革玛拉底下所引的一条密释纳与一条 《巴拉伊塔》 教说:按理推去,若不是有一节经文另教一样,那「拿牲口作妓女之价」的禁令,连那在给出去以先早已分别为圣作祭牲的牲口也该管得着。阿巴耶 说:若不是 拉比奥沙亚 把那条密释纳定作「人把妓女报在自己逾越的羊羔上、算作她的工价」那一款,又定作合 拉比犹大·哈纳西 的意思——照他所懂的,拉比犹大·哈纳西 以为人把羊羔分别为圣以后,在银钱上仍留着权分,所以才报得上那妓女——我本要把那条密释纳单定作论较轻之圣分的祭,并说它合 加利利人拉比约西 的意思,因他说过:较轻之圣分的祭是主人名下的财物,所以主人拿它作妓女之价是办得到的。
-
革玛拉底下所引的一条密释纳与一条 《巴拉伊塔》 教说:按理推去,若不是有一节经文另教一样,那「拿牲口作妓女之价」的禁令,连那在给出去以先早已分别为圣作祭牲的牲口也该管得着。
A mishna and baraita that the Gemara cites later on in the discussion teach that, logically, were it not for a verse teaching otherwise, the prohibition against using as an offering an animal given as payment for a prostitute’s services should apply even in a case where the animal had already been consecrated as an offering before being given as payment.
-
阿巴耶 说:若不是 拉比奥沙亚 把那条密释纳定作「人把妓女报在自己逾越的羊羔上、算作她的工价」那一款,又定作合 拉比犹大·哈纳西 的意思——照他所懂的,拉比犹大·哈纳西 以为人把羊羔分别为圣以后,在银钱上仍留着权分,所以才报得上那妓女——我本要把那条密释纳单定作论较轻之圣分的祭,并说它合 加利利人拉比约西 的意思,因他说过:较轻之圣分的祭是主人名下的财物,所以主人拿它作妓女之价是办得到的。
Abaye said: If not that Rabbi Oshaya established that that mishna is referring to a case of one who registers a prostitute for his Paschal lamb as her payment, and this position is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, whom Rabbi Oshaya apparently understood and who holds that a person retains monetary rights to his Paschal lamb even after consecration, which is why one is able to register the prostitute for it, I would have established that mishna as referring only to offerings of lesser sanctity and claimed it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, who said: Offerings of lesser sanctity are the monetary property of their owners, and therefore it is possible for the owner to use them as payment for a prostitute.