Home About Network of subjects Linked subjects heatmap Book indices included Search by subject Search by reference Browse subjects Browse texts

Tiresias: The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Source Database



484
Anon., Avot Derabbi Nathan A, 12
NaN


Intertexts (texts cited often on the same page as the searched text):

37 results
1. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 7.3 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

7.3. וְלֹא תִתְחַתֵּן בָּם בִּתְּךָ לֹא־תִתֵּן לִבְנוֹ וּבִתּוֹ לֹא־תִקַּח לִבְנֶךָ׃ 7.3. neither shalt thou make marriages with them: thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son."
2. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 12.5 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

12.5. וַיִּקַּח אַבְרָם אֶת־שָׂרַי אִשְׁתּוֹ וְאֶת־לוֹט בֶּן־אָחִיו וְאֶת־כָּל־רְכוּשָׁם אֲשֶׁר רָכָשׁוּ וְאֶת־הַנֶּפֶשׁ אֲשֶׁר־עָשׂוּ בְחָרָן וַיֵּצְאוּ לָלֶכֶת אַרְצָה כְּנַעַן וַיָּבֹאוּ אַרְצָה כְּנָעַן׃ 12.5. And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son, and all their substance that they had gathered, and the souls that they had gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came."
3. Hebrew Bible, Leviticus, 11.33-11.35 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

11.33. וְכָל־כְּלִי־חֶרֶשׂ אֲשֶׁר־יִפֹּל מֵהֶם אֶל־תּוֹכוֹ כֹּל אֲשֶׁר בְּתוֹכוֹ יִטְמָא וְאֹתוֹ תִשְׁבֹּרוּ׃ 11.34. מִכָּל־הָאֹכֶל אֲשֶׁר יֵאָכֵל אֲשֶׁר יָבוֹא עָלָיו מַיִם יִטְמָא וְכָל־מַשְׁקֶה אֲשֶׁר יִשָּׁתֶה בְּכָל־כְּלִי יִטְמָא׃ 11.35. וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר־יִפֹּל מִנִּבְלָתָם עָלָיו יִטְמָא תַּנּוּר וְכִירַיִם יֻתָּץ טְמֵאִים הֵם וּטְמֵאִים יִהְיוּ לָכֶם׃ 11.33. And every earthen vessel whereinto any of them falleth, whatsoever is in it shall be unclean, and it ye shall break." 11.34. All food therein which may be eaten, that on which water cometh, shall be unclean; and all drink in every such vessel that may be drunk shall be unclean." 11.35. And every thing whereupon any part of their carcass falleth shall be unclean; whether oven, or range for pots, it shall be broken in pieces; they are unclean, and shall be unclean unto you."
4. Hebrew Bible, Psalms, 34.15 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

34.15. סוּר מֵרָע וַעֲשֵׂה־טוֹב בַּקֵּשׁ שָׁלוֹם וְרָדְפֵהוּ׃ 34.15. Depart from evil, and do good; Seek peace, and pursue it."
5. Hebrew Bible, Isaiah, 54.13 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE)

54.13. וְכָל־בָּנַיִךְ לִמּוּדֵי יְהוָה וְרַב שְׁלוֹם בָּנָיִךְ׃ 54.13. And all thy children shall be taught of the LORD; and great shall be the peace of thy children."
6. Mishnah, Avot, 1.12-1.15 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

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." 1.13. He [also] used to say: one who makes his name great causes his name to be destroyed; one who does not add [to his knowledge] causes [it] to cease; one who does not study [the Torah] deserves death; on who makes [unworthy] use of the crown [of learning] shall pass away." 1.14. He [also] used to say: If I am not for myself, who is for me? But if I am for my own self [only], what am I? And if not now, when?" 1.15. Shammai used to say: make your [study of the] Torah a fixed practice; speak little, but do much; and receive all men with a pleasant countece."
7. Mishnah, Hagigah, 2.2 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

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."
8. Mishnah, Middot, 2.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

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."
9. Mishnah, Sukkah, 5.1-5.3 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

5.1. The flute was for five or six days. This refers to the flute at the Bet Hashoevah [the place of the water-drawing] which does not override Shabbat or the festival day. They said: he who has not seen the Simchat Bet Hashoevah has never seen rejoicing in his life." 5.2. At the conclusion of the first festival day of Sukkot they descended to the Women’s Court (Ezrat Nashim) and they would make there a great enactment. And golden candlesticks were there, and four golden bowls on the top of each of them and four ladders to each, and four youths drawn from the young priests, and in their hands there were jars of oil containing one hundred and twenty logs which they poured into the bowls." 5.3. From the worn-out pants and belts of the priests they made wicks and with them they kindled the lamps. And there was not a courtyard in Jerusalem that was not illuminated by the light of the Bet Hashoevah."
10. New Testament, 1 Peter, 1.22, 3.11 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

1.22. Seeing you have purified your souls in your obedience to the truth through the Spirit in sincere brotherly affection, love one another from the heart fervently: 3.11. Let him turn away from evil, and do good. Let him seek peace, and pursue it.
11. New Testament, 1 Thessalonians, 4.9 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

4.9. But concerning brotherly love, you have no need that one write to you. For you yourselves are taught by God to love one another
12. New Testament, 2 Corinthians, 6.6 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

13. New Testament, Acts, 28.11 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

28.11. After three months, we set sail in a ship of Alexandria which had wintered in the island, whose sign was "The Twin Brothers.
14. New Testament, Romans, 12.9 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

12.9. Let love be without hypocrisy. Abhor that which is evil. Cling to that which is good.
15. Tosefta, Berachot, 2.12 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

2.12. Zavim, Zavot, Niddot, and women who gave birth are permitted to read the Torah and to learn Mishna, Midrash, laws, and Aggadot. And men who had a seminal emission (Baalei Keraim) are forbidden in all of them. Rebbi Yossi says, “He can learn the laws that he is familiar with, as long as he does not arrange the Mishna.”"
16. Tosefta, Horayot, 2.7 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

17. Tosefta, Kiddushin, 1.5 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

1.5. A ship is acquired with drawing (meshikhah). Rabbi Natan says: A ship and documents are acquired with drawing and with a contract. Which is drawing? Whether he drew [the animal], whether he drove [it], whether he called to it and it came after him—this is drawing. Which is handing over (mesirah)? Anyone who handed over to him the halter and he took it—this is handing over. In what cases did they say that moveable property is acquired with drawing? In the public road or in a courtyard which doesn't belong to either [party in the transaction]. On the property of the buyer, whenever he accepts it, he acquires. On the property of the seller, when he lifts it or until he takes it out of the owner's property. On the property of the one with whom he deposited [the animal], until he [the bailee] accepts it [the responsibility of looking after the item for the buyer] or until he [the buyer] rents the place [where the item is stored with the bailee]."
18. Tosefta, Qiddushin, 1.5 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

1.5. A ship is acquired with drawing (meshikhah). Rabbi Natan says: A ship and documents are acquired with drawing and with a contract. Which is drawing? Whether he drew [the animal], whether he drove [it], whether he called to it and it came after him—this is drawing. Which is handing over (mesirah)? Anyone who handed over to him the halter and he took it—this is handing over. In what cases did they say that moveable property is acquired with drawing? In the public road or in a courtyard which doesn't belong to either [party in the transaction]. On the property of the buyer, whenever he accepts it, he acquires. On the property of the seller, when he lifts it or until he takes it out of the owner's property. On the property of the one with whom he deposited [the animal], until he [the bailee] accepts it [the responsibility of looking after the item for the buyer] or until he [the buyer] rents the place [where the item is stored with the bailee]."
19. Tosefta, Shabbat, 7, 6 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

20. Tosefta, Sukkah, 4.1, 4.3-4.4 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

4.1. Formerly when they were beholding the joy at the ceremony of the water drawing, the men were beholding it from within the Temple precincts and the women from without. But when the supreme court saw that they behaved in a frivolous manner they erected three balconies in the court, facing the three sides, that from them the women might behold the rejoicing at the ceremony. So when they were beholding the rejoicing at the ceremony the sexes were not mixed up together." 4.3. There is a story of Rabbi Shim’on ben Gamliel: he was dancing with eight lighted torches, and as he did so none of them fell to the ground. And when he prostrated himself he put his finger on the pavement, bending himself and kissing it, and then stood upright again. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Haiah said: All the days of the rejoicing at the water-drawing our eyes had no sleep, for we rose early in the morning for the morning sacrifice. We went to the synagogue, then to the college, then to do additional prayers, then to eat and drink, then to afternoon prayer, then to the evening sacrifice, then to the rejoicing of the water-drawing." 4.4. Rabbi Yehudah said: Whoever has not seen the basilica-synagogue of Alexandria has never seen the great glory of Israel. It is something like a large colonnade, with porches within porches, and accommodating sometimes double the number of those that followed Moses from Egypt. There were seventy-one golden chairs there, corresponding to the seventy-one elders, and each of the chairs was worth twenty-five myriad talents of gold. In the center was a wooden dais, and the sexton stood upon it with a scarf (as a flag) in his hand. At the close of each benediction he waved the scarf, and all the people answered “Amen”. The people were not seated together, but the goldsmiths were by themselves, the blacksmiths by themselves, the embroiderers by themselves, so that when a poor man came in he joined his fellow tradesmen, and in this way was enabled to obtain a means of livelihood."
21. Anon., Genesis Rabba, 56.2 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)

56.2. אָמַר לְיִצְחָק, בְּנִי, רוֹאֶה אַתָּה מַה שֶּׁאֲנִי רוֹאֶה, אָמַר לוֹ הֵן. אָמַר לִשְׁנֵי נְעָרָיו, רוֹאִים אַתֶּם מַה שֶּׁאֲנִי רוֹאֶה, אָמְרוּ לוֹ לַאו. אָמַר הוֹאִיל וַחֲמוֹר אֵינוֹ רוֹאֶה וְאַתֶּם אֵין אַתֶּם רוֹאִים (בראשית כב, ה): שְׁבוּ לָכֶם פֹּה עִם הַחֲמוֹר. וּמִנַּיִין שֶׁהָעֲבָדִים דּוֹמִין לִבְהֵמָה, מֵהָכָא, שְׁבוּ לָכֶם פֹּה עִם הַחֲמוֹר, עַם הַחֲמוֹר. רַבָּנָן מַיְתֵי לֵיהּ מֵהָכָא מִמַּתַּן תּוֹרָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כ, ט י): שֵׁשֶׁת יָמִים תַּעֲבֹד וְעָשִׂיתָ כָּל מְלַאכְתֶּךָ וגו' אַתָּה וּבִנְךָ וּבִתֶּךָ וְעַבְדְּךָ וַאֲמָתְךָ וּבְהֶמְתֶּךָ, אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק עָתִיד הַמָּקוֹם לִרָחֵק מִבְּעָלָיו, וּלְעוֹלָם, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (תהלים קלב, יד): זֹאת מְנוּחָתִי עֲדֵי עַד פֹּה אֵשֵׁב, לִכְשֶׁיָּבוֹא אוֹתוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב בּוֹ (זכריה ט, ט): עָנִי וְרֹכֵב עַל חֲמוֹר. (בראשית כב, ה): וַאֲנִי וְהַנַּעַר נֵלְכָה עַד כֹּה, אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי נֵלֵךְ וְנִרְאֶה מַה יִּהְיֶה בְּסוֹפוֹ שֶׁל כֹּה. (בראשית כב, ה): וְנִשְׁתַּחֲוֶה וְנָשׁוּבָה אֲלֵיכֶם, בִּשְֹּׂרוֹ שֶׁהוּא חוֹזֵר מֵהַר הַמּוֹרִיָה בְּשָׁלוֹם. אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק הַכֹּל בִּזְכוּת הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה, וְאַבְרָהָם לֹא חָזַר מֵהַר הַמּוֹרִיָּה בְּשָׁלוֹם אֶלָּא בִּזְכוּת הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה, וְנִשְׁתַּחֲוֶה וְנָשׁוּבָה אֲלֵיכֶם. יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא נִגְאֲלוּ אֶלָּא בִּזְכוּת הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות ד, לא): וַיַּאֲמֵן הָעָם וגו' וַיִקְדּוּ וַיִּשְׁתַּחֲווּ. הַתּוֹרָה לֹא נִתְּנָה אֶלָּא בִּזְכוּת הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כד, א): וְהִשְׁתַּחֲוִיתֶם מֵרָחֹק. חַנָּה לֹא נִפְקְדָה אֶלָּא בִּזְכוּת הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמואל א א, כח): וַיִּשְׁתַּחוּ שָׁם לַה': הַגָּלֻיּוֹת אֵינָן מִתְכַּנְסוֹת אֶלָּא בִּזְכוּת הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ישעיה כז, יג): וְהָיָה בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא יִתָּקַע בְּשׁוֹפָר גָּדוֹל וגו' וְהִשְׁתַּחֲווּ לַה' בְּהַר הַקֹּדֶשׁ בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם. בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ לֹא נִבְנָה אֶלָּא בִּזְכוּת הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהלים צט, ט): רוֹמְמוּ ה' אֱלֹהֵינוּ וְהִשְׁתַּחֲווּ לְהַר קָדְשׁוֹ. הַמֵּתִים אֵינָן חַיִּין אֶלָּא בִּזְכוּת הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהלים צה, ו): בֹּאוּ נִשְׁתַּחֲוֶה וְנִכְרָעָה נִבְרְכָה לִפְנֵי ה' עֹשֵׂנוּ. 56.2. He then said to him [Itzchak]: ‘Itzchak, my son do you what I see?’ ‘Yes,’ he replied. He said to his two servants: ‘Do you see what I see?’ ‘No,’ they answered. ‘Since you do not see it, “stay here with the donkey,” (Gen. 22:5), he bade them, because you are like the donkey, it follows that slaves are like cattle. The Rabbis proved [it from this verse spoken at] the Revelation: Six days you shall labor, and do all your work … you, nor your daughter, nor your man-servant, nor your maid-servant, nor your cattle (Ex. 20:10). R. Itzchak said: This place shall one day be alienated from its Owner. For ever? [No], for it is stated, “This is My resting-place forever; here will I dwell for I have desired it” (Ps. 132:14) — when he comes of whom it is written, “Lowly, and riding upon a donkey” (Zech. 1:9). “And I and the lad will go just there” — Ad Koh. Said R. Joshua b. Levi: We will go and see what is to be the eventual outcome of Koh. “And we will worship, and we will come back to you.” He informed him [through these words] that he [Itzchak] would return safely from Mount Moriah. R. Itzchak said: Everything happened as a reward for worshipping. Abraham returned in peace from Mount Moriah only as a reward for worshipping. “And we will worship, and we will come back to you.” Israel were redeemed only as a reward for worshipping: “And the people believed … then they bowed their heads and worshipped” (Ex. 4:31). The Torah was given only as a reward for worshipping: “And worship y’all afar off” (Ex. 24:1). Hannah was remembered only as a reward for worshipping: “And they worshipped before the Lord” (I Sam. 1:19). The exiles will be reassembled only as a reward for worshipping: “And it shall come to pass in that day, that a great horn shall be blown; and they shall come that were lost … and that were dispersed … and they shall worship Ad-nai in the holy mountain at Jerusalem” (Isa. 27:13). The Temple was built only as a reward for worshipping: “Exalt y’all Ad-nai our God, and worship at His holy mountain” (Ps. 99:9). The dead will come to life again only as a reward for worshipping: “O come, let us worship and bend the knee; let us kneel before Ad-nai our Maker (Ps 95:6)."
22. Anon., Leviticus Rabba, 9.3, 20.2 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)

9.3. דָּבָר אַחֵר, וְשָׂם דֶּרֶךְ, אָמַר רַבִּי יַנַּאי וְשָׁם כְּתִיב דְּשָׁיֵם אָרְחֵיהּ, סַגֵּי שָׁוֵי, מַעֲשֶׂה בְּרַבִּי יַנַּאי שֶׁהָיָה מְהַלֵּךְ בַּדֶּרֶךְ וְרָאָה אָדָם אֶחָד שֶׁהָיָה מְשֻׁפַּע בְּיוֹתֵר, אֲמַר לֵיהּ מַשְׁגַּח רַבִּי מִתְקַבְּלָא גַבָּן, אֲמַר לוֹ אִין, הִכְנִיסוֹ לְבֵיתוֹ הֶאֱכִילוֹ וְהִשְׁקָהוּ, בְּדָקוֹ בְּמִקְרָא וְלֹא מְצָאוֹ, בְּמִשְׁנָה וְלֹא מְצָאוֹ, בְּאַגָּדָה וְלֹא מְצָאוֹ, בְּתַלְמוּד וְלֹא מְצָאוֹ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ סַב בְּרִיךְ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ יְבָרֵךְ יַנַּאי בְּבֵיתֵיהּ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ אִית בָּךְ אֲמַר מַה דַּאֲנָא אֲמַר לָךְ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ אִין, אֲמַר לֵיהּ אֱמֹר אָכוֹל כַּלְבָּא פִּיסְתְּיָא דְּיַנַּאי, קָם תַּפְסֵיהּ אֲמַר לֵיהּ יְרוּתָתִי גַבָּךְ דְּאַתְּ מוֹנֵעַ לִי, אֲמַר לֵיהּ וּמַה יַרְתּוּתָךְ גַבִּי, אֲמַר לֵיהּ חַד זְמַן הֲוֵינָא עָבַר קַמֵּי בֵּית סִפְרָא, וּשְׁמָעִית קָלְהוֹן דְּמֵנִיקַיָא אָמְרִין (דברים לג, ד): תּוֹרָה צִוָּה לָנוּ משֶׁה מוֹרָשָׁה קְהִלַּת יַעֲקֹב, מוֹרָשָׁה קְהִלַּת יַנַּאי אֵין כְּתִיב כָּאן אֶלָּא קְהִלַּת יַעֲקֹב. אֲמַר לֵיהּ לָמָּה זָכִיתָ לְמֵיכְלָא עַל פְּתוֹרִי, אֲמַר לוֹ מִיּוֹמַי לָא שְׁמָעִית מִילָא בִּישָׁא וְחִזַּרְתִּי לְמָרַהּ, וְלָא חָמֵית תְּרֵין דְּמִתְכַּתְּשִׁין דֵּין עִם דֵּין וְלָא יְהַבִית שְׁלָמָא בֵּינֵיהוֹן. אֲמַר לֵיהּ כָּל הֲדָא דֶּרֶךְ אֶרֶץ גַּבָּךְ וְקָרִיתָךְ כַּלְבָּא, קָרָא עֲלֵיהּ שָׁם דֶּרֶךְ, דְּשָׁיֵם אָרְחֵיהּ סַגֵּי שָׁוֵי, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בַּר רַב נַחְמָן עֶשְׂרִים וְשִׁשָּׁה דוֹרוֹת קָדְמָה דֶּרֶךְ אֶרֶץ אֶת הַתּוֹרָה, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (בראשית ג, כד): לִשְׁמֹר אֶת דֶּרֶךְ עֵץ הַחַיִּים, דֶּרֶךְ, זוֹ דֶּרֶךְ אֶרֶץ, וְאַחַר כָּךְ עֵץ הַחַיִּים, זוֹ תּוֹרָה. אַרְאֶנּוּ בְּיֵשַׁע אֱלֹהִים, אָמַר רַבִּי אַבָּהוּ זֶה אֶחָד מִן הַמִּקְרָאוֹת שֶׁיְשׁוּעָתוֹ שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא יְשׁוּעָתָן שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל (תהלים פ, ג): וּלְכָה לִישֻׁעָתָה לָּנוּ. 20.2. דָּבָר אַחֵר, אַחֲרֵי מוֹת, רַבִּי לֵוִי פָּתַח (תהלים עה, ה): אָמַרְתִּי לַהוֹלְלִים אַל תָּהוֹלוּ, לַהוֹלְלִים, לִמְעַרְבְּבַיָּא, אֵלּוּ שֶׁלִּבָּם מָלֵא עֲלֵיהֶם חַלְחוֹלִיּוֹת רָעוֹת, רַבִּי לֵוִי הֲוָה צָוַח לְהוֹן אַלְלַיָיא, שֶׁמְבִיאִין אַלְלַי לָעוֹלָם. (תהלים עה, ה): וְלָרְשָׁעִים אַל תָּרִימוּ קָרֶן, אָמַר לָהֶם הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לָרְשָׁעִים, הַצַּדִּיקִים לֹא שָׂמְחוּ בְּעוֹלָמִי וְאַתֶּם מְבַקְּשִׁין לִשְׂמֹחַ. רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן מְנַסְיָא אָמַר תַּפּוּחַ עֲקֵבוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן הָיָה מַכְּהֶה גַּלְגַּל חַמָּה, קְלַסְתֵּר פָּנָיו עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה, וְאַל תִּתְמַהּ, בְּנֹהַג שֶׁבָּעוֹלָם אָדָם עוֹשֶׂה דִיסְקָרִי, אֶחָד לוֹ וְאֶחָד לְבֵיתוֹ, שֶׁל מִי עוֹשֶׂה נָאֶה לֹא אֶת שֶׁלּוֹ, כָּךְ אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן נִבְרָא לְתַשְׁמִישׁ שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא וְגַלְגַּל חַמָּה לְתַשְׁמִישָׁן שֶׁל בְּרִיּוֹת. אָמַר רַבִּי לֵוִי בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי חָמָא בַּר חֲנִינָא, שְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה חֻפּוֹת קָשַׁר לוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא בְּגַן עֵדֶן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (יחזקאל כח, יג): בְּעֵדֶן גַּן אֱלֹהִים הָיִיתָ כָּל אֶבֶן יְקָרָה מְסֻכָתֶךָ אֹדֶם פִּטְדָה וְיַהֲלֹם תַּרְשִׁישׁ שֹׁהַם וְיָשְׁפֵה סַפִּיר נֹפֶךְ וּבָרְקַת וְזָהָב מְלֶאכֶת תֻּפֶּיךָ וּנְקָבֶיךָ בָּךְ בְּיוֹם הִבָּרַאֲךָ כּוֹנָנוּ. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר חַד עֲשַׂר, וְרַבָּנָן אָמְרֵי עֲשַׂר, וְלָא פְּלִיגֵי מַאן דַעֲבַד לְהוֹן תְּלַת עֲשַׂר עָבֵיד כָּל אֶבֶן יְקָרָה מְסֻכָתֶךָ תְּלַת, מַאן דַּעֲבַד לְהוֹן חַד סַר, עֲבֵיד לְהוּ חָדָא, מַאן דַעֲבַד לְהוֹן עֲשָׂרָה לָא עֲבֵיד חַד מִנְהוֹן, וְאַחַר כָּל הַשֶּׁבַח הַזֶּה (בראשית ג, יט): כִּי עָפָר אַתָּה וְאֶל עָפָר תָּשׁוּב. אַבְרָהָם לֹא שָׂמַח בְּעוֹלָמִי וְאַתֶּם מְבַקְּשִׁים לִשְמֹחַ. נוֹלַד לוֹ בֵּן לְמֵאָה שָׁנָה וּבַסּוֹף אָמַר לוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא (בראשית כב, ב): קַח נָא אֶת בִּנְךָ, וְהָלַךְ אַבְרָהָם מַהֲלַךְ שְׁלשֶׁת יָמִים, לְאַחַר שְׁלשָׁה יָמִים רָאָה עָנָן קָשׁוּר עַל גַּב הָהָר, אָמַר לוֹ בְּנִי רוֹאֶה אַתָּה מַה שֶּׁאֲנִי רוֹאֶה, אָמַר לֵיהּ הֵן, מָה אַתָּה רוֹאֶה אָמַר לֵיהּ עָנָן קָשׁוּר עַל גַּב הָהָר אֲנִי רוֹאֶה, אָמַר לְיִשְׁמָעֵאל וְלֶאֱלִיעֶזֶר רוֹאִים אַתֶּם כְּלוּם, אָמְרוּ לֵיהּ לָאו, אָמַר לָהֶם הוֹאִיל וְאֵינְכֶם רוֹאִים כְּלוּם וַחֲמוֹר זֶה אֵינוֹ רוֹאֶה (בראשית כב, ה): שְׁבוּ לָכֶם פֹּה עִם הַחֲמוֹר, עַם הַדּוֹמִים לַחֲמוֹר. נָטַל אֶת יִצְחָק בְּנוֹ וְהֶעֱלָהוּ הָרִים וְהוֹרִידוֹ גְּבָעוֹת, הֶעֱלָהוּ עַל אֶחָד מִן הֶהָרִים וּבָנָה מִזְבֵּחַ וְסִדֵּר עֵצִים וְעָרַךְ מַעֲרָכָה וְנָטַל אֶת הַסַּכִּין לְשָׁחֲטוֹ, וְאִלּוּלֵי שֶׁקְּרָאוֹ מַלְאָךְ מִן הַשָּׁמַיִם כְּבָר הָיָה נִשְׁחָט. תֵּדַע שֶׁכֵּן, שֶׁחָזַר יִצְחָק אֵצֶל אִמּוֹ, וְאָמְרָה לוֹ אָן הָיִיתָ בְּרִי, אָמַר לָהּ נְטָלַנִּי אָבִי וְהֶעֱלַנִי הָרִים וְהוֹרִידַנִּי גְבָעוֹת וכו', אָמְרָה וַוי עַל בְּרִי דְרֵיוָתָא, אִלּוּלֵי הַמַּלְאָךְ כְּבָר הָיִיתָ שָׁחוּט, אָמַר לָהּ אִין. בְּאוֹתָהּ שָׁעָה צָוְחָה שִׁשָּׁה קוֹלוֹת כְּנֶגֶד שִׁשָּׁה תְּקִיעוֹת, אָמְרוּ לֹא הִסְפִּיקָה אֶת הַדָּבָר עַד שֶׁמֵּתָה, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (בראשית כג, ב): וַיָּבֹא אַבְרָהָם לִסְפֹּד לְשָׂרָה וְלִבְכֹּתָהּ, וּמֵהֵיכָן בָּא, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן רַבִּי סִימוֹן אָמַר מֵהַר הַמּוֹרִיָה בָּא, וְהָיָה אַבְרָהָם מְהַרְהֵר בְּלִבּוֹ וְאוֹמֵר שֶׁמָּא חַס וְשָׁלוֹם נִמְצָא בּוֹ פְּסוּל וְלֹא נִתְקַבֵּל קָרְבָּנוֹ, יָצְתָה בַּת קוֹל וְאוֹמֶרֶת לוֹ (קהלת ט, ז): לֵךְ אֱכֹל בְּשִׂמְחָה לַחְמֶךָ. יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא שָׂמְחוּ בְּעוֹלָמִי, שָׂמַח יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּעֹשָׂיו אֵינוֹ אוֹמֵר אֶלָּא (תהלים קמט, ב): יִשְׂמַח, עֲתִידִין הֵן לִשְׂמֹחַ בְּמַעֲשָׂיו שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לֶעָתִיד לָבוֹא. כִּבְיָכוֹל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לֹא שָׂמַח בְּעוֹלָמוֹ, שָׂמַח ה' בְּמַעֲשָׂיו אֵינוֹ אוֹמֵר, אֶלָּא (תהלים קד, לא): יִשְׂמַח, עָתִיד הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לִשְׂמֹחַ בְּמַעֲשֵׂיהֶם שֶׁל צַדִּיקִים לֶעָתִיד לָבוֹא. אֱלִישֶׁבַע בַּת עֲמִינָדָב לֹא שָׂמְחָה בָּעוֹלָם, שֶׁרָאֲתָה חֲמִשָּׁה כְּתָרִים בְּיוֹם אֶחָד, יְבָמָהּ מֶלֶךְ, אָחִיהָ נָשִׂיא, בַּעֲלָהּ כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל, שְׁנֵי בָּנֶיהָ שְׁנֵי סְגָנֵי כְּהֻנָּה, פִּנְחָס בֶּן בְּנָהּ מְשׁוּחַ מִלְחָמָה, כֵּיוָן שֶׁנִּכְנְסוּ בָּנֶיהָ לְהַקְרִיב וְנִשְׂרְפוּ, נֶהְפְּכָה שִׂמְחָתָהּ לְאֵבֶל, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב: אַחֲרֵי מוֹת שְׁנֵי בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן. 9.3. Another opinion regarding the verse (Ps. 50:23) “And there is a path, I will show him the salvation of God”- Rabbi Yanai said: the it is written the one who puts a path[with a sin and not a shin], meaning that two ways are similar [in bringing one to salvation] Rabbi Yannai was once walking along the road, and saw a man who was extremely well dressed. Rabbi Yannai said to him: Would you like to come over to my house? The man replied: Yes. Rabbi Yannai brought him into his home, and gave him food and drink. As they were eating and drinking together, he examined him in his knowledge of Bible, and found out that he had none; examined his knowledge of Mishnah, and realized that he had none; his knowledge of legends, and saw that he had none; his knowledge of Talmud and saw he had none. Rabbi Yannai then told him: Wash and recite grace. Said the guest: Let Yannai recite grace in his own home. Seeing that he could not even recite a blessing, Yannai told him: Can you at least repeat what I say? Said he: Yes. Said Rabbi Yannai: repeat the following: 'A dog has eaten Yannai's bread.' offended, the man stood up, and grabbed Rabbi Yannai by the coat! He then said: My inheritance is with you, and you are withholding it from me! Said Rabbi Yannai with puzzlement: What legacy of yours is there with me? He replied: Once I passed by a school, and I heard the voices of the little children saying: 'Moses gave us the Torah, the inheritance of the congregation of Jacob.' They did not say 'the inheritance of the congregation of Yannai,' but the 'congregation of Jacob.' Rabbi Yannai asked, “How then are you worthy to eat at my table?” The guest replied, “Never have I heard an evil word spoken against me and returned to argue with the person who spoke it. Never have I seen two people arguing without making peace between them.” Rabbi Yannai then said, “you have so much Derech Eretz and I called you a dog.” On him rabbi Yanai said the verse “And there is a path” – meaning not one, but two paths take you to salvation – since rabbi Ishmael son of rav Nachman said: Derech eretz precedes Torah by 26 generations, since it is written “and to guard the way to the Tree of Life” (Genesis 3). “Way” is the derech eretz, and only after that comes “Tree of Life” which is Torah. [Back to the verse in question, Ps 50:23] I will show him the salvation of God, said rabbi Abahu: this is one of the sources for the idea that God’s salvation is Israel’s salvation (Ps. 80:3) “and come and save us”"
23. Anon., Mekhilta Derabbi Yishmael, None (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)

24. Anon., Sifre Deuteronomy, 161 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)

25. Anon., Sifre Numbers, 115 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)

26. Palestinian Talmud, Berachot, 2.8 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)

27. Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

28. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Batra, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

8a. אלו ת"ח ור"ל סבר לה כדדרש רבא (שיר השירים ח, י) אני חומה זו כנסת ישראל ושדי כמגדלות אלו בתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות,רב נחמן בר רב חסדא רמא כרגא ארבנן א"ל רב נחמן בר יצחק עברת אדאורייתא ואדנביאי ואדכתובי,אדאורייתא דכתיב (דברים לג, ג) אף חובב עמים כל קדושיו בידך אמר משה לפני הקב"ה רבונו של עולם אפילו בשעה שאתה מחבב עמים כל קדושיו יהיו בידך והם תכו לרגלך תני רב יוסף אלו תלמידי חכמים שמכתתים רגליהם מעיר לעיר וממדינה למדינה ללמוד תורה ישא מדברותיך לישא וליתן בדבורותיו של מקום,אדנביאי דכתיב (הושע ח, י) גם כי יתנו בגוים עתה אקבצם ויחלו מעט ממשא מלך ושרים אמר עולא פסוק זה בלשון ארמית נאמר אי תנו כולהו עתה אקבצם ואם מעט מהם יחלו ממשא מלך ושרים,אדכתובי דכתיב (עזרא ז, כד) מנדה בלו והלך לא שליט למרמא עליהם ואמר רב יהודה מנדה זו מנת המלך בלו זו כסף גולגלתא והלך זו ארנונא,רב פפא רמא כריא חדתא איתמי א"ל רב שישא בריה דרב אידי לרב פפא ודילמא לא מידויל אמר ליה מישקל שקילנא מנייהו אי מידויל מידויל ואי לא מהדרנא לה ניהלייהו,אמר רב יהודה הכל לאגלי גפא אפילו מיתמי אבל רבנן לא צריכי נטירותא הכל לכריא פתיא אפילו מרבנן ולא אמרן אלא דלא נפקי באכלוזא אבל נפקי באכלוזא רבנן לאו בני מיפק באכלוזא נינהו:,רבי פתח אוצרות בשני בצורת אמר יכנסו בעלי מקרא בעלי משנה בעלי גמרא בעלי הלכה בעלי הגדה אבל עמי הארץ אל יכנסו דחק רבי יונתן בן עמרם ונכנס אמר לו רבי פרנסני אמר לו בני קרית אמר לו לאו שנית אמר לו לאו אם כן במה אפרנסך [אמר לו] פרנסני ככלב וכעורב פרנסיה,בתר דנפק יתיב רבי וקא מצטער ואמר אוי לי שנתתי פתי לעם הארץ אמר לפניו ר' שמעון בר רבי שמא יונתן בן עמרם תלמידך הוא שאינו רוצה ליהנות מכבוד תורה מימיו בדקו ואשכח אמר רבי יכנסו הכל,רבי לטעמיה דאמר רבי אין פורענות בא לעולם אלא בשביל עמי הארץ כההוא דמי כלילא דשדו אטבריא אתו לקמיה דרבי ואמרו ליה ליתבו רבנן בהדן אמר להו לא אמרו ליה ערוקינן [אמר להו] ערוקו ערקו פלגיהון דליוה פלגא,אתו הנהו פלגא קמי דרבי א"ל ליתבו רבנן בהדן אמר להו לא ערוקינן ערוקו ערקו כולהו פש ההוא כובס שדיוה אכובס ערק כובס פקע כלילא א"ר ראיתם שאין פורענות בא לעולם אלא בשביל עמי הארץ:,וכמה יהא בעיר ויהא כאנשי העיר וכו': ורמינהי החמרת והגמלת העוברת ממקום למקום ולנה בתוכה והודחה עמהן הן בסקילה וממונן פלט,ואם נשתהו שם שלשים יום הן בסייף וממונן אבד,אמר רבא לא קשיא הא לבני מתא הא ליתובי מתא כדתניא המודר הנאה מאנשי העיר כל שנשתהא שם שנים עשר חדש אסור ליהנות ממנו פחות מכאן מותר מיושבי העיר כל שנשתהא שם שלשים יום אסור ליהנות ממנו פחות מכאן מותר ליהנות ממנו,ולכל מילי מי בעינן י"ב חדש והתניא שלשים יום לתמחוי שלשה חדשים לקופה ששה לכסות תשעה לקבורה שנים עשר לפסי העיר אמר ר' אסי אמר ר' יוחנן כי תנן נמי מתניתין שנים עשר חדש לפסי העיר תנן:,וא"ר אסי אמר ר' יוחנן הכל לפסי העיר ואפי' מיתמי אבל רבנן לא דרבנן לא צריכי נטירותא אמר רב פפא לשורא ולפרשאה ולטרזינא אפילו מיתמי אבל רבנן לא צריכי נטירותא כללא דמילתא כל מילתא דאית להו הנאה מיניה אפילו מיתמי,רבה רמא צדקה איתמי דבי בר מריון א"ל אביי והתני רב שמואל בר יהודה אין פוסקין צדקה על היתומים אפילו לפדיון שבוים אמר ליה אנא לאחשובינהו קא עבידנא,איפרא הורמיז אימיה דשבור מלכא שדרה ארנקא דדינרי לקמיה דרב יוסף אמרה ליהוי למצוה רבה יתיב רב יוסף וקא מעיין בה מאי מצוה רבה א"ל אביי מדתני רב שמואל בר יהודה אין פוסקין צדקה על היתומים אפילו לפדיון שבוים שמע מינה 8a. bthese are Torah scholars,and towers do not require additional protection? The Gemara comments: bAnd Reish Lakish,who did not cite this verse, bholdsin accordance with the way that bRava expoundedthe verse: b“I am a wall”; thisis referring to bthe Congregation of Israel. “And my breasts are like towers”; these are the synagogues and study halls. /b,It is similarly related that bRav Naḥman bar Rav Ḥisdaonce bim-posedpayment of bthepoll btax [ ikarga /i]even bon the Sages. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said to him: You have transgressedthe words of bthe Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings. /b,You have transgressed the words of bthe Torah, as it is written: “Even when He loves the peoples, all His holy ones are in Your hand”(Deuteronomy 33:3), which is understood to mean that bMoses said to the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, even when You hold theother bnations dearand grant them dominion over Israel, let b“all His holy ones,”meaning the Torah scholars, bbeexclusively bin Your handand free from the authority of the nations, and therefore be exempt from pay-ing taxes. The continuation of that verse can also be understood as referring to Torah scholars, as it states: b“And they sit [ itukku /i] at Your feet,receiving Your words” (Deuteronomy 33:3), and bRav Yosef teaches: These are Torah scholars who pound [ imekhatetim /i] their feet from city to city and from country to country to study Torah; “receiving [ iyissa /i] Your words,” to discuss [ ilissa velitten /i] the utterances of God. /b,And you have transgressed the words of bthe Prophets, as it is written: “Though they have hired lovers [ iyitnu /i] among the nations, now I will gather them, and they will begin to be diminished by reason of the burden of kings and princes”(Hosea 8:10). With regard to this verse, bUlla says:Part of bthis verse is stated in the Aramaic language;the word iyitnushould be understood here in its Aramaic sense: To learn. And the verse should be interpreted as follows: bIf allof Israel blearnsTorah, bI will gather themalready bnow; and ifonly ba few of themlearn Torah, bthey will be excused from the burdenimposed bby kings and princes.This indicates that those who study Torah should not be subject to paying taxes.,And furthermore, you have transgressed the words of bthe Writings, as it is written: “It shall not be lawful to impose tribute, impost or toll upon them”(Ezra 7:24), i.e., upon the priests and Levites who serve in the Temple. This ihalakhawould apply to Torah scholars as well. bAnd Rav Yehuda says: “Tribute”; thisis referring to bthe king’s portion,a tax given to the king. b“Impost”; thisis referring to bthe head tax. “Toll”; thisis referring to ba tax [ iarnona /i]paid with property that was imposed from time to time.,It is related that bRav Pappaonce bimposeda tax for bthe digging of a newcistern even bon orphans. Rav Sheisha, son of Rav Idi, said to Rav Pappa: Perhapsthey will dig, but in the end bthey will not drawany bwaterfrom there, and it will turn out that the money will have been spent for nothing. The rest of the townspeople can relinquish their rights to their money, but orphans who are minors cannot do so. Rav Pappa bsaid to him: I shall collectmoney bfromthe orphans; bif they drawwater, btheywill bdrawwater, band if not, I will returnthe money btothe orphans., bRav Yehuda says: Allof the city’s residents must contribute btothe building and upkeep of bthe city gates [ ile’aglei gappa /i],and for this purpose money is collected beven from orphans. But the Sages do not require protectionand are therefore exempt from this payment. bAllof the city’s residents must contribute bto the digging of cisterns [ ilekarya patya /i],and for this purpose money is collected beven from the Sages,since they too need water. The Gemara comments: bAnd we saidthis bonly whenthe people are bnotrequired to bgo out en masse [ ibe’akhluza /i]and do the actual digging, but are obligated merely to contribute money for that purpose. bBut ifthe people are required to bgo out en masseand actually dig, bthe Sagesare bnotexpected to bgo outwith them ben masse,but rather they are exempt from such labor.,It is related that bRabbiYehuda HaNasi once bopenedhis bstorehousesto distribute food bduring years of drought. He said: Masters of Bible, masters of Mishna, masters of Talmud, masters of ihalakha /i, masters of iaggadamay enterand receive food from me, bbut ignoramuses should not enter. Rabbi Yonatan ben Amram,whom Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi did not know, bpushedhis way in, band entered,and bsaid to him: RabbiYehuda HaNasi, bsustain me.Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi bsaid to him: My son, have you readthe Bible? Rabbi Yonatan ben Amram bsaid to him,out of modesty: bNo.Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi continued: bHave you studiedMishna? Once again, Rabbi Yonatan ben Amram bsaid to him: No.Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi then asked him: bIf so, by whatmerit bshould I sustain you?Rabbi Yonatan ben Amram bsaid to him: Sustain me like a dog and like a raven,who are given food even though they have not learned anything. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi was moved by his words and bfed him. /b, bAfterRabbi Yonatan bleft, RabbiYehuda HaNasi bsat, and was distressed, and said: Woe is me, that I have given my bread to an ignoramus.His son, bRabbi Shimon bar RabbiYehuda HaNasi, bsaid to him: Perhaps he was your disciple Yonatan ben Amram, who never in his life wanted tomaterially bbenefit from the honorshown to the bTorah? They investigatedthe matter band foundthat such was the case. bRabbiYehuda HaNasi then bsaid: Let everyone enter,as there may also be others who hide the fact that they are true Torah scholars.,Commenting on Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s opinion, the Gemara notes that bRabbiYehuda HaNasi conformed bto hisstandard line of breasoning,as bRabbiYehuda HaNasi bsays: Suffering comes to the world only due to ignoramuses.This is blikethe incident of bthe crown tax [ ikelila /i] that was imposed onthe residents of the city of bTiberias.The heads of the city bcame before RabbiYehuda HaNasi band said to him: The Sages should contributealong bwith us.Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi bsaid to them: No,the Sages are exempt. bThey said to him:Then bwe will run awayand the entire burden will fall on the Torah scholars. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi bsaid to them: Run awayas you please. bHalfof the city’s residents bran away.The authorities then bwaived halfthe sum that they had initially imposed on the city., bThe halfof the population that remained in the city then bcame before RabbiYehuda HaNasi, and bsaid to him: The Sages should contributealong bwith us.Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi bsaid to them: No,the Sages are exempt. They said to him: Then bwetoo bwill run away.Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to them: bRun awayas you please. bThey all ran away,so that only bone launderer was leftin the city. The authorities bimposedthe entire tax bon the launderer. The laundererthen bran awayas well. bThe crown tax wasthen bcanceledin its entirety. bRabbiYehuda HaNasi bsaid: You seefrom this bthat suffering comes to the world only due to ignoramuses,for as soon as they all fled from the city, the crown tax was completely canceled.,§ The mishna teaches: bAnd how longmust one live bin the city to beconsidered blikeone of bthe people of the city?Twelve months. bAnd we raise a contradictionfrom what is taught in a ibaraita /i: In the case of ba donkey caravan or a camel caravan that was journeying from place to place, and it lodged insidean idolatrous city, band itsmembers bwere led astrayalong bwiththe other residents of the city, and they too engaged in idol worship, bthey,the members of the caravan, are liable to death bby stoninglike ordinary individual idolaters, band their property escapesdestruction, i.e., they are not treated like the residents of an idolatrous city, who are liable to death by the sword and whose property is destroyed.,The ibaraitacontinues: bAnd ifthe caravan members bhad remainedin that city for bthirty days, theyare liable to death bby the sword and their property is destroyed,just as it is for the rest of the residents of the city. This seems to indicate that once an individual has lived in a city for thirty days, he is already considered one of its residents., bRava said:This is bnot difficult. Thisperiod, i.e., twelve months, is required in order to be considered one of the bmembers of the city;and bthatperiod, i.e., thirty days, suffices in order to be considered one of the bresidents of the city. As it is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bOne who is prohibited by a vow from deriving benefit from the people of aparticular bcityis bprohibited from deriving benefit from anyone who has stayed therefor btwelve months,but it is permitted for him to derive benefit from anyone who has stayed there for blesstime bthan that.By contrast, if he prohibited himself by way of a vow from deriving benefit bfrom the residents of aparticular bcity,he is bprohibited from deriving benefit from anyone who has stayed therefor bthirty days,but bit is permitted for him to derive benefit fromanyone who has stayed there for blesstime bthan that. /b,The Gemara asks: bAnd do we requirethat one live in a city for btwelve months for all matters? But isn’t it taughtin a ibaraita /i: If one lives in city for bthirty days,he must contribute btothe bcharity platterfrom which food is distributed to the poor. If he lives there for bthree months,he must contribute btothe charity bbox.If he lives there for bsixmonths, he must contribute btothe bclothingfund. If he lives there for bninemonths, he must contribute btothe bburialfund. If he lives there for btwelvemonths, he must contribute btothe bcolumns of the city [ ilepassei ha’ir /i],i.e., for the construction of a security fence. bRabbi Asi saidthat bRabbi Yoḥa said: When we learned twelve months in the mishna, we learnedthat with regard to contributing btothe bcolumns of the city,money used for protecting and strengthening the city, but not for other matters., bAnd Rabbi Asi saysthat bRabbi Yoḥa says: Allare required to contribute btothe bcolumns of the city, andmoney is collected for that purpose beven from orphans. But the Sagesare bnotrequired to contribute, bsince the Sages do not need protection. Rav Pappa said:Money is collected beven from orphans for thecity bwall, for thecity bhorseman, and for the guard [ iuletarzina /i]of the city armory, bbut the Sages do not require protection. The principle of the matteris: Money is collected beven from orphansfor banything from which theyderive bbenefit. /b,It is reported that bRabba imposeda contribution to a certain bcharity on the orphans of the house of bar Maryon. Abaye said to him: But didn’t Rav Shmuel bar Yehuda teach: One does not impose a charityobligation bon orphans even forthe sake of bredeeming captives,since they are minors and are not obligated in the mitzvot? Rabba bsaid to him: I did this to elevate themin standing, i.e., so that people should honor them as generous benefactors; not in order that the poor should benefit.,Incidental to this story, the Gemara relates that bIfera Hurmiz, the mother of King Shapur,king of Persia, bsent a purse [ iarneka /i]full bof dinars to Rav Yosef. She saidto him: bLetthe money be used bfor a great mitzva. Rav Yosef sat and consideredthe question: bWhatdid Ifera Hurmiz mean when she attached a condition to the gift, saying that it should be used for ba great mitzva? Abaye said to him: From what Rav Shmuel bar Yehuda taught,that bone does not impose a charityobligation bon orphans even forthe sake of bredeeming captives, learn from this /b
29. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Qamma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

49a. א"כ משהאשה יולדת משבחת אלא שמין את הולדות כמה הן יפין ונותן לבעל ואם אין לה בעל נותן ליורשיו,היתה שפחה ונשתחררה או גיורת פטור:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big טעמא דמתכוין לחבירו הא מתכוין לאשה משלם דמי ולדות לימא תיהוי תיובתא דרב אדא בר אהבה דאמר רב אדא בר אהבה שוורים שנתכוונו לאשה פטורים מדמי ולדות,אמר לך רב אדא בר אהבה הוא הדין דאפי' נתכוונו לאשה נמי פטורים מדמי ולדות והא דקתני שור שהיה מתכוין לחבירו איידי דקא בעי למיתנא סיפא אדם שהיה מתכוין לחבירו דהכי כתיב קרא קתני רישא נמי שור שהיה מתכוין לחבירו,אמר רב פפא שור שנגח את השפחה ויצאו ילדיה משלם דמי ולדות מאי טעמא חמרתא מעברתא בעלמא הוא דאזיק דאמר קרא (בראשית כב, ה) שבו לכם פה עם החמור עם הדומה לחמור:,כיצד משלם דמי ולדות: דמי ולדות שבח ולדות מיבעי ליה הכי נמי קאמר כיצד משלם דמי ולדות ושבח ולדות שמין את האשה כמה היא יפה עד שלא ילדה וכמה היא יפה משילדה:,אמר רשב"ג א"כ משהאשה יולדת משבחת: מאי קאמר אמר רבה ה"ק וכי אשה משבחת קודם שתלד יותר מלאחר שתלד והלא אשה משבחת לאחר שתלד יותר מקודם שתלד אלא שמין את הולדות ונותנין לבעל,תניא נמי הכי וכי אשה משבחת קודם שתלד יותר מלאחר שתלד והלא אשה משבחת לאחר שתלד יותר מקודם שתלד אלא שמין את הולדות ונותנין לבעל,רבא אמר הכי קתני וכי אשה למי שיולדת משבחת ואין לעצמה בשבח ולדות כלום אלא שמין את הולדות ונותנין לבעל ושבח ולדות חולקין,תניא נמי הכי אמר רשב"ג וכי אשה למי שיולדת משבחת ואין לעצמה בשבח ולדות כלום אלא שמין נזק בפני עצמו וצער בפני עצמו ושמין את הולדות ונותנין לבעל ושבח ולדות חולקין,קשיא דרשב"ג אדרשב"ג,ל"ק כאן במבכרת כאן בשאינה מבכרת,ורבנן דאמרי שבח ולדות נמי לבעל מאי טעמא כדתנן ממשמע שנאמר (שמות כא, כב) ויצאו ילדיה איני יודע שהיא הרה מה ת"ל הרה לומר לך שבח הריון לבעל,ורשב"ג האי הרה מאי דריש ביה מבעי ליה לכדתניא ר"א בן יעקב אומר לעולם אינו חייב עד שיכנה כנגד בית ההריון אמר רב פפא לא תימא כנגד בית הריון ממש אלא כל היכא דסליק ביה שיחמא לולד לאפוקי יד ורגל דלא:,היתה שפחה ונשתחררה או גיורת פטור: אמר רבה לא שנו אלא שחבל בה בחיי הגר ומת הגר דכיון דחבל בה בחיי הגר זכה בהו גר וכיון דמת הגר זכה בהו מן הגר אבל חבל בה לאחר מיתת הגר זכיא לה איהי בגוייהו ומיחייב לשלומי לה לדידה,א"ר חסדא מרי דיכי אטו ולדות צררי נינהו וזכיא בהו אלא איתיה לבעל זכה ליה רחמנא ליתיה לבעל לא,מיתיבי הכה את האשה ויצאו ילדיה נותן נזק וצער לאשה ודמי ולדות לבעל אין הבעל נותן ליורשיו אין האשה נותן ליורשיה היתה שפחה ונשתחררה או גיורת זכה,אמרי ומי עדיפא ממתניתין דאוקימנא שחבל בה בחיי הגר ומת הגר הכא נמי שחבל בה בחיי הגר ומת הגר ואיבעית אימא לאחר מיתת הגר 49a. bIf so,the consequences would be absurd, as bwhen a woman gives birthher value bincreases. Rather,the court bappraises how much the offspring are worth, andthe one liable for the damage bgivesthat amount bto the husband. And if she does not have a husband,e.g., her husband died, he bgivesthe money bto his heirs. /b,If the pregt woman bwasa Canaanite bmaidservant andthen bshe was emancipated, or a convert,and she was married to an emancipated Canaanite slave or to a convert who died without any heirs, the one who caused the damage is bexemptfrom pay-ing compensation for miscarried offspring. This is because this payment is made specifically to the husband, not to the woman., strongGEMARA: /strong The first clause of the mishna indicates that bthe reasonthe owner is exempt from paying compensation for the offspring when an ox unintentionally gores a pregt woman is specifically bthat it was intending togore banotherox. By inference, if it bwas intending togore bthe woman,the owner bpays compensation formiscarried boffspring. Shall we saythat this bshould be a conclusive refutationof the opinion bof Rav Adda bar Ahava, as Rav Adda bar Ahava says:With regard to boxen that intended togore ba womanand then did so, the owners are bexemptfrom paying bcompensation formiscarried boffspring? /b,The Gemara answers that bRav Adda bar Ahavacould have bsaid to you: The same is true, that evenif the oxen bintended togore bthe woman,the owners are balso exempt frompaying bcompensation formiscarried boffspring.As for bthat which is taughtin the mishna: bAn ox that was intending togore banotherox, it bistaught this way bsince it wants to teach the latter clause: A person that was intending toinjure banotherperson, bas thiscase is bwrittenexplicitly in bthe verse:“And if men struggle and hurt a pregt woman and her offspring emerge” (Exodus 21:22). In the case in the verse, the assailant intended to injure another person but injured the woman instead. Therefore, the mishna balso teaches the first clausein that style: bAn ox that was intending togore banotherox., bRav Pappa says:In the case of ban ox that goreda Canaanite bmaidservant, and her offspring emergeddue to miscarriage, the owner bpays compensation formiscarried boffspring. What is the reason?The ox binjured a mere pregt donkey.With regard to the matter of compensation for offspring, who would be the property of the master were they to be born, a Canaanite slave is considered property of the master. bAsthe bverse statesthat Abraham addressed Eliezer, who was a Canaanite, by saying: b“You remain here with [ iim /i] the donkey”(Genesis 22:5), on which the Sages expound that he was alluding to the idea that Eliezer is of ba people [ iam /i] that is similar to a donkey.Therefore, the case of an ox goring a Canaanite maidservant is not included in the Torah’s exemption from paying compensation for miscarried offspring.,§ The mishna teaches: bHow does he pay compensation formiscarried boffspring?The court appraises how much the value of the woman increased due to the offspring. The Gemara asks: Would this be a correct interpretation of the term: bCompensation formiscarried boffspring?If this is how the sum is calculated, the mishna bshould havestated: How does he pay bthe increasein value due to bthe offspring?The Gemara answers: bThat is also whatthe itanna bis saying: How does he pay compensation formiscarried boffspring and the increasein value due to bthe offspring?In other words, apart from evaluating the compensation for the miscarried offspring, the court also bappraisesthe value bof the womanby calculating how much shewould be bworthif sold as a maidservantbefore giving birth, and how much shewould be bworth after giving birth. /b,he mishna teaches: bRabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: If so,the consequences would be absurd, as bwhen a woman gives birthher value bincreases.The Gemara asks: bWhat isRabban Shimon ben Gamliel bsaying? Rabba said: This iswhat he bis saying: But isthe monetary value of ba woman higher before she gives birth than after she gives birth? But isn’tthe opposite true, that the monetary value of ba womanis bhigher after giving birth than before giving birth,since the concern for her dying during childbirth, which lowers her monetary value prior to giving birth, is no longer a concern? bRather,the court bappraisesthe value of bthe fetuses and givesthat amount bto the husband. /b, bThisexplanation of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel’s statement bis also taughtin a ibaraita /i: bBut isthe monetary value of ba woman higher before she gives birth than after she gives birth? But isn’tthe opposite true, that the monetary value of ba womanis bhigher after giving birth than before giving birth? Rather,the court bappraisesthe value of bthe fetuses and givesthat amount bto the husband. /b, bRava said: This is whatRabban Shimon ben Gamliel bis teaching: But isthe value of bthe woman higheronly bfor the one for whom she gives birth,i.e., her husband, band she herself does not have any increasein value bat alldue to the boffspring?A pregt woman’s monetary value is increased on account of her pregcy, beyond the monetary value of the offspring. bRather,the court bappraisesthe value of bthe offspring and givesit bto the husband. Andin addition, bthehusband and wife bdivide the increasein her value due to the boffspring. /b, bThisexplanation of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel’s opinion bis also taughtin a ibaraita /i: bRabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: But isthe value of bthe woman higheronly bfor the one for whom she gives birth,i.e., her husband, band she herself does not have any increasein value bat alldue to the boffspring? Rather,the court bappraises damage by itself and pain by itself, and appraisesthe value of bthe offspring and givesit bto the husband, and thehusband and wife bdivide the increasein her value due to the boffspring. /b,The Gemara asks: The opinion bof Rabban Shimon ben Gamlielin the first ibaraita /i, that the woman’s value decreases because of pregcy, poses ba difficulty for that of Rabban Shimon ben Gamlielin the second ibaraita /i, that it increases.,The Gemara answers: This is bnot difficult,since each ibaraitais referring to a different case: bHere,the first ibaraita /i, which stated that the woman’s value increases after giving birth, is referring btoa woman bgiving birth toher bfirstborn.Her value decreases prior to birth out of concern that she might die in childbirth. bThere,the second ibaraita /i, which stated that her value increases due to pregcy, is referring btoa woman bwho is not giving birth toher bfirstborn. /b,The Gemara asks: bAnd what is the reasonof bthe Rabbisin the second ibaraita /i, bwho say: The increasein her value due to bthe offspringis balsogiven bto the husband?The Gemara answers: They derive it from a redundancy in a verse, bas we learnedin a ibaraita /i: The verse states: “And hurt a pregt woman and her offspring emerge” (Exodus 21:22). bFrom the fact that it is stated: “And her offspring emerge,” don’t I knowby inference bthat she was pregt?If so, bwhatis the meaning when bthe verse states: “A pregtwoman,” and not just “a woman”? bTo inform youthat even the bincreasein her value due to bthe pregcyis given bto the husband. /b,The Gemara asks: bAnd what ihalakha bdoes Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel expound on thisextra word b“pregt”?The Gemara answers: bHe requires it for that which is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bRabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov saysthat one who injures a woman bis never liableto pay compensation for miscarried offspring bunless he strikes her opposite the womb,i.e., on the abdomen. bRav Pappa said: Do not saythat it must be bliterally opposite the womb. Rather,he is liable if she was struck banywhere that the wound’simpact could breach the offspring,i.e., any part of the torso, bto excludea wound to her bhand or foot, for whichhe is bnotliable, since it could be argued that it was not the wound to the hand or foot that caused the miscarriage.,§ The mishna teaches: If the pregt woman bwas a maidservant andthen bshe was emancipated, or a convert,he is bexemptfrom the payment of damages for miscarried offspring. bRabba says: They taughtthis ihalakha bonlyin a case bwhere one injured her during the lifetime of the convert,i.e., her husband, band the convert diedbefore the payment was given. The reason for this is bthat sincethe assailant binjured her during the lifetime of the convert, the convert acquiresthe money, although it is still in the possession of the one liable for the damage. bAnd once the convert dieswithout heirs, the money is ownerless. Therefore, the assailant bacquires it from the convert.Since anyone can assume ownership of ownerless property, the assailant, who already possesses the money, becomes the owner. bBut if he injured her after the convert had died, she acquiresthe money, band he must pay the woman herself. /b, bRav Ḥisda saidin amazement: bMaster of this ruling! Is that to saythat compensation for the boffspring islike bbundlesof money, band she acquires themwhen her husband dies? Rabba seems to understand that the pregt woman assumes ownership of the offspring by virtue of being in possession of them when the husband dies, and therefore has the right to compensation for them. That is not the case. bRather,if bthe husband is present, the Merciful One grantscompensation for the offspring bto him,but if bthe husband is notalive, the Torah does bnotgrant compensation to anyone else.,The Gemara braises an objectionagainst the opinion of Rabba from the following: If the assailant bstruck the woman and her offspring emergeddue to miscarriage, bhe givescompensation for bdamage and pain to the woman and compensation formiscarried boffspring to the husband.If bthe husband is notalive, bhe givesthe compensation for the offspring bto his heirs.If bthe woman is notalive, bhe givesthe payment owed to her bto her heirs.If bshe was a maidservant andthen bshe was emancipated, or a convert,the assailant bacquiresthe money. This indicates that if the husband is no longer alive, the woman doesn’t receive anything.,The Sages bsaidin response to this: bBut isthe ibaraita bpreferable to the mishna, which we interpretedas a referring to case bwhere he injured her during the lifetime of the convert, and the convertthen bdied? Here also,it must be explained bthat he injured her during the lifetime of the convert, and the convertthen bdied. And if you wish, sayinstead that he injured her even bafter the death of the convert. /b
30. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

43b. אמר רב גידל אמר רב האי סמלק מברכין עלויה בורא עצי בשמים אמר רב חננאל אמר רב הני חלפי דימא מברכין עלייהו בורא עצי בשמים אמר מר זוטרא מאי קראה (יהושע ב, ו) והיא העלתם הגגה ותטמנם בפשתי העץ,(רב משרשיא אמר) האי נרקום דגנוניתא מברכין עלויה בורא עצי בשמים דדברא בורא עשבי בשמים אמר רב ששת הני סיגלי מברכין עלייהו בורא עשבי בשמים אמר מר זוטרא האי מאן דמורח באתרוגא או בחבושא אומר ברוך שנתן ריח טוב בפירות,אמר רב יהודה האי מאן דנפיק ביומי ניסן וחזי אילני דקא מלבלבי אומר ברוך שלא חיסר בעולמו כלום וברא בו בריות טובות ואילנות טובות להתנאות בהן בני אדם אמר רב זוטרא בר טוביה אמר רב מנין שמברכין על הריח שנאמר (תהלים קנ, ו) כל הנשמה תהלל יה איזהו דבר שהנשמה נהנית ממנו ואין הגוף נהנה ממנו הוי אומר זה הריח,ואמר רב זוטרא בר טוביה אמר רב עתידים בחורי ישראל שיתנו ריח טוב כלבנון שנאמר (הושע יד, ז) ילכו יונקותיו ויהי כזית הודו וריח לו כלבנון:,ואמר רב זוטרא בר טוביה אמר רב מאי דכתיב (קהלת ג, יא) את הכל עשה יפה בעתו מלמד שכל אחד ואחד יפה לו הקב"ה אומנתו בפניו,אמר רב פפא היינו דאמרי אינשי תלה ליה קורא לדבר אחר ואיהו דידיה עביד,ואמר רב זוטרא בר טוביה אמר רב אבוקה כשנים וירח כשלשה איבעיא להו אבוקה כשנים בהדי דידיה או דילמא אבוקה כשנים לבר מדידיה ת"ש וירח כשלשה אי אמרת בשלמא בהדי דידיה שפיר אלא אי אמרת לבר מדידיה ארבעה למה לי והאמר מר לאחד נראה ומזיק לשנים נראה ואינו מזיק לשלשה אינו נראה כל עיקר אלא לאו שמע מינה אבוקה כשנים בהדי דידיה שמע מינה:,ואמר רב זוטרא בר טוביה אמר רב ואמרי לה אמר רב חנא בר ביזנא אמר רבי שמעון חסידא ואמרי לה אמר רבי יוחנן משום רבי שמעון בן יוחי נוח לו לאדם שיפיל עצמו לתוך כבשן האש ואל ילבין פני חברו ברבים מנלן מתמר שנאמר (בראשית לח, כה) היא מוצאת וגו':,ת"ר הביאו לפניו שמן והדס ב"ש אומרים מברך על השמן ואח"כ מברך על ההדס וב"ה אומרים מברך על ההדס ואח"כ מברך על השמן אמר ר"ג אני אכריע שמן זכינו לריחו וזכינו לסיכתו הדס לריחו זכינו לסיכתו לא זכינו א"ר יוחנן הלכה כדברי המכריע,רב פפא איקלע לבי רב הונא בריה דרב איקא אייתו לקמייהו שמן והדס שקל רב פפא בריך אהדס ברישא והדר בריך אשמן אמר ליה לא סבר לה מר הלכה כדברי המכריע אמר ליה הכי אמר רבא הלכה כב"ה ולא היא לאשתמוטי נפשיה הוא דעבד,ת"ר הביאו לפניהם שמן ויין ב"ש אומרים אוחז השמן בימינו ואת היין בשמאלו מברך על השמן וחוזר ומברך על היין ב"ה אומרים אוחז את היין בימינו ואת השמן בשמאלו מברך על היין וחוזר ומברך על השמן וטחו בראש השמש ואם שמש ת"ח הוא טחו בכותל מפני שגנאי לתלמיד חכם לצאת לשוק כשהוא מבושם,ת"ר ששה דברים גנאי לו לתלמיד חכם אל יצא כשהוא מבושם לשוק ואל יצא יחידי בלילה ואל יצא במנעלים המטולאים ואל יספר עם אשה בשוק ואל יסב בחבורה של עמי הארץ ואל יכנס באחרונה לבית המדרש ויש אומרים אף לא יפסיע פסיעה גסה ואל יהלך בקומה זקופה,אל יצא כשהוא מבושם לשוק א"ר אבא בריה דר' חייא בר אבא אמר רבי יוחנן במקום שחשודים על משכב זכור אמר רב ששת לא אמרן אלא בבגדו אבל בגופו זיעה מעברא ליה אמר רב פפא ושערו כבגדו דמי ואמרי לה כגופו דמי,ואל יצא יחידי בלילה משום חשדא ולא אמרן אלא דלא קביע ליה עידנא אבל קביע ליה עידנא מידע ידיע דלעידניה קא אזיל,ואל יצא במנעלים המטולאים מסייע ליה לרבי חייא בר אבא דאמר ר' חייא בר אבא גנאי הוא לתלמיד חכם שיצא במנעלים המטולאים איני והא ר' חייא בר אבא נפיק אמר מר זוטרא בריה דרב נחמן בטלאי על גבי טלאי ולא אמרן אלא בפנתא אבל בגילדא לית לן בה ובפנתא לא אמרן אלא באורחא אבל בביתא לית לן בה ולא אמרן אלא בימות החמה אבל בימות הגשמים לית לן בה,ואל יספר עם אשה בשוק אמר רב חסדא ואפילו היא אשתו תניא נמי הכא אפילו היא אשתו ואפילו היא בתו ואפילו היא אחותו לפי שאין הכל בקיאין בקרובותיו,ואל יסב בחבורה של עמי הארץ מאי טעמא דילמא אתי לאמשוכי בתרייהו,ואל יכנס אחרונה לבית המדרש משום דקרו ליה פושע,וי"א אף לא יפסיע פסיעה גסה דאמר מר פסיעה גסה נוטלת אחד מת"ק ממאור עיניו של אדם מאי תקנתיה להדריה בקדושא דבי שמשי,ואל יהלך בקומה זקופה דאמר מר המהלך בקומה זקופה אפילו ארבע אמות כאילו דוחק רגלי שכינה דכתיב (ישעיהו ו, ג) מלא כל הארץ כבודו: 43b. bRav Giddel saidthat bRav said: Over this jasmine [ isimlak /i], one recites: Who creates fragrant trees. Rav Ḥael saidthat bRav said: Over these spikenards,which grow next to bthe sea, one recites: Who creates fragrant trees. Mar Zutra said: What is the versefrom which we derive that even a plant with soft stalks can be called a tree? From the verse: b“She had taken them up to the roof and hidden them under the trees of flax”(Joshua 2:6); evidently, even stalks of flax are called “trees.”, bRav Mesharshiya said: Over this garden daffodil one recites: Who creates fragrant trees,while over a wild daffodil that grows bin the field,one recites: bWho creates fragrant plants. Rav Sheshet said: Overfragrant bviolets one recites: Who creates fragrant plants. Mar Zutra said: One who smells a citron [ ietrog /i] or a quince recites: Blessed…who gave pleasant fragrance in fruits. /b,On a related topic, the Gemara cites that bRav Yehuda said: One who goes out during Nisan and sees trees that are blossoming recites: Blessed…who has withheld nothing from His world, and has created in it beautiful creatures and trees for human beings to enjoy. Rav Zutra bar Toviya saidthat bRav said: From whereis it derived bthat one recites a blessing over scent? As it is stated: “Let every soul praise the Lord”(Psalms 150:6). He explains the verse: bWhat is it from which the soul derives benefit and the body does not derive benefit from it? You must say: That is scent.Even over items from which only the soul derives benefit, one must recite a blessing and praise God., bAnd Rav Zutra bar Toviya saidthat bRav said: The young men of Israel are destined to emit a sweet scent as the Lebanon, as it is stated: “His branches shall spread and his beauty will be as the olive tree, and his fragrance as Lebanon”(Hosea 14:7)., bAnd Rav Zutra bar Toviya saidthat bRav said: What isthe meaning of bthat which is written: “He has made everything beautiful in its time,and he has placed the world in their heart, yet so man cannot find out the work that God has done from the beginning even to the end” (Ecclesiastes 3:11)? This bteaches that each and every individual, God has made his work pleasant for him in his own eyes.In that way, each individual will be satisfied with his work, enabling the world to function properly., bRav Pappa said: This isthe proverb bthat people say: Hang a heart of palm on a pig, and he willcontinue bto perform hisstandard activities. Although hearts of palm are a delicacy, a pig will roll it in the mud as is his wont. Every creature has its own particular tastes, and one cannot draw conclusions with regard to one based on the standards of another., bAnd Rav Zutra bar Toviya saidthat bRav said:For one walking on a dark path, if he has ba torchin his hand, bit is like twowere walking on that path bandthe light of the bmoon is like three.The Gemara braises a dilemma: Is a torch like two includingthe one carrying the torch bor perhaps a torch is like two besides himfor a total of three? bCome and heara proof from that which Rav said: bAnd the moon is like three. Granted, if you saythree bincluding him,it works out bwell. However, if you saythree bbesides him, why do I need four,what purpose do they serve? bDidn’t the Master say: To onewalking alone, a demon bcan be seen and causehim bharm. To twopeople, a demon can be seen banddoes not bcausethem bharm. To threepeople, bit cannot be seen at all.Four people are no better than three. bRather, can’t we learn from thisthat ba torch is like two,means two bincluding him.The Gemara comments: Indeed, bconclude from this. /b, bAnd Rav Zutra bar Toviya saidthat bRav said; and some say Rav Ḥana bar Bizna saidthat bRabbi Shimon Ḥasida said; and some say Rabbi Yoḥa said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: It is preferable,from an ethical perspective, bfor one to throw himself into a fiery furnace rather than humiliate another in public. From where do wederive this? bFrom Tamar,the daughter-in-law of Judah, when she was taken out to be burned, bas it is stated: “As she was brought forth,she sent to her father-in-law, saying I am pregt by the man to whom these belong, and she said examine these, to whom does this seal, cord and staff belong?” (Genesis 38:25). Despite her dire situation, she did not reveal that she was pregt with Judah’s child; rather, she left the decision to him, to avoid humiliating him in public., bThe Sages taught:If bthey brought before himboth scented boil anda bmyrtlebranch, bBeit Shammai say: One recites a blessing over the oilfirst band over the myrtlebranch bthereafter /b. bAnd Beit Hillel say: One recites a blessing over the myrtlebranch first band over the oil thereafter. Rabban Gamliel said: I will decidethis dispute in favor of the opinion of Beit Shammai, that one should recite a blessing over the oil first, as it is more significant. With regard to boil; we are privilegedto enjoy bits fragrance and we are privilegedto enjoy it by banointingourselves with bit.With regard to the bmyrtlebranch; bwe are privilegedto enjoy bits fragrance, we are not privilegedto enjoy it by banointingourselves with bit. Rabbi Yoḥa said: The ihalakhais in accordance withthe opinion of bthe decisor,Rabban Gamliel.,The Gemara relates: bRav Pappa happenedto come bto the house of Rav Huna, son of Rav Ika. They brought before himboth scented boil anda bmyrtlebranch. bRav Pappa took and recited a blessingover the bmyrtle branch first and then recited a blessingover the boil.Rav Huna bsaid to him:And bdoes the Master not holdthat bthe ihalakhais in accordancewith the opinion of bthe decisor?If so, you should have recited a blessing over the oil first. Rav Pappa said: bRava said the following: The ihalakhais in accordance withthe opinion of bBeit Hillel.The Gemara comments: bThat is not so,as Rava did not issue that ruling. bRather, Rav Pappa didthis bin order to extricate himselffrom an unpleasant situation and justify his conduct., bOur Sages taughtin a ibaraita /i: If bthey brought before themboth scented boil and wine, Beit Shammai say: He grasps the oil in his righthand, since he recites a blessing over the oil first, band the wine in his lefthand. bHe recites a blessing over the oil and then he recites a blessing over the wine. Beit Hillel saythe opposite: bHe grasps the wine in his righthand band the oil in his lefthand. bHe recites a blessing over the wine and then he recites a blessing over the oil. Andafter he has recited a blessing over the oil and anointed his hands with it, bhe smearsit bon the head of the servantso that his hands will not remain perfumed. bAnd if the servant is a Torah scholar, he smearsthe oil bon the wall, as it is unbecoming for a Torah scholar to go out perfumed into the marketplace. /b,Tangential to the mention of conduct unbecoming a Torah scholar, bthe Sages taughtin a ibaraita /i: bSix things are disgraceful for a Torah scholar: He may not go out perfumed into the marketplace; he may not go outof his house balone at night; he may not go outwearing bpatched shoes; he may not converse with a woman in the marketplace; he may not reclineand participate in a meal bin the company of ignoramuses; and he may not be the last to enter the study hall. And some saythat bhe may not take long strides and he may not walk with an upright posture. /b,The Gemara elaborates on the statements of the ibaraita /i. bHe may not go out perfumed into the marketplace; Rabbi Abba, son of Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, saidthat bRabbi Yoḥa said:This prohibition only applies bin a place where they are suspected of homosexuality.One who goes out into the marketplace perfumed, will arouse suspicion. bRav Sheshet said: We only said this with regard to his clothingthat was perfumed, bbut with regard to his body,it is permitted, as bhis sweat causes the fragrance to dissipate. Rav Pappa said:In this regard, bhis hair isconsidered blike his clothing. And some say: His hair isconsidered blike his body. /b, bHe may not go outof his house balone at night because of suspicionof promiscuity. bAndtherefore bthis was onlyprohibited bif he does not have a set timeduring the night to study with his teacher, bbutif bhe has a set time,everyone bknows that he is going tostudy with his teacher at bhis set time,and they will not be suspicious of him., bHe may not go outwearing bpatched shoes.This bsupportsthe statement of bRabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, as Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said: It is disgraceful for a Torah scholar to go outwearing bpatched shoes.The Gemara challenges: bIs that so? Didn’t Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abbahimself bgo outwearing patched shoes? bMar Zutra, son of Rav Naḥman, said:It is only prohibited when the shoe has ba patch upon a patch. And we only said this with regard topatches on bthe upperpart of the shoe bbutif the patch is bon the sole, this does notapply. bAnd with regard topatches on bthe upperpart of the shoe, bwe only said thiswhen he is out bon the road, but in his house, we need notbe concerned. bAnd we only said this with regard to the summerwhen the patches would be visible to all, bbut during the rainy season,when the mud obscures the view of the patches, bwe need notbe concerned., bHe may not converse with a woman in the marketplace. Rav Ḥisda said: Even if she is his wife. This was also taughtin a ibaraita /i: One may not converse with a woman in the market, beven if she is his wife, even if she is his daughter and even if she is his sister,for bnot everyone is well-versed inthe identity of bhis female relativesand they will suspect that he is talking to women who are not his relatives., bHe may not reclineand participate in a meal bin the company of ignoramuses.The Gemara explains: bWhat is the reason? Perhaps he will be drawn after themand emulate them., bHe may not be the last to enter the study hall.The Gemara explains: bBecause theywill bcall him negligent,in other words, careless and lazy., bAnd some say he may not take long strides, as the Master said: A long stride takesaway bone five-hundredth of a person’s eyesight.The Gemara asks: bWhat is his remedyif he took long strides? The Gemara responds: bHe can restore itby drinking the wine of ikiddushonShabbat beve. /b, bAnd he may not walk with an upright posture,but slightly bowed, bas the Master said: One who walks with an upright postureand in an arrogant manner, beven four cubits,it is bas if he is pushing away the feet of the Divine Presence,as bit is written: “The entire world is full of His glory”(Isaiah 6:3). One who walks in an arrogant way shows a lack of regard for the glory and honor of God that is surrounding him, and thereby chases God from that place.
31. Babylonian Talmud, Menachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

44a. is bmore lowlythan a woman, and therefore it is appropriate to recite an additional blessing on not having been born a slave.,§ bThe Sages taught: This iḥilazon /i,which bisthe source of the sky-blue dye used in ritual fringes, has the following characteristics: bIts body resembles the sea, its form resemblesthat of ba fish, it emerges once in seventy years, and with its blood one dyeswool bsky-bluefor ritual fringes. It is scarce, and btherefore it is expensive. /b,It bis taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Natan says: There is no mitzva,however bminor, that is written in the Torah, for which there is no reward given in this world; and in the World-to-Come I do not know how muchreward is given. bGo and learn fromthe following incident concerning bthe mitzva of ritual fringes. /b,There was ban incident involving a certain man who was diligent about the mitzva of ritual fringes.This man bheard that there was a prostitute inone of bthe cities overseas who took four hundred gold coins as her payment. He sent her four hundred gold coins and fixed a time tomeet with bher. When his time came, he came and sat at the entranceto her house., bThe maidservant ofthat prostitute bentered and said to her: That man who sent you four hundred gold coins came and sat at the entrance. She said: Let him enter. He entered. She arranged seven beds for him, six of silver and one of gold. Between each and every oneof them there was ba laddermade bof silver, and the topbed was the one that was made bof gold. /b, bShe went up and sat naked on the topbed, band he too went upin order bto sit naked facing her.In the meantime, bhis four ritual fringes came and slapped him on his face. He dropped down and sat himself on the ground, and she also dropped down and sat on the ground. She said to him:I take an oath by the igappaof Rome that I will not allow youto go buntil you tell me what defect you saw in me. /b, bHe said to her:I take an oath by bthe Templeservice bthat I never saw a woman as beautiful as you. Butthere is bone mitzvathat bthe Lord, our God, commanded us, and its name is ritual fringes, and inthe passage where bitis commanded, bit is written twice: “I am the Lord your God”(Numbers 15:41). The doubling of this phrase indicates: bI am the one who will punishthose who transgress My mitzvot, band I am the one who will rewardthose who fulfill them. bNow,said the man, the four sets of ritual fringes bappeared to me asif they were bfour witnesseswho will testify against me., bShe said to him: I will not allow youto go buntil you tell me: What is your name, and what is the name of your city, and what is the name of your teacher, and what is the name of the study hall in which you studied Torah? He wrotethe information band placedit bin her hand. /b, bShe arose and divided all of her property,giving bone-thirdas a bribe bto the government, one-third to the poor, and she took one-thirdwith her bin her possession, in addition to those bedsof gold and silver., bShe came to the study hall of Rabbi Ḥiyyaand bsaid to him: My teacher, instructyour students bconcerning me andhave them bmake me a convert.Rabbi Ḥiyya bsaid to her: My daughter, perhaps you set your sights on one of the studentsand that is why you want to convert? bShe tookthe bnotethe student had given her bfrom her hand and gave it toRabbi Ḥiyya. bHe said to her: Go take possession of your purchase. /b, bThose beds that she had arranged for him in a prohibitedfashion, bshenow barranged for him in a permittedfashion. The Gemara completes its point about the reward of mitzvot and points out how this story illustrates the concept: bThis is the reward given to him in this world, andwith regard bto the World-to-Come, I do not know how muchreward he will be given.,§ bRav Yehuda says:In the case of ba borrowed cloak, forthe first bthirty days it is exempt from ritual fringes; from then onit is bobligated. /b,The Gemara notes: bThatdistinction bis also taughtin a ibaraita /i: In the case of bone who resides in a guesthouse [ ipundaki /i] in Eretz Yisrael, or one who rents a house outside of Eretz Yisrael, forthe first bthirty dayshe is bexempt from themitzva of imezuza /i; from then onhe is bobligated. But one who rents a house in Eretz Yisraelmust baffix a imezuzaimmediately, due tothe bsettlement of Eretz Yisrael. /b,§ The mishna teaches: Absence of the bphylacteries ofthe barm does not preventfulfillment of the mitzva of the phylacteries of the head, and absence of the phylacteries of the head does not prevent fulfillment of the mitzva of the phylacteries of the arm. bRav Ḥisda said: They taughtthis bonlyin a case bwhere one hasthe other phylacteries, but they are not with him or he is unable to wear them for some reason. bButif bhe does not havethe other phylacteries at all, then their absence bdoes preventthe fulfillment of the mitzva to don the phylacteries that he has.,Later on, the students bsaid to him:Do byoustill bsaythat? Rav Ḥisda bsaid to them: No, ratherI would say the opposite: Concerning bone who does not havethe ability to fulfill btwo mitzvot, should he also not performthe bone mitzvathat he does have the ability to fulfill? The Gemara asks: bAnd what did he hold initiallywhen he said not to don one of the phylacteries in the absence of the other? The Gemara answers: He held that it was due to a rabbinic bdecree, lest he be negligentand not try to acquire the phylacteries that he lacks., bRav Sheshet says: Anyone who does not don phylacteries violates eight positive mitzvot.This is referring to the mitzva to don phylacteries of the arm and head, each of which is mentioned in four different passages (Exodus 13:9; Exodus 13:16; Deuteronomy 6:8; Deuteronomy 11:18)., bAnd anyone who does not have ritual fringes on his garments violates five positive mitzvot.This is because the mitzva of ritual fringes is stated four times in the primary passage concerning ritual fringes in Numbers: “That they prepare for themselves strings…and they shall put on the fringe of the corner a sky-blue thread. And it shall be to you for a fringe that you may look upon it and remember all the commandments of the Lord” (Numbers 15:38–39). An additional command appears in the verse: “You shall prepare yourself twisted cords” (Deuteronomy 22:12)., bAnd any priest who does not ascend the platformto recite the Priestly Benediction bviolates three positive mitzvotexpressed in the verses: “So you shall bless the children of Israel; you shall say to them” (Numbers 6:23), and: “And they shall put My name upon the children of Israel” (Numbers 6:27)., bAnyone who does not have a imezuzain his doorway violates two positive mitzvot,stated in the verses: b“And you shall write themon the doorposts of your house” (Deuteronomy 6:9), and: b“And you shall write themon the doorposts of your house” (Deuteronomy 11:20)., bAnd Reish Lakish says: Anyone who dons phylacteries livesa blong life, as it is stated: /b
32. Babylonian Talmud, Qiddushin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

68a. אפילו נדה נמי אלמה אמר אביי הכל מודים בבא על הנדה ועל הסוטה שאין הולד ממזר אמר חזקיה אמר קרא (ויקרא טו, כד) ותהי נדתה עליו אפילו בשעת נדתה תהא בה הויה,מכדי איכא לאקושה לנדה ואיכא לאקושה לאחות אשה מאי חזית דמקשת להו לאחות אשה אקשה לנדה קולא וחומרא לחומרא מקשינן,רב אחא בר יעקב אמר אתיא בק"ו מיבמה ומה יבמה שהיא בלאו לא תפסי בה קידושין חייבי מיתות וחייבי כריתות לא כל שכן אי הכי שאר חייבי לאוין נמי,אמר רב פפא חייבי לאוין בהדיא כתיב בהו (דברים כא, טו) כי תהיין לאיש שתי נשים האחת אהובה והאחת שנואה וכי יש שנואה לפני המקום ואהובה לפני המקום אלא אהובה אהובה בנישואיה שנואה שנוא' בנישואיה וקאמר רחמנא כי תהיין,ולר"ע דאמר אין קידושין תופסין בחייבי לאוין כי תהיין במאי מוקים באלמנה לכ"ג וכר' סימאי,דתניא רבי סימאי אומר מן הכל היה ר"ע עושה ממזר חוץ מאלמנה לכהן גדול שהרי אמרה תורה (ויקרא כא, ו) לא יחלל חילולים עושה ואין עושה ממזרות,ולר' ישבב דאמר בואו ונצווח על עקיבא בן יוסף שהיה אומר כל שאין לו ביאה בישראל הולד ממזר הניחא לר' ישבב אי לאפוקי מדר' סימאי קאתי שפיר,אלא אי טעמא דנפשיה קאמר ואפי' חייבי עשה במאי מוקים לה,בבעולה לכ"ג ומאי שנא משום דהוי ליה עשה שאין שוה בכל,ורבנן אדמוקי לה בחייבי לאוין נוקמא בחייבי עשה,הני חייבי עשה במאי נינהו אי שתיהן מצריות שתיהן שנואות אי אחת מצרית ואחת ישראלית שתי נשים מעם אחד בעינן אי בעולה לכהן גדול מי כתיב תהיין לכהן,ורבי עקיבא בעל כורחיך שבקיה לקרא דהוי דחיק ומוקי אנפשיה,וכל מי שאין לה עליו וכו' שפחה כנענית מנלן אמר רב הונא אמר קרא (בראשית כב, ה) שבו לכם פה עם החמור עם הדומה לחמור אשכחן דלא תפסי בה קדושי 68a. then bevenif he betrothed ba menstruating woman as well,his betrothal should not be effective and the offspring should be a imamzer /i, as a menstruating woman is included in the list in that chapter of those with whom sexual intercourse is forbidden. If so, bwhydid bAbaye say: All concede with regard to one who engages in intercourse with a menstruating woman or with a isota /i,a woman forbidden to her husband on suspicion of being unfaithful to him, bthat the offspring is not a imamzer /i? Ḥizkiyya said:In the case of a menstruating woman, bthe verse states: “And her impurity be [ iut’hi /i] upon him”(Leviticus 15:24), from which it is derived that beven at the time of her impurity,the type of bbecoming [ ihavaya /i]stated with regard to betrothal (see Deuteronomy 24:2) bshouldapply bto her.The Gemara is interpreting the connection between the words iut’hiand ihavaya /i, as both share the same Hebrew root.,The Gemara asks: bAfter all, there isthe possibility bof juxtaposingall other forbidden relatives bto a menstruating woman, and there isalso the possibility bof juxtaposingthem bto a wife’s sister. What did you see that you juxtaposed them to a wife’s sister?Why not bjuxtapose theminstead bto a menstruating woman?The Gemara answers: When there is an option of juxtaposing a case in a manner that leads to ba leniency, orjuxtaposing it to a ihalakhathat entails ba stringency, we juxtaposeit in a fashion that leads bto a stringency. /b, bRav Aḥa bar Ya’akov saidthat there is a different source for the ihalakhathat betrothal is ineffective with forbidden relatives: This principle bis derived bymeans of ban ia fortiori /iinference bfromthe case of ba iyevama /i: Just as a iyevama /i,before she is released from the iyavamthrough iḥalitza /i, bisforbidden bbya mere bprohibition,which entails lashes, and yet bbetrothal is not effective with her,with regard to bthosepeople with whom sexual intercourse renders one bliable toreceive the bdeathpenalty bor liable tobe punished with ikaret /i,is it bnot all the more sothe case that betrothal should not be effective in these cases? The Gemara asks: bIf so,meaning that this is the source, one should balsoderive that betrothal is ineffective with any botherpeople with whom one bisonly bliablefor violating ba prohibitionof engaging in intercourse, by means of the same analogy.,Rav Pappa says: It bis written explicitlyin the Torah that a man can betroth women bwith whom he is liablefor violating ordinary bprohibitionsof intercourse. The Torah states in a different context: b“If a man has two wives, the one beloved and the one hated”(Deuteronomy 21:15). Rav Pappa asks rhetorically: bBut is there one who is hated before the Omnipresent and one who is beloved before the Omnipresent? Rather, “beloved”means bbeloved in her marriage,i.e., her marriage is permitted; b“hated”means bhated in her marriage,i.e., her marriage involves the violation of a prohibition. bAnddespite the fact that the latter marriage is between a man and a woman who are forbidden to one another, their union still has the status of a marriage, as bthe Merciful One states: “If a man hastwo wives,” i.e., he is married to both of them.,The Gemara asks: bAnd according tothe opinion of bRabbi Akiva, who says: Betrothal does not take effecteven bwiththose women with whom one bisonly bliablefor violating ba prohibitionof engaging in intercourse, bwith regard to whatcase bdoes he establishthe verse: b“If a man hastwo wives”? The Gemara answers: He explains that this verse is referring bto a widowmarried bto a High Priest, andthis is bin accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Simai. /b, bAs it is taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Simai says: From allrelationships that involve prohibitions, bRabbi Akiva would renderthe offspring ba imamzer /i, except forthe marriage of ba widow to a High Priest, as the Torah said: “And he shall not profane [ iyeḥallel /i]”(Leviticus 21:15), which teaches that bhe renders them profane [ iḥillulim /i],i.e., his children from this marriage are iḥalalim /i, bbut he does not renderthem labeled with imamzerstatus. /b,The Gemara asks: bAndwhat can be said baccording tothe opinion of bRabbi Yeshevav, who says: Come, let us shout at Akiva ben Yosef, who would say:In beverycase where ba Jew may not engage in intercoursewith a particular woman, and he does so, bthe offspringthat results from this union bis a imamzer /i,even the child of a widow and a High Priest? bThis works out welleven baccording tothe opinion of bRabbi Yeshevav if he comes to exclude the reason of Rabbi Simai,i.e., if he means to take issue with the ruling of Rabbi Akiva in the specific case mentioned by Rabbi Simai, that of a widow married to a High Priest, then Rabbi Yeshevav too concedes that according to the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, betrothal does take effect in a case where a positive mitzva is violated by the betrothal. Accordingly, one can establish the phrase “and the one hated” (Deuteronomy 21:15) as referring to those whose marriage entailed the violation of a positive mitzva., bBut ifhe states ba reasoning of his own,i.e., he states an independent statement critical of Rabbi Akiva’s ruling that the child of any illicit union is a imamzer /i, bandit is a categorical statement that applies to all illicit unions, beven those liablefor violating ba positive mitzva,i.e., Rabbi Akiva holds that even the offspring of this relationship is a imamzer /i, bwith regard to whatcase bdoes he interpretthe “hated” woman of the above verse?,The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yeshevav would say that the verse is referring bto a non-virginmarried bto a High Priest,as there is a positive mitzva that a High Priest should marry a virgin. The Gemara asks: bAndin bwhatway bisthis case bdifferent fromthe previous ones? If Rabbi Yeshevav holds that a child born of any act of intercourse prohibited by a positive mitzva is a imamzer /i, the marriage of a non-virgin to a High Priest likewise involves the violation of a positive mitzva. The Gemara answers: bBecause it is a positive mitzva that is not equally applicable to all,and since this command applies only to a High Priest and not to other Jews, its violation is considered less severe than that of other positive mitzvot.,The Gemara asks: bAndwith regard to bthe Rabbis,who disagree with Rabbi Akiva’s opinion, brather than establishingthe verse: “If a man has two wives, the one beloved and the one hated” (Deuteronomy 21:15), as referring btothose who are bliable forviolating bprohibitions, let them establish itas referring bto those liable forviolating ba positive mitzva.In other words, betrothal should not be effective if it involves the violation of a prohibition. And as for the “hated” woman whose marriage is nevertheless valid, mentioned in that verse, this is referring to one whose engaging in sexual intercourse violates a positive mitzva.,The Gemara responds: bThesecases where they are bliablefor violating ba positive mitzva, what are they? Ifyou say that bbothwives are bEgyptianconverts, bthey are both hated,as both marriages are prohibited. bIfyou claim that bone is an Egyptian woman and the other a Jewish womanof unflawed lineage, this cannot be the case, as bwe require “two wives” from the same nation,since the Torah equates the two women. bIfthe hated one is ba non-virginmarried bto a High Priest,this too is problematic, as, bis it written: If a priest hastwo wives? The verse merely says: “If a man has two wives.” Consequently, the verse cannot be interpreted as referring to those who are liable for violating a positive mitzva.,The Gemara asks: bButaccording to the opinion of bRabbi Akiva,that betrothal that involves a prohibition does not take effect, this verse can be referring only to a non-virgin who marries a High Priest, or marriage to a female Egyptian convert, which involve the violation of positive mitzvot. Can the verse really be interpreted as concerning such unlikely cases? The Gemara answers: bYou are forced to leave this verseaside, bas it establishes itself asdealing with ba difficultcase. In other words, as Rabbi Akiva claims that betrothal is ineffective if any prohibition is involved, he has no choice but to explain the verse that says: “If a man has two wives,” in this forced manner.,§ The mishna teaches: bAndin banycase bwherea woman bcannotjoin in betrothal bwith himor with others, the offspring is like her. This ruling refers specifically to a Canaanite maidservant or a gentile woman. The Gemara asks: bFrom where do wederive that betrothal with ba Canaanite maidservantis ineffective? bRav Huna says: The verse statesthat Abraham commanded his slaves: b“You abide here with [ iim /i] the donkey”(Genesis 22:5), which alludes to the fact that his slaves belong to ba nation [ iam /i] similar to a donkey;just as betrothal is ineffective with animals, it is likewise ineffective with Canaanite maidservants. The Gemara comments: bWe have found that betrothal is ineffective witha Canaanite maidservant;
33. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

92a. יקבוהו לאום ואין לאום אלא עוברין שנאמר (בראשית כה, כג) ולאום מלאום יאמץ ואין קבה אלא קללה שנאמר (במדבר כג, ח) מה אקב לא קבה אל ואין בר אלא תורה שנאמר (תהלים ב, יב) נשקו בר פן יאנף,עולא בר ישמעאל אומר מנקבין אותו ככברה כתיב הכא (משלי יא, כו) יקבוהו לאום וכתיב התם (מלכים ב יב, י) ויקב חור בדלתו ואמר אביי כי אוכלא דקצרי,ואם למדו מה שכרו אמר רבא אמר רב ששת זוכה לברכות כיוסף שנאמר (משלי יא, כו) וברכה לראש משביר ואין משביר אלא יוסף שנאמר (בראשית מב, ו) ויוסף הוא [השליט על הארץ הוא] המשביר לכל עם הארץ,אמר רב ששת כל המלמד תורה בעוה"ז זוכה ומלמדה לעולם הבא שנאמר (משלי יא, כה) ומרוה גם הוא יורה,אמר רבא מניין לתחיית המתים מן התורה שנאמר (דברים לג, ו) יחי ראובן ואל ימות יחי ראובן בעולם הזה ואל ימות לעולם הבא רבינא אמר מהכא (דניאל יב, ב) ורבים מישני אדמת עפר יקיצו אלה לחיי עולם ואלה לחרפות לדראון עולם רב אשי אמר מהכא (דניאל יב, יג) ואתה לך [לקץ] ותנוח ותעמוד לגורלך לקץ הימין,אמר רבי אלעזר כל פרנס שמנהיג את הצבור בנחת זוכה ומנהיגם לעוה"ב שנאמר (ישעיהו מט, י) כי מרחמם ינהגם ועל מבועי מים ינהלם,וא"ר אלעזר גדולה דעה שניתנה בין שתי אותיות שנאמר (שמואל א ב, ג) כי אל דעות ה',וא"ר אלעזר גדול מקדש שניתן בין שתי אותיות שנאמר (שמות טו, יז) פעלת ה' מקדש ה' כוננו ידיך מתקיף לה רב אדא קרחינאה אלא מעתה גדולה נקמה שניתנה בין שתי אותיות דכתיב (תהלים צד, א) אל נקמות ה' אל נקמות הופיע,אמר ליה למילתיה הכי נמי כדעולא דאמר עולא שתי הופעיות הללו למה אחת למדת טובה ואחת למדת פורענות,ואמר ר' אלעזר כל אדם שיש בו דעה כאילו נבנה בית המקדש בימיו שזה ניתן בין שתי אותיות וזה ניתן בין שתי אותיות,ואמר ר' אלעזר כל אדם שיש בו דעה לסוף מתעשר שנאמר (משלי כד, ד) ובדעת חדרים ימלאו כל הון יקר ונעים,ואמר ר' אלעזר כל אדם שאין בו דעה אסור לרחם עליו שנאמר (ישעיהו כז, יא) כי לא עם בינות הוא על כן לא ירחמנו עושהו ויוצרו לא יחוננו,וא"ר אלעזר כל הנותן פיתו למי שאין בו דעה יסורין באין עליו שנאמר (עובדיה א, ז) לחמך ישימו מזור תחתיך אין תבונה בו ואין מזור אלא יסורין שנאמר (הושע ה, יג) וירא אפרים את חליו ויהודה את מזורו,ואמר ר' אלעזר כל אדם שאין בו דעה לסוף גולה שנאמר (ישעיהו ה, יג) לכן גלה עמי מבלי דעת,ואמר ר"א כל בית שאין דברי תורה נשמעים בו בלילה אש אוכלתו שנאמר (איוב כ, כו) כל חשך טמון לצפוניו תאכלהו אש לא נופח ירע שריד באהלו אין שריד אלא ת"ח שנאמר (יואל ג, ה) ובשרידים אשר ה' קורא,ואמר ר' אלעזר כל שאינו מהנה תלמידי חכמים מנכסיו אינו רואה סימן ברכה לעולם שנאמר (איוב כ, כא) אין שריד לאכלו על כן לא יחיל טובו אין שריד אלא תלמידי חכמים שנאמר ובשרידים אשר ה' קורא,ואמר רבי אלעזר כל שאינו משייר פת על שלחנו אינו רואה סימן ברכה לעולם שנאמר אין שריד לאכלו על כן לא יחיל טובו,והאמר רבי אלעזר כל המשייר פתיתים על שלחנו כאילו עובד ע"ז שנאמר (ישעיהו סה, יא) העורכים לגד שלחן והממלאים למני ממסך לא קשיא הא דאיכא שלימה בהדיה הא דליכה שלימה בהדיה,ואמר רבי אלעזר כל המחליף בדבורו כאילו עובד ע"ז כתיב הכא (בראשית כז, יב) והייתי בעיניו כמתעתע וכתיב התם (ירמיהו י, טו) הבל המה מעשה תעתועים,ואמר רבי אלעזר כל המסתכל בערוה קשתו ננערת שנאמר (חבקוק ג, ט) עריה תעור קשתך,ואמר רבי אלעזר לעולם הוי קבל וקיים אמר רבי זירא אף אנן נמי תנינא בית אפל אין פותחין לו חלונות לראות נגעו ש"מ,אמר ר' טבי אמר ר' יאשיה מאי דכתיב (משלי ל, טז) שאול ועוצר רחם ארץ לא שבעה מים וכי מה ענין שאול אצל רחם אלא לומר לך מה רחם מכניס ומוציא אף שאול מכניס ומוציא,והלא דברים קל וחומר ומה רחם שמכניסין בו בחשאי מוציאין ממנו בקולי קולות שאול שמכניסין בו בקולות אינו דין שמוציאין ממנו בקולי קולות מיכן תשובה לאומרין אין תחיית המתים מן התורה,תנא דבי אליהו צדיקים שעתיד הקדוש ברוך הוא להחיותן אינן חוזרין לעפרן שנאמר (ישעיהו ד, ג) והיה הנשאר בציון והנותר בירושלים קדוש יאמר לו כל הכתוב לחיים בירושלים מה קדוש לעולם קיים אף הם לעולם קיימין 92a. bthe people [ ileom /i] shall curse him [ iyikkevuhu /i],but blessing shall be upon the head of one who provides” (Proverbs 11:26). bAndthe term ileom /iis referring to bnothing other than fetuses, as it is stated:“Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples shall be separated from your bowels; band the one ileomshall overcome the other ileom /i”(Genesis 25:23). bAnd ikabbo /iis referring to bnothing other than curse, as it is statedin the statement of Balaam: b“How can I curse one who is not cursed [ ikabbo /i] by God?”(Numbers 23:8). bAnd ibar /iis referring to bnothing other than Torah, as it is stated: “Pay homage to ibarlest He be angry”(Psalms 2:12), i.e., observe the Torah to avoid God’s wrath., bUlla bar Yishmael says: One perforates like a sievea person who withholds ihalakhafrom a student. bIt is written here:“He who withholds ibar /i, bthe people iyikkevuhu /i”(Proverbs 11:26), band it is written there: “And he bored [ ivayyikkov /i] a hole in its lid of it”(II Kings 12:10). bAnd Abaye says:One perforates him blike a launderers’ utensilused for sprinkling water on garments., bAnd if one teachesthe student ihalakharather than withholding it, bwhat is his reward? Rava saysthat bRav Sheshet says: He is privilegedto receive bblessings like Joseph, as it is statedat the end of that verse: b“But blessing shall be upon the head of one who provides [ imashbir /i]”(Proverbs 11:26). bAnd imashbir /iis referring to bnoone bother than Joseph, as it is stated: “And Joseph was the governor of the land, and he was the provider [ ihamashbir /i] to all the people of the land”(Genesis 42:6)., bRav Sheshet says: Anyone who teaches Torah in this world is privileged and teaches it in the World-to-Come, as it is stated: “And he who satisfies abundantly [ iumarveh /i] shall be satisfied himself [ iyoreh /i]”(Proverbs 11:25). Rav Sheshet interprets the verse homiletically: By transposing the letters of the word imarveh /i: iMem /i, ireish /i, ivav /i, iheh /i, one arrives at the word imoreh /i, meaning teaches. The verse means that one who teaches [ imoreh /i] will teach [ iyoreh /i] in the future as well.,The Gemara returns to the topic of the source for resurrection in the Torah. bRava says: From whereis bresurrection of the deadderived bfrom the Torah?It is derived from a verse, bas it is stated: “Let Reuben live and not die,in that his men become few” (Deuteronomy 33:6). This is interpreted: b“Let Reuben live” in this world “and not die” in the World-to-Come. Ravina saysthat resurrection is derived bfrom here: “And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awaken, some to everlasting life, and some to reproaches and everlasting disgrace”(Daniel 12:2). bRav Ashi saysproof is derived bfrom here: “But go you your way until the end be; and you shall rest, and arise to your lot at the end of days”(Daniel 12:13).,§ bRabbi Elazar says: Any communal leader who leads the community calmly,without anger and honestly, bis privileged and leads them in the World-to-Come, as it is stated: “For he that has compassion upon them will lead them, even by the springs of water shall he guide them”(Isaiah 49:10). Just as he led them in this world, so too will he guide them in the World-to-Come.,The Gemara proceeds to cite additional statements of Rabbi Elazar relating to recommended conduct. bAnd Rabbi Elazar says: Great is knowledge, as it was placed between two letters,two names of God, bas it is stated: “For a God of knowledge is the Lord”(I Samuel 2:3)., bAnd Rabbi Elazar says: Great is the Holy Temple, as ittoo bwas placed between two letters,two names of God, bas it is stated:“The place in which to dwell that bYou have made, Lord, the Temple, Lord, which Your hands have prepared”(Exodus 15:17). bRav Adda Karḥina’a objects tothe explanation that being placed between two names of God accords significance. bIf that is so,the same should hold true for vengeance. Shall one say: bGreatis bvengeance, as it was placed between two letters, as it is written: “God of vengeance, Lord, God of vengeance shine forth”(Psalms 94:1)?,Rabbi Elazar bsaid to him: In its context, indeed,vengeance is great, bin accordance withthe statement bof Ulla. As Ulla sayswith regard to bthese two appearances:“O Lord, God to Whom vengeance belongs; God to Whom vengeance belongs, appear” (Psalms 94:1), and: “He appeared from Mount Paran” (Deuteronomy 33:2), bwhyare both necessary? bOne,the second verse, is necessary bfor the attribute ofdivine bgood,with which God gave the Torah at Sinai, band one,the first verse, is necessary bfor the attribute ofdivine bpunishment,with which God exacts vengeance against the enemies and oppressors of the Jewish people., bAnd Rabbi Elazar says:With regard to bany person in whom there is knowledge,it is bas though the Temple was built in his days, as this,knowledge, bwas placed between two letters and that,the Temple, bwas placed between two letters. /b, bAnd Rabbi Elazar says: Any person in whom there is knowledge ultimately becomes wealthy, as it is stated: “And by knowledge are the chambers filled with all precious and pleasant riches”(Proverbs 24:4)., bAnd Rabbi Elazar says:With regard to bany person in whom there is no knowledge, it is prohibited to have mercy upon him, as it is stated: “For it is a people of no understanding; therefore its Maker will have no mercy on them, and its Creator will show them no favor”(Isaiah 27:11). If God has no mercy upon them, all the more so should people not show them mercy., bAnd Rabbi Elazar says:With regard to banyone who gives his bread to one without knowledge, afflictions befall him, as it is stated: “They who eat your bread will place imazorunder you, in whom there is no discernment”(Obadiah 1:7). bAnd imazor /imeans bnothing other than afflictions,based on the parallel with another verse, bas it is stated: “And Ephraim saw his sickness and Judah his wound [ imezoro /i]”(Hosea 5:13). This indicates that one who gives his bread to one without discernment will ultimately fall ill., bAnd Rabbi Elazar says: Any person in whom there is no knowledge is ultimately exiled, as it is stated: “Therefore my people are exiled, for lack of knowledge”(Isaiah 5:13)., bAnd Rabbi Elazar says:With regard to bany house in which there are no matters of Torah heard at night, the fireof Gehenna bconsumes it, as it is stated: “All darkness is laid up for his treasures, a fire not fanned shall consume him; it shall go ill with a isaridin his tent”(Job 20:26). iSarid /iis referring to bnoone bbut a Torah scholar, as it is stated: “And among the iseridim /i, those whom the Lord shall call”(Joel 3:5). A house that is dark at night and in which no Torah is heard will be consumed by a fire that does not require fanning with a bellows, the fire of Gehenna., bAnd Rabbi Elazar says: Anyone who does not benefit Torah scholars from his property never sees a sign of blessing, as it is stated: “None of his food shall remain [ isarid /i]; therefore his prosperity shall not endure”(Job 20:21). iSarid /iis referring to bnoone bbut Torah scholars, as it is stated: “And among the iseridim /i, those whom the Lord shall call.”No prosperity will come to one who does not share his food with a Torah scholar., bAnd Rabbi Elazar says: Anyone who does not leave bread on his tableat the end of his meal indicating his gratitude to God for providing him more than enough bnever sees a sign of blessing, as it is stated: “None of his food shall remain; therefore his prosperity shall not endure.” /b,The Gemara asks: bBut doesn’t Rabbi Elazar say:With regard to banyone who leaves piecesof bread bon his table, it is as if he worships idols, as it is stated: “Who prepare a table for Fortune [ iGad /i] and offer blended wine for Destiny”(Isaiah 65:11). The people would leave pieces of bread on the table as an offering to the constellation iGad /i, which they believed influences the fortune of the home. This practice was a form of idol worship. The Gemara answers: This apparent contradiction is bnot difficult: Thiscase, where leaving pieces of bread is a form of idol worship, applies bwhen there is a wholeloaf together bwiththe pieces, as the addition of the pieces is clearly for idol worship; bthatcase, where failure to leave bread on the table is criticized, applies bwhen there is no wholeloaf together bwiththe pieces., bAnd Rabbi Elazar says:With regard to banyone who amendsthe truth bin his speech, it is as though he worships idols.As, bit is written here,in the verse where Jacob sought to resist taking his father’s blessing from Esau: b“And I shall seem to him a deceiver [ imetate’a /i]”(Genesis 27:12), band it is written therewith regard to idol worship: b“They are vanity, the work of deception [ itatuim /i]”(Jeremiah 10:15)., bAnd Rabbi Elazar says:With regard to banyone who looks at nakedness [ ierva /i], his bow is emptied,i.e., he will be robbed of his potency, bas it is stated: “Your bow is stripped bare [ ierya /i]”(Habakkuk 3:9)., bAnd Rabbi Elazar says: Forever be in the dark,i.e., anonymous, bandyou will continue to bexist. Rabbi Zeira says: We learna similar idea in a mishna bas well( iNega’im2:3): In ba dark house, one does not open windows toilluminate bitin order bto seewhether or not bitsblemish is bleprosy,and the house retains the presumptive status of ritual purity. Those matters that are obscured are allowed to continue. The Gemara affirms: bConclude fromthat mishna that this is so.,§ The Gemara returns to the topic of the source for resurrection in the Torah. bRabbi Tavi saysthat bRabbi Yoshiya says: Whatis the meaning of that bwhich is written:“There are three that are never satisfied… bthe grave, and the barren womb, and earth that does not receive sufficient water”(Proverbs 30:15–16)? bAnd what does a grave have to do with a womb? Rather,they are juxtaposed bto say to you: Just as a womb takes in and gives forth, so too a grave takes in andalso bgives forth,with the resurrection of the dead., bAnd arethese bmatters notinferred ia fortiori /i: Ifwith regard to ba womb, into which one introducesthe embryo bin secret, one removesthe baby bfrom itaccompanied bbythe bloud soundsof the woman crying out during childbirth, then with regard to bthe grave, into which one introducesthe corpse bwith soundsof wailing and mourning the dead, bis it not right that one removesfrom it the resurrected dead accompanied bbythe bloud soundsof the resurrected multitudes? bFrom herethere is ba response tothose who bsay: There is no resurrection of the deadderived bfrom the Torah. /b, bThe school of Eliyahu taught: The righteous whom the Holy One, Blessed be He, is destined to resurrect do not return to their dust, as it is stated: “And it shall come to pass, that he who remains in Zion and he who remains in Jerusalem shall be called holy, anyone who is written unto life in Jerusalem”(Isaiah 4:3). bJust asthe bHoly One exists forever, so too will they exist forever. /b
34. Babylonian Talmud, Sukkah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

51a. כתנאי (דתניא) עבדי כהנים היו דברי ר' מאיר רבי יוסי אומר משפחת בית הפגרים ומשפחת בית ציפריא ומאמאום היו שהיו משיאין לכהונה,ר' חנינא בן אנטיגנוס אומר לוים היו מאי לאו בהא קא מיפלגי דמאן דאמר עבדים היו קסבר עיקר שירה בפה ומאן דאמר לוים היו קסבר עיקר שירה בכלי,ותסברא רבי יוסי מאי קסבר אי קסבר עיקר שירה בפה אפילו עבדים נמי אי קסבר עיקר שירה בכלי לוים אין ישראלים לא,אלא דכולי עלמא עיקר שירה בפה ובהא קא מיפלגי דמר סבר הכי הוה מעשה ומר סבר הכי הוה מעשה,למאי נפקא מינה למעלין מדוכן ליוחסין ולמעשר קא מיפלגי,מאן דאמר עבדים היו קסבר אין מעלין מדוכן ליוחסין ולא למעשר ומאן דאמר ישראל היו קסבר מעלין מדוכן ליוחסין אבל לא למעשר ומאן דאמר לוים היו קסבר מעלין מדוכן בין ליוחסין בין למעשר,ורבי ירמיה בר אבא אמר מחלוקת בשיר של שואבה דרבי יוסי בר יהודה סבר שמחה יתירה נמי דוחה את השבת ורבנן סברי שמחה יתירה אינה דוחה את השבת אבל בשיר של קרבן דברי הכל עבודה היא ודוחה את השבת,מיתיבי שיר של שואבה דוחה את השבת דברי רבי יוסי בר יהודה וחכמים אומרים אף יום טוב אינו דוחה תיובתא דרב יוסף תיובתא,לימא בשיר של שואבה הוא דפליגי אבל בשיר של קרבן דברי הכל דוחה את השבת לימא תיהוי תיובתא דרב יוסף בתרתי,אמר לך רב יוסף פליגי בשיר של שואבה והוא הדין לקרבן והאי דקמיפלגי בשיר של שואבה להודיעך כחו דרבי יוסי בר יהודה דאפילו דשואבה נמי דחי,והא קתני זהו חליל של בית השואבה שאינו דוחה לא את השבת ולא את יום טוב זהו דאינו דוחה אבל דקרבן דוחה מני אי נימא רבי יוסי בר יהודה האמר שיר של שואבה נמי דוחה אלא לאו רבנן ותיובתא דרב יוסף בתרתי תיובתא,מאי טעמא דמאן דאמר עיקר שירה בכלי דכתיב (דברי הימים ב כט, כז) ויאמר חזקיהו להעלות העולה להמזבח ובעת החל העולה החל שיר ה' והחצוצרות ועל ידי כלי דויד מלך ישראל,מ"ט דמאן דאמר עיקר שירה בפה דכתיב (דברי הימים ב ה, יג) ויהי כאחד למחצצרים ולמשוררים להשמיע קול אחד,ואידך נמי הא כתיב ויאמר חזקיהו הכי קאמר החל שיר ה' בפה על ידי כלי דויד מלך ישראל לבסומי קלא,ואידך נמי הא כתיב ויהי כאחד למחצצרים ולמשוררים הכי קאמר משוררים דומיא דמחצצרים מה מחצצרים בכלי אף משוררים בכלי:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big מי שלא ראה שמחת בית השואבה לא ראה שמחה מימיו במוצאי יום טוב הראשון של חג ירדו לעזרת נשים ומתקנין שם תיקון גדול מנורות של זהב היו שם וארבעה ספלים של זהב בראשיהם וארבעה סולמות לכל אחד ואחד וארבעה ילדים מפירחי כהונה ובידיהם כדים של מאה ועשרים לוג שהן מטילין לכל ספל וספל מבלאי מכנסי כהנים ומהמייניהן מהן היו מפקיעין ובהן היו מדליקין ולא היה חצר בירושלים שאינה מאירה מאור בית השואבה,חסידים ואנשי מעשה היו מרקדין בפניהם 51a. This dispute is bparallelto another dispute between itanna’im /i, as it is taughtin a mishna in tractate iArakhin /i: The Temple musicians bwere slaves of priests;this is bthe statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yosei says:The musicians were not slaves; they were Israelites from bthe family of the House of Happegarim and the family of the House of Tzipperaya. And they were fromthe city of bEmma’um,and their lineage was sufficiently distinguished bthat they would marrytheir daughters btomembers of bthe priesthood. /b, bRabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus says: They were Levites. What, is it not that they disagree with regard to this; that the one who saidthat the musicians bwere slaves holdsthat the bprimaryessence of bsongis singing bwith the mouth.Since the instrumental music is mere accompaniment, it could be performed by slaves. bAnd the one who said thatthe musicians bwere Levites holdsthat the bprimaryessence of bsongis accompaniment bbymusical binstruments.Therefore, the musicians were Levites, who were tasked with the song that was part of the Temple service.,The Gemara asks: bAndhow can byou understandthe mishna that way? According to that explanation, bwhat does Rabbi Yosei hold? If he holdsthat the bprimaryessence of bsongis singing bwith the mouth,then beven slavescan balsoplay the instruments. Why then does he require that the musicians be from Israelite families of distinguished lineage? bIf he holdsthat the bprimaryessence of bsongis accompaniment bbymusical binstruments,he should have said: bLevites, yes,they may play the instruments, but bIsraelites, no,they may not., bRather,the explanation of the dispute is bthat everyone agreesthat the bprimaryessence of bsongis singing bwith the mouthand the musical instruments are merely for accompaniment. bAndit is bwith regard to this that they disagree:It is bthatone bSage holdsthat the beventtook place in bthismanner, i.e., slaves played the instruments, bandone bSage holdsthat the beventtook place in bthismanner, i.e., Israelite families of distinguished lineage played the instruments.,The Gemara asks: bWhatpractical halakhic bdifference is therewhether one group or another played the instruments? The Gemara answers: It is with regard btowhether bone elevatesa Levite bfrom the platform tothe presumptive status of distinguished blineage andeligibility btoreceive btithes that they disagree.Is it possible to draw the conclusion that a family is of distinguished lineage or eligible to receive tithes based on the fact that a member or ancestor of that family played a musical instrument on the Temple platform?, bThe one who said thatthe musicians bwere slaves holdsthat bone does not elevate from the platform tothe presumptive status of distinguished blineage andeligibility btoreceive btithes. And the one who said thatthe musicians bwere Israelites holdsthat bone elevatesa Levite bfrom the platformto the presumptive status of distinguished blineage but noteligibility btoreceive btithes. And the one who said thatthe musicians bwere Levites holdsthat bone elevatesa Levite bfrom the platform tothe presumptive status of distinguished blineageand eligibility btoreceive btithes. /b,§ The Gemara cites an opinion that disagrees with that of Rav Yosef. bAnd Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba said: The disputebetween Rabbi Yosei bar Yehuda and the Rabbis bis with regard to the song ofthe bDrawingof the Water. bRabbi Yosei bar Yehuda holdsthat bextra rejoicing also overrides Shabbat, and the Rabbis holdthat bextra rejoicing does not override Shabbat. However, with regard tothe bsong thatthe Levites sang accompanying ban offering, everyone agreesthat it is part of the Temple bservice, and overrides Shabbat. /b,The Gemara braises an objectionto the opinion of Rav Yosef that the dispute is with regard to the song that the Levites sang accompanying the daily offering: bThe song ofthe bDrawingof the Water boverrides Shabbat;this is bthe statement of Rabbi Yosei bar Yehuda. And the Rabbis say: It does not override even the Festival.Apparently, their dispute is with regard to the song of the Drawing of the Water. Say that this is ba conclusive refutationof the opinion bof Rav Yosef.The Gemara concludes: Indeed, it is ba conclusive refutation. /b,The Gemara suggests: bLet us say,based on this ibaraita /i, that bit is with regard to the song ofthe bDrawingof the Water alone bthat they disagree; however, with regard to the song thatthe Levites sang accompanying bthedaily boffering, everyone saysthat bit overrides Shabbat.If so, blet us saythat bthis will be a conclusive refutation ofthe opinion bof Rav Yosef on twocounts. According to Rav Yosef, the dispute is with regard to the song of the Drawing of the Water, and not with regard to the song the Levites sang accompanying the daily offering. The above suggestion refutes both aspects of his opinion., bRav Yosefcould have bsaid to you: They disagree with regard to the song ofthe bDrawingof the Water band the same is true forthe song that the Levites sang accompanying ban offering. Andthe fact bthat they disagreespecifically bwith regard to the song ofthe bDrawingof the Water and do not specifically mention the song that the Levites sang accompanying the daily offering bis to convey to you the far-reachingnature of the opinion bof Rabbi Yosei bar Yehuda, that even thesong bofthe bDrawingof the Water balso overridesShabbat.,The Gemara asks: bBut isn’t it taughtin the mishna: bThis isthe bflute of the Place of the Drawingof the Water, bwhich overrides neither Shabbat northe bFestival.By inference, bthis isthe flute bthat does not overrideShabbat; bhowever,the flute that accompanies bthedaily boffering overridesShabbat. The Gemara asks: bWho isthe itannaof the mishna? bIf we sayit is bRabbi Yosei bar Yehuda, didn’t he say that the song ofthe bDrawingof the Water balso overridesShabbat? bRather, is it not the Rabbis, andsay that this is ba conclusive refutationof bRav Yosef on twocounts. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, it is ba conclusive refutation. /b,The Gemara asks: bWhat is the rationalefor the opinion bof the one who said:The bprimaryessence of bsongis singing accompanied bbymusical binstruments?The Gemara answers: It is bas it is written: “And Hezekiah commanded to sacrifice the burnt-offering upon the altar. And when the burnt-offering began, the song of the Lord began also, and the trumpets, together with the instruments of David, king of Israel”(II Chronicles 29:27), indicating that the song of God that accompanies the offering is played by trumpets and other instruments.,The Gemara asks: bWhat is the rationalefor the opinion bof the one who said:The bprimaryessence of bsongis singing bwith the mouth?The Gemara answers: It is bas it is written: “And it came to pass, when the trumpeters and the singers were as one to make one sound”(II Chronicles 5:13). Since the verse does not mention any musical instrument played with the singing other than the trumpets, and the trumpets were not sounded as accompaniment for the singers, apparently the primary essence of song is singing with the mouth. The trumpets were sounded in order to accompany the sacrifice of the daily and additional offerings with the requisite sounds of itekiaand iterua /i.,The Gemara asks: bAndaccording to bthe other itanna btoo,who holds that the primary essence of song is singing with the mouth, bisn’t it written: “And Hezekiah commanded /b…the song of the Lord began also, and the trumpets, together with the instruments,” indicating that the instruments are the primary essence? The Gemara answers: bThis is whatthe verse bis saying: “The song of the Lord began,”indicates that the primary essence is bwith the mouth; “with the instruments of David, King of Israel,”is bto sweeten the sound,as the instruments are merely to accompany and enhance the singing.,The Gemara asks: bAndaccording to bthe other itanna btoo,who holds that the primary essence of song is singing accompanied by musical instruments, bisn’t it written: “And it came to pass, when the trumpeters and the singers were as one,”indicating that the primary essence is with the mouth? The Gemara answers: bThis is whatthe verse bis saying:Through their juxtaposition, one derives that the bsingersare bsimilar to the trumpeters; just as trumpetersproduce their sound bwith an instrument, so toothe bsingersproduce their song bwith an instrument. /b, strongMISHNA: /strong bOne who did not see the Celebration of the Place of the Drawingof the Water bnever saw celebration in his days.This was the sequence of events: bAt the conclusion of the first Festivalday the priests and the Levites bdescendedfrom the Israelites’ courtyard bto the Women’s Courtyard, where they would introduce a significant repair,as the Gemara will explain. bThere were golden candelabraatop poles btherein the courtyard. bAndthere were bfour basinsmade bof gold at the topof each candelabrum. bAndthere were bfour ladders for each and everypole bandthere were bfour children from the priesthood trainees, and in their handswere bpitcherswith a capacity bof 120 ilog /iof oil bthat they would pour into each and every basin. From the worn trousers of the priests and their belts they would loosenand tear strips to use as wicks, band with them they would lightthe candelabra. bAndthe light from the candelabra was so bright that bthere was not a courtyard in Jerusalem that was not illuminated from the light of the Place of the Drawingof the Water.,The bpious andthe bmen of action would dance beforethe people who attended the celebration
35. Babylonian Talmud, Yevamot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

61a. קברי עובדי כוכבים אינן מטמאין באהל שנא' (יחזקאל לד, לא) ואתן צאני צאן מרעיתי אדם אתם אתם קרויין אדם ואין העובדי כוכבים קרויין אדם,מיתיבי (במדבר לא, מ) ונפש אדם ששה עשר אלף משום בהמה,(יונה ד, יא) אשר יש בה הרבה משתים עשרה רבוא אדם אשר לא ידע בין ימינו לשמאלו (ובהמה רבה) משום בהמה,(במדבר לא, יט) כל הורג נפש וכל נוגע בחלל תתחטאו דלמא איקטיל חד מישראל ורבנן לא נפקד ממנו איש ור' שמעון בן יוחי לא נפקד ממנו איש לעבירה,רבינא אמר נהי דמעטינהו קרא מאטמויי באהל דכתיב (במדבר יט, יד) אדם כי ימות באהל ממגע ומשא מי מעטינהו קרא:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big אירס את האלמנה ונתמנה להיות כהן גדול יכנוס ומעשה ביהושע בן גמלא שקדש את מרתא בת ביתוס ומנהו המלך להיות כה"ג וכנסה שומרת יבם שנפלה לפני כהן הדיוט ונתמנה להיות כה"ג אע"פ שעשה בה מאמר הרי זה לא יכנוס:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ת"ר מנין שאם אירס את האלמנה ונתמנה להיות כהן גדול שיכנוס ת"ל (ויקרא כא, יד) יקח אשה א"ה שומרת יבם נמי אשה ולא יבמה:,מעשה ביהושע וכו': מנהו אין נתמנה לא אמר רב יוסף קטיר קחזינא הכא דאמר רב אסי תרקבא דדינרי עיילה ליה מרתא בת ביתוס לינאי מלכא עד דמוקי ליה ליהושע בן גמלא בכהני רברבי:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big כהן גדול שמת אחיו חולץ ולא מייבם:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big קא פסיק ותני לא שנא מן האירוסין ולא שנא מן הנשואין בשלמא מן הנשואין עשה ולא תעשה הוא ואין עשה דוחה ל"ת ועשה אלא מן האירוסין יבא עשה וידחה את לא תעשה,גזירה ביאה ראשונה אטו ביאה שניה:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big כהן הדיוט לא ישא אילונית אלא א"כ יש לו אשה ובנים רבי יהודה אומר אע"פ שיש לו אשה ובנים לא ישא אילונית שהיא זונה האמורה בתורה וחכמים אומרים אין זונה אלא גיורת ומשוחררת ושנבעלה בעילת זנות:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big א"ל ריש גלותא לרב הונא מ"ט משום פריה ורביה אפריה ורביה כהנים הוא דמפקדי וישראל לא מפקדי אמר ליה משום דקא בעי למיתני סיפא רבי יהודה אומר אע"פ שיש לו אשה 61a. bThe graves of gentiles do not renderitems bimpure though a tent, as it is stated: “And you My sheep, the sheep of My pasture, are men [ iadam /i]”(Ezekiel 34:31), from which it is derived that byou,the Jewish people, bare called men [ iadam /i] but gentiles are not called men [ iadam /i].Since the Torah introduces the ihalakhaof ritual impurity of a tent with the words: “When a man [ iadam /i] dies in a tent” (Numbers 19:14), this ihalakhaapplies only to corpses of Jews but not those of gentiles.,The Gemara braises an objectionbased upon the verse with regard to captives taken during the war against Midian: b“And the persons [ inefesh adam /i] were sixteen thousand”(Numbers 31:40), which indicates that gentiles are also referred to as iadam /i. The Gemara answers: They are given this title bdue tothe need to distinguish the people taken captive from the banimalsthat were taken as spoils of war.,The Gemara raises another difficulty based upon a verse with regard to the city of Nineveh: b“Wherein are more than one hundred and twenty thousand men [ iadam /i] that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand, and also much cattle”(Jonah 4:11). The Gemara answers: There, too, the gentiles are given this title bdue tothe need to distinguish them from the banimalsmentioned in the verse.,The Gemara continues to question Rabbi Shimon’s ruling based upon a verse pertaining to the war against Midian: b“Whoever has killed anyone, and whoever has touched any slain, purify yourselves”(Numbers 31:19). This indicates that gentile corpses convey ritual impurity. The Gemara answers: bPerhaps a Jew was killed,and the concern was for impurity caused by his corpse. bAnd the Rabbisreply that the verse attests: b“Not one man of us is missing”(Numbers 31:49). No Jewish soldiers fell in battle, and therefore the concern for impurity must have been due to the corpses of gentiles. bAnd Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥairesponds: The intent of that verse is that bnot one man of us is missingdue to btransgression,i.e., none of them sinned., bRavina saidthat the explanation above is unnecessary: bGranted, the verse excludedgentiles bfrom renderingitems bimpure through a tent, as it is written: “When a man [ iadam /i] dies in a tent”(Numbers 19:14); but bdid the verse exclude them fromrendering items impure via btouching and carrying?Since gentile corpses convey impurity in these ways, they could have rendered impure the Jews involved in the war with Midian, even according to Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai., strongMISHNA: /strong If a priest bbetrothed a widow and wassubsequently bappointed to be High Priest, he may marryher. bAndthere was ban incident with Yehoshua ben Gamla, who betrothed Marta bat Baitos,a widow, band the kingsubsequently bappointed him to be High Priest, andhe nevertheless bmarried her.Conversely, in the case of ba widow waiting for her iyavamwho happened before a common priest,i.e., the priest was her iyavam /i, band he wassubsequently bappointed to be High Priest,then beven if hehad already bperformed levirate betrothal with her, he may not marry her,because she is a widow., strongGEMARA: /strong bThe Sages taught: From whereis it derived bthat ifa priest bbetrothed a widow and wassubsequently bappointed to be High Priest, that he may marryher? bThe verse states: “Shall he take for a wife”(Leviticus 21:14), an inclusive phrase that indicates that he may marry her in this situation despite the general prohibition for a High Priest to marry a widow. The Gemara asks: bIf so, a widow waiting for her iyavam /ishould balsobe permitted to a High Priest. The Gemara answers: The word b“wife”indicates that this does bnotinclude ba iyevama /i,who was not initially his wife but his brother’s.,The mishna related ban incident with Yehoshuaben Gamla. The Gemara notes that the mishna states that the king bappointed him, yes,but bnotthat he bwasworthy of being bappointed. Rav Yosef said: I see a conspiracy here,as this was clearly not a proper appointment by the priests and the Sanhedrin but rather a political appointment, bas Rav Asi said: Marta bat Baitos broughta vessel the size of ba half- ise’a[ itarkav /i]full bof dinars to King Yannai until he appointed Yehoshua ben Gamla High Priest. /b, strongMISHNA: /strong bA High Priest whose brother diedwithout children bperforms iḥalitzaand he does not perform levirate marriage,as he may not marry a widow., strongGEMARA: /strong The Gemara comments: The mishna bteachesthis ihalakha bcategorically,indicating that bit is no differentif she is his brother’s widow bfrom betrothal, and it is no differentif she is his widow bfrom marriage.The Gemara analyzes this ihalakha /i: bGranted,she is forbidden to him if she was widowed bfrom marriage, as,if he were to marry her, bitwould be a violation of both the bpositive mitzvathat the High Priest marry a virgin bandthe bprohibitionfor him to marry a widow. bAnd a positive mitzva,i.e., levirate marriage, bdoes not override a prohibition and a positivemitzva together. bHowever,if she was a widow bfrom betrothaland is therefore still a virgin, bthe positive mitzvaof levirate marriage bshould come and override the prohibitionfor a High Priest to marry a widow.,The Gemara answers: By Torah law, levirate marriage is permitted in this case. However, there is a rabbinic bdecreeprohibiting their bfirstact of bintercourse due totheir bsecondact of bintercourse.After they have engaged in intercourse once, they have fulfilled the mitzva of levirate marriage, and any subsequent act of intercourse would constitute a violation of the prohibition without the fulfillment of a mitzva., strongMISHNA: /strong bA common priest may not marry a sexually underdeveloped woman [ iaylonit /i],who is incapable of bearing children, bunless healready bhas a wife and children. Rabbi Yehuda says: Evenif bhe has a wife and children, he may not marry a sexually underdeveloped woman, as she is the izona /iabout whom it is bstated in the Torahthat a priest may not marry her. Intercourse with her is considered a licentious act because she is incapable of bearing children. bAnd the Rabbis say: The onlywomen in the category of izona /i,who are therefore forbidden to a priest, are ba female convert, a freedmaidservant, bandany woman bwho engaged in licentious sexual intercoursewith a man she is prohibited from marrying., strongGEMARA: /strong bThe Exilarch said to Rav Huna: What is the reasonfor the ihalakhathat a priest may not marry a sexually underdeveloped woman? It is bbecausehe is obligated to fulfill the mitzva to bbe fruitful and multiply. Is itonly bpriests who were commanded to be fruitful and multiply, but Israelites were not commanded?Why does the mishna specify that a priest may not marry a sexually underdeveloped woman? Rav Huna bsaid to him:This ihalakhadoes in fact apply even to Israelites, and the itannamentions priests bbecause he wants to teachit in a way that would parallel bthe latter clauseof the mishna, which states that bRabbi Yehuda says: Evenif bhe has a wife /b
36. Anon., Avot Derabbi Nathan B, 34 (6th cent. CE - 8th cent. CE)

37. Anon., Pesikta Rabbati, 43



Subjects of this text:

subject book bibliographic info
abraham Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 343
admission fees, amenities Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
albeck, h. Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 136
amei haarets (nonlearned jews), geonic sources on Rubenstein, The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud (2003) 198
amorarim, missionary tradition Lavee, The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity (2017) 176
amorarim, palestinian Lavee, The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity (2017) 176
amorarim, sources Lavee, The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity (2017) 176
art and artists Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
basins Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
bathhouse activities in Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
birth and renewal, imagery of Lavee, The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity (2017) 176
birth and renewal Lavee, The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity (2017) 176
cities, slaves of Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
clothes, garments used in the bath Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
clothes Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
devotional purity Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 138
dioscuri Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 343
eleazar, r., and amei haarets Rubenstein, The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud (2003) 198
eleazar Lavee, The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity (2017) 176
fox, h. Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 136
gardens Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
gentiles, and amei haarets Rubenstein, The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud (2003) 198
gentiles, murder of Rubenstein, The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud (2003) 198
geonim, on amei haarets Rubenstein, The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud (2003) 198
greek, ethnos Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 343
greek-jewish (graeco-jewish), literature and culture Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 343
halakhah, as modality of tradition Jaffee, Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE (2001) 70
hands, purity of Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 138
harmonization, babylonian Lavee, The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity (2017) 176
hellenism, hellenistic Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 343
hillel Rubenstein, The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud (2003) 198
hillel the elder Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 138
imagery, birth and renewal Lavee, The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity (2017) 176
imagery, new creation Lavee, The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity (2017) 176
imagery, one-day/year-old Lavee, The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity (2017) 176
interior and structure, leisure (pleasures) Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
interior and structure, maintece, repair, and staff Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
interior and structure Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
isaac Lavee, The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity (2017) 176
jesus (christ) (see also yeshu) Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 138
josephus Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 343
land of israel (palestine) Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 138
levitical/ritual purity Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 138
lieberman, s. Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 136
lulav Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 136
macedonia Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 343
maimonides Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 136
massage, in baths Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
mediterranean, eastern Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
memorization Jaffee, Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE (2001) 69, 70
mesopotamia Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
mikva, mikvaot (ritual bathhouse) Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 138
mishnah (matnyta)' Jaffee, Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE (2001) 70
mishnah (matnyta) Jaffee, Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE (2001) 69
missionary activities Lavee, The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity (2017) 176
multiform (~ judaism, pharisaism) Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 138
neusner, j. Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 136
new creature/creation (phrase) Lavee, The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity (2017) 176
non-jews Lavee, The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity (2017) 176
operating hours, ownership, types of Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
operating hours, paraphernalia Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
palaestra Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
palestine (syria palaestina) Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
paraenesis Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 343
paul (saul) Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 138, 343
persia, parthians, sasanian Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
pharisaic-rabbinic (tradition) Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 138
pharisees Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 136
philo Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 343
pools Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
purity (see also food laws) Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 138
purity system Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 138
rabban gamaliel (i and ii) Jaffee, Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE (2001) 69, 70
rabban yohanan b. zakkai Jaffee, Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE (2001) 69
rabbinic judaism, literature of Stern, From Rebuke to Consolation: Exegesis and Theology in the Liturgical Anthology of the Ninth of Av Season (2004) 155
rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 138
rabbis Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 138
repeated tradition Jaffee, Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE (2001) 69, 70
roman civilization, empire and emperors Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
safrai, s. Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 136
sarah Lavee, The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity (2017) 176
shammai (see also subject index) Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 138
simhat beit hashoeva Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 136
sinai Lavee, The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity (2017) 176
social hierarchy Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
society, slaves Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
society Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
spiritual purity Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 138
splendor and beauty, as social arena Eliav, A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean (2023) 203
synagogue Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 136; Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 138
synagogues, targumim in Stern, From Rebuke to Consolation: Exegesis and Theology in the Liturgical Anthology of the Ninth of Av Season (2004) 155
temple Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 136
thessalonika Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 343
tora (see also pentateuch) Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 138
torah, study of Jaffee, Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE (2001) 69, 70
tosefta, in relation to mishnah Jaffee, Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE (2001) 70
tradition, oral-formulaic Jaffee, Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE (2001) 70
tradition, oral-literary Jaffee, Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE (2001) 70
yassa Lavee, The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity (2017) 176
york, anthony Stern, From Rebuke to Consolation: Exegesis and Theology in the Liturgical Anthology of the Ninth of Av Season (2004) 155
yosi ben zimra Lavee, The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity (2017) 176