1. Hebrew Bible, Song of Songs, 1.2, 4.11 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Sheshet (Amora) • tannaitic midrashim, relationship with amoraic midrashim
Found in books: Kaplan (2015), My Perfect One: Typology and Early Rabbinic Interpretation of Song of Songs, 186; Kosman (2012), Gender and Dialogue in the Rabbinic Prism, 139, 151
sup>
1.2 יִשָּׁקֵנִי מִנְּשִׁיקוֹת פִּיהוּ כִּי־טוֹבִים דֹּדֶיךָ מִיָּיִן׃
4.11 נֹפֶת תִּטֹּפְנָה שִׂפְתוֹתַיִךְ כַּלָּה דְּבַשׁ וְחָלָב תַּחַת לְשׁוֹנֵךְ וְרֵיחַ שַׂלְמֹתַיִךְ כְּרֵיחַ לְבָנוֹן׃'' None | sup>
1.2 Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth— For thy love is better than wine.
4.11 Thy lips, O my bride, drop honey— Honey and milk are under thy tongue; And the smell of thy garments is like the smell of Lebanon.'' None |
|
2. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 6.5 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic literature, questions of theodicy • amoraic period
Found in books: Avemarie, van Henten, and Furstenberg (2023), Jewish Martyrdom in Antiquity, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176; Hirshman (2009), The Stabilization of Rabbinic Culture, 100 C, 10
sup>
6.5 וְאָהַבְתָּ אֵת יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכָל־לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל־נַפְשְׁךָ וּבְכָל־מְאֹדֶךָ׃'' None | sup>
6.5 And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.'' None |
|
3. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 1.26-1.27 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraim, Babylonian • Amoraim, Palestinian • Sages early rabbinic, Galilean Amoraic • Samuel (Amora)
Found in books: Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 150; Kosman (2012), Gender and Dialogue in the Rabbinic Prism, 207; Neis (2012), When a Human Gives Birth to a Raven: Rabbis and the Reproduction of Species. 156
sup>
1.26 וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ וְיִרְדּוּ בִדְגַת הַיָּם וּבְעוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם וּבַבְּהֵמָה וּבְכָל־הָאָרֶץ וּבְכָל־הָרֶמֶשׂ הָרֹמֵשׂ עַל־הָאָרֶץ׃ 1.27 וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת־הָאָדָם בְּצַלְמוֹ בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים בָּרָא אֹתוֹ זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בָּרָא אֹתָם׃'' None | sup>
1.26 And God said: ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.’ 1.27 And God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them.'' None |
|
4. Hebrew Bible, Psalms, 128.3 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraim • Amoraim, Palestinian • Haggai (Amora) • Isaac (Amora) • Judah (Amora) • Levi (Amora) • Yose (Amora)
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 58; Neis (2012), When a Human Gives Birth to a Raven: Rabbis and the Reproduction of Species. 140
sup>
128.3 אֶשְׁתְּךָ כְּגֶפֶן פֹּרִיָּה בְּיַרְכְּתֵי בֵיתֶךָ בָּנֶיךָ כִּשְׁתִלֵי זֵיתִים סָבִיב לְשֻׁלְחָנֶךָ׃'' None | sup>
128.3 Thy wife shall be as a fruitful vine, in the innermost parts of thy house; Thy children like olive plants, round about thy table.'' None |
|
5. None, None, nan (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic • Amoraic literature, presumes kiddush ha-Shem as public act • public aspect of kiddush ha-Shem and hillul ha-Shem, assumed in Amoraic literature
Found in books: Avemarie, van Henten, and Furstenberg (2023), Jewish Martyrdom in Antiquity, 69; Ruzer (2020), Early Jewish Messianism in the New Testament: Reflections in the Dim Mirror, 127
|
6. None, None, nan (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic literature, presumes kiddush ha-Shem as public act • Amoraim, amoraic period • public aspect of kiddush ha-Shem and hillul ha-Shem, assumed in Amoraic literature
Found in books: Avemarie, van Henten, and Furstenberg (2023), Jewish Martyrdom in Antiquity, 67; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 136, 138
|
7. Mishnah, Rosh Hashanah, 1.8, 4.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraim, amoraic period • Joseph (Amora) • Judah (Amora) • Levi (Amora) • Samuel (Amora)
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 16, 17; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 69, 106
sup>
1.8 אֵלּוּ הֵן הַפְּסוּלִין, הַמְשַׂחֵק בְּקֻבְיָא, וּמַלְוֵי בְרִבִּית, וּמַפְרִיחֵי יוֹנִים, וְסוֹחֲרֵי שְׁבִיעִית, וַעֲבָדִים. זֶה הַכְּלָל, כָּל עֵדוּת שֶׁאֵין הָאִשָּׁה כְשֵׁרָה לָהּ, אַף הֵן אֵינָן כְּשֵׁרִים לָהּ:
4.5 סֵדֶר בְּרָכוֹת, אוֹמֵר אָבוֹת וּגְבוּרוֹת וּקְדֻשַּׁת הַשֵּׁם, וְכוֹלֵל מַלְכוּיוֹת עִמָּהֶן, וְאֵינוֹ תוֹקֵעַ. קְדֻשַּׁת הַיּוֹם, וְתוֹקֵעַ. זִכְרוֹנוֹת, וְתוֹקֵעַ. שׁוֹפָרוֹת, וְתוֹקֵעַ. וְאוֹמֵר עֲבוֹדָה וְהוֹדָאָה וּבִרְכַּת כֹּהֲנִים, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, אִם אֵינוֹ תוֹקֵעַ לַמַּלְכוּיוֹת, לָמָּה הוּא מַזְכִּיר. אֶלָּא אוֹמֵר אָבוֹת וּגְבוּרוֹת וּקְדֻשַּׁת הַשֵּׁם, וְכוֹלֵל מַלְכוּיוֹת עִם קְדֻשַּׁת הַיּוֹם, וְתוֹקֵעַ. זִכְרוֹנוֹת, וְתוֹקֵעַ. שׁוֹפָרוֹת, וְתוֹקֵעַ. וְאוֹמֵר עֲבוֹדָה וְהוֹדָאָה וּבִרְכַּת כֹּהֲנִים:'' None | sup>
1.8 And these are they which are not qualified to be witnesses or judges: A dice player, a usurer, pigeon racers, or traffickers in Seventh Year produce, and slaves. This is the general rule: any testimony for which a woman is not qualified, they too are not qualified.
4.5 The order of blessings in the Musaf Amidah of Rosh Hashanah:He says “patriarchs”, “powers” and the “sanctification of the name” and includes the kingship verses with them and does not blow the shofar. The sanctification of the day and blows the shofar, the remembrance-verses and blows the shofar, and the shofar-verses and blows the shofar. Then he says the blessing of the Temple service and “thanksgiving” and the blessing of the priests, the words of Rabbi Yoha ben Nuri. Rabbi Akiva said to him: if he does not blow the shofar for the kingship-verses, why should he say them? Rather he says: “patriarchs”, “powers” and the “sanctification of the name” and includes the kingship verse with the sanctification of the day and blows the shofar, then he says the remembrance-verses and blows, and the shofar-verses and blows. Then he says the Temple service and “thanksgiving” and the blessing of the priest.'' None |
|
8. Mishnah, Sanhedrin, 10.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraim, Babylonian, attitude to Moses, Torah • Amoraim, amoraic period
Found in books: Kalmin (1998), The Sage in Jewish Society of Late Antiquity, 97; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 134
sup>
10.1 כָּל יִשְׂרָאֵל יֵשׁ לָהֶם חֵלֶק לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ישעיה ס) וְעַמֵּךְ כֻּלָּם צַדִּיקִים לְעוֹלָם יִירְשׁוּ אָרֶץ נֵצֶר מַטָּעַי מַעֲשֵׂה יָדַי לְהִתְפָּאֵר. וְאֵלּוּ שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם חֵלֶק לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא, הָאוֹמֵר אֵין תְּחִיַּת הַמֵּתִים מִן הַתּוֹרָה, וְאֵין תּוֹרָה מִן הַשָּׁמָיִם, וְאֶפִּיקוֹרֶס. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, אַף הַקּוֹרֵא בַסְּפָרִים הַחִיצוֹנִים, וְהַלּוֹחֵשׁ עַל הַמַּכָּה וְאוֹמֵר (שמות טו) כָּל הַמַּחֲלָה אֲשֶׁר שַׂמְתִּי בְמִצְרַיִם לֹא אָשִׂים עָלֶיךָ כִּי אֲנִי ה' רֹפְאֶךָ. אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר, אַף הַהוֹגֶה אֶת הַשֵּׁם בְּאוֹתִיּוֹתָיו:"" None | sup>
10.1 All Israel have a portion in the world to come, for it says, “Your people, all of them righteous, shall possess the land for ever; They are the shoot that I planted, my handiwork in which I glory” (Isaiah 60:2. And these are the ones who have no portion in the world to come: He who maintains that resurrection is not a biblical doctrine, that the torah was not divinely revealed, and an epikoros. Rabbi Akiva says: “Even one who reads non-canonical books and one who whispers a charm over a wound and says, “I will not bring upon you any of the diseases which i brought upon the Egyptians: for I the lord am you healer” (Exodus 15:26). Abba Shaul says: “Also one who pronounces the divine name as it is spelled.”'' None |
|
9. Mishnah, Sukkah, 4.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amora • Amoraim, amoraic period
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 546; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 101
sup>
4.5 מִצְוַת עֲרָבָה כֵּיצַד, מָקוֹם הָיָה לְמַטָּה מִירוּשָׁלַיִם, וְנִקְרָא מוֹצָא. יוֹרְדִין לְשָׁם וּמְלַקְּטִין מִשָּׁם מֻרְבִּיּוֹת שֶׁל עֲרָבָה, וּבָאִין וְזוֹקְפִין אוֹתָן בְּצִדֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, וְרָאשֵׁיהֶן כְּפוּפִין עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. תָּקְעוּ וְהֵרִיעוּ וְתָקָעוּ. בְּכָל יוֹם מַקִּיפִין אֶת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ פַּעַם אַחַת, וְאוֹמְרִים, אָנָּא ה' הוֹשִׁיעָה נָּא, אָנָּא ה' הַצְלִיחָה נָּא. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אֲנִי וָהוֹ הוֹשִׁיעָה נָּא. וְאוֹתוֹ הַיּוֹם מַקִּיפִין אֶת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ שֶׁבַע פְּעָמִים. בִּשְׁעַת פְּטִירָתָן, מָה הֵן אוֹמְרִים, יֹפִי לְךָ מִזְבֵּחַ, יֹפִי לְךָ מִזְבֵּחַ. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, לְיָהּ וּלְךָ, מִזְבֵּחַ. לְיָהּ וּלְךָ, מִזְבֵּחַ:"" None | sup>
4.5 The mitzvah of the aravah how was it performed?There was a place below Jerusalem called Moza. They went down there and gathered tall branches of aravot and then they came and stood them up at the sides of the altar, and their tops were bent over the altar. They then sounded a teki’ah long blast, a teru’ah staccato blast and again a teki’ah. Every day they went round the altar once, saying, “O Lord, save us, O Lord, make us prosper” (Psalms 118:. Rabbi Judah says: “Ani vaho, save us.” On that day they went round the altar seven times. When they departed, what did they say? “O altar, beauty is to you! O altar, beauty is to you!” Rabbi Eliezer said: they would say, “To the Lord and to you, O altar, to the Lord and to you, O altar.”'' None |
|
10. Mishnah, Taanit, 3.8 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic • Amoraic literature, presumes kiddush ha-Shem as public act • Amoraim, Amoraic period • public aspect of kiddush ha-Shem and hillul ha-Shem, assumed in Amoraic literature
Found in books: Avemarie, van Henten, and Furstenberg (2023), Jewish Martyrdom in Antiquity, 64; Ruzer (2020), Early Jewish Messianism in the New Testament: Reflections in the Dim Mirror, 85; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 650
sup>
3.8 עַל כָּל צָרָה שֶׁלֹּא תָבֹא עַל הַצִּבּוּר, מַתְרִיעִין עֲלֵיהֶן, חוּץ מֵרוֹב גְּשָׁמִים. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁאָמְרוּ לוֹ לְחוֹנִי הַמְעַגֵּל, הִתְפַּלֵּל שֶׁיֵּרְדוּ גְשָׁמִים. אָמַר לָהֶם, צְאוּ וְהַכְנִיסוּ תַנּוּרֵי פְסָחִים, בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁלֹּא יִמּוֹקוּ. הִתְפַּלֵּל, וְלֹא יָרְדוּ גְשָׁמִים. מֶה עָשָׂה, עָג עוּגָה וְעָמַד בְּתוֹכָהּ, וְאָמַר לְפָנָיו, רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם, בָּנֶיךָ שָׂמוּ פְנֵיהֶם עָלַי, שֶׁאֲנִי כְבֶן בַּיִת לְפָנֶיךָ. נִשְׁבָּע אֲנִי בְשִׁמְךָ הַגָּדוֹל שֶׁאֵינִי זָז מִכָּאן, עַד שֶׁתְּרַחֵם עַל בָּנֶיךָ. הִתְחִילוּ גְּשָׁמִים מְנַטְּפִין. אָמַר, לֹא כָךְ שָׁאַלְתִּי, אֶלָּא גִּשְׁמֵי בוֹרוֹת שִׁיחִין וּמְעָרוֹת. הִתְחִילוּ לֵירֵד בְּזָעַף. אָמַר, לֹא כָךְ שָׁאַלְתִּי, אֶלָּא גִּשְׁמֵי רָצוֹן, בְּרָכָה וּנְדָבָה. יָרְדוּ כְתִקְנָן, עַד שֶׁיָּצְאוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל מִירוּשָׁלַיִם לְהַר הַבַּיִת מִפְּנֵי הַגְּשָׁמִים. בָּאוּ וְאָמְרוּ לוֹ, כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהִתְפַּלַלְתָּ עֲלֵיהֶם שֶׁיֵּרְדוּ כָּךְ הִתְפַּלֵּל שֶׁיֵּלְכוּ לָהֶן. אָמַר לָהֶן, צְאוּ וּרְאוּ אִם נִמְחֵת אֶבֶן הַטּוֹעִים. שָׁלַח לוֹ שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטָח, אִלְמָלֵא חוֹנִי אַתָּה, גּוֹזְרַנִי עָלֶיךָ נִדּוּי. אֲבָל מָה אֶעֱשֶׂה לְּךָ, שֶׁאַתָּה מִתְחַטֵּא לִפְנֵי הַמָּקוֹם וְעוֹשֶׂה לְךָ רְצוֹנְךָ כְּבֵן שֶׁהוּא מִתְחַטֵּא עַל אָבִיו וְעוֹשֶׂה לוֹ רְצוֹנוֹ. וְעָלֶיךָ הַכָּתוּב אוֹמֵר (משלי כג), יִשְׂמַח אָבִיךָ וְאִמֶּךָ וְתָגֵל יוֹלַדְתֶּךָ:'' None | sup>
3.8 For every trouble that should not come upon the community they sound a blast except on account of too much rain. It happened that they said to Honi the circle drawer: “Pray for rain to fall.” He replied: “Go and bring in the pesah ovens so that they do not dissolve.” He prayed and no rain fell. What did he do? He drew a circle and stood within it and exclaimed before Him: “Master of the universe, Your children have turned their faces to me because I am like one who was born in Your house. I swear by Your great name that I will not move from here until You have mercy upon Your children.” Rain then began to drip, and he exclaimed: “I did not request this but rain which can fill cisterns, ditches and caves. The rain then began to come down with great force, and he exclaimed: “I did not request this but pleasing rain of blessing and abudance.” Rain then fell in the normal way until the Jews in Jerusalem had to go up Temple Mount because of the rain. They came and said to him: “In the same way that you prayed for the rain to fall pray now for the rain to stop.” He replied: “Go and see if the stone of people claiming lost objects has washed away.” Rabbi Shimon ben Shetah sent to him: “Were you not Honi I would have excommunicated you, but what can I do to you, for you are spoiled before God and he does your will like a son that is spoiled before his father and his father does his request. Concerning you it is written, “Let your father and your mother rejoice, and let she that bore you rejoice” (Proverbs 23:25).'' None |
|
11. Mishnah, Yoma, 4.2 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic midrash • Amoraim, amoraic period
Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 131; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 491
sup>
4.2 קָשַׁר לָשׁוֹן שֶׁל זְהוֹרִית בְּרֹאשׁ שָׂעִיר הַמִּשְׁתַּלֵּחַ וְהֶעֱמִידוֹ כְנֶגֶד בֵּית שִׁלּוּחוֹ, וְלַנִּשְׁחָט כְּנֶגֶד בֵּית שְׁחִיטָתוֹ. בָּא לוֹ אֵצֶל פָּרוֹ שְׁנִיָּה, וְסוֹמֵךְ שְׁתֵּי יָדָיו עָלָיו וּמִתְוַדֶּה. וְכָךְ הָיָה אוֹמֵר, אָנָּא הַשֵּׁם, עָוִיתִי פָּשַׁעְתִּי חָטָאתִי לְפָנֶיךָ אֲנִי וּבֵיתִי וּבְנֵי אַהֲרֹן עַם קְדוֹשֶׁיךָ. אָנָּא הַשֵּׁם, כַּפֶּר נָא לָעֲוֹנוֹת וְלַפְּשָׁעִים וְלַחֲטָאִים, שֶׁעָוִיתִי וְשֶׁפָּשַׁעְתִּי וְשֶׁחָטָאתִי לְפָנֶיךָ אֲנִי וּבֵיתִי וּבְנֵי אַהֲרֹן עַם קְדוֹשֶׁךָ, כַּכָּתוּב בְּתוֹרַת משֶׁה עַבְדֶּךָ (ויקרא טז), כִּי בַיּוֹם הַזֶּה יְכַפֵּר עֲלֵיכֶם לְטַהֵר אֶתְכֶם מִכֹּל חַטֹּאתֵיכֶם לִפְנֵי יְיָ תִּטְהָרוּ. וְהֵן עוֹנִין אַחֲרָיו, בָּרוּךְ שֵׁם כְּבוֹד מַלְכוּתוֹ לְעוֹלָם וָעֶד:'' None | sup>
4.2 He bound a thread of crimson wool on the head of the goat which was to be sent away, and he placed it at the gate where it was later to be sent away, and on the goat that was to be slaughtered he placed a thread of crimson wool on its neck at the place of the slaughtering. He came to his bull a second time, pressed his two hands upon it and made confession. And thus he would say: “Please, ‘Hashem’! I have done wrong, I have transgressed, I have sinned before You, I and my house and the sons of Aaron Your holy people. Please, ‘Hashem’! Forgive the wrongdoings, the transgressions, the sins which I have committed and transgressed and sinned before You, I and my house and the sons of Aaron Your holy people, as it is written in the torah of Moses Your servant: “For on this day shall atonement be made for you to cleanse you of all your sins; you shall be clean before the Lord” (Leviticus 16:30). And they answered after him: “Blessed be the name of His glorious kingdom for ever and ever!”'' None |
|
12. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic period, amei ha’arets in • Amoraim, Babylonian, increasing Palestinian influences • Amoraim, on amei ha’arets
Found in books: Kalmin (1998), The Sage in Jewish Society of Late Antiquity, 31; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 124, 127
|
13. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraim, Amoraic period • Amoraim, and lineage
Found in books: Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 85; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 38
|
14. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraim, Amoraic period • Amoraim, amoraic period
Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 84; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 40
|
15. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraim, Amoraic period • Haggai (Amora) • Isaac (Amora)
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 61; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 39, 40
|
16. Anon., Genesis Rabba, 11.5, 56.6, 64.3 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic midrash • Amoraic midrash compilations, halakhic material in • Amoraic midrash compilations, rabbinization of Scripture • Levi (amora) • Shmuel (amora)
Found in books: Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 605, 606, 608; Kanarek (2014), Biblical narrative and formation rabbinic law, 42, 43, 56, 57; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 170
sup>
56.6 וַיִּשְׁלַח אַבְרָהָם אֶת יָדוֹ וַיִּקַּח אֶת הַמַּאֲכֶלֶת (בראשית כב, י), רַב בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רַבִּי חִיָּא רַבָּה מִנַּיִן לִשְׁחִיטָה שֶׁהִיא בְּדָבָר הַמִּטַּלְטֵל, מִן הָכָא, וַיִּשְׁלַח אַבְרָהָם אֶת יָדוֹ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ אִין מִן הַהַגָּדָה אֲמַר לָךְ, חָזַר הוּא בֵּיהּ, וְאִין מִן אוּלְפָּן אֲמַר לָךְ, לֵית הוּא חָזַר בֵּיהּ, דְּתָנֵי לֵוִי הָיוּ נְעוּצִים מִתְּחִלָּתָן הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ פְּסוּלִים, תְּלוּשִׁין וּנְעָצָן הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁרִים, דִּתְנַן הַשּׁוֹחֵט בְּמַגַּל יָד בְּמַגַּל קָצִיר וּבְצֹר וּבְקָנֶה, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי חֲמִשָּׁה דְבָרִים נֶאֶמְרוּ בִּקְרוּמִיּוֹת שֶׁל קָנֶה, אֵין שׁוֹחֲטִין בָּהּ, וְאֵין מוֹהֲלִין בָּהּ, וְאֵין חוֹתְכִין בָּהּ בָּשָׂר, וְאֵין מְקַנְחִין בָּהּ אֶת הַיָּדַיִם, וְלֹא מְחַצִּין בָּהּ אֶת הַשִּׁנַּיִם, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁרוּחַ רָעָה שׁוֹכֶנֶת עָלָיו.' ' None | sup>
56.6 "And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife (Gen. 22:10). Rav asked R. Hiyya the Elder: How do we know that ritual slaughtering must be with a movable object? From here: \\"And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife\\" — he said: if he told you this from a Haggadah, he might retract; and if he stated it as a tradition, he cannot not retract from it, since Levi taught: If they sharp flints were attached to the ground or rocks from the very beginning, they are unfit; but if they had been originally detached but subsequently fixed in the ground, they are fit, since we learned: \\"If one slaughters with a hand-sickle, a harvest sickle, a flint, or a reed, the slaughtering is fit.\\" Said Rabbi Yosei: Five things were said of a reed stalk: You may not slaughter, circumcise, cut meat, wipe your hands, nor pick your teeth with it, because an evil spirit rests upon it.", ' ' None |
|
17. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic midrash • Amoraim
Found in books: Herman, Rubenstein (2018), The Aggada of the Bavli and Its Cultural World. 31; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 170
|
18. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amora • Amoraic literature, presumes kiddush ha-Shem as public act • public aspect of kiddush ha-Shem and hillul ha-Shem, assumed in Amoraic literature
Found in books: Avemarie, van Henten, and Furstenberg (2023), Jewish Martyrdom in Antiquity, 68; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 546
|
19. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic literature, on gladiatorial combat • Jeremiah (Amora) • Judah (Amora) • Samuel (Amora) • Yose (Amora)
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 98; Spielman (2020), Jews and Entertainment in the Ancient World. 204
|
20. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: nan
Found in books: nan nan
|
21. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraim • Amoraim, Babylonian
Found in books: Herman, Rubenstein (2018), The Aggada of the Bavli and Its Cultural World. 74; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 183
|
22. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic literature • Jeremiah (Amora) • Judah (Amora) • Samuel (Amora) • Yose (Amora)
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 98; Spielman (2020), Jews and Entertainment in the Ancient World. 249
|
23. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraim, Babylonian, attitude to Moses, Torah • Amoraim, Babylonian, use of term Torah of Moses • Amoraim, amoraic period • Torah, study of, of Babylonian Amoraim
Found in books: Kalmin (1998), The Sage in Jewish Society of Late Antiquity, 95; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 152
|
24. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic literature, on gladiatorial combat • Amoraic literature, on public architecture • Amoraim • Amoraim, Babylonian • Amoraim, Palestinian • Amoraim, and public teaching
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 100; Neis (2012), When a Human Gives Birth to a Raven: Rabbis and the Reproduction of Species. 139; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 138; Spielman (2020), Jews and Entertainment in the Ancient World. 185, 204
|
25. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic Period in Babylonia • Amoraic period, end of • Amoraic period, vs. Stammaitic period • Amoraim • Amoraim, Babylonian • Amoraim, style of • Amoraim, vs. Stammaim • Resh Lakish (Simeon ben Lakish, Amora) • Resh Lakish (Simeon ben Lakish, Amora), his meeting with R. Johanan in the Jordan River • Sheshet (Amora) • Stammaim, vs. Amoraim • Stammaitic period, vs. Amoraic period • sages, Amoraic vs. Stammaitic • style, Amoraic vs. Stammaitic
Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 69; Herman, Rubenstein (2018), The Aggada of the Bavli and Its Cultural World. 206, 220, 222; Kosman (2012), Gender and Dialogue in the Rabbinic Prism, 134, 141; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 5, 22, 51
| 84a כי האי מעשה לידיה פגע ביה אליהו,אמר ליה עד מתי אתה מוסר עמו של אלהינו להריגה אמר ליה מאי אעביד הרמנא דמלכא הוא אמר ליה אבוך ערק לאסיא את ערוק ללודקיא,כי הוו מקלעי ר\' ישמעאל ברבי יוסי ור\' אלעזר בר\' שמעון בהדי הדדי הוה עייל בקרא דתורי בינייהו ולא הוה נגעה בהו,אמרה להו ההיא מטרוניתא בניכם אינם שלכם אמרו לה שלהן גדול משלנו כל שכן איכא דאמרי הכי אמרו לה (שופטים ח, כא) כי כאיש גבורתו איכא דאמרי הכי אמרו לה אהבה דוחקת את הבשר,ולמה להו לאהדורי לה והא כתיב (משלי כו, ד) אל תען כסיל כאולתו שלא להוציא לעז על בניהם,א"ר יוחנן איבריה דר\' ישמעאל בר\' יוסי כחמת בת תשע קבין אמר רב פפא איבריה דרבי יוחנן כחמת בת חמשת קבין ואמרי לה בת שלשת קבין דרב פפא גופיה כי דקורי דהרפנאי,אמר רבי יוחנן אנא אישתיירי משפירי ירושלים האי מאן דבעי מחזי שופריה דרבי יוחנן נייתי כסא דכספא מבי סלקי ונמלייה פרצידיא דרומנא סומקא ונהדר ליה כלילא דוורדא סומקא לפומיה ונותביה בין שמשא לטולא ההוא זהרורי מעין שופריה דר\' יוחנן,איני והאמר מר שופריה דרב כהנא מעין שופריה דרבי אבהו שופריה דר\' אבהו מעין שופריה דיעקב אבינו שופריה דיעקב אבינו מעין שופריה דאדם הראשון ואילו ר\' יוחנן לא קא חשיב ליה שאני ר\' יוחנן דהדרת פנים לא הויא ליה,ר\' יוחנן הוה אזיל ויתיב אשערי טבילה אמר כי סלקן בנות ישראל מטבילת מצוה לפגעו בי כי היכי דלהוו להו בני שפירי כוותי גמירי אורייתא כוותי,אמרו ליה רבנן לא מסתפי מר מעינא בישא אמר להו אנא מזרעא דיוסף קאתינא דלא שלטא ביה עינא בישא דכתיב (בראשית מט, כב) בן פורת יוסף בן פורת עלי עין ואמר ר\' אבהו אל תקרי עלי עין אלא עולי עין,ר\' יוסי בר חנינא אמר מהכא (בראשית מח, טז) וידגו לרוב בקרב הארץ מה דגים שבים מים מכסים אותם ואין העין שולטת בהן אף זרעו של יוסף אין העין שולטת בהן,יומא חד הוה קא סחי ר\' יוחנן בירדנא חזייה ריש לקיש ושוור לירדנא אבתריה אמר ליה חילך לאורייתא אמר ליה שופרך לנשי א"ל אי הדרת בך יהיבנא לך אחותי דשפירא מינאי קביל עליה בעי למיהדר לאתויי מאניה ולא מצי הדר,אקרייה ואתנייה ושוייה גברא רבא יומא חד הוו מפלגי בי מדרשא הסייף והסכין והפגיון והרומח ומגל יד ומגל קציר מאימתי מקבלין טומאה משעת גמר מלאכתן,ומאימתי גמר מלאכתן רבי יוחנן אמר משיצרפם בכבשן ריש לקיש אמר משיצחצחן במים א"ל לסטאה בלסטיותיה ידע אמר ליה ומאי אהנת לי התם רבי קרו לי הכא רבי קרו לי אמר ליה אהנאי לך דאקרבינך תחת כנפי השכינה,חלש דעתיה דרבי יוחנן חלש ריש לקיש אתאי אחתיה קא בכיא אמרה ליה עשה בשביל בני אמר לה (ירמיהו מט, יא) עזבה יתומיך אני אחיה עשה בשביל אלמנותי אמר לה (ירמיהו מט, יא) ואלמנותיך עלי תבטחו,נח נפשיה דר\' שמעון בן לקיש והוה קא מצטער ר\' יוחנן בתריה טובא אמרו רבנן מאן ליזיל ליתביה לדעתיה ניזיל רבי אלעזר בן פדת דמחדדין שמעתתיה,אזל יתיב קמיה כל מילתא דהוה אמר רבי יוחנן אמר ליה תניא דמסייעא לך אמר את כבר לקישא בר לקישא כי הוה אמינא מילתא הוה מקשי לי עשרין וארבע קושייתא ומפריקנא ליה עשרין וארבעה פרוקי וממילא רווחא שמעתא ואת אמרת תניא דמסייע לך אטו לא ידענא דשפיר קאמינא,הוה קא אזיל וקרע מאניה וקא בכי ואמר היכא את בר לקישא היכא את בר לקישא והוה קא צוח עד דשף דעתיה מיניה בעו רבנן רחמי עליה ונח נפשיה'86a חכים יתקרי ורבי לא יתקרי ואסו דרבי על ידו תהא רבי ור\' נתן סוף משנה רב אשי ורבינא סוף הוראה,וסימנך (תהלים עג, יז) עד אבוא אל מקדשי אל אבינה לאחריתם,אמר רב כהנא אישתעי לי רב חמא בר ברתיה דחסא רבה בר נחמני אגב שמדא נח נפשיה אכלו ביה קורצא בי מלכא אמרו איכא חד גברא ביהודאי דקא מבטל תריסר אלפי גברי מישראל ירחא בקייטא וירחא בסתוא מכרגא דמלכא,שדרו פריסתקא דמלכא בתריה ולא אשכחיה ערק ואזל מפומבדיתא לאקרא מאקרא לאגמא ומאגמא לשחין ומשחין לצריפא ומצריפא לעינא דמים ומעינא דמים לפומבדיתא בפומבדיתא אשכחיה איקלע פריסתקא דמלכא לההוא אושפיזא דרבה קריבו תכא קמיה ואשקוהו תרי כסי ודליוה לתכא מקמיה הדר פרצופיה לאחוריה,אמרו ליה מאי נעביד ליה גברא דמלכא הוא אמר להו קריבו תכא לקמיה ואשקיוהו חד כסא ודליוהו לתכא מקמיה ולתסי עבדו ליה הכי ואתסי אמר מידע ידענא דגברא דקא בעינא הכא הוא בחיש אבתריה ואשכחיה אמר אזלינא מהא אי מקטל קטלו לההוא גברא לא מגלינא ואי נגידי מנגדין ליה מגלינא,אתיוהו לקמיה עייליה לאדרונא וטרקיה לבבא באנפיה בעא רחמי פרק אשיתא ערק ואזיל לאגמא הוה יתיב אגירדא דדקולא וקא גריס קא מיפלגי במתיבתא דרקיעא אם (ויקרא יג, ב) בהרת קודמת לשער לבן טמא ואם שער לבן קודם לבהרת טהור,ספק הקב"ה אומר טהור וכולהו מתיבתא דרקיעא אמרי טמא ואמרי מאן נוכח נוכח רבה בר נחמני דאמר רבה בר נחמני אני יחיד בנגעים אני יחיד באהלות,שדרו שליחא בתריה לא הוה מצי מלאך המות למקרב ליה מדלא הוה קא פסיק פומיה מגרסיה אדהכי נשב זיקא ואויש ביני קני סבר גונדא דפרשי הוא אמר תינח נפשיה דההוא גברא ולא ימסר בידא דמלכותא,כי הוה קא ניחא נפשיה אמר טהור טהור יצאת בת קול ואמרה אשריך רבה בר נחמני שגופך טהור ויצאתה נשמתך בטהור נפל פתקא מרקיעא בפומבדיתא רבה בר נחמני נתבקש בישיבה של מעלה נפקו אביי ורבא וכולהו רבנן לאיעסוקי ביה לא הוו ידעי דוכתיה אזלו לאגמא חזו צפרי דמטללי וקיימי אמרי שמע מינה התם הוא,ספדוהו תלתא יומי ותלתא לילותא נפל פתקא כל הפורש יהא בנידוי ספדוהו שבעה יומי נפל פתקא לכו לביתכם לשלום,ההוא יומא דנח נפשיה דלייה זעפא ודרי לההוא טייעא כי רכיב גמלא מהאי גיסא דנהר פפא ושדייה בהך גיסא אמר מאי האי אמרי ליה נח נפשיה דרבה בר נחמני אמר לפניו רבונו של עולם כולי עלמא דידך הוא ורבה בר נחמני דידך את דרבה ורבה דידך אמאי קא מחרבת ליה לעלמא נח זעפא,רבי שמעון בן חלפתא בעל בשר הוה יומא חד הוה חמימא ליה הוה סליק ויתיב אשינא דטורא אמר לה לברתיה בתי הניפי עלי במניפא ואני אתן ליך ככרין דנרד אדהכי נשבא זיקא אמר כמה ככרין דנרד למרי דיכי,הכל כמנהג המדינה וכו\' הכל לאתויי מאי לאתויי באתרא דנהיגי מכרך ריפתא ומשתה אנפקא דאי אמר להו קדימו ואייתי לכו אמרו לו לא כל כמינך,מעשה ברבן יוחנן בן מתיא שאמר לבנו צא ושכור וכו\' מעשה לסתור חסורי מחסרא והכי קתני ואם פסק להן מזונות ' None | 84a Elijah the prophet encountered him,and said to him: Until when will you inform on the nation of our God to be sentenced to execution? Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, said to Elijah: What should I do? It is the king’s edict that I must obey. Elijah said to him: Faced with this choice, your father fled to Asia. You should flee to Laodicea rather than accept this appointment.,§ With regard to these Sages, the Gemara adds: When Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, and Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, would meet each other, it was possible for a pair of oxen to enter and fit between them, under their bellies, without touching them, due to their excessive obesity.,A certain Roman noblewoman matronita once said to them: Your children are not really your own, as due to your obesity it is impossible that you engaged in intercourse with your wives. They said to her: Theirs, i.e., our wives’ bellies, are larger than ours. She said to them: All the more so you could not have had intercourse. There are those who say that this is what they said to her: “For as the man is, so is his strength” (Judges 8:21), i.e., our sexual organs are proportionate to our bellies. There are those who say that this is what they said to her: Love compresses the flesh.,The Gemara asks: And why did they respond to her audacious and foolish question? After all, it is written: “Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you also be like him” (Proverbs 26:4). The Gemara answers: They answered her in order not to cast aspersions on the lineage of their children.,The Gemara continues discussing the bodies of these Sages: Rabbi Yoḥa said: The organ of Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, was the size of a jug of nine kav. Rav Pappa said: The organ of Rabbi Yoḥa was the size of a jug of five kav, and some say it was the size of a jug of three kav. Rav Pappa himself had a belly like the baskets dikurei made in Harpanya.,With regard to Rabbi Yoḥa’s physical features, the Gemara adds that Rabbi Yoḥa said: I alone remain of the beautiful people of Jerusalem. The Gemara continues: One who wishes to see something resembling the beauty of Rabbi Yoḥa should bring a new, shiny silver goblet from the smithy and fill it with red pomegranate seeds partzidaya and place a diadem of red roses upon the lip of the goblet, and position it between the sunlight and shade. That luster is a semblance of Rabbi Yoḥa’s beauty.,The Gemara asks: Is that so? Was Rabbi Yoḥa so beautiful? But doesn’t the Master say: The beauty of Rav Kahana is a semblance of the beauty of Rabbi Abbahu; the beauty of Rabbi Abbahu is a semblance of the beauty of Jacob, our forefather; and the beauty of Jacob, our forefather, is a semblance of the beauty of Adam the first man, who was created in the image of God. And yet Rabbi Yoḥa is not included in this list. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yoḥa is different from these other men, as he did not have a beauty of countece, i.e., he did not have a beard.,The Gemara continues to discuss Rabbi Yoḥa’s beauty. Rabbi Yoḥa would go and sit by the entrance to the ritual bath. He said to himself: When Jewish women come up from their immersion for the sake of a mitzva, after their menstruation, they should encounter me first, so that they have beautiful children like me, and sons learned in Torah like me. This is based on the idea that the image upon which a woman meditates during intercourse affects the child she conceives.,The Rabbis said to Rabbi Yoḥa: Isn’t the Master worried about being harmed by the evil eye by displaying yourself in this manner? Rabbi Yoḥa said to them: I come from the offspring of Joseph, over whom the evil eye does not have dominion, as it is written: “Joseph is a fruitful vine, a fruitful vine by a fountain alei ayin” (Genesis 49:22); and Rabbi Abbahu says: Do not read the verse as saying: “By a fountain alei ayin”; rather, read it as: Those who rise above the evil eye olei ayin. Joseph’s descendants are not susceptible to the influence of the evil eye.,Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina said that this idea is derived from here: “And let them grow veyidgu into a multitude in the midst of the earth” (Genesis 48:16). Just as with regard to fish dagim in the sea, the water covers them and the evil eye therefore has no dominion over them, as they are not seen, so too, with regard to the offspring of Joseph, the evil eye has no dominion over them.,The Gemara relates: One day, Rabbi Yoḥa was bathing in the Jordan River. Reish Lakish saw him and jumped into the Jordan, pursuing him. At that time, Reish Lakish was the leader of a band of marauders. Rabbi Yoḥa said to Reish Lakish: Your strength is fit for Torah study. Reish Lakish said to him: Your beauty is fit for women. Rabbi Yoḥa said to him: If you return to the pursuit of Torah, I will give you my sister in marriage, who is more beautiful than I am. Reish Lakish accepted upon himself to study Torah. Subsequently, Reish Lakish wanted to jump back out of the river to bring back his clothes, but he was unable to return, as he had lost his physical strength as soon as he accepted the responsibility to study Torah upon himself.,Rabbi Yoḥa taught Reish Lakish Bible, and taught him Mishna, and turned him into a great man. Eventually, Reish Lakish became one of the outstanding Torah scholars of his generation. One day the Sages of the study hall were engaging in a dispute concerning the following baraita: With regard to the sword, the knife, the dagger vehapigyon, the spear, a hand sickle, and a harvest sickle, from when are they susceptible to ritual impurity? The baraita answers: It is from the time of the completion of their manufacture, which is the halakha with regard to metal vessels in general.,These Sages inquired: And when is the completion of their manufacture? Rabbi Yoḥa says: It is from when one fires these items in the furnace. Reish Lakish said: It is from when one scours them in water, after they have been fired in the furnace. Rabbi Yoḥa said to Reish Lakish: A bandit knows about his banditry, i.e., you are an expert in weaponry because you were a bandit in your youth. Reish Lakish said to Rabbi Yoḥa: What benefit did you provide me by bringing me close to Torah? There, among the bandits, they called me: Leader of the bandits, and here, too, they call me: Leader of the bandits. Rabbi Yoḥa said to him: I provided benefit to you, as I brought you close to God, under the wings of the Divine Presence.,As a result of the quarrel, Rabbi Yoḥa was offended, which in turn affected Reish Lakish, who fell ill. Rabbi Yoḥa’s sister, who was Reish Lakish’s wife, came crying to Rabbi Yoḥa, begging that he pray for Reish Lakish’s recovery. She said to him: Do this for the sake of my children, so that they should have a father. Rabbi Yoḥa said to her the verse: “Leave your fatherless children, I will rear them” (Jeremiah 49:11), i.e., I will take care of them. She said to him: Do so for the sake of my widowhood. He said to her the rest of the verse: “And let your widows trust in Me.”,Ultimately, Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, Reish Lakish, died. Rabbi Yoḥa was sorely pained over losing him. The Rabbis said: Who will go to calm Rabbi Yoḥa’s mind and comfort him over his loss? They said: Let Rabbi Elazar ben Pedat go, as his statements are sharp, i.e., he is clever and will be able to serve as a substitute for Reish Lakish.,Rabbi Elazar ben Pedat went and sat before Rabbi Yoḥa. With regard to every matter that Rabbi Yoḥa would say, Rabbi Elazar ben Pedat would say to him: There is a ruling which is taught in a baraita that supports your opinion. Rabbi Yoḥa said to him: Are you comparable to the son of Lakish? In my discussions with the son of Lakish, when I would state a matter, he would raise twenty-four difficulties against me in an attempt to disprove my claim, and I would answer him with twenty-four answers, and the halakha by itself would become broadened and clarified. And yet you say to me: There is a ruling which is taught in a baraita that supports your opinion. Do I not know that what I say is good? Being rebutted by Reish Lakish served a purpose; your bringing proof to my statements does not.,Rabbi Yoḥa went around, rending his clothing, weeping and saying: Where are you, son of Lakish? Where are you, son of Lakish? Rabbi Yoḥa screamed until his mind was taken from him, i.e., he went insane. The Rabbis prayed and requested for God to have mercy on him and take his soul, and Rabbi Yoḥa died.'86a shall be called a wise ḥakim physician, but he shall not be called rabbi, and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s convalescence shall be through him. I also saw written there: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and Rabbi Natan are the end of the Mishna, i.e., the last of the tanna’im, the redactors of the Mishna. Rav Ashi and Ravina are the end of instruction, i.e., the end of the period of the amora’im, the redacting of the Talmud, which occurred after the period of the tanna’im.,And your mnemonic to remember that Rav Ashi and Ravina redacted the Talmud is the verse: “Until I entered into the sanctuary mikdashei of God, and considered avina their end” (Psalms 73:17). The sanctuary, mikdashei, alludes to Rav Ashi, while the term avina alludes to Ravina, which is a contraction of Rav Avina. The phrase: Their end, is interpreted as a reference to the redacting of the Talmud.,§ The Gemara relates another story discussing the greatness of the Sages. Rav Kahana said: Rav Ḥama, son of the daughter of Ḥasa, told me that Rabba bar Naḥmani died due to the fear of a decree of religious persecution. The Gemara explains: His enemies accused him akhalu beih kurtza of disloyalty in the king’s palace, as they said: There is one man from among the Jews who exempts twelve thousand Jewish men from the king’s head tax two months a year, one month in the summer and one month in the winter. Since many people would study in Rabba’s study hall during the months of Adar and Elul, he was being blamed for preventing those people from working during those months.,They sent a messenger peristaka of the king after him, but he was not able to find him. Rabba bar Naḥmani fled and went from Pumbedita to Akra, from Akra to Agma, from Agma to Shiḥin, from Shiḥin to Tzerifa, from Tzerifa to Eina Demayim, and from Eina Demayim back to Pumbedita. Ultimately, he was found in Pumbedita, as the king’s messenger arrived by chance at that same inn where Rabba bar Naḥmani was hiding. The inn attendants placed a tray before the messenger and gave him two cups to drink. They then removed the tray from before him and his face was miraculously turned backward.,The attendants said to Rabba bar Naḥmani: What should we do with him? He is the king’s man, and we cannot leave him like this. Rabba bar Naḥmani said to them: Place a tray before him and give him one cup to drink, and then remove the tray from before him and he will be healed. They did this, and he was healed. The messenger said: I am certain that the man I seek is here, as this unnatural event must have befallen me on his account. He searched for Rabba bar Naḥmani and found out where he was. The messenger said that they should tell Rabba bar Naḥmani: I will leave this inn and will not disclose your location. Even if they will kill that man, i.e., me, I will not disclose your location. But if they will beat him, me, I will disclose your whereabouts, as I cannot bear being tortured.,With that guarantee, they brought Rabba bar Naḥmani before the messenger. They took him into a small vestibule le’idrona and closed the door before him. Rabba bar Naḥmani prayed for mercy, and the wall crumbled. He fled and went to hide in a swamp. He was sitting on the stump of a palm tree and studying Torah alone. At that moment, the Sages in the heavenly academy were disagreeing with regard to a halakha of leprosy. In general, a leprous spot includes two signs of impurity, a bright white spot and a white hair. The basic halakha is that if the snow-white leprous sore baheret preceded the white hair then the afflicted person is ritually impure, but if the white hair preceded the baheret, he is pure.,The heavenly debate concerned a case of uncertainty as to which came first, the spot or the hair. The Holy One, Blessed be He, says: The individual is pure, but every other member of the heavenly academy says: He is impure. And they said: Who can arbitrate in this dispute? They agreed that Rabba bar Naḥmani should arbitrate, as Rabba bar Naḥmani once said: I am preeminent in the halakhot of leprosy and I am preeminent in the halakhot of ritual impurity imparted by tents.,They sent a messenger from heaven after him to take his soul up to the heavenly academy, but the Angel of Death was unable to approach Rabba bar Naḥmani, as his mouth did not cease from his Torah study. In the meantime, a wind blew and howled between the branches. Rabba bar Naḥmani thought that the noise was due to an infantry battalion gunda about to capture him. He said: Let that man, i.e., me, die and not be given over to the hands of the government. The Angel of Death was therefore able to take his soul.,As he was dying, he said in response to the dispute in heaven: It is pure; it is pure. A Divine Voice emerged from heaven and said: Happy are you, Rabba bar Naḥmani, as your body is pure and your soul left you with the word: Pure. A note pitka fell from heaven and landed in the academy of Pumbedita. The note read: Rabba bar Naḥmani was summoned to the heavenly academy, i.e., he has died. Abaye and Rava and all of the other Rabbis went out to tend to his burial; however, they did not know the location of his body. They went to the swamp and saw birds forming a shade and hovering over a certain spot. The Rabbis said: We can conclude from this that he is there.,The Rabbis lamented him for three days and three nights. A note fell from heaven, upon which was written: Anyone who removes himself from the lamentations shall be ostracized. Accordingly, they lamented him for seven days. Another note fell from heaven, stating: Go to your homes in peace.,On that day when Rabba bar Naḥmani died, a hurricane lifted a certain Arab taya’a merchant while he was riding his camel. The hurricane carried him from one side of the Pappa River and threw him onto the other side. He said: What is this? Those present said to him: Rabba bar Naḥmani has died. He said before God: Master of the Universe! The entire world is Yours and Rabba bar Naḥmani is also Yours. You are to Rabba and Rabba is to You, i.e., you are beloved to each other. If so, why are You destroying the world on his account? The storm subsided.,The Gemara concludes its earlier discussion of obese Sages (84a). Rabbi Shimon ben Ḥalafta was obese. One day he was particularly hot and went and sat on a mountain boulder to cool himself off. He said to his daughter: My daughter, fan me with a fan, and as a gift I will give you packages of spikenard. In the meantime, a strong wind blew. He said: How many packages of spikenard do I owe to the overseers of this wind?,§ The Gemara returns to its discussion of the mishna (83a), which teaches that an employer must provide his laborers with sustece, all in accordance with the regional custom. The Gemara asks: What is added by the inclusive term: All? The Gemara answers: This serves to include a place where it is customary for the laborers to eat bread and drink a quarter-log anpaka of wine. As, if in such a case the employer were to say to them: Arise early in the morning and I will bring you this sustece, so as not to waste work time, they may say to him: It is not in your power to compel us to do so.,§ The mishna teaches that there was an incident involving Rabbi Yoḥa ben Matya, who said to his son: Go out and hire laborers for us. His son hired the laborers and stipulated that he would provide sustece for them. The Gemara asks: After the mishna has stated that all practices are in accordance with the regional custom, how can it cite this incident, which seems to contradict the previous ruling, as Rabbi Yoḥa ben Matya and his son did not follow the regional custom? The Gemara answers: The mishna is incomplete and this is what it is teaching: All practices are in accordance with the regional custom, but if the employer pledged to provide sustece for them, ' None |
|
26. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic • Amoraim, amoraic period • Sheshet (Amora)
Found in books: Kosman (2012), Gender and Dialogue in the Rabbinic Prism, 145; Ruzer (2020), Early Jewish Messianism in the New Testament: Reflections in the Dim Mirror, 60, 85; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 131
10a כל פרשה שהיתה חביבה על דוד פתח בה באשרי וסיים בה באשרי פתח באשרי דכתיב (תהלים א, א) אשרי האיש וסיים באשרי דכתיב (תהלים ב, יב) אשרי כל חוסי בו:,הנהו בריוני דהוו בשבבותיה דר"מ והוו קא מצערו ליה טובא הוה קא בעי ר\' מאיר רחמי עלויהו כי היכי דלימותו אמרה לי\' ברוריא דביתהו מאי דעתך משום דכתיב (תהלים קד, לה) יתמו חטאים מי כתיב חוטאים חטאים כתיב,ועוד שפיל לסיפיה דקרא ורשעים עוד אינם כיון דיתמו חטאים ורשעים עוד אינם אלא בעי רחמי עלויהו דלהדרו בתשובה ורשעים עוד אינם,בעא רחמי עלויהו והדרו בתשובה:,אמר לה ההוא צדוקי לברוריא כתיב (ישעיהו נד, א) רני עקרה לא ילדה משום דלא ילדה רני,אמרה ליה שטיא שפיל לסיפיה דקרא דכתיב כי רבים בני שוממה מבני בעולה אמר ה\',אלא מאי עקרה לא ילדה רני כנסת ישראל שדומה לאשה עקרה שלא ילדה בנים לגיהנם כותייכו:,א"ל ההוא צדוקי לר\' אבהו כתיב (תהלים ג, א) מזמור לדוד בברחו מפני אבשלום בנו וכתיב (תהלים נז, א) לדוד מכתם בברחו מפני שאול במערה הי מעשה הוה ברישא מכדי מעשה שאול הוה ברישא לכתוב ברישא,אמר ליה אתון דלא דרשיתון סמוכין קשיא לכו אנן דדרשינן סמוכים לא קשיא לן,דא"ר יוחנן סמוכין מן התורה מנין שנא\' (תהלים קיא, ח) סמוכים לעד לעולם עשוים באמת וישר,למה נסמכה פרשת אבשלום לפרשת גוג ומגוג שאם יאמר לך אדם כלום יש עבד שמורד ברבו אף אתה אמור לו כלום יש בן שמורד באביו אלא הוה הכא נמי הוה:,אמר ר\' יוחנן משום רבי שמעון בן יוחי מאי דכתיב (משלי לא, כו) פיה פתחה בחכמה ותורת חסד על לשונה כנגד מי אמר שלמה מקרא זה לא אמרו אלא כנגד דוד אביו שדר בחמשה עולמים ואמר שירה,דר במעי אמו ואמר שירה שנאמר (תהלים קג, א) ברכי נפשי את ה\' וכל קרבי את שם קדשו,יצא לאויר העולם ונסתכל בכוכבים ומזלות ואמר שירה שנאמר (תהלים קג, כ) ברכו ה\' מלאכיו גבורי כח עושי דברו לשמוע בקול דברו ברכו ה\' כל צבאיו וגו\',ינק משדי אמו ונסתכל בדדיה ואמר שירה שנאמר (תהלים קג, ב) ברכי נפשי את ה\' ואל תשכחי כל גמוליו,מאי כל גמוליו אמר ר\' אבהו שעשה לה דדים במקום בינה,טעמא מאי אמר (רבי) יהודה כדי שלא יסתכל במקום ערוה רב מתנא אמר כדי שלא יינק ממקום הטנופת,ראה במפלתן של רשעים ואמר שירה שנאמר (תהלים קד, לה) יתמו חטאים מן הארץ ורשעים עוד אינם ברכי נפשי את ה\' הללויה,נסתכל ביום המיתה ואמר שירה שנאמר (תהלים קד, א) ברכי נפשי את ה\' ה\' אלהי גדלת מאד הוד והדר לבשת,מאי משמע דעל יום המיתה נאמר אמר רבה בר רב שילא מסיפא דעניינא דכתיב (תהלים קד, כט) תסתיר פניך יבהלון תוסף רוחם יגועון וגו\',רב שימי בר עוקבא ואמרי לה מר עוקבא הוה שכיח קמיה דר\' שמעון בן פזי והוה מסדר אגדתא קמיה דר\' יהושע בן לוי אמר ליה מאי דכתיב (תהלים קג, א) ברכי נפשי את ה\' וכל קרבי את שם קדשו אמר ליה בא וראה שלא כמדת הקדוש ברוך הוא מדת בשר ודם מדת בשר ודם צר צורה על גבי הכותל ואינו יכול להטיל בה רוח ונשמה קרבים ובני מעים והקב"ה אינו כן צר צורה בתוך צורה ומטיל בה רוח ונשמה קרבים ובני מעים והיינו דאמרה חנה (שמואל א ב, ב) אין קדוש כה\' כי אין בלתך ואין צור כאלהינו.,מאי אין צור כאלהינו אין צייר כאלהינו,מאי כי אין בלתך אמר ר\' יהודה בר מנסיא אל תקרי כי אין בלתך אלא אין לבלותך שלא כמדת הקדוש ברוך הוא מדת בשר ודם מדת בשר ודם מעשה ידיו מבלין אותו והקב"ה מבלה מעשיו,א"ל אנא הכי קא אמינא לך הני חמשה ברכי נפשי כנגד מי אמרן דוד לא אמרן אלא כנגד הקב"ה וכנגד נשמה,מה הקב"ה מלא כל העולם אף נשמה מלאה את כל הגוף מה הקדוש ברוך הוא רואה ואינו נראה אף נשמה רואה ואינה נראית מה הקב"ה זן את כל העולם כלו אף נשמה זנה את כל הגוף מה הקב"ה טהור אף נשמה טהורה מה הקב"ה יושב בחדרי חדרים אף נשמה יושבת בחדרי חדרים יבא מי שיש בו חמשה דברים הללו וישבח למי שיש בו חמשה דברים הללו:,אמר רב המנונא מאי דכתיב (קהלת ח, א) מי כהחכם ומי יודע פשר דבר מי כהקדוש ברוך הוא שיודע לעשות פשרה בין שני צדיקים בין חזקיהו לישעיהו חזקיהו אמר ליתי ישעיהו גבאי דהכי אשכחן באליהו דאזל לגבי אחאב (שנאמר (מלכים א יח, ב) וילך אליהו להראות אל אחאב) ישעיהו אמר ליתי חזקיהו גבאי דהכי אשכחן ביהורם בן אחאב דאזל לגבי אלישע,מה עשה הקב"ה הביא יסורים על חזקיהו ואמר לו לישעיהו לך ובקר את החולה שנאמר (מלכים ב כ, א) בימים ההם חלה חזקיהו למות ויבא אליו ישעיהו בן אמוץ הנביא ויאמר אליו כה אמר ה\' (צבאות) צו לביתך כי מת אתה ולא תחיה וגו\' מאי כי מת אתה ולא תחיה מת אתה בעולם הזה ולא תחיה לעולם הבא,אמר ליה מאי כולי האי אמר ליה משום דלא עסקת בפריה ורביה א"ל משום דחזאי לי ברוח הקדש דנפקי מינאי בנין דלא מעלו,א"ל בהדי כבשי דרחמנא למה לך מאי דמפקדת איבעי לך למעבד ומה דניחא קמיה קודשא בריך הוא לעביד,אמר ליה השתא הב לי ברתך אפשר דגרמא זכותא דידי ודידך ונפקי מנאי בנין דמעלו א"ל כבר נגזרה עליך גזירה א"ל בן אמוץ כלה נבואתך וצא,כך מקובלני מבית אבי אבא אפי\' חרב חדה מונחת על צוארו של אדם אל ימנע עצמו מן הרחמים,אתמר נמי רבי יוחנן ורבי (אליעזר) דאמרי תרוייהו אפילו חרב חדה מונחת על צוארו של אדם אל ימנע עצמו מן הרחמים שנא\' (איוב יג, טו) הן יקטלני לו איחל'34b כהן גדול בסוף כל ברכה וברכה והמלך תחלת כל ברכה וברכה וסוף כל ברכה וברכה,אמר רבי יצחק בר נחמני לדידי מפרשא לי מיניה דריב"ל הדיוט כמו שאמרנו כהן גדול תחלת כל ברכה וברכה המלך כיון שכרע שוב אינו זוקף שנאמר (מלכים א ח, נד) ויהי ככלות שלמה להתפלל וגו\' קם מלפני מזבח ה\' מכרוע על ברכיו:,ת"ר קידה על אפים שנאמר (מלכים א א, לא) ותקד בת שבע אפים ארץ כריעה על ברכים שנאמר מכרוע על ברכיו השתחואה זו פשוט ידים ורגלים שנאמר (בראשית לז, י) הבא נבא אני ואמך ואחיך להשתחות לך ארצה,אמר רב חייא בריה דרב הונא חזינא להו לאביי ורבא דמצלו אצלויי,תני חדא הכורע בהודאה הרי זה משובח ותניא אידך הרי זה מגונה,לא קשיא הא בתחלה הא לבסוף,רבא כרע בהודאה תחלה וסוף אמרי ליה רבנן אמאי קא עביד מר הכי אמר להו חזינא לרב נחמן דכרע וחזינא ליה לרב ששת דקא עבד הכי,והתניא הכורע בהודאה הרי זה מגונה,ההיא בהודאה שבהלל,והתניא הכורע בהודאה ובהודאה של הלל הרי זה מגונה,כי תניא ההיא בהודאה דברכת המזון:,| 10a Every chapter that was dear to David, he began with “happy is” and concluded with “happy is.” He opened with “happy is,” as it is written: “Happy is the man who has not walked in the counsel of the wicked or stood in the way of sinners or sat in the dwelling place of the scornful” (Psalms 1:1). And he concluded with “happy,” as it is written at the end of the chapter: “Pay homage in purity, lest He be angry, and you perish on the way when His anger is kindled suddenly. Happy are those who take refuge in Him” (Psalms 2:12). We see that these two chapters actually constitute a single chapter.,With regard to the statement of Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi, that David did not say Halleluya until he saw the downfall of the wicked, the Gemara relates: There were these hooligans in Rabbi Meir’s neighborhood who caused him a great deal of anguish. Rabbi Meir prayed for God to have mercy on them, that they should die. Rabbi Meir’s wife, Berurya, said to him: What is your thinking? On what basis do you pray for the death of these hooligans? Do you base yourself on the verse, as it is written: “Let sins cease from the land” (Psalms 104:35), which you interpret to mean that the world would be better if the wicked were destroyed? But is it written, let sinners cease?” Let sins cease, is written. One should pray for an end to their transgressions, not for the demise of the transgressors themselves.,Moreover, go to the end of the verse, where it says: “And the wicked will be no more.” If, as you suggest, transgressions shall cease refers to the demise of the evildoers, how is it possible that the wicked will be no more, i.e., that they will no longer be evil? Rather, pray for God to have mercy on them, that they should repent, as if they repent, then the wicked will be no more, as they will have repented.,Rabbi Meir saw that Berurya was correct and he prayed for God to have mercy on them, and they repented.,The Gemara relates an additional example of Berurya’s incisive insight: A certain heretic said to Berurya: It is written: “Sing, barren woman who has not given birth, open forth in song and cry, you did not travail, for more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, said the Lord” (Isaiah 54:1). Because she has not given birth, she should sing and rejoice?,Berurya responded to this heretic’s mockery and said: Fool! Go to the end of the verse, where it is written: “For the children of the desolate shall be more numerous than the children of the married wife, said the Lord.”,Rather, what is the meaning of: “Sing, barren woman who has not given birth”? It means: Sing congregation of Israel, which is like a barren woman who did not give birth to children who are destined for Gehenna like you.,In explaining passages from Psalms, the Gemara relates another instance of a response to the question of a heretic: A certain heretic said to Rabbi Abbahu, it is written: “A Psalm of David, when he fled from his son, Absalom” (Psalms 3:1), and similarly it is said: “To the chief musician, al tashḥet, a mikhtam of David when fleeing from Saul into the cave” (Psalms 57:1). Which event was first? Since the event with Saul was first, it would have been appropriate to write it first.,Rabbi Abbahu said to him: For you, who do not employ the homiletic method of juxtaposition of verses, it is difficult. But for us, who employ the homiletic method of juxtaposition of verses, it is not difficult, as the Sages commonly homiletically infer laws and moral lessons from the juxtaposition of two verses.,Regarding the juxtaposition of verses, Rabbi Yoḥa said: From where in the Bible is it derived that one may draw homiletical inferences from the juxtaposition of verses? As it is said: “The works of His hands in truth and justice, all His commandments are sure. Adjoined forever and ever, made in truth and uprightness” (Psalms 111:7–8). Conclude from here that it is appropriate to draw inferences from the juxtaposition of God’s commandments. Accordingly, David’s fleeing from Absalom is situated where it is in order to juxtapose it to the next chapter, which mentions the war of Gog and Magog; the second chapter of Psalms opens: “Why are the nations in an uproar?”,Why was the chapter of Absalom juxtaposed with the chapter of Gog and Magog? They are juxtaposed so that if a person should say to you, expressing doubt with regard to the prophecy of the war of Gog and Magog “against the Lord and against His anointed”: Is there a slave who rebels against his master? Is there someone capable of rebelling against God? You too say to him: Is there a son who rebels against his father and severs the relationship with the one who brought him into the world and raised him? Yet, nevertheless, there was such a son, Absalom, and so too there can be a situation where people will seek to rebel against God.,Rabbi Yoḥa said explanations of other verses in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: What is the meaning of that which is written: “She opens her mouth with wisdom, and the teaching of loving-kindness is on her tongue” (Proverbs 31:26)? The Sages explain that this chapter discusses the wisdom of Torah and those who engage in its study, so with reference to whom did Solomon say this verse? He said this verse about none other than his father, David, who was the clearest example of one who opens his mouth in wisdom, and who resided in five worlds or stages of life and his soul said a song of praise corresponding to each of them. Five times David said: “Bless the Lord, O my soul,” each corresponding to a different stage of life.,He resided in his mother’s womb, his first world, and said a song of praise of the pregcy, as it is stated: “of David. Bless the Lord, O my soul and all that is within me bless His holy name” (Psalms 103:1), in which he thanks God for creating all that is within his mother, i.e., her womb.,He emerged into the atmosphere of the world, his second world, looked upon the stars and constellations and said a song of praise of God for the entirety of creation, as it is stated: “Bless the Lord, His angels, mighty in strength, that fulfill His word, listening to the voice of His word. Bless the Lord, all His hosts, His servants, that do His will. Bless the Lord, all His works, in all places of His kingship, bless my soul, Lord” (Psalms 103:20–23). David saw the grandeur of all creation and recognized that they are mere servants, carrying out the will of their Creator (Ma’ayan HaBerakhot).,He nursed from his mother’s breast, his third world, and he looked upon her bosom and said a song of praise, as it is stated: “Bless the Lord, O my soul, and do not forget all His benefits gemulav” (Psalms 103:2). The etymological association is between gemulav and gemulei meḥalav, which means weaned from milk (Isaiah 28:9).,We still must understand, however, what is meant by all His benefits? What in particular is praiseworthy in what God provided, beyond merely providing for the infant? Rabbi Abbahu said: In contrast with most other animals, God placed her breasts near her heart, the place that is the source of understanding.,What is the reason that God did this? Rav Yehuda said: So that the nursing child would not look upon the place of his mother’s nakedness. Rav Mattana said: So that the child would not nurse from a place of uncleanliness.,He witnessed in both vision and reality the downfall of the wicked and he said a song of praise, as it is stated: “Let sinners cease from the earth, and let the wicked be no more. Bless the Lord, O my soul, Halleluya” (Psalms 104:35).,The fifth world was when David looked upon the day of death and said a song of praise, as it is stated: “Bless the Lord, O my soul. Lord my God, You are very great; You are clothed in glory and majesty” (Psalms 104:1); for even death is a time of transcendence for the righteous.,The connection between this final praise and the day of death is unclear. The Gemara asks: From where is it inferred that this verse was stated with regard to the day of death? Rabba bar Rav Sheila says: We can derive this from the verses at the end of the matter, where it is written: “You hide Your face, they vanish; You gather Your breath, they perish and return to the dust” (Psalms 104:29).,Other interpretations of this verse exist. The Gemara relates how Rav Shimi bar Ukva, and some say Mar Ukva, would regularly study before Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi, who was well versed in aggada and would arrange the aggada before Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi. rOnce, Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi said to him: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Bless the Lord, my soul, and all that is within me bless His Holy name”? rRav Shimi bar Ukva said to Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi: Come and see that the attribute of the Holy One, Blessed be He, is not like the attribute of flesh and blood, as this verse praises the formation of man in his mother’s womb. The attribute of flesh and blood is such that he shapes a form on the wall for all to see, yet he cannot instill it with a spirit and soul, bowels and intestines. While the Holy One, Blessed be He, is not so, as God shapes one form within another form, a child in its mother’s womb, and instills it with spirit and soul, bowels and intestines. And this is the explanation of what Hannah said with regard to the birth of Samuel: “There is none holy like the Lord, for there is none like You, and there is no Rock like our God” (I Samuel 2:2).,What is the meaning of there is no rock tzur like our God? There is no artist tzayyar like our God.,The Gemara continues to interpret the rest of that verse homiletically: What is the meaning of “there is none like You”? Rabbi Yehuda ben Menasya said: Do not read the verse to mean “there is none like You biltekha”; rather, read it to mean “none can outlast You levalotkha,” as the attribute of the Holy One, Blessed be He, is not like the attribute of flesh and blood: The attribute of flesh and blood is such that his creations outlast him, but the Holy One, Blessed be He, outlasts His actions.,This did not satisfy Rav Shimi bar Ukva, who said to Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi: I meant to say to you as follows: Corresponding to whom did David say these five instance of “Bless the Lord, O my soul”? He answered him: He said them about none other than the Holy One, Blessed be He, and corresponding to the soul, as the verse refers to the relationship between man’s soul and God. The five instances of “Bless the Lord, O my soul” correspond to the five parallels between the soul in man’s body and God’s power in His world.,Just as the Holy One, Blessed be He, fills the entire world, so too the soul fills the entire body. rJust as the Holy One, Blessed be He, sees but is not seen, so too does the soul see, but is not seen. rJust as the Holy One, Blessed be He, sustains the entire world, so too the soul sustains the entire body. rJust as the Holy One, Blessed be He, is pure, so too is the soul pure. rJust as the Holy One, Blessed be He, resides in a chamber within a chamber, in His inner sanctum, so too the soul resides in a chamber within a chamber, in the innermost recesses of the body. rTherefore, that which has these five characteristics, the soul, should come and praise He Who has these five characteristics.,With regard to redemption and prayer, the Gemara tells the story of Hezekiah’s illness, his prayer to God, and subsequent recuperation. Rav Hamnuna said: What is the meaning of that which is written praising the Holy One, Blessed be He: “Who is like the wise man, and who knows the interpretation pesher of the matter” (Ecclesiastes 8:1)? This verse means: Who is like the Holy One, Blessed be He, Who knows how to effect compromise peshara between two righteous individuals, between Hezekiah, the king of Judea, and Isaiah the prophet. They disagreed over which of them should visit the other. Hezekiah said: Let Isaiah come to me, as that is what we find with regard to Elijah the prophet, who went to Ahab, the king of Israel, as it is stated: “And Elijah went to appear to Ahab” (I Kings 18:2). This proves that it is the prophet who must seek out the king. And Isaiah said: Let Hezekiah come to me, as that is what we find with regard to Yehoram ben Ahab, king of Israel, who went to Elisha the prophet, as it is stated: “So the king of Israel, Jehosaphat and the king of Edom went down to him” (II Kings 3:12).,What did the Holy One, Blessed be He, do to effect compromise between Hezekiah and Isaiah? He brought the suffering of illness upon Hezekiah and told Isaiah: Go and visit the sick. Isaiah did as God instructed, as it is stated: “In those days Hezekiah became deathly ill, and Isaiah ben Amoz the prophet came and said to him: Thus says the Lord of Hosts: Set your house in order, for you will die and you will not live” (Isaiah 38:1). This seems redundant; what is the meaning of you will die and you will not live? This repetition means: You will die in this world, and you will not live, you will have no share, in the World-to-Come.,Hezekiah said to him: What is all of this? For what transgression am I being punished? rIsaiah said to him: Because you did not marry and engage in procreation. rHezekiah apologized and said: I had no children because I envisaged through divine inspiration that the children that emerge from me will not be virtuous. Hezekiah meant that he had seen that his children were destined to be evil. In fact, his son Menashe sinned extensively, and he thought it preferable to have no children at all.,Isaiah said to him: Why do you involve yourself with the secrets of the Holy One, Blessed be He? That which you have been commanded, the mitzva of procreation, you are required to perform, and that which is acceptable in the eyes of the Holy One, Blessed be He, let Him perform, as He has so decided.,Hezekiah said to Isaiah: Now give me your daughter as my wife; perhaps my merit and your merit will cause virtuous children to emerge from me. rIsaiah said to him: The decree has already been decreed against you and this judgment cannot be changed. rHezekiah said to him: Son of Amoz, cease your prophecy and leave. As long as the prophet spoke as God’s emissary, Hezekiah was obligated to listen to him. He was not, however, obligated to accept Isaiah’s personal opinion that there was no possibility for mercy and healing.,Hezekiah continued: I have received a tradition from the house of my father’s father, from King David, the founding father of the dynasty of kings of Judea: Even if a sharp sword rests upon a person’s neck, he should not prevent himself from praying for mercy. One may still hold out hope that his prayers will be answered, as was David himself when he saw the Angel of Destruction, but nonetheless prayed for mercy and his prayers were answered.,With regard to the fact that one should not despair of God’s mercy, the Gemara cites that it was also said that Rabbi Yoḥa and Rabbi Eliezer both said: Even if a sharp sword is resting upon a person’s neck, he should not prevent himself from praying for mercy, as it is stated in the words of Job: “Though He slay me, I will trust in Him” (Job 13:15). Even though God is about to take his life, he still prays for God’s mercy.'34b It is appropriate, though, for a High Priest to bow at the end of each and every blessing; and for a king to bow at the beginning of each and every blessing and at the end of each and every blessing. This is because the more lofty one’s status, the more important it is to demonstrate his subservience to God.,Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Naḥmani said: It was explained to me directly from Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi himself differently: An ordinary person, conducts himself as we said; a High Priest bows at the beginning of each and every blessing; the king, once he has bowed at the beginning of the first blessing, does not rise until he concludes the entire prayer, as it is stated: “And it was that when Solomon finished praying all of his prayer to the Lord, he rose from before the altar of the Lord, from kneeling upon his knees with his hands spread forth toward the heavens” (I Kings 8:54).,Having mentioned Solomon bowing, the Gemara distinguishes between various types of bowing. The Sages taught in a baraita: The term kidda means bowing upon one’s face, with his face toward the ground, as it is stated: “Then Bathsheba bowed vatikod with her face to the ground” (I Kings 1:31). Keria means bowing upon one’s knees, as regarding Solomon it is stated: He finished praying and “he rose from before the altar of the Lord, from kneeling mikkeroa upon his knees.” Finally, hishtaḥava’a, that is bowing with one’s hands and legs spread in total submission, as it is stated in Jacob’s question to Joseph in response to his dream: “Shall we, I and your mother and your brothers, come and bow down lehishtaḥavot to you to the ground?” (Genesis 37:10).,On the topic of bowing, Rav Ḥiyya, son of Rav Huna, said: I saw Abaye and Rava, who would lean their heads and not actually prostrate themselves on the ground.,The Gemara asks: One baraita taught: One who bows in the blessing of thanksgiving, it is praiseworthy. And it was taught in another baraita: One who bows in the blessing of thanksgiving, it is reprehensible. These baraitot are contradictory.,The Gemara reconciles these two baraitot: This is not difficult; this baraita, which praises one who bows in the blessing of thanksgiving, refers to one who bows at the beginning of the blessing. This baraita, which condemns one who bows in the blessing of thanksgiving, refers to one who bows at the end of the blessing.,Rava bowed in the blessing of thanksgiving, both beginning and end. The Sages said to him: Why does our master do this? He said to them: I saw Rav Naḥman who bowed in the blessing of thanksgiving, and I saw Rav Sheshet who did so as well.,But wasn’t it taught in a baraita that one who bows in thanksgiving, it is reprehensible?,Rava explained: That baraita refers to one who bows in the thanksgiving that is in hallel, when one recites: Give thanks to the Lord. Then, bowing is inappropriate.,The Sages continue to question Rava’s conduct: But wasn’t it taught explicitly in a baraita: One who bows in thanksgiving or in thanksgiving of hallel, it is reprehensible? The term thanksgiving unqualified does not refer to thanksgiving of hallel; it obviously refers to the blessing of thanksgiving recited in the Amida prayer. One who bows in either, it is reprehensible.,The Gemara rejects this challenge as well: When that baraita was taught, it was in reference to the blessing of thanksgiving, the second blessing recited in Grace after Meals: We thank You.,halakhot of prayer, the mishna discusses less practical aspects of prayer. One who prays and realizes that he erred in his prayer, it is a bad omen for him; it indicates to him that his prayer was not accepted. And if he who erred is the communal prayer leader, it is a bad omen for those who sent him, because a person’s agent has legal status equivalent to his own. On a similar note, they said about Rabbi Ḥanina ben Dosa that he would pray on behalf of the sick and immediately after his prayer he would say: This one shall recover from his illness and live and this one shall die. When they said to him: From where do you know? He said to them: If my prayer is fluent in my mouth as I recite it and there are no errors, I know that my prayer is accepted. And if not, I know that my prayer is rejected.,In which blessing is an error a bad omen?,Rabbi Ḥiyya said that Rav Safra said in the name of one of the Sages of the school of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: An error is a bad omen in the first blessing of the Amida prayer, the blessing of Patriarchs.”,Some teach that this statement was made on a baraita referring to another topic. It was taught in a baraita: One who prays must focus his heart in all of the blessings. And if he is unable to focus his heart in all of them, he should focus his heart at least in one.,Regarding this baraita, Rabbi Ḥiyya said that Rav Safra said in the name of one of the Sages of the school of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: In one refers to the blessing of Patriarchs.,We learned in the mishna: They said about Rabbi Ḥanina ben Dosa that the indication whether or not his prayer was accepted was whether the prayer was fluent in his mouth as he recited it. The Gemara asks: From where are these matters, that this is an accurate indication of whether or not his prayer was accepted, derived? Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: As the verse stated: “The Lord that creates the expression of the lips says, Peace, peace, to him that is far off and to him that is near; and I will heal him” (Isaiah 57:19). It can be inferred from this verse that if speech of the lips, fluent speech, is granted to one who prays, it indicates that his prayer on behalf of the ill has been accepted and I will heal him, that person will be healed.,In conclusion of this discussion, the Gemara cites that which Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥa said with regard to the reward of the righteous: All the prophets only prophesied in their prophecies of consolation, with regard to one who values wisdom and therefore marries his daughter to a Torah scholar and to one who conducts business perakmatya on behalf of a Torah scholar as well as to one who utilizes his wealth to benefit a Torah scholar in some other way. However, the prophets did not describe the extent of the reward for Torah scholars themselves, whose reward is not quantifiable as it is stated: “And from of old they have not heard, they have not lent an ear, no eye has seen it, God, aside from You, who will do for those who await Him” (Isaiah 64:3).,And Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: All the prophets only prophesied with regard to the change in world order in the end of days with regard to the days of the Messiah. However, with regard to the World-to-Come, which exists on a higher level, it is stated: “No eye has seen it, God, aside from You.”,And the Gemara notes that this statement disagrees with the opinion of Shmuel, as Shmuel said: The only difference between this world and the days of the Messiah is with regard to servitude to foreign kingdoms alone. While in the days of the Messiah, Israel will be independent and free from enslavement to foreign powers, the world order will remain otherwise unchanged, as it is stated: “For the poor shall not cease from the land” (Deuteronomy 15:11), which indicates that the ways of the world are set and unchanging.,And Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: All of the prophets only prophesied their prophecies of consolation with regard to penitents but with regard to the full-fledged righteous it is stated: “No eye has seen it, God, aside from You.”,And the Gemara notes that this statement disagrees with the opinion of Rabbi Abbahu who holds that penitents are superior to the righteous. As Rabbi Abbahu said: In the place where penitents stand, even the full-fledged righteous do not stand, as it is stated: “Peace, peace upon him who is far and him who is near.” Peace and greeting is extended first to him who is far, the penitent, and only thereafter is peace extended to him who is near, the full-fledged righteous.,And Rabbi Yoḥa could have said to you: What is the meaning of him who is far? This refers to the full-fledged righteous who was distant from an act of transgression from the outset, and to whom peace is extended first. What is meant by him who is near? This refers to the penitent who was close to an act of transgression but has now distanced himself from it, and to whom peace is extended only after it has been extended to him who has been righteous from the outset.,Earlier, Rabbi Yoḥa said that there is a reward referred to in the verse: “No eye has seen it.” The Gemara asks: What is this reward about which it is said: “No eye has seen it”? Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: That is the wine that has been preserved in its grapes since the six days of creation and which no eye has ever seen. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: That is Eden, which no creature’s eye has ever surveyed.,Lest you will say: Where was Adam the first man? Wasn’t he there and didn’t he survey Eden? The Gemara responds: Adam was only in the Garden of Eden, not in Eden itself.,And lest you will say: It is the Garden and it is Eden; two names describing the same place. That is not the case, as the verse states: “And a river went out from Eden to water the Garden” (Genesis 2:10). Obviously, the Garden exists on its own and Eden exists on its own.,Having mentioned Rabbi Ḥanina ben Dosa in our mishna, the Gemara proceeds to further praise the efficacy of his prayer: The Sages taught: There was an incident where Rabban Gamliel’s son fell ill. Rabban Gamliel dispatched two scholars to Rabbi Ḥanina ben Dosa to pray for mercy and healing on his behalf. When Rabbi Ḥanina ben Dosa saw them approaching, he went up to the attic on the roof of his house and prayed for mercy on his behalf. Upon his descent, he said to the messengers: You may go and return to Rabban Gamliel, as the fever has already left his son and he has been healed. The messengers asked him: How do you know? Are you a prophet? He replied to them: I am neither a prophet nor son of a prophet (see Amos 7:14), but I have received a tradition with regard to this indication: If my prayer is fluent in my mouth as I recite it and there are no errors, I know that my prayer is accepted. And if not, I know that my prayer is rejected. The Gemara relates that these messengers sat and wrote and approximated that precise moment when Rabbi Ḥanina ben Dosa told them this. When they came before Rabban Gamliel and related all that had happened and showed him what they had written, Rabban Gamliel said to them: I swear by the Temple service that in the time you wrote you were neither earlier or later; rather, this is how the event transpired: Precisely at that moment his fever broke and he asked us for water to drink.,And there was another incident involving Rabbi Ḥanina ben Dosa, who went to study Torah before Rabbi Yoḥa ben Zakkai, and Rabbi Yoḥa’s son fell ill. He said to him: Ḥanina, my son, pray for mercy on behalf of my son so that he will live. Rabbi Ḥanina ben Dosa placed his head between his knees in order to meditate and prayed for mercy upon his behalf, and Rabbi Yoḥa ben Zakkai’s son lived. Rabbi Yoḥa ben Zakkai said about himself: Had ben Zakkai stuck his head between his knees throughout the entire day, they would have paid him no attention. His wife said to him: And is Ḥanina greater than you? He replied to her: No, but his prayer is better received than my own because he is like a servant before the King, and as such he is able to enter before the King and make various requests at all times. I, on the other hand, am like a minister before the King, and I can enter only when invited and can make requests only with regard to especially significant matters.,And on the topic of prayer, Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: One may only pray in a house with windows, as then he can see the heavens and focus his heart, as it is stated with regard to Daniel’s prayer: “In his attic there were open windows facing Jerusalem” (Daniel 6:11).,With regard to the appropriate place to pray, Rav Kahana said: I consider impudent one who prays in a field.,Employing parallel language, Rav Kahana also said: I consider impudent one who specifies his transgression, as it is stated: “Happy is he whose iniquity is forgiven, whose transgression is covered over” (Psalms 32:1); one who conceals his transgressions indicates that he is ashamed of them, and due to his shame he will be forgiven., ' None | |
|
27. Babylonian Talmud, Eruvin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amora (R.) • Amoraim • Amoraim, Palestinian • Amoraim, on amei ha’arets
Found in books: Fishbane (2003), Biblical Myth and Rabbinic Mythmaking, 257; Neis (2012), When a Human Gives Birth to a Raven: Rabbis and the Reproduction of Species. 157; Piotrkowski (2019), Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period, 145; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 131
| 21b הבכורות והדוד (ה) אחד תאנים רעות מאד אשר לא תאכלנה מרוע,תאנים הטובות אלו צדיקים גמורים תאנים הרעות אלו רשעים גמורים ושמא תאמר אבד סברם ובטל סיכוים ת"ל הדודאים נתנו ריח אלו ואלו עתידין שיתנו ריח,דרש רבא מאי דכתיב (שיר השירים ז, יד) הדודאים נתנו ריח אלו בחורי ישראל שלא טעמו טעם חטא,ועל פתחינו כל מגדים אלו בנות ישראל שמגידות פתחיהן לבעליהן ל"א שאוגדות פתחיהן לבעליהן,חדשים גם ישנים דודי צפנתי לך אמרה כנסת ישראל לפני הקב"ה רבונו של עולם הרבה גזירות גזרתי על עצמי יותר ממה שגזרת עלי וקיימתים,א"ל רב חסדא לההוא מדרבנן דהוה קא מסדר אגדתא קמיה מי שמיע לך חדשים גם ישנים מהו אמר ליה אלו מצות קלות ואלו מצות חמורות,א"ל וכי תורה פעמים פעמים ניתנה אלא הללו מדברי תורה והללו מדברי סופרים,דרש רבא מאי דכתיב (קהלת יב, יב) ויותר מהמה בני הזהר עשות ספרים הרבה וגו\' בני הזהר בדברי סופרים יותר מדברי תורה שדברי תורה יש בהן עשה ולא תעשה ודברי סופרים כל העובר על דברי סופרים חייב מיתה,שמא תאמר אם יש בהן ממש מפני מה לא נכתבו אמר קרא עשות ספרים הרבה אין קץ,(קהלת יב, יב) ולהג הרבה יגיעת בשר א"ר פפא בריה דרב אחא בר אדא משמיה דרב אחא בר עולא מלמד שכל המלעיג על דברי חכמים נידון בצואה רותחת,מתקיף לה רבא מי כתיב לעג להג כתיב אלא כל ההוגה בהן טועם טעם בשר,תנו רבנן מעשה בר"ע שהיה חבוש בבית האסורין והיה ר\' יהושע הגרסי משרתו בכל יום ויום היו מכניסין לו מים במדה יום אחד מצאו שומר בית האסורין אמר לו היום מימך מרובין שמא לחתור בית האסורין אתה צריך שפך חציין ונתן לו חציין,כשבא אצל ר"ע אמר לו יהושע אין אתה יודע שזקן אני וחיי תלויין בחייך,סח לו כל אותו המאורע אמר לו תן לי מים שאטול ידי אמר לו לשתות אין מגיעין ליטול ידיך מגיעין אמר לו מה אעשה שחייבים עליהן מיתה מוטב אמות מיתת עצמי ולא אעבור על דעת חבירי,אמרו לא טעם כלום עד שהביא לו מים ונטל ידיו כששמעו חכמים בדבר אמרו מה בזקנותו כך בילדותו על אחת כמה וכמה ומה בבית האסורין כך שלא בבית האסורין על אחת כמה וכמה,אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל בשעה שתיקן שלמה עירובין ונטילת ידים יצתה בת קול ואמרה (משלי כג, טו) בני אם חכם לבך ישמח לבי גם אני ואומר (משלי כז, יא) חכם בני ושמח לבי ואשיבה חרפי דבר,דרש רבא מאי דכתיב (שיר השירים ז, יב) לכה דודי נצא השדה נלינה בכפרים נשכימה לכרמים נראה אם פרחה הגפן פתח הסמדר הנצו הרמונים שם אתן את דודי לך,לכה דודי נצא השדה אמרה כנסת ישראל לפני הקב"ה רבש"ע אל תדינני כיושבי כרכים שיש בהן גזל ועריות ושבועת שוא ושבועת שקר נצא השדה בא ואראך תלמידי חכמים שעוסקין בתורה מתוך הדחק,נלינה בכפרים אל תקרי בכפרים אלא בכופרים בא ואראך אותם שהשפעת להן טובה והן כפרו בך,נשכימה לכרמים אלו בתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות נראה אם פרחה הגפן אלו בעלי מקרא פתח הסמדר אלו בעלי משנה הנצו הרמונים אלו בעלי גמרא שם אתן את דודי לך אראך כבודי וגודלי שבח בני ובנותי,אמר רב המנונא מאי דכתיב (מלכים א ה, יב) וידבר שלשת אלפים משל ויהי שירו חמשה ואלף מלמד שאמר שלמה על כל דבר ודבר של תורה שלשת אלפים משל על כל דבר ודבר של סופרים חמשה ואלף טעמים,דרש רבא מאי דכתיב (קהלת יב, ט) ויותר שהיה קהלת חכם עוד לימד דעת את העם ו איזן וחקר תיקן משלים הרבה לימד דעת את העם דאגמריה בסימני טעמים ואסברה במאי דדמי ליה,ו איזן וחקר תיקן משלים הרבה אמר עולא אמר רבי אליעזר בתחילה היתה תורה דומה לכפיפה שאין לה אזנים עד שבא שלמה ועשה לה אזנים,קווצותיו תלתלים אמר רב חסדא אמר מר עוקבא מלמד שיש לדרוש על כל קוץ וקוץ תילי תילים של הלכות,שחורות כעורב במי אתה מוצאן במי' ' None | 21b that are first ripe, and the other basket dud had very bad figs, so bad they could not be eaten” (Jeremiah 24:1–2).,Good figs, these are the full-fledged righteous people; bad figs, these are the full-fledged wicked people. And lest you say that the hope of the wicked is lost and their prospect is void, the verse states, interpreting the word duda’im homiletically: “The baskets duda’im yield a fragrance” (Song of Songs 7:14), meaning that both of them, the righteous and the wicked, will eventually yield a fragrance.,Rava interpreted the verse cited above homiletically as follows: What is the meaning of that which is written: “The mandrakes duda’im yield a fragrance, and at our doors are all manner of choice fruits, new and old, which I have laid up for you, O my beloved” (Song of Songs 7:14)? “The mandrakes duda’im yield a fragrance,” these are the young men of Israel who have never tasted the taste of sin.,“And at our doors petaḥeinu are all manner of choice fruits megadim,” these are the daughters of Israel who inform maggidot their husbands about their passageway pit’ḥeihen, i.e., they tell them when they are menstruating. Another version of this interpretation is: They bind ogedot their passageway and save it for their husbands, and do not have relations with others.,“New and old, which I have laid up for you, O my beloved,” the Congregation of Israel said before the Holy One, Blessed be He, and continued: Master of the Universe, I have decreed many decrees upon myself through the enactments and ordices of the Sages, more than what You decreed upon me in the Torah, and I have fulfilled them. These are the new laws which were added to the old ones stated in the Torah.,It was related that Rav Ḥisda said to one of the Sages who would arrange the traditions of the aggada before him: Did you hear what the meaning of: New and old is? He said to him: These, the new, are the more lenient mitzvot, and these, the old, are the more stringent mitzvot.,Rav Ḥisda said to him: This cannot be so, for was the Torah given on two separate occasions, i.e., were the more lenient and more stringent mitzvot given separately? Rather, these, the old, are mitzvot from the Torah, and these, the new, are from the Sages.,Rava expounded another verse in similar fashion: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And more than these, my son, be careful: of making many books sefarim there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh” (Ecclesiastes 12:12)? My son, be careful to fulfill the words of the Sages soferim even more than the words of the Torah. For the words of the Torah include positive and negative commandments, and even with regard to the negative commandments, the violation of many of them is punishable only by lashes. Whereas with respect to the words of the Sages, anyone who transgresses the words of the Sages is liable to receive the death penalty, as it is stated: “And whoever breaches through a hedge, a snake shall bite him” (Ecclesiastes 10:8), taking hedges to refer metaphorically to decrees.,Lest you say: If the words of the Sages are of substance and have such great importance, why were they not written in the Torah, therefore, the verse states: “of making many books there is no end,” meaning that it is impossible to fully commit the Oral Torah to writing, as it is boundless.,What is the meaning of the words: “And much study lahag is a weariness of the flesh”? Rav Pappa, son of Rav Aḥa bar Adda, said in the name of Rav Aḥa bar Ulla: This teaches that whoever mocks malig the words of the Sages will be sentenced to boiling excrement, which results from the weariness of the flesh of man.,Rava strongly objects to this explanation: Is it written: Mock la’ag? “Lahag” is the word that is written. Rather, the verse must be understood in the opposite manner: Whoever meditates hogeh upon them, the words of the Sages, experiences enjoyment as if it had the taste of meat.,Concerning the significance of observing the words of the Sages, the Gemara relates: The Sages taught in a baraita: It once happened that Rabbi Akiva was incarcerated in a prison, and Rabbi Yehoshua HaGarsi would come to the prison to attend to his needs. Every day his disciples would bring him water in a measured quantity. One day the prison guard met Rabbi Yehoshua HaGarsi and said to him: The amount of your water today is more than usual; perhaps you need it in order to soften the walls and thus undermine the prison. He then poured out half the water, and gave him the other half to take in to Rabbi Akiva.,When Rabbi Yehoshua came to Rabbi Akiva, and the latter saw the small amount of water he had brought, he said to him: Yehoshua, do you not know that I am old, and my life depends on your life? No one else brings me water, so if you bring me less than I need, my life is endangered.,After Rabbi Yehoshua related to him the entire incident, Rabbi Akiva said to him: Give me water so that I may wash my hands. Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: The water that I brought will not suffice for drinking; how will it suffice for washing your hands? He said to him: What can I do; for transgressing the words of the Sages and eating without first washing hands one is liable to receive the death penalty. And if so, it is better that I should die my own death by thirst, rather than transgress the opinion of my colleagues who enacted that one must wash hands before eating.,They said that he would not taste anything until Rabbi Yehoshua brought him water and he washed his hands. When the Sages heard about this, they said: If in his old age and weakened state he is still so meticulous in his observance of the mitzvot, how much more so must he have been in his youth. And if in prison he is so scrupulous in his behavior, how much more so must he have been when not in prison.,Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: At the time that King Solomon instituted the ordices of eiruv of courtyards and of washing hands to purify them from their impurity, which are added safeguards to the words of the Torah, a Divine Voice emerged and said in his praise: “My son, if your heart is wise, My heart will be glad, even Mine” (Proverbs 23:15). And it states with regard to him: “My son, be wise and make My heart glad, that I may respond to he who taunts Me” (Proverbs 27:11).,The Gemara cites additional teachings that Rava interpreted homiletically: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Come, my beloved, let us go forth into the field; let us lodge in the villages. Let us get up early to the vineyards; let us see if the vine has flowered, if the grape blossoms have opened, if the pomegranates are in flower; there will I give you my loves” (Song of Songs 7:12–13)?,With regard to the words: “Come, my beloved, let us go forth into the field,” the Congregation of Israel said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, do not judge me like those who reside in large cities where there is robbery and licentiousness, and vain oaths and false oaths, but rather: “Let us go forth into the field,” come and I will show You Torah scholars who work the land but nonetheless engage in Torah study, in poverty and in distress.,With regard to the words, “Let us lodge in the villages,” do not read the phrase as: In the villages bakefarim, but rather as: By the deniers bakoferim, meaning, come and I will show You the nations of the world, whom You showered with good, but yet they have denied You.,“Let us get up early to the vineyards,” these are the synagogues and houses of study. “Let us see if the vine has flowered,” these are the masters of Bible, who are proficient in the first stage of Torah study. “If the grape blossoms have opened,” these are the masters of Mishna. “If the pomegranates are in flower,” these are the masters of Gemara. “There will I give you my loves,” means I will show You my glory and my greatness, the praise of my sons and daughters, how they adhere to sanctity.,The Gemara expounds further concerning King Solomon. Rav Hamnuna said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And he spoke three thousand proverbs, and his poems were a thousand and five” (i Kings 5:12)? This teaches that Solomon pronounced three thousand proverbs for each and every word of the Torah, and one thousand and five reasons for each and every word of the Scribes.,Rava also taught: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And besides being wise, Koheleth also taught the people knowledge; and he weighed, and sought out, and set in order many proverbs” (Ecclesiastes 12:9). Rava interpreted homiletically: He taught the people knowledge, meaning he taught it with the accentuation marks in the Torah, and he explained each matter by means of something similar to it.,With regard to: “And he weighed izzen, and sought out, and set in order many proverbs,” Ulla said that Rabbi Eliezer said: At first the Torah was like a basket without handles oznayim, until Solomon came and made handles for it. By means of his explanations and proverbs he enabled each person to understand and take hold of the Torah, fulfill its mitzvot, and distance himself from transgressions.,With regard to the verse, “His head is as the most fine gold, his locks kevutzotav are wavy taltalim, and black as a raven” (Song of Songs 5:11), Rav Ḥisda said that Mar Ukva said: This teaches that it is possible to expound from each and every stroke kotz of the letters in the Torah mounds upon mounds tilei tilim of laws.,Black sheḥorot as a raven orev means: In whom do you find the words of Torah? In him' ' None |
|
28. Babylonian Talmud, Gittin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic literature, questions of theodicy • Amoraim, Amoraic period • Amoraim, amoraic period • Levi (Amora)
Found in books: Avemarie, van Henten, and Furstenberg (2023), Jewish Martyrdom in Antiquity, 173; Kosman (2012), Gender and Dialogue in the Rabbinic Prism, 103; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 176; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 163
| 56a אמר ליה לא אמר ליה יהיבנא לך דמי פלגא דסעודתיך אמר ליה לא אמר ליה יהיבנא לך דמי כולה סעודתיך א"ל לא נקטיה בידיה ואוקמיה ואפקיה,אמר הואיל והוו יתבי רבנן ולא מחו ביה ש"מ קא ניחא להו איזיל איכול בהו קורצא בי מלכא אזל אמר ליה לקיסר מרדו בך יהודאי א"ל מי יימר א"ל שדר להו קורבנא חזית אי מקרבין ליה,אזל שדר בידיה עגלא תלתא בהדי דקאתי שדא ביה מומא בניב שפתים ואמרי לה בדוקין שבעין דוכתא דלדידן הוה מומא ולדידהו לאו מומא הוא,סבור רבנן לקרוביה משום שלום מלכות אמר להו רבי זכריה בן אבקולס יאמרו בעלי מומין קריבין לגבי מזבח סבור למיקטליה דלא ליזיל ולימא אמר להו רבי זכריה יאמרו מטיל מום בקדשים יהרג,אמר רבי יוחנן ענוותנותו של רבי זכריה בן אבקולס החריבה את ביתנו ושרפה את היכלנו והגליתנו מארצנו,שדר עלוייהו לנירון קיסר כי קאתי שדא גירא למזרח אתא נפל בירושלים למערב אתא נפל בירושלים לארבע רוחות השמים אתא נפל בירושלים,א"ל לינוקא פסוק לי פסוקיך אמר ליה (יחזקאל כה, יד) ונתתי את נקמתי באדום ביד עמי ישראל וגו\' אמר קודשא בריך הוא בעי לחרובי ביתיה ובעי לכפורי ידיה בההוא גברא ערק ואזל ואיגייר ונפק מיניה ר"מ,שדריה עילוייהו לאספסיינוס קיסר אתא צר עלה תלת שני הוו בה הנהו תלתא עתירי נקדימון בן גוריון ובן כלבא שבוע ובן ציצית הכסת נקדימון בן גוריון שנקדה לו חמה בעבורו בן כלבא שבוע שכל הנכנס לביתו כשהוא רעב ככלב יוצא כשהוא שבע בן ציצית הכסת שהיתה ציצתו נגררת על גבי כסתות איכא דאמרי שהיתה כסתו מוטלת בין גדולי רומי,חד אמר להו אנא זיינא להו בחיטי ושערי וחד אמר להו בדחמרא ובדמלחא ומשחא וחד אמר להו בדציבי ושבחו רבנן לדציבי דרב חסדא כל אקלידי הוה מסר לשמעיה בר מדציבי דאמר רב חסדא אכלבא דחיטי בעי שיתין אכלבי דציבי הוה להו למיזן עשרים וחד שתא,הוו בהו הנהו בריוני אמרו להו רבנן ניפוק ונעביד שלמא בהדייהו לא שבקינהו אמרו להו ניפוק ונעביד קרבא בהדייהו אמרו להו רבנן לא מסתייעא מילתא קמו קלנהו להנהו אמברי דחיטי ושערי והוה כפנא,מרתא בת בייתוס עתירתא דירושלים הויא שדרתה לשלוחה ואמרה ליה זיל אייתי לי סמידא אדאזל איזדבן אתא אמר לה סמידא ליכא חיורתא איכא אמרה ליה זיל אייתי לי אדאזל איזדבן אתא ואמר לה חיורתא ליכא גושקרא איכא א"ל זיל אייתי לי אדאזל אזדבן אתא ואמר לה גושקרא ליכא קימחא דשערי איכא אמרה ליה זיל אייתי לי אדאזל איזדבן,הוה שליפא מסאנא אמרה איפוק ואחזי אי משכחנא מידי למיכל איתיב לה פרתא בכרעא ומתה,קרי עלה רבן יוחנן בן זכאי (דברים כח, נו) הרכה בך והענוגה אשר לא נסתה כף רגלה איכא דאמרי גרוגרות דר\' צדוק אכלה ואיתניסא ומתה דר\' צדוק יתיב ארבעין שנין בתעניתא דלא ליחרב ירושלים כי הוה אכיל מידי הוה מיתחזי מאבראי וכי הוה בריא מייתי ליה גרוגרות מייץ מייהו ושדי להו,כי הוה קא ניחא נפשה אפיקתה לכל דהבא וכספא שדיתיה בשוקא אמרה האי למאי מיבעי לי והיינו דכתיב (יחזקאל ז, יט) כספם בחוצות ישליכו,אבא סקרא ריש בריוני דירושלים בר אחתיה דרבן יוחנן בן זכאי הוה שלח ליה תא בצינעא לגבאי אתא א"ל עד אימת עבדיתו הכי וקטליתו ליה לעלמא בכפנא א"ל מאי איעביד דאי אמינא להו מידי קטלו לי א"ל חזי לי תקנתא לדידי דאיפוק אפשר דהוי הצלה פורתא,א"ל נקוט נפשך בקצירי וליתי כולי עלמא ולישיילו בך ואייתי מידי סריא ואגני גבך ולימרו דנח נפשך וליעיילו בך תלמידך ולא ליעול בך איניש אחרינא דלא לרגשן בך דקליל את דאינהו ידעי דחייא קליל ממיתא,עביד הכי נכנס בו רבי אליעזר מצד אחד ורבי יהושע מצד אחר כי מטו לפיתחא בעו למדקריה אמר להו יאמרו רבן דקרו בעו למדחפיה אמר להו יאמרו רבן דחפו פתחו ליה בבא נפק,כי מטא להתם אמר שלמא עלך מלכא שלמא עלך מלכא א"ל מיחייבת תרי קטלא חדא דלאו מלכא אנא וקא קרית לי מלכא ותו אי מלכא אנא עד האידנא אמאי לא אתית לגבאי א"ל דקאמרת לאו מלכא אנא' ' None | 56a The host said to him: No, you must leave. Bar Kamtza said to him: I will give you money for half of the feast; just do not send me away. The host said to him: No, you must leave. Bar Kamtza then said to him: I will give you money for the entire feast; just let me stay. The host said to him: No, you must leave. Finally, the host took bar Kamtza by his hand, stood him up, and took him out.,After having been cast out from the feast, bar Kamtza said to himself: Since the Sages were sitting there and did not protest the actions of the host, although they saw how he humiliated me, learn from it that they were content with what he did. I will therefore go and inform eikhul kurtza against them to the king. He went and said to the emperor: The Jews have rebelled against you. The emperor said to him: Who says that this is the case? Bar Kamtza said to him: Go and test them; send them an offering to be brought in honor of the government, and see whether they will sacrifice it.,The emperor went and sent with him a choice three-year-old calf. While bar Kamtza was coming with the calf to the Temple, he made a blemish on the calf’s upper lip. And some say he made the blemish on its eyelids, a place where according to us, i.e., halakha, it is a blemish, but according to them, gentile rules for their offerings, it is not a blemish. Therefore, when bar Kamtza brought the animal to the Temple, the priests would not sacrifice it on the altar since it was blemished, but they also could not explain this satisfactorily to the gentile authorities, who did not consider it to be blemished.,The blemish notwithstanding, the Sages thought to sacrifice the animal as an offering due to the imperative to maintain peace with the government. Rabbi Zekharya ben Avkolas said to them: If the priests do that, people will say that blemished animals may be sacrificed as offerings on the altar. The Sages said: If we do not sacrifice it, then we must prevent bar Kamtza from reporting this to the emperor. The Sages thought to kill him so that he would not go and speak against them. Rabbi Zekharya said to them: If you kill him, people will say that one who makes a blemish on sacrificial animals is to be killed. As a result, they did nothing, bar Kamtza’s slander was accepted by the authorities, and consequently the war between the Jews and the Romans began.,Rabbi Yoḥa says: The excessive humility of Rabbi Zekharya ben Avkolas destroyed our Temple, burned our Sanctuary, and exiled us from our land.,The Roman authorities then sent Nero Caesar against the Jews. When he came to Jerusalem, he wished to test his fate. He shot an arrow to the east and the arrow came and fell in Jerusalem. He then shot another arrow to the west and it also fell in Jerusalem. He shot an arrow in all four directions of the heavens, and each time the arrow fell in Jerusalem.,Nero then conducted another test: He said to a child: Tell me a verse that you learned today. He said to him as follows: “And I will lay My vengeance upon Edom by the hand of My people Israel” (Ezekiel 25:14). Nero said: The Holy One, Blessed be He, wishes to destroy His Temple, and He wishes to wipe his hands with that man, i.e., with me. The Romans are associated with Edom, the descendants of Esau. If I continue on this mission, I will eventually be punished for having served as God’s agent to bring about the destruction. So he fled and became a convert, and ultimately Rabbi Meir descended from him.,The Roman authorities then sent Vespasian Caesar against the Jews. He came and laid siege to Jerusalem for three years. There were at that time in Jerusalem these three wealthy people: Nakdimon ben Guryon, ben Kalba Savua, and ben Tzitzit HaKesat. The Gemara explains their names: Nakdimon ben Guryon was called by that name because the sun shined nakad on his behalf, as it is related elsewhere (see Ta’anit 19b) that the sun once continued to shine in order to prevent him from suffering a substantial loss. Ben Kalba Savua was called this because anyone who entered his house when he was hungry as a dog kelev would leave satiated save’a. Ben Tzitzit HaKesat was referred to by that name because his ritual fringes tzitzit dragged along on blankets keset, meaning that he would not walk in the street with his feet on the ground, but rather they would place blankets beneath him. There are those who say that his seat kiseh was found among the nobles of Rome, meaning that he would sit among them.,These three wealthy people offered their assistance. One of them said to the leaders of the city: I will feed the residents with wheat and barley. And one of them said to leaders of the city: I will provide the residents with wine, salt, and oil. And one of them said to the leaders of the city: I will supply the residents with wood. The Gemara comments: And the Sages gave special praise to he who gave the wood, since this was an especially expensive gift. As Rav Ḥisda would give all of the keys aklidei to his servant, except for the key to his shed for storing wood, which he deemed the most important of them all. As Rav Ḥisda said: One storehouse akhleva of wheat requires sixty storehouses of wood for cooking and baking fuel. These three wealthy men had between them enough commodities to sustain the besieged for twenty-one years.,There were certain zealots among the people of Jerusalem. The Sages said to them: Let us go out and make peace with the Romans. But the zealots did not allow them to do this. The zealots said to the Sages: Let us go out and engage in battle against the Romans. But the Sages said to them: You will not be successful. It would be better for you to wait until the siege is broken. In order to force the residents of the city to engage in battle, the zealots arose and burned down these storehouses ambarei of wheat and barley, and there was a general famine.,With regard to this famine it is related that Marta bat Baitos was one of the wealthy women of Jerusalem. She sent out her agent and said to him: Go bring me fine flour semida. By the time he went, the fine flour was already sold. He came and said to her: There is no fine flour, but there is ordinary flour. She said to him: Go then and bring me ordinary flour. By the time he went, the ordinary flour was also sold. He came and said to her: There is no ordinary flour, but there is coarse flour gushkera. She said to him: Go then and bring me coarse flour. By the time he went, the coarse flour was already sold. He came and said to her: There is no coarse flour, but there is barley flour. She said to him: Go then and bring me barley flour. But once again, by the time he went, the barley flour was also sold.,She had just removed her shoes, but she said: I will go out myself and see if I can find something to eat. She stepped on some dung, which stuck to her foot, and, overcome by disgust, she died.,Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai read concerning her a verse found in the section of the Torah listing the curses that will befall Israel: “The tender and delicate woman among you who would not adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground” (Deuteronomy 28:56). There are those who say that she did not step on dung, but rather she ate a fig of Rabbi Tzadok, and became disgusted and died. What are these figs? Rabbi Tzadok observed fasts for forty years, praying that Jerusalem would not be destroyed. He became so emaciated from fasting that when he would eat something it was visible from the outside of his body. And when he would eat after a fast they would bring him figs and he would suck out their liquid and cast the rest away. It was one such fig that Marta bat Baitos found and that caused her death.,It is further related that as she was dying, she took out all of her gold and silver and threw it in the marketplace. She said: Why do I need this? And this is as it is written: “They shall cast their silver in the streets and their gold shall be as an impure thing; their silver and their gold shall not be able to deliver them in the day of the wrath of the Lord; they shall not satisfy their souls, neither fill their bowels” (Ezekiel 7:19).,§ The Gemara relates: Abba Sikkara was the leader of the zealots biryonei of Jerusalem and the son of the sister of Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai. Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai sent a message to him: Come to me in secret. He came, and Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai said to him: Until when will you do this and kill everyone through starvation? Abba Sikkara said to him: What can I do, for if I say something to them they will kill me. Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai said to him: Show me a method so that I will be able to leave the city, and it is possible that through this there will be some small salvation.,Abba Sikkara said to him: This is what you should do: Pretend to be sick, and have everyone come and ask about your welfare, so that word will spread about your ailing condition. Afterward bring something putrid and place it near you, so that people will say that you have died and are decomposing. And then, have your students enter to bring you to burial, and let no one else come in so that the zealots not notice that you are still light. As the zealots know that a living person is lighter than a dead person.,Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai did this. Rabbi Eliezer entered from one side and Rabbi Yehoshua from the other side to take him out. When they arrived at the entrance of the city on the inside, the guards, who were of the faction of the zealots, wanted to pierce him with their swords in order to ascertain that he was actually dead, as was the common practice. Abba Sikkara said to them: The Romans will say that they pierce even their teacher. The guards then wanted at least to push him to see whether he was still alive, in which case he would cry out on account of the pushing. Abba Sikkara said to them: They will say that they push even their teacher. The guards then opened the gate and he was taken out.,When Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai reached there, i.e., the Roman camp, he said: Greetings to you, the king; greetings to you, the king. Vespasian said to him: You are liable for two death penalties, one because I am not a king and yet you call me king, and furthermore, if I am a king, why didn’t you come to me until now? Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai said to him: As for what you said about yourself: I am not a king,' ' None |
|
29. Babylonian Talmud, Hulin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic midrash compilations, halakhic material in • Amoraic midrash compilations, rabbinization of Scripture • Amoraim, Babylonian • Joseph (Amora) • Judah (Amora) • Levi (Amora) • Samuel (Amora) • Shmuel (amora)
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 99; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 606, 607; Kanarek (2014), Biblical narrative and formation rabbinic law, 57; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 51
| 16a קשיין אהדדי אלא לאו ש"מ שאני בין מחובר מעיקרו לתלוש ולבסוף חברו ש"מ,אמר מר השוחט במוכני שחיטתו כשרה והתניא שחיטתו פסולה ל"ק הא בסרנא דפחרא הא בסרנא דמיא,ואיבעית אימא הא והא בסרנא דמיא ולא קשיא הא בכח ראשון הא בכח שני,וכי הא דאמר רב פפא האי מאן דכפתיה לחבריה ואשקיל עליה בידקא דמיא ומית חייב מ"ט גירי דידיה הוא דאהני ביה וה"מ בכח ראשון אבל בכח שני גרמא בעלמא הוא,יתיב רב אחוריה דרבי חייא ורבי חייא קמיה דרבי ויתיב רבי וקאמר מנין לשחיטה שהוא בתלוש שנאמר (בראשית כב, י) ויקח את המאכלת לשחוט א"ל רב לרבי חייא מאי קאמר א"ל וי"ו דכתיב אאופתא קאמר והא קרא קאמר קרא זריזותיה דאברהם קמ"ל,אמר רבא פשיטא לי תלוש ולבסוף חברו לענין עבודת כוכבים הוי תלוש דאמר מר המשתחוה לבית שלו אסרו ואי ס"ד הוי מחובר (דברים יב, ב) אלהיהם על ההרים ולא ההרים אלהיהם,לענין הכשר זרעים תנאי היא דתנן הכופה קערה על הכותל בשביל שתודח הרי זה בכי יותן בשביל שלא ילקה הכותל אינו בכי יותן,הא גופא קשיא אמרת בשביל שתודח הרי זה בכי יותן הא בשביל שיודח הכותל אין זה בכי יותן,והדר תני בשביל שלא ילקה הכותל אינו בכי יותן הא בשביל שיודח הכותל ה"ז בכי יותן,א"ר אלעזר תברא מי ששנה זו לא שנה זו רב פפא אמר כולה חד תנא הוא הא בכותל מערה הא בכותל בנין,וה"ק הכופה קערה על הכותל בשביל שתודח ה"ז בכי יותן הא בשביל שיודח הכותל אין זה בכי יותן,בד"א בכותל מערה אבל בכותל בנין בשביל שלא ילקה הכותל הוא דאינו בכי יותן הא בשביל שיודח הכותל ה"ז בכי יותן,בעי רבא' ' None | 16a Ostensibly, the two clauses of the baraita are difficult, as they contradict each other, since the first clause states that slaughter with a blade that is attached is valid and the latter clause states that slaughter is not valid. Rather, must one not conclude from it that there is a difference between a case where the blade was attached from the outset and a case where the blade was detached and ultimately he reattached it? The Gemara affirms: Indeed, learn from it.,§ The Master said: In the case of one who slaughters with a mechanism of a wheel with a knife attached to it, his slaughter is valid. The Gemara asks: But isn’t it taught in a baraita that his slaughter is not valid? The Gemara answers: This contradiction is not difficult. This baraita, which rules that the slaughter is valid, is in a case where the knife was attached to a potter’s wheel, whose movement is generated by the potter pressing on a pedal. Since the slaughter was performed by the force of the person’s actions, the slaughter is valid. That baraita, which rules that the slaughter is not valid, is in a case where the knife was attached to a waterwheel. Since the slaughter was not performed by the force of the person’s actions, the slaughter is not valid.,And if you wish, say instead: The rulings of both this baraita and that baraita are in a case where the knife was attached to a waterwheel, and the contradiction is not difficult. This baraita, which rules that the slaughter is valid, is in a case where the movement of the slaughter was generated by primary force, as the person releases the water that turns the wheel, and on that initial turn of the wheel the knife slaughters the animal. That baraita, which rules that the slaughter is not valid, is in a case where the slaughter was generated by secondary force, as the knife slaughters the animal on the second turn of the wheel.,And this is like that which Rav Pappa says: In the case of a certain person who bound another and diverted a flow bidka of water upon him and he died, the one who diverted the water is liable for his murder. What is the reason? It is because those were his arrows that were effective in his murder. And this matter applies in a case where he killed the other person by primary force, as the person was proximate to him and was directly drowned by the water. But if the person was further away and was killed by secondary force after the water flowed on its own, it is not by his direct action; rather, it is merely an indirect action, and he is exempt.,§ Rav sat behind Rabbi Ḥiyya, and Rabbi Ḥiyya sat before Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi sat and said: From where is it derived that slaughter is performed specifically with a blade that is detached? It is derived from a verse, as it is stated: “And Abraham stretched forth his hand and took the knife to slaughter his son” (Genesis 22:10). Rav said to Rabbi Ḥiyya: What is he saying? Rabbi Ḥiyya said to Rav: He is saying an incorrect reason, comparable to the letter vav that is written on the rough surface of a tree trunk a’ufta. The Gemara asks: But didn’t Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi say a verse as proof for his statement? The Gemara answers: The verse teaches us the diligence of Abraham, who had a knife prepared to slaughter Isaac. It does not teach any halakha concerning ritual slaughter.,§ Apropos the issue of slaughter with a detached blade, Rava said: It is obvious to me that concerning an item that was detached and ultimately one attached it, with regard to the matter of idol worship its halakhic status is that of a detached item, as the Master says: One who bows to his house has rendered it forbidden as an object of idol worship. And if it enters your mind to say that its halakhic status is that of an attached item, it is written with regard to idolatry: “Their gods, upon the high mountains” (Deuteronomy 12:2), from which it is derived: But the mountains are not their gods, as items attached to the ground are never rendered forbidden as objects of idol worship. The halakhic status of a house built from stones that were detached is that of a detached item.,With regard to the matter of rendering seeds susceptible to ritual impurity, there is a dispute between tanna’im, as we learned in a mishna (Makhshirin 4:3): In the case of one who places a bowl on the wall while it is raining so that the bowl will be rinsed with the rainwater, if the water from the bowl then falls onto produce, that is under the rubric of the verse: “But when water is placed upon the seed” (Leviticus 11:38). The water has the halakhic status of a liquid that he poured of his own volition on fruit and seeds. Consequently, it renders them susceptible to ritual impurity. But if he placed the bowl there so that the wall will not be damaged, it is not under the rubric of the verse “but when water is placed upon the seed.” Since he had no intent to use the water, it is not considered to have entered the bowl of his own volition, and it does not render produce susceptible to impurity.,This mishna itself is difficult, as the inferences from the first clause and the latter clause are contradictory. In the first clause you said: In the case of one who places a bowl on the wall so that the bowl will be rinsed with the rainwater, that is under the rubric of the verse “but when water is placed upon the seed,” and the water renders produce susceptible to impurity. By inference, if he placed the bowl so that the wall will be rinsed by means of the bowl, that is not under the rubric of the verse “but when water is placed upon the seed.” That water would not render produce susceptible to impurity, because the intent was for the water to rinse the wall, which is an item attached to the ground.,And then the mishna teaches in the latter clause: If he placed the bowl so that the wall will not be damaged, it is not under the rubric of the verse: “But when water is placed upon the seed.” By inference, if he placed the bowl so that the wall will be rinsed, that is under the rubric of the verse: “But when water is placed upon the seed,” as a wall has the status of a detached item, since it was built from stones that were detached.,Rabbi Elazar said: This mishna is disjointed; the tanna who taught this first clause did not teach that second clause. There is a tannaitic dispute whether the status of a wall that is built from detached stones is that of an attached item or a detached item. Rav Pappa said: The entire mishna is the opinion of one tanna: This first clause is in the case of the wall of a cave, which is attached from the outset; that latter clause is in the case of the wall of a building, which is built from stones that were detached from the ground.,And this is what the mishna is saying: In the case of one who places a bowl on the wall so that the bowl will be rinsed with the rainwater, that is under the rubric of the verse “but when water is placed upon the seed,” and the water renders produce susceptible to impurity. By inference, if he placed the bowl so that the wall will be rinsed by means of the bowl, that is not under the rubric of the verse “but when water is placed upon the seed.”,In what case is this statement said? It is said in the case of the wall of a cave, which was always attached to the ground. But in the case of the wall of a building, whose stones were detached and subsequently reattached, if he places the bowl so that the wall will not be damaged, that is when it is not under the rubric of the verse “but when water is placed upon the seed.” But if he places the bowl so that the wall will be rinsed, that is under the rubric of the verse “but when water is placed upon the seed.”,Rava raises a dilemma:' ' None |
|
30. Babylonian Talmud, Ketuvot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraim, Amoraic period • Amoraim, Babylonian, increasing Palestinian influences • Amoraim, amoraic period • Babylonia, Amoraic • Samuel (Amora) • Samuel [Amora]
Found in books: Kalmin (1998), The Sage in Jewish Society of Late Antiquity, 31; Kosman (2012), Gender and Dialogue in the Rabbinic Prism, 207; Lorberbaum (2015), In God's Image: Myth, Theology, and Law in Classical Judaism, 256; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 103; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 189; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 29
| 62b אכולהו והא ששה חדשים קאמר אינו דומה מי שיש לו פת בסלו למי שאין לו פת בסלו,א"ל רבה בר רב חנן לאביי חמר ונעשה גמל מאי א"ל רוצה אשה בקב ותיפלות מעשרה קבין ופרישות:,הספנים אחת לששה חדשים דברי ר\' אליעזר: אמר רב ברונא אמר רב הלכה כר"א אמר רב אדא בר אהבה אמר רב זו דברי ר\' אליעזר אבל חכמים אומרים התלמידים יוצאין לת"ת ב\' וג\' שנים שלא ברשות אמר רבא סמכו רבנן אדרב אדא בר אהבה ועבדי עובדא בנפשייהו,כי הא דרב רחומי הוה שכיח קמיה דרבא במחוזא הוה רגיל דהוה אתי לביתיה כל מעלי יומא דכיפורי יומא חד משכתיה שמעתא הוה מסכיא דביתהו השתא אתי השתא אתי לא אתא חלש דעתה אחית דמעתא מעינה הוה יתיב באיגרא אפחית איגרא מתותיה ונח נפשיה,עונה של תלמידי חכמים אימת אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל מע"ש לע"ש (תהלים א, ג) אשר פריו יתן בעתו אמר רב יהודה ואיתימא רב הונא ואיתימא רב נחמן זה המשמש מטתו מע"ש לע"ש,יהודה בריה דר\' חייא חתניה דר\' ינאי הוה אזיל ויתיב בבי רב וכל בי שמשי הוה אתי לביתיה וכי הוה אתי הוה קא חזי קמיה עמודא דנורא יומא חד משכתיה שמעתא כיון דלא חזי ההוא סימנא אמר להו רבי ינאי כפו מטתו שאילמלי יהודה קיים לא ביטל עונתו הואי (קהלת י, ה) כשגגה שיוצא מלפני השליט ונח נפשיה,רבי איעסק ליה לבריה בי רבי חייא כי מטא למיכתב כתובה נח נפשה דרביתא אמר רבי ח"ו פסולא איכא יתיבו ועיינו במשפחות רבי אתי משפטיה בן אביטל ורבי חייא אתי משמעי אחי דוד,אזיל איעסק ליה לבריה בי ר\' יוסי בן זימרא פסקו ליה תרתי סרי שנין למיזל בבי רב אחלפוה קמיה אמר להו ניהוו שית שנין אחלפוה קמיה אמר להו איכניס והדר איזיל הוה קא מכסיף מאבוה א"ל בני דעת קונך יש בך,מעיקרא כתיב (שמות טו, יז) תביאמו ותטעמו ולבסוף כתיב (שמות כה, ח) ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם,אזיל יתיב תרתי סרי שני בבי רב עד דאתא איעקרא דביתהו אמר רבי היכי נעביד נגרשה יאמרו ענייה זו לשוא שימרה נינסיב איתתא אחריתי יאמרו זו אשתו וזו זונתו בעי עלה רחמי ואיתסיאת:,רבי חנניה בן חכינאי הוה קאזיל לבי רב בשילהי הלוליה דר"ש בן יוחאי א"ל איעכב לי עד דאתי בהדך לא איעכבא ליה אזל יתיב תרי סרי שני בבי רב עד דאתי אישתנו שבילי דמתא ולא ידע למיזל לביתיה,אזל יתיב אגודא דנהרא שמע לההיא רביתא דהוו קרו לה בת חכינאי בת חכינאי מלי קולתך ותא ניזיל אמר ש"מ האי רביתא דידן אזל בתרה הוה יתיבא דביתהו קא נהלה קמחא דל עינה חזיתיה סוי לבה פרח רוחה אמר לפניו רבש"ע ענייה זו זה שכרה בעא רחמי עלה וחייה,רבי חמא בר ביסא אזיל יתיב תרי סרי שני בבי מדרשא כי אתא אמר לא איעביד כדעביד בן חכינאי עייל יתיב במדרשא שלח לביתיה אתא ר\' אושעיא בריה יתיב קמיה הוה קא משאיל ליה שמעתא חזא דקא מתחדדי שמעתיה חלש דעתיה אמר אי הואי הכא הוה לי זרע כי האי,על לביתיה על בריה קם קמיה הוא סבר למשאליה שמעתתא קא בעי אמרה ליה דביתהו מי איכא אבא דקאים מקמי ברא קרי עליה רמי בר חמא (קהלת ד, יב) החוט המשולש לא במהרה ינתק זה ר\' אושעיא בנו של רבי חמא בר ביסא,ר"ע רעיא דבן כלבא שבוע הוה חזיתיה ברתיה דהוה צניע ומעלי אמרה ליה אי מקדשנא לך אזלת לבי רב אמר לה אין איקדשא ליה בצינעה ושדרתיה שמע אבוה אפקה מביתיה אדרה הנאה מנכסיה אזיל יתיב תרי סרי שנין בבי רב כי אתא אייתי בהדיה תרי סרי אלפי תלמידי שמעיה לההוא סבא דקאמר לה עד כמה' ' None | 62b the tanna taught us a halakha with regard to all of them, not only a man of leisure or a laborer. He asked him: But with regard to a sailor it said that the set interval for conjugal relations is six months; why, then, should he have to divorce her if he vowed to forbid these relations for only a week? He answered him: It is well known that one who has bread in his basket is not comparable to one who does not have bread in his basket. On a fast day, one who does not have bread available in his basket suffers more than one who does have bread available and knows that he will be able to eat later. In this case as well, when a woman knows that marital relations are forbidden to her due to a vow, her suffering from waiting for her husband to return is increased.,Rabba bar Rav Ha said to Abaye: If a donkey driver who is already married wants to become a camel driver, what is the halakha? Is he permitted to change his profession in order to earn more money from his work, even though this will mean he reduces the frequency with which he engages in conjugal relations with his wife? He answered him: A woman prefers a kav, i.e., modest means, with conjugal relations to ten kav with abstinence. Consequently, he is not allowed to change his profession without her permission.,§ The mishna stated: For sailors, the set interval for conjugal relations is once every six months. This is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. Rav Berona said that Rav said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer. Rav Adda bar Ahava said that Rav said: This is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer, but the Rabbis say: Students may leave their homes to study Torah for as long as two or three years without permission from their wives. Rava said: The Sages relied on Rabbi Adda bar Ahava’s opinion and performed an action like this themselves, but the results were sometimes fatal.,This is as it is related about Rav Reḥumi, who would commonly study before Rava in Meḥoza: He was accustomed to come back to his home every year on the eve of Yom Kippur. One day he was particularly engrossed in the halakha he was studying, and so he remained in the study hall and did not go home. His wife was expecting him that day and continually said to herself: Now he is coming, now he is coming. But in the end, he did not come. She was distressed by this and a tear fell from her eye. At that exact moment, Rav Reḥumi was sitting on the roof. The roof collapsed under him and he died. This teaches how much one must be careful, as he was punished severely for causing anguish to his wife, even inadvertently.,§ When is the ideal time for Torah scholars to fulfill their conjugal obligations? Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: The appropriate time for them is from Shabbat eve to Shabbat eve, i.e., on Friday nights. Similarly, it is stated with regard to the verse “that brings forth its fruit in its season” (Psalms 1:3): Rav Yehuda said, and some say that it was Rav Huna, and some say that it was Rav Naḥman: This is referring to one who engages in marital relations, bringing forth his fruit, from Shabbat eve to Shabbat eve.,It is related further that Yehuda, son of Rabbi Ḥiyya and son-in-law of Rabbi Yannai, would go and sit in the study hall, and every Shabbat eve at twilight he would come to his house. When he would come, Rabbi Yannai would see a pillar of fire preceding him due to his sanctity. One day he was engrossed in the halakha he was studying, and he stayed in the study hall and did not return home. When Rabbi Yannai did not see that sign preceding him, he said to the family: Turn his bed over, as one does at times of mourning, since he must have died, reasoning that if Yehuda were alive he would not have missed his set interval for conjugal relations and would certainly have come home. What he said became “like an error that proceeds from a ruler” (Ecclesiastes 10:5), and Yehuda, son of Rabbi Ḥiyya, died.,It is related further that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi arranged for his son to marry a daughter of the household of Rabbi Ḥiyya. When he came to write the marriage contract, the girl died. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: Is there, Heaven forbid, some disqualification in these families, as it appears that God prevented this match from taking place? They sat and looked into the families’ ancestry and found that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi was descended from Shefatya ben Avital, the wife of David, whereas Rabbi Ḥiyya was descended from Shimi, David’s brother.,He went and arranged for his son to marry a daughter of the household of Rabbi Yosei ben Zimra. They agreed for him that they would support him for twelve years to go to study in the study hall. It was assumed that he would first go to study and afterward get married. They passed the girl in front of the groom and when he saw her he said: Let it be just six years. They passed her in front of him again and he said to them: I will marry her now and then go to study. He was then ashamed to see his father, as he thought he would reprimand him because when he saw the girl he desired her and could not wait. His father placated him and said to him: My son, you have your Maker’s perception, meaning you acted the same way that God does.,The proof for this is that initially it is written: “You bring them and plant them in the mountain of Your inheritance, the place that You, O Lord, have made for You to dwell in” (Exodus 15:17), which indicates that God’s original intention was to build a Temple for the Jewish people after they had entered Eretz Yisrael. And ultimately it is written: “And let them make Me a Sanctuary, that I may dwell among them” (Exodus 25:8), i.e., even while they were still in the desert, which indicates that due to their closeness to God, they enjoyed greater affection and He therefore advanced what would originally have come later.,After his wedding he went and sat for twelve years in the study hall. By the time he came back his wife had become infertile, as a consequence of spending many years without her husband. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: What should we do? If he will divorce her, people will say: This poor woman waited and hoped for naught. If he will marry another woman to beget children, people will say: This one, who bears him children, is his wife and that one, who lives with him, is his mistress. Therefore, her husband pleaded with God to have mercy on her and she was cured.,Rabbi Ḥaya ben Ḥakhinai went to the study hall at the end of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai’s wedding feast. Rabbi Shimon said to him: Wait for me until I can come with you, after my days of celebration are over. However, since he wanted to learn Torah, he did not wait and went and sat for twelve years in the study hall. By the time he came back, all the paths of his city had changed and he did not know how to go to his home.,He went and sat on the bank of the river and heard people calling to a certain girl: Daughter of Ḥakhinai, daughter of Ḥakhinai, fill your pitcher and come up. He said: I can conclude from this that this is our daughter, meaning his own daughter, whom he had not recognized after so many years. He followed her to his house. His wife was sitting and sifting flour. She lifted her eyes up, saw him and recognized him, and her heart fluttered with agitation and she passed away from the emotional stress. Rabbi Ḥaya said before God: Master of the universe, is this the reward of this poor woman? He pleaded for mercy for her and she lived.,Rabbi Ḥama bar Bisa went and sat for twelve years in the study hall. When he came back to his house, he said: I will not do what the son of Ḥakhinai, who came home suddenly with tragic consequences for his wife, did. He went and sat in the study hall in his hometown, and sent a message to his house that he had arrived. While he was sitting there his son Rabbi Oshaya, whom he did not recognize, came and sat before him. Rabbi Oshaya asked him questions about halakha, and Rabbi Ḥama saw that the halakhot of Rabbi Oshaya were incisive, i.e., he was very sharp. Rabbi Ḥama was distressed and said: If I had been here and had taught my son I would have had a child like this.,Rabbi Ḥama went in to his house and his son went in with him. Rabbi Ḥama then stood up before him to honor a Torah scholar, since he thought that he wanted to ask him a matter of halakha. His wife said to him: Is there a father who stands up before his son? The Gemara comments: Rami bar Ḥama read the verse about him: “A threefold cord is not quickly broken” (Ecclesiastes 4:12). This is referring to Rabbi Oshaya, son of Rabbi Ḥama bar Bisa, as he represented the third generation of Torah scholars in his family.,The Gemara further relates: Rabbi Akiva was the shepherd of ben Kalba Savua, one of the wealthy residents of Jerusalem. The daughter of Ben Kalba Savua saw that he was humble and refined. She said to him: If I betroth myself to you, will you go to the study hall to learn Torah? He said to her: Yes. She became betrothed to him privately and sent him off to study. Her father heard this and became angry. He removed her from his house and took a vow prohibiting her from benefiting from his property. Rabbi Akiva went and sat for twelve years in the study hall. When he came back to his house he brought twelve thousand students with him, and as he approached he heard an old man saying to his wife: For how long' ' None |
|
31. Babylonian Talmud, Menachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic literature • Amoraic midrash compilations, and Bavli • Amoraim • Amoraim, Babylonian • Bavli, and Amoraic midrashim • Joseph (Amora) • Judah (Amora) • Levi (Amora) • Samuel (Amora) • Yerushalmi and Amoraic midrashim, and Bavli
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 99; Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 4, 88; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 260; Piotrkowski (2019), Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period, 153, 160; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 19
| 29b had the leg of the letter heh in the term: “The nation ha’am” (Exodus 13:3), written in his phylacteries, severed by a perforation. He came before his son-in-law Rabbi Abba to clarify the halakha. Rabbi Abba said to him: If there remains in the leg that is attached to the roof of the letter the equivalent of the measure of a small letter, i.e., the letter yod, it is fit. But if not, it is unfit.,The Gemara relates: Rami bar Tamrei, who was the father-in-law of Rami bar Dikkulei, had the leg of the letter vav in the term: “And the Lord slew vayaharog all the firstborn” (Exodus 13:15), written in his phylacteries, severed by a perforation. He came before Rabbi Zeira to clarify the halakha. Rabbi Zeira said to him: Go bring a child who is neither wise nor stupid, but of average intelligence; if he reads the term as “And the Lord slew vayaharog” then it is fit, as despite the perforation the letter is still seen as a vav. But if not, then it is as though the term were: Will be slain yehareg, written without the letter vav, and it is unfit.,§ Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: When Moses ascended on High, he found the Holy One, Blessed be He, sitting and tying crowns on the letters of the Torah. Moses said before God: Master of the Universe, who is preventing You from giving the Torah without these additions? God said to him: There is a man who is destined to be born after several generations, and Akiva ben Yosef is his name; he is destined to derive from each and every thorn of these crowns mounds upon mounds of halakhot. It is for his sake that the crowns must be added to the letters of the Torah.,Moses said before God: Master of the Universe, show him to me. God said to him: Return behind you. Moses went and sat at the end of the eighth row in Rabbi Akiva’s study hall and did not understand what they were saying. Moses’ strength waned, as he thought his Torah knowledge was deficient. When Rabbi Akiva arrived at the discussion of one matter, his students said to him: My teacher, from where do you derive this? Rabbi Akiva said to them: It is a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai. When Moses heard this, his mind was put at ease, as this too was part of the Torah that he was to receive.,Moses returned and came before the Holy One, Blessed be He, and said before Him: Master of the Universe, You have a man as great as this and yet You still choose to give the Torah through me. Why? God said to him: Be silent; this intention arose before Me. Moses said before God: Master of the Universe, You have shown me Rabbi Akiva’s Torah, now show me his reward. God said to him: Return to where you were. Moses went back and saw that they were weighing Rabbi Akiva’s flesh in a butcher shop bemakkulin, as Rabbi Akiva was tortured to death by the Romans. Moses said before Him: Master of the Universe, this is Torah and this is its reward? God said to him: Be silent; this intention arose before Me.,§ The Gemara continues its discussion of the crowns on letters of the Torah: Rava says: Seven letters require three crowns ziyyunin, and they are the letters shin, ayin, tet, nun, zayin; gimmel and tzadi. Rav Ashi says: I have seen that the exacting scribes of the study hall of Rav would put a hump-like stroke on the roof of the letter ḥet and they would suspend the left leg of the letter heh, i.e., they would ensure that it is not joined to the roof of the letter.,Rava explains: They would put a hump-like stroke on the roof of the letter ḥet as if to thereby say: The Holy One, Blessed be He, lives ḥai in the heights of the universe. And they would suspend the left leg of the letter heh, as Rabbi Yehuda Nesia asked Rabbi Ami: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Trust in the Lord forever, for in the Lord beYah is God, an everlasting olamim Rock” (Isaiah 26:4)? Rabbi Ami said to him: Anyone who puts their trust in the Holy One, Blessed be He, will have Him as his refuge in this world and in the World-to-Come. This is alluded to in the word “olamim,” which can also mean: Worlds.,Rabbi Yehuda Nesia said to Rabbi Ami: I was not asking about the literal meaning of the verse; this is what poses a difficulty for me: What is different about that which is written: “For in the Lord beYah,” and it is not written: For the Lord Yah?,Rav Ashi responded: It is as Rabbi Yehuda bar Rabbi Elai taught: The verse “For in the Lord beYah is God, an everlasting Rock Tzur olamim” is understood as follows: The term “Tzur olamim” can also mean Creator of worlds. These letters yod and heh that constitute the word yah are referring to the two worlds that the Holy One, Blessed be He, created; one with be the letter heh and one with be the letter yod. And I do not know whether the World-to-Come was created with the letter yod and this world was created with the letter heh, or whether this world was created with the letter yod and the World-to-Come was created with the letter heh.,When the verse states: “These are the generations of the heaven and of the earth when they were created behibare’am” (Genesis 2:4), do not read it as behibare’am, meaning: When they were created; rather, read it as beheh bera’am, meaning: He created them with the letter heh. This verse demonstrates that the heaven and the earth, i.e., this world, were created with the letter heh, and therefore the World-to-Come must have been created with the letter yod.,And for what reason was this world created specifically with the letter heh? It is because the letter heh, which is open on its bottom, has a similar appearance to a portico, which is open on one side. And it alludes to this world, where anyone who wishes to leave may leave, i.e., every person has the ability to choose to do evil. And what is the reason that the left leg of the letter heh is suspended, i.e., is not joined to the roof of the letter? It is because if one repents, he is brought back in through the opening at the top.,The Gemara asks: But why not let him enter through that same way that he left? The Gemara answers: That would not be effective, since one requires assistance from Heaven in order to repent, in accordance with the statement of Reish Lakish. As Reish Lakish says: What is the meaning of that which is written: “If it concerns the scorners, He scorns them, but to the humble He gives grace” (Proverbs 3:34)? Concerning one who comes in order to become pure, he is assisted from Heaven, as it is written: “But to the humble He gives grace.” Concerning one who comes to become impure, he is provided with an opening to do so. The Gemara asks: And what is the reason that the letter heh has a crown on its roof? The Gemara answers: The Holy One, Blessed be He, says: If a sinner returns, repenting for his sin, I tie a crown for him from above.,The Gemara asks: For what reason was the World-to-Come created specifically with the letter yod, the smallest letter in the Hebrew alphabet? The Gemara answers: It is because the righteous of the world are so few. And for what reason is the left side of the top of the letter yod bent downward? It is because the righteous who are in the World-to-Come hang their heads in shame, since the actions of one are not similar to those of another. In the World-to-Come some of the righteous will be shown to be of greater stature than others.,§ Rav Yosef says: Rav states these two matters with regard to scrolls, and in each case a statement is taught in a baraita that constitutes a refutation of his ruling. One is that which Rav says: A Torah scroll that contains two errors on each and every column may be corrected, but if there are three errors on each and every column then it shall be interred.,And a statement is taught in a baraita that constitutes a refutation of his ruling: A Torah scroll that contains three errors on every column may be corrected, but if there are four errors on every column then it shall be interred. A tanna taught in a baraita: If the Torah scroll contains one complete column with no errors, it saves the entire Torah scroll, and it is permitted to correct the scroll rather than interring it. Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Shmuel bar Marta says in the name of Rav: And this is the halakha only when the majority of the scroll is written properly and is not full of errors.,Abaye said to Rav Yosef: If that column contained three errors, what is the halakha? Rav Yosef said to him: Since the column itself may be corrected, it enables the correction of the entire scroll. The Gemara adds: And with regard to the halakha that a Torah scroll may not be fixed if it is full of errors, this statement applies when letters are missing and must be added in the space between the lines. But if there were extraneous letters, we have no problem with it, since they can easily be erased. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that a scroll with letters missing may not be corrected? Rav Kahana said: Because it would look speckled if one adds all of the missing letters in the spaces between the lines.,The Gemara relates: Agra, the father-in-law of Rabbi Abba, had many extraneous letters in his scroll. He came before Rabbi Abba to clarify the halakha. Rabbi Abba said to him: We said that one may not correct the scroll only in a case where the letters are missing. 93b The Gemara answers: He holds that one derives the halakhot of the offering of an individual from the halakhot of another offering of an individual, such as the burnt offering of appearance, and one does not derive the halakhot of the offering of an individual from the halakhot of a communal offering, e.g., the bull brought for a community-wide violation.,The Gemara asks: And according to the one who said that the exclusion of a blind person is derived from the placing of hands performed by the Elders of the congregation, what is the reason that he does not derive this from the burnt offering of appearance? The Gemara answers: He holds that one derives the halakhot of a matter concerning which the requirement of placing hands is explicitly written with regard to that case itself, as is the case in the passage detailing the general requirement of placing hands, from another matter concerning which placing hands is also explicitly written with regard to that case itself, as is the case in the passage describing the bull brought for a community-wide violation of a sin. This serves to exclude the possibility of deriving the halakhot from those of the burnt offering of appearance, as the requirement to place hands upon it is not explicitly written in the Torah with regard to it, but rather it itself is derived from the requirement stated with regard to a voluntary burnt offering.,This is as a tanna taught in a baraita in the presence of Rav Yitzḥak bar Abba: With regard to the obligatory offering brought by Aaron the High Priest on the eighth day of the inauguration of the Tabernacle, it is written: “And the burnt offering was presented, and he sacrificed in accordance with the ordice” (Leviticus 9:16). This last phrase means: In accordance with the ordice of a voluntary burnt offering. Accordingly, this verse teaches about every obligatory burnt offering, including the burnt offering of appearance, that it requires placing hands, just as a voluntary burnt offering does.,§ The mishna states: A Canaanite slave, the agent of the owner of the offering who brings the offering on his behalf, and a woman do not place hands on their offerings. Concerning these halakhot, the Sages taught in a baraita: The term “his hand” is mentioned three times in Leviticus, chapter 3, which details the requirement of placing hands. Each mention is expounded to exclude a different case. “His hand” (Leviticus 3:2), but not the hand of his Canaanite slave; “his hand” (Leviticus 3:8), but not the hand of his agent; “his hand” (Leviticus 3:13), but not the hand of his wife.,The Gemara asks: Why do I need all these three exclusions? The Gemara explains that all three mentions are necessary, as had the Merciful One written only one exclusion, I would say that it serves to exclude only a Canaanite slave, as since he is not commanded in mitzvot it is reasonable that he cannot perform the rite of placing hands. But with regard to an agent, since he is commanded in mitzvot, and there is a principle that the halakhic status of a person’s agent is like that of himself, one might say that he could place his hands on the offering of the owner on the owner’s behalf, and thereby fulfill the requirement. Therefore, it is necessary to have an independent source to exclude an agent.,And had the Merciful One taught us only these two halakhot, one would have excluded only a Canaanite slave and an agent, as they are not considered like his own flesh. But with regard to his wife, who is considered like his own flesh, one might say that she places her hands on her husband’s offering. Therefore, the third mention is necessary to teach that even a wife cannot fulfill the requirement on behalf of her husband.,§ The mishna states: The requirement of placing hands is a non-essential mitzva. The Sages taught in a baraita: “And he shall place his hand upon the head of the burnt offering, and it shall be accepted for him to effect atonement for him” (Leviticus 1:4). The baraita asks: But does the rite of placing hands effect atonement? Isn’t atonement effected only through the presentation of the blood? As it is stated with regard to blood: “For the soul of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to effect atonement for your souls, for it is the blood of the soul that effects atonement” (Leviticus 17:11). Rather, the verse serves to say to you that if one treated placing hands as though it were a non-essential mitzva and therefore neglected to perform it, then the verse ascribes him blame as though he did not effect atonement; but nevertheless, in actuality, the offering atones for his sin and he does not need to bring another offering.,And it is taught in a baraita with regard to waving in this way: “He shall take one male lamb as a guilt offering to be waved to effect atonement for him” (Leviticus 14:21). The baraita asks: Does waving the offering effect atonement? Isn’t atonement effected only through the presentation of the blood? As it is stated: “For it is the blood of the soul that effects atonement” (Leviticus 17:11). Rather, the verse serves to say to you that if one treated waving as though it were a non-essential mitzva and therefore neglected to perform it, then the verse ascribes him blame as though he did not effect atonement; but nevertheless, in actuality, the offering effects atonement for his sin and he does not need to bring another offering.,§ The mishna further states that that placing hands is performed by leaning on the head of the offering. The Sages taught in a baraita: The phrase “his hand upon the head” is mentioned three times in Leviticus, chapter 3. Each mention is expounded to exclude the possibility of performing the rite on a different part of the animal’s body. Placing hands is performed with “his hand upon the head” (Leviticus 3:2), but not with his hand on the neck of the animal; with “his hand upon the head” (Leviticus 3:8), but not with his hand on the back of the animal; with “his hand upon the head” (Leviticus 3:13), but not with his hand on the breast of the animal.,The Gemara asks: Why do I need all these three exclusions? The Gemara explains that all three mentions are necessary, as had the Merciful One written only one exclusion, I would say that it serves to exclude only the animal’s neck, as it is not level with the head of the animal. But with regard to its back, which is level with its head, one might say that it is not precluded and that one can fulfill the requirement by placing one’s hands there. Therefore, it is necessary to have an independent source to exclude the animal’s back.,And had the Torah taught us only these two halakhot, one would have excluded only the neck and the back, as those parts are not included in the waving of the offering, i.e., they are not waved. But with regard to the animal’s breast, which is included in the waving of the offering, one might say that it is not precluded and that one can fulfill the requirement by placing one’s hands there. Therefore, the third mention is necessary to teach that placing hands cannot be performed even on the animal’s breast.,A dilemma was raised before the Sages: If one placed his hand on the sides of the animal’s head, what is the halakha; does one fulfill the requirement of placing hands by doing so? The Gemara answers: Come and hear, as it is taught in a baraita: Abba Bira’a, son of Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov, says that the verse: “And he shall place his hand upon the head of the burnt offering” (Leviticus 1:4), indicates that it must be done with his hand on the top of its head and not with his hand on the sides of its head.,Rabbi Yirmeya raises a dilemma: If one’s hands were wrapped in a cloth, what is the halakha as to whether the cloth is regarded as an interposition between his hands and the animal such that it invalidates the rite? The Gemara answers: Come and hear a resolution from a baraita, which states: The rite is valid provided that there is no item that interposes between him and the offering.,§ The mishna adds that the placing of hands is performed with two hands. The Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived? Reish Lakish said: As the verse states with regard to the Yom Kippur service: “And Aaron shall place both his hands yadav upon the head of the live goat” (Leviticus 16:21). The word yadav, meaning: His hands, is written without a second yod, and so if read without vowels it reads as: His hand. But it is also written “both,” which makes clear that the intention is that he must use both of his hands. This established a paradigm that in any place where it is stated in the Torah: His hand, there are here two hands, unless the verse explicitly specifies that there is only one.,The Gemara relates: Rabbi Elazar went and stated this halakha in the study hall, but he did not say it in the name of Reish Lakish. Reish Lakish heard about this and became angry. He said to Rabbi Elazar: If it enters your mind that wherever it is written: His hand, the meaning is that there are actually two hands, then why do I ever need the Torah to write: His hands, his hands, i.e., yadav in the plural, which it does on numerous occasions?,Reish Lakish raised objections against him from twenty-four occasions where the Torah writes: His hands, for example: “His own hands yadav shall bring the offerings of the Lord” (Leviticus 7:30); “his hands yadav shall contend for him, and You shall be a help against his adversaries” (Deuteronomy 33:7); “Guiding his hands yadav wittingly, for Manasseh was the firstborn” (Genesis 48:14). Rabbi Elazar was silent, as he had no response.,After Reish Lakish had calmed down, he said to Rabbi Elazar: What is the reason that you did not say to me the following: When I established that paradigm, I was speaking only about the term: His hands yadav, with regard to placing hands. But with regard to other halakhot, when the Torah says “his hand” the reference is to just one hand, and so when referring to two hands it must say “his hands.”,The Gemara asks: But also with regard to placing hands it is written, concerning Moses’ ordination of Joshua: “And he placed his hands yadav upon him and gave him a charge” (Numbers 27:23), using the plural “his hands” yadav instead of: His hand yado. The Gemara clarifies that Reish Lakish meant that one could say: When I established that paradigm, I was speaking only about the term: His hands yadav, with regard to placing hands on an animal offering. But in all other cases, if the intention is that there were two hands, the plural must be used.,§ The mishna teaches: And in the same location in the Temple that one places hands, one slaughters the animal. And immediately following the rite of placing hands, the slaughter is performed. The Gemara asks: What is the mishna saying? The mishna appears to state two distinct rulings. But if so, the first statement is superfluous, because if the slaughter immediately follows the placing of hands, then it is obvious that the animal is slaughtered without changing its location. The Gemara explains that this is what the mishna is saying: In the same location in the Temple that one places hands one slaughters the animal, because immediately following the rite of placing hands, the slaughter is performed. There are not two distinct rulings; rather, the second statement is the explanation of the first.,stringency with regard to placing hands than there is with regard to waving, and there is an aspect of greater stringency with regard to waving than there is with regard to placing hands. The stringency with regard to placing hands is that if several people are partners in bringing an offering, one of them waves the offering on behalf of all the other partners, but one cannot fulfill the requirement of placing hands if he alone places hands on behalf of all the other partners; rather, each member must place hands himself. The stringency with regard to waving is that waving is practiced in the cases of both offerings of an individual, e.g., peace offerings, where the breast and thigh and sacrificial portions are waved, and in the cases of communal offerings, e.g., the two lambs sacrificed on Shavuot, which are waved together with the two loaves; 110a and swear to the Lord of hosts; one shall be called the city of destruction” (Isaiah 19:18). They went to Alexandria in Egypt and built an altar and sacrificed offerings upon it for the sake of Heaven, as it is stated in the following verse: “In that day shall there be an altar to the Lord in the midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar at its border, to the Lord” (Isaiah 19:19).,The verse states: “One shall be called the city of destruction” (Isaiah 19:18). The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the verse: “One shall be called the city of destruction”? The Gemara answers: As Rav Yosef translates into Aramaic: Concerning the City of the Sun, which will be destroyed in the future, it will be said that it is one of them. And from where is it derived that in the phrase: “The city of destruction heres,” the term heres is referring to the sun? As it is written: “Who commands the sun ḥeres, and it does not rise; and seals up the stars” (Job 9:7).,§ After mentioning the Jewish community in Egypt, the Gemara discusses Jewish communities in other locations. The verse states: “Fear not, for I am with you; I will bring your seed from the east and gather you from the west; I will say to the north: Give up, and to the south: Keep not back, bring My sons from far, and My daughters from the end of the earth” (Isaiah 43:5–6). What is the meaning of “bring My sons from far”? Rav Huna says: These are the exiles of Babylonia, whose minds are calm, like sons, and who can therefore focus properly on Torah study and mitzvot. What is the meaning of “and My daughters from the end of the earth”? These are the exiles of other countries, whose minds are unsettled, like daughters.,§ Rabbi Abba bar Rav Yitzḥak says that Rav Ḥisda says, and some say that Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: The gentiles living from Tyre to Carthage recognize the Jewish people, their religion, and their Father in Heaven. But those living to the west of Tyre and to the east of Carthage recognize neither the Jewish people nor their Father in Heaven.,Rav Shimi bar Ḥiyya raised an objection to the statement of Rav from the verse: “From the rising of the sun until it sets, My name is great among the nations; and in every place offerings are presented to My name, and a pure meal offering; for My name is great among the nations, says the Lord of hosts” (Malachi 1:11). This indicates that God’s name is known across the entire world, even to the west of Tyre and the east of Carthage. Rav said to him: Shimi, is it you who is raising such an objection? The verse does not mean that they recognize God and worship him. Rather, it means that although they worship idols, they call Him the God of gods.,§ The verse states: “And in every place offerings are presented to My name, and a pure meal offering; for My name is great among the nations, says the Lord of hosts.” Does it enter your mind to say that it is permitted to sacrifice offerings in every place? Rather, Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani says that Rabbi Yonatan says: These are Torah scholars, who engage in Torah study in every place. God says: I ascribe them credit as though they burn and present offerings to My name.,Furthermore, when the verse states: “And a pure meal offering,” this is referring to one who studies Torah in purity, i.e., one who first marries a woman and afterward studies Torah. Since he is married, he is not disturbed by sinful thoughts.,The Gemara cites another verse that praises Torah scholars. “A Song of Ascents, Behold, bless the Lord, all you servants of the Lord, who stand in the House of the Lord at night” (Psalms 134:1). What is the meaning of “at night,” given that the Temple service is not performed at night and all the offerings must be sacrificed during the daytime? Rabbi Yoḥa says: These are Torah scholars, who engage in Torah study at night. The verse ascribes them credit as though they engage in the Temple service.,§ The Gemara cites another verse that is interpreted in a similar vein. King Solomon said to Hiram of Tyre: “Behold, I am about to build a house for the name of the Lord my God, to dedicate it to Him, and to burn before Him incense of sweet spices, and for the continual shewbread, and for the burnt offerings morning and evening, on the Shabbatot, and on the New Moons, and on the Festivals of the Lord our God. This is an ordice forever for Israel” (II\xa0Chronicles 2:3). Since the Temple was eventually destroyed, what did Solomon mean when he said that it is “an ordice forever”? Rav Giddel says that Rav says: This is referring to the altar that remains built in Heaven even after the earthly Temple was destroyed, and the angel Michael, the great minister, stands and sacrifices an offering upon it.,And Rabbi Yoḥa says that there is an alternative explanation of the verse: These are Torah scholars, who engage in studying the halakhot of the Temple service. The verse ascribes them credit as though the Temple was built in their days and they are serving in it.,§ The Gemara cites similar interpretations of verses: Reish Lakish said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “This is the law torah of the burnt offering, of the meal offering, and of the sin offering, and of the guilt offering, and of the consecration offering, and of the sacrifice of peace offerings” (Leviticus 7:37)? This teaches that anyone who engages in Torah study is considered as though he sacrificed a burnt offering, a meal offering, a sin offering, and a guilt offering.,Rava said an objection to this interpretation: This verse states: “of the burnt offering, of the meal offering.” If the interpretation of Reish Lakish is correct, the verse should have written: “Burnt offering and meal offering.” Rather, Rava says that the correct interpretation of this verse is: Anyone who engages in Torah study need not bring a burnt offering, nor a sin offering, nor a meal offering, nor a guilt offering.,Rabbi Yitzḥak said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “This is the law of the sin offering” (Leviticus 6:18), and: “This is the law of the guilt offering” (Leviticus 7:1)? These verses teach that anyone who engages in studying the law of the sin offering is ascribed credit as though he sacrificed a sin offering, and anyone who engages in studying the law of a guilt offering is ascribed credit as though he sacrificed a guilt offering.,It is stated with regard to an animal burnt offering: “A fire offering, an aroma pleasing to the Lord” (Leviticus 1:9), and with regard to a bird burnt offering: “A fire offering, an aroma pleasing to the Lord” (Leviticus 1:17), and with regard to a meal offering: “A fire offering, an aroma pleasing to the Lord” (Leviticus 2:2). The repetitive language employed concerning all of these different offerings is to say to you that one who brings a substantial offering and one who brings a meager offering have equal merit, provided that he directs his heart toward Heaven.,Rabbi Zeira said: What is the verse from which this principle is derived? “Sweet is the sleep of a laboring man, whether he consumes little or much”(Ecclesiastes 5:11).The verse is interpreted as referring to one who brings an offering, and teaches that one who brings a substantial offering and one who brings a meager offering can be equally assured that their offering will be accepted.,Rav Adda bar Ahava said that the source is from here: “When goods increase, those who consume them increase; and what advantage is there to the owner, except seeing them with his eyes?” (Ecclesiastes 5:10). One who brings a substantial offering, who thereby increases the number of priests who partake of it, does not have more merit than one who brings a meager offering. Rather, the offering that God desires is one where He recognizes, i.e., “seeing them with His eyes,” that its owner has the proper intent.,The Gemara addresses the expression “an aroma pleasing to the Lord” stated in the verses mentioned in the mishna. It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon ben Azzai says: Come and see what is written in the portion of offerings: As in these verses, the divine names El and Elohim are not stated, but only “the Lord.” This is so as not to give a claim to a litigant to argue. Only one name of God is used in conjunction with all the various offerings, to prevent heretics from claiming that different offerings are brought to different gods.,And it is stated with regard to a large bull offering: “A fire offering, an aroma pleasing to the Lord” (Leviticus 1:9), and with regard to a small bird offering: “A fire offering, an aroma pleasing to the Lord” (Leviticus 1:17), and with regard to a meal offering: “A fire offering, an aroma pleasing to the Lord” (Leviticus 1:9). The repetitive language employed concerning all of these different offerings is to say to you that one who brings a substantial offering and one who brings a meager offering have equal merit, provided that he directs his heart toward Heaven.,And lest you say that God needs these offerings for consumption, in which case a larger offering would be preferable to a smaller one, the verse states: “If I were hungry, I would not tell you; for the world is Mine, and everything within it” (Psalms 50:12). And it is stated: “For every beast of the forest is Mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills. I know all the fowls of the mountains; and the wild beasts of the field are Mine” (Psalms 50:10–11). Similarly, it is stated in the following verse: “Do I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats?” (Psalms 50:13).,I did not say to you: Sacrifice offerings to me, so that you will say: I will do His will, i.e., fulfill His needs, and He will do my will. You are not sacrificing to fulfill My will, i.e., My needs, but you are sacrificing to fulfill your will, i.e., your needs, in order to achieve atonement for your sins by observing My mitzvot, as it is stated: “And when you sacrifice an offering of peace offerings to the Lord, you shall sacrifice it so that you may be accepted” (Leviticus 19:5).,Alternatively, the verse: “And when you sacrifice an offering of peace offerings to the Lord, you shall sacrifice it so that you may be accepted lirtzonkhem” (Leviticus 19:5), can be interpreted differently: Sacrifice willingly lirtzonkhem; sacrifice intentionally.,This is as Shmuel asked Rav Huna: From where is it derived with regard to one who acts unawares in the case of consecrated items, i.e., if one slaughtered an offering without intending to perform the act of slaughter at all, but rather appeared like one occupied with other matters, that the offering is disqualified? Rav Huna said to Shmuel: It is derived from a verse, as it is stated: “And he shall slaughter the young bull before the Lord” (Leviticus 1:5), teaching that the mitzva is not performed properly unless the slaughter is for the sake of a young bull, i.e., with the knowledge that he is performing an act of slaughter.,Shmuel said to Rav Huna: We have this as an established halakha already, that it is a mitzva to slaughter the offering for the sake of a bull, but from where is it derived that this requirement is indispensable? Rav Huna said to him that the verse states: “With your will you shall slaughter it” (Leviticus 19:5), i.e., sacrifice intentionally, in the form of a purposeful action.,...Y'' None |
|
32. Babylonian Talmud, Moed Qatan, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic literature • Amoraim • Amoraim, Babylonian • Jeremiah (Amora) • Joseph (Amora) • Judah (Amora) • Levi (Amora) • Samuel (Amora) • Yose (Amora)
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 98, 99; Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 4; Herman, Rubenstein (2018), The Aggada of the Bavli and Its Cultural World. 220; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 183
| 16b אף דברי תורה בסתר,יצא רבי חייא ושנה לשני בני אחיו בשוק לרב ולרבה בר בר חנה שמע ר\' איקפד אתא ר\' חייא לאיתחזויי ליה א"ל עייא מי קורא לך בחוץ ידע דנקט מילתא בדעתיה נהג נזיפותא בנפשיה תלתין יומין,ביום תלתין שלח ליה תא הדר שלח ליה דלא ליתי,מעיקרא מאי סבר ולבסוף מאי סבר מעיקרא סבר מקצת היום ככולו ולבסוף סבר לא אמרינן מקצת היום ככולו,לסוף אתא א"ל אמאי אתית א"ל דשלח לי מר דליתי והא שלחי לך דלא תיתי א"ל זה ראיתי וזה לא ראיתי קרי עליה (משלי טז, ז) ברצות ה\' דרכי איש גם אויביו ישלים אתו,מ"ט עבד מר הכי א"ל דכתיב (משלי א, כ) חכמות בחוץ תרונה א"ל אם קרית לא שנית ואם שנית לא שילשת ואם שילשת לא פירשו לך,חכמות בחוץ תרונה כדרבא דאמר רבא כל העוסק בתורה מבפנים תורתו מכרזת עליו מבחוץ,והא כתיב (ישעיהו מח, טז) לא מראש בסתר דברתי ההוא ביומי דכלה,ור\' חייא האי חמוקי ירכיך מאי עביד לה מוקי לה בצדקה ובגמילות חסדים,אלמא נזיפה דידהו תלתין יומין נזיפת נשיא שאני,ונזיפה דידן כמה הוי חד יומא כי הא דשמואל ומר עוקבא כי הוו יתבי גרס שמעתא הוה יתיב מר עוקבא קמיה דשמואל ברחוק ד\' אמות וכי הוו יתבי בדינא הוה יתיב שמואל קמיה דמר עוקבא ברחוק ד\' אמות והוו חייקי ליה דוכתא למר עוקבא בציפתא ויתיב עילויה כי היכי דלישתמען מיליה,כל יומא הוה מלוי ליה מר עוקבא לשמואל עד אושפיזיה יומא חד איטריד בדיניה הוה אזיל שמואל בתריה כי מטא לביתיה א"ל לא נגה לך לישרי לי מר בתיגריה ידע דנקט מילתא בדעתיה נהג נזיפותא בנפשיה חד יומא,ההיא איתתא דהוות יתבה בשבילא הוות פשטה כרעה וקא מניפה חושלאי והוה חליף ואזיל צורבא מרבנן ולא איכנעה מקמיה אמר כמה חציפא ההיא איתתא אתאי לקמיה דר"נ אמר לה מי שמעת שמתא מפומיה אמרה ליה לא אמר לה זילי נהוגי נזיפותא חד יומא בנפשיך,זוטרא בר טוביה הוה קפסיק סידרא קמיה דרב יהודה כי מטא להאי פסוקא (שמואל ב כג, א) ואלה דברי דוד האחרונים א"ל אחרונים מכלל דאיכא ראשונים ראשונים מאי נינהו,שתיק ולא אמר ליה ולא מידי הדר א"ל אחרונים מכלל דאיכא ראשונים ראשונים מאי היא א"ל מאי דעתך דלא ידע פירושא דהאי קרא לאו גברא רבה הוא ידע דנקט מילתא בדעתיה נהג נזיפותא בנפשיה חד יומא,ודאתן עלה מיהא אחרונים מכלל דאיכא ראשונים ראשונים מאי היא (שמואל ב כב, א) וידבר דוד לה\' את דברי השירה הזאת ביום הציל ה\' אותו מכף כל אויביו ומכף שאול,אמר לו הקב"ה לדוד דוד שירה אתה אומר על מפלתו של שאול אלמלי אתה שאול והוא דוד איבדתי כמה דוד מפניו,היינו דכתיב (תהלים ז, א) שגיון לדוד אשר שר לה\' על דברי כוש בן ימיני וכי כוש שמו והלא שאול שמו אלא מה כושי משונה בעורו אף שאול משונה במעשיו,כיוצא בדבר אתה אומר (במדבר יב, א) על אודות האשה הכושית אשר לקח וכי כושית שמה והלא ציפורה שמה אלא מה כושית משונה בעורה אף ציפורה משונה במעשיה כיוצא בדבר אתה אומר (ירמיהו לח, ז) וישמע עבד מלך הכושי וכי כושי שמו והלא צדקיה שמו אלא מה כושי משונה בעורו אף צדקיה משונה במעשיו,כיוצא בדבר אתה אומר (עמוס ט, ז) הלא כבני כושיים אתם לי (בית) ישראל וכי כושיים שמן והלא ישראל שמן אלא מה כושי משונה בעורו אף ישראל משונין במעשיהן מכל האומות,א"ר שמואל בר נחמני א"ר יונתן מאי דכתיב (שמואל ב כג, א) נאם דוד בן ישי ונאם הגבר הוקם על נאם דוד בן ישי שהקים עולה של תשובה,(שמואל ב כג, ג) אמר אלהי ישראל לי דבר צור ישראל מושל באדם צדיק מושל יראת אלהים מאי קאמר א"ר אבהו ה"ק אמר אלהי ישראל לי דבר צור ישראל אני מושל באדם מי מושל בי צדיק שאני גוזר גזרה ומבטלה,(שמואל ב כג, ח) אלה שמות הגבורים אשר לדוד יושב בשבת וגו\' מאי קאמר א"ר אבהו ה"ק ואלה שמות גבורותיו של דוד,יושב בשבת בשעה שהיה יושב בישיבה לא היה יושב על גבי כרים וכסתות אלא על גבי קרקע דכל כמה דהוה רביה עירא היאירי קיים הוה מתני להו לרבנן על גבי כרים וכסתות כי נח נפשיה הוה מתני דוד לרבנן והוה יתיב על גבי קרקע אמרו ליה ליתיב מר אכרים וכסתות לא קביל עליה,תחכמוני אמר רב אמר לו הקב"ה הואיל והשפלת עצמך תהא כמוני שאני גוזר גזרה ואתה מבטלה,ראש השלישים תהא ראש לשלשת אבות הוא עדינו העצני כשהיה יושב ועוסק בתורה היה מעדן עצמו כתולעת ובשעה שיוצא למלחמה היה מקשה עצמו כעץ,על שמונה מאות חלל בפעם אחת שהיה זורק חץ ומפיל שמונה מאות חלל בפעם אחת והיה מתאנח על מאתים דכתיב (דברים לב, ל) איכה ירדף אחד אלף,יצתה בת קול ואמרה (מלכים א טו, ה) רק בדבר אוריה החתי,אמר רבי תנחום בריה דרבי חייא איש כפר עכו אמר רבי יעקב בר אחא אמר ר\' שמלאי ואמרי לה אמר ר\' תנחום אמר רב הונא ואמרי לה אמר רב הונא לחודיה'28a אלא חיה אבל שאר נשים מניחין,ר\' אלעזר אמר אפילו שאר הנשים דכתיב (במדבר כ, א) ותמת שם מרים ותקבר שם סמוך למיתה קבורה,ואמר ר\' אלעזר אף מרים בנשיקה מתה אתיא שם שם ממשה ומפני מה לא נאמר בה על פי ה\' מפני שגנאי הדבר לאומרו,א"ר אמי למה נסמכה מיתת מרים לפרשת פרה אדומה לומר לך מה פרה אדומה מכפרת אף מיתתן של צדיקים מכפרת א"ר אלעזר למה נסמכה מיתת אהרן לבגדי כהונה מה בגדי כהונה מכפרין אף מיתתן של צדיקים מכפרת,ת"ר מת פתאום זו היא מיתה חטופה חלה יום אחד ומת זו היא מיתה דחופה ר\' חנניא בן גמליאל אומר זו היא מיתת מגפה שנאמר (יחזקאל כד, טז) בן אדם הנני לוקח ממך את מחמד עיניך במגפה וכתיב (יחזקאל כד, יח) ואדבר אל העם בבקר ותמת אשתי בערב,שני ימים ומת זו היא מיתה דחויה ג\' גערה ארבעה נזיפה חמשה זו היא מיתת כל אדם,א"ר חנין מאי קרא (דברים לא, יד) הן קרבו ימיך למות הן חד קרבו תרי ימיך תרי הא חמשה הן חד שכן בלשון יוני קורין לאחת הן,מת בחמשים שנה זו היא מיתת כרת חמשים ושתים שנה זו היא מיתתו של שמואל הרמתי ששים זו היא מיתה בידי שמים,אמר מר זוטרא מאי קרא דכתיב (איוב ה, כו) תבא בכלח אלי קבר בכלח בגימטריא שיתין הוו,שבעים שיבה שמונים גבורות דכתיב (תהלים צ, י) ימי שנותינו בהם שבעים שנה ואם בגבורות שמונים שנה אמר רבה מחמשים ועד ששים שנה זו היא מיתת כרת והאי דלא חשיב להו משום כבודו של שמואל הרמתי,רב יוסף כי הוה בר שיתין עבד להו יומא טבא לרבנן אמר נפקי לי מכרת א"ל אביי נהי דנפק ליה מר מכרת דשני מכרת דיומי מי נפיק מר א"ל נקוט לך מיהא פלגא בידך,רב הונא נח נפשיה פתאום הוו קא דייגי רבנן תנא להו זוגא דמהדייב לא שנו אלא שלא הגיע לגבורות אבל הגיע לגבורות זו היא מיתת נשיקה,אמר רבא חיי בני ומזוני לא בזכותא תליא מילתא אלא במזלא תליא מילתא דהא רבה ורב חסדא תרוייהו רבנן צדיקי הוו מר מצלי ואתי מיטרא ומר מצלי ואתי מיטרא,רב חסדא חיה תשעין ותרתין שנין רבה חיה ארבעין בי רב חסדא שיתין הלולי בי רבה שיתין תיכלי,בי רב חסדא סמידא לכלבי ולא מתבעי בי רבה נהמא דשערי לאינשי ולא משתכח,ואמר רבא הני תלת מילי בעאי קמי שמיא תרתי יהבו לי חדא לא יהבו לי חוכמתיה דרב הונא ועותריה דרב חסדא ויהבו לי ענותנותיה דרבה בר רב הונא לא יהבו לי,רב שעורים אחוה דרבא הוה יתיב קמיה דרבא חזייה דהוה קא מנמנם א"ל לימא ליה מר דלא לצערן א"ל מר לאו שושביניה הוא א"ל כיון דאימסר מזלא לא אשגח בי א"ל ליתחזי לי מר איתחזי ליה א"ל הוה ליה למר צערא א"ל כי ריבדא דכוסילתא,רבא הוה יתיב קמיה דר"נ חזייה דקא מנמנם א"ל לימא ליה מר דלא לצערן א"ל מר לאו אדם חשוב הוא א"ל מאן חשיב מאן ספין מאן רקיע,א"ל ליתחזי לי מר אתחזי ליה א"ל ה"ל למר צערא א"ל כמישחל בניתא מחלבא ואי אמר לי הקב"ה זיל בההוא עלמא כד הוית לא בעינא דנפיש בעיתותיה,רבי אלעזר הוה קאכיל תרומה איתחזי ליה א"ל תרומה קא אכילנא ולאו קודש איקרי חלפא ליה שעתא,רב ששת איתחזי ליה בשוקא אמר ליה בשוקא כבהמה איתא לגבי ביתא,רב אשי איתחזי ליה בשוקא א"ל איתרח לי תלתין יומין ואהדרי לתלמודאי דאמריתו אשרי מי שבא לכאן ותלמודו בידו ביום תלתין אתא אמר ליה מאי כולי האי קא דחקא רגליה דבר נתן ואין מלכות נוגעת בחבירתה אפילו כמלא נימא,רב חסדא לא הוה יכיל ליה דלא הוה שתיק פומיה מגירסא סליק יתיב בארזא דבי רב פקע ארזא ושתק ויכיל ליה,ר\' חייא לא הוה מצי למיקרבא ליה יומא חד אידמי ליה כעניא אתא טריף אבבא א"ל אפיק לי ריפתא אפיקו ליה א"ל ולאו קא מרחם מר אעניא אההוא גברא אמאי לא קא מרחם מר גלי ליה אחוי ליה שוטא דנורא אמצי ליה נפשיה: ' None | 16b so too, the words of Torah, which are “the work of the hands of an artist,” i.e., God, must remain hidden in the study hall.,Despite Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s decree, Rabbi Ḥiyya went out and taught his two nephews, Rav and Rabba bar bar Ḥana, in the marketplace. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi heard what he had done and became angry with him. When Rabbi Ḥiyya came at some later date to visit him, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi mockingly said to him: Iyya, who is calling you outside? By asking this question Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi was intimating that Rabbi Ḥiyya should leave his house. Rabbi Ḥiyya understood that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi had taken the matter to heart and was insulted, and so he conducted himself as if he had been admonished, as a self-imposed punishment, for thirty days.,On the thirtieth day, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi sent him a message, saying: Come and visit me. However, he later reversed his opinion and sent him another message, telling him not to come.,The Gemara asks: At the outset what did he hold, and ultimately what did he hold? Initially, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi held that the legal status of part of the day is like that of an entire day, and since the thirtieth day already begun, Rabbi Ḥiyya’s time of admonition had ended. But ultimately he held that with regard to this issue we do not say that the legal status of part of the day is like that of an entire day.,In the end Rabbi Ḥiyya came on that same day. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi asked him: Why have you come? Rabbi Ḥiyya responded: Because you, Master, sent me a message that I should come. He said to him: But I sent you a second message that you should not come. He responded: This messenger that you sent, i.e., the first one, I saw him and I did as he said, but that messenger, i.e., the second one, I did not see. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi read the verse about Rabbi Ḥiyya: “When a man’s ways please the Lord, He makes even his enemies to be at peace with him” (Proverbs 16:7), as it was clear to him that Rabbi Ḥiyya had merited divine assistance.,§ Concerning the issue with which the entire incident had begun, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi asked Rabbi Ḥiyya: What is the reason that you, the Master, acted as you did, ignoring my instructions not to teach Torah in the marketplace? Rabbi Ḥiyya said to him: As it is written: “Wisdom cries aloud in the streets” (Proverbs 1:20), which implies that Torah should be publicized in the streets. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to him: If you read this verse once, you certainly did not read it a second time in greater depth; and if you read it a second time, you certainly did not read it a third time; and if you read it a third time, then it was not adequately explained to you, as it is clear that you do not understand it properly.,The words: “Wisdom cries aloud in the streets,” should be understood in accordance with the opinion of Rava. As Rava said: With regard to everyone who occupies himself with Torah study inside the privacy of his home, his Torah knowledge will proclaim his greatness outside, as it will be revealed to the masses and they will see his greatness.,The Gemara asks: But isn’t it written: “From the beginning I have not spoken in secret” (Isaiah 48:16), implying that the Torah should be taught and proclaimed in public? The Gemara answers: That verse is referring to the days of the kalla, the gathering for Torah study held during Elul and Adar, when many people come to listen to Torah discourses. During this time, it is not only permitted but even recommended to teach Torah to the masses. In this way, the verse can be explained in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi.,The Gemara asks: And what did Rabbi Ḥiyya do with this verse: “Your rounded thighs are like jewels”? How did he understand it? This verse implies that the Torah must be kept hidden in the study hall and not publicized in the marketplace. The Gemara explains: He interprets it not as a reference to Torah, but as referring to acts of charity and loving-kindness, which should certainly be performed in private.,This incident demonstrates that, apparently, admonition of those who live in Eretz Yisrael lasts for thirty days and not for seven days. The Gemara answers that this is not a conclusive proof, since Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi was the Nasi. The admonition of the Nasi of the Sanhedrin is different i.e., more severe, than the admonition of anyone else.,The Gemara asks: And how long is our admonition in Babylonia? The Gemara answers: It is only one day, as in the case involving Shmuel and the Exilarch Mar Ukva. When they would sit and study halakha, Mar Ukva would sit before Shmuel at a distance of four cubits as a sign of respect. Mar Ukva would conduct himself as though Shmuel were his teacher because Shmuel was much greater than him in Torah matters. And when they would sit together in judgment, Shmuel would sit before Mar Ukva at a distance of four cubits because Mar Ukva was the Exilarch and the chief judge. But they would lower a place for Mar Ukva in the matting upon which he sat, and he would sit on it so that he could hear Shmuel’s words of Torah even when they were engaged in judgment.,Every day, Mar Ukva would accompany Shmuel to his lodgings, in the manner that a student would show honor toward his teacher. One day, Mar Ukva was so heavily preoccupied with a case that had been brought before him for judgment that he did not realize that Shmuel was walking behind him to show him respect due to his position as the Exilarch. When Mar Ukva reached his home, Shmuel said to him: Is it not enough for you that I accompanied you until here? Release me, Master, from my obligation, so that I may return home. Mar Ukva understood that Shmuel had taken the matter to heart and was insulted. Therefore, he conducted himself as if he had been admonished, for one day as a self-imposed punishment.,It was related that a certain woman was sitting alongside a path with her leg extended while she was sifting barley. A Torah scholar passed by her on this path, but she did not yield to him and move her leg to make room for him. He said: How rude is that woman! The woman came before Rav Naḥman to ask if this statement should be deemed as excommunication. He said to her: Did you hear the word excommunication explicitly issue from his mouth? She said to him: No. He said to her: If this is the case, then go and observe an admonition for one day, as it appears that the Torah scholar sought only to admonish you.,§ Zutra bar Toviyya was once reading the portion of the Bible before Rav Yehuda. When he reached the verse: “Now these are the last words of David” (II\xa0Samuel 23:1), Zutra bar Toviyya said to Rav Yehuda: If it is written that these are the last of David’s words, by inference there are first words as well. If this is the case, what are these first words of David? Prior to this, it mentions only David’s song, but not his words.,Rav Yehuda remained silent and said nothing to him. Zutra bar Toviyya thought that Rav Yehuda did not hear what he had said, so he then said to him a second time: If it is written that these are the last of David’s words, by inference there are first words as well. If this is the case, what are these first words of David? He said to him: What do you think? Do you think that anyone who does not know the meaning of this verse is not a great man? Why are you stressing the fact that I do not know the answer to your question? Zutra bar Toviyya understood that Rav Yehuda had taken the matter to heart and was insulted. Therefore, he conducted himself as if had been admonished for one day as a self-imposed punishment.,The Gemara asks: But now that we have come to discuss this issue, since the verse mentions David’s last words, by inference there are also first words. What then are these first words of David? The Gemara answers: The first words are: “And David spoke to the Lord the words of this song in the day that the Lord delivered him out of the hand of his enemies, and out of the hand of Saul” (II\xa0Samuel 22:1), as that song is also referred to as words.,The Gemara elaborates: The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to David: David, do you recite a song over the fall of Saul? Had you been Saul and he were David, then I would have destroyed many Davids before him. Although I decreed that Saul’s kingdom would not continue, as an individual he was far greater and more important than you.,The response to this admonishment is found in the verse, as it is written: “Shiggaion of David, which he sang to the Lord, concerning the words of Cush the Benjaminite” (Psalms 7:1). Is Cush his name? Saul is his name. Rather, this is a designation that indicates: Just as a Cushite, a native of the ancient kingdom of Cush in eastern Africa, is distinguished by his dark skin, so too, Saul was distinguished by his actions, as he was absolutely righteous and performed many good deeds. Therefore, David uses the word shiggaion as an allusion to the error shegia that he had made when he sang a song of praise over Saul’s downfall.,The Gemara notes: Similarly, you can explain the verse: “And Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses due to the Cushite woman whom he had married, for he had taken a Cushite woman” (Numbers 12:1). But is her name Cushite? Zipporah is her name. Rather, just as a Cushite is distinguished by his dark skin, so too, Zipporah was distinguished by her actions. The Gemara continues: Similarly, you can explain the verse: “Now when Ebed-Melech the Cushite heard” (Jeremiah 38:7). Is his name Cushite? Zedekiah is his name. Rather, just as a Cushite is distinguished by his dark skin, so too, Zedekiah was distinguished by his righteous actions.,Similarly, you can explain the verse: “Are you not as much Mine as the children of the Cushites, O children of Israel?” (Amos 9:7). Is their name Cushite? Israel is their name. Rather, just as a Cushite is distinguished by his dark skin, so too, the Jewish people are distinguished by their actions, and they are different from all the other nations.,§ Having mentioned the last words of David, the Gemara continues to explain other expressions in that passage. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said in the name of Rabbi Yonatan: What is the meaning of that which is written: “The saying of David, son of Yishai, and the saying of the man who was raised up on high al ” (II\xa0Samuel 23:1)? It means as follows: The saying of David, son of Yishai, who raised the yoke of ulla repentance, as through his actions he taught the power of repentance. The word al, on high, and the word ulla are comprised of the same consots in Hebrew.,The passage continues: “The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spoke to me, He that rules over men must be righteous, ruling in the fear of God” (II\xa0Samuel 23:3). The Gemara asks: What is this verse saying? What does it mean? Rabbi Abbahu said: This is what the verse is saying: The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spoke to me: Although I rule over man, who rules over Me? It is a righteous person. How is it possible to say that a righteous person rules over God, as it were? As I, God, issue a decree and the righteous person nullifies it.,Similarly, the verse states there: “These are the names of David’s warriors; Josheb-Basshebeth a Tahchemonite, chief of the captains; the same was Adino the Eznite; he raised his spear against eight hundred, whom he slew at one time” (II\xa0Samuel 23:8). The Gemara asks: What is this verse saying? Rabbi Abbahu said: This is what the verse is saying: These are the names of the mighty actions of David. These expressions should not be read as names of people but instead as descriptions of David’s good deeds.,Josheb-Basshebeth yoshev bashevet indicates that when David would sit yoshev in the study hall, he would not sit upon pillows and cushions, as an important person ordinarily would. Rather, he would sit on the ground like one of the students. For as long as David’s teacher, Ira the Jairite, was alive, Ira would teach the Sages while sitting on pillows and cushions. When Ira passed away, David would teach the Sages, and he did this while sitting on the ground. They said to him: Master, you should sit upon pillows and blankets. He did not accept their suggestions, since in his humility he did not wish to appear as the teacher of the Jewish people.,In this verse, David is described as “a Tahchemonite taḥkemoni.” Rav said: The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to him: Since you have humbled yourself, be you now like Me tehe kamoni. How so? As I issue a decree, and you, owing to your righteousness, may nullify it.,David is also described here as “chief of the captains rosh hashalishim” because God said to him: You will be the head rosh of the three sheloshet Patriarchs. “The same was Adino the Eznite”; this alludes to the fact that when David would sit and occupy himself with Torah, he would make himself soft me’aden as a worm, and when he would go out to war, he would make himself hard and strong as a tree etz.,The expression: “Against eight hundred people, which he slew at one time,” means that he would throw an arrow in the air and with it kill eight hundred people at one time. And David would sigh over the two hundred who were missing from fulfillment of the Torah’s promise, as it is written: “How should one man chase a thousand” (Deuteronomy 32:30).,A Divine Voice issued forth and said by way of explanation as to why the promise was not entirely fulfilled: “Because David did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord, and turned not aside from anything that He commanded him all the days of his life, save only the matter of Uriah the Hittite” (I\xa0Kings 15:5). Had David not committed this sin, then all of the promises mentioned in the Torah would have been fulfilled in their entirety through him.,The Gemara returns to the halakhot of ostracism and mentions that Rabbi Tanḥum, son of Rabbi Ḥiyya, of the village of Akko, said that Rabbi Ya’akov bar Aḥa said that Rabbi Simlai said, and some say that this tradition was transmitted in the following manner: Rabbi Tanḥum said that Rav Huna said, and others say that Rav Huna himself made this statement without the chain of transmission:'28a with regard to a woman who died in childbirth, and therefore continues to bleed. But the biers of other women may be set down in the street.,Rabbi Elazar said: Even the biers of other women must not be set down in the street, as it is written: “And Miriam died there and was buried there” (Numbers 20:1), which teaches that the site of her burial was close to the place of her death. Therefore, it is preferable to bury a woman as close as possible to the place where she died.,With regard to that same verse Rabbi Elazar said further: Miriam also died by the divine kiss, just like her brother Moses. What is the source for this? This is derived through a verbal analogy between the word “there” stated with regard to Miriam and the word “there” mentioned with regard to Moses. With regard to Moses it says: “So Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of Moab by the mouth of the Lord” (Deuteronomy 34:5). For what reason was it not explicitly stated with regard to her, as it is stated with regard to Moses, that she died “by the mouth of the Lord”? It is because it would be unseemly to say such a thing, that a woman died by way of a divine kiss, and therefore it is not said explicitly.,Rabbi Ami said: Why was the Torah portion that describes the death of Miriam juxtaposed to the portion dealing with the red heifer? To tell you: Just as the red heifer atones for sin, so too, the death of the righteous atones for sin. Rabbi Elazar said: Why was the Torah portion that describes the death of Aaron juxtaposed to the portion discussing the priestly garments? This teaches that just as the priestly garments atone for sin, so too, the death of the righteous atones for sin.,§ The Sages taught the following baraita: If one dies suddenly without having been sick, this is death through snatching. If he became sick for a day and died, this is an expedited death. Rabbi Ḥaya ben Gamliel says: This is death at a stroke, as it is stated: “Son of man, behold, I am about to take away from you the delight of your eyes at a stroke” (Ezekiel 24:16). And when this prophecy is fulfilled it is written: “So I spoke to the people in the morning and at evening my wife died” (Ezekiel 24:18).,If he was sick for two days and died, this is a quickened death. If he was sick for three days and died, this is a death of rebuke. If he died after being sick for four days, this is a death of reprimand. If one died after a sickness lasting five days, this is the ordinary death of all people.,Rabbi Ḥanin said: What is the verse from which this is derived? It is stated: “Behold, your days approach that you must die” (Deuteronomy 31:14). This verse is expounded in the following manner: “Behold hen” indicates one; “approach karvu,” a plural term, indicates two; “your days yamekha,” also a plural term, indicates another two; and therefore in total this is five. How does the word hen indicate one? Because in the Greek language they call the number one hen.,The Gemara discusses the significance of death at different ages: If one dies when he is fifty years old, this is death through karet, the divine punishment of excision, meted out for the most serious transgressions. If he dies when he is fifty-two years old, this is the death of Samuel from Ramah. If he dies at the age of sixty, this is death at the hand of Heaven.,Mar Zutra said: What is the verse from which this is derived? As it is written: “You shall come to your grave in a ripe age bekhelaḥ” (Job 5:26). The word “ripe age” bekhelaḥ has the numerical value of sixty, and it is alluded to there that dying at this age involves a divine punishment.,One who dies at the age of seventy has reached old age. One who dies at the age of eighty dies in strength, as it is written: “The days of our years are seventy, or if by reason of strength, eighty years” (Psalms 90:10). Rabba said: Not only is death at the age of fifty a sign of karet, but even death from fifty to sixty years of age is death by karet. And the reason that all of these years were not counted in connection with karet is due to the honor of Samuel from Ramah, who died at the age of fifty-two.,The Gemara relates that when Rav Yosef turned sixty he made a holiday for the Sages. Explaining the cause for his celebration, he said: I have passed the age of karet. Abaye said to him: Master, even though you have passed the karet of years, have you, Master, escaped the karet of days? As previously mentioned, sudden death is also considered to be a form of karet. He said to him: Grasp at least half in your hand, for I have at least escaped one type of karet.,It was related that Rav Huna died suddenly, and the Sages were concerned that this was a bad sign. The Sage Zuga from Hadayeiv taught them the following: They taught these principles only when the deceased had not reached the age of strength, i.e., eighty. But if he had reached the age of strength and then died suddenly, this is death by way of a divine kiss.,Rava said: Length of life, children, and sustece do not depend on one’s merit, but rather they depend upon fate. As, Rabba and Rav Ḥisda were both pious Sages; one Sage would pray during a drought and rain would fall, and the other Sage would pray and rain would fall.,And nevertheless, their lives were very different. Rav Ḥisda lived for ninety-two years, whereas Rabba lived for only forty years. The house of Rav Ḥisda celebrated sixty wedding feasts, whereas the house of Rabba experienced sixty calamities. In other words, many fortuitous events took place in the house of Rav Ḥisda and the opposite occurred in the house of Rabba.,In the house of Rav Ḥisda there was bread from the finest flour semida even for the dogs, and it was not asked after, as there was so much food. In the house of Rabba, on the other hand, there was coarse barley bread even for people, and it was not found in sufficient quantities. This shows that the length of life, children, and sustece all depend not upon one’s merit, but upon fate.,Apropos Rav Ḥisda’s great wealth, the Gemara reports that Rava said: These three things I requested from Heaven, two of which were given to me, and one was not given to me: I requested the wisdom of Rav Huna and the wealth of Rav Ḥisda and they were given to me. I also requested the humility of Rabba bar Rav Huna, but it was not given to me.,The Gemara continues its discussion of the deaths of the righteous. Rav Seorim, Rava’s brother, sat before Rava, and he saw that Rava was dozing, i.e., about to die. Rava said to his brother: Master, tell him, the Angel of Death, not to torment me. Knowing that Rava was not afraid of the Angel of Death, Rav Seorim said to him: Master, are you not a friend of the Angel of Death? Rava said to him: Since my fate has been handed over to him, and it has been decreed that I shall die, the Angel of Death no longer pays heed to me. Rav Seorim said to Rava: Master, appear to me in a dream after your death. And Rava appeared to him. Rav Seorim said to Rava: Master, did you have pain in death? He said to him: Like the prick of the knife when letting blood.,It was similarly related that Rava sat before Rav Naḥman, and he saw that Rav Naḥman was dozing, i.e., slipping into death. Rav Naḥman said to Rava: Master, tell the Angel of Death not to torment me. Rava said to him: Master, are you not an important person who is respected in Heaven? Rav Naḥman said to him: In the supernal world who is important? Who is honorable? Who is complete?,Rava said to Rav Naḥman: Master, appear to me in a dream after your death. And he appeared to him. Rava said to him: Master, did you have pain in death? Rav Naḥman said to him: Like the removal of hair from milk, which is a most gentle process. But nevertheless, were the Holy One, Blessed be He, to say to me: Go back to that world, the physical world, as you were, I would not want to go, for the fear of the Angel of Death is great. And I would not want to go through such a terrifying experience a second time.,The Gemara relates that Rabbi Elazar was once eating teruma, when the Angel of Death appeared to him. He said to the Angel of Death: I am eating teruma; is it not called sacred? It would be inappropriate for me to die now and thereby defile this sacred teruma. The Angel of Death accepted his argument and left him. The moment passed, and he lived for some time afterward.,It was similarly related that the Angel of Death once appeared to Rav Sheshet in the marketplace. Rav Sheshet said to the Angel of Death: Shall I die in the market like an animal? Come to my house and kill me there like a human being.,So too, the Angel of Death appeared to Rav Ashi in the marketplace. Rav Ashi said to the Angel of Death: Give me thirty days so that I may review my studies, for you say above: Fortunate is he who comes here to Heaven with his learning in his hand. On the thirtieth day the Angel of Death came to take him. Rav Ashi said to the Angel of Death: What is all of this? Why are you in such a hurry to take me? Why can you not postpone my death? He said to him: The foot of Rav Huna bar Natan is pushing you, as he is ready to succeed you as the leader of the generation, and one sovereignty does not overlap with its counterpart, even by one hairbreadth. Therefore, you cannot live any longer.,The Angel of Death was unable to take Rav Ḥisda because his mouth was never silent from study. So the Angel of Death went and sat on the cedar column that supported the roof of the study hall of the Sages. The cedar cracked and Rav Ḥisda was silent for a moment, as he was startled by the sound. At that point the Angel of Death was able to take him.,The Angel of Death could not come near Rabbi Ḥiyya, owing to his righteousness. One day the Angel of Death appeared to him as a poor person. He came and knocked on the door. He said to Rabbi Ḥiyya: Bring out bread for me, and he took out bread for him. The Angel of Death then said to Rabbi Ḥiyya: Master, do you not have mercy on a poor person? Why, then, do you not have mercy upon that man, i.e., upon me, and give me what I want? The Angel of Death then revealed his identity to him, and showed him a fiery rod in order to confirm that he was the Angel of Death. At this point Rav Ḥiyya surrendered himself to him. ' None |
|
33. Babylonian Talmud, Pesahim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic Period in Babylonia • Amoraim
Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 67; Herman, Rubenstein (2018), The Aggada of the Bavli and Its Cultural World. 177
50a כאיסורו מה איסורו בכזית אף חזרתו בכזית,תניא ר\' נתן אומר זה וזה כשתי ביצים ולא הודו לו חכמים,(זכריה יד, ו) והיה ביום ההוא לא יהיה אור יקרות וקפאון מאי יקרות וקפאון,א"ר אלעזר זה אור שיקר בעולם הזה וקפוי לעולם הבא,ר\' יוחנן אמר אלו נגעים ואהלות שיקרין הן בעוה"ז וקפויין הן לעולם הבא,ור\' יהושע בן לוי אמר אלו בני אדם שיקרין הן בעולם הזה וקפויין הן לעוה"ב כי הא דרב יוסף בריה דר\' יהושע בן לוי חלש ואיתנגיד כי הדר אמר ליה אבוה מאי חזית אמר ליה עולם הפוך ראיתי עליונים למטה ותחתונים למעלה אמר לו בני עולם ברור ראית ואנן היכי התם כי היכי דאיתו אנן הכא הכי איתינן התם,ושמעתי שהיו אומרים אשרי מי שבא לכאן ותלמודו בידו ושמעתי שהיו אומרים הרוגי מלכות אין אדם יכול לעמוד במחיצתן,(ומאן) נינהו אילימא ר"ע וחביריו משום הרוגי מלכות ותו לא אלא הרוגי לוד,(זכריה יד, כ) ביום ההוא יהיה על מצלות הסוס קדש לה\' מאי מצלות הסוס,א"ר יהושע בן לוי עתיד הקב"ה להוסיף על ירושלים עד שהסוס רץ ומציל,ר\' אלעזר אמר כל מצילות שתולין לסוס בין עיניו יהיה קדש לה\',ור\' יוחנן אמר כל ביזה שבוזזין ישראל עד שעה שהסוס רץ ומציל יהיה קדש לה\',בשלמא למאן דאמר כל ביזה שבזזו ישראל היינו דכתיב (זכריה יד, כ) והיה הסירות בבית ה\' כמזרקים לפני המזבח אלא למ"ד בהנך תרתי מאי והיה הסירות בבית ה\' מילתא אחריתי קאמר דמתעתרי ישראל ומתנדבי ומייתי,בשלמא למ"ד ביזה היינו דכתיב (זכריה יד, כא) ולא יהיה כנעני עוד בבית ה\' צבאות אלא למ"ד הנך תרתי מאי ולא יהיה כנעני א"ר ירמיה אין כאן עני,וכנעני מנלן דאיקרי תגר דכתיב (בראשית לח, ב) וירא שם יהודה בת איש כנעני מאי כנעני אילימא כנעני ממש אפשר בא אברהם והזהיר את יצחק בא יצחק והזהיר את יעקב ויהודה אזיל ונסיב אלא אמר רבי שמעון בן לקיש בת גברא תגרא דכתיב (הושע יב, ח) כנען בידו מאזני מרמה ואיבעית אימא מהכא (ישעיהו כג, ח) אשר סוחריה שרים כנעניה נכבדי ארץ:,(זכריה יד, ט) והיה ה\' למלך על כל הארץ ביום ההוא יהיה ה\' אחד ושמו אחד אטו האידנא לאו אחד הוא,אמר רבי אחא בר חנינא לא כעולם הזה העולם הבא העולם הזה על בשורות טובות אומר ברוך הטוב והמטיב ועל בשורות רעות אומר ברוך דיין האמת לעולם הבא כולו הטוב והמטיב,ושמו אחד מאי אחד אטו האידנא לאו שמו אחד הוא,א"ר נחמן בר יצחק לא כעולם הזה העולם הבא העולם הזה נכתב ביו"ד ה"י ונקרא באל"ף דל"ת אבל לעולם הבא כולו אחד נקרא ביו"ד ה"י ונכתב ביו"ד ה"י,סבר רבא למדרשה בפירקא א"ל ההוא סבא לעלם כתיב,ר\' אבינא רמי כתיב (שמות ג, טו) זה שמי לעלם וזה זכרי לדור דור אמר הקב"ה לא כשאני נכתב אני נקרא נכתב אני ביו"ד ה"א ונקרא אני באל"ף דל"ת:,| 50a is analogous to its prohibition. Just as its prohibition is only when it is the size of an olive-bulk, so too, the requirement to return it is only when it is the size of an olive-bulk.,Another opinion on this issue was taught in a baraita. Rabbi Natan says: The minimum measure for both this and that, leaven and sacrificial meat, is two egg-bulks of prohibited material, but the Rabbis did not agree with him.,Incidental to the discussion of leaving Jerusalem and its surrounding area, the Gemara cites expositions of a prophetic passage, including a statement that God will eventually expand the boundaries of Jerusalem. The verse states: “And it shall come to pass on that day that there shall not be light, but heavy clouds yekarot and thickness vekippaon” (Zechariah 14:6). The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the expression “yekarot vekippaon”?,Rabbi Elazar said: This is the light currently provided by the sun, which is significant yakar in this world and insignificant kafuy in the World-to-Come, when the moon will shine as brightly as the sun does now and the sun will be seven times brighter than it is currently.,Rabbi Yoḥa said: This expression refers to the tractates of Nega’im and Oholot, which are weighty yekarim owing to their difficulty in this world, as they are among the most complex subjects, but will be easy kefuyin in the World-to-Come, when people will be much wiser.,And Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: These are people who are considered important yekarim in this world and unimportant kefuyim in the World-to-Come. This is like the incident involving Rav Yosef, son of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, who became ill and was about to expire. When he returned to good health, his father said to him: What did you see when you were about to die? He said to him: I saw an inverted world. Those above, i.e., those who are considered important in this world, were below, insignificant, while those below, i.e., those who are insignificant in this world, were above. He said to him: My son, you have seen a clear world. The world you have seen is the true world, as in that world people’s standings befit them. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi asked: And where are we, the Torah scholars, there? Rav Yosef responded: Just as we are regarded here, so are we regarded there.,Rav Yosef added: And I heard that they were saying in that world: Praiseworthy is the one who arrives here with his studies in hand. And I also heard that they were saying: Those executed by the government enjoy such an exalted status that no one can stand in their enclosure.,The Gemara asks: And who are these martyrs that Rav Yosef was referring to? If you say that he was referring to Rabbi Akiva and his colleagues, who were martyred, this cannot be: Is their elevated status due only to the fact that they were martyred by the Roman government and nothing more? These men were exceptional in their piety and sanctity during their lives as well. Rather, it is referring to the martyrs of Lod, Pappos and Luliyanos, who gave themselves up to be martyred for the sake of the Jewish people. They falsely admitted to killing the king’s daughter in order to prevent a harsh decree from being issued against the entire community. Although they were not known for exceptional piety before that event, they are considered to be extremely holy due to their martyrdom.,The Gemara continues to expound the section of the book of Zechariah cited above. The verse states: “On that day there shall be upon the bells of the horses metzillot hasus: Holy unto the Lord” (Zechariah 14:20). The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the expression metzillot hasus?,Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: In the future the Holy One, Blessed be He, will extend Jerusalem by as much as the distance that a horse can run the entire time it casts a shadow metzeil. Jerusalem will be so large that a horse running from one side of the city in the morning will not arrive at the other end of the city until midday, when its shadow will have disappeared.,Rabbi Elazar said: All decorative bells metzillot that one hangs between the eyes of a horse will be sanctified to God, i.e., they will be consecrated for the Temple treasury.,And Rabbi Yoḥa said: All spoils that the Jewish people will take from gentiles who wage war against them, up to the time a horse runs and casts a shadow metzeil, i.e., half a day, will be sanctified for God.,The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that this expression refers to all spoils that the Jewish people will take, this is as it is written in the continuation of the verse, which mentions additional treasure donated to the Temple: “And the pots in the Lord’s house shall be like the basins before the altar.” However, according to the ones who said these other two explanations, what is the meaning of: “And the pots in the Lord’s house”? The Gemara explains that according to these opinions the verse is saying something else: It is prophesying that in the future the Jewish people will become wealthy and bring donations to the Temple.,The Gemara goes on to ask: Granted, according to the one who said that this expression refers to spoils, this is as it is written in the next verse: “And on that day there shall no longer be a merchant kena’ani in the house of the Lord of hosts” (Zechariah 14:21), as he will no longer be needed. However, according to the ones who said these other two explanations, what is the meaning of the expression: “There shall no longer be a merchant”? Rabbi Yirmeya said: The word kena’ani is in fact a contraction of the phrase: There is no poor person here ein kan ani. In other words, there will no longer be poor people, and therefore the Jews themselves will be able to donate whatever is needed in the Temple (Maharsha).,And from where do we derive that a merchant can be called a kena’ani? As it is written: “And Judah saw there the daughter of a certain kena’ani…and he took her, and went in unto her” (Genesis 38:2). What is the meaning of the word kena’ani in this context? If you say it refers to an actual Canaanite, is it possible that Abraham warned Isaac not to marry a Canaanite woman, and Isaac warned Jacob to the same effect, and nonetheless Judah went and married a Canaanite woman? Rather, Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: She was the daughter of a merchant, as it is written: “As for the merchant kena’an, the balances of deceit are in his hand. He loves to oppress” (Hosea 12:8). And if you wish, say instead that this meaning of the word can be understood from the following verse, which describes Tyre: “Whose traders are princes, whose merchants kieha are the honorable of the earth” (Isaiah 23:8).,The Gemara cites another verse from the prophecy at the end of the book of Zechariah: “And the Lord shall be King over all the earth, on that day shall the Lord be one and His name one” (Zechariah 14:9). The Gemara asks: Is that to say that now He is not one?,Rabbi Aḥa bar Ḥanina said: The World-to-Come is not like this world. In this world, upon good tidings one recites: Blessed…Who is good and does good, and over bad tidings one recites: Blessed…the true Judge. In the World-to-Come one will always recite: Blessed…Who is good and does good. There will be only one mode of blessing God for tidings.,The verse states: “On that day shall the Lord be one and His name one.” The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the word one in this context? Is that to say that now His name is not one?,Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: The World-to-Come is not like this world. In this world, God’s name that is written with the letters yod and heh is read as Adonai, which begins with the letters alef and dalet. God’s name is not pronounced in the same way as it is written. However, in the World-to-Come it will all be one, as God’s name will be both read with the letters yod and heh and written with the letters yod and heh.,Rava thought to expound upon the correct punctuation and enunciation of the name of God during his public lecture before one of the Festivals. A certain old man said to him: The word forever is written in the verse: “This is My name forever le’olam” (Exodus 3:15) without the letter vav, such that it can be read le’alem, to conceal, meaning that the name should be concealed.,Rabbi Avina raised a contradiction: It is written in the verse: “This is My name forever,” implying a requirement to conceal the name of God, and in the very next phrase it states: “And this is My memorial unto all generations” (Exodus 3:15), which indicates that the name of God is to be publicized and remembered by all. Rather, the Holy One, Blessed be He, said: I, i.e., My name, is not read as I am written. I am written with the letters yod and heh, and I am read with the letters alef and dalet.,,a place where the people were accustomed to perform labor on Passover eve until midday, one may do so on that day. In a place where the people were accustomed not to perform labor, one may not do so. The performance of labor on the eve of Passover is not prohibited by Torah law, but is dependent on local custom. If one travels from a place where people perform labor on Passover eve to a place where people do not perform labor, or from a place where people do not perform labor on Passover eve to a place where people perform labor, the Sages impose upon him the stringencies of both the place from which he left and the stringencies of the place to which he went. In both cases, he may not perform labor.'' None | |
|
34. Babylonian Talmud, Rosh Hashanah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraim
Found in books: Herman, Rubenstein (2018), The Aggada of the Bavli and Its Cultural World. 220; Piotrkowski (2019), Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period, 145
| 18b דאמר רב חנא בר ביזנא אמר ר"ש חסידא מאי דכתיב (זכריה ח, יט) כה אמר ה\' צבאות צום הרביעי וצום החמישי וצום השביעי וצום העשירי יהיה לבית יהודה לששון ולשמחה קרי להו צום וקרי להו ששון ושמחה בזמן שיש שלום יהיו לששון ולשמחה אין שלום צום,אמר רב פפא הכי קאמר בזמן שיש שלום יהיו לששון ולשמחה יש גזרת המלכות צום אין גזרת המלכות ואין שלום רצו מתענין רצו אין מתענין,אי הכי ט"ב נמי אמר רב פפא שאני ט\' באב הואיל והוכפלו בו צרות דאמר מר בט\' באב חרב הבית בראשונה ובשניה ונלכדה ביתר ונחרשה העיר,תניא אמר ר"ש ארבעה דברים היה ר"ע דורש ואני אין דורש כמותו צום הרביעי זה ט\' בתמוז שבו הובקעה העיר שנאמר (ירמיהו נב, ו) (ברביעי) בתשעה לחדש ויחזק הרעב בעיר ולא היה לחם לעם הארץ ותבקע העיר ואמאי קרי ליה רביעי רביעי לחדשים,צום החמישי זה תשעה באב שבו נשרף בית אלהינו ואמאי קרי ליה חמישי חמישי לחדשים צום השביעי זה ג\' בתשרי שבו נהרג גדליה בן אחיקם ומי הרגו ישמעאל בן נתניה הרגו ללמדך ששקולה מיתתן של צדיקים כשריפת בית אלהינו ואמאי קרי ליה שביעי שביעי לחדשים,צום העשירי זה עשרה בטבת שבו סמך מלך בבל על ירושלים שנאמר (יחזקאל כד, א) ויהי דבר ה\' אלי בשנה התשיעית בחדש העשירי בעשור לחדש לאמר בן אדם כתב לך את שם היום את עצם היום הזה סמך מלך בבל אל ירושלם ואמאי קרי ליה עשירי עשירי לחדשים והלא היה ראוי זה לכתוב ראשון ולמה נכתב כאן כדי להסדיר חדשים כתיקנן,ואני איני אומר כן אלא צום העשירי זה חמשה בטבת שבו באת שמועה לגולה שהוכתה העיר שנאמר (יחזקאל לג, כא) ויהי בשתי עשרה שנה בעשירי בחמשה לחדש לגלותנו בא אלי הפליט מירושלם לאמר הוכתה העיר ועשו יום שמועה כיום שריפה,ונראין דברי מדבריו שאני אומר על ראשון ראשון ועל אחרון אחרון והוא אומר על ראשון אחרון ועל אחרון ראשון אלא שהוא מונה לסדר חדשים ואני מונה לסדר פורעניות,איתמר רב ורבי חנינא אמרי בטלה מגילת תענית רבי יוחנן וריב"ל אמרי לא בטלה מגילת תענית,רב ורבי חנינא אמרי בטלה מגילת תענית הכי קאמר בזמן שיש שלום יהיו לששון ולשמחה אין שלום צום והנך נמי כי הני,רבי יוחנן ורבי יהושע בן לוי אמרי לא בטלה מגילת תענית הני הוא דתלינהו רחמנא בבנין בהמ"ק אבל הנך כדקיימי קיימי,מתיב רב כהנא מעשה וגזרו תענית בחנוכה בלוד וירד ר"א ורחץ ורבי יהושע וסיפר ואמרו להם צאו והתענו על מה שהתעניתם,א"ר יוסף שאני חנוכה דאיכא מצוה א"ל אביי ותיבטיל איהי ותיבטל מצותה,אלא אמר רב יוסף שאני חנוכה דמיפרסם ניסא,מותיב רב אחא בר הונא בתלתא בתשרי בטילת אדכרתא מן שטרייא שגזרה מלכות יון גזרה שלא להזכיר שם שמים על פיהם וכשגברה מלכות חשמונאי ונצחום התקינו שיהו מזכירין שם שמים אפילו בשטרות וכך היו כותבים בשנת כך וכך ליוחנן כהן גדול לאל עליון,וכששמעו חכמים בדבר אמרו למחר זה פורע את חובו ונמצא שטר מוטל באשפה וביטלום ואותו היום עשאוהו יו"ט ואי סלקא דעתך בטלה מגילת תענית קמייתא בטול אחרנייתא מוסיפין,הכא במאי עסקינן בזמן שבית המקדש קיים'' None | 18b As Rav Ḥana bar Bizna said that Rabbi Shimon Ḥasida said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Thus said the Lord of hosts: The fast of the fourth month, and the fast of the fifth, and fast of the seventh, and the fast of the tenth, shall become times of joy and gladness, and cheerful seasons, to the house of Judah” (Zechariah 8:19). It calls them days of “fast” and it calls them “times of joy and gladness.” How so? When there is peace in the world, they will be times of joy and gladness, on which eulogies and fasting are forbidden; but when there is no peace, they are days of fasting. In a time when there is no peace, why are messengers not sent out also for the fourth and tenth months, so that people can know when to observe the fasts?,Rav Pappa said that this is what it is saying: When there is peace in the world and the Temple is standing, these days will be times of joy and gladness; when there is persecution and troubles for the Jewish people, they are days of fasting; and when there is no persecution but still no peace, neither particular troubles nor consolation for Israel, the halakha is as follows: If people wish, they fast, and if they wish, they do not fast. Since there is no absolute obligation to fast, messengers are not sent out for these months.,The Gemara asks: If so, the Ninth of Av should also be like the other fast days, that sometimes it is observed and sometimes not, depending upon the wishes of the community at the time. Why does the mishna state that messengers go out for the month of Av? Rav Pappa said: The Ninth of Av is different, since the calamities that occurred on that day were multiplied. As the Master said: On the Ninth of Av the Temple was destroyed, both the first one and the second one; on this day the city of Beitar was captured; and on this day the city of Jerusalem was plowed over by the enemies of the Jewish people, as a sign that it would never be rebuilt. Consequently, the fast of the Ninth of Av is obligatory, and not optional like the other fasts. Messengers are consequently sent out so that people will know when to fast.,§ The Sages disagreed about the fasts alluded to in the words of the prophet, as it is taught in a baraita. Rabbi Shimon said: Rabbi Akiva would expound four verses, but I would not expound the texts as he did. One of the disputes relates to the fasts mentioned by Zechariah. Rabbi Akiva would expound the verse as follows: “The fast of the fourth,” this is the ninth of Tammuz, on which the city of Jerusalem was breached, as it is stated: “And in the fourth month, on the ninth day of the month, the famine was severe in the city, so that there was no bread for the people of the land. Then the city was breached” (Jeremiah 52:6–7). And why does the prophet call it the fast of the fourth? Because it is in Tammuz, the fourth of the months when counting from Nisan.,“The fast of the fifth,” this is the Ninth of Av, on which the Temple of our Lord was burnt. And why does he call it the fast of the fifth? Because it falls in the fifth of the months. “The fast of the seventh,” this is the third of Tishrei, on which Gedaliah, son of Ahikam, was killed. And who killed him? Ishmael, son of Nethaniah, killed him (see II Kings 25:25; Jeremiah, chapter 41). The Sages established a fast to commemorate Gedaliah’s death to teach you that the death of the righteous is equivalent to the burning of the Temple of our Lord. And why did the prophet call it the fast of the seventh? Because Tishrei is the seventh of the months.,“The fast of the tenth,” This is the tenth of Tevet, on which the king of Babylonia laid siege to Jerusalem, as it is stated: “And in the ninth year, in the tenth month, on the tenth day of the month, the word of the Lord came to me, saying: Son of man, write the name of the day, of this same day: The king of Babylonia has laid siege to Jerusalem on this very day” (Ezekiel 24:1–2). And why did he call it the fast of the tenth? Because it is in Tevet, which is the tenth of the months. Wouldn’t it have been fitting to write this fast first, as the series of events began with the laying of the siege. Why was it written here at the end of the list? This was done in order to list the months in their proper order, as the prophet began with the fourth month and ended with the tenth month. This is the statement of Rabbi Akiva.,Rabbi Shimon disagreed and said: I do not say this, but rather I expound the verse as follows: “The fast of the tenth,” this is the fifth of Tevet, on which the report reached the Diaspora that the city had been smitten, as it is stated: “And it came to pass in the twelfth year of our exile, in the tenth month, on the fifth day of the month, that one that had escaped out of Jerusalem came to me, saying: The city is smitten” (Ezekiel 33:21); and they made the day of the report of the destruction like the day of the actual burning and decreed a fast on that day.,And Rabbi Shimon added: And my statement seems more convincing than his statement, as I say about the first fast mentioned by the prophet that it marks the event that took place first, and about the last fast that it marks the event that took place last. According to Rabbi Shimon, the fasts are listed in accordance with the chronological order of the events. But he, Rabbi Akiva, says about the first fast mentioned by the prophet that it marks the event that took place last, and about the last fast mentioned that it marks the event that took place first, only that he lists the fasts in the order of the months, whereas I list them also in the order of the calamities that they mark.,§ It was stated that the Sages disagreed about the following matter: Rav and Rabbi Ḥanina both say: Megillat Ta’anit, a listing of days on which fasting and eulogizing are forbidden, has been nullified, as in the present period of exile there is no reason to celebrate the joyous events that these days commemorate. Rabbi Yoḥa and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi say: Megillat Ta’anit has not been nullified.,The Gemara explains: Rav and Rabbi Ḥanina say that Megillat Ta’anit has been nullified. This is what the prophet is saying: At a time when there is peace in the world, the dates listed will be times of joy and gladness, on which eulogies and fasting are forbidden; but when there is no peace, they are days of fasting. And those days mentioned in Megillat Ta’anit are also like these days of fasting, that is to say, the days of joy listed in Megillat Ta’anit are also nullified when there is no peace.,Rabbi Yoḥa and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi say that Megillat Ta’anit has not been nullified, and they reason as follows: It was those fast days mentioned in the Bible that the Merciful One makes contingent on the building of the Temple, but these festive days listed in Megillat Ta’anit remain as they were and have not been nullified.,Rav Kahana raised an objection against Rav and Rabbi Ḥanina from a baraita: There was an incident and the Sages decreed a fast on Hanukkah in Lod, and Rabbi Eliezer went down on that day and bathed in the bathhouse and Rabbi Yehoshua went down and cut his hair to show that they did not accept the fast. Furthermore, these two Sages said to the others: Go out and fast another fast as an act of penitence for what you have already fasted, as the days of Hanukkah are days of joy, on which fasting is forbidden. Hanukkah is one of the Festivals listed in Megillat Ta’anit. Even after the destruction of the Temple Hanukkah is celebrated, demonstrating that Megillat Ta’anit has not been nullified.,Rav Yosef said: Hanukkah is different, as there is the mitzva of lighting candles, and so, unlike the other days listed in Megillat Ta’anit, the festival of Hanukkah was not nullified. Abaye said to him: What is this argument? Let Hanukkah itself be nullified, and let its mitzva of lighting candles be nullified with it.,Rather, Rav Yosef retracted his previous explanation and said: Hanukkah is different, as its miracle is well known, and it has become so widely accepted by all the Jewish people that it would be inappropriate to nullify it.,Rav Aḥa bar Huna raised an objection: It is stated in Megillat Ta’anit: On the third of Tishrei the ordice requiring the mention of God’s name in legal documents was abolished, and on that day fasting is forbidden. For the kingdom of Greece had issued a decree against the Jews forbidding them to mention the name of Heaven on their lips. When the Hasmonean kingdom became strong and defeated the Greeks, they instituted that people should mention the name of Heaven even in their legal documents. And therefore they would write: In year such and such of Yoḥa the High Priest of the God Most High.,And when the Sages heard about this they said: Tomorrow this one, the borrower, will repay his debt, the lender will no longer need to save the loan document, the document will be cast on a dunghill, and the name of Heaven written there will come to disgrace. And so they annulled the ordice to mention God’s name in documents, and they made that day into a Festival. And if it enters your mind to say that Megillat Ta’anit has been nullified, can you say that the first prohibitions against fasting they annulled, and then later ones were added?,The Gemara answers: With what are we dealing here? This is referring to a time when the Temple was standing and all the days listed in Megillat Ta’anit were in force. From time to time new days of commemoration were added. When the amora’im stated that Megillat Ta’anit was nullified they were referring to the time after the destruction of the Temple.'' None |
|
35. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic midrash • Amoraim • Amoraim, Babylonian, attitude to Moses, Torah • Amoraim, Babylonian, use of term Torah of Moses • Amoraim, on amei ha’arets • Torah, study of, of Babylonian Amoraim • Yerushalmi and Amoraic midrashim, and Tannaic midrashim • time of persecution, Amoraic concept
Found in books: Avemarie, van Henten, and Furstenberg (2023), Jewish Martyrdom in Antiquity, 43; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 128; Herman, Rubenstein (2018), The Aggada of the Bavli and Its Cultural World. 220; Kalmin (1998), The Sage in Jewish Society of Late Antiquity, 95; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 131; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 170
| 14a בטלו דיני קנסות מישראל שפעם אחת גזרה מלכות הרשעה גזירה על ישראל שכל הסומך יהרג וכל הנסמך יהרג ועיר שסומכין בה תיחרב ותחומין שסומכין בהן יעקרו,מה עשה יהודה בן בבא הלך וישב לו בין שני הרים גדולים ובין שתי עיירות גדולות ובין שני תחומי שבת בין אושא לשפרעם וסמך שם חמשה זקנים ואלו הן ר"מ ור\' יהודה ור\' שמעון ור\' יוסי ור\' אלעזר בן שמוע רב אויא מוסיף אף ר\' נחמיה,כיון שהכירו אויביהם בהן אמר להן בניי רוצו אמרו לו רבי מה תהא עליך אמר להן הריני מוטל לפניהם כאבן שאין לה הופכים אמרו לא זזו משם עד שנעצו בו שלש מאות לונביאות של ברזל ועשאוהו ככברה,רבי יהודה בן בבא אחריני הוו בהדיה והאי דלא חשיב להו משום כבודו דרבי יהודה בן בבא ור"מ ר\' יהודה בן בבא סמכיה והא אמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יוחנן כל האומר ר"מ לא סמכו ר\' עקיבא אינו אלא טועה סמכיה ר\' עקיבא ולא קיבלו סמכיה ר\' יהודה בן בבא וקיבלו,אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי אין סמיכה בחוצה לארץ מאי אין סמיכה אילימא דלא דייני דיני קנסות כלל בחוצה לארץ והא תנן סנהדרין נוהגת בין בארץ ובין בחוצה לארץ אלא דלא סמכינן בחוצה לארץ,פשיטא סומכין בחוצה לארץ ונסמכין בארץ הא אמרינן דלא אלא סומכין בארץ ונסמכין בחוצה לארץ מאי,ת"ש דרבי יוחנן הוה מצטער עליה דרב שמן בר אבא דלא הוה גבייהו דליסמכיה ר"ש בן זירוד וחד דעימיה ומנו ר\' יונתן בן עכמאי ואמרי לה רבי יונתן בן עכמאי וחד דעימיה ומנו ר"ש בן זירוד חד דהוה גבייהו סמכוהו וחד דלא הוה גבייהו לא סמכוהו,ר\' חנינא ורבי הושעיא הוה קא משתקיד רבי יוחנן למיסמכינהו לא הוה מסתייעא מילתא הוה קא מצטער טובא אמרו ליה לא נצטער מר דאנן מדבית עלי קאתינן,דא"ר שמואל בר נחמן א"ר יונתן מניין שאין נסמכין לבית עלי שנאמר (שמואל א ב, לב) לא יהיה זקן בביתך כל הימים מאי זקן אילימא זקן ממש והכתיב (שמואל א ב, לג) כל מרבית ביתך ימותו אנשים אלא סמיכה,רבי זירא הוה מיטמר למיסמכיה דאמר רבי אלעזר לעולם הוי קבל וקיים כיון דשמעה להא דא"ר אלעזר אין אדם עולה לגדולה אלא א"כ מוחלין לו על כל עונותיו אמצי ליה אנפשיה,כי סמכוה לר\' זירא שרו ליה הכי לא כחל ולא שרק ולא פירכוס ויעלת חן כי סמכוה לרבי אמי ולרבי אסי שרו להו הכי כל מן דין כל מן דין סמוכו לנא לא תסמכו לנא לא מסרמיטין ולא מסרמיסין ואמרי לה לא מחמיסין ולא מטורמיסין,ר\' אבהו כי הוה אתי ממתיבתא לבי קיסר נפקי מטרוניתא דבי קיסר ומשריין ליה רבה דעמיה מדברנא דאומתיה בוצינא דנהורא בריך מתייך לשלם:,עריפת עגלה בשלשה: ת"ר (דברים כא, ב) ויצאו זקניך ושופטיך זקניך שנים שופטיך שנים ואין ב"ד שקול מוסיפין עליהן עוד אחד הרי כאן חמשה דברי ר\' יהודה רבי שמעון אומר זקניך שנים ואין ב"ד שקול מוסיפין עליהם עוד אחד הרי כאן שלשה,ור"ש האי שופטיך מאי עביד ליה ההוא מיבעי ליה למיוחדין שבשופטיך ור\' יהודה מזקני זקניך נפקא,ור"ש אי מזקני הוה אמינא זקני השוק כתב רחמנא זקניך ואי כתיב זקניך הוה אמינא סנהדרי קטנה כתב רחמנא ושופטיך ממיוחדין שבשופטיך ורבי יהודה גמר זקני זקני מוסמכו זקני העדה את ידיהם מה להלן מיוחדין שבעדה אף כאן מיוחדין שבזקניך,אי יליף לילף כולה מהתם זקניך ושופטיך למה לי אלא וי"ו ושופטיך למניינא ורבי שמעון וי"ו לא דריש,אלא מעתה ויצאו שנים ומדדו שנים לרבי יהודה הרי תשעה לרבי שמעון שבעה ההוא מיבעי ליה לכדתניא ויצאו הן ולא שלוחן ומדדו שאפילו נמצא 74a רב פפא אמר במפותה ודברי הכל,אביי אמר ביכול להציל באחד מאבריו ורבי יונתן בן שאול היא דתניא רבי יונתן בן שאול אומר רודף שהיה רודף אחר חבירו להורגו ויכול להצילו באחד מאבריו ולא הציל נהרג עליו,מאי טעמא דרבי יונתן בן שאול דכתיב (שמות כא, כב) וכי ינצו אנשים (יחדו) וגו\' וא"ר אלעזר במצות שבמיתה הכתוב מדבר דכתיב (שמות כא, כג) ואם אסון יהיה ונתתה נפש תחת נפש ואפ"ה אמר רחמנא ולא יהיה אסון ענוש יענש,אי אמרת בשלמא יכול להציל באחד מאבריו לא ניתן להצילו בנפשו היינו דמשכחת לה דיענש כגון שיכול להציל באחד מאבריו,אלא אי אמרת יכול להציל באחד מאבריו נמי ניתן להצילו בנפשו היכי משכחת לה דיענש,דילמא שאני הכא דמיתה לזה ותשלומין לזה,לא שנא דאמר רבא רודף שהיה רודף אחר חבירו ושיבר את הכלים בין של נרדף ובין של כל אדם פטור מאי טעמא מתחייב בנפשו הוא,ונרדף ששיבר את הכלים של רודף פטור של כל אדם חייב של רודף פטור שלא יהא ממונו חביב עליו מגופו של כל אדם חייב שמציל עצמו בממון חבירו,ורודף שהיה רודף אחר רודף להצילו ושיבר את הכלים בין של רודף בין של נרדף בין של כל אדם פטור ולא מן הדין שאם אי אתה אומר כן נמצא אין לך כל אדם שמציל את חבירו מיד הרודף:,אבל הרודף אחר בהמה: תניא רשב"י אומר העובד עבודת כוכבים ניתן להצילו בנפשו מק"ו ומה פגם הדיוט ניתן להצילו בנפשו פגם גבוה לא כל שכן וכי עונשין מן הדין קא סבר עונשין מן הדין,תניא רבי אלעזר ברבי שמעון אומר המחלל את השבת ניתן להצילו בנפשו סבר לה כאבוה דאמר עונשין מן הדין ואתיא שבת בחילול חילול מעבודת כוכבים,א"ר יוחנן משום ר"ש בן יהוצדק נימנו וגמרו בעליית בית נתזה בלוד כל עבירות שבתורה אם אומרין לאדם עבור ואל תהרג יעבור ואל יהרג חוץ מעבודת כוכבים וגילוי עריות ושפיכות דמים,ועבודת כוכבים לא והא תניא א"ר ישמעאל מנין שאם אמרו לו לאדם עבוד עבודת כוכבים ואל תהרג מנין שיעבוד ואל יהרג ת"ל (ויקרא יח, ה) וחי בהם ולא שימות בהם,יכול אפילו בפרהסיא תלמוד לומר (ויקרא כב, לב) ולא תחללו את שם קדשי ונקדשתי,אינהו דאמור כר"א דתניא ר"א אומר (דברים ו, ה) ואהבת את ה\' אלהיך בכל לבבך ובכל נפשך ובכל מאדך אם נאמר בכל נפשך למה נאמר בכל מאדך ואם נאמר בכל מאדך למה נאמר בכל נפשך,אם יש לך אדם שגופו חביב עליו מממונו לכך נאמר בכל נפשך ואם יש לך אדם שממונו חביב עליו מגופו לכך נאמר בכל מאדך,גילוי עריות ושפיכות דמים כדרבי דתניא רבי אומר (דברים כב, כו) כי כאשר יקום איש על רעהו ורצחו נפש כן הדבר הזה וכי מה למדנו מרוצח,מעתה הרי זה בא ללמד ונמצא למד מקיש רוצח לנערה המאורסה מה נערה המאורסה ניתן להצילו בנפשו אף רוצח ניתן להצילו בנפשו,ומקיש נערה המאורסה לרוצח מה רוצח יהרג ואל יעבור אף נערה המאורסה תהרג ואל תעבור,רוצח גופיה מנא לן סברא הוא דההוא דאתא לקמיה דרבה ואמר ליה אמר לי מרי דוראי זיל קטליה לפלניא ואי לא קטלינא לך אמר ליה לקטלוך ולא תיקטול מי יימר דדמא דידך סומק טפי דילמא דמא דהוא גברא סומק טפי,כי אתא רב דימי א"ר יוחנן לא שנו אלא שלא בשעת גזרת המלכות) אבל בשעת גזרת המלכות אפי\' מצוה קלה יהרג ואל יעבור,כי אתא רבין א"ר יוחנן אפי\' שלא בשעת גזרת מלכות לא אמרו אלא בצינעא אבל בפרהסיא אפי\' מצוה קלה יהרג ואל יעבור,מאי מצוה קלה אמר רבא בר רב יצחק אמר רב' ' None | 14a the laws of fines would have ceased to be implemented from among the Jewish people, as they would not have been able to adjudicate cases involving these laws due to a lack of ordained judges. This is because at one time the wicked kingdom of Rome issued decrees of religious persecution against the Jewish people with the aim of abolishing the chain of ordination and the authority of the Sages. They said that anyone who ordains judges will be killed, and anyone who is ordained will be killed, and the city in which they ordain the judges will be destroyed, and the signs identifying the boundaries of the city in which they ordain judges will be uprooted. These measures were intended to discourage the Sages from performing or receiving ordination due to fear for the welfare of the local population.,What did Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava do? He went and sat between two large mountains, between two large cities, and between two Shabbat boundaries: Between Usha and Shefaram, i.e., in a desolate place that was not associated with any particular city so that he not endanger anyone not directly involved, and there he ordained five elders. And they were: Rabbi Meir, and Rabbi Yehuda, and Rabbi Shimon, and Rabbi Yosei, and Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua. Rav Avya adds that Rabbi Neḥemya was also among those ordained. This incident indicates that ordination can be performed by a single Sage.,When their enemies discovered them, Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava said to the newly ordained Sages: My sons, run for your lives. They said to him: My teacher, what will be with you? Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava was elderly and unable to run. He said to them: In any case, I am cast before them like a stone that cannot be overturned; even if you attempt to assist me I will not be able to escape due to my frailty, but if you do not escape without me you will also be killed. People say about this incident: The Roman soldiers did not move from there until they had inserted three hundred iron spears lunkhiyot into him, making him appear like a sieve pierced with many holes.,This proof is refuted: There may have been other Sages performing the ordination with Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava, who were added in order to reach the quota of three Sages, and this fact that they were not mentioned is due to the honor of Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava, who was the greatest among them. The Gemara asks: And with regard to Rabbi Meir, did Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava actually ordain him? But doesn’t Rabba bar bar Ḥana say that Rabbi Yoḥa says: Anyone who says that Rabbi Akiva did not ordain Rabbi Meir is nothing other than mistaken. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Akiva in fact ordained Rabbi Meir, but the people did not accept the appointment, as Rabbi Meir was still very young. Therefore, some time later, Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava ordained him a second time, and they accepted it.,§ Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: There is no ordination outside of Eretz Yisrael. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of: There is no ordination? If we say that they may not adjudicate cases involving laws of fines at all outside of Eretz Yisrael, that is difficult: Didn’t we learn in a mishna (Makkot 7a): The Sanhedrin and its authority functions both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael? Rather, the intention is that we do not ordain judges outside of Eretz Yisrael.,The Gemara comments: It is obvious that if those ordaining the new judges were outside of Eretz Yisrael, and those being ordained were inside Eretz Yisrael, we say that they may not perform the ordination. But if those ordaining the new judges were inside Eretz Yisrael, and those being ordained were outside of Eretz Yisrael, what is the halakha? May ordination be conferred from a distance in this situation?,The Gemara clarifies: Come and hear a resolution to the dilemma from the fact that Rabbi Yoḥa was distressed concerning Rav Shemen bar Abba, as the latter was not with the other Sages at the time they received the consent of the Nasi so that Rabbi Yoḥa could ordain him. In addition, concerning Rabbi Shimon ben Zeirud and one who was with him, the Gemara interjects: And who is he? Rabbi Yoḥa ben Akhmai. And some say that it was Rabbi Yoḥa ben Akhmai and one who was with him; the Gemara interjects: And who is he? Rabbi Shimon ben Zeirud. The Gemara continues: Although these two Sages were equal in stature, the Sages ordained only the one who was with them in Eretz Yisrael, and they did not ordain the other one, who was not with them. This indicates that ordination can be granted only in Eretz Yisrael.,The Gemara relates several other incidents with regard to ordination. Rabbi Yoḥa persistently tried to ordain Rabbi Ḥanina and Rabbi Hoshaya, as they were scholars and righteous people. But he was not successful with regard to the matter, as various incidents repeatedly interfered with his plan, and he was very distressed about this. They said to him: Do not be distressed, our Master, as we come from, i.e., are descendants of, the house of the High Priest Eli.,As Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman says that Rabbi Yonatan says: From where is it known that there are not to be ordained Sages from the house of Eli? As it is stated with regard to the house of Eli: “And there shall not be an elder in your house forever” (I\xa0Samuel 2:32). The Gemara explains: What is the meaning of “elder” in this verse? If we say it means an actual elder, meaning an old person, but isn’t it already written: “And all those raised in your house shall die young men” (I\xa0Samuel 2:33)? Rather, the term “elder” is an honorary term for a Sage, and it means that ordination will not be granted to descendants of the House of Eli.,The Gemara relates: Rabbi Zeira would habitually hide himself so that they would not ordain him. He did this due to the fact that Rabbi Elazar said: Always be obscure and remain alive, meaning the more humble and unknown you make yourself, the longer you will live. When he heard that which Rabbi Elazar also said: A person does not rise to greatness unless all his sins are forgiven, he understood that there are also benefits to greatness, and he presented himself to the Nasi in order that he would ordain him.,The Gemara relates: When they ordained Rabbi Zeira the Sages who were present at the ceremony sang to him this paean of praise traditionally sung to a bride at her wedding: She wears no blue eye shadow and no rouge on her face and no hair dye, and nevertheless she radiates grace. The bride is described as so beautiful that she does not need any cosmetics or adornments, and metaphorically Rabbi Zeira is praised as exceptionally and recognizably qualified for his appointment. Similarly, when they ordained Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi, they sang to them this paean of praise: Anyone like these, anyone like these, ordain for us, as they epitomized the ideal candidate for ordination. But do not ordain for us those counted among the rags misarmitin or among the distorters misarmisin. And some say that they said: Do not ordain for us those counted among the robbers meḥamisin or among the tramplers miturmisin.,Since the songs composed for various Sages were mentioned, the Gemara also recounts that when Rabbi Abbahu would come from the yeshiva to the house of the emperor, the ladies from the emperor’s house would go out and sing before him: O great one of his people, leader of his nation, illuminating candle, may your arrival be blessed in peace.,§ The mishna teaches that the breaking of the heifer’s neck is performed in front of a panel of three judges, and that Rabbi Yehuda says there must be five judges. The Sages taught in a baraita: The verse states: “And your elders and your judges shall go out and they shall measure to the cities that are around the corpse” (Deuteronomy 21:2). “Your elders” is in the plural, which indicates a minimum of two, and “your judges” is also plural, indicating another two, and as a court may not be composed of an even number of judges, they add an additional one to them, so there are five judges here; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Shimon says: “Your elders,” indicate two, and as a court may not be composed of an even number of judges, they add an additional one to them, so there are three judges here.,The Gemara asks: But according to Rabbi Shimon, what does he do with this extra expression: “Your judges”? The Gemara answers: He requires it to teach that these judges must be of the unique ones among your judges, meaning that they must be members of the Sanhedrin. The Gemara asks: And how does Rabbi Yehuda derive the halakha that the judges must be members of the Sanhedrin? He derives it from the fact that the verse did not merely state: “Elders,” but rather: “Your elders,” which indicates the elders that are unique to all of the Jewish people, meaning the Sages of the Sanhedrin.,And how does Rabbi Shimon respond to this claim? He holds that had the verse written only: “Elders,” I would say that the verse is referring to any elders in the marketplace who are not members of the Sanhedrin. Therefore, the Merciful One writes: “Your elders.” And if it was written: “Your elders,” I would say that it is referring to members of a lesser Sanhedrin. Therefore, the Merciful One writes: “And your judges,” to indicate that they must be of the unique ones among your judges. And how would Rabbi Yehuda respond to this claim? He learns it by means of a verbal analogy from the word “elders” written in this verse and the word “elders” written in the verse: “And the elders of the congregation shall lay their hands on the head of the bull” (Leviticus 4:15). Just as there it is referring to the unique ones of the congregation, so too here, it is referring to the unique ones among your elders.,The Gemara asks: If he learns this verbal analogy, he should learn all of it, i.e., the entire halakha, including the number of judges as well as their rank, from there, i.e., the verse in Leviticus, and if so why do I need the extra expressions: “Your elders” and: “And your judges”? Rather, certainly he does not accept this verbal analogy. Rather, he holds that the additional letter vav, corresponding to the word “and” in the expression: “And your judges,” is there for the tally, meaning that the expression “your judges” teaches that they must be members of the Great Sanhedrin, and the additional vav serves to add an additional two to the number of judges. And how does Rabbi Shimon respond to that? He does not expound the additional letter vav.,The Gemara asks: If that is so, if the verbs in the plural form are each understood as adding an additional two judges, then the expression: “And they shall go out,” in the continuation of the verse (Deuteronomy 21:2) indicates another two, and the expression: “And they shall measure,” adds another two, meaning that according to Rabbi Yehuda there should be nine judges, and according to Rabbi Shimon, seven. The Gemara answers: He needs this exposition for that which is taught in a baraita: The verse states: “And they shall go out,” to emphasize that they must go out, and not their agents, and the verse states: “And they shall measure,” to teach that this measurement is itself a mitzva, such that even if the corpse is found 74a Rav Pappa says: The ruling of the mishna, which lists his sister among those for whom he must pay a fine, is stated with regard to a young woman who was seduced, and in the case of seduction all agree that the woman is not saved at the cost of the seducer’s life, as the intercourse was consensual.,Abaye says: The ruling of the mishna is stated with regard to a young woman who was raped in a case where one was able to save her by injuring the pursuer in one of his limbs, so that it was not necessary to kill him in order to achieve her rescue, and it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yonatan ben Shaul. As it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yonatan ben Shaul says: If a pursuer was pursuing another to kill him, and one was able to save the pursued party without killing the pursuer, but instead by injuring him in one of his limbs, but he did not save him in this manner and rather chose to kill him, he is executed on his account as a murderer.,The Gemara explains: What is the reason of Rabbi Yonatan ben Shaul? As it is written: “If men strive and strike a woman with child, so that her fruit departs, and yet no further harm ensues, he shall be punished, according to the demands that the woman’s husband makes on him; and he shall pay it as the judges determine” (Exodus 21:22). And concerning this Rabbi Elazar says: The verse is speaking of striving to kill, where each man was trying to kill the other. The proof is that it is written: “But if any harm ensues, then you shall give life for life” (Exodus 21:23), and if there was no intention to kill, why should he be executed? And even so, the Merciful One states: “And yet no further harm ensues, he shall be punished,” teaching that he must pay the monetary value of the fetus to the woman’s husband.,Granted, if you say that in a case where one is able to save the pursued party by injuring the pursuer in one of his limbs, he may not save the pursued party at the cost of the pursuer’s life, and if he killed the pursuer rather than injure him he is liable to receive the death penalty, that is how you find the possibility that the one who ultimately struck the woman would be punished. This would be in a case where it was possible to save the man under attack, i.e., one of the men who were fighting, by injuring the pursuer, i.e., the other man, who ultimately struck the woman, in one of his limbs. In this case, the one who ultimately struck the woman was not subject to being killed. Therefore, he is subject to pay a fine.,But if you say that even if one is able to save the pursued party by injuring the pursuer in one of his limbs, he can also save him at the cost of the pursuer’s life, how can you find the possibility that the one who ultimately struck the woman would be punished? When he was going to strike the other man, he was at risk of being killed, as anybody could have killed him at that time, and the halakha is that anybody who commits an act warranting death exempts himself from any monetary obligation ensuing from that act.,The Gemara tries to refute this reasoning: Perhaps it is different here because his two liabilities are not on account of the same person; rather, his liability to be put to death is on account of this person, the man with whom he fought, while his liability to give payment is on account of that person, the woman he ultimately struck. Consequently, he is liable to receive both punishments.,The Gemara rejects this distinction: There is no difference. As Rava says: If a pursuer was pursuing another to kill him, and during the course of the chase the pursuer broke vessels belonging either to the person being pursued or to anyone else, he is exempt from paying for the broken vessels. What is the reason for this? The reason is that he is liable to be killed, since everyone is entitled to kill him in order to save the victim’s life, and one who commits an act rendering himself liable to be killed is exempt from any monetary obligation arising from that act, even if the payment were to be made to a person not connected to the act for which he is liable to be killed.,Rava continues: And if the pursued party broke vessels while fleeing from the pursuer, if those vessels belonged to the pursuer, the pursued party is exempt. But if they belonged to anyone else, he is liable to pay for them. The Gemara explains: If the vessels belonged to the pursuer, he is exempt. The reason for this is so that the pursuer’s property should not be more precious to the pursuer than his own body. Were the one being pursued to cause the pursuer bodily harm, he would be exempt; all the more so when the pursued one breaks the pursuer’s vessels. And if the vessels belonged to anyone else, he is liable, as he saved himself at the expense of another’s property, and that other person should not have to suffer a loss on his account.,Rava continues: But if one pursuer was pursuing another pursuer in order to save him, i.e., if he was trying to save the person being pursued by killing the pursuer, and while doing so he broke vessels belonging either to the pursuer or to the one being pursued, or to anyone else, he is exempt from paying for them. The Gemara comments: This is not by strict law, as if one who saves himself at another’s expense is liable to pay for the damage, certainly one who saves another at the expense of a third party should bear similar liability. Rather, it is an ordice instituted by the Sages. This is because if you do not say that he is exempt, it will be found that no person will save another from a pursuer, as everyone will be afraid of becoming liable to pay for damage caused in the course of saving the pursued party.,§ The mishna teaches: But with regard to one who pursues an animal to sodomize it, or one who seeks to desecrate Shabbat, or one who is going to engage in idol worship, they are not saved at the cost of their lives. It is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says: One who seeks to worship idols may be saved from transgressing at the cost of his life. This is derived through an a fortiori inference: If to avoid the degradation of an ordinary person, such as in the case of a rapist who degrades his victim, he can be saved even at the cost of his life, all the more so is it not clear that one may kill the transgressor to avoid the degrading of the honor of God through the worship of idols? The Gemara asks: But does the court administer punishment based on an a fortiori inference? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai maintains that the court administers punishment based on an a fortiori inference.,It is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, says: One who seeks to desecrate Shabbat may be saved from transgressing even at the cost of his life. The Gemara explains that Rabbi Elazar holds in accordance with the opinion of his father, Rabbi Shimon, who says: The court administers punishment based on an a fortiori inference, and the halakha with regard to one who desecrates Shabbat is derived from the halakha with regard to idol worship by way of a verbal analogy between the word “desecration” mentioned in the context of Shabbat and the word “desecration” mentioned in the context of idol worship.,§ The Gemara now considers which prohibitions are permitted in times of mortal danger. Rabbi Yoḥa says in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: The Sages who discussed this issue counted the votes of those assembled and concluded in the upper story of the house of Nitza in the city of Lod: With regard to all other transgressions in the Torah, if a person is told: Transgress this prohibition and you will not be killed, he may transgress that prohibition and not be killed, because the preserving of his own life overrides all of the Torah’s prohibitions. This is the halakha concerning all prohibitions except for those of idol worship, forbidden sexual relations, and bloodshed. Concerning those prohibitions, one must allow himself to be killed rather than transgress them.,The Gemara asks: And should one not transgress the prohibition of idol worship to save his life? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yishmael said: From where is it derived that if a person is told: Worship idols and you will not be killed, from where is it derived that he should worship the idol and not be killed? The verse states: “You shall keep My statutes and My judgments, which a person shall do, and he shall live by them” (Leviticus 18:5), thereby teaching that the mitzvot were given to provide life, but they were not given so that one will die due to their observance.,The baraita continues: One might have thought that it is permitted to worship the idol in this circumstance even in public, i.e., in the presence of many people. Therefore, the verse states: “Neither shall you profane My holy name; but I will be hallowed among the children of Israel: I am the Lord Who sanctifies you” (Leviticus 22:32). Evidently, one is not required to allow himself to be killed so as not to transgress the prohibition of idol worship when in private; but in public he must allow himself to be killed rather than transgress.,The Gemara answers: Those in the upper story of the house of Nitza stated their opinion in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer. As it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer says: It is stated: “And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your might” (Deuteronomy 6:5). If it is stated: “With all your soul,” why is it also stated: “With all your might,” which indicates with all your material possessions? And if it is stated: “With all your might,” why is it also stated: “With all your soul”? One of these clauses seems to be superfluous.,Rather, this serves to teach that if you have a person whose body is more precious to him than his property, it is therefore stated: “With all your soul.” That person must be willing to sacrifice even his life to sanctify God’s name. And if you have a person whose property is more precious to him than his body, it is therefore stated: “With all your might.” That person must even be prepared to sacrifice all his property for the love of God. According to the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, one must allow himself to be killed rather than worship an idol.,From where is it derived that one must allow himself to be killed rather than transgress the prohibition of forbidden sexual relations and the prohibition of bloodshed? This is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. As it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: With regard to the rape of a betrothed young woman it is written: “But you shall do nothing to the young woman; the young woman has committed no sin worthy of death; for as when a man rises against his neighbor, and slays him, so too with this matter” (Deuteronomy 22:26). But why would the verse mention murder in this context? But what do we learn here from a murderer?,Now, the mention of murder came in order to teach a halakha about the betrothed young woman, and it turns out that, in addition, it derives a halakha from that case. The Torah juxtaposes the case of a murderer to the case of a betrothed young woman to indicate that just as in the case of a betrothed young woman one may save her at the cost of the rapist’s life, so too, in the case of a murderer, one may save the potential victim at the cost of the murderer’s life.,And conversely, the Torah juxtaposes a betrothed young woman to a murderer to indicate that just as with regard to a potential murderer, the halakha is that if one was ordered to murder another, he must be killed and not transgress the prohibition of bloodshed, so too, with regard to a betrothed young woman, if she is faced with rape, she must be killed and not transgress the prohibition of forbidden sexual relations.,The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this halakha with regard to a murderer himself, that one must allow himself to be killed rather than commit murder? The Gemara answers: It is based on logical reasoning that one life is not preferable to another, and therefore there is no need for a verse to teach this halakha. The Gemara relates an incident to demonstrate this: As when a certain person came before Rabba and said to him: The lord of my place, a local official, said to me: Go kill so-and-so, and if not I will kill you, what shall I do? Rabba said to him: It is preferable that he should kill you and you should not kill. Who is to say that your blood is redder than his, that your life is worth more than the one he wants you to kill? Perhaps that man’s blood is redder. This logical reasoning is the basis for the halakha that one may not save his own life by killing another.,§ When Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: The Sages taught that one is permitted to transgress prohibitions in the face of mortal danger only when it is not a time of religious persecution. But in a time of religious persecution, when the gentile authorities are trying to force Jews to violate their religion, even if they issued a decree about a minor mitzva, one must be killed and not transgress.,When Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: Even when it is not a time of religious persecution, the Sages said that one is permitted to transgress a prohibition in the face of mortal danger only when he was ordered to do so in private. But if he was ordered to commit a transgression in public, even if they threaten him with death if he does not transgress a minor mitzva, he must be killed and not transgress.,The Gemara asks: What is a minor mitzva for this purpose? Rava bar Yitzḥak says that Rav says:' ' None |
|
36. Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic literature, questions of theodicy • Amoraim • Amoraim, Babylonian, increasing Palestinian influences • Amoraim, Babylonian, tears less frequent than tears of Tannaim • Amoraim, amoraic period • Amoraim, and Hebrew • Joseph (Amora) • Judah (Amora) • Levi (Amora) • Samuel (Amora) • Shmuel (amora) • Shmuel (amora), astrological expertise of • Tannaim, tears by, more frequent than by Amoraim • emotion, expression of, by Tannaim more frequent than by Amoraim
Found in books: Avemarie, van Henten, and Furstenberg (2023), Jewish Martyrdom in Antiquity, 173; Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 99; Herman, Rubenstein (2018), The Aggada of the Bavli and Its Cultural World. 279, 361; Kalmin (1998), The Sage in Jewish Society of Late Antiquity, 38, 129; Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 68; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 94
30b כל יומא דשבתא הוה יתיב וגריס כולי יומא ההוא יומא דבעי למינח נפשיה קם מלאך המות קמיה ולא יכיל ליה דלא הוה פסק פומיה מגירסא אמר מאי אעביד ליה הוה ליה בוסתנא אחורי ביתיה אתא מלאך המות סליק ובחיש באילני נפק למיחזי הוה סליק בדרגא איפחית דרגא מתותיה אישתיק ונח נפשיה,שלח שלמה לבי מדרשא אבא מת ומוטל בחמה וכלבים של בית אבא רעבים מה אעשה שלחו ליה חתוך נבלה והנח לפני הכלבים ואביך הנח עליו ככר או תינוק וטלטלו ולא יפה אמר שלמה (קהלת ט, ד) כי לכלב חי הוא טוב מן האריה המת ולענין שאילה דשאילנא קדמיכון נר קרויה נר ונשמתו של אדם קרויה נר מוטב תכבה נר של בשר ודם מפני נרו של הקב"ה:,אמר רב יהודה בריה דרב שמואל בר שילת משמיה דרב בקשו חכמים לגנוז ספר קהלת מפני שדבריו סותרין זה את זה ומפני מה לא גנזוהו מפני שתחילתו דברי תורה וסופו דברי תורה תחילתו דברי תורה דכתיב (קהלת א, ג) מה יתרון לאדם בכל עמלו שיעמול תחת השמש ואמרי דבי ר\' ינאי תחת השמש הוא דאין לו קודם שמש יש לו סופו דברי תורה דכתיב (קהלת יב, יג) סוף דבר הכל נשמע את האלהים ירא ואת מצותיו שמור כי זה כל האדם מאי כי זה כל האדם אמר רבי (אליעזר) כל העולם כולו לא נברא אלא בשביל זה ר\' אבא בר כהנא אמר שקול זה כנגד כל העולם כולו שמעון בן עזאי אומר ואמרי לה שמעון בן זומא אומר לא נברא כל העולם כולו אלא לצוות לזה,ומאי דבריו סותרין זה את זה כתיב (קהלת ז, ג) טוב כעס משחוק וכתיב (קהלת ב, ב) לשחוק אמרתי מהלל כתיב (קהלת ח, טו) ושבחתי אני את השמחה וכתיב (קהלת ב, ב) ולשמחה מה זה עושה לא קשיא טוב כעס משחוק טוב כעס שכועס הקב"ה על הצדיקים בעוה"ז משחוק שמשחק הקב"ה על הרשעים בעולם הזה ולשחוק אמרתי מהלל זה שחוק שמשחק הקב"ה עם הצדיקים בעולם הבא,ושבחתי אני את השמחה שמחה של מצוה ולשמחה מה זה עושה זו שמחה שאינה של מצוה ללמדך שאין שכינה שורה לא מתוך עצבות ולא מתוך עצלות ולא מתוך שחוק ולא מתוך קלות ראש ולא מתוך שיחה ולא מתוך דברים בטלים אלא מתוך דבר שמחה של מצוה שנאמר (מלכים ב ג, טו) ועתה קחו לי מנגן והיה כנגן המנגן ותהי עליו יד ה\' אמר רב יהודה וכן לדבר הלכה אמר רבא וכן לחלום טוב,איני והאמר רב גידל אמר רב כל תלמיד חכם שיושב לפני רבו ואין שפתותיו נוטפות מר תכוינה שנאמר (שיר השירים ה, יג) שפתותיו שושנים נוטפות מור עובר אל תקרי מור עובר אלא מר עובר אל תקרי שושנים אלא ששונים לא קשיא הא ברבה והא בתלמיד ואיבעית אימא הא והא ברבה ולא קשיא הא מקמי דלפתח הא לבתר דפתח כי הא דרבה מקמי דפתח להו לרבנן אמר מילתא דבדיחותא ובדחי רבנן לסוף יתיב באימתא ופתח בשמעתא,ואף ספר משלי בקשו לגנוז שהיו דבריו סותרין זה את זה ומפני מה לא גנזוהו אמרי ספר קהלת לאו עיינינן ואשכחינן טעמא הכא נמי ליעיינן ומאי דבריו סותרים זה את זה כתיב (משלי כו, ד) אל תען כסיל כאולתו וכתיב (משלי כו, ה) ענה כסיל כאולתו לא קשיא הא בדברי תורה הא במילי דעלמא,כי הא דההוא דאתא לקמיה דרבי אמר ליה אשתך אשתי ובניך בני אמר ליה רצונך שתשתה כוס של יין שתה ופקע ההוא דאתא לקמיה דרבי חייא אמר ליה אמך אשתי ואתה בני אמר ליה רצונך שתשתה כוס של יין שתה ופקע אמר רבי חייא אהניא ליה צלותיה לרבי דלא לשווייה בני ממזירי דרבי כי הוה מצלי אמר יהי רצון מלפניך ה\' אלהינו שתצילני היום מעזי. פנים ומעזות פנים,בדברי תורה מאי היא כי הא דיתיב רבן גמליאל וקא דריש עתידה אשה שתלד בכל יום שנאמר (ירמיהו לא, ח) הרה ויולדת יחדיו ליגלג עליו אותו תלמיד אמר אין כל חדש תחת השמש א"ל בא ואראך דוגמתן בעוה"ז נפק אחוי ליה תרנגולת,ותו יתיב רבן גמליאל וקא דריש עתידים אילנות שמוציאין פירות בכל יום שנאמר (יחזקאל יז, כג) ונשא ענף ועשה פרי מה ענף בכל יום אף פרי בכל יום ליגלג עליו אותו תלמיד אמר והכתיב אין כל חדש תחת השמש א"ל בא ואראך דוגמתם בעולם הזה נפק אחוי ליה צלף,ותו יתיב רבן גמליאל וקא דריש עתידה ארץ ישראל שתוציא גלוסקאות וכלי מילת שנאמר (תהלים עב, טז) יהי פסת בר בארץ ליגלג עליו אותו תלמיד ואמר אין כל חדש תחת השמש אמר ליה בא ואראך דוגמתן בעולם הזה נפק אחוי ליה כמיהין ופטריות ואכלי מילת נברא בר קורא:,. ת"ר לעולם יהא אדם ענוותן כהלל ואל יהא קפדן כשמאי מעשה בשני בני אדם 119b מהדר אזוזי זוזי דרבנן א"ל במטותא מינייכו לא תחללוניה,אמר רבא ואיתימא ר\' יהושע בן לוי אפי\' יחיד המתפלל בע"ש צריך לומר ויכולו דאמר רב המנונא כל המתפלל בע"ש ואומר ויכולו מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו נעשה שותף להקב"ה במעשה בראשית שנאמר ויכולו אל תקרי ויכולו אלא ויכלו אמר רבי אלעזר מניין שהדיבור כמעשה שנאמר (תהלים לג, ו) בדבר ה\' שמים נעשו,אמר רב חסדא אמר מר עוקבא כל המתפלל בע"ש ואומר ויכולו שני מלאכי השרת המלוין לו לאדם מניחין ידיהן על ראשו ואומרים לו (ישעיהו ו, ז) וסר עונך וחטאתך תכופר תניא ר\' יוסי בר יהודה אומר שני מלאכי השרת מלוין לו לאדם בע"ש מבית הכנסת לביתו אחד טוב ואחד רע וכשבא לביתו ומצא נר דלוק ושלחן ערוך ומטתו מוצעת מלאך טוב אומר יהי רצון שתהא לשבת אחרת כך ומלאך רע עונה אמן בעל כרחו ואם לאו מלאך רע אומר יהי רצון שתהא לשבת אחרת כך ומלאך טוב עונה אמן בעל כרחו,אמר ר\' אלעזר לעולם יסדר אדם שלחנו בע"ש אע"פ שאינו צריך אלא לכזית ואמר ר\' חנינא לעולם יסדר אדם שלחנו במוצאי שבת אע"פ שאינו צריך אלא לכזית חמין במוצאי שבת מלוגמא פת חמה במוצאי שבת מלוגמא ר\' אבהו הוה עבדין ליה באפוקי שבתא עיגלא תילתא הוה אכיל מיניה כולייתא כי גדל אבימי בריה א"ל למה לך לאפסודי כולי האי נשבוק כולייתא ממעלי שבתא שבקוהו ואתא אריא אכליה,אריב"ל כל העונה אמן יהא שמיה רבא מברך בכל כחו קורעין לו גזר דינו שנאמר (שופטים ה, ב) בפרוע פרעות בישראל בהתנדב עם ברכו ה\' מ"ט בפרוע פרעות משום דברכו ה\' רבי חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן אפילו יש בו שמץ של עבודה זרה מוחלין לו כתיב הכא בפרוע פרעות וכתיב התם (שמות לב, כה) כי פרוע הוא אמר ריש לקיש כל העונה אמן בכל כחו פותחין לו שערי ג"ע שנאמר (ישעיהו כו, ב) פתחו שערים ויבא גוי צדיק שומר אמונים אל תיקרי שומר אמונים אלא שאומרים אמן מאי אמן א"ר חנינא אל מלך נאמן,א"ר יהודה בריה דרב שמואל משמיה דרב אין הדליקה מצויה אלא במקום שיש חילול שבת שנאמר (ירמיהו יז, כז) ואם לא תשמעו אלי לקדש את יום השבת ולבלתי שאת משא וגו\' והצתי אש בשעריה ואכלה ארמנות ירושלים ולא תכבה מאי ולא תכבה אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק בשעה שאין בני אדם מצויין לכבותה אמר אביי לא חרבה ירושלים אלא בשביל שחללו בה את השבת שנאמר (יחזקאל כב, כו) ומשבתותי העלימו עיניהם ואחל בתוכם,אמר ר\' אבהו לא חרבה ירושלים אלא בשביל שביטלו ק"ש שחרית וערבית שנאמר (ישעיהו ה, יא) הוי משכימי בבקר שכר ירדפו וגו\' וכתיב (ישעיהו ה, יב) והיה כנור ונבל תוף וחליל ויין משתיהם ואת פועל ה\' לא יביטו וכתיב (ישעיהו ה, יג) לכן גלה עמי מבלי דעת,אמר רב המנונא לא חרבה ירושלים אלא בשביל שביטלו בה תינוקות של בית רבן שנאמר (ירמיהו ו, יא) שפוך על עולל בחוץ וגו\' מה טעם שפוך משום דעולל בחוץ אמר עולא לא חרבה ירושלים אלא מפני שלא היה להם בושת פנים זה מזה שנאמר (ירמיהו ו, טו) הובישו כי תועבה עשו גם בוש לא יבושו וגו\' אמר ר\' יצחק לא חרבה ירושלים אלא בשביל שהושוו קטן וגדול שנאמר (ישעיהו כד, ב) והיה כעם ככהן וכתיב בתריה הבוק תבוק הארץ,אמר רב עמרם בריה דר"ש בר אבא א"ר שמעון בר אבא א"ר חנינא לא חרבה ירושלים אלא בשביל שלא הוכיחו זה את זה שנאמר (איכה א, ו) היו שריה כאילים לא מצאו מרעה מה איל זה ראשו של זה בצד זנבו של זה אף ישראל שבאותו הדור כבשו פניהם בקרקע ולא הוכיחו זה את זה א"ר יהודה לא חרבה ירושלים אלא בשביל שביזו בה ת"ח שנאמר (דברי הימים ב לו, טז) ויהיו מלעיבים במלאכי האלהים ובוזים דבריו ומתעתעים בנביאיו עד עלות חמת ה\' בעמו עד ל אין מרפא מאי עד לאין מרפא אמר רב יהודה אמר רב כל המבזה ת"ח אין לו רפואה למכתו,אמר רב יהודה אמר רב מאי דכתיב (דברי הימים א טז, כב) אל תגעו במשיחי ובנביאי אל תרעו אל תגעו במשיחי אלו תינוקות של בית רבן ובנביאי אל תרעו אלו ת"ח אמר ריש לקיש משום רבי יהודה נשיאה אין העולם מתקיים אלא בשביל הבל תינוקות של בית רבן א"ל רב פפא לאביי דידי ודידך מאי א"ל אינו דומה הבל שיש בו חטא להבל שאין בו חטא ואמר ריש לקיש משום ר"י נשיאה אין מבטלין תינוקות של בית רבן אפי\' לבנין בית המקדש ואמר ר"ל לר"י נשיאה כך מקובלני מאבותי ואמרי לה מאבותיך כל עיר שאין בה תינוקות של בית רבן מחריבין אותה רבינא אמר מחרימין אותה,ואמר רבא לא חרבה ירושלים אלא בשביל שפסקו ממנה אנשי אמנה שנאמר (ירמיהו ה, א) שוטטו בחוצות ירושלים וראו נא ודעו ובקשו ברחובותיה אם תמצאו איש (אם יש איש) עושה משפט מבקש אמונה ואסלח לה איני והאמר רב קטינא אפי\' בשעת כשלונה של ירושלים לא פסקו ממנה אנשי אמנה שנאמר (ישעיהו ג, ו) כי יתפש איש באחיו בית אביו (לאמר) שמלה לכה קצין תהיה לנו דברים שבני אדם מתכסין בהן כשמלה ישנן בידיך והמכשלה הזאת תחת ידך' 156b דקאי צדק במערב מהדרנא ומוקמינא ליה במזרח והיינו דכתיב (ישעיהו מא, ב) מי העיר ממזרח צדק יקראהו לרגלו,ומדשמואל נמי אין מזל לישראל דשמואל ואבלט הוו יתבי והוו קאזלי הנך אינשי לאגמא א"ל אבלט לשמואל האי גברא אזיל ולא אתי טריק ליה חיויא ומיית א"ל שמואל אי בר ישראל הוא אזיל ואתי אדיתבי אזיל ואתי,קם אבלט שדיה לטוניה אשכח ביה חיויא דפסיק ושדי בתרתי גובי א"ל שמואל מאי עבדת א"ל כל יומא הוה מרמינן ריפתא בהדי הדדי ואכלינן האידנא הוה איכא חד מינן דלא הוה ליה ריפתא הוה קא מיכסף אמינא להו אנא קאימנא וארמינא כי מטאי לגביה שואי נפשאי כמאן דשקילי מיניה כי היכי דלא ליכסיף א"ל מצוה עבדת נפק שמואל ודרש (משלי י, ב) וצדקה תציל ממות ולא ממיתה משונה אלא ממיתה עצמה,ומדר"ע נמי אין מזל לישראל דר"ע הויא ליה ברתא אמרי ליה כלדאי ההוא יומא דעיילה לבי גננא טריק לה חיויא ומיתא הוה דאיגא אמילתא טובא ההוא יומא שקלתה למכבנתא דצתא בגודא איתרמי איתיב בעיניה דחיויא לצפרא כי קא שקלה לה הוה קא סריך ואתי חיויא בתרה,אמר לה אבוה מאי עבדת אמרה ליה בפניא אתא עניא קרא אבבא והוו טרידי כולי עלמא בסעודתא וליכא דשמעיה קאימנא שקלתי לריסתנאי דיהבית לי יהבתיה ניהליה אמר לה מצוה עבדת נפק ר"ע ודרש וצדקה תציל ממות ולא ממיתה משונה אלא ממיתה עצמה,ומדר"נ בר יצחק נמי אין מזל לישראל דאימיה דר"נ בר יצחק אמרי לה כלדאי בריך גנבא הוה לא שבקתיה גלויי רישיה אמרה ליה כסי רישיך כי היכי דתיהוו עלך אימתא דשמיא ובעי רחמי לא הוה ידע אמאי קאמרה ליה יומא חד יתיב קא גריס תותי דיקלא נפל גלימא מעילויה רישיה דלי עיניה חזא לדיקלא אלמיה יצריה סליק פסקיה לקיבורא בשיניה:,| 30b What did David do? Every Shabbat he would sit and learn all day long to protect himself from the Angel of Death. On that day on which the Angel of Death was supposed to put his soul to rest, the day on which David was supposed to die, the Angel of Death stood before him and was unable to overcome him because his mouth did not pause from study. The Angel of Death said: What shall I do to him? David had a garden bustana behind his house; the Angel of Death came, climbed, and shook the trees. David went out to see. As he climbed the stair, the stair broke beneath him. He was startled and was silent, interrupted his studies for a moment, and died.,Since David died in the garden, Solomon sent the following question to the study hall: Father died and is lying in the sun, and the dogs of father’s house are hungry. There is room for concern lest the dogs come and harm his body. What shall I do? They sent an answer to him: Cut up an animal carcass and place it before the dogs. Since the dogs are hungry, handling the animal carcass to feed them is permitted. And with regard to your father, it is prohibited to move his body directly. Place a loaf of bread or an infant on top of him, and you can move him into the shade due to the bread or the infant. And is it not appropriate what Solomon said: “For a living dog is better than a dead lion.” The ultimate conclusion of this discussion is that life is preferable to death. And now, with regard to the question that I asked before you; Rav Tanḥum spoke modestly, as, actually, they had asked him the question. A lamp is called ner and a person’s soul is also called ner, as it is written: “The spirit of man is the lamp ner of the Lord” (Proverbs 20:27). It is preferable that the lamp of a being of flesh and blood, an actual lamp, will be extinguished in favor of the lamp of the Holy One, Blessed be He, a person’s soul. Therefore, one is permitted to extinguish a flame for the sake of a sick person.,Since contradictions in Ecclesiastes were mentioned, the Gemara cites additional relevant sources. Rav Yehuda, son of Rav Shmuel bar Sheilat, said in the name of Rav: The Sages sought to suppress the book of Ecclesiastes and declare it apocryphal because its statements contradict each other and it is liable to confuse its readers. And why did they not suppress it? Because its beginning consists of matters of Torah and its end consists of matters of Torah. The ostensibly contradictory details are secondary to the essence of the book, which is Torah. The Gemara elaborates: Its beginning consists of matters of Torah, as it is written: “What profit has man of all his labor which he labors under the sun?” (Ecclesiastes 1:3), and the Sages of the school of Rabbi Yannai said: By inference: Under the sun is where man has no profit from his labor; however, before the sun, i.e., when engaged in the study of Torah, which preceded the sun, he does have profit. Its ending consists of matters of Torah, as it is written: “The end of the matter, all having been heard: Fear God, and keep His mitzvot; for this is the whole man” (Ecclesiastes 12:13). With regard to this verse, the Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the phrase: For this is the whole man? Rabbi Eliezer said: The entire world was only created for this person. Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: This person is equivalent to the entire world. Shimon ben Azzai says and some say that Shimon ben Zoma says: The entire world was only created as companion to this man, so that he will not be alone.,And to the essence of the matter, the Gemara asks: What is the meaning of: Its statements that contradict each other? It is written: “Vexation is better than laughter” (Ecclesiastes 7:3), and it is written: “I said of laughter: It is praiseworthy” (Ecclesiastes 2:2), which is understood to mean that laughter is commendable. Likewise in one verse it is written: “So I commended mirth” (Ecclesiastes 8:15), and in another verse it is written: “And of mirth: What does it accomplish?” (Ecclesiastes 2:2). The Gemara answers: This is not difficult, as the contradiction can be resolved. Vexation is better than laughter means: The vexation of the Holy One, Blessed be He, toward the righteous in this world is preferable to the laughter which the Holy One, Blessed be He, laughs with the wicked in this world by showering them with goodness. I said of laughter: It is praiseworthy, that is the laughter which the Holy One, Blessed be He, laughs with the righteous in the World-to-Come.,Similarly, “So I commended mirth,” that is the joy of a mitzva. “And of mirth: What does it accomplish?” that is joy that is not the joy of a mitzva. The praise of joy mentioned here is to teach you that the Divine Presence rests upon an individual neither from an atmosphere of sadness, nor from an atmosphere of laziness, nor from an atmosphere of laughter, nor from an atmosphere of frivolity, nor from an atmosphere of idle conversation, nor from an atmosphere of idle chatter, but rather from an atmosphere imbued with the joy of a mitzva. As it was stated with regard to Elisha that after he became angry at the king of Israel, his prophetic spirit left him until he requested: “But now bring me a minstrel; and it came to pass, when the minstrel played, that the hand of the Lord came upon him” (II Kings 3:15). Rav Yehuda said: And, so too, one should be joyful before stating a matter of halakha. Rava said: And, so too, one should be joyful before going to sleep in order to have a good dream.,The Gemara asks: Is that so, that one should introduce matters of halakha joyfully? Didn’t Rav Giddel say that Rav said: Any Torah scholar who sits before his teacher and his lips are not dripping with myrrh due to fear of his teacher, those lips shall be burnt, as it is stated: “His lips are as lilies, dripping with flowing myrrh shoshanim notefot mor over” (Song of Songs 5:13)? He interpreted homiletically: Do not read mor over, flowing myrrh; rather, read mar over, flowing bitterness. Likewise, do not read shoshanim, lilies; rather, read sheshonim, that are studying, meaning that lips that are studying Torah must be full of bitterness. The Gemara explains: This is not difficult, there is no contradiction here, as this, where it was taught that one should introduce matters of halakha joyfully, is referring to a rabbi, and that, where it was taught that one must be filled with bitterness, is referring to a student, who must listen to his teacher with trepidation. And if you wish, say instead that this and that are referring to a rabbi, and it is not difficult. This, where it was taught that he must be joyful, is before he begins teaching, whereas that, where it was taught that he must be filled with bitterness and trepidation, is after he already began teaching halakha. That explanation is like that which Rabba did. Before he began teaching halakha to the Sages, he would say something humorous and the Sages would be cheered. Ultimately, he sat in trepidation and began teaching the halakha.,And, the Gemara continues, the Sages sought to suppress the book of Proverbs as well because its statements contradict each other. And why did they not suppress it? They said: In the case of the book of Ecclesiastes, didn’t we analyze it and find an explanation that its statements were not contradictory? Here too, let us analyze it. And what is the meaning of: Its statements contradict each other? On the one hand, it is written: “Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you also be like him” (Proverbs 26:4), and on the other hand, it is written: “Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes” (Proverbs 26:5). The Gemara resolves this apparent contradiction: This is not difficult, as this, where one should answer a fool, is referring to a case where the fool is making claims about Torah matters; whereas that, where one should not answer him, is referring to a case where the fool is making claims about mundane matters.,The Gemara relates how Sages conducted themselves in both of those circumstances. As in the case of that man who came before Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and said to him: Your wife is my wife and your children are my children, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to him: Would you like to drink a cup of wine? He drank and burst and died. Similarly, the Gemara relates: There was that man who came before Rabbi Ḥiyya and said to him: Your mother is my wife, and you are my son. He said to him: Would you like to drink a cup of wine? He drank and burst and died. Rabbi Ḥiyya said with regard to the incident involving Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s prayer that his children will not be rendered mamzerim, children of illicit relations, was effective for him. As when Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi would pray, he said after his prayer: May it be Your will, O Lord, my God, that You will deliver me today from impudent people and from insolence. Insolence, in this case, refers to mamzerut. It was due to his prayer that that man burst and was unsuccessful in disparaging Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s children.,In matters of Torah, what is the case with regard to which the verse said that one should respond to a fool’s folly? As in the case where Rabban Gamliel was sitting and he interpreted a verse homiletically: In the future, in the World-to-Come, a woman will give birth every day, as it says: “The woman with child and her that gives birth together” (Jeremiah 31:7), explaining that birth will occur on the same day as conception. A certain student scoffed at him and said: That cannot be, as it has already been stated: “There is nothing new under the sun” (Ecclesiastes 1:9). Rabban Gamliel said to him: Come and I will show you an example of this in this world. He took him outside and showed him a chicken that lays eggs every day.,And furthermore: Rabban Gamliel sat and interpreted a verse homiletically: In the future, in the World-to-Come, trees will produce fruits every day, as it is stated: “And it shall bring forth branches and bear fruit” (Ezekiel 17:23); just as a branch grows every day, so too, fruit will be produced every day. A certain student scoffed at him and said: Isn’t it written: There is nothing new under the sun? He said to him: Come and I will show you an example of this in this world. He went outside and showed him a caper bush, part of which is edible during each season of the year.,And furthermore: Rabban Gamliel sat and interpreted a verse homiletically: In the future, the World-to-Come, Eretz Yisrael will produce cakes and fine wool garments that will grow in the ground, as it is stated: “Let abundant grain be in the land.” A certain student scoffed at him and said: There is nothing new under the sun. He said to him: Come and I will show you an example in this world. He went outside and showed him truffles and mushrooms, which emerge from the earth over the course of a single night and are shaped like a loaf of bread. And with regard to wool garments, he showed him the covering of a heart of palm, a young palm branch, which is wrapped in a thin net-like covering.,Since the Gemara discussed the forbearance of Sages, who remain silent in the face of nonsensical comments, it cites additional relevant examples. The Sages taught in a baraita: A person should always be patient like Hillel and not impatient like Shammai. The Gemara related: There was an incident involving two people 119b would seek pairs of Sages engaged in conversation on Shabbat and said to them: Please do not desecrate Shabbat by failing to delight in Shabbat.,Rava said, and some say it was Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi who said: Even an individual who prays on Shabbat evening must recite the passage: “And the heavens and the earth were finished vaykhullu” (Genesis 2:1–3), as Rav Hamnuna said: Anyone who prays on Shabbat evening and recites the passage of vaykhullu, the verse ascribed him credit as if he became a partner with the Holy One, Blessed be He, in the act of Creation. As it is stated: “And the heavens and the earth were finished vaykhullu.” Do not read it as: Were finished vaykhullu; rather, as: They finished vaykhallu. It is considered as though the Holy One, Blessed be He, and the individual who says this become partners and completed the work together. Rabbi Elazar said: From where is it derived that speech is like action? As it is stated: “By the word of God the heavens were made, and all of their hosts by the breath of His mouth” (Psalms 33:6).,Rav Ḥisda said that Mar Ukva said: One who prays on Shabbat evening and recites vaykhullu, the two ministering angels who accompany the person at all times place their hands on his head and say to him: “And your iniquity has passed, and your sin has been atoned” (Isaiah 6:7). It was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yosei bar Yehuda says: Two ministering angels accompany a person on Shabbat evening from the synagogue to his home, one good angel and one evil angel. And when he reaches his home and finds a lamp burning and a table set and his bed made, the good angel says: May it be Your will that it shall be like this for another Shabbat. And the evil angel answers against his will: Amen. And if the person’s home is not prepared for Shabbat in that manner, the evil angel says: May it be Your will that it shall be so for another Shabbat, and the good angel answers against his will: Amen.,Rabbi Elazar said: A person should always set his table on Shabbat eve with all the preparations for an important feast, even if he only needs the table set for an olive-bulk of food. And Rabbi Ḥanina said: A person should always set his table at the conclusion of Shabbat, Saturday night, for a feast in deference to the Shabbat that passed, even if he only needs the table set for an olive-bulk of food. And with regard to the meal at the conclusion of Shabbat, they said: Hot water after Shabbat is a remedy melugma, warm bread at the conclusion of Shabbat is a remedy. The Gemara relates: They would prepare for Rabbi Abbahu at the conclusion of Shabbat a third-born calf, and he would eat one kidney from it. When his son Avimi grew up, he said to his father: Why do you waste so much? Let us leave a kidney over from Shabbat eve, and you will not need to slaughter an entire calf for that purpose. Indeed, they left the calf and did not slaughter it, and a lion came and ate it. This teaches that one should not be miserly when it comes to honoring Shabbat.,Apropos the reward for honoring Shabbat, the Gemara cites statements about the reward for answering amen. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said that anyone who answers: Amen, may His great name be blessed, wholeheartedly, with all his might, they rip his sentence, as it is stated: “When punishments are annulled in Israel, when the people offer themselves, bless the Lord” (Judges 5:2). What is the reason for when punishments are annulled? Because the Jewish people blessed God. When one recites: Amen, may His great name be blessed, and blesses God, his punishment is annulled. Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: Even if one has within him a trace of idolatry, when he answers amen he is forgiven. It is written here, in the verse above: “When punishments pera’ot are annulled.” And it is written there, with regard to the sin of the Golden Calf: “And Moses saw that the nation was wild paru’a, for Aaron had let them loose for anyone who might rise against them” (Exodus 32:25). Even one with the wildness of idolatry is forgiven. Reish Lakish said: One who answers amen with all his strength, they open the gates of the Garden of Eden before him, as it is stated: “Open the gates, and a righteous nation shall come who keeps the faith” (Isaiah 26:2). Do not read: Who keeps shomer the faith emunim, but rather: Who say she’omerim amen. What is the allusion of the word amen? Rabbi Ḥanina said: It is an acronym of the words: God, faithful King El Melekh ne’eman.,Rav Yehuda, son of Rav Shmuel, said in the name of Rav: Fire is only found in a place where there is desecration of Shabbat, as it is stated: “And if you do not heed Me to sanctify the day of Shabbat, and to refrain from carrying burdens and come to the gates of Jerusalem on the day of Shabbat, and I will light a fire in its gates and it will consume the palaces of Jerusalem and it will not be extinguished” (Jeremiah 17:27). The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of: And it will not be extinguished? Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: Fire will break out at a time when people are not found to extinguish it. Abaye said: Jerusalem was destroyed only because people desecrated the Shabbat in it, as it is stated: “And from My Shabbatot they averted their eyes, and I was profaned among them” (Ezekiel 22:26). Several punishments were decreed to befall Jerusalem as punishment for this transgression.,The Gemara suggests additional reasons for the destruction of Jerusalem. rRabbi Abbahu said: Jerusalem was destroyed only because its citizens intentionally omitted recitation of Shema morning and evening, as it is stated: “Woe to those who rise early in the morning and pursue the drink and are aflame from wine until late in the evening” (Isaiah 5:11). And it is written in the continuation of that passage: “And their drinking parties have lyre and lute, drum and flute and wine, and they do not look upon the actions of God, and they do not see His hands’ creations” (Isaiah 5:12). This means that in the morning and evening, when the Jews should have been reciting Shema, they were drinking wine and liquor. And it is written in that passage: “Therefore My nation is being exiled for its ignorance; its honor will die of hunger and its multitudes will be parched with thirst” (Isaiah 5:13).,Rav Hamnuna said: Jerusalem was destroyed only because schoolchildren there were interrupted from studying Torah, as it is stated: “And I am filled with the wrath of God, I cannot contain it, pour it onto the infants in the street and onto the gathering of youths together, for men and women alike will be captured, the elderly along with those of advanced years” (Jeremiah 6:11). Rav Hamnuna explains: What is the reason that the wrath is poured? It is because infants are outside in the streets and are not studying Torah. rUlla said: Jerusalem was destroyed only because people had no shame before each other, as it is stated: “They acted shamefully; they have performed abominations, yet they neither were ashamed nor did they know humiliation. Therefore, they will fall among the fallen, they will fail at the time that I punish them, said God” (Jeremiah 6:15). rRabbi Yitzḥak said: Jerusalem was destroyed only because its small and the great citizens were equated. They did not properly value the prominent leaders of their generation, as it is stated: “And the common people were like the priest, the slave like his master, the maidservant like her mistress, the buyer like the seller, the lender like the borrower, the creditor like the one indebted to him” (Isaiah 24:2). And it is written afterward: “The land shall be utterly desolate and completely plundered, for God has said this” (Isaiah 24:3).,Rav Amram, son of Rabbi Shimon bar Abba, said that Rabbi Shimon bar Abba said that Rabbi Ḥanina said: Jerusalem was destroyed only because the people did not rebuke one another, as it is stated: “Her ministers were like stags that found no pasture, and they walked without strength before their pursuer” (Lamentations 1:6). Just as this stag turns its head toward the other’s tail when it grazes, and each one feeds on its own, so too, the Jewish people in that generation lowered their faces to the ground and did not rebuke one another. rRabbi Yehuda said: Jerusalem was destroyed only because they disparaged the Torah scholars in it, as it is stated: “And they mocked the messengers of God and disdained His words and taunted His prophets, until the wrath of God arose against His people, until it could not be healed” (II Chronicles 36:16). What is the meaning of: Until it could not be healed? Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: It means that anyone who disparages Torah scholars cannot be healed from his wound.,Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Do not touch My anointed ones and do My prophets no harm” (I Chronicles 16:22)? “Do not touch My anointed ones,” these are the schoolchildren, who are as precious and important as kings and priests (Maharsha); “and do not harm My prophets,” these are Torah scholars. Reish Lakish said in the name of Rabbi Yehuda Nesia: The world only exists because of the breath, i.e., reciting Torah, of schoolchildren. Rav Pappa said to Abaye: My Torah study and yours, what is its status? Why is the Torah study of adults worth less? He said to him: The breath of adults, which is tainted by sin, is not similar to the breath of children, which is not tainted by sin. And Reish Lakish said in the name of Rabbi Yehuda Nesia: One may not interrupt schoolchildren from studying Torah, even in order to build the Temple. And Reish Lakish said to Rabbi Yehuda Nesia: I have received from my ancestors, and some say that he said to him: I have received from your ancestors as follows: Any city in which there are no schoolchildren studying Torah, they destroy it. Ravina said: They leave it desolate.,And Rava said: Jerusalem was destroyed only because there were no more trustworthy people there, as it is stated: “Roam about the streets of Jerusalem and see, and search its plazas, if you can find a person, who acts justly, who seeks integrity, that I should forgive it” (Jeremiah 5:1). The Gemara asks: Is that so? Didn’t Rav Ketina say: Even at the time of Jerusalem’s failure, trustworthy people did not cease there, as it is stated: “For a man will grab his brother of his father’s house and say: You have a garment. Come be a chief over us and let this ruin be under your care” (Isaiah 3:6)? Things that people use to cover up like a garment, secrets, are in your hands and you know about them. Therefore, you should be a leader of the community. And that which is stated: “And let this ruin be under your care,” meaning:' 156b Is it because Jupiter is situated in the west that you cannot have children? I will restore it and establish it in the east. And that is the meaning of that which is written with regard to Abraham: “Who has raised up one from the east, he will call justice tzedek to his steps leraglo. He gives nations before him, and makes him rule over kings; his sword makes them as the dust, his bow as the driven stubble” (Isaiah 41:2). God established Jupiter tzedek in the east on behalf of leraglo Abraham.,And from that which transpired to Shmuel, one can also conclude that there is no constellation for the Jewish people. The Gemara relates that Shmuel and the gentile sage Ablet were sitting, and they saw these people were going to the lake. Ablet said to Shmuel: This person will go and he will not return, because a snake will bite him and he will die. Shmuel said to him: If he is a Jew, he will go and come back. As they were sitting for a while, the person they discussed went away and then returned.,Ablet stood up, threw down the person’s burden, and inside he found a snake cut and cast in two pieces. Shmuel said to him: What did you do to merit being saved from death? The person said to him: Every day we all take bread together and eat from the bread. Today, there was one of us who did not have bread, and when it came time to gather the bread, he was embarrassed because he did not have any to give. I said to the others: I will go and take the bread. When I came to the person who did not have bread, I rendered myself as one who was taking from him so that he would not be embarrassed. Shmuel said to him: You performed a mitzva. Shmuel went out and taught based on this incident that even though it is written: “And charity will save from death” (Proverbs 10:2), it does not only mean that it will save a person from an unusual death but even from death itself.,And from that which transpired to Rabbi Akiva as well it can be derived that there is no constellation for the Jewish people, as Rabbi Akiva had a daughter, and Chaldean astrologers told him that on the same day that she enters the wedding canopy, a snake will bite her and she will die. She was very worried about this. On that day, her wedding day, she took the ornamental pin from her hair and stuck it into a hole in the wall for safekeeping, and it happened that it entered directly into the eye of the snake. In the morning, when she took the pin, the snake was pulled and came out with it.,Her father Rabbi Akiva said to her: What did you do to merit being saved from the snake? She told him: In the evening a poor person came and knocked on the door, and everyone was preoccupied with the feast and nobody heard him. I stood and took the portion that you had given me and gave it to him. Rabbi Akiva said to her: You performed a mitzva, and you were saved in its merit. Rabbi Akiva went out and taught based on this incident that even though it is written: “And charity will save from death” (Proverbs 10:2), it does not mean that it will save a person only from an unusual death, but even from death itself.,And from that which transpired to Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak as well it can be derived that there is no constellation for the Jewish people, As Chaldean astrologers told Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak’s mother: Your son will be a thief. She did not allow him to uncover his head. She said to her son: Cover your head so that the fear of Heaven will be upon you, and pray for Divine mercy. He did not know why she said this to him. One day he was sitting and studying beneath a palm tree that did not belong to him, and the cloak fell off of his head. He lifted his eyes and saw the palm tree. He was overcome by impulse and he climbed up and detached a bunch of dates with his teeth. Apparently, he had an inborn inclination to steal, but was able to overcome that inclination with proper education and prayer.,One may cut the pumpkins before an animal on Shabbat, as long as they were picked prior to Shabbat. And likewise one may cut an animal carcass before the dogs on Shabbat. Rabbi Yehuda says: If it was not already a carcass, i.e., it was not dead, prior to Shabbat, it is prohibited to cut it or even move it on Shabbat because it is not prepared for use on Shabbat.,amora’im with regard to the prohibition of set-aside on Shabbat was stated. Ayin, reish, lamed, shin, ḥet, zayin is a mnemonic for the names of the amora’im who stated the following halakhot. Ulla said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who holds that there is a prohibition of set-aside on Shabbat. And Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon.,And Rav also holds that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. From where is it ascertained that this is Rav’s opinion? From that which was taught with regard to the mats that are on ships; Rav prohibited moving them on Shabbat due to the prohibition of set-aside, and Shmuel permitted moving them. And Levi also holds that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, as can be seen from his practice when they would bring a slaughtered animal with regard to which there was concern that it was an animal with a condition that will cause it to die within twelve months tereifa, before Levi on a Festival. He would examine it only when he was sitting near a garbage dump, as he said: Perhaps it would not be determined to be kosher and it would not be suited even for dogs, and then it would be prohibited to move the carcass. Apparently, he holds that it is prohibited to move a carcass that was not prepared for use before Shabbat.,And Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, who holds that the prohibition of set-aside does not apply on Shabbat. And Ze’eiri also holds that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, as we learned in a mishna: With regard to an animal that died on Shabbat, one may not move it from its place on Shabbat. And Ze’eiri explained: This prohibition only applies to a consecrated animal, as consecrated items may not be fed to dogs in deference to their sanctity; therefore, it is set-aside and may not be moved on Shabbat. However, in the case of a non-sacred animal, one may well move it and use it because it does not have set-aside status. And Rabbi Yoḥa also said that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon. The Gemara asks: And did Rabbi Yoḥa really say that? Didn’t Rabbi Yoḥa say: The halakha is in accordance with an unattributed mishna, and we learned in a mishna: ' None | |
|
37. Babylonian Talmud, Sukkah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic literature • Amoraim, Babylonian, commentary on Ezra • Amoraim, Palestinian, commentary on Ezra • Amoraim, vs. Stammaim • Stammaim, vs. Amoraim • Yannai (Amora) • sages, Amoraic vs. Stammaitic
Found in books: Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 4; Kalmin (1998), The Sage in Jewish Society of Late Antiquity, 17; Kosman (2012), Gender and Dialogue in the Rabbinic Prism, 35; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 162
| 20a והכי קאמר מחצלת הקנים גדולה עשאה לשכיבה מקבלת טומאה ואין מסככין בה טעמא דעשאה לשכיבה הא סתמא נעשה כמי שעשאה לסיכוך מסככין בה (קטנה עשאה לסיכוך מסככין בה טעמא דעשאה לסיכוך הא סתמא נעשה כמי שעשאה לשכיבה ואין מסככין בה) ואתא ר\' אליעזר למימר אחת קטנה ואחת גדולה סתמא כשרה לסיכוך,אמר ליה אביי אי הכי ר\' אליעזר אומר אחת קטנה ואחת גדולה אחת גדולה ואחת קטנה מיבעי ליה,ועוד כי פליגי בגדולה הוא דפליגי ורבי אליעזר לחומרא דתניא מחצלת הקנים בגדולה מסככין בה ר\' אליעזר אומר אם אינה מקבלת טומאה מסככין בה,אלא אמר רב פפא בקטנה כולי עלמא לא פליגי דסתמא לשכיבה כי פליגי בגדולה ת"ק סבר סתם גדולה לסיכוך ורבי אליעזר סבר סתם גדולה נמי לשכיבה,ומאי עשאה לשכיבה דקאמר הכי קאמר סתם עשייתה נמי לשכיבה עד דעביד לסיכוך,ת"ר מחצלת של שיפה ושל גמי גדולה מסככין בה קטנה אין מסככין בה של קנים ושל חילת גדולה מסככין בה ארוגה אין מסככין בה,רבי ישמעאל בר\' יוסי אומר משום אביו אחת זו ואחת זו מסככין בה וכן היה רבי דוסא אומר כדבריו,תנן התם כל החוצלות מטמאין טמא מת דברי ר\' דוסא וחכמים אומרים מדרס,מדרס אין טמא מת לא והא אנן תנן כל המטמא מדרס מטמא טמא מת אימא אף מדרס,מאי חוצלות אמר רב אבדימי בר המדורי מרזובלי מאי מרזובלי אמר ר\' אבא מזבלי ר\' שמעון בן לקיש אומר מחצלות ממש,ואזדא ריש לקיש לטעמיה דאמר ריש לקיש הריני כפרת רבי חייא ובניו שבתחלה כשנשתכחה תורה מישראל עלה עזרא מבבל ויסדה חזרה ונשתכחה עלה הלל הבבלי ויסדה חזרה ונשתכחה עלו רבי חייא ובניו ויסדוה וכן אמר רבי חייא ובניו לא נחלקו רבי דוסא וחכמים על מחצלות של אושא'49b כשם שניסוכו בקדושה כך שריפתו בקדושה מאי משמע אמר רבינא אתיא קדש קדש כתיב הכא (במדבר כח, ז) בקדש הסך נסך וכתיב התם (שמות כט, לד) ושרפת את הנותר באש לא יאכל כי קדש הוא,כמאן אזלא הא (דתניא) נסכים בתחילה מועלין בהן ירדו לשיתין אין מועלין בהן לימא רבי אלעזר בר צדוק היא דאי רבנן הא נחתו להו לתהום,אפילו תימא רבנן בדאיקלט,ואיכא דאמרי לימא רבנן היא ולא ר\' אלעזר בר צדוק דאי רבי אלעזר אכתי בקדושתייהו קיימי אפילו תימא רבי אלעזר אין לך דבר שנעשה מצותו ומועלין בו אמר ריש לקיש בזמן שמנסכין יין על גבי מזבח פוקקין את השיתין לקיים מה שנאמר בקדש הסך נסך שכר לה\',מאי משמע אמר רב פפא שכר לשון שתיה לשון שביעה לשון שכרות אמר רב פפא שמע מינה כי שבע איניש חמרא מגרוניה שבע אמר רבא צורבא מרבנן דלא נפישא ליה חמרא ליגמע גמועי רבא אכסא דברכתא אגמע גמועי,דרש רבא מאי דכתיב (שיר השירים ז, ב) מה יפו פעמיך בנעלים בת נדיב מה יפו פעמותיהן של ישראל בשעה שעולין לרגל בת נדיב בתו של אברהם אבינו שנקרא נדיב שנא\' (תהלים מז, י) נדיבי עמים נאספו עם אלהי אברהם אלהי אברהם ולא אלהי יצחק ויעקב אלא אלהי אברהם שהיה תחילה לגרים,תנא דבי רב ענן מאי דכתיב (שיר השירים ז, ב) חמוקי ירכיך למה נמשלו דברי תורה כירך לומר לך מה ירך בסתר אף דברי תורה בסתר,והיינו דא"ר אלעזר מאי דכתיב (מיכה ו, ח) הגיד לך אדם מה טוב ומה ה\' דורש ממך כי אם עשות משפט ואהבת חסד והצנע לכת עם אלהיך עשות משפט זה הדין ואהבת חסד זו גמילות חסדים והצנע לכת עם אלהיך זו הוצאת המת והכנסת כלה לחופה והלא דברים ק"ו ומה דברים שדרכן לעשותן בפרהסיא אמרה תורה הצנע לכת דברים שדרכן לעשותן בצנעא על אחת כמה וכמה,א"ר אלעזר גדול העושה צדקה יותר מכל הקרבנות שנאמר (משלי כא, ג) עשה צדקה ומשפט נבחר לה\' מזבח וא"ר אלעזר גדולה גמילות חסדים יותר מן הצדקה שנאמר (הושע י, יב) זרעו לכם לצדקה וקצרו לפי חסד אם אדם זורע ספק אוכל ספק אינו אוכל אדם קוצר ודאי אוכל,וא"ר אלעזר אין צדקה משתלמת אלא לפי חסד שבה שנאמר זרעו לכם לצדקה וקצרו לפי חסד,ת"ר בשלשה דברים גדולה גמילות חסדים יותר מן הצדקה צדקה בממונו גמילות חסדים בין בגופו בין בממונו צדקה לעניים גמילות חסדים בין לעניים בין לעשירים צדקה לחיים גמילות חסדים בין לחיים בין למתים,וא"ר אלעזר כל העושה צדקה ומשפט כאילו מילא כל העולם כולו חסד שנאמר (תהלים לג, ה) אוהב צדקה ומשפט חסד ה\' מלאה הארץ שמא תאמר כל הבא לקפוץ קופץ ת"ל (תהלים לו, ח) מה יקר חסדך אלהים (חסד ה\' מלאה הארץ) וגו\' יכול אף ירא שמים כן ת"ל (תהלים קג, יז) וחסד ה\' מעולם ועד עולם על יראיו,א"ר חמא בר פפא כל אדם שיש עליו חן בידוע שהוא ירא שמים שנא\' חסד ה\' מעולם ועד עולם על יראיו וא"ר אלעזר מאי דכתיב (משלי לא, כו) פיה פתחה בחכמה ותורת חסד על לשונה וכי יש תורה של חסד יש תורה שאינה של חסד אלא תורה לשמה זו היא תורה של חסד שלא לשמה זו היא תורה שאינה של חסד איכא דאמרי תורה ללמדה זו היא תורה של חסד שלא ללמדה זו היא תורה שאינה של חסד:,כמעשהו בחול כו\': ואמאי נייתי במקודשת אמר זעירי קסבר אין שיעור למים וכלי שרת מקדשין שלא מדעת ' None | 20a And this is what the mishna is saying: With regard to a large mat of reeds, if one produced it for the purpose of lying upon it, it is susceptible to ritual impurity, and one may not roof a sukka with it. The reason is that one produced it specifically for the purpose of lying upon it; however, by inference, a mat that one produced without designation becomes as a mat produced for roofing, and one may roof a sukka with it. With regard to a small mat of reeds, if one produced it for roofing, one may roof a sukka with it. The reason is that one produced it specifically for roofing; however, by inference, a mat that one produced without designation becomes as a mat produced for the purpose of lying upon it, and one may not roof a sukka with it. And Rabbi Eliezer comes to say that both a small mat and a large one produced without designation are fit for roofing.,Abaye said to him: If so, if their dispute is only with regard to a small mat, then instead of saying: Rabbi Eliezer says: Both a small mat and a large mat, the mishna needed to say: Both a large mat and a small mat. In a phrase with the format: Both this and that, one typically mentions the more obvious item first. Why then, does Rabbi Eliezer mention the small mat first, if it is with regard to the small mat that they disagree?,And furthermore, there is proof that when they disagree, it is with regard to a large mat, and Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion is a stringency and not a leniency, as it is taught in a baraita: In the case of a reed mat, with a large mat one may roof a sukka. Rabbi Eliezer says: If it is not susceptible to ritual impurity, one may roof his sukka with it. Apparently, Rabbi Eliezer holds that without designation, one may not roof his sukka with a large mat.,Rather, Rav Pappa said: Rava’s proposed resolution is rejected. Rather, with regard to a small mat, everyone agrees that if it was produced without designation, presumably it is for the purpose of lying upon it. When they disagree, is with regard to a large mat: The first tanna holds that a large mat produced without designation is presumably for roofing, and Rabbi Eliezer holds that a large mat produced without designation is also presumably for the purpose of lying upon it.,What, then, is the meaning of: If one produced it for the purpose of lying upon it, that Rabbi Eliezer states? This is what he is saying: Making mats without designation is also for the purpose of lying upon it, until one makes it specifically for roofing.,§ The Sages taught in the Tosefta: In the case of a mat maḥatzelet woven of papyrus or bulrushes, if it is a large mat, one may roof a sukka with it, as it is not typically produced for the purpose of lying upon it. If it is a small mat, one may not roof a sukka with it, as it is typically produced for the purpose of lying upon it. However, with regard to a mat produced of ordinary reeds or reeds specifically used for plaiting, if the mat is plaited with a large, coarse weave, one may roof a sukka with it, as it was certainly not produced for the purpose of lying upon it. If it is woven with a small, fine weave, one may not roof the sukka with it, as typically mats of this sort are woven only for the purpose of lying upon them.,Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, said in the name of his father: Both with this plaited mat and with that woven mat, one may roof a sukka, as without specific designation otherwise they are not produced for the purpose of lying upon them, and therefore they are ritually pure. And likewise, Rabbi Dosa would say in accordance with his statement.,We learned in a mishna there: All types of ḥotzalot can become ritually impure with impurity imparted by a corpse. Since their legal status is that of a vessel, they become a primary source of ritual impurity. This is the statement of Rabbi Dosa. And the Rabbis say: They become impure with the impurity imparted by treading. If a zav lies or sits on one of the ḥotzalot, they become a primary source of ritual impurity, like a chair or bed of a zav.,The Gemara asks: Impurity imparted by treading, yes; impurity imparted by a corpse, no? But didn’t we learn in a mishna: Any item that becomes ritually impure with impurity imparted by treading also becomes ritually impure with other types of impurity, including impurity imparted by a corpse, although the reverse is not necessarily so. The opinion of the Rabbis is difficult. The Gemara explains: Emend the mishna and say: They become ritually impure even with the impurity imparted by treading. These mats are not merely nondescript vessels, which become primary sources of ritual impurity through exposure to a corpse, they are vessels designated for sitting and lying upon them, and therefore they also become primary sources of ritual impurity if a zav sits or lies upon them.,The Gemara asks about the term used in the mishna: What is the meaning of ḥotzalot? Rav Avdimi bar Hamduri said: They are marzovelei. The Gemara is unfamiliar with the term and asks: What is the meaning of marzovelei? Rabbi Abba said: They are called mezablei in Babylonia. They are leather sacks used by shepherds to feed their animals. Shepherds place them under their heads when lying down. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says: Ḥotzalot are a different term for actual mats.,The Gemara notes: And Reish Lakish follows his line of reasoning stated elsewhere, as Reish Lakish said: I am the atonement for Rabbi Ḥiyya and his sons, as initially, when some of the Torah laws were forgotten from the Jewish people in Eretz Yisrael, Ezra ascended from Babylonia and reestablished the forgotten laws. Parts of the Torah were again forgotten in Eretz Yisrael, and Hillel the Babylonian ascended and reestablished the forgotten sections. When parts of the Torah were again forgotten in Eretz Yisrael, Rabbi Ḥiyya and his sons ascended and reestablished the forgotten sections. This expression of deference toward Rabbi Ḥiyya introduces the halakha that Reish Lakish is citing in his name. And so said Rabbi Ḥiyya and his sons: Rabbi Dosa and the Rabbis did not disagree concerning the soft mats of Usha,'49b just as its pouring is in sanctity, so too must its burning be in sanctity. From where may it be inferred that this is referring to burning? Ravina said: It is derived by means of a verbal analogy between the term sanctity written with regard to libations and sanctity written with regard to leftover offerings. It is written here, with regard to libations: “In sanctity shall you pour a libation” (Numbers 28:7), and it is written there, with regard to leftover offerings: “You shall burn the leftovers in fire; they are not to be eaten, for they are sanctity” (Exodus 29:34). Through the verbal analogy it is derived that leftover libations must also be burned.,The Gemara notes: In accordance with whose opinion is that which is taught in this mishna? With regard to libations, initially, prior to being poured, one can misuse consecrated property with them, as is the case with all consecrated items. However, once they descended to the drainpipes, one does not violate the prohibition against misuse of consecrated property with them, because the mitzva was already fulfilled. Let us say that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar bar Tzadok, who holds that the libations did not descend to the depths but would collect between the ramp and the altar and would be collected once every seventy years. As, if it were in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis, how could the libations be misused? Didn’t they already descend to the depths through the drainpipes?,The Gemara rejects this: Even if you say that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis, it could be referring to a case where some of the wine landed outside the drainpipes and was collected in the space between the ramp and the altar.,And some say a different version of this exchange. Let us say that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis and not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar bar Tzadok. As, if it were in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, then the wine that collected between the ramp and the altar remains in its sanctity, as it must be burned, and the prohibition against misuse would still apply. The Gemara rejects this: Even if you say that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, there is no item whose mitzva has been performed with which one can violate the prohibition against misuse of consecrated property. Reish Lakish said: When they pour wine onto the altar, they plug the top of the drainpipes so that the wine does not descend to the depths, in order to fulfill that which is stated: “In sanctity shall you pour a libation of strong drink shekhar unto the Lord” (Numbers 28:7).,The Gemara asks: From where may it be inferred that this is referring to plugging the drainpipes? Rav Pappa said: Shekhar is an expression of drinking, of satiation, of intoxication. In order to underscore all three aspects of the libations, the space between the altar and the ramp would fill with wine. Rav Pappa said: Conclude from this that when a person is satiated from drinking wine, it is from his throat being filled with wine that he is satiated. Unlike food, wine does not satiate a person when it fills his stomach. Rava said: Therefore, let a young Torah scholar, who does not have much wine, swallow his wine in large swigs, filling his throat each time, as he will thereby maximize his enjoyment. And Rava himself, when drinking a cup of blessing, would swallow large swigs so as to drink the wine accompanying the mitzva in an optimal manner.,§ Apropos the homiletic interpretations of the verses from Song of Songs with regard to the drainpipes, the Gemara cites additional interpretations. Rava taught: What is the meaning of that which is written: “How beautiful are your steps in sandals, O prince’s daughter” (Song of Songs 7:2)? How beautiful are the feet of the Jewish people at the time when they ascend to Jerusalem for the Festival. “O prince’s daughter”; this is referring to the daughter of Abraham our Patriarch, who was called prince, as it is stated: “The princes of the peoples are gathered, the people of the God of Abraham” (Psalms 47:10). The verse calls the Jewish people the people of the God of Abraham and not the God of Isaac and Jacob. Why are the Jewish people associated specifically with Abraham? Rather than referring to the three Patriarchs, the verse is referring to the God of Abraham, who was first of the converts, and therefore it is reasonable for the princes of other nations to gather around him.,In the school of Rav A it was taught: What is the meaning of that which is written: “The hidden of your thighs” (Song of Songs 7:2)? Why are matters of Torah likened to a thigh? It is to tell you that just as the thigh is always concealed, covered by clothes, so too, matters of Torah are optimal when recited in private and not in public.,And this is what Rabbi Elazar said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “It has been told you, O man, what is good, and what the Lord does require of you; only to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God” (Micah 6:8)? “To do justly”; this is justice. “To love mercy”; this is acts of kindness. “To walk humbly with your God”; this is referring to taking the indigent dead out for burial and accompanying a poor bride to her wedding canopy, both of which must be performed without fanfare. The Gemara summarizes: And are these matters not inferred a fortiori? If, with regard to matters that tend to be conducted in public, as the multitudes participate in funerals and weddings, the Torah says: Walk humbly, then in matters that tend to be conducted in private, e.g., giving charity and studying Torah, all the more so should they be conducted privately.,§ Rabbi Elazar said: One who performs acts of charity is greater than one who sacrifices all types of offerings, as it is stated: “To perform charity and justice is more acceptable to the Lord than an offering” (Proverbs 21:3), including all types of offerings. And Rabbi Elazar said: Acts of kindness, assisting someone in need, are greater than charity, as it is stated: “Sow to yourselves according to charity, and reap according to kindness” (Hosea 10:12). This means: If a person sows, it is uncertain whether he will eat or whether he will not eat, since much can go wrong before the seed becomes food. However, if a person reaps, he certainly eats. In this verse, charity is likened to sowing, while acts of kindness are likened to reaping.,And Rabbi Elazar said: The reward for charity is paid from Heaven only in accordance with the kindness and generosity included therein and in accordance with the effort and the consideration that went into the giving. It is not merely in accordance with the sum of money, as it is stated: “Sow to yourselves according to charity, and reap according to kindness.”,The Sages taught that acts of kindness are superior to charity in three respects: Charity can be performed only with one’s money, while acts of kindness can be performed both with his person and with his money. Charity is given to the poor, while acts of kindness are performed both for the poor and for the rich. Charity is given to the living, while acts of kindness are performed both for the living and for the dead.,And Rabbi Elazar said: Anyone who performs charity and justice is considered as though he filled the whole world in its entirety with kindness, as it is stated: “He loves charity and justice; the earth is full of the kindness of the Lord” (Psalms 33:5). Lest you say that anyone who comes to leap and perform an act of kindness may simply leap and do so without scrutiny, the verse states: “How precious is your kindness, O God” (Psalms 36:8). It is a precious and rare occurrence to perform an act of kindness properly. One might have thought that even a God-fearing individual does not always encounter the opportunity to perform acts of kindness. Therefore, the verse states: “But the kindness of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear Him” (Psalms 103:17).,Rabbi Ḥama bar Pappa said: With regard to any person who has grace about him, it is certain that he is God-fearing, as it is stated: “But the kindness of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear Him.” When one sees that a certain individual is endowed with grace and kindness, one can be certain that he is a God-fearing person. And Rabbi Elazar said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “She opens her mouth with wisdom, and a Torah of kindness is on her tongue” (Proverbs 31:26)? The Gemara asks: Is there, then, a Torah of kindness and a Torah that is not of kindness? Rather, it is Torah studied for its own sake that is a Torah of kindness, as one studies it wholeheartedly; and it is Torah studied not for its own sake but for some ulterior motive that is a Torah that is not of kindness. Some say that it is Torah studied in order to teach it to others that is a Torah of kindness; it is Torah studied with the intent of not teaching it to others that is a Torah that is not of kindness.,§ The mishna continues: As its performance during the week, so is its performance on Shabbat, except that on Shabbat one would not draw water. Instead, on Shabbat eve, one would fill a golden barrel that was not consecrated and would place it in the Temple chamber, and water would be drawn from there on Shabbat. The Gemara asks: And why should one do so? Let him bring the water in a consecrated barrel. Ze’iri said: The tanna in the mishna holds that there is no requisite measure for the water to be poured for libation, and therefore more than three log could be consecrated; and that Temple vessels consecrate their content if it is fit to be consecrated, even without intent to consecrate it. ' None |
|
38. Babylonian Talmud, Taanit, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic • Amoraic Period in Babylonia • Amoraic literature, presumes kiddush ha-Shem as public act • Amoraim • Amoraim, Amoraic period • Amoraim, Babylonian • Amoraim, Babylonian, increasing Palestinian influences • Amoraim, Babylonian, tears less frequent than tears of Tannaim • Amoraim, amoraic period • Amoraim, and decline of the generations • Jeremiah (Amora) • Joseph (Amora) • Judah (Amora) • Levi (Amora) • Samuel (Amora) • Tannaim, tears by, more frequent than by Amoraim • Yose (Amora) • emotion, expression of, by Tannaim more frequent than by Amoraim • public aspect of kiddush ha-Shem and hillul ha-Shem, assumed in Amoraic literature
Found in books: Avemarie, van Henten, and Furstenberg (2023), Jewish Martyrdom in Antiquity, 64; Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 98, 99; Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 66, 67; Hasan Rokem (2003), Tales of the Neighborhood Jewish Narrative Dialogues in Late Antiquity, 28; Herman, Rubenstein (2018), The Aggada of the Bavli and Its Cultural World. 130, 131; Kalmin (1998), The Sage in Jewish Society of Late Antiquity, 31, 129; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 51, 167; Ruzer (2020), Early Jewish Messianism in the New Testament: Reflections in the Dim Mirror, 85; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 176; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 650
| 9a (דברים יד, כב) עשר תעשר עשר בשביל שתתעשר,אשכחיה ר\' יוחנן לינוקא דריש לקיש אמר ליה אימא לי פסוקיך א"ל עשר תעשר א"ל ומאי עשר תעשר א"ל עשר בשביל שתתעשר אמר ליה מנא לך א"ל זיל נסי,אמר ליה ומי שרי לנסוייה להקב"ה והכתיב (דברים ו, טז) לא תנסו את ה\' א"ל הכי אמר רבי הושעיא חוץ מזו שנאמר (מלאכי ג, י) הביאו את כל המעשר אל בית האוצר ויהי טרף בביתי ובחנוני נא בזאת אמר ה\' צבאות אם לא אפתח לכם את ארובות השמים והריקותי לכם ברכה עד בלי די,מאי עד בלי די אמר רמי בר חמא אמר רב עד שיבלו שפתותיכם מלומר די א"ל אי הות מטי התם להאי פסוקא לא הוית צריכנא לך ולהושעיא רבך,ותו אשכחיה ר\' יוחנן לינוקיה דריש לקיש דיתיב ואמר (משלי יט, ג) אולת אדם תסלף דרכו ועל ה\' יזעף לבו,יתיב רבי יוחנן וקא מתמה אמר מי איכא מידי דכתיבי בכתובי דלא רמיזי באורייתא א"ל אטו הא מי לא רמיזי והכתיב (בראשית מב, כח) ויצא לבם ויחרדו איש אל אחיו לאמר מה זאת עשה אלהים לנו,דל עיניה וחזא ביה אתיא אימיה אפיקתיה אמרה ליה תא מקמיה דלא ליעבד לך כדעבד לאבוך,(א"ר יוחנן מטר בשביל יחיד פרנסה בשביל רבים מטר בשביל יחיד דכתיב (דברים כח, יב) יפתח ה\' לך את אוצרו הטוב לתת מטר ארצך פרנסה בשביל רבים דכתיב (שמות טז, ד) הנני ממטיר לכם לחם,מיתיבי ר\' יוסי בר\' יהודה אומר שלשה פרנסים טובים עמדו לישראל אלו הן משה ואהרן ומרים וג\' מתנות טובות ניתנו על ידם ואלו הן באר וענן ומן באר בזכות מרים עמוד ענן בזכות אהרן מן בזכות משה מתה מרים נסתלק הבאר שנאמר (במדבר כ, א) ותמת שם מרים וכתיב בתריה ולא היה מים לעדה וחזרה בזכות שניהן,מת אהרן נסתלקו ענני כבוד שנאמר (במדבר כא, א) וישמע הכנעני מלך ערד מה שמועה שמע שמע שמת אהרן ונסתלקו ענני כבוד וכסבור ניתנה לו רשות להלחם בישראל והיינו דכתיב (במדבר כ, כט) ויראו כל העדה כי גוע אהרן,אמר ר\' אבהו אל תקרי ויראו אלא וייראו כדדריש ר"ל דאר"ל כי משמש בארבע לשונות אי דלמא אלא דהא,חזרו שניהם בזכות משה מת משה נסתלקו כולן שנאמר (זכריה יא, ח) ואכחיד את שלשת הרועים בירח אחד וכי בירח אחד מתו והלא מרים מתה בניסן ואהרן באב ומשה באדר אלא מלמד שנתבטלו ג\' מתנות טובות שנתנו על ידן ונסתלקו כולן בירח אחד,אלמא אשכחן פרנסה בשביל יחיד שאני משה כיון דלרבים הוא בעי כרבים דמי,רב הונא בר מנוח ורב שמואל בר אידי ורב חייא מווסתניא הוו שכיחי קמיה דרבא כי נח נפשיה דרבא אתו לקמיה דרב פפא כל אימת דהוה אמר להו שמעתא ולא הוה מסתברא להו הוו מרמזי אהדדי חלש דעתיה 20b נזדמן לו אדם אחד שהיה מכוער ביותר אמר לו שלום עליך רבי ולא החזיר לו אמר לו ריקה כמה מכוער אותו האיש שמא כל בני עירך מכוערין כמותך אמר לו איני יודע אלא לך ואמור לאומן שעשאני כמה מכוער כלי זה שעשית כיון שידע בעצמו שחטא ירד מן החמור ונשתטח לפניו ואמר לו נעניתי לך מחול לי אמר לו איני מוחל לך עד שתלך לאומן שעשאני ואמור לו כמה מכוער כלי זה שעשית,היה מטייל אחריו עד שהגיע לעירו יצאו בני עירו לקראתו והיו אומרים לו שלום עליך רבי רבי מורי מורי אמר להם למי אתם קורין רבי רבי אמרו לו לזה שמטייל אחריך אמר להם אם זה רבי אל ירבו כמותו בישראל אמרו לו מפני מה אמר להם כך וכך עשה לי אמרו לו אעפ"כ מחול לו שאדם גדול בתורה הוא,אמר להם בשבילכם הריני מוחל לו ובלבד שלא יהא רגיל לעשות כן מיד נכנס רבי אלעזר בן רבי שמעון ודרש לעולם יהא אדם רך כקנה ואל יהא קשה כארז ולפיכך זכה קנה ליטול הימנה קולמוס לכתוב בו ספר תורה תפילין ומזוזות:,וכן עיר שיש בה דבר או מפולת כו\': תנו רבנן מפולת שאמרו בריאות ולא רעועות שאינן ראויות ליפול ולא הראויות ליפול,הי ניהו בריאות הי ניהו שאינן ראויות ליפול הי ניהו רעועות הי ניהו ראויות ליפול לא צריכא דנפלו מחמת גובהייהו אי נמי דקיימן אגודא דנהרא,כי ההיא אשיתא רעועה דהואי בנהרדעא דלא הוה חליף רב ושמואל תותה אע"ג דקיימא באתרה תליסר שנין יומא חד איקלע רב אדא בר אהבה להתם אמר ליה שמואל לרב ניתי מר נקיף אמר ליה לא צריכנא האידנא דאיכא רב אדא בר אהבה בהדן דנפיש זכותיה ולא מסתפינא,רב הונא הוה ליה ההוא חמרא בההוא ביתא רעיעא ובעי לפנוייה עייליה לרב אדא בר אהבה להתם משכי\' בשמעתא עד דפנייה בתר דנפק נפל ביתא ארגיש רב אדא בר אהבה איקפד,סבר לה כי הא דאמר רבי ינאי לעולם אל יעמוד אדם במקום סכנה ויאמר עושין לי נס שמא אין עושין לו נס ואם תימצי לומר עושין לו נס מנכין לו מזכיותיו אמר רב חנן מאי קרא דכתיב (בראשית לב, יא) קטנתי מכל החסדים ומכל האמת,מאי הוה עובדיה דרב אדא בר אהבה כי הא דאתמר שאלו תלמידיו (את רבי זירא ואמרי לה) לרב אדא בר אהבה במה הארכת ימים אמר להם מימי לא הקפדתי בתוך ביתי ולא צעדתי בפני מי שגדול ממני,ולא הרהרתי במבואות המטונפות ולא הלכתי ד\' אמות בלא תורה ובלא תפילין ולא ישנתי בבית המדרש לא שינת קבע ולא שינת עראי ולא ששתי בתקלת חברי ולא קראתי לחבירי בהכינתו ואמרי לה בחניכתו,אמר ליה רבא לרפרם בר פפא לימא לן מר מהני מילי מעלייתא דהוה עביד רב הונא אמר ליה בינקותיה לא דכירנא בסיבותיה דכירנא דכל יומא דעיבא הוו מפקין ליה בגוהרקא דדהבא וסייר לה לכולה מתא וכל אשיתא דהוות רעיעתא הוה סתר לה אי אפשר למרה בני לה ואי לא אפשר בני לה איהו מדידיה,וכל פניא דמעלי שבתא הוה משדר שלוחא לשוקא וכל ירקא דהוה פייש להו לגינאי זבין ליה ושדי ליה לנהרא וליתביה לעניים זמנין דסמכא דעתייהו ולא אתו למיזבן ולשדייה לבהמה קסבר מאכל אדם אין מאכילין לבהמה,ולא ליזבניה כלל נמצאת מכשילן לעתיד לבא,כי הוה ליה מילתא דאסותא הוי מלי כוזא דמיא ותלי ליה בסיפא דביתא ואמר כל דבעי ליתי ולישקול ואיכא דאמרי מילתא דשיבתא הוה גמיר והוה מנח כוזא דמיא ודלי ליה ואמר כל דצריך ליתי וליעול דלא לסתכן,כי הוה כרך ריפתא הוה פתח לבביה ואמר כל מאן דצריך ליתי וליכול אמר רבא כולהו מצינא מקיימנא לבר מהא דלא מצינא למיעבד'21b ביום אחד או בארבעה ימים אין זה דבר,דרוקרת עיר המוציאה חמש מאות רגלי הוה ויצאו ממנה שלשה מתים ביום אחד גזר רב נחמן בר רב חסדא תעניתא אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק כמאן כר"מ,דאמר ריחק נגיחותיו חייב קירב נגיחותיו לא כ"ש,א"ל רב נחמן בר רב חסדא לרב נחמן בר יצחק ליקום מר ליתי לגבן א"ל תנינא רבי יוסי אומר לא מקומו של אדם מכבדו אלא אדם מכבד את מקומו שכן מצינו בהר סיני שכל זמן שהשכינה שרויה עליו אמרה תורה (שמות לד, ג) גם הצאן והבקר אל ירעו אל מול ההר ההוא נסתלקה שכינה ממנו אמרה תורה (שמות יט, יג) במשוך היובל המה יעלו בהר,וכן מצינו באהל מועד שבמדבר שכל זמן שהוא נטוי אמרה תורה (במדבר ה, ב) וישלחו מן המחנה כל צרוע הוגללו הפרוכת הותרו זבין והמצורעים ליכנס שם,אמר ליה אי הכי ניקום אנא לגבי מר אמר ליה מוטב יבא מנה בן פרס אצל מנה בן מנה ואל יבא מנה בן מנה אצל מנה בן פרס,בסורא הוות דברתא בשיבבותיה דרב לא הוות דברתא סברו מיניה משום זכותיה דרב דנפיש איתחזי להו בחילמא רב דנפישא זכותיה טובא הא מילתא זוטרא ליה לרב אלא משום ההוא גברא דשייל מרא וזבילא לקבורה,בדרוקרת הוות דליקתא ובשיבבותיה דרב הונא לא הוות דליקתא סבור מינה בזכותא דרב הונא דנפיש איתחזי להו בחילמא האי זוטרא ליה לרב הונא אלא משום ההיא איתתא דמחממת תנורא ומשיילי לשיבבותיה,אמרו ליה לרב יהודה אתו קמצי גזר תעניתא אמרו ליה לא קא מפסדן אמר להו זוודא אייתו בהדייהו,אמרו ליה לרב יהודה איכא מותנא בחזירי גזר תעניתא נימא קסבר רב יהודה מכה משולחת ממין אחד משולחת מכל המינין לא שאני חזירי דדמיין מעייהו לבני אינשי,אמרו ליה לשמואל איכא מותנא בי חוזאי גזר תעניתא א"ל והא מרחק אמר ליכא מעברא הכא דפסיק ליה,אמרו ליה לרב נחמן איכא מותנא בארעא דישראל גזר תעניתא אמר אם גבירה לוקה שפחה לא כל שכן,טעמא דגבירה ושפחה הא שפחה ושפחה לא והא אמרו ליה לשמואל איכא מותנא בי חוזאי גזר תעניתא שאני התם כיון דאיכא שיירתא דלווי ואתיא בהדיה,אבא אומנא הוה אתי ליה שלמא ממתיבתא דרקיעא כל יומא ולאביי כל מעלי יומא דשבתא לרבא כל מעלי יומא דכיפורי הוה קא חלשא דעתיה דאביי משום דאבא אומנא אמרו ליה לא מצית למיעבד כעובדיה,ומאי הוו עובדיה דאבא אומנא דכי הוה עביד מילתא הוה מחית גברי לחוד ונשי לחוד ואית ליה לבושא דאית ביה קרנא דהוות בזיעא כי כוסילתא כי הוות אתיא ליה איתתא הוה מלביש לה כי היכי דלא ניסתכל בה ואית ליה דוכתא דצניעא דשדי ביה פשיטי דשקיל דאית ליה שדי ביה דלית ליה לא מיכסיף,כי הוה אתרמי ליה צורבא מרבנן אגרא מיניה לא שקיל ובתר דקאי יהיב ליה פשיטי ואמר ליה זיל בריא נפשך יומא חד שדר אביי זוגא דרבנן למיבדקיה אותבינהו ואכלינהו ואשקינהו ומך להו ביסתרקי בליליא 23a בעתם בלילי רביעיות ובלילי שבתות,שכן מצינו בימי שמעון בן שטח שירדו להם גשמים בלילי רביעיות ובלילי שבתות עד שנעשו חטים ככליות ושעורים כגרעיני זיתים ועדשים כדינרי זהב וצררו מהם דוגמא לדורות להודיע כמה החטא גורם שנאמר (ירמיהו ה, כה) עונותיכם הטו אלה וחטאתיכם מנעו הטוב מכם,וכן מצינו בימי הורדוס שהיו עוסקין בבנין בהמ"ק והיו יורדין גשמים בלילה למחר נשבה הרוח ונתפזרו העבים וזרחה החמה ויצאו העם למלאכתן וידעו שמלאכת שמים בידיהם:,מעשה ששלחו לחוני המעגל וכו\': ת"ר פעם אחת יצא רוב אדר ולא ירדו גשמים שלחו לחוני המעגל התפלל וירדו גשמים התפלל ולא ירדו גשמים עג עוגה ועמד בתוכה כדרך שעשה חבקוק הנביא שנאמר (חבקוק ב, א) על משמרתי אעמדה ואתיצבה על מצור וגו\',אמר לפניו רבונו של עולם בניך שמו פניהם עלי שאני כבן בית לפניך נשבע אני בשמך הגדול שאיני זז מכאן עד שתרחם על בניך התחילו גשמים מנטפין אמרו לו תלמידיו רבי ראינוך ולא נמות כמדומין אנו שאין גשמים יורדין אלא להתיר שבועתך,אמר לא כך שאלתי אלא גשמי בורות שיחין ומערות ירדו בזעף עד שכל טפה וטפה כמלא פי חבית ושיערו חכמים שאין טפה פחותה מלוג אמרו לו תלמידיו רבי ראינוך ולא נמות כמדומין אנו שאין גשמים יורדין אלא לאבד העולם,אמר לפניו לא כך שאלתי אלא גשמי רצון ברכה ונדבה ירדו כתיקנן עד שעלו כל העם להר הבית מפני הגשמים אמרו לו רבי כשם שהתפללת שירדו כך התפלל וילכו להם אמר להם כך מקובלני שאין מתפללין על רוב הטובה,אעפ"כ הביאו לי פר הודאה הביאו לו פר הודאה סמך שתי ידיו עליו ואמר לפניו רבש"ע עמך ישראל שהוצאת ממצרים אינן יכולין לא ברוב טובה ולא ברוב פורענות כעסת עליהם אינן יכולין לעמוד השפעת עליהם טובה אינן יכולין לעמוד יהי רצון מלפניך שיפסקו הגשמים ויהא ריוח בעולם מיד נשבה הרוח ונתפזרו העבים וזרחה החמה ויצאו העם לשדה והביאו להם כמהין ופטריות,שלח לו שמעון בן שטח אלמלא חוני אתה גוזרני עליך נידוי שאילו שנים כשני אליהו שמפתחות גשמים בידו של אליהו לא נמצא שם שמים מתחלל על ידך,אבל מה אעשה לך שאתה מתחטא לפני המקום ועושה לך רצונך כבן שמתחטא על אביו ועושה לו רצונו ואומר לו אבא הוליכני לרחצני בחמין שטפני בצונן תן לי אגוזים שקדים אפרסקים ורמונים ונותן לו ועליך הכתוב אומר (משלי כג, כה) ישמח אביך ואמך ותגל יולדתך,תנו רבנן מה שלחו בני לשכת הגזית לחוני המעגל (איוב כב, כח) ותגזר אומר ויקם לך ועל דרכיך נגה אור,ותגזר אומר אתה גזרת מלמטה והקדוש ברוך הוא מקיים מאמרך מלמעלה ועל דרכיך נגה אור דור שהיה אפל הארת בתפלתך,כי השפילו ותאמר גוה דור שהיה שפל הגבהתו בתפלתך ושח עינים יושיע דור ששח בעונו הושעתו בתפלתך ימלט אי נקי דור שלא היה נקי מלטתו בתפלתך ונמלט בבור כפיך מלטתו במעשה ידיך הברורין,אמר ר\' יוחנן כל ימיו של אותו צדיק היה מצטער על מקרא זה (תהלים קכו, א) שיר המעלות בשוב ה\' את שיבת ציון היינו כחולמים אמר מי איכא דניים שבעין שנין בחלמא,יומא חד הוה אזל באורחא חזייה לההוא גברא דהוה נטע חרובא אמר ליה האי עד כמה שנין טעין אמר ליה עד שבעין שנין אמר ליה פשיטא לך דחיית שבעין שנין אמר ליה האי גברא עלמא בחרובא אשכחתיה כי היכי דשתלי לי אבהתי שתלי נמי לבראי,יתיב קא כריך ריפתא אתא ליה שינתא נים אהדרא ליה משוניתא איכסי מעינא ונים שבעין שנין כי קם חזייה לההוא גברא דהוה קא מלקט מינייהו אמר ליה את הוא דשתלתיה א"ל בר בריה אנא אמר ליה שמע מינה דניימי שבעין שנין חזא לחמריה דאתיילידא ליה רמכי רמכי,אזל לביתיה אמר להו בריה דחוני המעגל מי קיים אמרו ליה בריה ליתא בר בריה איתא אמר להו אנא חוני המעגל לא הימנוהו אזל לבית המדרש שמעינהו לרבנן דקאמרי נהירן שמעתתין כבשני חוני המעגל דכי הוי עייל לבית מדרשא כל קושיא דהוו להו לרבנן הוה מפרק להו אמר להו אנא ניהו לא הימנוהו ולא עבדי ליה יקרא כדמבעי ליה חלש דעתיה בעי רחמי ומית אמר רבא היינו דאמרי אינשי או חברותא או מיתותא,אבא חלקיה בר בריה דחוני המעגל הוה וכי מצטריך עלמא למיטרא הוו משדרי רבנן לגביה ובעי רחמי ואתי מיטרא זימנא חדא איצטריך עלמא למיטרא שדור רבנן זוגא דרבנן לגביה למבעי רחמי דניתי מיטרא אזול לביתיה ולא אשכחוהו אזול בדברא ואשכחוהו דהוה קא רפיק יהבו ליה שלמא 23b ולא אסבר להו אפיה בפניא כי הוה מנקט ציבי דרא ציבי ומרא בחד כתפא וגלימא בחד כתפא כולה אורחא לא סיים מסאני כי מטי למיא סיים מסאניה כי מטא להיזמי והיגי דלינהו למניה כי מטא למתא נפקא דביתהו לאפיה כי מיקשטא כי מטא לביתיה עלת דביתהו ברישא והדר עייל איהו והדר עיילי רבנן יתיב וכריך ריפתא ולא אמר להו לרבנן תו כרוכו פלג ריפתא לינוקי לקשישא חדא ולזוטרא תרי,אמר לה לדביתהו ידענא דרבנן משום מיטרא קא אתו ניסק לאיגרא וניבעי רחמי אפשר דמרצי הקדוש ברוך הוא וייתי מיטרא ולא נחזיק טיבותא לנפשין סקו לאיגרא קם איהו בחדא זויתא ואיהי בחדא זויתא קדים סלוק ענני מהך זויתא דדביתהו כי נחית אמר להו אמאי אתו רבנן אמרו ליה שדרי לן רבנן לגבי דמר למיבעי רחמי אמיטרא אמר להו ברוך המקום שלא הצריך אתכם לאבא חלקיה,אמרו ליה ידעינן דמיטרא מחמת מר הוא דאתא אלא לימא לן מר הני מילי דתמיהא לן מאי טעמא כי יהיבנא למר שלמא לא אסבר לן מר אפיה אמר להו שכיר יום הואי ואמינא לא איפגר ומאי טעמא דרא מר ציבי אחד כתפיה וגלימא אחד כתפיה אמר להו טלית שאולה היתה להכי שאלי ולהכי לא שאלי,מאי טעמא כולה אורחא לא סיים מר מסאניה וכי מטי למיא סיים מסאניה אמר להו כולה אורחא חזינא במיא לא קא חזינא מ"ט כי מטא מר להיזמי והיגי דלינהו למניה אמר להו זה מעלה ארוכה וזה אינה מעלה ארוכה,מאי טעמא כי מטא מר למתא נפקא דביתהו דמר כי מיקשטא אמר להו כדי שלא אתן עיני באשה אחרת מאי טעמא עיילא היא ברישא והדר עייל מר אבתרה והדר עיילינן אנן אמר להו משום דלא בדקיתו לי,מאי טעמא כי כריך מר ריפתא לא אמר לן איתו כרוכו משום דלא נפישא ריפתא ואמינא לא אחזיק בהו ברבנן טיבותא בחנם מאי טעמא יהיב מר לינוקא קשישא חדא ריפתא ולזוטרא תרי אמר להו האי קאי בביתא והאי יתיב בבי כנישתא,ומאי טעמא קדים סלוק ענני מהך זויתא דהוות קיימא דביתהו דמר לעננא דידיה משום דאיתתא שכיחא בביתא ויהבא ריפתא לעניי ומקרבא הנייתה ואנא יהיבנא זוזא ולא מקרבא הנייתיה אי נמי הנהו ביריוני דהוו בשיבבותן אנא בעי רחמי דלימותו והיא בעיא רחמי דליהדרו בתיובתא ואהדרו,חנן הנחבא בר ברתיה דחוני המעגל הוה כי מצטריך עלמא למיטרא הוו משדרי רבנן ינוקי דבי רב לגביה ונקטי ליה בשיפולי גלימיה ואמרו ליה אבא אבא הב לן מיטרא אמר לפני הקב"ה רבש"ע עשה בשביל אלו שאין מכירין בין אבא דיהיב מיטרא לאבא דלא יהיב מיטרא ואמאי קרי ליה חנן הנחבא מפני שהיה מחביא עצמו בבית הכסא,אמר ליה רבי זריקא לרב ספרא תא חזי מה בין תקיפי דארעא דישראל לחסידי דבבל חסידי דבבל רב הונא ורב חסדא כי הוה מצטריך עלמא למיטרא אמרי ניכניף הדדי וניבעי רחמי אפשר דמירצי הקדוש ברוך הוא דייתי מיטרא,תקיפי דארעא דישראל כגון ר\' יונה אבוה דרבי מני כי הוה מצטריך עלמא למיטרא הוה עייל לביתיה ואמר להו הבו לי גואלקי ואיזיל ואייתי לי בזוזא עיבורא כי הוה נפיק לברא אזיל וקאי בדוכתא עמיקתא דכתיב (תהלים קל, א) ממעמקים קראתיך ה\' וקאי בדוכתא צניעא ומכסי בשקא ובעי רחמי ואתי מיטרא כי הוה אתי לביתיה אמרי ליה אייתי מר עיבורא אמר להו אמינא הואיל ואתא מיטרא השתא רווח עלמא,ותו רבי מני בריה הוו קא מצערי ליה דבי נשיאה אישתטח על קברא דאבוה אמר ליה אבא אבא הני מצערו לי יומא חד הוו קא חלפי התם אינקוט כרעא דסוסוותייהו עד דקבילו עלייהו דלא קא מצערו ליה,ותו רבי מני הוה שכיח קמיה דרבי יצחק בן אלישיב אמר ליה עתירי דבי חמי קא מצערו לי אמר ליענו ואיענו אמר קא דחקו לי אמר ליעתרו ואיעתרו,אמר לא מיקבלי עלי אינשי ביתי א"ל מה שמה חנה תתייפי חנה ונתייפת אמר ליה קא מגנדרא עלי א"ל אי הכי תחזור חנה לשחרוריתה וחזרה חנה לשחרוריתה,הנהו תרי תלמידי דהוו קמיה דרבי יצחק בן אלישיב אמרו ליה ניבעי מר רחמי עלן דניחכים טובא אמר להו עמי היתה ושלחתיה,רבי יוסי בר אבין הוה שכיח קמיה דר\' יוסי דמן יוקרת שבקיה ואתא לקמיה דרב אשי ' None | 9a “A tithe shall you tithe te’aser” (Deuteronomy 14:22)? This phrase can be interpreted homiletically: Take a tithe asser so that you will become wealthy titasher, in the merit of the mitzva.,Rabbi Yoḥa found the young son of Reish Lakish. He said to the boy: Recite to me your verse, i.e., the verse you studied today in school. The boy said to him: “A tithe shall you tithe.” The boy further said to Rabbi Yoḥa: But what is the meaning of this phrase: “A tithe shall you tithe”? Rabbi Yoḥa said to him: The verse means: Take a tithe so that you will become wealthy. The boy said to Rabbi Yoḥa: From where do you derive that this is so? Rabbi Yoḥa said to him: Go and test it.,The boy said to him: And is it permitted to test the Holy One, Blessed be He? But isn’t it written: “You shall not test the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 6:16)? Rabbi Yoḥa said to the boy that Rabbi Hoshaya said as follows: It is prohibited to test God in any way, except in this case of tithes, as it is stated: “Bring the whole tithe into the storeroom, that there may be food in My house, and test Me now by this, said the Lord of hosts, if I will not open for you the windows of heaven, and pour out for you a blessing that there shall be more than sufficiency” (Malachi 3:10).,In relation to the above verse, the Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the phrase: “That there shall be more than sufficiency ad beli dai”? Rami bar Ḥama said that Rav said: It means that the abundance will be so great that your lips will be worn out yivlu, similar to the word beli, from saying enough dai. Returning to the above incident, the Gemara adds that the boy said to Rabbi Yoḥa: Your claim appears explicitly in a verse. If I had arrived there, at this verse, I would not have needed you or Hoshaya your teacher, as I could have understood it on my own.,The Gemara relates another story about the precociousness of this child. And furthermore, on a different occasion Rabbi Yoḥa found the young son of Reish Lakish, when he was sitting and studying and he was reciting the verse: “The foolishness of man perverts his way, and his heart frets against the Lord” (Proverbs 19:3). This verse means that when someone sins and every manner of mishap befalls him, he complains and wonders why these things are happening to him.,Rabbi Yoḥa sat down and wondered aloud about this verse, saying: Is there anything that is written in the Writings that is not alluded to in the Torah at all? I cannot think of any hint of this idea in the Torah itself. The child said to him: Is that to say that this idea is really not alluded to in the Torah? But isn’t it written, with regard to Joseph’s brothers: “And their heart failed them and they turned trembling to one to another, saying: What is this that God has done to us?” (Genesis 42:28). This verse exemplifies the notion that when one sins and encounters troubles, he wonders why it is happening to him.,Impressed by the youth’s wisdom, Rabbi Yoḥa raised his eyes and stared at the boy. At this point, the boy’s mother came and took him away, saying to him: Come away from Rabbi Yoḥa, so that he does not do to you as he did to your father. Reish Lakish, the boy’s father, died during a heated dispute with Rabbi Yoḥa over a Torah matter. The argument ended with an offended look from Rabbi Yoḥa which caused Reish Lakish’s death, and the boy’s mother was afraid that her son might suffer the same fate.,§ After this brief digression, the Gemara turns to the fifth in the series of statements by Rabbi Yoḥa concerning rain. Rabbi Yoḥa said: Rain falls even for the sake of an individual, in response to the petition of a single person in need of rain, whereas a blessing of sustece comes only for the sake of many. Rain falls even for the sake of an individual, as it is written: “The Lord will open for you His good treasure, the heavens, to give the rain of your land” (Deuteronomy 28:12). The fact that this verse is written in the second person singular demonstrates that rain can fall even for the sake of an individual. Rabbi Yoḥa further proves that sustece comes for the sake of many, as it is written: “Behold I will cause to rain bread from the heavens for you” (Exodus 16:4). Here, God is referring to the people in the plural form.,The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: Three good sustainers rose up for the Jewish people during the exodus from Egypt, and they are: Moses, Aaron and Miriam. And three good gifts were given from Heaven through their agency, and these are they: The well of water, the pillar of cloud, and the manna. He elaborates: The well was given to the Jewish people in the merit of Miriam; the pillar of cloud was in the merit of Aaron; and the manna in the merit of Moses. When Miriam died the well disappeared, as it is stated: “And Miriam died there” (Numbers 20:1), and it says thereafter in the next verse: “And there was no water for the congregation” (Numbers 20:2). But the well returned in the merit of both Moses and Aaron.,When Aaron died the clouds of glory disappeared, as it is stated: “And the Canaanite, the king of Arad heard” (Numbers 33:40). What report did he hear? He heard that Aaron had died and the clouds of glory had disappeared, and he thought that the Jewish people were no longer protected by Heaven and therefore he had been given permission to go to war against the Jewish people. And this disappearance of the clouds is the meaning of that which is written: “And all the congregation saw that ki Aaron was dead” (Numbers 20:29).,Rabbi Abbahu said: Do not read the verse as: “And they saw va’yiru”; rather, read it as: And they were seen va’yera’u, as the clouds which had concealed the Jewish people were temporarily removed. This is as Reish Lakish taught. As Reish Lakish said: The term ki actually has at least four distinct meanings: If; perhaps; but; because, or that. According to this interpretation, the verse would be rendered: And all the congregation was seen, because ki Aaron was dead.,The baraita continues: Both the well and the clouds of glory returned in the merit of Moses. However, when Moses died all of them disappeared. As it is stated: “And I cut off the three shepherds in one month” (Zechariah 11:8). But did the three shepherds really die in one month? Didn’t Miriam die in the month of Nisan, and Aaron in Av and Moses in Adar? Rather, this verse teaches us that with the death of Moses the three good gifts that were given through their agency were annulled, and all three gifts disappeared in one month, which made it seem as though all three leaders had died at the same time.,The Gemara explains the difficulty from this baraita. Apparently, we find that sustece can come for the sake of an individual, as the baraita states that sustece in the form of manna came for the sake of Moses. The Gemara answers: Moses is different, since he requested the manna for many, and therefore he was considered like many, not as an individual.,The Gemara relates a story concerning the aforementioned verse from Zechariah. Rav Huna bar Manoaḥ, Rav Shmuel bar Idi, and Rav Ḥiyya from Vastanya were often found before Rava, as they were among his most distinguished students. When Rava died, they came before Rav Pappa to learn from him. However, as also they were great Sages, whenever Rav Pappa would say a halakha that did not sound reasonable to them, they would gesture to each other that Rav Pappa was not equal in stature to Rava. Rav Pappa was offended by their behavior. 20b He happened upon an exceedingly ugly person, who said to him: Greetings to you, my rabbi, but Rabbi Elazar did not return his greeting. Instead, Rabbi Elazar said to him: Worthless reika person, how ugly is that man. Are all the people of your city as ugly as you? The man said to him: I do not know, but you should go and say to the Craftsman Who made me: How ugly is the vessel you made. When Rabbi Elazar realized that he had sinned and insulted this man merely on account of his appearance, he descended from his donkey and prostrated himself before him, and he said to the man: I have sinned against you; forgive me. The man said to him: I will not forgive you go until you go to the Craftsman Who made me and say: How ugly is the vessel you made.,He walked behind the man, trying to appease him, until they reached Rabbi Elazar’s city. The people of his city came out to greet him, saying to him: Greetings to you, my rabbi, my rabbi, my master, my master. The man said to them: Who are you calling my rabbi, my rabbi? They said to him: To this man, who is walking behind you. He said to them: If this man is a rabbi, may there not be many like him among the Jewish people. They asked him: For what reason do you say this? He said to them: He did such and such to me. They said to him: Even so, forgive him, as he is a great Torah scholar.,He said to them: For your sakes I forgive him, provided that he accepts upon himself not to become accustomed to behave like this. Immediately, Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, entered the study hall and taught: A person should always be soft like a reed and he should not be stiff like a cedar, as one who is proud like a cedar is likely to sin. And therefore, due to its gentle qualities, the reed merited that a quill is taken from it to write with it a Torah scroll, phylacteries, and mezuzot.,§ The mishna taught: And likewise, if a city is afflicted by pestilence or collapsing buildings, that city fasts and sounds the alarm, and all of its surrounding areas fast but they do not sound the alarm. Rabbi Akiva says: They sound the alarm but they do not fast. The Sages taught: These collapsing buildings to which the Sages referred are those of sturdy and not dilapidated walls; they have walls that are not ready to fall, and not those that are ready to fall.,The Gemara expresses puzzlement with regard to the wording of the baraita: What are sound walls; what are walls that are not ready to fall; what are dilapidated walls; what are those that are ready to fall? The elements in each pair of walls are apparently the same, and the baraita is repetitive. The Gemara answers: No, it is necessary to specify that in the case of walls that fell due to their height, i.e., they are sound but also ready to fall, due to their excessive height. Alternatively, the baraita is referring to a case where the walls were positioned on a riverbank, as they are likely to fall despite the fact that they are not dilapidated, as the riverbank itself is unstable.,The Gemara relates: This is like that dilapidated wall that was in Neharde’a, under which Rav and Shmuel would not pass, although it stood in place thirteen years. One day Rav Adda bar Ahava happened to come there and walked with them. As they passed the wall, Shmuel said to Rav: Come, Master, let us circumvent this wall, so that we do not stand beneath it. Rav said to him: It is not necessary to do so today, as Rav Adda bar Ahava is with us, whose merit is great, and therefore I am not afraid of its collapse.,The Gemara relates another incident. Rav Huna had a certain quantity of wine in a certain dilapidated house and he wanted to move it, but he was afraid that the building would collapse upon his entry. He brought Rav Adda bar Ahava to there, to the ramshackle house, and he dragged out a discussion with him concerning a matter of halakha until they had removed all the wine. As soon as they exited, the building collapsed. Rav Adda bar Ahava realized what had happened and became angry.,The Gemara explains: Rav Adda bar Ahava holds in accordance with this statement, as Rabbi Yannai said: A person should never stand in a place of danger and say: A miracle will be performed for me, and I will escape unharmed, lest a miracle is not performed for him. And if you say that a miracle will be performed for him, they will deduct it from his merits. Rav Ḥa said: What is the verse that alludes to this idea? As it is written: “I have become small from all the mercies and all the truth that You have showed Your servant” (Genesis 32:11). In other words, the more benevolence one receives from God, the more his merit is reduced.,After recounting stories that reflect Rav Adda bar Ahava’s great merit, the Gemara asks: What were the exceptional deeds of Rav Adda bar Ahava? The Gemara reports that they are as it is stated: The students of Rabbi Zeira asked him, and some say that the students of Rav Adda bar Ahava asked him: To what do you attribute your longevity? He said to them: In all my days I did not become angry with my household, and I never walked before someone greater than myself; rather, I always gave him the honor of walking before me.,Rav Adda bar Ahava continued: And I did not think about matters of Torah in filthy alleyways; and I did not walk four cubits without engaging in Torah and without donning phylacteries; and I would not fall asleep in the study hall, neither a deep sleep nor a brief nap; and I would not rejoice in the mishap of my colleague; and I would not call my colleague by his nickname. And some say that he said: I would not call my colleague by his derogatory family name.,§ The Gemara relates another story about the righteous deeds of the Sages involving a dilapidated wall. Rava said to Rafram bar Pappa: Let the Master tell us some of those fine deeds that Rav Huna performed. He said to him: I do not remember what he did in his youth, but the deeds of his old age I remember. As on every cloudy day they would take him out in a golden carriage guharka, and he would survey the entire city. And he would command that every unstable wall be torn down, lest it fall in the rain and hurt someone. If its owner was able to build another, Rav Huna would instruct him to rebuild it. And if he was unable to rebuild it, Rav Huna would build it himself with his own money.,Rafram bar Pappa further relates: And every Shabbat eve, in the afternoon, Rav Huna would send a messenger to the marketplace, and he would purchase all the vegetables that were left with the gardeners who sold their crops, and throw them into the river. The Gemara asks: But why did he throw out the vegetables? Let him give them to the poor. The Gemara answers: If he did this, the poor would sometimes rely on the fact that Rav Huna would hand out vegetables, and they would not come to purchase any. This would ruin the gardeners’ livelihood. The Gemara further asks: And let him throw them to the animals. The Gemara answers: He holds that human food may not be fed to animals, as this is a display of contempt for the food.,The Gemara objects: But if Rav Huna could not use them in any way, he should not purchase the vegetables at all. The Gemara answers: If nothing is done, you would have been found to have caused a stumbling block for them in the future. If the vegetable sellers see that some of their produce is left unsold, the next week they will not bring enough for Shabbat. Therefore, Rav Huna made sure that the vegetables were all bought, so that the sellers would continue to bring them.,Another custom of Rav Huna was that when he had a new medicine, he would fill a water jug with the medicine and hang it from the doorpost of his house, saying: All who need, let him come and take from this new medicine. And there are those who say: He had a remedy against the demon Shivta that he knew by tradition, that one must wash his hands for protection against this evil spirit. And to this end, he would place a water jug and hang it by the door, saying: Anyone who needs, let him come to the house and wash his hands, so that he will not be in danger.,The Gemara further relates: When Rav Huna would eat bread, he would open the doors to his house, saying: Whoever needs, let him come in and eat. Rava said: I can fulfill all these customs of Rav Huna, except for this one, which I cannot do,'21b If all three died on one day or over four days, this is not a plague of pestilence.,In explanation of the counterintuitive ruling that many deaths in one day is not indicative of a plague, the Gemara relates: Drokart was a city that sent out five hundred infantrymen, and three dead were removed from it on one day. Rav Naḥman bar Rav Ḥisda decreed a fast on account of the plague. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: In accordance with whose opinion did you declare this fast? It must be in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir.,This is related to the definition of a forewarned ox, an animal that has gored enough times to be considered a dangerous beast that requires careful supervision, as Rabbi Meir said: The owner of an ox is liable to pay full damages if its acts of goring were separated, i.e., if it gored three times on three consecutive days, as claimed by the Rabbis. If its acts of goring were near each other, performed on a single day, is it not all the more so that this animal should be classified as a forewarned ox? However, Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak continued, this represents a minority opinion. Just as Rabbi Meir’s reasoning is rejected for halakha in the case of an ox, so too it is rejected with regard to a plague.,Upon hearing this impressive argument, Rav Naḥman bar Rav Ḥisda said to Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak: Let the Master arise and come to live with us as our community leader. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said to him: We already learned in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei says: It is not the place of a person that honors him; rather, the person honors his place, as we found with regard to Mount Sinai, that as long as the Divine Presence rested upon it, the Torah said: “Neither let the flocks nor the herds feed before that mount” (Exodus 34:3). Once the Divine Presence departed from the mountain, the Torah said: “When the shofar sounds long they shall come up to the mount” (Exodus 19:13). This indicates that the sanctity was not inherent to the place but was due to the Divine Presence resting there.,And we likewise found with regard to the Tent of Meeting that was in the wilderness, that whenever it was erected, the Torah said: “That they put out of the camp every leper” (Numbers 5:2). Once the curtain was rolled up and the Tent of Meeting was prepared for travel, zavim and lepers were permitted to enter the place where it had stood. The place itself had no intrinsic sanctity; rather, it was sacred only because the Divine Presence was there. Accordingly, Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak maintained that there is no reason for him to move places to receive honor.,Rav Naḥman bar Rav Ḥisda said to Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak: If so, let me arise and come to the Master, to learn Torah from you. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said to him: It is better that one hundred dinars that is the son of a peras, fifty dinars, should come to one hundred dinars that is the son of one hundred dinars; but one hundred dinars that is the son of one hundred dinars, should not come to one hundred dinars that is the son of a peras. In other words, although Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak was a learned scholar, comparable to one hundred dinars, it was nevertheless more appropriate for him to come to Rav Naḥman bar Rav Ḥisda. Whereas Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak was the son of a peras, an ordinary man, Rav Naḥman bar Rav Ḥisda was the son of a scholar.,The Gemara relates another story involving a plague: Once there was a plague of pestilence in Sura, but in the neighborhood of Rav there was no pestilence. The people therefore thought that this was due to Rav’s great merit. However, it was revealed to them in a dream that Rav’s merit was too great and this matter too small for the merit of Rav to be involved. Rather, his neighborhood was spared due to the acts of kindness of a certain man, who would lend his hoe mara and shovel zevila to prepare sites for burial.,The Gemara relates a similar incident. In Drokart there was a fire, but in the neighborhood of Rav Huna there was no fire. The people therefore thought that this was due to Rav Huna’s great merit. It was revealed to them in a dream that this matter was too small for the merit of Rav Huna to have played a role. Rather, it was due to a certain woman who heats her oven and lends it, i.e., the use of her oven, to her neighbors.,They said to Rav Yehuda: Locusts have come to our region. Rav Yehuda decreed a fast. They said to him: They are not destroying anything, as they are eating only a little. He said to them: Have they brought provisions with them, that they have something else to eat? Even if they are not damaging your crops now, they will certainly eat them soon.,On another occasion, they said to Rav Yehuda: There is pestilence among the pigs. Rav Yehuda decreed a fast. The Gemara asks: Let us say that Rav Yehuda maintains that a plague affecting one species will come to affect all species, and that is why he decreed a fast. The Gemara answers: No, in other cases there is no cause for concern. However, pigs are different, as their intestines are similar to those of humans. Consequently, their disease might spread to people.,They said to Shmuel: There is pestilence in the region of Bei Ḥozai, which is quite a distance from Babylonia. Shmuel decreed a fast. They said to him: But it is far from here. He said: There is no crossing here that will stop the pestilence, and therefore there is cause for concern that it will reach us.,They said to Rav Naḥman: There is pestilence in Eretz Yisrael. Rav Naḥman decreed a fast in Babylonia, saying: If the lady of the house, i.e., Eretz Yisrael, is afflicted, is it not all the more so that the maidservant, Babylonia, will be afflicted?,The Gemara asks: The reason for this ruling is apparently only because Eretz Yisrael is a lady in comparison to the Diaspora, which is likened to a maidservant. It may be inferred from this that in a case involving a maidservant and a maidservant, i.e., two places in the Diaspora, there is no reason to fast. But in the previous story, when they said to Shmuel: There is pestilence in the region of Bei Ḥozai, he decreed a fast in Neharde’a, despite the fact that Neharde’a is not considered a lady with respect to Bei Ḥozai. The Gemara answers: It is different there. Since there are caravans that regularly travel from Bei Ḥozai to Neharde’a, the pestilence will join and accompany them in the caravans.,§ Apropos the above stories that deal with the merits of ordinary people, the Gemara relates: Abba the Bloodletter would receive greetings from the yeshiva on High every day, and Abaye would receive these greetings every Shabbat eve, and Rava would receive greetings only once a year on Yom Kippur eve. Abaye was distressed due to Abba the Bloodletter, as he did not understand why Abba received greater honor than he did. They said to him: You are unable to perform what he does, and therefore you do not merit the same honor.,The Gemara asks: And what were these righteous deeds of Abba the Bloodletter? The Gemara explains that when he would perform a matter of bloodletting, he would bring in men separately from women, for reasons of modesty. And he had a special garment that had a slit in the place of the incision kusilta where the bloodletting instrument was inserted. When a woman came to him, he would have her dress in that garment, so that he would not see her exposed. And furthermore, he had a hidden place where he worked, where customers would place the coins peshitei that he would take as his fee. In this manner, one who had money would throw it there, while one who did not have money was not embarrassed.,When a Torah scholar came to him for bloodletting, he would take no pay from him, and after the scholar arose, Abba would give him money and say to him: Go and purchase food with this money to heal yourself, as it is important to eat healthy food after bloodletting. One day, Abaye sent a pair of Sages to investigate the extent of Abba the Bloodletter’s righteousness. Abba the Bloodletter sat them down, and gave them food to eat, and gave them something to drink. And at night he spread out mats bistarkei for them to sleep on. 23a “In their season” means on Wednesday eves, i.e., Tuesday nights, and on Shabbat eves, i.e., Friday nights, because at these times people are not out in the streets, either due to fear of demonic forces that were thought to wander on Tuesday nights or due to the sanctity of Shabbat.,As we found in the days of Shimon ben Shetaḥ that rain invariably fell for them on Wednesday eves and on Shabbat eves, until wheat grew as big as kidneys, and barley as big as olive pits, and lentils as golden dinars. And they tied up some of these crops as an example dugma for future generations, to convey to them how much damage sin causes, as it is stated: “The Lord our God, Who gives rain, the former rain and the latter rain, in its season that keeps for us the appointed weeks of the harvest. Your iniquities have turned away these things, and your sins have withheld the good from you” (Jeremiah 5:24–25).,And we likewise found that in the days of Herod that they were occupied in the building of the Temple, and rain would fall at night. And the next day the wind would blow, the clouds would disperse, the sun would shine, and the people would go out to their work. And as rain would fall only at a time when it would not interfere with their labor, the nation knew that the work of Heaven was being performed by their hands.,§ The mishna taught: An incident occurred in which the people sent a message to Ḥoni HaMe’aggel. This event is related in greater detail in the following baraita. The Sages taught: Once, most of the month of Adar had passed but rain had still not fallen. They sent this message to Ḥoni HaMe’aggel: Pray, and rain will fall. He prayed, but no rain fell. He drew a circle in the dust and stood inside it, in the manner that the prophet Habakkuk did, as it is stated: “And I will stand upon my watch and set myself upon the tower, and I will look out to see what He will say to me, and what I shall answer when I am reproved” (Habakkuk 2:1). This verse is taken to mean that Habakkuk fashioned a kind of prison for himself where he sat.,Ḥoni said before God: Master of the Universe, Your children have turned their faces toward me, as I am like a member of Your household. Therefore, I take an oath by Your great name that I will not move from here until you have mercy upon Your children and answer their prayers for rain. Rain began to trickle down, but only in small droplets. His students said to him: Rabbi, we have seen that you can perform great wonders, but this quantity of rain is not enough to ensure that we will not die. It appears to us that a small amount of rain is falling only to enable you to dissolve your oath, but it is not nearly enough to save us.,Ḥoni said to God: I did not ask for this, but for rain to fill the cisterns, ditches, and caves. Rain began to fall furiously, until each and every drop was as big as the mouth of a barrel, and the Sages estimated that no drop was less than a log in size. His students said to him: Rabbi, we have seen that you can call on God to perform miracles and we will not die, but now it appears to us that rain is falling only to destroy the world.,Ḥoni again said before God: I did not ask for this harmful rain either, but for rain of benevolence, blessing, and generosity. Subsequently, the rains fell in their standard manner, until all of the people sought higher ground and ascended to the Temple Mount due to the rain. They said to him: Rabbi, just as you prayed that the rains should fall, so too, pray that they should stop. He said to them: This is the tradition that I received, that one does not pray over an excess of good.,Ḥoni continued: Nevertheless, bring me a bull. I will sacrifice it as a thanks-offering and pray at the same time. They brought him a bull for a thanks-offering. He placed his two hands on its head and said before God: Master of the Universe, Your nation Israel, whom You brought out of Egypt, cannot bear either an excess of good or an excess of punishment. You grew angry with them and withheld rain, and they are unable to bear it. You bestowed upon them too much good, and they were also unable to bear it. May it be Your will that the rain stop and that there be relief for the world. Immediately, the wind blew, the clouds dispersed, the sun shone, and everyone went out to the fields and gathered for themselves truffles and mushrooms that had sprouted in the strong rain.,Shimon ben Shetaḥ relayed to Ḥoni HaMe’aggel: If you were not Ḥoni, I would have decreed ostracism upon you. For were these years like the years of Elijah, when the keys of rain were entrusted in Elijah’s hands, and he swore it would not rain, wouldn’t the name of Heaven have been desecrated by your oath not to leave the circle until it rained? Once you have pronounced this oath, either yours or Elijah’s must be falsified.,However, what can I do to you, as you nag God and He does your bidding, like a son who nags his father and his father does his bidding. And the son says to his father: Father, take me to be bathed in hot water; wash me with cold water; give me nuts, almonds, peaches, and pomegranates. And his father gives him. About you, the verse states: “Your father and mother will be glad and she who bore you will rejoice” (Proverbs 23:25).,The Sages taught: What message did the members of the Chamber of the Hewn Stone, the Great Sanhedrin, send to Ḥoni HaMe’aggel? About you, the verse states: “You shall also decree a matter, and it shall be established for you; and the light shall shine upon your ways. When they cast down, you will say: There is lifting up, for He saves the humble person. He will deliver the one who is not innocent and he will be delivered through the cleanness of your hands” (Job 22:28–30).,They interpreted: “You shall also decree a matter”; you, Ḥoni, decree from below, and the Holy One, Blessed be He, fulfills your statement from above. “And the light shall shine upon your ways”; a generation that was in darkness, you have illuminated it with your prayer.,“When they cast down, you will say: There is lifting up”; a generation that was cast down, you lifted it up with your prayer. “For He saves the humble person”; a generation that was humble in its transgression, you saved it through your prayer. “He will deliver the one who is not innocent”; a generation that was not innocent, you have delivered it through your prayer. “And he will be delivered through the cleanness of your hands”; you have delivered an undeserving generation through the clean work of your hands.,§ The Gemara relates another story about Ḥoni HaMe’aggel. Rabbi Yoḥa said: All the days of the life of that righteous man, Ḥoni, he was distressed over the meaning of this verse: “A song of Ascents: When the Lord brought back those who returned to Zion, we were like those who dream” (Psalms 126:1). He said to himself: Is there really a person who can sleep and dream for seventy years? How is it possible to compare the seventy-year exile in Babylonia to a dream?,One day, he was walking along the road when he saw a certain man planting a carob tree. Ḥoni said to him: This tree, after how many years will it bear fruit? The man said to him: It will not produce fruit until seventy years have passed. Ḥoni said to him: Is it obvious to you that you will live seventy years, that you expect to benefit from this tree? He said to him: That man himself found a world full of carob trees. Just as my ancestors planted for me, I too am planting for my descendants.,Ḥoni sat and ate bread. Sleep overcame him and he slept. A cliff formed around him, and he disappeared from sight and slept for seventy years. When he awoke, he saw a certain man gathering carobs from that tree. Ḥoni said to him: Are you the one who planted this tree? The man said to him: I am his son’s son. Ḥoni said to him: I can learn from this that I have slept for seventy years, and indeed he saw that his donkey had sired several herds during those many years.,Ḥoni went home and said to the members of the household: Is the son of Ḥoni HaMe’aggel alive? They said to him: His son is no longer with us, but his son’s son is alive. He said to them: I am Ḥoni HaMe’aggel. They did not believe him. He went to the study hall, where he heard the Sages say about one scholar: His halakhot are as enlightening and as clear as in the years of Ḥoni HaMe’aggel, for when Ḥoni HaMe’aggel would enter the study hall he would resolve for the Sages any difficulty they had. Ḥoni said to them: I am he, but they did not believe him and did not pay him proper respect. Ḥoni became very upset, prayed for mercy, and died. Rava said: This explains the folk saying that people say: Either friendship or death, as one who has no friends is better off dead.,§ The Gemara relates another story, this time about Ḥoni HaMe’aggel’s descendants, who were also renowned for their righteous deeds. Abba Ḥilkiyya was the son of Ḥoni HaMe’aggel’s son. And when the world was in need of rain they would send Sages to him, and he would pray for mercy, and rain would fall. Once the world was in need of rain, and the Sages sent a pair of Sages to him so that he would pray for mercy and rain would fall. They went to his house but they did not find him there. They went to the field and found him hoeing the ground. They greeted him, 23b but he did not return their greetings. Toward evening, as he was gathering firewood, he placed the wood and hoe on one shoulder and his cloak on the other shoulder. Along the entire way he did not wear his shoes, but when he reached water he put on his shoes. When he reached an area filled with shrubs and thorns he lifted up his clothes. When he reached the city, his wife came out to greet him, adorned with finery. When he reached his house, his wife entered first, he entered afterward, and afterward the two Sages entered. He sat and ate bread, but he did not say to the Sages: Come and eat, as was customary and polite. He divided bread to his children; to the elder child he gave one piece and to the younger one he gave two.,Abba Ḥilkiyya said to his wife: I know that these Sages have come due to the rain. Let us go up to the roof and pray for mercy. Perhaps the Holy One, Blessed be He, will be appeased, and it will rain, and we will not receive credit ourselves for the rainfall. They went up to the roof. He stood in one corner and she stood in the other corner. Clouds began to form on that side where his wife stood. When he descended, he said to the Sages: Why have the Sages come? They said to him: The other Sages have sent us to the Master, so that you should pray for mercy for rain. He said to them: Blessed is God, Who did not require you to petition Abba Ḥilkiyya, as the sky has filled with clouds and rain is certainly on its way.,They said to him: We know that the rain has come on the Master’s account. However, let the Master please say and explain to us these aspects of your behavior that are puzzling to us: What is the reason that when we greeted the Master, the Master did not return our greeting? He said to them: I am a day laborer, hired for the day, and I said to myself that I may not delay my work to answer you. They further inquired: And what is the reason that the Master carried the firewood on one shoulder and his cloak on the other shoulder? He said to them: It was a borrowed robe. I borrowed it for this purpose, to wear it, and I did not borrow it for that purpose, to place wood on it.,The Sages continued to ask Abba Ḥilkiyya about his unusual behavior. What is the reason that the entire way the Master did not wear his shoes, but when he reached water he put on his shoes? He said to them: The entire way I can see and take care where I walk, and therefore there is no need for me to wear out my shoes, but in the water I cannot see. Therefore, I put on my shoes to avoid hurting myself. They asked: What is the reason that when the Master reached shrubs and thorns, he lifted up his clothes? He said to them: This flesh will heal if it is scratched by thorns, but this garment will not heal if it is torn.,They further inquired: What is the reason that when the Master reached the city, the Master’s wife came out adorned in her finery? He said to them: She dresses that way so that when I walk through the city I will not set my eyes upon another woman. They asked: What is the reason that she entered first, and afterward the Master entered, and only afterward we entered? He said to them: Because you have not been checked by me. I cannot be sure how you will act, and therefore I did not want you to be alone with my wife.,The Sages were not done with their questions. What is the reason that when the Master ate bread, you did not say to us: Come and eat? He replied: Because there is not enough bread for guests, and I said to myself that I should not gain credit from the Sages for nothing, by offering you food I cannot serve you. They asked: What is the reason that the Master gave the older child one piece of bread and the younger child two? He said to them: This older child stays at home, and if he is hungry he can eat at any time, but this younger child sits and studies in the synagogue, and therefore he is hungrier.,The two Sages had one final set of queries for Abba Ḥilkiyya. And what is the reason that the clouds began to form on that side where the Master’s wife stood before your own side? He explained: Because my wife is frequently at home, and she gives bread to the poor, and therefore her provision of benefit to the needy is immediate, i.e., soon after the rains fall she is able to provide the needy with provisions. Accordingly, her prayers are answered without delay. In contrast, I give money to the poor, and consequently, the benefit of my gift is not immediate, i.e., it takes a lot of time before the rainfall results in my ability to give money to the poor. Alternatively, her prayers may have been answered first because when certain hooligans biryonei were living in our neighborhood, I prayed that they should die, but she prayed that they should repent. And indeed, they repented.,§ The Gemara relates another story about a descendant of Ḥoni HaMe’aggel. Ḥa HaNeḥba was the son of Ḥoni HaMe’aggel’s daughter. When the world was in need of rain, the Sages would send schoolchildren to him, and they would grab him by the hem of his cloak and say to him: Father, Father, give us rain. He said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, act on behalf of these children, who cannot distinguish between their Father in Heaven, Who can provide rain, and the father who cannot provide rain. The Gemara asks: And why was he called Ḥa HaNeḥba? Because he would hide maḥbi himself in the lavatory so that people would not bestow honor upon him.,The Gemara relates another story about righteous individuals praying for rain. Rabbi Zerika said to Rav Safra: Come and see what the difference is between the powerful men of Eretz Yisrael and the pious men of Babylonia. This comparison serves to highlight the righteousness of the great men of Eretz Yisrael. By the pious men of Babylonia, I mean Rav Huna and Rav Ḥisda. When the world is in need of rain, these Sages say: Let us assemble together and pray for mercy, and perhaps the Holy One, Blessed be He, will be appeased and bring rain. In this manner, the pious men of Babylonia publicized their prayers for rain.,By contrast, the powerful men of Eretz Yisrael, such as Rabbi Yona, the father of Rabbi Mani, acted differently. When the world was in need of rain, he enters his house and say to his household: Give me my sack gevalki and I will go and buy myself a dinar of grain. When he went outside, he went and stood in a low place, as it is written: “Out of the depths I have called You, O Lord” (Psalms 130:1). And he would stand in a secluded place, and cover himself with sackcloth, and pray for mercy, and rain would come. When he would come home, they would say to him: Did the Master bring grain? He said to them: I said to myself, since rain has now come, there will be relief in the world and prices will soon go down. In this manner, he hid his greatness even from his own household.,And furthermore, the Gemara relates that Rabbi Mani, Rabbi Yona’s son, was persecuted by members of the house of the Nasi. He prostrated himself upon his father’s grave and said to him: Father, Father, these men are persecuting me. One day, those men were passing there, by the grave, and the legs of their horses became stuck in the ground until they accepted upon themselves not to persecute Rabbi Mani anymore.,And furthermore, the Gemara relates that Rabbi Mani was frequently found before Rabbi Yitzḥak ben Elyashiv, a well-known miracle worker. Once, Rabbi Mani said to him: The wealthy members of my father-in-law’s house are persecuting me. Rabbi Yitzḥak said: May they become poor, so they will no longer lord over you. And indeed, they became poor. Some time later, Rabbi Mani said to his teacher: Now that they are poor they are pressuring me for ficial support. Rabbi Yitzḥak said: May they become rich again. And indeed, they became rich.,Rabbi Mani said to his teacher: The members of my household, i.e., my wife, are not acceptable to me, as she is not beautiful. Rabbi Yitzḥak said: What is her name? Rabbi Mana replied: Ḥana. Rabbi Yitzḥak declared: Let Ḥana grow beautiful, and indeed she grew beautiful. After a while, Rabbi Mani said to Rabbi Yitzḥak: She acts haughtily toward me, due to her great beauty. He said to him: If so, let Ḥana return to her homely appearance, and she returned to her homely appearance.,The Gemara relates: These two students, who were sitting before Rabbi Yitzḥak ben Elyashiv, said to him: Let the Master pray for mercy on our behalf, that we should become very wise. He said to them: This power was indeed with me at one stage, as I used to be able to pray for matters of this kind, but I sent it away. I took it upon myself never to pray for changes in the world order.,The Gemara cites another story involving a complaint. Rabbi Yosei bar Avin was frequently found before Rabbi Yosei from Yokrat. At some point he left him and came to study before Rav Ashi, who did not recognize him. ' None |
|
39. Babylonian Talmud, Yoma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraim • Amoraim, amoraic period • Jeremiah (Amora) • Judah (Amora) • Samuel (Amora) • Yose (Amora)
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 98, 100; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 131
| 87b אתא ר\' חייא הדר לרישא עייל בר קפרא הדר לרישא אתא ר"ש ברבי הדר לרישא אתא ר\' חנינא (בר) חמא אמר כולי האי נהדר וניזיל לא הדר איקפיד ר\' חנינא אזל רב לגביה תליסר מעלי יומי דכפורי ולא איפייס,והיכי עביד הכי והאמר ר\' יוסי בר חנינא כל המבקש מטו מחבירו אל יבקש ממנו יותר משלש פעמים רב שאני ור\' חנינא היכי עביד הכי והאמר רבא כל המעביר על מדותיו מעבירין לו על כל פשעיו,אלא ר\' חנינא חלמא חזי ליה לרב דזקפוהו בדיקלא וגמירי דכל דזקפוהו בדיקלא רישא הוי אמר שמע מינה בעי למעבד רשותא ולא איפייס כי היכי דליזיל ולגמר אורייתא בבבל,ת"ר מצות וידוי ערב יוה"כ עם חשכה אבל אמרו חכמים יתודה קודם שיאכל וישתה שמא תטרף דעתו בסעודה ואע"פ שהתודה קודם שאכל ושתה מתודה לאחר שיאכל וישתה שמא אירע דבר קלקלה בסעודה ואף על פי שהתודה ערבית יתודה שחרית שחרית יתודה במוסף במוסף יתודה במנחה במנחה יתודה בנעילה,והיכן אומרו יחיד אחר תפלתו ושליח צבור אומרו באמצע מאי אמר אמר רב אתה יודע רזי עולם ושמואל אמר ממעמקי הלב ולוי אמר ובתורתך כתוב לאמר ר\' יוחנן אמר רבון העולמים,ר\' יהודה אמר כי עונותינו רבו מלמנות וחטאתינו עצמו מספר רב המנונא אמר אלהי עד שלא נוצרתי איני כדאי עכשיו שנוצרתי כאילו לא נוצרתי עפר אני בחיי ק"ו במיתתי הרי אני לפניך ככלי מלא בושה וכלימה יהי רצון מלפניך שלא אחטא ומה שחטאתי מרוק ברחמיך אבל לא ע"י יסורין והיינו וידויא דרבא כולה שתא ודרב המנונא זוטא ביומא דכפורי,אמר מר זוטרא לא אמרן אלא דלא אמר אבל אנחנו חטאנו אבל אמר אבל אנחנו חטאנו תו לא צריך דאמר בר המדודי הוה קאימנא קמיה דשמואל והוה יתיב וכי מטא שליחא דצבורא ואמר אבל אנחנו חטאנו קם מיקם אמר שמע מינה עיקר וידוי האי הוא,תנן התם בשלשה פרקים בשנה כהנים נושאין את כפיהן ארבעה פעמים ביום בשחרית במוסף במנחה ובנעילת שערים ואלו הן שלשה פרקים בתעניות ובמעמדות וביום הכפורים,מאי נעילת שערים רב אמר צלותא יתירתא ושמואל אמר מה אנו מה חיינו מיתיבי אור יוה"כ מתפלל שבע ומתודה בשחרית מתפלל שבע ומתודה במוסף מתפלל שבע ומתודה במנחה מתפלל שבע ומתודה בנעילה מתפלל שבע ומתודה,תנאי היא דתניא יום הכפורים עם חשיכה מתפלל שבע ומתודה וחותם בוידוי דברי ר"מ וחכמים אומרים מתפלל שבע ואם רצה לחתום בוידוי חותם תיובתא דשמואל תיובתא,עולא בר רב נחית קמיה דרבא פתח באתה בחרתנו וסיים במה אנו מה חיינו ושבחיה רב הונא בריה דרב נתן אמר ויחיד אומרה אחר תפלתו,אמר רב תפלת נעילה פוטרת את של ערבית רב לטעמיה דאמר צלותא יתירא היא וכיון דצלי ליה תו לא צריך,ומי אמר רב הכי והאמר רב הלכה כדברי האומר תפלת ערבית רשות לדברי האומר חובה קאמר,מיתיבי אור יום הכפורים מתפלל שבע ומתודה שחרית שבע ומתודה מוסף שבע ומתודה בנעילה מתפלל שבע ומתודה ערבית מתפלל שבע מעין שמונה עשרה רבי חנינא בן גמליאל משום אבותיו מתפלל שמונה עשרה שלימות'' None | 87b Rabbi Ḥiyya, Rav’s uncle and teacher, came in, whereupon Rav returned to the beginning of the portion and began to read it again. Afterward, bar Kappara came in, and Rav returned to the beginning of the portion out of respect for bar Kappara. Then Rabbi Shimon, son of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, came in, and he returned again to the beginning of the portion. Then, Rabbi Ḥanina bar Ḥama came in, and Rav said to himself: Shall I go back and read so many times? He did not return but continued from where he was. Rabbi Ḥanina was offended because Rav showed that he was less important than the others. Rav went before Rabbi Ḥanina on Yom Kippur eve every year for thirteen years to appease him, but he would not be appeased.,The Gemara asks: How could Rav act this way? Didn’t Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina say: Anyone who requests forgiveness from another should not ask more than three times? The Gemara answers: Rav is different, since he was very pious and forced himself to act beyond the letter of the law. The Gemara asks: And how could Rabbi Ḥanina act this way and refuse to forgive Rav, though he asked many times? Didn’t Rava say: With regard to anyone who suppresses his honor and forgives someone for hurting him, God pardons all his sins?,The Gemara explains: Rather, this is what happened: Rabbi Ḥanina saw in a dream that Rav was being hung on a palm tree, and he learned as a tradition that anyone about whom there is a dream in which he was being hung on a palm tree will become the head of a yeshiva. He said: Learn from this that providence has decreed that he must eventually become the head of the yeshiva. Therefore, I will not be appeased, so that he will have to go and study Torah in Babylonia. He was conscious of the principle that one kingdom cannot overlap with another, and he knew that once Rav was appointed leader, he, Rabbi Ḥanina, would have to abdicate his own position or die. Therefore, he delayed being appeased, so that Rav would go to Babylonia and be appointed there as head of the yeshiva. In this way, the dream would be fulfilled, as Rav would indeed be appointed as head of a yeshiva, but since he would be in Babylonia, Rabbi Ḥanina would not lose his own position.,§ The Sages taught: The main mitzva of confession is on Yom Kippur eve when darkness falls. But the Sages said: One should also confess on Yom Kippur eve before he eats and drinks at his last meal before the fast lest he become confused at the meal, due to the abundance of food and drink, and be unable to confess afterward. And although one confessed before he ate and drank, he confesses again after he eats and drinks, as perhaps he committed some sin during the meal itself. And although one confessed during the evening prayer on the night of Yom Kippur, he should confess again during the morning prayer. Likewise, although one confessed during the morning prayer, he should still confess during the additional prayer. Similarly, although one confessed during the additional prayer, he should also confess during the afternoon prayer; and although one confessed during the afternoon prayer, he should confess again during the closing prayer ne’ila.,And where in the Yom Kippur prayers does one say the confession? An individual says it after his Amida prayer, and the prayer leader says it in the middle of the Amida prayer. The Gemara asks: What does one say; what is the liturgy of the confession? Rav said: One says the prayer that begins: You know the mysteries of the universe, in accordance with the standard liturgy. And Shmuel said that the prayer begins with: From the depths of the heart. And Levi said that it begins: And in your Torah it is written, saying, and one then recites the forgiveness achieved by Yom Kippur as stated in the Torah. Rabbi Yoḥa said that it begins: Master of the Universe.,Rabbi Yehuda said that one says: For our iniquities are too many to count and our sins are too great to number. Rav Hamnuna said: This is the liturgy of the confession: My God, before I was formed I was unworthy. Now that I have been formed, it is as if I had not been formed. I am dust while alive, how much more so when I am dead. See, I am before You like a vessel filled with shame and disgrace. May it be Your will that I may sin no more, and as for the sins I have committed before You, erase them in Your compassion, but not by suffering. The Gemara comments: This is the confession that Rava used all year long; and it was the confession that Rav Hamnuna Zuta used on Yom Kippur.,Mar Zutra said: We said only that one must follow all these versions when he did not say the words: But we have sinned. However, if he said the words: But we have sinned, he need not say anything further because that is the essential part of the confession. As bar Hamdudei said: I was standing before Shmuel and he was sitting; and when the prayer leader reached the words: But we have sinned, Shmuel stood. Bar Hamdudei said: Learn from here that this is the main part of the confession, and Shmuel stood up to emphasize the significance of these words.,§ We learned in a mishna there, in tractate Ta’anit: At three times in the year, priests raise their hands to recite the priestly benediction four times in a single day: In the morning prayer, in the additional prayer, in the afternoon prayer, and at the closing ne’ila of the gates. And these are the three times in the year: During communal fasts for lack of rain, on which the ne’ila prayer is recited; and during non-priestly watches ma’amadot, when the Israelite members of the guard parallel to the priestly watch come and read the account of Creation (see Ta’anit 26a); and on Yom Kippur.,The Gemara asks: What is the closing of the gates, i.e., the ne’ila prayer? Rav said: It is an added prayer of Amida. And Shmuel said: It is not a full prayer but only a confession that begins with the words: What are we, what are our lives? The Gemara raises an objection to this from a baraita, as it was taught: On the night of Yom Kippur, one prays seven blessings in the Amida prayer and confesses; during the morning prayer, one prays seven blessings and confesses; during the additional prayer, one prays seven blessings and confesses; during the afternoon prayer, one prays seven blessings and confesses; and during the ne’ila prayer, one prays seven blessings and confesses. This concurs with Rav’s opinion that ne’ila is an added prayer.,This is a dispute between tanna’im They all agree that ne’ila is an added prayer but disagree about the obligation to confess at the ne’ila prayer, as it was taught in a baraita: At the end of Yom Kippur, as darkness falls, one prays seven blessings of the Amida and confesses and ends with the confession; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: He prays seven blessings of the Amida, and if he wishes to end his prayer with a confession, he ends it in this way. The Gemara says: If so, this is a refutation of the opinion of Shmuel, since all agree that ne’ila is a complete prayer. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, it is a conclusive refutation.,The Gemara relates: Ulla bar Rav went down to lead the ne’ila prayer before Rava, who was in the synagogue. He opened the prayer with: You have chosen us, and he concluded with: What are we, what are our lives? And Rava praised him. Rav Huna, son of Rav Natan, said: And an individual says it after his Amida prayer. The individual says the confession after his Amida prayer, not within the Amida prayer as the prayer leader does.,Rav said: The ne’ila prayer exempts one from the evening prayer. Since one recited an added prayer after the afternoon prayer, when darkness fell, it serves as the evening prayer. The Gemara comments that Rav conforms to his line of reasoning above, as he said: It is an added prayer, and since he has prayed it he needs no further prayer in the evening.,The Gemara is surprised at this: And did Rav actually say this? Didn’t Rav say: The halakha is in accordance with the statement of the one who says that the evening prayer is optional? If it is optional, why would Rav use the term exempt? One is exempt even if he does not pray the closing prayer. The Gemara answers: He said this in accordance with the statement of the one who says that the evening prayer is mandatory. Even according to the opinion that maintains that the evening prayer is mandatory, if one recites ne’ila, he has fulfilled his obligation to recite the evening prayer.,The Gemara raises an objection from that which we learned in a baraita: During the evening after Yom Kippur, one prays seven blessings in the Amida and confesses; during the morning prayer, one prays seven blessings in the Amida and confesses; during the additional prayer, one prays seven blessings in the Amida and confesses; during ne’ila one prays seven blessings in the Amida and confesses; and during the evening prayer, one prays seven blessings in an abridged version of the eighteen blessings of the weekday Amida prayer. One recites the first three blessings, the final three, and a middle blessing that includes an abbreviated form of the other weekday blessings. Rabbi Ḥanina ben Gamliel says in the name of his ancestors: One prays the full eighteen blessings of the weekday Amida prayer as usual,'' None |
|
40. None, None, nan (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic Period in Babylonia • Amoraim, Babylonian
Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 70; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 183
|
41. None, None, nan (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraim, Amoraic period • halakha, tannaitic vs. amoraic
Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 116; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 29
|
