Mishnah.org Logo
Perek 2

Mishnayos Shekalim Perek 2 Mishnah 4

שקלים פרק ב׳ משנה ד׳

4
Rabbi Shimon said: What is the difference between shekels and a sin-offering? Why do Beit Hillel say that the leftover money is non-sacred property in the case of shekels, while with regard to a sin-offering they say that the leftover money is consecrated for a free-will offering? Rather, the issue is that shekels have a fixed value, a half-shekel and no more. Therefore, there is a clear amount beyond which one did not intend the money to become consecrated property. However, a sin-offering has no fixed value. Since the entire sum that one collected could have been used to purchase a sin-offering, whatever he didn’t use must at least be designated for a free-will offering. Rabbi Yehuda says: Even for shekels there is no real fixed value. For when the Jewish people ascended from the exile, they would contribute darics, which are Median coins worth two shekels by Torah law. They brought these coins with them and would give a half of one to fulfill their half-shekel obligation. Later on, when the Median Empire was dissolved, they reverted to contributing with a sela, a silver coin of equal weight to the the shekel mentioned in the Torah. People would contribute a half-sela for their half-shekel requirement. When the value of this currency changed later on, they reverted to contributing with a tiva, a different coin which is worth a half-shekel. Some people wished to contribute only dinars, which are half the value of the tiva, i.e., one quarter shekel in value. The Sages refused to accept it and required them to contribute at least the half-shekel mentioned in the Torah. Nevertheless, it is clear that the obligation of contributing shekels does not have a fixed value. Rabbi Shimon said in response: Even so, despite the fact that during different periods there were different amounts used to fulfill the obligation of the half-shekel, everyone has equal standing, i.e., at any particular time, everyone contributes the same amount. Therefore, any sum collected beyond that amount was not intended to be consecrated. However, a sin-offering has no fixed amount whatsoever; this person may bring an animal worth a sela, and that one may bring one worth two, and this one may bring one worth three. Therefore, it cannot be supposed that there was no intention to consecrate the whole sum.
אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, מַה בֵּין שְׁקָלִים לְחַטָאת. שְׁקָלִים יֵשׁ לָהֶם קִצְבָה, וְחַטָאת אֵין לָהּ קִצְבָה. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אַף לִשְׁקָלִים אֵין לָהֶן קִצְבָה, שֶׁכְּשֶׁעָלוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל מִן הַגּוֹלָה הָיוּ שׁוֹקְלִים דַּרְכּוֹנוֹת, חָזְרוּ לִשְׁקוֹל סְלָעִים, חָזְרוּ לִשְׁקוֹל טְבָעִין, וּבִקְּשׁוּ לִשְׁקֹל דִּינָרִים. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, אַף עַל פִּי כֵן, יַד כֻּלָּן שָׁוָה. אֲבָל חַטָאת, זֶה מֵבִיא בְּסֶלַע וְזֶה מֵבִיא בִּשְׁתַּיִם וְזֶה מֵבִיא בְּשָׁלשׁ:
ד׳

מה בין שקלים לחטאת – what is the difference that regarding Shekalim when one collects/gathers monies and says, “these are for my [half-]Shekel, that the School of Hillel states that the excess is non-holy and that regarding Sin-offerings, that they agree with the School of Shammai that the excess is a free-will offering?

שקלים יש להן קצבה – as it is written (Exodus 30:15): “the rich shall not pay more and the poor shall not pay less,” therefore, he definitely did not intend other than the [half-]shekel, and the excess is an errant dedication to the Temple, but the sin-offering has no limit. If he wants, he should bring a sin-offering of silver M’ah, and if he desires, he can bring greater sums. Therefore, the monies are seized but the excess is a donation.

היו שוקלים דרכונות – coinage of the Persian kingdom that came up with them from the Diaspora and it was of gold. It was worth two Selaim, and people were accustomed to do business with that coin, and like the time of the First Temple when their coin was the Shekel, they would give the one-half Shekel. So, now, when their coin was a Darkon/daric, they would give one-half daric.

חזרו לשקול סלעים – after the Kingdom of Persia passed on, the coinage of the daric was cancelled, they returned to do business with Selaim which was their first coinage that was in usage at the time of the First Temple and they gave one-half shekel as at the first.

חזרו לשקול טבעין – the coin in usage returned to be the Tevaim which is the one-half shekel that they desired to give was one-half of that coinage, that is one Dinar. For a Selah is four dinars and they did not accept it from them for they had to supplement to the Shekel of the Torah because they changed the going currency at that time but not to decrease from it. Therefore, we see that the Shekel also had no definite limit for sometimes the Shekels were large and at other times, the Shekels were small, for they would not give ever other than one-half shekel according to the currency in vogue at the time.

אעפ"כ יד כולן שוה – that is to say, that still the Shekalim are not similar to the sin-offerings, for in each and every time period, the one-half Shekel was equivalent for all. This [person] would donate according to that [person] – each individual one-half Shekel according to the going rate of that time period. But sin-offerings are not equivalent ever, for this one brings a Selah and the other brings two or three Selaim, and in this, the rationale of the School of Hillel agrees with that of the School of Shammai.

מה בין שקלים לחטאת. מאי שנא שקלים דמכנס מעות ואמר הרי אלו [לשקלי] אמרי ב״ה דהוי המותר חולין. ומ״ש חטאת דמודו לב״ש דהוי נדבה:

שקלים יש להן קצבה. דכתיב (שמות ל׳:ט״ו) העשיר לא ירבה והדל לא ימעיט, הלכך בודאי לא נתכוין זה אלא לשקל, והמותר הוי הקדש טעות. אבל חטאת אין לה קצבה אם ירצה יביא חטאת במעה כסף, ואם ירצה יביא בדמים מרובים, הלכך נתפסו הדמים ומותרן נדבה:

היו שוקלים דרכונות. מטבע של מלכות מדי שעלה עמהן מן הגולה ושל זהב היה, והוא שוה שני סלעים, ורגילים לישא וליתן באותו מטבע. וכמו שבזמן בית ראשון שהיה מטבע שלהן שקל היו נותנים מחצית השקל, גם עתה שהיה מטבע שלהן דרכון היו נותנים חצי דרכון:

חזרו לשקול סלעים. אחר שעברה מלכות מדי נתבטל מטבע דרכון, חזרו להיות נושאים ונותנים בסלעים, שהוא מטבע ראשון שהיה יוצא בזמן בית ראשון, ונתנו מחצית השקל כבתחלה:

חזרו לשקול טבעין. חזר מטבע היוצא בהוצאה להיות טבעין, דהיינו מחצית השקל. בקשו ליתן חצי אותו המטבע דהיינו דינר אחד. שהסלע ד׳ דינרין, ולא קבלו מהן, דרשאים להוסיף אשקל דאורייתא לפי שינוי המטבעות היוצאות באותו זמן, ולא לפחות ממנו. אלמא לשקלים נמי אין להם קצבה, דלפעמים השקלים גדולים ולפעמים קטנים, שהרי לא היו נותנים לעולם אלא מחצית השקל היוצא באותה שעה:

אעפ״כ יד כולן שוה. כלומר אכתי לא דמי שקלים לחטאת, דבכל זמן וזמן היה מחצית השקל שוה לכל, זה שוקל כמו זה, כל אחד מחצית השקל היוצא בזמן ההוא. אבל חטאת לעולם אינו שוה, שזה מביא בסלע וזה מביא בב׳ או בג׳ סלעים. והכי מסקינן דטעמייהו דבית הלל כר״ש: