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, 5
NaN


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

41 results
1. Hebrew Bible, Psalms, 149 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

2. Plato, Phaedo, None (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)

67c. imposed upon me is begun with good hope; and the like hope exists for every man who thinks that his mind has been purified and made ready. Certainly, said Simmias. And does not the purification consist in this which has been mentioned long ago in our discourse, in separating, so far as possible, the soul from the body and teaching the soul the habit of collecting and bringing itself together from all parts of the body, and living, so far as it can, both now
3. Anon., 1 Enoch, 22.13 (3rd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)

22.13. of the sinners. Such has been made for the spirits of men who were not righteous but sinners, who were complete in transgression, and of the transgressors they shall be companions: but their spirits shall not be slain in the day of judgement nor shall they be raised from thence.'
4. Hebrew Bible, Daniel, 12.2 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)

12.2. וְרַבִּים מִיְּשֵׁנֵי אַדְמַת־עָפָר יָקִיצוּ אֵלֶּה לְחַיֵּי עוֹלָם וְאֵלֶּה לַחֲרָפוֹת לְדִרְאוֹן עוֹלָם׃ 12.2. And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to reproaches and everlasting abhorrence."
5. Septuagint, 1 Maccabees, 2.42, 12.18-12.24 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)

2.42. Then there united with them a company of Hasideans, mighty warriors of Israel, every one who offered himself willingly for the law. 12.18. And now please send us a reply to this. 12.19. This is a copy of the letter which they sent to Onias: 12.20. Arius, king of the Spartans, to Onias the high priest, greeting. 12.21. It has been found in writing concerning the Spartans and the Jews that they are brethren and are of the family of Abraham. 12.22. And now that we have learned this, please write us concerning your welfare; 12.23. we on our part write to you that your cattle and your property belong to us, and ours belong to you. We therefore command that our envoys report to you accordingly. 12.24. Now Jonathan heard that the commanders of Demetrius had returned, with a larger force than before, to wage war against him.
6. Septuagint, 2 Maccabees, 7.9, 7.14, 7.23, 7.29, 14.46, 15.12 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)

7.9. And when he was at his last breath, he said, 'You accursed wretch, you dismiss us from this present life, but the King of the universe will raise us up to an everlasting renewal of life, because we have died for his laws.' 7.14. And when he was near death, he said, 'One cannot but choose to die at the hands of men and to cherish the hope that God gives of being raised again by him. But for you there will be no resurrection to life!' 7.23. Therefore the Creator of the world, who shaped the beginning of man and devised the origin of all things, will in his mercy give life and breath back to you again, since you now forget yourselves for the sake of his laws.' 7.29. Do not fear this butcher, but prove worthy of your brothers. Accept death, so that in God's mercy I may get you back again with your brothers.' 14.46. with his blood now completely drained from him, he tore out his entrails, took them with both hands and hurled them at the crowd, calling upon the Lord of life and spirit to give them back to him again. This was the manner of his death.' 15.12. What he saw was this: Onias, who had been high priest, a noble and good man, of modest bearing and gentle manner, one who spoke fittingly and had been trained from childhood in all that belongs to excellence, was praying with outstretched hands for the whole body of the Jews.'
7. Septuagint, Wisdom of Solomon, 9.15-9.16 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)

9.15. for a perishable body weighs down the soul,and this earthy tent burdens the thoughtful mind. 9.16. We can hardly guess at what is on earth,and what is at hand we find with labor;but who has traced out what is in the heavens?
8. Philo of Alexandria, On The Creation of The World, 135 (1st cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE)

135. But he asserts that the formation of the individual man, perceptible by the external senses is a composition of earthy substance, and divine spirit. For that the body was created by the Creator taking a lump of clay, and fashioning the human form out of it; but that the soul proceeds from no created thing at all, but from the Father and Ruler of all things. For when he uses the expression, "he breathed into," etc., he means nothing else than the divine spirit proceeding form that happy and blessed nature, sent to take up its habitation here on earth, for the advantage of our race, in order that, even if man is mortal according to that portion of him which is visible, he may at all events be immortal according to that portion which is invisible; and for this reason, one may properly say that man is on the boundaries of a better and an immortal nature, partaking of each as far as it is necessary for him; and that he was born at the same time, both mortal and the immortal. Mortal as to his body, but immortal as to his intellect. XLVII.
9. Philo of Alexandria, Hypothetica, 11.1 (1st cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE)

10. Epictetus, Discourses, 1.3.3 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

11. Josephus Flavius, Jewish Antiquities, 13.297-13.298, 18.20 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

13.297. but of these matters we shall speak hereafter. What I would now explain is this, that the Pharisees have delivered to the people a great many observances by succession from their fathers, which are not written in the laws of Moses; and for that reason it is that the Sadducees reject them, and say that we are to esteem those observances to be obligatory which are in the written word, but are not to observe what are derived from the tradition of our forefathers. 13.298. And concerning these things it is that great disputes and differences have arisen among them, while the Sadducees are able to persuade none but the rich, and have not the populace obsequious to them, but the Pharisees have the multitude on their side. But about these two sects, and that of the Essenes, I have treated accurately in the second book of Jewish affairs.
12. Josephus Flavius, Jewish War, 2.165 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

2.165. and they say, that to act what is good, or what is evil, is at men’s own choice, and that the one or the other belongs so to every one, that they may act as they please. They also take away the belief of the immortal duration of the soul, and the punishments and rewards in Hades.
13. Mishnah, Avot, 1, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 1.12, 1.15, 1.16-2.4, 2.8, 2.9, 2.10, 3.11, 4.1, 4.13, 5.5, 5.17 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

14. Mishnah, Eduyot, 5.7 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

5.7. At the time of his death he said to his son, “Retract the four opinions which I used to declare.” He (the said to him, “Why did not you retract them?” He said to him, “I heard them from the mouth of the many, and they heard [the contrary] from the mouth of the many. I stood fast by the tradition which I heard, and they stood fast by the tradition which they heard. But you have heard [my tradition] from the mouth of a single individual and [their tradition] from the mouth of the many. It is better to leave the opinion of the single individual and to hold by the opinion of the many.” He said to him, “Father commend me to your colleagues.” He said to him, “I will not commend you.” He said to him, “Have you found in me any wrong?” He said, “No; your own deeds will cause you to be near, and your own deeds will cause you to be far.”"
15. Mishnah, Hagigah, 2.7 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

2.7. The garments of an am haaretz possess midras-impurity for Pharisees. The garments of Pharisees possess midras-impurity for those who eat terumah. The garments of those who eat terumah possess midras-impurity for [those who eat] sacred things. The garments of [those who eat] sacred things possess midras-impurity for [those who occupy themselves with the waters of] purification. Yose ben Yoezer was the most pious in the priesthood, yet his apron was [considered to possess] midras-impurity for [those who ate] sacred things. Yoha ben Gudgada all his life used to eat [unconsecrated food] in accordance with the purity required for sacred things, yet his apron was [considered to possess] midras-impurity for [those who occupied themselves with the water of] purification."
16. Mishnah, Menachot, 10.3 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

10.3. How would they do it [reap the omer]?The agents of the court used to go out on the day before the festival and tie the unreaped grain in bunches to make it the easier to reap. All the inhabitants of the towns near by assembled there, so that it might be reaped with a great demonstration. As soon as it became dark he says to them: “Has the sun set?” And they answer, “Yes.” “Has the sun set?” And they answer, “Yes.” “With this sickle?” And they answer, “Yes.” “With this sickle?” And they answer, “Yes.” “Into this basket?” And they answer, “Yes.” “Into this basket?” And they answer, “Yes.” On the Sabbath he says to them, “On this Sabbath?” And they answer, “Yes.” “On this Sabbath?” And they answer, “Yes.” “Shall I reap?” And they answer, “Reap.” “Shall I reap?” And they answer, “Reap.” He repeated every matter three times, and they answer, “yes, yes, yes.” And why all of this? Because of the Boethusians who held that the reaping of the omer was not to take place at the conclusion of the [first day of the] festival."
17. Mishnah, Sanhedrin, 10.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

10.1. All Israel have a portion in the world to come, for it says, “Your people, all of them righteous, shall possess the land for ever; They are the shoot that I planted, my handiwork in which I glory” (Isaiah 60:2. And these are the ones who have no portion in the world to come: He who maintains that resurrection is not a biblical doctrine, that the torah was not divinely revealed, and an epikoros. Rabbi Akiva says: “Even one who reads non-canonical books and one who whispers [a charm] over a wound and says, “I will not bring upon you any of the diseases whichbrought upon the Egyptians: for I the lord am you healer” (Exodus 15:26). Abba Shaul says: “Also one who pronounces the divine name as it is spelled.”"
18. Mishnah, Sotah, 1.7 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

1.7. In the measure with which a person metes out to others, they mete out to him. She adorned herself for a sin; the Omnipresent made her repulsive. She exposed herself for a sin; the Omnipresent exposed her. She began the transgression with the thigh and afterwards with the womb; therefore she is punished first in the thigh and afterwards in the womb, nor does all the body escape."
19. New Testament, Acts, 4.1-4.2, 5.34, 23.8 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

4.1. As they spoke to the people, the priests and the captain of the temple and the Sadducees came to them 4.2. being upset because they taught the people and proclaimed in Jesus the resurrection from the dead. 5.34. But one stood up in the council, a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, honored by all the people, and commanded to take the apostles out a little while. 23.8. For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit; but the Pharisees confess all of these.
20. New Testament, Luke, 20.27-20.40 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

20.27. Some of the Sadducees came to him, those who deny that there is a resurrection. 20.28. They asked him, "Teacher, Moses wrote to us that if a man's brother dies having a wife, and he is childless, his brother should take the wife, and raise up children for his brother. 20.29. There were therefore seven brothers. The first took a wife, and died childless. 20.30. The second took her as wife, and he died childless. 20.31. The third took her, and likewise the seven all left no children, and died. 20.32. Afterward the woman also died. 20.33. Therefore in the resurrection whose wife of them will she be? For the seven had her as a wife. 20.34. Jesus said to them, "The sons of this age marry, and are given in marriage. 20.35. But those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage. 20.36. For they can't die any more, for they are like the angels, and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection. 20.37. But that the dead are raised, even Moses showed at the bush, when he called the Lord 'The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.' 20.38. Now he is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for all are alive to him. 20.39. Some of the scribes answered, "Teacher, you speak well. 20.40. They didn't dare to ask him any more questions.
21. New Testament, Mark, 12.18 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

12.18. There came to him Sadducees, who say that there is no resurrection. They asked him, saying
22. New Testament, Matthew, 22.23 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

22.23. On that day Sadducees (those who say that there is no resurrection) came to him. They asked him
23. Tosefta, Eduyot, 1.1 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

1.1. When the Sages entered the Vineyard in Yavneh, they said, \"In the future, there will come an hour when a person seeks a teaching from the teachings of the Torah and he will not find it, or in the teachings of the Scribes, and he will not find it.\" As it says, \"Behold, days are coming, says the Lord, etc. they will seek out the word of God and they will not find it (Amos 8).\" 'The word of God' refers to prophecy. 'The word of God' refers to the End (of Days). 'The word of God', so that there shall not be one word of Torah similar to its fellow. They said, \"Let us begin from Hillel and Shammai!\"..."
24. Tosefta, Hagigah, 2.3 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

25. Tosefta, Hulin, 2.24 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

26. Tosefta, Menachot, 13.21 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

27. Tosefta, Rosh Hashanah, 1.15 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

28. Tosefta, Kippurim, 1.8 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

29. Justin, Dialogue With Trypho, 80 (2nd cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

80. The opinion of Justin with regard to the reign of a thousand years. Several Catholics reject it Trypho: I remarked to you sir, that you are very anxious to be safe in all respects, since you cling to the Scriptures. But tell me, do you really admit that this place, Jerusalem, shall be rebuilt; and do you expect your people to be gathered together, and made joyful with Christ and the patriarchs, and the prophets, both the men of our nation, and other proselytes who joined them before your Christ came? Or have you given way, and admitted this in order to have the appearance of worsting us in the controversies? Justin: I am not so miserable a fellow, Trypho, as to say one thing and think another. I admitted to you formerly, that I and many others are of this opinion, and [believe] that such will take place, as you assuredly are aware; but, on the other hand, I signified to you that many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise. Moreover, I pointed out to you that some who are called Christians, but are godless, impious heretics, teach doctrines that are in every way blasphemous, atheistical, and foolish. But that you may know that I do not say this before you alone, I shall draw up a statement, so far as I can, of all the arguments which have passed between us; in which I shall record myself as admitting the very same things which I admit to you. For I choose to follow not men or men's doctrines, but God and the doctrines [delivered] by Him. For if you have fallen in with some who are called Christians, but who do not admit this [truth], and venture to blaspheme the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; who say there is no resurrection of the dead, and that their souls, when they die, are taken to heaven; do not imagine that they are Christians, even as one, if he would rightly consider it, would not admit that the Sadducees, or similar sects of Genistæ, Meristæ, Galilæans, Hellenists, Pharisees, Baptists, are Jews (do not hear me impatiently when I tell you what I think), but are [only] called Jews and children of Abraham, worshipping God with the lips, as God Himself declared, but the heart was far from Him. But I and others, who are right-minded Christians on all points, are assured that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged, [as] the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah and others declare.
30. Palestinian Talmud, Taanit, 4.8 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)

31. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

22a. משמשת וראתה נדה אינה צריכה טבילה אבל בעל קרי גרידא מחייב לא תימא מברך אלא מהרהר,ומי אית ליה לרבי יהודה הרהור והתניא בעל קרי שאין לו מים לטבול קורא קריאת שמע ואינו מברך לא לפניה ולא לאחריה ואוכל פתו ומברך לאחריה ואינו מברך לפניה אבל מהרהר בלבו ואינו מוציא בשפתיו דברי רבי מאיר רבי יהודה אומר בין כך ובין כך מוציא בשפתיו,אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק עשאן ר' יהודה כהלכות דרך ארץ,דתניא (דברים ד, ט) והודעתם לבניך ולבני בניך וכתיב בתריה יום אשר עמדת לפני ה' אלהיך בחורב מה להלן באימה וביראה וברתת ובזיע אף כאן באימה וביראה וברתת ובזיע,מכאן אמרו הזבים והמצורעים ובאין על נדות מותרים לקרות בתורה ובנביאים ובכתובים לשנות במשנה וגמרא ובהלכות ובאגדות אבל בעלי קריין אסורים,רבי יוסי אומר שונה הוא ברגיליות ובלבד שלא יציע את המשנה רבי יונתן בן יוסף אומר מציע הוא את המשנה ואינו מציע את הגמרא רבי נתן בן אבישלום אומר אף מציע את הגמרא ובלבד שלא יאמר אזכרות שבו רבי יוחנן הסנדלר תלמידו של רבי עקיבא משום ר"ע אומר לא יכנס למדרש כל עיקר ואמרי לה לא יכנס לבית המדרש כל עיקר ר' יהודה אומר שונה הוא בהלכות דרך ארץ,מעשה ברבי יהודה שראה קרי והיה מהלך על גב הנהר אמרו לו תלמידיו רבינו שנה לנו פרק אחד בהלכות דרך ארץ ירד וטבל ושנה להם אמרו לו לא כך למדתנו רבינו שונה הוא בהלכות דרך ארץ אמר להם אע"פ שמיקל אני על אחרים מחמיר אני על עצמי:,תניא ר' יהודה בן בתירא היה אומר אין דברי תורה מקבלין טומאה מעשה בתלמיד אחד שהיה מגמגם למעלה מרבי יהודה בן בתירא אמר ליה בני פתח פיך ויאירו דבריך שאין דברי תורה מקבלין טומאה שנאמר (ירמיהו כג, כט) הלא כה דברי כאש נאם ה' מה אש אינו מקבל טומאה אף דברי תורה אינן מקבלין טומאה,אמר מר מציע את המשנה ואינו מציע את הגמרא מסייע ליה לרבי אלעאי דאמר רבי אלעאי אמר ר' אחא בר יעקב משום רבינו הלכה מציע את המשנה ואינו מציע את הגמרא כתנאי מציע את המשנה ואינו מציע את הגמרא דברי רבי מאיר רבי יהודה בן גמליאל אומר משום רבי חנינא בן גמליאל זה וזה אסור ואמרי לה זה וזה מותר,מ"ד זה וזה אסור כרבי יוחנן הסנדלר מ"ד זה וזה מותר כרבי יהודה בן בתירא,אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק נהוג עלמא כהני תלת סבי כרבי אלעאי בראשית הגז כרבי יאשיה בכלאים כרבי יהודה בן בתירא בד"ת,כרבי אלעאי בראשית הגז דתניא רבי אלעאי אומר ראשית הגז אינו נוהג אלא בארץ,כרבי יאשיה בכלאים כדכתיב (דברים כב, ט) (כרמך) לא תזרע [כרמך] כלאים רבי יאשיה אומר לעולם אינו חייב עד שיזרע חטה ושעורה וחרצן במפולת יד,כרבי יהודה בן בתירא בדברי תורה דתניא רבי יהודה בן בתירא אומר אין דברי תורה מקבלין טומאה,כי אתא זעירי אמר בטלוה לטבילותא ואמרי לה בטלוה לנטילותא מאן דאמר בטלוה לטבילותא כרבי יהודה בן בתירא מאן דאמר בטלוה לנטילותא כי הא דרב חסדא לייט אמאן דמהדר אמיא בעידן צלותא:,תנו רבנן בעל קרי שנתנו עליו תשעה קבין מים טהור נחום איש גם זו לחשה לרבי עקיבא ורבי עקיבא לחשה לבן עזאי ובן עזאי יצא ושנאה לתלמידיו בשוק פליגי בה תרי אמוראי במערבא רבי יוסי בר אבין ורבי יוסי בר זבידא חד תני שנאה וחד תני לחשה,מאן דתני שנאה משום בטול תורה ומשום בטול פריה ורביה ומאן דתני לחשה שלא יהו תלמידי חכמים מצויים אצל נשותיהם כתרנגולים,אמר רבי ינאי שמעתי שמקילין בה ושמעתי שמחמירין בה וכל המחמיר בה על עצמו מאריכין לו ימיו ושנותיו,אמר ריב"ל מה טיבן של טובלי שחרין מה טיבן הא איהו דאמר בעל קרי אסור בדברי תורה הכי קאמר מה טיבן בארבעים סאה אפשר בתשעה קבין מה טיבן בטבילה אפשר בנתינה,אמר רבי חנינא גדר גדול גדרו בה דתניא מעשה באחד שתבע אשה לדבר עבירה אמרה לו ריקא יש לך ארבעים סאה שאתה טובל בהן מיד פירש,אמר להו רב הונא לרבנן רבותי מפני מה אתם מזלזלין בטבילה זו אי משום צינה אפשר במרחצאות,אמר ליה רב חסדא וכי יש טבילה בחמין אמר ליה רב אדא בר אהבה קאי כוותך,רבי זירא הוה יתיב באגנא דמיא בי מסותא אמר ליה לשמעיה זיל ואייתי לי תשעה קבין ושדי עלואי אמר ליה רבי חייא בר אבא למה ליה למר כולי האי והא יתיב בגווייהו אמר ליה כארבעים סאה מה ארבעים סאה בטבילה ולא בנתינה אף תשעה קבין בנתינה ולא בטבילה,רב נחמן תקן חצבא בת תשעה קבין כי אתא רב דימי אמר רבי עקיבא ורבי יהודה גלוסטרא אמרו לא שנו אלא לחולה לאונסו אבל לחולה המרגיל ארבעים סאה,אמר רב יוסף אתבר חצביה דרב נחמן כי אתא רבין אמר באושא הוה עובדא 22a. that ba woman who engaged in intercourse and saw menstrualblood bis not required to immerse herself, but one who experienced a seminal emission alone,with no concurrent impurity, bis required to do so?If so, we must interpret Rabbi Yehuda’s statement in the mishna that one recites a blessing both beforehand and thereafter as follows: bDo not saythat one brecites a blessingorally, but rather he means that bone contemplatesthose blessings in his heart.,The Gemara challenges this explanation: bAnd does Rabbi Yehuda maintain thatthere is validity to bcontemplatingin his heart? bWasn’t it taughtin a ibaraita /i: bOne who experienced a seminal emission and who has no water to immerseand purify himself brecites iShemaand neither recites the blessingsof iShema bbeforehand nor thereafter? Andwhen bhe eats his bread, he recites the blessing thereafter,Grace after Meals, bbut does not recite the blessing:Who brings forth bread from the earth, bbeforehand. However,in the instances where he may not recite the blessing, bhe contemplatesit bin his heart rather than utterit bwith his lips,this is bthe statement of Rabbi Meir.However bRabbi Yehuda says: In either case, he uttersall of the blessings bwith his lips.Rabbi Yehuda does not consider contemplating the blessings in his heart a solution and permits them to be recited., bRav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said:Rabbi Yehuda’s statement in the mishna should be interpreted in another way. bRabbi Yehuda renderedthe blessings blike iHilkhot Derekh Eretz /i,which according to some Sages were not considered to be in the same category as all other matters of Torah and therefore, one is permitted to engage in their study even after having experienced a seminal emission., bAs it was taughtin a ibaraita /i: It is written: b“And you shall impart them to your children and your children’s children”(Deuteronomy 4:9), band it is written thereafter: “The day that you stood before the Lord your God at Horeb”(Deuteronomy 4:10). bJust as below,the Revelation at Sinai was bin reverence, fear, quaking, and trembling, so too here,in every generation, Torah must be studied with a sense of breverence, fear, quaking, and trembling. /b, bFrom herethe Sages bstated: iZavim /i, lepers, and those who engaged in intercourse with menstruating women,despite their severe impurity, bare permitted to read the Torah, Prophets, and Writings, and to study Mishna and Gemara and ihalakhotand iaggada /i. However, those who experienced a seminal emission are prohibitedfrom doing so. The reason for this distinction is that the cases of severe impurity are caused by ailment or other circumstances beyond his control and, as a result, they do not necessarily preclude a sense of reverence and awe as he studies Torah. This, however, is not the case with regard to impurity resulting from a seminal emission, which usually comes about due to frivolity and a lack of reverence and awe. Therefore, it is inappropriate for one who experiences a seminal emission to engage in matters of in Torah.,However, there are many opinions concerning the precise parameters of the Torah matters prohibited by this decree. bRabbi Yosei says:One who experiences a seminal emission bstudies imishnayotthat he is baccustomedto study, bas long as he does not expound upon anew bmishnato study it in depth. bRabbi Yonatan ben Yosef says: He expounds upon the mishna but he does not expound upon the Gemara,which is the in-depth analysis of the Torah. bRabbi Natan ben Avishalom says: He may even expound upon the Gemara, as long as he does not utterthe bmentionsof God’s name btherein. Rabbi Yoḥa the Cobbler, Rabbi Akiva’s student, says in the name of Rabbi Akiva:One who experiences a seminal emission bmay not enter into homiletic interpretation [ imidrash /i]of verses bat all. Some saythat he says: bHe may not enter the study hall [ ibeit hamidrash /i] at all. Rabbi Yehuda says: He may studyonly iHilkhot Derekh Eretz /i.In terms of the problem raised above, apparently Rabbi Yehuda considers the legal status of the blessings to be parallel to the legal status of iHilkhot Derekh Eretz /i, and therefore one may utter them orally.,The Gemara relates ban incident involving Rabbi Yehudahimself, who bexperienced a seminal emission and was walking along the riverbankwith his disciples. bHis disciples said to him: Rabbi, teach us a chapter from iHilkhot Derekh Eretz /i,as he maintained that even in a state of impurity, it is permitted. bHe descended and immersed himselfin the river band taught them iHilkhot Derekh Eretz /i. bThey said to him: Did you not teach us, our teacher, that he may study iHilkhot Derekh Eretz /i? He said to them: Although I am lenient with others,and allow them to study it without immersion, bI am stringent with myself. /b,Further elaborating on the issue of Torah study while in a state of impurity, bit was taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Yehuda ben Beteira would say: Matters of Torah do not become ritually impureand therefore one who is impure is permitted to engage in Torah study. He implemented this ihalakhain practice. The Gemara relates ban incident involving a student who wasreciting imishnayotand ibaraitot bhesitantly beforethe study hall of bRabbi Yehuda ben Beteira.The student experienced a seminal emission, and when he was asked to recite he did so in a rushed, uneven manner, as he did not want to utter the words of Torah explicitly. Rabbi Yehuda bsaid to him: My son, open your mouth and let your words illuminate, as matters of Torah do not become ritually impure, as it is stated: “Is not my word like fire, says the Lord”(Jeremiah 23:29). bJust as fire does not become ritually impure, so too matters of Torah do not become ritually impure. /b,In this ibaraita bthe Master saidthat one who is impure because of a seminal emission bexpounds upon the mishna but does not expound upon the Gemara.The Gemara notes: This statement bsupportsthe opinion of bRabbi El’ai,as bRabbi El’ai saidthat bRabbi Aḥa bar Ya’akov said in the name of Rabbeinu,Rav b: The ihalakhais that one who experienced a seminal emission bmay expound upon the mishna but may not expound upon the Gemara.This dispute bis parallel a tannaiticdispute, as it was taught: One who experienced a seminal emission bexpounds upon the mishna but does not expound upon the Gemara;that is bthe statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda ben Gamliel says in the name of Rabbi Ḥanina ben Gamliel:Both bthis and that are prohibited. And some saythat he said: Both bthis and that are permitted. /b,Comparing these opinions: bThe one who saidthat both bthis and that are prohibitedholds bin accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yoḥa the Cobbler; the one who saidthat both bthis and that are permittedholds bin accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yehuda ben Beteira. /b,Summarizing the ihalakha /i, bRav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: The universallyaccepted bpractice is in accordance withthe opinions of bthese three elders: In accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi El’ai with regard tothe ihalakhotof bthe first shearing, in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yoshiya with regard tothe laws of prohibited bdiverse kinds,and bin accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yehuda ben Beteira with regard to matters of Torah. /b,The Gemara elaborates: bIn accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi El’ai with regard to the first shearing, as it was taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi El’ai says:The obligation to set aside bthe first shearingfrom the sheep for the priest bis only practiced in EretzYisrael and not in the Diaspora, and that is the accepted practice., bIn accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yoshiya with regard to diverse kinds, as it is written: “You shall not sow your vineyard with diverse kinds”(Deuteronomy 22:9). bRabbi Yoshiya says:This means that bonewho sows diverse kinds bis not liableby Torah law buntil he sows wheat and barley and agrape bpit with a single hand motion,meaning that while sowing in the vineyard he violates the prohibition of diverse kinds that applies to seeds and to the vineyard simultaneously., bIn accordance with Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira with regard toone who experiences a seminal emission is permitted to engage in bmatters of Torah, as it was taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: Matters of Torah do not become ritually impure. /b,And the Gemara relates: bWhen Ze’iri camefrom Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, bhesuccinctly capsulated this ihalakhaand bsaid: They abolished ritual immersion, and some say thathe said: bThey abolished ritual washing of the hands.The Gemara explains: bThe one who saysthat bthey abolished immersionholds in accordance with the opinion of bRabbi Yehuda ben Beteirathat one who experienced a seminal emission is not required to immerse. bAnd the one who saysthat bthey abolished washing of the handsholds bin accordance with that which Rav Ḥisda cursed one whogoes out of his way bto seek water at the time of prayer. /b, bThe Sages taughtin a ibaraita /i: bOne who experienced a seminal emission who had nine ikavofdrawn bwater poured over him,that is sufficient to render him britually pureand he need not immerse himself in a ritual bath. The Gemara relates: bNaḥum of Gam Zo whisperedthis ihalakhato bRabbi Akiva, and Rabbi Akiva whispered it tohis student bben Azzai, and ben Azzai went out and taught it to his studentspublicly bin the marketplace. Two iamora’imin Eretz Yisrael, Rabbi Yosei bar Avin and Rabbi Yosei bar Zevida, disagreedas to the correct version of the conclusion of the incident. bOne taught:Ben Azzai btaught itto his students in the market. bAnd the other taught: Ben Azzaialso bwhispered itto his students.,The Gemara explains the rationale behind the two versions of this incident. bTheSage bwho taughtthat ben Azzai btaughtthe law openly in the market held that the leniency was bdue toconcern that the ihalakhotrequiring ritual immersion would promote bderelictionin the study bof Torah.The ruling of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira eases the way for an individual who experienced a seminal emission to study Torah. This was balso due toconcern that the ihalakhotrequiring ritual immersion would promote bthe suspension of procreation,as one might abstain from marital relations to avoid the immersion required thereafter. bAnd theSage, bwho taughtthat ben Azzai only bwhisperedthis ihalakhato his students, held that he did so bin order that Torah scholars would not be with their wives like roosters.If the purification process was that simple, Torah scholars would engage in sexual activity constantly, which would distract them from their studies.,With regard to this ritual immersion, bRabbi Yannai said: I heard that there are those who are lenient with regard to it and I have heard that there are those who are stringent with regard to it.The ihalakhain this matter was never conclusively established band anyone whoaccepts bupon himself to be stringent with regard to it, they prolong for him his days and years. /b,The Gemara relates that bRabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: What is the essence of those who immerse themselves in the morning?The Gemara retorts: How can one ask bwhat is their essence? Isn’t hethe one bwho saidthat bone who experiences a seminal emission is prohibited fromengaging in bmatters of Torahand is required to immerse himself in the morning? Rather, bthis iswhat bhemeant to bsay: What is the essence ofimmersion in a ritual bath of bforty ise’a /iof water when bit is possibleto purify oneself bwith nine ikav /i?Furthermore, bwhat is the essence of immersionwhen bit isalso bpossibleto purify oneself by bpouringwater?,Regarding this, bRabbi Ḥanina said: They established a massive fenceprotecting one from sinning with their decree that one must immerse himself in forty ise’aof water. bAs it was taughtin a ibaraita /i: There was ban incident involving one who solicited a woman tocommit ba sinful act. She said to him: Good-for-nothing. Do you have forty ise’ain which to immerseand purify byourselfafterwards? He bimmediately desisted.The obligation to immerse oneself caused individuals to refrain from transgression., bRav Huna said to the Sages: Gentlemen, why do you disdain this immersion? If it is becauseit is difficult for you to immerse in the bcoldwaters of the ritual bath, bit is possibleto purify oneself by immersing oneself in the heated bbathhouses,which are unfit for immersion for other forms of ritual impurity but are fit for immersion in this case., bRabbi Ḥisda said to him: Is there ritual immersion in hot water?Rav Huna bsaid to him:Indeed, doubts with regard to the fitness of baths have been raised, and bRav Adda bar Ahava holds in accordance with youropinion. Nevertheless, I remain convinced that it is permitted.,The Gemara relates: bRabbi Zeira was sitting in a tub of water in the bathhouse. He said to his attendant: Go and get nine ikav /iof water band pourit bover meso that I may purify myself from the impurity caused by a seminal emission. bRabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said to him: Why does my masterrequire ball of this? Aren’t you seated inat least nine ikavof water in the tub. bHe said to him:The law of nine ikav bparallelsthe law of bforty ise’a /i,in that their ihalakhotare exclusive. bJust as forty ise’a /ican only purify an individual through bimmersion and not through pouring, so too nine ikav /ican only purify one who experienced a seminal emission bthrough pouring and not through immersion. /b,The Gemara relates that bRav Naḥman prepared a jugwith a capacity bof nine ikav /iso that his students could pour water over themselves and become pure. bWhen Rav Dimi camefrom Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, bhe said: Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yehuda Gelostera said:The ihalakhathat one who experienced a seminal emission can be purified by pouring nine ikav bwas only taught for a sick personwho experienced the emission binvoluntarily. However, a sick personwho experienced a bnormalseminal emission in the course of marital relations, is required to immerse himself in bforty ise’a /i. /b, bRav Yosef said:In that case, bRav Naḥman’s jug is broken,meaning it is no longer of any use, as few people fall into the category of sick people who experienced seminal emissions. Nevertheless, bwhen Ravin camefrom Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia bhe said: In Usha there was an incident /b
32. Babylonian Talmud, Niddah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

33b. או דילמא נוגעת היתה ולא סתרה,אמר רבא לפום חורפא שבשתא נהי נמי דסתרה כמה תסתור תסתור שבעה דיה כבועלה,תסתור יום אחד (ויקרא טו, כח) ואחר תטהר אמר רחמנא אחר אחר לכולן שלא תהא טומאה מפסקת ביניהם,וליטעמיך זב גופיה היכי סתר לטהרתו אמר רחמנא שלא תהא טומאה מפסקת ביניהן,אלא מאי אית לך למימר שלא תהא טומאת זיבה מפסקת ביניהן הכא נמי שלא תהא טומאת זיבה מפסקת ביניהן,ואין חייבין עליהן על ביאת מקדש וכו' רב פפא איקלע לתואך אמר אי איכא צורבא מרבנן הכא איזיל אקבל אפיה אמרה ליה ההיא סבתא איכא הכא צורבא מרבנן ורב שמואל שמיה ותני מתניתא יהא רעוא דתהוי כוותיה,אמר מדקמברכי לי בגוויה ש"מ ירא שמים הוא אזל לגביה רמא ליה תורא רמא ליה מתני' אהדדי תנן אין חייבין עליהן על ביאת מקדש ואין שורפין עליהן את התרומה מפני שטומאתה ספק אלמא מספיקא לא שרפינן תרומה,ורמינהי על ששה ספקות שורפין את התרומה על ספק בגדי עם הארץ,אמר רב פפא יהא רעוא דלתאכיל האי תורא לשלמא הכא במאי עסקינן בכותי חבר,כותי חבר בועל נדה משוית ליה,שבקיה ואתא לקמיה דרב שימי בר אשי אמר ליה מאי טעמא לא משנית ליה בכותי שטבל ועלה ודרס על בגדי חבר ואזלו בגדי חבר ונגעו בתרומה,דאי משום טומאת עם הארץ הא טביל ליה ואי משום בועל נדה ספק בעל בקרוב ספק לא בעל בקרוב,ואם תמצי לומר בעל בקרוב ספק השלימתו ירוק ספק לא השלימתו והוי ספק ספיקא ואספק ספיקא לא שרפינן תרומה,ותיפוק ליה משום בגדי עם הארץ דאמר מר בגדי עם הארץ מדרס לפרושין אמר ליה בכותי ערום, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big בנות צדוקין בזמן שנהגו ללכת בדרכי אבותיהן הרי הן ככותיות פרשו ללכת בדרכי ישראל הרי הן כישראלית רבי יוסי אומר לעולם הן כישראלית עד שיפרשו ללכת בדרכי אבותיהן, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big איבעיא להו סתמא מאי ת"ש בנות צדוקין בזמן שנוהגות ללכת בדרכי אבותיהן הרי הן ככותיות הא סתמא כישראלית אימא סיפא פרשו ללכת בדרכי ישראל הרי הן כישראלית הא סתמא ככותיות אלא מהא ליכא למשמע מיניה,ת"ש דתנן ר' יוסי אומר לעולם הן כישראלית עד שיפרשו ללכת בדרכי אבותיהן מכלל דת"ק סבר סתמא ככותיות ש"מ,תנו רבנן מעשה בצדוקי אחד שספר עם כהן גדול בשוק ונתזה צנורא מפיו ונפלה לכהן גדול על בגדיו והוריקו פניו של כהן גדול וקדם אצל אשתו,אמרה לו אף על פי שנשי צדוקים הן מתיראות מן הפרושים ומראות דם לחכמים,אמר רבי יוסי בקיאין אנו בהן יותר מן הכל והן מראות דם לחכמים חוץ מאשה אחת שהיתה בשכונתינו שלא הראת דם לחכמים ומתה,ותיפוק ליה משום צנורא דעם הארץ אמר אביי בצדוקי חבר אמר רבא צדוקי חבר בועל נדה משוית ליה אלא אמר רבא 33b. bOr perhapsit is because bshe was touchingthe semen, bandif so bshe has notthereby bnegatedher count, just as a izavdoes not negate his count if he touches semen., bRava says: Commensurate with the sharpnessof Rami bar Ḥama is the extent of his berror,as this is not a dilemma at all, since bevenif one could suggest bthata izavawho discharges semen has bindeed negatedher count, one must ask: bHow much should she negate?If one suggests bshe should negateall bsevendays of her counting, this is untenable, as bit is enough for herthat she should negate her count blikethe man who bengages in intercourse with her,i.e., like a izavwho discharges semen, who negates only one day.,And if one suggests that bshe should negate one dayalone, this too is untenable, as bthe Merciful One states:“But if she is purified from her izivathen she shall count to herself seven days, band after that she shall be pure”(Leviticus 15:28). The word b“after”indicates that she shall be pure only bafter all of them,i.e., after seven consecutive clean days, such bthat there should be no impurity separating between them.If so, there cannot be a situation where a izavanegates a single day, and consequently it cannot be that a izavawho discharges semen negates any part of her count.,The Gemara rejects Rava’s response: bAnd according to your reasoning, how does a izavhimself negateonly one day from his count due to a seminal emission? After all, bthe Merciful One states:“And when the izavis purified of his iziva /i, then he shall count for himself seven days for his purification, and wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in running water, and he shall be pure” (Leviticus 15:13). The phrase: “Seven days bfor his purification,”indicates bthat there should be no impurity separating between them. /b, bRather, what have you to say?The verse means only bthat there should not be an impurity of izivaseparating between them. Here too,with regard to a izava /i, the verse means only bthat there should not be an impurity of izivaseparating between them;a discharge of semen is not included in this restriction. It is therefore possible that a discharge of semen from a izavanegates only one day from her count. Accordingly, the dilemma raised by Rami bar Ḥama remains in place.,§ The mishna teaches: bButone who enters the Temple while wearing bthosegarments upon which a Samaritan had lain bis not liableto bring an offering bfor entering the Temple,nor does one burn iterumathat came into contact with those garments, because their impurity is uncertain. In connection to these ihalakhot /i, the Gemara relates that bRav Pappa happenedto come btothe city of bTavakh. He said: If there is a Torah scholar here I will go and greet him. A certain elderly woman said to him: There is a Torah scholar here and Rav Shmuel is his name, and he teaches imishnayot /i; may it beGod’s bwill that you should be like him. /b,Rav Pappa bsaidto himself: bFromthe fact bthat they bless me throughthis Rav Shmuel that I should be like him, I may bconclude from itthat bhe is a God-fearingindividual. Rav Pappa bwent tovisit bhim,and Rav Shmuel braised a bull for him,i.e., he slaughtered a bull in honor of Rav Pappa, and he also braiseda difficulty between two imishnayot /ithat apparently contradict bone another: We learnin the mishna: One who enters the Temple while wearing bthosegarments upon which a Samaritan had lain is bnot liableto bring an offering bfor entering the Temple, nor does one burn iteruma /ithat came into contact with bthosegarments, bbecause their impurity is uncertain. Evidently, we do not burn iterumadue to uncertainimpurity., bAndone can braise a contradictionfrom another mishna ( iTeharot4:5): bFor sixcases of buncertainimpurity bone burns the iteruma /iif it came into contact with them, or if a person came into contact with them and subsequently touched the iteruma /i. One of these is bfor the uncertaincase bof the garments of one who is unreliable with regard to ritual impurity [ iam ha’aretz /i].Such garments impart impurity through contact and through carrying, due to a concern that the wife of the iam ha’aretzmight have sat on them while she was menstruating. Evidently, one burns iterumadue to uncertain impurity., bRav Pappabegan his response with a supplication and bsaid: May it beGod’s bwill that this bull shall be eaten peacefully,i.e., that I will provide a satisfactory resolution of this contradiction. Since the bull was slaughtered in my honor, failing to resolve the contradiction might spoil the meal. Rav Pappa continued: bHere we are dealing with a Samaritanwho is bdevoted to the meticulous observance of mitzvot, especially ihalakhotof ritual purity, iteruma /i, and tithes [ iḥaver /i].There is therefore less concern with regard to his ritual purity than that of an iam ha’aretz /i. Consequently, the mishna here states that iterumais not burned on account of him.,Rav Shmuel rejected this response: Since the mishna is referring to men who engage in intercourse with menstruating women, bare you equating a Samaritan iḥaver /iwith a man who bengages in intercourse with a menstruating woman? /b,Rav Pappa bleftRav Shmuel in embarrassment band came before Rav Shimi bar Ashi,to whom he related this incident. Rav Shimi bar Ashi bsaid to him: What is the reasonthat byou did not respond to himthat the ruling of the mishna is stated bwith regard to a Samaritan who immersedin a ritual bath band arosefrom his impure status, bandsubsequently btrod on the garments of a iḥaver /i,which means they are now considered the bedding of the Samaritan, bandthen those bgarments ofthe iḥaverwent and touched iteruma /i?In such a case one does not burn the iteruma /i., bAs, ifone would say to burn it bdue to the impurity of an iam ha’aretz /i, hehas bimmersedin a ritual bath. bAnd ifone were to suggest that it should be burned bbecausethe Samaritan is one who bengages in intercourse with a menstruating woman,this too is an unsatisfactory reason. This is because it is buncertainwhether bhe recently engaged in intercoursewith his wife, in which case his immersion does not remove his impurity; and it is buncertainwhether bhe did not recently engage in intercoursewith his wife, in which case he is in fact pure., bAndeven bif you saythat bhe recently engaged in intercoursewith his wife, another uncertainty remains: It is buncertainwhether his wife began counting seven days from an emission of green blood and ignored any subsequent emission of red blood and bcompletedher count for the bgreenblood, which would mean that she was in fact a menstruating woman when she engaged in sexual intercourse with her husband; and it is buncertainwhether bshe did not completea count of seven days from the emission of the green blood, rather from the emission of red blood, in which case she was not a menstruating woman when her husband engaged in intercourse with her. bAndtherefore bthis is a compound uncertainty, andthere is a principle that bone does not burn iterumaonaccount of ba compound uncertainty. /b,Rav Pappa raised an objection to Rav Shimi bar Ashi: bAnd letone bderivethat the garments of the iḥaverare impure bbecausethey came into contact with the bgarments of an iam ha’aretz /i. As the Master said:The bgarments of an iam ha’aretz /iare considered impure with the ritual impurity imparted by the btreadingof a izav /i, which means they impart impurity to people and to garments, bfor individuals who are scrupulous with regard to impurity [ iperushin /i].Rav Shimi bar Ashi bsaid toRav Pappa: The mishna is referring bto a naked Samaritan.Consequently, none of his garments came into contact with the garments of the iḥaver /i., strongMISHNA: /strong With regard to bSadducee girls, when they were accustomed to follow in the ways of theirSadducee bancestors theirstatus bis likethat of bSamaritan women,whose ihalakhawas discussed in the previous mishna. If the Sadducee women babandonedthe customs of their ancestors in order bto follow in the ways of the Jewish peopletheir status bis likethat of ba Jewish woman. Rabbi Yosei says: Theirstatus bis always likethat of ba Jewish woman, until they will abandonthe ways of the Jewish people in order bto follow in the ways of theirSadducee bancestors. /b, strongGEMARA: /strong bA dilemma was raised beforethe Sages: bWhatis the ihalakhain ban unspecifiedcase, i.e., when the custom of a Sadducee woman is unknown? The Gemara suggests: bComeand bhearevidence from the mishna: With regard to bSadducee girls, when they are accustomed to follow in the ways of theirSadducee bancestors theirstatus bis likethat of bSamaritan women.It can be inferred from the mishna bthatin ban unspecifiedcase their status bis likethat of ba Jewish woman.The Gemara rejects this suggestion: bSay the latter clause:If the Sadducee women babandonedthe customs of their ancestors in order bto follow in the ways of the Jewish people theirstatus bis likethat of ba Jewish woman.One may infer from this bthatin ban unspecifiedcase their status bis likethat of bSamaritan women. Rather, noinference is bto be learned from thismishna.,The Gemara suggests: bComeand bhearthe last clause of the mishna, bas we learnedin the mishna that bRabbi Yosei says: Theirstatus bis always likethat of ba Jewish woman, until they will abandonthe ways of the Jewish people in order bto follow in the ways of theirSadducee bancestors. By inference,one may conclude bthat the first itannaholdsthat in ban unspecifiedcase their status bis likethat of bSamaritan women.The Gemara affirms: bConclude from itthat this is the case.,§ bThe Sages taught:There was ban incident involving a certain Sadducee who was conversing with the High Priest in the marketplace, andas he was speaking, bsaliva [ itzinora /i] sprayed from his mouth and fell onto the garments of the High Priest. And the face of the High Priest turned green,as he feared that his garments had been rendered ritually impure. bAnd he rushed tothe Sadducee’s bwifeto inquire whether she properly observed the ihalakhotof menstruation, in which case his garments were not rendered impure by the saliva of her husband, as he is not considered one who engages in intercourse with a menstruating woman., bShe said to him: Even thoughwomen such as myself bare the wives of Sadducees,who do not follow in the ways of the iperushim /i, bthey are scared of the iperushimand they showtheir bblood to the Sageswhen an uncertainty arises. The garments of the High Priest are therefore pure, as the Sadducee wives properly observe the ihalakhotof menstruation., bRabbi Yosei says: We are familiar with thewives of Sadducees bmore so than everyoneelse, as they are our neighbors, bandI can testify that btheyall bshowtheir bblood to the Sages, except for a certain woman who wasliving bin our neighborhood who did not showher bblood to the Sages, and she died,as a punishment for her behavior.,The Gemara objects: bAnd letthe High Priest bderivethat his garments are impure bdue to the saliva of an iam ha’aretz /i,which imparts impurity. bAbaye said:That case involved ba Sadducee iḥaver /i,who was particular with regard to the ihalakhotof ritual purity. bRava said: Are you equating a Sadducee iḥaver /iwith a man who bengages in intercourse with a menstruating woman?After all, the High Priest was initially concerned that the Sadducee might engage in intercourse with his wife while she is still menstruating. bRather, Rava said: /b
33. Babylonian Talmud, Pesahim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

57a. נימא תלתא תנאי הוו לא תרי תנאי הוו ותנא קמא דר' שמעון היינו ר' יוסי ותנא קמא דר' יוסי היינו ר' שמעון ומאי אף אקמייתא,ת"ר בן בוהיין נתן פיאה לירק ובא אביו ומצאן לעניים שהיו טעונין ירק ועומדין על פתח הגינה אמר להם בני השליכו מעליכם ואני נותן לכם כפליים במעושר לא מפני שעיני צרה אלא מפני שאמרו חכמים אין נותנין פיאה לירק,למה ליה למימרא להו לא מפני שעיני צרה כי היכי דלא לימרו דחויי קא מדחי לן,ת"ר בראשונה היו מניחין עורות קדשים בלשכת בית הפרוה לערב היו מחלקין אותן לאנשי בית אב והיו בעלי זרועות נוטלין אותן בזרוע התקינו שיהיו מחלקין אותן מערב שבת לע"ש דאתיין כולהו משמרות ושקלן בהדדי,ועדיין היו גדולי כהונה נוטלין אותן בזרוע עמדו בעלים והקדישום לשמים,אמרו לא היו ימים מועטים עד שחיפו את ההיכל כולו בטבלאות של זהב שהן אמה על אמה כעובי דינר זהב ולרגל היו מקפלין אותן ומניחין אותן על גב מעלה בהר הבית כדי שיהו עולי רגלים רואין שמלאכתם נאה ואין בה דלם,תנא אבא שאול אומר קורות של שקמה היו ביריחו והיו בעלי זרועות נוטלין אותן בזרוע עמדו בעלים והקדישום לשמים,עליהם ועל כיוצא בהם אמר אבא שאול בן בטנית משום אבא יוסף בן חנין אוי לי מבית בייתוס אוי לי מאלתן אוי לי מבית חנין אוי לי מלחישתן אוי לי מבית קתרוס אוי לי מקולמוסן אוי לי מבית ישמעאל בן פיאכי אוי לי מאגרופן שהם כהנים גדולים ובניהן גיזברין וחתניהם אמרכלין ועבדיהן חובטין את העם במקלות,תנו רבנן ארבע צווחות צוחה עזרה ראשונה צאו מכאן בני עלי שטימאו היכל ה' ועוד צווחה צא מיכן יששכר איש כפר ברקאי שמכבד את עצמו ומחלל קדשי שמים דהוה כריך ידיה בשיראי ועביד עבודה,ועוד צווחה העזרה שאו שערים ראשיכם ויכנס ישמעאל בן פיאכי תלמידו של פנחס וישמש בכהונה גדולה ועוד צווחה העזרה שאו שערים ראשיכם ויכנס יוחנן בן נרבאי תלמידו של פנקאי וימלא כריסו מקדשי שמים,אמרו עליו על יוחנן בן נרבאי שהיה אוכל ג' מאות עגלים ושותה ג' מאות גרבי יין ואוכל ארבעים סאה גוזלות בקינוח סעודה אמרו כל ימיו של יוחנן בן נרבאי לא נמצא נותר במקדש מאי סלקא ביה ביששכר איש כפר ברקאי אמרי מלכא ומלכתא הוו יתבי מלכא אמר גדיא יאי ומלכתא אמרה אימרא יאי אמרו מאן מוכח כהן גדול דקא מסיק קרבנות כל יומא אתא איהו 57a. bLet us saythat bthere are three itanna’im /iwho dispute this point: The two unattributed opinions, each of which is referring to two vegetables, and the opinion common to Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon that includes all three vegetables. The Gemara rejects this: bNo, there areonly btwo itanna’im /iwho dispute the point, band the first itanna /iwhose opinion appears before the opinion of bRabbi Shimon is Rabbi Yosei. And the first itanna /iwhose opinion appears before the opinion of bRabbi Yosei is Rabbi Shimon. And whatis the meaning of the word bevenin both their statements? They agree with regard to bthe firstvegetable, turnips; however, they disagree with regard to the second, and replace it with another vegetable.,The Gemara cites an episode from the iTosefta /i. bThe Sages taught: The sonof a man named bBohayan designatedfor the poor btheproduce in the bcornerin a garden bof vegetables, and his fatherBohayan bfound the poor ladenwith bvegetables and standing at the opening of the gardenon their way out. bHe said to them: My sons, castthe vegetables that you have gathered bfrom upon yourselves and I will give you twicethe amount in btithedproduce, and you will be no worse off. bNot because I begrudgeyou what you have taken. bRather, it is because the Sages say: One does not designatefor the poor btheproduce in the bcornerin a garden bof vegetables.Therefore, the vegetables that you took require tithing.,The Gemara asks: bWhywas it necessary bfor him to say to them: Not because I begrudgeyou what you have taken? It would have been sufficient to offer them tithed produce. The Gemara answers that he said it bso they would not say: He is putting us off,taking what we collected now, but later he will not fulfill his commitment.,Apropos the people of Jericho, the Gemara relates that powerful people would steal wood from them. bThe Sages taught: Initially,the priests bwould place the hidesthat were flayed from animals bconsecratedas offerings of the most sacred order, which were given to the priests, bin the Parva chamber. In the evening, they would distribute them to the members of the familyof priests serving in the Temple that day. bAnd the powerfulpriests among them would btake them by forcebefore they could be distributed. The Rabbis bdecreed that they would distribute them each Shabbat eve,because then ball thefamilies of both priestly bwatches came and tooktheir part btogether.All the families from both the watch that was beginning its service and the one ending its service were together when they divided the hides. The powerful priests were unable to take the hides by force., bYet still the prominent priestsby virtue of their lineage bwould take them by force.Due to their prominence, the members of the rest of the watch dared not challenge them. When they realized that there was no equitable distribution, bthe ownersof the sacrifices ( iMe’iri /i) barose and consecratedthe hides bto Heavenso the priests could not take them.,The Sages bsaid: Not a few days passed before they had plated the entire sanctuary with golden tabletswith the proceeds from the redemption and sale of the hides. These plates bwere one cubit by one cubit and as thick as a golden dinar. Andwhen the people assembled bfor theFestival bpilgrimage they would removethe tablets band place them on a stair of the Temple Mount so that the pilgrims would see that the craftsmanshipof the tablets bwas beautiful and without flaw [ idalam /i].Afterward they replaced the tablets in the Sanctuary., bIt wassimilarly btaughtthat bAbba Shaul says: There were sycamore tree trunks in Jericho, and powerful people would take themfrom their owners bby force. The owners stood and consecratedthese trunks bto Heaven.It was with regard to these trunks and the branches that grew from them that the residents of Jericho acted against the will of the Sages., bWith regard tothe prominent priests band those like them, Abba Shaul ben Batnit said in the name of Abba Yosef ben Ḥanin: Woe is me due tothe High Priests of bthe house of Baitos, woe is me due to their clubs. Woe is me due tothe High Priests of bthe house of Ḥanin; woe is me due to their whispersand the rumors they spread. bWoe is me due tothe High Priests of bthe house of Katros; woe is me due to their pensthat they use to write lies. bWoe is me due tothe servants of the High Priests of bthe house of Yishmael ben Piakhi; woe is me due to their fists.The power of these households stemmed from the fact bthatthe fathers bwere High Priests, and their sons werethe Temple btreasurers, and their sons-in-law wereTemple boverseers [ iamarkalin /i]. And their servants strike the people with clubs,and otherwise act inappropriately.,Apropos the critique of several prominent priests, the Gemara relates that bthe Sages taught:The people in btheTemple bcourtyardall bcried four cries,as they were in agreement over various issues ( iPardes Rimonim /i). The bfirstcry was: bLeave here, sons of Eli, who defiled God’s Sanctuary(see I Samuel 2:22). Subsequently the priesthood was transferred to the house of Zadok. bAnd an additional cry: Leave here, Yissakhar of Kfar Barkai, who honors himself and desecratesthe items bconsecratedto bHeaven.Due to his delicate nature and his disrespect for the Temple service, he would bwraphis hands bin silk [ ishirai /i] and perform the service.This would invalidate the service because the silk was an interposition between his hands and the Temple vessels. Furthermore, his conduct demeaned the Temple service, as he demonstrated that he was unwilling to dirty his hands for it., bAndthe people in btheTemple bcourtyard cried additionally: Lift your heads, O gates, and letthe righteous bYishmael ben Piakhi, the student of Pinehasben Elazar the priest, benter and serve as High Priest,although the members of this family were violent. bAndthe people in btheTemple bcourtyard cried additionally: Lift your heads, O gates, and let Yoḥa ben Narbbai, the student of Pinkai, enter and fill his belly withmeat bof offeringsconsecrated to bHeaven,as he is worthy to eat offerings., bThey said about Yoḥa ben Narbbai that heand his household bwould eat three hundred calves, and drink three hundred jugs of wine, and eat forty ise’aof doves for dessert. They said:Throughout ball the days of Yoḥa ben Narbbai there was no leftoversacrificial meat bin the Temple,as he would make certain that someone ate it. The Gemara asks: bWhatultimately bhappened to Yissakhar of Kfar Barkai? They said: The king and the queen were sittingand talking. bThe king saidthat bgoatmeat bis betterfood, band the queen said lambmeat is bbetterfood. bThey said: Who can provewhich one of us is correct? bThe High Priestcan, bas he offers sacrifices all dayand tastes their meat. The High Priest had the right to take a portion from any sacrifice offered in the Temple, and therefore was well acquainted with the tastes of different meat. Yissakhar of Kfar Barkai bcame,and when they asked him this question
34. Babylonian Talmud, Qiddushin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

39b. ארבע על ארבע רוחות הערוגה ואחת באמצע שפיר אלא הכא משום נוי ואי נמי משום טרחא דשמעא היא:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big כל העושה מצוה אחת מטיבין לו ומאריכין לו ימיו ונוחל את הארץ וכל שאינו עושה מצוה אחת אין מטיבין לו ואין מאריכין לו ימיו ואינו נוחל את הארץ:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ורמינהי אלו דברים שאדם אוכל פירותיהן בעולם הזה והקרן קיימת לו לעולם הבא אלו הן כבוד אב ואם וגמילות חסדים והכנסת אורחים והבאת שלום בין אדם לחבירו ותלמוד תורה כנגד כולם,אמר רב יהודה הכי קאמר כל העושה מצוה אחת יתירה על זכיותיו מטיבים לו ודומה כמי שמקיים כל התורה כולה מכלל דהנך אפילו בחדא נמי אמר רב שמעיה לומר שאם היתה שקולה מכרעת,וכל העושה מצוה אחת יתירה על זכיותיו מטיבין לו ורמינהו כל שזכיותיו מרובין מעונותיו מריעין לו ודומה כמי ששרף כל התורה כולה ולא שייר ממנה אפילו אות אחת וכל שעונותיו מרובין מזכיותיו מטיבין לו ודומה כמי שקיים כל התורה כולה ולא חיסר אות אחת ממנה,אמר אביי מתניתין דעבדין ליה יום טב ויום ביש רבא אמר הא מני רבי יעקב היא דאמר שכר מצוה בהאי עלמא ליכא,דתניא רבי יעקב אומר אין לך כל מצוה ומצוה שכתובה בתורה שמתן שכרה בצדה שאין תחיית המתים תלויה בה בכיבוד אב ואם כתיב (דברים ה, טו) למען יאריכון ימיך ולמען ייטב לך בשילוח הקן כתיב (דברים כב, ז) למען ייטב לך והארכת ימים,הרי שאמר לו אביו עלה לבירה והבא לי גוזלות ועלה לבירה ושלח את האם ונטל את הבנים ובחזירתו נפל ומת היכן טובת ימיו של זה והיכן אריכות ימיו של זה אלא למען ייטב לך לעולם שכולו טוב ולמען יאריכון ימיך לעולם שכולו ארוך,ודלמא לאו הכי הוה ר' יעקב מעשה חזא ודלמא מהרהר בעבירה הוה מחשבה רעה אין הקב"ה מצרפה למעשה,ודלמא מהרהר בעבודת כוכבים הוה וכתיב (יחזקאל יד, ה) למען תפוש את בית ישראל בלבם איהו נמי הכי קאמר אי סלקא דעתך שכר מצוה בהאי עלמא אמאי לא אגין מצות עליה כי היכי דלא ליתי לידי הרהור,והא א"ר אלעזר שלוחי מצוה אין נזוקין התם בהליכתן שאני,והא אמר רבי אלעזר שלוחי מצוה אינן נזוקין לא בהליכתן ולא בחזירתן סולם רעוע הוה דקביע היזיקא וכל היכא דקביע היזיקא לא סמכינן אניסא דכתיב (שמואל א טז, ב) ויאמר שמואל איך אלך ושמע שאול והרגני,אמר רב יוסף אילמלי דרשיה אחר להאי קרא כרבי יעקב בר ברתיה לא חטא ואחר מאי הוא איכא דאמרי כי האי גוונא חזא,ואיכא דאמרי לישנא דחוצפית המתורגמן חזא דהוה גריר ליה דבר אחר אמר פה שהפיק מרגליות ילחך עפר נפק חטא,רמי רב טובי בר רב קיסנא לרבא תנן כל העושה מצוה אחת מטיבין לו עשה אין לא עשה לא ורמינהי ישב ולא עבר עבירה נותנים לו שכר כעושה מצוה אמר ליה התם כגון שבא דבר עבירה לידו וניצול הימנה,כי הא דרבי חנינא בר פפי תבעתיה ההיא מטרוניתא אמר מלתא ומלי נפשיה שיחנא וכיבא עבדה היא מילתא ואיתסי ערק טשא בההוא בי בני דכי הוו עיילין בתרין אפילו ביממא הוו מיתזקי למחר אמרו ליה רבנן מאן נטרך אמר להו שני 39b. and he was careful to plant bfourdifferent species balong the four sides of the garden bed and one in the middle,so that there would be space between them, it works out bwell.This would show that Rav was cautious not to plant diverse kinds together. bBut here,where Rav actually planted each species in its own bed, he did so bdue to beautification,i.e., to improve the appearance of the garden in front of the study hall. bAlternatively,the reason Rav planted this way bis due to the troublethat would be caused to bthe attendant.When his attendant would be sent to fetch a certain type of vegetable from the garden he would not need to search for it, but would know where the different vegetables were planted. Therefore, this does not prove that Rav was concerned about diverse kinds outside of Eretz Yisrael., strongMISHNA: /strong bAnyone who performs one mitzva has goodness bestowed upon him, his life is lengthened, and he inherits the land,i.e., life in the World-to-Come. bAnd anyone who does not perform one mitzva does not have goodness bestowed upon him, his life is not lengthened, and he does not inherit the landof the World-to-Come., strongGEMARA: /strong bAndthe Gemara braises a contradictionfrom a mishna ( iPe’a1:1): bTheseare the bmatters that a personengages in and benjoys their profits in this world, and the principalreward bremains for him for the World-to-Come,and bthey are: Honoring one’s father and mother, acts of loving kindness, hospitalitytoward bguests, and bringing peace between one person and another; and Torah study is equal to all of them.This indicates that one is rewarded in this world only for fulfilling these mitzvot, but not for fulfilling all mitzvot., bRav Yehuda saidthat bthis is whatthe mishna bis saying: Anyone who performs one mitzva in addition to hisother bmerits,and thereby tips the scale of all his deeds to the side of righteousness, bhas goodness bestowed upon him and is compared to one who fulfills the entire Torah.The Gemara asks: One can learn bby inferencefrom here bthatwith regard to bthosemitzvot listed in the mishna in iPe’aone is rewarded beven for oneof them, notwithstanding the fact that overall his sins are more numerous. bRav Shemaya said:The other mishna serves bto say that ifone’s sins and merits bwereof bequalbalance, i.e., he has accrued an equal amount of merit and sin, one of these mitzvot btiltsthe scale in his favor.,The Gemara further asks: bAnddoes banyone who performs one mitzva in addition to hisother bmerits have goodness bestowed upon himin this world? The Gemara braises a contradictionfrom a ibaraita /i: bAnyone whose merits are greater than his sins is punished with sufferingin order to cleanse his sins in this world and enable him to merit full reward for his mitzvot in the World-to-Come. bAnddue to this punishment bhe appearsto observers blike one who burned the entire Torah without leaving even one letter remaining of it.Conversely, banyone whose sins are greater than his merits has goodness bestowed upon himin this world, band he appears like one who has fulfilled the entire Torah without lackingthe fulfillment of beven one letter of it. /b, bAbaye said:When bthe mishnasaid that he is rewarded, it means bthat he has one good day and one bad day.He is rewarded for the mitzvot he performs; nevertheless, occasionally he also has bad days which cleanse him of his sins, and the ibaraitais referring to those days. bRava saidthat the mishna and this ibaraitarepresent two different opinions. In accordance with bwhoseopinion bis this ibaraita /i? bIt isin accordance with the opinion of bRabbi Ya’akov, who says: There is no rewardfor performance of ba mitzva in this world,as one is rewarded for mitzvot only World-to-Come., bAs it is taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Ya’akov says: There is not a single mitzva written in the Torah whose rewardis stated balongside it, which is not dependent on the resurrection of the dead,i.e., the reward is actually bestowed in the World-to-Come, after the resurrection of the dead. How so? bWith regard to honoring one’s father and mother it is written: “That your days may be long, and that it may go well with you”(Deuteronomy 5:16). bWith regard tothe bdispatchof the mother bird from bthe nest it is written: “That it may be well with you, and that you may prolong your days”(Deuteronomy 22:7).,Despite this, it occurred that bthere wasone bwhose father said to him: Climb tothe top of bthe building and fetch me chicks. And he climbed tothe top of bthe building and dispatched the motherbird band took the young,thereby simultaneously fulfilling the mitzva to dispatch the mother bird from the nest and the mitzva to honor one’s parents, bbut upon his return he fell and died. Where is the goodness of the days of this one, and where is the length of days of this one? Rather,the verse b“that it may be well with you”means bin the world where all is well, and “that your days may be long”is referring bto the world that is entirely long. /b,The Gemara asks: bBut perhaps thisincident bnever occurred?It is possible that everyone who performs these mitzvot is rewarded in this world, and the situation described by Rabbi Ya’akov never happened. The Gemara answers: bRabbi Ya’akovhimself bsaw an incidentof this kind. The Gemara asks: bBut perhapsthat man bwas contemplating sinat the time, and he was punished for his thoughts? The Gemara answers that there is a principle that bthe Holy One, Blessed be He, does not link a bad thought to an action,i.e., one is not punished for thoughts alone.,The Gemara asks: bBut perhaps he was contemplating idol worshipat the time, band it is writtenwith regard to idol worship: b“So I may take the house of Israel in their own heart”(Ezekiel 14:5), which indicates that one is punished for idolatrous thoughts. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Ya’akov bwas saying this as well: If it enters your mindthat there is breward forperforming ba mitzva in this world, why didn’tthese bmitzvot protect him so that he should not come to contemplateidol worship? Since that man was not protected from thoughts of idol worship at the time, this indicates that the performance of mitzvot does not entitle one to merit reward in this world.,The Gemara asks: bBut didn’t Rabbi Elazar saythat bthose on the path to perform a mitzva are notsusceptible to bharm?How is it possible that this individual, who was sent by his father to perform a mitzva, could have died? The Gemara answers: bThere,Rabbi Elazar is referring those bon their wayto perform a mitzva, which bis different,as one is not susceptible to harm when he is on his way to fulfill a mitzva. In this case the individual was harmed on his return, and one is not afforded protection after having performed a mitzva.,The Gemara asks: bBut didn’t Rabbi Elazar saythat bthose on the path to perform a mitzva are notsusceptible to bharm, neitherwhen they are bon their wayto perform the mitzva bnor when they are returningfrom performing the mitzva? The Gemara answers: In that case it bwas a rickety ladder,and therefore bthe danger was established; and anywhere that the danger is established one may not rely on a miracle, as it is writtenwith regard to God’s command to Samuel to anoint David as king in place of Saul: b“And Samuel said: How will I go, and Saul will hear and kill me;and God said: Take in your hand a calf and say: I have come to sacrifice an offering to God” (I Samuel 16:2). Although God Himself issued the command, there was concern with regard to the established dangers., bRav Yosef said: Had Aḥer,literally Other, the appellation of the former Sage Elisha ben Avuya, binterpreted thisaforementioned bverse:“That it may go well with you” (Deuteronomy 5:16), bhomiletically,as referring to the World-to-Come, basdid bRabbi Ya’akov, son of his daughter,he would bnot have sinned.The Gemara asks: bAnd whatcaused bAḥerto sin? bThere arethose bwho say he saw a case like this,where a son went up to the roof on his father’s command, dispatched the mother bird, and then died. It was witnessing this episode that led Elisha ben Avuya astray., bAnd there arethose bwho saythat bhe saw the tongue of Ḥutzpit the disseminatorafter the latter was executed by the government, thrown in the street, and bdraggedalong bby something else,a euphemism for a pig. bHe said: Shall a mouth that produced pearls lapup bdirt?For this reason bhe went outand bsinned. /b,§ bRav Tuvi bar Rav Kisna raises a contradiction to Ravaand asked: bWe learnedin the mishna that banyone who performs one mitzva has goodness bestowed upon him.This indicates that if one actually bperformedthe bmitzva, yes,he is rewarded, but if he bdid not performthe mitzva, bno,he does not receive a reward. He braises a contradictionbased on the following statement: If bone sits and does not transgress, he receives a reward as one who performs a mitzva,despite the fact that he does not actually perform a mitzva. Rava bsaid to him: There,when it is referring to one who sits and does not transgress, it does not mean that he was merely sitting; rather, it is speaking of a case bwherean opportunity to commit ba sinful act presents itselfto him band he is saved from it. /b,This is blikean incident involving bRabbi Ḥanina bar Pappi, who was enticed by a certain noblewoman [ imatronita /i]to engage in sexual intercourse with her. bHe said a formulaof an incantation band was covered with boils and scabsso as to render himself unattractive to her. bShe performed an actof magic band he was healed. He fled and hid in a bathhousethat was so dangerous, due to the demons that frequented the place, bthat when two people enteredtogether beven during the day they would be harmed. The next day the Sages said to him: Who protected youin that dangerous place? Rabbi Ḥanina bar Pappi bsaid to them:There were angels who appeared like btwo /b
35. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

52b. למה תלמיד חכם דומה לפני עם הארץ בתחלה דומה לקיתון של זהב סיפר הימנו דומה לקיתון של כסף נהנה ממנו דומה לקיתון של חרש כיון שנשבר שוב אין לו תקנה,אימרתא בת טלי בת כהן שזינתה הואי אקפה רב חמא בר טוביה חבילי זמורות ושרפה,אמר רב יוסף טעה בתרתי טעה בדרב מתנה וטעה בדתניא (דברים יז, ט) ובאת אל הכהנים הלוים ואל השופט אשר יהיה בימים ההם בזמן שיש כהן יש משפט בזמן שאין כהן אין משפט:,אמר רבי אלעזר ברבי צדוק מעשה בבת כהן שזינתה וכו': אמר רב יוסף בית דין של צדוקים הוה,הכי אמר להו והכי אהדרו ליה והתניא אמר רבי אלעזר ברבי צדוק זכורני כשהייתי תינוק ומורכב על כתיפו של אבא והביאו בת כהן שזינתה והקיפוה חבילי זמורות ושרפוה אמרו לו קטן היית ואין מביאין ראיה מן הקטן שני מעשים הוו,הי אמר להו ברישא אילימא הא קמייתא אמר להו ברישא א"ל כשהוא גדול ולא אשגחו ביה אמר להו כשהוא קטן ואשגחו ביה,אלא הא אמר להו ברישא ואמרו ליה קטן היית ואמר להו כשהוא גדול ואמרו ליה מפני שלא היה בית דין של אותה שעה בקי:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big מצות הנהרגין היו מתיזין את ראשו בסייף כדרך שהמלכות עושה רבי יהודה אומר ניוול הוא לו אלא מניחין את ראשו על הסדן וקוצץ בקופיץ אמרו לו אין מיתה מנוולת מזו:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big תניא אמר להן רבי יהודה לחכמים אף אני יודע שמיתה מנוולת היא אבל מה אעשה שהרי אמרה תורה (ויקרא יח, ג) ובחקותיהם לא תלכו,ורבנן כיון דכתיב סייף באורייתא לא מינייהו קא גמרינן,דאי לא תימא הכי הא דתניא שורפין על המלכים ולא מדרכי האמורי היכי שרפינן והכתיב ובחקותיהם לא תלכו אלא כיון דכתיב שריפה באורייתא דכתיב (ירמיהו לד, ה) ובמשרפות אבותיך וגו' לאו מינייהו קא גמרינן והכא נמי כיון דכתיב סייף באורייתא לאו מינייהו קא גמרינן,והא דתנן באידך פירקין אלו הן הנהרגין הרוצח ואנשי עיר הנדחת בשלמא עיר הנדחת כתיב בהו (דברים יג, טז) לפי חרב אלא רוצח מנלן,דתניא (שמות כא, כ) נקם ינקם נקימה זו איני יודע מה הוא כשהוא אומר (ויקרא כו, כה) והבאתי עליכם חרב נוקמת נקם ברית הוי אומר נקימה זו סייף,ואימא דבריז ליה מיברז לפי חרב כתיב,ואימא דעביד ליה גיסטרא אמר רב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה אמר קרא (ויקרא יט, יח) ואהבת לרעך כמוך ברור לו מיתה יפה,אשכחן דקטל עבדא בר חורין מנא לן,ולאו קל וחומר הוא קטל עבדא בסייף בר חורין בחנק,הניחא למאן דאמר חנק קל אלא למ"ד חנק חמור מאי איכא למימר,נפקא ליה מדתניא (דברים כא, ט) ואתה תבער הדם הנקי מקרבך הוקשו כל שופכי דמים לעגלה ערופה מה להלן בסייף ומן הצואר אף כאן בסייף ומן הצואר,אי מה להלן בקופיץ וממול עורף אף כאן בקופיץ וממול עורף אמר רב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה אמר קרא ואהבת לרעך כמוך ברור לו מיתה יפה:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big מצות הנחנקין היו משקעין אותו בזבל עד ארכובותיו ונותן סודר קשה לתוך הרכה וכורך על צוארו זה מושך אצלו וזה מושך אצלו עד שנפשו יוצאת:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big תנו רבנן (ויקרא כ, י) איש פרט לקטן (ויקרא כ, י) אשר ינאף את אשת איש פרט לאשת קטן (ויקרא כ, י) אשת רעהו פרט לאשת אחרים,(ויקרא כ, ב) מות יומת בחנק אתה אומר בחנק או אינו אלא באחת מכל מיתות האמורות בתורה אמרת כל מקום שנאמר מיתה בתורה סתם אין אתה רשאי למושכה להחמיר עליה אלא להקל עליה דברי רבי יאשיה,רבי יונתן אומר לא מפני שהיא קלה אלא כל מיתה האמורה בתורה סתם אינה אלא חנק,רבי אומר נאמר מיתה בידי שמים ונאמר מיתה בידי אדם מה מיתה האמורה בידי שמים מיתה שאין בה רושם אף מיתה האמורה בידי אדם מיתה שאין בה רושם,ואימא שריפה מדאמר רחמנא בת כהן בשריפה מכלל דהא לאו בת שריפה היא 52b. bTo what is a Torah scholar comparedwhen he is standing bbefore an ignoramus? At first,when he does not know him, the ignoramus considers him to be blike a goblet [ ilekiton /i] of gold.Once bhe has conversed with himconcerning mundane matters, he considers him to be blike a goblet of silver,i.e., the stature of the Torah scholar is downgraded in the eyes of the ignoramus. Once the scholar bhas received benefit fromthe ignoramus, bheconsiders him to be blike an earthenware goblet,which bonce broken cannot be fixed. /b,The Gemara relates: bImrata bat Talei was a priest’s daughter who committed adultery. Rav Ḥama bar Toviyya surrounded herwith bbundles of branches and burned her. /b, bRav Yosef says:Rav Ḥama bar Toviyya berred with regard to two ihalakhot /i. bHe erred with regard tothe ruling bof Rav Mattana,i.e., that burning is performed using a wick of lead, band he erred with regard to that which is taughtin a ibaraita /i: It is derived from the verse: b“And you shall come to the priests, the Levites, and to the judge that will be in those days”(Deuteronomy 17:9), that bat a time when there is a priestserving in the Temple, i.e., when the Temple is built, bthere is judgmentof capital cases. By inference, bat a time when there is no priest, there is no judgmentof capital cases.,§ The mishna teaches that bRabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, said: An incidentoccurred bwith regard to a priest’s daughter who committed adultery,and she was executed by actual burn-ing, and the Sages said to him that the court at that time was not proficient in ihalakha /i. bRav Yosef says: It was a court of the Sadducees,who interpreted the verse according to its straightforward meaning.,The Gemara asks: bDidRabbi Elazar ben Tzadok bsay that tothe Sages, band didthe Sages banswer him in that manner? But isn’ta different version of the exchange btaughtin a ibaraita /i: bRabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says: I remember when I was a child, and was riding onmy bfather’s shoulders. And they brought a priest’s daughter who had committed adultery, and surrounded herwith bbundles of branches and burned her.The Sages bsaid to him: You were a minorat that time band one cannot bring proof fromthe testimony of ba minor,as perhaps you did not understand the proceedings properly. The two versions of this exchange do not accord with each other. The Gemara answers: bThere were twoseparate bincidents,and Rabbi Elazar ben Tzadok testified with regard to both.,The Gemara asks: bWhichincident bdid he tellthe Sages about bfirst? If we saythat bfirst he told themabout bthis firstincident, i.e., the one that is recounted in the mishna, this is unreasonable; if he first btoldthem about the incident that occurred bwhen he was an adult, and they paid no attention to him,but rejected his statement by responding that the court was not proficient in ihalakha /i, bwould he tellthem afterward about the incident that occurred bwhen he was a small child andthink that bthey would pay attention to him? /b, bRather,it is clear that bhe first told themabout bthatincident, i.e., the one recounted in the ibaraita /i, band they said to him: You were a minor,and one cannot bring proof from the testimony of a minor. bAndthen bhe told themabout the incident that occurred bwhen he was an adult, and they said to him:The court did so bbecause the court at that time was not proficientin ihalakha /i., strongMISHNA: /strong bThe mitzva of those who are killed,i.e., the process of execution by decapitation, is carried out in the following manner: The executioners bcut off his head with a sword, the way that the monarchy doeswhen a king sentences a person to death. bRabbi Yehuda says:This manner of execution is improper, as bit degrades him. Rather, they place the head ofthe condemned bon the block, and chopit off bwith a cleaver [ ibekofitz /i].The Rabbis bsaid to him:If you are concerned about his degradation, bthere is no deathpenalty more bdegrading than that.It is better for him to be executed in the manner described first., strongGEMARA: /strong bIt is taughtin a ibaraita( iTosefta9:3): bRabbi Yehuda said to the Rabbis: I too, know that it is a degrading death, but what shall I do, as the Torah states: “And you shall not follow their statutes”(Leviticus 18:3), i.e., it is prohibited to adopt the practices of the gentiles.,The Gemara asks: bAndhow do bthe Rabbisrespond to this claim? The Gemara answers: bSincedecapitation by the bsword is written in the Torah, it is not fromthe gentiles that bwe learnit. This is Torah law, and the custom of the gentiles is not taken into consideration. It is of no import that they have a corresponding type of execution., bAs, if you do not say so,that a Jewish custom is not forbidden even if the gentiles have the same custom, then bthat which is taughtin a ibaraitaposes a difficulty. The ibaraitateaches: bOne burnsvessels and clothes boverthe deaths of bkingsas an expression of grief, bandthis is bnotforbidden bforbeing bof the ways of the Amorites. How can we performthis bburning? But isn’t it written: “And you shall not follow their statutes”? Rather, since burningitems over the death of a king bis written in the Torah, as it is written: “And with the burnings of your fathers,the first kings who came before you, so shall they make a burning for you” (Jeremiah 34:5), it is bnot fromthe gentiles that bwe learnit. bAnd here too, sincedecapitation by the bsword is written in the Torah,it is bnot from themthat bwe learnit.,§ The Gemara asks: bAndwith regard to bthat which we learnedin a mishna bin another chapterof this tractate (76b): bThesetransgressors bare those who are killedby decapitation: bThe murderer and the people of an idolatrous city,there is a difficulty. bGranted,the people of ban idolatrous cityare executed in this manner, as bit is written concerning them:“You shall smite the inhabitants of that city bwith the edge of the sword”(Deuteronomy 13:16). bButwith regard to ba murderer, from where do wederive that he is executed by decapitation?,The Gemara answers that it is derived bas it is taughtin a ibaraita /i: It is stated in the verse: “And if a man smites his slave or his maidservant by the staff and he dies under his hand, bhe shall be avenged”(Exodus 21:20). Prima facie, bI do not know what this vengeance isreferring to. bWhen it says: “And I will bring upon you the sword avenging the vengeance of the covet”(Leviticus 26:25), byou must saythat bvengeance isdecapitation by the bsword. /b,The Gemara asks: bButwhy not bsay thatthe executioner bshould stab himwith a sword, rather than decapitate him? The Gemara answers: bIt is writtenwith regard to the people of an idolatrous city: b“With the edge of the sword,”indicating that the execution should be administered with the edge of the sword and not its point.,The Gemara asks: bBut say thatthe executioner bshould cut him in half [ igistera /i],down the middle of his body. The Gemara answers that bRav Naḥman saysthat bRabba bar Avuh says:The bverse states: “And you shall love your neighbor as yourself”(Leviticus 19:18), which teaches that even with regard to a condemned prisoner, one should bselect a good,i.e., a compassionate, bdeath for him.Cutting his body in half is not a compassionate manner of execution.,The Gemara asks: bWe have foundproof that one bwho killeda Canaanite bslaveis executed by decapitation. But bfrom where do wederive that one who kills ba freemanis executed in the same manner?,The Gemara answers: bBut is it notinferred ia fortiori /i?If one who bkilleda Canaanite bslaveis executed bbythe bsword,should one who killed ba freemanbe executed merely bby strangulation? /b,This Gemara rejects this answer: bThis works out well according to the one who saysthat bstrangulationis a more blenienttype of capital punishment than decapitation. bBut according to the one who saysthat bstrangulationis more bseverethan decapitation, bwhat can be said?It is possible that one who murdered a freeman is in fact executed by strangulation.,The Gemara answers: The mishna bderives it from that which is taughtin a ibaraita /i: It is derived from the verse: b“And so shall you put away the innocent blood from your midst”(Deuteronomy 21:9), that ball spillers of blood are compared to the heifer whose neck is brokenas atonement for an unresolved murder. bJust as there,the heifer is killed bbythe bsword and at the neck, so too here,murderers are executed bbythe bsword and at the neck. /b,The Gemara challenges: bIfso, perhaps it should be derived that bjust as there,the heifer is decapitated bwith a cleaver and at the nape of the neck, so too here,murderers should be decapitated bwith a cleaver and at the nape of the neck.The Gemara answers that bRav Naḥman saysthat bRabba bar Avuh says:The bverse states: “And you shall love your neighbor as yourself”(Leviticus 19:18), which teaches that even with regard to a condemned prisoner, one should bselect a good,i.e., a compassionate, bdeath for him.Although the type of capital punishment is derived from the heifer whose neck is broken, the most compassionate method of decapitation is selected., strongMISHNA: /strong bThe mitzva of those who are strangledis carried out in the following manner: The agents of the court bsubmergethe condemned one bin dung up to his kneesso he cannot move, bandone of them bplaces a rough scarf within a soft one, and wrapsit baround his neck. Thisone, i.e., one of the witnesses, bpullsthe scarf btoward him, and thatone, the other witness, bpullsit btoward him, until the soul ofthe condemned one bdeparts. /b, strongGEMARA: /strong bThe Sages taught:The verse states: “And a man who commits adultery with another man’s wife, even he who commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, both the adulterer and the adulteress shall be put to death” (Leviticus 20:10). The term: b“A man,”is interpreted as bexcluding a minor boywho committed adultery before he came of age. The phrase: b“Who commits adultery with another man’s wife,”is interpreted as bexcluding the wife of a minor boy;marriage to a minor is not considered halakhic marriage. b“His neighbor’s wife” excludes the wife of another,i.e., a gentile, who is not referred to as “his neighbor.”, b“Shall be put to death”means death bby strangulation. Do you saythat his execution is bby strangulation, or is it rather by one of all theother types of bdeathpenalty bstated in the Torah? You must saythat it is by strangulation, as beverywhere thatthe bdeathpenalty bis stated in the Torah without specification you may not take it to be more stringent with regard to it,i.e., to mean that the sinner should be sentenced to ba severetype of execution; brather,you must take it bto be more lenient with regard to it,i.e., that a lenient type of execution should be applied. Consequently, the sinner is sentenced to be executed by strangulation, which is the least severe type of capital punishment. This is bthe statement of Rabbi Yoshiya. /b,The ibaraitacontinues: bRabbi Yonatan says: It is not becausestrangulation bisthe most blenienttype of capital punishment; brather,there is a principle that bevery deathpenalty bstated in the Torah without specification is nothing other than strangulation,whereas the other types of capital punishment must be stated explicitly in the verse., bRabbiYehuda HaNasi bsays,in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yonatan: bDeath at the hand of Heaven is statedin the Torah, band death at the hands of a person,i.e., court-imposed capital punishment, bis statedin the Torah. bJust asthe bdeath at the hand of Heaven that is statedin the Torah is ba death that leaves noexternal bmark, so too,the bdeath at the hands of a person that is statedin the Torah is ba death that leaves noexternal bmark,i.e., strangulation.,The Gemara asks: bButwhy not bsaythat perhaps it is referring to execution by bburning,which also leaves no external mark? The Gemara answers: bFromthe fact bthat the Merciful One statesexplicitly that ba priest’s daughterwho committed adultery is executed bby burningone can learn bby inference that thisother woman who committed adultery bis not liable tobe executed by bburning,but rather by a different type of execution that does not leave a mark, i.e., strangulation.
36. Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

31a. שהמרו זה את זה אמרו כל מי שילך ויקניט את הלל יטול ד' מאות זוז אמר אחד מהם אני אקניטנו אותו היום ע"ש היה והלל חפף את ראשו הלך ועבר על פתח ביתו אמר מי כאן הלל מי כאן הלל נתעטף ויצא לקראתו אמר לו בני מה אתה מבקש א"ל שאלה יש לי לשאול א"ל שאל בני שאל מפני מה ראשיהן של בבליים סגלגלות א"ל בני שאלה גדולה שאלת מפני שאין להם חיות פקחות,הלך והמתין שעה אחת חזר ואמר מי כאן הלל מי כאן הלל נתעטף ויצא לקראתו אמר לו בני מה אתה מבקש א"ל שאלה יש לי לשאול א"ל שאל בני שאל מפני מה עיניהן של תרמודיין תרוטות אמר לו בני שאלה גדולה שאלת מפני שדרין בין החולות,הלך והמתין שעה אחת חזר ואמר מי כאן הלל מי כאן הלל נתעטף ויצא לקראתו א"ל בני מה אתה מבקש א"ל שאלה יש לי לשאול א"ל שאל בני שאל מפני מה רגליהם של אפרקיים רחבות א"ל בני שאלה גדולה שאלת מפני שדרין בין בצעי המים,אמר לו שאלות הרבה יש לי לשאול ומתירא אני שמא תכעוס נתעטף וישב לפניו א"ל כל שאלות שיש לך לשאול שאל א"ל אתה הוא הלל שקורין אותך נשיא ישראל א"ל הן א"ל אם אתה הוא לא ירבו כמותך בישראל א"ל בני מפני מה א"ל מפני שאבדתי על ידך ד' מאות זוז א"ל הוי זהיר ברוחך כדי הוא הלל שתאבד על ידו ד' מאות זוז וד' מאות זוז והלל לא יקפיד:,ת"ר מעשה בנכרי אחד שבא לפני שמאי אמר לו כמה תורות יש לכם אמר לו שתים תורה שבכתב ותורה שבעל פה א"ל שבכתב אני מאמינך ושבעל פה איני מאמינך גיירני ע"מ שתלמדני תורה שבכתב גער בו והוציאו בנזיפה בא לפני הלל גייריה יומא קמא א"ל א"ב ג"ד למחר אפיך ליה א"ל והא אתמול לא אמרת לי הכי א"ל לאו עלי דידי קא סמכת דעל פה נמי סמוך עלי:,שוב מעשה בנכרי אחד שבא לפני שמאי א"ל גיירני ע"מ שתלמדני כל התורה כולה כשאני עומד על רגל אחת דחפו באמת הבנין שבידו בא לפני הלל גייריה אמר לו דעלך סני לחברך לא תעביד זו היא כל התורה כולה ואידך פירושה הוא זיל גמור.,שוב מעשה בנכרי אחד שהיה עובר אחורי בית המדרש ושמע קול סופר שהיה אומר (שמות כח, ד) ואלה הבגדים אשר יעשו חושן ואפוד אמר הללו למי אמרו לו לכהן גדול אמר אותו נכרי בעצמו אלך ואתגייר בשביל שישימוני כהן גדול בא לפני שמאי אמר ליה גיירני על מנת שתשימני כהן גדול דחפו באמת הבנין שבידו בא לפני הלל גייריה,א"ל כלום מעמידין מלך אלא מי שיודע טכסיסי מלכות לך למוד טכסיסי מלכות הלך וקרא כיון שהגיע (במדבר א, נא) והזר הקרב יומת אמר ליה מקרא זה על מי נאמר א"ל אפי' על דוד מלך ישראל נשא אותו גר קל וחומר בעצמו ומה ישראל שנקראו בנים למקום ומתוך אהבה שאהבם קרא להם (שמות ד, כב) בני בכורי ישראל כתיב עליהם והזר הקרב יומת גר הקל שבא במקלו ובתרמילו על אחת כמה וכמה,בא לפני שמאי א"ל כלום ראוי אני להיות כהן גדול והלא כתיב בתורה והזר הקרב יומת בא לפני הלל א"ל ענוותן הלל ינוחו לך ברכות על ראשך שהקרבתני תחת כנפי השכינה לימים נזדווגו שלשתן למקום אחד אמרו קפדנותו של שמאי בקשה לטורדנו מן העולם ענוותנותו של הלל קרבנו תחת כנפי השכינה:,אמר ר"ל מאי דכתיב (ישעיהו לג, ו) והיה אמונת עתיך חוסן ישועות חכמת ודעת וגו' אמונת זה סדר זרעים עתיך זה סדר מועד חוסן זה סדר נשים ישועות זה סדר נזיקין חכמת זה סדר קדשים ודעת זה סדר טהרות ואפ"ה (ישעיהו לג, ו) יראת ה' היא אוצרו,אמר רבא בשעה שמכניסין אדם לדין אומרים לו נשאת ונתת באמונה קבעת עתים לתורה עסקת בפו"ר צפית לישועה פלפלת בחכמה הבנת דבר מתוך דבר ואפ"ה אי יראת ה' היא אוצרו אין אי לא לא משל לאדם שאמר לשלוחו העלה לי כור חיטין לעלייה הלך והעלה לו א"ל עירבת לי בהן קב חומטון א"ל לאו א"ל מוטב אם לא העליתה,תנא דבי ר"י מערב אדם קב חומטון בכור של תבואה ואינו חושש:,אמר רבה בר רב הונא כל אדם שיש בו תורה ואין בו 31a. bwho wagered with each otherand bsaid: Anyone who will go and aggravate Hillelto the point that he reprimands him, bwill take four-hundred izuz /i. bOne of them said: I will aggravate him. That daythat he chose to bother Hillel bwas Shabbat eve, and Hillel was washingthe hair on bhis head. He went and passed the entrance toHillel’s bhouseand in a demeaning manner bsaid: Who here is Hillel, who here is Hillel?Hillel bwrapped himselfin a dignified garment band went out to greet him. He said to him: My son, what do you seek? He said to him: I have a question to ask.Hillel bsaid to him: Ask, my son, ask.The man asked him: bWhy are the heads of Babylonians oval?He was alluding to and attempting to insult Hillel, who was Babylonian. bHe said to him: My son, you have asked a significant question.The reason is bbecause they do not have clever midwives.They do not know how to shape the child’s head at birth.,That man bwent and waited one hour,a short while, breturnedto look for Hillel, band said: Who here is Hillel, who here is Hillel?Again, Hillel bwrapped himself and went out to greet him.Hillel bsaid to him: My son, what do you seek?The man bsaid to him: I have a question to ask. He said to him: Ask, my son, ask.The man asked: bWhy are the eyes of the residents of Tadmor bleary [ iterutot /i]?Hillel bsaid to him: My son, you have asked a significant question.The reason is bbecause they live among the sandsand the sand gets into their eyes.,Once again the man bwent, waited one hour, returned, and said: Who here is Hillel, who here is Hillel?Again, bhe,Hillel, bwrapped himself and went out to greet him. He said to him: My son, what do you seek? He said to him: I have a question to ask. He said to him: Ask, my son, ask.The man asked: bWhy do Africans have wide feet?Hillel bsaid to him: You have asked a significant question.The reason is bbecause they live in marshlandsand their feet widened to enable them to walk through those swampy areas.,That man bsaid to him: I have manymore bquestions to ask, but I am afraid lest you get angry.Hillel bwrapped himself and sat before him,and bhe said to him: All ofthe bquestions that you have to ask, askthem. The man got angry and bsaid to him: Are you Hillel whom they callthe iNasiof Israel? He said to him: Yes. He said to him: Ifit bis you,then bmay there not be many like you in Israel.Hillel bsaid to him: My son, for whatreason do you say this? The man bsaid to him: Because I lost four hundred izuzbecause of you.Hillel bsaid to him: Be vigilant of your spiritand avoid situations of this sort. bHillel is worthy of having you lose four hundred izuzandanother bfour hundred izuzon his account, and Hillel will not get upset. /b, bThe Sages taught:There was ban incident involving one gentile who came before Shammai.The gentile bsaid to Shammai: How many Torahs do you have? He said to him: Two, the Written Torah and the Oral Torah.The gentile bsaid to him:With regard to bthe WrittenTorah, bI believe you, butwith regard to bthe OralTorah, bI do not believe you. Convert me on condition that you will teach meonly the bWritten Torah.Shammai bscolded him and cast him out with reprimand.The same gentile bcame before Hillel,who bconverted himand began teaching him Torah. bOn the first day, heshowed him the letters of the alphabet and bsaid to him: iAlef /i, ibet /i, igimmel /i, idalet /i. The next day he reversedthe order of the letters and told him that an ialefis a itavand so on. The convert bsaid to him: But yesterday you did not tell me that.Hillel bsaid to him:You see that it is impossible to learn what is written without relying on an oral tradition. bDidn’t you rely on me?Therefore, you should balso rely on mewith regard to the matter bof the OralTorah, and accept the interpretations that it contains.,There was banother incident involving one gentile who came before Shammaiand bsaid toShammai: bConvert me on condition that you teach me the entire Torah while I am standing on one foot.Shammai bpushed himaway bwith the builder’s cubit in his hand.This was a common measuring stick and Shammai was a builder by trade. The same gentile bcame before Hillel. He converted himand bsaid to him:That bwhich is hateful to you do not do to another; that is the entire Torah, and the rest is its interpretation. Go study. /b,There was banother incident involving one gentile who was passing behind the study halland bheard the voice of a teacher who wasteaching Torah to his students and bsayingthe verse: b“And these are the garments which they shall make: A breastplate, and an iefod, /iand a robe, and a tunic of checkered work, a mitre, and a girdle” (Exodus 28:4). bThe gentile said: Thesegarments, bfor whom are theydesignated? The students bsaid to him: For the High Priest. The gentile said to himself: I will go and convert so that they will install me as High Priest. He came before Shammaiand bsaid to him: Convert me on condition that you install meas High Priest. Shammai bpushed him with the builder’s cubit in his hand. He came before Hillel; he converted him. /b,Hillel bsaid to him,to the convert: bIs it notthe way of the world that bonly one who knows the protocols [ itakhsisei /i]of royalty bis appointed king? Goand blearn the royal protocolsby engaging in Torah study. bHe went and readthe Bible. bWhen he reachedthe verse which says: b“And the common man that draws near shall be put to death”(Numbers 1:51), the convert bsaid toHillel: bWith regard to whom is the verse speaking?Hillel bsaid to him: Even with regard to David, king of Israel. The convert reasoned an ia fortioriinference himself: If the Jewish people are called God’s children, and due to the love that God loved them he called them: “Israel is My son, My firstborn”(Exodus 4:22), and nevertheless bit is written about them: And the common man that draws near shall be put to death; a mere convert who camewithout merit, bwithnothing more than bhis staff and traveling bag, all the more sothat this applies to him, as well.,The convert bcame before Shammaiand btold himthat he retracts his demand to appoint him High Priest, saying: bAm I at all worthy to be High Priest? Is it not written in the Torah: And the common man that draws near shall be put to death? He came before Hilleland bsaid to him: Hillel the patient, may blessings rest upon your head as you brought me under the wings of the Divine Presence.The Gemara relates: bEventually, the threeconverts bgathered togetherin bone place,and bthey said: Shammai’s impatience sought to drive us from the world; Hillel’s patience brought us beneath the wings of the Divine Presence. /b,The Gemara continues discussing the conduct of the Sages, citing that bReish Lakish said: Whatis the meaning of bthat which is written: “And the faith of your times shall be a strength of salvation, wisdom, and knowledge,the fear of the Lord is his treasure” (Isaiah 33:6)? bFaith; that is the order of iZera /i’ iim /i, Seeds,in the Mishna, because a person has faith in God and plants his seeds (Jerusalem Talmud). bYour times; that is the order of iMoed /i, Festival,which deals with the various occasions and Festivals that occur throughout the year. bStrength; that is the order of iNashim /i, Women. Salvations; that is the order of iNezikin /i, Damages,as one who is being pursued is rescued from the hands of his pursuer. bWisdom; that is the order of iKodashim /i, Consecrated Items. And knowledge; that is the order of iTeharot /i, Purity,which is particularly difficult to master. bAnd evenif a person studies and masters all of these, b“the fear of the Lord is his treasure,”it is preeminent.,With regard to the same verse, bRava said:After departing from this world, bwhen a person is brought to judgmentfor the life he lived in this world, bthey say to himin the order of that verse: Did byou conduct business faithfully?Did byou designate times for Torahstudy? Did byou engage in procreation? Did you await salvation? Did you engagein the dialectics of bwisdomor understand bone matter from another? And, nevertheless,beyond all these, bif the fear of the Lord is his treasure, yes,he is worthy, and bif not, no,none of these accomplishments have any value. There is ba parablethat illustrates this. bA person who said to his emissary: Bring a ikorof wheat up to the attic for meto store there. The messenger bwent and brought it up for him. He said to the emissary:Did byou mix a ikavof iḥomton /i,a preservative to keep away worms, binto it for me? He said to him: No. He said to him:If so, it would have been bpreferable had you not brought it up.of what use is worm-infested wheat? Likewise, Torah and mitzvot without the fear of God are of no value.,On a related note, the Gemara cites a ihalakhathat was btaughtin bthe schoolof bRabbi Yishmael: A personwho sells wheat bmay, iab initio /i, bmix a ikavof iḥomtoninto a ikorof grain and need not be concernedthat by selling it all at the price of grain he will be guilty of theft, as the ikavof iḥomtonis essential for the preservation of the wheat., bRabba bar Rav Huna said: Any person who has Torah in him but does not have /b
37. Babylonian Talmud, Yoma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

19b. מי איכא מידי דאנן לא מצינן למעבד ושלוחי דידן מצו עבדי הכי קאמרי ליה משביעין אנו עליך על דעתינו ועל דעת בית דין,הוא פורש ובוכה והן פורשין ובוכין וכו' הוא פורש ובוכה שחשדוהו צדוקי והם פורשין ובוכין דא"ר יהושע בן לוי כל החושד בכשרים לוקה בגופו,וכל כך למה שלא יתקן מבחוץ ויכניס כדרך שהצדוקין עושין,ת"ר מעשה בצדוקי אחד שהתקין מבחוץ והכניס ביציאתו היה שמח שמחה גדולה פגע בו אביו אמר לו בני אף על פי שצדוקין אנו מתיראין אנו מן הפרושים אמר לו כל ימי הייתי מצטער על המקרא הזה (ויקרא טז, ב) כי בענן אראה על הכפורת אמרתי מתי יבוא לידי ואקיימנו עכשיו שבא לידי לא אקיימנו,אמרו לא היו ימים מועטין עד שמת והוטל באשפה והיו תולעין יוצאין מחוטמו ויש אומרים ביציאתו ניגף דתני רבי חייא כמין קול נשמע בעזרה שבא מלאך וחבטו על פניו ונכנסו אחיו הכהנים ומצאו ככף רגל עגל בין כתפיו שנאמר (יחזקאל א, ז) ורגליהם רגל ישרה וכף רגליהם ככף רגל עגל,א"ר זכריה בן קבוטל וכו' מתני ליה רב חנן בר רבא לחייא בר רב קמיה דרב א"ר זכריה בן קפוטל ומחוי ליה רב בידיה קבוטל ונימא ליה מימר ק"ש הוה קרי,וכי האי גוונא מי שרי והא"ר יצחק בר שמואל בר מרתא הקורא את שמע לא ירמוז בעיניו ולא יקרוץ בשפתותיו ולא יורה באצבעותיו ותניא רבי אלעזר חסמא אומר הקורא את שמע ומרמז בעיניו ומקרץ בשפתותיו ומראה באצבעו עליו הכתוב אומר (ישעיהו מג, כב) ולא אותי קראת יעקב,לא קשיא הא בפרק ראשון הא בפרק שני,ת"ר (דברים ו, ז) ודברת בם בם ולא בתפלה ודברת בם בם יש לך רשות לדבר ולא בדברים אחרים,רבי אחא אומר ודברת בם עשה אותן קבע ואל תעשם עראי אמר רבא השח שיחת חולין עובר בעשה שנאמר ודברת בם בם ולא בדברים אחרים רב אחא בר יעקב אמר עובר בלאו שנאמר (קהלת א, ח) כל הדברים יגעים לא יוכל איש לדבר, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big בקש להתנמנם פרחי כהונה מכין לפניו באצבע צרדא ואומרים לו אישי כ"ג עמוד והפג אחת על הרצפה ומעסיקין אותו עד שיגיע זמן השחיטה, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big מאי צרדא אמר רב יהודה צרתה דדא מאי היא גודל מחוי רב הונא ואזל קלא בכולי בי רב,ואומרים לו אישי כ"ג הפג אחת על הרצפה וכו' אמר רב יצחק על חדת מאי היא אמרי ליה אחוי קידה,ומעסיקין אותו עד שיגיע זמן שחיטה (וכו') תנא לא היו מעסיקין אותו לא בנבל ולא בכנור אלא בפה ומה היו אומרין (תהלים קכז, א) אם ה' לא יבנה בית שוא עמלו בוניו בו,מיקירי ירושלים לא היו ישנין כל הלילה כדי שישמע כ"ג קול הברה ולא תהא שינה חוטפתו תניא אבא שאול אמר אף בגבולין היו עושין כן זכר למקדש אלא שהיו חוטאין,אמר אביי ואיתימא ר"נ בר יצחק תרגומא נהרדעא דא"ל אליהו לרב יהודה אחוה דרב סלא חסידא אמריתו אמאי לא אתי משיח והא האידנא יומא דכיפורי הוא ואבעול כמה בתולתא בנהרדעא אמר ליה הקב"ה מאי אמר אמר ליה 19b. bis there any matter that we are unable to perform and our agents are able to perform?The role of the agent is to perform a task on behalf of the one who commissioned him. The agent cannot perform a task that the one who commissioned him is unable to perform. Since it is prohibited for Israelites to enter the priests’ courtyard and to perform the sacrificial rites, clearly the priests are not agents representing the Israelites. The language of the mishna in which the court Elders address the High Priest as their agent apparently contradicts that understanding. The Gemara answers: bThis is what they say to him: We administer an oath to you according to our understanding and the understanding of the court,cautioning him that he cannot rationalize violating the oath by claiming that he took the oath based on his own interpretation. He is bound by the understanding of the court. The mishna does not address the nature of the High Priest’s agency.,§ The mishna continues: After this oath, bhe would leavethem band cry and they would leavehim band cry.The Gemara explains: bHe turned aside and crieddue to the indignity bthat they suspected himof being ba Sadducee; and they turned aside and cried, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: One who suspects the innocentof indiscretion bis afflicted in his body.The High Priest might in fact be beyond reproach and they may have suspected him falsely.,The Gemara asks: bAnd whywere the Elders bsoinsistent that the High Priest take an oath? The Gemara explains: So that bhe would not preparethe incense and light it boutsidein the Sanctuary, before entering the Holy of Holies, band bringthe coal pan with the incense already burning on it bintothe Holy of Holies bin the mannerthat bthe Sadducees did.Since the High Priest is alone inside the Sanctuary and there is no way to ascertain whether he is in fact performing the service in the proper manner, the Elders insisted that he take an oath to perform it according to their instructions., bThe Sages taughtin the iTosefta /i: There was ban incident involving acertain bSadduceewho was appointed as High Priest, bwho prepared the incense outsideand then bbroughtit into the Holy of Holies. bUpon his emergence he was overjoyedthat he had succeeded. bThe father ofthat Sadducee bmet him and said to him: My son, although we are Sadduceesand you performed the service in accordance with our opinion, bwe fear the Phariseesand do not actually implement that procedure in practice. The son bsaid to hisfather: bAll my days I have been troubled over this verse: “For I will appear in the cloud above the Ark cover”(Leviticus 16:2). The Sadducees interpreted this verse to mean that God will appear above the Ark cover, i.e., will enter the Holy of Holies, only after the incense cloud is already there. bI said: When willthe opportunity bbecome available to me, and I will fulfill itaccording to the Sadducee interpretation? bNow thatthe opportunity bhas become available to me,will bI not fulfill it? /b,The Sages bsaid: Noteven ba few dayspassed buntil he died and was laid out in the garbagedump, band worms were coming out of his nosein punishment for his actions. bAnd some saythat bhe was struckas soon bas he emergedfrom the Holy of Holies, bas Rabbi Ḥiyya taught: A type of sound was heard in theTemple bcourtyard, as an angel came and struck him in the face. And his fellow priests came into remove him from there band they found the likeness of a footprint of a calf between his shoulders.That is the mark left by an angel striking, bas it is statedwith regard to angels: b“And their feet were straight feet, and the sole of their feet was like the sole of a calf’s foot”(Ezekiel 1:7).,§ It was taught in the mishna that bRabbi Zekharya ben Kevutalsays: Many times I read before the High Priest from the book of Daniel. bRav Ḥa bar Rava taught this to Ḥiyya bar Rav before Ravin the following manner: bRabbi Zekharya bar Kefutal said, and Rav demonstrated with his handthat the name should be pronounced bKevutal.The Gemara asks: Why did Rav demonstrate his point with a gesture? bLet himsimply bsay it.The Gemara answers: Rav bwas reciting iShema /iat that moment and could not interrupt iShemaby speaking.,The Gemara asks: bAnd isinterrupting in a manner bof that sort,by gesturing, bpermittedduring iShema /i? bDidn’t Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Shmuel bar Marta say: One who is reciting iShemashould neither make allusions with his eyes, nor open and closehis mouth bwith his lipsto convey a message, bnor gesture with his fingers? And it was taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Elazar Ḥisma says: Concerning one who recites iShemaand makes allusions with his eyes, or opens and closeshis mouth bwith his lips, or gestures with his fingers, the verse says: “And you did not call out to Me, O Jacob”(Isaiah 43:22). By signaling while reciting iShemahe behaves contemptuously toward God, and it is tantamount to not having recited iShemabefore Him. How, then, could Rav gesture while reading iShema /i?,The Gemara answers: This is bnot difficult. Thisprohibition to interrupt one’s recitation of iShemawith a gesture applies binthe course of reciting the bfirst paragraphof iShema /i, which is more fundamental; bthatcase where Rav gestured was binthe course of reciting the bsecond paragraphof iShema /i, where gesturing to convey a significant message is permitted.,Apropos interruptions in the course of reciting iShema /i, the Gemara cites a ibaraitain which bthe Sages taught:“And these words, which I command you this day, shall be upon your heart; and you shall teach them diligently unto your children, band you shall talk of themwhen you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you arise” (Deuteronomy 6:6–7). This means that in the course bofreciting bthem,the study of Torah and the recitation of iShema /i, it is permitted to interrupt to state a significant matter, bbut notin the course bofreciting the iAmida bprayer,which may not be interrupted for any kind of speech. Another interpretation of the verse is: bAnd you shall talk of themis to emphasize that bit is permittedto interrupt iShema bto speak these mattersof Torah, but not to speak bother mattersthat may lead to levity., bRabbi Aḥa says: Talk of themmeans one must brender them,the words of Torah, ba permanentfixture, band not render them a temporaryexercise. bRava said: One who engages in idle chatterwithout Torah or any particular purpose bviolatesa bpositivecommandment, bas it is stated: And you shall talk of them;talk bof them and not of other matters. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said:Furthermore, boneeven bviolates a negativecommandment, bas it is stated: “All these matters are wearisome; no man can ever state them”(Ecclesiastes 1:8). The phrase: No man can ever state them, is understood as a prohibition against engaging in idle chatter., strongMISHNA: /strong If the High Priest bsought to sleepat night, bthe young priestswould bsnap the middle [ itzerada /i] fingeragainst the thumb bbefore him, and theywould bsay to himevery so often: bMy Master, High Priest. Standfrom your bed band chillyourself bonce on the floorand overcome your drowsiness. bAnd theywould bengage himin various ways buntil the time would arrive to slaughter thedaily offering., strongGEMARA: /strong The Gemara asks: bWhatis the itzerada /ifinger mentioned in the mishna? bRav Yehuda said: It is the rival [ itzara /i] of that [ ida /i]one. Which finger bis it? iTzeradais the rival of bthe thumb;it is the middle finger. The middle finger would be strongly positioned against the thumb, and when one separates them, the finger hits the palm, creating a sound. bRav Huna demonstratedthe loud noise that could be achieved by snapping with the middle finger, and bthe sound traveled throughout Rav’s study hall.The sound created was loud enough to keep the High Priest awake.,It was taught in the mishna that bthey said to him: My Master, High Priest.Stand from your bed and bchillyourself bonce on the floorand overcome your drowsiness. bRav Yitzḥak saidthat they said to the High Priest: bIntroduce something new.The Gemara asks: bWhat is itthat they asked him to introduce? bThey say to him: Demonstratehow to perform the ceremonial bbowing[ikidda /i].This was a form of bowing that was difficult to perform, in which the High Priest was expert. The thought was that the exercise would keep him awake.,The mishna continues: bAnd theywould bengage himin different ways buntil the time to slaughter thedaily offering bwould arrive.It was btaught: They would not occupy him with a harp or a lyre,which may not be played on a Festival, bbutwould sing bwiththeir bmouths. And what would they say?They would say this verse: b“Unless the Lord builds the house, its builders labor in vain on it;unless the Lord watches over the city, the watchman keeps vigil in vain” (Psalms 127:1). The message to the High Priest was that his service must be performed for the sake of Heaven for it to be accepted by God; otherwise his efforts would be in vain.,The Gemara relates that bthe prominentmen bof Jerusalem would not sleep the entire nightbut instead engaged in Torah study, bso thatthe bHigh Priest would hearthe bsound of noisein the city band sleep would not overcome himin the silence of the sleeping city. bIt was taughtin a ibaraitathat bAbba Shaul said: They would do so even in the outlying areasand stay awake all night bin acknowledgment of the Temple; however,the result was bthat they would sin,as the men and women would participate in games together to pass the time, leading to transgression., bAbaye said, and some sayit was bRav Naḥman bar Yitzḥakwho said: bInterpretthat statement as referring to bNeharde’a, as Elijahthe Prophet bsaid to Rav Yehuda, brotherof bRav Salla Ḥasida: You have saidand wondered: bWhy has the Messiah not come?Why is that surprising? bIsn’t today Yom Kippur, and relations were had with several virgins in Neharde’a,as the men and women stayed awake all night and that led to promiscuity? Rav Yehuda bsaid to him: What did the Holy One, Blessed be He, sayabout those sins committed by the Jewish people? bHe said:This is what God said:
38. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History, 4.22 (3rd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)

39. Anon., Avot Derabbi Nathan B, 10 (6th cent. CE - 8th cent. CE)

40. Quran, Quran, 2.59 (7th cent. CE - 7th cent. CE)

2.59. فَبَدَّلَ الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا قَوْلًا غَيْرَ الَّذِي قِيلَ لَهُمْ فَأَنْزَلْنَا عَلَى الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا رِجْزًا مِنَ السَّمَاءِ بِمَا كَانُوا يَفْسُقُونَ
41. Pseudo-Phocylides, The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides, 104, 103



Subjects of this text:

subject book bibliographic info
abtalion Sigal, The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew (2007) 48
akiba, rabbi Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 178
ancestral language' Schwartz, 2 Maccabees (2008) 442
antigonus of sokho Sigal, The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew (2007) 44, 48
apostolic constitutions Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 178
areus of sparta Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 90
audian Butts and Gross, Jews and Syriac Christians: Intersections across the First Millennium. (2010) 267
bannus, josephus description Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 178
bannus Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 178
bar kokhba (bar koziba) Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 178
body, views of Keener, First-Second Corinthians (2005) 122
body and soul Rubin Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives (2008) 150
boethus Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 178
boethusians Sigal, The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew (2007) 48
boethusians (baytosim) Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 178
borborian Butts and Gross, Jews and Syriac Christians: Intersections across the First Millennium. (2010) 267
boyarin, daniel Klawans, Heresy, Forgery, Novelty: Condemning, Denying, and Asserting Innovation in Ancient Judaism (2019) 74
ceremony Rubin Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives (2008) 150
change, in conception Rubin Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives (2008) 150
cohen, shaye j. d. Klawans, Heresy, Forgery, Novelty: Condemning, Denying, and Asserting Innovation in Ancient Judaism (2019) 75
consensus Klawans, Heresy, Forgery, Novelty: Condemning, Denying, and Asserting Innovation in Ancient Judaism (2019) 74, 75
david Sigal, The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew (2007) 44, 48
diaspora, religion of Schwartz, 2 Maccabees (2008) 442
eli Sigal, The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew (2007) 44
eusebius, and translation of hegesippus Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 178
fourth philosophy Klawans, Heresy, Forgery, Novelty: Condemning, Denying, and Asserting Innovation in Ancient Judaism (2019) 75
gnostic Butts and Gross, Jews and Syriac Christians: Intersections across the First Millennium. (2010) 267
goldin, judah Klawans, Heresy, Forgery, Novelty: Condemning, Denying, and Asserting Innovation in Ancient Judaism (2019) 75
halivni, david weiss Klawans, Heresy, Forgery, Novelty: Condemning, Denying, and Asserting Innovation in Ancient Judaism (2019) 74
hasidim, and essene origins Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 90
hasmonean dynasty Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 90
hazon gabriel Klawans, Heresy, Forgery, Novelty: Condemning, Denying, and Asserting Innovation in Ancient Judaism (2019) 74, 75
hegesippus, seven schools of jewish law Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 178
hegesippus Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 178
hemerobaptists Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 178
herod the great Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 178
jewish law/legal schools, josephus three schools Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 90
jewish law/legal schools Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 178
john the baptist Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 178
josephus, and judaisms three schools of law Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 90
josephus Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 90
josephus essenes, name of Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 90
josephus essenes, origin of Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 90
josephus essenes Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 90
justin martyr Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 178
maccabean revolt Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 90
maccabeus, jonathan Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 90
min(im) Butts and Gross, Jews and Syriac Christians: Intersections across the First Millennium. (2010) 267
moses Klawans, Heresy, Forgery, Novelty: Condemning, Denying, and Asserting Innovation in Ancient Judaism (2019) 74; Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 90
nathan Rubin Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives (2008) 150
neusner, jacob Klawans, Heresy, Forgery, Novelty: Condemning, Denying, and Asserting Innovation in Ancient Judaism (2019) 74
onias iii Schwartz, 2 Maccabees (2008) 442
pharisees Klawans, Heresy, Forgery, Novelty: Condemning, Denying, and Asserting Innovation in Ancient Judaism (2019) 74, 75; Schwartz, 2 Maccabees (2008) 442
philos essenes, name origin, analysis of Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 90
philos essenes Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 90
purity and purification rituals, morning immersers Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 178
purity and purification rituals Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 178
rabbinic literature Schwartz, 2 Maccabees (2008) 442
resurrection, ancient views of Keener, First-Second Corinthians (2005) 122
resurrection, sectarian debate Schwartz, 2 Maccabees (2008) 442
sadducee Butts and Gross, Jews and Syriac Christians: Intersections across the First Millennium. (2010) 267
sadducees Klawans, Heresy, Forgery, Novelty: Condemning, Denying, and Asserting Innovation in Ancient Judaism (2019) 74, 75
samaritan Butts and Gross, Jews and Syriac Christians: Intersections across the First Millennium. (2010) 267
schiffman, lawrence h. Klawans, Heresy, Forgery, Novelty: Condemning, Denying, and Asserting Innovation in Ancient Judaism (2019) 74
schremer, adiel Klawans, Heresy, Forgery, Novelty: Condemning, Denying, and Asserting Innovation in Ancient Judaism (2019) 75
sievers, j. Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (2012) 90
stemberger, günter Klawans, Heresy, Forgery, Novelty: Condemning, Denying, and Asserting Innovation in Ancient Judaism (2019) 74
tropper, amram Klawans, Heresy, Forgery, Novelty: Condemning, Denying, and Asserting Innovation in Ancient Judaism (2019) 75