owners

If I have eaten the fruits thereof without money, or have caused the owners thereof to lose their life:

So are the ways of every one that is greedy of gain; which taketh away the life of the owners thereof.

When goods increase, they are increased that eat them: and what good is there to the owners thereof, saving the beholding of them with their eyes?

There is a sore evil which I have seen under the sun, namely, riches kept for the owners thereof to their hurt.

And as they were loosing the colt, the owners thereof said unto them, Why loose ye the colt?

And when she had sent them home to the owners, they paid her wages, and gave her also besides a kid.

And when it was in my house, and began to cry, I said unto her, From whence is this kid? is it not stolen? render it to the owners; for it is not lawful to eat any thing that is stolen.

But she replied upon me, It was given for a gift more than the wages. Howbeit I did not believe her, but bade her render it to the owners: and I was abashed at her. But she replied upon me, Where are thine alms and thy righteous deeds? behold, thou and all thy works are known.

Mary said to Jesus, "Whom are your disciples like?" He said, "They're like little children living in a field which isn't theirs. When the owners of the field come, they'll say, 'Give our field back to us.' They'll strip naked in front of them to let them have it and give them their field. "So I say that if the owner of the house realizes the bandit is coming, they'll watch out beforehand and won't let the bandit break into the house of their domain and steal their possessions. You, then, watch out for the world! Prepare to defend yourself so that the bandits don't attack you, because what you're expecting will come. May there be a wise person among you! "When the fruit ripened, the reaper came quickly, sickle in hand, and harvested it. Anyone who has ears to hear should hear!"

Then Adam said unto Eve, "O Eve, this is the skin of beasts with which we shall be covered. But when we have put it on, behold, a token of death shall have come upon us, inasmuch as the owners of these skins have died, and have wasted away. So also shall we die, and pass away."

And when I made no change in my statement, though I was beaten, he ordered me to be imprisoned, until, he said, the owners of the boy should come.

Extremely pleased with these arguments he gave orders that an addition should be made to the wages of the soldiers by the amount of the redemption money, that twenty drachmae should be paid to the owners for every slave, that a public order should be issued and that registers of the captives should be attached to it.

And I, when I ascended the throne, adopted a kindly attitude towards all my subjects, and more particularly to those who were citizens of yours--I have set at liberty more than a hundred thousand captives, paying their owners the appropriate market price for them, and if ever evil has been done to your people through the passions of the mob, I have made them reparation.

And after the crown of fruit had been put on, underneath there was inserted another pattern of eggs in precious stones, and other fluting and embossed work, that both sides of the table might be used, according to the wishes of the owners and for this reason the wave-work and the border were extended down to the feet of the table.

However, the famine increased among the Egyptians, and this heavy judgment grew more oppressive to them, because neither did the river overflow the ground, for it did not rise to its former height, nor did God send rain upon it; nor did they indeed make the least provision for themselves, so ignorant were they what was to be done; but Joseph sold them corn for their money. But when their money failed them, they bought corn with their cattle and their slaves; and if any of them had a small piece of land, they gave up that to purchase them food, by which means the king became the owner of all their substance; and they were removed, some to one place, and some to another, that so the possession of their country might be firmly assured to the king, excepting the lands of the priests, for their country continued still in their own possession. And indeed this sore famine made their minds, as well as their bodies, slaves; and at length compelled them to procure a sufficiency of food by such dishonorable means. But when this misery ceased, and the river overflowed the ground, and the ground brought forth its fruits plentifully, Joseph came to every city, and gathered the people thereto belonging together, and gave them back entirely the land which, by their own consent, the king might have possessed alone, and alone enjoyed the fruits of it. He also exhorted them to look on it as every one's own possession, and to fall to their husbandry with cheerfulness, and to pay as a tribute to the king, the fifth part of the fruits for the land which the king, when it was his own, restored to them. These men rejoiced upon their becoming unexpectedly owners of their lands, and diligently observed what was enjoined them; and by this means Joseph procured to himself a greater authority among the Egyptians, and greater love to the king from them. Now this law, that they should pay the fifth part of their fruits as tribute, continued until their later kings.

And truly Moses gave them all these precepts, being such as were observed during his own lifetime; but though he lived now in the wilderness, yet did he make provision how they might observe the same laws when they should have taken the land of Canaan. He gave them rest to the land from ploughing and planting every seventh year, as he had prescribed to them to rest from working every seventh day; and ordered, that then what grew of its own accord out of the earth should in common belong to all that pleased to use it, making no distinction in that respect between their own countrymen and foreigners: and he ordained, that they should do the same after seven times seven years, which in all are fifty years; and that fiftieth year is called by the Hebrews The Jubilee, wherein debtors are freed from their debts, and slaves are set at liberty; which slaves became such, though they were of the same stock, by transgressing some of those laws the punishment of which was not capital, but they were punished by this method of slavery. This year also restores the land to its former possessors in the manner following:—When the Jubilee is come, which name denotes liberty, he that sold the land, and he that bought it, meet together, and make an estimate, on one hand, of the fruits gathered; and, on the other hand, of the expenses laid out upon it. If the fruits gathered come to more than the expenses laid out, he that sold it takes the land again; but if the expenses prove more than the fruits, the present possessor receives of the former owner the difference that was wanting, and leaves the land to him; and if the fruits received, and the expenses laid out, prove equal to one another, the present possessor relinquishes it to the former owners. Moses would have the same law obtain as to those houses also which were sold in villages; but he made a different law for such as were sold in a city; for if he that sold it tendered the purchaser his money again within a year, he was forced to restore it; but in case a whole year had intervened, the purchaser was to enjoy what he had bought. This was the constitution of the laws which Moses learned of God when the camp lay under Mount Sinai, and this he delivered in writing to the Hebrews.

Accordingly he commanded the Levites to yield up to the priests thirteen of their forty-eight cities, and to set apart for them the tenth part of the tithes which they every year receive of the people; as also, that it was but just to offer to God the first-fruits of the entire product of the ground; and that they should offer the first-born of those four-footed beasts that are appointed for sacrifices, if it be a male, to the priests, to be slain, that they and their entire families may eat them in the holy city; but that the owners of those first-born which are not appointed for sacrifices in the laws of our country, should bring a shekel and a half in their stead: but for the first-born of a man, five shekels: that they should also have the first-fruits out of the shearing of the sheep; and that when any baked bread corn, and made loaves of it, they should give somewhat of what they had baked to them. Moreover, when any have made a sacred vow, I mean those that are called Nazarites, that suffer their hair to grow long, and use no wine, when they consecrate their hair, and offer it for a sacrifice, they are to allot that hair for the priests [to be thrown into the fire]. Such also as dedicate themselves to God, as a corban, which denotes what the Greeks call a gift, when they are desirous of being freed from that ministration, are to lay down money for the priests; thirty shekels if it be a woman, and fifty if it be a man; but if any be too poor to pay the appointed sum, it shall be lawful for the priests to determine that sum as they think fit. And if any slay beasts at home for a private festival, but not for a religious one, they are obliged to bring the maw and the cheek, [or breast,] and the right shoulder of the sacrifice, to the priests. With these Moses contrived that the priests should be plentifully maintained, besides what they had out of those offerings for sins which the people gave them, as I have set it down in the foregoing book. He also ordered, that out of every thing allotted for the priests, their servants, [their sons,] their daughters, and their wives, should partake, as well as themselves, excepting what came to them out of the sacrifices that were offered for sins; for of those none but the males of the family of the priests might eat, and this in the temple also, and that the same day they were offered.

Let not those that reap, and gather in the corn that is reaped, gather in the gleanings also; but let them rather leave some handfuls for those that are in want of the necessaries of life, that it may be a support and a supply to them, in order to their subsistence. In like manner when they gather their grapes, let them leave some smaller bunches for the poor, and let them pass over some of the fruits of the olive-trees, when they gather them, and leave them to be partaken of by those that have none of their own; for the advantage arising from the exact collection of all, will not be so considerable to the owners as will arise from the gratitude of the poor. And God will provide that the land shall more willingly produce what shall be for the nourishment of its fruits, in case you do not merely take care of your own advantage, but have regard to the support of others also. Nor are you to muzzle the mouths of the oxen when they tread the ears of corn in the thrashing-floor; for it is not just to restrain our fellow-laboring animals, and those that work in order to its production, of this fruit of their labors. Nor are you to prohibit those that pass by at the time when your fruits are ripe to touch them, but to give them leave to fill themselves full of what you have; and this whether they be of your own country or strangers,—as being glad of the opportunity of giving them some part of your fruits when they are ripe; but let it not be esteemed lawful for them to carry any away. Nor let those that gather the grapes, and carry them to the wine-presses, restrain those whom they meet from eating of them; for it is unjust, out of envy, to hinder those that desire it, to partake of the good things that come into the world according to God's will, and this while the season is at the height, and is hastening away as it pleases God. Nay, if some, out of bashfulness, are unwilling to touch these fruits, let them be encouraged to take of them [I mean, those that are Israelites] as if they were themselves the owners and lords, on account of the kindred there is between them. Nay, let them desire men that come from other countries, to partake of these tokens of friendship which God has given in their proper season; for that is not to be deemed as idly spent, which any one out of kindness communicates to another, since God bestows plenty of good things on men, not only for themselves to reap the advantage, but also to give to others in a way of generosity; and he is desirous, by this means, to make known to others his peculiar kindness to the people of Israel, and how freely he communicates happiness to them, while they abundantly communicate out of their great superfluities to even these foreigners also. But for him that acts contrary to this law, let him be beaten with forty stripes save one by the public executioner; let him undergo this punishment, which is a most ignominious one for a free-man, and this because he was such a slave to gain as to lay a blot upon his dignity; for it is proper for you who have had the experience of the afflictions in Egypt, and of those in the wilderness, to make provision for those that are in the like circumstances; and while you have now obtained plenty yourselves, through the mercy and providence of God, to distribute of the same plenty, by the like sympathy, to such as stand in need of it.

Let not those that reap, and gather in the corn that is reaped, gather in the gleanings also; but let them rather leave some handfuls for those that are in want of the necessaries of life, that it may be a support and a supply to them, in order to their subsistence. In like manner when they gather their grapes, let them leave some smaller bunches for the poor, and let them pass over some of the fruits of the olive-trees, when they gather them, and leave them to be partaken of by those that have none of their own; for the advantage arising from the exact collection of all, will not be so considerable to the owners as will arise from the gratitude of the poor. And God will provide that the land shall more willingly produce what shall be for the nourishment of its fruits, in case you do not merely take care of your own advantage, but have regard to the support of others also. Nor are you to muzzle the mouths of the oxen when they tread the ears of corn in the thrashing-floor; for it is not just to restrain our fellow-laboring animals, and those that work in order to its production, of this fruit of their labors. Nor are you to prohibit those that pass by at the time when your fruits are ripe to touch them, but to give them leave to fill themselves full of what you have; and this whether they be of your own country or strangers,—as being glad of the opportunity of giving them some part of your fruits when they are ripe; but let it not be esteemed lawful for them to carry any away. Nor let those that gather the grapes, and carry them to the wine-presses, restrain those whom they meet from eating of them; for it is unjust, out of envy, to hinder those that desire it, to partake of the good things that come into the world according to God's will, and this while the season is at the height, and is hastening away as it pleases God. Nay, if some, out of bashfulness, are unwilling to touch these fruits, let them be encouraged to take of them [I mean, those that are Israelites] as if they were themselves the owners and lords, on account of the kindred there is between them. Nay, let them desire men that come from other countries, to partake of these tokens of friendship which God has given in their proper season; for that is not to be deemed as idly spent, which any one out of kindness communicates to another, since God bestows plenty of good things on men, not only for themselves to reap the advantage, but also to give to others in a way of generosity; and he is desirous, by this means, to make known to others his peculiar kindness to the people of Israel, and how freely he communicates happiness to them, while they abundantly communicate out of their great superfluities to even these foreigners also. But for him that acts contrary to this law, let him be beaten with forty stripes save one by the public executioner; let him undergo this punishment, which is a most ignominious one for a free-man, and this because he was such a slave to gain as to lay a blot upon his dignity; for it is proper for you who have had the experience of the afflictions in Egypt, and of those in the wilderness, to make provision for those that are in the like circumstances; and while you have now obtained plenty yourselves, through the mercy and providence of God, to distribute of the same plenty, by the like sympathy, to such as stand in need of it.

Let him that is the owner of an ox which pusheth with his horn, kill him: but if he pushes and gores any one in the thrashing-floor, let him be put to death by stoning, and let him not be thought fit for food: but if his owner be convicted as having known what his nature was, and hath not kept him up, let him also be put to death, as being the occasion of the ox's having killed a man. But if the ox have killed a man-servant, or a maid-servant, let him be stoned; and let the owner of the ox pay thirty shekels to the master of him that was slain; but if it be an ox that is thus smitten and killed, let both the oxen, that which smote the other and that which was killed, be sold, and let the owners of them divide their price between them.

As for himself, upon the prophet's commanding him to leave the desert, and to go into the portion of the tribe of Judah, and abide there, he complied therewith; and coming to the city Hareth, which was in that tribe, he remained there. Now when Saul heard that David had been seen with a multitude about him, he fell into no small disturbance and trouble; but as he knew that David was a bold and courageous man, he suspected that somewhat extraordinary would appear from him, and that openly also, which would make him weep and put him into distress; so he called together to him his friends, and his commanders, and the tribe from which he was himself derived, to the hill where his palace was; and sitting upon a place called Aroura, his courtiers that were in dignities, and the guards of his body, being with him, he spake thus to them:—"You that are men of my own tribe, I conclude that you remember the benefits that I have bestowed upon you, and that I have made some of you owners of land, and made you commanders, and bestowed posts of honor upon you, and set some of you over the common people, and others over the soldiers; I ask you, therefore, whether you expect greater and more donations from the son of Jesse? for I know that you are all inclinable to him; [even my own son Jonathan himself is of that opinion, and persuades you to be of the same]; for I am not unacquainted with the oaths and the covenants that are between him and David, and that Jonathan is a counselor and an assistant to those that conspire against me, and none of you are concerned about these things, but you keep silence and watch, to see what will be the upshot of these things." When the king had made this speech, not one of the rest of those that were present made any answer; but Doeg the Syrian, who fed his mules, said, that he saw David when he came to the city Nob to Ahimelech the high priest, and that he learned future events by his prophesying; that he received food from him, and the sword of Goliath, and was conducted by him with security to such as he desired to go to.

"Marcus Antonius, imperator, to the magistrates, senate, and people of Tyre, sendeth greeting. I have sent you my decree, of which I will that ye take care that it be engraven on the public tables, in Roman and Greek letters, and that it stand engraven in the most illustrious places, that it may be read by all. Marcus Antonius, imperator, one of the triumvirate over the public affairs, made this declaration: Since Caius Cassius, in this revolt he hath made, hath pillaged that province which belonged not to him, and was held by garrisons there encamped, while they were our confederates, and hath spoiled that nation of the Jews that was in friendship with the Roman people, as in war; and since we have overcome his madness by arms, we now correct by our decrees and judicial determinations what he hath laid waste, that those things may be restored to our confederates. And as for what hath been sold of the Jewish possessions, whether they be bodies or possessions, let them be released; the bodies into that state of freedom they were originally in, and the possessions to their former owners. I also will that he who shall not comply with this decree of mine shall be punished for his disobedience; and if such a one be caught, I will take care that the offenders suffer condign punishment."

It is true, a man may say, these were favors peculiar to those particular places on which he bestowed his benefits; but then what favors he bestowed on the Eleans was a donation not only in common to all Greece, but to all the habitable earth, as far as the glory of the Olympic games reached. For when he perceived that they were come to nothing, for want of money, and that the only remains of ancient Greece were in a manner gone, he not only became one of the combatants in that return of the fifth-year games, which in his sailing to Rome he happened to be present at, but he settled upon them revenues of money for perpetuity, insomuch that his memorial as a combatant there can never fail. It would be an infinite task if I should go over his payments of people's debts, or tributes, for them, as he eased the people of Phasaelis, of Batanea, and of the small cities about Cilicia, of those annual pensions they before paid. However, the fear he was in much disturbed the greatness of his soul, lest he should be exposed to envy, or seem to hunt after greater filings than he ought, while he bestowed more liberal gifts upon these cities than did their owners themselves.

Now at the same time that certain young men of the village Dabaritta, who kept guard in the Great Plain laid snares for Ptolemy, who was Agrippa's and Bernice's steward, and took from him all that he had with him; among which things there were a great many costly garments, and no small number of silver cups, and six hundred pieces of gold; yet were they not able to conceal what they had stolen, but brought it all to Josephus, to Taricheae. Hereupon he blamed them for the violence they had offered to the king and queen, and deposited what they brought to him with Eneas, the most potent man of Taricheae, with an intention of sending the things back to the owners at a proper time; which act of Josephus brought him into the greatest danger; for those that had stolen the things had an indignation at him, both because they gained no share of it for themselves, and because they perceived beforehand what was Josephus's intention, and that he would freely deliver up what had cost them so much pains to the king and queen. These ran away by night to their several villages, and declared to all men that Josephus was going to betray them: they also raised great disorders in all the neighboring cities, insomuch that in the morning a hundred thousand armed men came running together; which multitude was crowded together in the hippodrome at Taricheae, and made a very peevish clamor against him; while some cried out, that they should depose the traitor; and others, that they should burn him. Now John irritated a great many, as did also one Jesus, the son of Sapphias, who was then governor of Tiberias. Then it was that Josephus's friends, and the guards of his body, were so affrighted at this violent assault of the multitude, that they all fled away but four; and as he was asleep, they awaked him, as the people were going to set fire to the house. And although those four that remained with him persuaded him to run away, he was neither surprised at his being himself deserted, nor at the great multitude that came against him, but leaped out to them with his clothes rent, and ashes sprinkled on his head, with his hands behind him, and his sword hanging at his neck. At this sight his friends, especially those of Taricheae, commiserated his condition; but those that came out of the country, and those in their neighborhood, to whom his government seemed burdensome, reproached him, and bid him produce the money which belonged to them all immediately, and to confess the agreement he had made to betray them; for they imagined, from the habit in which he appeared, that he would deny nothing of what they suspected concerning him, and that it was in order to obtain pardon that he had put himself entirely into so pitiable a posture. But this humble appearance was only designed as preparatory to a stratagem of his, who thereby contrived to set those that were so angry at him at variance one with another about the things they were angry at. However, he promised he would confess all: hereupon he was permitted to speak, when he said, "I did neither intend to send this money back to Agrippa, nor to gain it myself; for I did never esteem one that was your enemy to be my friend, nor did I look upon what would tend to your disadvantage to be my advantage. But, O you people of Tarieheae, I saw that your city stood in more need than others of fortifications for your security, and that it wanted money in order for the building it a wall. I was also afraid lest the people of Tiberias and other cities should lay a plot to seize upon these spoils, and therefore it was that I intended to retain this money privately, that I might encompass you with a wall. But if this does not please you, I will produce what was brought me, and leave it to you to plunder it; but if I have conducted myself so well as to please you, you may if you please punish your benefactor."

And now, when the multitude were gotten together to an assembly, and every one was in indignation at these men's seizing upon the sanctuary, at their rapine and murders, but had not yet begun their attacks upon them, [the reason of which was this, that they imagined it to be a difficult thing to suppress these zealots, as indeed the case was,] Ananus stood in the midst of them, and casting his eyes frequently at the temple, and having a flood of tears in his eyes, he said, "Certainly it had been good for me to die before I had seen the house of God full of so many abominations, or these sacred places, that ought not to be trodden upon at random, filled with the feet of these blood-shedding villains; yet do I, who am clothed with the vestments of the high priesthood, and am called by that most venerable name [of high priest], still live, and am but too fond of living, and cannot endure to undergo a death which would be the glory of my old age; and if I were the only person concerned, and as it were in a desert, I would give up my life, and that alone for God's sake; for to what purpose is it to live among a people insensible of their calamities, and where there is no notion remaining of any remedy for the miseries that are upon them? for when you are seized upon, you bear it! and when you are beaten, you are silent! and when the people are murdered, nobody dare so much as send out a groan openly! O bitter tyranny that we are under! But why do I complain of the tyrants? Was it not you, and your sufferance of them, that have nourished them? Was it not you that overlooked those that first of all got together, for they were then but a few, and by your silence made them grow to be many; and by conniving at them when they took arms, in effect armed them against yourselves? You ought to have then prevented their first attempts, when they fell a reproaching your relations; but by neglecting that care in time, you have encouraged these wretches to plunder men. When houses were pillaged, nobody said a word, which was the occasion why they carried off the owners of those houses; and when they were drawn through the midst of the city, nobody came to their assistance. They then proceeded to put those whom you have betrayed into their hands into bonds. I do not say how many and of what characters those men were whom they thus served; but certainly they were such as were accused by none, and condemned by none; and since nobody succored them when they were put into bonds, the consequence was, that you saw the same persons slain. We have seen this also; so that still the best of the herd of brute animals, as it were, have been still led to be sacrificed, when yet nobody said one word, or moved his right hand for their preservation. Will you bear, therefore, will you bear to see your sanctuary trampled on? and will you lay steps for these profane wretches, upon which they may mount to higher degrees of insolence? Will not you pluck them down from their exaltation? for even by this time they had proceeded to higher enormities, if they had been able to overthrow any thing greater than the sanctuary. They have seized upon the strongest place of the whole city; you may call it the temple, if you please, though it be like a citadel or fortress. Now, while you have tyranny in so great a degree walled in, and see your enemies over your heads, to what purpose is it to take counsel? and what have you to support your minds withal? Perhaps you wait for the Romans, that they may protect our holy places: are our matters then brought to that pass? and are we come to that degree of misery, that our enemies themselves are expected to pity us? O wretched creatures! will not you rise up and turn upon those that strike you? which you may observe in wild beasts themselves, that they will avenge themselves on those that strike them. Will you not call to mind, every one of you, the calamities you yourselves have suffered? nor lay before your eyes what afflictions you yourselves have undergone? and will not such things sharpen your souls to revenge? Is therefore that most honorable and most natural of our passions utterly lost, I mean the desire of liberty? Truly we are in love with slavery, and in love with those that lord it over us, as if we had received that principle of subjection from our ancestors; yet did they undergo many and great wars for the sake of liberty, nor were they so far overcome by the power of the Egyptians, or the Medes, but that still they did what they thought fit, notwithstanding their commands to the contrary. And what occasion is there now for a war with the Romans? [I meddle not with determining whether it be an advantageous and profitable war or not.] What pretense is there for it? Is it not that we may enjoy our liberty? Besides, shall we not bear the lords of the habitable earth to be lords over us, and yet bear tyrants of our own country? Although I must say that submission to foreigners may be borne, because fortune hath already doomed us to it, while submission to wicked people of our own nation is too unmanly, and brought upon us by our own consent. However, since I have had occasion to mention the Romans, I will not conceal a thing that, as I am speaking, comes into my mind, and affects me considerably; it is this, that though we should be taken by them, [God forbid the event should be so!] yet can we undergo nothing that will be harder to be borne than what these men have already brought upon us. How then can we avoid shedding of tears, when we see the Roman donations in our temple, while we withal see those of our own nation taking our spoils, and plundering our glorious metropolis, and slaughtering our men, from which enormities those Romans themselves would have abstained? to see those Romans never going beyond the bounds allotted to profane persons, nor venturing to break in upon any of our sacred customs; nay, having a horror on their minds when they view at a distance those sacred walls; while some that have been born in this very country, and brought up in our customs, and called Jews, do walk about in the midst of the holy places, at the very time when their hands are still warm with the slaughter of their own countrymen. Besides, can any one be afraid of a war abroad, and that with such as will have comparatively much greater moderation than our own people have? For truly, if we may suit our words to the things they represent, it is probable one may hereafter find the Romans to be the supporters of our laws, and those within ourselves the subverters of them. And now I am persuaded that every one of you here comes satisfied before I speak that these overthrowers of our liberties deserve to be destroyed, and that nobody can so much as devise a punishment that they have not deserved by what they have done, and that you are all provoked against them by those their wicked actions, whence you have suffered so greatly. But perhaps many of you are affrighted at the multitude of those zealots, and at their audaciousness, as well as at the advantage they have over us in their being higher in place than we are; for these circumstances, as they have been occasioned by your negligence, so will they become still greater by being still longer neglected; for their multitude is every day augmented, by every ill man's running away to those that are like to themselves, and their audaciousness is therefore inflamed, because they meet with no obstruction to their designs. And for their higher place, they will make use of it for engines also, if we give them time to do so; but be assured of this, that if we go up to fight them, they will be made tamer by their own consciences, and what advantages they have in the height of their situation they will lose by the opposition of their reason; perhaps also God himself, who hath been affronted by them, will make what they throw at us return against themselves, and these impious wretches will be killed by their own darts: let us but make our appearance before them, and they will come to nothing. However, it is a right thing, if there should be any danger in the attempt, to die before these holy gates, and to spend our very lives, if not for the sake of our children and wives, yet for God's sake, and for the sake of his sanctuary. I will assist you both with my counsel and with my hand; nor shall any sagacity of ours be wanting for your support; nor shall you see that I will be sparing of my body neither."

But when the people of Antioch were informed that Titus was approaching, they were so glad at it, that they could not keep within their walls, but hasted away to give him the meeting; nay, they proceeded as far as thirty furlongs, and more, with that intention. These were not the men only, but a multitude of women also with their children did the same; and when they saw him coming up to them, they stood on both sides of the way, and stretched out their right hands, saluting him, and making all sorts of acclamations to him, and turned back together with him. They also, among all the acclamations they made to him, besought him all the way they went to eject the Jews out of their city; yet did not Titus at all yield to this their petition, but gave them the bare hearing of it quietly. However, the Jews were in a great deal of terrible fear, under the uncertainty they were in what his opinion was, and what he would do to them. For Titus did not stay at Antioch, but continued his progress immediately to Zeugma, which lies upon the Euphrates, whither came to him messengers from Vologeses king of Parthia, and brought him a crown of gold upon the victory he had gained over the Jews; which he accepted of, and feasted the king's messengers, and then came back to Antioch. And when the senate and people of Antioch earnestly entreated him to come upon their theater, where their whole multitude was assembled, and expected him, he complied with great humanity; but when they pressed him with much earnestness, and continually begged of him that he would eject the Jews out of their city, he gave them this very pertinent answer: "How can this be done, since that country of theirs, whither the Jews must be obliged then to retire, is destroyed, and no place will receive them besides?" Whereupon the people of Antioch, when they had failed of success in this their first request, made him a second; for they desired that he would order those tables of brass to be removed on which the Jews' privileges were engraven. However, Titus would not grant that neither, but permitted the Jews of Antioch to continue to enjoy the very same privileges in that city which they had before, and then departed for Egypt; and as he came to Jerusalem in his progress, and compared the melancholy condition he saw it then in, with the ancient glory of the city, and called to mind the greatness of its present ruins, as well as its ancient splendor, he could not but pity the destruction of the city, so far was he from boasting that so great and goodly a city as that was had been by him taken by force; nay, he frequently cursed those that had been the authors of their revolt, and had brought such a punishment upon the city; insomuch that it openly appeared that he did not desire that such a calamity as this punishment of theirs amounted to should be a demonstration of his courage. Yet was there no small quantity of the riches that had been in that city still found among its ruins, a great deal of which the Romans dug up; but the greatest part was discovered by those who were captives, and so they carried it away; I mean the gold and the silver, and the rest of that most precious furniture which the Jews had, and which the owners had treasured up under ground, against the uncertain fortunes of war.

Now it is impossible to describe the multitude of the shows as they deserve, and the magnificence of them all; such indeed as a man could not easily think of as performed, either by the labor of workmen, or the variety of riches, or the rarities of nature; for almost all such curiosities as the most happy men ever get by piece-meal were here one heaped on another, and those both admirable and costly in their nature; and all brought together on that day demonstrated the vastness of the dominions of the Romans; for there was here to be seen a mighty quantity of silver, and gold, and ivory, contrived into all sorts of things, and did not appear as carried along in pompous show only, but, as a man may say, running along like a river. Some parts were composed of the rarest purple hangings, and so carried along; and others accurately represented to the life what was embroidered by the arts of the Babylonians. There were also precious stones that were transparent, some set in crowns of gold, and some in other places, as the workmen pleased; and of these such a vast number were brought, that we could not but thence learn how vainly we imagined any of them to be rarities. The images of the gods were also carried, being as well wonderful for their largeness, as made very artificially, and with great skill of the workmen; nor were any of these images of any other than very costly materials; and many species of animals were brought, every one in their own natural ornaments. The men also who brought every one of these shows were great multitudes, and adorned with purple garments, all over interwoven with gold; those that were chosen for carrying these pompous shows having also about them such magnificent ornaments as were both extraordinary and surprising. Besides these, one might see that even the great number of the captives was not unadorned, while the variety that was in their garments, and their fine texture, concealed from the sight the deformity of their bodies. But what afforded the greatest surprise of all was the structure of the pageants that were borne along; for indeed he that met them could not but be afraid that the bearers would not be able firmly enough to support them, such was their magnitude; for many of them were so made, that they were on three or even four stories, one above another. The magnificence also of their structure afforded one both pleasure and surprise; for upon many of them were laid carpets of gold. There was also wrought gold and ivory fastened about them all; and many resemblances of the war, and those in several ways, and variety of contrivances, affording a most lively portraiture of itself. For there was to be seen a happy country laid waste, and entire squadrons of enemies slain; while some of them ran away, and some were carried into captivity; with walls of great altitude and magnitude overthrown and ruined by machines; with the strongest fortifications taken, and the walls of most populous cities upon the tops of hills seized on, and an army pouring itself within the walls; as also every place full of slaughter, and supplications of the enemies, when they were no longer able to lift up their hands in way of opposition. Fire also sent upon temples was here represented, and houses overthrown, and falling upon their owners: rivers also, after they came out of a large and melancholy desert, ran down, not into a land cultivated, nor as drink for men, or for cattle, but through a land still on fire upon every side; for the Jews related that such a thing they had undergone during this war. Now the workmanship of these representations was so magnificent and lively in the construction of the things, that it exhibited what had been done to such as did not see it, as if they had been there really present. On the top of every one of these pageants was placed the commander of the city that was taken, and the manner wherein he was taken. Moreover, there followed those pageants a great number of ships; and for the other spoils, they were carried in great plenty. But for those that were taken in the temple of Jerusalem, they made the greatest figure of them all; that is, the golden table, of the weight of many talents; the candlestick also, that was made of gold, though its construction were now changed from that which we made use of; for its middle shaft was fixed upon a basis, and the small branches were produced out of it to a great length, having the likeness of a trident in their position, and had every one a socket made of brass for a lamp at the tops of them. These lamps were in number seven, and represented the dignity of the number seven among the Jews; and the last of all the spoils, was carried the Law of the Jews. After these spoils passed by a great many men, carrying the images of Victory, whose structure was entirely either of ivory or of gold. After which Vespasian marched in the first place, and Titus followed him; Domitian also rode along with them, and made a glorious appearance, and rode on a horse that was worthy of admiration.

If an Israelite rented a field from a priest or from a Levite [for a share in the produce] the tithes belong to the owners [of the field]. Rabbi Ishmael says: if a city dweller [from outside of Jerusalem] rented a field from a Jerusalemite, the second tithe belongs to the inhabitant of Jerusalem. But the sages say: the city dweller may go up and eat the second tithe in Jerusalem.

A daughter of an Israelite ate terumah and afterwards married a priest: If the terumah she ate had not yet been acquired by another priest she can repay to herself the value and the fifth. But if a priest had already acquired the terumah she had eaten, she must repay the value to the owners, but [she can repay] the fifth to herself, because they said that he who eats terumah unwittingly, pays the value to the owners and the fifth to whoever he wants.

A daughter of an Israelite ate terumah and afterwards married a priest: If the terumah she ate had not yet been acquired by another priest she can repay to herself the value and the fifth. But if a priest had already acquired the terumah she had eaten, she must repay the value to the owners, but [she can repay] the fifth to herself, because they said that he who eats terumah unwittingly, pays the value to the owners and the fifth to whoever he wants.

On the eve of the first [others read “last”] festival-day of Pesah in the fourth and in the seventh [years of the sabbatical cycle] the removal was performed. Terumah and the terumah of tithe were given to their owners, the first tithe was given to its owner, the tithe of the poor to its owner, and maaser sheni and first-fruits were removed in every place. Rabbi Shimon says: first-fruits were given to the priests like terumah. As for a cooked dish [with maaser sheni in it]: Bet Shammai says: it must be removed. But Bet Hillel say: lo, it may be considered as already removed.

If he slaughtered it for those who are not its eaters, or for those who were not registered for it, for uncircumcised or for unclean [persons], he is liable. [If he slaughtered it] for its eaters and for those who are not its eaters, for those who are registered for it and for those who are not registered for it, for circumcised and for uncircumcised, for unclean and for clean [persons], he is exempt. If he slaughtered it, and it was found to possess a blemish, he is liable. If he slaughtered it and it was found to be an internal terefah, he is exempt. If he slaughtered it, and [then] it became known that its owners had withdrawn their hands from it, or that they had died, or that they had become unclean, he is not culpable, because he slaughtered it with permission.

A pesah which went out [beyond the walls of Jerusalem] or was defiled must be burned immediately. If its owners were defiled or they died, its form must change and [then] it is burned on the sixteenth [of Nisan]. Rabbi Yohanan ben Berokah says: this too must be burned immediately, because there are none to eat it.

A beast and utensils are [restricted to the same limits] as the feet of the owners. One who gives his cow over to his son or to a cowherd [to tend], they are [restricted to the same limits] as the feet of the owner. Vessels which have been set apart for [the use of] one of the brothers in a house, are [restricted to the same limits] as his feet, but [those utensils] which have not been so set apart, can be taken [only] to a place where [all the brothers] may go.

If joint owners [of a courtyard] made a vow not to benefit from one another, they may not enter the courtyard. Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob says: This one enters his own property and this one enters his own property. And both are forbidden to set up a mill-stone or an oven or raise chickens. If [only] one was forbidden by vow to benefit from the other, he may not enter the court. Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob says: He can say to the other, “I am entering into my own, and I am not entering into yours.’ They force the one who vowed to sell his share [of the courtyard].

There was no Sicaricon in Judea for those killed in war. After the war’s slaughter ended there is Sicaricon there. How so? If a man buys a field from the Sicaricon and then buys it again from the original owner, his purchase is void, but if he buys it first from the original owner and then from the Sicaricon it is valid. If a man buys [a piece of a married woman’s property] from the husband and then buys it from the wife, the purchase is void, but if he buys it first from the wife and then from the husband it is valid. This was [the ruling] of the first mishnah. The court that came after them said if a man buys property from the Sicaricon he had to give the original owner a quarter [of the value]. When is this so? When the original owners cannot buy it themselves, but if they can they have preemption over everyone else. Rabbi assembled a court and they decided by vote that if the property had been in the hands of the Sicaricon twelve months, whoever purchased it first acquired the title, but he had to give a quarter [of the price] to the original owner.

The ox of a woman, or the ox of orphans, or the ox of a guardian, or a wild ox, or an ox belonging to the Temple, or an ox belonging to a proselyte who died and has no inheritors, these are all liable for the death penalty. Rabbi Judah says, “A wild ox, or an ox belonging to the Temple, or an ox belonging to a proselyte who died are exempt from death, since they have no owners.”

If an ox goes out to be stoned, and its owners dedicated it to the Temple, it is not considered dedicated. If he slaughtered it, its flesh is forbidden. But if before its sentence was complete its owner dedicated it, it is dedicated. If he slaughtered it, its flesh is permitted.

If one handed it to an unpaid guardian, or to a borrower, or to a paid guardian, or to a hirer, they take the place of the owners; if the beast was an attested danger he pays full damages, and if it was accounted harmless he pays half damages. If its owner had tied it with a halter, or locked it up properly, but it came out and caused damage, the owner is liable, whether it was an attested danger or accounted harmless, these are the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah says: “If it was accounted harmless he is liable, but if it was an attested danger he is exempt, as it says, “and its owner did not guard it”, but this one has been guarded. Rabbi Eliezer says: “Its only guarding is the knife.”

If excise collectors took his donkey and gave him another donkey, or if bandits robbed a man of his coat and gave him another coat, they are his own, since the original owners gave up hope of recovering them. If a man saved something from a flood or from marauding troops or from bandits: if the owner gave up hope of recovering [the item], it belongs to him. So too with a swarm of bees: if the owner gave up hope of recovering [the swarm], it belongs to him. Rabbi Yochanan ben Baroka said: “A woman or child may be believed if they say, ‘The swarm of bees went away from here.’” A man may go into his fellow’s field to save his swarm and if he causes damage he must pay for the damage that he has caused; but he may not cut off a branch of the tree [to save his swarm] even on condition that he pay its value. Rabbi Yishmael, the son of Rabbi Yochanan ben Baroka, says: “He may even cut off [the branch] and repay the value.”

If a man deposited produce with his fellow, even if it should perish he may not touch it. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: “He may sell it before a court of law, since he is like someone who returns a lost object to its owners.”

All sacrifices slaughtered not in their own name are valid, except that they do not count in fulfilling their owners’ obligation, with the exception of the pesah and the hatat (sin-offering). [This is true for] a pesah in its proper time and a hatat at all times. Rabbi Eliezer says: also the asham (guilt-offering). [This is true for] a pesah in its proper time and a hatat and an asham at all times. Rabbi Eliezer said: the hatat comes on account of sin, and the asham comes on account of sin: just as a hatat [slaughtered] not in its own name is invalid, so the asham is invalid if [slaughtered] not in its own name.

A pesah that was slaughtered on the morning of the fourteenth [of Nisan] under a different designation: Rabbi Joshua declares it valid, just as if it had been slaughtered on the thirteenth. Ben Batera declares it invalid, as if it had been slaughtered in the afternoon. Said Shimon ben Azzai: I have a tradition from seventy-two elder[s] on the day that Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah] was placed in the academy, that all sacrifices which are eaten, though slaughtered under a different designation are valid, except that their owners have not fulfilled their obligation, except the pesah and the hatat. And ben Azzai added only the olah, but the sages did not agree with him.

The hides of less holy sacrifices belong to their owners. The hides of most holy sacrifices belong to the priest. This is a kal vehomer: if with an olah, even though they do not acquire its flesh they do acquire its hide, is it not logical that they acquire the hides of most holy sacrifices, when they do acquire their flesh? The altar does not refute [this argument], for it does not acquire the hide in any instance.

All minhahs from which the handful was taken not in their own name are valid, except that they do not count in fulfilling their owners’ obligation, with the exception of the sinner's minhah and the minhah of jealousy. A sinner’s minhah and the minhah of jealousy from which he removed the handful not in their own name, or he put into the vessel, or brought [to the altar], or burned not in their own name, or for their own name and not for their own name, or not for their own name and for their own name, they are invalid. How can they be “for their own name and not for their own name”? [If offered it] as a sinner's minhah and as a voluntary minhah. And how can they be “not for their own name and for their own name”? [If offered it] as a voluntary minhah and as a sinner's minhah.

Two minhahs from which the handfuls had not yet been taken out were mixed together: If it is still possible to take the handful from each separately, they are valid; If not, they are invalid. If the handful [of a minhah] was mixed with a minhah from which the handful had not yet been taken, he must not burn it. If he did burn it, then the minhah from which the handful had been taken fulfills the owner's obligation while the other from which the handful had not been taken does not fulfill the owner's obligation. If the handful was mixed with the remainder of the minhah or with the remainder of another minhah, it must not be burned; If he did burn it does fulfill the owner's obligation. If the handful had become unclean and yet he offered it, the head plate renders it acceptable, But if it went out [of the Temple Court] and was afterwards he offered it, the headplate does not render it acceptable. For the headplate renders acceptable only an offering which was unclean but not that which was taken out.

Two minhahs from which the handfuls had not yet been taken out were mixed together: If it is still possible to take the handful from each separately, they are valid; If not, they are invalid. If the handful [of a minhah] was mixed with a minhah from which the handful had not yet been taken, he must not burn it. If he did burn it, then the minhah from which the handful had been taken fulfills the owner's obligation while the other from which the handful had not been taken does not fulfill the owner's obligation. If the handful was mixed with the remainder of the minhah or with the remainder of another minhah, it must not be burned; If he did burn it does fulfill the owner's obligation. If the handful had become unclean and yet he offered it, the head plate renders it acceptable, But if it went out [of the Temple Court] and was afterwards he offered it, the headplate does not render it acceptable. For the headplate renders acceptable only an offering which was unclean but not that which was taken out.

Two minhahs from which the handfuls had not yet been taken out were mixed together: If it is still possible to take the handful from each separately, they are valid; If not, they are invalid. If the handful [of a minhah] was mixed with a minhah from which the handful had not yet been taken, he must not burn it. If he did burn it, then the minhah from which the handful had been taken fulfills the owner's obligation while the other from which the handful had not been taken does not fulfill the owner's obligation. If the handful was mixed with the remainder of the minhah or with the remainder of another minhah, it must not be burned; If he did burn it does fulfill the owner's obligation. If the handful had become unclean and yet he offered it, the head plate renders it acceptable, But if it went out [of the Temple Court] and was afterwards he offered it, the headplate does not render it acceptable. For the headplate renders acceptable only an offering which was unclean but not that which was taken out.

With regard to [an animal] that was born through a cesarean section and the first born which came after it: Rabbi Tarfon says: both go out to pasture until blemished and are eaten with their blemishes by the owners. But Rabbi Akiva says: neither of them is a first born; the first because it did not open its mother’s womb, and the second, because another preceded it.

If one buys an animal from a non-Jew and it is not known whether it had given birth or had not given birth: Rabbi Ishmael says: that born of a goat in its first year certainly belongs to the priest; after that, it is a questionable case [of a first-born]. That born of a ewe two years old certainly belongs to the priest; after that, it is a questionable case [of a first born]. That born of a cow or a donkey three years old certainly belongs to the priest; after that, it is a questionable case [of a first born]. Rabbi Akiva to him: if an animal were exempted [from the law of the first born] only with the birth of [actual] offspring, it would be as you say. But they said: the sign of offspring in small cattle is a discharge [from the womb]. In large cattle, the after-birth; in a woman, the signs are the fetus and the after-birth. This is the general rule: Whenever it is known that it had given birth, the priest receives nothing. Whenever it had never given birth, it belongs to the priest. If there is a doubt, it shall be eaten blemished by the owners. Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob says: if a large domestic animal has discharged a clot of blood, it [the clot] shall be buried, and it [the mother] is exempted from the law of the first born.

All dedicated animals which became unfit [for the altar] are sold in a market, slaughtered in a market and weighed by the liter, except for a first born or a tithed animal, as their profit goes to the owners, [whereas] the profit on dedicated objects which became unfit goes to the Temple. One can weigh one piece of meat of the first-born against another piece of ordinary meat.

And in consequence of the following blemishes one may not slaughter a first born either in the Temple or in the rest of the state: White spots on the cornea and water [dripping from the eye] which are not permanent, Or molars which have been broken but not torn out [completely]; Or [an animal] affected with garav, a wart, or hazazit. An old [animal] or a sick one, [an animal] of offensive smell; Or [an animal] which with a transgression has been committed or an animal which is known to have killed a human being on the testimony of one witness or of the owners. A tumtum or a hermaphrodite cannot be slaughtered, neither in the Temple or in the rest of the state. Rabbi Ishmael however says: there is no greater blemish than that [of a hermaphrodite]. But the sages say: it is not considered a first-born and it may be shorn and worked with.

The following do not return [to their owners] in Jubilee year: The share of the first-born, [The inheritance of] one who inherits his wife's [estate] [And of] one who performs yibbum with his sister-in-law And a present, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: a present is like a sale. Rabbi Eliezer says: all of these return in the Jubilee. R. Johanan ben Berokah says: if one inherits his wife's estate, he returns it to the members of the family and he deducts from the purchase money.

How does one tithe animals? He brings them to a shed and makes for them a small opening so that two cannot go out at the same time. And he counts them with a rod: one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine. And the one that comes out tenth he marks with red chalk and he says: “Behold, this is [the tithe].” If he did not mark it, or if he did not count them with a rod, or if he counted them while they were crouching or standing, they are still considered tithed. If he had one hundred [lambs] and he took ten or if he had ten and he took one [without counting], this is not [a valid] tithe. Rabbi Yose bar Judah says: this is a [valid] tithe. If one [of the lambs] already counted jumped back into the flock [in the shed] they are all exempt. If one of the lambs that was a tithe jumped back into the flock [in the shed], they all go to pasture until they become unfit for sacrifice, and the owners may eat them in their unfit state.

If one said I will acquire it for twenty-one selas, then the owners must pay twenty-six. [If one said] Twenty-two, the owners must pay twenty-seven. Twenty-three, the owners must pay twenty-eight. Twenty-four, the owners must pay twenty-nine. Twenty-five, the owners must pay thirty, For they need not add one fifth to what the other bids more. If one said: I will acquire it for twenty-six, if the owners want to pay thirty-one and an extra denar, the owner comes first. And if not, we say to the other: It has become yours.

If one said I will acquire it for twenty-one selas, then the owners must pay twenty-six. [If one said] Twenty-two, the owners must pay twenty-seven. Twenty-three, the owners must pay twenty-eight. Twenty-four, the owners must pay twenty-nine. Twenty-five, the owners must pay thirty, For they need not add one fifth to what the other bids more. If one said: I will acquire it for twenty-six, if the owners want to pay thirty-one and an extra denar, the owner comes first. And if not, we say to the other: It has become yours.

If one said I will acquire it for twenty-one selas, then the owners must pay twenty-six. [If one said] Twenty-two, the owners must pay twenty-seven. Twenty-three, the owners must pay twenty-eight. Twenty-four, the owners must pay twenty-nine. Twenty-five, the owners must pay thirty, For they need not add one fifth to what the other bids more. If one said: I will acquire it for twenty-six, if the owners want to pay thirty-one and an extra denar, the owner comes first. And if not, we say to the other: It has become yours.

If one said I will acquire it for twenty-one selas, then the owners must pay twenty-six. [If one said] Twenty-two, the owners must pay twenty-seven. Twenty-three, the owners must pay twenty-eight. Twenty-four, the owners must pay twenty-nine. Twenty-five, the owners must pay thirty, For they need not add one fifth to what the other bids more. If one said: I will acquire it for twenty-six, if the owners want to pay thirty-one and an extra denar, the owner comes first. And if not, we say to the other: It has become yours.

If one said I will acquire it for twenty-one selas, then the owners must pay twenty-six. [If one said] Twenty-two, the owners must pay twenty-seven. Twenty-three, the owners must pay twenty-eight. Twenty-four, the owners must pay twenty-nine. Twenty-five, the owners must pay thirty, For they need not add one fifth to what the other bids more. If one said: I will acquire it for twenty-six, if the owners want to pay thirty-one and an extra denar, the owner comes first. And if not, we say to the other: It has become yours.

If one said I will acquire it for twenty-one selas, then the owners must pay twenty-six. [If one said] Twenty-two, the owners must pay twenty-seven. Twenty-three, the owners must pay twenty-eight. Twenty-four, the owners must pay twenty-nine. Twenty-five, the owners must pay thirty, For they need not add one fifth to what the other bids more. If one said: I will acquire it for twenty-six, if the owners want to pay thirty-one and an extra denar, the owner comes first. And if not, we say to the other: It has become yours.

Houses in courtyards - we accord to them the advantages of houses in a walled city and the advantages given to fields: They can be redeemed at once, and at any time within the twelve months like houses [in a walled city], and they return [to the owners] in the Jubilee or [at an earlier time] by [payment of a] reduced price like fields. The following are considered houses in courtyards: [a city which has] two courtyards, each having two houses, even though they have been encompassed by a wall since the days of Joshua ben Nun, they count as houses in courtyards.

All persons can substitute, both men and women. Not that one is permitted to substitute, but that if one did so, the substitute is sacred, and he receives forty lashes. Priests have the power to substitute their own [animal] and Israelites also have the power to substitute their own [animal]. Priests do not have the power to substitute a hatat, an asham or a first-born: Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri: what is the reason [priests] do not have the power to substitute a first-born? Rabbi Akiva said: a hatat and an asham are priestly gifts and a first-born is also a priestly gift. Just as in the case of a hatat and an asham [priests] have no power to substitute them, so in the case of a first-born [priests] have no power to substitute it. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri said to him: So what that priests should have no power to substitute a hatat and an asham, for there they have do not have a claim on these [offerings] while they are alive. How can you say that the same applies to a first-born upon which [the priests] do have a claim when it is alive? Rabbi Akiva replied to him: Has not Scripture already said: “Then it and its substitute shall be holy?” (Leviticus 27:10). Now where does the holiness [of the original animal] occur? In the house of the owners; so too the substitution occurs in the house of the owners.

All persons can substitute, both men and women. Not that one is permitted to substitute, but that if one did so, the substitute is sacred, and he receives forty lashes. Priests have the power to substitute their own [animal] and Israelites also have the power to substitute their own [animal]. Priests do not have the power to substitute a hatat, an asham or a first-born: Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri: what is the reason [priests] do not have the power to substitute a first-born? Rabbi Akiva said: a hatat and an asham are priestly gifts and a first-born is also a priestly gift. Just as in the case of a hatat and an asham [priests] have no power to substitute them, so in the case of a first-born [priests] have no power to substitute it. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri said to him: So what that priests should have no power to substitute a hatat and an asham, for there they have do not have a claim on these [offerings] while they are alive. How can you say that the same applies to a first-born upon which [the priests] do have a claim when it is alive? Rabbi Akiva replied to him: Has not Scripture already said: “Then it and its substitute shall be holy?” (Leviticus 27:10). Now where does the holiness [of the original animal] occur? In the house of the owners; so too the substitution occurs in the house of the owners.

A hatat of an individual whose owners have been atoned for is left to die, whereas that of a congregation is not left to die. Rabbi Judah says: it is left to die. Rabbi Shimon said: Just as we have found with regard to the offspring of a hatat, the substitute of a hatat and a hatat whose owners died, that these rules apply only to an individual but not to a congregation, so too [the rules concerning] the hatat whose owners have been atoned for and [a hatat] whose year has passed apply only to an individual but not a congregation.

A hatat of an individual whose owners have been atoned for is left to die, whereas that of a congregation is not left to die. Rabbi Judah says: it is left to die. Rabbi Shimon said: Just as we have found with regard to the offspring of a hatat, the substitute of a hatat and a hatat whose owners died, that these rules apply only to an individual but not to a congregation, so too [the rules concerning] the hatat whose owners have been atoned for and [a hatat] whose year has passed apply only to an individual but not a congregation.

A hatat of an individual whose owners have been atoned for is left to die, whereas that of a congregation is not left to die. Rabbi Judah says: it is left to die. Rabbi Shimon said: Just as we have found with regard to the offspring of a hatat, the substitute of a hatat and a hatat whose owners died, that these rules apply only to an individual but not to a congregation, so too [the rules concerning] the hatat whose owners have been atoned for and [a hatat] whose year has passed apply only to an individual but not a congregation.

The substitute of a first-born and an animal tithed, their young and the young of their young until the end of time, they are all treated like a first-born and an animal tithed, and are eaten by the owners when blemished. What is the difference between a first-born and an animal tithed [on the one hand] and other dedications [on the other]? All [blemished] dedications are sold in the market, killed in the market, and weighed by the pound, but not a first-born and an animal tithed. They [other dedications] and their substitutes are redeemed, but not a first-born and an animal tithed. They [other dedications] come from outside the land [to the land], but not a first-born and an animal tithed. [If] they however came from [outside the holy land] unblemished, they are offered, if blemished they are eaten by their owners with their blemishes. Rabbi Shimon: what is the reason? Because a first-born and an animal tithed have a remedy wherever they are, whereas all other dedications, although a blemish has occurred in them, remain holy.

The substitute of a first-born and an animal tithed, their young and the young of their young until the end of time, they are all treated like a first-born and an animal tithed, and are eaten by the owners when blemished. What is the difference between a first-born and an animal tithed [on the one hand] and other dedications [on the other]? All [blemished] dedications are sold in the market, killed in the market, and weighed by the pound, but not a first-born and an animal tithed. They [other dedications] and their substitutes are redeemed, but not a first-born and an animal tithed. They [other dedications] come from outside the land [to the land], but not a first-born and an animal tithed. [If] they however came from [outside the holy land] unblemished, they are offered, if blemished they are eaten by their owners with their blemishes. Rabbi Shimon: what is the reason? Because a first-born and an animal tithed have a remedy wherever they are, whereas all other dedications, although a blemish has occurred in them, remain holy.

The offspring of a hatat, the substitute of a hatat, and a hatat whose owner has died, are left to die. A hatat whose year has passed or which was lost and found blemished: If the owners obtained atonement [afterwards, through another animal], is left to die, and it does not make a substitute; it is forbidden to derive benefit from it, but the laws of sacrilege do not apply. If the owners have not yet obtained atonement, it must go to pasture until it becomes unfit for sacrifice. It is then sold and another is bought with the money. It makes a substitute, and the laws of sacrilege do apply.

The offspring of a hatat, the substitute of a hatat, and a hatat whose owner has died, are left to die. A hatat whose year has passed or which was lost and found blemished: If the owners obtained atonement [afterwards, through another animal], is left to die, and it does not make a substitute; it is forbidden to derive benefit from it, but the laws of sacrilege do not apply. If the owners have not yet obtained atonement, it must go to pasture until it becomes unfit for sacrifice. It is then sold and another is bought with the money. It makes a substitute, and the laws of sacrilege do apply.

If one set aside money for his hatat, and it was lost and he set aside other money in its place, if he did not have the opportunity to buy a hatat with it until the [first] money was found, he brings a hatat from both [sums], and the rest of the money is used for a freewill-offering. If one set aside money for his hatat and it was lost and he set aside a hatat in its place, if he did not have the opportunity to offer it until the money was found, and the hatat was blemished, it is sold and he brings a hatat from both [sums], and the rest is used as a freewill-offering. If one set aside a hatat and it was lost and he set aside money in its place, if he did not have the opportunity to buy a hatat until his hatat was found and it was blemished, it is sold and he brings a hatat from both [sums], and the rest is used for a freewill-offering. If one set aside a hatat and it was lost and he set aside another hatat in its place, if he did not have the opportunity to offer it until the first hatat was found and both were blemished, they are to be sold and he brings a hatat from both [sums] and the rest is used for a freewill-offering. If one set aside a hatat and it was lost and he set aside another in its place, if he did not have the opportunity of offering it until the first hatat was found and both animals were unblemished, one of them is offered as a hatat and the second must be left to die, the words of Rabbi. The sages say: the only hatat which is left to die is a case where it is found after the owners obtained atonement, and the money does not go to the Dead Sea except where found after the owners have obtained atonement.

If one set aside money for his hatat, and it was lost and he set aside other money in its place, if he did not have the opportunity to buy a hatat with it until the [first] money was found, he brings a hatat from both [sums], and the rest of the money is used for a freewill-offering. If one set aside money for his hatat and it was lost and he set aside a hatat in its place, if he did not have the opportunity to offer it until the money was found, and the hatat was blemished, it is sold and he brings a hatat from both [sums], and the rest is used as a freewill-offering. If one set aside a hatat and it was lost and he set aside money in its place, if he did not have the opportunity to buy a hatat until his hatat was found and it was blemished, it is sold and he brings a hatat from both [sums], and the rest is used for a freewill-offering. If one set aside a hatat and it was lost and he set aside another hatat in its place, if he did not have the opportunity to offer it until the first hatat was found and both were blemished, they are to be sold and he brings a hatat from both [sums] and the rest is used for a freewill-offering. If one set aside a hatat and it was lost and he set aside another in its place, if he did not have the opportunity of offering it until the first hatat was found and both animals were unblemished, one of them is offered as a hatat and the second must be left to die, the words of Rabbi. The sages say: the only hatat which is left to die is a case where it is found after the owners obtained atonement, and the money does not go to the Dead Sea except where found after the owners have obtained atonement.

If one set aside a hatat and it is blemished, he sells it and brings another with its money. Rabbi Elazar son of Rabbi Shimon says: if the second animal was offered before the first was killed, it is left to die, since the owners have [already] obtained atonement.

The offspring of a hatat, the substitute of a hatat, and a hatat whose owner has died, are left to die. A hatat whose year has passed or which was lost and found blemished: If the owners obtained atonement [afterwards, through another animal], is left to die, and it does not make a substitute; it is forbidden to derive benefit from it, but the law of sacrilege does not apply. If the owners have not yet obtained atonement, it must go to pasture until it becomes unfit for sacrifice. It is then sold and another is bought with the money. It makes a substitute, and the law of sacrilege does apply.

The offspring of a hatat, the substitute of a hatat, and a hatat whose owner has died, are left to die. A hatat whose year has passed or which was lost and found blemished: If the owners obtained atonement [afterwards, through another animal], is left to die, and it does not make a substitute; it is forbidden to derive benefit from it, but the law of sacrilege does not apply. If the owners have not yet obtained atonement, it must go to pasture until it becomes unfit for sacrifice. It is then sold and another is bought with the money. It makes a substitute, and the law of sacrilege does apply.

An oven that was heated from its outside, or one that was heated without the owner's knowledge, or one that was heated while still in the craftsman's house is susceptible to impurity. It once happened that a fire broke out among the ovens of Kefar Signah, and when the case was brought up at Yavneh Rabban Gamaliel ruled that they were unclean.

A bed half of which was stolen or lost, or one which brothers or joint owners divided between themselves, becomes clean. If it was restored it is susceptible to uncleanness henceforth. A bed may contract uncleanness and be rendered clean when all its parts are bound together, the words of Rabbi Eliezer. But the sages say: it can contract uncleanness and is rendered clean in single parts.

On that day they said: all animal sacrifices which have been sacrificed under the name of some other offering are [nevertheless] valid, but they are not accounted to their owners as a fulfillment of their obligations, with the exception of the pesah and the sin-offering. [This is true of] the pesah in its correct time and the sin-offering at any time. Rabbi Eliezer says: [with the exception] also of the guilt-offering; [so that this refers to] the pesah in its correct time and to the sin- and guilt-offerings at any time. Rabbi Shimon ben Azzai said: I received a tradition from the seventy-two elders on the day when they appointed Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah head of the college that all animal sacrifices which are eaten and which have not been sacrificed under their own name are nevertheless valid, but they are not accounted to their owners as a fulfillment of their obligations, with the exception of the pesah and the sin-offering. Ben Azzai only added [to these exceptions] the wholly burnt-offering, but the sages did not agree with him.

On that day they said: all animal sacrifices which have been sacrificed under the name of some other offering are [nevertheless] valid, but they are not accounted to their owners as a fulfillment of their obligations, with the exception of the pesah and the sin-offering. [This is true of] the pesah in its correct time and the sin-offering at any time. Rabbi Eliezer says: [with the exception] also of the guilt-offering; [so that this refers to] the pesah in its correct time and to the sin- and guilt-offerings at any time. Rabbi Shimon ben Azzai said: I received a tradition from the seventy-two elders on the day when they appointed Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah head of the college that all animal sacrifices which are eaten and which have not been sacrificed under their own name are nevertheless valid, but they are not accounted to their owners as a fulfillment of their obligations, with the exception of the pesah and the sin-offering. Ben Azzai only added [to these exceptions] the wholly burnt-offering, but the sages did not agree with him.

Rebbi Abba bar Cahana said, the generation of David were all just but because there were informers among them they went to war and were falling. That is what David said (Ps. 57:9–10): “My soul, among lions I am lying down with blazing fires.” “My soul, among lions,” these are Abner and Amasah who were lions in Torah; “I am lying down with blazing fires;” these are Doeg and Aḥitophel who were eager for calumny. “The people, their teeth are spear and arrows,” these are the owners of Qe‘ilah, as it is written (1Sam. 23:11): “Will the owners of Qe‘ilah deliver me in his hand, will Saul come?” “Their tongue is a sharp sword,” these are the people of Ziph (Ps. 54:1): “When the people of Ziph came and told Saul. “At that moment, David said before the Holy One, praised be He: Master of the Universe, why should Your glory descend among them? Remove Your glory from them! That is what is written (Ps. 57:6): “Rise over the Heavens, o God, higher than all earth Your glory!” The generation of Ahab were idolaters but since there was no informing among them they went to war and were victorious. That is what Obadiahu said to Elijah (1K. 18:13): “Certainly it was told to my lord what I did when Izebel slew all prophets of the Eternal etc., and I provided them with bread and water.” [If bread, why does he have to mention water, and if water, why does he have to mention bread. This teaches you that it was more difficult for him to provide them with water than with bread.] But Elijah was standing on Mount Carmel and declaring (1K.18:22): “I remained alone as prophet for the Eternal,” and everybody knew and nobody informed the king

Rebbi Abba bar Cahana said, the generation of David were all just but because there were informers among them they went to war and were falling. That is what David said (Ps. 57:9–10): “My soul, among lions I am lying down with blazing fires.” “My soul, among lions,” these are Abner and Amasah who were lions in Torah; “I am lying down with blazing fires;” these are Doeg and Aḥitophel who were eager for calumny. “The people, their teeth are spear and arrows,” these are the owners of Qe‘ilah, as it is written (1Sam. 23:11): “Will the owners of Qe‘ilah deliver me in his hand, will Saul come?” “Their tongue is a sharp sword,” these are the people of Ziph (Ps. 54:1): “When the people of Ziph came and told Saul. “At that moment, David said before the Holy One, praised be He: Master of the Universe, why should Your glory descend among them? Remove Your glory from them! That is what is written (Ps. 57:6): “Rise over the Heavens, o God, higher than all earth Your glory!” The generation of Ahab were idolaters but since there was no informing among them they went to war and were victorious. That is what Obadiahu said to Elijah (1K. 18:13): “Certainly it was told to my lord what I did when Izebel slew all prophets of the Eternal etc., and I provided them with bread and water.” [If bread, why does he have to mention water, and if water, why does he have to mention bread. This teaches you that it was more difficult for him to provide them with water than with bread.] But Elijah was standing on Mount Carmel and declaring (1K.18:22): “I remained alone as prophet for the Eternal,” and everybody knew and nobody informed the king

Rebbi Abin bar Ḥiyya said, that which was said, if it was abandoned to the poor but grabbed by the rich is a difference between Rebbi Meïr and Rebbi Yose. According to Rebbi Meïr, who asserts that [it is legally abandoned] as soon as a person abandons anything from his property, [in our case] it is legally abandoned. According to Rebbi Yose, who says that nothing may leave the hands of its owners except if it is taken up [by another person, in our case] it is not legally abandoned.

Ulla bar Ismael in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Rebbi and Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah entered to eat of late fruits; the watchman shouted at them, and Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah stopped. Rebbi told him: eat, because the owners already gave up their expectations for them! Rebbi Joḥanan asked: He shouted, and you say so? Rebbi Jonah said, he objects rightfully. But does not a Mishnah disagree: “ Calamint, hyssop, and thyme in the courtyard are obligated if they are tended.” Hence, in the garden they are free even if they are watched. There, he may say, the entire world is before you, but here, there is one basketful and I am watching it for my employer.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Eleazar said, it is Rebbi Meïr’s, since Rebbi Meïr said, they permitted to sell demay only to the commissioned grain wholesaler. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is according to everybody; there is a difference because the one who takes it up takes it up in retail quantity and the one who abandons does not abandon wholesale. But does this not disagree with Rebbi Meïr, since Rebbi Meïr is the one who says that as soon as a person abandons anything of his property, it is legally abandoned as soon as it leaves his power. There is a difference because the one who takes it up takes it up in retail quantity and the one who abandons does not abandon wholesale. It does not even disagree with Rebbi Yose, for Rebbi Yose says that nothing may leave the power of its owners except if it is taken up; otherwise it was not legally abandoned. There is a difference here, because the one who abandons abandons wholesale, and the one who takes it up, takes up only retail quantities.

Ḥizqiah said, nothing is missing for the owners but the credit by counting.

MISHNAH: If an Israel received (as sharecropper) from a Cohen or a Levite, the tithes are for the owners. Rebbi Ismael says, if a villager received a field from a Jerusalemite, the Second Tithe is the Jerusalemite’s. But the Sages say, the villager can make pilgrimage and eat his part in Jerusalem.

“When is the property called the rapist’s? From the moment it is sunk.” Rebbi Aḥa said: If the owners were forgotten but did not give up hope, the prohibition of the field is biblical. If the owners did give up hope but they were not forgotten, the prohibition of the field is rabbinic. But can real estate be robbed? Rebbi La said, even though real estate cannot be robbed, one can give up hope on real estate.

“When is the property called the rapist’s? From the moment it is sunk.” Rebbi Aḥa said: If the owners were forgotten but did not give up hope, the prohibition of the field is biblical. If the owners did give up hope but they were not forgotten, the prohibition of the field is rabbinic. But can real estate be robbed? Rebbi La said, even though real estate cannot be robbed, one can give up hope on real estate.

MISHNAH: Three trees belonging to three different owners are counted together and one may plough the entire bet seah for them. How much space must be between them? Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, so that the ox and its harness can pass.

HALAKHAH: “Three trees, etc.” Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: Trees belonging to one owner and ground belonging to a second owner are counted together and one may plough the entire bet seah for them. Rebbi Yose said, we have stated more: Three trees belonging to three different owners are counted together and one may plough the entire bet seah until the New Year.

There, we have stated: “Ariston brought First Fruits from Apamea and they received them from him.” Why could he not bring heave? Rebbi Hoshaia said, First Fruits are the responsibility of the owners, heave is not the responsibility of the owners. If you would say so, they would run after it there.

There, we have stated: “Ariston brought First Fruits from Apamea and they received them from him.” Why could he not bring heave? Rebbi Hoshaia said, First Fruits are the responsibility of the owners, heave is not the responsibility of the owners. If you would say so, they would run after it there.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Joḥanan said, [the Mishnah] is Rebbi Jehudah’s. “Rebbi Jehudah permits since he improves it.” On this, Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rebbi Jehudah inverted his reasoning. Rebbi Eleazar said, Rebbi Jehudah did not invert his reasoning, there for the Cohen, here for the owners. Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Joḥanan, one of them said because he reduces the number of drinkers, the other says because he diminishes its volume. We did not know who said what. Since Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rebbi Jehudah inverted his reasoning but Rebbi Eleazar said, Rebbi Jehudah did not invert his reasoning, there for the Cohen, here for the owners, it follows that Rebbi Joḥanan said because he reduces the number of drinkers. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan: “Even from uncooked for cooked and certainly from cooked for uncooked.” Rebbi Immi said, Rebbi Joḥanan did not state that.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Joḥanan said, [the Mishnah] is Rebbi Jehudah’s. “Rebbi Jehudah permits since he improves it.” On this, Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rebbi Jehudah inverted his reasoning. Rebbi Eleazar said, Rebbi Jehudah did not invert his reasoning, there for the Cohen, here for the owners. Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Joḥanan, one of them said because he reduces the number of drinkers, the other says because he diminishes its volume. We did not know who said what. Since Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rebbi Jehudah inverted his reasoning but Rebbi Eleazar said, Rebbi Jehudah did not invert his reasoning, there for the Cohen, here for the owners, it follows that Rebbi Joḥanan said because he reduces the number of drinkers. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan: “Even from uncooked for cooked and certainly from cooked for uncooked.” Rebbi Immi said, Rebbi Joḥanan did not state that.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, one makes the vat impure the moment the press men went over it warp and woof. But have we not stated: “If workers gave heave from a vat, their heave is not heave. But if the vat was small or if the owners or others stir it, their heave is heave.” Because others stir it, but if others do not stir it, their heave would not be heave! What is this? One statement for wine, the other for oil. But are not wine and oil the same? Wine is frequently impure, oil is not.

Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Joḥanan, one of them said because he diminishes its volume, the other says because he reduces the number of drinkers. We did not know who said what. Since Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rebbi Jehudah inverted his reasoning but Rebbi Eleazar said, Rebbi Jehudah did not invert his reasoning, there for the Cohen, here for the owners, it follows that Rebbi Joḥanan said because he reduces the number of drinkers.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Ila in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: So says the Mishnah, “one does not bring First Fruits as drinks except for those made from olives and grapes,” even after it became property of the owners. But did we not state: “If he pressed First Fruits as a drink, from where that he should bring them? The verse says (Ex. 23:19, 34:26), ‘bring!’”. That is, if he harvested them from the start for this purpose. But here, if he did not harvest them from the start for this purpose.

Rav Ḥisda said, if somebody declared his standing grain ownerless, came back and retook possession, and illegally gave heave, that is heave. What is the difference between standing grain and ears of grain? Standing grain, if he illegally gave heave before he declared it ownerless, that is not heave. Ears, if he illegally gave heave before he declared them ownerless, that is heave. Rav Ḥinena in the name of Rav Ḥisda, the same applies to a dedicated crop. The words of the rabbis disagree, since Rebbi Joḥanan said in the name of Rebbi Yannai: (Deut. 14:29) “The Levite shall come, because he has neither part nor inheritance with you.” You are obliged to give him from what you have but he has not. This excludes gleanings for which your and his hands are equal. Gleanings, forgotten sheaves, peah, and abandoned property are all equal. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the company did ask: But dedications, where your and his hands are not equal, are treated as if your and his hands were equal. Said Rebbi Ila, what are we talking about? If the heap was made when it was ownerless or dedicated, the Torah said (Deut. 18:4) “the first of your grain”, not the ownerless, “the first of your grain”, not Temple property. But we must be talking about ears that he declared ownerless and of which he retook possession. If they were ownerless, he would be free, if dedicated, he would be obligated. If they were ownerless, he would be free, since Rebbi Joḥanan said in the name of Rebbi Yannai: (Deut. 14:29) “The Levite shall come, because he has neither part nor inheritance with you.” You are obligated to give him from what you have but he has not. This excludes gleanings for which your and his hands are equal. If dedicated, he would be obligated, from the following: “If somebody dedicated standing produce and redeemed it standing, it is obligated.” What is the difference between ownerless and dedicated? Ownerless [property] is outside the power of everybody, dedicated [property] is not outside the power of the Temple treasurer. Rebbi Abin said, it did not even go outside the power of its owners since he must say to him you redeem first.

MISHNAH: If somebody passed by the market place and said: “take some figs,” one may eat without tithing. Therefore, if they brought to their houses, they must put in order as certain produce. “Take some figs and bring them home,” one should not eat them as a snack. Therefore, if they brought to their houses, they have to put in order only as demay. If they were sitting in a gate or in a store and he said, take some figs, they may eat and are free, but the owners of the gate or the store are obligated. Rebbi Jehudah frees them unless they turn their faces away or change their places.

If he gave much, even if he said, take and eat, it is as if he said, take and store. If he gave him anything that usually is not eaten raw, even if he said, take and eat, it is as if he said, take and store. If [the recipient] was an important personality who does not usually eat in public, if he said, take and eat, it is as if he said, take and store. If there were two people; to one he said, take and eat; to the other he said, take and store. The one to whom he said, take and eat, is free; the one to whom he said, take and store, is obligated. Rebbi Yose said, is that not a Mishnah (2:2): “They eat and are free but the owners of the gate or the store are obligated?” Rebbi Jonah said, it is everybody’s opinion; here for demay, there for certain.