AccueilÉtudeTanakhBibliothèqueSujetsParachaDivrei TorahRabbanimSagesHistoireÀ proposMes favorisFaire un don
Retour

Traité Niddah

47a

Étude de Niddah 47a

Étude de la Mishna & Guémara 47a

Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : it is subject to the obligation of separating ḥalla, the portion of the dough designated for the priest. And although teruma fell into it, that produce does not have the status of teruma, as the teruma was nullified by a majority of non-sacred produce. Consequently, it is not rendered unfit for consumption, i.e., rendered ritually impure, by one who was ritually impure who immersed that day and is waiting for nightfall for his purification process to be completed. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon deem the dough exempt from the obligation of separating ḥalla, as this obligation does not apply to teruma, and the entire dough is exempt due to the mixture of teruma it contains.
חַיֶּיבֶת בְּחַלָּה וְאֵינָהּ נִפְסֶלֶת בִּטְבוּל יוֹם, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה; רַבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן פּוֹטְרִין מִן הַחַלָּה.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : The Sages assumed that the one who said that teruma in the present applies by Torah law maintains that ḥalla likewise applies in the present by Torah law, whereas the one who said that teruma in the present applies by rabbinic law holds that ḥalla also applies by rabbinic law. If so, granted, if you say that Rabbi Yosei holds that ḥalla in the present applies by rabbinic law, one can understand that a mixture which has the status of teruma by rabbinic law comes and abrogates the obligation of separating ḥalla, which also applies by rabbinic law.
סַבְרוּהָ, מַאן דְּאָמַר תְּרוּמָה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא — חַלָּה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא, מַאן דְּאָמַר תְּרוּמָה דְּרַבָּנַן — חַלָּה דְּרַבָּנַן. אִי אָמְרַתְּ בִּשְׁלָמָא קָסָבַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי חַלָּה בַּזְּמַן הַזֶּה דְּרַבָּנַן, אָתֵי דִּמּוּעַ דְּרַבָּנַן וּמַפְקַע חַלָּה דְּרַבָּנַן.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : But if you say that ḥalla in the present applies by Torah law, can a mixture that has the status of teruma by rabbinic law come and abrogate the mitzva of ḥalla which is by Torah law? Evidently, according to Rabbi Yosei the obligation of separating ḥalla in the present is by rabbinic law, and therefore teruma likewise applies by rabbinic law. If so, Rabbi Yosei does not agree with the opinion he cites in Seder Olam, according to which teruma applies in the present by Torah law.
אֶלָּא אִי אָמְרַתְּ חַלָּה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא, אָתֵי דִּמּוּעַ דְּרַבָּנַן וּמַפְקַע חַלָּה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא?
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : The Gemara rejects this proof: But perhaps Rabbi Yosei maintains that teruma in the present applies by Torah law and yet ḥalla applies by rabbinic law, and therefore the mixture discussed in the above baraita, which has the status of teruma by Torah law, abrogates the obligation of ḥalla, which is by rabbinic law.
וְדִלְמָא קָסָבַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: תְּרוּמָה בַּזְּמַן הַזֶּה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא, וְחַלָּה דְּרַבָּנַן?
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : The Gemara adds: And this answer is as Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, responded to the statement of the other Sages. As Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said: I once found the Sages of the study hall of Rav sitting and saying: Even according to the one who said that teruma in the present applies by rabbinic law, the obligation to separate ḥalla is by Torah law.
וְכִדְאַהְדַּר רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, דְּאָמַר רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: אַשְׁכַּחְתִּינְהוּ לְרַבָּנַן דְּבֵי רַב דְּיָתְבִי וְקָאָמְרִי: אֲפִילּוּ לְמַאן דְּאָמַר תְּרוּמָה בַּזְּמַן הַזֶּה דְּרַבָּנַן, חַלָּה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : The reason is that during the seven years that the Jewish people conquered Eretz Yisrael led by Joshua and during the seven years that they divided the land, they were obligated to separate ḥalla but they were not obligated to separate teruma and tithe. In the present as well, although there is no obligation to set aside teruma in Eretz Yisrael by Torah law, the obligation to separate ḥalla applies by Torah law.
שֶׁהֲרֵי שֶׁבַע שֶׁכִּבְּשׁוּ, וְשֶׁבַע שֶׁחִלְּקוּ — נִתְחַיְּיבוּ בְּחַלָּה, וְלֹא נִתְחַיְּיבוּ בְּמַעֲשֵׂר.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, continued: And I said to them: On the contrary, even according to the one who said that teruma in the present applies by Torah law, the obligation to separate ḥalla applies by rabbinic law, as it is taught in a baraita: The verse states with regard to ḥalla: “When you come into the land where I bring you…from the first of your dough you shall set apart a cake for a gift” (Numbers 15:18–20). If the obligation applies “when you come” into the land, one might have thought that it took effect from the moment that two or three spies entered the land. Therefore the verse states: “When you come,” from which it is derived that the Torah is saying: I said that the obligation applies when all of you come, and not when some of you come.
וְאָמֵינָא לְהוּ אֲנָא: אֲפִילּוּ לְמַאן דְּאָמַר תְּרוּמָה בַּזְּמַן הַזֶּה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא, חַלָּה דְּרַבָּנַן, דְּתַנְיָא: אִי ״בְּבוֹאֲכֶם״ יָכוֹל מִשֶּׁנִּכְנְסוּ לָהּ שְׁנַיִם וּשְׁלֹשָׁה מְרַגְּלִים? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״בְּבוֹאֲכֶם״ — בְּבִיאַת כּוּלְּכֶם אָמַרְתִּי, וְלֹא בְּבִיאַת מִקְצַתְכֶם.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : According to this baraita, the separation of ḥalla is an obligation by Torah law only when the entire Jewish people come to Eretz Yisrael. And when Ezra brought the Jewish people to Eretz Yisrael at the beginning of the Second Temple period, not all of them ascended. Since the majority of the Jewish people stayed behind, separating ḥalla was not restored to the status of an obligation by Torah law.
וְכִי אַסְּקִינְהוּ עֶזְרָא — לָא כּוּלְּהוּ סְלוּק.
Mishna 1
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : MISHNA: The Sages stated a parable based on the development of the fruit of a fig tree with regard to the three stages of development in a woman: Minority, young womanhood, and grown womanhood. An unripe fig, a ripening fig, and a ripe fig. An unripe fig represents the stage when she is still a child and has not yet developed the signs of puberty; a ripening fig represents the days of her young womanhood, when she reaches twelve years and one day and has developed two pubic hairs.
מַתְנִי' מָשָׁל מָשְׁלוּ חֲכָמִים בָּאִשָּׁה — ״פַּגָּה״, ״בּוֹחַל״, וָ״צֶמֶל״. ״פַּגָּה״ — עוֹדָהּ תִּינוֹקֶת, ״בּוֹחַל״ — אֵלּוּ יְמֵי נְעוּרֶיהָ.(משנה)
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : With regard to the periods both during this stage, minority, and during that stage, young womanhood, the Sages said that her father is entitled to any lost object that she finds that cannot be returned to its owner, and to her earnings, and to nullification of her vows. A ripe fig represents the stage of grown womanhood: Once she has reached her majority, her father no longer has authority over her. He can no longer nullify her vows, and he does not have a claim to lost objects found by her and her earnings belong to her.
בְּזוֹ וּבָזוֹ אָמְרוּ: אָבִיהָ זַכַּאי בִּמְצִיאָתָהּ, וּבְמַעֲשֵׂה יָדֶיהָ, וּבַהֲפָרַת נְדָרֶיהָ. צֶמֶל — כֵּיוָן שֶׁבָּגְרָה, שׁוּב אֵין לְאָבִיהָ רְשׁוּת בָּהּ.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : What are the signs that indicate grown womanhood? Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says: Grown womanhood begins from when her breast grows sufficiently so that a fold appears below the breast. Rabbi Akiva says: It begins from when the breasts sag onto the chest. Ben Azzai says: It begins from when the areola at the tip of the breast darkens. Rabbi Yosei says: It begins when the breasts have developed to a size where a person places his hand on the nipple and it depresses and slows to return.
אֵיזֶהוּ סִימָנִין? רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי אוֹמֵר: מִשֶּׁיַּעֲלֶה הַקֶּמֶט תַּחַת הַדַּד. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: מִשֶּׁיַּטּוּ הַדַּדִּים. בֶּן עַזַּאי אוֹמֵר: מִשֶּׁתַּשְׁחִיר הַפִּיטּוֹמֶת. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: כְּדֵי שֶׁיְּהֵא נוֹתֵן יָדוֹ עַל הָעוֹקֶץ, וְהוּא שׁוֹקֵעַ וְשׁוֹהֶא לַחֲזוֹר.
Guémara
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : GEMARA: The mishna teaches that an unripe fig [paga] represents the stage when a woman is still a child. The Gemara explains that the meaning of the word paga is as it is written: “The fig tree puts forth her green fruits [fageha]” (Song of Songs 2:13). The mishna further teaches that a ripening fig [boḥal] represents the days of her young womanhood. The Gemara explains that the meaning of this word is as we learned in a mishna (Ma’asrot 1:2): The obligation of tithes applies to the figs from when they begin to ripen [misheyyibaḥalu]; and Rabba bar bar Ḥana says that Rav says that this means from when the heads of the figs whiten.
גְּמָ' פַּגָּה — עוֹדָהּ תִּינוֹקֶת, כְּדִכְתִיב: ״הַתְּאֵנָה חָנְטָה פַגֶּיהָ״, בּוֹחַל — אֵלּוּ יְמֵי הַנְּעוּרִים, כְּדִתְנַן: הַתְּאֵנִים מִשֶּׁיִּבְחֲלוּ, וְאָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חַנָּה אָמַר רַב: מִשֶּׁיַּלְבִּין רָאשֵׁיהֶן.
Niddah 47a
100%
נדה מ״ז אמַסֶּכֶת נִדָּה