1. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 6.8, 17.16, 26.12 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Egypt, Jewish definition of its boundaries • heresy, definition of • interiorities defined, prayers • interiorities defined, quorum for worship (synagogue) • interiorities defined, shares in God’s food • passions, Stoic definition • tsedaqah/tzdaka, defined • utility, factor in defining key terms
Found in books: Gardner (2015) 31; Geljon and Runia (2013) 181; Klawans (2019) 15; Neusner (2001) 62, 345; Salvesen et al (2020) 635
6.8. וּקְשַׁרְתָּם לְאוֹת עַל־יָדֶךָ וְהָיוּ לְטֹטָפֹת בֵּין עֵינֶיךָ׃
17.16. רַק לֹא־יַרְבֶּה־לּוֹ סוּסִים וְלֹא־יָשִׁיב אֶת־הָעָם מִצְרַיְמָה לְמַעַן הַרְבּוֹת סוּס וַיהוָה אָמַר לָכֶם לֹא תֹסִפוּן לָשׁוּב בַּדֶּרֶךְ הַזֶּה עוֹד׃
26.12. כִּי תְכַלֶּה לַעְשֵׂר אֶת־כָּל־מַעְשַׂר תְּבוּאָתְךָ בַּשָּׁנָה הַשְּׁלִישִׁת שְׁנַת הַמַּעֲשֵׂר וְנָתַתָּה לַלֵּוִי לַגֵּר לַיָּתוֹם וְלָאַלְמָנָה וְאָכְלוּ בִשְׁעָרֶיךָ וְשָׂבֵעוּ׃''. None | 6.8. And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thy hand, and they shall be for frontlets between thine eyes.
17.16. Only he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses; forasmuch as the LORD hath said unto you: ‘Ye shall henceforth return no more that way.’
26.12. When thou hast made an end of tithing all the tithe of thine increase in the third year, which is the year of tithing, and hast given it unto the Levite, to the stranger, to the fatherless, and to the widow, that they may eat within thy gates, and be satisfied,''. None |
|
2. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 1.26-1.27, 2.7, 5.1-5.3 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Barbeloite, modern definitions • Sethites my definition • city of God, defined in terms of ‘love’ • grammatical archive, commentarial strategies, defining terms • humanity, hope defining • interiorities defined, meets God at altar • interiorities defined, sheqel-tax • magic, late 19th and early 20th century definitions of • narrative, defined
Found in books: Birnbaum and Dillon (2020) 155, 158; Janowitz (2002) 84; Neusner (2001) 138, 163; O, Daly (2020) 182; Rasimus (2009) 62, 97, 159, 171, 175, 183, 184; Trudinger (2004) 267; Ward (2022) 158
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׃
2.7. וַיִּיצֶר יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים אֶת־הָאָדָם עָפָר מִן־הָאֲדָמָה וַיִּפַּח בְּאַפָּיו נִשְׁמַת חַיִּים וַיְהִי הָאָדָם לְנֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה׃
5.1. וַיְחִי אֱנוֹשׁ אַחֲרֵי הוֹלִידוֹ אֶת־קֵינָן חֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה וּשְׁמֹנֶה מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה וַיּוֹלֶד בָּנִים וּבָנוֹת׃
5.1. זֶה סֵפֶר תּוֹלְדֹת אָדָם בְּיוֹם בְּרֹא אֱלֹהִים אָדָם בִּדְמוּת אֱלֹהִים עָשָׂה אֹתוֹ׃ 5.2. וַיִּהְיוּ כָּל־יְמֵי־יֶרֶד שְׁתַּיִם וְשִׁשִּׁים שָׁנָה וּתְשַׁע מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה וַיָּמֹת׃ 5.2. זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בְּרָאָם וַיְבָרֶךְ אֹתָם וַיִּקְרָא אֶת־שְׁמָם אָדָם בְּיוֹם הִבָּרְאָם׃ 5.3. וַיְחִי אָדָם שְׁלֹשִׁים וּמְאַת שָׁנָה וַיּוֹלֶד בִּדְמוּתוֹ כְּצַלְמוֹ וַיִּקְרָא אֶת־שְׁמוֹ שֵׁת׃ 5.3. וַיְחִי־לֶמֶךְ אַחֲרֵי הוֹלִידוֹ אֶת־נֹחַ חָמֵשׁ וְתִשְׁעִים שָׁנָה וַחֲמֵשׁ מֵאֹת שָׁנָה וַיּוֹלֶד בָּנִים וּבָנוֹת׃' '. None | 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.
2.7. Then the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
5.1. This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made He him; 5.2. male and female created He them, and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created. 5.3. And Adam lived a hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth.' '. None |
|
3. None, None, nan (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Barbeloite, modern definitions • Philo of Alexandria, definition of wisdom
Found in books: Mermelstein (2021) 84; Rasimus (2009) 130
|
4. Homer, Iliad, 2.195-2.196, 2.241-2.242, 2.527-2.551, 2.604, 2.683-2.684, 18.504, 20.55 (8th cent. BCE - 7th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Aristotle, definition of anger • Peripatetic philosophy, definition of anger • Theoxenia, Delphi, defining Hellenicity (Greekness) • allegory, definition of • anger,Aristotle’s definition • catalogues, see also lists\n, definitions of • definitions • democracy, ancient and modern,, definition of • documents\n, definition of • heroines, definition of • shares, sacrificial (Delphi), defining religious community at Theoxenia • space, civic, defined • wisdom, definition of • ‘real world’\n, definitions of
Found in books: Arthur-Montagne DiGiulio and Kuin (2022) 67; Braund and Most (2004) 25, 26, 117; Fabian Meinel (2015) 75; Kaplan (2015) 34; Kowalzig (2007) 198; Laemmle (2021) 27; Legaspi (2018) 249; Lloyd (1989) 191; Lyons (1997) 7; Raaflaub Ober and Wallace (2007) 120
2.195. μή τι χολωσάμενος ῥέξῃ κακὸν υἷας Ἀχαιῶν· 2.196. θυμὸς δὲ μέγας ἐστὶ διοτρεφέων βασιλήων,
2.241. ἀλλὰ μάλʼ οὐκ Ἀχιλῆϊ χόλος φρεσίν, ἀλλὰ μεθήμων· 2.242. ἦ γὰρ ἂν Ἀτρεΐδη νῦν ὕστατα λωβήσαιο·
2.527. Λοκρῶν δʼ ἡγεμόνευεν Ὀϊλῆος ταχὺς Αἴας 2.528. μείων, οὔ τι τόσος γε ὅσος Τελαμώνιος Αἴας 2.529. ἀλλὰ πολὺ μείων· ὀλίγος μὲν ἔην λινοθώρηξ, 2.530. ἐγχείῃ δʼ ἐκέκαστο Πανέλληνας καὶ Ἀχαιούς· 2.531. οἳ Κῦνόν τʼ ἐνέμοντʼ Ὀπόεντά τε Καλλίαρόν τε 2.532. Βῆσσάν τε Σκάρφην τε καὶ Αὐγειὰς ἐρατεινὰς 2.533. Τάρφην τε Θρόνιον τε Βοαγρίου ἀμφὶ ῥέεθρα· 2.534. τῷ δʼ ἅμα τεσσαράκοντα μέλαιναι νῆες ἕποντο 2.535. Λοκρῶν, οἳ ναίουσι πέρην ἱερῆς Εὐβοίης. 2.536. οἳ δʼ Εὔβοιαν ἔχον μένεα πνείοντες Ἄβαντες 2.537. Χαλκίδα τʼ Εἰρέτριάν τε πολυστάφυλόν θʼ Ἱστίαιαν 2.538. Κήρινθόν τʼ ἔφαλον Δίου τʼ αἰπὺ πτολίεθρον, 2.539. οἵ τε Κάρυστον ἔχον ἠδʼ οἳ Στύρα ναιετάασκον, 2.540. τῶν αὖθʼ ἡγεμόνευʼ Ἐλεφήνωρ ὄζος Ἄρηος 2.541. Χαλκωδοντιάδης μεγαθύμων ἀρχὸς Ἀβάντων. 2.542. τῷ δʼ ἅμʼ Ἄβαντες ἕποντο θοοὶ ὄπιθεν κομόωντες 2.543. αἰχμηταὶ μεμαῶτες ὀρεκτῇσιν μελίῃσι 2.544. θώρηκας ῥήξειν δηΐων ἀμφὶ στήθεσσι· 2.545. τῷ δʼ ἅμα τεσσαράκοντα μέλαιναι νῆες ἕποντο. 2.546. οἳ δʼ ἄρʼ Ἀθήνας εἶχον ἐϋκτίμενον πτολίεθρον 2.547. δῆμον Ἐρεχθῆος μεγαλήτορος, ὅν ποτʼ Ἀθήνη 2.548. θρέψε Διὸς θυγάτηρ, τέκε δὲ ζείδωρος ἄρουρα, 2.549. κὰδ δʼ ἐν Ἀθήνῃς εἷσεν ἑῷ ἐν πίονι νηῷ· 2.550. ἔνθα δέ μιν ταύροισι καὶ ἀρνειοῖς ἱλάονται 2.551. κοῦροι Ἀθηναίων περιτελλομένων ἐνιαυτῶν·
2.604. Αἰπύτιον παρὰ τύμβον ἵνʼ ἀνέρες ἀγχιμαχηταί,
2.683. οἵ τʼ εἶχον Φθίην ἠδʼ Ἑλλάδα καλλιγύναικα, 2.684. Μυρμιδόνες δὲ καλεῦντο καὶ Ἕλληνες καὶ Ἀχαιοί,
18.504. εἵατʼ ἐπὶ ξεστοῖσι λίθοις ἱερῷ ἐνὶ κύκλῳ,
20.55. σύμβαλον, ἐν δʼ αὐτοῖς ἔριδα ῥήγνυντο βαρεῖαν·''. None | 2.195. Beware lest waxing wroth he work mischief to the sons of the Achaeans. Proud is the heart of kings, fostered of heaven; for their honour is from Zeus, and Zeus, god of counsel, loveth them. But whatsoever man of the people he saw, and found brawling, him would he smite with his staff; and chide with words, saying,
2.241. for he hath taken away, and keepeth his prize by his own arrogant act. of a surety there is naught of wrath in the heart of Achilles; nay, he heedeth not at all; else, son of Atreus, wouldest thou now work insolence for the last time. So spake Thersites, railing at Agamemnon, shepherd of the host. But quickly to his side came goodly Odysseus,
2.527. And their leaders busily marshalled the ranks of the Phocians, and made ready for battle hard by the Boeotians on the left.And the Loerians had as leader the swift son of Oïleus, Aias the less, in no wise as great as Telamonian Aias, but far less. Small of stature was he, with corselet of linen, 2.530. /but with the spear he far excelled the whole host of Hellenes and Achaeans. These were they that dwelt in Cynus and Opus and Calliarus and Bessa and Scarphe and lovely Augeiae and Tarphe and Thronium about the streams of Boagrius. With Aias followed forty black ships of 2.535. the Locrians that dwell over against sacred Euboea.And the Abantes, breathing fury, that held Euboea and Chalcis and Eretria and Histiaea, rich in vines, and Cerinthus, hard by the sea, and the steep citadel of Dios; and that held Carystus and dwelt in Styra,— 2.540. all these again had as leader Elephenor, scion of Ares, him that was son of Chalcodon and captain of the great-souled Abantes. And with him followed the swift Abantes, with hair long at the back, spearmen eager with outstretched ashen spears to rend the corselets about the breasts of the foemen. 2.545. /And with him there followed forty black ships. 2.549. And with him there followed forty black ships. And they that held Athens, the well-built citadel, the land of great-hearted Erechtheus, whom of old Athene, daughter of Zeus, fostered, when the earth, the giver of grain, had borne him; and she made him to dwell in Athens, in her own rich sanctuary, 2.550. and there the youths of the Athenians, as the years roll on in their courses, seek to win his favour with sacrifices of bulls and rams;—these again had as leader Menestheus, son of Peteos. Like unto him was none other man upon the face of the earth for the marshalling of chariots and of warriors that bear the shield.
2.604. and took from him his wondrous song, and made him forget his minstrelsy;—all these folk again had as leader the horseman, Nestor of Gerenia. And with him were ranged ninety hollow ships.And they that held Arcadia beneath the steep mountain of Cyllene, beside the tomb of Aepytus, where are warriors that fight in close combat;
2.683. And with them were ranged thirty hollow ships.Now all those again that inhabited Pelasgian Argos, and dwelt in Alos and Alope and Trachis, and that held Phthia and Hellas, the land of fair women, and were called Myrmidons and Hellenes and Achaeans—
18.504. declaring his cause to the people, but the other refused to accept aught; and each was fain to win the issue on the word of a daysman. Moreover, the folk were cheering both, shewing favour to this side and to that. And heralds held back the folk, and the elders were sitting upon polished stones in the sacred circle,
20.55. clash in battle, and amid them made grievous strife to burst forth. Then terribly thundered the father of gods and men from on high; and from beneath did Poseidon cause the vast earth to quake, and the steep crests of the mountains. All the roots of many-fountained Ida were shaken, ''. None |
|
5. Plato, Meno, None (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Antisthenes, and definition • definition • definitional inquiry
Found in books: Ebrey and Kraut (2022) 177, 178, 184, 195, 196; Wolfsdorf (2020) 188
98a. ἀγαθὰ ἐργάζονται· πολὺν δὲ χρόνον οὐκ ἐθέλουσι παραμένειν, ἀλλὰ δραπετεύουσιν ἐκ τῆς ψυχῆς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, ὥστε οὐ πολλοῦ ἄξιαί εἰσιν, ἕως ἄν τις αὐτὰς δήσῃ αἰτίας λογισμῷ. τοῦτο δʼ ἐστίν, ὦ Μένων ἑταῖρε, ἀνάμνησις, ὡς ἐν τοῖς πρόσθεν ἡμῖν ὡμολόγηται. ἐπειδὰν δὲ δεθῶσιν, πρῶτον μὲν ἐπιστῆμαι γίγνονται, ἔπειτα μόνιμοι· καὶ διὰ ταῦτα δὴ τιμιώτερον ἐπιστήμη ὀρθῆς δόξης ἐστίν, καὶ διαφέρει δεσμῷ ἐπιστήμη ὀρθῆς δόξης. ΜΕΝ. νὴ τὸν Δία, ὦ Σώκρατες, ἔοικεν τοιούτῳ τινί.''. None | 98a. and effect all that is good; but they do not care to stay for long, and run away out of the human soul, and thus are of no great value until one makes them fast with causal reasoning. And this process, friend Meno, is recollection, as in our previous talk we have agreed. But when once they are fastened, in the first place they turn into knowledge, and in the second, are abiding. And this is why knowledge is more prized than right opinion: the one transcends the other by its trammels. Men. Upon my word, Socrates, it seems to be very much as you say.''. None |
|
6. Plato, Timaeus, None (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • definitions • demons, defined
Found in books: Hoenig (2018) 150; Černušková (2016) 289
30b. λογισάμενος οὖν ηὕρισκεν ἐκ τῶν κατὰ φύσιν ὁρατῶν οὐδὲν ἀνόητον τοῦ νοῦν ἔχοντος ὅλον ὅλου κάλλιον ἔσεσθαί ποτε ἔργον, νοῦν δʼ αὖ χωρὶς ψυχῆς ἀδύνατον παραγενέσθαι τῳ. διὰ δὴ τὸν λογισμὸν τόνδε νοῦν μὲν ἐν ψυχῇ, ψυχὴν δʼ ἐν σώματι συνιστὰς τὸ πᾶν συνετεκταίνετο, ὅπως ὅτι κάλλιστον εἴη κατὰ φύσιν ἄριστόν τε ἔργον ἀπειργασμένος. οὕτως οὖν δὴ κατὰ λόγον τὸν εἰκότα δεῖ λέγειν τόνδε τὸν κόσμον ζῷον ἔμψυχον ἔννουν τε τῇ ἀληθείᾳ διὰ τὴν τοῦ θεοῦ''. None | 30b. none that is irrational will be fairer, comparing wholes with wholes, than the rational; and further, that reason cannot possibly belong to any apart from Soul. So because of this reflection He constructed reason within soul and soul within body as He fashioned the All, that so the work He was executing might be of its nature most fair and most good. Thus, then, in accordance with the likely account, we must declare that this Cosmos has verily come into existence as a Living Creature endowed with soul and reason owing to the providence of God.''. None |
|
7. None, None, nan (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Samaritan Pentateuch, Scripture, definition of • archival historiography, definitions of • archives, definitions of
Found in books: Halser (2020) 3, 36, 37; Jassen (2014) 23
|
8. None, None, nan (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Philosophy, definition of • definition
Found in books: Joosse (2021) 55; d, Hoine and Martijn (2017) 206
|
9. None, None, nan (4th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • definition • definition in geometry
Found in books: Ebrey and Kraut (2022) 195; d, Hoine and Martijn (2017) 176
|
10. None, None, nan (4th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Anger, Definitions • definition, Aristotle’s method of discovering • definition, of individual emotions, anger • god, definition of • principle (arche), as a complete definition • separation, in account or definition
Found in books: Carter (2019) 29, 34; Fortenbaugh (2006) 73; Marmodoro and Prince (2015) 106; Segev (2017) 95; Sorabji (2000) 263, 264
|
11. None, None, nan (4th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Pleasure, Definitions • definition,of tragedy • tragedy, definitions of
Found in books: Fabian Meinel (2015) 7; Fortenbaugh (2006) 190; Sorabji (2000) 24
|
12. None, None, nan (4th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Anger, Definitions • Appetite (epithumia), Definitions • Aristotle, Comedy, definition • Aristotle, definition of anger • Fear, Definitions • Peripatetic philosophy, definition of anger • Pity, Definitions • Pleasure, Definitions • anger,Aristotle’s definition • fear, definition of
Found in books: Braund and Most (2004) 103; Hockey (2019) 180; Sorabji (2000) 23, 24, 135, 290
|
13. Anon., Jubilees, 22.16 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Gentiles, definition of • prayer, definition of
Found in books: Lidonnici and Lieber (2007) 33; Lieu (2004) 113
| 22.16. May nations serve thee, And all the nations bow themselves before thy seed.''. None |
|
14. Cicero, On The Nature of The Gods, 2.153 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • piety, Stoic definition of • res publica, definition of
Found in books: Brouwer (2013) 175; O, Daly (2020) 272
| 2.153. "Then moreover hasn\'t man\'s reason penetrated even to the sky? We alone of living creatures know the risings and settings and the courses of the stars, the human race has set limits to the day, the month and the year, and has learnt the eclipses of the sun and moon and foretold for all future time their occurrence, their extent and their dates. And contemplating the heavenly bodies the mind arrives at a knowledge of the gods, from which arises piety, with its comrades justice and the rest of the virtues, the sources of a life of happiness that vies with and resembles the divine existence and leaves us inferior to the celestial beings in nothing else save immortality, which is immaterial for happiness. I think that my exposition of these matters has been sufficient to prove how widely man\'s nature surpasses all other living creatures; and this should make it clear that neither such a conformation and arrangement of the members nor such power of mind and intellect can possibly have been created by chance. ''. None |
|
15. None, None, nan (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • definition in dialectic • narratio, definition of
Found in books: Martin and Whitlark (2018) 80; d, Hoine and Martijn (2017) 184
|
16. None, None, nan (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Cicero, attributing the definition of wisdom to the ancients • definition, of emotion • definition, of individual emotions, anger
Found in books: Brouwer (2013) 14; Fortenbaugh (2006) 349
|
17. None, None, nan (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Anger, Definitions • Cicero, attributing the definition of wisdom to the ancients • Distress, Definition • Fear, Definitions • Pity, Definitions • Pleasure, Definitions • emotions, definitions of • res publica, definition of
Found in books: Brouwer (2013) 15; Graver (2007) 30, 43; O, Daly (2020) 272; Sorabji (2000) 29, 30
|
18. None, None, nan (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Apocalyptic literature, definitions • Periodization of history, defined • apocalypticism, definitions of apocalypticism • theme, defined
Found in books: Collins (2016) 4, 10, 81; Crabb (2020) 39; Trudinger (2004) 208
|
19. Philo of Alexandria, On Husbandry, 84 (1st cent. BCE - missingth cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • identity as nation or people, not defined by direct lineage in Philo • passions, Stoic definition
Found in books: Geljon and Runia (2019) 163; Gruen (2020) 162
| 84. Very beautifully, therefore, does the lawgiver in his recommendations, teach us not to elect as a chief, a man who is a breeder of horses, thinking that such a one is altogether unsuited to exercise authority, inasmuch as he is in a frenzy about pleasures and appetites, and intolerable loves, and rages about like an unbridled and unmanageable horse. For he speaks thus, "Thou shalt not be able to set over thyself a man that is a stranger, because he is not thy brother; because he will not multiply for himself his horses, and will not turn his people towards Egypt." ''. None |
|
20. Philo of Alexandria, On The Special Laws, 4.105 (1st cent. BCE - missingth cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Arithmological definition • Judaism, Soul, defining human category
Found in books: Corrigan and Rasimus (2013) 178; Potter Suh and Holladay (2021) 213
| 4.105. The animals which are clean and lawful to be used as food are ten in number; the heifer, the lamb, the goat, the stag, the antelope, the buffalo, the roebuck, the pygarga, the wildox, and the chamois, {19}{'. None |
|
21. Philo of Alexandria, On The Virtues, 179 (1st cent. BCE - missingth cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Philo of Alexandria, definition of wisdom • identity as nation or people, not defined by direct lineage in Philo
Found in books: Gruen (2020) 164; Mermelstein (2021) 84
| 179. And what can this best of all things be except God? whose honours those men have attributed to beings which are not gods, honouring them beyond all reason and moderation, and, like empty minded people that they are, wholly forgetting him. All those men therefore who, although they did not originally choose to honour the Creator and Father of the universe, have yet changed and done so afterwards, having learnt to prefer to honour a single monarch rather than a number of rulers, we must look upon as our friends and kinsmen, since they display that greatest of all bonds with which to cement friendship and kindred, namely, a pious and God-loving disposition, and we ought to sympathise in joy with and to congratulate them, since even if they were blind previously they have now received their sight, beholding the most brilliant of all lights instead of the most profound darkness. XXXIV. ''. None |
|
22. None, None, nan (1st cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Pompey (Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus), defines Egypt and the Nile • definition
Found in books: Manolaraki (2012) 152; Oksanish (2019) 103
|
23. Mishnah, Peah, 8.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Definition of a field • tsedaqah/tzdaka, defined
Found in books: Brooks (1983) 180; Gardner (2015) 31
8.5. אֵין פּוֹחֲתִין לָעֲנִיִּים בַּגֹּרֶן מֵחֲצִי קַב חִטִּים וְקַב שְׂעוֹרִים. רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, חֲצִי קַב. קַב וָחֵצִי כֻסְּמִין, וְקַב גְּרוֹגָרוֹת, אוֹ מָנֶה דְּבֵלָה. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, פְּרָס. חֲצִי לֹג יָיִן. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, רְבִיעִית. רְבִיעִית שֶׁמֶן. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, שְׁמִינִית. וּשְׁאָר כָּל הַפֵּרוֹת, אָמַר אַבָּא שָׁאוּל, כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּמְכְּרֵם וְיִקַּח בָּהֶם מְזוֹן שְׁתֵּי סְעֻדּוֹת:''. None | 8.5. They may not give to the poor from the threshing-floor less than a half-kav of wheat or a kav of barley. R. Meir says: only half a kav of barley. They must give a kav and a half of spelt, a kav of dried figs or a maneh of pressed figs. Rabbi Akiva says: half a maneh. They must give half a log of wine. Rabbi Akiva says: a quarter. They must give a quarter log of oil. Rabbi Akiva says: an eighth. As for other kinds of produce: Abba Shaul says, they must give enough so that he can sell it and buy food enough for two meals.''. None |
|
24. New Testament, 1 Peter, 4.16 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Christianity, issues of definition • Jewish Christianity, definition • Jews, issues of definition • shame, definition of
Found in books: Esler (2000) 137; Hockey (2019) 227
4.16. εἰ δὲ ὡς Χριστιανός, μὴ αἰσχυνέσθω, δοξαζέτω δὲ τὸν θεὸν ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τούτῳ.''. None | 4.16. But if one of you suffers for being a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God in this matter. ''. None |
|
25. New Testament, 1 Corinthians, 15.45 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Barbeloite, modern definitions • Sethites my definition • city of God, defined in terms of ‘love’ • fleshly, definition of • soul, definition of
Found in books: Mcglothlin (2018) 80, 113; O, Daly (2020) 182; Rasimus (2009) 130, 159, 174, 183, 184
15.45. οὕτως καὶ γέγραπταιἘγένετο ὁ πρῶτος ἄνθρωπος Ἀδὰμ εἰς ψυχὴν ζῶσαν·ὁ ἔσχατος Ἀδὰμ εἰς πνεῦμα ζωοποιοῦν.' '. None | 15.45. So also it is written, "The first man, Adam, became a livingsoul." The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.' '. None |
|
26. New Testament, Acts, 6.5 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Barbeloite, modern definitions • Jewish Christianity, definition • Sethites my definition
Found in books: Esler (2000) 138; Rasimus (2009) 240
6.5. καὶ ἤρεσεν ὁ λόγος ἐνώπιον παντὸς τοῦ πλήθους, καὶ ἐξελέξαντο Στέφανον, ἄνδρα πλήρη πίστεως καὶ πνεύματος ἁγίου, καὶ Φίλιππον καὶ Πρόχορον καὶ Νικάνορα καὶ Τίμωνα καὶ Παρμενᾶν καὶ Νικόλαον προσήλυτον Ἀντιοχέα,''. None | 6.5. These words pleased the whole multitude. They chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolaus, a proselyte of Antioch; ''. None |
|
27. New Testament, Galatians, 2.11-2.14, 5.22 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Christianity, issues of definition • fleshly, definition of • genuine humanness, defined by Epictetus • human beings, defined by Epictetus • human vocation, defined by Epictetus • soul, definition of • trust, relational, definition
Found in books: Dürr (2022) 145; Esler (2000) 136; Mcglothlin (2018) 78; Morgan (2022) 317
2.11. Ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν Κηφᾶς εἰς Ἀντιόχειαν, κατὰ πρόσωπον αὐτῷ ἀντέστην, ὅτι κατεγνωσμένος ἦν· 2.12. πρὸ τοῦ γὰρ ἐλθεῖν τινὰς ἀπὸ Ἰακώβου μετὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν συνήσθιεν· ὅτε δὲ ἦλθον, ὑπέστελλεν καὶ ἀφώριζεν ἑαυτόν, φοβούμενος τοὺς ἐκ περιτομῆς. 2.13. καὶ συνυπεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ Ἰουδαῖοι, ὥστε καὶ Βαρνάβας συναπήχθη αὐτῶν τῇ ὑποκρίσει. 2.14. ἀλλʼ ὅτε εἶδον ὅτι οὐκ ὀρθοποδοῦσιν πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, εἶπον τῷ Κηφᾷ ἔμπροσθεν πάντων Εἰ σὺ Ἰουδαῖος ὑπάρχων ἐθνικῶς καὶ οὐκ Ἰουδαϊκῶς ζῇς, πῶς τὰ ἔθνη ἀναγκάζεις Ἰουδαΐζειν;
5.22. ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη, χαρά, εἰρήνη, μακροθυμία, χρηστότης, ἀγαθωσύνη, πίστις,''. None | 2.11. But when Peter came to Antioch, I resisted him to the face,because he stood condemned. 2.12. For before some people came fromJames, he ate with the Gentiles. But when they came, he drew back andseparated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. 2.13. And the rest of the Jews joined him in his hypocrisy; so that evenBarnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy. 2.14. But when I sawthat they didn\'t walk uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, Isaid to Peter before them all, "If you, being a Jew, live as theGentiles do, and not as the Jews do, why do you compel the Gentiles tolive as the Jews do?
5.22. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience,kindness, goodness, faithfulness, ''. None |
|
28. New Testament, Titus, 1.14 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • conversion, definition • paraenesis, definition
Found in books: Despotis and Lohr (2022) 321; Malherbe et al (2014) 420
1.14. ἵνα ὑγιαίνωσιν ἐν τῇ πίστει, μὴ προσέχοντες Ἰουδαϊκοῖς μύθοις καὶ ἐντολαῖς ἀνθρώπων ἀποστρεφομένων τὴν ἀλήθειαν.''. None | 1.14. not paying attention to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn away from the truth. ''. None |
|
29. New Testament, John, 1.1-1.18 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Barbeloite, modern definitions • Sethites my definition • definitions
Found in books: Rasimus (2009) 130, 157, 259, 267, 275, 277; Černušková (2016) 132, 289
1.1. ΕΝ ΑΡΧΗ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. 1.2. Οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόν. 1.3. πάντα διʼ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν. 1.4. ὃ γέγονεν ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ἦν, καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἦν τὸ φῶς τῶν ἀνθρώπων· 1.5. καὶ τὸ φῶς ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ φαίνει, καὶ ἡ σκοτία αὐτὸ οὐ κατέλαβεν. 1.6. Ἐγένετο ἄνθρωπος ἀπεσταλμένος παρὰ θεοῦ, ὄνομα αὐτῷ Ἰωάνης· 1.7. οὗτος ἦλθεν εἰς μαρτυρίαν, ἵνα μαρτυρήσῃ περὶ τοῦ φωτός, ἵνα πάντες πιστεύσωσιν διʼ αὐτοῦ. 1.8. οὐκ ἦν ἐκεῖνος τὸ φῶς, ἀλλʼ ἵνα μαρτυρήσῃ περὶ τοῦ φωτός. 1.9. Ἦν τὸ φῶς τὸ ἀληθινὸν ὃ φωτίζει πάντα ἄνθρωπον ἐρχόμενον εἰς τὸν κόσμον.
1.10. ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ ἦν, καὶ ὁ κόσμος διʼ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ ὁ κόσμος αὐτὸν οὐκ ἔγνω.
1.11. Εἰς τὰ ἴδια ἦλθεν, καὶ οἱ ἴδιοι αὐτὸν οὐ παρέλαβον.
1.12. ὅσοι δὲ ἔλαβον αὐτόν, ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ἐξουσίαν τέκνα θεοῦ γενέσθαι, τοῖς πιστεύουσιν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ,
1.13. οἳ οὐκ ἐξ αἱμάτων οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος σαρκὸς οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος ἀνδρὸς ἀλλʼ ἐκ θεοῦ ἐγεννήθησαν.
1.14. Καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν, καὶ ἐθεασάμεθα τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ, δόξαν ὡς μονογενοῦς παρὰ πατρός, πλήρης χάριτος καὶ ἀληθείας·?̔
1.15. Ἰωάνης μαρτυρεῖ περὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ κέκραγεν λέγων — οὗτος ἦν ὁ εἰπών — Ὁ ὀπίσω μου ἐρχόμενος ἔμπροσθέν μου γέγονεν, ὅτι πρῶτός μου ἦν·̓
1.16. ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ πληρώματος αὐτοῦ ἡμεῖς πάντες ἐλάβομεν, καὶ χάριν ἀντὶ χάριτος·
1.17. ὅτι ὁ νόμος διὰ Μωυσέως ἐδόθη, ἡ χάρις καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐγένετο.
1.18. θεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώρακεν πώποτε· μονογενὴς θεὸς ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκεῖνος ἐξηγήσατο.''. None | 1.1. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 1.2. The same was in the beginning with God. 1.3. All things were made through him. Without him was not anything made that has been made. 1.4. In him was life, and the life was the light of men. ' "1.5. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness hasn't overcome it. " '1.6. There came a man, sent from God, whose name was John. 1.7. The same came as a witness, that he might testify about the light, that all might believe through him. 1.8. He was not the light, but was sent that he might testify about the light. 1.9. The true light that enlightens everyone was coming into the world. ' "
1.10. He was in the world, and the world was made through him, and the world didn't recognize him. " "
1.11. He came to his own, and those who were his own didn't receive him. " "
1.12. But as many as received him, to them he gave the right to become God's children, to those who believe in his name: " '
1.13. who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
1.14. The Word became flesh, and lived among us. We saw his glory, such glory as of the one and only Son of the Father, full of grace and truth.
1.15. John testified about him. He cried out, saying, "This was he of whom I said, \'He who comes after me has surpassed me, for he was before me.\'"
1.16. From his fullness we all received grace upon grace.
1.17. For the law was given through Moses. Grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.
1.18. No one has seen God at any time. The one and only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him. ''. None |
|
30. New Testament, Luke, 3.3 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • conversion, definition • innovation, definition of • novelty, viii-ix, defined
Found in books: Despotis and Lohr (2022) 243; Klawans (2019) 6
3.3. καὶ ἦλθεν εἰς πᾶσαν περίχωρον τοῦ Ἰορδάνου κηρύσσων βάπτισμα μετανοίας εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν,''. None | 3.3. He came into all the region around the Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for remission of sins. ''. None |
|
31. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Distress, Definition • agents, definition of
Found in books: Mackey (2022) 14; Sorabji (2000) 29
|
32. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Barbeloite, modern definitions • Samaritan Pentateuch, Scripture, definition of
Found in books: Jassen (2014) 5; Rasimus (2009) 197
|
33. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Barbeloite, modern definitions • definitions
Found in books: Rasimus (2009) 197; Černušková (2016) 132
|
34. Irenaeus, Refutation of All Heresies, 1.7.5, 1.29-1.30, 3.4.3, 5.11.1 (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Barbeloite, heresiological definitions • Barbeloite, modern definitions • Definition • Gnosticism, definition of • Sethites my definition • Sethites my definition, Turner’s definition • fleshly, definition of • heresy, definition of • soul, definition of
Found in books: Binder (2012) 81; Estes (2020) 250; Klawans (2019) 10; Mcglothlin (2018) 53, 78; Rasimus (2009) 3, 26, 27, 30, 31, 34, 35, 38, 39, 40, 43, 53, 57, 59, 62, 82, 124, 178, 189, 200, 202, 240, 285, 286, 292
| 1.7.5. They conceive, then, of three kinds of men, spiritual, material, and animal, represented by Cain, Abel, and Seth. These three natures are no longer found in one person, but constitute various kinds of men. The material goes, as a matter of course, into corruption. The animal, if it make choice of the better part, finds repose in the intermediate place; but if the worse, it too shall pass into destruction. But they assert that the spiritual principles which have been sown by Achamoth, being disciplined and nourished here from that time until now in righteous souls (because when given forth by her they were yet but weak), at last attaining to perfection, shall be given as brides to the angels of the Saviour, while their animal souls of necessity rest for ever with the Demiurge in the intermediate place. And again subdividing the animal souls themselves, they say that some are by nature good, and others by nature evil. The good are those who become capable of receiving the spiritual seed; the evil by nature are those who are never able to receive that seed.' "
3.4.3. For, prior to Valentinus, those who follow Valentinus had no existence; nor did those from Marcion exist before Marcion; nor, in short, had any of those maligt-minded people, whom I have above enumerated, any being previous to the initiators and inventors of their perversity. For Valentinus came to Rome in the time of Hyginus, flourished under Pius, and remained until Anicetus. Cerdon, too, Marcion's predecessor, himself arrived in the time of Hyginus, who was the ninth bishop. Coming frequently into the Church, and making public confession, he thus remained, one time teaching in secret, and then again making public confession; but at last, having been denounced for corrupt teaching, he was excommunicated from the assembly of the brethren. Marcion, then, succeeding him, flourished under Anicetus, who held the tenth place of the episcopate. But the rest, who are called Gnostics, take rise from Meder, Simon's disciple, as I have shown; and each one of them appeared to be both the father and the high priest of that doctrine into which he has been initiated. But all these (the Marcosians) broke out into their apostasy much later, even during the intermediate period of the Church." '
5.11.1. The apostle, foreseeing the wicked speeches of unbelievers, has particularized the works which he terms carnal; and he explains himself, lest any room for doubt be left to those who do dishonestly pervert his meaning, thus saying in the Epistle to the Galatians: "Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are adulteries, fornications, uncleanness, luxuriousness, idolatries, witchcrafts, hatreds, contentions jealousies, wraths, emulations, animosities, irritable speeches, dissensions, heresies, envyings, drunkenness, carousings, and such like; of which I warn you, as also I have warned you, that they who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God." Thus does he point out to his hearers in a more explicit manner what it is he means when he declares, "Flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God." For they who do these things, since they do indeed walk after the flesh, have not the power of living unto God. And then, again, he proceeds to tell us the spiritual actions which vivify a man, that is, the engrafting of the Spirit; thus saying, "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, goodness, benignity, faith, meekness, continence, chastity: against these there is no law." As, therefore, he who has gone forward to the better things, and has brought forth the fruit of the Spirit, is saved altogether because of the communion of the Spirit; so also he who has continued in the aforesaid works of the flesh, being truly reckoned as carnal, because he did not receive the Spirit of God, shall not have power to inherit the kingdom of heaven. As, again, the same apostle testifies, saying to the Corinthians, "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not err," he says: "neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor revilers, nor rapacious persons, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And these ye indeed have been; but ye have been washed, but ye have been sanctified, but ye have been justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God." He shows in the clearest manner through what things it is that man goes to destruction, if he has continued to live after the flesh; and then, on the other hand, he points out through what things he is saved. Now he says that the things which save are the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Spirit of our God.' '. None |
|
35. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Barbeloite, modern definitions • Definition • heresy, definition of • resurrection, competing definitions of
Found in books: Binder (2012) 81; Klawans (2019) 11; Mcglothlin (2018) 100; Rasimus (2009) 286
|
36. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Appetite (epithumia), Definitions • Distress, Definition • emotions, definitions of • passion, definition of
Found in books: Graver (2007) 29, 67; Hockey (2019) 69; Sorabji (2000) 29, 136
|
37. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • rabbinic movement, use of term defined • self-definition, Rome as rival • self-definition, distinctiveness within culture of Greek East
Found in books: Hayes (2022) 315, 346; Kalmin (1998) 118
|
38. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Bible-reading heretics, non-Jews, defined • min (pl. minim), definition of
Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018) 4; Kalmin (1998) 138
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''. None | 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.''. None |
|
39. Babylonian Talmud, Eruvin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Bible-reading heretics, non-Jews, defined • min (pl. minim), definition of
Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018) 4; Kalmin (1998) 138
101a. 101a. the door to a rear court, i.e., a door that opens from a house to the courtyard situated behind it, which is typically not a proper door but merely a wooden board without hinges that closes off the doorway; and likewise bundles of thorns that seal a breach; and reed mats, one may not close an opening with them on Shabbat. This would be considered building or completing a building, unless they remain above the ground even when they are open.,And the Gemara raises a contradiction from a baraita: With regard to a door, or a mat, or a lattice kankan that drag along the ground and are used for closing up openings, when they are tied and suspended in place one may close an opening with them on Shabbat; and needless to say this is permitted on a Festival. According to the baraita, the critical factor is apparently that they must be tied and suspended, not that they have to be held up above the ground.,Abaye said: The baraita is referring to ones that have a hinge. As they are considered proper doors, closing them does not appear like building. Rava said: The baraita is referring even to doors that once had a hinge, even though they no longer have one. These partitions also bear the clear form of a door, and therefore one’s action does not have the appearance of building.,The Gemara raises an objection from another baraita: With regard to a door, or a mat, or a lattice that drag along the ground, when they are tied and suspended in place and they are held above the ground even by as little as a hairbreadth, one may close an opening with them. However, if they are not raised in this manner, one may not close an opening with them. Clearly, these doors must indeed be raised above the ground as well.,The Gemara answers: Abaye reconciles the objection in accordance with his reasoning, and Rava reconciles the objection in accordance with his reasoning. The Gemara elaborates: Abaye reconciles the objection in accordance with his reasoning by adding to the baraita: They must either have a hinge or be held above the ground. Rava likewise reconciles the objection in accordance with his reasoning, as he reads: They must have had a hinge or else be held above the ground.,The Sages taught a baraita: With regard to branches of thorn bushes or bundles of wood that were arranged so that they sealed off a breach in a courtyard, when they are tied and suspended in place, one may close an opening with them on Shabbat; and needless to say, this is permitted on a Festival.,Rabbi Ḥiyya taught a baraita: With regard to a widowed door that drags along the ground, one may not close an opening with it. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of a widowed door? Some say it refers to a door built from a single plank, which does not look like a door, and others say it is a door that does not have a lower doorsill (ge’onim) and that touches the ground when closed.,With regard to activities that are prohibited because of their similarity to building, the Gemara cites a teaching that Rav Yehuda said: When arranging a pile of wood for a fire on a Festival, if the logs are arranged from the top down, i.e., the upper logs are temporarily suspended in the air while the lower logs are inserted below them, it is permitted. However, if the wood is placed from the bottom up, it is prohibited, as the arrangement of wood in the regular manner is a form of building.,And the same applies to eggs that are to be arranged in a pile, and the same applies to a cauldron that is to be set down on a fire by means of supports, and the same applies to a bed that will be placed on its frame, and the same applies to barrels arranged in a cellar. In all these cases, the part that goes on top must be temporarily suspended in the air while the lower section is inserted beneath it.,With regard to bundles of thorns used to seal a breach, the Gemara cites a related incident: A certain heretic once said to Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥaya: Man of thorns! For it says about you: “The best of them is as a brier” (Micah 7:4), which indicates that even Israel’s best are merely thorns. He said to him: Fool, go down to the end of the verse: “The most upright is worse than a thorn hedge,” a derogatory expression meant as praise. Rather, what is the meaning of the best of them is as a brier? It means that just as these thorns protect a breach, so the best among us protect us. Alternatively: The best of them is as a brier ḥedek means that they grind mehaddekin the nations of the world into Gehenna, as it is stated: “Arise and thresh, O daughter of Zion, for I will make your horn iron, and I will make your hoofs brass, and you shall beat in pieces vahadikot many peoples; and you shall devote their gain to God, and their substance to the God of the whole earth” (Micah 4:13).,A person may not stand in the private domain and open a door located in the public domain with a key, lest he inadvertently transfer the key from one domain to the other. Likewise, one may not stand in the public domain and open a door in the private domain with a key, unless in the latter case he erected a partition ten handbreadths high around the door and stands inside it. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir.,The Rabbis said to him: There was an incident at the poultry dealers’ market in Jerusalem, where they would fatten fowl for slaughter (Rabbeinu Ḥael), and they would lock the doors to their shops and place the key in the window that was over the door, which was more than ten handbreadths off the ground, and nobody was concerned about the possible violation of any prohibition. Rabbi Yosei says: That place was a market of wool dealers.,And those Rabbis, who cited the case of the poultry dealers of Jerusalem to rebut Rabbi Meir’s opinion, Rabbi Meir spoke to them about unlocking a door in a private domain while standing in the public domain, and they responded with an incident involving a karmelit. As Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: With regard to Jerusalem, were it not for the fact that its doors are locked at night, one would be liable for carrying in it on Shabbat, because its thoroughfares have the status of the public domain. However, since Jerusalem’s doors are typically locked, it is considered one large karmelit, which is subject to rabbinic prohibitions. How, then, could a proof be cited from the markets of Jerusalem with regard to the transfer of objects between a public domain and a private domain, which is prohibited by Torah law?,Rav Pappa said: Here, in the statement of Rabbi Yoha, Jerusalem was considered a karmelit during the period before breaches were made in its walls. Its doors did not turn it into a public domain, as they were locked. Whereas there, the Rabbis in the mishna are referring to the time after breaches had been made in the walls, and it therefore acquired the status of a public domain.,Rava said: In the latter clause of the mishna we came to a different issue, i.e., the final section of the mishna is not designed to counter Rabbi Meir’s statement with regard to the public domain. Rather, it refers to the gates of a garden with an area greater than two beit se’a in size, whose legal status is that of a karmelit. Consequently, the mishna is saying as follows: And likewise, one may not stand in the private domain and open a door in a karmelit; neither may one stand in a karmelit and open a door in the private domain,''. None | |
|
40. Babylonian Talmud, Megillah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • bet knesset, definition • mazal (mazla), definition of
Found in books: Kalmin (2014) 193, 194; Levine (2005) 26
3a. בנס היו עומדין,אין מהוה הוו ולא הוו ידעי הי באמצע תיבה והי בסוף תיבה ואתו צופים ותקינו פתוחין באמצע תיבה וסתומין בסוף תיבה,סוף סוף אלה המצות שאין נביא עתיד לחדש דבר מעתה אלא שכחום וחזרו ויסדום,וא"ר ירמיה ואיתימא רבי חייא בר אבא תרגום של תורה אונקלוס הגר אמרו מפי ר\' אליעזר ור\' יהושע תרגום של נביאים יונתן בן עוזיאל אמרו מפי חגי זכריה ומלאכי ונזדעזעה ארץ ישראל ארבע מאות פרסה על ארבע מאות פרסה יצתה בת קול ואמרה מי הוא זה שגילה סתריי לבני אדם,עמד יונתן בן עוזיאל על רגליו ואמר אני הוא שגליתי סתריך לבני אדם גלוי וידוע לפניך שלא לכבודי עשיתי ולא לכבוד בית אבא אלא לכבודך עשיתי שלא ירבו מחלוקת בישראל,ועוד ביקש לגלות תרגום של כתובים יצתה בת קול ואמרה לו דייך מ"ט משום דאית ביה קץ משיח,ותרגום של תורה אונקלוס הגר אמרו והא אמר רב איקא בר אבין אמר רב חננאל אמר רב מאי דכתיב (נחמיה ח, ח) ויקראו בספר תורת האלהים מפורש ושום שכל ויבינו במקרא ויקראו בספר תורת האלהים זה מקרא מפורש זה תרגום,ושום שכל אלו הפסוקין ויבינו במקרא אלו פיסקי טעמים ואמרי לה אלו המסורת שכחום וחזרו ויסדום,מאי שנא דאורייתא דלא אזדעזעה ואדנביאי אזדעזעה דאורייתא מיפרשא מלתא דנביאי איכא מילי דמיפרשן ואיכא מילי דמסתמן דכתיב (זכריה יב, יא) ביום ההוא יגדל המספד בירושלם כמספד הדדרימון בבקעת מגידון,ואמר רב יוסף אלמלא תרגומא דהאי קרא לא ידענא מאי קאמר ביומא ההוא יסגי מספדא בירושלים כמספדא דאחאב בר עמרי דקטל יתיה הדדרימון בן טברימון ברמות גלעד וכמספדא דיאשיה בר אמון דקטל יתיה פרעה חגירא בבקעת מגידו,(דניאל י, ז) וראיתי אני דניאל לבדי את המראה והאנשים אשר היו עמי לא ראו את המראה אבל חרדה גדולה נפלה עליהם ויברחו בהחבא מאן נינהו אנשים אמר ר\' ירמיה ואיתימא רבי חייא בר אבא זה חגי זכריה ומלאכי,אינהו עדיפי מיניה ואיהו עדיף מינייהו אינהו עדיפי מיניה דאינהו נביאי ואיהו לאו נביא איהו עדיף מינייהו דאיהו חזא ואינהו לא חזו,וכי מאחר דלא חזו מ"ט איבעיתו אע"ג דאינהו לא חזו מזלייהו חזו,אמר רבינא שמע מינה האי מאן דמיבעית אע"ג דאיהו לא חזי מזליה חזי מאי תקנתיה ליקרי ק"ש ואי קאים במקום הטנופת לינשוף מדוכתיה ארבע גרמידי ואי לא לימא הכי עיזא דבי טבחי שמינא מינאי:,והשתא דאמרת מדינה ומדינה ועיר ועיר לדרשה משפחה ומשפחה למאי אתא אמר רבי יוסי בר חנינא להביא משפחות כהונה ולויה שמבטלין עבודתן ובאין לשמוע מקרא מגילה,דאמר רב יהודה אמר רב כהנים בעבודתן ולוים בדוכנן וישראל במעמדן כולן מבטלין עבודתן ובאין לשמוע מקרא מגילה,תניא נמי הכי כהנים בעבודתן ולוים בדוכנן וישראל במעמדן כולן מבטלין עבודתן ובאין לשמוע מקרא מגילה מכאן סמכו של בית רבי שמבטלין תלמוד תורה ובאין לשמוע מקרא מגילה קל וחומר מעבודה ומה עבודה שהיא חמורה מבטלינן תלמוד תורה לא כל שכן,ועבודה חמורה מתלמוד תורה והכתיב (יהושע ה, יג) ויהי בהיות יהושע ביריחו וישא עיניו וירא והנה איש עומד לנגדו וגו\' וישתחו (לאפיו),והיכי עביד הכי והאמר רבי יהושע בן לוי אסור לאדם שיתן שלום לחבירו בלילה חיישינן שמא שד הוא שאני התם דאמר ליה כי אני שר צבא ה\',ודלמא משקרי גמירי דלא מפקי שם שמים לבטלה,אמר לו אמש בטלתם תמיד של בין הערבים ועכשיו בטלתם תלמוד תורה אמר לו על איזה מהן באת אמר לו עתה באתי מיד (יהושע ח, ט) וילן יהושע בלילה ההוא בתוך העמק אמר רבי יוחנן''. None | 3a. stood by way of a miracle?,The Gemara answers: Yes, two forms of these letters did exist at that time, but the people did not know which one of them was to be used in the middle of the word and which at the end of the word, and the Seers came and established that the open forms are to used be in the middle of the word and the closed forms at the end of the word.,The Gemara asks: Ultimately, however, doesn’t the phrase “these are the commandments” (Leviticus 27:34) indicate that a prophet is not permitted to initiate any matter of halakha from now on? Rather, it may be suggested that the final letters already existed at the time of the giving of the Torah, but over the course of time the people forgot them, and the prophets then came and reestablished them.,§ The Gemara cites another ruling of Rabbi Yirmeya or Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba. Rabbi Yirmeya said, and some say that it was Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba who said: The Aramaic translation of the Torah used in the synagogues was composed by Onkelos the convert based on the teachings of Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua. The Aramaic translation of the Prophets was composed by Yonatan ben Uzziel based on a tradition going back to the last prophets, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. The Gemara relates that when Yonatan ben Uzziel wrote his translation, Eretz Yisrael quaked over an area of four hundred parasangs parsa by four hundred parasangs, and a Divine Voice emerged and said: Who is this who has revealed My secrets to mankind?,Yonatan ben Uzziel stood up on his feet and said: I am the one who has revealed Your secrets to mankind through my translation. However, it is revealed and known to You that I did this not for my own honor, and not for the honor of the house of my father, but rather it was for Your honor that I did this, so that discord not increase among the Jewish people. In the absence of an accepted translation, people will disagree about the meaning of obscure verses, but with a translation, the meaning will be clear.,And Yonatan ben Uzziel also sought to reveal a translation of the Writings, but a Divine Voice emerged and said to him: It is enough for you that you translated the Prophets. The Gemara explains: What is the reason that he was denied permission to translate the Writings? Because it has in it a revelation of the end, when the Messiah will arrive. The end is foretold in a cryptic manner in the book of Daniel, and were the book of Daniel translated, the end would become manifestly revealed to all.,The Gemara asks: Was the translation of the Torah really composed by Onkelos the convert? Didn’t Rav Ika bar Avin say that Rav Ḥael said that Rav said: What is the meaning of that which is written with respect to the days of Ezra: “And they read in the book, the Torah of God, distinctly; and they gave the sense, and they caused them to understand the reading” (Nehemiah\xa08:8)? The verse should be understood as follows: “And they read in the book, the Torah of God,” this is the scriptural text; “distinctly,” this is the translation, indicating that they immediately translated the text into Aramaic, as was customary during public Torah readings.,“And they gave the sense,” these are the divisions of the text into separate verses. “And they caused them to understand the reading,” these are the cantillation notes, through which the meaning of the text is further clarified. And some say that these are the Masoretic traditions with regard to the manner in which each word is to be written. This indicates that the Aramaic translation already existed at the beginning of the Second Temple period, well before the time of Onkelos. The Gemara answers: The ancient Aramaic translation was forgotten and then Onkelos came and reestablished it.,The Gemara asks: What is different about the translation of Prophets? Why is it that when Onkelos revealed the translation of the Torah, Eretz Yisrael did not quake, and when he revealed the translation of the Prophets, it quaked? The Gemara explains: The meaning of matters discussed in the Torah is clear, and therefore its Aramaic translation did not reveal the meaning of passages that had not been understood previously. Conversely, in the Prophets, there are matters that are clear and there are matters that are obscure, and the Aramaic translation revealed the meaning of obscure passages. The Gemara cites an example of an obscure verse that is clarified by the Aramaic translation: As it is written: “On that day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, like the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon” (Zechariah 12:11).,And with regard to that verse, Rav Yosef said: Were it not for the Aramaic translation of this verse, we would not have known what it is saying, as the Bible does not mention any incident involving Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon. The Aramaic translation reads as follows: On that day, the mourning in Jerusalem will be as great as the mourning for Ahab, son of Omri, who was slain by Hadadrimmon, son of Tavrimon, in Ramoth-Gilead, and like the mourning for Josiah, son of Amon, who was slain by Pharaoh the lame in the valley of Megiddon. The translation clarifies that the verse is referring to two separate incidents of mourning, and thereby clarifies the meaning of this verse.,§ The Gemara introduces another statement from the same line of tradition. The verse states: “And I, Daniel, alone saw the vision, for the men who were with me did not see the vision; but a great trembling fell upon them, so that they fled to hide themselves” (Daniel 10:7). Who were these men? The term “men” in the Bible indicates important people; who were they? Rabbi Yirmeya said, and some say that it was Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba who said: These are the prophets Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi.,The Gemara comments: In certain ways they, the prophets, were greater than him, Daniel, and in certain ways he, Daniel, was greater than them. They were greater than him, as they were prophets and he was not a prophet. Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi were sent to convey the word of God to the Jewish people, while Daniel was not sent to reveal his visions to others. In another way, however, he was greater than them, as he saw this vision, and they did not see this vision, indicating that his ability to perceive obscure and cryptic visions was greater than theirs.,The Gemara asks: Since they did not see the vision, what is the reason that they were frightened? The Gemara answers: Even though they did not see the vision, their guardian angels saw it, and therefore they sensed that there was something fearful there and they fled.,Ravina said: Learn from this incident that with regard to one who is frightened for no apparent reason, although he does not see anything menacing, his guardian angel sees it, and therefore he should take steps in order to escape the danger. The Gemara asks: What is his remedy? He should recite Shema, which will afford him protection. And if he is standing in a place of filth, where it is prohibited to recite verses from the Torah, he should distance himself four cubits from his current location in order to escape the danger. And if he is not able to do so, let him say the following incantation: The goat of the slaughterhouse is fatter than I am, and if a calamity must fall upon something, it should fall upon it.,§ After this digression, the Gemara returns to the exposition of a verse cited above. Now that you have said that the phrases “every province” and “every city” appear for the purposes of midrashic exposition, for what exposition do the words “every family” appear in that same verse (Esther 9:28)? Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina said: These words come to include the priestly and Levitical families, and indicate that they cancel their service in the Temple and come to hear the reading of the Megilla.,As Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: The priests at their Temple service, the Levites on their platform in the Temple, where they sung the daily psalm, and the Israelites at their watches, i.e., the group of Israelites, corresponding to the priestly watches, who would come to Jerusalem and gather in other locations as representatives of the entire nation to observe or pray for the success of the Temple service, all cancel their service and come to hear the reading of the Megilla.,This is also taught in a baraita: The priests at their service, the Levites on the platform, and the Israelites at their watches, all cancel their service and come to hear the reading of the Megilla. The Sages of the house of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi relied upon the halakha stated here and determined that one cancels his Torah study and comes to hear the reading of the Megilla. They derived this principle by means of an a fortiori inference from the Temple service: Just as one who is engaged in performing service in the Temple, which is very important, cancels his service in order to hear the Megilla, is it not all the more so obvious that one who is engaged in Torah study cancels his study to hear the Megilla?,The Gemara asks: Is the Temple service more important than Torah study? Isn’t it written: “And it came to pass when Joshua was by Jericho that he lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, a man stood over against him with his sword drawn in his hand. And Joshua went over to him and said to him: Are you for us, or for our adversaries? And he said, No, but I am captain of the host of the Lord, I have come now. And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and bowed down” (Joshua 5:13–14).,The Gemara first seeks to clarify the incident described in the verse. How did Joshua do this, i.e., how could he bow to a figure he did not recognize? Didn’t Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi say: It is prohibited for a person to greet his fellow at night if he does not recognize him, as we are concerned that perhaps it is a demon? How did Joshua know that it was not a demon? The Gemara answers: There it was different, as the visitor said to him: But I am captain of the host of the Lord.,The Gemara asks: Perhaps this was a demon and he lied? The Gemara answers: It is learned as a tradition that demons do not utter the name of Heaven for naught, and therefore since the visitor had mentioned the name of God, Joshua was certain that this was indeed an angel.,As for the angel’s mission, the Gemara explains that the angel said to Joshua: Yesterday, i.e., during the afternoon, you neglected the afternoon daily offering due to the impending battle, and now, at night, you have neglected Torah study, and I have come to rebuke you. Joshua said to him: For which of these sins have you come? He said to him: I have come now, indicating that neglecting Torah study is more severe than neglecting to sacrifice the daily offering. Joshua immediately determined to rectify the matter, as the verses states: “And Joshua lodged that night” (Joshua 8:9) “in the midst of the valley ha’emek” (Joshua 8:13), and Rabbi Yoḥa said:''. None |
|
41. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Bible-reading heretics, non-Jews, defined • min (pl. minim), definition of
Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018) 12; Kalmin (1998) 138
39a. (יחזקאל יח, ב) אבות יאכלו בוסר ושיני בנים תקהינה (ויקרא יט, לו) מאזני צדק אבני צדק (משלי יא, ח) צדיק מצרה נחלץ ויבא רשע תחתיו,א"ל כופר לרבן גמליאל אלהיכם גנב הוא דכתיב (בראשית ב, כא) ויפל ה\' אלהים תרדמה על האדם ויישן אמרה ליה ברתיה שבקיה דאנא מהדרנא ליה אמרה ליה תנו לי דוכוס אחד א"ל למה ליך ליסטין באו עלינו הלילה ונטלו ממנו קיתון של כסף והניחו לנו קיתון של זהב אמר לה ולוואי שיבא עלינו בכל יום ולא יפה היה לו לאדם הראשון שנטלו ממנו צלע אחת ונתנו לו שפחה לשמשו,אמר לה הכי קאמינא אלא לשקליה בהדיא אמרה ליה אייתו לי אומצא דבישרא אייתו לה אותבה תותי בחשא אפיקתה אמרה ליה אכול מהאי אמר לה מאיסא לי אמרה ליה ואדם הראשון נמי אי הות שקילה בהדיא הוה מאיסא ליה,א"ל כופר לרבן גמליאל ידענא אלהייכו מאי קא עביד (והיכן יתיב) איתנגד ואיתנח א"ל מאי האי א"ל בן אחד יש לי בכרכי הים ויש לי גיעגועים עליו בעינא דמחוית ליה ניהלי אמר מי ידענא היכא ניהו א"ל דאיכא בארעא לא ידעת דאיכא בשמיא ידעת,אמר ליה כופר לרבן גמליאל כתיב (תהלים קמז, ד) מונה מספר לכוכבים מאי רבותיה אנא מצינא למימנא כוכבי אייתי חבושי שדינהו בארבילא וקא מהדר להו אמר ליה מנינהו א"ל אוקמינהו א"ל רקיע נמי הכי הדרא,איכא דאמרי הכי א"ל מני לי כוכבי א"ל אימא לי ככיך ושיניך כמה הוה שדא ידיה לפומיה וקא מני להו א"ל דאיכא בפומיך לא ידעת דאיכא ברקיעא ידעת,א"ל כופר לרבן גמליאל מי שברא הרים לא ברא רוח שנאמר (עמוס ד, יג) כי הנה יוצר הרים ובורא רוח אלא מעתה גבי אדם דכתיב ויברא וייצר הכי נמי מי שברא זה לא ברא זה,טפח על טפח יש בו באדם ושני נקבים יש בו מי שברא זה לא ברא זה שנאמר (תהלים צד, ט) הנוטע אוזן הלא ישמע ואם יוצר עין הלא יביט א"ל אין א"ל ובשעת מיתה כולן נתפייסו,א"ל ההוא אמגושא לאמימר מפלגך לעילאי דהורמיז מפלגך לתתאי דאהורמיז א"ל א"כ היכי שביק ליה אהורמיז להורמיז לעבורי מיא בארעיה,אמר ליה קיסר לר\' תנחום תא ליהוו כולן לעמא חד אמר לחיי אנן דמהלינן לא מצינן מיהוי כוותייכו אתון מהליתו והוו כוותן א"ל מימר שפיר קאמרת מיהו כל דזכי למלכא לשדיוה לביבר שדיוה לביבר ולא אכלוה א"ל ההוא מינא האי דלא אכלוה משום דלא כפין הוא שדיוה ליה לדידיה ואכלוה,א"ל כופר לר"ג אמריתו כל בי עשרה שכינתא שריא כמה שכינתא איכא קרייה לשמעיה מחא ביה באפתקא א"ל אמאי על שמשא בביתיה דכופר א"ל שמשא אכולי עלמא ניחא ומה שמשא דחד מן אלף אלפי רבוא שמשי דקמי קודשא בריך הוא ניחא לכולי עלמא שכינתא דקב"ה על אחת כמה וכמה,א"ל ההוא מינא לרבי אבהו אלהיכם גחכן הוא דקאמר ליה ליחזקאל (יחזקאל ד, ד) שכב על צדך השמאלי וכתיב (יחזקאל ד, ו) ושכבת על צדך הימני אתא ההוא תלמידא א"ל מ"ט דשביעתא א"ל השתא אמינא לכו מילתא דשויא לתרוייהו,אמר הקב"ה לישראל זרעו שש והשמיטו שבע כדי שתדעו שהארץ שלי היא והן לא עשו כן אלא חטאו וגלו מנהגו של עולם מלך בשר ודם שסרחה עליו מדינה אם אכזרי הוא הורג את כולן אם רחמן הוא הורג חצים אם רחמן מלא רחמים הוא מייסר הגדולים שבהן ביסורין אף כך הקב"ה מייסר את יחזקאל כדי למרק עונותיהם של ישראל,א"ל ההוא מינא לרבי אבהו אלהיכם כהן הוא דכתיב (שמות כה, ב) ויקחו לי תרומה כי קבריה למשה במאי טביל וכי תימא במיא והכתיב (ישעיהו מ, יב) מי מדד בשעלו מים,א"ל בנורא טביל דכתיב (ישעיהו סו, טו) כי הנה ה\' באש יבא ומי סלקא טבילותא בנורא א"ל אדרבה עיקר טבילותא בנורא הוא דכתיב (במדבר לא, כג) וכל אשר לא יבא באש תעבירו במים,אמר ליה ההוא מינא לרבי אבינא כתיב (שמואל ב ז, כג) מי כעמך כישראל גוי אחד בארץ מאי רבותייהו אתון נמי ערביתו בהדן דכתיב (ישעיהו מ, יז) כל הגוים כאין נגדו אמר ליה מדידכו אסהידו עלן דכתיב''. None | 39a. And they are the parables concerning the following verses: “The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge” (Ezekiel 18:2); “Just balances, just weights…shall you have” (Leviticus 19:36); and “The righteous is delivered out of trouble, and the wicked comes in his stead” (Proverbs 11:8).,§ The Roman emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: Your God is a thief, as it is written: “And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man and he slept; and He took one of his sides, and closed up the place with flesh instead” (Genesis 2:21). The daughter of the emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: Leave him, as I will respond to him. She said to her father: Provide one commander dukhus for me to avenge someone’s wrongdoing. The emperor said to her: Why do you need him? She said to him: Armed bandits came to us this past night, and took a silver jug kiton from us, and left a golden jug for us. The emperor said to her: If so, would it be that armed bandits such as these would come to us every day. She said to him: And was it not similarly good for Adam the first man that God took a side from him and gave him a maidservant to serve him?,The emperor said to her: This is what I was saying: But if it is good for Adam, let God take his side from him in the open, not during the time of his deep sleep, like a thief. She said to him: Bring me a slice of raw meat. They brought it to her. She placed it under the embers, and removed it after it was roasted. She said to him: Eat from this meat. The emperor said to her: It is repulsive to me. Although he knew that this is how meat is prepared, seeing the raw meat made it repulsive to him. She said to him: With regard to Adam the first man as well, had God taken her from him in the open, she would have been repulsive to him. Therefore God acted while Adam was asleep.,The emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: I know your God, what He does and where He sits. Meanwhile, the emperor was moaning and groaning. Rabban Gamliel said to him: What is this? Why are you in distress? The emperor said to him: I have one son in the cities overseas and I miss him. Rabban Gamliel said to him: I want you to show him to me. The emperor said: Do I know where he is? Rabban Gamliel said to him: If you do not know that which is on earth, is it possible that you do know that which is in the heavens?,The emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: It is written in praise of the Lord: “He counts the number of the stars; He gives them all their names” (Psalms 147:4). What is His greatness? I can also count the stars. Rabban Gamliel brought quinces, put them in a sieve, and spun them. He said to the emperor: Count them. The emperor said to him: Stand them still so that I can count them. Rabban Gamliel said to him: The firmament also revolves like this, therefore you cannot count the stars in it.,Some say that this is what the emperor said to him: I have counted the stars. Rabban Gamliel said to him: Tell me how many teeth and incisors you have. The emperor put his hand in his mouth and was counting them. Rabban Gamliel said to him: You do not know what is in your mouth, but you do know what is in the firmament?,The emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: He Who created mountains did not create wind, rather two separate gods created them, as it is stated: “For, lo, He forms mountains and creates wind” (Amos 4:13); one is described with the verb “forms,” and the other with the verb “creates.” Rabban Gamliel said to him: If that is so, then with regard to Adam, as it is written concerning him: “And God created” (Genesis 1:27), and also: “And the Lord God formed” (Genesis 2:7), so too should one say that He who created this did not create that?,If you will claim that different gods created different parts of Adam, that will not suffice. A person has one handbreadth by one handbreadth of facial countece, with two types of orifices in it, eyes and ears. Should one say that He who created this did not create that; as it is stated: “He that planted the ear, shall He not hear? He that formed the eye, shall He not see?” (Psalms 94:9)? The verse employs two verbs for the eyes and ears alone. The emperor said to him: Yes, different gods created different parts of the face. Rabban Gamliel said to him: And at the moment of death, are they all appeased? Do all these gods agree as one that the time arrived for the person to die?,The Gemara relates: A certain magus said to Ameimar: From your midpoint and up is in the domain of Hurmiz, the god of good, who created the significant and important parts of the body, and from your midpoint and down is in the domain of Ahurmiz, the god of bad. Ameimar said to him: If so, how does Ahurmiz allow Hurmiz to urinate in his territory? A person drinks with his mouth, which is in his upper half, and urinates from below.,The Gemara relates: The emperor said to Rabbi Tanḥum: Come, let us all be one people. Rabbi Tanḥum said: Very well. But we, who are circumcised, cannot become uncircumcised as you are; you all circumcise yourselves and become like us. The emperor said to Rabbi Tanḥum: In terms of the logic of your statement, you are saying well, but anyone who bests the king in a debate is thrown to the enclosure labeivar of wild animals. They threw him to the enclosure but the animals did not eat him, as God protected him. A certain heretic said to the emperor: This incident, that they did not eat him, happened because they are not hungry. They then threw the heretic into the enclosure and the animals ate him.,The emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: You say that the Divine Presence dwells in any place where there are ten adult male Jews. He asked, sarcastically: How many Divine Presences are there? Rabban Gamliel summoned the servant of the emperor and hit him on his neck be’appatka. Rabban Gamliel said to him: Why did you allow the sun to enter the house of the emperor? The emperor said to him: The sun rests upon all the world; no one can prevent it from shining. Rabban Gamliel said to him: And if the sun, which is one of ten thousand attendants that are before the Holy One, Blessed be He, rests upon all the world, the Divine Presence of the Holy One, Blessed be He, all the more so rests upon the world.,A certain heretic said to Rabbi Abbahu: Your God is a jester, as He said to Ezekiel the prophet: “Lie on your left side” (Ezekiel 4:4), and it is also written: “Lie on your right side” (Ezekiel 4:6); God had Ezekiel turn from side to side, apparently for comic effect. In the meantime, a certain student came before Rabbi Abbahu and said to him: What is the reason for the mitzva of the Sabbatical Year? Rabbi Abbahu said to them: Now I will tell you something that is fit for the two of you.,Rabbi Abbahu continued: The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to the Jewish people: Sow for six years, and withhold sowing during the seventh year, so that that you will know that the land is Mine. But the Jewish people did not do so; rather, they sinned and were consequently exiled. The manner of the world is that in the case of a flesh-and-blood king whose province sinned against him, if he is cruel, he kills them all; if he is compassionate, he kills only half of them; and if he is compassionate and is full of compassion, he afflicts the leaders among them with suffering. Rabbi Abbahu continues: So too in this case, the Holy One, Blessed be He, afflicts Ezekiel in order to cleanse the sins of the Jewish people. God instructed him to lie down and suffer the same number of days as the number of years that the Jewish people did not observe the halakhot of the Sabbatical Year.,A certain heretic said to Rabbi Abbahu: Your God is a priest, as it is written: “That they take for Me an offering teruma” (Exodus 25:2), and teruma is given to the priests. He asked, sarcastically: When He buried Moses, in what ritual bath did He immerse? A priest who contracts impurity from a corpse must immerse in order to be able to partake of teruma. And if you would say that He immersed in water, but isn’t it written: “Who has measured the waters in the hollow of His hand” (Isaiah 40:12), that all waters of the world fit in the palm of God, so He could not immerse in them.,Rabbi Abbahu said to him: He immersed in fire, as it is written: “For, behold, the Lord will come in fire” (Isaiah 66:15). The heretic said to him: But is immersion in fire effective? Rabbi Abbahu said to him: On the contrary, the main form of immersion is in fire, as it is written with regard to the removal of non-kosher substances absorbed in a vessel: “And all that abides not the fire you shall make to go through the water” (Numbers 31:23), indicating that fire purifies more than water does.,A certain heretic said to Rabbi Avina: It is written: “And who is like Your people, Israel, one nation in the earth” (II\xa0Samuel 7:23). The heretic asked: What is your greatness? You are also mixed together with us, as it is written: “All nations before Him are as nothing; they are counted by Him less than nothing and vanity” (Isaiah 40:17). Rabbi Avina said to him: One of yours, the gentile prophet Balaam, has already testified for us, as it is written:''. None |
|
42. Babylonian Talmud, Yevamot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Bible-reading heretics, non-Jews, defined • min (pl. minim), definition of
Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018) 4; Kalmin (1998) 138
102b. ומי איכא כי האי גוונא אין דחזיוה רבנן לרב יהודה דנפק בחמשא זוזי מוקי לשוקא,אמר רב יהודה אמר רב יבמה שהגדילה בין האחין מותרת לינשא לאחד מן האחין ואין חוששין שמא חלצה סנדל לאחד מהן טעמא דלא חזינן הא חזינן חיישינן,והא תניא בין שנתכוון הוא ולא נתכוונה היא בין שנתכוונה היא ולא נתכוון הוא חליצתה פסולה עד שיתכוונו שניהם כאחד הכי קאמר אע"ג דחזינן אין חוששין שמא כוונו,ואיכא דאמרי טעמא דלא חזינן הא חזינן חוששין ודקא תנא בעי כוונה הני מילי לאישתרויי לעלמא אבל לאחין מיפסלא,אמר רב יהודה אמר רב סנדל התפור בפשתן אין חולצין בו שנאמר (יחזקאל טז, י) ואנעלך תחש ואימא תחש אין מידי אחרינא לא נעל נעל ריבה,אי נעל נעל ריבה אפי\' כל מילי נמי אם כן תחש מאי אהני ליה,בעא מיניה רבי אלעזר מרב הוא של עור ותריסיותיו של שער מהו אמר ליה מי לא קרינן ביה ואנעלך תחש אי הכי כולו של שער נמי ההוא קרקא מקרי,אמר ליה רב כהנא לשמואל ממאי דהאי וחלצה נעלו מעל רגלו מישלף הוא דכתיב (ויקרא יד, מ) וחלצו את האבנים אשר בהן הנגע,ואימא זרוזי הוא דכתיב (במדבר לא, ג) החלצו מאתכם אנשים לצבא התם נמי שלופי מביתא לקרבא,והכתיב (איוב לו, טו) יחלץ עני בעניו בשכר עניו יחלצו מדינה של גיהנם,אלא הא דכתיב (תהלים לד, ח) חונה מלאך ה\' סביב ליראיו ויחלצם בשכר יראיו יחלצם מדינה של גיהנם,אלא הא דכתיב (ישעיהו נח, יא) ועצמותיך יחליץ ואמר רבי אלעזר זו מעולה שבברכות ואמר רבא זרוזי גרמי אין משמע הכי ומשמע הכי דהכא אי ס"ד זרוזי הוא א"כ לכתוב רחמנא וחלצה נעלו ברגלו,אי כתב רחמנא ברגלו ה"א ברגלו אין בשוקו לא כתב רחמנא מעל רגלו דאפילו בשוקו א"כ לכתוב רחמנא במעל רגלו מאי מעל רגלו ש"מ מישלף הוא,אמר ליה ההוא מינא לר"ג עמא דחלץ ליה מריה מיניה דכתיב (הושע ה, ו) בצאנם ובבקרם ילכו לבקש את ה\' ולא ימצאו חלץ מהם,אמר ליה שוטה מי כתיב חלץ להם חלץ מהם כתיב ואילו יבמה דחלצו לה אחין מידי מששא אית ביה:,באנפיליא חליצתה פסולה כו\': למימרא דאנפיליא לאו מנעל הוא,ותנן נמי אין התורם נכנס לא בפרגוד חפות ולא באנפיליא ואין צריך לומר במנעל וסנדל לפי שאין נכנסין במנעל וסנדל לעזרה,ורמינהו אחד מנעל וסנדל ואנפיליא לא יטייל בהן לא מבית לבית ולא ממטה למטה,אמר אביי דאית ביה כתיתי ומשום תענוג אמר ליה רבא ומשום תענוג בלא מנעל ביום הכפורים מי אסירי והא רבה בר רב הונא כריך סודרא אכרעיה ונפיק אלא אמר רבא לא קשיא כאן באנפיליא של עור כאן באנפיליא של בגד,ה"נ מסתברא דאי לא תימא הכי קשיא יום הכפורים איום הכפורים דתניא לא יטייל אדם בקורדקיסין בתוך ביתו אבל מטייל הוא באנפילין בתוך ביתו אלא לאו ש"מ כאן באנפיליא של עור כאן באנפיליא של בגד ש"מ,תניא כוותיה דרבא חלצה במנעל הנפרם שחופה את רוב הרגל בסנדל הנפחת שמקבל את רוב הרגל בסנדל של שעם ושל סיב בקב הקיטע במוק בסמיכת הרגלים באנפיליא של עור והחולצת מן הגדול''. None | 102b. The Gemara asks: Is there really a case like this where people wear one shoe on top of another? The Gemara answers: Yes, for the Sages saw Rav Yehuda, who went out once to the market wearing five pairs of shoes, which were similar to slippers, one on top of another.,Rav Yehuda said another halakha that Rav said: An underage yevama who grew up among her husband’s brothers before any ḥalitza was performed is permitted to marry one of the brothers through levirate marriage, and we are not concerned about the possibility that during the time she was in the company of her yevamin she removed a sandal from one of them, and thereby she would have already performed ḥalitza. The Gemara infers from this statement: The reason it is permitted to perform levirate marriage now is specifically that we did not see her remove one of their shoes, but if in fact we did see her do so, we are concerned and treat her as a yevama who already performed ḥalitza and is thereby forbidden to all the brothers.,The Gemara challenges: But isn’t it taught in a baraita: Whether he intended to perform ḥalitza and she did not intend to, or whether she intended to perform ḥalitza and he did not intend to, the ḥalitza is invalid, unless they both intended it as one to perform a proper act of ḥalitza? The Gemara answers: This is what Rav said: Even if we did see that she removed a shoe from one of them, we are not concerned that perhaps they intended to perform ḥalitza.,And there are those who say the inference from Rav’s statement should be made in the opposite manner: The reason it is permitted for her to perform levirate marriage now is specifically that we did not see her remove a shoe from one of the brothers. But if we did see, we would be concerned and would treat her as a yevama who already performed ḥalitza, despite our knowledge that she did not intend to perform ḥalitza. And with regard to that which was taught in the baraita, that intention is required, this applies only as far as validating the act of ḥalitza in order to permit her to marry a stranger. But performing an act of ḥalitza even without intention is sufficient to disqualify her for the brothers, rendering prohibited an act of levirate marriage afterward.,Rav Yehuda also said that Rav said: One may not perform ḥalitza using a sandal that was sewn together with threads made of flax, as it is stated: “And I made you shoes of taḥash skin” (Ezekiel 16:10), which is the skin of an animal, implying that a shoe is something made entirely of leather. The Gemara challenges: If the source is “taḥash,” let us say: A shoe made of taḥash skin, yes, it is valid; but if made of anything else, no. The Gemara rejects this: Because “shoe” and “shoe” are written in the Torah multiple times, this amplifies and includes all types of shoes crafted from leather skins as valid for performing ḥalitza.,The Gemara asks: If the inclusion of the words “shoe” and “shoe” amplifies, then should one include as valid for performing ḥalitza shoes crafted from even any other materials as well, including those not produced from leather at all? The Gemara answers: If so, what purpose does “taḥash” serve, as nothing is learned from it? Rather, from the word taḥash it is derived that the shoe must be crafted entirely of leather, but all types of leather are included because the word “shoe” is repeated in the Torah numerous times.,Rabbi Elazar asked Rav: What is the status of the following type of sandal used for performing ḥalitza? In a case where it, the shoe itself, is made of leather, and the sections that hold its straps tereisiyyot are made of hair, as they were woven together with goat’s hair, what is the halakha? He said to him: Do we not refer to such a sandal as: “And I made you shoes of taḥash”? Since it is crafted from material that comes from an animal it is valid. The Gemara asks: If that is so, i.e., that anything derived from an animal is valid, then even if it is fashioned entirely of hair it should also be valid. The Gemara answers: That would be called a slipper, not a shoe.,Rav Kahana said to Shmuel: From where is it known that this phrase: “And she shall remove ḥaltza his shoe from on his foot” (Deuteronomy 25:9), means to remove? As it is written: “Then the priest shall command, and they shall take out ḥiltzu the stones in which the plague is” (Leviticus 14:40), indicating that the word ḥaltza means that they shall remove the stones from their place.,The Gemara asks whether the word ḥaltza can be interpreted differently based upon its apparent meaning in other contexts: But could you say it is a term for strengthening, as it is written: “Arm heḥaletzu men from among you for the army” (Numbers 31:3), meaning that men among you will be strengthened and take up arms to prepare for battle? The Gemara answers: There too, the meaning of the word is referring to taking something from its place, as it means removing people from their houses in order to go out to war.,The Gemara challenges: But isn’t it written: “He delivers yeḥaletz the afflicted by His affliction be’onyo” (Job 36:15)? This indicates that the afflicted one becomes stronger due to his affliction, as, if the intention was to deliver him from his affliction, it should have said: From His affliction, rather than “by His affliction.” The Gemara answers that the verse should be interpreted as follows: Be’onyo, in other words, as reward for his suffering from affliction, He shall deliver him from the judgment of Gehenna, as is understood from the term be’onyo, through the reward due to his affliction.,The Gemara challenges further: But with regard to that it is written: “The angel of the Lord encamps around those who fear Him and delivers them vayeḥaltzem” (Psalms 34:8), doesn’t vayeḥaltzem rather mean: He shall strengthen them? The Gemara answers: The verse means: As a reward for those that fear Him, He shall deliver them from the judgment of Gehenna. Therefore, the Gemara interprets vayeḥaltzem as “delivers them,” not as: Strengthens them.,The Gemara challenges further: But with regard to that which is written: “And the Lord will guide you, and satisfy your soul in drought, and make your bones strong yaḥalitz” (Isaiah 58:11), and Rabbi Elazar said regarding that verse: This is the greatest of blessings, and Rava said it means: Strengthening of bones. This seems to indicate that the root of the word ḥalitza is referring to strengthening. The Gemara answers: Yes, it has this connotation, and it has this connotation, i.e., the root ḥ-l-tz sometimes connotes removal and sometimes connotes strengthening. But here, only one meaning is possible, as, if it enters your mind that ḥalitza here connotes strengthening, then let the Merciful One write in the Torah: She shall strengthen ḥaletza his shoe on his foot beraglo, indicating that she should tighten the shoe on his foot, rather than stating: “From on his foot me’al raglo,” which indicates that she is removing something from his foot.,The Gemara responds: If the Merciful One had written in the Torah: On his foot beraglo, I would have said she must strengthen and tighten the shoe on his foot, yes, but on his calf, no; and if his foot were amputated she may no longer perform ḥalitza. Therefore, the Merciful One writes in the Torah: “From on his foot me’al raglo,” to teach that she may strengthen the shoe even on his calf, which is part of the leg, or regel, above the foot. The Gemara answers: If so, and ḥalitza really means strengthening, let the Merciful One write in the Torah: She shall strengthen his shoe on the upper part of his foot beme’al raglo, indicating that the shoe can also be tightened on the area of the calf. What then is the meaning of “from on his foot me’al raglo,” which is written in the verse? Learn from here that in this context the word ḥalitza clearly indicates removal, meaning that the mitzva of ḥalitza is for the yevama to remove the shoe of the yavam and not to tighten it on his foot.,Parenthetical to this discussion, the Gemara relates: A certain heretic said to Rabban Gamliel: You, the children of Israel, are a nation whose Master removed ḥalatz Himself from them, for God has left you in much the same way in which a yavam would perform ḥalitza with his yevama, as it is written: “With their flocks and with their herds they shall go to seek the Lord, but they shall not find Him. He has removed ḥalatz Himself from them meihem” (Hoshea 5:6). The heretic tried to use this verse as scriptural support that God has performed ḥalitza with the Jewish people.,He, Rabban Gamliel, said to him: Imbecile, does it say: He performed ḥalitza to them lahem? Rather, it says “ḥalatz from them meihem,” meaning it is as if they, the Jewish people, performed ḥalitza on Him. But if a yevama had her shoe removed by her yevamin, does this have any significance? Here too, the meaning of the verse is that the nation of Israel abandoned God by removing themselves from Him, and this abandonment has no significance.,The Gemara analyzes the phrase used in the mishna that discusses the types of shoes that can be used for ḥalitza. It was taught in the mishna that if he was wearing a soft shoe anpileya made of cloth for ḥalitza, her ḥalitza is invalid. The Gemara explains: That is to say that an anpileya is not considered a shoe.,And we also learned similarly in a mishna (Shekalim 3:2): The one who collects the funds of shekels donated to the Temple from the chamber and puts them it into baskets in order to be used may not enter to collect the funds wearing a garment pargod that is cuffed ḥafut, nor wearing an anpileya, and needless to say that he may not enter wearing a shoe or a sandal, because one may not enter the Temple courtyard wearing a shoe or a sandal. It is prohibited for the one collecting funds from the chamber to enter the chamber wearing a garment or footwear in which money could be hidden, lest people come to suspect that he hid in them funds collected from the chamber. In any case, the wording of the mishna indicates that an anpileya is not considered a type of shoe, since it is permitted to enter the Temple wearing an anpileya when there is no reason for suspicion, unlike a shoe or sandal, which can never be worn in the Temple.,And the Gemara raises a contradiction from a baraita concerning what footwear is permitted on Yom Kippur, which seems to indicate otherwise: The halakha is the same for a soft leather shoe, and a hard leather sandal, and an anpileya, as one may not walk in them from one house to another, nor from one bed to another on Yom Kippur, due to the prohibition against wearing shoes, indicating that at least as far as Yom Kippur is concerned, an anpileya is considered a shoe.,Abaye said: There, with regard to Yom Kippur, it is referring to an anpileya that has cushioning, and this is forbidden due to the pleasure that one derives from cushioned footwear on a day when people are commanded to afflict themselves. Rava said to him: But is footwear that is not considered to be shoes forbidden on Yom Kippur due to the pleasure one derives from wearing them? But Rabba bar Rav Huna would wrap a scarf on his feet and go out on Yom Kippur so his feet would not be injured, implying that there is no prohibition against wearing something comfortable on one’s foot, as long as it is not defined as a shoe. Rather, Rava said: This is not difficult. Here, when they said that an anpileya has the status of a shoe, it is referring to an anpileya made of leather. There, when they do not consider it a shoe, it is referring to an anpileya made of cloth.,The Gemara adds: And so too, it is reasonable to distinguish in this manner, as, if you do not say so, it is difficult to reconcile the seeming contradiction between one statement about Yom Kippur and another statement about Yom Kippur. As it is taught in a baraita: A person shall not walk while wearing slippers kordakisin within his house on Yom Kippur, but he may walk while wearing an anpileya within his house. This would imply that wearing an anpileya is permitted, but the baraita quoted above taught that it is prohibited. Rather, must one not conclude from here that here, where it indicates that an anpileya is forbidden, it is referring to an anpileya made of leather, as they are considered like a shoe, and there, where an anpileya is permitted, it is referring to an anpileya made of cloth? The Gemara concludes: Indeed, learn from here that it is so.,It is taught in a baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rava: If she performed ḥalitza using a shoe whose seams were opened up, which still covered most of the foot; or if she performed ḥalitza with a sandal whose sole was partially opened that still held most of the foot; or if she performed ḥalitza with a sandal made of cork sha’am, or of fibers from a tree; or with a prosthetic foot of an amputee; or with a felt shoe muk; or with a leg blanket that an amputee makes for his feet as a covering in which to put the stumps of his legs, which is not an actual shoe; or with a leather anpileya; and likewise, a woman who performs ḥalitza with her yavam when he is an adult man,''. None |
|
43. Diogenes Laertius, Lives of The Philosophers, 7.49, 7.85-7.86, 7.88, 7.111 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Appetite (epithumia), Definitions • conversion, definition • dialectic, definition of • emotions, definitions of • justice, Socrates definition of • passion, definition of
Found in books: Brouwer (2013) 22, 174; Despotis and Lohr (2022) 165; Graver (2007) 39; Hockey (2019) 61, 69; Sorabji (2000) 136
| 7.49. The Stoics agree to put in the forefront the doctrine of presentation and sensation, inasmuch as the standard by which the truth of things is tested is generically a presentation, and again the theory of assent and that of apprehension and thought, which precedes all the rest, cannot be stated apart from presentation. For presentation comes first; then thought, which is capable of expressing itself, puts into the form of a proposition that which the subject receives from a presentation.' "
7.85. An animal's first impulse, say the Stoics, is to self-preservation, because nature from the outset endears it to itself, as Chrysippus affirms in the first book of his work On Ends: his words are, The dearest thing to every animal is its own constitution and its consciousness thereof; for it was not likely that nature should estrange the living thing from itself or that she should leave the creature she has made without either estrangement from or affection for its own constitution. We are forced then to conclude that nature in constituting the animal made it near and dear to itself; for so it comes to repel all that is injurious and give free access to all that is serviceable or akin to it." "7.86. As for the assertion made by some people that pleasure is the object to which the first impulse of animals is directed, it is shown by the Stoics to be false. For pleasure, if it is really felt, they declare to be a by-product, which never comes until nature by itself has sought and found the means suitable to the animal's existence or constitution; it is an aftermath comparable to the condition of animals thriving and plants in full bloom. And nature, they say, made no difference originally between plants and animals, for she regulates the life of plants too, in their case without impulse and sensation, just as also certain processes go on of a vegetative kind in us. But when in the case of animals impulse has been superadded, whereby they are enabled to go in quest of their proper aliment, for them, say the Stoics, Nature's rule is to follow the direction of impulse. But when reason by way of a more perfect leadership has been bestowed on the beings we call rational, for them life according to reason rightly becomes the natural life. For reason supervenes to shape impulse scientifically." '
7.88. And this is why the end may be defined as life in accordance with nature, or, in other words, in accordance with our own human nature as well as that of the universe, a life in which we refrain from every action forbidden by the law common to all things, that is to say, the right reason which pervades all things, and is identical with this Zeus, lord and ruler of all that is. And this very thing constitutes the virtue of the happy man and the smooth current of life, when all actions promote the harmony of the spirit dwelling in the individual man with the will of him who orders the universe. Diogenes then expressly declares the end to be to act with good reason in the selection of what is natural. Archedemus says the end is to live in the performance of all befitting actions.' "
7.111. They hold the emotions to be judgements, as is stated by Chrysippus in his treatise On the Passions: avarice being a supposition that money is a good, while the case is similar with drunkenness and profligacy and all the other emotions.And grief or pain they hold to be an irrational mental contraction. Its species are pity, envy, jealousy, rivalry, heaviness, annoyance, distress, anguish, distraction. Pity is grief felt at undeserved suffering; envy, grief at others' prosperity; jealousy, grief at the possession by another of that which one desires for oneself; rivalry, pain at the possession by another of what one has oneself."'. None |
|
44. Origen, Against Celsus, 6.24-6.28 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Barbeloite, heresiological definitions • Barbeloite, modern definitions • Gnosticism, definition of • Sethites my definition
Found in books: Estes (2020) 250; Rasimus (2009) 3, 27, 40, 53, 62, 75, 156, 206, 285, 288
| 6.24. After the instance borrowed from the Mithraic mysteries, Celsus declares that he who would investigate the Christian mysteries, along with the aforesaid Persian, will, on comparing the two together, and on unveiling the rites of the Christians, see in this way the difference between them. Now, wherever he was able to give the names of the various sects, he was nothing loth to quote those with which he thought himself acquainted; but when he ought most of all to have done this, if they were really known to him, and to have informed us which was the sect that makes use of the diagram he has drawn, he has not done so. It seems to me, however, that it is from some statements of a very insignificant sect called Ophites, which he has misunderstood, that, in my opinion, he has partly borrowed what he says about the diagram. Now, as we have always been animated by a love of learning, we have fallen in with this diagram, and we have found in it the representations of men who, as Paul says, creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with various lusts; ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. The diagram was, however, so destitute of all credibility, that neither these easily deceived women, nor the most rustic class of men, nor those who were ready to be led away by any plausible pretender whatever, ever gave their assent to the diagram. Nor, indeed, have we ever met any individual, although we have visited many parts of the earth, and have sought out all those who anywhere made profession of knowledge, that placed any faith in this diagram. ' "6.25. In this diagram were described ten circles, distinct from each other, but united by one circle, which was said to be the soul of all things, and was called Leviathan. This Leviathan, the Jewish Scriptures say, whatever they mean by the expression, was created by God for a plaything; for we find in the Psalms: In wisdom have You made all things: the earth is full of Your creatures; so is this great and wide sea. There go the ships; small animals with great; there is this dragon, which You have formed to play therein. Instead of the word dragon, the term leviathan is in the Hebrew. This impious diagram, then, said of this leviathan, which is so clearly depreciated by the Psalmist, that it was the soul which had travelled through all things! We observed, also, in the diagram, the being named Behemoth, placed as it were under the lowest circle. The inventor of this accursed diagram had inscribed this leviathan at its circumference and centre, thus placing its name in two separate places. Moreover, Celsus says that the diagram was divided by a thick black line, and this line he asserted was called Gehenna, which is Tartarus. Now as we found that Gehenna was mentioned in the Gospel as a place of punishment, we searched to see whether it is mentioned anywhere in the ancient Scriptures, and especially because the Jews too use the word. And we ascertained that where the valley of the son of Ennom was named in Scripture in the Hebrew, instead of valley, with fundamentally the same meaning, it was termed both the valley of Ennom and also Geenna. And continuing our researches, we find that what was termed Geenna, or the valley of Ennom, was included in the lot of the tribe of Benjamin, in which Jerusalem also was situated. And seeking to ascertain what might be the inference from the heavenly Jerusalem belonging to the lot of Benjamin and the valley of Ennom, we find a certain confirmation of what is said regarding the place of punishment, intended for the purification of such souls as are to be purified by torments, agreeably to the saying: The Lord comes like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap: and He shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver and of gold. " '6.26. It is in the precincts of Jerusalem, then, that punishments will be inflicted upon those who undergo the process of purification, who have received into the substance of their soul the elements of wickedness, which in a certain place is figuratively termed lead, and on that account iniquity is represented in Zechariah as sitting upon a talent of lead. But the remarks which might be made on this topic are neither to be made to all, nor to be uttered on the present occasion; for it is not unattended with danger to commit to writing the explanation of such subjects, seeing the multitude need no further instruction than that which relates to the punishment of sinners; while to ascend beyond this is not expedient, for the sake of those who are with difficulty restrained, even by fear of eternal punishment, from plunging into any degree of wickedness, and into the flood of evils which result from sin. The doctrine of Geenna, then, is unknown both to the diagram and to Celsus: for had it been otherwise, the framers of the former would not have boasted of their pictures of animals and diagrams, as if the truth were represented by these; nor would Celsus, in his treatise against the Christians, have introduced among the charges directed against them statements which they never uttered instead of what was spoken by some who perhaps are no longer in existence, but have altogether disappeared, or been reduced to a very few individuals, and these easily counted. And as it does not beseem those who profess the doctrines of Plato to offer a defense of Epicurus and his impious opinions, so neither is it for us to defend the diagram, or to refute the accusations brought against it by Celsus. We may therefore allow his charges on these points to pass as superfluous and useless, for we would censure more severely than Celsus any who should be carried away by such opinions. ' "6.27. After the matter of the diagram, he brings forward certain monstrous statements, in the form of question and answer, regarding what is called by ecclesiastical writers the seal, statements which did not arise from imperfect information; such as that he who impresses the seal is called father, and he who is sealed is called young man and son; and who answers, I have been anointed with white ointment from the tree of life,- things which we never heard to have occurred even among the heretics. In the next place, he determines even the number mentioned by those who deliver over the seal, as that of seven angels, who attach themselves to both sides of the soul of the dying body; the one party being named angels of light, the others 'archontics;' and he asserts that the ruler of those named 'archontics' is termed the 'accursed' god. Then, laying hold of the expression, he assails, not without reason, those who venture to use such language; and on that account we entertain a similar feeling of indignation with those who censure such individuals, if indeed there exist any who call the God of the Jews- who sends rain and thunder, and who is the Creator of this world, and the God of Moses, and of the cosmogony which he records - an accursed divinity. Celsus, however, appears to have had in view in employing these expressions, not a rational object, but one of a most irrational kind, arising out of his hatred towards us, which is so unlike a philosopher. For his aim was, that those who are unacquainted with our customs should, on perusing his treatise, at once assail us as if we called the noble Creator of this world an accursed divinity. He appears to me, indeed, to have acted like those Jews who, when Christianity began to be first preached, scattered abroad false reports of the Gospel, such as that Christians offered up an infant in sacrifice, and partook of its flesh; and again, that the professors of Christianity, wishing to do the 'works of darkness,' used to extinguish the lights (in their meetings), and each one to have sexual intercourse with any woman whom he chanced to meet. These calumnies have long exercised, although unreasonably, an influence over the minds of very many, leading those who are aliens to the Gospel to believe that Christians are men of such a character; and even at the present day they mislead some, and prevent them from entering even into the simple intercourse of conversation with those who are Christians. " '6.28. With some such object as this in view does Celsus seem to have been actuated, when he alleged that Christians term the Creator an accursed divinity; in order that he who believes these charges of his against us, should, if possible, arise and exterminate the Christians as the most impious of mankind. Confusing, moreover, things that are distinct, he states also the reason why the God of the Mosaic cosmogony is termed accursed, asserting that such is his character, and worthy of execration in the opinion of those who so regard him, inasmuch as he pronounced a curse upon the serpent, who introduced the first human beings to the knowledge of good and evil. Now he ought to have known that those who have espoused the cause of the serpent, because he gave good advice to the first human beings, and who go far beyond the Titans and Giants of fable, and are on this account called Ophites, are so far from being Christians, that they bring accusations against Jesus to as great a degree as Celsus himself; and they do not admit any one into their assembly until he has uttered maledictions against Jesus. See, then, how irrational is the procedure of Celsus, who, in his discourse against the Christians, represents as such those who will not even listen to the name of Jesus, or omit even that He was a wise man, or a person of virtuous character! What, then, could evince greater folly or madness, not only on the part of those who wish to derive their name from the serpent as the author of good, but also on the part of Celsus, who thinks that the accusations with which the Ophites are charged, are chargeable also against the Christians! Long ago, indeed, that Greek philosopher who preferred a state of poverty, and who exhibited the pattern of a happy life, showing that he was not excluded from happiness although he was possessed of nothing, termed himself a Cynic; while these impious wretches, as not being human beings, whose enemy the serpent is, but as being serpents, pride themselves upon being called Ophites from the serpent, which is an animal most hostile to and greatly dreaded by man, and boast of one Euphrates as the introducer of these unhallowed opinions. ''. None |
|
45. None, None, nan (3rd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • definition • magic, Porphyry’s definition of
Found in books: Janowitz (2002b) 10; d, Hoine and Martijn (2017) 206
|
46. None, None, nan (4th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Barbeloite, heresiological definitions • Barbeloite, modern definitions • Gnosticism, definition of • Sethites my definition
Found in books: Estes (2020) 250; Rasimus (2009) 3, 30, 35, 40, 42, 53, 59, 62, 75, 124, 125, 133, 150, 151, 201, 206, 240, 256, 290
|
47. None, None, nan (4th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • magic, Iamblichus’ definition of • magic, late 19th and early 20th century definitions of • theurgy, definitions of
Found in books: Janowitz (2002) 55; Janowitz (2002b) 11
|
48. None, None, nan (5th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • definition in physics • definitions
Found in books: Lloyd (1989) 76; d, Hoine and Martijn (2017) 182
|
49. Vergil, Aeneis, 12.314
Tagged with subjects: • Aristotle, definition of anger • fides definition of,, Punica • fides definition of,, and pietas
Found in books: Augoustakis et al (2021) 177; Braund and Most (2004) 226
12.314. O cohibete iras! Ictum iam foedus et omnes''. None | 12.314. worn, pale, and wasted in his youthful bloom. ''. None |
|
50. None, None, nan
Tagged with subjects: • Asianism, definitions of
Found in books: Konig and Wiater (2022) 277; König and Wiater (2022) 277
|
