁשָּׁם הַלְוִיִּם נוֹתְנִין כִּנּוֹרוֹת וּנְבָלִים, \nוּמְצִלְתַּיִם, וְכָל כְּלֵי שִׁיר. \n\nי\nעֲזָרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל הָיְתָה \nאֹרֶךְ מֵאָה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ, \nעַל רֹחַב אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה. \nוְכֵן עֲזָרַת הַכֹּהֲנִים הָיְתָה \nאֹרֶךְ מֵאָה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ, \nעַל רֹחַב אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה. \nוְרֹאשָׁן פְּסֶפְסִין מַבְדִּיל \nבֵּין עֲזָרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל לַעֲזָרַת הַכֹּהֲנִים. \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר: \nמַעְלָה הָיְתָה גְבוֹהָה אַמָּה, <הָיָה>\nוְהַדּוּכָן נָתוּן עָלֶיהָ, \nוּבוֹ שָׁלוֹשׁ מַעֲלוֹת שֶׁלַּחֲצִי חֲצִי אַמָּה. <שֶׁלְּחֲצִי>\nנִמְצֵאת עֲזָרַת הַכֹּהֲנִים גְּבוֹהָה מֵעֲזָרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל \nשְׁתֵּי אַמּוֹת וּמַחְצָה. \n\nיא\nכָּל הָעֲזָרָה הָיְתָה \nאֹרֶךְ מֵאָה וּשְׁמוֹנִים וָשֶׁבַע, \nעַל רֹחַב מֵאָה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ. \nוּשְׁלֹשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה הַשְׁתַּחְוָיוֹת הָיוּ שָׁם. \nאַבָּא יוֹסֵה בֶן חָנָן אוֹמֵר: \nכְּנֶגֶד שְׁלֹשָׁה עָשָׂר שְׁעָרִים. \nשְׁעָרִים דְּרוֹמִיִּים סְמוּכִים לַמַּעֲרָב: \nשַׁעַר הָעֶלְיוֹן, \nשַׁעַר הַדָּלֵק, \nשַׁעַר הַבְּכוֹרוֹת, \nשַׁעַר הַמַּיִם. \nוְלָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ שַׁעַר הַמַּיִם? \nשֶׁבּוֹ מַכְנִיסִין צְלוֹחִית שֶׁלַּמַּיִם שֶׁלַּנִּסּוּךְ בֶּחָג. \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר: \nבּוֹ הַמַּיִם מְפַכִּים, \nהַעֲתִידִין לִהְיוֹת יוֹצְאִין מִתַּחַת מִפְתַּן הַבַּיִת. \n\nיב\nוּלְעֻמָּתָן בַּצָּפוֹן סְמוּכִין לַמַּעֲרָב: \nשַׁעַר יְכָנְיָה, \nשַׁעַר הַקָּרְבָּן, \nשַׁעַר הַנָּשִׁים, \nשַׁעַר הַשִּׁיר. \nוְלָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ שַׁעַר יְכָנְיָה? \nשֶׁבּוֹ יָצָא יְכָנְיָה בְגָלוּתוֹ. \nשֶׁבַּמִּזְרָח, שַׁעַר נִיקָנוֹר. \nוּשְׁנֵי פִשַׁפְשִׁין הָיוּ לוֹ, \nאֶחָד מִימִינוֹ, וְאֶחָד מִשְּׂמאלוֹ. \nוּשְׁנַיִם בַּמַּעֲרָב. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nהַמִּזְבֵּחַ הָיָה שְׁלֹשִׁים וּשְׁתַּיִם וְעַל שְׁלֹשִׁים וּשְׁתַּיִם. \nעָלָה אַמָּה וְכָנַס אַמָּה, \nזֶה הַיְסוֹד. \nנִמְצָא שְׁלֹשִׁים עַל שְׁלֹשִׁים. \nעָלָה חָמֵשׁ וְכָנַס אַמָּה, <עָלָה אַמָּה>\nזֶה הַסּוֹבֵב. \nנִמְצָא עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁמוֹנֶה עַל עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁמוֹנֶה. \nמְקוֹם הַקְּרָנוֹת, אַמָּה מִזֶּה, וְאַמָּה מִזֶּה. \nנִמְצָא עֶשְׂרִים וָשֵׁשׁ עַל עֶשְׂרִים וָשֵׁשׁ. \nמְקוֹם הִלּוּךְ רַגְלֵי הַכֹּהֲנִים, \nאַמָּה מִזֶּה, וְאַמָּה מִזֶּה. \nנִמְצָא עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע עַל עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע \nמְקוֹם הַמַּעֲרָכָה. \n\nב\nאָמַר רְבִּי יוֹסֵה: \nמִתְּחִלָּתָהּ לֹא הָיָה אֶלָּא עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁמוֹנֶה. \nכּוֹנֵס וְעוֹלֶה כַּמִּדָּה זוֹ, \nעַד שֶׁנִּמְצָא מְקוֹם הַמַּעֲרָכָה עֶשְׂרִים עַל עֶשְׂרִים. \n\nג\nוּכְשֶׁעָלוּ בְנֵי הַגּוֹלָה, \nהוֹסִיפוּ עָלָיו אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת מִן הַצָּפוֹן, \nוְאַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת מִן הַמַּעֲרָב, \nכְּמִין גַּמָּה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (יחזקאל מג,טז) \n\"וְהָאֲרִאֵיל שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה אֹרֶךְ, \nבִּשְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה רֹחַב רָבוּעַ\". \nיָכוֹל שֶׁאֵינוּ אֶלָּא שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה? \nכְּשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר: \n\"אֶל אַרְבַּעַת רְבָעָיו\", \nמְלַמֵּד שֶׁמִּן הָאֶמְצַע הוּא מוֹדֵד \nשְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה לְכָל רוּחַ. \n\nד\nוְחוּט שֶׁלַּסִּקְרָה חוֹגְרוֹ בָאֶמְצַע, \nלְהַבְדִּיל בֵּין הַדָּמִים הָעֶלְיוֹנִים לַדָּמִים הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים. \nוְהַיְסוֹד הָיָה מְהַלֵּךְ עַל פְּנֵי כָל הַצָּפוֹן, \nוְעַל פְּנֵי כָל הַמַּעֲרָב, \nוְאוֹכֵל בַּדָּרוֹם אַמָּה אַחַת, \nוּבַמִּזְרָח אַמָּה אַחַת. \n",
+ "ה\nוּבְקֶרֶן מַעֲרָבִית דְּרוֹמִית הָיוּ שְׁנֵי נְקָבִין, \nכְּמִין שְׁנֵי חֹטְמִין דַּקִּין, \nשֶׁהַדָּמִין נִתָּנִין עַל יְסוֹד מַעֲרָבִי \nוְעַל יְסוֹד דְּרוֹמִי, וְיוֹרְדִין בָּהֶן, \nוּמִתְעָרְבִין בָּאַמָּה, \nוְיוֹצְאִין לְנַחַל קִדְרוֹן. \n",
+ "ו\nלְמַטָּה בָרִצְפָּה בְאוֹתָהּ הַקֶּרֶן, \nוּמָקוֹם הָיָה שָׁם אַמָּה עַל אַמָּה, \nוְטַבְלָה שֶׁלַּשַּׁיִשׁ, \nוְטַבַּעַת הָיְתָה קְבוּעָה בָהּ. \nשֶׁבּוֹ יוֹרְדִין לַשִּׁית, \nוּמְנַקִּין אוֹתוֹ. \nוְכֶבֶשׁ הָיָה לִדְרוֹמוֹ שֶׁלַּמִּזְבֵּחַ, \nשְׁלֹשִׁים וּשְׁתַּיִם עַל רֹחַב שֵׁשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה, \nוּרְבוּבָה הָיְתָה בְמַעֲרָבוֹ, \nשֶׁשָּׁם הָיוּ נוֹתְנִין פְּסוּלֵי חַטַּאת הָעוֹף. \n",
+ "ז\nאֶחָד אַבְנֵי הַכֶּבֶשׁ וְאֶחָד אַבְנֵי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, \nמִבִּקְעַת בֵּית כֶּרֶם, \nחוֹפְרִין לְמַטָּה מִן הַבְּתוּלָה, \nוּמְבִיאִים מִשָּׁם אֲבָנִים שְׁלֵמוֹת, \nשֶׁלֹּא הוּנַף עֲלֵיהֶן בַּרְזֶל, \nשֶׁהַבַּרְזֶל פּוֹסֵל בִּנְגִיעָה וּבִפְגִימָה בְּכָל דָּבָר. \nנִפְגָּמָה אַחַת מֵהֶן, הִיא פְסוּלָה, \nוְכֻלָּם כְּשֵׁרוֹת. \nמְלַבְּנִים אוֹתוֹ פַעֲמַיִם בַּשָּׁנָה: \nאַחַת בַּפֶּסַח, וְאַחַת בֶּחָג. \nוְהַהֵיכָל פַּעַם אַחַת, בַּפֶּסַח. \nרְבִּי אוֹמֵר: \nכָּל עֶרֶב שַׁבָּת מְלַבְּנִים אוֹתוֹ בַמַּפָּה, \nמִפְּנֵי הַדָּמִין. \n\nח\nלֹא הָיוּ שָׂדִין אוֹתָן בְּכָפִיס שֶׁלַּבַּרְזֶל, \nשֶׁמֵּא יִגַּע וְיִפְסֹל; \nשֶׁהַבַּרְזֶל נִבְרָא לְקַצֵּר יָמָיו שֶׁלָּאָדָם, \nוְהַמִּזְבֵּחַ נִבְרָא לְהַאֲרִיךְ יָמָיו שֶׁלָּאָדָם, \nאֵינוּ בָא בַדִּין שֶׁיִּנוֹף הַמְקַצֵּר עַל הַמַּאֲרִיךְ. \n",
+ "ט\nוְטַבָּעוֹת הָיוּ לִצְפוֹנוֹ שֶׁלַּמִּזְבֵּחַ, \nשִׁשָּׁה סְדָרִים שֶׁלְּאַרְבַּע אַרְבַּע. \nוְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים: \nאַרְבָּעָה שֶׁלְּשֵׁשׁ שֵׁשׁ, \nשֶׁעֲלֵיהֶן שׁוֹחֲטִין אֶת הַקָּדָשִׁים. \n\nי\nבֵּית הַמֻּטְבָּחַיִם הָיָה לִצְפוֹנוֹ שֶׁלַּמִּזְבֵּחַ, \nוְעָלָיו שְׁמוֹנָה עַמּוּדִים נַנָּסִין, \nוּרְבִיעִית שֶׁלָּאֶרֶז עַל גַּבֵּיהֶן, \nוְאָנְקְלָיוֹת שֶׁלַּבַּרְזֶל הָיוּ קְבוּעִין בָּהֶן, \nוּשְׁלֹשָׁה סְדָרִין הָיוּ בְכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד, \nשֶׁבָּהֶן תּוֹלִין וּמַפְשִׁיטִין, \nוְשֻׁלְחָנוֹת שֶׁלַּשַּׁיִשׁ בֵּין הָעַמּוּדִין. \n",
+ "יא\nהַכִּיּוֹר הָיָה בֵין הָאוּלָם וְלַמִּזְבֵּחַ, \nוּמָשׁוּךְ כְּלַפֵּי הַדָּרוֹם. \nבֵּין הָאוּלָם וְלַמִּזְבֵּחַ עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁתַּיִם אַמָּה; \nוּשְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה מַעֲלוֹת הָיוּ שָׁם, \nרוּם מַעֲלָה חֲצִי אַמָּה, \nוְשִׁלְחָהּ חֲצִי אַמָּה. \nאַמָּה אַמָּה רֹבֶד שָׁלוֹשׁ, <מנוקד רוֹבֶד בכל מקום>\nאַמָּה אַמָּה, וְרֹבֶד שָׁלוֹשׁ. \nהָעֶלְיוֹנָה, אַמָּה אַמָּה, וְרֹבֶד אַרְבַּע. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nהָעֶלְיוֹנָה, אַמָּה אַמָּה, וְרֹבֶד חָמֵשׁ. \n",
+ "יב\nפִּתְחוֹ שֶׁלָּאוּלָם, \nגָּבְהוֹ אַרְבָּעִים אַמָּה, \nוְרָחְבּוֹ עֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה. \nוְחָמֵשׁ מַלְתְּרָיוֹת שֶׁלַּמֵּילָה הָיוּ עַל גַּבָּיו. \nהַתַּחְתּוֹנָה עוֹדֶפֶת עַל הַפֶּתַח \nאַמָּה מִזֶּה, וְאַמָּה מִזֶּה. \nוְשֶׁלְּמַעְלָה מִמֶּנָּה עוֹדֶפֶת עָלֶיהָ \nאַמָּה מִזֶּה, וְאַמָּה מִזֶּה. \nנִמְצֵאת הָעֶלְיוֹנָה שְׁלֹשִׁים אַמָּה. \nוְנִדְבָּךְ שֶׁלָּאֲבָנִים הָיָה בֵין כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת. \n",
+ "יג\nוּכְלוֹנְסוֹת שֶׁלָּאֶרֶז הָיוּ קְבוּעִין \nמִכָּתְלוֹ שֶׁלַּהֵיכָל לְכָתְלוֹ שֶׁלָּאוּלָם, \nכְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִבְעַט. \nוְשַׁרְשְׁרוֹת שֶׁלַּזָּהָב הָיוּ קְבוּעוֹת בְּתִקְרַת הָאוּלָם, \nשֶׁבָּהֶן פִּרְחֵי כְהֻנָּה עוֹלִין, \nוְרוֹאִין אֶת הָעֲטָרוֹת שֶׁבַחַלּוֹנוֹת, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (זכריה ו,יד) \n\"וְהָעֲטָרֹת תִּהְיֶה \nלְחֵלֶם וּלְטוֹבִיָּה וְלִידַעְיָה וּלְחֵן בֶּן צְפַנְיָה, \nלְזִכָּרוֹן בְּהֵיכַל יי\". \nוְגֶפֶן שֶׁלַּזָּהָב הָיְתָה עוֹמֶדֶת עַל פִּתְחוֹ שֶׁלַּהֵיכָל, \nוּמֻדְלָה עַל גַּבֵּי כְלוֹנְסוֹת. \nכָּל מִי שֶׁהוּא מִתְנַדֵּב עָלֶה, גַּרְגִּיר, אוֹ אֶשְׁכּוֹל, \nמֵבִיא וְתוֹלֶה בָהּ. \nאָמַר רְבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בִּרְבִּי צָדוֹק: \nמַעֲשֶׂה הָיָה, \nוְנִמְנוּ עָלֶיהָ שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת כֹּהֲנִים. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nפִּתְחוֹ שֶׁלַּהֵיכָל, \nגָּבְהוֹ עֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה, \nוְרָחְבּוֹ עֶשֶׂר אַמּוֹת. \nוְאַרְבַּע דְּלָתוֹת הָיוּ לוֹ: \nשְׁתַּיִם מִבִּפְנִים, וּשְׁתַּיִם מִבַּחוּץ, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (יחזקאל מא,כג) \n\"וּשְׁתַּיִם דְּלָתוֹת לַהֵיכָל וְלַקֹּדֶשׁ\". \nהַחִיצוֹנוֹת נִפְתָּחוֹת לְתוֹךְ הַפֶּתַח, \nלְכַסּוֹת עָבְיוֹ שֶׁלַּכֹּתֶל, \nהַפְּנִימִיּוֹת נִפְתָּחוֹת לְתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת, \nלְכַסּוֹת אַחַר הַדְּלָתוֹת. \nשֶׁכָּל הַבַּיִת טוּחַ בַּזָּהָב, \nחוּץ מֵאַחַר הַדְּלָתוֹת. \n\nב\nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nבְּתוֹךְ הַפֶּתַח הָיוּ עוֹמְדוֹת, \nוּכְמִין אִצְרְפָה מִטָּה הָיוּ, \nנִקְפָּלוֹת לַאֲחוֹרֵיהֶן, \nאֵלּוּ שְׁתֵּי אַמּוֹת וּמַחְצָה, \nוְאֵלּוּ שְׁתֵּי אַמּוֹת וּמַחְצָה, \nחֲצִי אַמָּה מְזוּזָה מִכָּאן, \nוַחֲצִי אַמָּה מְזוּזָה מִכָּאן, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (יחזקאל מא,כד) \n\"וּשְׁתַּיִם דְּלָתוֹת לַדְּלָתוֹת, \nשְׁתַּיִם מוּסַבּוֹת דְּלָתוֹת, \nוּשְׁתַּיִם לַדֶּלֶת אַחַת, \nוּשְׁתֵּי דְלָתוֹת לָאַחֶרֶת\". \n",
+ "ג\nוּשְׁנֵי פְשַׁפְשִׁין הָיוּ לוֹ לְשַׁעַר הַגָּדוֹל: \nאֶחָד בַּצָּפוֹן, וְאֶחָד בַּדָּרוֹם. \nשֶׁבַּדָּרוֹם, לֹא נִכְנַס בּוֹ אָדָם מֵעוֹלָם, \nוְעָלָיו הוּא מְפָרֵשׁ עַל יְדֵי יְחֶזְקֵאל: (יחזקאל מד,ב) \n\"וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלַי יי: \nהַשַּׁעַר הַזֶּה סָגוּר יִהְיֶה, לֹא יִפָּתֵחַ, \nוְאִישׁ לֹא יָבֹא בוֹ, \nכִּי יי אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בָּא בוֹ וְהָיָה סָגוּר\". \nנָטַל אֶת הַמַּפְתֵּחַ וּפָתַח אֶת הַפְּשֶׁפֶשׁ, \nנִכְנַס לְהַתָּא, וּמֵהַתָּא לַהֵיכָל. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nבְּתוֹךְ עָבְיוֹ שֶׁלַּכֹּתֶל הָיָה מְהַלֵּךְ, \nעַד שֶׁנִּמְצָא עוֹמֵד בֵּין שְׁנֵי שְׁעָרִים, \nוּפָתַח אֶת הַחִיצוֹנוֹת מִבִּפְנִים, \nוְאֶת הַפְּנִימִיּוֹת מִבַּחוּץ. \n",
+ "ד\nשְׁלֹשִׁים וּשְׁמוֹנָה תָאִים הָיוּ שָׁם: \nחֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר בַּדָּרוֹם, \nוּשְׁמוֹנָה בַמַּעֲרָב. \nשֶׁבַּצָּפוֹן וְשֶׁבַּדָּרוֹם, \nחֲמִשָּׁה עַל גַּבֵּי חֲמִשָּׁה, \nוַחֲמִשָּׁה עַל גַּבֵּיהֶם. \nוְשֶׁבַּמַּעֲרָב, \nשְׁלֹשָׁה עַל גַּבֵּי שְׁלֹשָׁה, \nוּשְׁנַיִם עַל גַּבֵּיהֶם. \nוּשְׁלֹשָׁה פְתָחִים הָיָה לְכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד: \nאֶחָד לַתָּא מִן הַיָּמִין, \nוְאֶחָד לַתָּא מִן הַשְּׂמאל, \nוְאֶחָד לַתָּא שֶׁעַל גַּבָּיו. \nוּבְקֶרֶן מִזְרָחִית צְפוֹנִית, \nהָיוּ חֲמִשָּׁה פְתָחִים: \nאֶחָד לַתָּא מִן הַיָּמִין, \nוְאֶחָד לַתָּא שֶׁעַל גַּבָּיו, \nוְאֶחָד לַמְּסִבָּה, \nוְאֶחָד לִפְשֶׁפֶשׁ, \nוְאֶחָד לַהֵיכָל. \n",
+ "ה\nהַתַּחְתּוֹנָה, חָמֵשׁ, \nוְרֹבֶד שֵׁשׁ; \nוְהָאֶמְצָעִיּוֹת, שֵׁשׁ, \nוְרֹבֶד שֶׁבַע; \nהָעֶלְיוֹנָה, שֶׁבַע, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (מלכים א ו,ו) \n\"הַיָּצִיעַ הַתַּחְתֹּנָה חָמֵשׁ בָּאַמָּה רָחְבָּהּ, \nוְהַתִּיכֹנָה שֵׁשׁ בָּאַמָּה רָחְבָּהּ, \nוְהַשְּׁלִישִׁית שֶׁבַע בָּאַמָּה רָחְבָּהּ, \nכִּי מִגְרָעוֹת נָתַן לַבַּיִת סָבִיב חוּצָה, \nלְבִלְתִּי אֲחֹז בְּקִירוֹת הַבָּיִת.\"\nוְכֵן הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה, \nיַעֲלֶה עַל הָעֶלְיוֹנָה לַתִּיכֹנָה. <שורה זו אינה מנוקדת>\n",
+ "ו\nוּמְסִבָּה הָיְתָה עוֹלָה \nמִקֶּרֶן מִזְרָחִית צְפוֹנִית לְקֶרֶן צְפוֹנִית מַעֲרָבִית, \nשֶׁבָּהּ הָיוּ עוֹלִים לְגַגּוֹת הַתָּאִים. \nהָיָה עוֹלֶה בִמְסִבָּה וּפָנָיו לַמַּעֲרָב, \nהִלֵּךְ פְּנֵי כָל הַצָּפוֹן, \nעַד שֶׁהוּא מַגִּיעַ לַמַּעֲרָב. \nהִגִּיעַ לַמַּעֲרָב, הָפַךְ פָּנָיו לַדָּרוֹם. \nהִלֵּךְ פְּנֵי כָל הַמַּעֲרָב, \nעַד שֶׁהוּא מַגִּיעַ לַדָּרוֹם. \nהִגִּיעַ לַדָּרוֹם, הָפַךְ פָּנָיו לַמִּזְרָח. \nהָיָה מְהַלֵּךְ בַּדָּרוֹם, \nעַד שֶׁהוּא מַגִּיעַ לְפִתְחָהּ שֶׁלָּעֲלִיָּה, \nשֶׁפִּתְחָהּ שֶׁלָּעֲלִיָּה פָתוּחַ לַדָּרוֹם. \n\nז\nוּבְפִתְחָהּ שֶׁלָּעֲלִיָּה, \nהָיוּ שְׁנֵי כְלוֹנוֹסוֹת שֶׁלָּאֶרֶז, \nשֶׁבָּהֶן הָיוּ עוֹלִין לְגַגָּהּ שֶׁלָּעֲלִיָּה. \nוְרֹאשָׁן פְּסֶפְסִין מַבְדִּיל בָּעֲלִיָּה, \nבֵּין קֹדֶשׁ לְבֵין קֹדֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִׁים. \nוּבְלוּלִּין הָיוּ פְתוּחִין בָּעֲלִיָּה לְבֵית קֹדֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִׁים, <לבין>\nשֶׁבָּהֶן הָיוּ מְשַׁלְּשִׁין אֶת הָאֻמָּנִים בַּתֵּבוֹת, \nכְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִזּוֹנוּ אֶת עֵינֵיהֶן מִבֵּית קֹדֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִׁים. \n",
+ "ח\nהַהֵיכָל, מֵאָה עַל מֵאָה, עַל רוּם מֵאָה. \nהָאֹטֶם שֵׁשׁ אַמּוֹת, וְגָּבְהוֹ אַרְבָּעִים. \nאַמָּה כִיּוֹר, וְאַמָּתַיִם בֵּית דְּלִיפָה. <דילפה>\nוְאַמָּה תִקְרָה, וְאַמָּה מַעֲזֵיבָה. \nוְגָבְהָהּ שֶׁלָּעֲלִיָּה אַרְבָּעִים אַמָּה. \nאַמָּה כִיּוֹר, וְאַמָּה בֵית דְּלִיפָה. <דילפה> \nאַמָּה תִקְרָה, וְאַמָּה מַעֲזֵיבָה. \nשָׁלוֹשׁ אַמּוֹת מַעֲקֶה, \nוְאַמָּה כוֹלֶה עוֹרֵב. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nלֹא הָיָה כוֹלֶה עוֹרֵב עוֹלֶה בַמִּדָּה, \nאֶלָּא אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת הָיָה מַעֲקֶה. \n",
+ "ט\nמִן הַמִּזְרָח לַמַּעֲרָב, מֵאָה אַמָּה: \nכֹּתֶל הָאוּלָם חָמֵשׁ, \nוְהָאוּלָם אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה, \nכֹּתֶל הַהֵיכָל שֵׁשׁ, \nוְתוֹכוֹ אַרְבָּעִים אַמָּה, \nאַמָּה טַרְקְסִין, <טריקסין>\nעֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה לְבֵית קֹדֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִׁים. \nכֹּתֶל הַהֵיכָל שֵׁשׁ, \nוְהַתָּא שֵׁשׁ, \nוְכֹתֶל הַתָּא חָמֵשׁ. \n\nי\nמִן הַצָּפוֹן לַדָּרוֹם, שִׁבְעִים אַמָּה: \nכֹּתֶל הַמְּסִבָּה חָמֵשׁ, \nוְהַמְּסִבָּה שָׁלוֹשׁ, \nכֹּתֶל הַתָּא חָמֵשׁ, \nוְהַתָּא שֵׁשׁ, \nכֹּתֶל הַהֵיכָל שֵׁשׁ, \nוְתוֹכוֹ עֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה, \nכֹּתֶל הַהֵיכָל שֵׁשׁ, \nוְהַתָּא שֵׁשׁ, \nוְכֹתֶל הַתָּא חָמֵשׁ, \nוּבֵית הוֹרָדַת הַמַּיִם שָׁלוֹשׁ אַמּוֹת, \nוְהַכֹּתֶל חָמֵשׁ אַמּוֹת. \n\nיא\nוְהָאוּלָם עוֹדֵף עָלָיו \nחָמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה מִן הַצָּפוֹן, \nוַחֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה מִן הַדָּרוֹם, \nהוּא הָיָה נִקְרֵא \"בֵית הַחֲלָפוֹת\", \nשֶׁשָּׁם גּוֹנְזִין אֶת הַסַּכִּינִים. \nהַהֵיכָל צַר מֵאַחֲרָיו וְרָחָב מִלְּפָנָיו, \nדּוֹמֶה לַאֲרִי, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (ישעיה כט,א) \n\"הוֹי אֲרִיאֵל אֲרִיאֵל קִרְיַת חָנָה דָוִד\", \nמָה הָאֲרִי צַר מֵאַחֲרָיו וְרָחָב מִלְּפָנָיו, \nאַף הַהֵיכָל צַר מֵאַחֲרָיו וְרָחָב מִלְּפָנָיו. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nכָּל הָעֲזָרָה הָיְתָה \nאֹרֶךְ מֵאָה וּשְׁמוֹנִים וָשֶׁבַע, \nעַל רֹחַב מֵאָה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ. \nמִן הַמִּזְרָח לַמַּעֲרָב, \nמֵאָה וּשְׁמֹנִים וָשֶׁבַע: \nמְקוֹם דְּרִיסַת יִשְׂרָאֵל, אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה, \nוּמְקוֹם דְּרִיסַת הַכֹּהֲנִים, אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה, \nהַמִּזְבֵּחַ, שְׁלֹשִׁים וּשְׁתַּיִם, \nבֵּין הָאוּלָם וְלַמִּזְבֵּחַ, עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁתַּיִם אַמָּה, \nהַהֵיכָל מֵאָה אַמָּה, \nוְאַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה לַאֲחוֹרֵי בֵית הַכַּפֹּרֶת. <לְאֲחוֹרֵי>\n",
+ "ב\nמִן הַצָּפוֹן לַדָּרוֹם, \nמֵאָה אַמָּה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ: \nהַכֶּבֶשׁ וְהַמִּזְבֵּחַ, שִׁשִּׁים וּשְׁתַּיִם, \nמִן הַמִּזְבֵּחַ לַטַּבָּעוֹת, שְׁמוֹנֶה אַמּוֹת, \nמְקוֹם הַטַּבָּעוֹת, עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע, \nמִן הַטַּבָּעוֹת לַשֻּׁלְחָנוֹת, אַרְבַּע, \nמִן הַשֻּׁלְחָנוֹת וְלַנַּנָּסִין, אַרְבַּע, \nמֵהַנַּנָּסִין לְכֹתֶל הָעֲזָרָה, שְׁמוֹנֶה אַמּוֹת, \nוְהַמּוֹתָר בֵּין כֶּבֶשׁ לַכֹּתֶל, מְקוֹם הַנַּנָּסִין. \n",
+ "[ג]\nשֵׁשׁ לְשָׁכוֹת הָיוּ בָעֲזָרָה: \nשָׁלוֹשׁ בַּצָּפוֹן, וְשָׁלוֹשׁ בַּדָּרוֹם. \nשֶׁבַּצָּפוֹן: \nלִשְׁכַּת הַמֶּלַח, \nלִשְׁכַּת הַפַּרְוָה, \nלִשְׁכַּת הַמְדִיחִין. \nלִשְׁכַּת הַמֶּלַח, \nשָׁם הָיוּ נוֹתְנִים מֶלַח לַקָּרְבָּן. \nלִשְׁכַּת הַפַּרְוָה, \nשָׁם הָיוּ מוֹלְחִין עוֹרוֹת קָדָשִׁים. \nוְעַל גַּג הָיָה בֵית טְבִילָה \nלְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים. \nלִשְׁכַּת הַמְדִיחִין, \n(שֶׁשָּׁם הָיוּ מְדִיחִין) קִרְבֵי הַקֳּדָשִׁים, \nוּמִשָּׁם מְסִבָּה עוֹלָה לְגַג בֵּית הַפַּרְוָה. \n",
+ "ד\nשֶׁבַּדָּרוֹם: \nלִשְׁכַּת הָעֵץ, \nלִשְׁכַּת הַגּוֹלָה, \nלִשְׁכַּת הַגָּזִית. \nלִשְׁכַּת הָעֵץ, \n(אָמַר רְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב:) \nשָׁכַחְתִּי מָה הָיְתָה מְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת. \nאַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר: \nלִשְׁכַּת כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל הָיְתָה אַחַר שְׁתֵּיהֶם, \nוְגַג שְׁלָשְׁתָּן שָׁוֶה. \nלִשְׁכַּת הַגּוֹלָה, \nשָׁם הָיָה בוֹר הַגּוֹלָה, \nוְהַגַּלְגַּל נָתוּן עָלָיו, \nוּמִשָּׁם מְסַפְּקִין מַיִם לְכָל הָעֲזָרָה. \n\nה\nלִשְׁכַּת הַגָּזִית, \nשָׁם הָיְתָה סַנְהֶדְרִין גְּדוֹלָה שֶׁלְּיִשְׂרָאֵל יוֹשֶׁבֶת, \nוְדָנָה אֶת הַכְּהֻנָּה. \nכֹּהֵן שֶׁנִּמְצָא בוֹ פָסוּל, \nלוֹבֵשׁ שְׁחוֹרִים, וּמִתְעַטֵּף שְׁחוֹרִין, \nוְיוֹצֵא וְהוֹלֵךְ לוֹ; \nוְשֶׁלֹּא נִמְצָא פְסוּל, \nלוֹבֵשׁ לְבָנִים, \nוְנִכְנָס וּמְשַׁמֵּשׁ עִם אֶחָיו הַכֹּהֲנִים. \nיוֹם טוֹב הָיוּ עוֹשִׂין, \nשֶׁלֹּא נִמְצָא פְסוּל בְּזַרְעוֹ שֶׁלָּאַהֲרֹן. \nוְכָךְ הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים: \n\"בָּרוּךְ הַמָּקוֹם, בָּרוּךְ הוּא! \nשֶׁלֹּא נִמְצָא פְסוּל בְּזַרְעוֹ שֶׁלַּאַהֲרֹן. \n\nחסל מסכת מידות \n\n\n\n"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/Hebrew/Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/Hebrew/Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d548e688d4f86daab1195930ed294ab7052afcc5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/Hebrew/Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913.json
@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+{
+ "language": "he",
+ "title": "Mishnah Middot",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001741739",
+ "versionTitle": "Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 2.0,
+ "license": "Public Domain",
+ "digitizedBySefaria": true,
+ "heversionSource": "http://primo.nli.org.il/primo_library/libweb/action/dlDisplay.do?vid=NLI&docId=NNL_ALEPH00174173",
+ "versionTitleInHebrew": "משנה, מהדורת בית דפוס ראם, וילנא 1913",
+ "actualLanguage": "he",
+ "languageFamilyName": "hebrew",
+ "isBaseText": true,
+ "isSource": true,
+ "isPrimary": true,
+ "direction": "rtl",
+ "heTitle": "משנה מדות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "בשלשה מקומות הכהנים שומרים בבית המקדש. בבית אבטינס. ובבית הניצוץ. ובבית המוקד. והלוים בעשרים ואחד מקום. חמשה. על חמשה שערי הר הבית. ארבעה. על ארבע פנותיו מתוכו. חמשה על חמשה שערי העזרה. ארבע. על ארבע פנותיה מבחוץ. ואחד בלשכת הקרבן. ואחד בלשכת הפרוכת. ואחד לאחורי בית הכפורת: \n",
+ "איש הר הבית. היה מחזר על כל משמר ומשמר. ואבוקות דולקין לפניו. וכל משמר שאינו עומד. אומר לו איש הר הבית. שלום עליך. ניכר שהוא ישן חובטו במקלו. ורשות היה לו לשרוף את כסותו והם אומרים מה קול בעזרה. קול בן לוי לוקה ובגדיו נשרפים שישן לו על משמרו. רבי אליעזר בן יעקב אומר. פעם אחת מצאו את אחי אמא ישן ושרפו את כסותו: \n",
+ "חמשה שערים היו להר הבית. שני שערי חולדה מן הדרום. משמשין כניסה ויציאה. קיפונוס מן המערב משמש כניסה ויציאה. טדי מן הצפון. לא היה משמש כלום. שער המזרחי עליו שושן הבירה צורה. שבו כהן גדול השורף את הפרה. ופרה וכל מסעדיה יוצאים להר המשחה: \n",
+ "שבעה שערים היו בעזרה. שלשה בצפון. ושלשה בדרום. ואחד במזרח. שבדרום שער הדלק. שני לו שער הבכורות. שלישי לו שער המים. שבמזרח שער נקנור. ושתי לשכות היו לו. אחת מימינו. ואחת משמאלו. אחת לשכת פנחס המלביש ואחת לשכת עושי חביתין: \n",
+ "ושבצפון שער הנצוץ. וכמין אכסדרה היה. ועלייה בנויה על גביו. שהכהנים שומרים מלמעלן. והלוים מלמטן. ופתח היה לו לחיל. שני לו שער הקרבן. שלישי לו בית המוקד: \n",
+ "וארבע לשכות היו בבית המוקד. כקיטונות פתוחות לטרקלין. שתים בקדש ושתים בחול. וראשי פיספסין מבדילין בין קדש לחול. ומה היו משמשות. מערבית דרומית. היא היתה לשכת טלאי קרבן. דרומית מזרחית היא היתה לשכת עושי לחם הפנים. מזרחית צפונית. בה גנזו בני חשמונאי את אבני המזבח ששקצום מלכי יון. צפונית מערבית בה יורדים לבית הטבילה: \n",
+ "שנים שערים היו לבית המוקד. אחד פתוח לחיל. ואחד פתוח לעזרה. אמר רבי יהודה זה שהיה פתוח לעזרה. פשפש קטן היה לו. שבו נכנסין לבלוש את העזרה: \n",
+ "בית המוקד כיפה. ובית גדול היה. מוקף רובדין של אבן. וזקני בית אב ישנים שם. ומפתחות העזרה בידם. ופרחי כהונה. איש כסתו בארץ: \n",
+ "ומקום היה שם. אמה על אמה וטבלא של שיש וטבעת היתה קבועה בה. ושלשלת שהמפתחות היו תלויות בה. הגיע זמן הנעילה הגביה את הטבלא בטבעת. ונטל את המפתחות מן השלשלת ונעל הכהן מבפנים ובן לוי ישן לו מבחוץ. גמר מלנעול החזיר את המפתחות לשלשלת. ואת הטבלא למקומה. נתן כסותו עליה ישן לו. אירע קרי באחד מהם. יוצא והולך לו במסיבה ההולכת תחת הבירה. והנרות דולקים מכאן ומכאן עד שהוא מגיע לבית הטבילה. רבי אלעזר בן יעקב אומר במסיבה ההולכת תחת החיל יוצא והולך לו בטדי: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "הר הבית היה חמש מאות אמה על חמש מאות אמה רובו מן הדרום. שני לו מן המזרח. שלישי לו מן הצפון. מיעוטו מן המערב. מקום שהיה רוב מדתו שם היה רוב תשמישו: ",
+ "כל הנכנסין להר הבית. נכנסין דרך ימין. ומקיפין ויוצאין דרך שמאל. חוץ ממי שאירעו דבר שהוא מקיף לשמאל מה לך מקיף לשמאל שאני אבל. השוכן בבית הזה ינחמך. שאני מנודה. השוכן בבית הזה יתן בלבם ויקרבוך. דברי רבי מאיר. אמר לו רבי יוסי עשיתן כאילו עברו עליו את הדין. אלא השוכן בבית הזה יתן בלבך. ותשמע לדברי חבריך ויקרבוך: ",
+ "לפנים ממנו סורג גבוה עשרה טפחים. ושלש עשרה פרצות היו שם. שפרצום מלכי יון חזרו וגדרום וגזרו כנגדם שלש עשרה השתחויות. לפנים ממנו החיל. עשר אמות. ושתים עשרה מעלות היו שם. רום המעלה חצי אמה. ושלחה חצי אמה. כל המעלות שהיו שם. רום מעלה חצי אמה. ושלחה חצי אמה. חוץ משל אולם. כל הפתחים והשערים שהיו שם גובהן עשרים אמה. ורחבן עשר אמות. חוץ משל אולם. כל הפתחים שהיו שם היו להן דלתות. חוץ משל אולם. כל השערים שהיו שם היו להן שקופות. חוץ משער טדי. שהיו שם שתי אבנים מוטות זו על גב זו. כל השערים שהיו שם. נשתנו להיות של זהב. חוץ משער ניקנור. מפני שנעשה בהן נס. ויש אומרים מפני שנחשתן מצהיב: ",
+ "כל הכתלים שהיו שם. היו גבוהים. חוץ מכותל המזרחי. שהכהן השורף את הפרה עומד בראש הר המשחה ומתכוין ורואה בפתחו של היכל בשעת הזיית הדם: ",
+ "עזרת הנשים היתה אורך מאה ושלשים וחמש. על רחב מאה ושלשים וחמש. וארבע לשכות היו בארבע מקצעותיה. של ארבעים ארבעים אמה. ולא היו מקורות. וכך הם עתידים להיות. שנאמר (יחזקאל מו, כא) ויוציאני אל החצר החיצונה. ויעבירני אל ארבעת מקצועי החצר. והנה חצר במקצוע החצר. חצר במקצוע החצר. בארבעת מקצעות החצר חצרות קטורות ואין קטורות אלא שאינן מקורות. ומה היו משמשות דרומית מזרחית. היא היתה לשכת הנזירים. ששם הנזירין מבשלין את שלמיהן. ומגלחין את שערן ומשלחים תחת הדוד. מזרחית צפונית. היא היתה לשכת העצים. ששם הכהנים בעלי מומין מתליעין העצים. וכל עץ שנמצא בו תולעת פסול מעל גבי המזבח. צפונית מערבית. היא היתה לשכת מצורעים. מערבית דרומית. אמר רבי אליעזר בן יעקב שכחתי מה היתה משמשת. אבא שאול אומר שם היו נותנין יין ושמן. היא היתה נקראת לשכת בית שמניה. וחלקה היתה בראשונה. והקיפוה כצוצרה שהנשים רואות מלמעלן והאנשים מלמטן. כדי שלא יהו מעורבין וחמש עשרה מעלות עולות מתוכה לעזרת ישראל. כנגד חמש עשרה מעלות שבתהלים. שעליהן הלוים אומרים בשיר. לא היו טרוטות אלא מוקפות. כחצי גורן עגולה: ",
+ "ולשכות היו תחת עזרת ישראל. ופתוחות לעזרת הנשים. ששם הלוים נותנים כנורות ונבלים ומצלתים וכל כלי שיר. עזרת ישראל. היתה אורך מאה אמה ושלשים וחמש. על רוחב אחת עשרה. וכן עזרת כהנים היתה אורך מאה ושלשים וחמש. על רוחב אחת עשרה. וראשי פספסין מבדילין בין עזרת ישראל לעזרת הכהנים. רבי אליעזר בן יעקב אומר. מעלה היתה וגבוהה אמה. והדוכן נתון עליה. ובה שלש מעלות של חצי חצי אמה נמצאת עזרת הכהנים גבוהה מעזרת ישראל שתי אמות ומחצה. כל העזרה היתה אורך מאה ושמונים ושבע. על רחב מאה ושלשים וחמש. ושלש עשרה השתחויות היו שם. אבא יוסי בן חנן אומר. כנגד שלשה עשר שערים. שערים דרומיים סמוכים למערב. שער העליון. שער הדלק. שער הבכורות. שער המים. ולמה נקרא שמו שער המים. שבו מכניסין צלוחית של מים של ניסוך בחג. רבי אליעזר בן יעקב אומר. ובו המים מפכים. ועתידין להיות יוצאין מתחת מפתן הבית. ולעומתן בצפון סמוכים למערב. שער יכניה. שער הקרבן. שער הנשים. שער השיר. ולמה נקרא שמו שער יכניה. שבו יצא יכניה בגלותו. שבמזרח שער נקנור. ושני פשפשים היו לו. אחד מימינו ואחד משמאלו. ושנים במערב. לא היה להם שם: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "המזבח היה שלשים ושתים. על שלשים ושתים. עלה אמה וכנס אמה זה היסוד. נמצא שלשים על שלשים. עלה חמש וכנס אמה זה הסובב. נמצא עשרים ושמנה על עשרים ושמנה. מקום הקרנות אמה מזה ואמה מזה. נמצא עשרים ושש על עשרים ושש. מקום הילוך רגלי הכהנים אמה מזה ואמה מזה. נמצא עשרים וארבע על עשרים וארבע. מקום מערכה. אמר רבי יוסי מתחלה לא היה אלא שמונה ועשרים על שמונה ועשרים. כונס ועולה במדה זו. עד שנמצא מקום המערכה עשרים על עשרים. וכשעלו בני הגולה. הוסיפו עליו ארבע אמות מן הדרום. וארבע אמות מן המערב כמין גמא. שנאמר (יחזקאל מג, טז) והאריאל שתים עשרה ארך בשתים עשרה רחב. רבוע. יכול שאינו אלא שתים עשרה על שתים עשרה כשהוא אומר אל ארבעת רבעיו. מלמד שמן האמצע הוא מודד שתים עשרה אמה לכל רוח. וחוט של סיקרא חוגרו באמצע להבדיל בין הדמים העליונים לדמים התחתונים. והיסוד היה מהלך על פני כל הצפון ועל פני כל המערב. ואוכל בדרום אמה אחת. ובמזרח אמה אחת: ",
+ "ובקרן מערבית דרומית היו שני נקבים כמין שני חוטמין דקין. שהדמים הניתנין על יסוד מערבי ועל יסוד דרומי. יורדין בהן ומתערבין באמה. ויוצאין לנחל קדרון: ",
+ "למטה ברצפה באותו הקרן. מקום היה שם אמה על אמה. וטבלא של שיש. וטבעת היתה קבועה בה. שבו יורדין לשית. ומנקין אותו. וכבש היה לדרומו של מזבח. שלשים ושתים על רחב שש עשרה. ורבובה היתה לו במערבו. ששם היו נותנים פסולי חטאת העוף: ",
+ "אחד אבני הכבש. ואחד אבני המזבח. מבקעת בית כרם. וחופרין למטה מהבתולה. ומביאים משם אבנים שלמות. שלא הונף עליהן ברזל. שהברזל פוסל בנגיעה ובפגימה לכל דבר. נפגמה אחת מהן. היא פסולה. וכולן כשרות. ומלבנים אותן פעמים בשנה. אחת בפסח. ואחת בחג. וההיכל פעם אחת בפסח. רבי אומר, כל ערב שבת מלבנים אותו במפה מפני הדמים. לא היו סדין אותן בכפיס של ברזל. שמא יגע ויפסול. שהברזל נברא לקצר ימיו של אדם. והמזבח נברא להאריך ימיו של אדם. אינו בדין שיונף המקצר על המאריך: ",
+ "וטבעות היו לצפונו של מזבח. ששה סדרים של ארבעה ארבעה. ויש אומרים ארבע של ששה ששה. שעליהן שוחטים את הקדשים. בית המטבחיים. היה לצפונו של מזבח. ועליו שמנה עמודים ננסין. ורביעין של ארז על גביהן. ואונקליות של ברזל. היו קבועין בהם. ושלשה סדרים היו לכל אחד ואחד. שבהם תולין ומפשיטין. על שלחנות. של שיש שבין העמודים: ",
+ "הכיור היה בין האולם ולמזבח. ומשוך כלפי הדרום. בין האולם ולמזבח שתים ועשרים אמה ושתים עשרה מעלות היו שם. רום מעלה חצי אמה. ושלחה אמה. אמה אמה ורובד שלש. ואמה אמה ורובד שלש. והעליונה. אמה אמה. ורובד ארבע. רבי יהודה אומר העליונה אמה אמה ורובד חמש: ",
+ "פתחו של אולם גובהו ארבעים אמה ורחבו עשרים אמה. וחמש מלתראות של מילת היו על גביו. התחתונה עודפת על הפתח אמה מזה ואמה מזה. שלמעלה ממנה עודפת עליה אמה מזה ואמה מזה. נמצאת העליונה שלשים אמה. ונדבך של אבנים היה בין כל אחת ואחת: ",
+ "וכלונסות של ארז היו קבועין מכתלו של היכל לכתלו של אולם. כדי שלא יבעט. ושרשרות של זהב היו קבועין בתקרת האולם. שבהן פרחי כהונה עולין. ורואין את העטרות. שנאמר (זכריה ו, יד). והעטרות תהיה לחלם ולטוביה ולידעיה ולחן בן צפניה לזכרון בהיכל ה'. גפן של זהב היתה עומדת על פתחו של היכל ומודלה על גבי כלונסות. כל מי שהוא מתנדב. עלה. או גרגיר. או אשכול. מביא ותולה בה. אמר רבי אליעזר ברבי צדוק. מעשה היה ונמנו עליה שלש מאות כהנים: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "פתחו של היכל גבהו עשרים אמה. ורחבו עשר אמות. וארבע דלתות היו לו שתים בפנים ושתים בחוץ. שנאמר (יחזקאל מא, כג) שתים דלתות להיכל ולקדש החיצונות נפתחות לתוך הפתח. לכסות עוביו של כותל. והפנימיות נפתחות לתוך הבית לכסות אחר הדלתות. שכל הבית טוח בזהב חוץ מאחר הדלתות. רבי יהודה אומר בתוך הפתח היו עומדות. וכמין איצטרמיטה היו. ונקפלות לאחוריהן. אלו שני אמות ומחצה. ואלו שני אמות ומחצה. חצי אמה מזוזה מכאן. וחצי אמה מזוזה מכאן. שנאמר (יחזקאל מא, כד) ושתים דלתות לדלתות שתים מוסבות דלתות שתים לדלת אחת. ושתי דלתות לאחרת: ",
+ "ושני פשפשין היו לו לשער הגדול. אחד בצפון ואחד בדרום. שבדרום לא נכנס בו אדם מעולם. ועליו הוא מפורש על ידי יחזקאל שנאמר (יחזקאל מד, ב) ויאמר אלי ה' השער הזה סגור יהיה לא יפתח ואיש לא יבא בו כי ה' אלהי ישראל בא בו והיה סגור. נטל את המפתח ופתח את הפשפש. ונכנס להתא ומהתא להיכל. רבי יהודה אומר בתוך עוביו של כותל היה מהלך. עד שנמצא עומד בין שני השערים. ופתח את החיצונות מבפנים. ואת הפנימיות מבחוץ: ",
+ "ושלשים ושמנה תאים היו שם. חמשה עשר בצפון. חמשה עשר בדרום. ושמנה במערב. שבצפון ושבדרום. חמשה על גבי חמשה. וחמשה על גביהם. ושבמערב. שלשה על גבי שלשה. ושנים על גביהם. ושלשה פתחים היו לכל אחד ואחד. אחד לתא מן הימין. ואחד לתא מן השמאל. ואחד לתא שעל גביו. ובקרן מזרחית צפונית. היו חמשה פתחים. אחד לתא מן הימין. ואחד לתא שעל גביו. ואחד למסיבה ואחד לפשפש. ואחד להיכל: ",
+ "התחתונה חמשה ורובד ששה והאמצעית ששה. ורובד שבע. והעליונה שבע. שנאמר (מלכים א' ו, ו) היציע התחתונה חמש באמה רחבה. והתיכונה שש באמה רחבה. והשלישית שבע באמה רחבה: ",
+ "ומסבה היתה עולה מקרן מזרחית צפונית. לקרן צפונית מערבית. שבה היו עולים לגגות התאים. היה עולה במסבה. ופניו למערב. הלך על כל פני הצפון. עד שהוא מגיע למערב. הגיע למערב והפך פניו לדרום. הלך כל פני מערב. עד שהוא מגיע לדרום. הגיע לדרום והפך פניו למזרח היה מהלך בדרום. עד שהוא מגיע לפתחה של עליה. שפתחה של עליה פתוח לדרום. ובפתחה של עליה. היו שתי כלונסות של ארז. שבהן היו עולין לגגה של עליה. וראשי פספסין מבדילים בעליה בין הקדש לבין קדש הקדשים. ולולין היו פתוחין בעליה. לבית קדש הקדשים. שבהן היו משלשלין את האומנים בתיבות. כדי שלא יזונו עיניהן מבית קדשי הקדשים: ",
+ "וההיכל מאה על מאה על רום מאה. האוטם שש אמות. וגובהו ארבעים אמה אמה כיור. ואמתים בית דלפה. ואמה תקרה. ואמה מעזיבה. וגובה של עליה ארבעים אמה. ואמה כיור. ואמתים בית דלפה. ואמה תקרה. ואמה מעזיבה ושלש אמות מעקה. ואמה כלה עורב. רבי יהודה אומר לא היה כלה עורב עולה מן המדה. אלא ארבע אמות היה מעקה: ",
+ "מהמזרח למערב מאה אמה כותל האולם חמש. והאולם אחד עשר. כותל ההיכל שש. ותוכו ארבעים אמה. אמה טרקסין. ועשרים אמה. בית קדש הקדשים. כותל ההיכל שש. והתא שש. וכותל התא חמש. מן הצפון לדרום שבעים אמה. כותל המסבה חמש. והמסבה שלש. כותל התא חמש. והתא שש. כותל ההיכל שש. ותוכו עשרים אמה. כותל ההיכל שש. והתא שש. וכותל התא חמש. ובית הורדת המים. שלש אמות. והכותל חמש אמות האולם עודף עליו חמש עשרה אמה מן הצפון. וחמש עשרה אמה מן הדרום. והוא היה נקרא בית החליפות. ששם גונזים את הסכינים. וההיכל צר מאחריו. ורחב מלפניו. ודומה לארי. שנאמר (ישעיה כט, א) הוי אריאל קרית חנה דוד. מה הארי צר מאחריו. ורחב מלפניו. אף ההיכל צר מאחריו. ורחב מלפניו: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "כל העזרה. היתה אורך מאה ושמונים ושבע על רחב מאה ושלשים וחמש. מן המזרח למערב מאה ושמונים ושבע מקום דריסת ישראל אחת עשרה אמה. מקום דריסת הכהנים אחת עשרה אמה. המזבח שלשים ושתים. בין האולם ולמזבח עשרים ושתים אמה. ההיכל מאה אמה. ואחת עשרה אמה לאחורי בית הכפורת: ",
+ "מן הצפון לדרום מאה ושלשים וחמש הכבש והמזבח ששים ושתים. מן המזבח לטבעות שמונה אמות. מקוםהטבעות עשרים וארבע. מן הטבעות לשלחנות ארבע. מן השלחנות ולננסין ארבע. מן הננסין לכותל העזרה שמנה אמות. והמותר בין הכבש לכותל. ומקום הננסין: ",
+ "שש לשכות היו בעזרה. שלש בצפון. ושלש בדרום. שבצפון לשכת המלח. לשכת הפרוה. לשכת המדיחים. לשכת המלח. שם היו נותנים מלח לקרבן. לשכת הפרוה. שם היו מולחין עורות קדשים. ועל גגה היה בית הטבילה לכהן גדול ביום הכפורים. לשכת המדיחין ששם היו מדיחין קרבי הקדשים. ומשם מסבה עולה לגג בית הפרוה: ",
+ "שבדרום לשכת העץ. לשכת הגולה לשכת הגזית. לשכת העץ. אמר רבי אליעזר בן יעקב. שכחתי מה היתה משמשת. אבא שאול אומר לשכת כהן גדול. והיא היתה אחורי שתיהן. וגג שלשתן שוה. לשכת הגולה. שם היה בור קבוע והגלגל נתון עליו ומשם מספיקים מים לכל העזרה. לשכת הגזית. שם היתה סנהדרי גדולה של ישראל יושבת. ודנה את הכהונה. וכהן שנמצא בו פסול לובש שחורים ומתעטף שחורים ויוצא והולך לו. ושלא נמצא בו פסול לובש לבנים ומתעטף לבנים. נכנס ומשמש עם אחיו הכהנים. ויום טוב היו עושים שלא נמצא פסול בזרעו של אהרן הכהן. וכך היו אומרים. ברוך המקום ברוך הוא. שלא נמצא פסול בזרעו של אהרן. וברוך הוא. שבחר באהרן ובבניו לעמוד לשרת לפני ה' בבית קדשי קדשים: "
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/Hebrew/Torat Emet 357.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/Hebrew/Torat Emet 357.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..31585cfc8785fc8f34eaebf99cf3b54dcee31bf6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/Hebrew/Torat Emet 357.json
@@ -0,0 +1,71 @@
+{
+ "language": "he",
+ "title": "Mishnah Middot",
+ "versionSource": "http://www.toratemetfreeware.com/index.html?downloads",
+ "versionTitle": "Torat Emet 357",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 3.0,
+ "license": "Public Domain",
+ "versionTitleInHebrew": "תורת אמת 357",
+ "actualLanguage": "he",
+ "languageFamilyName": "hebrew",
+ "isBaseText": true,
+ "isSource": true,
+ "isPrimary": true,
+ "direction": "rtl",
+ "heTitle": "משנה מדות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "בִּשְׁלשָׁה מְקוֹמוֹת הַכֹּהֲנִים שׁוֹמְרִים בְּבֵית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, בְּבֵית אַבְטִינָס, וּבְבֵית הַנִּיצוֹץ, וּבְבֵית הַמּוֹקֵד. וְהַלְוִיִּם בְּעֶשְׂרִים וְאֶחָד מָקוֹם. חֲמִשָּׁה, עַל חֲמִשָּׁה שַׁעֲרֵי הַר הַבַּיִת. אַרְבָּעָה, עַל אַרְבַּע פִּנּוֹתָיו מִתּוֹכוֹ. חֲמִשָּׁה, עַל חֲמִשָּׁה שַׁעֲרֵי הָעֲזָרָה. אַרְבָּעָה, עַל אַרְבַּע פִּנּוֹתֶיהָ מִבַּחוּץ. וְאֶחָד בְּלִשְׁכַּת הַקָּרְבָּן, וְאֶחָד בְּלִשְׁכַּת הַפָּרֹכֶת, וְאֶחָד לַאֲחוֹרֵי בֵית הַכַּפֹּרֶת: ",
+ "אִישׁ הַר הַבַּיִת הָיָה מְחַזֵּר עַל כָּל מִשְׁמָר וּמִשְׁמָר, וַאֲבוּקוֹת דּוֹלְקִין לְפָנָיו, וְכָל מִשְׁמָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ עוֹמֵד, אוֹמֵר לוֹ אִישׁ הַר הַבַּיִת, שָׁלוֹם עָלֶיךָ. נִכָּר שֶׁהוּא יָשֵׁן, חוֹבְטוֹ בְמַקְלוֹ. וּרְשׁוּת הָיָה לוֹ לִשְׂרֹף אֶת כְּסוּתוֹ. וְהֵם אוֹמְרִים, מַה קּוֹל בָּעֲזָרָה. קוֹל בֶּן לֵוִי לוֹקֶה וּבְגָדָיו נִשְׂרָפִין, שֶׁיָּשֵׁן לוֹ עַל מִשְׁמָרוֹ. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר, פַּעַם אַחַת מָצְאוּ אֶת אֲחִי אִמָּא יָשֵׁן, וְשָׂרְפוּ אֶת כְּסוּתוֹ: ",
+ "חֲמִשָּׁה שְׁעָרִים הָיוּ לְהַר הַבַּיִת. שְׁנֵי שַׁעֲרֵי חֻלְדָּה מִן הַדָּרוֹם, מְשַׁמְּשִׁין כְּנִיסָה וִיצִיאָה. קִיפוֹנוֹס מִן הַמַּעֲרָב, מְשַׁמֵּשׁ כְּנִיסָה וִיצִיאָה. טָדִי מִן הַצָּפוֹן, לֹא הָיָה מְשַׁמֵּשׁ כְּלוּם. שַׁעַר הַמִּזְרָחִי, עָלָיו שׁוּשַׁן הַבִּירָה צוּרָה, שֶׁבּוֹ כֹהֵן גָּדוֹל הַשּׂוֹרֵף אֶת הַפָּרָה וּפָרָה וְכָל מְסַעֲדֶיהָ יוֹצְאִים לְהַר הַמִּשְׁחָה: ",
+ "שִׁבְעָה שְׁעָרִים הָיוּ בָעֲזָרָה, שְׁלשָׁה בַצָּפוֹן וּשְׁלשָׁה בַדָּרוֹם וְאֶחָד בַּמִּזְרָח. שֶׁבַּדָּרוֹם, שַׁעַר הַדֶּלֶק. שֵׁנִי לוֹ, שַׁעַר הַבְּכוֹרוֹת. שְׁלִישִׁי לוֹ, שַׁעַר הַמָּיִם. שֶׁבַּמִּזְרָח, שַׁעַר נִקָּנוֹר, וּשְׁתֵּי לְשָׁכוֹת הָיוּ לוֹ, אַחַת מִימִינוֹ וְאַחַת מִשְּׂמֹאלוֹ, אַחַת לִשְׁכַּת פִּנְחָס הַמַּלְבִּישׁ, וְאַחַת לִשְׁכַּת עוֹשֵׂי חֲבִתִּין: ",
+ "וְשֶׁבַּצָּפוֹן, שַׁעַר הַנִּיצוֹץ. וּכְמִין אַכְסַדְרָה הָיָה, וַעֲלִיָּה בְנוּיָה עַל גַּבָּיו, שֶׁהַכֹּהֲנִים שׁוֹמְרִים מִלְמַעְלָן וְהַלְוִיִּם מִלְּמַטָּן, וּפֶתַח הָיָה לוֹ לַחֵיל. שֵׁנִי לוֹ, שַׁעַר הַקָּרְבָּן. שְׁלִישִׁי לוֹ, בֵּית הַמּוֹקֵד: ",
+ "וְאַרְבַּע לְשָׁכוֹת הָיוּ בְּבֵית הַמּוֹקֵד, כְּקִיטוֹנוֹת פְּתוּחוֹת לִטְרַקְלִין, שְׁתַּיִם בַּקֹּדֶשׁ וּשְׁתַּיִם בַּחֹל, וְרָאשֵׁי פִסְפָּסִין מַבְדִּילִין בֵּין קֹדֶשׁ לַחֹל. וּמֶה הָיוּ מְשַׁמְּשׁוֹת. מַעֲרָבִית דְּרוֹמִית, הִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת טְלָאֵי קָרְבָּן. דְּרוֹמִית מִזְרָחִית, הִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת עוֹשֵׂי לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים. מִזְרָחִית צְפוֹנִית, בָּהּ גָּנְזוּ בְנֵי חַשְׁמוֹנַאי אֶת אַבְנֵי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ שֶׁשִּׁקְּצוּם מַלְכֵי יָוָן. צְפוֹנִית מַעֲרָבִית, בָּהּ יוֹרְדִים לְבֵית הַטְּבִילָה: ",
+ "שְׁנַיִם שְׁעָרִים הָיוּ לְבֵית הַמּוֹקֵד, אֶחָד פָּתוּחַ לַחֵיל וְאֶחָד פָּתוּחַ לָעֲזָרָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, זֶה שֶׁהָיָה פָתוּחַ לָעֲזָרָה, פִּשְׁפָּשׁ קָטָן הָיָה לוֹ, שֶׁבּוֹ נִכְנָסִין לִבְלֹשׁ אֶת הָעֲזָרָה: ",
+ "בֵּית הַמּוֹקֵד, כִּפָּה, וּבַיִת גָּדוֹל הָיָה, מֻקָּף רוֹבָדִין שֶׁל אֶבֶן, וְזִקְנֵי בֵית אָב יְשֵׁנִים שָׁם, וּמַפְתְּחוֹת הָעֲזָרָה בְּיָדָם, וּפִרְחֵי כְהֻנָּה, אִישׁ כִּסְתּוֹ בָאָרֶץ: ",
+ "וּמָקוֹם הָיָה שָׁם, אַמָּה עַל אַמָּה, וְטַבְלָא שֶׁל שַׁיִשׁ וְטַבַּעַת הָיְתָה קְבוּעָה בָהּ, וְשַׁלְשֶׁלֶת שֶׁהַמַּפְתְּחוֹת הָיוּ תְלוּיוֹת בָּהּ. הִגִּיעַ זְמַן הַנְּעִילָה, הִגְבִּיהַּ אֶת הַטַּבְלָא בַּטַּבַּעַת וְנָטַל אֶת הַמַּפְתְּחוֹת מִן הַשַּׁלְשֶׁלֶת, וְנָעַל הַכֹּהֵן מִבִּפְנִים, וּבֶן לֵוִי יָשֵׁן לוֹ מִבַּחוּץ. גָּמַר מִלִּנְעֹל, הֶחֱזִיר אֶת הַמַּפְתְּחוֹת לַשַּׁלְשֶׁלֶת וְאֶת הַטַּבְלָא לִמְקוֹמָהּ, נָתַן כְּסוּתוֹ עָלֶיהָ, יָשֵׁן לוֹ. אֵרַע קֶרִי בְּאַחַד מֵהֶם, יוֹצֵא וְהוֹלֵךְ לוֹ בַמְּסִבָּה הַהוֹלֶכֶת תַּחַת הַבִּירָה, וְהַנֵּרוֹת דּוֹלְקִים מִכָּאן וּמִכָּאן, עַד שֶׁהוּא מַגִּיעַ לְבֵית הַטְּבִילָה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר, בַּמְּסִבָּה הַהוֹלֶכֶת תַּחַת הַחֵיל יוֹצֵא וְהוֹלֵךְ לוֹ בְּטָדִי: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "הַר הַבַּיִת הָיָה חֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת אַמָּה עַל חֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת אַמָּה, רֻבּוֹ מִן הַדָּרוֹם, שֵׁנִי לוֹ מִן הַמִּזְרָח, שְׁלִישִׁי לוֹ מִן הַצָּפוֹן, מִעוּטוֹ מִן הַמַּעֲרָב. מְקוֹם שֶׁהָיָה רֹב מִדָּתוֹ, שָׁם הָיָה רֹב תַּשְׁמִישׁוֹ: ",
+ "כָּל הַנִּכְנָסִין לְהַר הַבַּיִת נִכְנָסִין דֶּרֶךְ יָמִין וּמַקִּיפִין וְיוֹצְאִין דֶּרֶךְ שְׂמֹאל, חוּץ מִמִּי שֶׁאֵרְעוֹ דָבָר, שֶׁהוּא מַקִּיף לִשְׂמֹאל. מַה לְּךָ מַקִּיף לִשְׂמֹאל, שֶׁאֲנִי אָבֵל, הַשּׁוֹכֵן בַּבַּיִת הַזֶּה יְנַחֲמֶךָּ. שֶׁאֲנִי מְנֻדֶּה, הַשּׁוֹכֵן בַּבַּיִת הַזֶּה יִתֵּן בְּלִבָּם וִיקָרְבוּךָ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, עֲשִׂיתָן כְּאִלּוּ עָבְרוּ עָלָיו אֶת הַדִּין. אֶלָּא, הַשּׁוֹכֵן בַּבַּיִת הַזֶּה יִתֵּן בְּלִבְּךָ וְתִשְׁמַע לְדִבְרֵי חֲבֵרֶיךָ וִיקָרְבוּךָ: ",
+ "לִפְנִים מִמֶּנּוּ, סוֹרֵג, גָּבוֹהַּ עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים. וּשְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה פְרָצוֹת הָיוּ שָׁם, שֶׁפְּרָצוּם מַלְכֵי יָוָן. חָזְרוּ וּגְדָרוּם, וְגָזְרוּ כְנֶגְדָּם שְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיוֹת. לִפְנִים מִמֶּנּוּ, הַחֵיל, עֶשֶׂר אַמּוֹת. וּשְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה מַעֲלוֹת הָיוּ שָׁם. רוּם הַמַּעֲלָה חֲצִי אַמָּה, וְשִׁלְחָהּ חֲצִי אַמָּה. כָּל הַמַּעֲלוֹת שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם, רוּם מַעֲלָה חֲצִי אַמָּה, וְשִׁלְחָהּ חֲצִי אַמָּה, חוּץ מִשֶּׁל אוּלָם. כָּל הַפְּתָחִים וְהַשְּׁעָרִים שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם, גָּבְהָן עֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה, וְרָחְבָּן עֶשֶׂר אַמּוֹת, חוּץ מִשֶּׁל אוּלָם. כָּל הַפְּתָחִים שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם, הָיוּ לָהֶן דְּלָתוֹת, חוּץ מִשֶּׁל אוּלָם. כָּל הַשְּׁעָרִים שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם, הָיוּ לָהֶן שְׁקוֹפוֹת, חוּץ מִשַּׁעַר טָדִי, שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם שְׁתֵּי אֲבָנִים מֻטּוֹת זוֹ עַל גַּב זוֹ. כָּל הַשְּׁעָרִים שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם, נִשְׁתַּנּוּ לִהְיוֹת שֶׁל זָהָב, חוּץ מִשַּׁעַר נִקָּנוֹר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה בָהֶן נֵס. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנְּחֻשְׁתָּן מַצְהִיב: ",
+ "כָּל הַכְּתָלִים שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם, הָיוּ גְבוֹהִים, חוּץ מִכֹּתֶל הַמִּזְרָחִי, שֶׁהַכֹּהֵן הַשּׂוֹרֵף אֶת הַפָּרָה עוֹמֵד בְּרֹאשׁ הַר הַמִּשְׁחָה, וּמִתְכַּוֵּן וְרוֹאֶה בְפִתְחוֹ שֶׁל הֵיכָל בִּשְׁעַת הַזָּיַת הַדָּם: ",
+ "עֶזְרַת הַנָּשִׁים הָיְתָה אֹרֶךְ מֵאָה וּשְׁלשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ עַל רֹחַב מֵאָה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ. וְאַרְבַּע לְשָׁכוֹת הָיוּ בְאַרְבַּע מִקְצוֹעוֹתֶיהָ, שֶׁל אַרְבָּעִים אַרְבָּעִים אַמָּה. וְלֹא הָיוּ מְקוֹרוֹת. וְכָךְ הֵם עֲתִידִים לִהְיוֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (יחזקאל מו), וַיּוֹצִיאֵנִי אֶל הֶחָצֵר הַחִיצוֹנָה וַיַּעֲבִירֵנִי אֶל אַרְבַּעַת מִקְצוֹעֵי הֶחָצֵר וְהִנֵּה חָצֵר בְּמִקְצֹעַ הֶחָצֵר, חָצֵר בְּמִקְצֹעַ הֶחָצֵר, בְּאַרְבַּעַת מִקְצֹעוֹת הֶחָצֵר חֲצֵרוֹת קְטֻרוֹת. וְאֵין קְטֻרוֹת אֶלָּא שֶׁאֵינָן מְקוֹרוֹת. וּמֶה הָיוּ מְשַׁמְּשׁוֹת. דְּרוֹמִית מִזְרָחִית, הִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת הַנְּזִירִים, שֶׁשָּׁם הַנְּזִירִים מְבַשְּׁלִין אֶת שַׁלְמֵיהֶן, וּמְגַלְּחִין אֶת שְׂעָרָן, וּמְשַׁלְּחִים תַּחַת הַדּוּד. מִזְרָחִית צְפוֹנִית, הִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת הָעֵצִים, שֶׁשָּׁם הַכֹּהֲנִים בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין מַתְלִיעִין הָעֵצִים. וְכָל עֵץ שֶׁנִּמְצָא בוֹ תוֹלַעַת, פָּסוּל מֵעַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. צְפוֹנִית מַעֲרָבִית, הִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת מְצֹרָעִים. מַעֲרָבִית דְּרוֹמִית, אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב, שָׁכַחְתִּי מֶה הָיְתָה מְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת. אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר, שָׁם הָיוּ נוֹתְנִין יַיִן וָשֶׁמֶן, הִיא הָיְתָה נִקְרֵאת לִשְׁכַּת בֵּית שְׁמַנְיָה. וַחֲלָקָה הָיְתָה בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה, וְהִקִּיפוּהָ כְצוֹצְרָה, שֶׁהַנָּשִׁים רוֹאוֹת מִלְמַעְלָן, וְהָאֲנָשִׁים מִלְּמַטָּן, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ מְעֹרָבִין. וַחֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה מַעֲלוֹת עוֹלוֹת מִתּוֹכָהּ לְעֶזְרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל, כְּנֶגֶד חֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה מַעֲלוֹת שֶׁבַּתְּהִלִּים, שֶׁעֲלֵיהֶן הַלְוִיִּם אוֹמְרִים בַּשִּׁיר. לֹא הָיוּ טְרוּטוֹת, אֶלָּא מֻקָּפוֹת כַּחֲצִי גֹרֶן עֲגֻלָּה: ",
+ "וּלְשָׁכוֹת הָיוּ תַחַת עֶזְרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל, וּפְתוּחוֹת לְעֶזְרַת הַנָּשִׁים, שֶׁשָּׁם הַלְוִיִּם נוֹתְנִים כִּנּוֹרוֹת וּנְבָלִים וּמְצִלְתַּיִם וְכָל כְּלֵי שִׁיר. עֶזְרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל הָיְתָה אֹרֶךְ מֵאָה אַמָּה וּשְׁלשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ עַל רֹחַב אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה. וְכֵן עֶזְרַת כֹּהֲנִים הָיְתָה אֹרֶךְ מֵאָה וּשְׁלשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ עַל רֹחַב אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה. וְרָאשֵׁי פִסְפָּסִין מַבְדִּילִין בֵּין עֶזְרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל לְעֶזְרַת הַכֹּהֲנִים. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר, מַעֲלָה הָיְתָה שָׁם, וּגְבוֹהָה אַמָּה, וְהַדּוּכָן נָתוּן עָלֶיהָ, וּבָהּ שָׁלשׁ מַעֲלוֹת שֶׁל חֲצִי חֲצִי אַמָּה. נִמְצֵאת עֶזְרַת הַכֹּהֲנִים גְּבוֹהָה מֵעֶזְרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל שְׁתֵּי אַמּוֹת וּמֶחֱצָה. כָּל הָעֲזָרָה הָיְתָה אֹרֶךְ מֵאָה וּשְׁמוֹנִים וָשֶׁבַע עַל רֹחַב מֵאָה וּשְׁלשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ. וּשְׁלֹשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיוֹת הָיוּ שָׁם. אַבָּא יוֹסֵי בֶן חָנָן אוֹמֵר, כְּנֶגֶד שְׁלֹשָׁה עָשָׂר שְׁעָרִים. שְׁעָרִים דְּרוֹמִיִּים סְמוּכִים לַמַּעֲרָב, שַׁעַר הָעֶלְיוֹן, שַׁעַר הַדֶּלֶק, שַׁעַר הַבְּכוֹרוֹת, שַׁעַר הַמָּיִם, וְלָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ שַׁעַר הַמַּיִם. שֶׁבּוֹ מַכְנִיסִין צְלוֹחִית שֶׁל מַיִם שֶׁל נִסּוּךְ בֶּחָג. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר, וּבוֹ הַמַּיִם מְפַכִּים, וַעֲתִידִין לִהְיוֹת יוֹצְאִין מִתַּחַת מִפְתַּן הַבָּיִת. וּלְעֻמָּתָן בַּצָּפוֹן סְמוּכִים לַמַּעֲרָב, שַׁעַר יְכָנְיָה, שַׁעַר הַקָּרְבָּן, שַׁעַר הַנָּשִׁים, שַׁעַר הַשִּׁיר. וְלָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ שַׁעַר יְכָנְיָה, שֶׁבּוֹ יָצָא יְכָנְיָה בְּגָלוּתוֹ. שֶׁבַּמִּזְרָח, שַׁעַר נִקָּנוֹר. וּשְׁנֵי פִשְׁפָּשִׁים הָיוּ לוֹ, אֶחָד מִימִינוֹ וְאֶחָד מִשְּׂמֹאלוֹ. וּשְׁנַיִם בַּמַעֲרָב, לֹא הָיָה לָהֶם שֵׁם: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "הַמִּזְבֵּחַ הָיָה שְׁלֹשִׁים וּשְׁתַּיִם עַל שְׁלֹשִׁים וּשְׁתַּיִם. עָלָה אַמָּה וְכָנַס אַמָּה, זֶה הַיְסוֹד. נִמְצָא שְׁלֹשִׁים עַל שְׁלֹשִׁים. עָלָה חָמֵשׁ וְכָנַס אַמָּה. זֶה הַסּוֹבֵב. נִמְצָא עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁמֹנֶה עַל עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁמֹנֶה. מְקוֹם הַקְּרָנוֹת אַמָּה מִזֶּה וְאַמָּה מִזֶּה. נִמְצָא עֶשְׂרִים וָשֵׁשׁ עַל עֶשְׂרִים וָשֵׁשׁ. מְקוֹם הִלּוּךְ רַגְלֵי הַכֹּהֲנִים, אַמָּה מִזֶּה וְאַמָּה מִזֶּה. נִמְצָא עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע עַל עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע, מְקוֹם הַמַּעֲרָכָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, מִתְּחִלָּה לֹא הָיָה אֶלָּא שְׁמֹנֶה וְעֶשְׂרִים עַל שְׁמֹנֶה וְעֶשְׂרִים, כּוֹנֵס וְעוֹלֶה בְּמִדָּה זוֹ, עַד שֶׁנִּמְצָא מְקוֹם הַמַּעֲרָכָה עֶשְׂרִים עַל עֶשְׂרִים. וּכְשֶׁעָלוּ בְנֵי הַגּוֹלָה, הוֹסִיפוּ עָלָיו אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת מִן הַדָּרוֹם וְאַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת מִן הַמַּעֲרָב, כְּמִין גַּמָּא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (יחזקאל מג), וְהָאֲרִיאֵל שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה אֹרֶךְ בִּשְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה רֹחַב רָבוּעַ. יָכוֹל שֶׁאֵינוֹ אֶלָּא שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה עַל שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה, כְּשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר (שם) אֶל אַרְבַּעַת רְבָעָיו, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁמִּן הָאֶמְצַע הוּא מוֹדֵד שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה לְכָל רוּחַ. וְחוּט שֶׁל סִקְרָא חוֹגְרוֹ בָאֶמְצַע, לְהַבְדִּיל בֵּין הַדָּמִים הָעֶלְיוֹנִים לַדָּמִים הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים. וְהַיְסוֹד הָיָה מְהַלֵּךְ עַל פְּנֵי כָל הַצָּפוֹן וְעַל פְּנֵי כָל הַמַּעֲרָב, וְאוֹכֵל בַּדָּרוֹם אַמָּה אַחַת, וּבַמִּזְרָח אַמָּה אֶחָת: ",
+ "וּבְקֶרֶן מַעֲרָבִית דְּרוֹמִית הָיוּ שְׁנֵי נְקָבִים, כְּמִין שְׁנֵי חֳטָמִין דַּקִּין, שֶׁהַדָּמִים הַנִּתָּנִין עַל יְסוֹד מַעֲרָבִי וְעַל יְסוֹד דְּרוֹמִי, יוֹרְדִין בָּהֶן וּמִתְעָרְבִין בָּאַמָּה, וְיוֹצְאִין לְנַחַל קִדְרוֹן: ",
+ "לְמַטָּה בָרִצְפָה בְּאוֹתָהּ הַקֶּרֶן, מָקוֹם הָיָה שָׁם אַמָּה עַל אַמָּה, וְטַבְלָא שֶׁל שַׁיִשׁ, וְטַבַּעַת הָיְתָה קְבוּעָה בָהּ, שֶׁבּוֹ יוֹרְדִין לַשִּׁית וּמְנַקִּין אוֹתוֹ. וְכֶבֶשׁ הָיָה לִדְרוֹמוֹ שֶׁל מִזְבֵּחַ, שְׁלֹשִׁים וּשְׁתַּיִם עַל רֹחַב שֵׁשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה, וּרְבוּבָה הָיְתָה לוֹ בְּמַעֲרָבוֹ, שֶׁשָּׁם הָיוּ נוֹתְנִים פְּסוּלֵי חַטַּאת הָעוֹף: ",
+ "אֶחָד אַבְנֵי הַכֶּבֶשׁ וְאֶחָד אַבְנֵי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, מִבִּקְעַת בֵּית כָּרֶם. וְחוֹפְרִין לְמַטָּה מֵהַבְּתוּלָה, וּמְבִיאִים מִשָּׁם אֲבָנִים שְׁלֵמוֹת, שֶׁלֹּא הוּנַף עֲלֵיהֶן בַּרְזֶל, שֶׁהַבַּרְזֶל פּוֹסֵל בִּנְגִיעָה. וּבִפְגִימָה לְכָל דָּבָר. נִפְגְּמָה אַחַת מֵהֶן, הִיא פְסוּלָה וְכֻלָּן כְּשֵׁרוֹת. וּמְלַבְּנִים אוֹתָן פַּעֲמַיִם בַּשָּׁנָה, אַחַת בַּפֶּסַח וְאַחַת בֶּחָג. וְהַהֵיכָל, פַּעַם אַחַת, בַּפֶּסַח. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר, כָּל עֶרֶב שַׁבָּת מְלַבְּנִים אוֹתוֹ בְמַפָּה מִפְּנֵי הַדָּמִים. לֹא הָיוּ סָדִין אוֹתָן בְּכָפִיס שֶׁל בַּרְזֶל, שֶׁמָּא יִגַּע וְיִפְסֹל, שֶׁהַבַּרְזֶל נִבְרָא לְקַצֵּר יָמָיו שֶׁל אָדָם, וְהַמִּזְבֵּחַ נִבְרָא לְהַאֲרִיךְ יָמָיו שֶׁל אָדָם, אֵינוֹ בַדִין שֶׁיּוּנַף הַמְקַצֵּר עַל הַמַּאֲרִיךְ: ",
+ "וְטַבָּעוֹת הָיוּ לִצְפוֹנוֹ שֶׁל מִזְבֵּחַ, שִׁשָּׁה סְדָרִים שֶׁל אַרְבַּע אַרְבַּע, וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים, אַרְבָּעָה שֶׁל שֵׁשׁ שֵׁשׁ, שֶׁעֲלֵיהֶן שׁוֹחֲטִין אֶת הַקֳּדָשִׁים. בֵּית הַמִּטְבָּחַיִם הָיָה לִצְפוֹנוֹ שֶׁל מִזְבֵּחַ, וְעָלָיו שְׁמֹנָה עַמּוּדִים נַנָּסִין, וּרְבִיעִין שֶׁל אֶרֶז עַל גַּבֵּיהֶן, וְאֻנְקְלָיוֹת שֶׁל בַּרְזֶל הָיוּ קְבוּעִין בָּהֶם, וּשְׁלֹשָׁה סְדָרִים הָיוּ לְכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד, שֶׁבָּהֶם תּוֹלִין. וּמַפְשִׁיטִין עַל שֻׁלְחָנוֹת שֶׁל שַׁיִשׁ שֶׁבֵּין הָעַמּוּדִים: ",
+ "הַכִּיּוֹר הָיָה בֵּין הָאוּלָם וְלַמִּזְבֵּחַ, וּמָשׁוּךְ כְּלַפֵּי הַדָּרוֹם. בֵּין הָאוּלָם וְלַמִּזְבֵּחַ, עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁתַּיִם אַמָּה. וּשְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה מַעֲלוֹת הָיוּ שָׁם, רוּם מַעֲלָה חֲצִי אַמָּה, וְשִׁלְחָהּ אַמָּה. אַמָּה אַמָּה וְרֹבֶד שָׁלֹשׁ, וְאַמָּה אַמָּה וְרֹבֶד שָׁלֹשׁ. וְהָעֶלְיוֹנָה, אַמָּה אַמָּה וְרֹבֶד אַרְבַּע. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, הָעֶלְיוֹנָה, אַמָּה אַמָּה וְרֹבֶד חָמֵשׁ: ",
+ "פִּתְחוֹ שֶׁל אוּלָם, גָּבְהוֹ אַרְבָּעִים אַמָּה, וְרָחְבּוֹ עֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה. וְחָמֵשׁ מַלְתְּרָאוֹת שֶׁל מִילָת הָיוּ עַל גַּבָּיו. הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה עוֹדֶפֶת עַל הַפֶּתַח אַמָּה מִזֶּה וְאַמָּה מִזֶּה. שֶׁלְּמַעְלָה מִמֶּנָּה עוֹדֶפֶת עָלֶיהָ אַמָּה מִזֶּה וְאַמָּה מִזֶּה. נִמְצֵאת הָעֶלְיוֹנָה שְׁלֹשִׁים אַמָּה. וְנִדְבָּךְ שֶׁל אֲבָנִים הָיָה בֵין כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת: ",
+ "וּכְלוֹנָסוֹת שֶׁל אֶרֶז הָיוּ קְבוּעִין מִכָּתְלוֹ שֶׁל הֵיכָל לְכָתְלוֹ שֶׁל אוּלָם, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִבְעָט. וְשַׁרְשְׁרוֹת שֶׁל זָהָב הָיוּ קְבוּעוֹת בְּתִקְרַת הָאוּלָם, שֶׁבָּהֶן פִּרְחֵי כְהֻנָּה עוֹלִין וְרוֹאִין אֶת הָעֲטָרֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (זכריה ו), וְהָעֲטָרֹת תִּהְיֶה לְחֵלֶם וּלְטוֹבִיָּה וְלִידַעְיָה וּלְחֵן בֶּן צְפַנְיָה לְזִכָּרוֹן בְּהֵיכַל ה'. גֶּפֶן שֶׁל זָהָב הָיְתָה עוֹמֶדֶת עַל פִּתְחוֹ שֶׁל הֵיכָל, וּמֻדְלָה עַל גַּבֵּי כְלוֹנָסוֹת. כָּל מִי שֶׁהוּא מִתְנַדֵּב עָלֶה, אוֹ גַרְגִּיר, אוֹ אֶשְׁכּוֹל, מֵבִיא וְתוֹלֶה בָהּ. אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּרַבִּי צָדוֹק, מַעֲשֶׂה הָיָה, וְנִמְנוּ עָלֶיהָ שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת כֹּהֲנִים: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "פִּתְחוֹ שֶׁל הֵיכָל, גָּבְהוֹ עֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה וְרָחְבּוֹ עֶשֶׂר אַמּוֹת. וְאַרְבַּע דְּלָתוֹת הָיוּ לוֹ, שְׁתַּיִם בִּפְנִים וּשְׁתַּיִם בַּחוּץ, שֶׁנֶאֱמַר (יחזקאל מא), וּשְׁתַּיִם דְּלָתוֹת לַהֵיכָל וְלַקֹּדֶשׁ. הַחִיצוֹנוֹת נִפְתָּחוֹת לְתוֹךְ הַפֶּתַח לְכַסּוֹת עָבְיוֹ שֶׁל כֹּתֶל, וְהַפְּנִימִיּוֹת נִפְתָּחוֹת לְתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת לְכַסּוֹת אַחַר הַדְּלָתוֹת, שֶׁכָּל הַבַּיִת טוּחַ בְּזָהָב, חוּץ מֵאַחַר הַדְּלָתוֹת. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, בְּתוֹךְ הַפֶּתַח הָיוּ עוֹמְדוֹת, וּכְמִין אִצְטְרָמִיטָה הָיוּ, וְנִקְפָּלוֹת לַאֲחוֹרֵיהֶן, אֵלּוּ שְׁתֵּי אַמּוֹת וּמֶחֱצָה, וְאֵלּוּ שְׁתֵּי אַמּוֹת וּמֶחֱצָה, חֲצִי אַמָּה מְזוּזָה מִכָּאן, וַחֲצִי אַמָּה מְזוּזָה מִכָּאן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), וּשְׁתַּיִם דְּלָתוֹת לַדְּלָתוֹת שְׁתַּיִם מוּסַבּוֹת דְּלָתוֹת, שְׁתַּיִם לְדֶלֶת אֶחָת וּשְׁתֵּי דְלָתוֹת לָאַחֶרֶת: ",
+ "וּשְׁנֵי פִשְׁפָּשִׁין הָיוּ לוֹ לַשַּׁעַר הַגָּדוֹל, אֶחָד בַּצָּפוֹן, וְאֶחָד בַּדָּרוֹם. שֶׁבַּדָּרוֹם, לֹא נִכְנַס בּוֹ אָדָם מֵעוֹלָם, וְעָלָיו הוּא מְפֹרָשׁ עַל יְדֵי יְחֶזְקֵאל, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם מד), וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלַי ה' הַשַּׁעַר הַזֶּה סָגוּר יִהְיֶה לֹא יִפָּתֵחַ וְאִישׁ לֹא יָבֹא בוֹ כִּי ה' אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בָּא בוֹ וְהָיָה סָגוּר. נָטַל אֶת הַמַּפְתֵּחַ וּפָתַח אֶת הַפִּשְׁפָּשׁ, וְנִכְנַס לְהַתָּא, וּמֵהַתָּא לַהֵיכָל. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, בְּתוֹךְ עָבְיוֹ שֶׁל כֹּתֶל הָיָה מְהַלֵּךְ, עַד שֶׁנִּמְצָא עוֹמֵד בֵּין שְׁנֵי הַשְּׁעָרִים, וּפָתַח אֶת הַחִיצוֹנוֹת מִבִּפְנִים וְאֶת הַפְּנִימִיּוֹת מִבַּחוּץ: ",
+ "וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וּשְׁמֹנָה תָאִים הָיוּ שָׁם, חֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר בַּצָּפוֹן, חֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר בַּדָּרוֹם, וּשְׁמֹנָה בַּמַּעֲרָב. שֶׁבַּצָּפוֹן וְשֶׁבַּדָּרוֹם, חֲמִשָּׁה עַל גַּבֵּי חֲמִשָּׁה, וַחֲמִשָּׁה עַל גַּבֵּיהֶם. וְשֶׁבַּמַּעֲרָב, שְׁלֹשָׁה עַל גַּבֵּי שְׁלֹשָׁה, וּשְׁנַיִם עַל גַּבֵּיהֶם. וּשְׁלֹשָׁה פְתָחִים הָיוּ לְכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד, אֶחָד לַתָּא מִן הַיָּמִין, וְאֶחָד לַתָּא מִן הַשְּׂמֹאל, וְאֶחָד לַתָּא שֶׁעַל גַּבָּיו. וּבְקֶרֶן מִזְרָחִית צְפוֹנִית הָיוּ חֲמִשָּׁה פְתָחִים, אֶחָד לַתָּא מִן הַיָּמִין, וְאֶחָד לַתָּא שֶׁעַל גַּבָּיו, וְאֶחָד לַמְּסִבָּה, וְאֶחָד לַפִּשְׁפָּשׁ, וְאֶחָד לַהֵיכָל: ",
+ "הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה, חָמֵשׁ, וְרֹבֶד שֵׁשׁ. וְהָאֶמְצָעִית, שֵׁשׁ, וְרֹבֶד שֶׁבַע. וְהָעֶלְיוֹנָה, שֶׁבַע, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (מלכים א ו), הַיָּצִיעַ הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה חָמֵשׁ בָּאַמָּה רָחְבָּהּ וְהַתִּיכֹנָה שֵׁשׁ בָּאַמָּה רָחְבָּהּ וְהַשְּׁלִישִׁית שֶׁבַע בָּאַמָּה רָחְבָּה: ",
+ "וּמְסִבָּה הָיְתָה עוֹלָה מִקֶּרֶן מִזְרָחִית צְפוֹנִית לְקֶרֶן צְפוֹנִית מַעֲרָבִית, שֶׁבָּהּ הָיוּ עוֹלִים לְגַגּוֹת הַתָּאִים. הָיָה עוֹלֶה בַּמְּסִבָּה וּפָנָיו לַמַּעֲרָב. הָלַךְ עַל כָּל פְּנֵי הַצָּפוֹן, עַד שֶׁהוּא מַגִּיעַ לַמַּעֲרָב. הִגִּיעַ לַמַּעֲרָב, וְהָפַךְ פָּנָיו לַדָּרוֹם. הָלַךְ כָּל פְּנֵי מַעֲרָב עַד שֶׁהוּא מַגִּיעַ לַדָּרוֹם. הִגִּיעַ לַדָּרוֹם, וְהָפַךְ פָּנָיו לַמִּזְרָח. הָיָה מְהַלֵּךְ בַּדָּרוֹם, עַד שֶׁהוּא מַגִּיעַ לְפִתְחָהּ שֶׁל עֲלִיָּה, שֶׁפִּתְחָהּ שֶׁל עֲלִיָּה פָּתוּחַ לַדָּרוֹם. וּבְפִתְחָהּ שֶׁל עֲלִיָּה הָיוּ שְׁנֵי כְלוֹנָסוֹת שֶׁל אֶרֶז, שֶׁבָּהֶן הָיוּ עוֹלִין לְגַגָּהּ שֶׁל עֲלִיָּה. וְרָאשֵׁי פִסְפָּסִין מַבְדִּילִים בָּעֲלִיָּה בֵּין הַקֹּדֶשׁ לְבֵין קֹדֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִׁים. וְלוּלִין הָיוּ פְתוּחִין בָּעֲלִיָּה לְבֵית קֹדֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִׁים, שֶׁבָּהֶן הָיוּ מְשַׁלְשְׁלִין אֶת הָאֻמָּנִים בְּתֵבוֹת, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יָזוּנוּ עֵינֵיהֶן מִבֵּית קָדְשֵׁי הַקֳּדָשִׁים: ",
+ "וְהַהֵיכָל מֵאָה עַל מֵאָה, עַל רוּם מֵאָה. הָאֹטֶם שֵׁשׁ אַמּוֹת, וְגָבְהוֹ אַרְבָּעִים אַמָּה, אַמָּה כִּיּוּר, וְאַמָּתַיִם בֵּית דִּלְפָה, וְאַמָּה תִּקְרָה, וְאַמָּה מַעֲזִיבָה, וְגֹבַהּ שֶׁל עֲלִיָּה אַרְבָּעִים אַמָּה, וְאַמָּה כִּיּוּר, וְאַמָּתַיִם בֵּית דִּלְפָה, וְאַמָּה תִּקְרָה, וְאַמָּה מַעֲזִיבָה, וְשָׁלֹשׁ אַמּוֹת מַעֲקֶה, וְאַמָּה כָּלֵה עוֹרֵב, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, לֹא הָיָה כָלֵה עוֹרֵב עוֹלֶה מִן הַמִּדָּה, אֶלָּא אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת הָיָה מַעֲקֶה: ",
+ "מֵהַמִּזְרָח לַמַּעֲרָב מֵאָה אַמָּה, כֹּתֶל הָאוּלָם חָמֵשׁ, וְהָאוּלָם אַחַד עָשָׂר, כֹּתֶל הַהֵיכָל שֵׁשׁ, וְתוֹכוֹ אַרְבָּעִים אַמָּה, אַמָּה טְרַקְסִין, וְעֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה בֵּית קֹדֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִׁים, כֹּתֶל הַהֵיכָל שֵׁשׁ, וְהַתָּא שֵׁשׁ, וְכֹתֶל הַתָּא חָמֵשׁ. מִן הַצָּפוֹן לַדָּרוֹם שִׁבְעִים אַמָּה, כֹּתֶל הַמְּסִבָּה חָמֵשׁ, וְהַמְּסִבָּה שָׁלֹשׁ, כֹּתֶל הַתָּא חָמֵשׁ, וְהַתָּא שֵׁשׁ, כֹּתֶל הַהֵיכָל שֵׁשׁ, וְתוֹכוֹ עֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה, כֹּתֶל הַהֵיכָל שֵׁשׁ, וְהַתָּא שֵׁשׁ, וְכֹתֶל הַתָּא חָמֵשׁ, וּבֵית הוֹרָדַת הַמַּיִם שָׁלֹשׁ אַמּוֹת, וְהַכֹּתֶל חָמֵשׁ אַמּוֹת. הָאוּלָם עוֹדֵף עָלָיו חֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה מִן הַצָּפוֹן, וַחֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה מִן הַדָּרוֹם, וְהוּא הָיָה נִקְרָא בֵּית הַחֲלִיפוֹת, שֶׁשָּׁם גּוֹנְזִים אֶת הַסַּכִּינִים. וְהַהֵיכָל צַר מֵאַחֲרָיו, וְרָחָב מִלְּפָנָיו, וְדוֹמֶה לַאֲרִי, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ישעיה כט), הוֹי אֲרִיאֵל אֲרִיאֵל קִרְיַת חָנָה דָוִד, מָה הָאֲרִי צַר מֵאַחֲרָיו וְרָחָב מִלְּפָנָיו, אַף הַהֵיכָל צַר מֵאַחֲרָיו וְרָחָב מִלְּפָנָיו: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "כָּל הָעֲזָרָה הָיְתָה אֹרֶךְ מֵאָה וּשְׁמוֹנִים וָשֶׁבַע עַל רֹחַב מֵאָה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ. מִן הַמִּזְרָח לַמַּעֲרָב מֵאָה וּשְׁמוֹנִים וָשֶׁבַע, מְקוֹם דְּרִיסַת יִשְׂרָאֵל אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה, מְקוֹם דְּרִיסַת הַכֹּהֲנִים אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה, הַמִּזְבֵּחַ שְׁלֹשִׁים וּשְׁתַּיִם, בֵּין הָאוּלָם וְלַמִּזְבֵּחַ עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁתַּיִם אַמָּה, הַהֵיכָל מֵאָה אַמָּה, וְאַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה לַאֲחוֹרֵי בֵית הַכַּפֹּרֶת: ",
+ "מִן הַצָּפוֹן לַדָּרוֹם מֵאָה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ, הַכֶּבֶשׁ וְהַמִּזְבֵּחַ שִׁשִּׁים וּשְׁתַּיִם. מִן הַמִּזְבֵּחַ לַטַּבָּעוֹת שְׁמֹנֶה אַמּוֹת, מְקוֹם הַטַּבָּעוֹת עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע, מִן הַטַּבָּעוֹת לַשֻּׁלְחָנוֹת אַרְבַּע, מִן הַשֻּׁלְחָנוֹת וְלַנַּנָּסִין אַרְבַּע. מִן הַנַּנָּסִין לְכֹתֶל הָעֲזָרָה שְׁמֹנֶה אַמּוֹת, וְהַמּוֹתָר בֵּין הַכֶּבֶשׁ לַכֹּתֶל וּמְקוֹם הַנַּנָּסִין: ",
+ "שֵׁשׁ לְשָׁכוֹת הָיוּ בָעֲזָרָה, שָׁלֹשׁ בַּצָּפוֹן וְשָׁלֹשׁ בַּדָּרוֹם. שֶׁבַּצָּפוֹן, לִשְׁכַּת הַמֶּלַח, לִשְׁכַּת הַפַּרְוָה, לִשְׁכַּת הַמְדִיחִים. לִשְׁכַּת הַמֶּלַח, שָׁם הָיוּ נוֹתְנִים מֶלַח לַקָּרְבָּן. לִשְׁכַּת הַפַּרְוָה, שָׁם הָיוּ מוֹלְחִין עוֹרוֹת קָדָשִׁים, וְעַל גַּגָּהּ הָיָה בֵית הַטְּבִילָה לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים. לִשְׁכַּת הַמְדִיחִין, שֶׁשָּׁם הָיוּ מְדִיחִין קִרְבֵי הַקֳּדָשִׁים. וּמִשָּׁם מְסִבָּה עוֹלָה לְגַג בֵּית הַפַּרְוָה: ",
+ "שֶׁבַּדָּרוֹם, לִשְׁכַּת הָעֵץ, לִשְׁכַּת הַגּוֹלָה, לִשְׁכַּת הַגָּזִית. לִשְׁכַּת הָעֵץ, אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב, שָׁכַחְתִּי מֶה הָיְתָה מְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת. אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר, לִשְׁכַּת כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל, וְהִיא הָיְתָה אֲחוֹרֵי שְׁתֵּיהֶן, וְגַג שְׁלָשְׁתָּן שָׁוֶה. לִשְׁכַּת הַגּוֹלָה, שָׁם הָיָה בוֹר קָבוּעַ, וְהַגַּלְגַּל נָתוּן עָלָיו, וּמִשָּׁם מַסְפִּיקִים מַיִם לְכָל הָעֲזָרָה. לִשְׁכַּת הַגָּזִית, שָׁם הָיְתָה סַנְהֶדְרִי גְדוֹלָה שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל יוֹשֶׁבֶת וְדָנָה אֶת הַכְּהֻנָּה, וְכֹהֵן שֶׁנִּמְצָא בוֹ פְסוּל, לוֹבֵשׁ שְׁחוֹרִים וּמִתְעַטֵּף שְׁחוֹרִים, וְיוֹצֵא וְהוֹלֵךְ לוֹ. וְשֶׁלֹּא נִמְצָא בוֹ פְסוּל, לוֹבֵשׁ לְבָנִים וּמִתְעַטֵּף לְבָנִים, נִכְנָס וּמְשַׁמֵּשׁ עִם אֶחָיו הַכֹּהֲנִים. וְיוֹם טוֹב הָיוּ עוֹשִׂים, שֶׁלֹּא נִמְצָא פְסוּל בְּזַרְעוֹ שֶׁל אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן, וְכָךְ הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים, בָּרוּךְ הַמָּקוֹם בָּרוּךְ הוּא, שֶׁלֹּא נִמְצָא פְסוּל בְּזַרְעוֹ שֶׁל אַהֲרֹן. וּבָרוּךְ הוּא, שֶׁבָּחַר בְּאַהֲרֹן וּבְבָנָיו לַעֲמֹד לְשָׁרֵת לִפְנֵי ה' בְּבֵית קָדְשֵׁי הַקֳּדָשִׁים: "
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/Hebrew/merged.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/Hebrew/merged.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cd78bc23ba5358053b450d1b01bfd817768958f2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Middot/Hebrew/merged.json
@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+{
+ "title": "Mishnah Middot",
+ "language": "he",
+ "versionTitle": "merged",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org/Mishnah_Middot",
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "בִּשְׁלשָׁה מְקוֹמוֹת הַכֹּהֲנִים שׁוֹמְרִים בְּבֵית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, בְּבֵית אַבְטִינָס, וּבְבֵית הַנִּיצוֹץ, וּבְבֵית הַמּוֹקֵד. וְהַלְוִיִּם בְּעֶשְׂרִים וְאֶחָד מָקוֹם. חֲמִשָּׁה, עַל חֲמִשָּׁה שַׁעֲרֵי הַר הַבַּיִת. אַרְבָּעָה, עַל אַרְבַּע פִּנּוֹתָיו מִתּוֹכוֹ. חֲמִשָּׁה, עַל חֲמִשָּׁה שַׁעֲרֵי הָעֲזָרָה. אַרְבָּעָה, עַל אַרְבַּע פִּנּוֹתֶיהָ מִבַּחוּץ. וְאֶחָד בְּלִשְׁכַּת הַקָּרְבָּן, וְאֶחָד בְּלִשְׁכַּת הַפָּרֹכֶת, וְאֶחָד לַאֲחוֹרֵי בֵית הַכַּפֹּרֶת: ",
+ "אִישׁ הַר הַבַּיִת הָיָה מְחַזֵּר עַל כָּל מִשְׁמָר וּמִשְׁמָר, וַאֲבוּקוֹת דּוֹלְקִין לְפָנָיו, וְכָל מִשְׁמָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ עוֹמֵד, אוֹמֵר לוֹ אִישׁ הַר הַבַּיִת, שָׁלוֹם עָלֶיךָ. נִכָּר שֶׁהוּא יָשֵׁן, חוֹבְטוֹ בְמַקְלוֹ. וּרְשׁוּת הָיָה לוֹ לִשְׂרֹף אֶת כְּסוּתוֹ. וְהֵם אוֹמְרִים, מַה קּוֹל בָּעֲזָרָה. קוֹל בֶּן לֵוִי לוֹקֶה וּבְגָדָיו נִשְׂרָפִין, שֶׁיָּשֵׁן לוֹ עַל מִשְׁמָרוֹ. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר, פַּעַם אַחַת מָצְאוּ אֶת אֲחִי אִמָּא יָשֵׁן, וְשָׂרְפוּ אֶת כְּסוּתוֹ: ",
+ "חֲמִשָּׁה שְׁעָרִים הָיוּ לְהַר הַבַּיִת. שְׁנֵי שַׁעֲרֵי חֻלְדָּה מִן הַדָּרוֹם, מְשַׁמְּשִׁין כְּנִיסָה וִיצִיאָה. קִיפוֹנוֹס מִן הַמַּעֲרָב, מְשַׁמֵּשׁ כְּנִיסָה וִיצִיאָה. טָדִי מִן הַצָּפוֹן, לֹא הָיָה מְשַׁמֵּשׁ כְּלוּם. שַׁעַר הַמִּזְרָחִי, עָלָיו שׁוּשַׁן הַבִּירָה צוּרָה, שֶׁבּוֹ כֹהֵן גָּדוֹל הַשּׂוֹרֵף אֶת הַפָּרָה וּפָרָה וְכָל מְסַעֲדֶיהָ יוֹצְאִים לְהַר הַמִּשְׁחָה: ",
+ "שִׁבְעָה שְׁעָרִים הָיוּ בָעֲזָרָה, שְׁלשָׁה בַצָּפוֹן וּשְׁלשָׁה בַדָּרוֹם וְאֶחָד בַּמִּזְרָח. שֶׁבַּדָּרוֹם, שַׁעַר הַדֶּלֶק. שֵׁנִי לוֹ, שַׁעַר הַבְּכוֹרוֹת. שְׁלִישִׁי לוֹ, שַׁעַר הַמָּיִם. שֶׁבַּמִּזְרָח, שַׁעַר נִקָּנוֹר, וּשְׁתֵּי לְשָׁכוֹת הָיוּ לוֹ, אַחַת מִימִינוֹ וְאַחַת מִשְּׂמֹאלוֹ, אַחַת לִשְׁכַּת פִּנְחָס הַמַּלְבִּישׁ, וְאַחַת לִשְׁכַּת עוֹשֵׂי חֲבִתִּין: ",
+ "וְשֶׁבַּצָּפוֹן, שַׁעַר הַנִּיצוֹץ. וּכְמִין אַכְסַדְרָה הָיָה, וַעֲלִיָּה בְנוּיָה עַל גַּבָּיו, שֶׁהַכֹּהֲנִים שׁוֹמְרִים מִלְמַעְלָן וְהַלְוִיִּם מִלְּמַטָּן, וּפֶתַח הָיָה לוֹ לַחֵיל. שֵׁנִי לוֹ, שַׁעַר הַקָּרְבָּן. שְׁלִישִׁי לוֹ, בֵּית הַמּוֹקֵד: ",
+ "וְאַרְבַּע לְשָׁכוֹת הָיוּ בְּבֵית הַמּוֹקֵד, כְּקִיטוֹנוֹת פְּתוּחוֹת לִטְרַקְלִין, שְׁתַּיִם בַּקֹּדֶשׁ וּשְׁתַּיִם בַּחֹל, וְרָאשֵׁי פִסְפָּסִין מַבְדִּילִין בֵּין קֹדֶשׁ לַחֹל. וּמֶה הָיוּ מְשַׁמְּשׁוֹת. מַעֲרָבִית דְּרוֹמִית, הִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת טְלָאֵי קָרְבָּן. דְּרוֹמִית מִזְרָחִית, הִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת עוֹשֵׂי לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים. מִזְרָחִית צְפוֹנִית, בָּהּ גָּנְזוּ בְנֵי חַשְׁמוֹנַאי אֶת אַבְנֵי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ שֶׁשִּׁקְּצוּם מַלְכֵי יָוָן. צְפוֹנִית מַעֲרָבִית, בָּהּ יוֹרְדִים לְבֵית הַטְּבִילָה: ",
+ "שְׁנַיִם שְׁעָרִים הָיוּ לְבֵית הַמּוֹקֵד, אֶחָד פָּתוּחַ לַחֵיל וְאֶחָד פָּתוּחַ לָעֲזָרָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, זֶה שֶׁהָיָה פָתוּחַ לָעֲזָרָה, פִּשְׁפָּשׁ קָטָן הָיָה לוֹ, שֶׁבּוֹ נִכְנָסִין לִבְלֹשׁ אֶת הָעֲזָרָה: ",
+ "בֵּית הַמּוֹקֵד, כִּפָּה, וּבַיִת גָּדוֹל הָיָה, מֻקָּף רוֹבָדִין שֶׁל אֶבֶן, וְזִקְנֵי בֵית אָב יְשֵׁנִים שָׁם, וּמַפְתְּחוֹת הָעֲזָרָה בְּיָדָם, וּפִרְחֵי כְהֻנָּה, אִישׁ כִּסְתּוֹ בָאָרֶץ: ",
+ "וּמָקוֹם הָיָה שָׁם, אַמָּה עַל אַמָּה, וְטַבְלָא שֶׁל שַׁיִשׁ וְטַבַּעַת הָיְתָה קְבוּעָה בָהּ, וְשַׁלְשֶׁלֶת שֶׁהַמַּפְתְּחוֹת הָיוּ תְלוּיוֹת בָּהּ. הִגִּיעַ זְמַן הַנְּעִילָה, הִגְבִּיהַּ אֶת הַטַּבְלָא בַּטַּבַּעַת וְנָטַל אֶת הַמַּפְתְּחוֹת מִן הַשַּׁלְשֶׁלֶת, וְנָעַל הַכֹּהֵן מִבִּפְנִים, וּבֶן לֵוִי יָשֵׁן לוֹ מִבַּחוּץ. גָּמַר מִלִּנְעֹל, הֶחֱזִיר אֶת הַמַּפְתְּחוֹת לַשַּׁלְשֶׁלֶת וְאֶת הַטַּבְלָא לִמְקוֹמָהּ, נָתַן כְּסוּתוֹ עָלֶיהָ, יָשֵׁן לוֹ. אֵרַע קֶרִי בְּאַחַד מֵהֶם, יוֹצֵא וְהוֹלֵךְ לוֹ בַמְּסִבָּה הַהוֹלֶכֶת תַּחַת הַבִּירָה, וְהַנֵּרוֹת דּוֹלְקִים מִכָּאן וּמִכָּאן, עַד שֶׁהוּא מַגִּיעַ לְבֵית הַטְּבִילָה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר, בַּמְּסִבָּה הַהוֹלֶכֶת תַּחַת הַחֵיל יוֹצֵא וְהוֹלֵךְ לוֹ בְּטָדִי: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "הַר הַבַּיִת הָיָה חֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת אַמָּה עַל חֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת אַמָּה, רֻבּוֹ מִן הַדָּרוֹם, שֵׁנִי לוֹ מִן הַמִּזְרָח, שְׁלִישִׁי לוֹ מִן הַצָּפוֹן, מִעוּטוֹ מִן הַמַּעֲרָב. מְקוֹם שֶׁהָיָה רֹב מִדָּתוֹ, שָׁם הָיָה רֹב תַּשְׁמִישׁוֹ: ",
+ "כָּל הַנִּכְנָסִין לְהַר הַבַּיִת נִכְנָסִין דֶּרֶךְ יָמִין וּמַקִּיפִין וְיוֹצְאִין דֶּרֶךְ שְׂמֹאל, חוּץ מִמִּי שֶׁאֵרְעוֹ דָבָר, שֶׁהוּא מַקִּיף לִשְׂמֹאל. מַה לְּךָ מַקִּיף לִשְׂמֹאל, שֶׁאֲנִי אָבֵל, הַשּׁוֹכֵן בַּבַּיִת הַזֶּה יְנַחֲמֶךָּ. שֶׁאֲנִי מְנֻדֶּה, הַשּׁוֹכֵן בַּבַּיִת הַזֶּה יִתֵּן בְּלִבָּם וִיקָרְבוּךָ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, עֲשִׂיתָן כְּאִלּוּ עָבְרוּ עָלָיו אֶת הַדִּין. אֶלָּא, הַשּׁוֹכֵן בַּבַּיִת הַזֶּה יִתֵּן בְּלִבְּךָ וְתִשְׁמַע לְדִבְרֵי חֲבֵרֶיךָ וִיקָרְבוּךָ: ",
+ "לִפְנִים מִמֶּנּוּ, סוֹרֵג, גָּבוֹהַּ עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים. וּשְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה פְרָצוֹת הָיוּ שָׁם, שֶׁפְּרָצוּם מַלְכֵי יָוָן. חָזְרוּ וּגְדָרוּם, וְגָזְרוּ כְנֶגְדָּם שְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיוֹת. לִפְנִים מִמֶּנּוּ, הַחֵיל, עֶשֶׂר אַמּוֹת. וּשְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה מַעֲלוֹת הָיוּ שָׁם. רוּם הַמַּעֲלָה חֲצִי אַמָּה, וְשִׁלְחָהּ חֲצִי אַמָּה. כָּל הַמַּעֲלוֹת שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם, רוּם מַעֲלָה חֲצִי אַמָּה, וְשִׁלְחָהּ חֲצִי אַמָּה, חוּץ מִשֶּׁל אוּלָם. כָּל הַפְּתָחִים וְהַשְּׁעָרִים שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם, גָּבְהָן עֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה, וְרָחְבָּן עֶשֶׂר אַמּוֹת, חוּץ מִשֶּׁל אוּלָם. כָּל הַפְּתָחִים שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם, הָיוּ לָהֶן דְּלָתוֹת, חוּץ מִשֶּׁל אוּלָם. כָּל הַשְּׁעָרִים שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם, הָיוּ לָהֶן שְׁקוֹפוֹת, חוּץ מִשַּׁעַר טָדִי, שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם שְׁתֵּי אֲבָנִים מֻטּוֹת זוֹ עַל גַּב זוֹ. כָּל הַשְּׁעָרִים שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם, נִשְׁתַּנּוּ לִהְיוֹת שֶׁל זָהָב, חוּץ מִשַּׁעַר נִקָּנוֹר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה בָהֶן נֵס. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנְּחֻשְׁתָּן מַצְהִיב: ",
+ "כָּל הַכְּתָלִים שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם, הָיוּ גְבוֹהִים, חוּץ מִכֹּתֶל הַמִּזְרָחִי, שֶׁהַכֹּהֵן הַשּׂוֹרֵף אֶת הַפָּרָה עוֹמֵד בְּרֹאשׁ הַר הַמִּשְׁחָה, וּמִתְכַּוֵּן וְרוֹאֶה בְפִתְחוֹ שֶׁל הֵיכָל בִּשְׁעַת הַזָּיַת הַדָּם: ",
+ "עֶזְרַת הַנָּשִׁים הָיְתָה אֹרֶךְ מֵאָה וּשְׁלשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ עַל רֹחַב מֵאָה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ. וְאַרְבַּע לְשָׁכוֹת הָיוּ בְאַרְבַּע מִקְצוֹעוֹתֶיהָ, שֶׁל אַרְבָּעִים אַרְבָּעִים אַמָּה. וְלֹא הָיוּ מְקוֹרוֹת. וְכָךְ הֵם עֲתִידִים לִהְיוֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (יחזקאל מו), וַיּוֹצִיאֵנִי אֶל הֶחָצֵר הַחִיצוֹנָה וַיַּעֲבִירֵנִי אֶל אַרְבַּעַת מִקְצוֹעֵי הֶחָצֵר וְהִנֵּה חָצֵר בְּמִקְצֹעַ הֶחָצֵר, חָצֵר בְּמִקְצֹעַ הֶחָצֵר, בְּאַרְבַּעַת מִקְצֹעוֹת הֶחָצֵר חֲצֵרוֹת קְטֻרוֹת. וְאֵין קְטֻרוֹת אֶלָּא שֶׁאֵינָן מְקוֹרוֹת. וּמֶה הָיוּ מְשַׁמְּשׁוֹת. דְּרוֹמִית מִזְרָחִית, הִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת הַנְּזִירִים, שֶׁשָּׁם הַנְּזִירִים מְבַשְּׁלִין אֶת שַׁלְמֵיהֶן, וּמְגַלְּחִין אֶת שְׂעָרָן, וּמְשַׁלְּחִים תַּחַת הַדּוּד. מִזְרָחִית צְפוֹנִית, הִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת הָעֵצִים, שֶׁשָּׁם הַכֹּהֲנִים בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין מַתְלִיעִין הָעֵצִים. וְכָל עֵץ שֶׁנִּמְצָא בוֹ תוֹלַעַת, פָּסוּל מֵעַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. צְפוֹנִית מַעֲרָבִית, הִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת מְצֹרָעִים. מַעֲרָבִית דְּרוֹמִית, אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב, שָׁכַחְתִּי מֶה הָיְתָה מְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת. אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר, שָׁם הָיוּ נוֹתְנִין יַיִן וָשֶׁמֶן, הִיא הָיְתָה נִקְרֵאת לִשְׁכַּת בֵּית שְׁמַנְיָה. וַחֲלָקָה הָיְתָה בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה, וְהִקִּיפוּהָ כְצוֹצְרָה, שֶׁהַנָּשִׁים רוֹאוֹת מִלְמַעְלָן, וְהָאֲנָשִׁים מִלְּמַטָּן, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ מְעֹרָבִין. וַחֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה מַעֲלוֹת עוֹלוֹת מִתּוֹכָהּ לְעֶזְרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל, כְּנֶגֶד חֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה מַעֲלוֹת שֶׁבַּתְּהִלִּים, שֶׁעֲלֵיהֶן הַלְוִיִּם אוֹמְרִים בַּשִּׁיר. לֹא הָיוּ טְרוּטוֹת, אֶלָּא מֻקָּפוֹת כַּחֲצִי גֹרֶן עֲגֻלָּה: ",
+ "וּלְשָׁכוֹת הָיוּ תַחַת עֶזְרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל, וּפְתוּחוֹת לְעֶזְרַת הַנָּשִׁים, שֶׁשָּׁם הַלְוִיִּם נוֹתְנִים כִּנּוֹרוֹת וּנְבָלִים וּמְצִלְתַּיִם וְכָל כְּלֵי שִׁיר. עֶזְרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל הָיְתָה אֹרֶךְ מֵאָה אַמָּה וּשְׁלשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ עַל רֹחַב אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה. וְכֵן עֶזְרַת כֹּהֲנִים הָיְתָה אֹרֶךְ מֵאָה וּשְׁלשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ עַל רֹחַב אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה. וְרָאשֵׁי פִסְפָּסִין מַבְדִּילִין בֵּין עֶזְרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל לְעֶזְרַת הַכֹּהֲנִים. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר, מַעֲלָה הָיְתָה שָׁם, וּגְבוֹהָה אַמָּה, וְהַדּוּכָן נָתוּן עָלֶיהָ, וּבָהּ שָׁלשׁ מַעֲלוֹת שֶׁל חֲצִי חֲצִי אַמָּה. נִמְצֵאת עֶזְרַת הַכֹּהֲנִים גְּבוֹהָה מֵעֶזְרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל שְׁתֵּי אַמּוֹת וּמֶחֱצָה. כָּל הָעֲזָרָה הָיְתָה אֹרֶךְ מֵאָה וּשְׁמוֹנִים וָשֶׁבַע עַל רֹחַב מֵאָה וּשְׁלשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ. וּשְׁלֹשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיוֹת הָיוּ שָׁם. אַבָּא יוֹסֵי בֶן חָנָן אוֹמֵר, כְּנֶגֶד שְׁלֹשָׁה עָשָׂר שְׁעָרִים. שְׁעָרִים דְּרוֹמִיִּים סְמוּכִים לַמַּעֲרָב, שַׁעַר הָעֶלְיוֹן, שַׁעַר הַדֶּלֶק, שַׁעַר הַבְּכוֹרוֹת, שַׁעַר הַמָּיִם, וְלָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ שַׁעַר הַמַּיִם. שֶׁבּוֹ מַכְנִיסִין צְלוֹחִית שֶׁל מַיִם שֶׁל נִסּוּךְ בֶּחָג. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר, וּבוֹ הַמַּיִם מְפַכִּים, וַעֲתִידִין לִהְיוֹת יוֹצְאִין מִתַּחַת מִפְתַּן הַבָּיִת. וּלְעֻמָּתָן בַּצָּפוֹן סְמוּכִים לַמַּעֲרָב, שַׁעַר יְכָנְיָה, שַׁעַר הַקָּרְבָּן, שַׁעַר הַנָּשִׁים, שַׁעַר הַשִּׁיר. וְלָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ שַׁעַר יְכָנְיָה, שֶׁבּוֹ יָצָא יְכָנְיָה בְּגָלוּתוֹ. שֶׁבַּמִּזְרָח, שַׁעַר נִקָּנוֹר. וּשְׁנֵי פִשְׁפָּשִׁים הָיוּ לוֹ, אֶחָד מִימִינוֹ וְאֶחָד מִשְּׂמֹאלוֹ. וּשְׁנַיִם בַּמַעֲרָב, לֹא הָיָה לָהֶם שֵׁם: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "הַמִּזְבֵּחַ הָיָה שְׁלֹשִׁים וּשְׁתַּיִם עַל שְׁלֹשִׁים וּשְׁתַּיִם. עָלָה אַמָּה וְכָנַס אַמָּה, זֶה הַיְסוֹד. נִמְצָא שְׁלֹשִׁים עַל שְׁלֹשִׁים. עָלָה חָמֵשׁ וְכָנַס אַמָּה. זֶה הַסּוֹבֵב. נִמְצָא עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁמֹנֶה עַל עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁמֹנֶה. מְקוֹם הַקְּרָנוֹת אַמָּה מִזֶּה וְאַמָּה מִזֶּה. נִמְצָא עֶשְׂרִים וָשֵׁשׁ עַל עֶשְׂרִים וָשֵׁשׁ. מְקוֹם הִלּוּךְ רַגְלֵי הַכֹּהֲנִים, אַמָּה מִזֶּה וְאַמָּה מִזֶּה. נִמְצָא עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע עַל עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע, מְקוֹם הַמַּעֲרָכָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, מִתְּחִלָּה לֹא הָיָה אֶלָּא שְׁמֹנֶה וְעֶשְׂרִים עַל שְׁמֹנֶה וְעֶשְׂרִים, כּוֹנֵס וְעוֹלֶה בְּמִדָּה זוֹ, עַד שֶׁנִּמְצָא מְקוֹם הַמַּעֲרָכָה עֶשְׂרִים עַל עֶשְׂרִים. וּכְשֶׁעָלוּ בְנֵי הַגּוֹלָה, הוֹסִיפוּ עָלָיו אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת מִן הַדָּרוֹם וְאַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת מִן הַמַּעֲרָב, כְּמִין גַּמָּא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (יחזקאל מג), וְהָאֲרִיאֵל שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה אֹרֶךְ בִּשְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה רֹחַב רָבוּעַ. יָכוֹל שֶׁאֵינוֹ אֶלָּא שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה עַל שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה, כְּשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר (שם) אֶל אַרְבַּעַת רְבָעָיו, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁמִּן הָאֶמְצַע הוּא מוֹדֵד שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה לְכָל רוּחַ. וְחוּט שֶׁל סִקְרָא חוֹגְרוֹ בָאֶמְצַע, לְהַבְדִּיל בֵּין הַדָּמִים הָעֶלְיוֹנִים לַדָּמִים הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים. וְהַיְסוֹד הָיָה מְהַלֵּךְ עַל פְּנֵי כָל הַצָּפוֹן וְעַל פְּנֵי כָל הַמַּעֲרָב, וְאוֹכֵל בַּדָּרוֹם אַמָּה אַחַת, וּבַמִּזְרָח אַמָּה אֶחָת: ",
+ "וּבְקֶרֶן מַעֲרָבִית דְּרוֹמִית הָיוּ שְׁנֵי נְקָבִים, כְּמִין שְׁנֵי חֳטָמִין דַּקִּין, שֶׁהַדָּמִים הַנִּתָּנִין עַל יְסוֹד מַעֲרָבִי וְעַל יְסוֹד דְּרוֹמִי, יוֹרְדִין בָּהֶן וּמִתְעָרְבִין בָּאַמָּה, וְיוֹצְאִין לְנַחַל קִדְרוֹן: ",
+ "לְמַטָּה בָרִצְפָה בְּאוֹתָהּ הַקֶּרֶן, מָקוֹם הָיָה שָׁם אַמָּה עַל אַמָּה, וְטַבְלָא שֶׁל שַׁיִשׁ, וְטַבַּעַת הָיְתָה קְבוּעָה בָהּ, שֶׁבּוֹ יוֹרְדִין לַשִּׁית וּמְנַקִּין אוֹתוֹ. וְכֶבֶשׁ הָיָה לִדְרוֹמוֹ שֶׁל מִזְבֵּחַ, שְׁלֹשִׁים וּשְׁתַּיִם עַל רֹחַב שֵׁשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה, וּרְבוּבָה הָיְתָה לוֹ בְּמַעֲרָבוֹ, שֶׁשָּׁם הָיוּ נוֹתְנִים פְּסוּלֵי חַטַּאת הָעוֹף: ",
+ "אֶחָד אַבְנֵי הַכֶּבֶשׁ וְאֶחָד אַבְנֵי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, מִבִּקְעַת בֵּית כָּרֶם. וְחוֹפְרִין לְמַטָּה מֵהַבְּתוּלָה, וּמְבִיאִים מִשָּׁם אֲבָנִים שְׁלֵמוֹת, שֶׁלֹּא הוּנַף עֲלֵיהֶן בַּרְזֶל, שֶׁהַבַּרְזֶל פּוֹסֵל בִּנְגִיעָה. וּבִפְגִימָה לְכָל דָּבָר. נִפְגְּמָה אַחַת מֵהֶן, הִיא פְסוּלָה וְכֻלָּן כְּשֵׁרוֹת. וּמְלַבְּנִים אוֹתָן פַּעֲמַיִם בַּשָּׁנָה, אַחַת בַּפֶּסַח וְאַחַת בֶּחָג. וְהַהֵיכָל, פַּעַם אַחַת, בַּפֶּסַח. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר, כָּל עֶרֶב שַׁבָּת מְלַבְּנִים אוֹתוֹ בְמַפָּה מִפְּנֵי הַדָּמִים. לֹא הָיוּ סָדִין אוֹתָן בְּכָפִיס שֶׁל בַּרְזֶל, שֶׁמָּא יִגַּע וְיִפְסֹל, שֶׁהַבַּרְזֶל נִבְרָא לְקַצֵּר יָמָיו שֶׁל אָדָם, וְהַמִּזְבֵּחַ נִבְרָא לְהַאֲרִיךְ יָמָיו שֶׁל אָדָם, אֵינוֹ בַדִין שֶׁיּוּנַף הַמְקַצֵּר עַל הַמַּאֲרִיךְ: ",
+ "וְטַבָּעוֹת הָיוּ לִצְפוֹנוֹ שֶׁל מִזְבֵּחַ, שִׁשָּׁה סְדָרִים שֶׁל אַרְבַּע אַרְבַּע, וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים, אַרְבָּעָה שֶׁל שֵׁשׁ שֵׁשׁ, שֶׁעֲלֵיהֶן שׁוֹחֲטִין אֶת הַקֳּדָשִׁים. בֵּית הַמִּטְבָּחַיִם הָיָה לִצְפוֹנוֹ שֶׁל מִזְבֵּחַ, וְעָלָיו שְׁמֹנָה עַמּוּדִים נַנָּסִין, וּרְבִיעִין שֶׁל אֶרֶז עַל גַּבֵּיהֶן, וְאֻנְקְלָיוֹת שֶׁל בַּרְזֶל הָיוּ קְבוּעִין בָּהֶם, וּשְׁלֹשָׁה סְדָרִים הָיוּ לְכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד, שֶׁבָּהֶם תּוֹלִין. וּמַפְשִׁיטִין עַל שֻׁלְחָנוֹת שֶׁל שַׁיִשׁ שֶׁבֵּין הָעַמּוּדִים: ",
+ "הַכִּיּוֹר הָיָה בֵּין הָאוּלָם וְלַמִּזְבֵּחַ, וּמָשׁוּךְ כְּלַפֵּי הַדָּרוֹם. בֵּין הָאוּלָם וְלַמִּזְבֵּחַ, עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁתַּיִם אַמָּה. וּשְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה מַעֲלוֹת הָיוּ שָׁם, רוּם מַעֲלָה חֲצִי אַמָּה, וְשִׁלְחָהּ אַמָּה. אַמָּה אַמָּה וְרֹבֶד שָׁלֹשׁ, וְאַמָּה אַמָּה וְרֹבֶד שָׁלֹשׁ. וְהָעֶלְיוֹנָה, אַמָּה אַמָּה וְרֹבֶד אַרְבַּע. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, הָעֶלְיוֹנָה, אַמָּה אַמָּה וְרֹבֶד חָמֵשׁ: ",
+ "פִּתְחוֹ שֶׁל אוּלָם, גָּבְהוֹ אַרְבָּעִים אַמָּה, וְרָחְבּוֹ עֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה. וְחָמֵשׁ מַלְתְּרָאוֹת שֶׁל מִילָת הָיוּ עַל גַּבָּיו. הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה עוֹדֶפֶת עַל הַפֶּתַח אַמָּה מִזֶּה וְאַמָּה מִזֶּה. שֶׁלְּמַעְלָה מִמֶּנָּה עוֹדֶפֶת עָלֶיהָ אַמָּה מִזֶּה וְאַמָּה מִזֶּה. נִמְצֵאת הָעֶלְיוֹנָה שְׁלֹשִׁים אַמָּה. וְנִדְבָּךְ שֶׁל אֲבָנִים הָיָה בֵין כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת: ",
+ "וּכְלוֹנָסוֹת שֶׁל אֶרֶז הָיוּ קְבוּעִין מִכָּתְלוֹ שֶׁל הֵיכָל לְכָתְלוֹ שֶׁל אוּלָם, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִבְעָט. וְשַׁרְשְׁרוֹת שֶׁל זָהָב הָיוּ קְבוּעוֹת בְּתִקְרַת הָאוּלָם, שֶׁבָּהֶן פִּרְחֵי כְהֻנָּה עוֹלִין וְרוֹאִין אֶת הָעֲטָרֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (זכריה ו), וְהָעֲטָרֹת תִּהְיֶה לְחֵלֶם וּלְטוֹבִיָּה וְלִידַעְיָה וּלְחֵן בֶּן צְפַנְיָה לְזִכָּרוֹן בְּהֵיכַל ה'. גֶּפֶן שֶׁל זָהָב הָיְתָה עוֹמֶדֶת עַל פִּתְחוֹ שֶׁל הֵיכָל, וּמֻדְלָה עַל גַּבֵּי כְלוֹנָסוֹת. כָּל מִי שֶׁהוּא מִתְנַדֵּב עָלֶה, אוֹ גַרְגִּיר, אוֹ אֶשְׁכּוֹל, מֵבִיא וְתוֹלֶה בָהּ. אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּרַבִּי צָדוֹק, מַעֲשֶׂה הָיָה, וְנִמְנוּ עָלֶיהָ שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת כֹּהֲנִים: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "פִּתְחוֹ שֶׁל הֵיכָל, גָּבְהוֹ עֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה וְרָחְבּוֹ עֶשֶׂר אַמּוֹת. וְאַרְבַּע דְּלָתוֹת הָיוּ לוֹ, שְׁתַּיִם בִּפְנִים וּשְׁתַּיִם בַּחוּץ, שֶׁנֶאֱמַר (יחזקאל מא), וּשְׁתַּיִם דְּלָתוֹת לַהֵיכָל וְלַקֹּדֶשׁ. הַחִיצוֹנוֹת נִפְתָּחוֹת לְתוֹךְ הַפֶּתַח לְכַסּוֹת עָבְיוֹ שֶׁל כֹּתֶל, וְהַפְּנִימִיּוֹת נִפְתָּחוֹת לְתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת לְכַסּוֹת אַחַר הַדְּלָתוֹת, שֶׁכָּל הַבַּיִת טוּחַ בְּזָהָב, חוּץ מֵאַחַר הַדְּלָתוֹת. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, בְּתוֹךְ הַפֶּתַח הָיוּ עוֹמְדוֹת, וּכְמִין אִצְטְרָמִיטָה הָיוּ, וְנִקְפָּלוֹת לַאֲחוֹרֵיהֶן, אֵלּוּ שְׁתֵּי אַמּוֹת וּמֶחֱצָה, וְאֵלּוּ שְׁתֵּי אַמּוֹת וּמֶחֱצָה, חֲצִי אַמָּה מְזוּזָה מִכָּאן, וַחֲצִי אַמָּה מְזוּזָה מִכָּאן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), וּשְׁתַּיִם דְּלָתוֹת לַדְּלָתוֹת שְׁתַּיִם מוּסַבּוֹת דְּלָתוֹת, שְׁתַּיִם לְדֶלֶת אֶחָת וּשְׁתֵּי דְלָתוֹת לָאַחֶרֶת: ",
+ "וּשְׁנֵי פִשְׁפָּשִׁין הָיוּ לוֹ לַשַּׁעַר הַגָּדוֹל, אֶחָד בַּצָּפוֹן, וְאֶחָד בַּדָּרוֹם. שֶׁבַּדָּרוֹם, לֹא נִכְנַס בּוֹ אָדָם מֵעוֹלָם, וְעָלָיו הוּא מְפֹרָשׁ עַל יְדֵי יְחֶזְקֵאל, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם מד), וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלַי ה' הַשַּׁעַר הַזֶּה סָגוּר יִהְיֶה לֹא יִפָּתֵחַ וְאִישׁ לֹא יָבֹא בוֹ כִּי ה' אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בָּא בוֹ וְהָיָה סָגוּר. נָטַל אֶת הַמַּפְתֵּחַ וּפָתַח אֶת הַפִּשְׁפָּשׁ, וְנִכְנַס לְהַתָּא, וּמֵהַתָּא לַהֵיכָל. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, בְּתוֹךְ עָבְיוֹ שֶׁל כֹּתֶל הָיָה מְהַלֵּךְ, עַד שֶׁנִּמְצָא עוֹמֵד בֵּין שְׁנֵי הַשְּׁעָרִים, וּפָתַח אֶת הַחִיצוֹנוֹת מִבִּפְנִים וְאֶת הַפְּנִימִיּוֹת מִבַּחוּץ: ",
+ "וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וּשְׁמֹנָה תָאִים הָיוּ שָׁם, חֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר בַּצָּפוֹן, חֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר בַּדָּרוֹם, וּשְׁמֹנָה בַּמַּעֲרָב. שֶׁבַּצָּפוֹן וְשֶׁבַּדָּרוֹם, חֲמִשָּׁה עַל גַּבֵּי חֲמִשָּׁה, וַחֲמִשָּׁה עַל גַּבֵּיהֶם. וְשֶׁבַּמַּעֲרָב, שְׁלֹשָׁה עַל גַּבֵּי שְׁלֹשָׁה, וּשְׁנַיִם עַל גַּבֵּיהֶם. וּשְׁלֹשָׁה פְתָחִים הָיוּ לְכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד, אֶחָד לַתָּא מִן הַיָּמִין, וְאֶחָד לַתָּא מִן הַשְּׂמֹאל, וְאֶחָד לַתָּא שֶׁעַל גַּבָּיו. וּבְקֶרֶן מִזְרָחִית צְפוֹנִית הָיוּ חֲמִשָּׁה פְתָחִים, אֶחָד לַתָּא מִן הַיָּמִין, וְאֶחָד לַתָּא שֶׁעַל גַּבָּיו, וְאֶחָד לַמְּסִבָּה, וְאֶחָד לַפִּשְׁפָּשׁ, וְאֶחָד לַהֵיכָל: ",
+ "הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה, חָמֵשׁ, וְרֹבֶד שֵׁשׁ. וְהָאֶמְצָעִית, שֵׁשׁ, וְרֹבֶד שֶׁבַע. וְהָעֶלְיוֹנָה, שֶׁבַע, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (מלכים א ו), הַיָּצִיעַ הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה חָמֵשׁ בָּאַמָּה רָחְבָּהּ וְהַתִּיכֹנָה שֵׁשׁ בָּאַמָּה רָחְבָּהּ וְהַשְּׁלִישִׁית שֶׁבַע בָּאַמָּה רָחְבָּה: ",
+ "וּמְסִבָּה הָיְתָה עוֹלָה מִקֶּרֶן מִזְרָחִית צְפוֹנִית לְקֶרֶן צְפוֹנִית מַעֲרָבִית, שֶׁבָּהּ הָיוּ עוֹלִים לְגַגּוֹת הַתָּאִים. הָיָה עוֹלֶה בַּמְּסִבָּה וּפָנָיו לַמַּעֲרָב. הָלַךְ עַל כָּל פְּנֵי הַצָּפוֹן, עַד שֶׁהוּא מַגִּיעַ לַמַּעֲרָב. הִגִּיעַ לַמַּעֲרָב, וְהָפַךְ פָּנָיו לַדָּרוֹם. הָלַךְ כָּל פְּנֵי מַעֲרָב עַד שֶׁהוּא מַגִּיעַ לַדָּרוֹם. הִגִּיעַ לַדָּרוֹם, וְהָפַךְ פָּנָיו לַמִּזְרָח. הָיָה מְהַלֵּךְ בַּדָּרוֹם, עַד שֶׁהוּא מַגִּיעַ לְפִתְחָהּ שֶׁל עֲלִיָּה, שֶׁפִּתְחָהּ שֶׁל עֲלִיָּה פָּתוּחַ לַדָּרוֹם. וּבְפִתְחָהּ שֶׁל עֲלִיָּה הָיוּ שְׁנֵי כְלוֹנָסוֹת שֶׁל אֶרֶז, שֶׁבָּהֶן הָיוּ עוֹלִין לְגַגָּהּ שֶׁל עֲלִיָּה. וְרָאשֵׁי פִסְפָּסִין מַבְדִּילִים בָּעֲלִיָּה בֵּין הַקֹּדֶשׁ לְבֵין קֹדֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִׁים. וְלוּלִין הָיוּ פְתוּחִין בָּעֲלִיָּה לְבֵית קֹדֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִׁים, שֶׁבָּהֶן הָיוּ מְשַׁלְשְׁלִין אֶת הָאֻמָּנִים בְּתֵבוֹת, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יָזוּנוּ עֵינֵיהֶן מִבֵּית קָדְשֵׁי הַקֳּדָשִׁים: ",
+ "וְהַהֵיכָל מֵאָה עַל מֵאָה, עַל רוּם מֵאָה. הָאֹטֶם שֵׁשׁ אַמּוֹת, וְגָבְהוֹ אַרְבָּעִים אַמָּה, אַמָּה כִּיּוּר, וְאַמָּתַיִם בֵּית דִּלְפָה, וְאַמָּה תִּקְרָה, וְאַמָּה מַעֲזִיבָה, וְגֹבַהּ שֶׁל עֲלִיָּה אַרְבָּעִים אַמָּה, וְאַמָּה כִּיּוּר, וְאַמָּתַיִם בֵּית דִּלְפָה, וְאַמָּה תִּקְרָה, וְאַמָּה מַעֲזִיבָה, וְשָׁלֹשׁ אַמּוֹת מַעֲקֶה, וְאַמָּה כָּלֵה עוֹרֵב, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, לֹא הָיָה כָלֵה עוֹרֵב עוֹלֶה מִן הַמִּדָּה, אֶלָּא אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת הָיָה מַעֲקֶה: ",
+ "מֵהַמִּזְרָח לַמַּעֲרָב מֵאָה אַמָּה, כֹּתֶל הָאוּלָם חָמֵשׁ, וְהָאוּלָם אַחַד עָשָׂר, כֹּתֶל הַהֵיכָל שֵׁשׁ, וְתוֹכוֹ אַרְבָּעִים אַמָּה, אַמָּה טְרַקְסִין, וְעֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה בֵּית קֹדֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִׁים, כֹּתֶל הַהֵיכָל שֵׁשׁ, וְהַתָּא שֵׁשׁ, וְכֹתֶל הַתָּא חָמֵשׁ. מִן הַצָּפוֹן לַדָּרוֹם שִׁבְעִים אַמָּה, כֹּתֶל הַמְּסִבָּה חָמֵשׁ, וְהַמְּסִבָּה שָׁלֹשׁ, כֹּתֶל הַתָּא חָמֵשׁ, וְהַתָּא שֵׁשׁ, כֹּתֶל הַהֵיכָל שֵׁשׁ, וְתוֹכוֹ עֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה, כֹּתֶל הַהֵיכָל שֵׁשׁ, וְהַתָּא שֵׁשׁ, וְכֹתֶל הַתָּא חָמֵשׁ, וּבֵית הוֹרָדַת הַמַּיִם שָׁלֹשׁ אַמּוֹת, וְהַכֹּתֶל חָמֵשׁ אַמּוֹת. הָאוּלָם עוֹדֵף עָלָיו חֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה מִן הַצָּפוֹן, וַחֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה מִן הַדָּרוֹם, וְהוּא הָיָה נִקְרָא בֵּית הַחֲלִיפוֹת, שֶׁשָּׁם גּוֹנְזִים אֶת הַסַּכִּינִים. וְהַהֵיכָל צַר מֵאַחֲרָיו, וְרָחָב מִלְּפָנָיו, וְדוֹמֶה לַאֲרִי, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ישעיה כט), הוֹי אֲרִיאֵל אֲרִיאֵל קִרְיַת חָנָה דָוִד, מָה הָאֲרִי צַר מֵאַחֲרָיו וְרָחָב מִלְּפָנָיו, אַף הַהֵיכָל צַר מֵאַחֲרָיו וְרָחָב מִלְּפָנָיו: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "כָּל הָעֲזָרָה הָיְתָה אֹרֶךְ מֵאָה וּשְׁמוֹנִים וָשֶׁבַע עַל רֹחַב מֵאָה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ. מִן הַמִּזְרָח לַמַּעֲרָב מֵאָה וּשְׁמוֹנִים וָשֶׁבַע, מְקוֹם דְּרִיסַת יִשְׂרָאֵל אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה, מְקוֹם דְּרִיסַת הַכֹּהֲנִים אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה, הַמִּזְבֵּחַ שְׁלֹשִׁים וּשְׁתַּיִם, בֵּין הָאוּלָם וְלַמִּזְבֵּחַ עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁתַּיִם אַמָּה, הַהֵיכָל מֵאָה אַמָּה, וְאַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה לַאֲחוֹרֵי בֵית הַכַּפֹּרֶת: ",
+ "מִן הַצָּפוֹן לַדָּרוֹם מֵאָה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ, הַכֶּבֶשׁ וְהַמִּזְבֵּחַ שִׁשִּׁים וּשְׁתַּיִם. מִן הַמִּזְבֵּחַ לַטַּבָּעוֹת שְׁמֹנֶה אַמּוֹת, מְקוֹם הַטַּבָּעוֹת עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע, מִן הַטַּבָּעוֹת לַשֻּׁלְחָנוֹת אַרְבַּע, מִן הַשֻּׁלְחָנוֹת וְלַנַּנָּסִין אַרְבַּע. מִן הַנַּנָּסִין לְכֹתֶל הָעֲזָרָה שְׁמֹנֶה אַמּוֹת, וְהַמּוֹתָר בֵּין הַכֶּבֶשׁ לַכֹּתֶל וּמְקוֹם הַנַּנָּסִין: ",
+ "שֵׁשׁ לְשָׁכוֹת הָיוּ בָעֲזָרָה, שָׁלֹשׁ בַּצָּפוֹן וְשָׁלֹשׁ בַּדָּרוֹם. שֶׁבַּצָּפוֹן, לִשְׁכַּת הַמֶּלַח, לִשְׁכַּת הַפַּרְוָה, לִשְׁכַּת הַמְדִיחִים. לִשְׁכַּת הַמֶּלַח, שָׁם הָיוּ נוֹתְנִים מֶלַח לַקָּרְבָּן. לִשְׁכַּת הַפַּרְוָה, שָׁם הָיוּ מוֹלְחִין עוֹרוֹת קָדָשִׁים, וְעַל גַּגָּהּ הָיָה בֵית הַטְּבִילָה לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים. לִשְׁכַּת הַמְדִיחִין, שֶׁשָּׁם הָיוּ מְדִיחִין קִרְבֵי הַקֳּדָשִׁים. וּמִשָּׁם מְסִבָּה עוֹלָה לְגַג בֵּית הַפַּרְוָה: ",
+ "שֶׁבַּדָּרוֹם, לִשְׁכַּת הָעֵץ, לִשְׁכַּת הַגּוֹלָה, לִשְׁכַּת הַגָּזִית. לִשְׁכַּת הָעֵץ, אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב, שָׁכַחְתִּי מֶה הָיְתָה מְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת. אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר, לִשְׁכַּת כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל, וְהִיא הָיְתָה אֲחוֹרֵי שְׁתֵּיהֶן, וְגַג שְׁלָשְׁתָּן שָׁוֶה. לִשְׁכַּת הַגּוֹלָה, שָׁם הָיָה בוֹר קָבוּעַ, וְהַגַּלְגַּל נָתוּן עָלָיו, וּמִשָּׁם מַסְפִּיקִים מַיִם לְכָל הָעֲזָרָה. לִשְׁכַּת הַגָּזִית, שָׁם הָיְתָה סַנְהֶדְרִי גְדוֹלָה שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל יוֹשֶׁבֶת וְדָנָה אֶת הַכְּהֻנָּה, וְכֹהֵן שֶׁנִּמְצָא בוֹ פְסוּל, לוֹבֵשׁ שְׁחוֹרִים וּמִתְעַטֵּף שְׁחוֹרִים, וְיוֹצֵא וְהוֹלֵךְ לוֹ. וְשֶׁלֹּא נִמְצָא בוֹ פְסוּל, לוֹבֵשׁ לְבָנִים וּמִתְעַטֵּף לְבָנִים, נִכְנָס וּמְשַׁמֵּשׁ עִם אֶחָיו הַכֹּהֲנִים. וְיוֹם טוֹב הָיוּ עוֹשִׂים, שֶׁלֹּא נִמְצָא פְסוּל בְּזַרְעוֹ שֶׁל אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן, וְכָךְ הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים, בָּרוּךְ הַמָּקוֹם בָּרוּךְ הוּא, שֶׁלֹּא נִמְצָא פְסוּל בְּזַרְעוֹ שֶׁל אַהֲרֹן. וּבָרוּךְ הוּא, שֶׁבָּחַר בְּאַהֲרֹן וּבְבָנָיו לַעֲמֹד לְשָׁרֵת לִפְנֵי ה' בְּבֵית קָדְשֵׁי הַקֳּדָשִׁים: "
+ ]
+ ],
+ "versions": [
+ [
+ "Torat Emet 357",
+ "http://www.toratemetfreeware.com/index.html?downloads"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "heTitle": "משנה מדות",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/English/Fischer - correction.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/English/Fischer - correction.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..04be6656885d199c6527676622958349ecb067b0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/English/Fischer - correction.json
@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Temurah",
+ "versionSource": "my own translation",
+ "versionTitle": "Fischer - correction",
+ "actualLanguage": "en",
+ "languageFamilyName": "english",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה תמורה",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [],
+ [],
+ [],
+ [],
+ [],
+ [
+ "Anything that is forbidden [to offer] on the altar renders other things forbidden in any amount."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git "a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/English/Mischnajot mit deutscher \303\234bersetzung und Erkl\303\244rung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de].json" "b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/English/Mischnajot mit deutscher \303\234bersetzung und Erkl\303\244rung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de].json"
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..1457e220ff3a8cc738448a17acf27d9207e8e755
--- /dev/null
+++ "b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/English/Mischnajot mit deutscher \303\234bersetzung und Erkl\303\244rung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de].json"
@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Temurah",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.talmud.de/tlmd/die-deutsche-mischna-uebersetzung",
+ "versionTitle": "Mischnajot mit deutscher Übersetzung und Erklärung. Berlin 1887-1933 [de]",
+ "priority": 0.5,
+ "versionNotes": "Ordnung Seraïm, übers. und erklärt von Ascher Samter. 1887.
Ordnung Moed, von Eduard Baneth. 1887-1927.
Ordnung Naschim, von Marcus Petuchowski u. Simon Schlesinger. 1896-1933.
Ordnung Nesikin, von David Hoffmann. 1893-1898.
Ordnung Kodaschim, von John Cohn. 1910-1925.
Ordnung Toharot, von David Hoffmann, John Cohn und Moses Auerbach. 1910-1933.",
+ "actualLanguage": "de",
+ "languageFamilyName": "german",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה תמורה",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "Jeder kann [Opfertiere] austauschen, sowohl Männer wie Frauen, nicht dass jemand austauschen darf, sondern wenn er ausgetauscht hat, gilt es als Austausch und er erhält vierzig Geisselhiebe . Priester können nur ihnen selbst gehörende Tiere austauschen wie Israeliten die ihnen gehörenden. Die Priester können weder ein Sündopfer noch ein Schuldopfer noch eine Erstgeburt austauschen. Darauf sagte R. Jochanan, Sohn des Nuri : Warum sollen sie eine Erstgeburt nicht austauschen können ? Darauf antwortete R. Akiba: Sündopfer und Schuldopfer gehören als Priestergabe den Priestern und die Erstgeburt gehört als Priestergabe den Priestern, wie sie Sündopfer und Schuldopfer nicht austauschen können, so können sie auch die Erstgeburt nicht austauschen. Darauf sagte R. Jochanan, Sohn des Nuri: Warum können sie ein Sündopfer und ein Schuldopfer nicht austauschen? Weil ihnen, so lange diese am Leben sind, kein Besitzrecht an ihnen zusteht. Willst du daraus auf die Erstgeburt schliessen, die ihnen, auch wenn sie noch am Leben ist, gehört ? Darauf antwortete R. Akiba: Es heisst aber doch: „so soll es selbst und das mit ihm Vertauschte heilig sein“ . Wo hat es selbst seine Heiligkeit erlangt? Im Hause des Eigentümers. So hat auch der Austausch nur Gültigkeit im Hause des Eigentümers.",
+ "Als Austausch gelten: Rinder gegen Kleinvieh und Kleinvieh gegen Rinder, Schafe gegen Ziegen und Ziegen gegen Schafe, männliche Tiere gegen weibliche und weibliche gegen männliche, fehlerfreie gegen fehlerbehaftete und fehlerbehaftete gegen fehlerfreie, denn es heisst: „er soll es nicht auswechseln und es nicht vertauschen, Gutes gegen Schlechtes oder Schlechtes gegen Gutes.“ Was ist unter „Gutes gegen Schlechtes“ zu verstehen ? Fehlerhaftes, das geheiligt worden ist, bevor es den Fehler hatte. Als Austausch gelten auch eines gegen zwei und zwei gegen eines, eines gegen hundert und hundert gegen eines; R. Simon sagt: Als Austausch gilt nur eines gegen eines, denn es heisst: „so soll es selbst und das mit ihm Vertauschte“, wie es selbst nur eines ist, so muss auch das gegen es Ausgetauschte nur eines sein.",
+ "Als Austausch gelten nicht: Glieder gegen ungeborene Junge und ungeborene Junge gegen Glieder, nicht Glieder und ungeborene Junge gegen ganze Tiere und nicht ganze Tiere gegen sie; R. Jose sagt: Glieder gegen ganze Tiere gelten als Austausch, aber nicht ganze Tiere gegen Glieder. Es sagte R. Jose: Ist es nicht bei Opfertieren so, dass, wenn jemand sagt: Den Fuss dieses [Tieres] bestimme ich als Ganzopfer, das ganze [Tier] Ganzopfer ist ? So gilt auch, wenn jemand sagt: Der Fuss dieses [Tieres] soll anstelle jenes [Tieres] treten, das ganze Tier als Austausch gegen jenes.",
+ "Mit Teruma Vermischtes macht anderes zu Terumamischung nur nach Verhältnis. [Mit Teruma] Gesäuertes macht anderes zu [durch Teruma] Gesäuertem nur nach Verhältnis. Geschöpftes Wasser macht das Tauchbad untauglich nur nach Verhältnis.",
+ "Das Sühnwasser wird zu Sühnwasser nur mit dem Hineintun der Asche. Ein durch Totengebein unrein gewordenes Feld macht nicht ein anderes zu einem durch Totengebein verunreinigten Felde. Eine Teruma, die abgehoben wird, nachdem bereits eine Teruma abgehoben war, gilt nicht als Teruma. Das Austauschen eines Austausches gilt nicht als Austausch. Das Austauschen des Jungen [eines Opfertieres] gilt nicht als Austausch. R. Jehuda sagt: Das Austauschen des Jungen gilt als Austausch. Darauf sagten sie zu ihm: Das Geheiligte selbst kann ausgetauscht werden, das Junge und das Ausgetauschte dagegen können nicht ausgetauscht werden.",
+ "Für Vogelopfer und Mehlopfer gilt kein Austausch, denn dieser wird nur beim Vieh erwähnt. Wenn die Gemeinde oder gemeinschaftliche Besitzer [ein Tier] austauschen, hat der Austausch keine Geltung, denn es heisst: „er soll es nicht vertauschen“, ein Einzelner kann austauschen, aber weder die Gemeinde noch gemeinschaftliche Besitzer können austauschen. Für Opfergaben für den Tempelschatz gilt kein Austausch. Es sagte R. Simon: Der Zehnt war doch schon mitinbegriffen, warum wird er noch besonders hervorgehoben ? Um als Beispiel zu dienen: Wie der Zehnt Opfer eines Einzelnen ist, so sind Gemeindeopfer ausgeschlossen, und wie der Zehnt ein auf dem Altar darzubringendes Opfertier ist, so sind Opfergaben für den Tempelschatz ausgeschlossen."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Es gibt Bestimmungen, die für Privatopfer gelten und nicht für Gemeindeopfer, und solche, die für Gemeindeopfer gelten und nicht für Privatopfer. Privatopfer können ausgetauscht werden, Gemeindeopfer können nicht ausgetauscht werden; als Privatopfer können männliche Tiere und weibliche dargebracht werden, als Gemeindeopfer nur männliche; Privatopfer muss man auch nachträglich darbringen und ebenso ihre Giessopfer, Gemeindeopfer ist man nicht verpflichtet nachträglich darzubringen und ebenso nicht ihre Giessopfer; dagegen muse man ihre Giessopfer nachträglich darbringen, wenn das Schlachtopfer bereits dargebracht worden ist. Es gibt Bestimmungen, die für Gemeindeopfer gelten und nicht für Privatopfer: Gemeindeopfer verdrängen den Schabbat und die Unreinheit, Privatopfer verdrängen nicht den Schabbat und nicht die Unreinheit. Darauf sagte R. Meïr: Sind nicht auch die Pfannenopfer des Hohepriesters und der Stier am Versöhnungstage Privatopfer und doch verdrängen sie den Schabbat und die Unreinheit! [Der Grund ist] nur, dass sie an eine bestimmte Zeit gebunden sind.",
+ "Privat-Sündopfer, deren Eigentümer bereits anderweitig gesühnt sind, lässt man umkommen, ebensolche Gemeindeopfer lässt man nicht umkommen; R. Juda sagt: Man lässt sie umkommen. Es sagte R. Simon: Wie wir finden, dass für das Junge eines Sündopfers und für das mit einem Sündopfer Ausgetauschte und für ein Sündopfer, dessen Eigentümer gestorben ist, diese Bestimmung nur bei einem Privatopfer getroffen ist, nicht aber bei einem Gemeindeopfer, so gilt diese Bestimmung auch für solche, deren Eigentümer bereits gesühnt sind und die ihr Jahresalter überschritten haben, nur bei Privatopfern, nicht aber bei Gemeindeopfern.",
+ "Es gibt für Opfertiere strengere Bestimmungen als für Ausgetauschtes und für Ausgetauschtes strengere als für Opfertiere. Opfertiere können ausgetauscht werden, Ausgetauschtes dagegen kann nicht ausgetauscht werden. Die Gemeinde und mehrere Teilhaber zusammen können [ein Tier] heiligen, aber nicht austauschen. Einzelne Glieder und ungeborene Junge kann man heiligen, aber nicht austauschen. Es gibt für das Ausgetauschte strengere Bestimmungen: Die Heiligkeit trifft auch ein Tier, das mit einem bleibenden Fehler behaftet ist, so dass es, selbst nachdem es [durch Auslösung] profan geworden ist, nicht geschoren und nicht zur Arbeit verwendet werden darf. R. Jose, Sohn des Jehuda, sagt: Beim Austausch gilt ein irrtümliches Bestimmen wie ein beabsichtigtes, bei der Heiligung gilt ein irrtümliches Bestimmen nicht wie eia beabsichtigtes. R. Elasar sagt: Eia Bastard, ein Trefa, ein seitwärts Herausgezogenes, ein Geschlechtsloses und eine Zwittergeburt werden [durch Austausch] nichtheilig und machen [den Austausch] nicht heilig."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Bei folgenden Opfertieren erhalten die von ihnen geworfenen Jungen und die mit ihnen ausgetauschten Tiere die gleiche Heiligkeit wie sie selbst: Das Junge von einem Friedensopfer und mit ihm Ausgetauschtes, ihr Junges und das Junge von ihrem Jungen und so weiter bis in die Unendlichkeit gelten wie Friedensopfer und erfordern Händeaufstützen, Giessopfer, Schwingung und [die Abgabe von] Brust und Schenkel. R. Elieser sagt: Das Junge von einem Friedensopfer wird nicht als Friedensopfer dargebracht; die Weisen sagen: Es wird dargebracht. Es sagte R. Simon: Darauf erstreckt sich ihre Meinungsverschiedenheit nicht, dass das Junge eines Jungen von einem Friedensopfer und das Junge eines Jungen von einem Ausgetauschten nicht dargebracht werden. Worin sind sie verschiedener Ansicht? Betreff des Jungen selbst, da sagt R. Elieser, es wird nicht dargebracht, während die Weisen sagen, es wird dargebracht. Es bezeugten R. Josua und R. Papjas, dass das Junge von einem Friedensopfer als Friedensopfer dargebracht wird. Es sagte R. Papjas: Ich bezeuge, dass wir eine Friedensopfer-Kuh hatten, sie selbst am Pessach verzehrten und ihr Junges am Feste als Friedensopfer verzehrten.",
+ "Das Junge von einem Dankopfer und mit ihm Ausgetauschtes, ihr Junges und das Junge von ihrem Jungen und so weiter bis in die Unendlichkeit gelten wie Dankopfer, nur erfordern sie kein Brotopfer. Mit einem Ganzopfer Ausgetauschtes und das Junge des mit ihm Ausgetauschten, ihr Junges und das Junge von ihrem Jungen und so weiter bis in die Unendlichkeit gelten wie Ganzopfer, sie erfordern Abhäutung und Zerlegung und sind ganz für das Altarfeuer bestimmt.",
+ "Wenn jemand ein weibliches Tier zum Ganzopfer bestimmt hat und es wirft ein männliches Junges, muss es weiden, bis es einen Fehler bekommt, und dann verkauft werden, und für das Geld bringt man ein Ganzopfer; R. Elasar sagt: Es wird selbst als Ganzopfer dargebracht. Wenn jemand ein weibliches Tier zum Schuldopfer bestimmt hat, muss es weiden, bis es einen Fehler bekommt, und dann verkauft werden, und für das Geld bringt man ein Schuldopfer. Ist sein Schuldopfer bereits dargebracht, fällt das Geld in die Spendenbüchse. R. Simon sagt: Es wird, ohne dass es einen Fehler hat, verkauft. Das mit einem Schuldopfer Ausgetauschte, das Junge von einem damit Ausgetauschten, ihr Junges und das Junge von ihrem Jungen und so weiter bis in die Unendlichkeit müssen weiden, bis sie einen Fehler bekommen, dann werden sie verkauft, und das Geld fällt in die Spendenbüchse; R. Elieser sagt: Man lässt sie umkommen; R. Elasar sagt: Man bringt für das Geld Ganzopfer. Ein Schuldopfer, dessen Eigentümer gestorben ist oder bereits anderweitig gesühnt ist, muss weiden, bis es einen Fehler bekommt und dann verkauft werden, und das Geld fällt in die Spendenbüchse; R. Elieser sagt: Man lässt es umkommen; R. Elasar sagt: Man bringt für das Geld Ganzopfer.",
+ "Ist nicht auch die Spendenbüchse zu Ganzopfern bestimmt ? Was ist also der Unterschied zwischen der Ansicht des R. Elasar und der der Weisen? Nur der, dass, wenn es als Pflichtopfer dargebracht wird, er seine Hände aufstützen und das dazu gehörige Giessopfer bringen und zwar das Giessopfer von dem Seinigen bringen muss, und wenn er ein Priester ist, die Opferhandlungen und das Fell ihm zustehen, während, wenn es aus der Spendenbüchse dargebracht wird, er nicht die Hände aufstützt, das dazu gehörige Giessopfer nicht darzubringen braucht, sondern das Giessopfer aus Gemeindemitteln gebracht wird, und auch wenn er ein Priester ist, die Opferhandlungen und das Fell der fungierenden Priesterabteilung zustehen.",
+ "Das mit einer Erstgeburt oder einem Zehnt Ausgetauschte, ihr Junges und das Junge von ihrem Jungen und so weiter bis in die Unendlichkeit gelten wie Erstgeburt und Zehnt und werden, nachdem sie einen Fehler bekommen haben, von den Eigentümern verzehrt. Was ist der Unterschied zwischen Erstgeburt und Zehnt und allen übrigen Opfertieren ? Alle Opfertiere werden auf dem Marktplatz verkauft und auf dem Marktplatz geschlachtet und nach Gewicht abgewogen, ausser Erstgeburt und Zehnt, und alle können ausgelöst werden und das mit ihnen Ausgetauschte kann ausgelöst werden, ausser Erstgeburt und Zehnt, und alle werden auch vom Ausland nach dem heiligen Lande gebracht, ausser Erstgehurt und Zehnt. Hat man sie [von dort) gebracht, werden sie, wenn sie fehlerfrei sind, dargebracht, haben sie einen Fehler, werden sie, da sie fehlerbehaftet sind, von den Eigentümern verzehrt. Es sagte R. Simon: Was ist der Grund ? Weil Erstgeburt und Zehnt auch an Ort und Stelle Verwendung finden können, alle übrigen Opfertiere dagegen, selbst wenn sie von einem Fehler befallen werden, in ihrer Heiligkeit verbleiben."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Das Junge eines Sündopfers und das mit einem Sündopfer Ausgetauschte und ein Sündopfer, dessen Eigentümer gestorben ist, lässt man umkommen, das sein Jahresalter überschritten hat und verloren gegangen [oder verloren gegangen ] und fehlerbehaftet wiedergefunden worden ist, lässt man, wenn der Eigentümer bereits anderweitig gesühnt worden ist, umkommen, ein Austausch mit ihm hat keine Geltung, man darf es nicht benützen, bringt aber für die Nutzniessung kein Opfer für Veruntreuung. 1st der Eigentümer noch nicht anderweitig gesühnt worden, muss es weiden, bis es einen Fehler bekommt, und dann verkauft werden, und man bringt für das Geld ein anderes, ein Austausch mit ihm hat Geltung, und die Nutzniessung von ihm gilt als Veruntreuung.",
+ "Wenn jemand ein Sündopfer abgesondert hat und es verloren gegangen ist und er ein anderes an seiner Stelle dargebracht hat, und nachher findet sich das erste wieder, lässt man es umkommen. Wenn jemand Geld zum Sündopfer abgesondert hat und es verloren gegangen ist, und er statt für dasselbe anderweitig ein Sündopfer dargebracht hat, und nachher findet sich das Geld wieder, wirft man das Geld in das Salzmeer.",
+ "Wenn jemand Geld für sein Sündopfer abgesondert hat und es verloren gegangen ist und er an seiner Stelle anderes Geld abgesondert hat, und bevor er dazu gekommen ist, ein Sündopfer dafür zu kaufen, das erste Geld sich wiedergefunden hat, bringt er von beiden gemeinsam ein Sündopfer, und das übrig bleibende Geld fällt in die Spendenbüchse. Wenn jemand Geld für sein Sündopfer abgesondert hat und es verloren gegangen ist und er an seiner Stelle ein Sündopfer abgesondert hat, und bevor er dazu gekommen ist, es darzubringen, das Geld sich wiedergefunden hat, das Sündopfer aber fehlerbehaftet ist, muss es verkauft werden, und er bringt von dem zusammengelegten Gelde ein Sündopfer, und der Rest fällt in die Spendenbüchse. Wenn jemand sein Sündopfer abgesondert hat und es verloren gegangen ist und er an seiner Stelle Geld abgesondert hat, und bevor er dazu gekommen ist, ein Sündopfer dafür zu kaufen, sein Sündopfer sich wiedergefunden hat, es aber fehlerbehaftet ist, muss es verkauft werden, und er bringt von dem zusammengelegten Gelde ein Sündopfer, und der Rest fällt in die Spendenbüchse. Wenn jemand sein Sündopfer abgesondert hat und es verloren gegangen ist und er ein anderes an seiner Stelle abgesondert hat, und bevor er dazu gekommen ist, es darzubringen, das erste sich wiedergefunden hat, beide aber fehlerbehaftet sind, müssen sie verkauft werden, und er bringt von dem zusammengelegten Gelde ein Sündopfer, und der Rest fällt in die Spendenbüchse. Wenn jemand sein Sündopfer abgesondert hat und es verloren gegangen ist und er ein anderes an seiner Stelle abgesondert hat, und bevor er dazu gekommen ist, es darzubringen, das erste sich wiedergefunden hat, und beide fehlerfrei sind, wird eines von ihnen als Sündopfer dargebracht und das andere lässt man umkommen, dies die Worte Rabbis; die Weisen aber sagen: Ein Sündopfer lässt man nur umkommen, wenn es sich erst wiedergefunden hat, nachdem der Eigentümer bereits gesühnt ist, und das Geld wirft man nur ins Salzmeer, wenn es sich erst wiedergefunden hat, nachdem der Eigentümer bereits gesühnt ist.",
+ "Wenn jemand sein Sündopfer abgesondert hat und es ist jetzt fehlerbehaftet, muss man es verkaufen und für das Geld ein anderes bringen. R. Elasar, Sohn des R. Simon, sagt: Wenn das zweite dargebracht worden ist, bevor das erste geschlachtet worden ist, muss man es umkommen lassen, weil der Eigentümer bereits gesühnt ist."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Wie kann man die Erstgeburtspflicht umgehen ? Wenn ein Erstgebärendes trächtig geworden ist, sagt man: „Was dieses in seinem Innern trägt, sei, wenn es ein männliches Tier ist, ein Ganzopfer “, wirft es dann ein männliches, so wird es als Ganzopfer dargebracht. [Sagt man:] „Wenn es ein weibliches Tier ist, sei es ein Friedensopfer „, und es wirft dann ein weibliches, so wird es als Friedensopfer dargebracht. [Sagt man:] „Wenn es ein männliches ist, sei es ein Ganzopfer, und wenn es ein weibliches ist, sei es ein Friedensopfer „, und es wirft ein männliches und ein weibliches, wird das männliche als Ganzopfer und das weibliche als Friedensopfer dargebracht.",
+ "Wirft es zwei männliche, so wird eines von ihnen als Ganzopfer dargebracht und das zweite wird an Ganzopferpflichtige verkauft, und das Geld ist nichtheilig. Wirft es zwei weibliche, so wird eines von ihnen als Friedensopfer dargebracht und das zweite wird an Friedensopferpflichtige verkauft, und das Geld ist nichtheilig. Wirft es ein Geschlechtloses oder eine Zwittergeburt, kann sich, sagt R. Simon, Sohn des Gamliel, eine Heiligkeit auf sie überhaupt nicht übertragen.",
+ "Wenn jemand sagt: „Das Junge dieses Tieres sei ein Ganzopfer und es selbst ein Friedensopfer“, so haben seine Worte Geltung, „es seihst sei ein Friedensopfer und sein Junges ein Ganzopfer“, so ist es doch das Junge eines Friedensopfers, dies die Worte des R. Meir. Es sagte R. Jose: Wenn er von Anfang an es so im Sinne hatte, haben seine Worte, da es unmöglich ist, zwei Bestimmungen zugleich auszusprechen, Geltung, wenn er aber erst, nachdem er gesagt hat: „dieses sei ein Friedensopfer“, sich es überlegt und gesagt hat: „das Junge sei ein Ganzopfer“, so ist es das Junge eines Friedensopfere.",
+ "[Wenn jemand sagt:] „Dieses sei ausgetauscht anstelle eines Ganzopfers, ausgetauscht anstelle eines Friedensopfers“ , so ist es ein anstelle eines Ganzopfers Ausgetauschtes, dies die Worte des R. Meir. Es sagte R. Jose: Wenn er von Anfang es so im Sinne hatte, haben, da es unmöglich ist, zwei Bestimmungen zugleich auszusprechen, seine Worte Geltung, wenn er aber erst, nachdem er gesagt hat: „ausgetauscht anstelle eines Ganzopfers“, sich es überlegt und gesagt hat: „anstelle eines Friedensopfers“, so ist es ein anstelle eines Ganzopfers Ausgetauschtes.",
+ "„Dieses sei anstelle von diesem, ausgetauscht für dieses, ausgewechselt gegen dieses“, gilt als Austausch, „dieses verliere seine Heiligkeit durch dieses“, gilt nicht als Austausch. Wenn das heilige Tier fehlerbehaftet war, so verliert es dadurch seine Heiligkeit, er muss es aber mit dem vollen Geldwerte bezahlen.",
+ "„Dieses sei anstelle eines Sündopfers“ oder „anstelle eines Ganzopfers“, das hat gar keine Geltung, „anstelle dieses Sündopfers“ oder „anstelle dieses Ganzopfers“ oder „anstelle des Sündopfers“, oder „anstelle des Ganzopfers, das ich zu Hause habe“ und er hat ein solches, so haben seine Worte Geltung. Wenn jemand auf ein unreines Tier und auf ein fehlerbehaftetes sagt: „diese seien Ganzopfer“, hat das gar keine Geltung, „diese seien zum Ganzopfer“, müssen sie verkauft werden, und man bringt für das Geld Ganzopfer."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Alle Tiere, die nicht auf den Altar gebracht werden dürfen, machen auch andere Tiere [unter die sie geraten sind] dafür untauglich, wenn deren auch noch so viele sind, nämlich: [ein Tier,] das [einen Menschen] begattet hat oder [von ihm] begattet worden ist, das [zum Götzenopfer] bestimmt worden oder [götzendienerisch] verehrt worden ist, das als [Buhlerinnen-] Lohn gegeben worden ist oder als [Hunde-] Preis, ein Bastardtier, ein Trefa und ein seitwärts Herausgezogenes. Was heisst das, ein bestimmt gewordenes ? Das für den Götzendienst bestimmt worden ist, es selbst ist verboten, aber was es auf sich hat, ist erlaubt . Was heisst das, ein verehrt gewordenes? Jedes, das götzendienerisch verehrt worden ist, es selbst und was es auf sich hat, ist verboten . Sowohl dieses wie jenes ist zum Genuss erlaubt .",
+ "Was heisst das, ein Buhlerinnenlohn? Wenn jemand zu einer Buhlerin sagt: „Hier hast du dieses Lamm als Lohn für dich„ , selbst wenn er ihr hundert gibt, sind sie alle verboten. Ebenso wenn jemand zu einem anderen sagt: „Hier hast du dieses Lamm, dafür lass deine Sklavin bei meinem Knechte schlafen“. Rabbi sagt: Das ist kein Buhlerinnenlohn; die Weisen aber sagen: Das ist ein Buhlerinnenlohn.",
+ "Was heisst das, der Preis für einen Hund? Wenn jemand zu einem Anderen sagt: „Hier hast du dieses Lamm für diesen Hund“. Ebenso, wenn zwei Gesellschafter teilen, und der Eine erhält zehn [Lämmer] und der andere neun und einen Hund, so sind die, die zu dem Gegenwert für den Hund gehören, verboten, die zusammen mit dem Hund zugeteilten erlaubt. Als Lohn für eine Hündin und als Preis für eine Buhlerin gegebene Tiere sind erlaubt , denn es heisst: „sie beide“, aber nicht vier. Junge von ihnen sind erlaubt, denn es heisst: „sie“, nicht aber ihre Jungen.",
+ "Hat er ihr Geld gegeben, so ist dieses erlaubt, Weine, Öle, Mehle oder irgend etwas, von dessen Art auf dem Altar dargebracht wird, so ist es verboten. Hat er ihr zu Opfern bestimmte Tiere gegeben, so sind sie erlaubt, Geflügel, so ist es verboten. Es wäre eigentlich folgender Schluss zu ziehen: Wenn zu Opfern bestimmte Tiere, die durch einen Leibesfehler untauglich werden, als Buhlerinnenlohn und Preis für einen Hund nicht untauglich werden, müssten da Vögel, die nicht durch einen Leibesfehler untauglich werden, nicht erst recht nicht als Buhlerinnenlohn und Preis für einen Hund untauglich werden ? Die Schrift sagt aber: „für irgend ein Gelübde„, um auch Geflügel mit einzuschliessen.",
+ "Von allen Tieren, die nicht auf den Altar gebracht werden dürfen, sind die Jungen erlaubt. Das Junge von einem Trefa darf, sagt R. Elieser, nicht auf den Altar gebracht werden; die Weisen aber sagen, es darf dargebracht werden. R. Chanina, Sohn des Antigonus, sagt: Ein taugliches Tier, das an einem Trefa gesaugt hat, ist untauglich für den Altar. Alle Opfertiere, die trefa geworden sind, dürfen nicht ausgelöst werden, denn man darf keine Opfertiere auslösen, um sie den Hunden zum Frass zu geben."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Es gibt Bestimmungen, die für Geheiligtes, das für den Altar geheiligt worden ist, gelten und nicht für solches, das für den Tempelschatz geheiligt worden ist, und es gibt Bestimmungen, die für Geheiligtes, das für den Tempelschatz geheiligt worden ist, gelten und nicht für solches, das für den Altar geheiligt worden ist. Für den Altar geheiligte [Opfer] können ausgetauscht werden, bei ihnen treten die auf Verworfenes, auf Übriggelassenes und auf Unreinheit stehenden Strafen ein, ein Junges und die Milch von ihnen sind auch nach ihrer Auslösung verboten, wer sie ausserhalb [des Heiligtums] schlachtet, macht sich schuldig, und man darf mit ihnen nicht den Tempelarbeitern ihren Lohn bezahlen; das alles gilt nicht für das für den Tempelschatz Geheiligte.",
+ "Es gibt Bestimmungen für das für den Tempelschatz Geheiligte, die nicht für das für den Altar Geheiligte gelten: Ohne nähere Bestimmung Geheiligtes fällt an den Tempelschatz, für den Tempelschatz kann alles geheiligt werden, man macht sich auch an daraus erst entstandenen Dingen der Veruntreuung schuldig, und die Priester ziehen aus ihnen gar keinen Nutzen.",
+ "Weder bei dem für den Altar noch bei dem für den Tempelschatz Geheiligten darf man die Bestimmung, für die man es geheiligt hat, ändern , man kann ihren abzuschätzenden Wert dem Heiligtum geloben und sie als Banngut weihen, und wenn sie von selbst verenden, müssen sie vergraben werden; R. Simon sagt: Für den Tempelschatz geheiligte Tiere können, wenn sie verendet sind, ausgelöst werden.",
+ "Für Folgendes ist das Vergraben Vorschrift: Fehlgeburten von Opfertieren müssen vergraben werden, eine von ihnen geworfene Fruchthaut muss vergraben werden, der [von Gerichts wegen] gesteinigte Ochse, das durch Genickschlag getötete Kalb , die Vogelopfer von Aussätzigen, das Haar des Nasiräers, die Erstgeburt eines Esels, Fleisch- und Milchmischung und nichtheilige Tiere, die im Heiligtum geschlachtet worden sind; R. Simon sagt: Nichtheilige Tiere, die im Heiligtume geschlachtet worden sind, müssen verbrannt werden , ebenso auch im Heiligturne geschlachtetes Wild.",
+ "Für Folgendes ist das Verbrennen Vorschrift: Gesäuertes am Pessach muss verbrannt werden , ferner unreine Priesterhebe , Orla-Frucht und Saaten-Mischung im Weinberge, das, was [davon] verbrannt zu werden pflegt, muss verbrannt werden, und was vergraben zu werden pflegt, muss vergraben werden; Brot und Öl von Priesterhebe darf man als Brennmaterial benützen.",
+ "Alle Opfertiere, die [mit der Absicht auf] ausser ihrer Zeit oder ausserhalb ihres Ortes geschlachtet worden sind, müssen verbrannt werden, ein Zweifel-Schuldopfer muss verbrannt werden; R. Jehuda sagt: Es muss vergraben werden. Ein für den Zweifelsfall gebrachtes Vogel-Sündopfer muss verbrannt werden; R. Jehuda sagt: Man wirft es in den Wasserarm. Alles, wofür das Verbrennen vorgeschrieben ist, darf nicht vergraben werden , und wofür das Vergraben vorgeschrieben ist, darf nicht verbrannt werden; R. Jehuda sagt: Wenn jemand es sich selbst erschweren will, das zu Vergrabende zu verbrennen, so ist es erlaubt; darauf sagte man zu ihm: Es ist nicht erlaubt, es anders zu machen."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/English/Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/English/Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4b90b2dc4211c97fb6bf923adbdfa369f469242a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/English/Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp.json
@@ -0,0 +1,75 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Temurah",
+ "versionSource": "http://learn.conservativeyeshiva.org/mishnah/",
+ "versionTitle": "Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 1.0,
+ "license": "CC-BY",
+ "shortVersionTitle": "Dr. Joshua Kulp",
+ "actualLanguage": "en",
+ "languageFamilyName": "english",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה תמורה",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "All persons can substitute, both men and women. Not that one is permitted to substitute, but that if one did so, the substitute is sacred, and he receives forty lashes. Priests have the power to substitute their own [animal] and Israelites also have the power to substitute their own [animal]. Priests do not have the power to substitute a hatat, an asham or a first-born: Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri: what is the reason [priests] do not have the power to substitute a first-born? Rabbi Akiva said: a hatat and an asham are priestly gifts and a first-born is also a priestly gift. Just as in the case of a hatat and an asham [priests] have no power to substitute them, so in the case of a first-born [priests] have no power to substitute it. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri said to him: So what that priests should have no power to substitute a hatat and an asham, for there they have do not have a claim on these [offerings] while they are alive. How can you say that the same applies to a first-born upon which [the priests] do have a claim when it is alive? Rabbi Akiva replied to him: Has not Scripture already said: “Then it and its substitute shall be holy?” (Leviticus 27:10). Now where does the holiness [of the original animal] occur? In the house of the owners; so too the substitution occurs in the house of the owners.",
+ "One can substitute Herd animals for flock animals and flock animals for herd animals; Sheep for goats and goats for sheep; Males for females and females for males; Unblemished animals for blemished animals and blemished animals for unblemished animals, since Scripture says: “One may not exchange or substitute another for it, either good for bad, or bad for good” (Leviticus 27:10). What is meant by “good for bad”? Blemished animals whose dedication was prior to their blemish. One can substitute one [hullin animal] for two [consecrated animals], and two [hullin animals] for one [consecrated animal]; One [hullin animal] for a hundred [consecrated animals] and a hundred [hullin animals] for one [consecrated animal]; Rabbi Shimon says: one can only substitute one for one, as it says, “Then it and its substitute” (ibid), just as “it” [the consecrated animal] is only one, so [its substitute] must also be only one.",
+ "One cannot substitute limbs [of hullin] for [dedicated] embryos; Or embryos [of hullin] for [dedicated] limbs; Or embryos and limbs [of hullin] for whole [dedicated animals]; Or whole [animals of hullin] for them. Rabbi Yose says: limbs [of hullin] can be substituted for whole [dedicated animals], but whole [animals of hullin] cannot be substitute for them. Rabbi Yose said: When it comes to dedicating animals, is it not true that if one says: “This foot shall be an olah (a burnt offering),” the whole [animal] becomes an olah? Similarly, if one says, “This foot shall be in place of this [whole dedicated animal],” the whole [animal] should become a substitute in its place!",
+ "[Anything which has become subject to the law of terumah through] a mixture can affect a [second] mixture only in proportion. [Dough] leavened [through terumah] can affect [other dough] only in proportion. Drawn water can disqualify a mikweh only in proportion.",
+ "Hatat water does not become hatat water except with the putting of ashes [in the water]. A doubtful graveyard cannot make another doubtful graveyard. Nor can terumah be made after terumah. A substitute cannot make another substitute. The offspring of a dedicated animal cannot make a substitute. Rabbi Judah says: the offspring of a dedicated animal can make a substitute. They said to him: a dedicated animal can make a substitute, but neither the offspring of a dedicated animal nor a substitute can make a substitute.",
+ "Birds and menahot do not make a substitute, since it only says “a beast” (Leviticus 27:10). A congregation or partners cannot make a substitute, since it says: “He shall not substitute for it” an individual can make a substitute but a congregation or partners cannot make substitute. One cannot make a substitute with [objects] dedicated for Temple repairs. Rabbi Shimon said: Now is not tithe included [in the laws of substitutes]? Then why was it specially mentioned? In order to make a comparison with it: tithe is a private offering, it thus excludes congregational offerings. And tithe is a dedication for the altar, it thus excludes offerings dedicated for Temple repairs."
+ ],
+ [
+ "There are [laws relating] to the sacrifices of an individual which do not apply to congregational sacrifices and [laws relating] to congregational sacrifices which do not apply to the sacrifices of individuals. For sacrifices of an individual can make a substitute whereas congregational sacrifices cannot make a substitute; Sacrifices of an individual can be either males or females, whereas congregational sacrifices can be only males. For sacrifices of an individual the owner is responsible for them and their libations, whereas for congregational sacrifices they are not liable for them or for their libations, although they are liable for their libations once the sacrifice has been offered. There are [laws relating] to congregational sacrifices which do not apply to the sacrifices of individuals: For congregational sacrifices override Shabbat and [the laws] of ritual impurity, whereas sacrifices of individuals do not override the Shabbat or [the laws] of ritual impurity. Rabbi Meir said: but do not the griddle cakes of a high priest and the bull for Yom Hakippurim which are sacrifices of individuals and yet override the Shabbat and [the laws] of ritual impurity? The matter therefore depends on [whether] the time [for the offering up] is fixed.",
+ "A hatat of an individual whose owners have been atoned for is left to die, whereas that of a congregation is not left to die. Rabbi Judah says: it is left to die. Rabbi Shimon said: Just as we have found with regard to the offspring of a hatat, the substitute of a hatat and a hatat whose owners died, that these rules apply only to an individual but not to a congregation, so too [the rules concerning] the hatat whose owners have been atoned for and [a hatat] whose year has passed apply only to an individual but not a congregation.",
+ "In some ways [the laws relating to] dedications are more stringent than [that those relating to] a substitute, and in some ways [those relating to] a substitute are more stringent than [those relating to] dedications. In some ways [the laws relating to] dedications are more stringent than [those relating to] a substitute, For dedicated animals can make a substitute whereas a substitute cannot make another substitute. A congregation or partners can dedicate but cannot make a substitute. One can dedicate embryos and limbs, but one cannot make a substitute with them. [The laws relating to] a substitute are more stringent than [those relating to] dedications, since a substitute applies to a permanently blemished animal and it does not become hullin to be sheared or worked. Rabbi Yose son of Rabbi Judah says: they made an error to be the same as intent when it comes to a substitute, but they did not make an error to be the same as intent when it comes to dedication. Rabbi Elazar says: kilayim, terefah, a fetus extracted by means of a cesarean section, a tumtum and a hermaphrodite, cannot become sacred nor can they make sacred."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The following are sacrifices whose offspring and substitutes are the same as them:The offspring of shelamim and their substitutes, their offspring and the offspring of their offspring, till the end of time, are regarded as shelamim, and they require the laying on of hands, libations and the waving of the breast and shoulder. Rabbi Eliezer says: the offspring of a shelamim must not be offered as a shelamim. The sages say: it is offered. Rabbi Shimon said: there is no dispute between them as regards the offspring of the offspring of a shelamim or the offspring of the offspring of a substitute that they are not offered. What did they dispute? The offspring [of a shelamim]: Rabbi Eliezer says: it is not offered, But the sages say: it is offered. Rabbi Joshua and Rabbi Papias testified regarding the offspring of a shelamim that it is offered as a shelamim. Rabbi Papias said: I testify that we had a cow of a shelamim and we ate it on Pesah and we ate its offspring as a shelamim on the festival [of Sukkot].",
+ "The offspring of a todah and its substitute, their offspring and the offspring of their offspring, until the end of all time, are considered as a todah, only they do not require the accompaniment of loaves of bread. The substitute of an olah, the offspring of its substitute, its offspring and the offspring of its offspring, until the end of time, are regarded as an olah: they require flaying, cutting into pieces and to be altogether burned.",
+ "If one set aside a female animal for an olah and it gave birth to a male, it goes out to pasture until it becomes unfit for sacrifice. It is then sold and with its money he brings an olah. Rabbi Elazar says: the [male] animal itself is offered as an olah. If one sets aside a female [animal] for an asham, it goes out to pasture until it becomes unfit for sacrifice. It is then sold and with its money he brings an asham. If he has already offered an asham [in its place], its money goes for freewill-offerings. Rabbi Shimon says: it is sold without [waiting for] a blemish. The substitute of an asham, the young of its substitute, their young and the young of their young until the end of time, go out to pasture until unfit for sacrifice. They are then sold and their money goes for a freewill-offering. Rabbi Eliezer says: they are left to die. Rabbi Elazar says: he brings olot [burnt sacrifices] with their money. An asham whose owner died or whose owner obtained atonement [through another animal] goes out to pasture until unfit for sacrifice. It is then sold and its money goes for freewill-offerings. Rabbi Eliezer says: they are left to die. Rabbi Elazar says: he brings olot [burnt sacrifices] with their money.",
+ "But cannot a nedavah [freewill-offering] also be an olah? What then is the difference between the opinion of Rabbi Elazar and that of the sages? Only in that when the offering comes as an obligation, he lays his hands on it and he brings libations and the libations must be from him; and if he is a priest, the privilege of officiating and its hide belong to him. Whereas when he brings it as a freewill-offering, he does not lay his hands [on it], he does not bring libations with it, the libations are provided by the congregation, and although he is a priest, the privilege of officiating and its hide belong to the men of the division [officiating that particular week].",
+ "The substitute of a first-born and an animal tithed, their young and the young of their young until the end of time, they are all treated like a first-born and an animal tithed, and are eaten by the owners when blemished. What is the difference between a first-born and an animal tithed [on the one hand] and other dedications [on the other]? All [blemished] dedications are sold in the market, killed in the market, and weighed by the pound, but not a first-born and an animal tithed. They [other dedications] and their substitutes are redeemed, but not a first-born and an animal tithed. They [other dedications] come from outside the land [to the land], but not a first-born and an animal tithed. [If] they however came from [outside the holy land] unblemished, they are offered, if blemished they are eaten by their owners with their blemishes. Rabbi Shimon: what is the reason? Because a first-born and an animal tithed have a remedy wherever they are, whereas all other dedications, although a blemish has occurred in them, remain holy."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The offspring of a hatat, the substitute of a hatat, and a hatat whose owner has died, are left to die. A hatat whose year has passed or which was lost and found blemished: If the owners obtained atonement [afterwards, through another animal], is left to die, and it does not make a substitute; it is forbidden to derive benefit from it, but the laws of sacrilege do not apply. If the owners have not yet obtained atonement, it must go to pasture until it becomes unfit for sacrifice. It is then sold and another is bought with the money. It makes a substitute, and the laws of sacrilege do apply.",
+ "If one set aside a hatat and it was lost and he sacrificed another in its place, if then the first [animal] is found, it is left to die. If one set aside money for his hatat and they were lost and he offered a hatat instead of it, if then the money was found, it goes to the Dead Sea.",
+ "If one set aside money for his hatat, and it was lost and he set aside other money in its place, if he did not have the opportunity to buy a hatat with it until the [first] money was found, he brings a hatat from both [sums], and the rest of the money is used for a freewill-offering. If one set aside money for his hatat and it was lost and he set aside a hatat in its place, if he did not have the opportunity to offer it until the money was found, and the hatat was blemished, it is sold and he brings a hatat from both [sums], and the rest is used as a freewill-offering. If one set aside a hatat and it was lost and he set aside money in its place, if he did not have the opportunity to buy a hatat until his hatat was found and it was blemished, it is sold and he brings a hatat from both [sums], and the rest is used for a freewill-offering. If one set aside a hatat and it was lost and he set aside another hatat in its place, if he did not have the opportunity to offer it until the first hatat was found and both were blemished, they are to be sold and he brings a hatat from both [sums] and the rest is used for a freewill-offering. If one set aside a hatat and it was lost and he set aside another in its place, if he did not have the opportunity of offering it until the first hatat was found and both animals were unblemished, one of them is offered as a hatat and the second must be left to die, the words of Rabbi. The sages say: the only hatat which is left to die is a case where it is found after the owners obtained atonement, and the money does not go to the Dead Sea except where found after the owners have obtained atonement.",
+ "If one set aside a hatat and it is blemished, he sells it and brings another with its money. Rabbi Elazar son of Rabbi Shimon says: if the second animal was offered before the first was killed, it is left to die, since the owners have [already] obtained atonement."
+ ],
+ [
+ "How can we act deceptively with regard to the first-born?He says in respect of a pregnant animal which was giving birth for the first time: if what is in the inside of this [animal] is a male, let it be an olah. If it then gave birth to a male, it is offered as an olah. [If he said:] if it is a female, let it be a shelamim, then if it gave birth to a female, it is offered as a shelamim. [If he said:] if it is a male, let it be an olah, and if a female [let it be] a shelamim, then if it gave birth to a male and a female, the male is offered as an olah and the female is offered as a shelamim.",
+ "If it gave birth to two males, one of them shall be offered as an olah and the second shall be sold to persons obligated to bring an olah and its money becomes hullin. If it gave birth to two females, one of them is offered as a shelamim and the second is sold to persons obligated to bring shelamim and the money becomes hullin. If [the animal] gave birth to a tumtum or a hermaphrodite, Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: no holiness attaches to them.",
+ "If one says: “The offspring of this [pregnant animal] shall be an olah and it [the animal itself] shall be a shelamim,” his words stand. But if he says [first]: “It [the animal] shall be a shelamim” [and then], “and its offspring shall be an olah,” [its offspring] is regarded as the offspring of an shelamim, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yose says: if he intended [to say] this at first, since it is impossible to mention both kinds [of sacrifices] simultaneously, his words stand; but if after he already said [intentionally]: this shall be a shelamim, and then he changed his mind and says: its offspring shall be an olah, [its offspring] is regarded as the offspring of a shelamim.",
+ "[If one says:] “Behold, this animal shall be the substitute of an olah and the substitute of a shelamim,” it is the substitute of an olah, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yose says: if he originally intended this, since it is impossible to mention both names [of sacrifices] simultaneously, his words stand. But if after he had already said: “This shall be the substitute of an olah,” he changed his mind and then said: “The substitute of a shelamim,” it is the substitute of an olah.",
+ "[If one says:] “Behold this [animal] is tahat [instead of] this,” [or] “Behold this is temurat [a substitute] this,” [or] “Behold this is halufat [in place of] this,” [each of these] is a substitute. [If however one says:] “This shall be redeemed for this,” it is not the case of a [valid] substitute. And if the dedicated animal was blemished, it becomes hullin and he is required to make up [the hullin] to the value [of the dedicated animal].",
+ "[If one says:] “Behold this animal shall be instead of a hatat,” [or] “instead of an olah,” he has said nothing. [But if he says:] “Instead of this hatat” [or] “Instead of this olah,” [or] “Instead of the hatat or the olah which I have in the house,” and he had it in the house, his words stand. If he says concerning an unclean animal or a blemished animal: “Behold these shall be an olah,” he has said nothing. [But if he says:] “Behold they shall be for an olah,” they are sold and he brings with their money an olah."
+ ],
+ [
+ "All [animals] forbidden for the altar render [others] unfit however few there are. [These are the animals forbidden for the altar]: An animal which had sexual relations with [a woman] or [an animal] that had sexual relations [with a man], an animal set aside (muktzeh) [for idolatry], or that had been worshipped (ne’evad) [as an idol]; or that was the fee of a whore, or [a dog's] exchange; or that was kilayim; or terefah; or an animal born through a caesarean section,What is meant by muktzeh? That which has been set aside for idolatrous use. It [the animal itself] is forbidden, but what is upon it, is permitted. And what is meant by ne'evad? That which has been used for idolatry. Both it [the animal itself] and that which is upon it, are forbidden. In both cases the animal may be eaten.",
+ "What is meant by “a prostitute’s fee”?If one says to a prostitute, “Take this lamb as your fee,” even if there are a hundred lambs, they are all forbidden [for the altar]. If one says to his fellow: Here is a lamb and have your female slave sleep with my servant, Rabbi Meir says: it [the lamb] is not regarded as a prostitute’s fee. But the sages say: it is regarded as a prostitute’s fee.",
+ "What is meant by the “price of a dog”?If one says to his fellow, here is this lamb instead of [this] dog. And similarly if two partners divided [an estate] and one took ten lambs and the other nine and a dog, all those taken in place of the dog are forbidden [for the altar], but those taken with a dog are valid [for the altar]. An animal that is the fee of a dog and the price of a prostitute are permitted [for the altar], since it says: “[For] both [of these]” (Deuteronomy 23:19): both’ but not four. Their offspring are permitted [for the altar since it says]: “[Both of these]” implying they but not their offspring.",
+ "If he gave her [a prostitute] money, it is permitted [for use for the altar.] [But if he gave her] wine, oil, flour and anything similar which is offered on the altar, it is forbidden for the altar. If he gave her dedicated [animals] they are permitted [for the altar]. If he gave her birds [of hullin] they are disqualified. For one might have reasoned [as follows]: if in the case of dedicated animals, where a blemish disqualifies them, [the law] of [the prostitute’s] fee and price [of a dog] does not apply to them, in the case of birds, where a blemish does not disqualify, is it not all the more reason that the law of [the prostitute’s] fee and the price [of a dog] should not apply? Scripture says, “For any vow,” (Deuteronomy 23:19) this includes a bird.",
+ "With regard to any animals that are disqualified for the altar, their offspring are permitted for the altar. The offspring of a terefah: Rabbi Eliezer says it may not be offered on the altar. But the sages say it may be offered. Rabbi Hanina ben Antigonus says: a ritually clean animal which nursed from a terefah is disqualified from the altar. Any dedicated animal which became terefah one may not dedicate them, since we may not redeem dedicated [animals] in order to give them to dogs to eat."
+ ],
+ [
+ "There are [laws] which apply to dedications for the altar which do not apply to dedications for repairs of the Temple, and there are [laws] which apply to dedications for the repairs of the Temple which do not apply to dedications for the altar.Dedications for the altar effect a substitute; They are subject to the laws of piggul, remnant and ritual uncleanness; Their offspring and milk are forbidden [even] after their redemption; If one kills them outside [the Temple] he is guilty; And wages are not paid from them to artisans, Which is not the case with dedications for temple repairs.",
+ "There are [laws] which apply to dedications for the repairs of the Temple which don’t apply to dedications to the altar.Unspecified dedications go to the repairs of the Temple. Dedication for the repairs of the temple can have an effect on all things, The law of sacrilege applies to things that grow from them. And there is no benefit to be derived from them for the priest.",
+ "Both dedications for the altar and dedications for the repairs of the Temple may not be changed from one holiness to another. One may dedicate them with a value-dedication, and one may conscribe them. If they die, they are buried. Rabbi Shimon says: dedications for the repairs of the temple, if they died, they are redeemed.",
+ "And the following are things which must be buried:A dedicated animal which had a miscarriage, [the miscarriage] must be buried. A dedicated animal which expelled a placenta, [the placenta] must be buried. An ox which was condemned to be stoned. The heifer whose neck was broken. The birds [brought in connection with the purification] of one with skin disease (metzora). The hair of a nazirite. The first-born of a donkey. [A mixture of] meat [cooked] in milk. And hullin which were slaughtered in the Temple court. Shimon says: hullin which were slaughtered in the Temple court must be burned. And similarly a wild animal killed in the Temple court [is also burned].",
+ "And the following are to be burned:Chametz on Pesah is burned; Unclean terumah; Orlah; Kilayim (mixed seeds) in the vineyard--that which it is customary to burn is to be burned and that which it is customary to bury is to be buried. We may kindle with the bread and oil of [unclean] terumah.",
+ "All dedicated animals which were slaughtered [with the intention of being eaten] after their set time or outside of their set place must be burned. An asham offered by one in doubt [as to whether he has transgressed] is to be burned. Rabbi Judah says: it is to be buried. A hatat of a bird that is brought for a doubt is burned. Rabbi Judah says: it is cast into the sewer. All things which must be buried must not be burned, and all things which must be burned must not be buried. Rabbi Judah says: if one wishes to be stringent with himself, to burn things which are buried, he is permitted to do so. They said to him: he is not allowed to change."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/English/Sefaria Community Translation.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/English/Sefaria Community Translation.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..516e6f1ef57229a8c3587fa8fa6b2076323f3b5b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/English/Sefaria Community Translation.json
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Temurah",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org",
+ "versionTitle": "Sefaria Community Translation",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "license": "CC0",
+ "versionTitleInHebrew": "תרגום קהילת ספריא",
+ "actualLanguage": "en",
+ "languageFamilyName": "english",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה תמורה",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "Everyone can substitute a dedicated animal for another, both men and women. Not that a one is allowed to substitute, but rather, that if he did substitute, the substitution takes effect, and he absorbs forty lashes. Priests can substitute their own [offerings] and Israelites can substitute their [own offerings]. Priests cannot substitute for chata'ot [sin-offerings], or Ashamot [guilt-offerings], or for the firstborn. Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri said: Why can they not substitute it for a firstborn? Rabbi Akiva said to him: the Chatat and Asham are gifts to the priest and the firstborn is a gift to the priest, just as he cannot substitute for the Chatat and Asham, so too he cannot substitute a for a first-born. Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri said to him: But why does it matter that he cannot substitute for the Chatat and Asham? He does not have rights to them while they are alive - should the same law apply to the firstborn, to which he has rights while it is alive? Rabbi Akiva responded to him: Does it not say (Leviticus 27:10): \"It and its substitution will be holy\"? Where does holiness takes effect [on a dedicated animal? While it is] in the owners possession; so too the substitution must be [while the animal is] in the owner's possession.",
+ "Cattle can be substituted for sheep and sheep for cattle, sheep for goats and goats for sheep, males for females and females for males, unblemished [animals] for blemished [animals] and blemished ones for unblemished ones, as it says (Leviticus 27:10): \"Do not switch it and do not substitute it - good for bad or bad for good.\" What is 'good for bad'? Blemished ones whose sanctification preceded their blemish. One [animal] can be substituted for two, and two for one, one for one hundred, and one hundred for one. Rabbi Shimon says: We only substitute one for one, as it says (Leviticus 27:10): \"it and its substitution\" - just as 'it' is particular so too its substitution is particular.",
+ "We do not substitute limbs for fetuses nor fetuses for limbs, and neither limbs nor fetuses for intact animals, nor intact animals for them. Rabbi Yose says: Limbs can be substituted for intact animals, but not intact animals for limbs. [for] Rabbi Yose said: And is it not the law regarding sanctified animals that if one says: the leg of this one is an Olah [burnt-offering], all of it [becomes an Olah? So too, if one says the leg of this one in place of that one, all of it is an substitution in its place.",
+ "Meduma (a mixture of terumah and non-sacred food) does not render [its admixture] meduma except according to reckoning [i.e., the amount of terumah in the initial mixture], and leavened foodstuffs [leavened by leavening which is terumah] does not render [its admixture] chamets except according to reckoning, and drawn water does not render a mikveh invalid except according to reckoning.",
+ "The purification-water cannot become purification-water except through the deposition of ash. A field in doubt [as to whether it contains a grave] cannot create a [secondary] field of the same status, tithes cannot come after other tithes, and an substituted animal cannot make a substituted animal, and the offspring [of a dedicated animal] cannot make a substituted animal. Rabbi Judah says: The offspring can make a substituted animal. They said to him: Dedicated animals can make a substituted animal , but neither the offspring [of a dedicated animal] nor a substituted animal can make a substituted animal.",
+ "The bird [offerings] and the flour-offerings cannot make a substitution, for [the rule of substitution] was only stated regarding animals. Neither the public nor [business] partners can created a substitution, for it is said (Leviticus 27:10): \"He shall not substitute it\" - an individual can create an substitution but neither the public nor partners can create a substitution. Offerings [donated] to the maintenance fund of the Temple cannot create a substitution. Rabbi Shimon said: Wasn't the tithe [animal] included in the rule [for substituted animals]? Why did it leave [the rule to be dealt with separately]? [In order] to compare [to it]: Just as the tithe is the offering of an individual, [so too are all subject offerings the offering of an individual] - public offerings are excluded. Just as the tithe is an offering for the altar, [so too are all subject offerings offerings for the altar] - offerings [donated] to the maintenance fund of the Temple are excluded."
+ ],
+ [
+ "There are [aspects] of individual sacrifices which are not [aspects] of public sacrifices, and there are [aspects] of public sacrifices which are not [aspects] of individual sacrifices, [namely,] that individual sacrifices can make a substituted animal, and public sacrifices cannot make a substituted animal; Individual sacrifices can be made with male or female [animals], and public sacrifices can only be made with males; [regarding] individual sacrifices and their libations, one is financially liable, [while regarding] public sacrifices and their libations, one is not financially liable. However, once is financially liable for their libations once the sacrifice has been offered. There are [aspects] of public sacrifices which are not [aspects] of individual sacrifices, [namely,]that [offering] public sacrifices sets aside Shabbat [prohibitions] and [priestly] impurity, and individual sacrifices do set aside neither Shabbat [prohibitions] nor [priestly] impurity. Rabbi Meir said: and are not the High Priest's grain-offering and [his] cow-offering on Yom Kippur individual sacrifices, yet they set aside Shabbat [prohibitions] and [priestly] impurity? Rather, [the reason that certain offering set aside Shabbat and impurity is] because their time [for their offering] is fixed.",
+ "An individual's chattat [sin-offering] whose owners atoned [otherwise, i.e., via another sin-offering] is [secluded until it] dies; the public's chattat [of similar circumstances] is not [secluded until it] dies. Rabbi Yehuda said: they will [both be secluded until they] die. Rabbi Shimon said: what do we find regarding the offspring of a chattat, and the substitute for a chattat, and a chattat whose owner has died? These matters were spoken of regarding an individual [chattat], but not regarding a public [chattat] - likewise, regarding a chattat whose owners atone [otherwise] and chattat which has passed one year [of age], these matters were spoken of regarding an individual [chattat], but not regarding a public [chattat].",
+ "[Original] holy [sacrifices] are more stringent [in some ways] than a substitute, and a substitute is [more stringent] than [original] holy [sacrifices] , as [original] holy [sacrifices] can make a substitute, yet a substitute cannot make a substitute. The public and partners can dedicate an animal, but they cannot substitute, and [one can] dedicate limbs and fetuses, but one cannot substitute [for them]. A substitute is more stringent, [in that] the holiness [imposed by the act of substitution] applies [even] to an animal with a permanent blemish, and it cannot be redeemed to be sheared or worked. Rabbi Yose bar Rabbi Yehuda said: They equated unintentional [action] with intentional action regarding substitution, but not with regards to [dedicating original] holy [sacrifices]. Rabbi Eliezer said: Kilayim [the products of forbidden crossbreeding], terefot [animals with a mortal condition such that they would die within one year], those born via Caesarian section, the tumtum [person (or animal) with recessed sexual organs whose gender is therefore impossible to determine, presently, by external examination. It is halachically uncertain whether such is male or female], or the androginos [person (or animal) with both male and female sexual organs. It is halachically uncertain whether such is male, female or, perhaps, has a uniquely defined halachic gender] - they neither can become sacred [offerings] nor [where already sacred] can they make [other animals] sacred [via substitution]. "
+ ],
+ [
+ "These are the holy [sacrifices] whose offspring and substitutions [are offered and thus] are similar to them: the offspring of a shelamim [An offering whose various parts are consumed by its owners, the Kohanim and the fire on the altar], and those exchanged for it, their offspring and their offspring's offspring until the end of the world, behold they are like shelamim, and they require semichah [placing both hands on the head of a sacrificial animal and leaning with all once's force, an action required for many sacrifices] and libations and waving and [giving] the breast and the leg [to the priests]. Rabbi Eliezer says: the offspring of a shelamim is not offered as a shelamim, [while] the Sages say: it is offered. Rabbi Shimon said: they did not disagree about the offspring of the offspring of a shelamim or about the offspring of the offspring of a substitute, that it is not offered. Regarding what did they disagree? [Regarding the immediate] offspring: Rabbi Eliezer says: it is not offered, and the Sages said: it is offered. Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Pappis testified regarding the offspring of a shelamim that it is offered as a shelamim. Rabbi Pappis said: I testify that we had a cow offered as a shelamim which we ate on [the day of] Pesach, and we ate its offspring as a shelamim during the [ensuing] holiday.",
+ "The offspring of a todah [thanksgiving offering] and its substitute, its offspring and the offspring of its offspring until the end of the world, behold these are like a todah, except they do not require [the accompanying] bread [offerings]. The substitute for an olah [offering that is entirely burnt], the offspring of that substitute, and the offspring of its offspring until the end of the world, behold they are like the olah, and require skinning, sectioning and are [consigned] entirely to the fire.",
+ "One who designated a female [animal] as an olah and it gives birth to a male, shall graze until it becomes blemished, and shall be sold and he shall bring an olah with its money. Rabbi Eliezer said: the offspring itself is offered an olah. One who designated a female as an asham [offering brought to alleviate guilt], let it graze until it becomes blemished, and then let it be sold and he shall bring an asham with its money. If he [already] offered his asham, its money falls [to the Temple fund] for a free-will offering. Rabbi Shimon said: it is sold though not blemished. The substitute for an asham, and the offspring of the exchange, and the offspring of the offspring until the end of the world, are left to graze until they becomes blemished, and are then sold and their money falls [to the Temple fund] for a free-will offering. Rabbi Eliezer said: [they shall be secluded until] they die. And Rabbi Eleazar said: he shall bring olot with their money. An asham whose owners have died, or whose owners have atoned [using another animal] shall graze until they become blemished and they shall be sold, and their money falls [to the Temple fund] for a free-will offering. Rabbi Eliezer said: [they shall be secluded until] they die. And Rabbi Eleazar said: he shall bring olot with their money.",
+ "But is not a free-will offering also an olah? [Then] what is there between the words of Rabbi Eleazar and the words of the Sages? Rather, when [an olah] is brought as an obligation, he lays his hands on it and bring [accompanying] libations, [for] its libations [come] from his own [funds]. And if he is a priest, its [sacrificial work and skin are his; [but] when it is brought as a free-will offering, he does not lay his hands on it, and he does not bring libations, for its libations [come] from the public. Even if he is a priest, its [sacrificial] work and skin are [given] to the priest of [that day's] watch.",
+ "The animals substituted for the firstborn and for the tithe [offerings], their offspring, and the offspring of their offspring until the end of the world, behold they are like the firstborn and the tithe, and they are eaten due to their blemishes by their owners. What is the difference between the firstborn and the tithe and all the [other] holy [sacrifices]? All the [other] holy [sacrifices] are sold in the meat marketplace, and are slaughtered in the meat marketplace, and are weighed on a scale - except for the firstborn and the tithe; they are redeemed [when blemished], and their substitutes are redeemed - except for the firstborn and the tithe; they [may] come from outside the Land [of Israel] - except for the firstborn and the tithe, [but] if they [nevertheless] came [from outside the Land of Israel, if] unblemished, they are offered; and if blemished, they shall be eaten due to their blemishes by their owners. Rabbi Shimon said: what is the reason? The firstborn and the tithe have a provision [if they become blemished] in their place; all the [other] holy [sacrifices], should they become blemished, they remain holy [and cannot be provided for outside the Land of Israel]."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The offspring of a chattat [offering brought to expiate sin], or the substitute for a chattat, or a chattat whose owner had died, [they are secluded until] they die. [A chattat] whose year has passed, or was lost and was found with a blemish, if after the owners had atoned [by means of another animal], it [is secluded until] it dies and does not make a substitute. One may not benefit [from it], nor is one liable for meilah [benefit from a consecrated item][regarding it]. If before the owners had atoned [by means of another animal], it should graze until it becomes blemished and [then] sold. Its proceeds should be used [to purchase] another [by means of another animal]. It can make a substitute, and one is liable for meilah [regarding it]. ",
+ "[If] one sets aside a chattat and it is lost, and he offered another in its place, after which the first [chattat] is found, [it is secluded until] it dies. [If] one sets aside money for [the purchase of] a chattat and it is lost, and another chattat was offered in their place, after which the money was found, then it goes into the Dead Sea.",
+ "[If] one sets aside money for his [purchase of a] chattat and it is lost, and he [then] set aside other money in their place - [if] before he bought with it another chattat, the first money was found, he brings a chattat from both [monies], and the remainder falls [to the Temple fund] for a free-will offering. [If] one sets aside money for his [purchase of a] chattat and it is lost, and he [then] set aside a chattat in their place - [if] before he offered it, the money was found and, behold, the chattat has a blemish, [then the chattat] is sold and he brings a chattat from both [monies], and the remainder falls [to the Temple fund] for a free-will offering. [If] one sets aside his chattat and it is lost, and he [then] set aside other money in its place - [if] before he bought with it a chattat his [original] chattat is found, and, behold it has a blemish, then it is sold and he brings a chattat from both [monies], and the remainder falls [to the Temple fund] for a free-will offering. [If] one sets aside his chattat and it is lost, and he [then] set aside another chattat in its place - [if] before he offered [the second one] the first one is found and, behold, they both have blemishes, they are sold and he brings a chattat from both [monies], and the remainder falls [to the Temple fund] for a free-will offering. [If] one set aside a chattat and it is lost, and he [then] set aside set aside another chattat in its place - [if] before he offered [the second one] he found the first one and they were both unblemished, one of them is offered as a chattat and the other [is secluded until] it dies - [these are] the words of Rebbe; the Sages say: a chattat is not secluded until] it dies unless it was found after the owners have atoned [with another animal].",
+ "[If] one set aside his chattat, and it becomes blemished, he sells it and brings another [chattat] with its money; Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon says: if the second one was offered before the first one was slaughtered, it is [secluded until] it dies, since the owners have already atoned."
+ ],
+ [
+ "How may one act cleverly [to circumvent the law] regarding a firstborn [animal]? [One owns] a pregnant animal about to give birth for the first time, and says, \"Whatever is inside of this [animal], if it is a male, [it is dedicated] as an Olah [offering that is entirely burnt]\" - if it gives birth to a male, it [the newborn animal] is offered as an Olah. [If he says,] \"[If] it is a female, [it is dedicated] as a Shelamim [an offering whose various parts are consumed by its owners, the Kohanim and the fire on the altar]\" - if it gives birth to a female, it is offered as a Shelamim. [If he says,] \"[If] it is a male, [it is dedicated] as an Olah; if it is a female, [it is dedicated] as a Shelamim\" - if it gives birth to a male and a female, the male is an Olah and the female a Shelamim.",
+ "If an animal gives birth to two males, one is offered as an Olah and the second is sold to one who needs to offer an Olah, and its payment is not holy. If it gave birth to two females, one is offered as a Shelamim and the second is sold to one who needs to offer a Shelamim, and the money is not holy. If it gave birth to a tumtum [person (or animal) with recessed sexual organs whose gender is therefore impossible to determine, presently, by external examination. It is halachically uncertain whether such is male or female], or an androginos [person (or animal) with both male and female sexual organs. It is halachically uncertain whether such is male, female or, perhaps, has a uniquely defined halachic gender], Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: holiness does not take effect regarding them.",
+ "If one says, \"This animal's fetus is an Olah, and [the animal] is a Shelamim,\" - his words stand; \"[This animal] is a Shelamim, and its fetus is an Olah,\" the fetus is a Shelamim - [these are] the words of Rabbi Meir; Rabbi Yosi says: If this is what he originally intended [that the fetus would be an Olah], then, since it is [physically] impossible to pronounce two names at one time, his words stand; if, when he said \"this is a Shelamim,\" he then changed his mind and said [i.e., added], \"the fetus is an Olah,\" then the fetus is a Shelamim.",
+ "[If one said], \"This [animal] is [both] a substitute for an Olah and a substitute for a Shelamim,\" then it is a substitute for the Olah - [these are] the words of Rabbi Meir; Rabbi Yosi says: If this is what he intended originally, then since it is [physically] impossible to pronounce two names at one time, his words stand; if, when he said \"[This animal is] a substitute for an Olah,\" he then changed his mind and said [i.e., added], \"[This animal is] a substitute for a Shelamim,\" then it is a substitute for an Olah.",
+ "[If one said], \"This [animal] instead of that,\" \"as a substitute for that,\" \"as an exchange for that,\" then [this animal] is a substitute [for that animal]; [if he said], \"[This animal] has its sanctity transferred onto that one,\" then [this animal] is not a substitute; if [, however, this animal] was a [sanctified] animal with a blemish, then it [does] lose its sanctity [upon that substituted animal], and [the owner] needs to make [restitution for any difference in] price.",
+ "[If one said], \"This [animal] is instead of a Chattat [offering brought to expiate sin],\" or \"instead of an Olah,\" he has not said anything. \"[This animal] is instead of this Chattat ,\" or \"instead of this Olah,\" \"instead of the Chattat or the Olah, which I have inside the house.\" - if he had [the animal], his words stand. If he said regarding an impure animal or a blemished animal, \"This is an Olah,\" he has not said anything; [if he says], \"This is for an Olah,\" he sells it and uses the money for an Olah."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Everything that is forbidden [from being offered] on the altar is forbidden in any amount. [The things that are forbidden are:] an animal with which a woman committed bestiality, an animal with which a man committed bestiality, an animal set aside, an animal which was worshipped, a prostitute's fee, a dog's exchange, a Kilaim, a Treifah [an animal with a mortal condition such that it would die within one year], and [an animal] delivered by Caesarean section. What is a \"set aside\"? An animal set aside for idol worship. It is forbidden, but that which is upon it is permitted. What is a worshipped [animal]? All that serve it. It and that which is upon it is forbidden. Both this [the set aside] and this [the worshipped animal] may be eaten.",
+ "What is a prostitute's fee? One says to a prostitute, \"Take this lamb as your payment.\" Even [if he gave her] one hundred [lambs], they are all forbidden. So too is the one who says to his friend, \"Take this lamb and your maidservant will sleep with my slave,\" Rebbe says, \"This is not a prostitute's payment.\" The Sages say, \"It is a prostitute's payment.\"",
+ "What is a dog's exchange? One says to his friend, \"Take this lamb in place of this dog.\" So too for two partners who split up. If one took ten [lambs] and one took nine [lambs] and a dog, [and the ten lambs] are equivalent to the dog [and the nine lambs], then [the ten lambs] are forbidden. [The nine lambs] that are with the dog are permitted. A dog as the prostitute's fee, or the exchange of a prostitute are permitted, as it says, (Deuteronomy 23:19), \"Two\" and not four. Their children are permitted, [as it says], (Deuteronomy 23:19), \"them\" and not their children.",
+ "If he gave to her (the prostitute), they are permitted. [If he gave to her] wines, oils, finely sifted flour, or anything like them that can be offered on the altar, [they are] forbidden. If he gave to her sanctified objects, they are permitted. [If he gave to her] birds, they are forbidden. [It is possible to learn this] by a fortiori reasoning: With sanctified [animals] a blemish forbids them [from being offered], but the status of \"prostitute's fee\" or \"exchanged\" do not fall upon them. With birds, which are not forbidden because of a blemish, is it not logical that the status of \"prostitute's fee\" or \"dog's exchange\" should [definitely] not fall on them? [Therefore] the Torah teaches (Deuteronomy 23:19), \"For all vows,\" to include the birds.",
+ "All [animals] which are forbidden [from being offered] on the altar, their children are permitted. The child of an unfit animal, Rabbi Eliezer says, \"Do not offer it on the altar.\" The Sages say, \"Offer it.\" Rabbi Chanina ben Antignos says, \"A Kosher animal which nurses from a non-Kosher animal is forbidden [from being offered] on the altar.\" All sanctified animals which are made unfit may not be redeemed, for sanctified animals [which have been rendered unfit] are not redeemed for them to be fed to the dogs."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The sanctified property for the altar has [qualities] which the sanctified property for the Temple upkeep does not have. And the sanctified property for the Temple upkeep has [qualities] which the sanctified property for the altar does not have. The sanctified property for the altar may be made into a Temurah [an animal which has been substituted, wrongfully, for a sacrificial animal, and which thereby becomes sanctified for certain purposes], and one is culpable for making it unfit, for leaving it over, or for making it impure. The children and milk [of sanctified animals] are forbidden after they are redeemed, and one who slaughters them outside [the Temple] is culpable. And they may not be given to workers for [the workers] wages. These are not so with the sanctified property for the Temple upkeep.",
+ "The sanctified property for the Temple upkeep has [qualities] which the sanctified property for the altar does not have. Unspecified sanctified property goes to the Temple upkeep. The status of \"for Temple upkeep\" falls on everything, [one may not] improperly use their products, and the Kohanim cannot benefit from them.",
+ "Both property for the altar and property for the Temple upkeep may not have their [holiness] changed from one [type of] holiness to [another type of] holiness. One may sanctify it above the holiness it already has or separate it [for a Kohen]. If it dies, it is buried. Rabbi Shimon says, \"Sanctified property for the Temple upkeep, if it dies, he may redeem it.\"",
+ "These are the things which are buried: Sanctified [animals] which were stillborn should be buried. The afterbirth of a stillborn should be buried. A bull which is stoned, an Eglah Arufa [a calf whose neck is broken by elders of the closest town to atone for an unsolved murder], the birds [brought by] a Metzora [one rendered severely impure from an unsightly skin disease. Upon recovery and purification, he must bring offerings], the hair of a Nazirite, the firstborn of a donkey, [mixed] milk and meat, unholy [animals] slaughtered in the Temple courtyard, [should be buried]. Rabbi Shimon says, \"Unholy [animals] which were slaughtered in the Temple courtyard should be burned, and so too a wild animal slaughtered in the courtyard.\"",
+ "These are the things which need to be burned. Chametz on Passover is burned. Terumah that is unfit, Orlah [the fruit of a tree during the first three years after its planting, the consumption or usage of which is forbidden], or Kilayim, things which are normally burned should be burned, and things which are normally buried should be buried. [A Kohen may benefit] from lighting bread or oil of Terumah.",
+ "All sanctified [animals] which were slaughtered at the wrong time or in the wrong place are to be burned. A questionable guilt offering is to be burned. Rabbi Yehudah says, \"It should be buried.\" A sin offering, a bird that is brought out of doubt should be burned. Rabbi Yehudah says, \"Place it in a container [of water].\" All that is burned is not buried and all that is buried is not burned. Rabbi Yehudah says, \"If he wants to be strict on himself to burn the things which are [normally] buried, he is permitted to do so.\" [the Sages] said to him, \"He is not permitted to change it.\""
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/English/Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de].json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/English/Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de].json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ae62d05ad42a5c1dcd6da60f09cc80d0adc9cf6d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/English/Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de].json
@@ -0,0 +1,75 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Temurah",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001042448/NLI",
+ "versionTitle": "Talmud Bavli. German. Lazarus Goldschmidt. 1929 [de]",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 0.25,
+ "license": "Public Domain",
+ "digitizedBySefaria": true,
+ "actualLanguage": "de",
+ "languageFamilyName": "german",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה תמורה",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "JEDER KANN UMTAUSCHEN, SOWOHL MÄNNER ALS AUCH WEIBER; NICHT ETWA, DASS MAN UMTAUSCHEN DARF, SONDERN DASS, WENN JEMAND UMGETAUSCHT HAT, DER UMTAUSCH GÜLTIG IST, UND ER ERHÄLT DIE VIERZIG GEISSELHIEBE. PRIESTER KÖNNEN IHRES UMTAUSCHEN UND JISRAÉLITEN KÖNNEN IHRES UMTAUSCHEN. PRIESTER KÖNNEN KEIN SÜNDOPFER, KEIN SCHULDOPFER, KEIN ERSTGEBORENES UMTAUSCHEN. R. JOḤANAN B. NURI SPRACH: WESHALB SOLLTEN SIE KEIN ERSTGEBORENESUMTAUSCHEN KÖNNEN? R. A͑QIBA ERWIDERTE IHM: SÜNDOPFER UND SCHULDOPFER SIND EINE GABE FÜR DEN PRIESTER UND DAS ERSTGEBORENE IST EINE GABE FÜR DEN PRIESTER; WIE SIE NUN SÜNDOPFER UND SCHULDOPFER NICHT UMTAUSCHEN KÖNNEN, EBENSO KÖNNEN SIE DAS ERSTGEBORENE NICHT UMTAUSCHEN. R. JOḤANAN B. NURI ENTGEGNETE: WAS SOLL DIES: WENN ER SÜNDOPFER UND SCHULDOPFER NICHT UMTAUSCHEN KANN, DIE IHM LEBEND NICHT ZUGEEIGNET SIND, SOLLTE DIES AUCH VOM ERSTGEBORENEN GELTEN, DAS IHM LEBEND ZUGEEIGNET IST!? R. A͑QIBA ERWIDERTE IHM: ES HEISST JA BEREITS:so soll es und sein Eingetauschtes heilig sein; WIE ES VON DER HEILIGKEIT ERFASST WIRD IM HAUSE DES EIGENTÜMERS, EBENSO DAS UMGETAUSCHTE NUR IM HAUSE DES EIGENTÜMERS.",
+ "MAN KANN UMTAUSCHENKLEINVIEH AUF RINDER, RINDER AUF KLEINVIEH, SCHAFE AUF ZIEGEN, ZIEGEN AUF SCHAFE, MÄNNCHEN AUF WEIBCHEN, WEIBCHEN AUF MÄNNCHEN, FEHLERFREIE AUF FEHLERBEHAFTETE UND FEHLERBEHAFTETE AUF FEHLERFREIE, DENN ES HEISST:er soll es nicht auswechseln und nicht umtauschen, ein gutes auf ein schlechtes oder ein schlechtes auf ein gutes. WAS HEISST GUTES AUF SCHLECHTES? DEREN HEILIGUNG FRÜHER ERFOLGT IST ALS IHRE FEHLERHAFTIGKEIT. MAN KANN UMTAUSCHEN EINES AUF ZWEI UND ZWEI AUF EINES, EINES AUF HUNDERT UND HUNDERT AUF EINES. R. ŠIMO͑N SAGT, MAN KÖNNE NUR EINES AUF EINES UMTAUSCHEN, DENN ES HEISST:so sei es und sein Eingetauschtes heilig, WIE ES SELBST EINES IST, EBENSO AUCH DIESES EINES.",
+ "MAN KANN NICHT UMTAUSCHEN UKGEBOUENE TIEREAUF GLIEDER, NICHT GLIEDER AUF UNGEBORENE, NICHT GANZE AUF UNGEBORENE UND GLIEDER, UND NICHT DIESE AUF GANZE. R. JOSE SAGT, MAN KÖNNE UMTAUSCHEN GANZE AUF GLIEDER, NICHT ABER DIESE AUF GANZE. R. JOSE SPRACH: BEIM GEHEILIGTEN IST JA, WENN JEMAND SAGT, DER FUSS VON DIESEM VIEH SEI EIN BRANDOPFER, DAS GANZE EIN BRANDOPFER, EBENSO IST, WENN JEMAND SAGT, DER FUSS VON DIESEM VIEH SEI ANSTELLE VON JENEM VIEH, DAS GANZE GEGEN JENES EINGETAUSCHT.",
+ "DAS BEMISCHTEBEWIRKT BEMISCHUNGNUR NACH VERHÄLTNIS, DAS GESÄUERTEBEWIRKT SÄUERUNG NUR NACH VERHÄLTNIS, UND GESCHÖPFTES WASSER MACHT DAS TAUCHBADUNTAUGLICH NUR NACH VERHÄLTNIS.",
+ "DAS ENTSÜNDIGÜNGSWASSERWIRD SOLCHES ERST BEIM HINEINTUN DER ASCHE. EIN GRÄBERPFLUG MACHT DIE UMGEBUNG NICHT ZUM GRÄBERPFLUGE. ES GIBT KEINE HEBE NACH DER HEBE. UMGETAUSCHTES BEWIRKT KEINEN UMTAUSCH. DIE GEBURTBEWIRKT KEINEN UMTAUSCH. R. JEHUDA SAGT, DIE GEBURT BEWIRKE UMTAUSCH. SIE SPRACHEN ZU IHM: NUR HEILIGES BEWIRKT UMTAUSCH, DIE GEBURT ABER BEWIRKT KEINEN UMTAUSCH.",
+ "BEIM GEFLÜGEL- UND BEIM SPEISEOPFER GIBT ES KEINEN UMTAUSCH, DENN ES HEISST NURVieh. GEMEINDE UND GESELLSCHAFTER KÖNNEN NICHT UMTAUSCHEN, DENN ES HEISST:er darf es nicht auswechseln und nicht umtauschen. DER EINZELNE KANN UMTAUSCHEN, NICHT ABER KÖNNEN GEMEINDE UND GESELLSCHAFTER UMTAUSCHEN. HEILIGES FÜR DEN TEMPELREPARATURFONDS KANN NICHT UMGETAUSCHTWERDEN. R. ŠIMO͑N SPRACH: DER ZEHNT WAR JA EINBEGRIFFEN, UND WENN ER BESONDERS HERVORGEHOBENWIRD, SO BESAGT DIES: GLEICH DEM ZEHNTEN, DER OPFER EINES EINZELNEN IST, AUSGENOMMEN GEMEINDEOPFER, UND GLEICH DEM ZEHNTEN, DER ALTAROPFERIST, AUSGENOMMEN OPFERGABEN FÜR DEN TEMPELREPARATURFONDS."
+ ],
+ [
+ "MANCHES GILT BEI PRIVATOPFERN, WAS NICHT BEI GEMEINDEOPFERN, UND MANCHES BEI GEMEINDEOPFERN, WAS NICHT BEI PRIVATOPFERN. PRIVATOPFER KÖNNEN UMGETAUSCHT WERDEN, GEMEINDEOPFER KÖNNEN NICHT UMGETAUSCHT WERDEN; ALS PRIVATOPFER SIND MÄNNCHEN UND WEIBCHEN GEEIGNET, ALS GEMEINDEOPFER SIND NUR MÄNNCHEN GEEIGNET; BEI PRIVATOPFERN IST MAN HAFTBAR FÜR SIE UND HAFTBAR FÜR IHRE GUSSOPFER, BEI GEMEINDEOPFERN IST MAN NICHT HAFTBAR FÜR SIE UND NICHT HAFTBAR FÜR IHRE GUSSOPFER, WOHL ABER IST MAN FÜR IHRE GUSSOPFER HAFTBAR, SOBALD DAS SCHLACHTOPFER DARGEBRACHT WORDEN IST. MANCHES GILT BEI GEMEINDEOPFERN, WAS NICHT BEI PRIVATOPFERN, DENN GEMEINDEOPFER VERDRÄNGEN DEN ŠABBATH UND DIE UNREINHEIT, PRIVATOPFER ABER VERDRÄNGEN NICHT DEN ŠABBATH UND NICHT DIE UNREINHEIT. R. MEÍR SPRACH: DIE PFANNOPFER DES HOCHPRIESTERS UND DER FAHRE DES VERSÖHNUNGSTAGES SIND JA PRIVATOPFER, UND SIE VERDRÄNGEN DEN ŠABBATH UND DIE UNREINHEIT; VIELMEHR, WEIL FÜR DIESE EINE ZEIT FESTGESETZT IST.",
+ "DAS SÜNDOPFER EINES PRIVATEN IST, WENN DER EIGENTÜMER SÜHNE ERLANGTHAT, VERENDEN ZU LASSEN, DAS EINER GEMEINDE IST NICHT VERENDEN ZU LASSEN; R. JEHUDA SAGT, ES SEI VERENDEN ZU LASSEN. R. ŠIMO͑N SAGTE: WIE WIR FINDEN BEI DER GEBURT EINES SÜNDOPFERS, DEM EINGETAUSCHTEN EINES SÜNDOPFERS UND DEM SÜNDOPFER, DESSEN EIGENTÜMER GESTORBEN IST, DASS DIESNUR VON DEM EINES PRIVATEN UND NICHT VON DEM EINER GEMEINDE GILT, EBENSO GILT DIES VON DEM, DESSEN EIGENTÜMER SÜHNE ERLANGT HAT, ODER DAS DAS JAHR ÜBERSCHRITTENHAT, NUR VON DEM EINES PRIVATEN UND NICHT VON DEM EINER GEMEINDE.",
+ "STRENGER IST ES BEIM GEHEILIGTENALS BEIM EINGETAUSCHTEN, UND STRENGER IST ES BEIM EINGETAUSCHTEN ALS BEIM GEHEILIGTEN. STRENGER IST ES BEIM GEHEILIGTEN ALS BEIM EINGETAUSCHTEN, DENN DAS GEHEILIGTE KANN UMGETAUSCHT WERDEN, DAS EINGETAUSCHTE ABER KANN NICHT UMGETAUSCHT WERDEN; DIE GEMEINDE UND GESELLSCHAFTER KÖNNEN HEILIGEN, ABER NICHT UMTAUSCHEN; MAN KANN UNGEBORENE TIERE UND EINZELNE GLIEDER HEILIGEN, NICHT ABER UMTAUSCHEN. STRENGER IST ES BEIM EINGETAUSCHTEN ALS BEIM GEHEILIGTEN, DENN DIE HEILIGKEITERFASST AUCH DAS MIT EINEM DAUERNDEN LEIBESFEHLER BEHAFTETE UND ES WIRDNICHT PROFAN ZUR SCHURUND ZUR ARBEIT. R. JOSE B. R. JEHUDA SAGTE: BEIM UMTAUSCH GLEICHT DAS VERSEHENDER VORSÄTZLICHKEIT, BEI DER HEILIGUNG ABER GLEICHT DAS VERSEHENNICHT DER VORSÄTZLICHKEIT. R. ELIE͑ZER SAGTE: DER MISCHLING, DAS TOTVERLETZTE, DIE SEITENGEBURT, DAS GESCHLECHTSLOSE UND DER ZWITTER WERDEN NICHT HEILIG UND MACHEN NICHT HEILIG."
+ ],
+ [
+ "BEI FOLGENDEN OPFERTIEREN GLEICHEN DAS JUNGE UND DAS EINGETAUSCHTE IHNEN SELBST; DAS JUNGE DES HEILSOPFERS UND SEIN EINGETAUSCHTES, IHR JUNGES UND DAS JUNGE IHRES JUNGEN, BIS ANS ENDE DER WELT, GELTEN ALS HEILSOPFER UND BENÖTIGEN DES STÜTZENS, DES GUSSOPFERS UND DES SCHWINGENS VON BRUST UND SCHENKEL. R. ELIE͑ZER SAGT, DAS JUNGE EINES HEILSOPFERS SEI NICHT ALS HEILSOPFERDARZUBRINGEN; DIE WEISEN SAGEN, ES SEI DARZUBRINGEN. R. ŠIMO͑N SPRACH. SIE STREITEN NICHT ÜBER DAS JUNGE DES JUNGEN EINES HEILSOPFERS UND DAS JUNGE DES JUNGEN EINES EINGETAUSCHTEN, OB SIE NICHT DARZUBRINGEN SIND, SIE STREITEN NUR ÜBER DAS JUNGE. R. ELIE͑ZER SAGT, ES SEI NICHT DARZUBRINGEN, UND DIE WEISEN SAGEN, ES SEI DARZUBRINGEN. R. JEHOŠUA͑ UND R. PAPJAS BEKUNDETEN ÜBER DAS JUNGE DES HEILSOPFERS, DASS ES ALS HEILSOPFER DARZUBRINGEN SEI. R. PAPJAS SPRACH: ICH BEZEUGE, DASS WIR EINE HEILSOPFER-KUH HATTEN, DIE WIR AM PESAḤFESTE ASSEN, UND IHR JÜNGES ALS HEILSOPFER AM HÜTTENFESTE.",
+ "DAS JUNGE DES DANKOPFERS UND SEIN EINGETAUSCHTES, IHR JUNGES UND DAS JUNGE IHRES JUNGEN, BIS ANS ENDE ALLER GENERATIONEN, GLEICHEN DEM DANKOPFER, NUR BENÖTIGEN SIE NICHT DER BROTE. DAS EINGETAUSCHTE EINES BRANDOPFERS, DAS JUNGE DES EINGETAUSCHTEN, IHR JUNGES UND DAS JUNGE IHRES JUNGEN, BIS ANS ENDE DER WELT, GLEICHEN DEM BRANDOPFER; SIE BENÖTIGEN DES ENTHÄUTENS, DES ZERLEGENS UND WERDEN VOLLSTÄNDIG VERBRANNT.",
+ "DAS EINGETAUSCHTE EINES SCHULDOPFERS, DAS JUNGE DES EINGETAUSCHTEN, IHRE JUNGEN UND DIE JUNGEN IHRER JUNGEN, BIS ANS ENDE DER WELT, SIND WEIDEN ZU LASSEN, BIS SIE EIN GEBRECHEN BEKOMMEN, SODANN ZU VERKAUFEN, UND DER ERLÖS FÄLLT DER FREIWILLIGEN SPENDENKASSE ZU; R. ELIE͑ZER SAGT, SIE SEIEN VERENDEN ZU LASSEN; R. ELEAZAR SAGT, MAN BRINGE FÜR DEN ERLÖS BRANDOPFER. EIN SCHULDOPFER, DESSEN EIGENTÜMER GESTORBEN IST, ODER DESSEN EIGENTÜMER SÜHNE ERLANGTHAT, IST WEIDEN ZU LASSEN, BIS ES EIN GEBRECHEN BEKOMMT, SODANN ZU VERKAUFEN, UND DER ERLÖS FÄLLT DER FREIWILLIGEN SPENDENKASSE ZU. R. ELIE͑ZER SAGT, ES SEI VERENDEN ZU LASSEN; R. ELEA͑ZAR SAGT, MAN BRINGE FÜR DEN ERLÖS EIN BRANDOPFER.",
+ "AUCH DAS FREIWILLIGE OPFER IST JA EI BRANDOPFER, WELCHEN UNTERSCHIED GIBT ES DEMNACH ZWISCHEN R. ELEA͑ZAR UND DEN WEISEN? IN FOLGENDEM: IST ES EIN BRANDOPFER, SO MUSS ER STÜTZEN, DAZU GUSSOPFER BRINGEN, DAS GUSSOPFER VON SEINEM, UND IST ER PRIESTER, SO ERFOLGT DIE HERRICHTUNG DURCH IHN SELBER UND DIE HAUT GEHÖRT IHM; WENN ABER VON DER FREIWILLIGEN SPENDENKASSE, SO STÜTZE ER NICHT UND BRINGE DAZU NICHT DAS GUSSOPFER, VIELMEHR IST DAS GUSSOPFER AUS GEMEINDEMITTELN ZU BRINGEN, UND AUCH WENN ER PRIESTER IST, ERFOLGT DIE HERRICHTUNG DURCH DIE PRIESTERWACHE, DER AUCH DIE HAUT GEHÖRT.",
+ "DAS EINGETAUSCHTE DES ERSTGEBORENEN UND DES ZEHNTEN, IHRE JUNGEN UND DIE JUNGEN IHRER JUNGEN, BIS ANS ENDE DER WELT, GLEICHEN DEM ERSTGEBORENEN UND DEM ZEHNTEN, UND SIE DÜRFEN FEHLERBEHAFTET VOM EIGENTÜMER GEGESSEN WERDEN. WELCHEN UNTERSCHIED GIBT ES ZWISCHEN ERSTGEBORENEM UND ZEHNTEM UND ALLEN ANDEREN OPFERTIEREN? ALLE OPFERTIERE WERDEN IM SCHARREN VERKAUFT, IM SCHARREN GESCHLACHTET UND NACH LITRAAUSGEWOGEN, AUSGENOMMEN DAS ERSTGEORENE UND DER ZEHNT; FÜR JENE GIBT ES EINE AUSLÖSUNG UND FÜR IHR EINGETAUSCHTES EINE AUSLÖSUNG, AUSGENOMMEN DAS ERSTGEBORENE UND DER ZEHNT; JENE KÖNNEN AUS DEM AUSLANDE EINGEFÜHRT WERDEN, AUSGENOMMEN DAS ERSTGEBORENE UND DER ZEHNT. SIND SIE BEREITS EINGEFÜHRT WORDEN, SO SIND SIE, WENN FEHLERFREI, DARZUBRINGEN, UND WENN FEHLERBEHAFTET, (FEHLERBEHAFTET) VOM EIGENTÜMER ZU ESSEN. R. ŠIMO͑N SPRACH: DIES AUS DEM GRUNDE, WEIL DAS ERSTGEBORENE UND DER ZEHNT EINE VERSORGUNG VON SICH AUSHABEN, ANDERE OPFERTIERE ABER BLEIBEN BEI IHRER HEILIGKEIT, AUCH WENN SIE EINEN LEIBESFEHLER BEKOMMEN."
+ ],
+ [
+ "DAS JUNGE EINES SÜNDOPFERS, DAS EINGETAUSCHTE EINES SÜNDOPFERS, UND DAS SÜNDOPFER, DESSEN EIGENTÜMER GESTORBEN IST, SIND VERENDEN ZU LASSEN; DESSEN JAHRESALTER VORÜBER IST, DAS ABHANDEN GEKOMMEN WAR UND SICH FEHLERBEHAFTET EINGEFUNDEN HAT, IST, WENN DER EIGENTÜMER BEREITS SÜHNE ERLANGT HAT, VERENDEN ZU LASSEN, ES KANN NICHT UMGETAUSCHT WERDEN, ES IST ZUR NUTZNIESSUNG VERBOTEN UND MAN BEGEHT DARAN KEINE VERUNTREUUNG. WENN ABER BEVOR DER EIGENTÜMER SÜHNE ERLANGT HAT, SO IST ES WEIDEN ZU LASSEN, BIS ES EIN GEBRECHEN BEKOMMT, SODANN ZU VERKAUFEN, UND FÜR DEN ERLÖS BRINGE MAN EIN ANDERES: DIESES KANN UMGETAUSCHT WERDEN UND MAN BEGEHT DARAN EINE VERUNTREUUNG.",
+ "WENN JEMAND SEIN SÜNDOPFER ABGESONDERT HAT UND ES ABHANDEN GEKOMMEN IST, UND NACHDEM ER EIN ANDERES ABGESONDERT HAT, DAS ERSTE SICH EINFINDET, SO IST ES VERENDEN ZU LASSEN. WENN JEMAND GELD FÜR SEIN SÜNDOPFER ABGESONDERT HAT UND ES ABHANDEN GEKOMMEN IST, UND NACHDEM ER STATT DESSEN EIN SÜNDOPFER ABGESONDERT HAT, DAS GELD SICH EINFINDET, SO IST ES INS SALZMEER ZU WERFEN.",
+ "WENN JEMAND GELD FÜR SEIN SÜNDOPFER ABGESONDERT HAT UND ES ABHANDEN GEKOMMEN IST, WORAUF ER STATT DESSEN ANDERES GELD ABGESONDERT HAT, UND BEVOR ER NOCH DAZU KAM, DAFÜR EIN SÜNDOPFER ZU KAUFEN, DAS ERSTE SICH EINFINDET, SO BRINGE ER FÜR DIESES UND FÜR JENES EIN SÜNDOPFER, UND DER REST FÄLLT DER FREIWILLIGEN SPENDENKASSE ZU. WENN JEMAND GELD FÜR SEIN SÜNDOPFER ABGESONDERT HAT UND ES ABHANDEN GEKOMMEN IST, WORAUF ER STATT DESSEN EIN SÜNDOPFER ABGESONDERT HAT, UND BEVOR ER NOCH DAZU KAM, ES DARZUBRINGEN, DAS GELD SICH EINFINDET UND DAS SÜNDOPFER FEHLERBEHAFTET IST, SO VERKAUFE ER ES UND BRINGE VON DIESEM UND VON JENEM EIN SÜNDOPFER, UND DER REST FÄLLT DER FREIWILLIGEN SPENDENKASSE ZU. WENN JEMAND EIN SÜNDOPFER ABGESONDERT HAT UND ES ABHANDEN GEKOMMEN IST, UND NACHDEM ER STATT DESSEN GELD ABGESONDERT HAT, ABER NOCH NICHT DAZU KAM, DAFÜR DAS SÜNDOPFER ZU KAUFEN, DAS ERSTE SÜNDOPFER SICH EINFINDET UND ES FEHLERBEHAFTET IST, SO VERKAUFE ER ES UND BRINGE VON DIESEM UND VON JENEM EIN SÜNDOPFER, UND DER REST FÄLLT DER FREIWILLIGEN SPENDENKASSE ZU. WENN JEMAND SEIN SÜNDOPFER ABGESONDERT HAT UND ES ABHANDEN GEKOMMEN IST, WORAUF ER STATT DESSEN EIN ANDERES ABGESONDERT HAT, UND BEVOR ER NOCH DAZU KAM, ES DARZUBRINGEN, DAS ERSTE SICH EINFINDET UND BEIDE FEHLERBEHAFTET SIND, SO VERKAUFE ER SIE UND BRINGE VON DIESEM UND VON JENEM EIN SÜNDOPFER, UND DER REST FÄLLT DER FREIWILLIGEN SPENDENKASSE ZU. WENN JEMAND SEIN SÜNDOPFER ABGESONDERT HAT UND ES ABHANDEN GEKOMMEN IST, WORAUF ER STATT DESSEN EIN ANDERES ABGESONDERT HAT, UND BEVOR ER DAZU KAM, ES DARZUBRINGEN, DAS ERSTE SICH EINFINDET UND BEIDE FEHLERFREI SIND, SO IST EINES VON IHNEN ALS SÜNDOPFER DARZUBRINGEN UND DAS ANDERE VERENDEN ZU LASSEN – SO RABBI. DIE WEISEN SAGEN, EIN SÜNDOPFER SEI NUR DANN VERENDEN ZU LASSEN, WENN ES SICH EINFINDET NACHDEM DER EIGENTÜMER SÜHNE ERLANGT HAT; EBENSO SEI DAS GELD NUR DANN INS SALZMEER ZU WERFEN, WENN ES SICH EINFINDET, NACHDEM DER EIGENTÜMER SÜHNE ERLANGT HAT.",
+ "WENN JEMAND EIN SÜNDOPFER ABGESONDERT HAT UND ES FEHLERBEHAFTET IST, SO VERKAUFE ER ES UND BRINGE FÜR DEN ERLÖS EIN ANDERES. R. ELEA͑ZAR B. R. ŠIMO͑N SAGTE: IST DAS ANDERE DARGEBRACHT WORDEN BEVOR DAS ERSTE GESCHLACHTET WORDENIST, SO IST ES VERENDEN ZU LASSEN, WEIL DER EIGENTÜMER BEREITS SÜHNE ERLANGT HAT."
+ ],
+ [
+ "AUF WELCHE WEISE KANN MAN BEIM ERSTGEBORENEN EINE LIST ANWENDEN? WENN EIN ERSTGEBÄRENDES TRÄCHTIG IST, SAGE MAN: WAS IM LEIBE DIESER, SEI, WENN ES EIN MÄNNCHEN IST, EIN BRANDOPFER; WIRFT ES EIN MÄNNCHEN, SO IST ES ALS BRANDOPFER DARZUBRINGEN; SAGTE ER: WENN EIN WEIBCHEN, SEI ES EIN HEILSOPFER, SO IST, WENN ES EIN WEIBCHEN WIRFT, ES ALS HEILSOPFER DARZUBRINGEN. SAGTE ER: WENN EIN MÄNNCHEN, SEI ES EIN BRANDOPFER, UND WENN EIN WEIBCHEN, SEI ES EIN HEILSOPFER, SO IST, WENN ES EIN MÄNNCHEN UND EIN WEIBCHEN WIRFT, DAS MÄNNCHEN ALS BRANDOPFER UND DAS WEIBCHEN ALS HEILSOPFER DARZUBRINGEN.",
+ "WIRFT ES ZWEI MÄNNCHEN, SO IST EINES ALS BRANDOPFER DARZUBRINGEIS UND DAS ANDERE AN BRANDOPFERPFLICHTIGE ZU VERKAUFEN, UND DER ERLÖS IST PROFAN. WIRFT ES ZWEI WEIBCHEN, SO IST DAS EINE VON IHNEN ALS HEILSOPFER DARZUBRINGEN UND DAS ANDERE AN HEILSOPFERPFLICHTIGE ZU VERKAUFEN, UND DER ERLÖS IST PROFAN. WIRFT ES EIN GESCHLECHTSLOSES ODER EINEN ZWITTER, SO WERDEN SIE WIE R. ŠIMO͑N B. GAMLIÉL SAGT, VON DER HEILIGKEIT NICHT ERFASST.",
+ "WENN JEMAND GESAGT HAT: DAS JUNGE VON DIESEM VIEH SEI EIN BRANDOPFER UND DIESES SELBST EIN HEILSOPFER, SO SIND SEINE WORTE GÜLTIG; WENN ABER: DIESES SELBST SEI EIN HEILSOPFER UND SEIN JUNGES EIN BRANDOPFER, SO IST ES DAS JUNGE EINES HEILSOPFERS – SO R. MEÍR. R. JOSE SAGTE: HAT ER DIES VON VORNHEREIN BEABSICHTIGT, SO SIND, DA MAN NICHT ZWEI NAMEN GLEICHZEITIG AUSSPRECHEN KANN, SEINE WORTE GÜLTIG; WENN ER ABER, NACHDEM ER ‘DIESES SELBST SEI EIN HEILSOPFER’ GESAGT HAT, SICH ÜBERLEGT UND SAGT: UND SEIN JUNGES EIN BRANDOPFER, SO IST ES DAS JUNGE EINES HEILSOPFERS.",
+ "SAGTE JEMAND: DIESES SEI EINGETAUSCHTES AUF DAS BRANDOPFER, EINGETAUSCHTES AUF DAS HEILSOPFER, SO IST ES EINGETAUSCHTES AUF DAS BRANDOPFER – SO R. MEÍR. R. JOSE SPRACH: HAT ER ESVON VORNHEREIN BEABSICHTIGT, SO SIND, DA MAN NICHT ZWEI NAMEN GLEICHZEITIG AUSSPRECHEN KANN, SEINE WORTE GÜLTIG, WENN ER ABER, NACHDEM ER ‘EINGETAUSCHTES AUF DAS BRANDOPFER’ GESAGT HAT, SICH ÜBERLEGT UND SAGT: EINGETAUSCHTES AUF DAS HEILSOPFER, SO IST ES EINGETAUSCHTES EINES BRANDOPFERS.",
+ "SAGTE JEMAND: DIESES SEI ANSTELLE VON DIESEM, UMGETAUSCHT AUF DIESES, AUSGEWECHSELT DURCH DIESES, SO IST DIES EIN UMTAUSCH; WENN ABER: DIESES SEI AUSGEWEIHT DURCH DIESES, SO IST DIES KEIN UMTAUSCH. IST ABER DAS OPFERTIER FEHLERBEHAFTET, SO WIRD ES PROFAN, NUR MUSS ER FÜR DEN GELDWERT AUFKOMMEN.",
+ "SAGTE JEMAND: DIESES SEI ANSTELLE DES BRANDOPFERS, ANSTELLE DES SÜNDOPFERS, SO HAT ER NICHTS GESAGT; WENN ABER: ANSTELLE DIESES SÜNDOPFERS, ANSTELLE DIESES BRANDOPFERS, ANSTELLE DES SÜNDOPFERS, ANSTELLE DES BRANDOPFERS, DAS ICH ZUHAUSE HABE, UND ER EIN SOLCHES HAT, SO SIND SEINE WORTE GÜLTIG. SAGTE JEMAND ÜBER EIN UNREINES VIEH ODER ÜBER EIN FEHLERBEHAFTETES: DIESES SEI EIN BRANDOPFER, SO HAT ER NICHTS GESAGT; WENN ABER: DIESES SEI FÜR EIN BRANDOPFER, SO IST ES ZU VERKAUFEN UED FÜR DEN ERLÖS EIN BRANDOPFER ZU BRINGEN."
+ ],
+ [
+ "ALLE TIERE, DIE FÜR DEN ALTAR VERBOTEN SIND, MACHEN ANDERE VERBOTEN, IN WELCHEM VERHÄLTNISSE SIE AUCH SIND: DAS AKTIV ODER PASSIV ZUR BESTIALITÄT VERWANDTE, DAS ABGESONDERTE, DAS ANGEBETETE, DAS ALS HURENGABE ODER HUNDEPREIS VERWANDTE, DER MISCHLING, DAS TOTVERLETZTE UND DIE SEITENGEBURT. WAS HEISST ‘ABGESONDERTES’? DAS FÜR DEN GÖTZENDIENST ABGESONDERT WORDEN IST; ES HEISST IST VERBOTEN, UND WAS AN IHM, IST ERLAUBT. WAS HEISST ‘ANGEBETETES’? DAS ANGEBETET WORDEN IST; ES SELBST IST VERBOTEN, UND WAS AN IHM, IST VERBOTEN. BEIDE SIND ZUM ESSEN ERLAUBT.",
+ "WAS HEISST HURENGABE? WENN JEMAND ZU EINER HUBE GESAGT HAT: DA HAST DU DIESES LAMM ALS BELOHNUNG. SELBST WENN ES HUNDERTSIND, SIND SIE VERBOTEN. DESGLEICHEN, WENN JEMAND ZU SEINEM NÄCHSTEN SAGT: DA HAST DU DIESES LAMM, UND DAFÜR MAG DEINE MAGD BEI MEINEM SKLAVEN SCHLAFEN; RABBI SAGT, ES SEI KEINE HURENGABE, UND DIE WEISEN SAGEN, ES SEI HURENGABE.",
+ "WAS HEISST HUNDEPREIS? WENN JEMAND ZU SEINEM NÄCHSTEN SAGT: DA HAST DU DIESES LAMM FÜR DIESEN HUND. DESGLEICHEN IST, WENN ZWEI GESELLSCHAFTER GETEILT HABEN, UND DER EINE ZEHN SCHAFE UND DER ANDERE NEUN UND EINEN HUND GENOMMEN HAT, DER GEGENWERT DES HUNDES VERBOTEN, UND DIE MIT DEM HUNDE ERLAUBT. DIE HUNDEGABEUND DER HURENPREISSIND ERLAUBT, DENN ES HEISSTbeide, NICHT ABER VIER; IHREJUNGEN SIND ERLAUBT, DENN ES HEISST sie, NICHT ABER IHRE JUNGEN.",
+ "HAT ER IHR GELD GEGEBEN, SO IST ES ERLAUBT, WENN ABER Wein, ÖL, MEHL ODER SONST ETWAS, DESSEN ART AUF DEM ALTAR DARGEBRACHT WIRD, SO IST ES VERBOTEN. HAT ER IHR OPFERTIERE GEGEBEN, SO SIND SIE ERLAUBT, WENN PROFANES GEFLÜGEL, SO IST ES VERBOTEN. EIGENTLICH SOLLTE MAN EINEN SCHLUSS FOLGERN: WENN AUF OPFERTIERE, DIE DURCH EINEN LEIBESFEHLER UNTAUGLICH WERDEN, DAS VERBOT DER HURENGABE UND DES HUNDEPREISES SICH NICHT ERSTRECKT, UM WIEVIEL WENIGER SOLLTE SICH DAS VERBOT DER HURENGABE UND DES HUNDEPREISES AUF DAS GEFLÜGEL ERSTRECKEN, DAS DURCH EINEN LEIBESFEHLER NICHT UNTAUGLICH WIRD. ABER ES HEISST:für jedes Gelübde, UND DIES SCHLIESST DAS GEFLÜGEL EIN.",
+ "VON ALLEN, DIE FÜR DEN ALTAR VERBOTEN SIND, SIND DIE JUNGEN ERLAUBT. R. ELIE͑ZER SAGT, DAS JUNGE DES TOTVERLETZTEN DÜRFE AUF DEM ALTAR NICHT DARGEBRACHT WERDEN. R. ḤANINA B. ANTIGONOS SAGT, WENN EIN TAUGLICHES VON EINEM TOTVERLETZTEN GESOGEN HAT, SEI ES FÜR DEN ALTAR UNTAUGLICH. ALLE OPFERTIERE, DIE TOTVERLETZT WURDEN, DÜRFEN NICHT AUSGELÖST WERDEN, WEIL MAN NICHT OPFER AUSLÖSEN DARF, UM SIE DEN HUNDEN ZUM FRESSEN ZU GEBEN."
+ ],
+ [
+ "MANCHES GILT BEIM GEHEILIGTEN FÜR DEN ALTAR, WAS NICHT BEIM GEHEILIGTEN FÜR DEN TEMPELREPARATURFONDS, UND MANCHES BEIM GEHEILIGTEN FÜR DEN TEMPELREPARATURFONDS, WAS NICHT BEIM GEHEILIGTEN FÜR DEN ALTAR. DAS GEHEILIGTE FÜR DEN ALTAR KANN UMGETAUSCHT WERDEN, GEHEILIGTES FÜR DEN TEMPELREPARATURFONDS KANN NICHT UMGETAUSCHT WERDEN; BEIM GEHEILIGTEN FÜR DEN ALTAR IST MAN SCHULDIG WEGEN VERWERFLICHEM, ZURÜCKGEBLIEBENEM UND UNREINEM, IHRE JUNGEN UND IHRE MILCH SIND NACH IHRER AUSLÖSUNG VERBOTEN, WER SIE AUSSERHALB SCHLACHTET, IST SCHULDIG, UND MAN DARF NICHT DAVON HANDWERKERN ALS LOHN GEBEN, WAS ABER BEIM GEHEILIGTEN FÜR DEN TEMPELREPARATURFONDS NICHT DER FALL IST.",
+ "MANCHES GILT NUR BEIM GEHEILIGTEN FÜR DEN TEMPELREPARATURFONDS: GEHEILIGTES OHNE BESTIMMUNG IST FÜR DEN TEMPELREPARATURFONDS, DIE HEILIGUNG FÜR DEN TEMPELREPARATURFONDS ERSTRECKT SICH AUF ALLES, MAN BEGEHT EINE VERUNTREUUNG AN IHREN ERZEUGNISSEN, UND DIE PRIESTER HABEN NICHTS DAVON.",
+ "WEDER GEHEILIGTES FÜR DEN ALTAR NOCH GEHEILIGTES FÜR DEN TEMPELREPARATURFONDS DARF MAN VON EINER HEILIGKEIT AUF EINE ANDERE HEILIGKEIT ABÄNDERN, WOHL ABER DARF MAN IHREN SCHÄTZUNGSWERT DEM HEILIGTUME GELOBEN ODER ALS GEBANNTES WEIHEN, UND WENN SIEVERENDEN, SIND SIE ZU BEGRABEN. R. ŠIMO͑N SAGT, GEHEILIGTES FÜR DEN TEMPELREPARATURFONDS IST, WENN ES VERENDET, AUSZULÖSEN.",
+ "FOLGENDES IST ZU VERGRABEN: HAT EIN OPFERTIER ABORTIERT, SO IST DIE FEHLGEBURT ZU VERGRABEN, HAT ES EINE EIHAUT GEWORFEN, SO IST SIE ZU VERGRABEN, FERNER DAS GESTEINIGTE RIND, DAS GENICKBROCHENE KALB, DIE VÖGELDES AUSSÄTZIGEN, DAS HAARDES NAZIRÄERS, DAS ERSTGEBORENE DES ESELS, FLEISCH IN MILCH, UND PROFANES, DAS IM TEMPELHOFE GESCHLACHTET WORDEN IST. R. ŠIMO͑N SAGT, PROFANES, DAS IM TEMPELHOFE GESCHLACHTET WORDEN IST, SEI ZU VERBRENNEN, DESGLEICHEN EIN WILD, DAS IM TEMPELHOFE GESCHLACHTET WORDEN IST.",
+ "FOLGENDES IST ZU VERBRENNEN: GESÄUERTES AM PESAḤFESTE IST ZU VERBRENNEN, UNBEINE HEBE, UNGEWEIHTES UND MISCHFRUCHT (DES WEINBERGES) SIND, WAS MAN ZU VERBRENNEN PFLEGT, ZU VERBRENNEN, UND WAS MAN ZU VERGRABEN PFLEGT, ZU VERGRABEN. BROT UND ÖL VON HEBE DARF MAN ZUM BRENNEN VERWENDEN.",
+ "ALLE OPFERTIERE, DIE AUSSERHALB DER FRIST UND AUSSERHALB DES RAUMESGESCHLACHTET WORDEN SIND, SIND ZU VERBRENNEN. DAS SCHWEBE-SCHULDOPFER IST ZU VERBRENNEN; R. JEHUDA SAGT, ZU VERGRABEN. DAS IM ZWEIFELDARGEBRACHTE GEFLÜGEL-SÜNDOPFER IST ZU VERBRENNEN; R. JEHUDA SAGT, MAN WERFE ES IN DEN KANAL. WAS ZU VERGRABEN IST, DARF NICHT VERBRANNT WERDEN, UND WAS ZU VERBRENNEN IST, DARF NICHT VERGRABEN WERDEN. R. JEHUDA SAGT, WER FÜR SICH ERSCHWEREN WILL, DAS ZU VERBRENNEN, WAS ZU VERGRABEN IST, DÜRFE DIES. SIE SPRACHEN ZU IHM: ES IST NICHT ERLAUBT, ANDERS ZU VERFAHREN."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/English/William Davidson Edition - English.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/English/William Davidson Edition - English.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..48acb03cf8b9a660a9705c8e5bbde9899d85adbc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/English/William Davidson Edition - English.json
@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
+{
+ "language": "en",
+ "title": "Mishnah Temurah",
+ "versionSource": "https://korenpub.com/collections/the-noe-edition-koren-talmud-bavli-1",
+ "versionTitle": "William Davidson Edition - English",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 2.0,
+ "license": "CC-BY-NC",
+ "versionNotes": "English from The William Davidson digital edition of the Koren Noé Talmud, with commentary by Rabbi Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz",
+ "shortVersionTitle": "Koren - Steinsaltz",
+ "actualLanguage": "en",
+ "languageFamilyName": "english",
+ "isBaseText": false,
+ "isSource": false,
+ "direction": "ltr",
+ "heTitle": "משנה תמורה",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "Everyone substitutes a non-sacred animal for a consecrated animal, both men and women. That is not to say that it is permitted for a person to effect substitution; rather, it means that if one substituted a non-sacred animal for a consecrated animal, the substitution takes effect, and the non-sacred animal becomes consecrated, and the consecrated animal remains sacred. And the one who substituted the non-sacred animal incurs the forty [sofeg et ha’arba’im] lashes. The priests substitute for their own offerings and Israelites substitute for their own offerings. The priests substitute neither for a sin offering, nor for a guilt offering, nor for a firstborn offering that they received from an Israelite, as those animals are not their property, and one does not substitute an animal that is not his. Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri said: For what reason can priests not substitute for a firstborn offering that they received from an Israelite? Does it not belong to them? Rabbi Akiva said to him: A sin offering and a guilt offering are a gift to the priest, and the firstborn offering is likewise a gift to the priest. Just as in the cases of a sin offering and a guilt offering, priests that receive one of them from an Israelite cannot substitute for it, so too with regard to a firstborn offering, priests that receive it from an Israelite cannot substitute for it. Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri said: What is this comparison for him? If a priest does not substitute for a sin offering and a guilt offering, which priests do not acquire during the animals’ lifetimes, will you say the same with regard to a firstborn, which priests do acquire during the animal’s lifetime? Rabbi Akiva said to him: But isn’t it already stated: “Then both it and its substitute shall be sacred” (Leviticus 27:10), which juxtaposes the consecration of the consecrated animal with that of its non-sacred substitute? Where is the consecrated animal imbued with sanctity? It is in the house of the owner. So too, the substitute animal is consecrated in the house of the owner. Therefore, the priest cannot substitute for the firstborn that he received because he is not the owner that initially consecrated it. It is written: “He shall neither exchange it, nor substitute it, good for bad, or bad for good; and if he substitutes an animal for an animal, then both it and its substitute shall be sacred” (Leviticus 27:10). The mishna enumerates the consecrated and non-sacred animals this verse applies to. ",
+ "One substitutes for consecrated animals from the flock of sheep or goats, and the sanctity takes effect upon animals from the herd of cattle, and one substitutes from the herd and the sanctity takes effect upon animals from the flock. And one substitutes from the sheep and the sanctity takes effect upon the goats, and from the goats upon the sheep; and from the males upon the females, and from the females upon the males; and from the unblemished animals upon the blemished animals, and from the blemished animals upon the unblemished animals. The source for this is as it is stated: “He shall neither exchange it, nor substitute it, good for bad, or bad for good” (Leviticus 27:10). And which is the case of good for bad where the substitution takes effect? It is a case where one substitutes for blemished animals whose consecration preceded their blemish. But if an animal was consecrated after it was blemished, substitution for it does not take effect. One substitutes one non-sacred animal for two consecrated animals and two non-sacred animals for one consecrated animal, and one substitutes one non-sacred animal for one hundred consecrated animals and one hundred non-sacred animals for one consecrated animal. Rabbi Shimon says: One substitutes only one non-sacred animal for one consecrated animal, as it is stated: “Then both it and its substitute shall be sacred” (Leviticus 27:10). Just as “it” indicates one specific animal, so too, its substitute can be only one specific animal.",
+ "One does not substitute non-sacred limbs for consecrated fetuses, i.e., if one says that a certain limb of a non-sacred animal is substituted for a fetus in the womb of a consecrated animal, it is not consecrated. And likewise, one does not substitute non-sacred fetuses for consecrated limbs. And one substitutes neither non-sacred limbs nor fetuses for whole consecrated animals nor non-sacred whole animals for consecrated limbs or fetuses. Rabbi Yosei says: One substitutes non-sacred limbs for whole consecrated animals, but not whole animals for consecrated limbs. Rabbi Yosei said: But isn’t it so with regard to sacrificial animals, that if one says: The hind leg of this animal is a burnt offering, the entire animal is a burnt offering? So too, when he says: The non-sacred hind leg of this animal is in exchange for that animal, the entire animal is a substitute in exchange for it.",
+ "If teruma, the portion of the produce designated for the priest, was intermingled with non-sacred produce, and it is impossible to distinguish between them, if the ratio of non-sacred produce to teruma was less than one hundred to one, the teruma is not nullified and all the produce is forbidden to those for whom teruma is forbidden. If the mixture was then intermingled with other non-sacred produce, that mixture renders it a mixture of teruma only according to the calculation of the percentage of the original teruma produce in the entire mixture. And dough that was leavened with a teruma leavening agent is forbidden to those for whom teruma is forbidden even if the ratio between the non-sacred and the teruma is greater than one hundred to one. If a portion of that dough was intermingled with non-sacred dough, it leavens only according to the calculation of the percentage of the original leavening agent in the entire dough, and the second dough is forbidden only if the quantity of the original teruma leavening agent inside it is sufficient to leaven it. And if three log of drawn water were poured into a ritual bath with less than forty se’a to complete the requisite forty se’a, the ritual bath is invalidated. But drawn water invalidates the ritual bath only according to calculation, as explained in the Gemara.",
+ "And the water of purification of the red heifer becomes water of purification only with the placement of the ashes into the water, but not by placement of water onto the ashes. And one beit haperas does not create another beit haperas. The Sages decreed ritual impurity on a field in which a grave was plowed, scattering the bones throughout the field. This field is called a beit haperas. That impurity extends to the area of one hundred cubits surrounding the grave. Nevertheless, they did not decree impurity on the second field if one plowed from that field into another field. And there is no teruma after teruma. Once one designates produce from his crop as teruma, if he then designates additional produce from that crop as teruma, it is not teruma. And a substitute animal that was consecrated when it was substituted for a consecrated animal does not render a non-sacred animal exchanged for it a substitute; rather, it remains non-sacred. And the offspring born of a consecrated animal that was not consecrated itself does not render a non-sacred animal exchanged for it a substitute. Rabbi Yehuda says: The offspring renders a non-sacred animal exchanged for it a substitute. The Sages said to him: A consecrated animal renders a non-sacred animal exchanged for it a substitute, but the offspring does not render a non-sacred animal exchanged for it a substitute.",
+ "The birds sacrificed as offerings, i.e., doves and pigeons, and the meal offerings do not render non-sacred items exchanged for them substitutes, as only the term “an animal” is stated with regard to substitution, in the verse: “And if he substitutes an animal for an animal” (Leviticus 27:10). A consecrated animal belonging to the community or to partners does not render a non-sacred animal exchanged for it a substitute, as it is stated in the same verse: “He shall neither exchange it nor substitute it.” One derives from the singular pronoun in the verse that an individual renders a non-sacred animal a substitute, but the community and partners do not render a non-sacred animal a substitute. Items consecrated for Temple maintenance do not render non-sacred items exchanged for them substitutes. Rabbi Shimon said: The fact that animals belonging to the community or partners do not render animals exchanged for them substitutes is derived as follows: The animal tithe was included in the category of all offerings, and why was it singled out in the verse: “And all the tithe of the herd or the flock, whatever passes under the rod, the tenth shall be sacred unto the Lord. He shall not inquire whether it is good or bad, neither shall he substitute for it; and if he substitutes it, then both it and that for which it is substituted shall be sacred” (Leviticus 27:32–33)? Rabbi Shimon explains: It was singled out to juxtapose substitution to the animal tithe, to tell you: Just as the animal tithe is brought exclusively as an individual offering, so too, all offerings that render their substitutes sacred are individual offerings, excluding communal offerings and the offerings of partners from the halakha of substitution. And just as the animal tithe is an offering sacrificed on the altar, so too, all offerings that render their substitutes sacred are offerings sacrificed on the altar, excluding items consecrated for Temple maintenance from the halakha of substitution."
+ ],
+ [
+ "There are halakhot in effect with regard to offerings of an individual that are not in effect with regard to communal offerings; and there are halakhot in effect with regard to communal offerings that are not in effect with regard to offerings of an individual. The mishna elaborates: There are halakhot in effect with regard to offerings of an individual that are not in effect with regard to communal offerings, as offerings of an individual render a non-sacred animal exchanged for the offering a substitute, and communal offerings do not render a non-sacred animal exchanged for the offering a substitute. Offerings of an individual apply to, i.e., can be brought from, both males and females, but communal offerings apply only to males. If offerings of an individual were not brought at the appropriate time, one is obligated to bring their compensation and compensation for their accompanying meal offering and libations at a later date, but if communal offerings were not brought at the appropriate time, one is obligated to bring neither their compensation nor compensation for their accompanying meal offering and libations at a later date. But one is obligated to bring compensation for their accompanying meal offering and libations once the offering is sacrificed. There are halakhot in effect with regard to communal offerings that are not in effect with regard to offerings of an individual, as communal offerings override Shabbat, in that they are sacrificed on Shabbat, and they override ritual impurity, i.e., they are sacrificed even if the priests are impure with impurity imparted by a corpse; and offerings of an individual override neither Shabbat nor ritual impurity. Rabbi Meir said: But aren’t the High Priest’s griddle-cake offerings and the bull of Yom Kippur offerings of an individual, and yet they override Shabbat and ritual impurity. Rather, this is the principle: Any offering, individual or communal, whose time is fixed overrides Shabbat and ritual impurity, whereas any offering, individual or communal, whose time is not fixed overrides neither Shabbat nor ritual impurity.",
+ "There is a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai that there are five sin offerings that are unfit for sacrifice on the altar and have no remedy and are therefore left to die. They are: The offspring of a sin offering; the substitute for a sin offering; a sin offering whose owner died; a sin offering whose owner achieved atonement with another sin offering, when the original sin offering was lost or stolen and later recovered; and a sin offering whose year has passed. The mishna continues the discussion of the distinction between individual and communal offerings. An individual sin offering whose owner achieved atonement with another sin offering after it was lost is left to die, but in the case of a communal sin offering it is not left to die. Rabbi Yehuda says: Even a communal sin offering shall be left to die. Rabbi Shimon says: Just as we found with regard to the offspring of a sin offering, and with regard to the substitute for a sin offering, and with regard to a sin offering whose owner died, that these matters apply to an individual sin offering and not to a communal sin offering, so too, in the cases of a sin offering whose owner achieved atonement with another sin offering, and a sin offering whose first year has passed, the matters are stated with regard to an individual sin offering, and not with regard to a communal sin offering.",
+ "There is greater stringency with regard to sacrificial animals than there is with regard to a substitute, and greater stringency with regard to a substitute than there is with regard to sacrificial animals. The Mishna explains: There is greater stringency with regard to sacrificial animals than there is with regard to a substitute, as sacrificial animals render a non-sacred animal exchanged for them a substitute, but a substitute does not render a non-sacred animal exchanged for it a substitute. Furthermore, the community and the partners consecrate animals as offerings, but they do not substitute non-sacred animals for their offerings. And one consecrates fetuses in utero and one can consecrate an animal’s limbs, but one cannot substitute non-sacred animals for them. There is greater stringency with regard to a substitute than there is with regard to sacrificial animals, as, if one substituted a non-sacred blemished animal for an unblemished sacrificial animal, then the animal with a permanent blemish is imbued with inherent sanctity, which is not the case with regard to consecration. And in addition, those blemished animals consecrated through substitution do not emerge from their consecrated status to assume non-sacred status by means of redemption, in terms of it being permitted to shear its wool and to perform labor with it. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says that there is an additional stringency that applies to substitution but not to consecration: The Torah rendered the status of one who acts unwittingly like that of one who acts intentionally with regard to substitution, as in both cases the substitute is consecrated. But it did not render the status of one who acts unwittingly like that of one who acts intentionally with regard to consecrated items, since unwitting consecration is ineffective. Rabbi Elazar says: An animal crossbred from diverse kinds, and a tereifa, and an animal born by caesarean section, and a tumtum animal, and a hermaphrodite animal are not sacred through consecration, and if they were sacred beforehand, e.g., one consecrated an animal and it subsequently became a tereifa, they do not sanctify non-sacred animals by means of substitution."
+ ],
+ [
+ "These are the sacrificial animals for which the halakhic status of their offspring and substitutes is like their own halakhic status: The offspring of peace offerings, and their substitute animals, and even the offspring of their offspring or their substitute animals, and even the offspring of their offspring, until the end of all time [ad sof kol ha’olam]. They are all endowed with the sanctity and halakhic status of peace offerings, and therefore they require placing hands on the head of the animal, and libations, and the waving of the breast and the thigh in order to give them to the priest. Although the previous mishna stated plainly that the offspring of a peace offering is itself sacrificed as a peace offering, its status is actually subject to a dispute between the tanna’im. Rabbi Eliezer says: The offspring of a peace offering is not sacrificed on the altar as a peace offering; rather it is sequestered and left to die. And the Rabbis say: It is sacrificed as a peace offering. Rabbi Shimon said: Rabbi Eliezer and the Rabbis do not disagree with regard to the status of the offspring of the offspring of a peace offering or with regard to the status of the offspring of the offspring of the substitute of a peace offering. In those cases, they all agree that the animal is not sacrificed on the altar as a peace offering. With regard to what case do they disagree? They disagree about the case of the offspring of a peace offering itself. Rabbi Eliezer says: It is not sacrificed as a peace offering, whereas the Rabbis say: It is sacrificed. Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Pappeyas testified about the offspring of a peace offering that it is sacrificed as a peace offering. Rabbi Pappeyas said: I testify that we ourselves had a cow that was a peace offering, and we ate it on Passover, and we ate its offspring as a peace offering on a different Festival.",
+ "The offspring of a thanks offering and the substitute of a thanks offering, and the offspring of the offspring and its substitute, and the offspring of their offspring until the end of all time, they are all like thanks offerings, with the only difference being that they do not require the accompanying loaves, unlike the thanks offering itself. With regard to the substitute of a burnt offering, the offspring of the substitute, e.g., if one substituted a female animal for a burnt offering, and it gave birth to a male, and the offspring of the offspring of its offspring until the end of all time, they are all like burnt offerings and therefore they require flaying and cutting into pieces and must be burned completely in the fire. ",
+ "In the case of one who designates a female animal as a burnt offering, which may be brought only from males, and that female gave birth to a male, although it is a male, it is left to graze until it becomes unfit [sheyista’ev] and then it is sold, and he brings a burnt offering with the money received for its sale. Rabbi Elazar says: The male offspring itself is sacrificed as a burnt offering. In the case of one who designates a female animal for a guilt offering, which may be brought only from males, it is left to graze until it becomes blemished and then it is sold, and he brings a guilt offering with the money received for its sale. And if in the interim, he designated a male animal and his guilt offering was already sacrificed, so that a guilt offering is no longer needed, the money received for the sale of the blemished female is allocated for communal gift offerings. Rabbi Shimon says: Since a female is unfit to be sacrificed as a guilt offering, its halakhic status is like that of a blemished animal in the sense that it does not become inherently sacred; rather, its value alone becomes sacred. Therefore, it may be sold without a blemish, and a guilt offering is purchased with the money received for its sale. With regard to the substitute of a guilt offering, the offspring of that substitute, their offspring and the offspring of their offspring, until the end of all time, they are all left to graze until they become unfit, and then they are sold, and the money received for the sale is allocated for communal gift offerings. Rabbi Eliezer says: These animals are not left to graze; rather they are left to die. And Rabbi Elazar says: Communal gift offerings are not purchased with the money from the sale; rather, the owner should bring an individual burnt offering with the money received for its sale. These tanna’im similarly disagree about the following case: A guilt offering whose owner died, and a guilt offering that was lost and its owner gained atonement with another animal, graze until they become unfit, and then they are sold, and the money received for the sale is allocated for communal gift offerings. Rabbi Eliezer says: These animals are left to die. Rabbi Elazar says: The owner must bring an individual burnt offering with the money received for its sale. ",
+ "The mishna objects: But even according to the Rabbis, isn’t a gift offering also a burnt offering? And what then is the difference between the statement of Rabbi Elazar and the statement of the Rabbis? Rather, the Rabbis are referring to a communal burnt offering and Rabbi Elazar is referring to an individual burnt offering, and there are several differences between these two offerings: When the animal comes as an individual burnt offering, the owner places his hands upon it and brings the accompanying meal offering and libations, and its libations come from his own property. If the owner of the animal was a priest, the right to perform its Temple service and the right to its hide are his. And when it is a communal gift offering, the owner of the animal that was sold does not place his hands upon it, as there is no placing of hands for communal offerings, and he does not bring its libations; rather, its libations are brought from the property of the community. Furthermore, although the owner of the animal that was sold is a priest, the right to perform its Temple service and the right to its hide are divided among the members of the priestly watch serving in the Temple that week. ",
+ "With regard to the substitute of a firstborn offering and the substitute of an animal tithe offering, and the offspring of those substitutes and the offspring of their offspring until the end of time, the halakhic status of these animals is like that of a firstborn offering and like that of an animal tithe offering in that they must be treated with sanctity: They graze until they become blemished, and at that point they may be eaten in their blemished state, the substitute of the firstborn by the priests and the substitute of the animal tithe by their owners. They are not sacrificed upon the altar like the original firstborn and animal tithe offerings. What is the practical difference between a firstborn offering and an animal tithe offering and all the other sacrificial animals? The difference is that all the other sacrificial animals that were blemished and redeemed are sold in the butchers’ market [ba’itliz], and slaughtered in the butchers’ market, and weighed and sold by the litra, in the manner that non-sacred meat is slaughtered and sold. This is the case with regard to all consecrated animals except for the firstborn and animal tithe offerings, which are sold only from the home and not by the litra. And in addition, all sacrificial animals that became blemished are subject to redemption through sale, at which point the money becomes sacred and the animal becomes non-sacred, and their substitutes are also subject to redemption through sale.This is true for all consecrated animals, except for the firstborn and animal tithe offerings, which are not subject to redemption. And all sacrificial animals come to be sacrificed in the Temple even from outside of Eretz Yisrael, except for the firstborn and animal tithe offerings, which should not be brought from outside Eretz Yisrael ab initio. But if they came unblemished, they are sacrificed in the Temple like a regular firstborn or animal tithe offering coming from Eretz Yisrael; and if they are blemished animals, they may be eaten in their blemished state, the firstborns by the priests and the animal tithes by their owners. Rabbi Shimon says: What is the reason for this last difference between them? It is that the firstborn and animal tithe offerings have a remedy in their place outside Eretz Yisrael, as they can graze until they become blemished and then can be eaten there. It is not necessary to bring them to Eretz Yisrael in order to eat them. But with regard to all other sacrificial animals, even if a blemish develops in them, these animals remain in their sanctity, and one must redeem them and bring another offering with the money of their redemption. Therefore, when they are unblemished it is proper to bring these animals themselves to Eretz Yisrael."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The offspring of a sin offering and the substitute for a sin offering, and a sin offering whose owner has died shall be sequestered and left to die. And with regard to a sin offering that is unfit for sacrifice because its first year from birth has passed, and a sin offering that was lost and when it was found, it was blemished, if it was after the owner achieved atonement through sacrifice of another animal as a sin offering, the blemished animal shall die, and it does not render a non-sacred animal exchanged for it a substitute. Furthermore, one may not derive benefit from any of these sin offerings ab initio, but if one derived benefit from them, after the fact, he is not liable to bring a sin offering for misuse of consecrated items. And if the lost animal was found and discovered to be unfit before the owner achieved atonement for his sin with a different animal, it shall graze until it becomes blemished, and then it shall be sold. And he must bring another sin offering with the money received from the sale. And this animal renders a non-sacred animal exchanged for it a substitute, and one who derives benefit from this animal is liable for misusing it.",
+ "In the case of one who designates a sin offering, and the animal was lost, and he designated another in its stead and sacrificed it, and thereafter the first animal was found; that is a sin offering whose owner achieved atonement with another animal, and it shall be left to die. In the case of one who designates money for purchase of his sin offering, and the money was lost,and he designated an animal as a sin offering in its stead, and he sacrificed it, and thereafter, the money was found, it is prohibited to derive benefit from the money, as the money attains the halakhic status of the sin offering that was to be purchased with it, and that sin offering would be left to die because the owner achieved atonement with another animal. Therefore, he must take the money and cast it into the Dead Sea, from where it cannot be recovered.",
+ "In the case of one who designates money for purchase of his sin offering, and the money was lost, and he designated other money in its stead, and he did not manage to purchase a sin offering with that money before the original money was found, he should bring a sin offering from a combination of this original money and that money designated in its stead, and the remainder shall be allocated for communal gift offerings. In the case of one who designates money for purchase of his sin offering, and the money was lost, and he designated an animal as a sin offering in its stead, and he did not manage to sacrifice the animal before the money was found, and the animal that he designated as a sin offering is blemished, the animal shall be sold; and he brings a sin offering from a combination of this original money and that money received for the sale of the blemished animal, and the remainder shall be allocated for communal gift offerings. In the case of one who designates a sin offering and the animal was lost, and he designated money in its stead, and he did not manage to purchase a sin offering with that money before his sin offering was found, and the animal is blemished, the animal shall be sold; and he brings a sin offering from a combination of this money that he designated and that money received for the sale of the blemished animal, and the remainder shall be allocated for communal gift offerings. In the case of one who designates his sin offering and the animal was lost, and he designated another animal in its stead, and he did not manage to sacrifice the sin offering before the first sin offering was found, and both of the animals are blemished, the animals shall be sold; and he brings a sin offering from a third animal that he buys with a combination of the money from the sale of this animal and from the sale of that animal, and the remainder shall be allocated for communal gift offerings. In the case of one who designates his sin offering and the animal was lost, and he designated another animal in its stead, and he did not manage to sacrifice the sin offering before the first sin offering was found, and both of the animals are unblemished and fit for sacrifice, one of them shall be sacrificed as a sin offering and the other shall be left to die; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. And the Rabbis say: A sin offering is not left to die unless it was found after its owner achieved atonement; and the money is not taken to the Dead Sea unless it was found after its owner achieved atonement.",
+ "In the case of one who designates a sin offering and the animal is blemished, he sells the animal and must bring another sin offering with the money received in its sale. Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, says: If the second animal is sacrificed before the first is slaughtered for non-sacred consumption, the first animal shall be left to die. Although it was sold and rendered non-sacred, its status is now that of a sin offering whose owner already achieved atonement with another animal."
+ ],
+ [
+ "How may one employ artifice to circumvent the obligation to give the firstborn to the priest and utilize the animal for a different offering that he is obligated to bring? The owner approaches an animal that is going to give birth to its firstborn while that animal was still pregnant, and says: That which is in the womb of this animal, if it is male, is designated as a burnt offering. In that case, if the animal gave birth to a male, it will be sacrificed as a burnt offering. And in a case where he says: If it is female, it is designated as a peace offering, if the animal gave birth to a female, it will be sacrificed as a peace offering. In a case where the owner says: If it is male it is designated as a burnt offering, and if it is female it is designated as a peace offering, and the animal gave birth to a male and a female, the male will be sacrificed as a burnt offering and the female will be sacrificed as a peace offering. ",
+ "If the animal gave birth to two males, one of them will be sacrificed as a burnt offering and the second will be sold to those obligated to bring a burnt offering, who will sacrifice it as a burnt offering; and the money received from its sale is non-sacred. If the animal gave birth to two females, one of them will be sacrificed as a peace offering and the second will be sold to those obligated to bring a peace offering, who will sacrifice it as a peace offering, and the money received from its sale is non-sacred. If the animal gave birth to a tumtum, whose gender is unknown, or a hermaphrodite, which has both male and female sexual organs, both of which are unfit for sacrifice, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: They are not imbued with sanctity. ",
+ "One who says: The offspring of this non-sacred animal is a burnt offering and the animal itself is a peace offering, his statement stands, i.e., is effective. If he says: The animal itself is a peace offering and its offspring is a burnt offering, then since consecration of the mother preceded consecration of the offspring, it is the offspring of a peace offering, whose halakhic status is that of a peace offering; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yosei said: If that was his intent from the outset, to designate the offspring as a burnt offering when he designated the mother as a peace offering, then since it is impossible to call it by two designations simultaneously, his statement stands, and the mother is a peace offering and the offspring a burnt offering. And if it was only after he said: This animal is hereby a peace offering, that he reconsidered and said: Its offspring is a burnt offering, that offspring is a peace offering, as before he reconsidered, the offspring had already assumed the status of the offspring of a peace offering. ",
+ "If one had two animals standing before him, one a burnt offering and the other a peace offering, and he said with regard to a third, non-sacred animal: This animal is hereby the substitute of the burnt offering, the substitute of the peace offering, that animal is the substitute of the burnt offering. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Once he designated it as the substitute of the burnt offering, his initial statement takes effect and the animal assumes the sanctity of the burnt offering. Rabbi Yosei said: If that was his intent from the outset, when he said that the animal is the substitute of the burnt offering, to state that the animal is also the substitute of the peace offering, then since it is impossible to call two designations simultaneously, i.e., one must first say one designation and then the other, his statement stands, and the animal is half a burnt offering and half a peace offering. And if it was only after he said: This animal is hereby the substitute of the burnt offering, that he reconsidered and said: The substitute of the peace offering, that entire animal is the substitute of the burnt offering. ",
+ "This mishna discusses the language that serves to effect substitution. If one said: This non-sacred animal is hereby in place of that consecrated animal, or if he said: It is the substitute of that consecrated animal, or if one said: It is the exchange for that consecrated animal, that non-sacred animal is a substitute. If he said: This consecrated animal is desacralized, with its sanctity transferred to that non-sacred animal, that non-sacred animal is not a substitute. And if the consecrated animal was blemished, and he said: This consecrated animal is desacralized, with its sanctity transferred to that non-sacred animal, the consecrated animal is desacralized and assumes non-sacred status, by Torah law. By rabbinic law, the owner is required to conduct an appraisal to ascertain the relative value of the two animals. If the consecrated animal was worth more than the non-sacred animal, he must pay the difference to the Temple treasury.",
+ "If one said: This non-sacred animal is hereby in place of a burnt offering, or: It is in place of a sin offering, he has said nothing, as he did not say that it was in place of a specific offering. If he said: It is in place of this sin offering, or: It is in place of this burnt offering, or if he said: It is in place of a sin offering that I have in the house, or: It is in place of a burnt offering that I have in the house, and he had that offering in his house, his statement stands, i.e., is effective. If he said with regard to a non-kosher animal and with regard to a blemished animal: These animals are hereby designated as a burnt offering, he has said nothing. If he said: These animals are hereby designated for a burnt offering, the animals should be sold, and he brings a burnt offering purchased with the money received from their sale."
+ ],
+ [
+ "With regard to all animals whose sacrifice on the altar is prohibited, if they are intermingled with animals whose sacrifice is permitted, they prohibit the entire mixture of animals in any amount, regardless of the ratio of permitted to prohibited animals. These are the animals whose sacrifice is prohibited: An animal that copulated with a person, and an animal that was the object of bestiality, and the set-aside, and one that was worshipped, and an animal that was given as payment to a prostitute or as the price of a dog, or an animal crossbred from a mixture of diverse kinds, or an animal with a wound that will cause it to die within twelve months [tereifa], or an animal born by caesarean section. Which is the animal that is set-aside? It is an animal that is set aside for idol worship. The animal itself is prohibited, but that which is upon it, e.g., its jewelry and garments, is permitted to be sold in order to purchase an animal to be sacrificed. And which is the animal that was worshipped? It is any animal that a person worships as an object of idol worship. In this case, the sacrifice of both the animal itself and an animal purchased using the money from the sale of that which is upon it is prohibited. And the consumption of both this, the animal designated for idol worship, and that, the animal worshipped, is permitted.",
+ "And which is the case of an animal used as payment to a prostitute, which is prohibited as a sacrifice? It is the case of one who says to a prostitute: Here is this lamb as your fee. Even if they were one hundred lambs that he gave her, all of them are considered as payment to a prostitute and are prohibited. And likewise, in the case of one who says to another: Here is this lamb and in return your maidservant will lie with my slave and engage in intercourse with him, Rabbi Meir says: Its halakhic status is not that of payment to a prostitute, and the Rabbis say: Its halakhic status is that of payment to a prostitute.",
+ "And which is the case where an animal has the halakhic status of the price of a dog, and it is therefore prohibited to sacrifice the animal on the altar? It is the case of one who says to another: Here is this lamb in place of a dog. And likewise, this prohibition applies in the case of two partners who divided their common property, which included nineteen lambs and one dog, and one took ten lambs and the other one took nine lambs and a dog. Sacrifice of the ten lambs taken by the partner in exchange for the nine lambs and the dog is prohibited, and sacrifice of the nine lambs that were taken by the partner with the dog is permitted. With regard to lambs given as payment to another for engaging in intercourse with his dog, or as the price of a prostitute to purchase her as his maidservant, their sacrifice is permitted, as it is stated: “As both of them are an abomination to the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 23:19), from which it is inferred: Two are prohibited, payment to a prostitute and the price of a dog, and not four, i.e., the additional two cases of payment for intercourse with a dog and the price of a prostitute, which are permitted. Furthermore, with regard to the two prohibited cases of payment to a prostitute and the price of a dog, sacrifice of their offspring is permitted, as it is stated “them,” and not their offspring.",
+ "If one gave money to a prostitute as her payment, it is permitted to purchase an offering with that money, as the money itself is not sacrificed. If he paid her with wine, or oil, or flour, or any other item the like of which is sacrificed on the altar, sacrifice of those items is prohibited. If he gave her consecrated items for her services, their sacrifice is permitted. Since they were already consecrated, they do not belong to him, and one cannot prohibit an item that is not his. If he paid her with non-sacred birds, their sacrifice is prohibited. The mishna elaborates: As, by right, it should be inferred a fortiori: If in the case of consecrated items, which a blemish disqualifies, the prohibition of payment to a prostitute and the price of a dog do not take effect with regard to them; with regard to a bird, which a blemish does not disqualify, is it not right that the prohibition of payment to a prostitute and the price of a dog should not take effect with regard to them? Therefore, the verse states: “You shall not bring the payment of a prostitute, or the price of a dog, into the House of the Lord your God for any vow” (Deuteronomy 23:19). This serves to include the bird in the prohibition.",
+ "The mishna adds a principle: With regard to all animals whose sacrifice on the altar is prohibited, sacrifice of their offspring is permitted. Rabbi Eliezer says: The offspring of an animal with a wound that will cause it to die within twelve months [tereifa]shall not be sacrificed on the altar. Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus says: A kosher animal that suckled from a tereifa is disqualified from sacrifice on the altar. With regard to all sacrificial animals that became tereifot, one may not redeem them and render them non-sacred, as their consumption is forbidden and one does not redeem sacrificial animals to feed them to dogs, as this is considered a degradation of sacrificial animals."
+ ],
+ [
+ "There are elements that apply to animals consecrated for the altar that do not apply to items consecrated for Temple maintenance, and there are elements that apply to items consecrated for Temple maintenance that do not apply to animals consecrated for the altar. One element exclusive to animals consecrated for the altar is that animals consecrated for the altar render an animal exchanged for them a substitute, and items consecrated for Temple maintenance do not render an animal exchanged for them a substitute. In addition, if one slaughters an animal consecrated for the altar with the intention to eat it beyond its designated time, or if he ate the offering after its designated time, or if he ate the offering while ritually impure, he is liable to receive karet for eating it due to violation of the prohibitions of piggul, notar, and eating while ritually impure, respectively. If animals consecrated for the altar became pregnant and then became blemished and gave birth after redemption, their offspring and their milk are forbidden after their redemption. And one who slaughters them outside the Temple courtyard is liable to receive karet. And the Temple treasurer does not give compensation to craftsmen from money designated for purchasing animals consecrated for the altar. And in all these instances, that is not so with regard to money consecrated for Temple maintenance.",
+ "There are elements that apply to items consecrated for Temple maintenance that do not apply to animals consecrated for the altar, in that unspecified consecrations are designated for Temple maintenance; consecration for Temple maintenance takes effect on all items; and one is liable to bring a guilt offering and pay an additional payment of one-fifth for misuse of consecrated property, not only for the items themselves, but for their by-products, e.g., milk of a consecrated animal or eggs of a consecrated chicken; and there is no benefit for the owner from items consecrated for Temple maintenance, in contrast to some animals consecrated for the altar, e.g., a peace offering, from which there is benefit for the owner.",
+ "While the previous mishna enumerated differences between consecration for the altar and consecration for Temple maintenance, this mishna enumerates halakhot that apply to both. With regard to both animals consecrated for the altar and items consecrated for Temple maintenance, one may not alter their designation from one form of sanctity to another form of sanctity. But one may consecrate animals already consecrated for the altar by a consecration of their value, and that value is donated to the Temple treasury for maintenance. And one may dedicate them for the purpose of giving their value to the priests. And if animals consecrated either for the altar or for Temple maintenance died, they must be buried. Rabbi Shimon says: Although that is the halakha with regard to animals consecrated for the altar, if animals consecrated for Temple maintenance died, they can be redeemed.",
+ "And these are the items that are buried from which deriving benefit is forbidden: In the case of a sacrificial animal that miscarried, the fetus shall be buried. If the animal miscarried a placenta, the placenta shall be buried. And the same halakha applies to an ox that is stoned for killing a person; and a heifer whose neck is broken when a corpse is found between two cities and the killer is unknown; and the birds brought by a leper for purification; and the hair of a nazirite who became ritually impure, who shaves his head before beginning a new term of naziriteship. And the same halakha applies to the firstborn of a donkey that, if it is not redeemed with a sheep, has its neck broken; and a forbidden mixture of meat cooked in milk; and non-sacred animals that were slaughtered in the Temple courtyard. Rabbi Shimon says: Non-sacred animals that were slaughtered in the Temple courtyard shall be burned, like sacrificial animals that were disqualified in the courtyard. And likewise, an undomesticated animal that was slaughtered in the Temple courtyard, although it is not similar to the animals sacrificed in the Temple, shall be burned by rabbinic decree.",
+ "And these are the items that are burned: Leavened bread on Passover shall be burned. And the same halakha applies to ritually impure teruma. And with regard to the fruit that grows on a tree during the three years after it was planted [orla], and diverse kinds of food crops sown in a vineyard, those items whose appropriate manner of destruction is to be burned, e.g., foods, shall be burned; and those items whose appropriate manner of destruction is to be buried, e.g., liquids, shall be buried. And one may ignite a fire with bread and with oil of impure teruma, even though the priest derives benefit from that fire. ",
+ "And with regard to all sacrificial animals that were slaughtered with the intent to sacrifice or consume them beyond their designated time or outside their designated place, those animals shall be burned. With regard to a provisional guilt offering brought by one who is uncertain as to whether he committed a sin that renders him liable to bring a sin offering, if he discovers that he did not sin, the offering shall be burned, as its legal status is like that of an unfit offering. Rabbi Yehuda says: It shall be buried. A sin offering of the bird that comes due to an uncertainty, e.g., in the case of a woman who miscarried and she is uncertain whether it was a fetus, shall be burned, as it may not be eaten due to the uncertainty and because the nape of its neck was pinched and it was not slaughtered. Rabbi Yehuda says: One should cast it into the Temple courtyard drain, as the young bird will decompose and be drawn into the stream outside the Temple. The principle is: All items that are buried shall not be burned, and all items that are burned shall not be buried. Rabbi Yehuda says: If one wished to impose a stringency upon himself by burning items that are to be buried, he is permitted to burn them. The Rabbis said to Rabbi Yehuda: One is not permitted to change the method of destruction, as this could lead to a leniency, since it is permitted to derive benefit from the ashes of items that require burning, whereas it is not permitted to derive benefit from the ashes of items that require burial."
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/Hebrew/Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/Hebrew/Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..26d1232dc1dfd223575b083b8628fab21a5a64c8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/Hebrew/Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri.json
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+{
+ "language": "he",
+ "title": "Mishnah Temurah",
+ "versionSource": "https://archive.org/details/MishnaCorrectedKaufman00WHOLE",
+ "versionTitle": "Mishnah based on the Kaufmann manuscript, edited by Dan Be'eri",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "license": "PD",
+ "digitizedBySefaria": true,
+ "actualLanguage": "he",
+ "languageFamilyName": "hebrew",
+ "isSource": true,
+ "isPrimary": true,
+ "direction": "rtl",
+ "heTitle": "משנה תמורה",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "א\nהַכֹּל מְמִירִים, \nאֶחָד אֲנָשִׁים, וְאֶחָד נָשִׁים. \nלֹא שֶׁאָדָם רַשַּׁי לְהָמִיר, \nאֶלָּא, אִם הֵמִיר, מוּמָר, \nוְסוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים. \nהַכֹּהֲנִים מְמִירִים אֶת שֶׁלָּהֶן, \nוְיִשְׂרָאֵל מְמִירִים אֶת שֶׁלָּהֶן. \nאֵין הַכֹּהֲנִים מְמִירִים לֹא בַחַטָּאת, \nוְלֹא בָאָשָׁם, וְלֹא בִבְכוֹר. \nאָמַר רְבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי: \nוְכִי מִפְּנֵי מָה אֵין מְמִירִים בִּבְכוֹר? \nאָמַר לוֹ רְבִּי עֲקִיבָה: \nחַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם מַתָּנָה לַכֹּהֵן, \nוְהַבְּכוֹר מַתָּנָה לַכֹּהֵן, \nמַה חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם, אֵין מְמִירִין בָּהֶן, \nאַף הַבְּכוֹר, לֹא יְמִירוּ בוֹ. \n\nב\nאָמַר לוֹ רְבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי: \nמָה לוֹ אֵינוּ מֵמִיר בַּחַטָּאת וּבָאָשָׁם, \nשֶׁאֵין זָכִין בָּהֶן בְּחַיֵּיהֶן, \nתֹּאמַר בִּבְכוֹר שֶׁזָּכִין בּוֹ בְחַיָּיו? \nאָמַר לוֹ רְבִּי עֲקִיבָה: \nוַהֲלֹא כְבָר נֶאֱמַר: (ויקרא כז,י) \n\"וְהָיָה הוּא וּתְמוּרָתוֹ יִהְיֶה קּדֶשׁ\", \nאֵיכָן קְדֻשָּׁה חָלָה עָלָיו? \nבְּבֵית הַבְּעָלִים! \nאַף תְּמוּרָה, בְּבֵית הַבְּעָלִים. \n",
+ "ג\nמְמִירִין מִן הַבָּקָר עַל הַצֹּאן, \nוּמִן הַצֹּאן עַל הַבָּקָר, \nמִן הַכְּבָשִׂים עַל הָעִזִּים, \nוּמִן הָעִזִּים עַל הַכְּבָשִׂים, \nמִן הַזְּכָרִים עַל הַנְּקֵבוֹת, \nוּמִן הַנְּקֵבוֹת עַל הַזְּכָרִים, \nמִן תְּמִימִים עַל בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין, \nוּמִן בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין עַל תְּמִימִים, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (ויקרא כז,י) \n\"לֹא יַחֲלִיפֶנּוּ וְלֹא יָמִיר אֹתוֹ טוֹב בְּרָע\". \nאֵי זֶה הוּא \"טוֹב בְּרָע\"? \nבַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין שֶׁקָּדַם הֶקְדֵּשָׁן אֶת מוּמָן. \n\nד\nמְמִירִין אֶחָד בִּשְׁנַיִם, וּשְׁנַיִם בְּאֶחָד; \nאֶחָד בְּמֵאָה, וּמֵאָה בְאֶחָד. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: \nאֵין מְמִירִין אֶלָּא אֶחָד בְּאֶחָד, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (ויקרא כז,י) \n\"וְהָיָה הוּא וּתְמוּרָתוֹ יִהְיֶה קּדֶשׁ\", \nמַה \"הוּא\" מְיֻחָד, \nאַף \"תְּמוּרָתוֹ\" מְיֻחֶדֶת. \n",
+ "ה\nאֵין מְמִירִין אֵבָרִין בַּעֲבָרִין, \nוְלֹא עֲבָרִין בָּאֵבָרִין, \nוְלֹא אֵבָרִין וַעֲבָרִין בִּשְׁלֵמִין, \nוְלֹא שְׁלֵמִים בָּהֶם. \nרְבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר: \nמְמִירִין אֵבָרִין בִּשְׁלֵמִים, \nוְלֹא שְׁלֵמִים בָּהֶם. \nאָמַר רְבִּי יוֹסֵה: \nוַהֲלֹא בַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין הוּא אוֹמֵר: \n\"רַגְלָהּ שֶׁלָּזוֹ עוֹלָה\", כֻּלָּהּ עוֹלָה, \nאַף כְּשֶׁיֹּאמַר: \n\"רַגְלָהּ שֶׁלָּזוֹ תַחַת זוֹ\", \nתְּהֵא כֻלָּהּ תְּמוּרָה תַחְתֶּיהָ. \n",
+ "ו\nאֵין הַמְדֻמָּע מְדַמֵּעַ אֶלָּא לְפִי חֶשְׁבּוֹן. \nאֵין הַמְחֻמָּץ מַחְמִיץ אֶלָּא לְפִי חֶשְׁבּוֹן. \nאֵין מַיִם שְׁאוּבִין פּוֹסְלִין אֶת הַמִּקְוֶה, \nאֶלָּא לְפִי חֶשְׁבּוֹן. \n",
+ "ז\nאֵין מֵי חַטָּאת נֶעֱשִׂים מֵי חַטָּאת, \nאֶלָּא עִם מַתַּן הָאֵפֶר. \nאֵין בֵּית פְּרַס עוֹשֶׂה בֵית פְּרַס, \nוְלֹא תְרוּמָה אַחַר תְּרוּמָה, \nוְלֹא תְמוּרָה עוֹשָׂה תְמוּרָה, \n[וְלֹא הַוֶּלֶד עוֹשֶׂה תְמוּרָה.] \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nהַוֶּלֶד עוֹשֶׂה תְמוּרָה. \nאָמְרוּ לוֹ: \nהַקֹּדֶשׁ עוֹשֶׂה תְמוּרָה, \nלֹא הַוֶּלֶד וְלֹא תְמוּרָה עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה. \n",
+ "ח\nהָעוֹפוֹת וְהַמְּנָחוֹת אֵינָן עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה, \nשֶׁלֹּא נֶאֱמַר אֶלָּא \"בְהֵמָה\". \nהַצִּבּוּר וְהַשּׁוּתָפִין אֵינָן עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (ויקרא כז,י) \n\"לֹא יָמִיר אֹתוֹ\". \nהַיָּחִיד עוֹשֶׂה תְמוּרָה, \nוְלֹא הַצִּבּוּר וְלֹא הַשּׁוּתָפִין עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה. \n\nט\nקָרְבְּנוֹת בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת אֵינָן עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה. \nאָמַר רְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: \nוַהֲלֹא מַעֲשֵׂר בַּכְּלָל הָיָה, \nוְלָמָּה יָצָא? לְהַקִּישׁ אֵלָיו: \nמַה מַּעְשֵׂר קָרְבַּן יָחִיד, \nיָצְאוּ קָרְבְּנוֹת צִבּוּר; \nמַה מַּעְשֵׂר קָרְבַּן מִזְבֵּחַ, \nיָצְאוּ קָרְבְּנוֹת בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nיֵשׁ בְּקָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד, \nמַה שֶּׁאֵין בְּקָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר, \nוְיֵשׁ בְּקָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר, \nמַה שֶּׁאֵין בְּקָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד, \nשֶׁקָּרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה, \nוְקָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר אֵינָן עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה. \nקָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד נוֹהֲגִין בַּזְּכָרִים וּבַנְּקֵבוֹת, \nוְקָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר אֵינָן נוֹהֲגִין אֶלָּא בַזְּכָרִין. \nקָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד, חַיָּבִין בְּאַחְרָיוּתָן, \nוּבְאַחְרָיוּת נִסְכֵּיהֶן, \nוְקָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר אֵינָן חַיָּבִין לֹא בְאַחְרָיוּתָן, \nוְלֹא בְאַחְרָיוּת נִסְכֵּיהֶן, \nאֲבָל חַיָּבִין בְּאַחְרָיוּת נִסְכֵּיהֶן מִשֶּׁקָּרַב הַזֶּבַח. \n\nב\nיֵשׁ בְּקָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר, \n[מַה שֶּׁאֵין בְּקָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד,] \nשֶׁקָּרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר \nדּוֹחִין אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת וְאֶת הַטֻּמְאָה, \nוְקָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד \nאֵינָן דּוֹחִין לֹא אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת וְלֹא אֶת הַטֻּמְאָה. \nאָמַר רְבִּי מֵאִיר: \nוַהֲלֹא חֲבִתֵּי כֹהֵן גָּדוֹל, \nוּפַר יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, \nקָרְבַּן יָחִיד, \nוְדוֹחִין אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת וְאֶת הַטֻּמְאָה? \nאֶלָּא שֶׁזְּמַנָּן קָבוּעַ. \n",
+ "ג\nחַטֹּאת הַיָּחִיד שֶׁכִּפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים, מֵתוֹת, \nוְשֶׁלַּצִּבּוּר, אֵינָן מֵתוֹת. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nיָמוּת. \nאָמַר רְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: \nמַה מָּצִינוּ בִוְלַד חַטָּאת, \nוּתְמוּרַת חַטָּאת, \nוְחַטָּאת שֶׁמֵּתוּ בְעָלֶיהָ, \nבְּיָחִיד דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים, אֲבָל לֹא בַצִּבּוּר; \nאַף כְּשֶׁכִּפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים וְשֶׁעִבְּרָה שְׁנָתָן, \nבְּיָחִיד דְּבָרִין אֲמוּרִין, אֲבָל לֹא בַצִּבּוּר. \n",
+ "ד\nחֹמֶר בַּקָּדָשִׁין מִבַּתְּמוּרָה, \nוּבַתְּמוּרָה מִבַּקֳּדָשִׁים, \nשֶׁהַקָּדָשִׁים עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה, \nוְאֵין תְּמוּרָה עוֹשָׂה תְמוּרָה. \n[הַצִּבּוּר] וְהַשֻּׁתָּפִין מַקְדִּישִׁין, \nאֲבָל לֹא מְמִירִים. \nוּמַקְדִּישִׁין אֵבָרִין וַעֲבָרִין, \nאֲבָל לֹא מְמִירִין. \n\nה\nחֹמֶר בַּתְּמוּרָה, \nשֶׁהַקְּדֻשָּׁה חָלָה עָלֶיהָ בַּעֲלַת מוּם קָבוּעַ, \nוְאֵינָה יוֹצָא לַחֻלִּים לְהִגָּזֵז וְלֵעָבֵד. \nרְבִּי יוֹסֵה בִרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nעָשָׂה שׁוֹגֵג כַּמֵּזִיד בַּתְּמוּרָה, \nלֹא עָשָׂה שׁוֹגֵג [כַּמֵּזִיד] בַּמֻּקְדָּשִׁין. \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: \nהַכִּלְאַיִם, וְהַטְּרֵפָה, וְיוֹצֵא דֹפֶן, \nוְטָמְטוֹם וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינָס, \nלֹא קְדֵשִׁין, וְלֹא מַקְדִּישִׁין. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nאֵלּוּ קָדָשִׁין שֶׁוַּלְדוֹתֵיהֶן וּתְמוּרוֹתֵיהֶן כַּיּוֹצֵא בָהֶן: \nוְלַד שְׁלָמִים וּתְמוּרָתָן, \nוְלָדָן, וּוְלַד וְלָדָן עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, \nהֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כִשְׁלָמִים, \nוּטְעוּנִים סְמִיכָה וּנְסָכִים, \nוּתְנוּפַת חָזֶה וָשׁוֹק. \n\nב\nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: \nוְלַד שְׁלָמִים לֹא יִקָּרֵב שְׁלָמִים. \nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: \nיִקָּרֵב. \nאָמַר רְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: \nלֹא נֶחְלְקוּ עַל וְלַד וְלַד שְׁלָמִים, \nוְעַל וְלַד וְלַד תְּמוּרָה, \nשֶׁלֹּא יִקָּרֵב, \nוְעַל מַה נֶּחְלָקוּ? \nעַל הַוֶּלֶד, \nשֶׁרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: \nלֹא יִקָּרֵב, \nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: \nיִקָּרֵב. \n\nג\nהֵעִיד רְבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ וּרְבִּי פַּפְּיַס \nעַל וְלַד שְׁלָמִים שֶׁיִּקָּרֵב שְׁלָמִים. \nאָמַר רְבִּי פַּפְּיַס: \nאֲנִי מֵעִיד, \nשֶׁהָיְתָה לָּנוּ פָרָה זִבְחֵי שְׁלָמִים, \nוַאֲכַלְנוּהָ בַפֶּסַח, \nוְאָכַלְנוּ וַלְדָהּ שְׁלָמִים בֶּחָג. \n",
+ "ד\nוְלַד תּוֹדָה, וּתְמוּרָתָהּ, \nוַלְדָהּ וּוְלַד וַלְדָהּ עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, \nהֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כְתוֹדָה, \nוּבִלְבַד שֶׁאֵינָן טְעוּנִין לֶחֶם. \nתְּמוּרַת עוֹלָה, \nוְלַד תְּמוּרָה, \nוְלָדָן וּוְלַד וְלָדָן עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, \nהֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כְעוֹלָה, \nוּטְעוּנָה הֶפְשֵׁט וְנִתּוּחַ, \nוְכָלִיל לָאִשִּׁים. \n",
+ "ה\nהַמַּפְרִישׁ נְקֵבָה לָעוֹלָה וְיָלְדָה זָכָר, \nיִרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֵב, \nוְיִמָּכֵר, וְיָבִיא בְדָמָיו עוֹלָה. \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: \nהוּא בְעַצְמוֹ יִקְרַב עוֹלָה. \n\nו\nהַמַּפְרִישׁ נְקֵבָה לְאָשָׁם, \nתִּרְעֶה עַד שֶׁתִּסְתָּאֵב, < שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֵב>\nתִּמָּכֵר, וְיָבִיא בְדָמֶיהָ אָשָׁם. <ימכר> \nאִם קָרַב אֲשָׁמוֹ, יִפְּלוּ דָמֶיהָ לִנְדָבָה. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: \nתִּמָּכֵר שֶׁלֹּא בַמּוּם. \n\nז \nאָשָׁם שֶׁמֵּתוּ בְעָלָיו, \nוְשֶׁכִּפְּרוּ בְעָלָיו, \nיִרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֵב, \nוְיִמָּכֵר, וְיִפְּלוּ דָמָיו לִנְדָבָה. \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: \nיָמוּת. \nרְבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: \nיָבִיא בְדָמָיו עוֹלָה. \n\nח\nתְּמוּרַת אָשָׁם, \nוְלַד תְּמוּרָה, \nוְלָדָן, וְלַד וְלָדָן עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, \nיִרְעוּ עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֲבוּ, \nוְיִמָּכְרוּ, וְיִפְּלוּ דְמֵיהֶן לִנְדָבָה. <דָמֶיהָ> \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: \nיָמוּתוּ. \nרְבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: \nיָבִיא בִדְמֵיהֶם עוֹלוֹת. \n",
+ "ט\nוַהֲלֹא אַף הַנְּדָבָה עוֹלָה הִיא? <עוֹלוֹת>\nמַה בֵּין דִּבְרֵי רְבִּי אֶלְעָזָר לְדִבְרֵי חֲכָמִים? <אֱלִיעֶזֶר>\nאֶלָּא בִזְמַן שֶׁהִיא בָּאָה חוֹבָה, \nהוּא סוֹמֵךְ עָלֶיהָ, \nוּמֵבִיא עָלֶיהָ נְסָכִים, \nוּנְסָכֶיהָ מִשֶּׁלּוֹ. \nאִם הָיָה כֹהֵן, \nעֲבוֹדָתָהּ וְעוֹרָהּ שֶׁלּוֹ. \nבִּזְמַן שֶׁהִיא בָאָה נְדָבָה, \nאֵינוּ סוֹמֵךְ עָלֶיהָ, \nוְאֵינוּ מֵבִיא עָלֶיהָ נְסָכִים, \nוּנְסָכֶיהָ מִשֶּׁלַּצִּבּוּר. \nאַף עַל פִּי כֹהֵן, \nעֲבוֹדָתָהּ וְעוֹרָהּ שֶׁלְּאַנְשֵׁי מִשְׁמָר. \n",
+ "י\nתְּמוּרַת הַבְּכוֹר וְהַמַּעֲשֵׂר, \nוְלָדָן, וְלַד וְלָדָן עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, \nהֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כִבְכוֹר וּכְמַעֲשֵׂר, \nוְיֵאָכְלוּ בְמוּמָן לַבְּעָלִים. \nמַה בֵּין הַבְּכוֹר וְהַמַּעֲשֵׂר לְבֵין כָּל הַקָּדָשִׁים? \nשֶׁכָּל הַקָּדָשִׁים נִמְכָּרִין בְּאַטְלֵס וְנִשְׁחָטִין בְּאַטְלֵס, \nוְנִשְׁקָלִין בְּלִטְרָה, \nחוּץ מִן הַבְּכוֹר וּמִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר. \nוְיֵשׁ לָהֶן פִּדָּיוֹן, \nוְלִתְמוּרוֹתֵיהֶן פִּדָּיוֹן, \nחוּץ מִן הַבְּכוֹר וּמִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר. \nוּבָאִין מִחוּץ לָאָרֶץ לָאָרֶץ, \nחוּץ מִן הַבְּכוֹר וּמִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר. \nאִם בָּאוּ תְמִימִין, \nיִקָּרֵבוּ, \nוְאִם בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין, \nיֵאָכְלוּ בְמוּמָן לַבְּעָלִים. \nאָמַר רְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: \nמַה הַטַּעַם? \nשֶׁהַבְּכוֹר וְהַמַּעֲשֵׂר יֵשׁ לָהֶם פַּרְנָסָה בִמְקוֹמָן, \nוּשְׁאָר כָּל הַקָּדָשִׁין, \nאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנּוֹלַד לָהֶם מוּם, <שֶׁנּוֹלְדוּ>\nהֲרֵי בִקְדֻשָּׁתָן. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nוְלַד חַטָּאת, וּתְמוּרַת חַטָּאת, \nוְחַטָּאת שֶׁמֵּתוּ בְעָלֶיהָ, יָמוּתוּ. \nוְשֶׁעִבְּרָה שְׁנָתָהּ, \nוְשֶׁאָבָדָה וְנִמְצֵאת וּבַעֲלַת מוּם: \nאִם מִשֶּׁכִּפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים, תָּמוּת, \nאֵינָה עוֹשָׂה תְמוּרָה, \nלֹא נֶהְנִין וְלֹא מוֹעֲלִין; \nאִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא כִפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים, \nתִּרְעֶה עַד שֶׁתִּסְתָּאֵב, \nוְתִמָּכֵר, וְיָבִיא בְדָמֶיהָ אַחֶרֶת, \nוְעוֹשָׂה תְמוּרָה, \nוּמוֹעֲלִין בָּהּ. \n",
+ "ב\nהַמַּפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבָדָה, \nוְהִקְרִיב אַחֶרֶת תַּחְתֶּיהָ, \nוְאַחַר כָּךְ נִמְצֵאת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, \nתָּמוּת. \nהַמַּפְרִישׁ מָעוֹת לְחַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבָדוּ, \nוְהִקְרִיב חַטָּאוֹת תַּחְתֵּיהֶן, \nוְאַחַר כָּךְ נִמְצְאוּ הַמָּעוֹת, \nיֵלְכוּ לְיָם הַמֶּלַח. \n",
+ "ג\nהַמַּפְרִישׁ מָעוֹת לְחַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבָדוּ, \nוְהִפְרִישׁ מָעוֹת אֲחֵרוֹת תַּחְתֵּיהֶן, <אֲחֵרִים>\nלֹא הִסְפִּיק לִקַּח בָּהֶן חַטָּאת, \nעַד שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ הַמָּעוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת, \nיָבִיא מֵאֵלּוּ וּמֵאֵלּוּ [חַטָּאת], \nוְהַשְּׁאָר יִפְּלוּ לִנְדָבָה. \n\nד\nהַמַּפְרִישׁ מָעוֹת לְחַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבָדוּ, \nוְהִפְרִישׁ חַטָּאת תַּחְתֵּיהֶן, \nלֹא הִסְפִּיק לְהַקְרִיבָהּ עַד שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ הַמָּעוֹת, \nוַהֲרֵי חַטָּאת בַּעֲלַת מוּם, \nתִּמָּכֵר, \nוְיָבִיא מֵאֵלּוּ וּמֵאֵלּוּ חַטָּאת, \nוְהַשְּׁאָר יִפְּלוּ לִנְדָבָה. \n\nה\nהַמַּפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבָדָה, \nוְהִפְרִישׁ מָעוֹת תַּחְתֶּיהָ, \nלֹא הִסְפִּיק לִקַּח בָּהֶן חַטָּאת עַד שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת חַטָּאתוֹ, \nוַהֲרֵי הִיא בַעֲלַת מוּם, \nתִּמָּכֵר, \nוְיָבִיא מֵאֵלּוּ וּמֵאֵלּוּ חַטָּאת, \nוְהַשְּׁאָר יִפְּלוּ לִנְדָבָה. \n\nו\nהַמַּפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבָדָה, \nוְהִפְרִישׁ אַחֶרֶת תַּחְתֶּיהָ, \nלֹא הִסְפִּיק לְהַקְרִיבָהּ עַד שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, \nוַהֲרֵי שְׁתֵּיהֶן בַּעֲלוֹת מוּם, <בַּעֲלַת>\nיִמָּכְרוּ, \nוְיָבִיא מֵאֵלּוּ וּמֵאֵלּוּ חַטָּאת, \nוְהַשְּׁאָר יִפְּלוּ לִנְדָבָה. \n\nז\nהַמַּפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבָדָה, \nוְהִפְרִישׁ אַחֶרֶת תַּחְתֶּיהָ, \nלֹא הִסְפִּיק לְהַקְרִיבָהּ עַד שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, \nוַהֲרֵי שְׁתֵּיהֶן תְּמִימוֹת, \nאַחַת מֵהֶן תִּקָּרֵב חַטָּאת, \nוְהַשְּׁנִיָּה תָמוּת. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי. \nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: \nאֵין חַטָּאת מֵתָה, \nאֶלָּא שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת מֵאַחַר שֶׁכִּפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים. \nאֵין הַמָּעוֹת הוֹלְכוֹת לְיָם הַמֶּלַח, \nאֶלָּא שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ מֵאַחַר שֶׁכִּפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים. \n",
+ "ח\nהַמַּפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ, \nוַהֲרֵי הִיא בַעֲלַת מוּם, \nמוֹכְרָהּ, \nוּמֵבִיא בְדָמֶיהָ אַחֶרֶת. <ויביא> \nרְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בִּרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: \nאִם קֵרְבָה שְׁנִיָּה עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁחָטָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, \nתָּמוּת, \nשֶׁכְּבָר כִּפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nכֵּיצַד מַעֲרִימִין עַל הַבְּכוֹר? \nמְבַכֶּרֶת שֶׁהָיְתָה מְעֻבֶּרֶת, אוֹמֵר: \n\"מַה שֶּׁבְּמֵעֶיהָ שֶׁלָּזוֹ, אִם זָכָר, עוֹלָה.\" \nיָלְדָה זָכָר, יִקָּרֵב עוֹלָה. \n\"אִם נְקֵבָה, זִבְחֵי שְׁלָמִים.\" \nיָלְדָה נְקֵבָה, תִּקָּרֵב שְׁלָמִים; \n\"אִם זָכָר, עוֹלָה, אִם נְקֵבָה, זִבְחֵי שְׁלָמִים\", \nיָלְדָה זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה, \nהַזָּכָר יִקָּרֵב עוֹלָה, \nוְהַנְּקֵבָה תִקָּרֵב שְׁלָמִים. \n",
+ "ב\nיָלְדָה שְׁנֵי זְכָרִים, \nאֶחָד מֵהֶן יִקָּרֵב עוֹלָה, \nוְהַשֵּׁנִי יִמָּכֵר לְחַיְבֵי עוֹלָה, \nוְדָמָיו חֻלִּין. \nיָלְדָה שְׁתֵּי נְקֵבוֹת, \nאַחַת מֵהֶן תִקָּרֵב שְׁלָמִים, \nוְהַשְּׁנִיָּה תִמָּכֵר לְחַיְבֵי שְׁלָמִים, \nוְדָמֶיהָ חֻלִּין. \nיָלְדָה טָמְטוֹם וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינָס, \nרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: \nאֵין קְדֻשָּׁה חָלָה עֲלֵיהֶן. \n",
+ "ג\nהָאוֹמֵר: \n\"וַלְדָהּ שֶׁלָּזוֹ עוֹלָה, וְהִיא שְׁלָמִים\", \nדְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִין. \n\"הִיא שְׁלָמִים וּוְלָדָהּ עוֹלָה\", \nהֲרֵי זוֹ וְלַד שְׁלָמִים. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי מֵאִיר. \nאָמַר רְבִּי יוֹסֵה: \nאִם לְכֵן נִתְכַּוַּן מִתְּחִלָּה, \nאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵי אֶפְשָׁר לִקְרוֹת שְׁנֵי שֵׁמוֹת כְּאַחַת, \nדְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִין. \nאִם מִשֶּׁאָמַר \"הֲרֵי זוֹ שְׁלָמִים\" \nוְנִמְלַךְ וְאָמַר \"וַלְדָהּ עוֹלָה\", \nהֲרֵי זוֹ וְלַד שְׁלָמִים. \n\n<לא נמצא בכתב היד>\n",
+ "הֲרֵי זוֹ תְמוּרַת עוֹלָה וּתְמוּרַת שְׁלָמִים, \nהֲרֵי זוֹ תְמוּרַת עוֹלָה. \nדִּבְרֵי רְבִּי מֵאִיר. \nאָמַר רְבִּי יוֹסֵה: \nאִם לָכֵן נִתְכַּוַּן מִתְּחִלָּה, \nהוֹאִיל וְאֵי אֶפְשָׁר לִקְרוֹת שְׁנֵי שֵׁמוֹת כְּאַחַת, \nדְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִין; \nוְאִם מִשֶּׁאָמַר: \nתְּמוּרַת עוֹלָה, \nנִמְלַךְ וְאָמַר: \nתְּמוּרַת שְׁלָמִים, הֲרֵי זוֹ תְמוּרַת עוֹלָה. )\n",
+ "ה\n\"הֲרֵי זוֹ תַחַת זוֹ\", \"תְּמוּרָה זוֹ\", \"חֲלִפֵּי זוֹ\", \nהֲרֵי זוֹ תְמוּרָה. \n\"זוֹ מְחֻלֶּלֶת עַל זוֹ\", \nאֵינָה תְּמוּרָה. \nאִם הָיָה הֶקְדֵּשׁ בַּעַל מוּם, \nיֵצֵא לַחֻלִּין, \nצָרִיךְ לְהֵעָשׁוֹת דָּמִים. \n",
+ "ו\n\"הֲרֵי זוֹ תַחַת חַטָּאת, \nתַחַת עוֹלָה\", \nלֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. \n\"תַּחַת חַטָּאת זוֹ\", \nתַחַת עוֹלָה זוֹ\", \n\"תַּחַת חַטָּאת, תַחַת עוֹלָה שֶׁיֶּשׁ לִי בְתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת\", \nהָיָה לוֹ, דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִין. \nאָמַר עַל בְּהֵמָה הַטְּמֵאָה וְעַל בַּעֲלַת מוּם: \n\"הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ עוֹלָה\", \nלֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. \n\"הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ לְעוֹלָה\", \nיִמָּכֵרוּ וְיָבִיא בִדְמֵיהֶן עוֹלוֹת. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nכָּל הָאֲסוּרִין עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּח, \nאוֹסְרִים כָּל שֶׁהֵן: \nהָרוֹבֵעַ, <הָרוֹבַע>\nוְהַנִּרְבָּע, \nוְהַמֻּקְצֶה, \nוְהַנֶּעְבָּד, \nוְהָאֶתְנָן, \nוְהַמְּחִיר, \nוְהַכִּלְאַיִם, <וְהַכְּלַאִים>\nוְהַטְּרֵפָה, \nוְיוֹצֵא דֹפֶן. \nאֵי זֶה הוּא הַמֻּקְצֶה? \nהַמֻּקְצֶה לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. \nהוּא אָסוּר, \nוּמַה שֶּׁעָלָיו מֻתָּר. \nוְאֵי זֶה הַנֶּעְבָּד? \nכָּל שֶׁעוֹבְדִין אוֹתוֹ. \nהוּא וּמַה שֶּׁעָלָיו אָסוּר. \nזֶה וָזֶה מֻתָּרִין בַּאֲכִילָה. \n",
+ "ב\nאֵי זֶה הוּא אֶתְנָן? \nהָאוֹמֵר לַזּוֹנָה: \n\"הֵא לִיךְ בִּשְׂכָרִיךְ.\" \nאֲפִלּוּ מֵאָה, כֻּלָּן אֲסוּרִין. \nוְכֵן הָאוֹמֵר לַחֲבֵרוֹ: \n\"הֵא לָךְ טָלֶה זֶה, \nוְתֵן לִי שִׁפְחָתָךְ אֵצֶל עַבְדִּי.\" \nרְבִּי אוֹמֵר: \nאֵינוּ אֶתְנָן. \nוַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: \nאֶתְנָן. \n",
+ "ג\nאֵיזֶה הוּא מְחִיר כֶּלֶב? \nהָאוֹמֵר לַחֲבֵרוֹ: \n\"הֵא לָךְ טָלֶה זֶה תַחַת כֶּלֶב זֶה.\" \nוְכֵן שְׁנֵי שׁוּתָפִין שֶׁחָלְקוּ: \nאֶחָד נוֹטֵל עֲשָׂרָה, \nוְאֶחָד נוֹטֵל תִּשְׁעָה וְכֶלֶב, \nשֶׁכְּנֶגֶד הַכֶּלֶב אֲסוּרִין, \nוְשֶׁעִם הַכֶּלֶב מֻתָּרִין. \nאֶתְנַן כֶּלֶב וּמְחִיר זוֹנָה, \nהֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מֻתָּרִים, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר \"שְׁנֵי\", לֹא אַרְבָּעָה. \nוַלְדוֹתֵיהֶן מֻתָּרִין, \nשֶׁנֶּאֱמַר \"הֵן\", לֹא וַלְדוֹתֵיהֶן. \n",
+ "ד\nנָתַן לָהּ כְּסָפִים, \nהֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מֻתָּרִין. \nיֵינוֹת, שְׁמָנִים, וּסְלָתוֹת, \nוְכָל דָּבָר שֶׁכַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ קָרֵב עַל גַּבֵּי מִזְבֵּחַ, <בָהּ>\nאָסוּר. \n\nה\nנָתַן לָהּ מֻקְדָּשִׁין, \nהֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מֻתָּרִין. \nעוֹפוֹת, \nהֲרֵי אֵלּוּ אֲסוּרִין. \nשֶׁהָיָה בַדִּין: \nמָה אִם הַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין שֶׁהַמּוּם פּוֹסֵל בָּהֶן, \nוְאֵין אֶתְנָן וּמְחִיר חָל עֲלֵיהֶם, \nעוֹף, שֶׁאֵין הַמּוּם פּוֹסֵל בּוֹ, \nאֵינוּ דִין שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא אֶתְנָן וּמְחִיר חָל עָלָיו? \nתַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: (דברים כג,יט) \n\"לְכָל נֶדֶר\", לְהָבִיא אֶת הָעוֹף. \n",
+ "ו\nכָּל הָאֲסוּרִין עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּח, \nוַלְדוֹתֵיהֶן מֻתָּרִין. \nוְלַד טְרֵפָה, רְבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: \nלֹא יִקָּרֵב עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. \n(וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: יִקָּרֵב.) \nרְבִּי חֲנַנְיָה בֶן אַנְטִיגְנָס אוֹמֵר: \nכְּשֵׁרָה שֶׁיָּנְקָה מִן הַטְּרֵפָה, \nפְּסוּלָה מֵעַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. \nכָּל הַקָּדָשִׁין שֶׁנֶּעֱשׁוּ טְרֵפָה, \nאֵין פּוֹדִין, \nשֶׁאֵין פּוֹדִין אֶת הַקָּדָשִׁים לְהַאֲכִילָן לַכְּלָבִין. \n\n\n\n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "א\nיֵשׁ בְּקָדְשֵׁי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ מַה שֶּׁאֵין בְּקָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת, \nיֵשׁ בְּקָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת מַה שֶּׁאֵין בְּקָדְשֵׁי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, \nשֶׁקָּדְשֵׁי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה, \nוְחַיָּבִין עֲלֵיהֶם מִשֵּׁם פִּגּוּל, נוֹתָר וְטָמֵא, \nוְלָדָן וַחֲלָבָן אָסוּר לְאַחַר פִּדְיוֹנָן, \nוְהַשּׁוֹחֲטָן בַּחוּץ חַיָּב. \nאֵין נוֹתְנִין מֵהֶן לָאֻמָּנִים בִּשְׂכָרָן. \n(מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בְּקָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת.) \n",
+ "ב\nיֵשׁ בְּקָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת, \nשֶׁסְּתָם הֶקְדֵּשׁוֹת לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת. \nהֶקְדֵּשׁ בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת חָל עַל הַכֹּל, \nוּמוֹעֲלִין בְּגִדּוּלֵיהֶן, \nוְאֵין בָּהֶן הֲנָיָה לַכֹּהֲנִים. \n",
+ "ג\nאֶחָד קָדְשֵׁי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, \nוְאֶחָד קָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת, \nאֵין מְשַׁנִּין אוֹתָן מִקְּדֻשָּׁה לִקְדֻשָּׁה, \nמַקְדִּישִׁין אוֹתָן הֶקְדֵּשׁ עִלּוּי, \nוּמַחֲרִימִין אוֹתָן. \nוְאִם מֵתוּ, יִקָּבֵרוּ. \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: \nקָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת, \nאִם מֵתוּ, יִפָּדוּ. \n",
+ "ד\nאֵלּוּ הֵן הַנִּקְבָּרִין: \nקָדָשִׁים שֶׁהִפִּילוּ, יִקָּבֵרוּ. \nהִפִּילָה שִׁלְיָה, תִּקָּבֵר. \nשׁוֹר הַנִּסְקָל, \nוְעֶגְלָה עֲרוּפָה, \nוְצִפֳּרֵי מְצֹרָע, \nוּשְׂעַר נָזִיר, \nוּפֶטֶר חֲמוֹר, \nוּבָשָׂר בֶּחָלָב, \nוְחֻלִּין שֶׁנִּשְׁחָטוּ בָעֲזָרָה, \nרְבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: \nחֻלִּין שֶׁנִּשְׁחָטוּ בָעֲזָרָה, יִשָּׂרֵפוּ. \nוְכֵן חַיָּה שֶׁנִּשְׁחָטָה בָעֲזָרָה. \n",
+ "ה\nאֵלּוּ הֵן הַנִּשְׂרָפִין: \nחָמֵץ בַּפֶּסַח, יִשָּׂרֵף. \nוּתְרוּמָה טְמֵאָה, \nהָעָרְלָה, \nוְכִלְאֵי הַכֶּרֶם, \nאֶת שֶׁדַּרְכּוֹ לְהִשָּׂרֵף, יִשָּׂרֵף, \nאֶת שֶׁדַּרְכּוֹ לְהִקָּבֵר, יִקָּבֵר. \nמַדְלִיקִין בְּפַת וּבְשֶׁמֶן שֶׁלִּתְרוּמָה. \n",
+ "ו\nכָּל קָדָשִׁים שֶׁנִּשְׁחָטוּ חוּץ לִזְמַנָּן, \nוְחוּץ לִמְקוֹמָן, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ יִשָּׂרְפוּ. \nאָשָׁם תָּלוּי, יִשָּׂרֵף; \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nיִקָּבֵר. \nחַטַּאת הָעוֹף הַבָּאָה עַל סָפֵק, תִּשָּׂרֵף. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nיְטִילֶנָּה לְאַמָּה. \nכָּל הַנִּשְׂרָפִין לֹא יִקָּבֵרוּ, \nכָּל הַנִּקְבָּרִים לֹא יִשָּׂרֵפוּ. \nרְבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: \nאִם רָצָה לְהַחְמִיר עַל עַצְמוּ, \nלִשְׂרוֹף אֶת הַנִּקְבָּרִין, רַשַּׁי; \nאָמְרוּ לוֹ: \nאֵינוּ מֻתָּר לְשַׁנּוֹת. \n\nחסל תמורה \n\n"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/Hebrew/Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/Hebrew/Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..9c7a4c1c31bb8131260161654039d0c9c3b3c3dc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/Hebrew/Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913.json
@@ -0,0 +1,78 @@
+{
+ "language": "he",
+ "title": "Mishnah Temurah",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001741739",
+ "versionTitle": "Mishnah, ed. Romm, Vilna 1913",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 2.0,
+ "license": "Public Domain",
+ "digitizedBySefaria": true,
+ "heversionSource": "http://primo.nli.org.il/primo_library/libweb/action/dlDisplay.do?vid=NLI&docId=NNL_ALEPH00174173",
+ "versionTitleInHebrew": "משנה, מהדורת בית דפוס ראם, וילנא 1913",
+ "actualLanguage": "he",
+ "languageFamilyName": "hebrew",
+ "isBaseText": true,
+ "isSource": true,
+ "isPrimary": true,
+ "direction": "rtl",
+ "heTitle": "משנה תמורה",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "הכל ממירים. אחד אנשים ואחד נשים. לא שאדם רשאי להמיר. אלא שאם המיר מומר. וסופג את הארבעים. הכהנים ממירים את שלהם וישראל ממירים את שלהם. אין הכהנים ממירים. לא בחטאת. ולא באשם. ולא בבכור. אמר רבי יוחנן בן נורי. וכי מפני מה אין ממירים בבכור. אמר רבי עקיבא חטאת ואשם מתנה לכהן. והבכור מתנה לכהן. מה חטאת ואשם אין ממירים בו. אף הבכור לא ימירנו בו. אמר לו רבי יוחנן בן נורי. מה לי אינו ממיר בחטאת ובאשם. שאין זכין בהן בחייהם. תאמר בבכור שזכין לו בחייו. אמר לו רבי עקיבא. והלא כבר נאמר (ויקרא כז, י) והיה הוא ותמורתו יהיה קדש. היכן קדושה חלה עליו. בבית הבעלים. אף תמורה בבית הבעלים: ",
+ "ממירין מן הבקר על הצאן ומן הצאן על הבקר. מן הכבשים על העזים ומן העזים על הכבשים. מן הזכרים על הנקבות ומן הנקבות על הזכרים מן התמימים על בעלי מומין ומבעלי מומין על התמימים. שנאמר (ויקרא כז, י) לא יחליפנו ולא ימיר אותו טוב ברע או רע בטוב. איזהו טוב ברע בעלי מומין שקדם הקדישן את מומם. ממירים אחד בשנים ושנים באחד. אחד במאה. ומאה באחד. רבי שמעון אומר אין ממירים אלא אחד באחד שנאמר (שם) והיה הוא ותמורתו מה הוא מיוחד אף תמורתו מיוחדת: ",
+ "אין ממירין אברים בעוברים. ולא עוברים באברים. ולא אברים ועוברים בשלמים. ולא שלמים בהן. רבי יוסי אומר ממירים אברין בשלמים. ולא שלמים באברין. אמר רבי יוסי והלא במוקדשין. האומר רגלה של זו עולה. כולה עולה. אף כשיאמר רגלה של זו תחת זו. תהא כולה תמורה תחתיה: ",
+ "אין המדומע מדמע אלא לפי חשבון. אין המחומץ מחמץ אלא לפי חשבון. אין המים שאובים פוסלין את המקוה אלא לפי חשבון: ",
+ "אין מי חטאת נעשין מי חטאת אלא עם מתן אפר. אין בית הפרס עושה בית הפרס. ולא תרומה אחר תרומה. ולא תמורה עושה תמורה. ולא הולד עושה תמורה רבי יהודה אומר הולד עושה תמורה. אמרו לו הקדש עושה תמורה. לא הולד ולא תמורה עושין תמורה: ",
+ "העופות והמנחות אינן עושין תמורה. שלא נאמר אלא בבהמה. הצבור והשותפים אינן עושים תמורה. שנאמר. (ויקרא כז, י) לא ימיר אותו. יחיד עושה תמורה לא הצבור ולא השותפים עושים תמורה. קרבנות בדק הבית. אינן עושין תמורה. אמר רבי שמעון והלא המעשר בכלל היה ולמה יצא להקיש אליו. מה מעשר קרבן יחיד. יצאו קרבנות צבור. מה מעשר קרבן מזבח. יצאו קרבנות בדק הבית. "
+ ],
+ [
+ "יש בקרבנות היחיד מה שאין בקרבנות הצבור. ויש בקרבנות הצבור. מה שאין בקרבנות היחיד. שקרבנות היחיד עושים תמורה. וקרבנות הצבור אינם עושים תמורה. קרבנות היחיד נוהגין בזכרים ובנקבות. וקרבנות צבור אין נוהגין אלא בזכרים. קרבנות היחיד חייבין באחריותן ובאחריות נסכיהם. וקרבנות הצבור אינן חייבין לא באחריותן ולא באחריות נסכיהן אבל חייבין באחריות נסכיהן משקרב הזבח. יש בקרבנות הצבור מה שאין בקרבנות היחיד. שקרבנות הצבור דוחין את השבת ואת הטומאה. וקרבנות היחיד. אינן דוחים לא את השבת ולא את הטומאה. אמר רבי מאיר והלא חביתי כהן גדול ופר יום הכפורים. קרבן יחיד. ודוחין את השבת ואת הטומאה. אלא שזמנן קבוע: ",
+ "חטאת היחיד. שכפרו בעליו מתות. ושל צבור. אינן מתות. רבי יהודה אומר ימותו. אמר רבי שמעון מה מצינו בולד חטאת ובתמורת חטאת ובחטאת שמתו בעליה. ביחיד דברים אמורים. אבל לא בצבור. אף שכפרו הבעלים ושעברה שנתן ביחיד דברים אמורים. אבל לא בצבור. ",
+ "חומר בקדשים מבתמורה ובתמורה מבקדשים. שהקדשים עושים תמורה. ואין תמורה עושה תמורה. הצבור והשותפין מקדישים. אבל לא ממירים. ומקדישים אברים ועוברים. אבל לא ממירים. חומר בתמורה שהקדושה חלה על בעלת מום קבוע. ואינה יוצא לחולין. להגזז ולהעבד. רבי יוסי בר רבי יהודה אומר. עשה שוגג כמזיד. בתמורה. ולא עשה שוגג כמזיד. במוקדשים. רבי אלעזר אומר הכלאים והטרפה ויוצא דופן. טומטום ואנדרוגינוס. לא קדשים ולא מקדישים: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "אלו קדשים שולדותיהן ותמורותיהן כיוצא בהן. ולד שלמים. ותמורתן. וולדן וולד ולדן עד סוף העולם. הרי אלו כשלמים. וטעונים סמיכה ונסכים ותנופה וחזה ושוק. רבי אליעזר אומר ולד שלמים לא יקרב שלמים. וחכמים אומרים יקרב. אמר רבי שמעון לא נחלקו על ולד ולד שלמים. ועל ולד ולד תמורה שלא יקרב. ועל מה נחלקו. על הולד. שרבי אליעזר אומר לא יקרב. וחכמים אומרים יקרב. העיד רבי יהושע ורבי פפייס על ולד שלמים שיקרב שלמים אמר רבי פפייס אני מעיד שהיתה לנו פרה זבחי שלמים ואכלנוה בפסח. ואכלנו ולדה שלמים בחג: ",
+ "ולד תודה ותמורתה. ולדן וולד ולדן עד סוף העולם. הרי אלו כתודה. ובלבד שאינן טעונין לחם. תמורת עולה וולד תמורה. ולדן וולד ולדן עד סוף העולם. הרי אלו כעולה. וטעונין הפשט ונתוח וכליל לאשים: ",
+ "המפריש נקבה לעולה וילדה זכר. ירעה עד שיסתאב וימכר ויביא בדמיו עולה. רבי אליעזר אומר הוא עצמו יקרב עולה. המפריש נקבה לאשם. תרעה עד שתסתאב. ותמכר ויביא בדמיה אשם. אם קרב אשמו יפלו דמיה לנדבה. רבי שמעון אומר תמכר שלא במום. תמורת אשם ולד תמורתה. וולדן וולד ולדן עד סוף העולם. ירעו עד שיסתאבו וימכרו ויפלו דמיהן לנדבה. רבי אליעזר אומר ימותו. ורבי אלעזר אומר יביא בדמיה עולות. אשם שמתו בעליו ושכפרו בעליו ירעה עד שיסתאב. וימכר ויפלו דמיו לנדבה. רבי אליעזר אומר ימותו. רבי אלעזר אומר יביא בדמיהן עולות: ",
+ "והלא אף הנדבה עולה היא. מה בין דברי רבי אלעזר לדברי חכמים. אלא בזמן שהיא באה חובה. הוא סומך עליה ומביא עליה נסכין ונסכיה משלו. ואם היה כהן. עבודתה ועורה שלו. ובזמן שהיא באה נדבה. אינו סומך עליה ואינו מביא עליה נסכין. ונסכיה משל צבור. אף על פי שהוא כהן. עבודתה ועורה של אנשי משמר: ",
+ "תמורת הבכור והמעשר. וולדן וולד ולדן. עד סוף העולם. הרי אלו כבכור וכמעשר. ויאכלו במומם לבעלים. מה בין הבכור והמעשר לבין כל הקדשים. שכל הקדשים נמכרים באטליס. ונשחטין באטליס. ונשקלין בליטרא. חוץ מן הבכור ומן המעשר. ויש להן פדיון. ולתמורותיהן פדיון. חוץ מן הבכור ומן המעשר. ובאים מחוצה לארץ. חוץ מן הבכור ומן המעשר. אם באו תמימים יקרבו. ואם בעלי מומין יאכלו במומן לבעלים. אמר רבי שמעון מה הטעם. שהבכור והמעשר יש להן פרנסה במקומן. ושאר כל הקדשים. אף על פי שנולד לו מום. הרי אלו בקדושתן: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "ולד חטאת. ותמורת חטאת. וחטאת שמתו בעליה. ימותו. שעברה שנתה. ושאבדה ונמצאת בעלת מום. אם משכיפרו הבעליםתמות. ואינה עושה תמורה. לא נהנין. ולא מועלין. אם עד שלא כפרו הבעלים. תרעה עד שתסתאב. ותמכר ויביא בדמיה אחרת. ועושה תמורה. ומועלין בה: ",
+ "המפריש חטאתו ואבדה והקריב אחרת תחתיה. ואחר כך נמצאת הראשונה. תמות. המפריש מעות לחטאת. ואבדו והקריב חטאת תחתיהן. ואחר כך נמצאו המעות ילכו לים המלח: ",
+ "המפריש מעות לחטאתו ואבדו. והפריש מעות אחרים תחתיהן. לא הספיק ליקח בהן חטאת. עד שנמצאו המעות הראשונות. יביא מאלו ומאלו חטאת. והשאר יפלו לנדבה. המפריש מעות לחטאתו ואבדו. והפריש חטאת תחתיהן. לא הספיק להקריבה עד שנמצאו המעות. והרי חטאת בעלת מום. תמכר. ויביא מאלו ומאלו. חטאת. והשאר יפלו לנדבה. המפריש חטאתו ואבדה. והפריש מעות תחתיה. לא הספיק ליקח בהן חטאת. עד שנמצאת חטאתו והרי היא בעלת מום. תמכר ויביא מאלו ומאלו חטאת. והשאר יפלו לנדבה. המפריש חטאתו ואבדה. והפריש אחרת תחתיה. לא הספיק להקריבה. עד שנמצאת הראשונה. והרי שתיהן בעלת מום. ימכרו ויביא מאלו ומאלו חטאת. והשאר יפלו לנדבה. המפריש חטאתו ואבדה. והפריש אחרת תחתיה. לא הספיק להקריבה עד שנמצאת הראשונה. והרי שתיהן תמימות. אחת מהן יקרב חטאת. והשניה תמות. דברי רבי. וחכמים אומרים אין חטאת מתה. אלא שנמצאת מאחר שכפרו הבעלים. ואין המעות הולכות לים המלח אלא שנמצאו מאחר שכפרו הבעלים: ",
+ "המפריש חטאתו והרי היא בעלת מום. מוכרה ויביא בדמיה אחרת. רבי אליעזר ברבי שמעון אומר. אם קרבה השניה עד שלא נשחטה הראשונה. תמות. שכבר כפרו הבעלים: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "כיצד מערימים על הבכור. מבכרת שהיתה מעוברת. אומר מה שבמעיה של זו. אם זכר. עולה. ילדה זכר יקרב עולה. ואם נקבה. זבחי שלמים. ילדה נקבה תקרב שלמים. אם זכר עולה. אם נקבה זבחי שלמים ילדה זכר ונקבה. הזכר יקרב עולה והנקבה תקרב שלמים: ",
+ "ילדה שני זכרים אחד מהן יקרב עולה והשני ימכר לחייבי עולה. ודמיו חולין. ילדה שתי נקבות. אחת מהן תקרב שלמים. והשניה תמכר. לחייבי שלמים. ודמיה חולין. ילדה טומטום ואנדרוגינוס. רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר. אין קדושה חלה עליהן: ",
+ "האומר ולדה של זו עולה. והיא שלמים. דבריו קיימים. היא שלמים. וולדה עולה. הרי זו ולד שלמים דברי רבי מאיר. אמר רבי יוסי אם לכן נתכוין מתחלה. הואיל ואי אפשר לקרות שני שמות כאחת. דבריו קיימים. ואם משאמר הרי זו שלמים. נמלך ואמר ולדה עולה הרי זו ולד שלמים: ",
+ "הרי זו תמורת עולה ותמורת שלמים. הרי זו תמורת עולה. דברי רבי מאיר. אמר רבי יוסי אם לכן נתכוין מתחלה. הואיל ואי אפשר לקרות שני שמות כאחת. דבריו קיימין. ואם משאמר תמורת עולה נמלך ואמר תמורת שלמים. הרי זו תמורת עולה. ",
+ "הרי זו תחת זו. תמורת זו. חלופת זו. הרי זו תמורה. זו מחוללת על זו. אינו תמורה. ואם היה הקדש בעל מום. יוצא לחולין. וצריך לעשות דמים: ",
+ "הרי זו תחת חטאת ותחת עולה. לא אמר כלום. תחת חטאת זו ותחת עולה זו. תחת חטאת ותחת עולה שיש לו בתוך הבית. היה לו דבריו קיימין. אם אמר על בהמה טמאה ועל בעלת מום הרי אלו עולה. לא אמר כלום. הרי אלו לעולה. ימכרו ויביא בדמיהם עולה: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "כל האסורין על גבי המזבח. אוסרים כל שהן. הרובע. והנרבע והמוקצה והנעבד ואתנן ומחיר והכלאים והטרפה ויוצא דופן. איזה הוא מוקצה המוקצה לעבודה זרה הוא אסור ומה שעליו מותר. איזהו נעבד כל שעובדין אותו. הוא ומה שעליו אסור. זה וזה מותרין באכילה: ",
+ "איזהו אתנן האומר לזונה הא ליך טלה זה בשכרך. אפילו מאה כולן אסורין. וכן האומר לחברו הא לך טלה זה. ותלין שפחתך אצל עבדי. רבי אומר אינו אתנן. וחכמים אומרים אתנן: ",
+ "איזהו מחיר כלב. האומר לחבירו. הא לך טלה זה. תחת כלב זה. וכן שני שותפין שחלקו. אחד נטל עשרה ואחד נטל תשעה וכלב. שכנגד הכלב אסורים. שעם הכלב מותרים. אתנן כלב ומחיר זונה הרי אלו מותרים. שנאמר (דברים כג) שנים ולא ארבעה. ולדותיהן מותרים. שנאמר הן ולא ולדותיהן: ",
+ "נתן לה כספים. הרי אלו מותרין. יינות שמנים וסלתות. וכל דבר שכיוצא בו קרב על גבי מזבח. אסור. נתן לה מוקדשין. הרי אלו מותרין. עופות הרי אלו אסורין. שהיה בדין. מה אם המוקדשין שהמום פוסל בהם. אין אתנן ומחיר חל עליהם. עופות שאין המום פוסל בהן. אינו בדין שלא יהא אתנן ומחיר חל עליהן. תלמוד לומר (דברים כג). לכל נדר. להביא את העוף: ",
+ "כל האסורים על גבי המזבח. ולדותיהן מותרים. ולד טרפה. רבי אליעזר אומר לא יקרב על גבי המזבח. וחכמים אומרים יקרב. רבי חנינא בן אנטיגנוס אומר כשרה שינקה מן הטרפה. פסולה מעל גבי המזבח. כל הקדשים שנעשו טרפה. אין פודין אותם. שאין פודים את הקדשים. להאכילן לכלבים: "
+ ],
+ [
+ "יש בקדשי מזבח. מה שאין בקדשי בדק הבית. ויש בקדשי בדק הבית. מה שאין בקדשי מזבח. שקדשי מזבח עושים תמורה. וחייבין עליהם משום פגול. נותר. וטמא. ולדן וחלבן אסור לאחר פדיונם. והשוחטם בחוץ חייב. ואין נותנים מהם לאומנים בשכרן. מה שאין כן בקדשי בדק הבית: ",
+ "יש בקדשי בדק הבית. מה שאין בקדשי מזבח. שסתם הקדשות לבדק הבית. הקדש בדק הבית חל על הכל. ומועלין בגדוליהן. ואין בהם הנאה לכהנים: ",
+ "אחד קדשי מזבח. ואחד קדשי בדק הבית. אין משנין אותן מקדושה לקדושה. ומקדישין אותן הקדש עלוי. ומחרימין אותן. ואם מתו יקברו. רבי שמעון אומר. קדשי בדק הבית אם מתו יפדו: ",
+ "ואלו הן הנקברים. קדשים שהפילו יקברו. הפילה שליא תקבר. שור הנסקל. ועגלה ערופה. וצפורי מצורע. ושער נזיר. ופטר חמור. ובשר בחלב. וחולין שנשחטו בעזרה. רבי שמעון אומר חולין שנשחטו בעזרה ישרפו. וכן חיה שנשחטה בעזרה: ",
+ "ואלו הן הנשרפים. חמץ בפסח ישרף. ותרומה טמאה. והערלה וכלאי הכרם. את שדרכו לישרף ישרף. ואת שדרכו ליקבר יקבר. ומדליקין בפת ובשמן של תרומה. ",
+ "כל הקדשים שנשחטו חוץ לזמנן. וחוץ למקומן. הרי אלו ישרפו. אשם תלוי ישרף. רבי יהודה אומר יקבר. חטאת העוף הבאה על ספק. תשרף. רבי יהודה אומר יטילנה לאמה. כל הנשרפין לא יקברו. וכל הנקברים לא ישרפו. רבי יהודה אומר אם רצה להחמיר על עצמו. לשרוף את הנקברים רשאי. אמרו לו אינו מותר לשנות. "
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/Hebrew/Torat Emet 357.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/Hebrew/Torat Emet 357.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8cb62280c0b2e0b5b208a5ec6d411a4f177da76d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/Hebrew/Torat Emet 357.json
@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
+{
+ "language": "he",
+ "title": "Mishnah Temurah",
+ "versionSource": "http://www.toratemetfreeware.com/index.html?downloads",
+ "versionTitle": "Torat Emet 357",
+ "status": "locked",
+ "priority": 3.0,
+ "license": "Public Domain",
+ "versionTitleInHebrew": "תורת אמת 357",
+ "actualLanguage": "he",
+ "languageFamilyName": "hebrew",
+ "isBaseText": true,
+ "isSource": true,
+ "isPrimary": true,
+ "direction": "rtl",
+ "heTitle": "משנה תמורה",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "הַכֹּל מְמִירִים, אֶחָד אֲנָשִׁים וְאֶחָד נָשִׁים. לֹא שֶׁאָדָם רַשַּׁאי לְהָמִיר, אֶלָּא, שֶׁאִם הֵמִיר, מוּמָר, וְסוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים. הַכֹּהֲנִים מְמִירִים אֶת שֶׁלָּהֶם, וְיִשְׂרָאֵל מְמִירִים אֶת שֶׁלָּהֶם. אֵין הַכֹּהֲנִים מְמִירִים לֹא בְחַטָּאת וְלֹא בְאָשָׁם וְלֹא בִבְכוֹר. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי, וְכִי מִפְּנֵי מָה אֵין מְמִירִים בִּבְכוֹר. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם מַתָּנָה לַכֹּהֵן, וְהַבְּכוֹר מַתָּנָה לַכֹּהֵן. מַה חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם אֵין מְמִירִים בּוֹ, אַף הַבְּכוֹר לֹא יְמִירֶנּוּ בוֹ. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי, מַה לִּי אֵינוֹ מֵמִיר בְּחַטָּאת וּבְאָשָׁם, שֶׁאֵין זָכִין בָּהֶן בְּחַיֵּיהֶם. תֹּאמַר בִּבְכוֹר, שֶׁזָּכִין בּוֹ בְחַיָּיו. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, וַהֲלֹא כְבָר נֶאֱמַר, וְהָיָה הוּא וּתְמוּרָתוֹ יִהְיֶה קֹּדֶשׁ (ויקרא כז), הֵיכָן קְדֻשָּׁה חָלָה עָלָיו, בְּבֵית הַבְּעָלִים, אַף תְּמוּרָה בְּבֵית הַבְּעָלִים: \n",
+ "מְמִירִין מִן הַבָּקָר עַל הַצֹּאן וּמִן הַצֹּאן עַל הַבָּקָר, מִן הַכְּבָשִׂים עַל הָעִזִּים וּמִן הָעִזִּים עַל הַכְּבָשִׂים, מִן הַזְּכָרִים עַל הַנְּקֵבוֹת וּמִן הַנְּקֵבוֹת עַל הַזְּכָרִים, מִן הַתְּמִימִים עַל בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין וּמִבַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין עַל הַתְּמִימִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), לֹא יַחֲלִיפֶנּוּ וְלֹא יָמִיר אֹתוֹ טוֹב בְּרָע אוֹ רַע בְּטוֹב. אֵיזֶהוּ טוֹב בְּרָע, בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין שֶׁקָּדַם הֶקְדֵּשָׁן אֶת מוּמָם. מְמִירִים אֶחָד בִּשְׁנַיִם וּשְׁנַיִם בְּאֶחָד, אֶחָד בְּמֵאָה וּמֵאָה בְּאֶחָד. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, אֵין מְמִירִים אֶלָּא אֶחָד בְּאֶחָד, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כז), וְהָיָה הוּא וּתְמוּרָתוֹ, מַה הוּא מְיֻחָד, אַף תְּמוּרָתוֹ מְיֻחָדֶת: \n",
+ "אֵין מְמִירִין אֵבָרִים בְּעֻבָּרִים וְלֹא עֻבָּרִים בְּאֵבָרִים, וְלֹא אֵבָרִים וְעֻבָּרִים בִּשְׁלֵמִים וְלֹא שְׁלֵמִים בָּהֶן. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, מְמִירִים אֵבָרִין בִּשְׁלֵמִים וְלֹא שְׁלֵמִים בְּאֵבָרִין. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, וַהֲלֹא בְמֻקְדָּשִׁין, הָאוֹמֵר רַגְלָהּ שֶׁל זוֹ עוֹלָה, כֻּלָּהּ עוֹלָה, אַף כְּשֶׁיֹּאמַר רַגְלָהּ שֶׁל זוֹ תַּחַת זוֹ, תְּהֵא כֻלָּהּ תְּמוּרָה תַּחְתֶּיהָ: \n",
+ "אֵין הַמְדֻמָּע מְדַּמֵּעַ אֶלָּא לְפִי חֶשְׁבּוֹן. אֵין הַמְחֻמָּץ מְחַמֵּץ אֶלָּא לְפִי חֶשְׁבּוֹן. אֵין הַמַּיִם הַשְּׁאוּבִים פּוֹסְלִין אֶת הַמִּקְוֶה אֶלָּא לְפִי חֶשְׁבּוֹן: \n",
+ "אֵין מֵי חַטָּאת נַעֲשִׂין מֵי חַטָּאת אֶלָּא עִם מַתַּן אֵפֶר. אֵין בֵּית הַפְּרָס עוֹשֶׂה בֵית הַפְּרָס, וְלֹא תְרוּמָה אַחַר תְּרוּמָה, וְלֹא תְמוּרָה עוֹשָׂה תְמוּרָה, וְלֹא הַוָּלָד עוֹשֶׂה תְמוּרָה. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, הַוָּלָד עוֹשֶׂה תְמוּרָה. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, הֶקְדֵּשׁ עוֹשֶׂה תְמוּרָה, לֹא הַוָּלָד וְלֹא תְמוּרָה עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה: \n",
+ "הָעוֹפוֹת וְהַמְּנָחוֹת אֵינָן עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה, שֶׁלֹּא נֶאֱמַר אֶלָּא (ויקרא כז) בִּבְהֵמָה. הַצִּבּוּר וְהַשֻּׁתָּפִים אֵינָן עוֹשִׂים תְּמוּרָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), לֹא יָמִיר אֹתוֹ, יָחִיד עוֹשֶׂה תְמוּרָה, לֹא הַצִּבּוּר וְלֹא הַשֻּׁתָּפִים עוֹשִׂים תְּמוּרָה. קָרְבְּנוֹת בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת אֵינָן עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, וַהֲלֹא הַמַּעֲשֵׂר בַּכְּלָל הָיָה, וְלָמָּה יָצָא, לְהָקִישׁ אֵלָיו, מַה מַּעֲשֵׂר קָרְבַּן יָחִיד, יָצְאוּ קָרְבְּנוֹת צִבּוּר. מַה מַּעֲשֵׂר קָרְבַּן מִזְבֵּחַ, יָצְאוּ קָרְבְּנוֹת בֶּדֶק הַבָּיִת: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "יֵשׁ בְּקָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד מַה שֶּׁאֵין בְּקָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר, וְיֵשׁ בְּקָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר מַה שֶּׁאֵין בְּקָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד. שֶׁקָּרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד עוֹשִׂים תְּמוּרָה, וְקָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר אֵינָם עוֹשִׂים תְּמוּרָה. קָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד נוֹהֲגִין בִּזְכָרִים וּבִנְקֵבוֹת, וְקָרְבְּנוֹת צִבּוּר אֵינָן נוֹהֲגִין אֶלָּא בִזְכָרִים. קָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד חַיָּבִין בְּאַחֲרָיוּתָן וּבְאַחֲרָיוּת נִסְכֵּיהֶם, וְקָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר אֵין חַיָּבִין לֹא בְאַחֲרָיוּתָן וְלֹא בְאַחֲרָיוּת נִסְכֵּיהֶן, אֲבָל חַיָּבִין בְּאַחֲרָיוּת נִסְכֵּיהֶן מִשֶּׁקָּרַב הַזָּבַח. יֵשׁ בְּקָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר מַה שֶּׁאֵין בְּקָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד. שֶׁקָּרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר דּוֹחִין אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת וְאֶת הַטֻּמְאָה, וְקָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד אֵינָן דּוֹחִים לֹא אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת וְלֹא אֶת הַטֻּמְאָה. אָמַר רַבִּי מֵאִיר, וַהֲלֹא חֲבִתֵּי כֹהֵן גָּדוֹל וּפַר יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, קָרְבַּן יָחִיד וְדוֹחִין אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת וְאֶת הַטֻּמְאָה. אֶלָּא שֶׁזְּמַנָּן קָבוּעַ: \n",
+ "חַטָּאת הַיָּחִיד שֶׁכִּפְּרוּ בְעָלָיו, מֵתוֹת. וְשֶׁל צִבּוּר, אֵינָן מֵתוֹת. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, יָמוּתוּ. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, מַה מָּצִינוּ בִּוְלַד חַטָּאת וּבִתְמוּרַת חַטָּאת וּבְחַטָּאת שֶׁמֵּתוּ בְעָלֶיהָ, בְּיָחִיד דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים אֲבָל לֹא בְצִבּוּר, אַף שֶׁכִּפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים וְשֶׁעָבְרָה שְׁנָתָן, בְּיָחִיד דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים אֲבָל לֹא בְצִבּוּר: \n",
+ "חֹמֶר בְּקָדָשִׁים מִבִּתְמוּרָה וּבִתְמוּרָה מִבְּקָדָשִׁים. שֶׁהַקֳּדָשִׁים עוֹשִׂים תְּמוּרָה וְאֵין תְּמוּרָה עוֹשָׂה תְמוּרָה. הַצִּבּוּר וְהַשֻּׁתָּפִין מַקְדִּישִׁים, אֲבָל לֹא מְמִירִים. וּמַקְדִּישִׁים אֵבָרִים וְעֻבָּרִים, אֲבָל לֹא מְמִירִים. חֹמֶר בִּתְמוּרָה, שֶׁהַקְּדֻשָּׁה חָלָה עַל בַּעֲלַת מוּם קָבוּעַ, וְאֵינָהּ יוֹצְאָה לְחֻלִּין לְהִגָּזֵז וּלְהֵעָבֵד. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, עָשָׂה שׁוֹגֵג כְּמֵזִיד בַּתְּמוּרָה, וְלֹא עָשָׂה שׁוֹגֵג כְּמֵזִיד בַּמֻּקְדָּשִׁים. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר, הַכִּלְאַיִם, וְהַטְּרֵפָה, וְיוֹצֵא דֹפֶן, טֻמְטוּם, וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוֹס, לֹא קְדֵשִׁים וְלֹא מַקְדִּישִׁים: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "אֵלּוּ קָדָשִׁים שֶׁוַּלְדוֹתֵיהֶן וּתְמוּרוֹתֵיהֶן כַּיּוֹצֵא בָהֶן. וְלַד שְׁלָמִים, וּתְמוּרָתָן, וּוְלָדָן, וּוְלַד וְלָדָן עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כִשְׁלָמִים, וּטְעוּנִים סְמִיכָה וּנְסָכִים וּתְנוּפָה וְחָזֶה וָשׁוֹק. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, וְלַד שְׁלָמִים לֹא יִקְרַב שְׁלָמִים. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, יִקְרָב. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ עַל וְלַד וְלַד שְׁלָמִים וְעַל וְלַד וְלַד תְּמוּרָה, שֶׁלֹּא יִקְרַב. וְעַל מַה נֶּחְלְקוּ, עַל הַוָּלָד, שֶׁרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, לֹא יִקְרַב, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, יִקְרָב. הֵעִיד רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ וְרַבִּי פַּפְּיַס עַל וְלַד שְׁלָמִים, שֶׁיִּקְרַב שְׁלָמִים. אָמַר רַבִּי פַּפְּיַס, אֲנִי מֵעִיד, שֶׁהָיְתָה לָנוּ פָרָה זִבְחֵי שְׁלָמִים, וַאֲכַלְנוּהָ בְפֶסַח, וְאָכַלְנוּ וְלָדָהּ שְׁלָמִים בֶּחָג: \n",
+ "וְלַד תּוֹדָה וּתְמוּרָתָהּ, וְלָדָן וּוְלַד וְלָדָן עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כְתוֹדָה, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁאֵינָן טְעוּנִין לָחֶם. תְּמוּרַת עוֹלָה, וּוְלַד תְּמוּרָה, וְלָדָן וּוְלַד וְלָדָן עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כְעוֹלָה, וּטְעוּנִין הֶפְשֵׁט וְנִתּוּחַ וְכָלִיל לָאִשִּׁים: \n",
+ "הַמַּפְרִישׁ נְקֵבָה לְעוֹלָה וְיָלְדָה זָכָר, יִרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֵב וְיִמָּכֵר וְיָבִיא בְדָמָיו עוֹלָה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, הוּא עַצְמוֹ יִקְרַב עוֹלָה. הַמַּפְרִישׁ נְקֵבָה לְאָשָׁם, תִּרְעֶה עַד שֶׁתִּסְתָּאֵב, וְתִמָּכֵר, וְיָבִיא בְדָמֶיהָ אָשָׁם. אִם קָרַב אֲשָׁמוֹ, יִפְּלוּ דָמֶיהָ לִנְדָבָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, תִּמָּכֵר שֶׁלֹּא בְמוּם. תְּמוּרַת אָשָׁם, וְלַד תְּמוּרָתָהּ וּוְלָדָן וּוְלַד וְלָדָן עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, יִרְעוּ עַד שֶּׁיִּסְתָּאֲבוּ, וְיִמָּכְרוּ, וְיִפְּלוּ דְמֵיהֶן לִנְדָבָה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, יָמוּתוּ. וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר, יָבִיא בִדְמֵיהֶן עוֹלוֹת. אָשָׁם שֶׁמֵּתוּ בְעָלָיו, וְשֶׁכִּפְּרוּ בְעָלָיו, יִרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֵב, וְיִמָּכֵר, וְיִפְּלוּ דָמָיו לִנְדָבָה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, יָמוּתוּ. וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר, יָבִיא בִדְמֵיהֶן עוֹלוֹת: \n",
+ "וַהֲלֹא אַף הַנְּדָבָה עוֹלָה הִיא. מַה בֵּין דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר לְדִבְרֵי חֲכָמִים. אֶלָּא, בִּזְמַן שֶׁהִיא בָאָה חוֹבָה, הוּא סוֹמֵךְ עָלֶיהָ וּמֵבִיא עָלֶיהָ נְסָכִין, וּנְסָכֶיהָ מִשֶּׁלּוֹ. וְאִם הָיָה כֹהֵן, עֲבוֹדָתָהּ וְעוֹרָהּ שֶׁלּוֹ. וּבִזְמַן שֶׁהִיא בָאָה נְדָבָה, אֵינוֹ סוֹמֵךְ עָלֶיהָ וְאֵינוֹ מֵבִיא עָלֶיהָ נְסָכִין, וּנְסָכֶיהָ מִשֶּׁל צִבּוּר. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא כֹהֵן, עֲבוֹדָתָהּ וְעוֹרָהּ שֶׁל אַנְשֵׁי מִשְׁמָר: \n",
+ "תְּמוּרַת הַבְּכוֹר וְהַמַּעֲשֵׂר, וּוְלָדָן, וּוְלַד וְלָדָן עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כִבְכוֹר וּכְמַעֲשֵׂר, וְיֵאָכְלוּ בְמוּמָם לַבְּעָלִים. מַה בֵּין הַבְּכוֹר וְהַמַּעֲשֵׂר לְבֵין כָּל הַקֳּדָשִׁים. שֶׁכָּל הַקֳּדָשִׁים נִמְכָּרִים בְּאִטְלִיס וְנִשְׁחָטִין בְּאִטְלִיס וְנִשְׁקָלִין בְּלִטְרָא, חוּץ מִן הַבְּכוֹר וּמִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר. וְיֵשׁ לָהֶן פִּדְיוֹן, וְלִתְמוּרוֹתֵיהֶן פִּדְיוֹן, חוּץ מִן הַבְּכוֹר וּמִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר. וּבָאִים מֵחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ, חוּץ מִן הַבְּכוֹר וּמִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר. אִם בָּאוּ תְמִימִים, יִקְרְבוּ. וְאִם בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין, יֵאָכְלוּ בְמוּמָן לַבְּעָלִים. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, מַה הַטַּעַם. שֶׁהַבְּכוֹר וְהַמַּעֲשֵׂר יֵשׁ לָהֶן פַּרְנָסָה בִמְקוֹמָן, וּשְׁאָר כָּל הַקֳּדָשִׁים אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנּוֹלַד לָהֶם מוּם, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ בִקְדֻשָּׁתָן: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "וְלַד חַטָּאת, וּתְמוּרַת חַטָּאת, וְחַטָּאת שֶׁמֵּתוּ בְעָלֶיהָ, יָמוּתוּ. שֶׁעָבְרָה שְׁנָתָהּ וְשֶׁאָבְדָה וְנִמְצֵאת בַּעֲלַת מוּם, אִם מִשֶּׁכִּפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים, תָּמוּת, וְאֵינָהּ עוֹשָׂה תְמוּרָה, לֹא נֶהֱנִין, וְלֹא מוֹעֲלִין. אִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא כִפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים, תִּרְעֶה עַד שֶׁתִּסְתָּאֵב, וְתִמָּכֵר, וְיָבִיא בְדָמֶיהָ אַחֶרֶת, וְעוֹשָׂה תְמוּרָה, וּמוֹעֲלִין בָּהּ: \n",
+ "הַמַּפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבְדָה, וְהִקְרִיב אַחֶרֶת תַּחְתֶּיהָ, וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִמְצֵאת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, תָּמוּת. הַמַּפְרִישׁ מָעוֹת לְחַטָּאת וְאָבְדוּ, וְהִקְרִיב חַטָּאת תַּחְתֵּיהֶן, וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִמְצְאוּ הַמָּעוֹת, יֵלְכוּ לְיַם הַמֶּלַח: \n",
+ "הַמַּפְרִישׁ מָעוֹת לְחַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבְדוּ, וְהִפְרִישׁ מָעוֹת אֲחֵרִים תַּחְתֵּיהֶן, לֹא הִסְפִּיק לִקַּח בָּהֶן חַטָּאת עַד שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ הַמָּעוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת, יָבִיא מֵאֵלּוּ וּמֵאֵלּוּ חַטָּאת, וְהַשְּׁאָר יִפְּלוּ לִנְדָבָה. הַמַּפְרִישׁ מָעוֹת לְחַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבְדוּ, וְהִפְרִישׁ חַטָּאת תַּחְתֵּיהֶן, לֹא הִסְפִּיק לְהַקְרִיבָהּ עַד שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ הַמָּעוֹת, וַהֲרֵי חַטָּאת בַּעֲלַת מוּם, תִּמָּכֵר, וְיָבִיא מֵאֵלּוּ וּמֵאֵלּוּ חַטָּאת, וְהַשְּׁאָר יִפְּלוּ לִנְדָבָה. הַמַּפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבְדָה, וְהִפְרִישׁ מָעוֹת תַּחְתֶּיהָ, לֹא הִסְפִּיק לִקַּח בָּהֶן חַטָּאת עַד שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת חַטָּאתוֹ, וַהֲרֵי הִיא בַעֲלַת מוּם, תִּמָּכֵר וְיָבִיא מֵאֵלּוּ וּמֵאֵלּוּ חַטָּאת, וְהַשְּׁאָר יִפְּלוּ לִנְדָבָה. הַמַּפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבְדָה, וְהִפְרִישׁ אַחֶרֶת תַּחְתֶּיהָ, לֹא הִסְפִּיק לְהַקְרִיבָהּ עַד שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, וַהֲרֵי שְׁתֵּיהֶן בַּעֲלוֹת מוּם, יִמָּכְרוּ, וְיָבִיא מֵאֵלּוּ וּמֵאֵלּוּ חַטָּאת, וְהַשְּׁאָר יִפְּלוּ לִנְדָבָה. הַמַּפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבְדָה, וְהִפְרִישׁ אַחֶרֶת תַּחְתֶּיהָ, לֹא הִסְפִּיק לְהַקְרִיבָהּ עַד שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, וַהֲרֵי שְׁתֵּיהֶן תְּמִימוֹת, אַחַת מֵהֶן תִּקְרַב חַטָּאת וְהַשְּׁנִיָּה תָּמוּת, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אֵין חַטָּאת מֵתָה אֶלָּא שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת מֵאַחַר שֶׁכִּפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים, וְאֵין הַמָּעוֹת הוֹלְכוֹת לְיַם הַמֶּלַח אֶלָּא שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ מֵאַחַר שֶׁכִּפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים: \n",
+ "הַמַּפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ, וַהֲרֵי הִיא בַעֲלַת מוּם, מוֹכְרָהּ וְיָבִיא בְדָמֶיהָ אַחֶרֶת. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, אִם קָרְבָה הַשְּׁנִיָּה עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁחֲטָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, תָּמוּת, שֶׁכְּבָר כִּפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "כֵּיצַד מַעֲרִימִים עַל הַבְּכוֹר. מְבַכֶּרֶת שֶׁהָיְתָה מְעֻבֶּרֶת, אוֹמֵר, מַה שֶּׁבְּמֵעֶיהָ שֶׁל זוֹ, אִם זָכָר, עוֹלָה, יָלְדָה זָכָר, יִקְרַב עוֹלָה. וְאִם נְקֵבָה, זִבְחֵי שְׁלָמִים, יָלְדָה נְקֵבָה, תִּקְרַב שְׁלָמִים. אִם זָכָר עוֹלָה, אִם נְקֵבָה זִבְחֵי שְׁלָמִים, יָלְדָה זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה, הַזָּכָר יִקְרַב עוֹלָה, וְהַנְּקֵבָה תִּקְרַב שְׁלָמִים: \n",
+ "יָלְדָה שְׁנֵי זְכָרִים, אַחַד מֵהֶן יִקְרַב עוֹלָה, וְהַשֵּׁנִי יִמָּכֵר לְחַיָּבֵי עוֹלָה, וְדָמָיו חֻלִּין. יָלְדָה שְׁתֵּי נְקֵבוֹת, אַחַת מֵהֶן תִּקְרַב שְׁלָמִים, וְהַשְּׁנִיָּה תִּמָּכֵר לְחַיָּבֵי שְׁלָמִים, וְדָמֶיהָ חֻלִּין. יָלְדָה טֻמְטוּם וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוֹס, רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, אֵין קְדֻשָּׁה חָלָה עֲלֵיהֶן: \n",
+ "הָאוֹמֵר, וְלָדָהּ שֶׁל זוֹ עוֹלָה וְהִיא שְׁלָמִים, דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִים. הִיא שְׁלָמִים וּוְלָדָהּ עוֹלָה, הֲרֵי זוֹ וְלַד שְׁלָמִים, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, אִם לְכֵן נִתְכַּוֵּן מִתְּחִלָּה, הוֹאִיל וְאִי אֶפְשָׁר לִקְרוֹת שְׁנֵי שֵׁמוֹת כְּאַחַת, דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִים. וְאִם מִשֶּׁאָמַר הֲרֵי זוֹ שְׁלָמִים, נִמְלַךְ וְאָמַר וְלָדָהּ עוֹלָה, הֲרֵי זוֹ וְלַד שְׁלָמִים: \n",
+ "הֲרֵי זוֹ תְמוּרַת עוֹלָה וּתְמוּרַת שְׁלָמִים, הֲרֵי זוֹ תְמוּרַת עוֹלָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, אִם לְכֵן נִתְכַּוֵּן מִתְּחִלָּה, הוֹאִיל וְאִי אֶפְשָׁר לִקְרוֹת שְׁנֵי שֵׁמוֹת כְּאַחַת, דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִין. וְאִם מִשֶּׁאָמַר תְּמוּרַת עוֹלָה, נִמְלַךְ וְאָמַר, תְּמוּרַת שְׁלָמִים, הֲרֵי זוֹ תְמוּרַת עוֹלָה: \n",
+ "הֲרֵי זוֹ תַחַת זוֹ, תְּמוּרַת זוֹ, חֲלוּפַת זוֹ, הֲרֵי זוֹ תְמוּרָה. זוֹ מְחֻלֶּלֶת עַל זוֹ, אֵינוֹ תְמוּרָה. וְאִם הָיָה הֶקְדֵּשׁ בַּעַל מוּם, יוֹצֵא לְחֻלִּין וְצָרִיךְ לַעֲשׂוֹת דָּמִים: \n",
+ "הֲרֵי זוֹ תַחַת חַטָּאת, וְתַחַת עוֹלָה, לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. תַּחַת חַטָּאת זוֹ, וְתַחַת עוֹלָה זוֹ, תַּחַת חַטָּאת וְתַחַת עוֹלָה שֶׁיֶּשׁ לִי בְתוֹךְ הַבָּיִת, הָיָה לוֹ, דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִין. אִם אָמַר עַל בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה, וְעַל בַּעֲלַת מוּם, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ עוֹלָה, לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ לְעוֹלָה, יִמָּכְרוּ וְיָבִיא בִדְמֵיהֶם עוֹלָה: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "כָּל הָאֲסוּרִין עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, אוֹסְרִים כָּל שֶׁהֵן. הָרוֹבֵעַ, וְהַנִּרְבָּע, וְהַמֻּקְצֶה, וְהַנֶּעֱבָד, וְאֶתְנָן, וּמְחִיר, וְהַכִּלְאַיִם, וְהַטְּרֵפָה, וְיוֹצֵא דֹפֶן. אֵיזֶה הוּא מֻקְצֶה. הַמֻּקְצֶה לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. הוּא אָסוּר, וּמַה שֶּׁעָלָיו מֻתָּר. אֵיזֶהוּ נֶעֱבָד. כֹּל שֶׁעוֹבְדִין אוֹתוֹ. הוּא וּמַה שֶּׁעָלָיו אָסוּר. זֶה וָזֶה מֻתָּרִין בַּאֲכִילָה: \n",
+ "אֵיזֶהוּ אֶתְנָן. הָאוֹמֵר לְזוֹנָה, הֵא לִיךְ טָלֶה זֶה בִשְׂכָרֵךְ, אֲפִלּוּ מֵאָה, כֻּלָּן אֲסוּרִין. וְכֵן הָאוֹמֵר לַחֲבֵרוֹ, הֵא לְךָ טָלֶה זֶה וְתָלִין שִׁפְחָתְךָ אֵצֶל עַבְדִּי, רַבִּי אוֹמֵר, אֵינוֹ אֶתְנָן. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אֶתְנָן: \n",
+ "אֵיזֶה הוּא מְחִיר כֶּלֶב. הָאוֹמֵר לַחֲבֵרוֹ, הֵא לְךָ טָלֶה זֶה תַּחַת כֶּלֶב זֶה. וְכֵן שְׁנֵי שֻׁתָּפִין שֶׁחָלְקוּ, אֶחָד נָטַל עֲשָׂרָה, וְאֶחָד נָטַל תִּשְׁעָה וָכֶלֶב, שֶׁכְּנֶגֶד הַכֶּלֶב, אֲסוּרִים, שֶׁעִם הַכֶּלֶב, מֻתָּרִים. אֶתְנַן כֶּלֶב וּמְחִיר זוֹנָה, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מֻתָּרִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כג), שְׁנַיִם, וְלֹא אַרְבָּעָה. וַלְדוֹתֵיהֶן מֻתָּרִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם) הֵן, וְלֹא וַלְדוֹתֵיהֶן: \n",
+ "נָתַן לָהּ כְּסָפִים, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מֻתָּרִין. יֵינוֹת, שְׁמָנִים, וּסְלָתוֹת, וְכָל דָּבָר שֶׁכַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ קָרֵב עַל גַּבֵּי מִזְבֵּחַ, אָסוּר. נָתַן לָהּ מֻקְדָּשִׁין, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מֻתָּרִין. עוֹפוֹת, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ אֲסוּרִין. שֶׁהָיָה בַדִּין, מָה אִם הַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין, שֶׁהַמּוּם פּוֹסֵל בָּהֶם, אֵין אֶתְנָן וּמְחִיר חָל עֲלֵיהֶם, עוֹפוֹת, שֶׁאֵין הַמּוּם פּוֹסֵל בָּהֶן, אֵינוֹ בַדִּין שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא אֶתְנָן וּמְחִיר חָל עֲלֵיהֶן. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (שם), לְכָל נֶדֶר, לְהָבִיא אֶת הָעוֹף: \n",
+ "כָּל הָאֲסוּרִים עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, וַלְדוֹתֵיהֶן מֻתָּרִים. וְלַד טְרֵפָה, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, לֹא יִקְרַב עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, יִקְרָב. רַבִּי חֲנִינָא בֶן אַנְטִיגְנוֹס אוֹמֵר, כְּשֵׁרָה שֶׁיָּנְקָה מִן הַטְּרֵפָה, פְּסוּלָה מֵעַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. כָּל הַקֳּדָשִׁים שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ טְרֵפָה, אֵין פּוֹדִים אוֹתָם, שֶׁאֵין פּוֹדִים אֶת הַקֳּדָשִׁים לְהַאֲכִילָן לִכְלָבִים: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "יֵשׁ בְּקָדְשֵׁי מִזְבֵּחַ מַה שֶׁאֵין בְּקָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת. וְיֵשׁ בְּקָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת מַה שֶּׁאֵין בְּקָדְשֵׁי מִזְבֵּחַ. שֶׁקָּדְשֵׁי מִזְבֵּחַ עוֹשִׂים תְּמוּרָה, וְחַיָּבִין עֲלֵיהֶם מִשּׁוּם פִּגּוּל, נוֹתָר, וְטָמֵא, וְלָדָן וַחֲלָבָן אָסוּר לְאַחַר פִּדְיוֹנָם, וְהַשׁוֹחֲטָם בַּחוּץ חַיָּב, וְאֵין נוֹתְנִין מֵהֶם לָאֻמָּנִים בִּשְׂכָרָן, מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בְּקָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבָּיִת: \n",
+ "יֵשׁ בְּקָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת מַה שֶּׁאֵין בְּקָדְשֵׁי מִזְבֵּחַ, שֶׁסְּתָם הֶקְדֵּשׁוֹת לְבֶדֶק הַבָּיִת. הֶקְדֵּשׁ בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת חָל עַל הַכֹּל, וּמוֹעֲלִין בְּגִדּוּלֵיהֶן, וְאֵין בָּהֶם הֲנָאָה לְכֹהֲנִים: \n",
+ "אֶחָד קָדְשֵׁי מִזְבֵּחַ וְאֶחָד קָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת, אֵין מְשַׁנִּין אוֹתָן מִקְּדֻשָּׁה לִקְדֻשָּׁה, וּמַקְדִּישִׁין אוֹתָן הֶקְדֵּשׁ עִלּוּי, וּמַחֲרִימִין אוֹתָן. וְאִם מֵתוּ, יִקָּבְרוּ. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, קָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת, אִם מֵתוּ, יִפָּדוּ: \n",
+ "וְאֵלּוּ הֵן הַנִּקְבָּרִים. קָדָשִׁים שֶׁהִפִּילוּ, יִקָּבְרוּ. הִפִּילָה שִׁלְיָא, תִּקָּבֵר. שׁוֹר הַנִּסְקָל, וְעֶגְלָה עֲרוּפָה, וְצִפֳּרֵי מְצֹרָע, וּשְׂעַר נָזִיר, וּפֶטֶר חֲמוֹר, וּבָשָׂר בְּחָלָב, וְחֻלִּין שֶׁנִּשְׁחֲטוּ בָעֲזָרָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, חֻלִּין שֶׁנִּשְׁחֲטוּ בָעֲזָרָה, יִשָּׂרְפוּ, וְכֵן חַיָּה שֶׁנִּשְׁחֲטָה בָעֲזָרָה: \n",
+ "וְאֵלּוּ הֵן הַנִּשְׂרָפִים. חָמֵץ בְּפֶסַח, יִשָּׂרֵף. וּתְרוּמָה טְמֵאָה, וְהָעָרְלָה, וְכִלְאֵי הַכֶּרֶם, אֶת שֶׁדַּרְכּוֹ לִשָּׂרֵף, יִשָּׂרֵף. וְאֶת שֶׁדַּרְכּוֹ לִקָּבֵר, יִקָּבֵר. וּמַדְלִיקִין בְּפַת וּבְשֶׁמֶן שֶׁל תְּרוּמָה: \n",
+ "כָּל הַקֳּדָשִׁים שֶׁנִּשְׁחֲטוּ חוּץ לִזְמַנָּן וְחוּץ לִמְקוֹמָן, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ יִשָּׂרְפוּ. אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, יִשָּׂרֵף. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, יִקָּבֵר. חַטַּאת הָעוֹף הַבָּאָה עַל סָפֵק, תִּשָּׂרֵף. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, יְטִילֶנָּה לָאַמָּה. כָּל הַנִּשְׂרָפִין לֹא יִקָּבְרוּ, וְכָל הַנִּקְבָּרִים לֹא יִשָּׂרְפוּ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אִם רָצָה לְהַחֲמִיר עַל עַצְמוֹ לִשְׂרֹף אֶת הַנִּקְבָּרִים, רַשַּׁאי. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, אֵינוֹ מֻתָּר לְשַׁנּוֹת: \n"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/Hebrew/merged.json b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/Hebrew/merged.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..eca4b4b880734de750c18ceff2bf8517782c7ed4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/json/Mishnah/Seder Kodashim/Mishnah Temurah/Hebrew/merged.json
@@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
+{
+ "title": "Mishnah Temurah",
+ "language": "he",
+ "versionTitle": "merged",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org/Mishnah_Temurah",
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "הַכֹּל מְמִירִים, אֶחָד אֲנָשִׁים וְאֶחָד נָשִׁים. לֹא שֶׁאָדָם רַשַּׁאי לְהָמִיר, אֶלָּא, שֶׁאִם הֵמִיר, מוּמָר, וְסוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים. הַכֹּהֲנִים מְמִירִים אֶת שֶׁלָּהֶם, וְיִשְׂרָאֵל מְמִירִים אֶת שֶׁלָּהֶם. אֵין הַכֹּהֲנִים מְמִירִים לֹא בְחַטָּאת וְלֹא בְאָשָׁם וְלֹא בִבְכוֹר. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי, וְכִי מִפְּנֵי מָה אֵין מְמִירִים בִּבְכוֹר. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם מַתָּנָה לַכֹּהֵן, וְהַבְּכוֹר מַתָּנָה לַכֹּהֵן. מַה חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם אֵין מְמִירִים בּוֹ, אַף הַבְּכוֹר לֹא יְמִירֶנּוּ בוֹ. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי, מַה לִּי אֵינוֹ מֵמִיר בְּחַטָּאת וּבְאָשָׁם, שֶׁאֵין זָכִין בָּהֶן בְּחַיֵּיהֶם. תֹּאמַר בִּבְכוֹר, שֶׁזָּכִין בּוֹ בְחַיָּיו. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, וַהֲלֹא כְבָר נֶאֱמַר, וְהָיָה הוּא וּתְמוּרָתוֹ יִהְיֶה קֹּדֶשׁ (ויקרא כז), הֵיכָן קְדֻשָּׁה חָלָה עָלָיו, בְּבֵית הַבְּעָלִים, אַף תְּמוּרָה בְּבֵית הַבְּעָלִים: \n",
+ "מְמִירִין מִן הַבָּקָר עַל הַצֹּאן וּמִן הַצֹּאן עַל הַבָּקָר, מִן הַכְּבָשִׂים עַל הָעִזִּים וּמִן הָעִזִּים עַל הַכְּבָשִׂים, מִן הַזְּכָרִים עַל הַנְּקֵבוֹת וּמִן הַנְּקֵבוֹת עַל הַזְּכָרִים, מִן הַתְּמִימִים עַל בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין וּמִבַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין עַל הַתְּמִימִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), לֹא יַחֲלִיפֶנּוּ וְלֹא יָמִיר אֹתוֹ טוֹב בְּרָע אוֹ רַע בְּטוֹב. אֵיזֶהוּ טוֹב בְּרָע, בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין שֶׁקָּדַם הֶקְדֵּשָׁן אֶת מוּמָם. מְמִירִים אֶחָד בִּשְׁנַיִם וּשְׁנַיִם בְּאֶחָד, אֶחָד בְּמֵאָה וּמֵאָה בְּאֶחָד. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, אֵין מְמִירִים אֶלָּא אֶחָד בְּאֶחָד, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כז), וְהָיָה הוּא וּתְמוּרָתוֹ, מַה הוּא מְיֻחָד, אַף תְּמוּרָתוֹ מְיֻחָדֶת: \n",
+ "אֵין מְמִירִין אֵבָרִים בְּעֻבָּרִים וְלֹא עֻבָּרִים בְּאֵבָרִים, וְלֹא אֵבָרִים וְעֻבָּרִים בִּשְׁלֵמִים וְלֹא שְׁלֵמִים בָּהֶן. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, מְמִירִים אֵבָרִין בִּשְׁלֵמִים וְלֹא שְׁלֵמִים בְּאֵבָרִין. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, וַהֲלֹא בְמֻקְדָּשִׁין, הָאוֹמֵר רַגְלָהּ שֶׁל זוֹ עוֹלָה, כֻּלָּהּ עוֹלָה, אַף כְּשֶׁיֹּאמַר רַגְלָהּ שֶׁל זוֹ תַּחַת זוֹ, תְּהֵא כֻלָּהּ תְּמוּרָה תַּחְתֶּיהָ: \n",
+ "אֵין הַמְדֻמָּע מְדַּמֵּעַ אֶלָּא לְפִי חֶשְׁבּוֹן. אֵין הַמְחֻמָּץ מְחַמֵּץ אֶלָּא לְפִי חֶשְׁבּוֹן. אֵין הַמַּיִם הַשְּׁאוּבִים פּוֹסְלִין אֶת הַמִּקְוֶה אֶלָּא לְפִי חֶשְׁבּוֹן: \n",
+ "אֵין מֵי חַטָּאת נַעֲשִׂין מֵי חַטָּאת אֶלָּא עִם מַתַּן אֵפֶר. אֵין בֵּית הַפְּרָס עוֹשֶׂה בֵית הַפְּרָס, וְלֹא תְרוּמָה אַחַר תְּרוּמָה, וְלֹא תְמוּרָה עוֹשָׂה תְמוּרָה, וְלֹא הַוָּלָד עוֹשֶׂה תְמוּרָה. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, הַוָּלָד עוֹשֶׂה תְמוּרָה. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, הֶקְדֵּשׁ עוֹשֶׂה תְמוּרָה, לֹא הַוָּלָד וְלֹא תְמוּרָה עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה: \n",
+ "הָעוֹפוֹת וְהַמְּנָחוֹת אֵינָן עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה, שֶׁלֹּא נֶאֱמַר אֶלָּא (ויקרא כז) בִּבְהֵמָה. הַצִּבּוּר וְהַשֻּׁתָּפִים אֵינָן עוֹשִׂים תְּמוּרָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), לֹא יָמִיר אֹתוֹ, יָחִיד עוֹשֶׂה תְמוּרָה, לֹא הַצִּבּוּר וְלֹא הַשֻּׁתָּפִים עוֹשִׂים תְּמוּרָה. קָרְבְּנוֹת בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת אֵינָן עוֹשִׂין תְּמוּרָה. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, וַהֲלֹא הַמַּעֲשֵׂר בַּכְּלָל הָיָה, וְלָמָּה יָצָא, לְהָקִישׁ אֵלָיו, מַה מַּעֲשֵׂר קָרְבַּן יָחִיד, יָצְאוּ קָרְבְּנוֹת צִבּוּר. מַה מַּעֲשֵׂר קָרְבַּן מִזְבֵּחַ, יָצְאוּ קָרְבְּנוֹת בֶּדֶק הַבָּיִת: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "יֵשׁ בְּקָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד מַה שֶּׁאֵין בְּקָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר, וְיֵשׁ בְּקָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר מַה שֶּׁאֵין בְּקָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד. שֶׁקָּרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד עוֹשִׂים תְּמוּרָה, וְקָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר אֵינָם עוֹשִׂים תְּמוּרָה. קָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד נוֹהֲגִין בִּזְכָרִים וּבִנְקֵבוֹת, וְקָרְבְּנוֹת צִבּוּר אֵינָן נוֹהֲגִין אֶלָּא בִזְכָרִים. קָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד חַיָּבִין בְּאַחֲרָיוּתָן וּבְאַחֲרָיוּת נִסְכֵּיהֶם, וְקָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר אֵין חַיָּבִין לֹא בְאַחֲרָיוּתָן וְלֹא בְאַחֲרָיוּת נִסְכֵּיהֶן, אֲבָל חַיָּבִין בְּאַחֲרָיוּת נִסְכֵּיהֶן מִשֶּׁקָּרַב הַזָּבַח. יֵשׁ בְּקָרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר מַה שֶּׁאֵין בְּקָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד. שֶׁקָּרְבְּנוֹת הַצִּבּוּר דּוֹחִין אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת וְאֶת הַטֻּמְאָה, וְקָרְבְּנוֹת הַיָּחִיד אֵינָן דּוֹחִים לֹא אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת וְלֹא אֶת הַטֻּמְאָה. אָמַר רַבִּי מֵאִיר, וַהֲלֹא חֲבִתֵּי כֹהֵן גָּדוֹל וּפַר יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, קָרְבַּן יָחִיד וְדוֹחִין אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת וְאֶת הַטֻּמְאָה. אֶלָּא שֶׁזְּמַנָּן קָבוּעַ: \n",
+ "חַטָּאת הַיָּחִיד שֶׁכִּפְּרוּ בְעָלָיו, מֵתוֹת. וְשֶׁל צִבּוּר, אֵינָן מֵתוֹת. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, יָמוּתוּ. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, מַה מָּצִינוּ בִּוְלַד חַטָּאת וּבִתְמוּרַת חַטָּאת וּבְחַטָּאת שֶׁמֵּתוּ בְעָלֶיהָ, בְּיָחִיד דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים אֲבָל לֹא בְצִבּוּר, אַף שֶׁכִּפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים וְשֶׁעָבְרָה שְׁנָתָן, בְּיָחִיד דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים אֲבָל לֹא בְצִבּוּר: \n",
+ "חֹמֶר בְּקָדָשִׁים מִבִּתְמוּרָה וּבִתְמוּרָה מִבְּקָדָשִׁים. שֶׁהַקֳּדָשִׁים עוֹשִׂים תְּמוּרָה וְאֵין תְּמוּרָה עוֹשָׂה תְמוּרָה. הַצִּבּוּר וְהַשֻּׁתָּפִין מַקְדִּישִׁים, אֲבָל לֹא מְמִירִים. וּמַקְדִּישִׁים אֵבָרִים וְעֻבָּרִים, אֲבָל לֹא מְמִירִים. חֹמֶר בִּתְמוּרָה, שֶׁהַקְּדֻשָּׁה חָלָה עַל בַּעֲלַת מוּם קָבוּעַ, וְאֵינָהּ יוֹצְאָה לְחֻלִּין לְהִגָּזֵז וּלְהֵעָבֵד. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, עָשָׂה שׁוֹגֵג כְּמֵזִיד בַּתְּמוּרָה, וְלֹא עָשָׂה שׁוֹגֵג כְּמֵזִיד בַּמֻּקְדָּשִׁים. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר, הַכִּלְאַיִם, וְהַטְּרֵפָה, וְיוֹצֵא דֹפֶן, טֻמְטוּם, וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוֹס, לֹא קְדֵשִׁים וְלֹא מַקְדִּישִׁים: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "אֵלּוּ קָדָשִׁים שֶׁוַּלְדוֹתֵיהֶן וּתְמוּרוֹתֵיהֶן כַּיּוֹצֵא בָהֶן. וְלַד שְׁלָמִים, וּתְמוּרָתָן, וּוְלָדָן, וּוְלַד וְלָדָן עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כִשְׁלָמִים, וּטְעוּנִים סְמִיכָה וּנְסָכִים וּתְנוּפָה וְחָזֶה וָשׁוֹק. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, וְלַד שְׁלָמִים לֹא יִקְרַב שְׁלָמִים. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, יִקְרָב. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ עַל וְלַד וְלַד שְׁלָמִים וְעַל וְלַד וְלַד תְּמוּרָה, שֶׁלֹּא יִקְרַב. וְעַל מַה נֶּחְלְקוּ, עַל הַוָּלָד, שֶׁרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, לֹא יִקְרַב, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, יִקְרָב. הֵעִיד רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ וְרַבִּי פַּפְּיַס עַל וְלַד שְׁלָמִים, שֶׁיִּקְרַב שְׁלָמִים. אָמַר רַבִּי פַּפְּיַס, אֲנִי מֵעִיד, שֶׁהָיְתָה לָנוּ פָרָה זִבְחֵי שְׁלָמִים, וַאֲכַלְנוּהָ בְפֶסַח, וְאָכַלְנוּ וְלָדָהּ שְׁלָמִים בֶּחָג: \n",
+ "וְלַד תּוֹדָה וּתְמוּרָתָהּ, וְלָדָן וּוְלַד וְלָדָן עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כְתוֹדָה, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁאֵינָן טְעוּנִין לָחֶם. תְּמוּרַת עוֹלָה, וּוְלַד תְּמוּרָה, וְלָדָן וּוְלַד וְלָדָן עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כְעוֹלָה, וּטְעוּנִין הֶפְשֵׁט וְנִתּוּחַ וְכָלִיל לָאִשִּׁים: \n",
+ "הַמַּפְרִישׁ נְקֵבָה לְעוֹלָה וְיָלְדָה זָכָר, יִרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֵב וְיִמָּכֵר וְיָבִיא בְדָמָיו עוֹלָה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, הוּא עַצְמוֹ יִקְרַב עוֹלָה. הַמַּפְרִישׁ נְקֵבָה לְאָשָׁם, תִּרְעֶה עַד שֶׁתִּסְתָּאֵב, וְתִמָּכֵר, וְיָבִיא בְדָמֶיהָ אָשָׁם. אִם קָרַב אֲשָׁמוֹ, יִפְּלוּ דָמֶיהָ לִנְדָבָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, תִּמָּכֵר שֶׁלֹּא בְמוּם. תְּמוּרַת אָשָׁם, וְלַד תְּמוּרָתָהּ וּוְלָדָן וּוְלַד וְלָדָן עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, יִרְעוּ עַד שֶּׁיִּסְתָּאֲבוּ, וְיִמָּכְרוּ, וְיִפְּלוּ דְמֵיהֶן לִנְדָבָה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, יָמוּתוּ. וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר, יָבִיא בִדְמֵיהֶן עוֹלוֹת. אָשָׁם שֶׁמֵּתוּ בְעָלָיו, וְשֶׁכִּפְּרוּ בְעָלָיו, יִרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֵב, וְיִמָּכֵר, וְיִפְּלוּ דָמָיו לִנְדָבָה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, יָמוּתוּ. וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר, יָבִיא בִדְמֵיהֶן עוֹלוֹת: \n",
+ "וַהֲלֹא אַף הַנְּדָבָה עוֹלָה הִיא. מַה בֵּין דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר לְדִבְרֵי חֲכָמִים. אֶלָּא, בִּזְמַן שֶׁהִיא בָאָה חוֹבָה, הוּא סוֹמֵךְ עָלֶיהָ וּמֵבִיא עָלֶיהָ נְסָכִין, וּנְסָכֶיהָ מִשֶּׁלּוֹ. וְאִם הָיָה כֹהֵן, עֲבוֹדָתָהּ וְעוֹרָהּ שֶׁלּוֹ. וּבִזְמַן שֶׁהִיא בָאָה נְדָבָה, אֵינוֹ סוֹמֵךְ עָלֶיהָ וְאֵינוֹ מֵבִיא עָלֶיהָ נְסָכִין, וּנְסָכֶיהָ מִשֶּׁל צִבּוּר. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא כֹהֵן, עֲבוֹדָתָהּ וְעוֹרָהּ שֶׁל אַנְשֵׁי מִשְׁמָר: \n",
+ "תְּמוּרַת הַבְּכוֹר וְהַמַּעֲשֵׂר, וּוְלָדָן, וּוְלַד וְלָדָן עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כִבְכוֹר וּכְמַעֲשֵׂר, וְיֵאָכְלוּ בְמוּמָם לַבְּעָלִים. מַה בֵּין הַבְּכוֹר וְהַמַּעֲשֵׂר לְבֵין כָּל הַקֳּדָשִׁים. שֶׁכָּל הַקֳּדָשִׁים נִמְכָּרִים בְּאִטְלִיס וְנִשְׁחָטִין בְּאִטְלִיס וְנִשְׁקָלִין בְּלִטְרָא, חוּץ מִן הַבְּכוֹר וּמִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר. וְיֵשׁ לָהֶן פִּדְיוֹן, וְלִתְמוּרוֹתֵיהֶן פִּדְיוֹן, חוּץ מִן הַבְּכוֹר וּמִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר. וּבָאִים מֵחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ, חוּץ מִן הַבְּכוֹר וּמִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר. אִם בָּאוּ תְמִימִים, יִקְרְבוּ. וְאִם בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין, יֵאָכְלוּ בְמוּמָן לַבְּעָלִים. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, מַה הַטַּעַם. שֶׁהַבְּכוֹר וְהַמַּעֲשֵׂר יֵשׁ לָהֶן פַּרְנָסָה בִמְקוֹמָן, וּשְׁאָר כָּל הַקֳּדָשִׁים אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנּוֹלַד לָהֶם מוּם, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ בִקְדֻשָּׁתָן: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "וְלַד חַטָּאת, וּתְמוּרַת חַטָּאת, וְחַטָּאת שֶׁמֵּתוּ בְעָלֶיהָ, יָמוּתוּ. שֶׁעָבְרָה שְׁנָתָהּ וְשֶׁאָבְדָה וְנִמְצֵאת בַּעֲלַת מוּם, אִם מִשֶּׁכִּפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים, תָּמוּת, וְאֵינָהּ עוֹשָׂה תְמוּרָה, לֹא נֶהֱנִין, וְלֹא מוֹעֲלִין. אִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא כִפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים, תִּרְעֶה עַד שֶׁתִּסְתָּאֵב, וְתִמָּכֵר, וְיָבִיא בְדָמֶיהָ אַחֶרֶת, וְעוֹשָׂה תְמוּרָה, וּמוֹעֲלִין בָּהּ: \n",
+ "הַמַּפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבְדָה, וְהִקְרִיב אַחֶרֶת תַּחְתֶּיהָ, וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִמְצֵאת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, תָּמוּת. הַמַּפְרִישׁ מָעוֹת לְחַטָּאת וְאָבְדוּ, וְהִקְרִיב חַטָּאת תַּחְתֵּיהֶן, וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִמְצְאוּ הַמָּעוֹת, יֵלְכוּ לְיַם הַמֶּלַח: \n",
+ "הַמַּפְרִישׁ מָעוֹת לְחַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבְדוּ, וְהִפְרִישׁ מָעוֹת אֲחֵרִים תַּחְתֵּיהֶן, לֹא הִסְפִּיק לִקַּח בָּהֶן חַטָּאת עַד שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ הַמָּעוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת, יָבִיא מֵאֵלּוּ וּמֵאֵלּוּ חַטָּאת, וְהַשְּׁאָר יִפְּלוּ לִנְדָבָה. הַמַּפְרִישׁ מָעוֹת לְחַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבְדוּ, וְהִפְרִישׁ חַטָּאת תַּחְתֵּיהֶן, לֹא הִסְפִּיק לְהַקְרִיבָהּ עַד שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ הַמָּעוֹת, וַהֲרֵי חַטָּאת בַּעֲלַת מוּם, תִּמָּכֵר, וְיָבִיא מֵאֵלּוּ וּמֵאֵלּוּ חַטָּאת, וְהַשְּׁאָר יִפְּלוּ לִנְדָבָה. הַמַּפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבְדָה, וְהִפְרִישׁ מָעוֹת תַּחְתֶּיהָ, לֹא הִסְפִּיק לִקַּח בָּהֶן חַטָּאת עַד שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת חַטָּאתוֹ, וַהֲרֵי הִיא בַעֲלַת מוּם, תִּמָּכֵר וְיָבִיא מֵאֵלּוּ וּמֵאֵלּוּ חַטָּאת, וְהַשְּׁאָר יִפְּלוּ לִנְדָבָה. הַמַּפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבְדָה, וְהִפְרִישׁ אַחֶרֶת תַּחְתֶּיהָ, לֹא הִסְפִּיק לְהַקְרִיבָהּ עַד שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, וַהֲרֵי שְׁתֵּיהֶן בַּעֲלוֹת מוּם, יִמָּכְרוּ, וְיָבִיא מֵאֵלּוּ וּמֵאֵלּוּ חַטָּאת, וְהַשְּׁאָר יִפְּלוּ לִנְדָבָה. הַמַּפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ וְאָבְדָה, וְהִפְרִישׁ אַחֶרֶת תַּחְתֶּיהָ, לֹא הִסְפִּיק לְהַקְרִיבָהּ עַד שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, וַהֲרֵי שְׁתֵּיהֶן תְּמִימוֹת, אַחַת מֵהֶן תִּקְרַב חַטָּאת וְהַשְּׁנִיָּה תָּמוּת, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אֵין חַטָּאת מֵתָה אֶלָּא שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת מֵאַחַר שֶׁכִּפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים, וְאֵין הַמָּעוֹת הוֹלְכוֹת לְיַם הַמֶּלַח אֶלָּא שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ מֵאַחַר שֶׁכִּפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים: \n",
+ "הַמַּפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ, וַהֲרֵי הִיא בַעֲלַת מוּם, מוֹכְרָהּ וְיָבִיא בְדָמֶיהָ אַחֶרֶת. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, אִם קָרְבָה הַשְּׁנִיָּה עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁחֲטָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, תָּמוּת, שֶׁכְּבָר כִּפְּרוּ הַבְּעָלִים: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "כֵּיצַד מַעֲרִימִים עַל הַבְּכוֹר. מְבַכֶּרֶת שֶׁהָיְתָה מְעֻבֶּרֶת, אוֹמֵר, מַה שֶּׁבְּמֵעֶיהָ שֶׁל זוֹ, אִם זָכָר, עוֹלָה, יָלְדָה זָכָר, יִקְרַב עוֹלָה. וְאִם נְקֵבָה, זִבְחֵי שְׁלָמִים, יָלְדָה נְקֵבָה, תִּקְרַב שְׁלָמִים. אִם זָכָר עוֹלָה, אִם נְקֵבָה זִבְחֵי שְׁלָמִים, יָלְדָה זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה, הַזָּכָר יִקְרַב עוֹלָה, וְהַנְּקֵבָה תִּקְרַב שְׁלָמִים: \n",
+ "יָלְדָה שְׁנֵי זְכָרִים, אַחַד מֵהֶן יִקְרַב עוֹלָה, וְהַשֵּׁנִי יִמָּכֵר לְחַיָּבֵי עוֹלָה, וְדָמָיו חֻלִּין. יָלְדָה שְׁתֵּי נְקֵבוֹת, אַחַת מֵהֶן תִּקְרַב שְׁלָמִים, וְהַשְּׁנִיָּה תִּמָּכֵר לְחַיָּבֵי שְׁלָמִים, וְדָמֶיהָ חֻלִּין. יָלְדָה טֻמְטוּם וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוֹס, רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, אֵין קְדֻשָּׁה חָלָה עֲלֵיהֶן: \n",
+ "הָאוֹמֵר, וְלָדָהּ שֶׁל זוֹ עוֹלָה וְהִיא שְׁלָמִים, דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִים. הִיא שְׁלָמִים וּוְלָדָהּ עוֹלָה, הֲרֵי זוֹ וְלַד שְׁלָמִים, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, אִם לְכֵן נִתְכַּוֵּן מִתְּחִלָּה, הוֹאִיל וְאִי אֶפְשָׁר לִקְרוֹת שְׁנֵי שֵׁמוֹת כְּאַחַת, דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִים. וְאִם מִשֶּׁאָמַר הֲרֵי זוֹ שְׁלָמִים, נִמְלַךְ וְאָמַר וְלָדָהּ עוֹלָה, הֲרֵי זוֹ וְלַד שְׁלָמִים: \n",
+ "הֲרֵי זוֹ תְמוּרַת עוֹלָה וּתְמוּרַת שְׁלָמִים, הֲרֵי זוֹ תְמוּרַת עוֹלָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, אִם לְכֵן נִתְכַּוֵּן מִתְּחִלָּה, הוֹאִיל וְאִי אֶפְשָׁר לִקְרוֹת שְׁנֵי שֵׁמוֹת כְּאַחַת, דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִין. וְאִם מִשֶּׁאָמַר תְּמוּרַת עוֹלָה, נִמְלַךְ וְאָמַר, תְּמוּרַת שְׁלָמִים, הֲרֵי זוֹ תְמוּרַת עוֹלָה: \n",
+ "הֲרֵי זוֹ תַחַת זוֹ, תְּמוּרַת זוֹ, חֲלוּפַת זוֹ, הֲרֵי זוֹ תְמוּרָה. זוֹ מְחֻלֶּלֶת עַל זוֹ, אֵינוֹ תְמוּרָה. וְאִם הָיָה הֶקְדֵּשׁ בַּעַל מוּם, יוֹצֵא לְחֻלִּין וְצָרִיךְ לַעֲשׂוֹת דָּמִים: \n",
+ "הֲרֵי זוֹ תַחַת חַטָּאת, וְתַחַת עוֹלָה, לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. תַּחַת חַטָּאת זוֹ, וְתַחַת עוֹלָה זוֹ, תַּחַת חַטָּאת וְתַחַת עוֹלָה שֶׁיֶּשׁ לִי בְתוֹךְ הַבָּיִת, הָיָה לוֹ, דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִין. אִם אָמַר עַל בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה, וְעַל בַּעֲלַת מוּם, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ עוֹלָה, לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ לְעוֹלָה, יִמָּכְרוּ וְיָבִיא בִדְמֵיהֶם עוֹלָה: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "כָּל הָאֲסוּרִין עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, אוֹסְרִים כָּל שֶׁהֵן. הָרוֹבֵעַ, וְהַנִּרְבָּע, וְהַמֻּקְצֶה, וְהַנֶּעֱבָד, וְאֶתְנָן, וּמְחִיר, וְהַכִּלְאַיִם, וְהַטְּרֵפָה, וְיוֹצֵא דֹפֶן. אֵיזֶה הוּא מֻקְצֶה. הַמֻּקְצֶה לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. הוּא אָסוּר, וּמַה שֶּׁעָלָיו מֻתָּר. אֵיזֶהוּ נֶעֱבָד. כֹּל שֶׁעוֹבְדִין אוֹתוֹ. הוּא וּמַה שֶּׁעָלָיו אָסוּר. זֶה וָזֶה מֻתָּרִין בַּאֲכִילָה: \n",
+ "אֵיזֶהוּ אֶתְנָן. הָאוֹמֵר לְזוֹנָה, הֵא לִיךְ טָלֶה זֶה בִשְׂכָרֵךְ, אֲפִלּוּ מֵאָה, כֻּלָּן אֲסוּרִין. וְכֵן הָאוֹמֵר לַחֲבֵרוֹ, הֵא לְךָ טָלֶה זֶה וְתָלִין שִׁפְחָתְךָ אֵצֶל עַבְדִּי, רַבִּי אוֹמֵר, אֵינוֹ אֶתְנָן. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אֶתְנָן: \n",
+ "אֵיזֶה הוּא מְחִיר כֶּלֶב. הָאוֹמֵר לַחֲבֵרוֹ, הֵא לְךָ טָלֶה זֶה תַּחַת כֶּלֶב זֶה. וְכֵן שְׁנֵי שֻׁתָּפִין שֶׁחָלְקוּ, אֶחָד נָטַל עֲשָׂרָה, וְאֶחָד נָטַל תִּשְׁעָה וָכֶלֶב, שֶׁכְּנֶגֶד הַכֶּלֶב, אֲסוּרִים, שֶׁעִם הַכֶּלֶב, מֻתָּרִים. אֶתְנַן כֶּלֶב וּמְחִיר זוֹנָה, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מֻתָּרִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כג), שְׁנַיִם, וְלֹא אַרְבָּעָה. וַלְדוֹתֵיהֶן מֻתָּרִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם) הֵן, וְלֹא וַלְדוֹתֵיהֶן: \n",
+ "נָתַן לָהּ כְּסָפִים, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מֻתָּרִין. יֵינוֹת, שְׁמָנִים, וּסְלָתוֹת, וְכָל דָּבָר שֶׁכַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ קָרֵב עַל גַּבֵּי מִזְבֵּחַ, אָסוּר. נָתַן לָהּ מֻקְדָּשִׁין, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מֻתָּרִין. עוֹפוֹת, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ אֲסוּרִין. שֶׁהָיָה בַדִּין, מָה אִם הַמֻּקְדָּשִׁין, שֶׁהַמּוּם פּוֹסֵל בָּהֶם, אֵין אֶתְנָן וּמְחִיר חָל עֲלֵיהֶם, עוֹפוֹת, שֶׁאֵין הַמּוּם פּוֹסֵל בָּהֶן, אֵינוֹ בַדִּין שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא אֶתְנָן וּמְחִיר חָל עֲלֵיהֶן. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (שם), לְכָל נֶדֶר, לְהָבִיא אֶת הָעוֹף: \n",
+ "כָּל הָאֲסוּרִים עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, וַלְדוֹתֵיהֶן מֻתָּרִים. וְלַד טְרֵפָה, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, לֹא יִקְרַב עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, יִקְרָב. רַבִּי חֲנִינָא בֶן אַנְטִיגְנוֹס אוֹמֵר, כְּשֵׁרָה שֶׁיָּנְקָה מִן הַטְּרֵפָה, פְּסוּלָה מֵעַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. כָּל הַקֳּדָשִׁים שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ טְרֵפָה, אֵין פּוֹדִים אוֹתָם, שֶׁאֵין פּוֹדִים אֶת הַקֳּדָשִׁים לְהַאֲכִילָן לִכְלָבִים: \n"
+ ],
+ [
+ "יֵשׁ בְּקָדְשֵׁי מִזְבֵּחַ מַה שֶׁאֵין בְּקָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת. וְיֵשׁ בְּקָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת מַה שֶּׁאֵין בְּקָדְשֵׁי מִזְבֵּחַ. שֶׁקָּדְשֵׁי מִזְבֵּחַ עוֹשִׂים תְּמוּרָה, וְחַיָּבִין עֲלֵיהֶם מִשּׁוּם פִּגּוּל, נוֹתָר, וְטָמֵא, וְלָדָן וַחֲלָבָן אָסוּר לְאַחַר פִּדְיוֹנָם, וְהַשׁוֹחֲטָם בַּחוּץ חַיָּב, וְאֵין נוֹתְנִין מֵהֶם לָאֻמָּנִים בִּשְׂכָרָן, מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בְּקָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבָּיִת: \n",
+ "יֵשׁ בְּקָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת מַה שֶּׁאֵין בְּקָדְשֵׁי מִזְבֵּחַ, שֶׁסְּתָם הֶקְדֵּשׁוֹת לְבֶדֶק הַבָּיִת. הֶקְדֵּשׁ בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת חָל עַל הַכֹּל, וּמוֹעֲלִין בְּגִדּוּלֵיהֶן, וְאֵין בָּהֶם הֲנָאָה לְכֹהֲנִים: \n",
+ "אֶחָד קָדְשֵׁי מִזְבֵּחַ וְאֶחָד קָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת, אֵין מְשַׁנִּין אוֹתָן מִקְּדֻשָּׁה לִקְדֻשָּׁה, וּמַקְדִּישִׁין אוֹתָן הֶקְדֵּשׁ עִלּוּי, וּמַחֲרִימִין אוֹתָן. וְאִם מֵתוּ, יִקָּבְרוּ. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, קָדְשֵׁי בֶדֶק הַבַּיִת, אִם מֵתוּ, יִפָּדוּ: \n",
+ "וְאֵלּוּ הֵן הַנִּקְבָּרִים. קָדָשִׁים שֶׁהִפִּילוּ, יִקָּבְרוּ. הִפִּילָה שִׁלְיָא, תִּקָּבֵר. שׁוֹר הַנִּסְקָל, וְעֶגְלָה עֲרוּפָה, וְצִפֳּרֵי מְצֹרָע, וּשְׂעַר נָזִיר, וּפֶטֶר חֲמוֹר, וּבָשָׂר בְּחָלָב, וְחֻלִּין שֶׁנִּשְׁחֲטוּ בָעֲזָרָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, חֻלִּין שֶׁנִּשְׁחֲטוּ בָעֲזָרָה, יִשָּׂרְפוּ, וְכֵן חַיָּה שֶׁנִּשְׁחֲטָה בָעֲזָרָה: \n",
+ "וְאֵלּוּ הֵן הַנִּשְׂרָפִים. חָמֵץ בְּפֶסַח, יִשָּׂרֵף. וּתְרוּמָה טְמֵאָה, וְהָעָרְלָה, וְכִלְאֵי הַכֶּרֶם, אֶת שֶׁדַּרְכּוֹ לִשָּׂרֵף, יִשָּׂרֵף. וְאֶת שֶׁדַּרְכּוֹ לִקָּבֵר, יִקָּבֵר. וּמַדְלִיקִין בְּפַת וּבְשֶׁמֶן שֶׁל תְּרוּמָה: \n",
+ "כָּל הַקֳּדָשִׁים שֶׁנִּשְׁחֲטוּ חוּץ לִזְמַנָּן וְחוּץ לִמְקוֹמָן, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ יִשָּׂרְפוּ. אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, יִשָּׂרֵף. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, יִקָּבֵר. חַטַּאת הָעוֹף הַבָּאָה עַל סָפֵק, תִּשָּׂרֵף. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, יְטִילֶנָּה לָאַמָּה. כָּל הַנִּשְׂרָפִין לֹא יִקָּבְרוּ, וְכָל הַנִּקְבָּרִים לֹא יִשָּׂרְפוּ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אִם רָצָה לְהַחֲמִיר עַל עַצְמוֹ לִשְׂרֹף אֶת הַנִּקְבָּרִים, רַשַּׁאי. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, אֵינוֹ מֻתָּר לְשַׁנּוֹת: \n"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "versions": [
+ [
+ "Torat Emet 357",
+ "http://www.toratemetfreeware.com/index.html?downloads"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "heTitle": "משנה תמורה",
+ "categories": [
+ "Mishnah",
+ "Seder Kodashim"
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Mishnah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file