Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) BROTHERS AND PARTNERS GIVING MA'ASER (cont'd)

(a) [R. Yirmiyah] There are two additional possibilities over those listed in the Mishnah.

1. They are Chayavim to bring both Ma'aser *and* Kalbon.
2. They are Peturim from both.

(b) Example for #1: They divided their property but not the animals.
(c) Example for #2: They divided the animals but not their property.
(d) [R. Mana] If the animals were the majority of the inheritance, then they dominate (Ikar).
(e) Question [R. Shimi]: By obligating them in Ma'aser Beheimah you are going to exempt them from Kalbon (even though they are bringing the Selah from separated funds)?!
(f) Answer: Here it is different because they are bringing one Selah (as if it were undivided).
(g) Question: Then even if they re-join after having divided, they should be exempt from Kalbon (if they use one 'undivided' Selah) and yet we know that they are *obligated* in such a case?!
(h) Answer: They would be obligated in Kalbon as would be two brothers-in-law inheriting their father-in-law.

(a) Question: What was done with the Kalbonos?
(b) Answer [R. Meir]: Towards the Shekalim.
(c) Answer [R. Elazar]: Nedavos (for Olos).
(d) Answer [R. Shimon Shezuri]: Gold plating and adornments for the Kodesh HaKodoshim.
(e) Answer: [Ben Azai]: The money changers would receive them as their fee.
(f) Answer [Yesh Omerim]: Transport expenses.

3) LAWS ASSOCIATED WITH THE TRANSFER OF SHEKALIM TO YERUSHALAYIM

(a) We may exchange the Shekalim for Darchonos to ease the transport.
(b) All collections were made into narrow-mouthed collection boxes.
(c) In the event of loss or theft of the money en route:

1. If these funds were already advanced by the Gizbarim, then the transfer agents take a Shevuah to the Gizbarim.
2. If funds were not yet taken from the Lishkah, then the agents take a Shevuah to those whose funds they were carrying and the latter must replace the funds.

(d) If the funds were recovered they are considered Shekalim and may not be used for the following year.

(a) Question: Change the coins into gems, making the transfer even easier?!
(b) Answer: Their value might go down, causing loss to Hekdesh (as is taught in the Bereisa).
(c) The reference to narrow-mouthed "Shofaros" is to two such boxes in the Beis HaMikdash, one for new Shekalim and one for old.
(d) There was only one such box in the outlying areas.
(e) The Mishnah in dealing with loss and its consequences is speaking of a Shomer Chinam, not a Shomer Sachar (who would have to pay).
(f) [R. Aba] It could be speaking even by a Shomer Sachar in a case of Ones.
(g) The issue of to whom they take the Shevuah assumes the position that the Gizbarim lay out the money for the funds not yet added to the Lishkah (otherwise the Shevuah would always be to those whose funds they were carrying).

(a) [R. Elazar] Our Mishnah follows the opinion of R. Shimon that a person must insure that his gift arrives at Hekdesh.
(b) [R. Yochanan] In this case all would agree to the Shevuah as a Takanah in order that people not take the Hekdesh lightly.

(c) Question: According to R. Elazar, why would he take a Shevuah to the Gizbarim (it is only the insurers who must pay)?!
(d) (Answer: It means they take a Shevuah to the Bnei HaIr in the presence of the Gizbarim [to avoid suspicion].)
(e) Even if the Bnei HaIr volunteer to pay (without imposing a Shevuah on their representatives), we still demand a Shevuah when Hekdesh is involved.
(f) [R. Yochanan] One who set aside his Shekel and it got lost, must replace it (until it is given to the Gizbar).
(g) [Reish Lakish] Hekdesh is always considered as already given.
(h) Question: Our Mishnah seems to contradict Reish Lakish (as the Bnei HaIr must replace the Shekalim)?
(i) Answer: As above, this is a Takanah.

(a) The first set of coins go into the box for new Shekalim while the second set of coins goes into the box for old Shekalim.
(b) Question: Which set is called old and which is called new?
(c) Answer: It is a dispute.

(a) If an agent used the Shekel as his own he is guilty of misappropriating Hekdesh (Me'ilah) if the Lishkah has already been drawn upon.
(b) If a person accidentally tried to give his Shekel from coins which were already Hekdesh, again, he is guilty if the Lishkah has been drawn upon, *and* the Korban bought with those funds has been offered.
(c) If he took the Shekel from money with Kedushas Shevi'is or Ma'aser Sheni, he must designate substitute funds.
(d) We have a Bereisa which learns the qualification of "the Korban has been offered" also in the Reisha (point (a) above).
(e) The position that Me'ilah would occur once the Lishkah has been drawn upon is R. Shimon (in the Mishnah from the 4th Perek which teaches that the money from the Lishkah becomes Chulin as soon as it is drawn upon, and not only once the Korban is offered).
(f) Question: The Shekel should serve the purpose of the original owner!?
(g) Answer: The original owner had his agent in mind (as in the case of the family of R. Gamliel).
(h) Question: But the money might end up as part of Shirayim?!
(i) Answer #1: R. Meir holds that there is Me'ilah by Shirayim.
(j) Answer #2: This coin was designated both for its agent as well as its use - for Korbanos (not Shirayim).
(k) Question: What benefit did he get (such that there should be Me'ilah)?
(l) Answer: He avoids the impounding of a security.

(a) Question: What is the source for this Din?
(b) Answer: The Pasuk teaches that a new Kedushah cannot come upon an existing one (and to allow the original coins to become Shekalim it is necessary to be Mechalel their Kedushah onto a new coin).