Babylonian Talmud

Rodkinson 1918 — source 2, scan section 73

merated in regular order either of sequence or time of enact- ment. Hence we, in consistency with our method of transla- tion— viz., to place everything in its proper department — have omitted in this tract the enumeration of these regulations, to- gether with the diverse opinions concerning the reasons for their institution, which reasons as cited by the Gemara are very ab- struse and for the most part untenable. In the last chapter of this tract, however, mention is again made of the eighteen regulations, and it is declared, that their measure was made " heaping full," while elsewhere in the Ge- mara the assertion is made, that the day on which they were enacted was as grave in its consequences for Israel as the day on which the golden calf was made. It is these two statements that have impelled us at the last moment to embody these eigh- voL. 11. — 13 381 382 APPENDIX. teen regulations in an appendix at the end of this volume, and state as best we can, after careful study and consideration of the subject, the most potent reasons for their enactment. With this purpose in view, we shall divide the eighteen regu- lations into five classes, as follows: Those pertaining to Theru- mah (heave-offerings), Tumah (uncleanness), Chithon (mingling with other nations), Mikvah (legal bath), and Sabbath. Therumah is rendered useless when brought into contact with any one of the following ten subjects: First: With a man who eats a thing that had been contaminated by a parent of uncleanness* and had thus become unclean in the first degree. Second : With a man who had eaten a thing unclean in the sec- ond degree {i.e., had been touched by a thing unclean in the first degree). Third : With a man who had drunk unclean bev- erages. Fourth : With a man who had bathed his head and the larger portion of his body in water that had been pumped up (drawn or scooped), and not in a legal bath. Fifth: With a clean person {i.e., one who had already taken a legal bath, but was subsequently drenched with three lugs of drawn water). Sixth : With the sacred scrolls of the Holy Writ, either in part or in its entire form.f Seventh: With hands of which one was not quite certain that they had been kept clean the whole day. Eighth : With one who had taken a legal bath, if the Therumah was touched before sunset. Ninth : With eatables and utensils which had become unclean through beverages (as will be ex- plained in Tract Yodaim). When brought in contact with any one of these nine subjects, Therumah is rendered useless. Tenth : The crop raised from Therumah (seed) is of the same character as the seed ; if the latter was clean when planted the crop is clean, but if the seed was unclean the crop is the same. Nevertheless, it is still considered Therumah, and subject to the * By a " parent of uncleanness" is meant any object that had come in direct con- tact with a corpse. See explanation in Tract Shekalim. f Why contact with the Holy Writ should render Therumah unclean can in our opinion be explained only as follows : When the priests came to demand their share of the Therumah, it is highly probable that they did this with a correspondingly impressive ceremony and read the part of the Law referring to the Therumah before the donors. If such was really the case, they no doubt carried the scrolls with them wherever they went, and in consequence the regulation was enacted which rendered the Therumah unclean when brought into contact with the scrolls or book contain- ing the Holy Writ. Our basis for this assertion is the ordinance to be found in Tract Yodaim, which proclaims that the scrolls or books containing the Holy Writ render hands unclean when coming in contact with them, and doubtless the hands of the priests, which were afterwards to handle Therumah, are meant. APPENDIX. 383 laws of Therumah. Thus we have ten regulations concerning Therumah. Concerning uncleanness, there were four regulations enacted : First : All movable things bring uncleanness on a man by means of a tent, not larger even than a span, covering a corpse, even if the space between the corpse and the tent was but an awl's width. (For explanation, see Tract Ahaloth.) Second : The daughters of the Samaritans are considered unclean (as women suffering from their menstruation) from the day of their birth. Third : A child of a heathen is considered unclean, because it is considered as one afflicted with venereal disease. Fourth : One who presses grapes or olives renders the vessels used to receive the must or the oil susceptible to uncleanness. (This is explained in detail in Tract Kelim.) Concerning Chithon, but one regulation was enacted, cover- ing four subjects : It was prohibited to partake of the bread, oil, or wine of other nations in order to prevent intermarriage with their daughters. Concerning Mikvah, one regulation only was enacted ; viz. : If the water running out of a rain-gutter flow directly into a Mikvah, the Mikvah is not invalidated ; but if the water was intercepted by a vessel from which it flowed into the Mikvah, the latter becomes invalid ; or even if three lugs of drawn water were poured into the Mikvah, they render it useless (see Tract Mikvaoth). Concerning Sabbath, two regulations were enacted : First : One shall not search for vermin or read before lamplight (on Friday night).* Second: One who was overtaken by dusk on the Sabbath eve while on the road must give his purse to a Gentile. The learned reader who is not familiar with the intricate teachings of the Talmud, and even the student of the Talmud who has delved in its labyrinths of lore for the sake of probing into the ordinances and discussions contained in its volumes, will be quite amazed at the seeming unimportance and triviality of the above regulations, unless thoroughly comprehensive of the spirit of the Talmud and the object of the sages in their day. At the time when these regulations were enacted and enforced, * There are differences of opinion in the Gemara as to the division of the regu- lations. Some hold that they should be grouped, while others would count them separately. The matter is of no importance, however, and hence we have grouped them in conformity with the number stated by the Mishna. 384 APPENDIX. there appeared no reasonable grounds for their enactment; and even the reasons advanced by the Gemara itself in a faltering, groping manner are in many instances quite absurd. Entirely contrary to their usual custom, the sages themselves did not base these regulations upon any inference, analogy, passage, or ordi- nance contained in the Holy Writ, a very remarkable occurrence indeed. Furthermore, at a casual glance, the student will not find in any one of the regulations a motive based even on com- mon sense. Strange to say, it has also occurred that our excellent He-