1. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 4.11, 16.3, 18.9-18.14, 24.21, 30.12 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer (ben Hyrcanus), Rabbi • Eliezer (or Elazar), Rabbi, ben Shamua • Eliezer ben Yose • Eliezer, R. • Eliezer, Rabbi • Eli‘ezer, Rabbi • R. Eliezer • R. Eliezer Shammaite • Rosenthal, Eliezer Shimshon
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 129; Bar Asher Siegal (2013), Early Christian Monastic Literature and the Babylonian Talmud, 97; Brooks (1983), Support for the Poor in the Mishnaic Law of Agriculture: Tractate Peah, 132, 164, 174; Kaplan (2015), My Perfect One: Typology and Early Rabbinic Interpretation of Song of Songs, 72, 73, 167; Levine Allison and Crossan (2006), The Historical Jesus in Context, 347; Mokhtarian (2021), Rabbis, Sorcerers, Kings, and Priests: The Culture of the Talmud in Ancient Iran. 128; Samely (2002), Rabbinic Interpretation of Scripture in the Mishnah, 201, 272, 355; Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 74, 173; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 74, 173; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 427
sup>
4.11 וַתִּקְרְבוּן וַתַּעַמְדוּן תַּחַת הָהָר וְהָהָר בֹּעֵר בָּאֵשׁ עַד־לֵב הַשָּׁמַיִם חֹשֶׁךְ עָנָן וַעֲרָפֶל׃
16.3 לֹא־תֹאכַל עָלָיו חָמֵץ שִׁבְעַת יָמִים תֹּאכַל־עָלָיו מַצּוֹת לֶחֶם עֹנִי כִּי בְחִפָּזוֹן יָצָאתָ מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם לְמַעַן תִּזְכֹּר אֶת־יוֹם צֵאתְךָ מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם כֹּל יְמֵי חַיֶּיךָ׃
18.9 כִּי אַתָּה בָּא אֶל־הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר־יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לָךְ לֹא־תִלְמַד לַעֲשׂוֹת כְּתוֹעֲבֹת הַגּוֹיִם הָהֵם׃' '18.11 וְחֹבֵר חָבֶר וְשֹׁאֵל אוֹב וְיִדְּעֹנִי וְדֹרֵשׁ אֶל־הַמֵּתִים׃ 18.12 כִּי־תוֹעֲבַת יְהוָה כָּל־עֹשֵׂה אֵלֶּה וּבִגְלַל הַתּוֹעֵבֹת הָאֵלֶּה יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ מוֹרִישׁ אוֹתָם מִפָּנֶיךָ׃ 18.13 תָּמִים תִּהְיֶה עִם יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ׃ 18.14 כִּי הַגּוֹיִם הָאֵלֶּה אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה יוֹרֵשׁ אוֹתָם אֶל־מְעֹנְנִים וְאֶל־קֹסְמִים יִשְׁמָעוּ וְאַתָּה לֹא כֵן נָתַן לְךָ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ׃
24.21 כִּי תִבְצֹר כַּרְמְךָ לֹא תְעוֹלֵל אַחֲרֶיךָ לַגֵּר לַיָּתוֹם וְלָאַלְמָנָה יִהְיֶה׃
30.12 לֹא בַשָּׁמַיִם הִוא לֵאמֹר מִי יַעֲלֶה־לָּנוּ הַשָּׁמַיְמָה וְיִקָּחֶהָ לָּנוּ וְיַשְׁמִעֵנוּ אֹתָהּ וְנַעֲשֶׂנָּה׃'' None | sup>
4.11 And ye came near and stood under the mountain; and the mountain burned with fire unto the heart of heaven, with darkness, cloud, and thick darkness.
16.3 Thou shalt eat no leavened bread with it; seven days shalt thou eat unleavened bread therewith, even the bread of affliction; for in haste didst thou come forth out of the land of Egypt; that thou mayest remember the day when thou camest forth out of the land of Egypt all the days of thy life.
18.9 When thou art come into the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations. 18.10 There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, one that useth divination, a soothsayer, or an enchanter, or a sorcerer, 18.11 or a charmer, or one that consulteth a ghost or a familiar spirit, or a necromancer. 18.12 For whosoever doeth these things is an abomination unto the LORD; and because of these abominations the LORD thy God is driving them out from before thee. 18.13 Thou shalt be whole-hearted with the LORD thy God. 18.14 For these nations, that thou art to dispossess, hearken unto soothsayers, and unto diviners; but as for thee, the LORD thy God hath not suffered thee so to do.
24.21 When thou gatherest the grapes of thy vineyard, thou shalt not glean it after thee; it shall be for the stranger, for the fatherless, and for the widow.
30.12 It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say: ‘Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?’'' None |
|
2. Hebrew Bible, Exodus, 15.1, 15.6 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer (R.) • Eliezer (or Elazar), Rabbi, ben Shamua • Eliezer,
Found in books: Fishbane (2003), Biblical Myth and Rabbinic Mythmaking, 178; Kaplan (2015), My Perfect One: Typology and Early Rabbinic Interpretation of Song of Songs, 72; Rubenstein(1995), The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods, 158
sup>
15.1 אָז יָשִׁיר־מֹשֶׁה וּבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת־הַשִּׁירָה הַזֹּאת לַיהוָה וַיֹּאמְרוּ לֵאמֹר אָשִׁירָה לַיהוָה כִּי־גָאֹה גָּאָה סוּס וְרֹכְבוֹ רָמָה בַיָּם׃
15.1 נָשַׁפְתָּ בְרוּחֲךָ כִּסָּמוֹ יָם צָלֲלוּ כַּעוֹפֶרֶת בְּמַיִם אַדִּירִים׃
15.6 יְמִינְךָ יְהוָה נֶאְדָּרִי בַּכֹּחַ יְמִינְךָ יְהוָה תִּרְעַץ אוֹיֵב׃'' None | sup>
15.1 Then sang Moses and the children of Israel this song unto the LORD, and spoke, saying: I will sing unto the LORD, for He is highly exalted; The horse and his rider hath He thrown into the sea.
15.6 Thy right hand, O LORD, glorious in power, Thy right hand, O LORD, dasheth in pieces the enemy.'' None |
|
3. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 15.2 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer (Servant of Abraham)
Found in books: Grypeou and Spurling (2009), The Exegetical Encounter between Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity, 166; Salvesen et al. (2020), Israel in Egypt: The Land of Egypt as Concept and Reality for Jews in Antiquity and the Early Medieval Period, 123
sup>
15.2 וְאֶת־הַחִתִּי וְאֶת־הַפְּרִזִּי וְאֶת־הָרְפָאִים׃
15.2 וַיֹּאמֶר אַבְרָם אֲדֹנָי יֱהוִה מַה־תִּתֶּן־לִי וְאָנֹכִי הוֹלֵךְ עֲרִירִי וּבֶן־מֶשֶׁק בֵּיתִי הוּא דַּמֶּשֶׂק אֱלִיעֶזֶר׃'' None | sup>
15.2 And Abram said: ‘O Lord GOD, what wilt Thou give me, seeing I go hence childless, and he that shall be possessor of my house is Eliezer of Damascus?’'' None |
|
4. Hebrew Bible, Leviticus, 18.5, 19.10, 23.40 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer, • Eliezer, Ben Damma, Rabbi • Eliezer, R., on amei ha’arets • Rabbi Eliezer
Found in books: Brooks (1983), Support for the Poor in the Mishnaic Law of Agriculture: Tractate Peah, 131, 132, 164; Hasan Rokem (2003), Tales of the Neighborhood Jewish Narrative Dialogues in Late Antiquity, 81; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 127; Rubenstein(1995), The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods, 114, 310, 311; Samely (2002), Rabbinic Interpretation of Scripture in the Mishnah, 355; Schremer (2010), Brothers Estranged: Heresy, Christianity and Jewish Identity in Late Antiquity, 202
sup>
18.5 וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם אֶת־חֻקֹּתַי וְאֶת־מִשְׁפָּטַי אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשֶׂה אֹתָם הָאָדָם וָחַי בָּהֶם אֲנִי יְהוָה׃' ' None | sup>
18.5 Ye shall therefore keep My statutes, and Mine ordices, which if a man do, he shall live by them: I am the LORD.
19.10 And thou shalt not glean thy vineyard, neither shalt thou gather the fallen fruit of thy vineyard; thou shalt leave them for the poor and for the stranger: I am the LORD your God.
23.40 And ye shall take you on the first day the fruit of goodly trees, branches of palm-trees, and boughs of thick trees, and willows of the brook, and ye shall rejoice before the LORD your God seven days.'' None |
|
5. Hebrew Bible, Numbers, 5.11-5.31, 15.30, 29.35 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer (or Elazar), Rabbi, ben Shamua • Eliezer ben Yose • Eliezer, • Eliezer, Rr. • Rosenthal, Eliezer Shimshon • Torah, rabbinic debates on teaching women, R. Eliezers view
Found in books: Kaplan (2015), My Perfect One: Typology and Early Rabbinic Interpretation of Song of Songs, 88; Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 229, 235; Kraemer (2010), Unreliable Witnesses: Religion, Gender, and History in the Greco-Roman Mediterranean, 42; Rubenstein(1995), The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods, 175; Samely (2002), Rabbinic Interpretation of Scripture in the Mishnah, 272; Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 74; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 74; Sigal (2007), The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew, 87
sup>
5.11 וַיְדַבֵּר יְהוָה אֶל־מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר׃ 5.12 דַּבֵּר אֶל־בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵהֶם אִישׁ אִישׁ כִּי־תִשְׂטֶה אִשְׁתּוֹ וּמָעֲלָה בוֹ מָעַל׃ 5.13 וְשָׁכַב אִישׁ אֹתָהּ שִׁכְבַת־זֶרַע וְנֶעְלַם מֵעֵינֵי אִישָׁהּ וְנִסְתְּרָה וְהִיא נִטְמָאָה וְעֵד אֵין בָּהּ וְהִוא לֹא נִתְפָּשָׂה׃ 5.14 וְעָבַר עָלָיו רוּחַ־קִנְאָה וְקִנֵּא אֶת־אִשְׁתּוֹ וְהִוא נִטְמָאָה אוֹ־עָבַר עָלָיו רוּחַ־קִנְאָה וְקִנֵּא אֶת־אִשְׁתּוֹ וְהִיא לֹא נִטְמָאָה׃ 5.15 וְהֵבִיא הָאִישׁ אֶת־אִשְׁתּוֹ אֶל־הַכֹּהֵן וְהֵבִיא אֶת־קָרְבָּנָהּ עָלֶיהָ עֲשִׂירִת הָאֵיפָה קֶמַח שְׂעֹרִים לֹא־יִצֹק עָלָיו שֶׁמֶן וְלֹא־יִתֵּן עָלָיו לְבֹנָה כִּי־מִנְחַת קְנָאֹת הוּא מִנְחַת זִכָּרוֹן מַזְכֶּרֶת עָוֺן׃ 5.16 וְהִקְרִיב אֹתָהּ הַכֹּהֵן וְהֶעֱמִדָהּ לִפְנֵי יְהוָה׃ 5.17 וְלָקַח הַכֹּהֵן מַיִם קְדֹשִׁים בִּכְלִי־חָרֶשׂ וּמִן־הֶעָפָר אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בְּקַרְקַע הַמִּשְׁכָּן יִקַּח הַכֹּהֵן וְנָתַן אֶל־הַמָּיִם׃ 5.18 וְהֶעֱמִיד הַכֹּהֵן אֶת־הָאִשָּׁה לִפְנֵי יְהוָה וּפָרַע אֶת־רֹאשׁ הָאִשָּׁה וְנָתַן עַל־כַּפֶּיהָ אֵת מִנְחַת הַזִּכָּרוֹן מִנְחַת קְנָאֹת הִוא וּבְיַד הַכֹּהֵן יִהְיוּ מֵי הַמָּרִים הַמְאָרֲרִים׃ 5.19 וְהִשְׁבִּיעַ אֹתָהּ הַכֹּהֵן וְאָמַר אֶל־הָאִשָּׁה אִם־לֹא שָׁכַב אִישׁ אֹתָךְ וְאִם־לֹא שָׂטִית טֻמְאָה תַּחַת אִישֵׁךְ הִנָּקִי מִמֵּי הַמָּרִים הַמְאָרֲרִים הָאֵלֶּה׃' '5.21 וְהִשְׁבִּיעַ הַכֹּהֵן אֶת־הָאִשָּׁה בִּשְׁבֻעַת הָאָלָה וְאָמַר הַכֹּהֵן לָאִשָּׁה יִתֵּן יְהוָה אוֹתָךְ לְאָלָה וְלִשְׁבֻעָה בְּתוֹךְ עַמֵּךְ בְּתֵת יְהוָה אֶת־יְרֵכֵךְ נֹפֶלֶת וְאֶת־בִּטְנֵךְ צָבָה׃ 5.22 וּבָאוּ הַמַּיִם הַמְאָרְרִים הָאֵלֶּה בְּמֵעַיִךְ לַצְבּוֹת בֶּטֶן וְלַנְפִּל יָרֵךְ וְאָמְרָה הָאִשָּׁה אָמֵן אָמֵן׃ 5.23 וְכָתַב אֶת־הָאָלֹת הָאֵלֶּה הַכֹּהֵן בַּסֵּפֶר וּמָחָה אֶל־מֵי הַמָּרִים׃ 5.24 וְהִשְׁקָה אֶת־הָאִשָּׁה אֶת־מֵי הַמָּרִים הַמְאָרֲרִים וּבָאוּ בָהּ הַמַּיִם הַמְאָרֲרִים לְמָרִים׃ 5.25 וְלָקַח הַכֹּהֵן מִיַּד הָאִשָּׁה אֵת מִנְחַת הַקְּנָאֹת וְהֵנִיף אֶת־הַמִּנְחָה לִפְנֵי יְהוָה וְהִקְרִיב אֹתָהּ אֶל־הַמִּזְבֵּחַ׃ 5.26 וְקָמַץ הַכֹּהֵן מִן־הַמִּנְחָה אֶת־אַזְכָּרָתָהּ וְהִקְטִיר הַמִּזְבֵּחָה וְאַחַר יַשְׁקֶה אֶת־הָאִשָּׁה אֶת־הַמָּיִם׃ 5.27 וְהִשְׁקָהּ אֶת־הַמַּיִם וְהָיְתָה אִם־נִטְמְאָה וַתִּמְעֹל מַעַל בְּאִישָׁהּ וּבָאוּ בָהּ הַמַּיִם הַמְאָרֲרִים לְמָרִים וְצָבְתָה בִטְנָהּ וְנָפְלָה יְרֵכָהּ וְהָיְתָה הָאִשָּׁה לְאָלָה בְּקֶרֶב עַמָּהּ׃ 5.28 וְאִם־לֹא נִטְמְאָה הָאִשָּׁה וּטְהֹרָה הִוא וְנִקְּתָה וְנִזְרְעָה זָרַע׃ 5.29 זֹאת תּוֹרַת הַקְּנָאֹת אֲשֶׁר תִּשְׂטֶה אִשָּׁה תַּחַת אִישָׁהּ וְנִטְמָאָה׃ 5.31 וְנִקָּה הָאִישׁ מֵעָוֺן וְהָאִשָּׁה הַהִוא תִּשָּׂא אֶת־עֲוֺנָהּ׃
29.35 בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁמִינִי עֲצֶרֶת תִּהְיֶה לָכֶם כָּל־מְלֶאכֶת עֲבֹדָה לֹא תַעֲשׂוּ׃'' None | sup>
5.11 And the LORD spoke unto Moses, saying: 5.12 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them: If any man’s wife go aside, and act unfaithfully against him, 5.13 and a man lie with her carnally, and it be hid from the eyes of her husband, she being defiled secretly, and there be no witness against her, neither she be taken in the act; 5.14 and the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he warned his wife, and she be defiled; or if the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he warned his wife, and she be not defiled; 5.15 then shall the man bring his wife unto the priest, and shall bring her offering for her, the tenth part of an ephah of barley meal; he shall pour no oil upon it, nor put frankincense thereon; for it is a meal-offering of jealousy, a meal-offering of memorial, bringing iniquity to remembrance. 5.16 And the priest shall bring her near, and set her before the LORD. 5.17 And the priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel; and of the dust that is on the floor of the tabernacle the priest shall take, and put it into the water. 5.18 And the priest shall set the woman before the LORD, and let the hair of the woman’s head go loose, and put the meal-offering of memorial in her hands, which is the meal-offering of jealousy; and the priest shall have in his hand the water of bitterness that causeth the curse. 5.19 And the priest shall cause her to swear, and shall say unto the woman: ‘If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness, being under thy husband, be thou free from this water of bitterness that causeth the curse; 5.20 but if thou hast gone aside, being under thy husband, and if thou be defiled, and some man have lain with thee besides thy husband— 5.21 then the priest shall cause the woman to swear with the oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman—the LORD make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the LORD doth make thy thigh to fall away, and thy belly to swell; 5.22 and this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, and make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to fall away’; and the woman shall say: ‘Amen, Amen.’ 5.23 And the priest shall write these curses in a scroll, and he shall blot them out into the water of bitterness. 5.24 And he shall make the woman drink the water of bitterness that causeth the curse; and the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her and become bitter. 5.25 And the priest shall take the meal-offering of jealousy out of the woman’s hand, and shall wave the meal-offering before the LORD, and bring it unto the altar. 5.26 And the priest shall take a handful of the meal-offering, as the memorial-part thereof, and make it smoke upon the altar, and afterward shall make the woman drink the water. 5.27 And when he hath made her drink the water, then it shall come to pass, if she be defiled, and have acted unfaithfully against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall fall away; and the woman shall be a curse among her people. 5.28 And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be cleared, and shall conceive seed. 5.29 This is the law of jealousy, when a wife, being under her husband, goeth aside, and is defiled; 5.30 or when the spirit of jealousy cometh upon a man, and he be jealous over his wife; then shall he set the woman before the LORD, and the priest shall execute upon her all this law. 5.31 And the man shall be clear from iniquity, and that woman shall bear her iniquity.
15.30 But the soul that doeth aught with a high hand, whether he be home-born or a stranger, the same blasphemeth the LORD; and that soul shall be cut off from among his people.
29.35 On the eighth day ye shall have a solemn assembly: ye shall do no manner of servile work;'' None |
|
6. Hebrew Bible, Proverbs, 5.8, 7.26 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer, R. • Rabbi Eliezer
Found in books: Rosen-Zvi (2011), Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity. 98; Schremer (2010), Brothers Estranged: Heresy, Christianity and Jewish Identity in Late Antiquity, 93
sup>
5.8 הַרְחֵק מֵעָלֶיהָ דַרְכֶּךָ וְאַל־תִּקְרַב אֶל־פֶּתַח בֵּיתָהּ׃
7.26 כִּי־רַבִּים חֲלָלִים הִפִּילָה וַעֲצֻמִים כָּל־הֲרֻגֶיהָ׃'' None | sup>
5.8 Remove thy way far from her, And come not nigh the door of her house;
7.26 For she hath cast down many wounded; Yea, a mighty host are all her slain.'' None |
|
7. Hebrew Bible, Psalms, 8.3, 25.14 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Ashkenazi, Eliezer • Baʿal Shem Tov (also, Israel ben Eliezer) • Eliezer • Eliezer (or Elazar), Rabbi, ben Shamua • Eliezer, Rabbi • R. Eliezer • R. Eliezer hismah
Found in books: Bergmann et al. (2023), The Power of Psalms in Post-Biblical Judaism: Liturgy, Ritual and Community. 10, 206; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 79; Kaplan (2015), My Perfect One: Typology and Early Rabbinic Interpretation of Song of Songs, 72; Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 546; Samely (2002), Rabbinic Interpretation of Scripture in the Mishnah, 114; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 58, 60
sup>
25.14 סוֹד יְהוָה לִירֵאָיו וּבְרִיתוֹ לְהוֹדִיעָם׃' ' None | sup>
25.14 The counsel of the LORD is with them that fear Him; And His covet, to make them know it.' ' None |
|
8. Hebrew Bible, Ecclesiastes, 7.8, 10.5 (5th cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer, R., on conjugal duty • R. Eliezer ben Hyrcanus
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 129; Lavee (2017), The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity, 120; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 104; Swartz (2018), The Mechanics of Providence: The Workings of Ancient Jewish Magic and Mysticism. 77
sup>
7.8 טוֹב אַחֲרִית דָּבָר מֵרֵאשִׁיתוֹ טוֹב אֶרֶךְ־רוּחַ מִגְּבַהּ־רוּחַ׃' ' None | sup>
7.8 Better is the end of a thing than the beginning thereof; And the patient in spirit is better than the proud in spirit.' ' None |
|
9. Josephus Flavius, Jewish War, 2.119 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer, Rabbi • R. Eliezer Shammaite
Found in books: Taylor (2012), The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea, 71; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 606
sup>
2.119 Τρία γὰρ παρὰ ̓Ιουδαίοις εἴδη φιλοσοφεῖται, καὶ τοῦ μὲν αἱρετισταὶ Φαρισαῖοι, τοῦ δὲ Σαδδουκαῖοι, τρίτον δέ, ὃ δὴ καὶ δοκεῖ σεμνότητα ἀσκεῖν, ̓Εσσηνοὶ καλοῦνται, ̓Ιουδαῖοι μὲν γένος ὄντες, φιλάλληλοι δὲ καὶ τῶν ἄλλων πλέον.'' None | sup>
2.119 2. For there are three philosophical sects among the Jews. The followers of the first of which are the Pharisees; of the second, the Sadducees; and the third sect, which pretends to a severer discipline, are called Essenes. These last are Jews by birth, and seem to have a greater affection for one another than the other sects have.'' None |
|
10. Mishnah, Avot, 1.12, 2.8, 2.10, 3.2, 4.11 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Arakh • Eliezer ben Hyrcanus • Eliezer ben Ya’akov • Eliezer, Rr. • R. Eliezer Shammaite
Found in books: Brooks (1983), Support for the Poor in the Mishnaic Law of Agriculture: Tractate Peah, 185; Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 230; Porton (1988), Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta, 149, 152; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 170; Sigal (2007), The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew, 54; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 616
sup>
1.12 הִלֵּל וְשַׁמַּאי קִבְּלוּ מֵהֶם. הִלֵּל אוֹמֵר, הֱוֵי מִתַּלְמִידָיו שֶׁל אַהֲרֹן, אוֹהֵב שָׁלוֹם וְרוֹדֵף שָׁלוֹם, אוֹהֵב אֶת הַבְּרִיּוֹת וּמְקָרְבָן לַתּוֹרָה:
2.8 רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי קִבֵּל מֵהִלֵּל וּמִשַּׁמָּאי. הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר, אִם לָמַדְתָּ תוֹרָה הַרְבֵּה, אַל תַּחֲזִיק טוֹבָה לְעַצְמְךָ, כִּי לְכָךְ נוֹצָרְתָּ. חֲמִשָּׁה תַלְמִידִים הָיוּ לוֹ לְרַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, וְאֵלּוּ הֵן, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן הוֹרְקְנוֹס, וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן חֲנַנְיָה, וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַכֹּהֵן, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן נְתַנְאֵל, וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲרָךְ. הוּא הָיָה מוֹנֶה שִׁבְחָן. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן הוֹרְקְנוֹס, בּוֹר סוּד שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְאַבֵּד טִפָּה. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן חֲנַנְיָה, אַשְׁרֵי יוֹלַדְתּוֹ. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַכֹּהֵן, חָסִיד. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן נְתַנְאֵל, יְרֵא חֵטְא. וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲרָךְ, מַעְיָן הַמִּתְגַּבֵּר. הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר, אִם יִהְיוּ כָל חַכְמֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּכַף מֹאזְנַיִם, וֶאֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן הוֹרְקְנוֹס בְּכַף שְׁנִיָּה, מַכְרִיעַ אֶת כֻּלָּם. אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר מִשְּׁמוֹ, אִם יִהְיוּ כָל חַכְמֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּכַף מֹאזְנַיִם וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן הוֹרְקְנוֹס אַף עִמָּהֶם, וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲרָךְ בְּכַף שְׁנִיָּה, מַכְרִיעַ אֶת כֻּלָּם:' 3.2 רַבִּי חֲנִינָא סְגַן הַכֹּהֲנִים אוֹמֵר, הֱוֵי מִתְפַּלֵּל בִּשְׁלוֹמָהּ שֶׁל מַלְכוּת, שֶׁאִלְמָלֵא מוֹרָאָהּ, אִישׁ אֶת רֵעֵהוּ חַיִּים בְּלָעוֹ. רַבִּי חֲנִינָא בֶן תְּרַדְיוֹן אוֹמֵר, שְׁנַיִם שֶׁיּוֹשְׁבִין וְאֵין בֵּינֵיהֶן דִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה, הֲרֵי זֶה מוֹשַׁב לֵצִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהלים א) וּבְמוֹשַׁב לֵצִים לֹא יָשָׁב. אֲבָל שְׁנַיִם שֶׁיּוֹשְׁבִין וְיֵשׁ בֵּינֵיהֶם דִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה, שְׁכִינָה שְׁרוּיָה בֵינֵיהֶם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (מלאכי ג) אָז נִדְבְּרוּ יִרְאֵי יְיָ אִישׁ אֶל רֵעֵהוּ וַיַּקְשֵׁב יְיָ וַיִּשְׁמָע וַיִּכָּתֵב סֵפֶר זִכָּרוֹן לְפָנָיו לְיִרְאֵי יְיָ וּלְחֹשְׁבֵי שְׁמוֹ. אֵין לִי אֶלָּא שְׁנַיִם, מִנַּיִן שֶׁאֲפִלּוּ אֶחָד שֶׁיּוֹשֵׁב וְעוֹסֵק בַּתּוֹרָה, שֶׁהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא קוֹבֵעַ לוֹ שָׂכָר, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (איכה ג) יֵשֵׁב בָּדָד וְיִדֹּם כִּי נָטַל עָלָיו:
4.11 רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר, הָעוֹשֶׂה מִצְוָה אַחַת, קוֹנֶה לוֹ פְרַקְלִיט אֶחָד. וְהָעוֹבֵר עֲבֵרָה אַחַת, קוֹנֶה לוֹ קַטֵּגוֹר אֶחָד. תְּשׁוּבָה וּמַעֲשִׂים טוֹבִים, כִּתְרִיס בִּפְנֵי הַפֻּרְעָנוּת. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן הַסַּנְדְּלָר אוֹמֵר, כָּל כְּנֵסִיָּה שֶׁהִיא לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, סוֹפָהּ לְהִתְקַיֵּם. וְשֶׁאֵינָהּ לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, אֵין סוֹפָהּ לְהִתְקַיֵּם:'' None | sup>
1.12 Hillel and Shammai received the oral tradition from them. Hillel used to say: be of the disciples of Aaron, loving peace and pursuing peace, loving mankind and drawing them close to the Torah.
2.8 Rabban Yoha ben Zakkai received the oral tradition from Hillel and Shammai.He used to say: if you have learned much torah, do not claim credit for yourself, because for such a purpose were you created. Rabban Yoha ben Zakkai had five disciples and they were these: Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, Rabbi Joshua ben Haiah, Rabbi Yose, the priest, Rabbi Shimon ben Nethaneel and Rabbi Eleazar ben Arach. He Rabbi Joha used to list their outstanding virtues: Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus is a plastered cistern which loses not a drop; Rabbi Joshua ben Haiah happy is the woman that gave birth to him; Rabbi Yose, the priest, is a pious man; Rabbi Simeon ben Nethaneel is one that fears sin, And Rabbi Eleazar ben Arach is like a spring that ever gathers force. He Rabbi Yoha used to say: if all the sages of Israel were on one scale of the balance and Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus on the other scale, he would outweigh them all. Abba Shaul said in his name: if all the sages of Israel were on one scale of the balance, and Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus also with them, and Rabbi Eleazar ben Arach on the other scale, he would outweigh them all.
2.10 They each said three things:Rabbi Eliezer said: Let the honor of your friend be as dear to you as your own; And be not easily provoked to anger; And repent one day before your death. And he also said: warm yourself before the fire of the wise, but beware of being singed by their glowing coals, for their bite is the bite of a fox, and their sting is the sting of a scorpion, and their hiss is the hiss of a serpent, and all their words are like coals of fire.
3.2 Rabbi Hanina, the vice-high priest said: pray for the welfare of the government, for were it not for the fear it inspires, every man would swallow his neighbor alive. R. Haiah ben Teradion said: if two sit together and there are no words of Torah spoken between them, then this is a session of scorners, as it is said: “nor sat he in the seat of the scornful…rather, the teaching of the Lord is his delight” (Psalms 1:1); but if two sit together and there are words of Torah spoken between them, then the Shekhinah abides among them, as it is said: “then they that feared the Lord spoke one with another; and the Lord hearkened and heard, and a book of remembrance was written before Him, for them that feared the Lord and that thought upon His name” (Malachi 3:16). Now I have no scriptural proof for the presence of the Shekhinah except among two, how do we know that even one who sits and studies Torah the Holy One, blessed be He, fixes his reward? As it is said: “though he sit alone and meditate in stillness, yet he takes a reward unto himself” (Lamentations 3:28).' "
4.11 Rabbi Eliezer son of Yaakov says: One who does a single good deed acquires a single defender. One who does a single sin acquires a single prosecutor. Repentance and good deeds are a shield against punishment. Rabbi Yocha the shoemaker said: Every gathering that is for the sake of Heaven will endure. And every gathering that isn't for the sake of Heven will not endure, in the end."' None |
|
11. Mishnah, Berachot, 1.1, 5.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer (Rabbi) • Eliezer, R.
Found in books: Balberg (2023), Fractured Tablets: Forgetfulness and Fallibility in Late Ancient Rabbinic Culture, 86, 87; Brooks (1983), Support for the Poor in the Mishnaic Law of Agriculture: Tractate Peah, 188; Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 86; Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014), Saints and role models in Judaism and Christianity, 73, 81, 109, 113, 134, 170
sup>
1.1 מֵאֵימָתַי קוֹרִין אֶת שְׁמַע בְּעַרְבִית. מִשָּׁעָה שֶׁהַכֹּהֲנִים נִכְנָסִים לֶאֱכֹל בִּתְרוּמָתָן, עַד סוֹף הָאַשְׁמוּרָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, עַד חֲצוֹת. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, עַד שֶׁיַּעֲלֶה עַמּוּד הַשָּׁחַר. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁבָּאוּ בָנָיו מִבֵּית הַמִּשְׁתֶּה, אָמְרוּ לוֹ, לֹא קָרִינוּ אֶת שְׁמַע. אָמַר לָהֶם, אִם לֹא עָלָה עַמּוּד הַשַּׁחַר, חַיָּבִין אַתֶּם לִקְרוֹת. וְלֹא זוֹ בִּלְבַד, אֶלָּא כָּל מַה שֶּׁאָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים עַד חֲצוֹת, מִצְוָתָן עַד שֶׁיַּעֲלֶה עַמּוּד הַשָּׁחַר. הֶקְטֵר חֲלָבִים וְאֵבָרִים, מִצְוָתָן עַד שֶׁיַּעֲלֶה עַמּוּד הַשָּׁחַר. וְכָל הַנֶּאֱכָלִים לְיוֹם אֶחָד, מִצְוָתָן עַד שֶׁיַּעֲלֶה עַמּוּד הַשָּׁחַר. אִם כֵּן, לָמָּה אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים עַד חֲצוֹת, כְּדֵי לְהַרְחִיק אֶת הָאָדָם מִן הָעֲבֵרָה:
5.5 הַמִּתְפַּלֵּל וְטָעָה, סִימָן רַע לוֹ. וְאִם שְׁלִיחַ צִבּוּר הוּא, סִימָן רַע לְשׁוֹלְחָיו, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁשְּׁלוּחוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם כְּמוֹתוֹ. אָמְרוּ עָלָיו עַל רַבִּי חֲנִינָא בֶן דּוֹסָא, כְּשֶׁהָיָה מִתְפַּלֵּל עַל הַחוֹלִים וְאוֹמֵר, זֶה חַי וְזֶה מֵת. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, מִנַּיִן אַתָּה יוֹדֵעַ. אָמַר לָהֶם, אִם שְׁגוּרָה תְפִלָּתִי בְּפִי, יוֹדֵעַ אֲנִי שֶׁהוּא מְקֻבָּל. וְאִם לָאו, יוֹדֵעַ אֲנִי שֶׁהוּא מְטֹרָף:'' None | sup>
1.1 From what time may one recite the Shema in the evening? From the time that the priests enter their houses in order to eat their terumah until the end of the first watch, the words of Rabbi Eliezer. The sages say: until midnight. Rabban Gamaliel says: until dawn. Once it happened that his sons came home late from a wedding feast and they said to him: we have not yet recited the evening Shema. He said to them: if it is not yet dawn you are still obligated to recite. And not in respect to this alone did they so decide, but wherever the sages say “until midnight,” the mitzvah may be performed until dawn. The burning of the fat and the pieces may be performed till dawn. Similarly, all the offerings that are to be eaten within one day may be eaten till dawn. Why then did the sages say “until midnight”? In order to keep a man far from transgression.
5.5 One who is praying and makes a mistake, it is a bad sign for him. And if he is the messenger of the congregation (the prayer leader) it is a bad sign for those who have sent him, because one’s messenger is equivalent to one’s self. They said about Rabbi Hanina ben Dosa that he used to pray for the sick and say, “This one will die, this one will live.” They said to him: “How do you know?” He replied: “If my prayer comes out fluently, I know that he is accepted, but if not, then I know that he is rejected.”'' None |
|
12. Mishnah, Eruvin, 3.5, 6.6-6.7 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Jacob • Eliezer,
Found in books: Porton (1988), Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta, 41, 117; Rubenstein(1995), The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods, 228
sup>
3.5 מַתְנֶה אָדָם עַל עֵרוּבוֹ וְאוֹמֵר, אִם בָּאוּ גוֹיִים מִן הַמִּזְרָח, עֵרוּבִי לַמַּעֲרָב. מִן הַמַּעֲרָב, עֵרוּבִי לַמִּזְרָח. אִם בָּאוּ מִכָּאן וּמִכָּאן, לִמְקוֹם שֶׁאֶרְצֶה אֵלֵךְ. לֹא בָאוּ לֹא מִכָּאן וְלֹא מִכָּאן, הֲרֵינִי כִבְנֵי עִירִי. אִם בָּא חָכָם מִן הַמִּזְרָח, עֵרוּבִי לַמִּזְרָח. מִן הַמַּעֲרָב, עֵרוּבִי לַמַּעֲרָב. בָּא לְכָאן וּלְכָאן, לִמְקוֹם שֶׁאֶרְצֶה אֵלֵךְ. לֹא לְכָאן וְלֹא לְכָאן, הֲרֵינִי כִבְנֵי עִירִי. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אִם הָיָה אֶחָד מֵהֶן רַבּוֹ, הוֹלֵךְ אֵצֶל רַבּוֹ, וְאִם הָיוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם רַבּוֹתָיו, לִמְקוֹם שֶׁיִּרְצֶה יֵלֵךְ:
6.6 חָמֵשׁ חֲבוּרוֹת שֶׁשָּׁבְתוּ בִטְרַקְלִין אֶחָד, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, עֵרוּב לְכָל חֲבוּרָה וַחֲבוּרָה. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, עֵרוּב אֶחָד לְכֻלָּן. וּמוֹדִים, בִּזְמַן שֶׁמִּקְצָתָן שְׁרוּיִן בַּחֲדָרִים אוֹ בַעֲלִיּוֹת, שֶׁהֵן צְרִיכִין עֵרוּב לְכָל חֲבוּרָה וַחֲבוּרָה: 6.7 הָאַחִין הַשֻּׁתָּפִין שֶׁהָיוּ אוֹכְלִין עַל שֻׁלְחַן אֲבִיהֶם וִישֵׁנִים בְּבָתֵּיהֶם, צְרִיכִין עֵרוּב לְכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד. לְפִיכָךְ, אִם שָׁכַח אֶחָד מֵהֶם וְלֹא עֵרֵב, מְבַטֵּל אֶת רְשׁוּתוֹ. אֵימָתַי, בִּזְמַן שֶׁמּוֹלִיכִין עֵרוּבָן בְּמָקוֹם אַחֵר, אֲבָל אִם הָיָה עֵרוּב בָּא אֶצְלָן, אוֹ שֶׁאֵין עִמָּהֶן דִּיוּרִין בֶּחָצֵר, אֵינָן צְרִיכִין לְעָרֵב:'' None | sup>
3.5 A man may make a stipulation concerning his eruv and say, “If foreigners came from the east, let my eruv be that of the west; if they came from the west let my eruv be that of the east; if they came from both directions, I will go in whatever direction I desire; and if they came from neither direction I will be like the people of my town.” Likewise say, “If a sage came from the east let my eruv be that of the east; if from the west let my eruv be that of the west; If he came from either direction I will go in whatever direction I desire; and if no one came from either direction I will be like the people of my town.” Rabbi Judah says: if one of them was his teacher he may go only to his teacher, but if both were his teachers he may go in whatever direction he prefers.
6.6 Five companies of men who spent Shabbat in one hall:: Bet Shammai says: an eruv for each an every company; But Bet Hillel says: one eruv for them all. They agree that where some of them occupy rooms or upper chambers, that they must make an eruv for each and every company. 6.7 Brothers or partners who were eating at their father’s table but slept in their own homes must each have an eruv. Hence, if any one of them forgot and did not contribute to the eruv, he must annul his right to his share in the courtyard. When does this apply? When they bring their eruv into some other place but if their eruv is deposited with them or if there are no other tets with them in the courtyard they need not prepare any eruv.'' None |
|
13. Mishnah, Hagigah, 2.2 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Hyrcanus
Found in books: Brooks (1983), Support for the Poor in the Mishnaic Law of Agriculture: Tractate Peah, 185; Sigal (2007), The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew, 99
sup>
2.2 יוֹסֵי בֶּן יוֹעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר שֶׁלֹּא לִסְמוֹךְ, יוֹסֵי בֶּן יוֹחָנָן אוֹמֵר לִסְמוֹךְ. יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן פְּרַחְיָה אוֹמֵר שֶׁלֹּא לִסְמוֹךְ, נִתַּאי הָאַרְבֵּלִי אוֹמֵר לִסְמוֹךְ. יְהוּדָה בֶּן טַבַּאי אוֹמֵר שֶׁלֹּא לִסְמוֹךְ, שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטָח אוֹמֵר לִסְמוֹךְ. שְׁמַעְיָה אוֹמֵר לִסְמוֹךְ. אַבְטַלְיוֹן אוֹמֵר שֶׁלֹּא לִסְמוֹךְ. הִלֵּל וּמְנַחֵם לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ. יָצָא מְנַחֵם, נִכְנַס שַׁמַּאי. שַׁמַּאי אוֹמֵר שֶׁלֹּא לִסְמוֹךְ, הִלֵּל אוֹמֵר לִסְמוֹךְ. הָרִאשׁוֹנִים הָיוּ נְשִׂיאִים, וּשְׁנִיִּים לָהֶם אַב בֵּית דִּין:'' None | sup>
2.2 Yose ben Yoezer says that on a festival the laying of the hands on the head of a sacrifice may not be performed. Yosef ben Joha says that it may be performed. Joshua ben Perahia says that it may not be performed. Nittai the Arbelite says that it may be performed. Judah ben Tabai says that it may not be performed. Shimon ben Shetah says that it may be performed. Shamayah says that it may be performed. Avtalyon says that it may not be performed. Hillel and Menahem did not dispute. Menahem went out, Shammai entered. Shammai says that it may not be performed. Hillel says that it may be performed. The former of each pair were patriarchs and the latter were heads of the court.'' None |
|
14. Mishnah, Hulin, 2.7 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • R. Eliezer Shammaite
Found in books: Porton (1988), Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta, 61, 99, 129, 149, 151, 227; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 12, 284, 377, 428, 592
sup>
2.7 הַשּׁוֹחֵט לְנָכְרִי, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר פּוֹסֵל. אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, אֲפִלּוּ שְׁחָטָהּ שֶׁיֹּאכַל הַנָּכְרִי מֵחֲצַר כָּבֵד שֶׁלָּהּ, פְּסוּלָה, שֶׁסְּתָם מַחֲשֶׁבֶת נָכְרִי לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, קַל וָחֹמֶר הַדְּבָרִים, וּמַה בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁהַמַּחֲשָׁבָה פוֹסֶלֶת, בְּמֻקְדָּשִׁין, אֵין הַכֹּל הוֹלֵךְ אֶלָּא אַחַר הָעוֹבֵד, מְקוֹם שֶׁאֵין מַחֲשָׁבָה פוֹסֶלֶת, בְּחֻלִּין, אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא הַכֹּל הוֹלֵךְ אֶלָּא אַחַר הַשּׁוֹחֵט:'' None | sup>
2.7 If one slaughtered for a non-Jew, the slaughtering is valid. Rabbi Eliezer declares it invalid. Rabbi Eliezer said: even if one slaughtered a beast with the intention that a non-Jew should eat only its liver, the slaughtering is invalid, for the thoughts of a non-Jew are usually directed towards idolatry. Rabbi Yose said: is there not a kal vehomer argument? For if in the case of consecrated animals, where a wrongful intention can render invalid, it is established that everything depends solely upon the intention of him who performs the service, how much more in the case of unconsecrated animals, where a wrongful intention cannot render invalid, is it not logical that everything should depend solely upon the intention of him who slaughters!'' None |
|
15. Mishnah, Maasrot, 1.5-1.8 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer, acquisition of untithed produce, processing and storing untithed produce • Eliezer, acquisition of untithed produce, removal of tithes
Found in books: Brooks (1983), Support for the Poor in the Mishnaic Law of Agriculture: Tractate Peah, 188; Jaffee (1981), Mishnah's Theology of Tithing: A Study of Tractate Maaserot, 57
sup>
1.5 אֵיזֶהוּ גָּרְנָן לַמַּעַשְׂרוֹת. הַקִּשּׁוּאִים וְהַדְּלוּעִים, מִשֶּׁיְּפַקְסוּ. וְאִם אֵינוֹ מְפַקֵּס, מִשֶּׁיַּעֲמִיד עֲרֵמָה. אֲבַטִּיחַ, מִשֶּׁיְּשַׁלֵּק. וְאִם אֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּק, עַד שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה מֻקְצֶה. יָרָק הַנֶּאֱגָד, מִשֶּׁיֹּאגַד. אִם אֵינוֹ אוֹגֵד, עַד שֶׁיְּמַלֵּא אֶת הַכְּלִי. וְאִם אֵינוֹ מְמַלֵּא אֶת הַכְּלִי, עַד שֶׁיְּלַקֵּט כָּל צָרְכּוֹ. כַּלְכָּלָה, עַד שֶׁיְּחַפֶּה. וְאִם אֵינוֹ מְחַפֶּה, עַד שֶׁיְמַלֵּא אֶת הַכְּלִי. וְאִם אֵינוֹ מְמַלֵּא אֶת הַכְּלִי, עַד שֶׁיְּלַקֵּט כָּל צָרְכּוֹ. בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים, בְּמוֹלִיךְ לַשּׁוּק. אֲבָל בְּמוֹלִיךְ לְבֵיתוֹ, אוֹכֵל מֵהֶם עֲרַאי עַד שֶׁהוּא מַגִּיעַ לְבֵיתוֹ: 1.6 הַפֶּרֶד וְהַצִּמּוּקִין וְהֶחָרוּבִין, מִשֶּׁיַּעֲמִיד עֲרֵמָה. הַבְּצָלִים, מִשֶּׁיְּפַקֵּל. וְאִם אֵינוֹ מְפַקֵּל, מִשֶּׁיַּעֲמִיד עֲרֵמָה. הַתְּבוּאָה, מִשֶּׁיְּמָרֵחַ. וְאִם אֵינוֹ מְמָרֵחַ, עַד שֶׁיַּעֲמִיד עֲרֵמָה. הַקִּטְנִיּוֹת, מִשֶּׁיִּכְבֹּר. וְאִם אֵינוֹ כוֹבֵר, עַד שֶׁיְּמָרֵחַ. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמֵּרַח, נוֹטֵל מִן הַקֻּטָּעִים וּמִן הַצְּדָדִים וּמִמַּה שֶׁבְּתוֹךְ הַתֶּבֶן, וְאוֹכֵל: 1.7 הַיַּיִן, מִשֶּׁיְּקַפֶּה. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁקִּפָּה, קוֹלֵט מִן הַגַּת הָעֶלְיוֹנָה וּמִן הַצִּנּוֹר, וְשׁוֹתֶה. הַשֶּׁמֶן, מִשֶּׁיֵּרֵד לָעוּקָה. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיָּרַד, נוֹטֵל מִן הֶעָקָל וּמִבֵּין הַמָּמָל וּמִבֵּין הַפַּצִּים, וְנוֹתֵן לַחֲמִטָּה וְלַתַּמְחוּי, אֲבָל לֹא יִתֵּן לַקְּדֵרָה וְלַלְּפָס כְּשֶׁהֵן רוֹתְחִין. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, לַכֹּל הוּא נוֹתֵן, חוּץ מִדָּבָר שֶׁיֶּשׁ בּוֹ חֹמֶץ וְצִיר: 1.8 הָעִגּוּל, מִשֶּׁיַּחֲלִיקֶנּוּ. מַחֲלִיקִים בִּתְאֵנִים וּבַעֲנָבִים שֶׁל טֶבֶל. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹסֵר. הַמַּחֲלִיק בַּעֲנָבִים, לֹא הֻכְשָׁר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, הֻכְשָׁר. הַגְּרוֹגָרוֹת, מִשֶּׁיָּדוּשׁ. וּמְגוּרָה מִשֶּׁיְּעַגֵּל. הָיָה דָשׁ בֶּחָבִית וּמְעַגֵּל בַּמְּגוּרָה, נִשְׁבְּרָה הֶחָבִית וְנִפְתְּחָה הַמְּגוּרָה, לֹא יֹאכַל מֵהֶם עֲרָאי. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי מַתִּיר:'' None | sup>
1.5 What is considered a “threshing floor” for tithes i.e. when does produce become liable for tithes?Cucumbers and gourds are liable for tithes once he removes their fuzz. And if he doesn’t remove it, once he makes a pile. Melons once he removes the fuzz with hot water. And if they he does not remove the fuzz, once he stores them in the muktzeh. Vegetables which are tied in bundles, from the time he ties them up in bundles. If he does not tie them up in bundles, until he fills the vessel with them. And if he does not fill the vessel, after he has gathered all that he wishes to gather. Produce which is packed in a basket is liable for tithes after he has covered it. If he is not going to cover it, until he fills the vessel with them. And if he does not fill the vessel, after he has gathered all that he wishes to gather. When does this apply? When one brings the produce to the market. But when he brings it to his own house, he may make a chance meal of it, until he reaches his house. 1.6 Dried pomegranate seeds, raisins and carobs, are liable for tithes after he has made a pile. Onions, once he removes the onion seeds. If he does not remove the onion seeds, after he makes a pile. Grain, once he smoothes out the pile. If he does not smooth the pile, after he makes a pile. Pulse, after he has sifted it. If he does not sift, after he smoothes out a pile. Even after he has smoothed out the pile, he may without tithing take from the broken ears, from the sides of the piles, and from that which is mixed in with the chaff, and eat. 1.7 Wine is liable for tithes after it has been skimmed in the lower part of the winepress. Even though it has been skimmed, he may take from the upper winepress, or from the duct, and drink without taking out tithe. Oil is liable for tithes after it has gone down into the trough. But even after it has gone down into the trough he may still take oil from the pressing bale, or from the press beam, or from the boards between the press without tithing, And he may put such oil on a cake, or large plate. But he should not put the oil in a dish or stewpot, while they are boiling. Rabbi Judah says: he may put it into anything except that which contains vinegar or brine. 1.8 A cake of pressed figs is liable for tithes from the moment it has been smoothed out with fruit juice. They may smooth them out with the juice of untithed figs or grapes. Rabbi Judah forbids this. If one smoothed with grapes, it is not susceptible to uncleanness. Rabbi Judah says it is susceptible. Dried figs are liable to tithe after they have been pressed into a jar. And figs stored in a bin are liable to tithe after they have been pressed. If one was pressing the figs into a jar, or pressing them in a storage bin, and the jar was broken or the storage bin opened, he may not make a chance meal of them. Rabbi Yose permits this.'' None |
|
16. Mishnah, Middot, 2.5, 5.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer ben Yaakov, R. • Eliezer ben Ya’akov (Rabbi)
Found in books: Balberg (2023), Fractured Tablets: Forgetfulness and Fallibility in Late Ancient Rabbinic Culture, 192, 193; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 49
sup>
2.5 עֶזְרַת הַנָּשִׁים הָיְתָה אֹרֶךְ מֵאָה וּשְׁלשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ עַל רֹחַב מֵאָה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ. וְאַרְבַּע לְשָׁכוֹת הָיוּ בְאַרְבַּע מִקְצוֹעוֹתֶיהָ, שֶׁל אַרְבָּעִים אַרְבָּעִים אַמָּה. וְלֹא הָיוּ מְקוֹרוֹת. וְכָךְ הֵם עֲתִידִים לִהְיוֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (יחזקאל מו), וַיּוֹצִיאֵנִי אֶל הֶחָצֵר הַחִיצוֹנָה וַיַּעֲבִירֵנִי אֶל אַרְבַּעַת מִקְצוֹעֵי הֶחָצֵר וְהִנֵּה חָצֵר בְּמִקְצֹעַ הֶחָצֵר, חָצֵר בְּמִקְצֹעַ הֶחָצֵר, בְּאַרְבַּעַת מִקְצֹעוֹת הֶחָצֵר חֲצֵרוֹת קְטֻרוֹת. וְאֵין קְטֻרוֹת אֶלָּא שֶׁאֵינָן מְקוֹרוֹת. וּמֶה הָיוּ מְשַׁמְּשׁוֹת. דְּרוֹמִית מִזְרָחִית, הִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת הַנְּזִירִים, שֶׁשָּׁם הַנְּזִירִים מְבַשְּׁלִין אֶת שַׁלְמֵיהֶן, וּמְגַלְּחִין אֶת שְׂעָרָן, וּמְשַׁלְּחִים תַּחַת הַדּוּד. מִזְרָחִית צְפוֹנִית, הִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת הָעֵצִים, שֶׁשָּׁם הַכֹּהֲנִים בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין מַתְלִיעִין הָעֵצִים. וְכָל עֵץ שֶׁנִּמְצָא בוֹ תוֹלַעַת, פָּסוּל מֵעַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. צְפוֹנִית מַעֲרָבִית, הִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת מְצֹרָעִים. מַעֲרָבִית דְּרוֹמִית, אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב, שָׁכַחְתִּי מֶה הָיְתָה מְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת. אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר, שָׁם הָיוּ נוֹתְנִין יַיִן וָשֶׁמֶן, הִיא הָיְתָה נִקְרֵאת לִשְׁכַּת בֵּית שְׁמַנְיָה. וַחֲלָקָה הָיְתָה בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה, וְהִקִּיפוּהָ כְצוֹצְרָה, שֶׁהַנָּשִׁים רוֹאוֹת מִלְמַעְלָן, וְהָאֲנָשִׁים מִלְּמַטָּן, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ מְעֹרָבִין. וַחֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה מַעֲלוֹת עוֹלוֹת מִתּוֹכָהּ לְעֶזְרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל, כְּנֶגֶד חֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה מַעֲלוֹת שֶׁבַּתְּהִלִּים, שֶׁעֲלֵיהֶן הַלְוִיִּם אוֹמְרִים בַּשִּׁיר. לֹא הָיוּ טְרוּטוֹת, אֶלָּא מֻקָּפוֹת כַּחֲצִי גֹרֶן עֲגֻלָּה:' "
5.4 שֶׁבַּדָּרוֹם, לִשְׁכַּת הָעֵץ, לִשְׁכַּת הַגּוֹלָה, לִשְׁכַּת הַגָּזִית. לִשְׁכַּת הָעֵץ, אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב, שָׁכַחְתִּי מֶה הָיְתָה מְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת. אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר, לִשְׁכַּת כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל, וְהִיא הָיְתָה אֲחוֹרֵי שְׁתֵּיהֶן, וְגַג שְׁלָשְׁתָּן שָׁוֶה. לִשְׁכַּת הַגּוֹלָה, שָׁם הָיָה בוֹר קָבוּעַ, וְהַגַּלְגַּל נָתוּן עָלָיו, וּמִשָּׁם מַסְפִּיקִים מַיִם לְכָל הָעֲזָרָה. לִשְׁכַּת הַגָּזִית, שָׁם הָיְתָה סַנְהֶדְרִי גְדוֹלָה שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל יוֹשֶׁבֶת וְדָנָה אֶת הַכְּהֻנָּה, וְכֹהֵן שֶׁנִּמְצָא בוֹ פְסוּל, לוֹבֵשׁ שְׁחוֹרִים וּמִתְעַטֵּף שְׁחוֹרִים, וְיוֹצֵא וְהוֹלֵךְ לוֹ. וְשֶׁלֹּא נִמְצָא בוֹ פְסוּל, לוֹבֵשׁ לְבָנִים וּמִתְעַטֵּף לְבָנִים, נִכְנָס וּמְשַׁמֵּשׁ עִם אֶחָיו הַכֹּהֲנִים. וְיוֹם טוֹב הָיוּ עוֹשִׂים, שֶׁלֹּא נִמְצָא פְסוּל בְּזַרְעוֹ שֶׁל אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן, וְכָךְ הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים, בָּרוּךְ הַמָּקוֹם בָּרוּךְ הוּא, שֶׁלֹּא נִמְצָא פְסוּל בְּזַרְעוֹ שֶׁל אַהֲרֹן. וּבָרוּךְ הוּא, שֶׁבָּחַר בְּאַהֲרֹן וּבְבָנָיו לַעֲמֹד לְשָׁרֵת לִפְנֵי ה' בְּבֵית קָדְשֵׁי הַקֳּדָשִׁים:"' None | sup>
2.5 The courtyard of the women was a hundred and thirty-five cubits long by a hundred and thirty-five wide. It had four chambers in its four corners, each of which was forty cubits. They were not roofed, and so they will be in the time to come, as it says, “Then he brought me forth into the outer court, and caused me to pass by the four corners of the court, and behold in every corner of the court there was a court. In the four corners of the court there were keturot courts” (Ezekiel 46:21-22) and keturot means that they were not roofed. For what were they used? The southeastern one was the chamber of the Nazirites where the Nazirites used to boil their shelamim and shave their hair and throw it under the pot. The northeastern one was the wood chamber where priests with physical defects used to pick out the wood which had worms, every piece with a worm in it being unfit for use on the altar. The northwestern one was the chamber of those with skin disease. The southwestern one: Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob said: I forget what it was used for. Abba Shaul says: they used to store there wine and oil, and it was called the chamber of oil. It the courtyard of the women had originally been smooth without protrusions in the walls but subsequently they surrounded it with a balcony so that the women could look on from above while the men were below, and they should not mix together. Fifteen steps led up from it to the courtyard of Israel, corresponding to the fifteen songs of ascents mentioned in the Book of Psalms, and upon which the Levites used to sing. They were not rectangular but circular like the half of a threshing floor.
5.4 On the south were the wood chamber, the chamber of the exile and the chamber of hewn stones. The wood chamber: Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob says: I forget what it was used for. Abba Shaul says: It was the chamber of the high priest, and it was behind the two of them, and one roof covered all three. In the chamber of the exile there was a fixed cistern, with a wheel over it, and from there water was provided for all of the courtyard. In the chamber of hewn stone the great Sanhedrin of Israel used to sit and judge the priesthood. A priest in whom was found a disqualification used to put on black garments and wrap himself in black and go away. One in whom no disqualification was found used to put on white garments and wrap himself in white and go in and serve along with his brother priests. They used to make a feast because no blemish had been found in the seed of Aaron the priest, and they used to say: Blessed is the Omnipresent, blessed is He, for no blemish has been found in the seed of Aaron. Blessed is He who chose Aaron and his sons to stand to minister before the Lord in the Holy of Holies.'' None |
|
17. Mishnah, Peah, 4.6 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Jacob
Found in books: Brooks (1983), Support for the Poor in the Mishnaic Law of Agriculture: Tractate Peah, 81; Porton (1988), Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta, 150
sup>
4.6 עוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים שֶׁקָּצַר אֶת שָׂדֵהוּ וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִתְגַּיֵּר, פָּטוּר מִן הַלֶּקֶט וּמִן הַשִּׁכְחָה וּמִן הַפֵּאָה. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה מְחַיֵּב בְּשִׁכְחָה, שֶׁאֵין הַשִּׁכְחָה אֶלָּא בִשְׁעַת הָעִמּוּר:'' None | sup>
4.6 A non-Jew who harvested his field and then converted, he is exempt from leaving gleanings, the forgotten sheaf and peah. Rabbi Judah makes him liable to leave the forgotten sheaf, since he becomes liable for the forgotten sheaf at the time of their binding.'' None |
|
18. Mishnah, Pesahim, 6.2 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer, R., and violence • Eliezer, Rr.
Found in books: Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 236; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 57, 181
sup>
6.2 אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, וַהֲלֹא דִין הוּא, מָה אִם שְׁחִיטָה שֶׁהִיא מִשּׁוּם מְלָאכָה דּוֹחָה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת, אֵלּוּ שֶׁהֵן מִשּׁוּם שְׁבוּת לֹא יִדְחוּ אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, יוֹם טוֹב יוֹכִיחַ, שֶׁהִתִּירוּ בוֹ מִשּׁוּם מְלָאכָה, וְאָסוּר בּוֹ מִשּׁוּם שְׁבוּת. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, מַה זֶּה, יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, מָה רְאָיָה רְשׁוּת לְמִצְוָה. הֵשִׁיב רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא וְאָמַר, הַזָּאָה תוֹכִיחַ, שֶׁהִיא מִצְוָה וְהִיא מִשּׁוּם שְׁבוּת וְאֵינָהּ דּוֹחָה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת, אַף אַתָּה אַל תִּתְמַהּ עַל אֵלּוּ, שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵן מִצְוָה וְהֵן מִשּׁוּם שְׁבוּת, לֹא יִדְחוּ אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, וְעָלֶיהָ אֲנִי דָן, וּמָה אִם שְׁחִיטָה שֶׁהִיא מִשּׁוּם מְלָאכָה, דּוֹחָה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת, הַזָּאָה שֶׁהִיא מִשּׁוּם שְׁבוּת, אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁדּוֹחָה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, אוֹ חִלּוּף, מָה אִם הַזָּאָה שֶׁהִיא מִשּׁוּם שְׁבוּת, אֵינָהּ דּוֹחָה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת, שְׁחִיטָה שֶׁהִיא מִשּׁוּם מְלָאכָה, אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁלֹּא תִדְחֶה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, עֲקִיבָא, עָקַרְתָּ מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה, בֵּין הָעַרְבַּיִם בְּמֹעֲדוֹ (במדבר ט), בֵּין בְּחֹל בֵּין בְּשַׁבָּת. אָמַר לוֹ, רַבִּי, הָבֵא לִי מוֹעֵד לָאֵלּוּ כַּמּוֹעֵד לַשְּׁחִיטָה. כְּלָל אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, כָּל מְלָאכָה שֶׁאֶפְשָׁר לַעֲשׂוֹתָהּ מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת, אֵינָהּ דּוֹחָה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת. שְׁחִיטָה שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לַעֲשׂוֹתָהּ מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת, דּוֹחָה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת:'' None | sup>
6.2 Rabbi Eliezer said: is it not logical: if slaughtering, which is usually forbidden as a labor, overrides Shabbat, shouldn’t these, which are only forbidden as mandated rest (shevut), override Shabbat? Rabbi Joshua said to him: let the festival prove this, for they permitted labor on the festival and forbade activities forbidden because of shevut. Rabbi Eliezer said to him: what is this, Joshua? What proof is a voluntary act in respect of a commandment! Rabbi Akiva answered and said: let sprinkling purificatory waters prove it, which is performed because it is a commandment and is forbidden only as a shevut, yet it does not override Shabbat; so you too, do not wonder at these, that though they are required on account of a commandment and are forbidden only as shevut, yet they do not override Shabbat. Rabbi Eliezer said to him: but in respect of that I am arguing: if slaughtering, which is a labor, overrides Shabbat, is it not logical that sprinkling, which is only a shevut, should override Shabbat! Rabbi Akiva said to him: or the opposite: if sprinkling, which is forbidden as a shevut, does not override Shabbat, then slaughtering, which is normally forbidden on account of labor, is it not logical that it should not override Shabbat. Rabbi Eliezer said to him: Akiva! You are uprooting what is written in the Torah, “at twilight, offer it at its set time” (Numbers 9:3), both on week-days and on Shabbat. He said to him: master, give me an appointed time for these as there is an appointed season for slaughtering! Rabbi Akiva stated a general rule: work which could be done on the eve of Shabbat does not override Shabbat; slaughtering, which could not be done on the eve of Shabbat, does override Shabbat.'' None |
|
19. Mishnah, Rosh Hashanah, 1.1, 1.4, 4.9 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer, • R. Eliezer b. Azariah
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 18, 19; Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 545; Rubenstein(1995), The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods, 178
sup>
1.1 אַרְבָּעָה רָאשֵׁי שָׁנִים הֵם. בְּאֶחָד בְּנִיסָן רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה לַמְּלָכִים וְלָרְגָלִים. בְּאֶחָד בֶּאֱלוּל רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה לְמַעְשַׂר בְּהֵמָה. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמְרִים, בְּאֶחָד בְּתִשְׁרֵי. בְּאֶחָד בְּתִשְׁרֵי רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה לַשָּׁנִים וְלַשְּׁמִטִּין וְלַיּוֹבְלוֹת, לַנְּטִיעָה וְלַיְרָקוֹת. בְּאֶחָד בִּשְׁבָט, רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה לָאִילָן, כְּדִבְרֵי בֵית שַׁמַּאי. בֵּית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, בַּחֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר בּוֹ:
1.4 עַל שְׁנֵי חֳדָשִׁים מְחַלְּלִין אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת, עַל נִיסָן וְעַל תִּשְׁרֵי, שֶׁבָּהֶן הַשְּׁלוּחִין יוֹצְאִין לְסוּרְיָא, וּבָהֶן מְתַקְּנִין אֶת הַמּוֹעֲדוֹת. וּכְשֶׁהָיָה בֵית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ קַיָּם, מְחַלְּלִין אַף עַל כֻּלָּן מִפְּנֵי תַקָּנַת הַקָּרְבָּן:
4.9 סֵדֶר תְּקִיעוֹת, שָׁלשׁ, שֶׁל שָׁלשׁ שָׁלשׁ. שִׁעוּר תְּקִיעָה כְּשָׁלשׁ תְּרוּעוֹת. שִׁעוּר תְּרוּעָה כְּשָׁלשׁ יְבָבוֹת. תָּקַע בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה, וּמָשַׁךְ בַּשְּׁנִיָּה כִשְׁתַּיִם, אֵין בְּיָדוֹ אֶלָּא אֶחָת. מִי שֶׁבֵּרַךְ וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִתְמַנָּה לוֹ שׁוֹפָר, תּוֹקֵעַ וּמֵרִיעַ וְתוֹקֵעַ שָׁלשׁ פְּעָמִים. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁשְּׁלִיחַ צִבּוּר חַיָּב, כָּךְ כָּל יָחִיד וְיָחִיד חַיָּב. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, שְׁלִיחַ צִבּוּר מוֹצִיא אֶת הָרַבִּים יְדֵי חוֹבָתָן:'' None | sup>
1.1 There are four new years:The first of Nisan is the new year for kings and for festivals. The first of Elul is the new year for the tithe of beasts. Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon say: the first of Tishri. The first of Tishri is the new year for years, for shmitta and jubilee years, for planting and for tithe of vegetables. The first of Shevat is the new year for trees, according to the words of Bet Shammai. Bet Hillel says: on the fifteenth of that month.
1.4 On account of two months they profane Shabbat: on account of Nissan and Tishri, for on those months messengers go forth to Syria and in them the dates of the festivals are fixed. When the Temple stood they used to profane Shabbat for all the months, in order that the sacrifice might be offered on the right day.' "
4.9 The order of the blasts: three sets of three each. The length of a teki’ah is equal to three teru'ahs, and the length of a teru'ah is equal to three yevavot. If one prolonged the first teki'ah so that it went directly into the second, it counts only as one. One who has blessed recited the Amidah and then a shofar is given to him, he sounds a teki'ah teru'ah teki'ah three times. Just as the shaliah tzibbur is obligated, so every single individual is obligated. Rabban Gamaliel says: the shaliah tzibbur (communal prayer leader) causes the whole congregation to fulfill their obligation."' None |
|
20. Mishnah, Sotah, 3.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer ben Hyrcanus • Eliezer, R.
Found in books: Alexander (2013), Gender and Timebound Commandments in Judaism. 201; Kosman (2012), Gender and Dialogue in the Rabbinic Prism, 100
sup>
3.4 אֵינָהּ מַסְפֶּקֶת לִשְׁתּוֹת עַד שֶׁפָּנֶיהָ מוֹרִיקוֹת וְעֵינֶיהָ בּוֹלְטוֹת וְהִיא מִתְמַלֵּאת גִּידִין, וְהֵם אוֹמְרִים הוֹצִיאוּהָ הוֹצִיאוּהָ, שֶׁלֹּא תְטַמֵּא הָעֲזָרָה. אִם יֶשׁ לָהּ זְכוּת, הָיְתָה תוֹלָה לָהּ. יֵשׁ זְכוּת תּוֹלָה שָׁנָה אַחַת, יֵשׁ זְכוּת תּוֹלָה שְׁתֵּי שָׁנִים, יֵשׁ זְכוּת תּוֹלָה שָׁלשׁ שָׁנִים. מִכָּאן אוֹמֵר בֶּן עַזַּאי, חַיָּב אָדָם לְלַמֵּד אֶת בִּתּוֹ תוֹרָה, שֶׁאִם תִּשְׁתֶּה, תֵּדַע שֶׁהַזְּכוּת תּוֹלָה לָהּ. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, כָּל הַמְלַמֵּד אֶת בִּתּוֹ תוֹרָה, כְּאִלּוּ מְלַמְּדָהּ תִּפְלוּת. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, רוֹצָה אִשָּׁה בְקַב וְתִפְלוּת מִתִּשְׁעָה קַבִּין וּפְרִישׁוּת. הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר, חָסִיד שׁוֹטֶה, וְרָשָׁע עָרוּם, וְאִשָּׁה פְרוּשָׁה, וּמַכּוֹת פְּרוּשִׁין, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מְכַלֵּי עוֹלָם:'' None | sup>
3.4 She had barely finished drinking when her face turns yellow, her eyes protrude and her veins swell. And those who see her exclaim, “Remove her! Remove her, so that the temple-court should not be defiled”. If she had merit, it causes the water to suspend its effect upon her. Some merit suspends the effect for one year, some merit suspends the effects for two years, and some merit suspends the effect for three years. Hence Ben Azzai said: a person must teach his daughter Torah, so that if she has to drink the water of bitterness, she should know that the merit suspends its effect. Rabbi Eliezer says: whoever teaches his daughter Torah teaches her lasciviousness. Rabbi Joshua says: a woman prefers one kav (of food) and sexual indulgence to nine kav and sexual separation. He used to say, a foolish pietist, a cunning wicked person, a female separatist, and the blows of separatists bring destruction upon the world.'' None |
|
21. Mishnah, Sukkah, 2.7 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer,
Found in books: Rubenstein(1995), The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods, 222; Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 4
sup>
2.7 מִי שֶׁהָיָה רֹאשׁוֹ וְרֻבּוֹ בַסֻּכָּה, וְשֻׁלְחָנוֹ בְתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי פּוֹסְלִין, וּבֵית הִלֵּל מַכְשִׁירִין. אָמְרוּ לָהֶן בֵּית הִלֵּל לְבֵית שַׁמַּאי, לֹא כָךְ הָיָה מַעֲשֶׂה, שֶׁהָלְכוּ זִקְנֵי בֵית שַׁמַּאי וְזִקְנֵי בֵית הִלֵּל לְבַקֵּר אֶת רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן הַחוֹרָנִי, וּמְצָאוּהוּ שֶׁהָיָה יוֹשֵׁב רֹאשׁוֹ וְרֻבּוֹ בַסֻּכָּה, וְשֻׁלְחָנוֹ בְתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת, וְלֹא אָמְרוּ לוֹ דָבָר. אָמְרוּ לָהֶן בֵּית שַׁמַּאי, מִשָּׁם רְאָיָה, אַף הֵם אָמְרוּ לוֹ, אִם כֵּן הָיִיתָ נוֹהֵג, לֹא קִיַּמְתָּ מִצְוַת סֻכָּה מִיָּמֶיךָ:'' None | sup>
2.7 One whose head and the greater part of his body were within the sukkah and his table within the house: Bet Shammai say: it is invalid and Bet Hillel say it valid. Bet Hillel said to Bet Shammai: Did it not in fact happen that the elders of Bet Shammai and the elders of Bet Hillel went to visit Rabbi Yoha ben HaHoroni and found him sitting with his head and the greater part of his body within the sukkah and his table within the house, and they didn’t say anything to him? Bet Shammai said to them: From there you bring proof? Indeed they said to him, “If this is your custom, then you have never in your whole life fulfilled the commandment of the sukkah.'' None |
|
22. Mishnah, Yevamot, 8.3 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Jacob • Eliezer, R.
Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 203; Porton (1988), Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta, 129, 150
sup>
8.3 עַמּוֹנִי וּמוֹאָבִי, אֲסוּרִים, וְאִסּוּרָן אִסּוּר עוֹלָם, אֲבָל נְקֵבוֹתֵיהֶם מֻתָּרוֹת מִיָּד. מִצְרִי וַאֲדוֹמִי אֵינָם אֲסוּרִים אֶלָּא עַד שְׁלֹשָׁה דוֹרוֹת, אֶחָד זְכָרִים וְאֶחָד נְקֵבוֹת. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מַתִּיר אֶת הַנְּקֵבוֹת מִיָּד. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, קַל וָחֹמֶר הַדְּבָרִים, וּמָה אִם בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁאָסַר אֶת הַזְּכָרִים אִסּוּר עוֹלָם, הִתִּיר אֶת הַנְּקֵבוֹת מִיָּד, מְקוֹם שֶׁלֹּא אָסַר אֶת הַזְּכָרִים אֶלָּא עַד שְׁלֹשָׁה דוֹרוֹת, אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁנַּתִּיר אֶת הַנְּקֵבוֹת מִיָּד. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, אִם הֲלָכָה נְקַבֵּל, וְאִם לַדִּין, יֵשׁ תְּשׁוּבָה. אָמַר לָהֶם, לֹא כִי, הֲלָכָה אֲנִי אוֹמֵר. מַמְזֵרִין וּנְתִינִין, אֲסוּרִין, וְאִסּוּרָן אִסּוּר עוֹלָם, אֶחָד זְכָרִים, וְאֶחָד נְקֵבוֹת:'' None | sup>
8.3 An Ammonite and a Moabite are forbidden to enter into the congregation of the Lord and their prohibition is for ever. However, their women are permitted at once. An Egyptian and an Edomite are forbidden only until the third generation, whether they are males or females. Rabbi Shimon permits their women immediately. Said Rabbi Shimon: This is a kal vehomer: if where the males are forbidden for all time the females are permitted immediately, where the males are forbidden only until the third generation how much more should the females be permitted immediately. They said to him: If this is a halakhah, we shall accept it; but if it is only a logical reference, there is a refutation. He replied: This is not so, I am in fact saying a halakhah. Mamzerim and nethinim are forbidden, and their prohibition is forever, whether they be males or females.'' None |
|
23. Mishnah, Zevahim, 4.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Jacob • R. Eliezer Shammaite
Found in books: Porton (1988), Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta, 150, 151; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 592
sup>
4.5 קָדְשֵׁי נָכְרִים, אֵין חַיָּבִין עֲלֵיהֶם מִשּׁוּם פִּגּוּל, נוֹתָר וְטָמֵא. וְהַשּׁוֹחֲטָן בַּחוּץ, פָּטוּר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי מְחַיֵּב. דְּבָרִים שֶׁאֵין חַיָּבִין עֲלֵיהֶם מִשּׁוּם פִּגּוּל, חַיָּבִים עֲלֵיהֶם מִשּׁוּם נוֹתָר, מִשּׁוּם טָמֵא, חוּץ מִן הַדָּם. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, בְּדָבָר שֶׁדַּרְכָּן לְהֵאָכֵל. אֲבָל כְּגוֹן הָעֵצִים וְהַלְּבוֹנָה וְהַקְּטֹרֶת, אֵין חַיָּבִין עֲלֵיהֶם מִשּׁוּם טֻמְאָה:'' None | sup>
4.5 The sacrifices of non-Jews: one is not liable on their account for piggul, remt, or defilement, and if a priest slaughters them outside the Temple, he is not liable, the words of Rabbi Meir. But Rabbi Yose declares him liable. The things for which one is not liable on account of piggul, one is liable on account of remt and defilement except blood. Rabbi Shimon declares one liable for anything which is normally eaten, but for wood, frankincense and incense, one is not liable for transgressions involving defilement.'' None |
|
24. Mishnah, Terumot, 4.7, 8.1-8.3, 8.8-8.12 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Jacob, heave-offering, oral designation of, executors of orphans • Eliezer, acquisition of untithed produce, processing and storing untithed produce • Eliezer, acquisition of untithed produce, removal of tithes • Eliezer, heave-offering, cultic cleanness of • Eliezer, heave-offering, neutralization of • Eliezer, heave-offering, payment of principal and added fifth
Found in books: Avery-Peck (1981), The priestly gift in Mishnah: a study of tractate Terumot, 144, 150, 151, 228, 229, 230, 231, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245; Brooks (1983), Support for the Poor in the Mishnaic Law of Agriculture: Tractate Peah, 146; Jaffee (1981), Mishnah's Theology of Tithing: A Study of Tractate Maaserot, 57; Porton (1988), Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta, 17, 18, 117, 137, 149
sup>
4.7 רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, תְּרוּמָה, עוֹלָה בְּאֶחָד וּמֵאָה. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, בְּמֵאָה וָעוֹד. וָעוֹד זֶה, אֵין לוֹ שִׁעוּר. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן מְשֻׁלָּם אוֹמֵר, וָעוֹד, קַב לְמֵאָה סְאָה, שְׁתוּת לַמְּדַמֵּעַ:
8.1 הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁהָיְתָה אוֹכֶלֶת בִּתְרוּמָה, בָּאוּ וְאָמְרוּ לָהּ, מֵת בַּעְלִיךְ אוֹ גֵרְשֵׁךְ, וְכֵן הָעֶבֶד שֶׁהָיָה אוֹכֵל בִּתְרוּמָה, וּבָאוּ וְאָמְרוּ לוֹ, מֵת רַבָּךְ, אוֹ מְכָרָךְ לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, אוֹ נְתָנָךְ בְּמַתָּנָה, אוֹ עֲשָׂאָךְ בֶּן חוֹרִין. וְכֵן כֹּהֵן שֶׁהָיָה אוֹכֵל בִּתְרוּמָה, וְנוֹדַע שֶׁהוּא בֶן גְּרוּשָׁה אוֹ בֶן חֲלוּצָה, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵּב קֶרֶן וְחֹמֶשׁ, וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ פּוֹטֵר. הָיָה עוֹמֵד וּמַקְרִיב עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, וְנוֹדַע שֶׁהוּא בֶן גְּרוּשָׁה אוֹ בֶן חֲלוּצָה, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, כָּל הַקָּרְבָּנוֹת שֶׁהִקְרִיב עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, פְּסוּלִים. וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ מַכְשִׁיר. נוֹדַע שֶׁהוּא בַעַל מוּם, עֲבוֹדָתוֹ פְּסוּלָה:
8.1 וְכֵן חָבִית שֶׁל שֶׁמֶן שֶׁנִּשְׁפְּכָה, מוֹדֶה רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, שֶׁאִם יָכוֹל לְהַצִּיל מִמֶּנָּה רְבִיעִית בְּטָהֳרָה, יַצִּיל. וְאִם לָאו, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, תֵּרֵד וְתִבָּלַע, וְאַל יְבַלְּעֶנָּה בְיָדָיו: 8.2 וְכֻלָּם, שֶׁהָיְתָה תְרוּמָה בְתוֹךְ פִּיהֶם, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, יִבְלְעוּ. וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, יִפְלֹטוּ. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, נִטְמֵאתָ וְנִטְמֵאת תְּרוּמָה, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, יִבְלָע. וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, יִפְלֹט. טָמֵא הָיִיתָ וּטְמֵאָה הָיְתָה תְרוּמָה, אוֹ נוֹדַע שֶׁהוּא טֶבֶל, וּמַעֲשֵׂר רִאשׁוֹן שֶׁלֹּא נִטְּלָה תְרוּמָתוֹ, וּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי וְהֶקְדֵּשׁ שֶׁלֹּא נִפְדּוּ, אוֹ שֶׁטָּעַם טַעַם פִּשְׁפֵּשׁ לְתוֹךְ פִּיו, הֲרֵי זֶה יִפְלֹט: 8.3 הָיָה אוֹכֵל בְּאֶשְׁכּוֹל וְנִכְנַס מִן הַגִּנָּה לֶחָצֵר, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, יִגְמֹר. וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, לֹא יִגְמֹר. חֲשֵׁכָה לֵילֵי שַׁבָּת, רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, יִגְמֹר. וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, לֹא יִגְמֹר:
8.8 חָבִית שֶׁל תְּרוּמָה שֶׁנּוֹלַד בָּהּ סְפֵק טֻמְאָה, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, אִם הָיְתָה מֻנַּחַת בִּמְקוֹם תֻּרְפָּה, יַנִּיחֶנָּה בְּמָקוֹם הַמֻּצְנָע, וְאִם הָיְתָה מְגֻלָּה, יְכַסֶּנָּה. וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, אִם הָיְתָה מֻנַּחַת בְּמָקוֹם מֻצְנָע, יַנִּיחֶנָּה בִּמְקוֹם תֻּרְפָּה, וְאִם הָיְתָה מְכֻסָּה, יְגַלֶּנָּה. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, אַל יְחַדֵּשׁ בָּהּ דָּבָר: 8.9 חָבִית שֶׁנִּשְׁבְּרָה בַּגַּת הָעֶלְיוֹנָה, וְהַתַּחְתּוֹנָה טְמֵאָה, מוֹדֶה רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, שֶׁאִם יְכוֹלִים לְהַצִּיל מִמֶּנָּה רְבִיעִית בְּטָהֳרָה, יַצִּיל. וְאִם לָאו, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, תֵּרֵד וְתִטַּמֵּא, וְאַל יְטַמְּאֶנָּה בְיָדָיו:' 8.11 וְעַל זוֹ וְעַל זוֹ אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, לֹא זוֹ הִיא תְרוּמָה שֶׁאֲנִי מֻזְהָר עָלֶיהָ מִלְּטַמְּאָהּ, אֶלָּא מִלְּאָכְלָהּ. וּבַל תְּטַמְּאָהּ כֵּיצַד, הָיָה עוֹבֵר מִמָּקוֹם לְמָקוֹם וְכִכָּרוֹת שֶׁל תְּרוּמָה בְיָדוֹ, אָמַר לוֹ נָכְרִי, תֶּן לִי אַחַת מֵהֶן וַאֲטַמְּאָהּ, וְאִם לָאו, הֲרֵי אֲנִי מְטַמֵּא אֶת כֻּלָּהּ, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, יְטַמֵּא אֶת כֻּלָּהּ, וְאַל יִתֶּן לוֹ אַחַת מֵהֶן וִיטַמֵּא. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, יַנִּיחַ לְפָנָיו אַחַת מֵהֶן עַל הַסָּלַע:
8.12 וְכֵן נָשִׁים שֶׁאָמְרוּ לָהֶם נָכְרִים, תְּנוּ אַחַת מִכֶּם וּנְטַמֵּא, וְאִם לָאו, הֲרֵי אָנוּ מְטַמְּאִים אֶת כֻּלְּכֶם, יְטַמְּאוּ אֶת כֻּלָּן, וְאַל יִמְסְרוּ לָהֶם נֶפֶשׁ אַחַת מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל:'' None | sup>
4.7 Rabbi Eliezer says: terumah can be taken out if it falls into a hundred and one parts. Rabbi Joshua says: in a hundred and more, and this “more” has no definite measure. Rabbi Yose ben Meshullam says: this ‘more’ must be a kav to a hundred seahs, a sixth of the seah which renders the whole as medumma.
8.1 If a woman was eating terumah, and they came and said to her, “Your husband is dead”, or “He divorced you.” Or, if a slave was eating terumah, and they came and said to him: “Your master is dead”, or “He sold you to an Israelite”, or “He gave you away as a gift”, or “He emancipated you.” So too, if a priest was eating terumah and it became known that he was the son of a divorced woman or a halutzah (a woman released from levirate marriage): Rabbi Eliezer says: they must repay both the value and the fifth. But Rabbi Joshua exempts them from the added fifth. If a priest was standing and sacrificing on the altar and it became known that he was the son of a divorced woman or a halutzah: Rabbi Eliezer says: all the sacrifices he had offered on the altar are disqualified. But Rabbi Joshua pronounces them valid. If it, however, it became known that he possessed a blemish, his service is disqualified. 8.2 In all the above cases, if terumah was still in their mouth: Rabbi Eliezer says: they may swallow it. But Rabbi Joshua says: they must spit it out. If it was said to him, “Your have become unclean”, or “the terumah has become unclean”, Rabbi Eliezer says: he may swallow it. But Rabbi Joshua says: he must spit it out. If it was said to him, “You were unclean” or “the terumah was unclean”, or it became known that the food he was eating was untithed, or that it was first tithe from which terumah had not yet been taken, or second tithe or dedicated produce that had not been redeemed, or if he tasted the taste of a bug in his mouth, he must spit it out. 8.3 If he was eating a bunch of grapes, and he entered from the garden into the courtyard: Rabbi Eliezer says: he may finish eating. But Rabbi Joshua says: he may not finish. If dusk set in at the eve of Shabbat: Rabbi Eliezer says: he may finish eating. But Rabbi Joshua says: he may not finish.
8.8 A jar of terumah which may have become impure:Rabbi Eliezer says: if it had been deposited in an exposed place, he must now place it in a hidden place; and if it had formerly been uncovered, it must now be covered. But Rabbi Joshua says: if it had been in a hidden place, he must now place it in an exposed place; and if it had formerly been covered up, he must now uncover it. Rabban Gamaliel says: let him not do anything new to it. 8.9 A jar of terumah was broken in the upper part of the wine-press, and the lower part was unclean: Both Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Joshua agree that if one can save at least a reviit of it in cleanness he should save it. But if not: Rabbi Eliezer says: let it flow down and become unclean of its own accord, and let him not make it unclean with his own hands.
8.10 Similarly a jar of terumah oil which spilled: Both Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Joshua agree that if he can save at least a reviit in purity he should save it; But if not: Rabbi Eliezer says: let it flow down and be swallowed up by the ground, and let him not make it unclean with his own hands.
8.11 Concerning both cases Rabbi Joshua said: This is not the kind of terumah over which I am cautioned lest I defile it, but rather to eat of it and not to defile it. If one was passing from place to place with loaves of terumah in his hand and a Gentile said to him: “Give me one of these and I will make it unclean; for if not, I will defile them all,” let him defile them all, and not give him deliberately one to defile, the words of Rabbi Eliezer. But Rabbi Joshua says: he should place one of them on a rock.
8.12 Similarly, if gentiles say to women, “Give us one of you that we may defile her, and if not, we will defile you all”, then let them all be defiled rather than hand over to them one soul from Israel.'' None |
|
25. Mishnah, Yadayim, 3.5, 4.2-4.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer ben Yose • Eliezer, Rabbi • R. Eliezer • R. Eliezer Shammaite
Found in books: Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 79; Samely (2002), Rabbinic Interpretation of Scripture in the Mishnah, 198, 272; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 58; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 11, 428
sup>
3.5 סֵפֶר שֶׁנִּמְחַק וְנִשְׁתַּיֵּר בּוֹ שְׁמוֹנִים וְחָמֵשׁ אוֹתִיּוֹת, כְּפָרָשַׁת וַיְהִי בִּנְסֹעַ הָאָרֹן, מְטַמֵּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. מְגִלָּה שֶׁכָּתוּב בָּהּ שְׁמוֹנִים וְחָמֵשׁ אוֹתִיּוֹת כְּפָרָשַׁת וַיְהִי בִּנְסֹעַ הָאָרֹן, מְטַמָּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. כָּל כִּתְבֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ מְטַמְּאִין אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. שִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים וְקֹהֶלֶת מְטַמְּאִין אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, שִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים מְטַמֵּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם, וְקֹהֶלֶת מַחֲלֹקֶת. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, קֹהֶלֶת אֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם וְשִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים מַחֲלֹקֶת. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, קֹהֶלֶת מִקֻּלֵּי בֵית שַׁמַּאי וּמֵחֻמְרֵי בֵית הִלֵּל. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן עַזַּאי, מְקֻבָּל אֲנִי מִפִּי שִׁבְעִים וּשְׁנַיִם זָקֵן, בַּיּוֹם שֶׁהוֹשִׁיבוּ אֶת רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה בַּיְשִׁיבָה, שֶׁשִּׁיר הַשִּׁירִים וְקֹהֶלֶת מְטַמְּאִים אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, חַס וְשָׁלוֹם, לֹא נֶחֱלַק אָדָם מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל עַל שִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים שֶׁלֹּא תְטַמֵּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם, שֶׁאֵין כָּל הָעוֹלָם כֻּלּוֹ כְדַאי כַּיּוֹם שֶׁנִּתַּן בּוֹ שִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, שֶׁכָּל הַכְּתוּבִים קֹדֶשׁ, וְשִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים. וְאִם נֶחְלְקוּ, לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ אֶלָּא עַל קֹהֶלֶת. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן חָמִיו שֶׁל רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, כְּדִבְרֵי בֶן עַזַּאי, כָּךְ נֶחְלְקוּ וְכָךְ גָּמְרוּ:' "4.3 בּוֹ בַיּוֹם אָמְרוּ, עַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב, מַה הֵן בַּשְּׁבִיעִית. גָּזַר רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן, מַעְשַׂר עָנִי. וְגָזַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה, מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי. אָמַר רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל, אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה, עָלֶיךָ רְאָיָה לְלַמֵּד, שֶׁאַתָּה מַחְמִיר, שֶׁכָּל הַמַּחְמִיר, עָלָיו רְאָיָה לְלַמֵּד. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה, יִשְׁמָעֵאל אָחִי, אֲנִי לֹא שִׁנִּיתִי מִסֵּדֶר הַשָּׁנִים, טַרְפוֹן אָחִי שִׁנָּה, וְעָלָיו רְאָיָה לְלַמֵּד. הֵשִׁיב רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן, מִצְרַיִם חוּץ לָאָרֶץ, עַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב חוּץ לָאָרֶץ, מַה מִּצְרַיִם מַעְשַׂר עָנִי בַשְּׁבִיעִית, אַף עַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב מַעְשַׂר עָנִי בַשְּׁבִיעִית. הֵשִׁיב רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה, בָּבֶל חוּץ לָאָרֶץ, עַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב חוּץ לָאָרֶץ, מַה בָּבֶל מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי בַשְּׁבִיעִית, אַף עַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי בַשְּׁבִיעִית. אָמַר רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן, מִצְרַיִם שֶׁהִיא קְרוֹבָה, עֲשָׂאוּהָ מַעְשַׂר עָנִי, שֶׁיִּהְיוּ עֲנִיֵּי יִשְׂרָאֵל נִסְמָכִים עָלֶיהָ בַּשְּׁבִיעִית, אַף עַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב, שֶׁהֵם קְרוֹבִים, נַעֲשִׂים מַעְשַׂר עָנִי, שֶׁיִּהְיוּ עֲנִיֵּי יִשְׂרָאֵל נִסְמָכִים עֲלֵיהֶם בַּשְּׁבִיעִית. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה, הֲרֵי אַתָּה כִמְהַנָּן מָמוֹן, וְאֵין אַתָּה אֶלָּא כְמַפְסִיד נְפָשׁוֹת. קוֹבֵעַ אַתָּה אֶת הַשָּׁמַיִם מִלְּהוֹרִיד טַל וּמָטָר, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (מלאכי ג), הֲיִקְבַּע אָדָם אֱלֹהִים כִּי אַתֶּם קֹבְעִים אֹתִי וַאֲמַרְתֶּם בַּמֶּה קְבַעֲנוּךָ הַמַּעֲשֵׂר וְהַתְּרוּמָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, הֲרֵינִי כְמֵשִׁיב עַל טַרְפוֹן אָחִי, אֲבָל לֹא לְעִנְיַן דְּבָרָיו. מִצְרַיִם מַעֲשֶׂה חָדָשׁ, וּבָבֶל מַעֲשֶׂה יָשָׁן, וְהַנִּדּוֹן שֶׁלְּפָנֵינוּ מַעֲשֶׂה חָדָשׁ. יִדּוֹן מַעֲשֶׂה חָדָשׁ מִמַּעֲשֶׂה חָדָשׁ, וְאַל יִדּוֹן מַעֲשֶׂה חָדָשׁ מִמַּעֲשֶׂה יָשָׁן. מִצְרַיִם מַעֲשֵׂה זְקֵנִים, וּבָבֶל מַעֲשֵׂה נְבִיאִים, וְהַנִּדּוֹן שֶׁלְּפָנֵינוּ מַעֲשֵׂה זְקֵנִים. יִדּוֹן מַעֲשֵׂה זְקֵנִים מִמַּעֲשֵׂה זְקֵנִים, וְאַל יִדּוֹן מַעֲשֵׂה זְקֵנִים מִמַּעֲשֵׂה נְבִיאִים. נִמְנוּ וְגָמְרוּ, עַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב מְעַשְּׂרִין מַעְשַׂר עָנִי בַּשְּׁבִיעִית. וּכְשֶׁבָּא רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן דֻּרְמַסְקִית אֵצֶל רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּלוֹד, אָמַר לוֹ, מַה חִדּוּשׁ הָיָה לָכֶם בְּבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ הַיּוֹם. אָמַר לוֹ, נִמְנוּ וְגָמְרוּ, עַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב מְעַשְּׂרִים מַעְשַׂר עָנִי בַּשְּׁבִיעִית. בָּכָה רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר וְאָמַר, סוֹד ה' לִירֵאָיו וּבְרִיתוֹ לְהוֹדִיעָם (תהלים כה). צֵא וֶאֱמֹר לָהֶם, אַל תָּחֹשּׁוּ לְמִנְיַנְכֶם. מְקֻבָּל אֲנִי מֵרַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, שֶׁשָּׁמַע מֵרַבּוֹ, וְרַבּוֹ מֵרַבּוֹ עַד הֲלָכָה לְמשֶׁה מִסִּינַי, שֶׁעַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב מְעַשְּׂרִין מַעְשַׂר עָנִי בַּשְּׁבִיעִית:" "4.4 בּוֹ בַיּוֹם בָּא יְהוּדָה, גֵּר עַמּוֹנִי, וְעָמַד לִפְנֵיהֶן בְּבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ. אָמַר לָהֶם, מָה אֲנִי לָבֹא בַקָּהָל. אָמַר לוֹ רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, אָסוּר אָתָּה. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, מֻתָּר אָתָּה. אָמַר לוֹ רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, הַכָּתוּב אוֹמֵר (דברים כג), לֹא יָבֹא עַמּוֹנִי וּמוֹאָבִי בִּקְהַל ה' גַּם דּוֹר עֲשִׂירִי וְגוֹ'. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, וְכִי עַמּוֹנִים וּמוֹאָבִים בִּמְקוֹמָן הֵן. כְּבָר עָלָה סַנְחֵרִיב מֶלֶךְ אַשּׁוּר וּבִלְבֵּל אֶת כָּל הָאֻמּוֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ישעיה י), וְאָסִיר גְּבוּלֹת עַמִּים וַעֲתוּדוֹתֵיהֶם שׁוֹשֵׂתִי וְאוֹרִיד כַּאבִּיר יוֹשְׁבִים. אָמַר לוֹ רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, הַכָּתוּב אוֹמֵר (ירמיה מט), וְאַחֲרֵי כֵן אָשִׁיב אֶת שְׁבוּת בְּנֵי עַמּוֹן, וּכְבָר חָזְרוּ. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, הַכָּתוּב אוֹמֵר (עמוס ט), וְשַׁבְתִּי אֶת שְׁבוּת עַמִּי יִשְׂרָאֵל וִיהוּדָה, וַעֲדַיִן לֹא שָׁבוּ. הִתִּירוּהוּ לָבֹא בַקָּהָל:" ' None | sup>
3.5 A scroll on which the writing has become erased and eighty-five letters remain, as many as are in the section beginning, \\"And it came to pass when the ark set forward\\" (Numbers 11:35-36) defiles the hands. A single sheet on which there are written eighty-five letters, as many as are in the section beginning, \\"And it came to pass when the ark set forward\\", defiles the hands. All the Holy Scriptures defile the hands. The Song of Songs and Kohelet (Ecclesiastes) defile the hands. Rabbi Judah says: the Song of Songs defiles the hands, but there is a dispute about Kohelet. Rabbi Yose says: Kohelet does not defile the hands, but there is a dispute about the Song of Songs. Rabbi Shimon says: the ruling about Kohelet is one of the leniencies of Bet Shammai and one of the stringencies of Bet Hillel. Rabbi Shimon ben Azzai said: I have received a tradition from the seventy-two elders on the day when they appointed Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah head of the academy that the Song of Songs and Kohelet defile the hands. Rabbi Akiba said: Far be it! No man in Israel disputed that the Song of Songs saying that it does not defile the hands. For the whole world is not as worthy as the day on which the Song of Songs was given to Israel; for all the writings are holy but the Song of Songs is the holy of holies. If they had a dispute, they had a dispute only about Kohelet. Rabbi Yoha ben Joshua the son of the father-in-law of Rabbi Akiva said in accordance with the words of Ben Azzai: so they disputed and so they reached a decision. 4.3 On that day they said: what is the law applying to Ammon and Moab in the seventh year? Rabbi Tarfon decreed tithe for the poor. And Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah decreed second tithe. Rabbi Ishmael said: Elazar ben Azariah, you must produce your proof because you are expressing the stricter view and whoever expresses a stricter view has the burden to produce the proof. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah said to him: Ishmael, my brother, I have not deviated from the sequence of years, Tarfon, my brother, has deviated from it and the burden is upon him to produce the proof. Rabbi Tarfon answered: Egypt is outside the land of Israel, Ammon and Moab are outside the land of Israel: just as Egypt must give tithe for the poor in the seventh year, so must Ammon and Moab give tithe for the poor in the seventh year. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah answered: Babylon is outside the land of Israel, Ammon and Moab are outside the land of Israel: just as Babylon must give second tithe in the seventh year, so must Ammon and Moab give second tithe in the seventh year. Rabbi Tarfon said: on Egypt which is near, they imposed tithe for the poor so that the poor of Israel might be supported by it during the seventh year; so on Ammon and Moab which are near, we should impose tithe for the poor so that the poor of Israel may be supported by it during the seventh year. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah said to him: Behold, you are like one who would benefit them with gain, yet you are really as one who causes them to perish. Would you rob the heavens so that dew or rain should not descend? As it is said, \\"Will a man rob God? Yet you rob me. But you: How have we robbed You? In tithes and heave-offerings\\" (Malakhi 3:8). Rabbi Joshua said: Behold, I shall be as one who replies on behalf of Tarfon, my brother, but not in accordance with the substance of his arguments. The law regarding Egypt is a new act and the law regarding Babylon is an old act, and the law which is being argued before us is a new act. A new act should be argued from another new act, but a new act should not be argued from an old act. The law regarding Egypt is the act of the elders and the law regarding Babylon is the act of the prophets, and the law which is being argued before us is the act of the elders. Let one act of the elders be argued from another act of the elders, but let not an act of the elders be argued from an act of the prophets. The votes were counted and they decided that Ammon and Moab should give tithe for the poor in the seventh year. And when Rabbi Yose ben Durmaskit visited Rabbi Eliezer in Lod he said to him: what new thing did you have in the house of study today? He said to him: their votes were counted and they decided that Ammon and Moab must give tithe for the poor in the seventh year. Rabbi Eliezer wept and said: \\"The counsel of the Lord is with them that fear him: and his covet, to make them know it\\" (Psalms 25:14). Go and tell them: Don\'t worry about your voting. I received a tradition from Rabbi Yoha ben Zakkai who heard it from his teacher, and his teacher from his teacher, and so back to a halachah given to Moses from Sinai, that Ammon and Moab must give tithe for the poor in the seventh year. 4.4 On that day Judah, an Ammonite convert, came and stood before them in the house of study. He said to them: Do I have the right to enter into the assembly? Rabban Gamaliel said to him: you are forbidden. Rabbi Joshua said to him: you are permitted. Rabban Gamaliel said to him: the verse says, \\"An Ammonite or a Moabite shall not enter into the assembly of the Lord: even to the tenth generation\\" (Deuteronomy 23:4). R. Joshua said to him: But are the Ammonites and Moabites still in their own territory? Sanheriv, the king of Assyria, has long since come up and mingled all the nations, as it is said: \\"In that I have removed the bounds of the peoples, and have robbed their treasures, and have brought down as one mighty the inhabitants\\" (Isaiah 10:1. Rabban Gamaliel said to him: the verse says, \\"But afterward I will bring back the captivity of the children of Ammon,\\" (Jeremiah 49:6) they have already returned. Rabbi Joshua said to him: another verse says, \\"I will return the captivity of my people Israel and Judah\\" (Amos 9:14). Yet they have not yet returned. So they permitted him to enter the assembly.' ' None |
|
26. New Testament, Mark, 7.11-7.13 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer ben Hanokh • Eliezer, Rabbi
Found in books: Levine Allison and Crossan (2006), The Historical Jesus in Context, 294; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 126
sup>
7.11 ὑμεῖς δὲ λέγετε Ἐὰν εἴπῃ ἄνθρωπος τῷ πατρὶ ἢ τῇ μητρί Κορβάν, ὅ ἐστιν Δῶρον, ὃ ἐὰν ἐξ ἐμοῦ ὠφεληθῇς, 7.12 οὐκέτι ἀφίετε αὐτὸν οὐδὲν ποιῆσαι τῷ πατρὶ ἢ τῇ μητρί, 7.13 ἀκυροῦντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ τῇ παραδόσει ὑμῶν ᾗ παρεδώκατε· καὶ παρόμοια τοιαῦτα πολλὰ ποιεῖτε.'' None | sup>
7.11 But you say, \'If a man tells his father or his mother, "Whatever profit you might have received from me is Corban, that is to say, given to God;"\ '7.12 then you no longer allow him to do anything for his father or his mother, 7.13 making void the word of God by your tradition, which you have handed down. You do many things like this."'' None |
|
27. New Testament, Matthew, 12.10-12.12 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Hyrcanus • Eliezer, Rabbi
Found in books: Levine Allison and Crossan (2006), The Historical Jesus in Context, 293; Sigal (2007), The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew, 75, 149
sup>
12.10 καὶ ἰδοὺ ἄνθρωπος χεῖρα ἔχων ξηράν. καὶ ἐπηρώτησαν αὐτὸν λέγοντες Εἰ ἔξεστι τοῖς σάββασιν θεραπεύειν; ἵνα κατηγορήσωσιν αὐτοῦ. 12.11 ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Τίς ἔσται ἐξ ὑμῶν ἄνθρωπος ὃς ἕξει πρόβατον ἕν, καὶ ἐὰν ἐμπέσῃ τοῦτο τοῖς σάββασιν εἰς βόθυνον, οὐχὶ κρατήσει αὐτὸ καὶ ἐγερεῖ; 12.12 πόσῳ οὖν διαφέρει ἄνθρωπος προβάτου. ὥστε ἔξεστιν τοῖς σάββασιν καλῶς ποιεῖν.'' None | sup>
12.10 And behold there was a man with a withered hand. They asked him, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath day?" that they might accuse him. 12.11 He said to them, "What man is there among you, who has one sheep, and if this one falls into a pit on the Sabbath day, won\'t he grab on to it, and lift it out? 12.12 of how much more value then is a man than a sheep! Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath day."'' None |
|
28. Tosefta, Ketuvot, 5.1 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer, R.
Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 203; Porton (1988), Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta, 129
sup>
5.1 הבוגרת בתביעה נותנים לה שנים עשר חודש אם היתה קטנה בין היא בין אביה יכולין לעכב ר\\"ט אומר נותנין לה הכל תרומה בד\\"א מן האירוסין אבל מן הנישואין מודה ר\\"ט שנותנין לה מחצה חולין ומחצה תרומה במה ד\\"א בבת כהן לכהן אבל בת ישראל לכהן הכל מודים שמעלין לה כל מזונותיה מן החולין ר\' יהודה בן בתירה אומר שתי ידות תרומה ואחד חולין ר\' יהודה אומר מוכרת את התרומה ולוקחת בדמיה חולין רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר כל מקום שהוזכרו שם תרומה נותנין כפול חולין. זו משנה ראשונה רבותינו אמרו אין האשה אוכלת בתרומה עד שתכנס לחופה והיבמה עד שתבעל ואם מתה בעלה יורשה אמר ר\' מנחם בן נפח משם ר\' אליעזר הקפר מעשה בר\' טרפון שקדש ג\' מאות נשים להאכילן בתרומה שהיו שני בצורת וכבר שלח יוחנן בן בג בג אצל ר\' יהודה בן בתירה לנציבים אמר לו שמעתי עליך שאתה אומר בת ישראל המאורסת לכהן אוכלת בתרומה שלח לו ואמר לו מוחזק הייתי בך שאתה בקי בחדרי תורה לדון קל וחומר אי אתה יודע ומה שפחה כנענית שאין ביאתה קונה אותה לאכול בתרומה כסף קונה אותה להאכילה בתרומה בת ישראל שהביאה קונה אותה להאכילה בתרומה אינו דין שיהא כסף קונה אותה להאכילה בתרומה אבל מה אעשה שהרי אמרו חכמים אין ארוסה בת ישראל אוכלת בתרומה עד שתכנס לחופה אם מתה בעלה יורשה.'' None | sup>
5.1 The adult woman is like (sic!) one claimed—they give her 12 months. If she were a minor, either she or her father is able to delay the marriage until she is of majority age. Rabbi Tarfon says: They give her everything terumah if she is claimed by a priest and the time limit of 12 months is up and they are still not married, she eats entirely terumah. When does this apply? From betrothal i.e. when the claiming 12 months is up, she is betrothed but still not married, but from marriage, Rabbi Tarfon agrees that they give her half hullin and half terumah. When does this apply? With a kohen\'s daughter married to a kohen, but an Israelite\'s daughter to a kohen, everyone agrees they raise all of her food from hullin. Rabbi Yehudah ben Betera says: Two parts terumah and one hullin. Rabbi Yehudah says: She should sell the terumah and buy with its value hullin. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Any place where they the sages mention \\"terumah\\", he gives double hullin. This was the original mishnah. Our rabbis said: A wife who is an Israelite\'s daughter doesn\'t eat terumah until she enters the bridal chamber, and a yevamah doesn\'t eat terumah until she has sex with her levir. If her husband dies after the time of claiming has passed, he inherits her. Said Rabbi Menahem ben Nafah in the name of Rabbi Liezer Ha-Kappar: A case, that Rabbi Tarfon who betrothed 300 wives for them to eat terumah, for they were years of famine. But Yoha ben Bagbag already sent to Rabbi Yehudah ben Beterah to Netzivin, he said to him: I heard about you that you say a betrothed Israelite\'s daughter betrothed to a kohen can eat terumah. He replied to him and said to him: I had assumed that you were an expert in the chambers of Torah, but you don\'t know how to do a kal va-homer! Just as a Canaanite slavegirl, whose sex with a kohen does not acquire her to allow her to eat terumah, isn\'t it logical that money would acquire her to eat terumah!? But what can I do? For the Hakhamim said: A betrothed Israelite\'s daughter can\'t eat terumah until she enters the bridal chamber. If she dies, her father inherits her.'' None |
|
29. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Arakh • R. Eliezer b. Hyrcanus
Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 348; Sigal (2007), The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew, 53
|
30. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Hyrcanos, R. • Eliezer ben Hyrkanos, Rabbi • Eliezer, Ben Damma, Rabbi • Eliezer, R. • R. Eliezer • R. Eliezer ben Hyrcanus • Rabbi Eliezer
Found in books: Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 54; Goodman (2006), Judaism in the Roman World: Collected Essays, 168; Hasan Rokem (2003), Tales of the Neighborhood Jewish Narrative Dialogues in Late Antiquity, 81; Poorthuis Schwartz and Turner (2009), Interaction Between Judaism and Christianity in History, Religion, Art, and Literature, 59; Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014), Saints and role models in Judaism and Christianity, 170; Porton (1988), Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta, 99, 129, 136, 158, 227, 235; Rosen-Zvi (2011), Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity. 98; Schremer (2010), Brothers Estranged: Heresy, Christianity and Jewish Identity in Late Antiquity, 101; Schwartz (2008), 2 Maccabees, 292; Swartz (2018), The Mechanics of Providence: The Workings of Ancient Jewish Magic and Mysticism. 76, 77
|
31. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Hyrcanos, R.
Found in books: Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 132; Porton (1988), Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta, 158
|
32. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Segal, Eliezer
Found in books: Gardner (2015), The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism, 118; Porton (1988), Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta, 120
|
33. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Jacob • R. Eliezer Shammaite
Found in books: Porton (1988), Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta, 158, 160; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 18
|
34. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • R. Eliezer Shammaite
Found in books: Porton (1988), Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta, 87, 129, 158, 234; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 12, 377, 428
|
35. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer (R.)
Found in books: Fishbane (2003), Biblical Myth and Rabbinic Mythmaking, 178; Porton (1988), Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta, 234
|
36. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer (ben Hyrcanus), Rabbi • Eliezer Hisma • Eliezer b. Jacob • Eliezer, Rr.
Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 22; Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 230; Lavee (2017), The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity, 245; Porton (1988), Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta, 160, 161
|
37. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Jacob • R. Eliezer Shammaite
Found in books: Porton (1988), Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta, 160; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 592
|
38. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Jacob • Eliezer ben Nathan • R. Eliezer Shammaite
Found in books: Binder (2012), Tertullian, on Idolatry and Mishnah Avodah Zarah: Questioning the Parting of the Ways Between Christians and Jews, 160; Porton (1988), Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta, 150; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 64; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 284
|
39. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Hyrcanus • Eliezer ben Hyrcanus • Eliezer ben Yossi Haglili
Found in books: Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 145; Sigal (2007), The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew, 99
|
40. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • R. Eliezer Shammaite
Found in books: Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 4; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 427
|
41. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, Rabbi • Eliezer, R.
Found in books: Janowitz (2002), Magic in the Roman World: Pagans, Jews and Christians, 22; Mokhtarian (2021), Rabbis, Sorcerers, Kings, and Priests: The Culture of the Talmud in Ancient Iran. 127, 128
|
42. Anon., Leviticus Rabba, 34.3 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer b. Hyrcanos, R. • R. Eliezer Shammaite
Found in books: Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 132; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 427
sup>
34.3 דָּבָר אַחֵר, וְכִי יָמוּךְ, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (משלי יא, יז): גֹּמֵל נַפְשׁוֹ אִישׁ חָסֶד, זֶה הִלֵּל הַזָּקֵן, שֶׁבְּשָׁעָה שֶׁהָיָה נִפְטַר מִתַּלְמִידָיו הָיָה מְהַלֵּךְ וְהוֹלֵךְ עִמָּם, אָמְרוּ לוֹ תַּלְמִידָיו רַבֵּנוּ לְהֵיכָן אַתָּה הוֹלֵךְ אָמַר לָהֶם לַעֲשׂוֹת מִצְוָה, אָמְרוּ לוֹ וְכִי מַה מִּצְוָה זוֹ, אָמַר לָהֶן לִרְחֹץ בְּבֵית הַמֶּרְחָץ, אָמְרוּ לוֹ וְכִי זוֹ מִצְוָה הִיא, אָמַר לָהֶם, הֵן. מָה אִם אִיקוֹנִין שֶׁל מְלָכִים שֶׁמַּעֲמִידִים אוֹתָן בְּבָתֵּי טַרְטִיאוֹת וּבְבָתֵּי קִרְקָסִיאוֹת, מִי שֶׁנִּתְמַנֶּה עֲלֵיהֶם הוּא מוֹרְקָן וְשׁוֹטְפָן וְהֵן מַעֲלִין לוֹ מְזוֹנוֹת, וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא שֶׁהוּא מִתְגַּדֵּל עִם גְּדוֹלֵי מַלְכוּת, אֲנִי שֶׁנִּבְרֵאתִי בְּצֶלֶם וּבִדְמוּת, דִּכְתִיב (בראשית ט, ו): כִּי בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים עָשָׂה אֶת הָאָדָם, עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה. דָּבָר אַחֵר, גֹּמֵל נַפְשׁוֹ אִישׁ חָסֶד, זֶה הִלֵּל הַזָּקֵן, שֶׁבְּשָׁעָה שֶׁהָיָה נִפְטַר מִתַּלְמִידָיו הָיָה מְהַלֵּךְ וְהוֹלֵךְ עִמָּם, אָמְרוּ לוֹ תַּלְמִידָיו רַבֵּנוּ לְהֵיכָן אַתָּה הוֹלֵךְ, אָמַר לָהֶם לִגְמֹל חֶסֶד עִם הָדֵין אַכְסַנְיָא בְּגוֹ בֵּיתָא. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, כָּל יוֹם אִית לָךְ אַכְסַנְיָא, אָמַר לָהֶם, וְהָדֵין נַפְשָׁא עֲלוּבְתָּא לָאו אַכְסַנְיָא הוּא בְּגוֹ גוּפָא, יוֹמָא דֵין הִיא הָכָא לְמָחָר לֵית הִיא הָכָא. דָּבָר אַחֵר (משלי יא, יז): גֹּמֵל נַפְשׁוֹ אִישׁ חָסֶד וְעֹכֵר שְׁאֵרוֹ אַכְזָרִי, אָמַר רַבִּי אֲלֶכְּסַנְדְּרִי זֶה שֶׁמַּגַעַת לוֹ שִׂמְחָה וְאֵינוֹ מַדְבִּיק אֶת קְרוֹבָיו עִמּוֹ מִשּׁוּם עֲנִיּוּת. אָמַר רַבִּי נַחְמָן כְּתִיב (דברים טו, י): כִּי בִּגְלַל הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה, גַּלְגַּל הוּא שֶׁחוֹזֵר בָּעוֹלָם, לְפִיכָךְ משֶׁה מַזְהִיר אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל וְכִי יָמוּךְ אָחִיךָ.'' None | sup>
34.3 "Another Thing: \'But if he is impoverished\', here it is written, \\"The merciful man does good to his own soul (Proverbs 11:17),\\" this refers to Hillel the Elder, who, at the time that he was departing from his students, would walk with them. They said to him, \\"Rabbi, where are you walking to?\\" He said to them, \\"To fulfill a commandment!\\" They said to him, \\"And what commandment is this?\\" He said to them, \\"To bathe in the bathhouse.\\" They said to him: \\"But is this really a commandment?\\" He said to them: \\"Yes. Just like regarding the statues (lit. icons) of kings, that are set up in the theaters and the circuses, the one who is appointed over them bathes them and scrubs them, and they give him sustece, and furthermore, he attains status with the leaders of the kingdom; I, who was created in the Divine Image and Form, as it is written, \\"For in the Image of G-d He made Man (Genesis 9:6),\\" even more so!...", '' None |
|
43. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer b. Hyrcanos, R. • Eliezer, R. • Rosenthal, Eliezer Shimshon
Found in books: Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 54; Rosen-Zvi (2011), Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity. 98; Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 74; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 74
|
44. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer ben Yose • Eliezer,
Found in books: Rubenstein(1995), The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods, 239, 243; Samely (2002), Rabbinic Interpretation of Scripture in the Mishnah, 272
|
45. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer, Rabbi • Eli‘ezer, Rabbi
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 173; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 173
|
46. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Rosenthal, Eliezer Shimshon
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 74; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 74
|
47. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer (R.) • Eliezer, R.
Found in books: Fishbane (2003), Biblical Myth and Rabbinic Mythmaking, 163; Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 86, 87
|
48. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer, R., and R. Simon
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 98; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 184
|
49. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer, R. • Eliezer, R., and R. Simon
Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 42; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 184
|
50. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Segal, Eliezer
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 98; Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 229
|
51. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer, Ben Damma, Rabbi • Eliezer, R.
Found in books: Hasan Rokem (2003), Tales of the Neighborhood Jewish Narrative Dialogues in Late Antiquity, 81; Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 42
|
52. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer, R., and violence • Torah, rabbinic debates on teaching women, R. Eliezers view
Found in books: Kraemer (2010), Unreliable Witnesses: Religion, Gender, and History in the Greco-Roman Mediterranean, 42; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 181
|
53. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: nan
Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 42; Rubenstein(1995), The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods, 177
|
54. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer, R.
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 98; Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 42
|
55. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Hyrcanus • Eliezer b. Paruaḥ • Eliezer, R. • Eliezer, R., and R. Simon • Eliezer, R., and hyperbole • Eliezer, R., and shame • Eliezer, R., and violence • Eli’ezer, Rabbi
Found in books: Mokhtarian (2021), Rabbis, Sorcerers, Kings, and Priests: The Culture of the Talmud in Ancient Iran. 127; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 44, 57, 70, 71, 178, 184; Rubenstein (2018), The Land of Truth: Talmud Tales, Timeless Teachings, 198, 199; Sigal (2007), The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew, 75; Zawanowska and Wilk (2022), The Character of David in Judaism, Christianity and Islam: Warrior, Poet, Prophet and King, 144
59b וזה הוא תנור של עכנאי מאי עכנאי אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל שהקיפו דברים כעכנא זו וטמאוהו תנא באותו היום השיב רבי אליעזר כל תשובות שבעולם ולא קיבלו הימנו,אמר להם אם הלכה כמותי חרוב זה יוכיח נעקר חרוב ממקומו מאה אמה ואמרי לה ארבע מאות אמה אמרו לו אין מביאין ראיה מן החרוב חזר ואמר להם אם הלכה כמותי אמת המים יוכיחו חזרו אמת המים לאחוריהם אמרו לו אין מביאין ראיה מאמת המים,חזר ואמר להם אם הלכה כמותי כותלי בית המדרש יוכיחו הטו כותלי בית המדרש ליפול גער בהם רבי יהושע אמר להם אם תלמידי חכמים מנצחים זה את זה בהלכה אתם מה טיבכם לא נפלו מפני כבודו של רבי יהושע ולא זקפו מפני כבודו של ר"א ועדיין מטין ועומדין,חזר ואמר להם אם הלכה כמותי מן השמים יוכיחו יצאתה בת קול ואמרה מה לכם אצל ר"א שהלכה כמותו בכ"מ,עמד רבי יהושע על רגליו ואמר (דברים ל, יב) לא בשמים היא מאי לא בשמים היא אמר רבי ירמיה שכבר נתנה תורה מהר סיני אין אנו משגיחין בבת קול שכבר כתבת בהר סיני בתורה (שמות כג, ב) אחרי רבים להטות אשכחיה רבי נתן לאליהו א"ל מאי עביד קוב"ה בההיא שעתא א"ל קא חייך ואמר נצחוני בני נצחוני בני,אמרו אותו היום הביאו כל טהרות שטיהר ר"א ושרפום באש ונמנו עליו וברכוהו ואמרו מי ילך ויודיעו אמר להם ר"ע אני אלך שמא ילך אדם שאינו הגון ויודיעו ונמצא מחריב את כל העולם כולו,מה עשה ר"ע לבש שחורים ונתעטף שחורים וישב לפניו ברחוק ארבע אמות אמר לו ר"א עקיבא מה יום מיומים אמר לו רבי כמדומה לי שחבירים בדילים ממך אף הוא קרע בגדיו וחלץ מנעליו ונשמט וישב על גבי קרקע,זלגו עיניו דמעות לקה העולם שליש בזיתים ושליש בחטים ושליש בשעורים ויש אומרים אף בצק שבידי אשה טפח תנא אך גדול היה באותו היום שבכל מקום שנתן בו עיניו ר"א נשרף,ואף ר"ג היה בא בספינה עמד עליו נחשול לטבעו אמר כמדומה לי שאין זה אלא בשביל ר"א בן הורקנוס עמד על רגליו ואמר רבונו של עולם גלוי וידוע לפניך שלא לכבודי עשיתי ולא לכבוד בית אבא עשיתי אלא לכבודך שלא ירבו מחלוקות בישראל נח הים מזעפו,אימא שלום דביתהו דר"א אחתיה דר"ג הואי מההוא מעשה ואילך לא הוה שבקה ליה לר"א למיפל על אפיה ההוא יומא ריש ירחא הוה ואיחלף לה בין מלא לחסר איכא דאמרי אתא עניא וקאי אבבא אפיקא ליה ריפתא,אשכחתיה דנפל על אנפיה אמרה ליה קום קטלית לאחי אדהכי נפק שיפורא מבית רבן גמליאל דשכיב אמר לה מנא ידעת אמרה ליה כך מקובלני מבית אבי אבא כל השערים ננעלים חוץ משערי אונאה,תנו רבנן המאנה את הגר עובר בשלשה לאוין והלוחצו עובר בשנים,מאי שנא מאנה דכתיבי שלשה לאוין (שמות כב, כ) וגר לא תונה (ויקרא יט, לג) וכי יגור אתך גר בארצכם לא תונו אותו (ויקרא כה, יז) ולא תונו איש את עמיתו וגר בכלל עמיתו הוא לוחצו נמי שלשה כתיבי (שמות כב, כ) ולא תלחצנו (שמות כג, ט) וגר לא תלחץ (שמות כב, כד) ולא תהיה לו כנושה וגר בכלל הוא אלא אחד זה ואחד זה בשלשה,תניא רבי אליעזר הגדול אומר מפני מה הזהירה תורה בל"ו מקומות ואמרי לה במ"ו מקומות בגר מפני שסורו רע,מאי דכתיב וגר לא תונה ולא תלחצנו כי גרים הייתם בארץ מצרים (תנינא) רבי נתן אומר מום שבך אל תאמר לחברך והיינו דאמרי אינשי דזקיף ליה זקיפא בדיותקיה לא נימא ליה לחבריה זקיף ביניתא:,| 59b And this is known as the oven of akhnai. The Gemara asks: What is the relevance of akhnai, a snake, in this context? Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: It is characterized in that manner due to the fact that the Rabbis surrounded it with their statements like this snake, which often forms a coil when at rest, and deemed it impure. The Sages taught: On that day, when they discussed this matter, Rabbi Eliezer answered all possible answers in the world to support his opinion, but the Rabbis did not accept his explanations from him.,After failing to convince the Rabbis logically, Rabbi Eliezer said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with my opinion, this carob tree will prove it. The carob tree was uprooted from its place one hundred cubits, and some say four hundred cubits. The Rabbis said to him: One does not cite halakhic proof from the carob tree. Rabbi Eliezer then said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with my opinion, the stream will prove it. The water in the stream turned backward and began flowing in the opposite direction. They said to him: One does not cite halakhic proof from a stream.,Rabbi Eliezer then said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with my opinion, the walls of the study hall will prove it. The walls of the study hall leaned inward and began to fall. Rabbi Yehoshua scolded the walls and said to them: If Torah scholars are contending with each other in matters of halakha, what is the nature of your involvement in this dispute? The Gemara relates: The walls did not fall because of the deference due Rabbi Yehoshua, but they did not straighten because of the deference due Rabbi Eliezer, and they still remain leaning.,Rabbi Eliezer then said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with my opinion, Heaven will prove it. A Divine Voice emerged from Heaven and said: Why are you differing with Rabbi Eliezer, as the halakha is in accordance with his opinion in every place that he expresses an opinion?,Rabbi Yehoshua stood on his feet and said: It is written: “It is not in heaven” (Deuteronomy 30:12). The Gemara asks: What is the relevance of the phrase “It is not in heaven” in this context? Rabbi Yirmeya says: Since the Torah was already given at Mount Sinai, we do not regard a Divine Voice, as You already wrote at Mount Sinai, in the Torah: “After a majority to incline” (Exodus 23:2). Since the majority of Rabbis disagreed with Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion, the halakha is not ruled in accordance with his opinion. The Gemara relates: Years after, Rabbi Natan encountered Elijah the prophet and said to him: What did the Holy One, Blessed be He, do at that time, when Rabbi Yehoshua issued his declaration? Elijah said to him: The Holy One, Blessed be He, smiled and said: My children have triumphed over Me; My children have triumphed over Me.,The Sages said: On that day, the Sages brought all the ritually pure items deemed pure by the ruling of Rabbi Eliezer with regard to the oven and burned them in fire, and the Sages reached a consensus in his regard and ostracized him. And the Sages said: Who will go and inform him of his ostracism? Rabbi Akiva, his beloved disciple, said to them: I will go, lest an unseemly person go and inform him in a callous and offensive manner, and he would thereby destroy the entire world.,What did Rabbi Akiva do? He wore black and wrapped himself in black, as an expression of mourning and pain, and sat before Rabbi Eliezer at a distance of four cubits, which is the distance that one must maintain from an ostracized individual. Rabbi Eliezer said to him: Akiva, what is different about today from other days, that you comport yourself in this manner? Rabbi Akiva said to him: My teacher, it appears to me that your colleagues are distancing themselves from you. He employed euphemism, as actually they distanced Rabbi Eliezer from them. Rabbi Eliezer too, rent his garments and removed his shoes, as is the custom of an ostracized person, and he dropped from his seat and sat upon the ground.,The Gemara relates: His eyes shed tears, and as a result the entire world was afflicted: One-third of its olives were afflicted, and one-third of its wheat, and one-third of its barley. And some say that even dough kneaded in a woman’s hands spoiled. The Sages taught: There was great anger on that day, as any place that Rabbi Eliezer fixed his gaze was burned.,And even Rabban Gamliel, the Nasi of the Sanhedrin at Yavne, the head of the Sages who were responsible for the decision to ostracize Rabbi Eliezer, was coming on a boat at the time, and a large wave swelled over him and threatened to drown him. Rabban Gamliel said: It seems to me that this is only for the sake of Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, as God punishes those who mistreat others. Rabban Gamliel stood on his feet and said: Master of the Universe, it is revealed and known before You that neither was it for my honor that I acted when ostracizing him, nor was it for the honor of the house of my father that I acted; rather, it was for Your honor, so that disputes will not proliferate in Israel. In response, the sea calmed from its raging.,The Gemara further relates: Imma Shalom, the wife of Rabbi Eliezer, was the sister of Rabban Gamliel. From that incident forward, she would not allow Rabbi Eliezer to lower his head and recite the taḥanun prayer, which includes supplication and entreaties. She feared that were her husband to bemoan his fate and pray at that moment, her brother would be punished. A certain day was around the day of the New Moon, and she inadvertently substituted a full thirty-day month for a deficient twenty-nine-day month, i.e., she thought that it was the New Moon, when one does not lower his head in supplication, but it was not. Some say that a pauper came and stood at the door, and she took bread out to him. The result was that she left her husband momentarily unsupervised.,When she returned, she found him and saw that he had lowered his head in prayer. She said to him: Arise, you already killed my brother. Meanwhile, the sound of a shofar emerged from the house of Rabban Gamliel to announce that the Nasi had died. Rabbi Eliezer said to her: From where did you know that your brother would die? She said to him: This is the tradition that I received from the house of the father of my father: All the gates of Heaven are apt to be locked, except for the gates of prayer for victims of verbal mistreatment.,§ The Sages taught: One who verbally mistreats the convert violates three prohibitions, and one who oppresses him in other ways violates two.,The Gemara asks: What is different with regard to verbal mistreatment, that three prohibitions are written concerning it: “And you shall neither mistreat a convert” (Exodus 22:20); “And when a convert lives in your land, you shall not mistreat him” (Leviticus 19:33); “And you shall not mistreat, each man his colleague” (Leviticus 25:17), and a convert is included in the category of colleague? With regard to one who also oppresses a convert as well, three prohibitions are written: “And you shall neither mistreat a convert, nor oppress him” (Exodus 22:20); “And you shall not oppress a convert (Exodus 23:9); “And you shall not be to him like a creditor” (Exodus 22:24). This last prohibition is a general prohibition, in which converts are included. Consequently, it is not correct that one who oppresses a convert violates only two prohibitions. Rather, both this one, who verbally mistreats a convert, and that one, who oppresses him, violate three prohibitions.,It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer the Great says: For what reason did the Torah issue warnings in thirty-six places, and some say in forty-six places, with regard to causing any distress to a convert? It is due to the fact that a convert’s inclination is evil, i.e., he is prone to return to his previous way of living.,What is the meaning of that which is written: “And you shall not mistreat a convert nor oppress him, because you were strangers in the land of Egypt” (Exodus 22:20)? We learned in a baraita that Rabbi Natan says: A defect that is in you, do not mention it in another. Since the Jewish people were themselves strangers, they are not in a position to demean a convert because he is a stranger in their midst. And this explains the adage that people say: One who has a person hanged in his family bidyotkei, does not say to another member of his household: Hang a fish for me, as the mention of hanging is demeaning for that family.,One may not intermingle produce bought from one supplier with other produce, even if he intermingles new produce with other new produce and ostensibly the buyer suffers no loss from his doing so.' ' None | |
|
56. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer (R.) • Eliezer (ben Hyrcanus), Rabbi • Eliezer b. Hyrcanos, R. • Eliezer b. Paruaḥ • Eliezer ben Yossi Haglili • Eliezer, • R. Eliezer Shammaite • R. Eliezer b. Hyrcanus • R. Eliezer hismah
Found in books: Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 132; Fishbane (2003), Biblical Myth and Rabbinic Mythmaking, 162, 163; Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 22; Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 348, 546; Rubenstein(1995), The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods, 178; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 132; Sigal (2007), The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew, 65; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 127; Zawanowska and Wilk (2022), The Character of David in Judaism, Christianity and Islam: Warrior, Poet, Prophet and King, 144
3a קשיא דרבי מאיר אדרבי מאיר תרי תנאי אליבא דרבי מאיר,קשיא דרבי אליעזר אדרבי אליעזר,תרי תנאי אליבא דרבי אליעזר ואיבעית אימא רישא לאו רבי אליעזר היא:,עד סוף האשמורה:,מאי קסבר רבי אליעזר אי קסבר שלש משמרות הוי הלילה לימא עד ארבע שעות ואי קסבר ארבע משמרות הוי הלילה לימא עד שלש שעות,לעולם קסבר שלש משמרות הוי הלילה והא קא משמע לן דאיכא משמרות ברקיע ואיכא משמרות בארעא דתניא רבי אליעזר אומר שלש משמרות הוי הלילה ועל כל משמר ומשמר יושב הקדוש ברוך הוא ושואג כארי שנאמר ה' ממרום ישאג וממעון קדשו יתן קולו שאוג ישאג על נוהו,וסימן לדבר משמרה ראשונה חמור נוער שניה כלבים צועקים שלישית תינוק יונק משדי אמו ואשה מספרת עם בעלה.,מאי קא חשיב רבי אליעזר אי תחלת משמרות קא חשיב תחלת משמרה ראשונה סימנא למה לי אורתא הוא אי סוף משמרות קא חשיב סוף משמרה אחרונה למה לי סימנא יממא הוא,אלא חשיב סוף משמרה ראשונה ותחלת משמרה אחרונה ואמצעית דאמצעיתא ואיבעית אימא כולהו סוף משמרות קא חשיב וכי תימא אחרונה לא צריך,למאי נפקא מינה למיקרי קריאת שמע למאן דגני בבית אפל ולא ידע זמן קריאת שמע אימת כיון דאשה מספרת עם בעלה ותינוק יונק משדי אמו ליקום וליקרי.,אמר רב יצחק בר שמואל משמיה דרב ג' משמרות הוי הלילה ועל כל משמר ומשמר יושב הקדוש ברוך הוא ושואג כארי ואומר אוי לבנים שבעונותיהם החרבתי את ביתי ושרפתי את היכלי והגליתים לבין אומות העולם:,תניא אמר רבי יוסי פעם אחת הייתי מהלך בדרך ונכנסתי לחורבה אחת מחורבות ירושלים להתפלל בא אליהו זכור לטוב ושמר לי על הפתח (והמתין לי) עד שסיימתי תפלתי לאחר שסיימתי תפלתי אמר לי שלום עליך רבי ואמרתי לו שלום עליך רבי ומורי ואמר לי בני מפני מה נכנסת לחורבה זו אמרתי לו להתפלל ואמר לי היה לך להתפלל בדרך ואמרתי לו מתיירא הייתי שמא יפסיקו בי עוברי דרכים ואמר לי היה לך להתפלל תפלה קצרה,באותה שעה למדתי ממנו שלשה דברים למדתי שאין נכנסין לחורבה ולמדתי שמתפללין בדרך ולמדתי שהמתפלל בדרך מתפלל תפלה קצרה,ואמר לי בני מה קול שמעת בחורבה זו ואמרתי לו שמעתי בת קול שמנהמת כיונה ואומרת אוי לבנים שבעונותיהם החרבתי את ביתי ושרפתי את היכלי והגליתים לבין האומות ואמר לי חייך וחיי ראשך לא שעה זו בלבד אומרת כך אלא בכל יום ויום שלש פעמים אומרת כך ולא זו בלבד אלא בשעה שישראל נכנסין לבתי כנסיות ולבתי מדרשות ועונין יהא שמיה הגדול מבורך הקדוש ברוך הוא מנענע ראשו ואומר אשרי המלך שמקלסין אותו בביתו כך מה לו לאב שהגלה את בניו ואוי להם לבנים שגלו מעל שולחן אביהם:,תנו רבנן מפני שלשה דברים אין נכנסין לחורבה מפני חשד מפני המפולת ומפני המזיקין. מפני חשד ותיפוק ליה משום מפולת" '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'22a משמשת וראתה נדה אינה צריכה טבילה אבל בעל קרי גרידא מחייב לא תימא מברך אלא מהרהר,ומי אית ליה לרבי יהודה הרהור והתניא בעל קרי שאין לו מים לטבול קורא קריאת שמע ואינו מברך לא לפניה ולא לאחריה ואוכל פתו ומברך לאחריה ואינו מברך לפניה אבל מהרהר בלבו ואינו מוציא בשפתיו דברי רבי מאיר רבי יהודה אומר בין כך ובין כך מוציא בשפתיו,אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק עשאן ר\' יהודה כהלכות דרך ארץ,דתניא (דברים ד, ט) והודעתם לבניך ולבני בניך וכתיב בתריה יום אשר עמדת לפני ה\' אלהיך בחורב מה להלן באימה וביראה וברתת ובזיע אף כאן באימה וביראה וברתת ובזיע,מכאן אמרו הזבים והמצורעים ובאין על נדות מותרים לקרות בתורה ובנביאים ובכתובים לשנות במשנה וגמרא ובהלכות ובאגדות אבל בעלי קריין אסורים,רבי יוסי אומר שונה הוא ברגיליות ובלבד שלא יציע את המשנה רבי יונתן בן יוסף אומר מציע הוא את המשנה ואינו מציע את הגמרא רבי נתן בן אבישלום אומר אף מציע את הגמרא ובלבד שלא יאמר אזכרות שבו רבי יוחנן הסנדלר תלמידו של רבי עקיבא משום ר"ע אומר לא יכנס למדרש כל עיקר ואמרי לה לא יכנס לבית המדרש כל עיקר ר\' יהודה אומר שונה הוא בהלכות דרך ארץ,מעשה ברבי יהודה שראה קרי והיה מהלך על גב הנהר אמרו לו תלמידיו רבינו שנה לנו פרק אחד בהלכות דרך ארץ ירד וטבל ושנה להם אמרו לו לא כך למדתנו רבינו שונה הוא בהלכות דרך ארץ אמר להם אע"פ שמיקל אני על אחרים מחמיר אני על עצמי:,תניא ר\' יהודה בן בתירא היה אומר אין דברי תורה מקבלין טומאה מעשה בתלמיד אחד שהיה מגמגם למעלה מרבי יהודה בן בתירא אמר ליה בני פתח פיך ויאירו דבריך שאין דברי תורה מקבלין טומאה שנאמר (ירמיהו כג, כט) הלא כה דברי כאש נאם ה\' מה אש אינו מקבל טומאה אף דברי תורה אינן מקבלין טומאה,אמר מר מציע את המשנה ואינו מציע את הגמרא מסייע ליה לרבי אלעאי דאמר רבי אלעאי אמר ר\' אחא בר יעקב משום רבינו הלכה מציע את המשנה ואינו מציע את הגמרא כתנאי מציע את המשנה ואינו מציע את הגמרא דברי רבי מאיר רבי יהודה בן גמליאל אומר משום רבי חנינא בן גמליאל זה וזה אסור ואמרי לה זה וזה מותר,מ"ד זה וזה אסור כרבי יוחנן הסנדלר מ"ד זה וזה מותר כרבי יהודה בן בתירא,אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק נהוג עלמא כהני תלת סבי כרבי אלעאי בראשית הגז כרבי יאשיה בכלאים כרבי יהודה בן בתירא בד"ת,כרבי אלעאי בראשית הגז דתניא רבי אלעאי אומר ראשית הגז אינו נוהג אלא בארץ,כרבי יאשיה בכלאים כדכתיב (דברים כב, ט) (כרמך) לא תזרע כרמך כלאים רבי יאשיה אומר לעולם אינו חייב עד שיזרע חטה ושעורה וחרצן במפולת יד,כרבי יהודה בן בתירא בדברי תורה דתניא רבי יהודה בן בתירא אומר אין דברי תורה מקבלין טומאה,כי אתא זעירי אמר בטלוה לטבילותא ואמרי לה בטלוה לנטילותא מאן דאמר בטלוה לטבילותא כרבי יהודה בן בתירא מאן דאמר בטלוה לנטילותא כי הא דרב חסדא לייט אמאן דמהדר אמיא בעידן צלותא:,תנו רבנן בעל קרי שנתנו עליו תשעה קבין מים טהור נחום איש גם זו לחשה לרבי עקיבא ורבי עקיבא לחשה לבן עזאי ובן עזאי יצא ושנאה לתלמידיו בשוק פליגי בה תרי אמוראי במערבא רבי יוסי בר אבין ורבי יוסי בר זבידא חד תני שנאה וחד תני לחשה,מאן דתני שנאה משום בטול תורה ומשום בטול פריה ורביה ומאן דתני לחשה שלא יהו תלמידי חכמים מצויים אצל נשותיהם כתרנגולים,אמר רבי ינאי שמעתי שמקילין בה ושמעתי שמחמירין בה וכל המחמיר בה על עצמו מאריכין לו ימיו ושנותיו,אמר ריב"ל מה טיבן של טובלי שחרין מה טיבן הא איהו דאמר בעל קרי אסור בדברי תורה הכי קאמר מה טיבן בארבעים סאה אפשר בתשעה קבין מה טיבן בטבילה אפשר בנתינה,אמר רבי חנינא גדר גדול גדרו בה דתניא מעשה באחד שתבע אשה לדבר עבירה אמרה לו ריקא יש לך ארבעים סאה שאתה טובל בהן מיד פירש,אמר להו רב הונא לרבנן רבותי מפני מה אתם מזלזלין בטבילה זו אי משום צינה אפשר במרחצאות,אמר ליה רב חסדא וכי יש טבילה בחמין אמר ליה רב אדא בר אהבה קאי כוותך,רבי זירא הוה יתיב באגנא דמיא בי מסותא אמר ליה לשמעיה זיל ואייתי לי תשעה קבין ושדי עלואי אמר ליה רבי חייא בר אבא למה ליה למר כולי האי והא יתיב בגווייהו אמר ליה כארבעים סאה מה ארבעים סאה בטבילה ולא בנתינה אף תשעה קבין בנתינה ולא בטבילה,רב נחמן תקן חצבא בת תשעה קבין כי אתא רב דימי אמר רבי עקיבא ורבי יהודה גלוסטרא אמרו לא שנו אלא לחולה לאונסו אבל לחולה המרגיל ארבעים סאה,אמר רב יוסף אתבר חצביה דרב נחמן כי אתא רבין אמר באושא הוה עובדא 26b תנו רבנן טעה ולא התפלל מנחה בערב שבת מתפלל בליל שבת שתים טעה ולא התפלל מנחה בשבת מתפלל במוצאי שבת שתים של חול מבדיל בראשונה ואינו מבדיל בשניה ואם הבדיל בשניה ולא הבדיל בראשונה שניה עלתה לו ראשונה לא עלתה לו,למימרא דכיון דלא אבדיל בקמייתא כמאן דלא צלי דמי ומהדרינן ליה,ורמינהו טעה ולא הזכיר גבורות גשמים בתחיית המתים ושאלה בברכת השנים מחזירין אותו הבדלה בחונן הדעת אין מחזירין אותו מפני שיכול לאומרה על הכוס קשיא,איתמר רבי יוסי ברבי חנינא אמר תפלות אבות תקנום רבי יהושע בן לוי אמר תפלות כנגד תמידין תקנום,תניא כוותיה דר\' יוסי ברבי חנינא ותניא כוותיה דרבי יהושע בן לוי תניא כוותיה דרבי יוסי בר\' חנינא אברהם תקן תפלת שחרית שנא\' (בראשית יט, כז) וישכם אברהם בבקר אל המקום אשר עמד שם ואין עמידה אלא תפלה שנאמר (תהלים קו, ל) ויעמד פינחס ויפלל,יצחק תקן תפלת מנחה שנאמר (בראשית כד, סג) ויצא יצחק לשוח בשדה לפנות ערב ואין שיחה אלא תפלה שנאמר (תהלים קב, א) תפלה לעני כי יעטף ולפני ה\' ישפוך שיחו,יעקב תקן תפלת ערבית שנאמר (בראשית כח, יא) ויפגע במקום וילן שם ואין פגיעה אלא תפלה שנאמר (ירמיהו ז, טז) ואתה אל תתפלל בעד העם הזה ואל תשא בעדם רנה ותפלה ואל תפגע בי,ותניא כוותיה דר\' יהושע בן לוי מפני מה אמרו תפלת השחר עד חצות שהרי תמיד של שחר קרב והולך עד חצות ורבי יהודה אומר עד ארבע שעות שהרי תמיד של שחר קרב והולך עד ארבע שעות,ומפני מה אמרו תפלת המנחה עד הערב שהרי תמיד של בין הערבים קרב והולך עד הערב רבי יהודה אומר עד פלג המנחה שהרי תמיד של בין הערבים קרב והולך עד פלג המנחה,ומפני מה אמרו תפלת הערב אין לה קבע שהרי אברים ופדרים שלא נתעכלו מבערב קרבים והולכים כל הלילה,ומפני מה אמרו של מוספין כל היום שהרי קרבן של מוספין קרב כל היום רבי יהודה אומר עד שבע שעות שהרי קרבן מוסף קרב והולך עד שבע שעות,ואיזו היא מנחה גדולה משש שעות ומחצה ולמעלה ואיזו היא מנחה קטנה מתשע שעות ומחצה ולמעלה,איבעיא להו רבי יהודה פלג מנחה קמא קאמר או פלג מנחה אחרונה קאמר תא שמע דתניא ר\' יהודה אומר פלג המנחה אחרונה אמרו והיא י"א שעות חסר רביע,נימא תיהוי תיובתיה דר\' יוסי בר\' חנינא אמר לך ר\' יוסי בר\' חנינא לעולם אימא לך תפלות אבות תקנום ואסמכינהו רבנן אקרבנות דאי לא תימא הכי תפלת מוסף לר\' יוסי בר\' חנינא מאן תקנה אלא תפלות אבות תקנום ואסמכינהו רבנן אקרבנות:,רבי יהודה אומר עד ארבע שעות: איבעיא להו עד ועד בכלל או דלמא עד ולא עד בכלל תא שמע ר\' יהודה אומר עד פלג המנחה אי אמרת בשלמא עד ולא עד בכלל היינו דאיכא בין ר\' יהודה לרבנן אלא אי אמרת עד ועד בכלל ר\' יהודה' "54a מתני׳ | 3a The previous baraita cited Rabbi Meir’s opinion that the time for the recitation of Shema begins when the priests immerse before partaking of their teruma. In the Tosefta, it was taught that Rabbi Meir holds that one begins to recite Shema from when people enter to eat their meal on Shabbat eve. One opinion of Rabbi Meir seems to contradict another opinion of Rabbi Meir. The Gemara responds: Two tanna’im, students of Rabbi Meir, expressed different opinions in accordance with Rabbi Meir’s opinion.,So too, the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer cited in the mishna contradicts the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer cited in the baraita. In the mishna, Rabbi Eliezer holds that the time for the recitation of Shema begins with the emergence of the stars: From the time when the priests enter to partake of their teruma, while in the baraita, he states that the time for the recitation of Shema begins when the day becomes sanctified on the eve of Shabbat.,The Gemara responds: There are two possible resolutions to the apparent contradiction in Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion. Either two tanna’im expressed different opinions in accordance with Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion, or if you wish, say instead that the first clause of the mishna, according to which we begin to recite Shema when the priests enter to partake of their teruma, is not actually Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion. Only the second half of the statement: Until the end of the first watch, was stated by Rabbi Eliezer.,In the mishna, we learned that Rabbi Eliezer establishes that one may recite the evening Shema until the end of the first watch. These watches are mentioned in the Bible as segments of the night, but it must be established: Into precisely how many segments is the night divided, three or four? Moreover, why does Rabbi Eliezer employ such inexact parameters rather than a more precise definition of time (Tosefot HaRosh)?,What does Rabbi Eliezer actually hold? If he holds that the night consists of three watches, let him say explicitly that one recites the evening Shema until the fourth hour. If he holds that the night consists of four watches, let him say explicitly until the third hour.,The Gemara responds: Actually, Rabbi Eliezer holds that the night consists of three watches, and he employs this particular language of watches in order to teach us: There are watches in heaven and there are watches on earth; just as our night is divided into watches, so too is the night in the upper worlds. As it was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Eliezer says: The night consists of three watches, and over each and every watch, the Holy One, Blessed be He, sits and roars like a lion in pain over the destruction of the Temple. This imagery is derived from a reference in the Bible, as it is stated: “The Lord roars yishag from on high, from His holy dwelling He makes His voice heard. He roars mightily shaog yishag over His dwelling place, He cries out like those who tread grapes, against all the inhabitants of the earth” (Jeremiah 25:30). The three instances of the root shin-alef-gimmel in this verse correspond to the three watches of the night.,And signs of the transition between each of these watches in the upper world can be sensed in this world: In the first watch, the donkey brays; in the second, dogs bark; and in the third people begin to rise, a baby nurses from its mother’s breast and a wife converses with her husband.,With regard to these earthly manifestations of the three heavenly watches as established in the baraita, the Gemara asks: What did Rabbi Eliezer enumerate? If he enumerated the beginning of the watch, why do I need a sign for the beginning of the first watch? It is when evening begins; an additional sign is superfluous. If he enumerated the end of the watches, why do I need a sign for the end of the last watch? It is when day begins; an additional sign is similarly superfluous.,The Gemara answers: Rather, he enumerated the signs for the end of the first watch and the beginning of the last watch, both of which require a sign, as well as the middle of the middle watch. And if you wish, say instead: He enumerated the ends of all of the watches. And if you say that a sign indicating the end of the final watch is unnecessary because it is day, nevertheless, that sign is useful.,What is the practical ramification of this sign? It is relevant to one who recites Shema while lying in a dark house, who cannot see the dawn and who does not know when the time for reciting Shema arrives. That person is provided with a sign that when a woman speaks with her husband and a baby nurses from its mother’s breast, the final watch of the night has ended and he must rise and recite Shema.,Rav Yitzḥak bar Shmuel said in the name of Rav: The night consists of three watches, and over each and every watch the Holy One, Blessed be He sits and roars like a lion, because the Temple service was connected to the changing of these watches (Tosefot HaRosh), and says: “Woe to Me, that due to their sins I destroyed My house, burned My Temple and exiled them among the nations of the world.”,Incidental to the mention of the elevated significance of the night watches, the Gemara cites a related story: It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei said: I was once walking along the road when I entered the ruins of an old, abandoned building among the ruins of Jerusalem in order to pray. I noticed that Elijah, of blessed memory, came and guarded the entrance for me and waited at the entrance until I finished my prayer. When I finished praying and exited the ruin, Elijah said to me, deferentially as one would address a Rabbi: Greetings to you, my Rabbi. I answered him: Greetings to you, my Rabbi, my teacher. And Elijah said to me: My son, why did you enter this ruin? I said to him: In order to pray. And Elijah said to me: You should have prayed on the road. And I said to him: I was unable to pray along the road, because I was afraid that I might be interrupted by travelers and would be unable to focus. Elijah said to me: You should have recited the abbreviated prayer instituted for just such circumstances.,Rabbi Yosei concluded: At that time, from that brief exchange, I learned from him, three things: I learned that one may not enter a ruin; and I learned that one need not enter a building to pray, but he may pray along the road; and I learned that one who prays along the road recites an abbreviated prayer so that he may maintain his focus.,And after this introduction, Elijah said to me: What voice did you hear in that ruin? rI responded: I heard a Heavenly voice, like an echo of that roar of the Holy One, Blessed be He (Maharsha), cooing like a dove and saying: Woe to the children, due to whose sins I destroyed My house, burned My Temple, and exiled them among the nations.rAnd Elijah said to me: By your life and by your head, not only did that voice cry out in that moment, but it cries out three times each and every day. Moreover, any time that God’s greatness is evoked, such as when Israel enters synagogues and study halls and answers in the kaddish prayer, May His great name be blessed, the Holy One, Blessed be He, shakes His head and says: Happy is the king who is thus praised in his house. When the Temple stood, this praise was recited there, but now: How great is the pain of the father who exiled his children, and woe to the children who were exiled from their father’s table, as their pain only adds to that of their father (Rabbi Shem Tov ibn Shaprut).,The Sages taught, for three reasons one may not enter a ruin: Because of suspicion of prostitution, because the ruin is liable to collapse, and because of demons. Three separate reasons seem extraneous, so the Gemara asks: Why was the reason because of suspicion necessary? Let this halakha be derived because of collapse. 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.'22a that a woman who engaged in intercourse and saw menstrual blood is not required to immerse herself, but one who experienced a seminal emission alone, with no concurrent impurity, is required to do so? If so, we must interpret Rabbi Yehuda’s statement in the mishna that one recites a blessing both beforehand and thereafter as follows: Do not say that one recites a blessing orally, but rather he means that one contemplates those blessings in his heart.,The Gemara challenges this explanation: And does Rabbi Yehuda maintain that there is validity to contemplating in his heart? Wasn’t it taught in a baraita: One who experienced a seminal emission and who has no water to immerse and purify himself recites Shema and neither recites the blessings of Shema beforehand nor thereafter? And when he eats his bread, he recites the blessing thereafter, Grace after Meals, but does not recite the blessing: Who brings forth bread from the earth, beforehand. However, in the instances where he may not recite the blessing, he contemplates it in his heart rather than utter it with his lips, this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. However Rabbi Yehuda says: In either case, he utters all of the blessings with his lips. Rabbi Yehuda does not consider contemplating the blessings in his heart a solution and permits them to be recited.,Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: Rabbi Yehuda’s statement in the mishna should be interpreted in another way. Rabbi Yehuda rendered the blessings like Hilkhot Derekh Eretz, which according to some Sages were not considered to be in the same category as all other matters of Torah and therefore, one is permitted to engage in their study even after having experienced a seminal emission.,As it was taught in a baraita: It is written: “And you shall impart them to your children and your children’s children” (Deuteronomy 4:9), and it is written thereafter: “The day that you stood before the Lord your God at Horeb” (Deuteronomy 4:10). Just as below, the Revelation at Sinai was in reverence, fear, quaking, and trembling, so too here, in every generation, Torah must be studied with a sense of reverence, fear, quaking, and trembling.,From here the Sages stated: Zavim, lepers, and those who engaged in intercourse with menstruating women, despite their severe impurity, are permitted to read the Torah, Prophets, and Writings, and to study Mishna and Gemara and halakhot and aggada. However, those who experienced a seminal emission are prohibited from doing so. The reason for this distinction is that the cases of severe impurity are caused by ailment or other circumstances beyond his control and, as a result, they do not necessarily preclude a sense of reverence and awe as he studies Torah. This, however, is not the case with regard to impurity resulting from a seminal emission, which usually comes about due to frivolity and a lack of reverence and awe. Therefore, it is inappropriate for one who experiences a seminal emission to engage in matters of in Torah.,However, there are many opinions concerning the precise parameters of the Torah matters prohibited by this decree. Rabbi Yosei says: One who experiences a seminal emission studies mishnayot that he is accustomed to study, as long as he does not expound upon a new mishna to study it in depth. Rabbi Yonatan ben Yosef says: He expounds upon the mishna but he does not expound upon the Gemara, which is the in-depth analysis of the Torah. Rabbi Natan ben Avishalom says: He may even expound upon the Gemara, as long as he does not utter the mentions of God’s name therein. Rabbi Yoḥa the Cobbler, Rabbi Akiva’s student, says in the name of Rabbi Akiva: One who experiences a seminal emission may not enter into homiletic interpretation midrash of verses at all. Some say that he says: He may not enter the study hall beit hamidrash at all. Rabbi Yehuda says: He may study only Hilkhot Derekh Eretz. In terms of the problem raised above, apparently Rabbi Yehuda considers the legal status of the blessings to be parallel to the legal status of Hilkhot Derekh Eretz, and therefore one may utter them orally.,The Gemara relates an incident involving Rabbi Yehuda himself, who experienced a seminal emission and was walking along the riverbank with his disciples. His disciples said to him: Rabbi, teach us a chapter from Hilkhot Derekh Eretz, as he maintained that even in a state of impurity, it is permitted. He descended and immersed himself in the river and taught them Hilkhot Derekh Eretz. They said to him: Did you not teach us, our teacher, that he may study Hilkhot Derekh Eretz? He said to them: Although I am lenient with others, and allow them to study it without immersion, I am stringent with myself.,Further elaborating on the issue of Torah study while in a state of impurity, it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira would say: Matters of Torah do not become ritually impure and therefore one who is impure is permitted to engage in Torah study. He implemented this halakha in practice. The Gemara relates an incident involving a student who was reciting mishnayot and baraitot hesitantly before the study hall of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira. The student experienced a seminal emission, and when he was asked to recite he did so in a rushed, uneven manner, as he did not want to utter the words of Torah explicitly. Rabbi Yehuda said to him: My son, open your mouth and let your words illuminate, as matters of Torah do not become ritually impure, as it is stated: “Is not my word like fire, says the Lord” (Jeremiah 23:29). Just as fire does not become ritually impure, so too matters of Torah do not become ritually impure.,In this baraita the Master said that one who is impure because of a seminal emission expounds upon the mishna but does not expound upon the Gemara. The Gemara notes: This statement supports the opinion of Rabbi El’ai, as Rabbi El’ai said that Rabbi Aḥa bar Ya’akov said in the name of Rabbeinu, Rav: The halakha is that one who experienced a seminal emission may expound upon the mishna but may not expound upon the Gemara. This dispute is parallel a tannaitic dispute, as it was taught: One who experienced a seminal emission expounds upon the mishna but does not expound upon the Gemara; that is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda ben Gamliel says in the name of Rabbi Ḥanina ben Gamliel: Both this and that are prohibited. And some say that he said: Both this and that are permitted.,Comparing these opinions: The one who said that both this and that are prohibited holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥa the Cobbler; the one who said that both this and that are permitted holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira.,Summarizing the halakha, Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: The universally accepted practice is in accordance with the opinions of these three elders: In accordance with the opinion of Rabbi El’ai with regard to the halakhot of the first shearing, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoshiya with regard to the laws of prohibited diverse kinds, and in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira with regard to matters of Torah.,The Gemara elaborates: In accordance with the opinion of Rabbi El’ai with regard to the first shearing, as it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi El’ai says: The obligation to set aside the first shearing from the sheep for the priest is only practiced in Eretz Yisrael and not in the Diaspora, and that is the accepted practice.,In accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoshiya with regard to diverse kinds, as it is written: “You shall not sow your vineyard with diverse kinds” (Deuteronomy 22:9). Rabbi Yoshiya says: This means that one who sows diverse kinds is not liable by Torah law until he sows wheat and barley and a grape pit with a single hand motion, meaning that while sowing in the vineyard he violates the prohibition of diverse kinds that applies to seeds and to the vineyard simultaneously.,In accordance with Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira with regard to one who experiences a seminal emission is permitted to engage in matters of Torah, as it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: Matters of Torah do not become ritually impure.,And the Gemara relates: When Ze’iri came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he succinctly capsulated this halakha and said: They abolished ritual immersion, and some say that he said: They abolished ritual washing of the hands. The Gemara explains: The one who says that they abolished immersion holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira that one who experienced a seminal emission is not required to immerse. And the one who says that they abolished washing of the hands holds in accordance with that which Rav Ḥisda cursed one who goes out of his way to seek water at the time of prayer.,The Sages taught in a baraita: One who experienced a seminal emission who had nine kav of drawn water poured over him, that is sufficient to render him ritually pure and he need not immerse himself in a ritual bath. The Gemara relates: Naḥum of Gam Zo whispered this halakha to Rabbi Akiva, and Rabbi Akiva whispered it to his student ben Azzai, and ben Azzai went out and taught it to his students publicly in the marketplace. Two amora’im in Eretz Yisrael, Rabbi Yosei bar Avin and Rabbi Yosei bar Zevida, disagreed as to the correct version of the conclusion of the incident. One taught: Ben Azzai taught it to his students in the market. And the other taught: Ben Azzai also whispered it to his students.,The Gemara explains the rationale behind the two versions of this incident. The Sage who taught that ben Azzai taught the law openly in the market held that the leniency was due to concern that the halakhot requiring ritual immersion would promote dereliction in the study of Torah. The ruling of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira eases the way for an individual who experienced a seminal emission to study Torah. This was also due to concern that the halakhot requiring ritual immersion would promote the suspension of procreation, as one might abstain from marital relations to avoid the immersion required thereafter. And the Sage, who taught that ben Azzai only whispered this halakha to his students, held that he did so in order that Torah scholars would not be with their wives like roosters. If the purification process was that simple, Torah scholars would engage in sexual activity constantly, which would distract them from their studies.,With regard to this ritual immersion, Rabbi Yannai said: I heard that there are those who are lenient with regard to it and I have heard that there are those who are stringent with regard to it. The halakha in this matter was never conclusively established and anyone who accepts upon himself to be stringent with regard to it, they prolong for him his days and years.,The Gemara relates that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: What is the essence of those who immerse themselves in the morning? The Gemara retorts: How can one ask what is their essence? Isn’t he the one who said that one who experiences a seminal emission is prohibited from engaging in matters of Torah and is required to immerse himself in the morning? Rather, this is what he meant to say: What is the essence of immersion in a ritual bath of forty se’a of water when it is possible to purify oneself with nine kav? Furthermore, what is the essence of immersion when it is also possible to purify oneself by pouring water?,Regarding this, Rabbi Ḥanina said: They established a massive fence protecting one from sinning with their decree that one must immerse himself in forty se’a of water. As it was taught in a baraita: There was an incident involving one who solicited a woman to commit a sinful act. She said to him: Good-for-nothing. Do you have forty se’a in which to immerse and purify yourself afterwards? He immediately desisted. The obligation to immerse oneself caused individuals to refrain from transgression.,Rav Huna said to the Sages: Gentlemen, why do you disdain this immersion? If it is because it is difficult for you to immerse in the cold waters of the ritual bath, it is possible to purify oneself by immersing oneself in the heated bathhouses, which are unfit for immersion for other forms of ritual impurity but are fit for immersion in this case.,Rabbi Ḥisda said to him: Is there ritual immersion in hot water? Rav Huna said to him: Indeed, doubts with regard to the fitness of baths have been raised, and Rav Adda bar Ahava holds in accordance with your opinion. Nevertheless, I remain convinced that it is permitted.,The Gemara relates: Rabbi Zeira was sitting in a tub of water in the bathhouse. He said to his attendant: Go and get nine kav of water and pour it over me so that I may purify myself from the impurity caused by a seminal emission. Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said to him: Why does my master require all of this? Aren’t you seated in at least nine kav of water in the tub. He said to him: The law of nine kav parallels the law of forty se’a, in that their halakhot are exclusive. Just as forty se’a can only purify an individual through immersion and not through pouring, so too nine kav can only purify one who experienced a seminal emission through pouring and not through immersion.,The Gemara relates that Rav Naḥman prepared a jug with a capacity of nine kav so that his students could pour water over themselves and become pure. When Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said: Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yehuda Gelostera said: The halakha that one who experienced a seminal emission can be purified by pouring nine kav was only taught for a sick person who experienced the emission involuntarily. However, a sick person who experienced a normal seminal emission in the course of marital relations, is required to immerse himself in forty se’a.,Rav Yosef said: In that case, Rav Naḥman’s jug is broken, meaning it is no longer of any use, as few people fall into the category of sick people who experienced seminal emissions. Nevertheless, when Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia he said: In Usha there was an incident 26b On a similar note, the Sages taught in a baraita: One who erred and did not recite the afternoon prayer on the eve of Shabbat, prays in the evening prayer two Amida prayers on Shabbat evening. One who erred and did not recite the afternoon prayer on Shabbat, recites two weekday Amida prayers in the evening prayer at the conclusion of Shabbat. He recites havdala the prayer of distinction between the sanctity of Shabbat and the profanity of the week by reciting: You have graced us, etc., in the fourth blessing of the Amida, which is: Who graciously grants knowledge, in the first prayer, as it is the actual evening prayer, but he does not recite havdala in the second prayer, which is in place of the afternoon prayer. Moreover, if he recited havdala in the second prayer and did not recite havdala in the first, the second prayer fulfilled his obligation, the first one did not fulfill his obligation.,The Gemara comments: Is that to say that since he did not recite havdala in the first prayer, he is as one who did not pray and we require him to return to the beginning of the prayer and repeat it? If so, the conclusion is that one who fails to recite havdala in the prayer must repeat that prayer.,The Gemara raises a contradiction to the above conclusion from the Tosefta: One who erred and did not mention the might of the rains: He makes the wind blow and rain fall in the second blessing of the Amida, the blessing on the revival of the dead, and one who erred and failed to recite the request for rain in the ninth blessing of the Amida, the blessing of the years, we require him to return to the beginning of the prayer and repeat it. However, one who erred and failed to recite havdala in the blessing: Who graciously grants knowledge, we do not require him to return to the beginning of the prayer and repeat it, as he can recite havdala over the cup of wine, independent of his prayer. This contradiction was not resolved and remains difficult.,The dispute between the Rabbis and Rabbi Yehuda with regard to the times beyond which the different prayers may not be recited is rooted in a profound disagreement, also manifest in a later amoraic dispute. It was stated: Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: The practice of praying three times daily is ancient, albeit not in its present form; prayers were instituted by the Patriarchs. However, Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said that the prayers were instituted based on the daily offerings sacrificed in the Holy Temple, and the prayers parallel the offerings, in terms of both time and characteristics.,The Gemara comments: It was taught in a baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, and it was taught in a baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi. The Gemara elaborates: It was taught in a baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina: Abraham instituted the morning prayer, as it is stated when Abraham came to look out over Sodom the day after he had prayed on its behalf: “And Abraham rose early in the morning to the place where he had stood before the Lord” (Genesis 19:27), and from the context as well as the language utilized in the verse, the verb standing means nothing other than prayer, as this language is used to describe Pinehas’ prayer after the plague, as it is stated: “And Pinehas stood up and prayed and the plague ended” (Psalms 106:30). Clearly, Abraham was accustomed to stand in prayer in the morning.,Isaac instituted the afternoon prayer, as it is stated: “And Isaac went out to converse lasuaḥ in the field toward evening” (Genesis 24:63), and conversation means nothing other than prayer, as it is stated: “A prayer of the afflicted when he is faint and pours out his complaint siḥo before the Lord” (Psalms 102:1). Obviously, Isaac was the first to pray as evening approached, at the time of the afternoon prayer.,Jacob instituted the evening prayer, as it is stated: “And he encountered vayifga the place and he slept there for the sun had set” (Genesis 28:11). The word encounter means nothing other than prayer, as it is stated when God spoke to Jeremiah: “And you, do not pray on behalf of this nation and do not raise on their behalf song and prayer, and do not encounter tifga Me for I do not hear you” (Jeremiah 7:16). Jacob prayed during the evening, after the sun had set.,And it was taught in a baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi that the laws of prayer are based on the laws of the daily offerings: Why did the Rabbis say that the morning prayer may be recited until noon? Because, although the daily morning offering is typically brought early in the morning, it may be sacrificed until noon. And Rabbi Yehuda says: My opinion, that the morning prayer may be recited until four hours into the day, is because the daily morning offering is sacrificed until four hours.,And why did the Rabbis say that the afternoon prayer may be recited until the evening? Because the daily afternoon offering is sacrificed until the evening. Rabbi Yehuda says that the afternoon prayer may be recited only until the midpoint of the afternoon because, according to his opinion, the daily afternoon offering is sacrificed until the midpoint of the afternoon.,And why did they say that the evening prayer is not fixed? Because the burning of the limbs and fats of the offerings that were not consumed by the fire on the altar until the evening. They remained on the altar and were offered continuously throughout the entire night.,And why did the Rabbis say that the additional prayer may be recited all day? Because the additional offering is brought throughout the entire day. However, Rabbi Yehuda says that the additional prayer may be recited until the seventh hour of the day, because the additional offering is sacrificed until the seventh hour.,The baraita continues and states that there are two times for the afternoon prayer. Greater, earlier minḥa minḥa gedola and lesser, later minḥa minḥa ketana. The Gemara clarifies the difference between them: Which is minḥa gedola? From six-and-a-half hours after sunrise and on, which is a half an hour after noon and on. It is the earliest time that the daily afternoon offering may be sacrificed, as in the case on the eve of Passover that occurs on Shabbat. Which is minḥa ketana? From nine-and-a-half hours and on, which is the standard time that the daily afternoon offering is sacrificed.,On that note, a dilemma was raised before them: Rabbi Yehuda, who holds that the afternoon prayer may be recited only until the midpoint of the afternoon, does he say the midpoint of the first minḥa, minḥa gedola? Or, does he say the midpoint of the last minḥa? Come and hear an explicit resolution to this dilemma: As it was taught in a baraita, Rabbi Yehuda says: They said the midpoint of the last minḥa, and that is eleven hours minus a quarter of an hour after sunrise, i.e., an hour-and-a-quarter hours before sunset.,In any case, it is clear that according to this baraita the halakhot of prayer are based on the Temple offerings. The Gemara suggests: Let us say that this is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, who held that the forefathers instituted the prayers. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, could have said to you: Actually, I will say to you that the Patriarchs instituted the prayers and the Sages based the times and characteristics of prayer on the Temple offerings, even though they do not stem from the same source. As, if you do not say so, that even Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, would agree that the laws of offerings and those of prayers are related, then, according to Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, who instituted the additional prayer? It is not one of the prayers instituted by the forefathers. Rather, even according to Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, the prayers were instituted by the Patriarchs and the Sages based them on the laws of the offerings.,We learned in the mishna that Rabbi Yehuda says: The morning prayer may be recited until four hours of the day. A dilemma was raised before the yeshiva students: When Rabbi Yehuda says until, does he mean until and including the fourth hour, or, perhaps when he says “until” he means until and not including, in which case one may not pray during the fourth hour? Come and hear a resolution to this dilemma based on the mishna. Rabbi Yehuda says: The afternoon prayer may be recited only until the midpoint of the afternoon. Now, granted, if you say that until means until and not including, then there is a difference between the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda and the opinion of the Rabbis. However, if you say that until means until and including, then the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda 54a This mishna, which includes all of this chapter’s mishnayot, contains a series of blessings and halakhot that are not recited at specific times, but rather in response to various experiences and events. rrFor zikin and zeva’ot, which the Gemara will discuss below, for thunder, gale force winds, and lightning, manifestations of the power of the Creator, one recites: Blessed…Whose strength and power fill the world. For extraordinary (Rambam) mountains, hills, seas, rivers, and deserts, one recites: Blessed…Author of creation. Consistent with his opinion that a separate blessing should be instituted for each individual species, Rabbi Yehuda says: One who sees the great sea recites a special blessing: Blessed…Who made the great sea. As with all blessings of this type, one only recites it when he sees the sea intermittently, not on a regular basis.,For rain and other good tidings, one recites the special blessing: Blessed…Who is good and Who does good. Even for bad tidings, one recites a special blessing: Blessed…the true Judge. Similarly, when one built a new house or purchased new vessels, he recites: Blessed…Who has given us life, sustained us, and brought us to this time. The mishna articulates a general principle: One recites a blessing for the bad that befalls him just as he does for the good. In other words, one recites the appropriate blessing for the trouble that he is experiencing at present despite the fact that it may conceal some positive element in the future. Similarly, one must recite a blessing for the good that befalls him just as for the bad.,The mishna states: And one who cries out over the past in an attempt to change that which has already occurred, it is a vain prayer. For example, one whose wife was pregt and he says: May it be God’s will that my wife will give birth to a male child, it is a vain prayer. Or one who was walking on the path home and he heard the sound of a scream in the city, and he says: May it be God’s will that this scream will not be from my house, it is a vain prayer. In both cases, the event already occurred.,The Sages also said: One who enters a large city, the Gemara explains below that this is in a case where entering the city is dangerous, recites two prayers: One upon his entrance, that he may enter in peace, and one upon his exit, that he may leave in peace. Ben Azzai says: He recites four prayers, two upon his entrance and two upon his exit. In addition to praying that he may enter and depart in peace, he gives thanks for the past and cries out in prayer for the future.,The mishna articulates a general principle: One is obligated to recite a blessing for the bad that befalls him just as he recites a blessing for the good that befalls him, as it is stated: “And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your might” (Deuteronomy 6:5). The mishna explains this verse as follows: “With all your heart” means with your two inclinations, with your good inclination and your evil inclination, both of which must be subjugated to the love of God. “With all your soul” means even if God takes your soul. “And with all your might” means with all your money, as money is referred to in the Bible as might. Alternatively, it may be explained that “with all your might” means with every measure that He metes out to you; whether it is good or troublesome, thank Him.,The mishna teaches several Temple-related halakhot. One may not act irreverently or conduct himself flippantly opposite the eastern gate of the Temple Mount, which is aligned opposite the Holy of Holies. In deference to the Temple, one may not enter the Temple Mount with his staff, his shoes, his money belt punda, or even the dust on his feet. One may not make the Temple a shortcut to pass through it, and through an a fortiori inference, all the more so one may not spit on the Temple Mount.,The mishna relates: At the conclusion of all blessings recited in the Temple, those reciting the blessing would say: Blessed are You Lord, God of Israel, until everlasting haolam, the world. But when the Sadducees strayed and declared that there is but one world and there is no World-to-Come, the Sages instituted that at the conclusion of the blessing one recites: From everlasting haolam to everlasting haolam.,The Sages also instituted that one should greet another in the name of God, i.e., one should mention God’s name in his greeting, as it is stated: “And presently Boaz came from Bethlehem and said to the harvesters, The Lord is with you, and they said to him, May the Lord bless you” (Ruth 2:4). And it says: “And the angel of God appeared to him and said to him, God is with you, mighty man of valor” (Judges 6:12). And it says: “And despise not your mother when she is old” (Proverbs 23:22), i.e., one must not neglect customs which he inherits. And lest you say that mentioning God’s name is prohibited, it says: “It is time to work for the Lord; they have made void Your Torah” (Psalms 119:126), i.e., it is occasionally necessary to negate biblical precepts in order to perform God’s will, and greeting another is certainly God’s will. Rabbi Natan says another interpretation of the verse: “Make void Your Torah” because “it is the time to work for the Lord,” i.e., occasionally it is necessary to negate biblical precepts in order to bolster the Torah.,From where are these matters derived? Rabbi Yoḥa said: The verse states: “And Jethro said: Blessed be the Lord, Who delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians, and out of the hand of Pharaoh; Who delivered the people from under the hand of the Egyptians” (Exodus 18:10); a blessing is recited for a miracle.,The Gemara asks: For a miracle that occurs for the multitudes we recite a blessing, but for a miracle that befalls an individual person we do not recite a blessing? Wasn’t there an incident where a certain man was walking along the right side of the Euphrates River when a lion attacked him, a miracle was performed for him, and he was rescued? He came before Rava, who said to him: Every time that you arrive there, to the site of the miracle, recite the blessing, “Blessed…Who performed a miracle for me in this place.”,And once when Mar, son of Ravina, was walking in a valley of willows and was thirsty for water, a miracle was performed for him and a spring of water was created for him, and he drank.,Furthermore, once when Mar, son of Ravina, was walking in the marketplace risteka of Meḥoza and a wild camel gamla peritza attacked him. The wall cracked open, he went inside it, and he was rescued. Ever since, when he came to the willows he recited: Blessed…Who performed a miracle for me in the willows and with the camel. And, when he came to the marketplace of Meḥoza he recited: Blessed…Who performed a miracle for me with the camel and in the willows, indicating that one recites a blessing even for a miracle that occurs to an individual. The Sages say: On a miracle performed on behalf of the multitudes, everyone is obligated to recite a blessing; on a miracle performed on behalf of an individual, only the individual is obligated to recite a blessing.,The Sages taught in a baraita a list of places where one is required to recite a blessing due to miracles that were performed there: One who sees the crossings of the Red Sea, where Israel crossed; and the crossings of the Jordan; and the crossings of the streams of Arnon; the hailstones of Elgavish on the descent of Beit Ḥoron; the rock that Og, King of Bashan, sought to hurl upon Israel; and the rock upon which Moses sat when Joshua waged war against Amalek; and Lot’s wife; and the wall of Jericho that was swallowed up in its place. On all of these miracles one must give thanks and offer praise before God.,The Gemara elaborates: Granted, the miracles at the crossings of the sea are recorded explicitly in the Torah, as it is stated: “And the Israelites went into the sea on dry ground and the water was a wall for them on their right and on their left” (Exodus 14:22). So too, the miracle at the crossings of the Jordan, as it is stated: “The priests who bore the ark of God’s covet stood on dry land within the Jordan, while all Israel crossed on dry land until the entire nation finished crossing the Jordan” (Joshua 3:17).,However, from where do we derive the miracle that occurred at the crossing of the streams of Arnon? As it is stated: “Wherefore it is said in the Book of the Wars of the Lord: Vahev in Sufa, and the valleys of Arnon. And the slope of the valleys that incline toward the seat of Ar, and lean upon the border of Moab” (Numbers 21:14–15). It was taught: “Vahev in Sufa”; there were two lepers, one named Et and the second named Hev, who were walking at the rear of the camp of Israel. As Israel passed, the Emorites came ' None | |
|
57. Babylonian Talmud, Hagigah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Arakh • R. Eliezer b. Hyrcanus
Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 348; Sigal (2007), The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew, 54
| 14b הא בדברי תורה הא במשא ומתן בדברי תורה הוו במשא ומתן לא הוו.,ת"ר מעשה ברבן יוחנן בן זכאי שהיה רוכב על החמור והיה מהלך בדרך ור\' אלעזר בן ערך מחמר אחריו אמר לו רבי שנה לי פרק אחד במעשה מרכבה אמר לו לא כך שניתי לכם ולא במרכבה ביחיד אלא א"כ היה חכם מבין מדעתו אמר לו רבי תרשיני לומר לפניך דבר אחד שלמדתני אמר לו אמור,מיד ירד רבן יוחנן בן זכאי מעל החמור ונתעטף וישב על האבן תחת הזית אמר לו רבי מפני מה ירדת מעל החמור אמר אפשר אתה דורש במעשה מרכבה ושכינה עמנו ומלאכי השרת מלוין אותנו ואני ארכב על החמור מיד פתח ר"א בן ערך במעשה המרכבה ודרש וירדה אש מן השמים וסיבבה כל האילנות שבשדה פתחו כולן ואמרו שירה,מה שירה אמרו (תהלים קמח, ז) הללו את ה\' מן הארץ תנינים וכל תהומות עץ פרי וכל ארזים הללויה נענה מלאך מן האש ואמר הן הן מעשה המרכבה עמד רבן יוחנן ב"ז ונשקו על ראשו ואמר ברוך ה\' אלהי ישראל שנתן בן לאברהם אבינו שיודע להבין ולחקור ולדרוש במעשה מרכבה יש נאה דורש ואין נאה מקיים נאה מקיים ואין נאה דורש אתה נאה דורש ונאה מקיים אשריך אברהם אבינו שאלעזר בן ערך יצא מחלציך,וכשנאמרו הדברים לפני ר\' יהושע היה הוא ורבי יוסי הכהן מהלכים בדרך אמרו אף אנו נדרוש במעשה מרכבה פתח רבי יהושע ודרש ואותו היום תקופת תמוז היה נתקשרו שמים בעבים ונראה כמין קשת בענן והיו מלאכי השרת מתקבצין ובאין לשמוע כבני אדם שמתקבצין ובאין לראות במזמוטי חתן וכלה,הלך רבי יוסי הכהן וסיפר דברים לפני רבן יוחנן בן זכאי ואמר אשריכם ואשרי יולדתכם אשרי עיני שכך ראו ואף אני ואתם בחלומי מסובין היינו על הר סיני ונתנה עלינו בת קול מן השמים עלו לכאן עלו לכאן טרקלין גדולים ומצעות נאות מוצעות לכם אתם ותלמידיכם ותלמידי תלמידיכם מזומנין לכת שלישית,איני והתניא ר\' יוסי בר\' יהודה אומר שלשה הרצאות הן ר\' יהושע הרצה דברים לפני רבן יוחנן בן זכאי ר"ע הרצה לפני ר\' יהושע חנניא בן חכינאי הרצה לפני ר"ע ואילו ר"א בן ערך לא קא חשיב דארצי וארצו קמיה קחשיב דארצי ולא ארצו קמיה לא קא חשיב והא חנניא בן חכינאי דלא ארצו קמיה וקא חשיב דארצי מיהא קמיה מאן דארצי.,ת"ר ארבעה נכנסו בפרדס ואלו הן בן עזאי ובן זומא אחר ורבי עקיבא אמר להם ר"ע כשאתם מגיעין אצל אבני שיש טהור אל תאמרו מים מים משום שנאמר (תהלים קא, ז) דובר שקרים לא יכון לנגד עיני,בן עזאי הציץ ומת עליו הכתוב אומר (תהלים קטז, טו) יקר בעיני ה\' המותה לחסידיו בן זומא הציץ ונפגע ועליו הכתוב אומר (משלי כה, טז) דבש מצאת אכול דייך פן תשבענו והקאתו אחר קיצץ בנטיעות רבי עקיבא יצא בשלום,שאלו את בן זומא מהו לסרוסי כלבא אמר להם (ויקרא כב, כד) ובארצכם לא תעשו כל שבארצכם לא תעשו שאלו את בן זומא בתולה שעיברה מהו לכ"ג מי חיישינן לדשמואל דאמר שמואל'' None | 14b This case is referring to words of Torah, while that case is referring to commerce. With regard to words of Torah, they were trustworthy; with regard to commerce, they were not.,§ The Gemara returns to the topic of the Design of the Divine Chariot. The Sages taught: An incident occurred involving Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai, who was riding on a donkey and was traveling along the way, and his student, Rabbi Elazar ben Arakh, was riding a donkey behind him. Rabbi Elazar said to him: My teacher, teach me one chapter in the Design of the Divine Chariot. He said to him: Have I not taught you: And one may not expound the Design of the Divine Chariot to an individual, unless he is a Sage who understands on his own accord? Rabbi Elazar said to him: My teacher, allow me to say before you one thing that you taught me. In other words, he humbly requested to recite before him his own understanding of this issue. He said to him: Speak.,Immediately, Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai alighted from the donkey, and wrapped his head in his cloak in a manner of reverence, and sat on a stone under an olive tree. Rabbi Elazar said to him: My teacher, for what reason did you alight from the donkey? He said: Is it possible that while you are expounding the Design of the Divine Chariot, and the Divine Presence is with us, and the ministering angels are accompanying us, that I should ride on a donkey? Immediately, Rabbi Elazar ben Arakh began to discuss the Design of the Divine Chariot and expounded, and fire descended from heaven and encircled all the trees in the field, and all the trees began reciting song.,What song did they recite? “Praise the Lord from the earth, sea monsters and all depths…fruit trees and all cedars…praise the Lord” (Psalms 148:7–14). An angel responded from the fire, saying: This is the very Design of the Divine Chariot, just as you expounded. Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai stood and kissed Rabbi Elazar ben Arakh on his head, and said: Blessed be God, Lord of Israel, who gave our father Abraham a son like you, who knows how to understand, investigate, and expound the Design of the Divine Chariot. There are some who expound the Torah’s verses well but do not fulfill its imperatives well, and there are some who fulfill its imperatives well but do not expound its verses well, whereas you expound its verses well and fulfill its imperatives well. Happy are you, our father Abraham, that Elazar ben Arakh came from your loins.,The Gemara relates: And when these matters, this story involving his colleague Rabbi Elazar ben Arakh, were recounted before Rabbi Yehoshua, he was walking along the way with Rabbi Yosei the Priest. They said: We too shall expound the Design of the Divine Chariot. Rabbi Yehoshua began expounding. And that was the day of the summer solstice, when there are no clouds in the sky. Yet the heavens became filled with clouds, and there was the appearance of a kind of rainbow in a cloud. And ministering angels gathered and came to listen, like people gathering and coming to see the rejoicing of a bridegroom and bride.,Rabbi Yosei the Priest went and recited these matters before Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai, who said to him: Happy are all of you, and happy are the mothers who gave birth to you; happy are my eyes that saw this, students such as these. As for you and I, I saw in my dream that we were seated at Mount Sinai, and a Divine Voice came to us from heaven: Ascend here, ascend here, for large halls teraklin and pleasant couches are made up for you. You, your students, and the students of your students are invited to the third group, those who will merit to welcome the Divine Presence.,The Gemara poses a question: Is that so? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: There are three lectures. In other words, there are three Sages with regard to whom it states that they delivered lectures on the mystical tradition: Rabbi Yehoshua lectured on these matters before Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai; Rabbi Akiva lectured before Rabbi Yehoshua; and Ḥaya ben Ḥakhinai lectured before Rabbi Akiva. However, Rabbi Elazar ben Arakh was not included in the list, despite the testimony that he lectured before Rabban Yoḥa. The Gemara explains: Those who lectured and were also lectured to were included; but those who lectured and were not lectured to were not included. The Gemara asks: But wasn’t there Ḥaya ben Ḥakhinai, who was not lectured to, and yet he is included? The Gemara answers: Ḥaya ben Ḥakhinai actually lectured before one who lectured in front of his own rabbi, so he was also included in this list.,§ The Sages taught: Four entered the orchard pardes, i.e., dealt with the loftiest secrets of Torah, and they are as follows: Ben Azzai; and ben Zoma; Aḥer, the other, a name for Elisha ben Avuya; and Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Akiva, the senior among them, said to them: When, upon your arrival in the upper worlds, you reach pure marble stones, do not say: Water, water, although they appear to be water, because it is stated: “He who speaks falsehood shall not be established before My eyes” (Psalms 101:7).,The Gemara proceeds to relate what happened to each of them: Ben Azzai glimpsed at the Divine Presence and died. And with regard to him the verse states: “Precious in the eyes of the Lord is the death of His pious ones” (Psalms 116:15). Ben Zoma glimpsed at the Divine Presence and was harmed, i.e., he lost his mind. And with regard to him the verse states: “Have you found honey? Eat as much as is sufficient for you, lest you become full from it and vomit it” (Proverbs 25:16). Aḥer chopped down the shoots of saplings. In other words, he became a heretic. Rabbi Akiva came out safely.,The Gemara recounts the greatness of ben Zoma, who was an expert interpreter of the Torah and could find obscure proofs: They asked ben Zoma: What is the halakha with regard to castrating a dog? The prohibition against castration appears alongside the sacrificial blemishes, which may imply that it is permitted to castrate an animal that cannot be sacrificed as an offering. He said to them: The verse states “That which has its testicles bruised, or crushed, or torn, or cut, you shall not offer to God, nor shall you do so in your land” (Leviticus 22:24), from which we learn: With regard to any animal that is in your land, you shall not do such a thing. They also asked ben Zoma: A woman considered to be a virgin who became pregt, what is the halakha? A High Priest may marry only a virgin; is he permitted to marry her? The answer depends on the following: Are we concerned for the opinion of Shmuel? Shmuel says:'' None |
|
58. Babylonian Talmud, Ketuvot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Arakh • Eliezer, R., on conjugal duty
Found in books: Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 103, 104; Sigal (2007), The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew, 53
| 62b אכולהו והא ששה חדשים קאמר אינו דומה מי שיש לו פת בסלו למי שאין לו פת בסלו,א"ל רבה בר רב חנן לאביי חמר ונעשה גמל מאי א"ל רוצה אשה בקב ותיפלות מעשרה קבין ופרישות:,הספנים אחת לששה חדשים דברי ר\' אליעזר: אמר רב ברונא אמר רב הלכה כר"א אמר רב אדא בר אהבה אמר רב זו דברי ר\' אליעזר אבל חכמים אומרים התלמידים יוצאין לת"ת ב\' וג\' שנים שלא ברשות אמר רבא סמכו רבנן אדרב אדא בר אהבה ועבדי עובדא בנפשייהו,כי הא דרב רחומי הוה שכיח קמיה דרבא במחוזא הוה רגיל דהוה אתי לביתיה כל מעלי יומא דכיפורי יומא חד משכתיה שמעתא הוה מסכיא דביתהו השתא אתי השתא אתי לא אתא חלש דעתה אחית דמעתא מעינה הוה יתיב באיגרא אפחית איגרא מתותיה ונח נפשיה,עונה של תלמידי חכמים אימת אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל מע"ש לע"ש (תהלים א, ג) אשר פריו יתן בעתו אמר רב יהודה ואיתימא רב הונא ואיתימא רב נחמן זה המשמש מטתו מע"ש לע"ש,יהודה בריה דר\' חייא חתניה דר\' ינאי הוה אזיל ויתיב בבי רב וכל בי שמשי הוה אתי לביתיה וכי הוה אתי הוה קא חזי קמיה עמודא דנורא יומא חד משכתיה שמעתא כיון דלא חזי ההוא סימנא אמר להו רבי ינאי כפו מטתו שאילמלי יהודה קיים לא ביטל עונתו הואי (קהלת י, ה) כשגגה שיוצא מלפני השליט ונח נפשיה,רבי איעסק ליה לבריה בי רבי חייא כי מטא למיכתב כתובה נח נפשה דרביתא אמר רבי ח"ו פסולא איכא יתיבו ועיינו במשפחות רבי אתי משפטיה בן אביטל ורבי חייא אתי משמעי אחי דוד,אזיל איעסק ליה לבריה בי ר\' יוסי בן זימרא פסקו ליה תרתי סרי שנין למיזל בבי רב אחלפוה קמיה אמר להו ניהוו שית שנין אחלפוה קמיה אמר להו איכניס והדר איזיל הוה קא מכסיף מאבוה א"ל בני דעת קונך יש בך,מעיקרא כתיב (שמות טו, יז) תביאמו ותטעמו ולבסוף כתיב (שמות כה, ח) ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם,אזיל יתיב תרתי סרי שני בבי רב עד דאתא איעקרא דביתהו אמר רבי היכי נעביד נגרשה יאמרו ענייה זו לשוא שימרה נינסיב איתתא אחריתי יאמרו זו אשתו וזו זונתו בעי עלה רחמי ואיתסיאת:,רבי חנניה בן חכינאי הוה קאזיל לבי רב בשילהי הלוליה דר"ש בן יוחאי א"ל איעכב לי עד דאתי בהדך לא איעכבא ליה אזל יתיב תרי סרי שני בבי רב עד דאתי אישתנו שבילי דמתא ולא ידע למיזל לביתיה,אזל יתיב אגודא דנהרא שמע לההיא רביתא דהוו קרו לה בת חכינאי בת חכינאי מלי קולתך ותא ניזיל אמר ש"מ האי רביתא דידן אזל בתרה הוה יתיבא דביתהו קא נהלה קמחא דל עינה חזיתיה סוי לבה פרח רוחה אמר לפניו רבש"ע ענייה זו זה שכרה בעא רחמי עלה וחייה,רבי חמא בר ביסא אזיל יתיב תרי סרי שני בבי מדרשא כי אתא אמר לא איעביד כדעביד בן חכינאי עייל יתיב במדרשא שלח לביתיה אתא ר\' אושעיא בריה יתיב קמיה הוה קא משאיל ליה שמעתא חזא דקא מתחדדי שמעתיה חלש דעתיה אמר אי הואי הכא הוה לי זרע כי האי,על לביתיה על בריה קם קמיה הוא סבר למשאליה שמעתתא קא בעי אמרה ליה דביתהו מי איכא אבא דקאים מקמי ברא קרי עליה רמי בר חמא (קהלת ד, יב) החוט המשולש לא במהרה ינתק זה ר\' אושעיא בנו של רבי חמא בר ביסא,ר"ע רעיא דבן כלבא שבוע הוה חזיתיה ברתיה דהוה צניע ומעלי אמרה ליה אי מקדשנא לך אזלת לבי רב אמר לה אין איקדשא ליה בצינעה ושדרתיה שמע אבוה אפקה מביתיה אדרה הנאה מנכסיה אזיל יתיב תרי סרי שנין בבי רב כי אתא אייתי בהדיה תרי סרי אלפי תלמידי שמעיה לההוא סבא דקאמר לה עד כמה'' None | 62b the tanna taught us a halakha with regard to all of them, not only a man of leisure or a laborer. He asked him: But with regard to a sailor it said that the set interval for conjugal relations is six months; why, then, should he have to divorce her if he vowed to forbid these relations for only a week? He answered him: It is well known that one who has bread in his basket is not comparable to one who does not have bread in his basket. On a fast day, one who does not have bread available in his basket suffers more than one who does have bread available and knows that he will be able to eat later. In this case as well, when a woman knows that marital relations are forbidden to her due to a vow, her suffering from waiting for her husband to return is increased.,Rabba bar Rav Ha said to Abaye: If a donkey driver who is already married wants to become a camel driver, what is the halakha? Is he permitted to change his profession in order to earn more money from his work, even though this will mean he reduces the frequency with which he engages in conjugal relations with his wife? He answered him: A woman prefers a kav, i.e., modest means, with conjugal relations to ten kav with abstinence. Consequently, he is not allowed to change his profession without her permission.,§ The mishna stated: For sailors, the set interval for conjugal relations is once every six months. This is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. Rav Berona said that Rav said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer. Rav Adda bar Ahava said that Rav said: This is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer, but the Rabbis say: Students may leave their homes to study Torah for as long as two or three years without permission from their wives. Rava said: The Sages relied on Rabbi Adda bar Ahava’s opinion and performed an action like this themselves, but the results were sometimes fatal.,This is as it is related about Rav Reḥumi, who would commonly study before Rava in Meḥoza: He was accustomed to come back to his home every year on the eve of Yom Kippur. One day he was particularly engrossed in the halakha he was studying, and so he remained in the study hall and did not go home. His wife was expecting him that day and continually said to herself: Now he is coming, now he is coming. But in the end, he did not come. She was distressed by this and a tear fell from her eye. At that exact moment, Rav Reḥumi was sitting on the roof. The roof collapsed under him and he died. This teaches how much one must be careful, as he was punished severely for causing anguish to his wife, even inadvertently.,§ When is the ideal time for Torah scholars to fulfill their conjugal obligations? Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: The appropriate time for them is from Shabbat eve to Shabbat eve, i.e., on Friday nights. Similarly, it is stated with regard to the verse “that brings forth its fruit in its season” (Psalms 1:3): Rav Yehuda said, and some say that it was Rav Huna, and some say that it was Rav Naḥman: This is referring to one who engages in marital relations, bringing forth his fruit, from Shabbat eve to Shabbat eve.,It is related further that Yehuda, son of Rabbi Ḥiyya and son-in-law of Rabbi Yannai, would go and sit in the study hall, and every Shabbat eve at twilight he would come to his house. When he would come, Rabbi Yannai would see a pillar of fire preceding him due to his sanctity. One day he was engrossed in the halakha he was studying, and he stayed in the study hall and did not return home. When Rabbi Yannai did not see that sign preceding him, he said to the family: Turn his bed over, as one does at times of mourning, since he must have died, reasoning that if Yehuda were alive he would not have missed his set interval for conjugal relations and would certainly have come home. What he said became “like an error that proceeds from a ruler” (Ecclesiastes 10:5), and Yehuda, son of Rabbi Ḥiyya, died.,It is related further that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi arranged for his son to marry a daughter of the household of Rabbi Ḥiyya. When he came to write the marriage contract, the girl died. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: Is there, Heaven forbid, some disqualification in these families, as it appears that God prevented this match from taking place? They sat and looked into the families’ ancestry and found that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi was descended from Shefatya ben Avital, the wife of David, whereas Rabbi Ḥiyya was descended from Shimi, David’s brother.,He went and arranged for his son to marry a daughter of the household of Rabbi Yosei ben Zimra. They agreed for him that they would support him for twelve years to go to study in the study hall. It was assumed that he would first go to study and afterward get married. They passed the girl in front of the groom and when he saw her he said: Let it be just six years. They passed her in front of him again and he said to them: I will marry her now and then go to study. He was then ashamed to see his father, as he thought he would reprimand him because when he saw the girl he desired her and could not wait. His father placated him and said to him: My son, you have your Maker’s perception, meaning you acted the same way that God does.,The proof for this is that initially it is written: “You bring them and plant them in the mountain of Your inheritance, the place that You, O Lord, have made for You to dwell in” (Exodus 15:17), which indicates that God’s original intention was to build a Temple for the Jewish people after they had entered Eretz Yisrael. And ultimately it is written: “And let them make Me a Sanctuary, that I may dwell among them” (Exodus 25:8), i.e., even while they were still in the desert, which indicates that due to their closeness to God, they enjoyed greater affection and He therefore advanced what would originally have come later.,After his wedding he went and sat for twelve years in the study hall. By the time he came back his wife had become infertile, as a consequence of spending many years without her husband. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: What should we do? If he will divorce her, people will say: This poor woman waited and hoped for naught. If he will marry another woman to beget children, people will say: This one, who bears him children, is his wife and that one, who lives with him, is his mistress. Therefore, her husband pleaded with God to have mercy on her and she was cured.,Rabbi Ḥaya ben Ḥakhinai went to the study hall at the end of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai’s wedding feast. Rabbi Shimon said to him: Wait for me until I can come with you, after my days of celebration are over. However, since he wanted to learn Torah, he did not wait and went and sat for twelve years in the study hall. By the time he came back, all the paths of his city had changed and he did not know how to go to his home.,He went and sat on the bank of the river and heard people calling to a certain girl: Daughter of Ḥakhinai, daughter of Ḥakhinai, fill your pitcher and come up. He said: I can conclude from this that this is our daughter, meaning his own daughter, whom he had not recognized after so many years. He followed her to his house. His wife was sitting and sifting flour. She lifted her eyes up, saw him and recognized him, and her heart fluttered with agitation and she passed away from the emotional stress. Rabbi Ḥaya said before God: Master of the universe, is this the reward of this poor woman? He pleaded for mercy for her and she lived.,Rabbi Ḥama bar Bisa went and sat for twelve years in the study hall. When he came back to his house, he said: I will not do what the son of Ḥakhinai, who came home suddenly with tragic consequences for his wife, did. He went and sat in the study hall in his hometown, and sent a message to his house that he had arrived. While he was sitting there his son Rabbi Oshaya, whom he did not recognize, came and sat before him. Rabbi Oshaya asked him questions about halakha, and Rabbi Ḥama saw that the halakhot of Rabbi Oshaya were incisive, i.e., he was very sharp. Rabbi Ḥama was distressed and said: If I had been here and had taught my son I would have had a child like this.,Rabbi Ḥama went in to his house and his son went in with him. Rabbi Ḥama then stood up before him to honor a Torah scholar, since he thought that he wanted to ask him a matter of halakha. His wife said to him: Is there a father who stands up before his son? The Gemara comments: Rami bar Ḥama read the verse about him: “A threefold cord is not quickly broken” (Ecclesiastes 4:12). This is referring to Rabbi Oshaya, son of Rabbi Ḥama bar Bisa, as he represented the third generation of Torah scholars in his family.,The Gemara further relates: Rabbi Akiva was the shepherd of ben Kalba Savua, one of the wealthy residents of Jerusalem. The daughter of Ben Kalba Savua saw that he was humble and refined. She said to him: If I betroth myself to you, will you go to the study hall to learn Torah? He said to her: Yes. She became betrothed to him privately and sent him off to study. Her father heard this and became angry. He removed her from his house and took a vow prohibiting her from benefiting from his property. Rabbi Akiva went and sat for twelve years in the study hall. When he came back to his house he brought twelve thousand students with him, and as he approached he heard an old man saying to his wife: For how long'' None |
|
59. Babylonian Talmud, Qiddushin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer, R.
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 98; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 178
52b והא מתניתין דגזל דידה וקאמר רב אינה מקודשת לא קשיא הא דשדיך הא דלא שדיך,ההיא איתתא דהוה קא משיא כרעא במשיכלא דמיא אתא ההוא גברא חטף זוזי מחבריה ושדא לה אמר לה מיקדשת לי אתא ההוא גברא לקמיה דרבא אמר לית דחש להא דר\' שמעון דאמר סתם גזילה יאוש בעלים הוי,ההוא אריסא דקדיש במוזא דשמכי אתא לקמיה דרבא אמר ליה מאן אחלך והני מילי במוזא אבל כישא מצי אמר ליה אנא שקלי כישא שקיל את כישא כישא כי כישא,ההוא סרסיא דקדיש בפרומא דשיכרא אתא מריה דשיכרא אשכחיה אמר ליה אמאי לא תיתיב מהאי חריפא אתא לקמיה דרבא אמר לא אמרו כלך אצל יפות אלא לענין תרומה בלבד,דתניא כיצד אמרו תורם שלא מדעת תרומתו תרומה הרי שירד לתוך שדה חבירו וליקט ותרם שלא ברשות אם חושש משום גזל אין תרומתו תרומה ואם לאו תרומתו תרומה,ומנין היה יודע אם חושש משום גזל אם לאו הרי שבא בעל הבית ומצאו ואמר לו כלך אצל יפות אם נמצאו יפות מהם תרומתו תרומה ואם לאו אין תרומתו תרומה היו הבעלים מלקטים ומוסיפים בין כך ובין כך תרומתו תרומה,אבל הכא משום כיסופא הוא דעבד ואינה מקודשת,| 52b The Gemara questions this analysis: But doesn’t the mishna deal with a case where the stolen item is hers, and yet Rav says she is not betrothed. The Gemara answers: This is not difficult; this case, in the baraita, is referring to a situation where he had arranged to betroth her beforehand, which indicates that she has released him from his obligation to return it, but that case, in the mishna, is referring to a situation where he had not arranged his marriage with her, so it is stolen property and she is not betrothed.,The Gemara relates: There was a certain woman who was washing her feet in a vessel of water. A certain man came along, grabbed a few dinars from another person, and threw them to her, and said to her: You are betrothed to me. That man subsequently came before Rava, to inquire as to the status of the woman. Rava said: There is not anyone who is concerned for this opinion of Rabbi Shimon, who said: In an ordinary case of robbery the owner has despaired of recovering the stolen item, and it belongs to the robber. Rather, the assumption is that the owner has not despaired of recovering the stolen item. In this case, since the stolen dinars do not belong to the man, his betrothal is of no effect.,The Gemara relates another incident: The was a certain sharecropper who betrothed a woman with a handful bemoza of onions deshamkhei taken from the field where he worked. He came before Rava to ask about the status of the woman. Rava said to him: Who relinquished these onions to you? Since the owner did not allow you to take them, they are stolen property, and the woman is not betrothed. The Gemara comments: And this matter applies only to a handful, but if he took a bundle of onions and betrothed a woman with them, the sharecropper can say to the owner: I took a bundle, you take a bundle; one bundle for another bundle. Since in any case they divide the crop between them, it is not considered theft.,The Gemara relates another incident: There was a certain brewer sarseya who was making date beer for someone, who betrothed a woman with sediment bifruma from the beer. The owner of the beer came and found him. The owner said to him: Why don’t you give her the betrothal from this, the sharp sediments that are of better quality than the kind you chose? The brewer came before Rava to ask whether the owner’s comment indicated that he had relinquished his rights to the sediment, which would mean the woman is betrothed. Rava said to him: The Sages said that if the owner discovers that someone has taken something of his without permission and says: Go to and take the item of better quality, that it is a sign he agrees with the man’s action only with regard to teruma alone, and you did not have the right to use the sediment.,The Gemara explains the previous statement: As it is taught in a baraita (Tosefta, Terumot 1:5): When did they say that in the case where one separates teruma without the owner’s consent, his teruma is considered teruma? The baraita clarifies: In a case where there was someone who entered another’s field and gathered produce from it, and separated teruma without the owner’s permission, if the owner is concerned about his actions and view it as robbery, his teruma is not teruma, but if he is not concerned, his teruma is teruma.,The baraita continues: And from where would the gatherer know whether he should be concerned that the owner objects and views it as robbery or not? If the owner came and found him separating teruma and said to him: Go to take the produce of better quality and separate teruma from that, then if produce of better quality than the produce he had separated is found, his teruma is considered teruma, since the owner is assumed to have been sincere and pleased that the other has separated teruma from his produce. But if not, his teruma is not teruma, as it may be assumed that the owner was angry at him and was speaking sarcastically. The baraita adds: If the owners were gathering and adding to the teruma he had separated, indicating that they agree to his act of separation, either way, whether or not better-quality produce was found, his teruma is considered teruma.,Rava concludes the explanation of his ruling: This halakha applies only to teruma, which is a mitzva that the owner must in any case perform. But here, in the case of the brewer who betrothed a woman with sediment from the beer, the owner acts because of embarrassment, and while he does not feel comfortable protesting, he did not in fact relinquish his rights to the sediment, and she is not betrothed.,who betroths a woman with his portion of offerings, whether he did so with offerings of the most sacred order or whether he did so with offerings of lesser sanctity, she is not betrothed. One who betroths a woman with second tithe, whether unwittingly or intentionally, has not betrothed her; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: If he did so unwittingly he has not betrothed her, but if he did so intentionally he has betrothed her.,And with regard to one who betroths a woman with consecrated property belonging to the Temple treasury, if he does so intentionally he has betrothed her, and if he does so unwittingly he has not betrothed her; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says the opposite: If he does so unwittingly he has betrothed her, but if he does so intentionally he has not betrothed her.,Shall we say that the mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili? As it is taught in a baraita that the verse states with regard to the obligation to bring an offering for taking a false oath concerning unlawful possession of the property of another: “If any one sin, and he commits a trespass against the Lord, and deal falsely with his neighbor in a matter of deposit, or of pledge, or of robbery, or have oppressed his neighbor” (Leviticus 5:21). As the verse is discussing property belonging to another, the phrase “a trespass against the Lord” serves to include in the obligation of an offering a false oath with regard to possession of offerings of lesser sanctity of another person, which are the property of the owner; this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili. According to Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, the portion of an offering of lesser sanctity that the priest receives belongs to him, so he should be able to betroth a woman with it.,The Gemara rejects this: You can even say that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, as Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says that an offering of lesser sanctity belongs to its owner only while the animal is still alive, but after its slaughter it does not belong to the priest who receives portions from it. What is the reason for this? When the priests receive their portion after the animal has been slaughtered they receive their portion from the table of the Most High, and do not own the portion itself.,The Gemara adds: The language of the mishna is also precise, as it teaches: With regard to a priest who betroths a woman with his portion of offerings, whether he did so with offerings of the most sacred order or whether he used offerings of lesser sanctity, has not betrothed her. The mishna does not speak of a priest who betroths a woman with a living offering of lesser sanctity but of one who betroths with the portion of the slaughtered animal he has received. The Gemara concludes: Learn from it that it is only in this case that she is not betrothed.,The Sages taught: After the death of Rabbi Meir, Rabbi Yehuda said to his students: Do not let the students of Rabbi Meir enter here into our house of study, because they are vexatious kanteranim. And they do not come to study Torah, but rather they come to overwhelm me with halakhot. Sumakhos, a student of Rabbi Meir, pushed and entered anyway. He said to them: This is what Rabbi Meir taught me: With regard to a priest who betroths a woman with his portion of the offerings, whether he did so with offerings of the most sacred order or whether he used offerings of lesser sanctity, he has not betrothed her.,Upon hearing this, Rabbi Yehuda became angry with his students. He said to them: Didn’t I say this to you: Do not let the students of Rabbi Meir enter here into our house of study, because they are vexatious? And they do not come to study Torah, but rather they come to overwhelm me with halakhot. Rabbi Yehuda explained his objection to the statement of Rabbi Meir: This halakha is not relevant, as from where would a woman appear in the Temple courtyard? Women may not enter the area of the Temple courtyard where the priests eat the offerings of the most sacred order, so there is no reason to address an impossible scenario.,Rabbi Yosei, who was present, said: They will say: Meir died, Yehuda grew angry, and Yosei remained silent; what will become of the words of Torah? He said: In fact, this halakha is relevant; but isn’t it common for a man to accept betrothal for his daughter in the Temple courtyard? There is no need to give the betrothal item directly to the woman; it can be given to her father. And additionally, isn’t it common for a woman to designate an agent for herself to accept her betrothal in the courtyard? And furthermore: What would be the halakha if the woman pushed and entered? Since it is possible for her to do so, the halakha in such a case must be determined.,It is taught in a baraita that the Sages discussed the issue of a priest who betroths a woman with his portion of offerings of the most sacred order: Rabbi Yehuda says she is betrothed, and Rabbi Yosei says she is not betrothed. Rabbi Yoḥa says: Both of them derived their opinions from one verse, which states that the priests have a right to a portion of offerings of the most sacred order, but they explained it in different ways. The verse states: “This shall be yours of the most holy things, reserved from the fire” (Numbers 18:9). Rabbi Yehuda holds that the term “yours” indicates that the portion the priest receives is intended for you, i.e., a priest, and for all your needs, including betrothing a woman. And Rabbi Yosei holds that the verse compares the priest’s portion to the fire on the altar: Just as the portion burned on the fire is for the fire’s consumption, so too, the priest’s portion is also for consumption alone, and not for any other purpose.,Rabbi Yoḥa says:'' None | |
|
60. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Arakh • Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, Rabbi • Eliezer, Rabbi • Eliezer, Rr. • Eli‘ezer, Rabbi • Rosenthal, Eliezer Shimshon
Found in books: Janowitz (2002), Magic in the Roman World: Pagans, Jews and Christians, 22; Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 233; Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 74, 173; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 74, 173; Sigal (2007), The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew, 53
| 32b טעו לא ישלמו כל שכן שתנעול דלת בפני לווין,רבא אמר מתניתין דהכא בדיני קנסות ואידך בהודאות והלואות,רב פפא אמר אידי ואידי בהודאה והלואה כאן בדין מרומה כאן בדין שאינו מרומה,כדריש לקיש דריש לקיש רמי כתיב (ויקרא יט, טו) בצדק תשפוט עמיתך וכתיב (דברים טז, כ) צדק צדק תרדף הא כיצד כאן בדין מרומה כאן בדין שאין מרומה,רב אשי אמר מתני׳ כדשנין קראי אחד לדין וא\' לפשרה,כדתניא צדק צדק תרדף אחד לדין ואחד לפשרה כיצד שתי ספינות עוברות בנהר ופגעו זה בזה אם עוברות שתיהן שתיהן טובעות בזה אחר זה שתיהן עוברות וכן שני גמלים שהיו עולים במעלות בית חורון ופגעו זה בזה אם עלו שניהן שניהן נופלין בזה אחר זה שניהן עולין,הא כיצד טעונה ושאינה טעונה תידחה שאינה טעונה מפני טעונה קרובה ושאינה קרובה תידחה קרובה מפני שאינה קרובה היו שתיהן קרובות שתיהן רחוקות הטל פשרה ביניהן ומעלות שכר זו לזו,ת"ר צדק צדק תרדף הלך אחר ב"ד יפה אחר רבי אליעזר ללוד אחר רבן יוחנן בן זכאי לברור חיל,תנא קול ריחים בבורני שבוע הבן שבוע הבן אור הנר בברור חיל משתה שם משתה שם,ת"ר צדק צדק תרדף הלך אחר חכמים לישיבה אחר ר\' אליעזר ללוד אחר רבן יוחנן בן זכאי לברור חיל אחר רבי יהושע לפקיעין אחר רבן גמליאל ליבנא אחר רבי עקיבא לבני ברק אחר רבי מתיא לרומי אחר רבי חנניא בן תרדיון לסיכני אחר ר\' יוסי לציפורי אחר רבי יהודה בן בתירה לנציבין אחר רבי יהושע לגולה אחר רבי לבית שערים אחר חכמים ללשכת הגזית:,דיני ממונות פותחין כו\': היכי אמרינן אמר רב יהודה הכי אמרינן להו מי יימר כדקאמריתו,א"ל עולא והא חסמינן להו וליחסמו מי לא תניא רבי שמעון בן אליעזר אומר מסיעין את העדים ממקום למקום כדי שתיטרף דעתן ויחזרו בהן,מי דמי התם ממילא קא מידחו הכא קא דחינן להו בידים,אלא אמר עולא הכי אמרינן יש לך עדים להזימם א"ל רבה וכי פותחין בזכותו של זה שהיא חובתו של זה,ומי הויא חובתו והתנן אין עדים זוממין נהרגין עד שיגמר הדין,הכי אמינא אילו שתיק האי עד דמיגמר דיניה ומייתי עדים ומזים להו הויא ליה חובתו של זה אלא אמר רבה אמרינן ליה יש לך עדים להכחישן,רב כהנא אמר מדבריכם נזדכה פלוני אביי ורבא דאמרי תרוייהו אמרי\' ליה אי לא קטלת לא תדחל רב אשי אמר כל מי שיודע לו זכות יבא וילמד עליו,תניא כוותיה דאביי ורבא רבי אומר (במדבר ה, יט) אם לא שכב איש אותך ואם לא שטית וגו\'' 65b מתיב ר\' זירא יצאו עדים זוממין שאין בהן מעשה ואמאי הא ליתנהו בלב,אמר רבא שאני עדים זוממין הואיל וישנו בקול,וקול לרבי יוחנן לאו מעשה הוא והא איתמר חסמה בקול והנהיגה בקול רבי יוחנן אמר חייב ור"ל אמר פטור,רבי יוחנן אמר חייב עקימת פיו הוי מעשה ר"ל אמר פטור עקימת פיו לא הוי מעשה,אלא אמר רבא שאני עדים זוממין הואיל וישנן בראיה,ת"ר בעל אוב זה המדבר בין הפרקים ומבין אצילי ידיו ידעוני זה המניח עצם ידוע בפיו והוא מדבר מאליו,מיתיבי (ישעיהו כט, ד) והיה כאוב מארץ קולך מאי לאו דמשתעי כי אורחיה לא דסליק ויתיב בין הפרקים ומשתעי,תא שמע (שמואל א כח, יג) ותאמר האשה אל שאול אלהים ראיתי עולים מן הארץ מאי לאו דמשתעי כי אורחיה לא דיתיב בין הפרקים ומשתעי,ת"ר בעל אוב אחד המעלה בזכורו ואחד הנשאל בגולגולת מה בין זה לזה מעלה בזכורו אינו עולה כדרכו ואינו עולה בשבת נשאל בגולגולת עולה כדרכו ועולה בשבת,עולה להיכא סליק הא קמיה מנח אלא אימא עונה כדרכו ועונה בשבת,ואף שאלה זו שאל טורנוסרופוס את ר"ע אמר לו ומה יום מיומים אמר לו ומה גבר מגוברין א"ל דמרי צבי שבת נמי דמרי צבי,א"ל הכי קאמינא לך מי יימר דהאידנא שבתא אמר לו נהר סבטיון יוכיח בעל אוב יוכיח קברו של אביו יוכיח שאין מעלה עשן בשבת אמר לו ביזיתו ביישתו וקיללתו,שואל אוב היינו ודורש אל המתים,דורש למתים כדתניא (דברים יח, יא) ודורש אל המתים זה המרעיב עצמו והולך ולן בבה"ק כדי שתשרה עליו רוח טומאה,וכשהיה ר"ע מגיע למקרא זה היה בוכה ומה המרעיב עצמו כדי שתשרה עליו רוח טומאה שורה עליו רוח טומאה המרעיב עצמו כדי שתשרה עליו רוח טהרה על אחת כמה וכמה אבל מה אעשה שעונותינו גרמו לנו שנאמר (ישעיהו נט, ב) כי אם עונותיכם היו מבדילים ביניכם לבין אלהיכם,אמר רבא אי בעו צדיקי ברו עלמא שנאמר כי עונותיכם היו מבדילים וגו\',רבא ברא גברא שדריה לקמיה דר\' זירא הוה קא משתעי בהדיה ולא הוה קא מהדר ליה אמר ליה מן חבריא את הדר לעפריך,רב חנינא ורב אושעיא הוו יתבי כל מעלי שבתא ועסקי בספר יצירה ומיברו להו עיגלא תילתא ואכלי ליה,תנו רבנן מעונן ר\' שמעון אומר זה המעביר שבעה מיני זכור על העין וחכ"א זה האוחז את העינים ר"ע אומר זה המחשב עתים ושעות ואומר היום יפה לצאת למחר יפה ליקח לימודי ערבי שביעיות חיטין יפות עיקורי קטניות מהיות רעות,תנו רבנן מנחש זה האומר פתו נפלה מפיו מקלו נפלה מידו בנו קורא לו מאחריו עורב קורא לו צבי הפסיקו בדרך נחש מימינו ושועל משמאלו 67b מיתה אחת,בן עזאי אומר נאמר (שמות כב, יז) מכשפה לא תחיה ונאמר (שמות כב, יח) כל שוכב עם בהמה מות יומת סמכו ענין לו מה שוכב עם בהמה בסקילה אף מכשף בסקילה,אמר לו רבי יהודה וכי מפני שסמכו ענין לו נוציא לזה בסקילה אלא אוב וידעוני בכלל מכשפים היו ולמה יצאו להקיש עליהן ולומר לך מה אוב וידעוני בסקילה אף מכשף בסקילה,לרבי יהודה נמי ליהוו אוב וידעוני שני כתובים הבאים כאחד וכל שני כתובין הבאין כאחד אין מלמדין,אמר רבי זכריה עדא אמרה קסבר ר\' יהודה שני כתובין הבאין כאחד מלמדין,אמר רבי יוחנן למה נקרא שמן כשפים שמכחישין פמליא של מעלה:,(דברים ד, לה) אין עוד מלבדו אמר רבי חנינא אפילו לדבר כשפים,ההיא איתתא דהות קא מהדרא למשקל עפרא מתותי כרעיה דרבי חנינא אמר לה אי מסתייעת זילי עבידי אין עוד מלבדו כתיב,איני והאמר רבי יוחנן למה נקרא שמן מכשפים שמכחישין פמליא של מעלה שאני רבי חנינא דנפיש זכותיה,אמר רבי אייבו בר נגרי אמר רבי חייא בר אבא בלטיהם אלו מעשה שדים בלהטיהם אלו מעשה כשפים וכן הוא אומר (בראשית ג, כד) ואת להט החרב המתהפכת,אמר אביי דקפיד אמנא שד דלא קפיד אמנא כשפים,אמר אביי הלכות כשפים כהלכות שבת יש מהן בסקילה ויש מהן פטור אבל אסור ויש מהן מותר לכתחלה,העושה מעשה בסקילה האוחז את העינים פטור אבל אסור מותר לכתחלה כדרב חנינא ורב אושעיא כל מעלי שבתא הוו עסקי בהלכות יצירה ומיברי להו עיגלא תילתא ואכלי ליה,אמר רב אשי חזינא ליה לאבוה דקרנא דנפיץ ושדי כריכי דשיראי מנחיריה,(שמות ח, טו) ויאמרו החרטומים אל פרעה אצבע אלהים היא אמר ר\' אליעזר מיכן שאין השד יכול לבראות בריה פחות מכשעורה,רב פפא אמר האלהים אפילו כגמלא נמי לא מצי ברי האי מיכניף ליה והאי לא מיכניף ליה,א"ל רב לרבי חייא לדידי חזי לי ההוא טייעא דשקליה לספסירא וגיידיה לגמלא וטרף ליה בטבלא וקם אמר ליה לבתר הכי דם ופרתא מי הואי אלא ההיא אחיזת עינים הוה,זעירי איקלע לאלכסנדריא של מצרים זבן חמרא כי מטא לאשקוייה מיא פשר וקם גמלא דוסקניתא אמרו ליה אי לאו זעירי את לא הוה מהדרינן לך מי איכא דזבין מידי הכא ולא בדיק ליה אמיא:,ינאי איקלע לההוא אושפיזא אמר להו אשקין מיא קריבו שתיתא חזא דקא מרחשן שפוותה שדא פורתא מיניה הוו עקרבי אמר להו אנא שתאי מדידכו אתון נמי שתו מדידי אשקייה הואי חמרא רכבה סליק לשוקא אתא חברתה פשרה לה חזייה דרכיב וקאי אאיתתא בשוקא,(שמות ח, ב) ותעל הצפרדע ותכס את ארץ מצרים אמר ר\' אלעזר צפרדע אחת היתה השריצה ומלאה כל ארץ מצרים,כתנאי רבי עקיבא אומר צפרדע אחת היתה ומלאה כל ארץ מצרים אמר לו רבי אלעזר בן עזריה עקיבא מה לך אצל הגדה כלה מדברותיך ולך אצל נגעים ואהלות צפרדע אחת היתה שרקה להם והם באו:,אמר ר\' עקיבא כו\': ' None | 32b then if the judges erred they should not need to pay the party they wronged, as they can claim that they were prevented from examining the witnesses effectively. The Gemara answers: If that were to be the halakha, all the more so that this would lock the door in the face of potential borrowers. If people know that the courts are not responsible for an error in judgment, they will not be willing to lend money.,Rava says: The ruling of the mishna here, that cases of monetary law require inquiry and interrogation, is stated with regard to laws of fines, not standard cases of monetary law. And the other sources, i.e., the mishna in tractate Shevi’it and the baraita, which do not require inquiry and interrogation, are stated with regard to cases of admissions and loans, in which there is cause to relax the procedures of deliberation, as explained.,Rav Pappa says: This and that, i.e., both the mishna here and the other sources, are stated with regard to cases of an admission and a loan. The distinction between them is that the mishna here, which rules that cases of monetary law require inquiry and interrogation, is stated with regard to a possibly fraudulent trial, where the court suspects that one party is attempting to defraud the other party and have witnesses offer false testimony on his own behalf. There, in the baraita and in the mishna in tractate Shevi’it, which do not require inquiry and interrogation, the ruling is stated with regard to a trial that does not appear fraudulent.,This distinction is in accordance with the statement of Reish Lakish, as Reish Lakish raises a contradiction between two verses: It is written in one verse: “In justice shall you judge your neighbor” (Leviticus 19:15), and it is written in another verse: “Justice, justice, shall you follow” (Deuteronomy 16:21), with the repetition indicating that it is not enough to merely judge with justice. He continues: How can these texts be reconciled? Here, this latter verse is stated with regard to a possibly fraudulent trial, where the court must take extra care to judge with justice; and there, that former verse is stated with regard to a trial that does not appear fraudulent.,Rav Ashi says: The ruling of the mishna here, that cases of monetary law require inquiry and interrogation, is as we answered, i.e., in accordance with any one of the answers offered by the other amora’im. And those verses were not stated with regard to fraudulent trials; rather, one is stated with regard to judgment, in which the court must pursue justice extensively, and one is stated with regard to compromise.,As it is taught in a baraita: When the verse states: “Justice, justice, shall you follow,” one mention of “justice” is stated with regard to judgment and one is stated with regard to compromise. How so? Where there are two boats traveling on the river and they encounter each other, if both of them attempt to pass, both of them sink, as the river is not wide enough for both to pass. If they pass one after the other, both of them pass. And similarly, where there are two camels who were ascending the ascent of Beit Ḥoron, where there is a narrow steep path, and they encounter each other, if both of them attempt to ascend, both of them fall. If they ascend one after the other, both of them ascend.,How does one decide which of them should go first? If there is one boat that is laden and one boat that is not laden, the needs of the one that is not laden should be overridden due to the needs of the one that is laden. If there is one boat that is close to its destination and one boat that is not close to its destination, the needs of the one that is close should be overridden due to the needs of the one that is not close. If both of them were close to their destinations, or both of them were far from their destinations, impose a compromise between them to decide which goes first, and the owners of the boats pay a fee to one other, i.e., the owners of the first boat compensate the owner of the boat that waits, for any loss incurred.,§ The Sages taught: The verse states: “Justice, justice, shall you follow.” This teaches that one should follow the best, most prestigious, court of the generation. For example, follow after Rabbi Eliezer to Lod, after Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai to Beror Ḥayil.,The Sages taught: When the gentile authorities issued decrees outlawing observance of the mitzvot, members of Jewish communities devised clandestine ways of indicating observance of mitzvot to each other. For example: If one produces the sound of a millstone in the city called Burni, this is tantamount to announcing: Week of the son, week of the son, i.e., there will be a circumcision. If one displays the light of a lamp in the city called Beror Ḥayil, this is tantamount to announcing: There is a wedding feast there, there is a wedding feast there.,The Sages taught: The verse states: “Justice, justice, shall you follow.” This teaches that one should follow the Sages to the academy where they are found. For example, follow after Rabbi Eliezer to Lod, after Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai to Beror Ḥayil, after Rabbi Yehoshua to Peki’in, after Rabban Gamliel to Yavne, after Rabbi Akiva to Bnei Brak, after Rabbi Matya to Rome Romi, after Rabbi Ḥaya ben Teradyon to Sikhnei, after Rabbi Yosei to Tzippori, after Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira to Netzivin, after Rabbi Yehoshua to the exile gola, i.e., Babylonia, after Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi to Beit She’arim, and after the Sages in the time of the Temple to the Chamber of Hewn Stone.,§ The mishna teaches that in cases of monetary law, the court opens the deliberations either with a claim to exempt the accused, or with a claim to find him liable. In cases of capital law, the court opens the deliberations with a claim to acquit the accused, but does not open the deliberations with a claim to find him liable. The Gemara asks: How do we say this opening stage of the deliberations? In other words, with what claim does the court begin deliberating? Rav Yehuda said: We say this to the witnesses: Who says that the event occurred as you said? Perhaps you erred?,Ulla said to him: But by confronting the witnesses in this manner, we silence them. The witnesses will think that the court suspects them of lying, and they will not testify. Rav Yehuda said to him: And let them be silenced. Isn’t it taught in a baraita (Tosefta 9:1): Rabbi Shimon ben Eliezer says: In cases of capital law, the court brings the witnesses from one place to another place in order to confuse them so that they will retract their testimony if they are lying.,The Gemara rejects this argument: Are the halakhot comparable? There, where Rabbi Shimon ben Eliezer says to bring the witnesses from place to place, the witnesses are repressed by themselves, whereas here, we repress them by direct action, and that the court should not do.,Rather, Ulla says: We say this to the accused: Do you have witnesses to determine that the witnesses who testified against you are conspiring witnesses? Rabba said to him: But do we open the deliberations with a claim to acquit the accused that is to the liability of this one, i.e., the witnesses? This claim can lead to the witnesses incurring liability for their testimony.,The Gemara questions Rabba’s assumption: But is this to the liability of the witnesses? But didn’t we learn in a mishna (Makkot 5b): Conspiring witnesses are not killed for their testimony until the verdict of the one concerning whom they testified is issued? Therefore, if they will be shown to be conspiring witnesses at this early stage of the proceedings, they will not be liable.,The Gemara restates Rabba’s objection: This is what I say: If the accused would be silent until his verdict is issued and then brings witnesses and the court determines them to be conspiring witnesses, it will be found that the statement of the court is to the liability of this one, i.e., the witnesses. Rather, Rabba says: We say to the accused: Do you have witnesses to contradict them? If the first witnesses are contradicted as to the facts of the case, no one is liable.,Rav Kahana said: We say to the witnesses: Based on your statements, so-and-so is acquitted. The court issues a pro forma declaration that it is possible to find a reason to acquit based on the testimony of the witnesses, and then they begin the deliberations. Abaye and Rava both say: We say to the accused: For example, if you did not kill anyone, do not fear the consequences of these proceedings, as you will be acquitted. Rav Ashi says: The court announces: Whoever knows of a reason to acquit the accused should come and teach this reason concerning him.,The Gemara comments: It is taught in a baraita in accordance with the explanation of Abaye and Rava. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: The priest administering the sota rite to the sota says to her: “If no man has lain with you and if you have not gone astray to impurity while under your husband, you shall be free from this water of bitterness that causes the curse. But if you have gone astray while under your husband…” (Numbers 5:19–20). The priest first states the scenario in which the woman is innocent of adultery.' 65b Rabbi Zeira raises an objection to Rava’s answer, as it is stated in a baraita that one who unwittingly commits a transgression punishable by death is obligated to bring a sin-offering, excluding conspiring witnesses, who are not obligated to bring a sin-offering, as their transgressions do not involve an action. Rabbi Zeira asks: And why is a false witness’s testimony not considered a transgression that involves an action? The testimony is delivered through speech, which should be considered an action, as this is not a transgression that is committed in the heart; the witnesses are liable for what they said, and not for their intention.,Rava says: Conspiring witnesses are different, since their transgression is committed through their voice. The essence of their transgression is not speech itself but rather making themselves heard by the court. Therefore, since the projection of one’s voice does not involve action, the transgression of conspiring witnesses is considered not be to involving action.,The Gemara asks: And is projecting one’s voice not considered an action according to Rabbi Yoḥa? But wasn’t it stated that amora’im engaged in a dispute concerning the following case: If one muzzled an animal by projecting his voice, by berating it whenever it tried to eat, has he transgressed the prohibition of: “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the corn” (Deuteronomy 25:4)? And similarly, if one led different species to work together by projecting his voice, without performing any action, has he transgressed the prohibition of: “You shall not plow with an ox and a donkey together” (Deuteronomy 22:10)? Rabbi Yoḥa says he is liable, and Reish Lakish says he is exempt.,The Gemara explains the reasoning behind their opinions: Rabbi Yoḥa says he is liable, as he maintains that the twisting of one’s mouth to speak is considered an action, whereas Reish Lakish says he is exempt, because he holds that that the twisting of one’s mouth to speak is not considered an action. Evidently, Rabbi Yoḥa holds that a transgression one commits by projecting his voice is considered to involve an action.,Rather, Rava says there is a different answer to Rabbi Zeira’s objection: Conspiring witnesses are different, since they are rendered liable mainly through sight, i.e., the important part of their testimony is what they saw, which is not considered an action.,§ The Sages taught: A necromancer is one who causes the voice of the dead to be heard speaking from between his joints or from his armpit. A sorcerer yideoni is one who places a bone of an animal called a yadua in his mouth, and the bone speaks on its own.,The Gemara raises an objection from the verse: “And your voice shall be as a ghost out of the ground” (Isaiah 29:4). What, does the dead person not speak from the grave on his own? The Gemara answers: No, this is not so, as the dead person rises by sorcery and sits between the joints of the necromancer and speaks.,The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a proof from the statement of the necromancer to King Saul: “And the woman said to Saul, I see a godlike being coming up out of the earth” (I\xa0Samuel 28:13). What, does the verse not mean to say that the dead person spoke on his own? The Gemara refutes this proof: No, this is not so, as the dead person sits between the joints of the necromancer and speaks.,The Sages taught: The category of a necromancer includes both one who raises the dead with his zekhur, which is a form of sorcery, and one who inquires about the future from a skull begulgolet. What is the difference between this type of necromancer and that type of necromancer? When one raises the dead with his zekhur, the dead does not rise in its usual manner, but appears upside-down, and it does not rise on Shabbat. By contrast, when one inquires about the future from a skull, the dead rises in its usual manner, and it rises oleh even on Shabbat.,The Gemara asks with regard to the wording of the last statement: Rises? To where does it rise? Isn’t the skull lying before him? Rather, say as follows: The dead answers in its usual manner, and it answers ve’oneh even on Shabbat.,With regard to the statement that the dead do not rise on Shabbat, the Gemara relates: The wicked Turnus Rufus, the Roman governor of Judea, asked this question of Rabbi Akiva as well. Turnus Rufus said to him: And what makes this day, Shabbat, different from other days? Rabbi Akiva said to him: And what makes this man, referring to his interlocutor, more distinguished than other men? Turnus Rufus said to him: I am more distinguished because my master the emperor wants it that way. Rabbi Akiva said to him: Shabbat too is unique because my Master wants it that way, as he has sanctified that day.,Turnus Rufus said to him: This is what I mean to say to you: Who is to say that now is Shabbat? Perhaps a different day of the week is Shabbat. Rabbi Akiva said to him: The Sabbatyon River can prove that today is Shabbat, as it is calm only on Shabbat. A necromancer can also prove this, as the dead do not rise on Shabbat. The grave of his father, referring to Turnus Rufus’s father, can also prove this, as it does not emit smoke on Shabbat, although smoke rises from it all week, as during the week he is being punished in Gehenna. Turnus Rufus said to him: You have demeaned my father, you have publicly shamed him, and you have cursed him by saying that he is being punished in Gehenna.,§ The Gemara asks: Isn’t one who inquires about the future from a necromancer the same as what is described in the verse: “Or directs inquiries to the dead” (Deuteronomy 18:11)? Why are they mentioned separately in the verse?,The Gemara answers: One who directs inquiries to the dead em-ploys a different method to contact the dead, as it is taught in a baraita: “Or directs inquiries to the dead”; this is one who starves himself and goes and sleeps overnight in a graveyard so that a spirit of impurity should settle upon him, and he can listen to what the dead are saying.,And when Rabbi Akiva would arrive at this verse he would weep and say: If one who starves himself so that a spirit of impurity will settle upon him succeeds in doing so, and a spirit of impurity settles upon him, all the more so one who starves himself so that a spirit of purity will settle upon him should be successful, and a spirit of purity should settle upon him. But what can I do, as our iniquities have caused us not to merit the spirit of sanctity and purity, as it is stated: “But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid His face from you, that He will not hear” (Isaiah 59:2).,Rava says: If the righteous wish to do so, they can create a world, as it is stated: “But your iniquities have separated between you and your God.” In other words, there is no distinction between God and a righteous person who has no sins, and just as God created the world, so can the righteous.,Indeed, Rava created a man, a golem, using forces of sanctity. Rava sent his creation before Rabbi Zeira. Rabbi Zeira would speak to him but he would not reply. Rabbi Zeira said to him: You were created by one of the members of the group, one of the Sages. Return to your dust.,The Gemara relates another fact substantiating the statement that the righteous could create a world if they so desired: Rav Ḥanina and Rav Oshaya would sit every Shabbat eve and engage in the study of Sefer Yetzira, and a third-born calf igla tilta would be created for them, and they would eat it in honor of Shabbat.,§ The Sages taught: What is the definition of the soothsayer mentioned in the verse: “There shall not be found among you…a soothsayer” (Deuteronomy 18:10)? Rabbi Shimon says: This is one who applies seven types of semen zekhur to one’s eye in order to perform sorcery. And the Rabbis say: This is one who deceives the eyes, as though he is performing sorcery. Rabbi Akiva says: This is one who calculates the fortune of times and hours, and says, for example: Today is a propitious day for going away on a journey; tomorrow is propitious for purchasing property successfully. Or he says that on the eve of the Sabbatical Years, the wheat harvest is generally good; uprooting legumes rather than cutting them from above the ground prevents them from going bad.,The Sages taught: The enchanter mentioned in the verse (Deuteronomy 18:10) is one who relies on superstitious signs, e.g., one who says: If one’s bread fell from his mouth, that is a bad sign for him; or: If one’s staff fell from his hand, it is a bad sign; or: If one’s son calls him from behind, it is a sign that he should return from his journey; or: If a raven calls to him, or if a deer blocks him on the way, or if a snake is to his right, or if a fox is to his left, all of these are bad signs. An enchanter is one who relies on these as bad signs and consequently changes his course of action. 67b one type of death penalty, namely, decapitation. Since that is the only type of capital punishment that applies to gentiles, it cannot be derived through a verbal analogy that the same type applies to a Jewish sorceror.,The baraita continues: Ben Azzai says that it is stated: “You shall not allow a witch to live” (Exodus 22:17), and it is stated in the following verse: “Whoever lies with an animal shall be put to death” (Exodus 22:18). The fact that the Torah juxtaposes this matter to that matter is to teach that just as one who lies with an animal is executed by stoning (see Leviticus, chapter 20), so too, a warlock is executed by stoning.,With regard to this derivation, Rabbi Yehuda said to him: And because the Torah juxtaposes this matter with that matter, shall we take this person out to be stoned? Should he be sentenced to the most severe type of capital punishment on that basis? Rather, the source is as follows: A necromancer and a sorcerer were included in the general category of warlocks, and why were they singled out from the rest, with their prohibition and punishment stated independently? This was done in order to draw an analogy to them and say to you: Just as a necromancer and a sorcerer are executed by stoning, so too, a warlock is executed by stoning.,The Gemara asks: According to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda as well, let the punishment with regard to a necromancer and a sorcerer be considered two verses that come as one, i.e., that teach the same matter, and therefore the halakha of other cases cannot be derived from it, according to the principle that any two verses that come as one do not teach about other cases. In other words, if a halakha is taught with regard to two individual cases in the Torah, the understanding is that this halakha applies only to those cases. Had this halakha applied to all other relevant cases as well, it would not have been necessary for the Torah to teach it twice. The fact that two cases are mentioned indicates that they are the exceptions rather than the rule.,Rabbi Zekharya says: This means that Rabbi Yehuda holds that two verses that come as one do teach about other cases.,§ Rabbi Yoḥa says: Why is sorcery called keshafim? Because it is an acronym for: Contradicts the heavenly entourage shemakhḥishin pamalia shel mala. Sorcery appears to contradict the laws of nature established by God.,The verse states: “To you it was shown, so that you should know that the Lord is God; there is none else besides Him” (Deuteronomy 4:35). Rabbi Ḥanina says: This is true even with regard to a matter of sorcery; sorcery is ineffective against a righteous person.,The Gemara relates: There was a certain woman who was attempting to take dust from under the feet of Rabbi Ḥanina in order to perform sorcery on him and harm him. Rabbi Ḥanina said to her: If you succeed, go and do it. I am not concerned about it, as it is written: “There is none else besides Him.”,The Gemara asks: Is that so? But doesn’t Rabbi Yoḥa say: Why are sorcerers called mekhashefim? Because it is an acronym for: Contradicts the heavenly entourage. This indicates that one should be wary of sorcery. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Ḥanina is different, as his merit is great, and sorcery certainly has no effect on such a righteous person.,Rabbi Aivu bar Nagri says that Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba says that in the verse: “And the magicians of Egypt did in that manner with their secret arts belateihem” (Exodus 7:22), these words are describing acts of employing demons, which are invisible, and their actions are therefore hidden balat. With regard to the similar term “belahateihem” (Exodus 7:11), these are acts of sorcery, which sorcerers perform themselves, without using demons. And likewise it says: “And the flaming lahat sword that turned every way” (Genesis 3:24), referring to a sword that revolves by itself.,Abaye says: A sorcerer who is particular about using a certain utensil for his sorcery is employing a demon; one who is not particular about using a certain utensil is performing an act of sorcery.,Abaye says: The halakhot of sorcery are like the halakhot of Shabbat, in that their actions can be divided into three categories: There are some of them for which one is liable to be executed by stoning, and there are some of them for which one is exempt from punishment by Torah law but they are prohibited by rabbinic law, and there are some of them that are permitted ab initio.,Abaye elaborates: One who performs a real act of sorcery is liable to be executed by stoning. One who deceives the eyes is exempt from punishment, but it is prohibited for him to do so. What is permitted ab initio is to act like Rav Ḥanina and Rav Oshaya: Every Shabbat eve they would engage in the study of the halakhot of creation, and a third-born calf would be created for them, and they would eat it in honor of Shabbat.,Rav Ashi said: I saw Karna’s father perform a magic trick in which he would blow his nose and cast rolls of silk from his nostrils by deceiving the eye.,With regard to the verse: “And the magicians said to Pharaoh: This is the finger of God” (Exodus 8:15), Rabbi Eliezer says: It is derived from here that a demon cannot create an entity smaller than the size of a barley grain. Consequently, the magicians were not capable of duplicating the plague of lice, and they realized that this was not an act of sorcery but was performed by God.,Rav Pappa said: By God! They cannot create even an entity as large as a camel. They do not create anything. Rather, they can gather these large animals, leading them from one place to another, but they cannot gather those small animals.,Rav said to Rabbi Ḥiyya: I myself saw a certain Arab who took a sword and sliced a camel and then beat a drum betavla, and the camel arose from the dead. Rabbi Ḥiyya said to him: Was there blood and excretion afterward in that place, which flowed from the camel when it was sliced? Rather, since there was none, that was clearly a deception of the eyes and not sorcery.,The Gemara relates: Ze’eiri happened to come to Alexandria of Egypt. He bought a donkey. When he was about to give it water to drink the magic thawed when the donkey touched the water and it was revealed that it was not a donkey, and it turned into the plank of a bridge. The ones who sold it to him said to him: If you were not Ze’eiri, a distinguished person, we would not refund you the money for the donkey. Is there anyone who buys an item here and does not examine it first with water? Since sorcery was widespread there, anyone who bought an item examined it in order to find out if it was affected by sorcery, and if one did not examine an acquired item by exposing it to water and it turned out to be under a spell, he suffered the loss.,The Gemara relates: A man named Yannai arrived at a certain inn. He said to the innkeepers: Give me water to drink. They brought him flour mixed with water. He saw that the lips of the innkeeper woman were moving, and he cast a bit of the drink to the ground, and it turned into scorpions, and he understood that the innkeepers performed sorcery on the drink. Yannai said to them: I drank from yours; you too drink from mine, and he also performed sorcery on the drink. He gave it to her to drink and she turned into a donkey. He rode upon her and went to the marketplace. Her friend came and released her from the sorcery, and people saw him riding on a woman in the marketplace.,It is stated with regard to the plagues of Egypt: “And the frog came up and covered the land of Egypt” (Exodus 8:2). Noting that the term “the frog” is written in the singular, Rabbi Elazar says: At first it was one frog; it spawned and filled the entire land of Egypt with frogs.,The Gemara comments: This matter is subject to a dispute between tanna’im: Rabbi Akiva says: It was one frog, and it spawned and filled the entire land of Egypt with frogs. Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya said to him: Akiva, what are you doing occupying yourself with the study of aggada? This is not your field of expertise. Take your statements to the tractates of Nega’im and Oholot. In other words, it is preferable that you teach the halakhot of the impurity of leprosy and the impurity imparted in a tent, which are among the most difficult areas of halakha and are within your field of expertise. Rather, the verse is to be understood as follows: It was one frog; it whistled to the other frogs, and they all came after it.,§ In the mishna, Rabbi Akiva says in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua that two people can each gather cucumbers by sorcery, one of whom is exempt, as he merely deceives the eyes, and one of whom is liable, as he performs real sorcery. ' None |
|
61. Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer b. Arakh • Eliezer ben Hyrcanus • Eliezer ben Ya’akov (Rabbi) • Eliezer ben Yossi Haglili • Eliezer, R., and violence • R. Eliezer Shammaite • Rosenthal, Eliezer Shimshon • Waldenberg, Eliezer Judah
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 98; Balberg (2023), Fractured Tablets: Forgetfulness and Fallibility in Late Ancient Rabbinic Culture, 192; Kosman (2012), Gender and Dialogue in the Rabbinic Prism, 198; Lavee (2017), The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity, 143; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 181; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 145; Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 74; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 74; Sigal (2007), The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew, 54; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 428
| 31a שהמרו זה את זה אמרו כל מי שילך ויקניט את הלל יטול ד\' מאות זוז אמר אחד מהם אני אקניטנו אותו היום ע"ש היה והלל חפף את ראשו הלך ועבר על פתח ביתו אמר מי כאן הלל מי כאן הלל נתעטף ויצא לקראתו אמר לו בני מה אתה מבקש א"ל שאלה יש לי לשאול א"ל שאל בני שאל מפני מה ראשיהן של בבליים סגלגלות א"ל בני שאלה גדולה שאלת מפני שאין להם חיות פקחות,הלך והמתין שעה אחת חזר ואמר מי כאן הלל מי כאן הלל נתעטף ויצא לקראתו אמר לו בני מה אתה מבקש א"ל שאלה יש לי לשאול א"ל שאל בני שאל מפני מה עיניהן של תרמודיין תרוטות אמר לו בני שאלה גדולה שאלת מפני שדרין בין החולות,הלך והמתין שעה אחת חזר ואמר מי כאן הלל מי כאן הלל נתעטף ויצא לקראתו א"ל בני מה אתה מבקש א"ל שאלה יש לי לשאול א"ל שאל בני שאל מפני מה רגליהם של אפרקיים רחבות א"ל בני שאלה גדולה שאלת מפני שדרין בין בצעי המים,אמר לו שאלות הרבה יש לי לשאול ומתירא אני שמא תכעוס נתעטף וישב לפניו א"ל כל שאלות שיש לך לשאול שאל א"ל אתה הוא הלל שקורין אותך נשיא ישראל א"ל הן א"ל אם אתה הוא לא ירבו כמותך בישראל א"ל בני מפני מה א"ל מפני שאבדתי על ידך ד\' מאות זוז א"ל הוי זהיר ברוחך כדי הוא הלל שתאבד על ידו ד\' מאות זוז וד\' מאות זוז והלל לא יקפיד:,ת"ר מעשה בנכרי אחד שבא לפני שמאי אמר לו כמה תורות יש לכם אמר לו שתים תורה שבכתב ותורה שבעל פה א"ל שבכתב אני מאמינך ושבעל פה איני מאמינך גיירני ע"מ שתלמדני תורה שבכתב גער בו והוציאו בנזיפה בא לפני הלל גייריה יומא קמא א"ל א"ב ג"ד למחר אפיך ליה א"ל והא אתמול לא אמרת לי הכי א"ל לאו עלי דידי קא סמכת דעל פה נמי סמוך עלי:,שוב מעשה בנכרי אחד שבא לפני שמאי א"ל גיירני ע"מ שתלמדני כל התורה כולה כשאני עומד על רגל אחת דחפו באמת הבנין שבידו בא לפני הלל גייריה אמר לו דעלך סני לחברך לא תעביד זו היא כל התורה כולה ואידך פירושה הוא זיל גמור.,שוב מעשה בנכרי אחד שהיה עובר אחורי בית המדרש ושמע קול סופר שהיה אומר (שמות כח, ד) ואלה הבגדים אשר יעשו חושן ואפוד אמר הללו למי אמרו לו לכהן גדול אמר אותו נכרי בעצמו אלך ואתגייר בשביל שישימוני כהן גדול בא לפני שמאי אמר ליה גיירני על מנת שתשימני כהן גדול דחפו באמת הבנין שבידו בא לפני הלל גייריה,א"ל כלום מעמידין מלך אלא מי שיודע טכסיסי מלכות לך למוד טכסיסי מלכות הלך וקרא כיון שהגיע (במדבר א, נא) והזר הקרב יומת אמר ליה מקרא זה על מי נאמר א"ל אפי\' על דוד מלך ישראל נשא אותו גר קל וחומר בעצמו ומה ישראל שנקראו בנים למקום ומתוך אהבה שאהבם קרא להם (שמות ד, כב) בני בכורי ישראל כתיב עליהם והזר הקרב יומת גר הקל שבא במקלו ובתרמילו על אחת כמה וכמה,בא לפני שמאי א"ל כלום ראוי אני להיות כהן גדול והלא כתיב בתורה והזר הקרב יומת בא לפני הלל א"ל ענוותן הלל ינוחו לך ברכות על ראשך שהקרבתני תחת כנפי השכינה לימים נזדווגו שלשתן למקום אחד אמרו קפדנותו של שמאי בקשה לטורדנו מן העולם ענוותנותו של הלל קרבנו תחת כנפי השכינה:,אמר ר"ל מאי דכתיב (ישעיהו לג, ו) והיה אמונת עתיך חוסן ישועות חכמת ודעת וגו\' אמונת זה סדר זרעים עתיך זה סדר מועד חוסן זה סדר נשים ישועות זה סדר נזיקין חכמת זה סדר קדשים ודעת זה סדר טהרות ואפ"ה (ישעיהו לג, ו) יראת ה\' היא אוצרו,אמר רבא בשעה שמכניסין אדם לדין אומרים לו נשאת ונתת באמונה קבעת עתים לתורה עסקת בפו"ר צפית לישועה פלפלת בחכמה הבנת דבר מתוך דבר ואפ"ה אי יראת ה\' היא אוצרו אין אי לא לא משל לאדם שאמר לשלוחו העלה לי כור חיטין לעלייה הלך והעלה לו א"ל עירבת לי בהן קב חומטון א"ל לאו א"ל מוטב אם לא העליתה,תנא דבי ר"י מערב אדם קב חומטון בכור של תבואה ואינו חושש:,אמר רבה בר רב הונא כל אדם שיש בו תורה ואין בו' 152a ושל בית הכסא רעות של סם ושל שחוק ושל פירות יפות,(קהלת יב, ג) ביום שיזועו שומרי הבית והתעותו וגו\' ביום שיזועו שומרי הבית אלו הכסלים והצלעות והתעותו אנשי החיל אלו שוקים ובטלו הטוחנות אלו שינים וחשכו הרואות בארובות אלו עינים,א"ל קיסר לר\' יהושע בן חנניה מ"ט לא אתית לבי אבידן א"ל טור תלג סחרוני גלידין כלבוהי לא נבחין טחנוהי לא טוחנין בי רב אמרי אדלא אבידנא בחישנא,תניא רבי יוסי בר קיסמא אומר טבא תרי מתלת ווי לה לחדא דאזלא ולא אתיא מאי היא א"ר חסדא ינקותא כי אתא רב דימי אמר ינקותא כלילא דוורדא סבותא כלילא דחילפא תנא משמיה דרבי מאיר דוק בככי ותשכח בניגרי שנאמר (ירמיהו מד, יז) ונשבע לחם ונהיה טובים ורעה לא ראינו א"ל שמואל לרב יהודה שיננא שרי שקיך ועייל לחמך עד ארבעין שנין מיכלא מעלי מכאן ואילך משתי מעלי,א"ל ההוא גוזאה לר\' יהושע בן קרחה מהכא לקרחינא כמה הוי א"ל כמהכא לגוזניא א"ל צדוקי ברחא קרחא בארבעה אמר ליה עיקרא שליפא בתמניא,חזייה דלא סיים מסאניה א"ל דעל סוס מלך דעל חמור בן חורין ודמנעלי בריגלוהי בר איניש דלא הא ולא הא דחפיר וקביר טב מיניה א"ל גוזא גוזא תלת אמרת לי תלת שמעת הדרת פנים זקן שמחת לב אשה (תהלים קכז, ג) נחלת ה\' בנים ברוך המקום שמנעך מכולם א"ל קרחא מצויינא אמר ליה עיקרא שליפא תוכחה,א"ל רבי לר\' שמעון בן חלפתא מפני מה לא הקבלנו פניך ברגל כדרך שהקבילו אבותי לאבותיך א"ל סלעים נעשו גבוהים קרובים נעשו רחוקים משתים נעשו שלש משים שלום בבית בטל:,(קהלת יב, ד) וסגרו דלתים בשוק וגו\' אלו נקביו של אדם בשפל קול הטחנה בשביל קורקבן שאינו טוחן ויקום לקול הצפור שאפילו צפור מנערתו משנתו וישחו כל בנות השיר שאפילו (קול שירים ושירות) דומות עליו כשוחה,ואף ברזילי הגלעדי אמר לדוד (שמואל ב יט, לו) בן שמנים שנה אנכי היום האדע בין טוב לרע מכאן שדעותן של זקנים משתנות אם יטעם עבדך את אשר אוכל ואת אשר אשתה מכאן ששפתותיהן של זקנים מתרפטות אם אשמע עוד בקול שרים ושרות מכאן שאזניהם של זקנים מתכבדות,אמר רב ברזילי הגלעדי שקרא הוה דההיא אמתא דהויא בי רבי בת תשעין ותרתין שנין והות טעמא קידרא רבא אמר ברזילי הגלעדי שטוף בזמה הוה וכל השטוף בזמה זקנה קופצת עליו תניא רבי ישמעאל ברבי יוסי אומר תלמידי חכמים כל זמן שמזקינין חכמה נתוספת בהם שנאמר (איוב יב, יב) בישישים חכמה ואורך ימים תבונה ועמי הארץ כל זמן שמזקינין טפשות נתוספת בהן שנאמר (איוב יב, כ) מסיר שפה לנאמנים וטעם זקנים יקח,גם מגבוה ייראו שאפילו גבשושית קטנה דומה עליו כהרי הרים וחתחתים בדרך בשעה שמהלך בדרך נעשו לו תוהים וינאץ השקד זו קליבוסת ויסתבל החגב אלו עגבות ותפר האביונה זו חמדה,רב כהנא הוה פסיק סידרא קמיה דרב כי מטא להאי קרא נגיד ואתנח אמר ש"מ בטל ליה חמדיה דרב אמר רב כהנא מאי דכתיב (תהלים לג, ט) כי הוא אמר ויהי זו אשה הוא צוה ויעמוד אלו בנים תנא אשה חמת מלא צואה ופיה מלא דם והכל רצין אחריה,(קהלת יב, ה) כי הולך האדם אל בית עולמו א"ר יצחק מלמד שכל צדיק וצדיק נותנין לו מדור לפי כבודו משל למלך שנכנס הוא ועבדיו לעיר כשהן נכנסין כולן בשער אחד נכנסין כשהן לנין כל אחד ואחד נותנין לו מדור לפי כבודו,ואמר רבי יצחק מאי דכתיב (קהלת יא, י) כי הילדות והשחרות הבל דברים שאדם עושה בילדותו משחירים פניו לעת זקנתו,ואמר רבי יצחק קשה רימה למת כמחט בבשר החי שנאמר (איוב יד, כב) אך בשרו עליו יכאב אמר רב חסדא נפשו של אדם מתאבלת עליו כל שבעה שנא\' ונפשו עליו תאבל וכתיב (בראשית נ, י) ויעש לאביו אבל שבעת ימים,אמר רב יהודה מת שאין לו מנחמין הולכין י\' בני אדם ויושבין במקומו ההוא דשכיב בשבבותיה דרב יהודה לא היו לו מנחמין ' None | 31a who wagered with each other and said: Anyone who will go and aggravate Hillel to the point that he reprimands him, will take four-hundred zuz. One of them said: I will aggravate him. That day that he chose to bother Hillel was Shabbat eve, and Hillel was washing the hair on his head. He went and passed the entrance to Hillel’s house and in a demeaning manner said: Who here is Hillel, who here is Hillel? Hillel wrapped himself in a dignified garment and went out to greet him. He said to him: My son, what do you seek? He said to him: I have a question to ask. Hillel said to him: Ask, my son, ask. The man asked him: Why are the heads of Babylonians oval? He was alluding to and attempting to insult Hillel, who was Babylonian. He said to him: My son, you have asked a significant question. The reason is because they do not have clever midwives. They do not know how to shape the child’s head at birth.,That man went and waited one hour, a short while, returned to look for Hillel, and said: Who here is Hillel, who here is Hillel? Again, Hillel wrapped himself and went out to greet him. Hillel said to him: My son, what do you seek? The man said to him: I have a question to ask. He said to him: Ask, my son, ask. The man asked: Why are the eyes of the residents of Tadmor bleary terutot? Hillel said to him: My son, you have asked a significant question. The reason is because they live among the sands and the sand gets into their eyes.,Once again the man went, waited one hour, returned, and said: Who here is Hillel, who here is Hillel? Again, he, Hillel, wrapped himself and went out to greet him. He said to him: My son, what do you seek? He said to him: I have a question to ask. He said to him: Ask, my son, ask. The man asked: Why do Africans have wide feet? Hillel said to him: You have asked a significant question. The reason is because they live in marshlands and their feet widened to enable them to walk through those swampy areas.,That man said to him: I have many more questions to ask, but I am afraid lest you get angry. Hillel wrapped himself and sat before him, and he said to him: All of the questions that you have to ask, ask them. The man got angry and said to him: Are you Hillel whom they call the Nasi of Israel? He said to him: Yes. He said to him: If it is you, then may there not be many like you in Israel. Hillel said to him: My son, for what reason do you say this? The man said to him: Because I lost four hundred zuz because of you. Hillel said to him: Be vigilant of your spirit and avoid situations of this sort. Hillel is worthy of having you lose four hundred zuz and another four hundred zuz on his account, and Hillel will not get upset.,The Sages taught: There was an incident involving one gentile who came before Shammai. The gentile said to Shammai: How many Torahs do you have? He said to him: Two, the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. The gentile said to him: With regard to the Written Torah, I believe you, but with regard to the Oral Torah, I do not believe you. Convert me on condition that you will teach me only the Written Torah. Shammai scolded him and cast him out with reprimand. The same gentile came before Hillel, who converted him and began teaching him Torah. On the first day, he showed him the letters of the alphabet and said to him: Alef, bet, gimmel, dalet. The next day he reversed the order of the letters and told him that an alef is a tav and so on. The convert said to him: But yesterday you did not tell me that. Hillel said to him: You see that it is impossible to learn what is written without relying on an oral tradition. Didn’t you rely on me? Therefore, you should also rely on me with regard to the matter of the Oral Torah, and accept the interpretations that it contains.,There was another incident involving one gentile who came before Shammai and said to Shammai: Convert me on condition that you teach me the entire Torah while I am standing on one foot. Shammai pushed him away with the builder’s cubit in his hand. This was a common measuring stick and Shammai was a builder by trade. The same gentile came before Hillel. He converted him and said to him: That which is hateful to you do not do to another; that is the entire Torah, and the rest is its interpretation. Go study.,There was another incident involving one gentile who was passing behind the study hall and heard the voice of a teacher who was teaching Torah to his students and saying the verse: “And these are the garments which they shall make: A breastplate, and an efod, and a robe, and a tunic of checkered work, a mitre, and a girdle” (Exodus 28:4). The gentile said: These garments, for whom are they designated? The students said to him: For the High Priest. The gentile said to himself: I will go and convert so that they will install me as High Priest. He came before Shammai and said to him: Convert me on condition that you install me as High Priest. Shammai pushed him with the builder’s cubit in his hand. He came before Hillel; he converted him.,Hillel said to him, to the convert: Is it not the way of the world that only one who knows the protocols takhsisei of royalty is appointed king? Go and learn the royal protocols by engaging in Torah study. He went and read the Bible. When he reached the verse which says: “And the common man that draws near shall be put to death” (Numbers 1:51), the convert said to Hillel: With regard to whom is the verse speaking? Hillel said to him: Even with regard to David, king of Israel. The convert reasoned an a fortiori inference himself: If the Jewish people are called God’s children, and due to the love that God loved them he called them: “Israel is My son, My firstborn” (Exodus 4:22), and nevertheless it is written about them: And the common man that draws near shall be put to death; a mere convert who came without merit, with nothing more than his staff and traveling bag, all the more so that this applies to him, as well.,The convert came before Shammai and told him that he retracts his demand to appoint him High Priest, saying: Am I at all worthy to be High Priest? Is it not written in the Torah: And the common man that draws near shall be put to death? He came before Hillel and said to him: Hillel the patient, may blessings rest upon your head as you brought me under the wings of the Divine Presence. The Gemara relates: Eventually, the three converts gathered together in one place, and they said: Shammai’s impatience sought to drive us from the world; Hillel’s patience brought us beneath the wings of the Divine Presence.,The Gemara continues discussing the conduct of the Sages, citing that Reish Lakish said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And the faith of your times shall be a strength of salvation, wisdom, and knowledge, the fear of the Lord is his treasure” (Isaiah 33:6)? Faith; that is the order of Zera’im, Seeds, in the Mishna, because a person has faith in God and plants his seeds (Jerusalem Talmud). Your times; that is the order of Moed, Festival, which deals with the various occasions and Festivals that occur throughout the year. Strength; that is the order of Nashim, Women. Salvations; that is the order of Nezikin, Damages, as one who is being pursued is rescued from the hands of his pursuer. Wisdom; that is the order of Kodashim, Consecrated Items. And knowledge; that is the order of Teharot, Purity, which is particularly difficult to master. And even if a person studies and masters all of these, “the fear of the Lord is his treasure,” it is preeminent.,With regard to the same verse, Rava said: After departing from this world, when a person is brought to judgment for the life he lived in this world, they say to him in the order of that verse: Did you conduct business faithfully? Did you designate times for Torah study? Did you engage in procreation? Did you await salvation? Did you engage in the dialectics of wisdom or understand one matter from another? And, nevertheless, beyond all these, if the fear of the Lord is his treasure, yes, he is worthy, and if not, no, none of these accomplishments have any value. There is a parable that illustrates this. A person who said to his emissary: Bring a kor of wheat up to the attic for me to store there. The messenger went and brought it up for him. He said to the emissary: Did you mix a kav of ḥomton, a preservative to keep away worms, into it for me? He said to him: No. He said to him: If so, it would have been preferable had you not brought it up. of what use is worm-infested wheat? Likewise, Torah and mitzvot without the fear of God are of no value.,On a related note, the Gemara cites a halakha that was taught in the school of Rabbi Yishmael: A person who sells wheat may, ab initio, mix a kav of ḥomton into a kor of grain and need not be concerned that by selling it all at the price of grain he will be guilty of theft, as the kav of ḥomton is essential for the preservation of the wheat.,Rabba bar Rav Huna said: Any person who has Torah in him but does not have' 152a and from pain in the bathroom are bad for the eyes. Tears that come from medicinal drugs, and from laughter, and from sharp produce are good for the eyes.,The Gemara continues to interpret verses from the Book of Ecclesiastes. The verse states: “On the day when the keepers of the house shall tremble, and the strong men shall bow themselves, and the grinders cease because they are few, and those that look out the windows shall be dimmed” (Ecclesiastes 12:3). “On the day when the keepers of the house shall tremble”; this is referring to the flanks and ribs that surround and protect a person’s internal organs. “And the strong men shall bow themselves”; these are the thighs, which support a person’s strength. “And the grinders cease”; these are the teeth, which decay and fall out. “And those that look out the windows shall be dimmed”; these are the eyes, which become dimmer.,The Gemara relates: The Roman emperor said to Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥaya: What is the reason you did not come to the House of Avidan? This was a place in which dialogues and debates were conducted. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥaya said to him enigmatically: The snowy mountain is surrounded with ice, meaning that his hair had turned white; his dogs do not bark, meaning that his voice could no longer be heard; his grinders have ceased grinding, meaning that his teeth had fallen out. In the school of Rav they say that he added: I am searching for that which I have not lost, because an old man walks bent over and appears to be searching for something.,It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei bar Kisma says: The two feet of one’s youth are better than the three of old age, when one walks with a cane. Woe to the one who goes and does not come back. What is this referring to? Rav Ḥisda said: Youth. Similarly, when Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia he said: Youth is a crown of roses; old age is a crown of thorns. The Sage taught in the name of Rabbi Meir: Grind food with your teeth and you will find in your feet the strength to carry your body, as it is stated: “For we were sated with our bread and were well, and saw no evil” (Jeremiah 44:17). Shmuel said to Rav Yehuda: Large-toothed one; untie your sack, that is, your mouth, and insert your food. Until the age of forty years, food is beneficial; from here and on, drinking is beneficial.,Having quoted some aphorisms of the Sages, the Gemara relates the following conversation: A certain eunuch who was an apostate said the following to Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa as a provocation: How far is it from here to Karḥina? The provocateur’s intention was to hint to the fact that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa was bald kere’aḥ. He said to him: It is the same as the distance from here to the mountains of Gozen, hinting at the eunuch’s castration, which in Aramaic is goza (Rav Ya’akov Emden). The apostate said to him: A bald buck is sold for four dinar. He said to him: A castrated goat ikkara shelifa is sold for eight.,The apostate saw that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa was not wearing shoes. He said to him: One who rides on a horse is a king. One who rides on a donkey is a free man. And one who wears shoes is at least a human being. One who does neither this nor that, someone who is buried in the earth is better than him. He said to him: Eunuch, eunuch, you said to me three things, and now hear three things: The glory of a face is the beard, the joy of the heart is a wife, and “the portion of the Lord is children” (Psalms 127:3); blessed is the Omnipresent who has denied you all of them, for a eunuch does not have a beard, a wife or children. He said to him: Does a bald man quarrel? He said to him: Does a castrated male goat speak words of rebuke?,The Gemara again addresses old age: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to Rabbi Shimon ben Ḥalafta: For what reason did we not greet you during the Festival the way that my fathers greeted your fathers? This was a polite way of asking Rabbi Shimon ben Ḥalafta why he had not come to visit Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. He said to him: Because I have grown old, and the rocks on the road have become tall, and destinations that are near have become far away, and my two feet have been made into three with the addition of a cane, and that which brings peace to the house, namely, the sexual drive which motivates a couple to make peace, is no more.,The Gemara continues to expound the verses of the final chapter of Ecclesiastes. The verse states: “And the doors shall be shut in the marketplace when the sound of the grinding is low, and one shall start up at the voice of a bird, and all the daughters of music shall be brought low” (Ecclesiastes 12:4). The Sages expounded: “And the doors shall be shut in the marketplace”; these are a person’s orifices, which cease to function normally. The interpretation continues: “When the sound of the grinding is low”; because the stomach is not grinding and digesting one’s food. “And one shall start up at the voice of a bird”; because one is unable to sleep deeply such that even a bird will wake him from his sleep. “And all the daughters of music shall be brought low”; this means that even the voices of male and female singers will seem to him like mere conversation, and he will no longer derive pleasure from song.,And even Barzilai the Gileadite said to David: “Today I am eighty years old, can I discern between good and bad? Can your servant taste what I eat or what I drink? Can I hear any more the voice of singing men and singing women?” (II Samuel 19:36). The Gemara explains: “Can I discern between good and bad”; from here we derive that the minds of the elderly change and they no longer discern properly. “Can your servant taste what I eat or what I drink”; from here we derive that the lips of the elderly crack and wither. “Can I hear any more the voice of singing men and singing women”; from here we derive that the ears of the elderly become heavy.,Rav said: Barzilai the Gileadite was a liar and he merely wanted to avoid joining David upon his return to Jerusalem, for an eighty-year old man is not usually this debilitated. For there was a particular maidservant in the house of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi who was ninety-two years old, and she would taste the food that was cooking in the pots. Rava said: Barzilai was speaking the truth, but Barzilai the Gileadite was steeped in promiscuity, and anyone who is steeped in promiscuity is overtaken by old age before his time. It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, says: As Torah scholars grow older, wisdom is increased in them, as it is stated: “With aged men is wisdom; and length of days brings understanding” (Job 12:12). And as ignoramuses grow older, foolishness is increased in them, as it is stated: “He removes the speech of men of trust and takes away the understanding of the aged” (Job 12:20).,The Gemara continues interpreting verses from Ecclesiastes. The verse states: “Also when they shall be afraid of that which is high and terrors shall be on the road, and the almond tree shall blossom, and the grasshopper shall drag itself along, and the caper berry shall fail, for a person goes to his eternal home, and the mourners circle the marketplace” (Ecclesiastes 12:5). The Gemara explains: “Also when they shall be afraid of that which is high”; this means that even a small knoll on the road seems to him, the elderly, like the highest of mountains. “And terrors shall be on the road”; this means that while he is walking on the road he will have terrors, i.e., he will fear falling or otherwise suffering injury. “And the almond tree shall blossom”; this is the hip bone that protrudes from the skin of an elderly person. “And the grasshopper ḥagav shall drag itself along yistabbel”; by replacing the letter ḥet of ḥagav with an ayin, this can be understood as referring to the buttocks agavot which become heavy sevel. “And the caper berry shall fail”; this is sexual desire that ceases.,The Gemara relates that Rav Kahana was reading biblical verses before Rav. When he got to this verse, Rav sighed. Rav Kahana said: We can derive from this that Rav’s desire has ceased. Rav Kahana also said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “For He spoke and it was, He commanded and it stood” (Psalms 33:9)? He understands this to mean that God created man with desires that push him to do things he would not do if he acted purely on the judgment of his intellect, and Rav Kahana therefore interprets the verse in the following manner: “For He spoke and it was”; this is a woman that a man marries. “He commanded and it stood”; these are the children who one works hard to raise. A tanna taught in a baraita: A woman is essentially a flask full of feces, a reference to the digestive system, and her mouth is full of blood, a euphemistic reference to menstruation, yet men are not deterred and they all run after her with desire.,The Gemara interprets the continuation of the verse cited above: “For a person goes to his eternal home” (Ecclesiastes 12:5). Rabbi Yitzḥak said: This teaches that each and every righteous person is given a dwelling place in the World-to-Come in accordance with his honor. The Gemara offers a parable in which a king enters a city along with his servants. When they enter, they all enter through a single gate; however, when they sleep, each one is given a dwelling place in accordance with his honor. So too, although everyone dies, not everyone receives the same reward in the World-to-Come.,And Rabbi Yitzḥak said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “For childhood and youth shaḥarut are vanity” (Ecclesiastes 11:10)? Sinful things that a person does in his youth darken mashḥirim his face with shame as he grows old (Rabbi Yoshiya Pinto).,And Rabbi Yitzḥak said: The maggots that eat the flesh of the deceased are as painful to the dead as a needle in the flesh of the living, as it says with regard to the dead: “But his flesh is in pain for him, and his soul mourns over him” (Job 14:22). Rav Ḥisda said: A person’s soul mourns for him during all seven days of mourning following his death, as it is stated: And his soul mourns over him,” and it is also written: “And he mourned his father seven days” (Genesis 50:10).,Rav Yehuda said: In the case of a deceased person who has no comforters, i.e., he has nobody to mourn for him, ten people should go and sit in his place and accept condolences. The Gemara relates the story of a certain person who died in Rav Yehuda’s neighborhood and who did not have any comforters, i.e., mourners; ' None |
|
62. Babylonian Talmud, Sotah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer
Found in books: Samely (2002), Rabbinic Interpretation of Scripture in the Mishnah, 114; Sigal (2007), The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew, 87
47b עד ימיו היה פטיש מכה בירושלים ובימיו א"צ לשאול על הדמאי,| 47b Until his days the hammer of smiths would strike in Jerusalem on the intermediate days of a Festival, but he banned the practice. And furthermore, in his days there was no need to inquire about doubtfully tithed produce demai, as everyone was careful to tithe.,The Sages taught: From where is it derived that if the heifer’s neck was broken and afterward the killer was found, then the breaking of the neck does not exempt him from punishment? The verse states: “And the land shall not be atoned, for the blood that was spilled in it, but by the blood of he who spilled it” (Numbers 35:33).,The mishna taught that if one witness says: I saw the killer, and another testifies: You did not see him, they would break the heifer’s neck. The Gemara infers: The reason they break the neck is because the second witness contradicts him, but if no one contradicts him, one witness is relied upon, and they do not break the heifer’s neck.,From where are these matters derived? The Gemara answers that it is as the Sages taught in a baraita: It states with regard to the heifer whose neck is broken: “It is not known who has smitten him” (Deuteronomy 21:1). Consequently, if it was known who smote him, even if it was only one person at the end of the world who knew, they would not break the neck of the heifer. Rabbi Akiva says: From where is it derived that if the members of the Sanhedrin themselves saw one person kill someone, but they do not recognize him, then they would not break the neck of the heifer? The verse states: “Nor did our eyes see” (Deuteronomy 21:7), and did they not see? Seeing the murder alone obviates the need for the performance of the ritual.,The Gemara poses a question: Now that you have said that in this case one witness is relied upon, if so, how is the other one able to contradict him? Didn’t Ulla say: Wherever the Torah relies on one witness, there is the equivalent of the testimony of two witnesses here, and the statement of one witness has no standing in a place where it is contradicted by two witnesses. The Gemara answers: Ulla could have said to you that the text of the mishna should be emended and teach the mishna in this way: They would not break the neck of the heifer. And Rabbi Yitzḥak also said to teach: They would not break the neck.,And Rabbi Ḥiyya said that one should teach: They would break the neck. The Gemara asks: And according to Rabbi Ḥiyya, the above ruling of Ulla is difficult. The Gemara answers: This is not difficult, as here, in the mishna, the case is discussing when two witnesses came simultaneously, and therefore both of their testimonies are rejected; whereas there, with regard to the statement of Ulla, it is referring to a case when they testified one after the other. Ulla rules that once the testimony of the first witness has been accepted the testimony of the second witness cannot nullify it.,We learned in the mishna: If one witness says: I saw the killer, and two say: You did not see, they would break the neck. This cannot be stated just to teach us this halakha, as the fact that two witnesses override one witness is well known. The Gemara assumes that it is stated for the following inference: Therefore, if one testified, and the other one then testified, they would not break the neck. This appears to be a conclusive refutation of Rabbi Ḥiyya, who has the text of: They would break the neck.,The Gemara answers: And according to your reasoning that the mishna states its cases in order to teach an inference, say the latter clause of the mishna: If two witnesses say: We saw, and one witness says: You did not see, they would not break the neck. The Gemara makes an inference from this clause: Therefore, if one came and then the other one came, i.e., they did not come simultaneously, they would break the neck. The two inferences from the different clauses of the mishna consequently contradict one another, and the mishna needs to be explained differently.,Rather, the correct understanding is that the entire mishna is not dealing with valid witnesses and stating an obvious halakha in order to enable an inference, but instead it is dealing with people who are disqualified from bearing witness and is also teaching us a novel ruling. And the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Neḥemya, who says: Wherever the Torah relies on one witness, follow the majority of opinions. In other words, if the testimonies of two disqualified witnesses conflict, the court rules in accordance with the testimony provided by more witnesses, whether or not they are qualified to testify. And they established that with regard to the testimony of two women, who are usually disqualified from testifying, when they testify against one man, it should be like that of two men against one man, and the court will rule in accordance with the testimony of the two women.,And there are those who say a different version of Rabbi Neḥemya’s opinion: Anywhere that one valid witness came at the outset, even one hundred women who later contradict him are considered like one witness, and do not override his testimony. And with what are we dealing here in the mishna? A case where a woman came at the outset, and testified that she saw the killer. Then two other women arrived to contradict her statement. And according to this interpretation you must emend the statement of Rabbi Neḥemya so that it reads like this: Rabbi Neḥemya says: Wherever the Torah relies on one witness, follow the majority of opinions. And they established that two women against one woman are like two men against one man. But two women in opposition to one man who is a valid witness is like half of a pair of witnesses and half of a pair of witnesses, and the mishna did not address that case.,The Gemara poses a question on these two interpretations of the mishna: And why do I need two cases in the mishna to teach the halakha that the majority opinion of those disqualified from bearing witness is followed? The Gemara explains: It is necessary, lest you say that when we follow the majority opinion in the case of invalid witnesses, this is when it results in a decision to be stringent and require the performance of the ritual. But when it results in a decision to be lenient and say that the ritual is not required, we do not follow the majority opinion, and the performance of the ritual is required even if there is one witness saying that the killer was not seen. Therefore, the mishna teaches us that there is no difference in this regard, and the majority opinion is followed in any case.,§ The mishna taught that from the time when murderers proliferated, the ritual of the heifer whose neck is broken was nullified. The Sages taught: From the time when murderers proliferated, the ritual of the heifer whose neck is broken was nullified, because it comes only for a case involving uncertainty with regard to the identity of the murderer. Therefore, when there was an increase of murderers acting openly so that their identities were known, the ritual of the heifer whose neck is broken was nullified.,The mishna also taught that from the time when adulterers proliferated, the performance of the ritual of the bitter water of a sota was nullified. The Sages taught: It states: “And the man shall be cleared of transgression, and that woman shall bear her transgression” (Numbers 5:31), which indicates that when the man is clear of transgression the waters evaluate if his wife was unfaithful, but if the man is not clear of transgression the waters do not evaluate if his wife was unfaithful. And it states: “I will not punish your daughters when they commit harlotry, nor your daughters-in-law when they commit adultery; for they consort with lewd women, and they sacrifice with prostitutes; and the people that is without understanding is distraught” (Hosea 4:14).,The Gemara clarifies: What is the purpose of the addition of: And it states? What is lacking in the exposition from the verse of the Torah? The Gemara explains: And if you would say that based on the verse: “And the man shall be cleared of transgression,” the halakha would be that with regard to his transgression, yes, it will cause the waters to be ineffective, but the transgression of his sons and daughters does not impact the effectiveness, come and hear the verse: “I will not punish your daughters,” i.e., I will not punish your wives, due to your daughters, “when they commit harlotry, nor your daughters-in-law when they commit adultery.”,And if you would say: With regard to the transgression of adultery with a married woman, yes, it will cause the waters to be ineffective, but the transgression of one who engaged in sexual intercourse with an unmarried woman does not impact the effectiveness, come and hear the continuation of the verse: “For they consort with lewd women, and they sacrifice with prostitutes.”,The Gemara turns its attention to the end of the verse. What is the meaning of: “And the people that is without understanding is distraught”? Rabbi Elazar says: The prophet said to the Jewish people: If you are particular about yourselves, the water evaluates your wives; but if not, the water does not evaluate your wives. This would make people distraught, as they would not know how to overcome their suspicion if they are concerned that their wives have been unfaithful.,§ The Gemara cites statements similar to those of the mishna. From the time when those who accept benefit from others proliferated, the laws became twisted and deeds became corrupted, and there was no comfort in the world. From the time when those who look at the faces of the litigants in judgment, in order to rule based on the appearance of the litigants, proliferated, the fulfillment of the verse: “You shall not fear the face of any man” (Deuteronomy 1:17), ceased, and the fulfillment of the verse: “You shall not respect faces in judgment” (Deuteronomy 1:17), halted, and they removed the yoke of Heaven from themselves, and placed upon themselves the yoke of flesh and blood.,From the time when those who whisper whisperings in judgment, advising judges surreptitiously, proliferated, fierce anger proliferated in Israel, and the Divine Presence departed, because it is stated: “God stands in the congregation of God; in the midst of the judges He judges” (Psalms 82:1). The Divine Presence that dwells among judges leaves if they judge improperly. From the time when those who are referred to in the verse: “Their heart goes after their covetousness” (Ezekiel 33:31), proliferated, “Those who say to evil good, and to good evil” (Isaiah 5:20) proliferated, i.e., those who treat wicked people as though they were righteous proliferated as a result. From the time when the fulfillment of the verse: “Those who say to evil good, and to good evil,” proliferated, the cry of: Woe, woe, proliferated in the world. There was an increase in troubles that cause people to cry out.,From the time when those who show their arrogance by drawing out spittle proliferated, the number of haughty people in general proliferated, and the number of students decreased, as they would say haughtily that there was nothing left for them to learn, and the Torah needs to go around to seek those who study it, as people do not learn of their own initiative. Furthermore, from the time when haughty people proliferated, the daughters of Israel began marrying haughty men, as our generation looks only at the face, i.e., the external aspects of a person, and ignores the inner aspects of a person.,The Gemara raises a difficulty: Is that so? Do women wish to marry arrogant men? But didn’t the Master say: One who is haughty is not even accepted by the members of his household, as it is stated: “The haughty man abides not” (Habakkuk 2:5)? “Abides yinaveh not” means that even in his abode naveh, he is not accepted. The Gemara explains: Initially, she jumps at the chance to marry him, because he appears to be a great person to her, but in the end, once she gets to know him, he is demeaned in her eyes.,The baraita continues: From the time when there was an increase in those who placed upon homeowners the obligation to designate the profits from merchandise for the upkeep of judges, bribery and corruption of judgment proliferated and good ceased. From the time when those judges and leaders who say: I accept your favor, and: I hold your favor, proliferated, the fulfillment of the verse: “Every man did that which was right in his eyes” (Judges 17:6), proliferated. Lowly ones were raised and lofty ones were lowered, and the monarchy is increasingly on the decline. From the time when misers and those greedy for profit proliferated, those hardened of heart and who closed their hands from lending proliferated, and they transgressed that which is written in the Torah: “You shall not harden your heart, nor shut your hand from your needy brother…Guard yourself in case there is a base thought in your heart…and you do not give him” (Deuteronomy 15:7, 9).,From the time when women with “stretched-forth necks and wanton eyes” (Isaiah 3:16) proliferated, the bitter waters of a sota proliferated, as more people were suspected of committing adultery; but they eventually ceased when licentiousness became too widespread. From the time when those who accept gifts proliferated, the days decreased and the years shortened, as it is written: “And he who hates gifts lives” (Proverbs 15:27). From the time when those with boastful zeḥuḥei hearts proliferated, dispute proliferated in Israel. From the time when the students of Shammai and Hillel who did not serve their Rabbis sufficiently proliferated, dispute proliferated in Israel, and the Torah became like two Torahs. From the time when those who accept charity from gentiles proliferated, the Jewish people were above and they below; the Jewish people ahead and they behind. This last statement is a euphemism; it was the Jewish people that were below and behind, but the Gemara did not want to say so explicitly.,§ The mishna taught that from the time when Yosei ben Yo’ezer died the clusters ceased. The Gemara poses a question: What is the meaning of clusters eshkolot? Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: It means a man who contains all ish shehakol bo elements of Torah and mitzvot. The mishna further taught that Yoḥa the High Priest took away the declaration of the tithe. The Gemara poses a question: What is the reason he did this? Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, says: Because they did not give the tithe in the proper manner as stated by the Torah. In what way is that? As the Merciful One states in the Torah that they should give the first tithe to the Levites,'' None | |
|
63. Babylonian Talmud, Sukkah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer (ben Hyrcanus), Rabbi • Eliezer, Rr.
Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 22; Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 230
28a התם הוא דמבטל אבל הכא דלא מבטל לא,ת"ר מעשה ברבי אליעזר ששבת בגליל העליון ושאלוהו שלשים הלכות בהלכות סוכה שתים עשרה אמר להם שמעתי שמונה עשר אמר להם לא שמעתי ר\' יוסי בר\' יהודה אומר חילוף הדברים שמונה עשר אמר להם שמעתי שתים עשרה אמר להם לא שמעתי,אמרו לו כל דבריך אינן אלא מפי השמועה אמר להם הזקקתוני לומר דבר שלא שמעתי מפי רבותי מימי לא קדמני אדם בבית המדרש ולא ישנתי בבית המדרש לא שינת קבע ולא שינת עראי ולא הנחתי אדם בבית המדרש ויצאתי ולא שחתי שיחת חולין ולא אמרתי דבר שלא שמעתי מפי רבי מעולם,אמרו עליו על רבן יוחנן בן זכאי מימיו לא שח שיחת חולין ולא הלך ד\' אמות בלא תורה ובלא תפילין ולא קדמו אדם בבית המדרש ולא ישן בבית המדרש לא שינת קבע ולא שינת עראי ולא הרהר במבואות המטונפות ולא הניח אדם בבית המדרש ויצא ולא מצאו אדם יושב ודומם אלא יושב ושונה ולא פתח אדם דלת לתלמידיו אלא הוא בעצמו ולא אמר דבר שלא שמע מפי רבו מעולם ולא אמר הגיע עת לעמוד מבית המדרש חוץ מערבי פסחים וערבי יום הכפורים וכן היה ר\' אליעזר תלמידו נוהג אחריו,תנו רבנן שמונים תלמידים היו לו להלל הזקן שלשים מהן ראוים שתשרה עליהן שכינה כמשה רבינו ושלשים מהן ראוים שתעמוד להם חמה כיהושע בן נון עשרים בינונים גדול שבכולן יונתן בן עוזיאל קטן שבכולן רבן יוחנן בן זכאי,אמרו עליו על רבן יוחנן בן זכאי שלא הניח מקרא ומשנה גמרא הלכות ואגדות דקדוקי תורה ודקדוקי סופרים קלים וחמורים וגזרות שוות תקופות וגימטריאות שיחת מלאכי השרת ושיחת שדים ושיחת דקלים משלות כובסין משלות שועלים דבר גדול ודבר קטן,דבר גדול מעשה מרכבה דבר קטן הויות דאביי ורבא לקיים מה שנאמר (משלי ח, כא) להנחיל אוהבי יש ואוצרותיהם אמלא וכי מאחר שקטן שבכולן כך גדול שבכולן על אחת כמה וכמה אמרו עליו על יונתן בן עוזיאל בשעה שיושב ועוסק בתורה כל עוף שפורח עליו מיד נשרף:,| 28a The Gemara answers: There is a difference between the case of the shutter and the case of the sheet. There, in the case of the shutter, where he negates it by shuttering the window, it is considered part of the building and it is therefore prohibited. However, here, in the case of the sheet, where he does not negate it, as he plans on removing it, no, it is not necessarily prohibited.,The Gemara relates a similar incident. The Sages taught: There was an incident involving Rabbi Eliezer, who stayed in the Upper Galilee, and the people there asked him thirty halakhot in the halakhot of sukka. In response to twelve, he said to them: I heard an answer from my teachers, and he related what he heard. In response to the other eighteen, he said to them: I did not hear an answer. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: It was the reverse of these matters. In response to eighteen he said to them: I heard an answer; in response to the other twelve he said to them: I did not hear an answer.,They said to him: Are all the matters that you know only from what you heard? Don’t you say any matters on your own? He said to them: Now you forced me to say a matter that I did not hear from my teachers, as I must describe my character traits and the manner in which I conduct myself. In all my days, no person ever preceded me into the study hall, as I am always first to arrive; and I never slept in the study hall, neither substantial sleep nor a brief nap; and I never left anyone in the study hall and exited, as I was always last to leave; and I never engaged in idle conversation; rather, I discussed only necessary matters or matters of Torah; and I never said anything that I did not hear from my teacher. That is why he did not answer those questions that his teacher did not address.,Apropos the character traits of Rabbi Eliezer, the Gemara cites character traits of his teacher. The Sages said about Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai, the teacher of Rabbi Eliezer: In all his days he never engaged in idle conversation; and he never walked four cubits without engaging in Torah study and without donning phylacteries; and no person ever preceded him into the study hall; and he never slept in the study hall, neither substantial sleep nor a brief nap; and he never contemplated matters of Torah in alleyways filthy with human excrement, as doing so is a display of contempt for the Torah; and he never left anyone in the study hall and exited; and no person ever found him sitting and silent, i.e., inactive; rather, he was always sitting and studying; and only he opened the door for his students, disregarding his own eminent standing; and he never said anything that he did not hear from his teacher; and he never said to his students that the time has arrived to arise and leave the study hall except on Passover eves, when they were obligated to sacrifice the Paschal lamb, and Yom Kippur eves, when there is a mitzva to eat and drink abundantly. And Rabbi Eliezer, his student, accustomed himself to model his conduct after his example.,The Gemara continues to praise the Sages. The Sages taught: Hillel the Elder had eighty students. Thirty of them were sufficiently worthy that the Divine Presence should rest upon them as it did upon Moses our teacher, and thirty of them were sufficiently worthy that the sun should stand still for them as it did for Joshua bin Nun, and twenty were on an intermediate level between the other two. The greatest of all the students was Yonatan ben Uzziel, and the youngest of them was Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai.,The Gemara relates: The Sages said about Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai that he did not neglect Bible; Mishna; Gemara; halakhot and aggadot; minutiae of the Torah and minutiae of the scribes; the hermeneutical principles of the Torah with regard to a fortiori inferences and verbal analogies; the calculation of the calendrical seasons; and numerology gimmatreyaot. In addition, he did not neglect esoteric matters, including the conversation of ministering angels; the conversation of demons, and the conversation of palm trees; parables of launderers, which are folk tales that can be used to explain the Torah; parables of foxes; and more generally, a great matter and a small matter.,The Gemara elaborates: A great matter is referring to the secrets of the Design of the Divine Chariot, the conduct of the transcendent universe. A small matter is, for example, halakhot that were ultimately formulated in the framework of the disputes of Abaye and Rava. He did not neglect any of these disciplines so as to fulfill that which is stated: “That I may cause those that love me to inherit substance and that I may fill their treasuries” (Proverbs 8:21), as Rabban Yoḥa was filled with the disciplines of Torah and wisdom. And if the youngest of them was so prolific, the greatest of them was all the more so prolific. The Gemara relates that the Sages said of Yonatan ben Uzziel, the greatest of Hillel’s students, that when he sat and was engaged in Torah study, the sanctity that he generated was so intense that any bird that flew over him was immediately incinerated.,one whose head and most of his body were in the sukka and his table was in the house, Beit Shammai deem it unfit, and Beit Hillel deem it fit. Beit Hillel said to Beit Shammai: And wasn’t there an incident where the Elders of Beit Shammai and the Elders of Beit Hillel went to visit Rabbi Yoḥa ben HaḤoranit and they found him such that he was sitting with his head and most of his body in the sukka and his table in the house, and they said nothing to him? Even Beit Shammai did not object. Beit Shammai said to them: Is there proof from there? That is not what happened; rather, they said to him: If you were accustomed to act in this manner, you have never fulfilled the mitzva of sukka in your life.,The mishna continues: Women, slaves, and minors are exempt from the mitzva of sukka. A minor who does not need his mother any longer is obligated in the mitzva. There was an incident where the daughter-in-law of Shammai the Elder gave birth just before Sukkot, and Shammai removed the coat of plaster from the roof, leaving the beams, and roofed with the beams over the bed for the newborn minor.,halakha that women, slaves, and minors are exempt from the mitzva of sukka, the Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived? The Gemara answers that it is as the Sages taught in a baraita that it is stated: “All the homeborn in Israel shall reside in sukkot” (Leviticus 23:42). Had the verse stated only: Homeborn, it would have been derived that any homeborn member of the Jewish people is obligated to observe this mitzva. However, the term with the addition of the definite article: “The homeborn,” indicates that only certain homeborn members are obligated, i.e., men, to the exclusion of the women. The word “all” in the phrase: “All the homeborn,” comes to include the minors capable of performing this mitzva.,§ The Gemara analyzes the baraita. The Master said: “The homeborn” is to the exclusion of women. Is that to say that the term homeborn without the definite article indicates both men and women? Isn’t it taught in a baraita with regard to Yom Kippur that it is stated: “And it shall be a statute forever unto you: In the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, you shall afflict your souls and shall do no manner of work, the homeborn, or the stranger that sojourns among you” (Leviticus 16:29). And the term “the homeborn” in that verse comes to include homeborn women, who are obligated in the mitzva of affliction on Yom Kippur. In that case, the definite article comes to include women. Therefore, apparently, the term homeborn, without the definite article, indicates only men. Rabba said: They are each a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai, and the Sages merely supported them with verses as a mnemonic device. Therefore, it is not surprising that the derivations are contradictory.,The Gemara asks: Which of them is derived from the verse and which is a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai and merely supported by a verse? And furthermore, why do I need the verse and why do I need the halakha? Isn’t sukka a positive, time-bound mitzva, and the principle is that women are exempt from all positive, time-bound mitzvot? There is no need for a special derivation to exempt women from the mitzva of sukka.,And there is no need for a derivation with regard to their obligation to fast on Yom Kippur, as that can be derived from that which Rav Yehuda said that Rav said, as Rav Yehuda said that Rav said, and it was likewise taught in the school of Rabbi Yishmael: The verse says: “When a man or woman shall commit any sin that a person commits, to commit a trespass against the Lord, and that soul be guilty” (Numbers 5:6).'' None | |
|
64. Babylonian Talmud, Taanit, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer, • Eliezer, R., and shame • Eliezer, R., and violence • R. Eliezer b. Hyrcanus
Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 495; Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014), Saints and role models in Judaism and Christianity, 73; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 55, 74; Rubenstein(1995), The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods, 128, 129, 178
| 7a נימרינהו לתרוייהו אל ההודאות ורוב ההודאות,אמר ר\' אבהו גדול יום הגשמים מתחיית המתים דאילו תחיית המתים לצדיקים ואילו גשמים בין לצדיקים בין לרשעים ופליגא דרב יוסף דאמר רב יוסף מתוך שהיא שקולה כתחיית המתים קבעוה בתחיית המתים,אמר רב יהודה גדול יום הגשמים כיום שניתנה בו תורה שנא\' (דברים לב, ב) יערף כמטר לקחי ואין לקח אלא תורה שנא\' (משלי ד, ב) כי לקח טוב נתתי לכם תורתי אל תעזובו רבא אמר יותר מיום שניתנה בו תורה שנאמר יערף כמטר לקחי מי נתלה במי הוי אומר קטן נתלה בגדול,רבא רמי כתיב יערף כמטר לקחי וכתיב תזל כטל אמרתי אם תלמיד חכם הגון הוא כטל ואם לאו עורפהו כמטר,תניא היה ר\' בנאה אומר כל העוסק בתורה לשמה תורתו נעשית לו סם חיים שנאמר (משלי ג, יח) עץ חיים היא למחזיקים בה ואומר (משלי ג, ח) רפאות תהי לשרך ואומר (משלי ח, לה) כי מוצאי מצא חיים וכל העוסק בתורה שלא לשמה נעשית לו סם המות שנאמר יערף כמטר לקחי ואין עריפה אלא הריגה שנאמר (דברים כא, ד) וערפו שם את העגלה בנחל,א"ל ר\' ירמיה לר\' זירא ליתי מר ליתני א"ל חלש לבאי ולא יכילנא לימא מר מילתא דאגדתא א"ל הכי אמר ר\' יוחנן מאי דכתיב (דברים כ, יט) כי האדם עץ השדה וכי אדם עץ שדה הוא,אלא משום דכתיב (דברים כ, יט) כי ממנו תאכל ואותו לא תכרת וכתיב אותו תשחית וכרת הא כיצד אם ת"ח הגון הוא ממנו תאכל ואותו לא תכרת ואם לאו אותו תשחית וכרת,אמר רבי חמא (אמר רבי) חנינא מאי דכתיב (משלי כז, יז) ברזל בברזל יחד לומר לך מה ברזל זה אחד מחדד את חבירו אף שני תלמידי חכמים מחדדין זה את זה בהלכה,אמר רבה בר בר חנה למה נמשלו דברי תורה כאש שנאמר (ירמיהו כג, כט) הלא כה דברי כאש נאם ה\' לומר לך מה אש אינו דולק יחידי אף דברי תורה אין מתקיימין ביחידי,והיינו דאמר רבי יוסי בר חנינא מאי דכתיב (ירמיהו נ, לו) חרב אל הבדים ונואלו חרב על שונאיהן של תלמידי חכמים שעוסקין בד בבד בתורה ולא עוד אלא שמטפשין שנאמר ונואלו,ולא עוד אלא שחוטאין כתיב הכא ונואלו וכתיב התם (במדבר יב, יא) אשר נואלנו ואשר חטאנו ואיבעית אימא מהכא (ישעיהו יט, יג) נואלו שרי צוען וגו\' והתעו את מצרים,אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק למה נמשלו דברי תורה כעץ שנאמר (משלי ג, יח) עץ חיים היא למחזיקים בה לומר לך מה עץ קטן מדליק את הגדול אף תלמידי חכמים קטנים מחדדים את הגדולים והיינו דאמר ר\' חנינא הרבה למדתי מרבותי ומחבירי יותר מרבותי ומתלמידי יותר מכולן,רבי חנינא בר פפא רמי כתיב (ישעיהו כא, יד) לקראת צמא התיו מים וכתיב (ישעיהו נה, א) הוי כל צמא לכו למים אם תלמיד הגון הוא לקראת צמא התיו מים ואי לא הוי כל צמא לכו למים,רבי חנינא בר חמא רמי כתיב (משלי ה, טז) יפוצו מעינותיך חוצה וכתיב (משלי ה, יז) יהיו לך לבדך אם תלמיד הגון הוא יפוצו מעינותיך חוצה ואם לאו יהיו לך לבדך,(ואמר) רבי חנינא בר אידי למה נמשלו דברי תורה למים דכתיב הוי כל צמא לכו למים לומר לך מה מים מניחין מקום גבוה והולכין למקום נמוך אף דברי תורה אין מתקיימין אלא במי שדעתו שפלה,ואמר רבי אושעיא למה נמשלו דברי תורה לשלשה משקין הללו במים וביין ובחלב דכתיב הוי כל צמא לכו למים וכתיב (ישעיהו נה, א) לכו שברו ואכלו ולכו שברו בלא כסף ובלא מחיר יין וחלב לומר לך מה שלשה משקין הללו אין מתקיימין אלא בפחות שבכלים אף דברי תורה אין מתקיימין אלא במי שדעתו שפלה,כדאמרה ליה ברתיה דקיסר לר\' יהושע בן חנניה אי חכמה מפוארה בכלי מכוער אמר לה אביך רמי חמרא במני דפחרא אמרה ליה אלא במאי נירמי אמר לה אתון דחשביתו רמו במאני דהבא וכספא,אזלה ואמרה ליה לאבוה רמייא לחמרא במני דהבא וכספא ותקיף אתו ואמרו ליה אמר לה לברתיה מאן אמר לך הכי אמרה ליה רבי יהושע בן חנניה קריוהו אמר ליה אמאי אמרת לה הכי אמר ליה כי היכי דאמרה לי אמרי לה והא איכא שפירי דגמירי 10a בברייתו של עולם,ת"ר א"י נבראת תחילה וכל העולם כולו נברא לבסוף שנאמר (משלי ח, כו) עד לא עשה ארץ וחוצות א"י משקה אותה הקב"ה בעצמו וכל העולם כולו ע"י שליח שנאמר (איוב ה, י) הנותן מטר על פני ארץ ושולח מים על פני חוצות,א"י שותה מי גשמים וכל העולם כולו מתמצית שנאמר הנותן מטר על פני ארץ וגו\' א"י שותה תחילה וכל העולם כולו לבסוף שנאמר הנותן מטר על פני ארץ וגו\' משל לאדם שמגבל את הגבינה נוטל את האוכל ומניח את הפסולת,אמר מר ממתקין הן בעבים מנליה דא"ר יצחק בר יוסף א"ר יוחנן כתיב (תהלים יח, יב) חשכת מים עבי שחקים וכתיב (שמואל ב כב, יב) חשרת מים עבי שחקים,שקול כף ושדי אריש וקרי ביה חכשרת,ור\' יהושע בהני קראי מאי דריש בהו סבר לה כי הא דכי אתא רב דימי אמר אמרי במערבא נהור ענני זעירין מוהי חשוך ענני סגיין מוהי,כמאן אזלא הא דתניא מים העליונים במאמר הם תלוים ופירותיהן מי גשמים שנאמר (תהלים קד, יג) מפרי מעשיך תשבע הארץ כמאן כר\' יהושע ור\' אליעזר ההוא במעשה ידיו של הקב"ה הוא דכתיב,אריב"ל כל העולם כולו מתמצית גן עדן הוא שותה שנאמר (בראשית ב, י) ונהר יוצא מעדן וגו\' תנא מתמצית בית כור שותה תרקב:,ת"ר ארץ מצרים הויא ד\' מאות פרסה על ד\' מאות פרסה והוא אחד מששים בכוש וכוש אחד מששים בעולם ועולם א\' מששים בגן וגן אחד מששים לעדן ועדן אחד מס\' לגיהנם נמצא כל העולם כולו ככיסוי קדרה לגיהנם וי"א גיהנם אין לה שיעור וי"א עדן אין לה שיעור,א"ר אושעיא מאי דכתיב (ירמיהו נא, יג) שוכנת על מים רבים רבת אוצרות מי גרם לבבל שיהו אוצרותיה מליאות בר הוי אומר מפני ששוכנת על מים רבים אמר רב עתירה בבל דחצדא בלא מיטרא אמר אביי נקיטינן טובעני ולא יובשני:,25b אין גזעו מחליף אף צדיק ח"ו אין גזעו מחליף לכך נאמר ארז אילו נאמר ארז ולא נאמר תמר הייתי אומר מה ארז אין עושה פירות אף צדיק ח"ו אין עושה פירות לכך נאמר תמר ונאמר ארז,וארז גזעו מחליף והתניא הלוקח אילן מחבירו לקוץ מגביהו מן הקרקע טפח וקוצץ בסדן השקמה שני טפחים בבתולת השקמה שלשה טפחים בקנים ובגפנים מן הפקק ולמעלה בדקלים ובארזים חופר למטה ומשריש לפי שאין גזעו מחליף,הכא במאי עסקינן בשאר מיני ארזים כדרבה בר הונא דאמר רבה בר הונא עשרה מיני ארזים הן שנאמר (ישעיהו מא, יט) אתן במדבר ארז שיטה והדס וגו\',ת"ר מעשה ברבי אליעזר שגזר שלש עשרה תעניות על הצבור ולא ירדו גשמים באחרונה התחילו הצבור לצאת אמר להם תקנתם קברים לעצמכם געו כל העם בבכיה וירדו גשמים,שוב מעשה בר\' אליעזר שירד לפני התיבה ואמר עשרים וארבע ברכות ולא נענה ירד רבי עקיבא אחריו ואמר אבינו מלכנו אין לנו מלך אלא אתה אבינו מלכנו למענך רחם עלינו וירדו גשמים הוו מרנני רבנן יצתה בת קול ואמרה לא מפני שזה גדול מזה אלא שזה מעביר על מדותיו וזה אינו מעביר על מדותיו,ת"ר עד מתי יהו הגשמים יורדין והצבור פוסקין מתעניתם כמלא ברך המחרישה דברי רבי מאיר וחכמים אומרים בחרבה טפח בבינונית טפחיים בעבודה שלשה טפחים,תניא רבי שמעון בן אלעזר אומר אין לך טפח מלמעלה שאין תהום יוצא לקראתו שלשה טפחים והא תניא טפחיים לא קשיא כאן בעבודה כאן בשאינה עבודה,א"ר אלעזר כשמנסכין את המים בחג תהום אומר לחבירו אבע מימיך קול שני ריעים אני שומע שנאמר (תהלים מב, ח) תהום אל תהום קורא לקול צנוריך וגו\',אמר רבה לדידי חזי לי האי רידיא דמי לעיגלא (תלתא) ופירסא שפוותיה וקיימא בין תהומא תתאה לתהומא עילאה לתהומא עילאה א"ל חשור מימיך לתהומא תתאה א"ל אבע מימיך שנא\' (שיר השירים ב, יב) הנצנים נראו בארץ וגו\':,היו מתענין וירדו גשמים קודם הנץ החמה כו\': ת"ר היו מתענין וירדו להם גשמים קודם הנץ החמה לא ישלימו לאחר הנץ החמה ישלימו דברי ר\' מאיר ר\' יהודה אומר קודם חצות לא ישלימו לאחר חצות ישלימו,רבי יוסי אומר קודם ט\' שעות לא ישלימו לאחר ט\' שעות ישלימו שכן מצינו באחאב מלך ישראל שהתענה מתשע שעות ולמעלה שנאמר (מלכים א כא, כט) הראית כי נכנע אחאב וגו\',ר\' יהודה נשיאה גזר תעניתא וירדו להם גשמים לאחר הנץ החמה סבר לאשלומינהו א"ל רבי אמי קודם חצות ואחר חצות שנינו שמואל הקטן גזר תעניתא וירדו להם גשמים קודם הנץ החמה כסבורין העם לומר שבחו של צבור הוא,אמר להם אמשול לכם משל למה הדבר דומה לעבד שמבקש פרס מרבו אמר להם תנו לו ואל אשמע קולו,שוב שמואל הקטן גזר תעניתא וירדו להם גשמים לאחר שקיעת החמה כסבורים העם לומר שבחו של צבור הוא אמר להם שמואל לא שבח של צבור הוא אלא אמשול לכם משל למה הדבר דומה לעבד שמבקש פרס מרבו ואמר להם המתינו לו עד שיתמקמק ויצטער ואחר כך תנו לו,ולשמואל הקטן שבחו של צבור היכי דמי אמר משיב הרוח ונשב זיקא אמר מוריד הגשם ואתא מיטרא:,מעשה וגזרו תענית בלוד כו\': ונימא הלל מעיקרא אביי ורבא דאמרי תרווייהו לפי שאין אומרים הלל ' None | 7a we will recite them both: God of thanksgivings, and: Abundant thanksgivings.,§ The Gemara cites statements in praise of rainfall. Rabbi Abbahu said: The day of rain is greater than the resurrection of the dead. The reason is that while the resurrection of the dead benefits only the righteous, rain benefits both the righteous and the wicked. The Gemara comments: And this statement disagrees with the opinion of Rav Yosef, as Rav Yosef said: Since rainfall is equivalent to the resurrection of the dead, the Sages established its recitation in the second blessing of the Amida, the blessing of the resurrection of the dead. According to Rav Yosef, rainfall is the equivalent to, but not superior to, the resurrection of the dead.,Similarly, Rav Yehuda said: The day of the rains is as great as the day on which the Torah was given, as it is stated: “My doctrine likḥi shall drop as the rain” (Deuteronomy 32:2), and lekaḥ means nothing other than Torah, as it is stated: “For I give you good doctrine lekaḥ; do not forsake My Torah” (Proverbs 4:2). Rava said: Rainfall is even greater than the day on which the Torah was given, as it is stated: “My doctrine shall drop as the rain,” and when one makes a comparison, which object is made dependent upon which? You must say that the lesser object is dependent upon the greater one. If Torah is compared to rain, it follows that rain is greater than Torah.,The Gemara cites another interpretation of the verse from Deuteronomy. Rava raised a contradiction: At the beginning of the verse it is written: “My doctrine shall drop ya’arof as the rain,” in a harsh manner, and yet later in the verse, it is written: “My speech shall distill as the dew,” in a gentle tone. He resolves this apparent contradiction as follows: If he is a worthy Torah scholar, the Torah flows through him like the dew, but if he is not worthy, it snaps his neck orfehu like the powerful rain.,It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Bena’a would say: Anyone who engages in Torah for its own sake, his Torah study will be an elixir of life for him, as it is stated: “It is a tree of life to them who lay hold upon it” (Proverbs 3:18), and it says: “It shall be health to your navel” (Proverbs 3:8), and it says: “For whoever finds Me finds life” (Proverbs 8:35). And anyone who engages in Torah not for its own sake, e.g., for self-aggrandizement, his Torah will be an elixir of death for him, as it is stated: “My doctrine shall drop ya’arof as the rain,” and arifa means nothing other than killing, as it is stated: “And they shall break the heifer’s neck arefu there in the valley” (Deuteronomy 21:4).,Rabbi Yirmeya once said to Rabbi Zeira: Let the Master come and teach a halakhic discourse. Rabbi Zeira said to him: My heart is weak and I cannot strain myself over a halakhic discourse. Rabbi Yirmeya replied to him: In that case, let the Master tell us a matter of aggada, which does not require as much effort. Rabbi Zeira said to him that Rabbi Yoḥa said as follows: What is the meaning of that which is written: “For man is a tree of the field” (Deuteronomy 20:19)? And is man actually a tree of the field?,Rather, it is because it is written earlier in the same verse: “You may eat of them but you may not cut them down,” and it is written in the next verse: “Them you may destroy and cut down” (Deuteronomy 20:20). This indicates that there are certain trees which may be cut down, while others may not be destroyed. How so? If a Torah scholar is worthy: “You may eat of them but you may not cut them down,” but if he is not worthy: “He you may destroy and cut down.”,The Gemara cites other expositions that deal with Torah study. Rabbi Ḥama, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Iron sharpens iron, so a man sharpens the countece of his friend” (Proverbs 27:17)? This verse comes to tell you that just as with these iron implements, one sharpens the other when they are rubbed against each other, so too, when Torah scholars study together, they sharpen one another in halakha.,Rabba bar bar Ḥana said: Why are matters of Torah compared to fire, as it is stated: “Is not My word like fire, says the Lord” (Jeremiah 23:29)? To tell you: Just as fire does not ignite in a lone stick of wood but in a pile of kindling, so too, matters of Torah are not retained and understood properly by a lone scholar who studies by himself, but by a group of Sages.,And this is what Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “A sword is upon the boasters habaddim, and they shall become fools noalu” (Jeremiah 50:36)? This verse can be interpreted homiletically: There is a sword upon the enemies of Torah scholars, a euphemism for Torah scholars themselves, who sit alone bad bevad and study Torah. And not only that, but those who study by themselves grow foolish from their solitary Torah study, as it is stated: “And they shall become fools.”,And not only that, but they sin, as it is written here: “And they shall become fools,” and it is written there: “For that we have done foolishly noalnu and for that we have sinned” (Numbers 12:11). And if you wish, say instead that it is derived from here: “The princes of Zoan have become fools noalu…they have caused Egypt to go astray” (Isaiah 19:13).,Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: Why are Torah matters likened to a tree, as it is stated: “It is a tree of life to them who lay hold upon it” (Proverbs 3:18)? This verse comes to tell you that just as a small piece of wood can ignite a large piece, so too, minor Torah scholars can sharpen great Torah scholars and enable them to advance in their studies. And this is what Rabbi Ḥanina said: I have learned much from my teachers and even more from my friends, but from my students I have learned more than from all of them.,Rabbi Ḥanina bar Pappa raised a contradiction. In one verse it is written: “To him who is thirsty bring water” (Isaiah 21:14), which indicates that the one who has water must bring it to the thirsty person, and it is written elsewhere: “Ho, everyone who thirsts, come for water” (Isaiah 55:1), from which it may be inferred that the thirsty person must seek out water himself. Rabbi Ḥanina bar Pappa resolves this apparent contradiction by explaining that if he is a worthy student the teacher must seek him out, as in “to him who is thirsty bring water,” but if the student is not worthy, then “Ho, everyone who thirsts, come for water,” i.e., this student must seek out a teacher himself.,Rabbi Ḥanina bar Ḥama raised another contradiction. In one verse it is written: “Let your springs be dispersed abroad” (Proverbs 5:16), whereas in the next verse it is written: “Let them be your own” (Proverbs 5:17). Rabbi Ḥanina bar Ḥama explains: If the student sitting before you is worthy, then “Let your springs be dispersed abroad,” as you should teach him, but if he is not worthy, then “Let them be your own.”,And Rabbi Ḥanina bar Idi said: Why are matters of Torah likened to water, as it is written: “Ho, everyone who thirsts, come for water” (Isaiah 55:1)? This verse comes to tell you: Just as water leaves a high place and flows to a low place, so too, Torah matters are retained only by one whose spirit is lowly, i.e., a humble person.,And Rabbi Oshaya said: Why are matters of Torah likened to these three liquids: To water, wine and milk? As it is written with regard to water: “Ho, everyone who thirsts, come for water,” and it is written in the same verse: “Come, buy and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price.” This verse comes to tell you: Just as these three liquids can be retained only in the least of vessels, e.g., clay pots, but not vessels of silver and gold, as they will spoil, so too, matters of Torah are retained only by one whose spirit is lowly.,The Gemara cites a related incident: This is as the daughter of the Roman emperor said to Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥaya, who was an ugly man: Woe to glorious wisdom such as yours, which is contained in an ugly vessel. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥaya said to her, in a seemingly unrelated response: Does your father keep his wine in simple clay vessels? The emperor’s daughter said to him: Rather, in what, then, should he keep it? Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥaya said to her: You, who are so important, should put it in vessels of gold and silver.,The emperor’s daughter went and said this to her father. He put the wine in vessels of gold and silver and it turned sour. When his advisors came and told the emperor that the wine had turned sour, he said to his daughter: Who told you to do this? His daughter responded: Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥaya. The emperor summoned him and said to him: Why did you say this to her? Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥaya said to him: Just as she said to me, so I said say to her, to demonstrate to her that fine material is best preserved in the least of vessels. The emperor said to him: But there are handsome people who are learned. 10a verse deals with the creation of the world, when all the water was contained in the deep.,The Sages taught in a baraita: Eretz Yisrael was created first and the rest of the entire world was created afterward, as it is stated: “While as yet He had not made the land, nor the fields” (Proverbs 8:26). Here, and in the following statements, the term “land” is understood as a reference to the Land of Israel, while “the fields” means all the fields in other lands. Furthermore, Eretz Yisrael is watered by the Holy One, Blessed be He, Himself, and the rest of the entire world is watered through an intermediary, as it is stated: “Who gives rain upon the land, and sends water upon the fields” (Job 5:10).,Additionally, Eretz Yisrael drinks rainwater and the rest of the entire world drinks from the remaining residue of rainwater left in the clouds, as it is stated that God is He “who gives rain upon the land” and only afterward takes what is left “and sends water upon the fields.” Eretz Yisrael drinks first, and the rest of the entire world afterward, as it is stated: “Who gives rain upon the land and sends water upon the fields.” There is a parable that illustrates this: A person who kneads his cheese after it has curdled takes the food and leaves the refuse.,The Master said above: The ocean waters are sweetened in the clouds. The Gemara asks: From where does Rabbi Eliezer derive this? The Gemara answers that Rav Yitzḥak bar Yosef said that Rabbi Yoḥa said that it is written: “Darkness ḥeshkhat of waters, thick clouds of the skies” (Psalms 18:12). And it is written, in a similar verse: “Gathering of ḥashrat waters, thick clouds of the skies” (II\xa0Samuel 22:12).,The Gemara explains the significance of this minor variation. These two phrases vary in only one word, which themselves differ by only one letter, a kaf for a reish. If you join the two versions together, and take the letter kaf from the first version and place it with the second version of the word, which has a reish, you can read into the verse a new word meaning rendering fit ḥakhsharat. Accordingly, the verse can be interpreted as: The rendering fit of water is performed in the clouds of the sky.,The Gemara asks: And Rabbi Yehoshua, with regard to these verses, what does he learn from them? The Gemara answers that Rabbi Yehoshua holds in accordance with the opinion of this Sage, Rav Dimi. As when Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that they say in the West, Eretz Yisrael: When clouds are bright, they have little water; when clouds are dark, they have much water. Accordingly, Rabbi Yehoshua explains that when there is “a darkness of waters” in the clouds, there is also “a gathering of waters,” as rain will fall from them.,The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion is that which is taught in a baraita: The upper waters do not stand in any defined place; rather, they are suspended by the word of God, and their fruit is rainwater, as it is stated: “Who waters the mountains from His upper chambers; the earth is full of the fruit of Your works” (Psalms 104:13). In accordance with whose opinion is this statement? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua. And Rabbi Eliezer, how does he explain this verse? Rabbi Eliezer could say: That verse from Psalms is written with regard to the handiwork of the Holy One, Blessed be He, not the upper waters.,Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: The entire world drinks from the runoff of the Garden of Eden, as it is stated: “And a river went out of Eden to water the garden” (Genesis 2:10). It was taught in a baraita: From the runoff of a beit kor, a field in which a kor of seed can be planted, which is approximately seventy-five thousand square cubits, a field in which a half-se’a tarkav, of seed can be sown, i.e. one-sixtieth the size of a beit kor, can be watered. If the runoff from a beit kor is sufficient for a field one-sixtieth its size, it can be inferred that the rest of the world is one-sixtieth the size of the Garden of Eden.,The Sages taught in a baraita: The area of the land of Egypt is four hundred parasangs parsa by four hundred parasangs. And this is one sixtieth the size of Cush, and Cush itself is one sixtieth the size of the rest of the world. And the world is one sixtieth of the Garden of Eden, and the Garden of Eden is one sixtieth of Eden itself, and Eden is one sixtieth of Gehenna. You find that the entire world is like a pot cover for Gehenna, as Eden, which is far larger than the rest of the world, is only one sixtieth the size of Gehenna. And some say: Gehenna has no measure. And some say that Eden has no measure.,Rabbi Oshaya said: What is the meaning of that which is written about Babylonia: “You who dwells on many waters, abundant in storehouses” (Jeremiah 51:13)? What caused Babylonia to have storehouses full of grain? You must say that it is due to the fact that it resides on many waters, the Tigris and the Euphrates Rivers, which render its land easy to irrigate. Similarly, Rav said: Babylonia is wealthy since it can grow crops for harvest even without rain. Abaye said: We hold that it is better for a land to be swampy like Babylonia, and not dry, as crops in Babylonia grow all year.,On the third of the month of Marḥeshvan one starts to request rain by inserting the phrase: And give dew and rain, in the blessing of the years, the ninth blessing of the Amida. Rabban Gamliel says: One starts to request rain on the seventh of Marḥeshvan, which is fifteen days after the festival of Sukkot. Rabban Gamliel explains that one waits these extra four days so that the last pilgrim of the Jewish people, who traveled to Jerusalem on foot for the Festival, can reach the Euphrates River without being inconvenienced by rain on his journey home.,Rabbi Elazar said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Gamliel, that one does not begin to request rain until the seventh of Marḥeshvan. It is taught in a baraita that Ḥaya says: And in the Diaspora one does not begin to request rain until sixty days into the season, i.e., sixty days after the autumnal equinox. Rav Huna bar Ḥiyya said that Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Ḥaya.,The Gemara asks: Is that so? But they raised a dilemma before Shmuel: From when does one mention: And give dew and rain? He said to them: From when they bring wood into the house of Tavut the bird hunter rishba. This is apparently a different date than that mentioned by Ḥaya. The Gemara suggests: Perhaps this and that are one measure of time, i.e., Shmuel merely provided a sign of sixty days after the autumnal equinox.,A dilemma was raised before the Sages: Is the sixtieth day itself treated as part of the period before the sixtieth day or is it included in the period after the sixtieth day? The Gemara answers. Come and hear that there is a dispute in this regard. Rav said: The sixtieth day is part of the period after the sixtieth day, and Shmuel said: The sixtieth day is part of the period before the sixtieth.,Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: And your mnemonic to remember the divergent opinions is: Those above require water; those below do not require water. Since water flows downward, those who live in low places receive their water from above and are generally in less need of additional water. Accordingly, Shmuel, who lived in the lowlands of Babylonia, ruled that one begins to request for rain later, whereas Rav, who studied in Eretz Yisrael, which is higher in elevation and has a greater need for rain, stated an earlier date. Rav Pappa said: The halakha is that the sixtieth day is part of the period after the sixtieth day, as stated by Rav, and therefore one begins to mention the request for rain on the sixtieth day after the autumnal equinox.,seventeenth of Marḥeshvan arrived and rain has not fallen, individuals, but not the entire community, begin to fast three fasts for rain. How are these fasts conducted? As the fast begins in the morning, one may eat and drink after dark, and one is permitted during the days of the fasts themselves to engage in the performance of work, in bathing, in smearing oil on one’s body, in wearing shoes, and in conjugal relations. If the New Moon of Kislev arrived and rain has still not fallen, the court decrees three fasts on the entire community. Similar to the individual fasts, everyone may eat and drink after dark, and they are permitted to engage in the performance of work, in bathing, in smearing one’s body with oil, in wearing shoes, and in conjugal relations.,Who are these individuals mentioned in the mishna? Rav Huna said: This is referring to the Sages, who are held to a higher standard and are expected to undertake fasts even when ordinary people do not. And Rav Huna further said: The individuals who fast the three fasts do so on a Monday, and on the next Thursday, and again on the following Monday.,The Gemara asks: What is Rav Huna teaching us? We already learned this (15b): The court may not decree a fast on the community starting from a Thursday, so as not to cause an increase in prices. Rather, the first three fasts are established on Monday, and Thursday, and Monday. What does Rav Huna’s statement add to this ruling?,The Gemara answers: Rav Huna’s comment is necessary, lest you say that this applies only to a community, but that in the case of an individual, no, the series of three fasts does not have to start on a Monday. This opinion is also taught in a baraita with regard to those mentioned in the mishna: When the individuals begin to fast, they fast on a Monday, a Thursday, and a Monday. And if one of the fast days occurs on a day with special observances, they interrupt the sequence for New Moons,' 25b its shoots do not replenish themselves when its stump is cut down, so too, Heaven forbid, with regard to a righteous person, his shoots will not replenish themselves, i.e., he will be unable to recover from misfortune. Therefore, it is stated “cedar” in the verse. Just as the cedar grows new shoots after its stump is cut down, so too, a righteous individual will thrive again. Conversely, were it stated “cedar” and were it not stated “palm tree,” I would say that just as in the case of a cedar, it does not produce fruit, so too, a righteous man, God forbid, does not produce fruit, i.e., he will have no reward in the World-to-Come. Therefore, it is stated “palm tree” and it is also stated “cedar.”,§ The Gemara asks: And do a cedar’s shoots really replenish themselves? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: With regard to one who bought a tree from another to chop it down for wood, without acquiring total ownership of the tree, he must lift his ax a handbreadth and chop there, so as to allow the tree to grow back? However, in a case where he purchased a large sycamore, he must leave two handbreadths. In the case of an untrimmed sycamore, he must leave three handbreadths. In a situation where one bought reeds or grapevines, he may chop only from the first knot and above. In the case of palms or cedars, one may dig down and uproot it, as its shoots will not replenish themselves. This baraita indicates that cedars will not grow new shoots after they have been cut down.,The Gemara answers: With what are we dealing here? With other species of cedars. This is in accordance with the opinion of Rabba bar Huna, as Rabba bar Huna said: There are ten species of cedars, as it is stated: “I will plant in the wilderness the cedar, the acacia tree and myrtle and the oil tree; I will set in the desert cypress, the plane tree and the larch together” (Isaiah 41:19). The seven species mentioned in this verse are all called cedars, as are three additional species.,The Sages taught: An incident occurred involving Rabbi Eliezer, who decreed a complete cycle of thirteen fasts upon the congregation, but rain did not fall. At the end of the last fast, the congregation began to exit the synagogue. He said to them: Have you prepared graves for yourselves? If rain does not fall, we will all die of hunger. All the people burst into tears, and rain fell.,There was another incident involving Rabbi Eliezer, who descended to serve as prayer leader before the ark on a fast day. And he recited twenty-four blessings, but he was not answered. Rabbi Akiva descended before the ark after him and said: Our Father, our King, we have no king other than You. Our Father, our King, for Your sake, have mercy on us. And rain immediately fell. The Sages were whispering among themselves that Rabbi Akiva was answered while his teacher, Rabbi Eliezer, was not. A Divine Voice emerged and said: It is not because this Sage, Rabbi Akiva, is greater than that one, Rabbi Eliezer, but that this one is forgiving, and that one is not forgiving. God responded to Rabbi Akiva’s forgiving nature in kind by sending rain.,§ The Sages taught in a baraita: How much rain must fall for the community to cease their fast for rain? If the rain penetrates the soil by the full depth of the blade of a plow until the spot where it bends, they may cease fasting; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say a different measurement: If the earth is completely dry, the soil must become moist to the depth of a single handbreadth. For average soil, they must wait until the moisture reaches a depth of two handbreadths. If it is worked soil, i.e., soil that has been plowed, the moisture must reach to a depth of three handbreadths.,It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: There is no handbreadth of rain from above toward which the water of the deep does not rise three handbreadths. The Gemara raises an objection: But isn’t it taught in another baraita that the water of the deep rises two handbreadths? The Gemara explains: This is not difficult. Here, in first baraita, it is referring to worked land, which water penetrates faster, whereas there, in the second baraita, it is referring to unworked land, which water does not penetrate as easily, and therefore the water of the deep rises only two handbreadths.,Rabbi Elazar said: When the water libation was poured during the festival of Sukkot, these waters of the deep say to the other waters of the deep: Let your water flow, as I hear the voices of two of our friends, the wine libation and the water libation, which are both poured on the altar. As it is stated: “Deep calls to deep at the sound of your channels, all Your waves and Your billows are gone over me” (Psalms 42:8), i.e., the upper waters of the deep call to the lower waters of the deep when they hear the sound of the libations.,Rabba said: I have seen this angel in charge of water, Ridya, in the form of a calf whose lips were parted, standing between the lower waters of the deep and the upper waters of the deep. To the upper waters of the deep, he said: Distill your water and let it rain. To the lower waters of the deep, he said: Let your water flow from below, as it is stated: “The flowers appear on the earth; the time of the singing has come, and the voice of the turtledove tur is heard in our land” (Song of Songs 2:12). The appearance of flowers in this verse alludes to the libations, as both the blooming of flowers and pouring of these libations are annual events. The time of the singing is referring to the singing of the Festival. Finally, the term tur in Aramaic can also mean an ox; in this context, it is interpreted as a reference to the angel Ridya.,§ The mishna teaches: If they were fasting for rain and rain fell for them before sunrise, they need not complete their fast until the evening. The Sages taught: If they were fasting for rain and rain fell for them before sunrise, they need not complete their fast, as the obligation to fast does not come into effect until sunrise. However, if rain fell after sunrise, they must complete their fast. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: If rain fell before midday, they need not complete their fast; however, if it rains after midday, they must complete their fast.,Rabbi Yosei says: If rain falls before the ninth hour, three hours into the afternoon, they need not complete their fast; if it rains after the ninth hour of the day, they must complete their fast, as we found with regard to Ahab, king of Israel, who fasted from the ninth hour and onward, as it is stated: “And it came to pass, when Ahab heard these words, that he rent his clothes, and put sackcloth upon his flesh, and fasted, and lay in sackcloth, and went softly. And the word of the Lord came to Elijah the Tishbite saying: Do you see how Ahab humbles himself before Me?” (I\xa0Kings 21:27–29). According to tradition, this occurred in the ninth hour.,Rabbi Yehuda Nesia decreed a fast, and rain fell for them after sunrise. He thought to complete the fast, but Rabbi Ami said to him that we learned: Before noon and after noon, i.e., the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. Shmuel HaKatan decreed a fast, and rain fell for them before sunrise. The people thought to say: This is a sign of the praiseworthiness of the community, as we merited rainfall even before we prayed.,He said to them: I will tell you a parable. To what is this matter comparable? To a situation where there is a slave who requests a reward from his master, either food or livelihood, and the master says to his ministers: Give him what he asks for and let me not hear his voice, as I would rather not have to listen to him. Here, too, evidently God has no desire to hear our prayers.,Again, on another occasion, Shmuel HaKatan decreed a fast, and rain fell for them after sunset. Based on his previous response, the people thought to say: This is a sign of the praiseworthiness of the community, as God listened to our prayers all day. Shmuel HaKatan said to them: It is not a sign of the praiseworthiness of the community. Rather, I will tell you a parable. To what is this matter comparable? To a situation where there is a slave who requests a reward from his master, and the master says to his ministers: Wait until he pines away and suffers, and afterward give it to him. Here too, the delay is not to the congregation’s credit.,The Gemara asks: But if so, according to the opinion of Shmuel HaKatan, what is considered the praiseworthiness of the community; what are the circumstances in which approval is shown from Heaven? The Gemara explains: When the prayer leader recites: He Who makes the wind blow, and the wind blows; and when he recites: And the rain fall, and rain falls.,The mishna teaches: An incident occurred in which the court decreed a fast in Lod, and when rain fell they ate and drank, and afterward they recited hallel. The Gemara asks: And let us recite hallel at the outset, without delay. Why did they first go home and eat? Abaye and Rava both said: Because one recites hallel ' None |
|
65. Babylonian Talmud, Yevamot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer ben Hyrcanus • Eliezer, Rabbi • R. Eliezer • Rabbi Eliezer
Found in books: Kanarek (2014), Biblical narrative and formation rabbinic law, 96, 97, 98; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 167; Schremer (2010), Brothers Estranged: Heresy, Christianity and Jewish Identity in Late Antiquity, 172; Taylor (2012), The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea, 71
| 61b ויש לו בנים לא ישא אילונית שהיא זונה האמורה בתורה דאזונה כהנים הוא דמפקדי וישראל לא מפקדי משום הכי קתני כהן,אמר רב הונא מאי טעמא דר\' יהודה דכתיב (הושע ד, י) אכלו ולא ישבעו הזנו ולא יפרוצו כל ביאה שאין בה פירצה אינה אלא בעילת זנות,תניא רבי אליעזר אומר כהן לא ישא את הקטנה אמר ליה רב חסדא לרבה פוק עיין בה דלאורתא בעי לה רב הונא מינך נפק עיין בה רבי אליעזר סבר לה כרבי מאיר וסבר לה כרבי יהודה,סבר לה כרבי מאיר דחייש למיעוטא וסבר לה כרבי יהודה דאמר אילונית זונה הויא,וכרבי מאיר מי סבר לה והתניא קטן וקטנה לא חולצין ולא מיבמין דברי רבי מאיר אמרו לו לרבי מאיר יפה אמרת שאין חולצין (דברים כה, ז) איש כתיב בפרשה ומקשינן אשה לאיש אלא מאי טעמא אין מיבמין,א"ל קטן שמא ימצא סריס קטנה שמא תמצא אילונית ונמצאו פוגעין בערוה ותניא קטנה מתייבמת ואינה חולצת דברי רבי אליעזר,וכרבי יהודה מי סבר לה והתניא זונה זונה כשמה דברי רבי אליעזר רבי עקיבא אומר זונה זו מופקרת רבי מתיא בן חרש אומר אפי\' הלך בעלה להשקותה ובא עליה בדרך עשאה זונה,רבי יהודה אומר זונה זו אילונית וחכמים אומרים אין זונה אלא גיורת ומשוחררת ושנבעלה בעילת זנות ר\' אליעזר אומר פנוי הבא על הפנויה שלא לשם אישות עשאה זונה,אלא אמר רב אדא בר אהבה הכא בכ"ג עסקינן לאימת קני לה לכי גדלה בעולה היא,אמר רבא מכלי לב אי דקדשה אבוה מההיא שעתא הוא דקני לה ואי דקדשה נפשה הא רבי אליעזר היא ולא רבנן,אלא אמר רבא לעולם בכהן הדיוט וחיישינן שמא תתפתה עליו א"ה ישראל נמי פתויי קטנה אונס הוא ואונס בישראל מישרא שרי,רב פפא אמר בכ"ג והאי תנא הוא דתניא (ויקרא כא, ג) בתולה יכול קטנה ת"ל אשה אי אשה יכול בוגרת ת"ל בתולה הא כיצד יצתה מכלל קטנות ולכלל בגרות לא באתה,רב נחמן בר יצחק אמר האי תנא הוא דתניא בתולה אין בתולה אלא נערה וכן הוא אומר (בראשית כד, טז) והנערה טובת מראה מאד בתולה,ר\' אלעזר אומר פנוי הבא על הפנויה שלא לשם אישות עשאה זונה אמר רב עמרם אין הלכה כרבי אלעזר:,63b מן החטא מקרי ליה רב יהודה לרב יצחק בריה (קהלת ז, כו) ומוצא אני מר ממות את האשה א"ל כגון מאן כגון אמך,והא מתני ליה רב יהודה לרב יצחק בריה אין אדם מוצא קורת רוח אלא מאשתו ראשונה שנאמר (משלי ה, יח) יהי מקורך ברוך ושמח מאשת נעוריך וא"ל כגון מאן כגון אמך מתקיף תקיפא ועבורי מיעברא במלה,היכי דמי אשה רעה אמר אביי מקשטא ליה תכא ומקשטא ליה פומא רבא אמר מקשטא ליה תכא ומהדרא ליה גבא,אמר רבי חמא בר חנינא כיון שנשא אדם אשה עונותיו מתפקקין שנאמר (משלי יח, כב) מצא אשה מצא טוב ויפק רצון מה\' במערבא כי נסיב אינש איתתא אמרי ליה הכי מצא או מוצא מצא דכתיב מצא אשה מצא טוב מוצא דכתיב ומוצא אני מר ממות את האשה,אמר רבא אשה רעה מצוה לגרשה דכתיב (משלי כב, י) גרש לץ ויצא מדון וישבות דין וקלון ואמר רבא אשה רעה וכתובתה מרובה צרתה בצדה דאמרי אינשי בחברתה ולא בסילתא ואמר רבא קשה אשה רעה כיום סגריר שנאמר (משלי כז, טו) דלף טורד ביום סגריר ואשת מדינים נשתוה,ואמר רבא בא וראה כמה טובה אשה טובה וכמה רעה אשה רעה כמה טובה אשה טובה דכתיב מצא אשה מצא טוב אי בגוה משתעי קרא כמה טובה אשה טובה שהכתוב משבחה אי בתורה משתעי קרא כמה טובה אשה טובה שהתורה נמשלה בה כמה רעה אשה רעה דכתיב ומוצא אני מר ממות את האשה אי בגוה משתעי קרא כמה רעה אשה רעה שהכתוב מגנה אי בגיהנם משתעי קרא כמה רעה אשה רעה שגיהנם נמשלה בה,(ירמיהו יא, יא) הנני מביא רעה אשר לא יוכלו לצאת ממנה אמר רב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה זו אשה רעה וכתובתה מרובה (איכה א, יד) נתנני ה\' בידי לא אוכל קום אמר רב חסדא אמר מר עוקבא בר חייא זו אשה רעה וכתובתה מרובה במערבא אמרו זה שמזונותיו תלוין בכספו,(דברים כח, לב) בניך ובנותיך נתונים לעם אחר אמר רב חנן בר רבא אמר רב זו אשת האב (דברים לב, כא) בגוי נבל אכעיסם אמר רב חנן בר רבא אמר רב זו אשה רעה וכתובתה מרובה רבי אליעזר אומר אלו הצדוקים וכן הוא אומר (תהלים יד, א) אמר נבל בלבו אין אלהים וגו\',במתניתא תנא אלו אנשי ברבריא ואנשי מרטנאי שמהלכין ערומים בשוק שאין לך משוקץ ומתועב לפני המקום יותר ממי שמהלך בשוק ערום רבי יוחנן אמר אלו חברים אמרו ליה לר\' יוחנן אתו חברי לבבל שגא נפל אמרו ליה מקבלי שוחדא תריץ יתיב,גזרו על ג\' מפני ג\' גזרו על הבשר מפני המתנות גזרו על המרחצאות מפני הטבילה,קא מחטטי שכבי מפני ששמחים ביום אידם שנאמר (שמואל א יב, טו) והיתה יד ה\' בכם ובאבותיכם אמר רבה בר שמואל זו חטוטי שכבי דאמר מר בעון חיים מתים מתחטטין,א"ל רבא לרבה בר מארי כתיב (ירמיהו ח, ב) לא יאספו ולא יקברו לדומן על פני האדמה יהיו וכתיב (ירמיהו ח, ג) ונבחר מות מחיים אמר ליה נבחר מות לרשעים שלא יחיו בעולם הזה ויחטאו ויפלו בגיהנם,כתוב בספר בן סירא אשה טובה מתנה טובה לבעלה וכתיב טובה בחיק ירא אלהים תנתן אשה רעה צרעת לבעלה מאי תקנתיה יגרשנה ויתרפא מצרעתו אשה יפה אשרי בעלה מספר ימיו כפלים,העלם עיניך מאשת חן פן תלכד במצודתה אל תט אצל בעלה למסוך עמו יין ושכר כי בתואר אשה יפה רבים הושחתו ועצומים כל הרוגיה רבים היו פצעי רוכל המרגילים לדבר ערוה כניצוץ מבעיר גחלת ככלוב מלא עוף כן בתיהם מלאים מרמה,אל תצר צרת מחר כי לא תדע מה ילד יום שמא מחר בא ואיננו נמצא מצטער על העולם שאין שלו מנע רבים מתוך ביתך ולא הכל תביא ביתך רבים יהיו דורשי שלומך גלה סוד לאחד מאלף,אמר רבי אסי אין בן דוד בא עד שיכלו כל הנשמות שבגוף שנאמר (ישעיהו נז, טז) כי רוח מלפני יעטוף ונשמות אני עשיתי תניא רבי אליעזר אומר כל מי שאין עוסק בפריה ורביה כאילו שופך דמים שנאמר (בראשית ט, ו) שופך דם האדם באדם דמו ישפך וכתיב בתריה ואתם פרו ורבו,רבי יעקב אומר כאילו ממעט הדמות שנאמר (בראשית ט, ו) כי בצלם אלהים עשה את האדם וכתיב בתריה ואתם פרו וגו\' בן עזאי אומר כאילו שופך דמים וממעט הדמות שנאמר ואתם פרו ורבו,אמרו לו לבן עזאי יש נאה דורש ונאה מקיים נאה מקיים ואין נאה דורש ואתה נאה דורש ואין נאה מקיים אמר להן בן עזאי ומה אעשה שנפשי חשקה בתורה אפשר לעולם שיתקיים על ידי אחרים,תניא אידך רבי אליעזר אומר כל מי שאין עוסק בפריה ורביה כאילו שופך דמים שנאמר שופך דם האדם וסמיך ליה ואתם פרו וגו\' רבי אלעזר בן עזריה אומר כאילו ממעט הדמות בן עזאי אומר וכו\' אמרו לו לבן עזאי יש נאה דורש וכו\',ת"ר (במדבר י, לו) ובנחה יאמר שובה ה\' רבבות אלפי ישראל ' None | 61b and he has children, he may not marry a sexually underdeveloped woman, as she is the zona about whom it is stated in the Torah that a priest may not marry her. It is priests who were commanded not to marry a zona, but Israelites were not commanded this. It is due to that reason that he taught the first clause of the mishna about a priest, even though that halakha applies equally to Israelites.,Rav Huna said: What is the reason for the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda? As it is written: “And they shall eat, and not have enough, they shall commit harlotry, and shall not increase” (Hosea 4:10). He expounds the verse as follows: Any intercourse that does not have the possibility to increase the population because the woman is incapable of having children, is nothing other than licentious sexual intercourse.,§ It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer says: A priest may not marry a minor. Rav Ḥisda said to Rabba: Go and investigate this halakha, as in the evening Rav Huna will ask you the reason for Rabbi Eliezer’s ruling. He went and investigated it, and arrived at the following conclusion: Rabbi Eliezer holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, and he also holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda.,Rabba explains: He holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, who says that one must be concerned for the minority. Rabbi Meir does not allow one to assume that an unknown case is similar to the majority of cases. Consequently, one must take into account the possibility that a minor will turn out to be sexually underdeveloped, although this will not be true of most individuals. And he also holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who said that a sexually underdeveloped woman is a zona and therefore forbidden to a priest.,The Gemara challenges Rabba’s explanation: And does Rabbi Eliezer hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir? Isn’t it taught in a baraita: A boy minor and a girl minor may not perform ḥalitza or levirate marriage; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. The Rabbis said to Rabbi Meir: You spoke well when you said that they may not perform ḥalitza, as the term “man” is written in the passage of ḥalitza (Deuteronomy 25:7–10), which limits the halakha to an adult male, and we compare a woman to a man and therefore limit ḥalitza to an adult woman. However, what is the reason that they may not perform levirate marriage?,Rabbi Meir said to them: A boy minor may not perform levirate marriage lest he be found to be a eunuch, i.e., one who is incapable of fathering children for his late brother. Similarly, a girl minor may not perform levirate marriage lest she be found to be sexually underdeveloped when she grows up. In either case, the mitzva of levirate marriage does not apply, and they turn out to have encountered a forbidden relative. And it was taught in a different baraita: A girl minor enters into levirate marriage but does not perform ḥalitza; this is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. This proves that Rabbi Eliezer disagrees with Rabbi Meir and is not concerned that a girl may turn out to be sexually underdeveloped.,The Gemara continues to challenge Rabba’s explanation of Rabbi Eliezer’s ruling. And does Rabbi Eliezer hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda? Wasn’t it is taught in a baraita: The zona forbidden to a priest is as the name zona implies, i.e., a married woman who committed adultery; this is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Akiva says: A zona is a woman, even an unmarried woman, who is available to all, i.e., she has intercourse with whoever is interested. Rabbi Matya ben Ḥarash says: Even if her husband went to make her drink the bitter waters after she disregarded his warning not to seclude herself with a certain man, and he had intercourse with her on the way, he has thereby caused her to become a zona because she was forbidden to him at the time, despite the fact that she is his wife.,Rabbi Yehuda says: A zona is a sexually underdeveloped woman. And the Rabbis say: The term zona applies only to a female convert, a freed maidservant, and one who engaged in licentious sexual intercourse. Rabbi Elazar says: Even in the case of an unmarried man who had intercourse with an unmarried woman not for the purpose of marriage, he has thereby caused her to become a zona. This baraita proves that Rabbi Eliezer does not agree with Rabbi Yehuda.,Rather, Rav Adda bar Ahava said that Rabbi Eliezer’s ruling that a priest may not marry a minor must be explained differently: Here we are dealing with a High Priest, and the problem is as follows: When can he acquire her as his wife? Only when she is grown up. However, if they had started living together as husband and wife when she was a minor, then when she is grown up and the marriage can legally take effect, she is already a non-virgin, and a High Priest is commanded to marry a virgin.,Rava said: This explanation is without reason. If her father betrothed her to her husband, her husband acquired her from that time, as betrothal that a father carries out on his daughter’s behalf when she is a minor is effective by Torah law. And if the minor betrothed herself, is this Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion and not that of the Rabbis? The Rabbis would certainly agree that a High Priest may not marry a minor under these circumstances.,Rather, Rava said: Actually, Rabbi Eliezer’s ruling includes a common priest, and the reason he cannot marry a minor is that we are concerned lest she be seduced by another man, due to her tender age and naïveté, while married to him. The Gemara asks: If so, the same concern should apply to an Israelite also. The Gemara answers: The seduction of a minor is considered rape, and a rape victim remains permitted to her husband in a case where she is married to an Israelite, but not if she is married to a priest.,Rav Pappa said: Rabbi Eliezer’s ruling applies specifically to a High Priest, and it is the opinion of this tanna, as it is taught in a baraita that when the verse states: “A virgin of his own people shall he take for a wife isha” (Leviticus 21:14), one might have thought a High Priest may marry a minor; the verse therefore states that he must marry a woman isha, i.e., an adult. If he must marry a woman, one might have thought it means a grown woman. The verse therefore states that he must marry a virgin, which excludes a grown woman, who is considered only a partial virgin because her hymen is not fully intact. How so? He must marry a woman who has left the class of minority but who has not yet reached the class of grown womanhood, i.e., he must marry a maiden.,Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: It is the opinion of this tanna, as it is taught in a baraita: The High Priest must marry a virgin, and the term virgin refers only to a maiden. And a verse similarly states: “And the maiden was very fair to look upon, a virgin, and no man had known her” (Genesis 24:16).,The baraita cited above mentioned that Rabbi Elazar says: In the case of an unmarried man who had intercourse with an unmarried woman not for the purpose of marriage, he has caused her to become a zona. Rav Amram said: The halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar.,A man may not neglect the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply unless he already has children. Beit Shammai say: One fulfills this mitzva with two males, and Beit Hillel say: A male and a female, as it is stated: “Male and female He created them” (Genesis 5:2).,he already has children he may neglect the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply, but he may not neglect the mitzva to have a wife. This supports what Rav Naḥman said in the name of Shmuel, who said: Even if a man has several children, it is prohibited to remain without a wife, as it is stated: “It is not good that the man should be alone” (Genesis 2:18).,And some say a different version of the inference from the mishna: If he already has children, he may neglect the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply and he may also neglect the mitzva to have a wife. Shall we say this is a conclusive refutation of what Rav Naḥman said that Shmuel said? The Gemara responds: No, it means that if he does not have children he must marry a woman capable of bearing children, whereas if he has children he may marry a woman who is not capable of bearing children. A practical difference between a man who has children and one who does not is whether he is permitted to sell a Torah scroll in order to marry a woman capable of having children. This is permitted only for one who does not yet have children.,§ The mishna states that Beit Shammai say that one fulfills the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply when he has two males. The Gemara asks: What is the reason of Beit Shammai? The Gemara answers: We learn this from Moses as it is written: “The sons of Moses, Gershom and Eliezer” (I\xa0Chronicles 23:15). Since Moses did not have any other children, two sons must be sufficient to fulfill the mitzva. And the reason of Beit Hillel is that we learn from the creation of the world, as mankind was created male and female. The Gemara asks: And Beit Shammai, let them learn from the creation of the world as well. The Gemara answers that Beit Shammai could say to you: We do not derive a case where it is possible'63b from sin. We should therefore show our gratitude to them. The Gemara cites a related incident: Rav Yehuda was teaching Torah to Rav Yitzḥak, his son, and they encountered the verse: “And I find more bitter than death the woman” (Ecclesiastes 7:26). His son said to him: For example, whom? His father replied: For example, your mother.,The Gemara asks: Didn’t Rav Yehuda teach Rav Yitzḥak, his son, the following baraita: A man finds peace of mind only with his first wife, as it is stated: “Let your fountain be blessed, and have joy from the wife of your youth” (Proverbs 5:18), and his son said to him: For example, whom, and his father responded in this case as well: For example, your mother. This indicates that Rav Yehuda did find peace of mind with his wife. The Gemara answers: She was aggressive and forceful, but she was easily appeased.,The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances when a woman is considered a bad wife? Abaye said: She arranges a table for him and arranges her mouth for him at the same time. In other words, although she prepares food for him, she verbally abuses him while he eats. Rava said: She arranges a table for him and then turns her back to him, displaying her lack of interest in his company.,Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina said: Once a man marries a woman his iniquities crumble mitpakekin, as it is stated: “Whoever finds a wife finds good, and obtains veyafek favor of the Lord” (Proverbs 18:22). In the West, i.e., Eretz Yisrael, when a man married a woman they would say to him as follows: Matza or motze? In other words, they would ask the groom if the appropriate passage for his wife is that verse, which begins with the word matza, as it is written: Whoever finds matza a wife finds good, or whether the more appropriate verse is the one beginning with the word motze, as it is written: “And I find motze more bitter than death the woman” (Ecclesiastes 7:26).,Rava said: It is a mitzva to divorce a bad wife, as it is written: “Cast out the scorner and contention will depart; strife and shame will cease” (Proverbs 22:10). And Rava said: A bad wife whose marriage contract settlement is too large for her husband to pay in the event of a divorce, her rival wife is at her side. In other words, the only way for him to improve matters is to take another wife. As people say in the well-known adage: The way to trouble a woman is with her peer and not with a thorn. And Rava said: A bad wife is as troublesome as a day of heavy rain, as it is stated: “A continual dropping on a very rainy day and a contentious woman are alike” (Proverbs 27:15).,And Rava said: Come and see how good a good wife is and how bad a bad wife is. How good is a good wife? As it is written: Whoever finds a wife finds good. If the verse speaks of her, a wife, this demonstrates how good a good wife is, as the Bible praises her. If the verse speaks metaphorically of the Torah, it nevertheless indicates how good a good wife is, as the Torah is compared to her. Conversely, how bad is a bad wife? As it is written: “And I find more bitter than death the woman.” If the verse speaks of her, this demonstrates how bad a bad wife is, as the Bible condemns her. If the verse speaks metaphorically of Gehenna, it still demonstrates how bad a bad wife is, as Gehenna is compared to her.,The Gemara cites further statements on the same issue. The verse states: “Behold, I will bring evil upon them, which they shall not be able to escape” (Jeremiah 11:11). Rav Naḥman said that Rabba bar Avuh said: This is a bad wife whose marriage contract is large. Similarly, with regard to the verse: “The Lord has given me into the hands of those against whom I cannot stand” (Lamentations 1:14), Rav Ḥisda said that Mar Ukva bar Ḥiyya said: This is a bad wife whose marriage contract is large. In the West, Eretz Yisrael, they said this verse is referring to one whose food is dependent on his money. He is forced to purchase his food with cash, as he does not possess land of his own.,With regard to the verse: “Your sons and your daughters shall be given to another people” (Deuteronomy 28:32), Rav Ḥa bar Rava said that Rav said: This is a reference to the children’s father’s wife, their stepmother. With regard to the verse: “I will provoke them with a vile nation” (Deuteronomy 32:21), Rav Ḥa bar Rava said that Rav said: This is a bad wife whose marriage contract is large. Rabbi Eliezer says that these are apostates, and so too the verse states: “The vile man has said in his heart: There is no God, they have dealt corruptly” (Psalms 14:1), which proves that an apostate is called vile.,It was taught in a baraita with regard to the verse: “I will provoke them with a vile nation,” that these are the inhabitants of Barbarya and the inhabitants of Martenai, who walk naked in the marketplace, as none is more despised and abominable before the Omnipresent than one who walks naked in the marketplace. Rabbi Yoḥa said: These are the Ḥabbarim, a sect of Persian priests. The Gemara relates: When they said to Rabbi Yoḥa: The Ḥabbarim have come to Babylonia, he shuddered and fell of his chair, out of concern for the Jews living there. They said to him: There is a way to deal with their persecution, as they accept bribes. Upon hearing that not all was lost, he straightened himself and sat in his place once again.,Apropos the Ḥabbarim, the Gemara cites the following statement of the Sages: The Ḥabbarim were able to issue decrees against the Jewish people with regard to three matters, due to three transgressions on the part of the Jewish people. They decreed against meat, i.e., they banned ritual slaughter, due to the failure of the Jewish people to give the priests the gifts of the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw. They decreed against Jews bathing in bathhouses, due to their neglect of ritual immersion.,Third, they exhumed the dead from their graves because the Jews rejoice on the holidays of the gentiles, as it is stated: “Then shall the hand of the Lord be against you and against your fathers” (I\xa0Samuel 12:15). Rabba bar Shmuel said: This verse is referring to exhuming the dead, which upsets both the living and the dead, as the Master said: Due to the iniquity of the living, the dead are exhumed.,Rava said to Rabba bar Mari: It is written: “They shall not be gathered nor buried; they shall be for dung upon the face of the earth” (Jeremiah 8:2), and it is written: “And death shall be chosen rather than life” (Jeremiah 8:3). If death will be so indecent that their bodies will not even be buried, why would people choose death over life? Rabba bar Mari said to him: The latter verse does not refer to the previously described state of affairs, but rather it means: Death is preferable for the wicked, as it is better that they not live in this world and sin and consequently descend into Gehenna.,The Gemara cites more statements concerning women. It is written in the book of Ben Sira: A good wife is a good gift for her husband. And it is written: A good one will be placed in the bosom of a God-fearing man; a bad wife is a plague to her husband. What is his remedy? He should divorce her and he will be cured of his plague. A beautiful wife, happy is her husband; the number of his days are doubled. His pleasure in her beauty makes him feel as though he has lived twice as long.,Turn your eyes from a graceful woman who is married to another man, lest you be caught in her trap. Do not turn to her husband to mix wine and strong drink with him, which can lead to temptation. For on account of the countece of a beautiful woman many have been destroyed, and her slain is a mighty host. Furthermore, many have been the wounded peddlers. This is referring to men who travel from place to place to sell women’s jewelry. Their frequent dealings with women lead their husbands to harm the peddlers. Those who accustom themselves to licentious matters are like a spark that ignites a coal. As a cage is full of birds, so are their houses full of deceit.,The Gemara quotes additional statements from the book of Ben Sira: Do not suffer from tomorrow’s trouble, that is, do not worry about problems that might arise in the future, as you do not know what a day will bring. Perhaps when tomorrow comes, the individual who was so worried will not be among the living, and he was consequently upset over a world that is not his. Prevent a crowd from inside your house, do not let many people enter, and do not even bring all your friends into your house. Make sure, however, that a crowd seeks your welfare, and that you have many allies. Reveal a secret to only one in a thousand, since most people are unable to keep a secret.,Rabbi Asi said: The Messiah, son of David, will not come until all the souls of the body have been finished, i.e., until all souls that are destined to inhabit physical bodies will do so. As it is stated: “For the spirit that enwraps itself is from Me, and the souls that I have made” (Isaiah 57:16). It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer says: Anyone who does not engage in the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply is considered as though he sheds blood, as it is stated: “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed” (Genesis 9:6), and it is written immediately afterward: “And you, be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 9:7).,Rabbi Ya’akov says: It is as though he diminishes the Divine Image, as it is stated: “For in the image of God He made man” (Genesis 9:6), and it is written immediately afterward: “And you, be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 9:7). Ben Azzai says: It is as though he sheds blood and also diminishes the Divine Image, as it is stated: “And you, be fruitful and multiply,” after the verse that alludes to both shedding blood and the Divine Image.,They said to ben Azzai: There is a type of scholar who expounds well and fulfills his own teachings well, and another who fulfills well and does not expound well. But you, who have never married, expound well on the importance of procreation, and yet you do not fulfill well your own teachings. Ben Azzai said to them: What shall I do, as my soul yearns for Torah, and I do not wish to deal with anything else. It is possible for the world to be maintained by others, who are engaged in the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply.,It is similarly taught in another baraita that Rabbi Eliezer says: Anyone who does not engage in the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply is considered as though he sheds blood, as it is stated: “Whoever sheds the blood of man,” and it is stated near it: “And you, be fruitful and multiply.” Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya says: It is as though he diminishes the Divine Image. Ben Azzai says: It is as though he both sheds blood and diminishes the Divine Image. They said to ben Azzai: There is a type of scholar who expounds well, etc.,The Sages taught with regard to the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply: “And when it rested, he would say: Return, Lord, to the ten thousands of the thousands of Israel” (Numbers 10:36). ' None |
|
66. None, None, nan (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer, R. • Eliezer, Rr.
Found in books: Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 229, 235; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 33
|
67. None, None, nan (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer ben Hyrcanus • Eliezer ben Yossi Haglili • Eliezer,
Found in books: Rubenstein(1995), The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods, 128; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 145
|
68. None, None, nan (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer, R.
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 98; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 178
|
69. Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah, None
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer ben Hyrkanos, Rabbi • Rabbi Eliezer
Found in books: Poorthuis Schwartz and Turner (2009), Interaction Between Judaism and Christianity in History, Religion, Art, and Literature, 59; Schremer (2010), Brothers Estranged: Heresy, Christianity and Jewish Identity in Late Antiquity, 203
| 17a והנאך ועליו נתפסת אמר לו עקיבא הזכרתני פעם אחת הייתי מהלך בשוק העליון של ציפורי ומצאתי אחד ומתלמידי ישו הנוצרי ויעקב איש כפר סכניא שמו אמר לי כתוב בתורתכם (דברים כג, יט) לא תביא אתנן זונה וגו\' מהו לעשות הימנו בהכ"ס לכ"ג ולא אמרתי לו כלום,אמר לי כך לימדני ישו הנוצרי (מיכה א, ז) כי מאתנן זונה קבצה ועד אתנן זונה ישובו ממקום הטנופת באו למקום הטנופת ילכו,והנאני הדבר על ידי זה נתפסתי למינות ועברתי על מה שכתוב בתורה (משלי ה, ח) הרחק מעליה דרכך זו מינות ואל תקרב אל פתח ביתה זו הרשות ואיכא דאמרי הרחק מעליה דרכך זו מינות והרשות ואל תקרב אל פתח ביתה זו זונה וכמה אמר רב חסדא ארבע אמות,ורבנן האי מאתנן זונה מאי דרשי ביה כדרב חסדא דאמר רב חסדא כל זונה שנשכרת לבסוף היא שוכרת שנאמר (יחזקאל טז, לד) ובתתך אתנן ואתנן לא נתן לך ותהי להפך,ופליגא דרבי פדת דא"ר פדת לא אסרה תורה אלא קריבה של גלוי עריות בלבד שנא\' (ויקרא יח, ו) איש איש אל כל שאר בשרו לא תקרבו לגלות ערוה,עולא כי הוה אתי מבי רב הוה מנשק להו לאחתיה אבי ידייהו ואמרי לה אבי חדייהו ופליגא דידיה אדידיה דאמר עולא קריבה בעלמא אסור משום לך לך אמרין נזירא סחור סחור לכרמא לא תקרב,(משלי ל, טו) לעלוקה שתי בנות הב הב מאי הב הב אמר מר עוקבא קול שתי בנות שצועקות מגיהנם ואומרות בעוה"ז הבא הבא ומאן נינהו מינות והרשות איכא דאמרי אמר רב חסדא אמר מר עוקבא קול גיהנם צועקת ואומרת הביאו לי שתי בנות שצועקות ואומרות בעולם הזה הבא הבא,(משלי ב, יט) כל באיה לא ישובון ולא ישיגו אורחות חיים וכי מאחר שלא שבו היכן ישיגו ה"ק ואם ישובו לא ישיגו אורחות חיים,למימרא דכל הפורש ממינות מיית והא ההיא דאתאי לקמיה דרב חסדא ואמרה ליה קלה שבקלות עשתה בנה הקטן מבנה הגדול ואמר לה רב חסדא טרחו לה בזוודתא ולא מתה,מדקאמרה קלה שבקלות עשתה מכלל דמינות נמי הויא בה ההוא דלא הדרא בה שפיר ומש"ה לא מתה,איכא דאמרי ממינות אין מעבירה לא והא ההיא דאתאי קמיה דרב חסדא וא"ל ר"ח זוידו לה זוודתא ומתה מדקאמרה קלה שבקלות מכלל דמינות נמי הויא בה,ומעבירה לא והתניא אמרו עליו על ר"א בן דורדיא שלא הניח זונה אחת בעולם שלא בא עליה פעם אחת שמע שיש זונה אחת בכרכי הים והיתה נוטלת כיס דינרין בשכרה נטל כיס דינרין והלך ועבר עליה שבעה נהרות בשעת הרגל דבר הפיחה אמרה כשם שהפיחה זו אינה חוזרת למקומה כך אלעזר בן דורדיא אין מקבלין אותו בתשובה,הלך וישב בין שני הרים וגבעות אמר הרים וגבעות בקשו עלי רחמים אמרו לו עד שאנו מבקשים עליך נבקש על עצמנו שנאמר (ישעיהו נד, י) כי ההרים ימושו והגבעות תמוטינה אמר שמים וארץ בקשו עלי רחמים אמרו עד שאנו מבקשים עליך נבקש על עצמנו שנאמר (ישעיהו נא, ו) כי שמים כעשן נמלחו והארץ כבגד תבלה,אמר חמה ולבנה בקשו עלי רחמים אמרו לו עד שאנו מבקשים עליך נבקש על עצמנו שנאמר (ישעיהו כד, כג) וחפרה הלבנה ובושה החמה אמר כוכבים ומזלות בקשו עלי רחמים אמרו לו עד שאנו מבקשים עליך נבקש על עצמנו שנאמר (ישעיהו לד, ד) ונמקו כל צבא השמים,אמר אין הדבר תלוי אלא בי הניח ראשו בין ברכיו וגעה בבכיה עד שיצתה נשמתו יצתה בת קול ואמרה ר"א בן דורדיא מזומן לחיי העולם הבא והא הכא בעבירה הוה ומית התם נמי כיון דאביק בה טובא כמינות דמיא,בכה רבי ואמר יש קונה עולמו בכמה שנים ויש קונה עולמו בשעה אחת ואמר רבי לא דיין לבעלי תשובה שמקבלין אותן אלא שקורין אותן רבי,ר\' חנינא ור\' יונתן הוו קאזלי באורחא מטו להנהו תרי שבילי חד פצי אפיתחא דעבודת כוכבים וחד פצי אפיתחא דבי זונות אמר ליה חד לחבריה ניזיל אפיתחא דעבודת כוכבים'' None | 17a and you derived pleasure from it, and because of this you were held responsible by Heaven. Rabbi Eliezer said to him: Akiva, you are right, as you have reminded me that once I was walking in the upper marketplace of Tzippori, and I found a man who was one of the students of Jesus the Nazarene, and his name was Ya’akov of Kefar Sekhanya. He said to me: It is written in your Torah: “You shall not bring the payment to a prostitute, or the price of a dog, into the house of the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 23:19). What is the halakha: Is it permitted to make from the payment to a prostitute for services rendered a bathroom for a High Priest in the Temple? And I said nothing to him in response.,He said to me: Jesus the Nazarene taught me the following: It is permitted, as derived from the verse: “For of the payment to a prostitute she has gathered them, and to the payment to a prostitute they shall return” (Micah 1:7). Since the coins came from a place of filth, let them go to a place of filth and be used to build a bathroom.,And I derived pleasure from the statement, and due to this, I was arrested for heresy by the authorities, because I transgressed that which is written in the Torah: “Remove your way far from her, and do not come near the entrance of her house” (Proverbs 5:8). “Remove your way far from her,” this is a reference to heresy; “and do not come near the entrance of her house,” this is a reference to the ruling authority. The Gemara notes: And there are those who say a different interpretation: “Remove your way far from her,” this is a reference to heresy and the ruling authority; “and do not come near the entrance of her house,” this is a reference to a prostitute. And how much distance must one maintain from a prostitute? Rav Ḥisda said: Four cubits.,With regard to the derivation of the verse by Jesus the Nazarene, the Gemara asks: And what do the Sages derive from this phrase: “Payment to a prostitute”? The Gemara answers: They explain it in accordance with the opinion of Rav Ḥisda, as Rav Ḥisda says: Any prostitute who hires herself out to others for money will become so attached to this practice that ultimately, when others no longer wish to hire her, she will hire others to engage in intercourse with her. As it is stated: “And in that you gave payment, and no payment is given to you, therefore you are contrary” (Ezekiel 16:34).,The Gemara comments: And Rav Ḥisda, who stated above that the Torah requires one to maintain a distance of four cubits from a prostitute, disagrees with the opinion of Rabbi Pedat. As Rabbi Pedat says: The Torah prohibited only intimacy that involves engaging in prohibited sexual relations, as it is stated: “None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness” (Leviticus 18:6). The prohibition against intimacy in the Torah applies exclusively to sexual intercourse, and all other kinds of intimacy that do not include actual intercourse are not included in the prohibition.,The Gemara relates: When Ulla would come from the study hall, he would kiss his sisters on their hands. And some say: On their chests. And the Gemara points out that this action of his disagrees with another ruling that Ulla himself issued, as Ulla says: Mere intimacy with a woman with whom one is prohibited from engaging in sexual intercourse is prohibited, due to the maxim: Go, go, we say to a nazirite, go around, go around but do not come near to the vineyard. Just as a nazirite is warned not even to come into close proximity of a vineyard lest he consume a product of the vine, so too one is obligated to distance himself from anyone with whom intercourse is forbidden.,§ In connection to the earlier mention of heresy and the ruling authorities, the Gemara cites a verse: “The horseleech has two daughters: Give, give” (Proverbs 30:15). What is meant by “give, give”? Mar Ukva says: This is the voice of the two daughters who cry out from Gehenna due to their suffering; and they are the ones who say in this world: Give, give, demanding dues and complete allegiance. And who are they? They are heresy and the ruling authority. There are those who say that Rav Ḥisda says that Mar Ukva says: The voice of Gehenna cries out and says: Bring me two daughters who cry and say in this world: Give, give.,The following verse in Proverbs makes reference to a foreign woman, which according to the Sages is a euphemism for heresy: “None that go to her return, neither do they attain the paths of life” (Proverbs 2:19). The Gemara asks: Since those that are drawn to heresy do not return, from where would they attain the path of life? Why is it necessary for the verse to add that they do not attain the paths of life? The Gemara explains that this is what the verse is saying: In general, those who go to her do not return, and even if they return, they do not attain the paths of life, i.e., the pain of their regret will shorten their lives.,The Gemara asks: Is this to say that anyone who separates himself from heresy and returns from his mistaken ways must die? But what about that woman who came before Rav Ḥisda to confess to him, and she said to him: The lightest of the light, i.e., the least of the sins that she committed, is that she conceived her younger son from engaging in intercourse with her older son. And Rav Ḥisda said to her: Prepare funeral shrouds for her, i.e., yourself, as you will certainly die soon, but she did not die.,The above incident refutes the claim that anyone who repents for the sin of heresy must die, as from the fact that she said that the lightest of the light of her sins was that she conceived one son from engaging in intercourse with another son, by inference one can learn that she was also involved in heresy, and yet she did not die. The Gemara answers: That is a case where the woman did not repent properly, and due to that reason she did not die.,There are those who say there is a different version of the objection to the Gemara’s statement that those who repent for the sin of heresy must die: Is that to say that if one repents for the sin of heresy, yes, the result is death, whereas if one repents for the sin of forbidden sexual intercourse he does not die? But what about that woman who came before Rav Ḥisda to confess to him and Rav Ḥisda said to those present: Prepare funeral shrouds for her, and she died? The Gemara answers: From the fact that she said: The lightest of the light, by inference one can learn that she was also involved in heresy.,The Gemara asks: And is it correct that one who repents of the sin of forbidden sexual intercourse does not die? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: They said about Rabbi Elazar ben Durdayya that he was so promiscuous that he did not leave one prostitute in the world with whom he did not engage in sexual intercourse. Once, he heard that there was one prostitute in one of the cities overseas who would take a purse full of dinars as her payment. He took a purse full of dinars and went and crossed seven rivers to reach her. When they were engaged in the matters to which they were accustomed, a euphemism for intercourse, she passed wind and said: Just as this passed wind will not return to its place, so too Elazar ben Durdayya will not be accepted in repentance, even if he were to try to repent.,This statement deeply shocked Elazar ben Durdayya, and he went and sat between two mountains and hills and said: Mountains and hills, pray for mercy on my behalf, so that my repentance will be accepted. They said to him: Before we pray for mercy on your behalf, we must pray for mercy on our own behalf, as it is stated: “For the mountains may depart, and the hills be removed” (Isaiah 54:10). He said: Heaven and earth, pray for mercy on my behalf. They said to him: Before we pray for mercy on your behalf, we must pray for mercy on our own behalf, as it is stated: “For the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment” (Isaiah 51:6).,He said: Sun and moon, pray for mercy on my behalf. They said to him: Before we pray for mercy on your behalf, we must pray for mercy on our own behalf, as it is stated: “Then the moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed” (Isaiah 24:23). He said: Stars and constellations, pray for mercy on my behalf. They said to him: Before we pray for mercy on your behalf, we must pray for mercy on our own behalf, as it is stated: “And all the hosts of heaven shall molder away” (Isaiah 34:4).,Elazar ben Durdayya said: Clearly the matter depends on nothing other than myself. He placed his head between his knees and cried loudly until his soul left his body. A Divine Voice emerged and said: Rabbi Elazar ben Durdayya is destined for life in the World-to-Come. The Gemara explains the difficulty presented by this story: And here Elazar ben Durdayya was guilty of the sin of forbidden sexual intercourse, and yet he died once he repented. The Gemara answers: There too, since he was attached so strongly to the sin, to an extent that transcended the physical temptation he felt, it is similar to heresy, as it had become like a form of idol worship for him.,When Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi heard this story of Elazar ben Durdayya, he wept and said: There is one who acquires his share in the World-to-Come only after many years of toil, and there is one who acquires his share in the World-to-Come in one moment. And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi further says: Not only are penitents accepted, but they are even called: Rabbi, as the Divine Voice referred to Elazar ben Durdayya as Rabbi Elazar ben Durdayya.,§ In relation to the issue of distancing oneself from idol worship and prostitution, the Gemara relates: Rabbi Ḥanina and Rabbi Yonatan were once walking along the road when they came to a certain two paths, one of which branched off toward the entrance of a place of idol worship, and the other one branched off toward the entrance of a brothel. One said to the other: Let us go by the path that leads to the entrance of the place of idol worship,'' None |
|
70. None, None, nan
Tagged with subjects: • Eliezer • Eliezer Ha-Darshan (R.)
Found in books: Fishbane (2003), Biblical Myth and Rabbinic Mythmaking, 355; Lavee (2017), The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity, 74
|
