Babylonian Talmud

Rodkinson 1918 — source 7, scan section 22

edition the same saying is repeated, 9 b and 12 a), and there is not to be found even a hint that he was erratic. Also in the Palestinian Talmud the same is mentioned twice (Berakhoth, Chap. I., Halakha 3), with whom two great men of the Amoraim, R. Tanhum and R. Hezekiah, communicated. There it is also said that he was a disciple of R. Zera (Zeera^ — according to the pronunciation of the Palestinian Talmud). Why, then, should it be ascribed to such a man that he was erratic ? Moreover, Heilprin does not mention Adda bar Ukhmi among the Amoraim at all, although he mentions his name in the paragraph of Adda bar Abhimi, and gives also all our citation mentioned above. We also do not know the sources from which Heilprin states that according to others it is Abba bar Abhimi. TRACT BETZAH (YOM TOB). 53 bath ? He meant to say it was fit at twilight, but afterwards it got wet from rain, and dried again, as it was in the beginning, and not fit during one part of Sabbath, and then fit agani. How is it ? The answer was : There is no law of Muktzah for a half of Sabbath. Shall we assume that the above Boraitha, which declares that if it was born with a blemish it shall be considered as prepared, is a support to Rabha's decree ? Because the first-born, when it was yet in the womb of its mother, was fit along with its mother (because it was not reckoned a firstling before its birth) ; and as soon as it is born, it is not fit ; and after its being examined by an expert and found blemished it becomes again fit (from this we see that the law of Muktzah does not exist for a half of Sab- bath, as it was fit before its birth, became unfit at birth, and be- came fit again after examination). Nay, said Abayi in the name of R. Saphra : It may be that the case was, the expert was by when it was born, and saw it was fit from its birth. R. Jehudah the second possessed a firsthng, and sent it to R. Ammi on a festival for examination. At first he thought he would not examine it. Said R. Zrika, or according to others R. Jeremiah, to him : If R. Simeon and R. Jehudah differ, the Halakha prevails according to R. Jehudah. At another time he sent it to R. Itz'hak of Naph'ha, and the same happened again. Said R. Abba to R. Zrika : Why did not you let people do a thing in accordance with R. Simeon ? And he answered him : Have you heard any decision that the Hala- kha is according to R. Simeon ? And he said : Yea, so I have heard from R. Zera. Said some one of the disciples present : If I will be worthy to go to Palestine, I would like to learn the Hala- kha from the mouth of R. Zera. Later when he came to Palestine, he asked R. Zera : Did the Master say that the Halakha prevails according to R. Simeon? And .he answered: I did not say it is so, but I said : It seems so to me, because the Mishna relates, R. Simeon said : If the blemish was not recognized while it was yet day, it is not prepared, and the Boraitha teaches the same in the name of the sages (in plural). And I thought the Boraitha did so because the Halakha prevails accordingly. How is it in reality ? Said R. Joseph : Come and hear. I will base my de- cision on the words of great men, that R. Simeon ben Pazzi in the name of R. Joshuah b. Levi, quoting R. Jose b. Saul in the name of Rabbi, upon the authority of the Holy Assembly of Jerusalem, said that R. Simeon (b. Menasseh) and his colleagues 54 THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD. decide the above Halakha according to R. Meir. How can they have decided it according to R. Meir? They Hved (the Holy Assembly of Jerusalem) in an earlier age than he. Say, they decided it in accordance with the system of R. Meir (this will be explained in Tract B'choroth). Ammi of Vardinaa was the examiner of the firstlings of the Nasi ; and he did not examine on festivals. When this was told to R. Ammi, he said, he does right. Is it so? Did not R. Ammi himself examine the blemishes of the firstlings ? Nay, he used to see them the preceding day, but he kept his decision until the morrow, when he asked the owner how the animal had come by the blemish. As it happened when a man brought a firstling before Rabha on the eve of a festival, after noon, and at that time Rabha was washing his head. He raised his eyes, and looked on the blemish, and told the man : Go away to-day, and come to-morrow. The next day he asked him what was the cause of the blemish, and he answered : I have given it barley on one side of thorns, and it was on the other side ; when it wanted to eat, it put forth its head between the thorns and thus tore its lip. And Rabha asked him : Perhaps you did it intentionally ? And he said : No. MISHNA: An animal which dies on the festival may not be removed thereon. It happened once, when Rabbi Tarphon was questioned on the subject, and also concerning a separate piece of dough, which had become polluted, he went to the college and inquired. They told him : They may not be removed from the spot. GEMARA : Shall we say that this anonymous Mishna is not in accordance with R. Simeon (see Sabbath, p. 375) ? Nay, the Mishna can be explained in accordance with him, but he owns that animals that died on Sabbath are prohibited. This would be right according to Mar bar Amemar, who said in the name of Rabh that R. Simeon owns it ; but according to Mar b. R. Joseph, v/ho declares in the name of Rabha that R. Simeon differs, even when the animals died on Sabbath, and said that they may be used ? (What can be said to that ?) Zera explained this Mishna, that it refers to an animal that was consecrated for sacrifice. And it seems Zera is right in his explanation, because the Mishna speaks further on about Hala that became unclean ; and as the Hala was a consecrated thing, so must be also the animal in question. MISHNA; An association for the purpose of jointly pur- TRACT BETZAH (YOM TOB). 55 chasing an animal may not be formed on the festival ; but if this was arranged before the festival, the animal so purchased may be slaughtered and shared on the festival. GEMARA : What is meant by " may not be formed " ? Said R. Jehudah in the name of Samuel : The price of the animal must not be fixed on the festival ; but how shall it be done ? Said Rabh : Two animals shall be brought, and placed side by side, and it shall be said : The value of this animal shall be as the value of that. We have learned also in a Boraitha : One shall not say to his neighbor : I will be a partner with you in this animal for one Sela or more ; but he may say : I would be a part- ner with you for one half, third, or quarter of it. MISHNA : R. Jehudah said : (A butcher who sells meat on a festival) may weigh it against a vessel or hatchet ; but according