Torah Community Connections head-01-01.jpg (328 bytes)
Torah Community ConnectionsTorah Community Connections
NewsNechama LeibowitzWeekly ParashaMishna Yomit ProgramAbout UsContact UsTCC Home Page
The World Council for Torah Education

About Us

Networking

Educational Programs
- Ve'eyleh Shemot
- Religious Zionist Album
- Holocaust Curriculum
- Hebrew Proficiency

Leadership

Contact Us


Mishna Yomit Program
Week 25 - Friday - 19 May 2000

Sunday | Monday | Tuesday | Wednesday
Thursday | Friday | Shabbat

SHEKALIM: CHAPTER 2: MISHNA 3

If one collected coins and said: These are for my shekel Bet Shammai say: The remainder is a donative offering; and Bet Hillel say: The remainder is unconsecrated; That I will bring from these my shekel, they agree that the remainder is unconsecrated. These are for a hatat, they agree that the remainder is a donative offering; that I will bring from these for a hatat, they agreee that the remainder is unconsecrated.

Kehati

If one collected coins one by one, and said when he began collecting them, these are for my shekel I am collecting these for my shekel,

Bet Shammai say: The remainder is a donative offering If he found that he had collected more than required, the remainder goes to the Temple chest used for buying donative offerings to be sacrificed when the altar stands idle, and that is known as kayitz mizbe'ah; Bet Shammai are of the opinion that consecration made in error is valid;

And Bet Hillel say: The remainder is unconsecrated because he had no intention of consecrating more than his shekel. I will bring from these for my shekel If he said: I am saving these coins so that I can bring my half shekel from these, they Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel, agree that the remainder is unconsecrated because it is as if he said: If I collect more than a half shekel, the remainder should remain unconsecrated.

These are for a hatat If a person collects a coin and says: This is for the hatat sin offering that I am obliged to bring, they Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel, agree that the remainder is a donative offering as will be explained in the following mishnah. That I will bring from these for a hatat If he said, I am collecting coins so that I will purchase with them a hatat, they agree that the remainder is unconsecrated as explained above regarding the shekel.

SHEKALIM: CHAPTER 2: MISHNA 4

R. Shimon said: What is the difference between shekels and a hataf? Shekels have a set limit, and a hatat does not have a set limit. R. Yehudah says, Shekels too do not have a set limit, for when Israel returned from the exile they would consecrate darics, later they contributed sela coins, later they contributed teva'in and they wished to pay dinars. R. Shimon said, Nevertheless they all contributed a like amount, whereas for a hatat one may bring a sela and another for two and yet another for three.

Kehati

Why is it that in the previous mishnah Bet Hillel hold that if a person said, These are for my shekel the remainder is unconsecrated, while if he said, These are for a hatat, Bet Hillel agrees with Bet Shammai that the remainder is a donative offering? Shekels have a set limit As the Torah states (Ex. 30:15), The rich shall not increase, and the poor shall not decrease from half a shekel, we therefore say that his intention was only to consecrate the amount needed for the half shekel, and the remainder remains unconsecrated; but a hatat does not have a set limit Some spend more and some spend less for a hatat, therefore all the money that was collected is consecrated, and whatever money is left over after he has purchased an animal for a hatat is considered a donative offering to the Temple.

R. Yehudah says: Shekels too do not have a set limit while one cannot contribute less than the half shekel which was required at the time of Moses, there were times when they contributed more than a half shekel, for when Israel returned from the exile After the Babylonian exile, they would contribute darics A daric was a Persian gold coin which was worth two selas (and hence four shekels), and this coin was mentioned in the previous chapter. Later they contributed sela coins Some time later they began contributing half selah coins, these being equivalent to the shekels of the mishnah, which were half the value of the shekels of the Torah, and they wished to contribute dinars in the version of this mishnah which appears in the Jerusalem Talmud and in the mishnah of the Babylonian Talmud, the following words are added at this point: and they did not accept these from them namely the bet din refused to accept dinars, for it is forbidden to accept less than the value of a Scriptural half shekel, and the dinar was worth half a shekel of the mishnah, or a quarter of the Scriptural shekel.

Others explain that when the Jews first returned to Eretz Yisrael from the diaspora, the population was small and the Temple expenses were high. As a result they contributed a gold daric. Later, when the population increased, they reduced this to a sela. Finally, they reinstituted the amount mandated by the Torah, namely teva'in, which were worth half a Scriptural shekel. Later, though, when they wished to contribute even less, the Sages rejected this, for one cannot contribute less than the half shekel instituted by the Torah (Korban Ha'eidah; Rivevan; Ramban in his commentary on the Torah; Ravad). Others explain that they would give half the standard currency of any given era. In other words, when the standard currency was the daric, each person contributed half a daric; when the daric was replaced by the sela, each person contributed half a sela. At the time, however, that they began to use teva'in, they had to contribute whole teva'in, because the teva was equal to a Scriptural half shekel (Rambam; Hameiri; Bartenura).

Thus Rambam rules: The half shekel the commandment is to contribute half of the standard currency of that era even if it was a coin larger than the holy shekel.” But one may never give less than half of the shekel which they had at the time of Moses our Teacher, whose weight was a hundred and sixty barley grains (Hil. Shekalim 1:5; and see there Halakhah 6 and Ravad's comments). In any event, R. Yehudah proves from this that there is no set limit for the shekel.

R. Shimon said: Nevertheless they all contributed a like amount In every ear all would contribute the same coin for a half shekel, whether poor or rich. Thus shekels do have a set limit, whereas a hatat offering, one may bring for a sela and another for two and yet another three Every one can bring a hatat of whatever value he wishes, so that there is no set limit. Therefore whatever money was collected toward a hatat is consecrated, and the surplus money above the cost of the animal for a hatat is consecrated and is to be placed in the chest for donative burnt offerings

Sunday | Monday | Tuesday | Wednesday
Thursday | Friday | Shabbat

Return to Mishna Yomit Index

Visit the Mishna Yomit Archives

 

strip_5x5_F7F7DE.gif (63 bytes)
Center for Religious Affairs in the Diaspora

About Us

Rabbinical & Community Services

Conferences

Publications

Contact Us

3x3_0000CC.gif (62 bytes)
NewsNechama LeibowitzWeekly ParashaMishna Yomit ProgramAbout UsContact UsTCC Home Page
jafi_nav.gif (5358 bytes)