Yerushalmi Demai 2:3 ירושלמי דמאי ב׳:ג׳

MISHNAH: He who accepts upon himself to be a ḥaver will not sell to the am haäreẓ wet or dry¹³⁵The entire essence of fellowship is to preserve food grown or raised in the Land of Israel from ritual impurity. Since the am haäreẓ is characterized by his disregard for ritual purity (except in Jerusalem during the three annual pilgrimages when the Temple was standing, when “all of Israel are ḥaverim”), food sold to the am haäreẓ will certainly become defiled. and will not buy wet from him¹³⁶There is a rabbinic decree (explained in the next Note) that any fluid which becomes impure in any degree becomes impure in the first degree. In particular, unwashed hands are always impure in the second degree; the am haäreẓ can be assumed not to wash his hands before handling either drinks or wet food (such as olives); the food therefore is impure in the first degree and unfit for the ḥaver. (Fluids that cause impurity are water, human body fluids, grape juice or wine, olive oil, and date honey.), is not guest of an am haäreẓ and does not have him as a guest in his clothing¹³⁷The impurities caused by certain human discharges, such as gonorrhea and menstrual blood, impart original impurity not only to the human himself but also to his clothes. Hence, the clothes of an am haäreẓ have to be considered sources of original impurity and a ḥaver can have an am haäreẓ person as a guest only if he sends him first to the ritual bath to be purified and then clothes him in his own pure clothing. The stages of impurity are, in order, 1) “grandfather of impurity,” a dead person and the house in which there is a corpse, 2) original impurity, anything in contact with a corpse or in a house in which there is a corpse (with a few exceptions), and any other impurity described in the Torah, 3) impurity in the first degree, imparted by contact with original impurity or any impure fluid (because fluids might be in contact with impure human discharges, as above), 3) impurity in the second degree, imparted by contact with impurity of the first degree, also the status of any unwashed hands unless the person was careful that his hands should not touch anything absentmindedly, 4) impurity in the third degree, imparted by contact with impurity of the second degree, applicable to sacrifices and heave only, not to profane food (including profane food eaten under the rules of the heave), and 5) impurity in the fourth degree, imparted by contact with impurity of the third degree, applicable to sacrifices only, but not to heave or to profane food.. Rebbi Jehudah says, moreover he should not raise animals of the flock¹³⁸Sheep or goats. The prohibition applies only to goats whose grazing is destructive to young trees and should be permitted in semi-desert conditions only, never near cultivated land., should not overstep bounds by vows¹³⁹The scrupulous should not make vows for fear of not fulfilling them to the letter. Laughter might be considered a sacrilege; since nobody would laugh in the presence of a king, how could one laugh in the always present fear of the Almighty King of Kings. and laughter, should not defile himself with the dead¹⁴⁰Since priests may not defile themselves unless it be for a close relative (Lev. 21:1). However, for the majority view, burying the dead is a most sacred duty because its reward is entirely in the hands of Heaven since the object of the duty can no longer give thanks., and be a regular in the house of study. They said to him, these are not included.

HALAKHAH: “He will not buy wet from him,” hence dry is permitted since the amē haäreẓ are trustworthy as to preparation¹⁴¹Fluids always become impure by contact. Produce in the ground cannot become impure. Produce harvested dry can become impure if first it was “prepared” by contact with water (or any of the fluids mentioned above), Lev. 11:38. Since the pu‘al verb יתן is written defective, orthographically identical to the active pi‘el form, it is concluded that even passive wetting must have an active ingredient, viz., that the wetting should be agreeable to the owner. Since the status of the produce depends on the owner and the rules were known to the am haäreẓ, his word in this matter can be trusted.. And it was stated: “The am haäreẓ is trustworthy to say, these fruits were never prepared. But he is not trustworthy to say that they were prepared but did not accept impurity¹⁴²If the produce is prepared, the am haäreẓ by his person will make it most likely that it is impure..”

By the first statement he invalidated the second¹⁴³Rebbi Jehudah, who in Mishnah 2 permitted to be a guest at the am haäreẓ’s, accepts all restrictions given in Mishnah 3. Why can he not accept that the ḥaver will eat only dry produce not prepared for impurity?. Does this not disagree with Rebbi Jonah, since Rebbi Jonah said, ḥaverim are not suspect to eat or to serve to others? He should not go, defile his body and come to defile pure food¹⁴⁴If the problem were only food, R. Jehudah could disagree. But since the chairs and couches in the house of the am haäreẓ must be presumed to be originally impure (Lev. 15:6, 20), the ḥaver will not be able to remain undefiled in that house; returning, he might defile all pure food in his own house.. It does not disagree even with Rebbi Yose, since Rebbi Yose said, ḥaverim are suspect to eat but not to serve to others. There one speaks about purity but here about tithes¹⁴⁵It follows that the “ḥaver” of R. Yose is not really a ḥaver but a person trustworthy for tithes.. “He who is trustworthy for purities is trustworthy for tithes¹⁴⁶See the previous Halakhah..”

It was stated¹⁴⁷Tosephta Demay 2:13, Babli Bekhorot 30b.: “Everybody who comes has to accept¹⁴⁸As explained in the Tosephta of the next paragraph, he has publicly to accept the restrictions imposed on a ḥaver., even a learned ḥaver¹⁴⁹One is forced to explain this “ḥaver” by “trustworthy person.”; but a rabbi¹⁵⁰The חכם everywhere is the acting rabbi. who has been sitting in rabbinical court does not have to accept because he did it at the moment he joined the court.” Rebbi La said, only if he really accepted it from the first hour on¹⁵¹Rebbi La, student of R. Simeon ben Laqish, represents the later generations when abstinence from ritually unclean food was no longer a prerequisite for a rabbinical position.. Rebbi Yose asked, if it was from the first hour, what is the difference between a ḥaver and an am ḥaäreẓ? The position of Rebbi La parallels that of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, for Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish came to those of the house of Rebbi Yannai¹⁵²The yeshivah of R. Yannai, after the latter’s death.; the women saw him and removed themselves from before him¹⁵³So that he should not come in contact with any of their clothes and become impure.. He said to them, I shall come to your house; I am an am haäreẓ with respect to purities¹⁵⁴He was not a ḥaver in the sense of the Mishnah even though he was number two in the rabbinical establishment of his time..

It was stated¹⁵⁵A different text with the same meaning in Tosephta Demay 2:14, a substantially different text in Babli Bekhorot 30b.: “He answers¹⁵⁶The acceptance of the rules of fellowship has to be in public in front of the resident ḥaverim; his wife, servants, and minor children will accept before him. to the fellowship, his sons and household answer to him.” Some Tannaïm state: “He, his sons, and his household answer to the fellowship.” They do not disagree: the first, if they are dependent on their father¹⁵⁶The acceptance of the rules of fellowship has to be in public in front of the resident ḥaverim; his wife, servants, and minor children will accept before him., the second, if they do not depend on their father. Rebbi Ḥalaphta ben Saul stated, adults answer to the fellowship, minors answer to him¹⁵⁷R. Ḥalaphta ben Saul disagrees with the explanation just given; according to him, only minors do not have to appear personally before the fellowship. In the Babli, Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel is reported to require appearance of the (adult) sons before the fellowship because that is the more impressive ceremony..

It was stated¹⁵⁸In Tosephta Demay 2:11 and Babli Bekhorot 30b: “One accepts for ‘wings’ and after that one accepts for purities.”: “One brings close¹⁵⁹People who are interested in following the strict rules are first trained to follow the strict discipline of washing their hands before they are taught the intricacies of the rules of pure food. for ‘wings’¹⁶⁰“Wings” are the hands the person who is a candidate for fellowship has to promise to wash before eating (Rashi in Bekhorot 30b). The institution of washing one’s hands for profane food follows the discipline of the heave (Bikkurim 2:1, fol. 64d). The washing required here is for any food since even dry food may become wet by saliva. The Babylonian version of the same discipline is to wash only for meals taken with bread (Ḥulin 106a), but there fellowship was unknown. and after that one teaches about purity¹⁶¹Pure food. Taking טהרות as a plural of abstraction..” Rebbi Isaac ben Eleazar said, wings, smells¹⁶²From נדף “to give smell” (Maimonides to Zavim 4:6). The Biblical original impurities produced by a person with gonorrhea refer not only to things he touches but also those on which he sits or which he carries or moves otherwise. A lesser impurity is imparted to things above him but which he does not move. These are called מדף, “a smell of impurity.” The list given is a syllabus of the different kinds of impurity the novice has to learn about., pushings¹⁶³Vessels and foodstuffs that the zav, the person with gonorrhea, pushes or moves. These become impure even if never touched by the zav., purity¹⁶⁴All other impurities treated in Mishnah tractate Ṭahorot., tithes.

“In earlier times, they said: One removes from fellowship a ḥaver who became tax collector. They changed to say, one removes him from fellowship for the entire time he acts as tax collector. Once he left his collectorship, he is again treated as a ḥaver.¹⁶⁵Tosephta Demay 3:4, Babli Bekhorot 31a. Since taxes in antiquity were usually farmed out, the tax collector had to pay the anticipated taxes up front to the government and then try to recover them from the population. Since he incurred expenses for the collection, he was forced to collect more than what he had paid to the government. Any amount taken above his expenses is possibly theft, and certainly any amount taken above the official rate is robbery. The tax collector would not be in business if he did not make money. Hence, he probably is a thief and a robber and disqualified as member of a religious fellowship. However, in the absence of bidders the Roman government would force people to become tax collectors; the prior rule was therefore no longer enforceable or applicable.”

Ḥiyya ben Rebbi Abun¹⁶⁶He probably is R. Ḥiyya ben Abba. in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: One does not remove from fellowship a ḥaver who went outside the Land¹⁶⁷The land outside the Land of Israel is impure (Amos 7:17); the person who leaves the Land automatically becomes impure. But this impurity is not from the Torah and is easily removed upon return; hence, leaving the Land on trips was not frowned upon (except for priests who had no compelling reason to go abroad.) Because of this impurity, the Israeli fellowship was impossible in Babylonia at all times.. Hence¹⁶⁸The place of this sentence is not here but three paragraphs earlier (but it possibly is a statement by R. Joḥanan.) Since the minor takes the obligation of fellowship through his father, his father, not the fellowship, is required to teach him., a minor does not need to be brought close.