1. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 7.3, 33.4 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
| 7.3. וְלֹא תִתְחַתֵּן בָּם בִּתְּךָ לֹא־תִתֵּן לִבְנוֹ וּבִתּוֹ לֹא־תִקַּח לִבְנֶךָ׃ 33.4. תּוֹרָה צִוָּה־לָנוּ מֹשֶׁה מוֹרָשָׁה קְהִלַּת יַעֲקֹב׃ | 7.3. neither shalt thou make marriages with them: thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son." 33.4. Moses commanded us a law, An inheritance of the congregation of Jacob." |
|
2. Mishnah, Avot, 1.13 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
| 1.13. He [also] used to say: one who makes his name great causes his name to be destroyed; one who does not add [to his knowledge] causes [it] to cease; one who does not study [the Torah] deserves death; on who makes [unworthy] use of the crown [of learning] shall pass away." |
|
3. Mishnah, Nedarim, 9.10 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
| 9.10. “Konam if I marry that ugly woman,” and she turns out to be beautiful; “That black-skinned woman,” and she turns out to be light-skinned; “That short woman,” and she turns out to be tall, he is permitted to marry her, not because she was ugly, and became beautiful, or black and became light-skinned, short and grew tall, but because the vow was made in error. And thus it happened with one who vowed not to benefit from his sister’s daughter, and she was taken into Rabbi Ishmael’s house and they made her beautiful. Rabbi Ishmael said to him, “My son! Did you vow not to benefit from this one!” He said, “No,” and Rabbi Ishmael permitted her [to him]. In that hour Rabbi Ishmael wept and said, “The daughters of Israel are beautiful, but poverty disfigures them.” And when Rabbi Ishmael died, the daughters of Israel raised a lament, saying, “Daughters of Israel weep for Rabbi Ishmael.” And thus it is said too of Saul, “Daughters of Israel, weep for Saul” (II Samuel 1:24)." |
|
4. Tosefta, Eruvin, 1.2, 6.2 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
5. Tosefta, Hagigah, 2.13 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
6. Tosefta, Pesahim, 10.12 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
| 10.12. Once, Rabban Gamliel and the elders were reclining in the house of Boethus ben Zonin in Lod, and they were occupied in studying the laws of Pesach all that night, until the cock crowed. They lifted the table, made themselves ready and went to the house of study [to pray]." |
|
7. Tosefta, Shabbat, 2.5, 13.2 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
8. Tosefta, Sukkah, 1.9 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
| 1.9. One who puts up four beams, and covers them over [with schach], R. Yaakov says, They should be seen whether, were they divided, each post would reach a span on each side; if so, it is kosher; if not, it is invalid. And the sages say: Two legal walls; and the third wall [need only be] one handbreadth. R. Shimon says: Three legal [walls], and a fourth [need only be] one handbreadth. R. Shimon b. Elazar says in the name of R. Meir: If two are man-made and one by a tree, the sukkah is kosher and they may enter it on the festival." |
|
9. Tosefta, Terumot, 2.13 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
10. Anon., Genesis Rabba, 56.2 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
| 56.2. אָמַר לְיִצְחָק, בְּנִי, רוֹאֶה אַתָּה מַה שֶּׁאֲנִי רוֹאֶה, אָמַר לוֹ הֵן. אָמַר לִשְׁנֵי נְעָרָיו, רוֹאִים אַתֶּם מַה שֶּׁאֲנִי רוֹאֶה, אָמְרוּ לוֹ לַאו. אָמַר הוֹאִיל וַחֲמוֹר אֵינוֹ רוֹאֶה וְאַתֶּם אֵין אַתֶּם רוֹאִים (בראשית כב, ה): שְׁבוּ לָכֶם פֹּה עִם הַחֲמוֹר. וּמִנַּיִין שֶׁהָעֲבָדִים דּוֹמִין לִבְהֵמָה, מֵהָכָא, שְׁבוּ לָכֶם פֹּה עִם הַחֲמוֹר, עַם הַחֲמוֹר. רַבָּנָן מַיְתֵי לֵיהּ מֵהָכָא מִמַּתַּן תּוֹרָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כ, ט י): שֵׁשֶׁת יָמִים תַּעֲבֹד וְעָשִׂיתָ כָּל מְלַאכְתֶּךָ וגו' אַתָּה וּבִנְךָ וּבִתֶּךָ וְעַבְדְּךָ וַאֲמָתְךָ וּבְהֶמְתֶּךָ, אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק עָתִיד הַמָּקוֹם לִרָחֵק מִבְּעָלָיו, וּלְעוֹלָם, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (תהלים קלב, יד): זֹאת מְנוּחָתִי עֲדֵי עַד פֹּה אֵשֵׁב, לִכְשֶׁיָּבוֹא אוֹתוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב בּוֹ (זכריה ט, ט): עָנִי וְרֹכֵב עַל חֲמוֹר. (בראשית כב, ה): וַאֲנִי וְהַנַּעַר נֵלְכָה עַד כֹּה, אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי נֵלֵךְ וְנִרְאֶה מַה יִּהְיֶה בְּסוֹפוֹ שֶׁל כֹּה. (בראשית כב, ה): וְנִשְׁתַּחֲוֶה וְנָשׁוּבָה אֲלֵיכֶם, בִּשְֹּׂרוֹ שֶׁהוּא חוֹזֵר מֵהַר הַמּוֹרִיָה בְּשָׁלוֹם. אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק הַכֹּל בִּזְכוּת הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה, וְאַבְרָהָם לֹא חָזַר מֵהַר הַמּוֹרִיָּה בְּשָׁלוֹם אֶלָּא בִּזְכוּת הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה, וְנִשְׁתַּחֲוֶה וְנָשׁוּבָה אֲלֵיכֶם. יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא נִגְאֲלוּ אֶלָּא בִּזְכוּת הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות ד, לא): וַיַּאֲמֵן הָעָם וגו' וַיִקְדּוּ וַיִּשְׁתַּחֲווּ. הַתּוֹרָה לֹא נִתְּנָה אֶלָּא בִּזְכוּת הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כד, א): וְהִשְׁתַּחֲוִיתֶם מֵרָחֹק. חַנָּה לֹא נִפְקְדָה אֶלָּא בִּזְכוּת הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמואל א א, כח): וַיִּשְׁתַּחוּ שָׁם לַה': הַגָּלֻיּוֹת אֵינָן מִתְכַּנְסוֹת אֶלָּא בִּזְכוּת הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ישעיה כז, יג): וְהָיָה בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא יִתָּקַע בְּשׁוֹפָר גָּדוֹל וגו' וְהִשְׁתַּחֲווּ לַה' בְּהַר הַקֹּדֶשׁ בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם. בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ לֹא נִבְנָה אֶלָּא בִּזְכוּת הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהלים צט, ט): רוֹמְמוּ ה' אֱלֹהֵינוּ וְהִשְׁתַּחֲווּ לְהַר קָדְשׁוֹ. הַמֵּתִים אֵינָן חַיִּין אֶלָּא בִּזְכוּת הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהלים צה, ו): בֹּאוּ נִשְׁתַּחֲוֶה וְנִכְרָעָה נִבְרְכָה לִפְנֵי ה' עֹשֵׂנוּ. | 56.2. He then said to him [Itzchak]: ‘Itzchak, my son do you what I see?’ ‘Yes,’ he replied. He said to his two servants: ‘Do you see what I see?’ ‘No,’ they answered. ‘Since you do not see it, “stay here with the donkey,” (Gen. 22:5), he bade them, because you are like the donkey, it follows that slaves are like cattle. The Rabbis proved [it from this verse spoken at] the Revelation: Six days you shall labor, and do all your work … you, nor your daughter, nor your man-servant, nor your maid-servant, nor your cattle (Ex. 20:10). R. Itzchak said: This place shall one day be alienated from its Owner. For ever? [No], for it is stated, “This is My resting-place forever; here will I dwell for I have desired it” (Ps. 132:14) — when he comes of whom it is written, “Lowly, and riding upon a donkey” (Zech. 1:9). “And I and the lad will go just there” — Ad Koh. Said R. Joshua b. Levi: We will go and see what is to be the eventual outcome of Koh. “And we will worship, and we will come back to you.” He informed him [through these words] that he [Itzchak] would return safely from Mount Moriah. R. Itzchak said: Everything happened as a reward for worshipping. Abraham returned in peace from Mount Moriah only as a reward for worshipping. “And we will worship, and we will come back to you.” Israel were redeemed only as a reward for worshipping: “And the people believed … then they bowed their heads and worshipped” (Ex. 4:31). The Torah was given only as a reward for worshipping: “And worship y’all afar off” (Ex. 24:1). Hannah was remembered only as a reward for worshipping: “And they worshipped before the Lord” (I Sam. 1:19). The exiles will be reassembled only as a reward for worshipping: “And it shall come to pass in that day, that a great horn shall be blown; and they shall come that were lost … and that were dispersed … and they shall worship Ad-nai in the holy mountain at Jerusalem” (Isa. 27:13). The Temple was built only as a reward for worshipping: “Exalt y’all Ad-nai our God, and worship at His holy mountain” (Ps. 99:9). The dead will come to life again only as a reward for worshipping: “O come, let us worship and bend the knee; let us kneel before Ad-nai our Maker (Ps 95:6)." |
|
11. Anon., Leviticus Rabba, 20.2 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
| 20.2. דָּבָר אַחֵר, אַחֲרֵי מוֹת, רַבִּי לֵוִי פָּתַח (תהלים עה, ה): אָמַרְתִּי לַהוֹלְלִים אַל תָּהוֹלוּ, לַהוֹלְלִים, לִמְעַרְבְּבַיָּא, אֵלּוּ שֶׁלִּבָּם מָלֵא עֲלֵיהֶם חַלְחוֹלִיּוֹת רָעוֹת, רַבִּי לֵוִי הֲוָה צָוַח לְהוֹן אַלְלַיָיא, שֶׁמְבִיאִין אַלְלַי לָעוֹלָם. (תהלים עה, ה): וְלָרְשָׁעִים אַל תָּרִימוּ קָרֶן, אָמַר לָהֶם הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לָרְשָׁעִים, הַצַּדִּיקִים לֹא שָׂמְחוּ בְּעוֹלָמִי וְאַתֶּם מְבַקְּשִׁין לִשְׂמֹחַ. רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן מְנַסְיָא אָמַר תַּפּוּחַ עֲקֵבוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן הָיָה מַכְּהֶה גַּלְגַּל חַמָּה, קְלַסְתֵּר פָּנָיו עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה, וְאַל תִּתְמַהּ, בְּנֹהַג שֶׁבָּעוֹלָם אָדָם עוֹשֶׂה דִיסְקָרִי, אֶחָד לוֹ וְאֶחָד לְבֵיתוֹ, שֶׁל מִי עוֹשֶׂה נָאֶה לֹא אֶת שֶׁלּוֹ, כָּךְ אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן נִבְרָא לְתַשְׁמִישׁ שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא וְגַלְגַּל חַמָּה לְתַשְׁמִישָׁן שֶׁל בְּרִיּוֹת. אָמַר רַבִּי לֵוִי בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי חָמָא בַּר חֲנִינָא, שְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה חֻפּוֹת קָשַׁר לוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא בְּגַן עֵדֶן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (יחזקאל כח, יג): בְּעֵדֶן גַּן אֱלֹהִים הָיִיתָ כָּל אֶבֶן יְקָרָה מְסֻכָתֶךָ אֹדֶם פִּטְדָה וְיַהֲלֹם תַּרְשִׁישׁ שֹׁהַם וְיָשְׁפֵה סַפִּיר נֹפֶךְ וּבָרְקַת וְזָהָב מְלֶאכֶת תֻּפֶּיךָ וּנְקָבֶיךָ בָּךְ בְּיוֹם הִבָּרַאֲךָ כּוֹנָנוּ. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר חַד עֲשַׂר, וְרַבָּנָן אָמְרֵי עֲשַׂר, וְלָא פְּלִיגֵי מַאן דַעֲבַד לְהוֹן תְּלַת עֲשַׂר עָבֵיד כָּל אֶבֶן יְקָרָה מְסֻכָתֶךָ תְּלַת, מַאן דַּעֲבַד לְהוֹן חַד סַר, עֲבֵיד לְהוּ חָדָא, מַאן דַעֲבַד לְהוֹן עֲשָׂרָה לָא עֲבֵיד חַד מִנְהוֹן, וְאַחַר כָּל הַשֶּׁבַח הַזֶּה (בראשית ג, יט): כִּי עָפָר אַתָּה וְאֶל עָפָר תָּשׁוּב. אַבְרָהָם לֹא שָׂמַח בְּעוֹלָמִי וְאַתֶּם מְבַקְּשִׁים לִשְמֹחַ. נוֹלַד לוֹ בֵּן לְמֵאָה שָׁנָה וּבַסּוֹף אָמַר לוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא (בראשית כב, ב): קַח נָא אֶת בִּנְךָ, וְהָלַךְ אַבְרָהָם מַהֲלַךְ שְׁלשֶׁת יָמִים, לְאַחַר שְׁלשָׁה יָמִים רָאָה עָנָן קָשׁוּר עַל גַּב הָהָר, אָמַר לוֹ בְּנִי רוֹאֶה אַתָּה מַה שֶּׁאֲנִי רוֹאֶה, אָמַר לֵיהּ הֵן, מָה אַתָּה רוֹאֶה אָמַר לֵיהּ עָנָן קָשׁוּר עַל גַּב הָהָר אֲנִי רוֹאֶה, אָמַר לְיִשְׁמָעֵאל וְלֶאֱלִיעֶזֶר רוֹאִים אַתֶּם כְּלוּם, אָמְרוּ לֵיהּ לָאו, אָמַר לָהֶם הוֹאִיל וְאֵינְכֶם רוֹאִים כְּלוּם וַחֲמוֹר זֶה אֵינוֹ רוֹאֶה (בראשית כב, ה): שְׁבוּ לָכֶם פֹּה עִם הַחֲמוֹר, עַם הַדּוֹמִים לַחֲמוֹר. נָטַל אֶת יִצְחָק בְּנוֹ וְהֶעֱלָהוּ הָרִים וְהוֹרִידוֹ גְּבָעוֹת, הֶעֱלָהוּ עַל אֶחָד מִן הֶהָרִים וּבָנָה מִזְבֵּחַ וְסִדֵּר עֵצִים וְעָרַךְ מַעֲרָכָה וְנָטַל אֶת הַסַּכִּין לְשָׁחֲטוֹ, וְאִלּוּלֵי שֶׁקְּרָאוֹ מַלְאָךְ מִן הַשָּׁמַיִם כְּבָר הָיָה נִשְׁחָט. תֵּדַע שֶׁכֵּן, שֶׁחָזַר יִצְחָק אֵצֶל אִמּוֹ, וְאָמְרָה לוֹ אָן הָיִיתָ בְּרִי, אָמַר לָהּ נְטָלַנִּי אָבִי וְהֶעֱלַנִי הָרִים וְהוֹרִידַנִּי גְבָעוֹת וכו', אָמְרָה וַוי עַל בְּרִי דְרֵיוָתָא, אִלּוּלֵי הַמַּלְאָךְ כְּבָר הָיִיתָ שָׁחוּט, אָמַר לָהּ אִין. בְּאוֹתָהּ שָׁעָה צָוְחָה שִׁשָּׁה קוֹלוֹת כְּנֶגֶד שִׁשָּׁה תְּקִיעוֹת, אָמְרוּ לֹא הִסְפִּיקָה אֶת הַדָּבָר עַד שֶׁמֵּתָה, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (בראשית כג, ב): וַיָּבֹא אַבְרָהָם לִסְפֹּד לְשָׂרָה וְלִבְכֹּתָהּ, וּמֵהֵיכָן בָּא, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן רַבִּי סִימוֹן אָמַר מֵהַר הַמּוֹרִיָה בָּא, וְהָיָה אַבְרָהָם מְהַרְהֵר בְּלִבּוֹ וְאוֹמֵר שֶׁמָּא חַס וְשָׁלוֹם נִמְצָא בּוֹ פְּסוּל וְלֹא נִתְקַבֵּל קָרְבָּנוֹ, יָצְתָה בַּת קוֹל וְאוֹמֶרֶת לוֹ (קהלת ט, ז): לֵךְ אֱכֹל בְּשִׂמְחָה לַחְמֶךָ. יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא שָׂמְחוּ בְּעוֹלָמִי, שָׂמַח יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּעֹשָׂיו אֵינוֹ אוֹמֵר אֶלָּא (תהלים קמט, ב): יִשְׂמַח, עֲתִידִין הֵן לִשְׂמֹחַ בְּמַעֲשָׂיו שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לֶעָתִיד לָבוֹא. כִּבְיָכוֹל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לֹא שָׂמַח בְּעוֹלָמוֹ, שָׂמַח ה' בְּמַעֲשָׂיו אֵינוֹ אוֹמֵר, אֶלָּא (תהלים קד, לא): יִשְׂמַח, עָתִיד הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לִשְׂמֹחַ בְּמַעֲשֵׂיהֶם שֶׁל צַדִּיקִים לֶעָתִיד לָבוֹא. אֱלִישֶׁבַע בַּת עֲמִינָדָב לֹא שָׂמְחָה בָּעוֹלָם, שֶׁרָאֲתָה חֲמִשָּׁה כְּתָרִים בְּיוֹם אֶחָד, יְבָמָהּ מֶלֶךְ, אָחִיהָ נָשִׂיא, בַּעֲלָהּ כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל, שְׁנֵי בָּנֶיהָ שְׁנֵי סְגָנֵי כְּהֻנָּה, פִּנְחָס בֶּן בְּנָהּ מְשׁוּחַ מִלְחָמָה, כֵּיוָן שֶׁנִּכְנְסוּ בָּנֶיהָ לְהַקְרִיב וְנִשְׂרְפוּ, נֶהְפְּכָה שִׂמְחָתָהּ לְאֵבֶל, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב: אַחֲרֵי מוֹת שְׁנֵי בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן. | |
|
12. Anon., Sifre Deuteronomy, 41 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
|
13. Anon., Sifre Numbers, 115 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
|
14. Palestinian Talmud, Berachot, 2.8 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
|
15. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Batra, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 8a. אלו ת"ח ור"ל סבר לה כדדרש רבא (שיר השירים ח, י) אני חומה זו כנסת ישראל ושדי כמגדלות אלו בתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות,רב נחמן בר רב חסדא רמא כרגא ארבנן א"ל רב נחמן בר יצחק עברת אדאורייתא ואדנביאי ואדכתובי,אדאורייתא דכתיב (דברים לג, ג) אף חובב עמים כל קדושיו בידך אמר משה לפני הקב"ה רבונו של עולם אפילו בשעה שאתה מחבב עמים כל קדושיו יהיו בידך והם תכו לרגלך תני רב יוסף אלו תלמידי חכמים שמכתתים רגליהם מעיר לעיר וממדינה למדינה ללמוד תורה ישא מדברותיך לישא וליתן בדבורותיו של מקום,אדנביאי דכתיב (הושע ח, י) גם כי יתנו בגוים עתה אקבצם ויחלו מעט ממשא מלך ושרים אמר עולא פסוק זה בלשון ארמית נאמר אי תנו כולהו עתה אקבצם ואם מעט מהם יחלו ממשא מלך ושרים,אדכתובי דכתיב (עזרא ז, כד) מנדה בלו והלך לא שליט למרמא עליהם ואמר רב יהודה מנדה זו מנת המלך בלו זו כסף גולגלתא והלך זו ארנונא,רב פפא רמא כריא חדתא איתמי א"ל רב שישא בריה דרב אידי לרב פפא ודילמא לא מידויל אמר ליה מישקל שקילנא מנייהו אי מידויל מידויל ואי לא מהדרנא לה ניהלייהו,אמר רב יהודה הכל לאגלי גפא אפילו מיתמי אבל רבנן לא צריכי נטירותא הכל לכריא פתיא אפילו מרבנן ולא אמרן אלא דלא נפקי באכלוזא אבל נפקי באכלוזא רבנן לאו בני מיפק באכלוזא נינהו:,רבי פתח אוצרות בשני בצורת אמר יכנסו בעלי מקרא בעלי משנה בעלי גמרא בעלי הלכה בעלי הגדה אבל עמי הארץ אל יכנסו דחק רבי יונתן בן עמרם ונכנס אמר לו רבי פרנסני אמר לו בני קרית אמר לו לאו שנית אמר לו לאו אם כן במה אפרנסך [אמר לו] פרנסני ככלב וכעורב פרנסיה,בתר דנפק יתיב רבי וקא מצטער ואמר אוי לי שנתתי פתי לעם הארץ אמר לפניו ר' שמעון בר רבי שמא יונתן בן עמרם תלמידך הוא שאינו רוצה ליהנות מכבוד תורה מימיו בדקו ואשכח אמר רבי יכנסו הכל,רבי לטעמיה דאמר רבי אין פורענות בא לעולם אלא בשביל עמי הארץ כההוא דמי כלילא דשדו אטבריא אתו לקמיה דרבי ואמרו ליה ליתבו רבנן בהדן אמר להו לא אמרו ליה ערוקינן [אמר להו] ערוקו ערקו פלגיהון דליוה פלגא,אתו הנהו פלגא קמי דרבי א"ל ליתבו רבנן בהדן אמר להו לא ערוקינן ערוקו ערקו כולהו פש ההוא כובס שדיוה אכובס ערק כובס פקע כלילא א"ר ראיתם שאין פורענות בא לעולם אלא בשביל עמי הארץ:,וכמה יהא בעיר ויהא כאנשי העיר וכו': ורמינהי החמרת והגמלת העוברת ממקום למקום ולנה בתוכה והודחה עמהן הן בסקילה וממונן פלט,ואם נשתהו שם שלשים יום הן בסייף וממונן אבד,אמר רבא לא קשיא הא לבני מתא הא ליתובי מתא כדתניא המודר הנאה מאנשי העיר כל שנשתהא שם שנים עשר חדש אסור ליהנות ממנו פחות מכאן מותר מיושבי העיר כל שנשתהא שם שלשים יום אסור ליהנות ממנו פחות מכאן מותר ליהנות ממנו,ולכל מילי מי בעינן י"ב חדש והתניא שלשים יום לתמחוי שלשה חדשים לקופה ששה לכסות תשעה לקבורה שנים עשר לפסי העיר אמר ר' אסי אמר ר' יוחנן כי תנן נמי מתניתין שנים עשר חדש לפסי העיר תנן:,וא"ר אסי אמר ר' יוחנן הכל לפסי העיר ואפי' מיתמי אבל רבנן לא דרבנן לא צריכי נטירותא אמר רב פפא לשורא ולפרשאה ולטרזינא אפילו מיתמי אבל רבנן לא צריכי נטירותא כללא דמילתא כל מילתא דאית להו הנאה מיניה אפילו מיתמי,רבה רמא צדקה איתמי דבי בר מריון א"ל אביי והתני רב שמואל בר יהודה אין פוסקין צדקה על היתומים אפילו לפדיון שבוים אמר ליה אנא לאחשובינהו קא עבידנא,איפרא הורמיז אימיה דשבור מלכא שדרה ארנקא דדינרי לקמיה דרב יוסף אמרה ליהוי למצוה רבה יתיב רב יוסף וקא מעיין בה מאי מצוה רבה א"ל אביי מדתני רב שמואל בר יהודה אין פוסקין צדקה על היתומים אפילו לפדיון שבוים שמע מינה | 8a. bthese are Torah scholars,and towers do not require additional protection? The Gemara comments: bAnd Reish Lakish,who did not cite this verse, bholdsin accordance with the way that bRava expoundedthe verse: b“I am a wall”; thisis referring to bthe Congregation of Israel. “And my breasts are like towers”; these are the synagogues and study halls. /b,It is similarly related that bRav Naḥman bar Rav Ḥisdaonce bim-posedpayment of bthepoll btax [ ikarga /i]even bon the Sages. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said to him: You have transgressedthe words of bthe Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings. /b,You have transgressed the words of bthe Torah, as it is written: “Even when He loves the peoples, all His holy ones are in Your hand”(Deuteronomy 33:3), which is understood to mean that bMoses said to the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, even when You hold theother bnations dearand grant them dominion over Israel, let b“all His holy ones,”meaning the Torah scholars, bbeexclusively bin Your handand free from the authority of the nations, and therefore be exempt from pay-ing taxes. The continuation of that verse can also be understood as referring to Torah scholars, as it states: b“And they sit [ itukku /i] at Your feet,receiving Your words” (Deuteronomy 33:3), and bRav Yosef teaches: These are Torah scholars who pound [ imekhatetim /i] their feet from city to city and from country to country to study Torah; “receiving [ iyissa /i] Your words,” to discuss [ ilissa velitten /i] the utterances of God. /b,And you have transgressed the words of bthe Prophets, as it is written: “Though they have hired lovers [ iyitnu /i] among the nations, now I will gather them, and they will begin to be diminished by reason of the burden of kings and princes”(Hosea 8:10). With regard to this verse, bUlla says:Part of bthis verse is stated in the Aramaic language;the word iyitnushould be understood here in its Aramaic sense: To learn. And the verse should be interpreted as follows: bIf allof Israel blearnsTorah, bI will gather themalready bnow; and ifonly ba few of themlearn Torah, bthey will be excused from the burdenimposed bby kings and princes.This indicates that those who study Torah should not be subject to paying taxes.,And furthermore, you have transgressed the words of bthe Writings, as it is written: “It shall not be lawful to impose tribute, impost or toll upon them”(Ezra 7:24), i.e., upon the priests and Levites who serve in the Temple. This ihalakhawould apply to Torah scholars as well. bAnd Rav Yehuda says: “Tribute”; thisis referring to bthe king’s portion,a tax given to the king. b“Impost”; thisis referring to bthe head tax. “Toll”; thisis referring to ba tax [ iarnona /i]paid with property that was imposed from time to time.,It is related that bRav Pappaonce bimposeda tax for bthe digging of a newcistern even bon orphans. Rav Sheisha, son of Rav Idi, said to Rav Pappa: Perhapsthey will dig, but in the end bthey will not drawany bwaterfrom there, and it will turn out that the money will have been spent for nothing. The rest of the townspeople can relinquish their rights to their money, but orphans who are minors cannot do so. Rav Pappa bsaid to him: I shall collectmoney bfromthe orphans; bif they drawwater, btheywill bdrawwater, band if not, I will returnthe money btothe orphans., bRav Yehuda says: Allof the city’s residents must contribute btothe building and upkeep of bthe city gates [ ile’aglei gappa /i],and for this purpose money is collected beven from orphans. But the Sages do not require protectionand are therefore exempt from this payment. bAllof the city’s residents must contribute bto the digging of cisterns [ ilekarya patya /i],and for this purpose money is collected beven from the Sages,since they too need water. The Gemara comments: bAnd we saidthis bonly whenthe people are bnotrequired to bgo out en masse [ ibe’akhluza /i]and do the actual digging, but are obligated merely to contribute money for that purpose. bBut ifthe people are required to bgo out en masseand actually dig, bthe Sagesare bnotexpected to bgo outwith them ben masse,but rather they are exempt from such labor.,It is related that bRabbiYehuda HaNasi once bopenedhis bstorehousesto distribute food bduring years of drought. He said: Masters of Bible, masters of Mishna, masters of Talmud, masters of ihalakha /i, masters of iaggadamay enterand receive food from me, bbut ignoramuses should not enter. Rabbi Yonatan ben Amram,whom Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi did not know, bpushedhis way in, band entered,and bsaid to him: RabbiYehuda HaNasi, bsustain me.Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi bsaid to him: My son, have you readthe Bible? Rabbi Yonatan ben Amram bsaid to him,out of modesty: bNo.Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi continued: bHave you studiedMishna? Once again, Rabbi Yonatan ben Amram bsaid to him: No.Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi then asked him: bIf so, by whatmerit bshould I sustain you?Rabbi Yonatan ben Amram bsaid to him: Sustain me like a dog and like a raven,who are given food even though they have not learned anything. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi was moved by his words and bfed him. /b, bAfterRabbi Yonatan bleft, RabbiYehuda HaNasi bsat, and was distressed, and said: Woe is me, that I have given my bread to an ignoramus.His son, bRabbi Shimon bar RabbiYehuda HaNasi, bsaid to him: Perhaps he was your disciple Yonatan ben Amram, who never in his life wanted tomaterially bbenefit from the honorshown to the bTorah? They investigatedthe matter band foundthat such was the case. bRabbiYehuda HaNasi then bsaid: Let everyone enter,as there may also be others who hide the fact that they are true Torah scholars.,Commenting on Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s opinion, the Gemara notes that bRabbiYehuda HaNasi conformed bto hisstandard line of breasoning,as bRabbiYehuda HaNasi bsays: Suffering comes to the world only due to ignoramuses.This is blikethe incident of bthe crown tax [ ikelila /i] that was imposed onthe residents of the city of bTiberias.The heads of the city bcame before RabbiYehuda HaNasi band said to him: The Sages should contributealong bwith us.Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi bsaid to them: No,the Sages are exempt. bThey said to him:Then bwe will run awayand the entire burden will fall on the Torah scholars. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi bsaid to them: Run awayas you please. bHalfof the city’s residents bran away.The authorities then bwaived halfthe sum that they had initially imposed on the city., bThe halfof the population that remained in the city then bcame before RabbiYehuda HaNasi, and bsaid to him: The Sages should contributealong bwith us.Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi bsaid to them: No,the Sages are exempt. They said to him: Then bwetoo bwill run away.Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to them: bRun awayas you please. bThey all ran away,so that only bone launderer was leftin the city. The authorities bimposedthe entire tax bon the launderer. The laundererthen bran awayas well. bThe crown tax wasthen bcanceledin its entirety. bRabbiYehuda HaNasi bsaid: You seefrom this bthat suffering comes to the world only due to ignoramuses,for as soon as they all fled from the city, the crown tax was completely canceled.,§ The mishna teaches: bAnd how longmust one live bin the city to beconsidered blikeone of bthe people of the city?Twelve months. bAnd we raise a contradictionfrom what is taught in a ibaraita /i: In the case of ba donkey caravan or a camel caravan that was journeying from place to place, and it lodged insidean idolatrous city, band itsmembers bwere led astrayalong bwiththe other residents of the city, and they too engaged in idol worship, bthey,the members of the caravan, are liable to death bby stoninglike ordinary individual idolaters, band their property escapesdestruction, i.e., they are not treated like the residents of an idolatrous city, who are liable to death by the sword and whose property is destroyed.,The ibaraitacontinues: bAnd ifthe caravan members bhad remainedin that city for bthirty days, theyare liable to death bby the sword and their property is destroyed,just as it is for the rest of the residents of the city. This seems to indicate that once an individual has lived in a city for thirty days, he is already considered one of its residents., bRava said:This is bnot difficult. Thisperiod, i.e., twelve months, is required in order to be considered one of the bmembers of the city;and bthatperiod, i.e., thirty days, suffices in order to be considered one of the bresidents of the city. As it is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bOne who is prohibited by a vow from deriving benefit from the people of aparticular bcityis bprohibited from deriving benefit from anyone who has stayed therefor btwelve months,but it is permitted for him to derive benefit from anyone who has stayed there for blesstime bthan that.By contrast, if he prohibited himself by way of a vow from deriving benefit bfrom the residents of aparticular bcity,he is bprohibited from deriving benefit from anyone who has stayed therefor bthirty days,but bit is permitted for him to derive benefit fromanyone who has stayed there for blesstime bthan that. /b,The Gemara asks: bAnd do we requirethat one live in a city for btwelve months for all matters? But isn’t it taughtin a ibaraita /i: If one lives in city for bthirty days,he must contribute btothe bcharity platterfrom which food is distributed to the poor. If he lives there for bthree months,he must contribute btothe charity bbox.If he lives there for bsixmonths, he must contribute btothe bclothingfund. If he lives there for bninemonths, he must contribute btothe bburialfund. If he lives there for btwelvemonths, he must contribute btothe bcolumns of the city [ ilepassei ha’ir /i],i.e., for the construction of a security fence. bRabbi Asi saidthat bRabbi Yoḥa said: When we learned twelve months in the mishna, we learnedthat with regard to contributing btothe bcolumns of the city,money used for protecting and strengthening the city, but not for other matters., bAnd Rabbi Asi saysthat bRabbi Yoḥa says: Allare required to contribute btothe bcolumns of the city, andmoney is collected for that purpose beven from orphans. But the Sagesare bnotrequired to contribute, bsince the Sages do not need protection. Rav Pappa said:Money is collected beven from orphans for thecity bwall, for thecity bhorseman, and for the guard [ iuletarzina /i]of the city armory, bbut the Sages do not require protection. The principle of the matteris: Money is collected beven from orphansfor banything from which theyderive bbenefit. /b,It is reported that bRabba imposeda contribution to a certain bcharity on the orphans of the house of bar Maryon. Abaye said to him: But didn’t Rav Shmuel bar Yehuda teach: One does not impose a charityobligation bon orphans even forthe sake of bredeeming captives,since they are minors and are not obligated in the mitzvot? Rabba bsaid to him: I did this to elevate themin standing, i.e., so that people should honor them as generous benefactors; not in order that the poor should benefit.,Incidental to this story, the Gemara relates that bIfera Hurmiz, the mother of King Shapur,king of Persia, bsent a purse [ iarneka /i]full bof dinars to Rav Yosef. She saidto him: bLetthe money be used bfor a great mitzva. Rav Yosef sat and consideredthe question: bWhatdid Ifera Hurmiz mean when she attached a condition to the gift, saying that it should be used for ba great mitzva? Abaye said to him: From what Rav Shmuel bar Yehuda taught,that bone does not impose a charityobligation bon orphans even forthe sake of bredeeming captives, learn from this /b |
|
16. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Qamma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 49a. א"כ משהאשה יולדת משבחת אלא שמין את הולדות כמה הן יפין ונותן לבעל ואם אין לה בעל נותן ליורשיו,היתה שפחה ונשתחררה או גיורת פטור:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big טעמא דמתכוין לחבירו הא מתכוין לאשה משלם דמי ולדות לימא תיהוי תיובתא דרב אדא בר אהבה דאמר רב אדא בר אהבה שוורים שנתכוונו לאשה פטורים מדמי ולדות,אמר לך רב אדא בר אהבה הוא הדין דאפי' נתכוונו לאשה נמי פטורים מדמי ולדות והא דקתני שור שהיה מתכוין לחבירו איידי דקא בעי למיתנא סיפא אדם שהיה מתכוין לחבירו דהכי כתיב קרא קתני רישא נמי שור שהיה מתכוין לחבירו,אמר רב פפא שור שנגח את השפחה ויצאו ילדיה משלם דמי ולדות מאי טעמא חמרתא מעברתא בעלמא הוא דאזיק דאמר קרא (בראשית כב, ה) שבו לכם פה עם החמור עם הדומה לחמור:,כיצד משלם דמי ולדות: דמי ולדות שבח ולדות מיבעי ליה הכי נמי קאמר כיצד משלם דמי ולדות ושבח ולדות שמין את האשה כמה היא יפה עד שלא ילדה וכמה היא יפה משילדה:,אמר רשב"ג א"כ משהאשה יולדת משבחת: מאי קאמר אמר רבה ה"ק וכי אשה משבחת קודם שתלד יותר מלאחר שתלד והלא אשה משבחת לאחר שתלד יותר מקודם שתלד אלא שמין את הולדות ונותנין לבעל,תניא נמי הכי וכי אשה משבחת קודם שתלד יותר מלאחר שתלד והלא אשה משבחת לאחר שתלד יותר מקודם שתלד אלא שמין את הולדות ונותנין לבעל,רבא אמר הכי קתני וכי אשה למי שיולדת משבחת ואין לעצמה בשבח ולדות כלום אלא שמין את הולדות ונותנין לבעל ושבח ולדות חולקין,תניא נמי הכי אמר רשב"ג וכי אשה למי שיולדת משבחת ואין לעצמה בשבח ולדות כלום אלא שמין נזק בפני עצמו וצער בפני עצמו ושמין את הולדות ונותנין לבעל ושבח ולדות חולקין,קשיא דרשב"ג אדרשב"ג,ל"ק כאן במבכרת כאן בשאינה מבכרת,ורבנן דאמרי שבח ולדות נמי לבעל מאי טעמא כדתנן ממשמע שנאמר (שמות כא, כב) ויצאו ילדיה איני יודע שהיא הרה מה ת"ל הרה לומר לך שבח הריון לבעל,ורשב"ג האי הרה מאי דריש ביה מבעי ליה לכדתניא ר"א בן יעקב אומר לעולם אינו חייב עד שיכנה כנגד בית ההריון אמר רב פפא לא תימא כנגד בית הריון ממש אלא כל היכא דסליק ביה שיחמא לולד לאפוקי יד ורגל דלא:,היתה שפחה ונשתחררה או גיורת פטור: אמר רבה לא שנו אלא שחבל בה בחיי הגר ומת הגר דכיון דחבל בה בחיי הגר זכה בהו גר וכיון דמת הגר זכה בהו מן הגר אבל חבל בה לאחר מיתת הגר זכיא לה איהי בגוייהו ומיחייב לשלומי לה לדידה,א"ר חסדא מרי דיכי אטו ולדות צררי נינהו וזכיא בהו אלא איתיה לבעל זכה ליה רחמנא ליתיה לבעל לא,מיתיבי הכה את האשה ויצאו ילדיה נותן נזק וצער לאשה ודמי ולדות לבעל אין הבעל נותן ליורשיו אין האשה נותן ליורשיה היתה שפחה ונשתחררה או גיורת זכה,אמרי ומי עדיפא ממתניתין דאוקימנא שחבל בה בחיי הגר ומת הגר הכא נמי שחבל בה בחיי הגר ומת הגר ואיבעית אימא לאחר מיתת הגר | 49a. bIf so,the consequences would be absurd, as bwhen a woman gives birthher value bincreases. Rather,the court bappraises how much the offspring are worth, andthe one liable for the damage bgivesthat amount bto the husband. And if she does not have a husband,e.g., her husband died, he bgivesthe money bto his heirs. /b,If the pregt woman bwasa Canaanite bmaidservant andthen bshe was emancipated, or a convert,and she was married to an emancipated Canaanite slave or to a convert who died without any heirs, the one who caused the damage is bexemptfrom pay-ing compensation for miscarried offspring. This is because this payment is made specifically to the husband, not to the woman., strongGEMARA: /strong The first clause of the mishna indicates that bthe reasonthe owner is exempt from paying compensation for the offspring when an ox unintentionally gores a pregt woman is specifically bthat it was intending togore banotherox. By inference, if it bwas intending togore bthe woman,the owner bpays compensation formiscarried boffspring. Shall we saythat this bshould be a conclusive refutationof the opinion bof Rav Adda bar Ahava, as Rav Adda bar Ahava says:With regard to boxen that intended togore ba womanand then did so, the owners are bexemptfrom paying bcompensation formiscarried boffspring? /b,The Gemara answers that bRav Adda bar Ahavacould have bsaid to you: The same is true, that evenif the oxen bintended togore bthe woman,the owners are balso exempt frompaying bcompensation formiscarried boffspring.As for bthat which is taughtin the mishna: bAn ox that was intending togore banotherox, it bistaught this way bsince it wants to teach the latter clause: A person that was intending toinjure banotherperson, bas thiscase is bwrittenexplicitly in bthe verse:“And if men struggle and hurt a pregt woman and her offspring emerge” (Exodus 21:22). In the case in the verse, the assailant intended to injure another person but injured the woman instead. Therefore, the mishna balso teaches the first clausein that style: bAn ox that was intending togore banotherox., bRav Pappa says:In the case of ban ox that goreda Canaanite bmaidservant, and her offspring emergeddue to miscarriage, the owner bpays compensation formiscarried boffspring. What is the reason?The ox binjured a mere pregt donkey.With regard to the matter of compensation for offspring, who would be the property of the master were they to be born, a Canaanite slave is considered property of the master. bAsthe bverse statesthat Abraham addressed Eliezer, who was a Canaanite, by saying: b“You remain here with [ iim /i] the donkey”(Genesis 22:5), on which the Sages expound that he was alluding to the idea that Eliezer is of ba people [ iam /i] that is similar to a donkey.Therefore, the case of an ox goring a Canaanite maidservant is not included in the Torah’s exemption from paying compensation for miscarried offspring.,§ The mishna teaches: bHow does he pay compensation formiscarried boffspring?The court appraises how much the value of the woman increased due to the offspring. The Gemara asks: Would this be a correct interpretation of the term: bCompensation formiscarried boffspring?If this is how the sum is calculated, the mishna bshould havestated: How does he pay bthe increasein value due to bthe offspring?The Gemara answers: bThat is also whatthe itanna bis saying: How does he pay compensation formiscarried boffspring and the increasein value due to bthe offspring?In other words, apart from evaluating the compensation for the miscarried offspring, the court also bappraisesthe value bof the womanby calculating how much shewould be bworthif sold as a maidservantbefore giving birth, and how much shewould be bworth after giving birth. /b,he mishna teaches: bRabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: If so,the consequences would be absurd, as bwhen a woman gives birthher value bincreases.The Gemara asks: bWhat isRabban Shimon ben Gamliel bsaying? Rabba said: This iswhat he bis saying: But isthe monetary value of ba woman higher before she gives birth than after she gives birth? But isn’tthe opposite true, that the monetary value of ba womanis bhigher after giving birth than before giving birth,since the concern for her dying during childbirth, which lowers her monetary value prior to giving birth, is no longer a concern? bRather,the court bappraisesthe value of bthe fetuses and givesthat amount bto the husband. /b, bThisexplanation of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel’s statement bis also taughtin a ibaraita /i: bBut isthe monetary value of ba woman higher before she gives birth than after she gives birth? But isn’tthe opposite true, that the monetary value of ba womanis bhigher after giving birth than before giving birth? Rather,the court bappraisesthe value of bthe fetuses and givesthat amount bto the husband. /b, bRava said: This is whatRabban Shimon ben Gamliel bis teaching: But isthe value of bthe woman higheronly bfor the one for whom she gives birth,i.e., her husband, band she herself does not have any increasein value bat alldue to the boffspring?A pregt woman’s monetary value is increased on account of her pregcy, beyond the monetary value of the offspring. bRather,the court bappraisesthe value of bthe offspring and givesit bto the husband. Andin addition, bthehusband and wife bdivide the increasein her value due to the boffspring. /b, bThisexplanation of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel’s opinion bis also taughtin a ibaraita /i: bRabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: But isthe value of bthe woman higheronly bfor the one for whom she gives birth,i.e., her husband, band she herself does not have any increasein value bat alldue to the boffspring? Rather,the court bappraises damage by itself and pain by itself, and appraisesthe value of bthe offspring and givesit bto the husband, and thehusband and wife bdivide the increasein her value due to the boffspring. /b,The Gemara asks: The opinion bof Rabban Shimon ben Gamlielin the first ibaraita /i, that the woman’s value decreases because of pregcy, poses ba difficulty for that of Rabban Shimon ben Gamlielin the second ibaraita /i, that it increases.,The Gemara answers: This is bnot difficult,since each ibaraitais referring to a different case: bHere,the first ibaraita /i, which stated that the woman’s value increases after giving birth, is referring btoa woman bgiving birth toher bfirstborn.Her value decreases prior to birth out of concern that she might die in childbirth. bThere,the second ibaraita /i, which stated that her value increases due to pregcy, is referring btoa woman bwho is not giving birth toher bfirstborn. /b,The Gemara asks: bAnd what is the reasonof bthe Rabbisin the second ibaraita /i, bwho say: The increasein her value due to bthe offspringis balsogiven bto the husband?The Gemara answers: They derive it from a redundancy in a verse, bas we learnedin a ibaraita /i: The verse states: “And hurt a pregt woman and her offspring emerge” (Exodus 21:22). bFrom the fact that it is stated: “And her offspring emerge,” don’t I knowby inference bthat she was pregt?If so, bwhatis the meaning when bthe verse states: “A pregtwoman,” and not just “a woman”? bTo inform youthat even the bincreasein her value due to bthe pregcyis given bto the husband. /b,The Gemara asks: bAnd what ihalakha bdoes Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel expound on thisextra word b“pregt”?The Gemara answers: bHe requires it for that which is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bRabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov saysthat one who injures a woman bis never liableto pay compensation for miscarried offspring bunless he strikes her opposite the womb,i.e., on the abdomen. bRav Pappa said: Do not saythat it must be bliterally opposite the womb. Rather,he is liable if she was struck banywhere that the wound’simpact could breach the offspring,i.e., any part of the torso, bto excludea wound to her bhand or foot, for whichhe is bnotliable, since it could be argued that it was not the wound to the hand or foot that caused the miscarriage.,§ The mishna teaches: If the pregt woman bwas a maidservant andthen bshe was emancipated, or a convert,he is bexemptfrom the payment of damages for miscarried offspring. bRabba says: They taughtthis ihalakha bonlyin a case bwhere one injured her during the lifetime of the convert,i.e., her husband, band the convert diedbefore the payment was given. The reason for this is bthat sincethe assailant binjured her during the lifetime of the convert, the convert acquiresthe money, although it is still in the possession of the one liable for the damage. bAnd once the convert dieswithout heirs, the money is ownerless. Therefore, the assailant bacquires it from the convert.Since anyone can assume ownership of ownerless property, the assailant, who already possesses the money, becomes the owner. bBut if he injured her after the convert had died, she acquiresthe money, band he must pay the woman herself. /b, bRav Ḥisda saidin amazement: bMaster of this ruling! Is that to saythat compensation for the boffspring islike bbundlesof money, band she acquires themwhen her husband dies? Rabba seems to understand that the pregt woman assumes ownership of the offspring by virtue of being in possession of them when the husband dies, and therefore has the right to compensation for them. That is not the case. bRather,if bthe husband is present, the Merciful One grantscompensation for the offspring bto him,but if bthe husband is notalive, the Torah does bnotgrant compensation to anyone else.,The Gemara braises an objectionagainst the opinion of Rabba from the following: If the assailant bstruck the woman and her offspring emergeddue to miscarriage, bhe givescompensation for bdamage and pain to the woman and compensation formiscarried boffspring to the husband.If bthe husband is notalive, bhe givesthe compensation for the offspring bto his heirs.If bthe woman is notalive, bhe givesthe payment owed to her bto her heirs.If bshe was a maidservant andthen bshe was emancipated, or a convert,the assailant bacquiresthe money. This indicates that if the husband is no longer alive, the woman doesn’t receive anything.,The Sages bsaidin response to this: bBut isthe ibaraita bpreferable to the mishna, which we interpretedas a referring to case bwhere he injured her during the lifetime of the convert, and the convertthen bdied? Here also,it must be explained bthat he injured her during the lifetime of the convert, and the convertthen bdied. And if you wish, sayinstead that he injured her even bafter the death of the convert. /b |
|
17. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 34b. כהן גדול בסוף כל ברכה וברכה והמלך תחלת כל ברכה וברכה וסוף כל ברכה וברכה,אמר רבי יצחק בר נחמני לדידי מפרשא לי מיניה דריב"ל הדיוט כמו שאמרנו כהן גדול תחלת כל ברכה וברכה המלך כיון שכרע שוב אינו זוקף שנאמר (מלכים א ח, נד) ויהי ככלות שלמה להתפלל וגו' קם מלפני מזבח ה' מכרוע על ברכיו:,ת"ר קידה על אפים שנאמר (מלכים א א, לא) ותקד בת שבע אפים ארץ כריעה על ברכים שנאמר מכרוע על ברכיו השתחואה זו פשוט ידים ורגלים שנאמר (בראשית לז, י) הבא נבא אני ואמך ואחיך להשתחות לך ארצה,אמר רב חייא בריה דרב הונא חזינא להו לאביי ורבא דמצלו אצלויי,תני חדא הכורע בהודאה הרי זה משובח ותניא אידך הרי זה מגונה,לא קשיא הא בתחלה הא לבסוף,רבא כרע בהודאה תחלה וסוף אמרי ליה רבנן אמאי קא עביד מר הכי אמר להו חזינא לרב נחמן דכרע וחזינא ליה לרב ששת דקא עבד הכי,והתניא הכורע בהודאה הרי זה מגונה,ההיא בהודאה שבהלל,והתניא הכורע בהודאה ובהודאה של הלל הרי זה מגונה,כי תניא ההיא בהודאה דברכת המזון:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big המתפלל וטעה סימן רע לו ואם שליח צבור הוא סימן רע לשולחיו מפני ששלוחו של אדם כמותו אמרו עליו על ר' חנינא בן דוסא שהיה מתפלל על החולים ואומר זה חי וזה מת אמרו לו מנין אתה יודע אמר להם אם שגורה תפלתי בפי יודע אני שהוא מקובל ואם לאו יודע אני שהוא מטורף:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big אהייא,א"ר חייא אמר רב ספרא משום חד דבי רבי באבות,איכא דמתני לה אברייתא המתפלל צריך שיכוין את לבו בכולן ואם אינו יכול לכוין בכולן יכוין את לבו באחת,א"ר חייא אמר רב ספרא משום חד דבי רבי באבות,אמרו עליו על רבי חנינא וכו': מנא הני מילי א"ר יהושע בן לוי דאמר קרא (ישעיהו נז, יט) בורא ניב שפתים שלום שלום לרחוק ולקרוב אמר ה' ורפאתיו,א"ר חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן כל הנביאים כולן לא נתנבאו אלא למשיא בתו לתלמיד חכם ולעושה פרקמטיא לת"ח ולמהנה ת"ח מנכסיו אבל תלמידי חכמים עצמן (ישעיהו סד, ג) עין לא ראתה אלהים זולתך יעשה למחכה לו,ואמר רבי חייא בר אבא אמר רבי יוחנן כל הנביאים כולן לא נתנבאו אלא לימות המשיח אבל לעולם הבא עין לא ראתה אלהים זולתך,ופליגא דשמואל דאמר שמואל אין בין העוה"ז לימות המשיח אלא שעבוד מלכיות בלבד שנאמר (דברים טו, יא) כי לא יחדל אביון מקרב הארץ,וא"ר חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן כל הנביאים כולן לא נתנבאו אלא לבעלי תשובה אבל צדיקים גמורים עין לא ראתה אלהים זולתך,ופליגא דר' אבהו דא"ר אבהו מקום שבעלי תשובה עומדין צדיקים גמורים אינם עומדין שנאמר (ישעיהו נז, יט) שלום שלום לרחוק ולקרוב לרחוק ברישא והדר לקרוב,ורבי יוחנן אמר לך מאי רחוק שהיה רחוק מדבר עבירה מעיקרא ומאי קרוב שהיה קרוב לדבר עבירה ונתרחק ממנו השתא,מאי עין לא ראתה אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי זה יין המשומר בענביו מששת ימי בראשית רבי שמואל בר נחמני אמר זה עדן שלא שלטה בו עין כל בריה,שמא תאמר אדם הראשון היכן היה בגן,ושמא תאמר הוא גן הוא עדן תלמוד לומר (בראשית ב, י) ונהר יוצא מעדן להשקות את הגן גן לחוד ועדן לחוד:,ת"ר מעשה שחלה בנו של ר"ג שגר שני ת"ח אצל רבי חנינא בן דוסא לבקש עליו רחמים כיון שראה אותם עלה לעלייה ובקש עליו רחמים בירידתו אמר להם לכו שחלצתו חמה אמרו לו וכי נביא אתה אמר להן לא נביא אנכי ולא בן נביא אנכי אלא כך מקובלני אם שגורה תפלתי בפי יודע אני שהוא מקובל ואם לאו יודע אני שהוא מטורף ישבו וכתבו וכוונו אותה שעה וכשבאו אצל ר"ג אמר להן העבודה לא חסרתם ולא הותרתם אלא כך היה מעשה באותה שעה חלצתו חמה ושאל לנו מים לשתות,ושוב מעשה ברבי חנינא בן דוסא שהלך ללמוד תורה אצל ר' יוחנן בן זכאי וחלה בנו של ריב"ז אמר לו חנינא בני בקש עליו רחמים ויחיה הניח ראשו בין ברכיו ובקש עליו רחמים וחיה אמר רבי יוחנן בן זכאי אלמלי הטיח בן זכאי את ראשו בין ברכיו כל היום כולו לא היו משגיחים עליו אמרה לו אשתו וכי חנינא גדול ממך אמר לה לאו אלא הוא דומה כעבד לפני המלך ואני דומה כשר לפני המלך:,ואמר רבי חייא בר אבא אמר רבי יוחנן אל יתפלל אדם אלא בבית שיש שם חלונות שנאמר (דניאל ו, יא) וכוין פתיחן ליה בעליתיה (לקבל) [נגד],ירושלם אמר רב כהנא חציף עלי מאן דמצלי בבקתא,ואמר רב כהנא חציף עלי מאן דמפרש חטאיה שנאמר (תהלים לב, א) אשרי נשוי פשע כסוי חטאה:, br br big strongהדרן עלך אין עומדין /strong /big br br | |
|
18. Babylonian Talmud, Hulin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 92a. ברוך אופנים הוא דאמרי ליה ואיבעית אימא כיון דאתיהיב רשותא אתיהיב,(הושע יב, ה) וישר אל מלאך ויוכל בכה ויתחנן לו איני יודע מי נעשה שר למי כשהוא אומר (בראשית לב, כט) כי שרית עם אלהים הוי אומר יעקב נעשה שר למלאך,בכה ויתחנן לו איני יודע מי בכה למי כשהוא אומר ויאמר שלחני הוי אומר מלאך בכה ליעקב,כי שרית [עם אלהים ועם אנשים] אמר רבה רמז רמז לו שעתידים שני שרים לצאת ממנו ראש גולה שבבבל ונשיא שבארץ ישראל מכאן רמז לו גלות,(בראשית מ, י) ובגפן שלשה שריגים אמר רב חייא בר אבא אמר רב אלו ג' שרי גאים היוצאים מישראל בכל דור ודור פעמים ששנים כאן ואחד בארץ ישראל פעמים ששנים בארץ ישראל ואחד כאן יהיבו רבנן עינייהו ברבנא עוקבא ורבנא נחמיה בני ברתיה דרב,רבא אמר אלו שלשה שרי גוים שמלמדים זכות על ישראל בכל דור ודור,תניא רבי אליעזר אומר גפן זה העולם שלשה שריגים זה אברהם יצחק ויעקב והיא כפורחת עלתה נצה אלו האמהות הבשילו אשכלותיה ענבים אלו השבטים,אמר לו רבי יהושע וכי מראין לו לאדם מה שהיה והלא אין מראין לו לאדם אלא מה שעתיד להיות אלא גפן זה תורה שלשה שריגים אלו משה ואהרן ומרים והיא כפורחת עלתה נצה אלו סנהדרין הבשילו אשכלותיה ענבים אלו הצדיקים שבכל דור ודור,אמר ר"ג עדיין צריכין אנו למודעי דמוקים ליה כוליה בחד מקום רבי אלעזר המודעי אומר גפן זה ירושלים שלשה שריגים זה מקדש מלך וכהן גדול והיא כפורחת עלתה נצה אלו פרחי כהונה הבשילו אשכלותיה ענבים אלו נסכים,רבי יהושע בן לוי מוקים לה במתנות דאמר ר' יהושע בן לוי גפן זו תורה שלשה שריגים זה באר עמוד ענן ומן והיא כפורחת עלתה נצה אלו הבכורים הבשילו אשכלותיה ענבים אלו נסכים,רבי ירמיה בר אבא אמר גפן אלו ישראל וכן הוא אומר (תהלים פ, ט) גפן ממצרים תסיע שלשה שריגים אלו שלשה רגלים שישראל עולין בהן בכל שנה ושנה והיא כפורחת עלתה נצה הגיע זמנן של ישראל לפרות ולרבות וכן הוא אומר (שמות א, ז) ובני ישראל פרו וישרצו,עלתה נצה הגיע זמנן של ישראל ליגאל וכן הוא אומר (ישעיהו סג, ג) ויז נצחם על בגדי וכל מלבושי אגאלתי הבשילו אשכלותיה ענבים הגיע זמנה של מצרים לשתות כוס התרעלה,והיינו דאמר רבא שלשה כוסות האמורות במצרים למה אחד ששתה בימי משה ואחד ששתה בימי פרעה נכה ואחד שעתידה לשתות עם כל העובדי כוכבים,אמר ליה רבי אבא לרבי ירמיה בר אבא כי דריש להו רב להני קראי באגדתא כוותך דריש להו,אמר רבי שמעון בן לקיש אומה זו כגפן נמשלה זמורות שבה אלו בעלי בתים אשכולות שבה אלו תלמידי חכמים עלין שבה אלו עמי הארץ קנוקנות שבה אלו ריקנים שבישראל,והיינו דשלחו מתם ליבעי רחמים איתכליא על עליא דאילמלא עליא לא מתקיימין איתכליא,(הושע ג, ב) ואכרה לי בחמשה עשר כסף א"ר יוחנן משום ר' שמעון בן יהוצדק אין כירה אלא לשון מכירה שנאמר (בראשית נ, ה) בקברי אשר כריתי לי,בחמשה עשר זה ט"ו בניסן שבו נגאלו ישראל ממצרים כסף אלו צדיקים וכן הוא אומר (משלי ז, כ) צרור הכסף לקח בידו,חומר שעורים ולתך שעורים אלו מ"ה צדיקים שהעולם מתקיים בהם ואיני יודע אם שלשים כאן וט"ו בארץ ישראל ואם שלשים בארץ ישראל וט"ו כאן כשהוא אומר (זכריה יא, יג) ואקחה שלשים הכסף ואשליך אותו בית ה' אל היוצר הוי אומר שלשים בארץ ישראל וט"ו כאן,אמר אביי ורובייהו משתכחי בבי כנישתא דתותי אפתא והיינו דכתיב (זכריה יא, יב) ואומר אליהם אם טוב בעיניכם הבו שכרי ואם לא חדלו וישקלו את שכרי שלשים כסף,רבי יהודה אומר אלו שלשים צדיקי אומות העולם שאומות העולם מתקיימים עליהם עולא אמר אלו שלשים מצות שקבלו עליהם בני נח ואין מקיימין אלא שלשה אחת | 92a. The Gemara answers that it is the iofanimwho saythe verse: b“Blessed bethe glory of the Lord from His place,” as the next verse mentions “the noise of the iofanim /i” (Ezekiel 3:13), and Rav Ḥanina’s statement citing Rav was referring not to iofanimbut to ministering angels. bAnd if you wish, saythat bonce permission has been givento them to mention the name of God after three words when they say: “Holy, holy, holy,” permission is also bgivento them to mention the name of God again while praising Him even after fewer than three words.,The Gemara continues to discuss Jacob wrestling with the angel. The prophet states: b“So he strove [ ivayyasar /i] with an angel, and prevailed; he wept, and made supplication to him;at Beth El he would find him, and there he would speak with us” (Hosea 12:5). From this verse bI do not know who became master [ isar /i],i.e., was victorious, bover whom. Whenanother verse bstates:“And he said: Your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel; bfor you have striven with angelsand with men, and have prevailed” (Genesis 32:29), byou must saythat bJacob became master over the angel. /b,The verse in Hosea states: b“He wept, and made supplication to him.”From this verse bI do not know who cried to whom. Whenanother verse bstates: “And he said: Let me go,for the dawn has risen” (Genesis 32:27), byou must saythat bthe angel cried to Jacob. /b,The verse states: “And he said: Your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel; bfor you have striven with angels [ ielohim /i] and with men,and have prevailed” (Genesis 32:29). bRabba says:The angel bintimated toJacob bthat in the future two princes would emerge from him:They are the bExilarch who is in Babylonia and the iNasiwho is in Eretz Yisrael.And bfrom here healso bintimated toJacob that there would be ban exile. /b,Similarly, with regard to the dream of Pharaoh’s butler, the verse states: b“And in the vine were three branches [ isarigim /i];and as it was budding, its blossoms shot forth, and its clusters brought forth ripe grapes” (Genesis 40:10). bRav Ḥiyya bar Abba saysthat bRav says: Thesethree branches refer to the bthree proud princes [ isarei ge’im /i] who emerge from the Jewish people in each and every generation.There are btimeswhen btwo are herein Babylonia band one is in Eretz Yisrael,and there are btimeswhen btwo are in Eretz Yisrael and one is herein Babylonia. When this was stated in the study hall, bthe Sagespresent bturned their eyes toward Rabbana Ukva and Rabbana Neḥemya, the sons of the daughter of Rav,who were from the family of the Exilarch and were two leaders of the generation who resided in Babylonia., bRava saysa different explanation of the verse: bThesethree branches [ isarigim /i] bare the three ministeringangels appointed to oversee bthe gentiles [ isarei goyim /i], who plead in favor of the Jewish people in each and every generation. /b, bIt is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bRabbi Eliezer saysan alternate interpretation of the verse. b“Vine”; thisis a reference to bthe world. “Three branches”; thisis a reference to bAbraham, Isaac, and Jacob. “And as it was budding, its blossoms shot forth”; these are the matriarchs. “And its clusters brought forth ripe grapes”; these are thetwelve btribes,i.e., the twelve sons of Jacob., bRabbi Yehoshua said to him: But is a person shownin a dream bwhat wasin the past? bIsn’tit true that bone is shown only what will be in the future?Since the patriarchs, matriarchs, and sons of Jacob were all born prior to this dream, the dream was not alluding to them. bRather,the verse should be interpreted as follows: b“Vine”; thisis a reference to bthe Torah. “Three branches”; these are Moses, Aaron, and Miriam. “And as it was budding, its blossoms shot forth”; these are themembers of the bSanhedrin. “And its clusters brought forth ripe grapes”; these are the righteouspeople bwholive bin each and every generation. /b, bRabban Gamliel said:In order to understand this verse (Genesis 40:10) bwe still needthe explanation bofRabbi Elazar bHaModa’i, whois an expert in matters of iaggada /i, as he binterprets all ofthe phrases in the verse as referring to bone location. Rabbi Elazar HaModa’i says: “Vine”; thisis a reference to bJerusalem. “Three branches”; thisis a reference to the bTemple,the bking andthe bHigh Priest. “And as it was budding [ iporaḥat /i], its blossoms shot forth”; these are the young priests [ ipirḥei khehunna /i]. “And its clusters brought forth ripe grapes”; these are thewine blibations. /b, bRabbi Yehoshua ben Levi interprets it withreference to the bgiftsthat God gave the Jewish people, bas Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: “Vine”; thisis a reference to the bTorah. “Three branches”; thisis a reference to the miraculous items that accompanied the Jewish people in the wilderness and sustained and protected them: The bwell, the pillar of cloud, and the manna. “And as it was budding, its blossoms shot forth”; these are the first fruitsthat are brought to the Temple. b“And its clusters brought forth ripe grapes”; these arethe wine blibations. /b, bRabbi Yirmeya bar Abba says: “Vine”; thisis a reference to bthe Jewish people, and similarlyanother verse bstates: “You plucked up a vine out of Egypt;You drove out the nations and planted it” (Psalms 80:9). b“Three branches”; these are the threepilgrimage bFestivals, on which the Jewish people ascendto Jerusalem bevery year. “And as it was budding, its blossoms shot forth,”means that bthe time has arrived for the Jewish people to be fruitful and multiply, and similarlyanother verse bstates: “And the children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly,and multiplied, and became exceeding mighty; and the land was filled with them” (Exodus 1:7)., b“Its blossoms [ initzah /i] shot forth”means that bthe time has arrived for the Jewish people to be redeemed. And similarlyanother verse bstates: “And their eternity [ initzḥam /i] is dashed against My garments, and I have redeemed all My raiment”(Isaiah 63:3). b“And its clusters brought forth ripe grapes”means that bthe time has arrived for Egypt to drink the cup of fury,i.e., to receive its punishment., bAnd this is as Rava said: Whyare there bthree cups stated with regard to Egyptin the dream of Pharaoh’s butler (see Genesis 40:11)? They are an allusion to three cups of misfortune that would later befall Egypt: bOne thatEgypt bdrank in the days of Mosesduring the ten plagues and the Exodus; bone thatEgypt bdrank in the days of Pharaoh Nekho,the king of Egypt defeated by Nebuchadnezzar; band one thatEgypt bwill drink in the future with all theother bnations,when they are punished in the time of the Messiah., bRabbi Abba said to Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba: When Rav interpreted these verses homiletically he interpreted them according tothe way in which byouhave interpreted them, and not according to any of the other opinions cited above.,Similar to Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba’s interpretation of the word vine as an allusion to the Jewish people, bRabbi Shimon ben Lakish says: This nation is likened to a vine. The branches ofthe vine support the clusters of grapes, the leaves, and the tendrils; bthese arerepresented among the Jewish people by bthe homeowners,who provide ficial support for the entire nation. bThe clustersof grapes bonthe vine, bthese are the Torah scholars. The leaves onthe vine, which protect the grapes, bthese are the ignoramuses,who protect the Torah scholars. bThe tendrils ofthe vine, which do not directly serve the grapes themselves, bthese are the emptyones bof the Jewish people. /b, bAnd this isthe meaning of the instruction bthat they sent from there,i.e., from Eretz Yisrael: bLet the clustersof grapes bpray for the leaves, as were it not for the leaves, the clustersof grapes bwould not survive. /b,§ The Gemara cites homiletical interpretations of other verses that pertain to the leaders of the Jewish people in Eretz Yisrael and Babylonia. The verse states: b“So I bought her [ iva’ekkereha /i] to me for fifteen pieces of silver,and a iḥomerof barley, and a half- iḥomerof barley” (Hosea 3:2). bRabbi Yoḥa says in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak:The term ikira /i,which forms the basis of the verb iva’ekkereha /i, bis nothing other than languagereferring to ba sale [ imekhira /i], as it is statedthat Joseph said: “My father made me swear, saying: Lo, I die; bin my grave that I have acquired [ ikariti /i] for mein the land of Canaan, there shall you bury me” (Genesis 50:5).,Rabbi Yoḥa continues: b“For fifteenpieces of silver”; bthisis a reference to bthe fifteenth of Nisan,the date bon which the Jewish people were redeemed from Egypt. “Silver”; these are the righteouspeople. bAnd similarly,another verse bstates: “He has taken the bag of silver with him”(Proverbs 7:20), a reference to God taking the righteous away prior to the destruction of the First Temple (see iSanhedrin96b).,The verse states: b“A iḥomerof barley, and a half- iḥomerof barley.”A iḥomerequals thirty ise’a /i, and a half- iḥomerequals fifteen ise’a /i, totaling forty-five ise’a /i; bthese are the forty-five righteousindividuals bin whosemerit bthe worldcontinues to bexist. Andalthough the verse alludes to the fact that thirty of these righteous individuals are in one place and fifteen are elsewhere, bI do not know if thirty are herein Babylonia band fifteen are in Eretz Yisrael, or if thirty are in Eretz Yisrael and fifteen are herein Babylonia. bWhen it saysin a different verse: b“And I took the thirty pieces of silver and cast them into the treasury, in the house of the Lord”(Zechariah 11:13), byou must saythat bthirtyof the righteous individuals are bin Eretz Yisrael and fifteen are herein Babylonia., bAbaye said: And most of thefifteen righteous individuals in Babylonia bare found in the synagogue under the upper room. And this isthe meaning of that bwhich is written: “And I said to them: If it is good in your eyes, give me my hire; and if not, refrain. And they weighed for my hire thirty pieces of silver”(Zechariah 11:12)., bRabbi Yehuda says: These are the thirty righteousindividuals among the bnations of the world, in whosemerit bthe nations of the worldcontinue to bexist. Ulla says: These are the thirty mitzvot that the descendants of Noahinitially baccepted upon themselves; but they fulfill only threeof them. bOneof these three mitzvot i |
|
19. Babylonian Talmud, Ketuvot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 105b. אפילו צדיק גמור ולוקח שוחד אינו נפטר מן העולם בלא טירוף דעת,כי אתא רב דימי אמר דרש רב נחמן בר כהן מאי דכתיב (משלי כט, ד) מלך במשפט יעמיד ארץ ואיש תרומות יהרסנה אם דומה דיין למלך שאינו צריך לכלום יעמיד ארץ ואם דומה לכהן שמחזר על הגרנות יהרסנה,אמר רבה בר רב שילא האי דיינא דשאיל שאילתא פסול למידן דינא ולא אמרן אלא דלית ליה לאושולי אבל אית ליה לאושולי לית לן בה,איני והא רבא שאיל שאילתא מדבי בר מריון אע"ג דלא שיילי מיניה התם לאחשובינהו הוא דבעי,אמר רבא מאי טעמא דשוחדא כיון דקביל ליה שוחדא מיניה איקרבא ליה דעתיה לגביה והוי כגופיה ואין אדם רואה חובה לעצמו מאי שוחד שהוא חד א"ר פפא לא לידון איניש דינא למאן דרחים ליה ולא למאן דסני ליה דרחים ליה לא חזי ליה חובה דסני ליה לא חזי ליה זכותא,אמר אביי האי צורבא מרבנן דמרחמין ליה בני מתא לאו משום דמעלי טפי אלא משום דלא מוכח להו במילי דשמיא,אמר רבא מריש הוה אמינא הני בני מחוזא כולהו רחמו לי כיון דהואי דיינא אמינא מינייהו סנו לי ומינייהו רחמו לי כיון דחזאי דמאן דמיחייב ליה האידנא קא זכי למחר אמינא אם מרחם כולהו רחמו לי אי מסנו כולהו סנו לי,ת"ר (שמות כג, ח) ושוחד לא תקח אינו צריך לומר שוחד ממון אלא אפילו שוחד דברים נמי אסור מדלא כתיב בצע לא תקח היכי דמי שוחד דברים,כי הא דשמואל הוה עבר במברא אתא ההוא גברא יהיב ליה ידיה אמר ליה מאי עבידתיך אמר ליה דינא אית לי א"ל פסילנא לך לדינא,אמימר הוה יתיב וקא דאין דינא פרח גדפא ארישיה אתא ההוא גברא שקליה א"ל מאי עבידתיך א"ל דינא אית לי אמר ליה פסילנא לך לדינא מר עוקבא הוה שדי רוקא קמיה אתא ההוא גברא כסייה א"ל מאי עבידתיך א"ל דינא אית לי א"ל פסילנא לך לדינא,ר' ישמעאל בר' יוסי הוה רגיל אריסיה דהוה מייתי ליה כל מעלי שבתא כנתא דפירי יומא חד אייתי ליה בה' בשבתא א"ל מאי שנא האידנא א"ל דינא אית לי ואמינא אגב אורחי אייתי ליה למר לא קביל מיניה א"ל פסילנא לך לדינא,אותיב זוזא דרבנן וקדיינין ליה בהדי דקאזיל ואתי אמר אי בעי טעין הכי ואי בעי טעין הכי אמר תיפח נפשם של מקבלי שוחד ומה אני שלא נטלתי ואם נטלתי שלי נטלתי כך מקבלי שוחד על אחת כמה וכמה:,ר' ישמעאל בר אלישע אייתי ליה ההוא גברא ראשית הגז אמר ליה מהיכא את א"ל מדוך פלן ומהתם להכא לא הוה כהן למיתבא ליה א"ל דינא אית לי ואמינא אגב אורחאי אייתי ליה למר א"ל פסילנא לך לדינא לא קביל מיניה,אותיב ליה זוגא דרבנן וקדייני ליה בהדי דקאזיל ואתי אמר אי בעי טעין הכי ואי בעי טעין הכי אמר תיפח נפשם של מקבלי שוחד ומה אני שלא נטלתי ואם נטלתי שלי נטלתי כך מקבלי שוחד על אחת כמה וכמה:,רב ענן אייתי ליה ההוא גברא כנתא דגילדני דבי גילי א"ל מאי עבידתיך א"ל דינא אית לי לא קביל מיניה א"ל פסילנא לך לדינא,אמר ליה דינא דמר לא בעינא קבולי לקביל מר דלא למנען מר מאקרובי בכורים דתניא (מלכים ב ד, מב) ואיש בא מבעל שלישה ויבא לאיש האלהים לחם בכורים עשרים לחם שעורים וכרמל בצקלונו וכי אלישע אוכל בכורים הוה אלא לומר לך כל המביא דורון לתלמיד חכם כאילו מקריב בכורים,אמר ליה קבולי לא בעינן דאיקביל השתא דאמרת לי טעמא מקבילנא שדריה לקמיה דרב נחמן שלח ליה נידייניה מר להאי גברא דאנא ענן פסילנא ליה לדינא אמר מדשלח לי הכי שמע מינה קריביה הוא הוה קאים דינא דיתמי קמיה אמר | 105b. beven if he is completely righteous but he took a bribe, he will not leavethis bworld without becoming demented. /b, bWhen Rav Dimi camefrom Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, bhe saidthat bRav Naḥman bar Kohen interpreteda verse bhomileticallyas follows. bWhat isthe meaning of that bwhich is written: “The king by justice establishes the land, but he who exacts gifts [ iterumot /i] overthrows it”(Proverbs 29:4)? bIf a judge is like a king,in bthat he does not need anythingand is not dependent on anyone, bhe establishes the land,i.e., he can serve as a judge. bBut if he is like a priest, who seeks outhis iterumot bfromvarious bgranaries,as he is dependent on others, bhe overthrowsthe land.,§ bRabba bar Rav Sheila said: This judge who borrowsitems bfrom others is disqualified from rendering judgmentbecause it is as though he accepts a salary. bAnd we said this onlyin a case bwhere he does not havearticles bto lendout to others but is constantly borrowing without lending objects in turn. bHowever, if he hasitems bto lendout to others, bwe have noproblem bwith it. /b,The Gemara asks: bIs that so? But Ravawould bborrowitems bfrom the house of bar Maryon even though they would not borrow from him.The Gemara answers: bThere, he wanted to cause them tobe considered bmore importantin the community. Rava was very wealthy and did not need to borrow for his own benefit. On the contrary, by borrowing from the house of bar Maryon he raised their standing in the community., bRava said: What is the reason forthe prohibition against taking ba bribe? Oncea judge baccepts a bribe fromone party, bhis thoughts draw closer to him and he becomes like hisown bself, and a person does not find fault in himself.The Gemara notes that the term itself alludes to this idea: bWhat isthe meaning of ishoḥad /i,bribe? It can be read as: iShehu ḥad /i,as he is one, i.e., at one mind with the litigant. bRav Pappa said: A person should not judge a case involving one whom he loves, nor involving one whom he hates.He should not judge one bwhom he loves,as bhe will not find any fault in him,while with regard to one bwhom he hates, he will not find any merit in him. /b, bAbaye said:With regard to bthis Torah scholar who is beloved by the residentsof his town, bit is not because he is a superiorSage than others; brather,it is bbecause he does not reprove them in Heavenly matters.He is beloved because he is not strict with them with regard to the observance of mitzvot., bRava said: At first I would saythat ball these residents of Meḥoza love me;however, bonce I became a judge I saidthat bsome of them hate me and some of them love me,as I assumed that their feelings toward me depended on the success of their case. bWhen I saw that the one I declared guilty todaywould be bfound innocent the following day,I realized that my rulings do not determine their attitudes, and therefore bI said: Ifthey blove,then bthey all love me,and bifthey bhate,then bthey all hate me,regardless of what happens in the courtroom.,§ bThe Sages taught: “And you shall take no bribe”(Exodus 23:8). bIt is not necessary to saythat this includes bbriberyby means of bmoney; however, even verbal bribery,assisting by means of speech, bis also prohibited.The ihalakhathat a bribe is not necessarily monetary is derived bfromthe fact bthat it is not written: And you shall take no profit.The Gemara asks: bWhat are the circumstances of bribing with words? /b,The Gemara explains: This can be demonstrated bby thatepisode binvolving Shmuel, who wasonce bcrossinga river bona narrow bferry. A certain man camealong band gave him a handto help him out of the ferryboat. Shmuel bsaid to him: What are you doingin this place? The man bsaid to him: I have a caseto present before you for judgment. Shmuel bsaid to him: I am disqualified frompresiding over byour case,as you did me a favor. Although no money changed hands, a bond was formed between the pair.,The Gemara relates a similar story. bAmeimar was sitting and judging a casewhen ba feather floatedand landed bon his head. A certain man cameby and bremoved itfrom his head. Ameimar bsaid to him: What are you doinghere? bHe said to him: I have a caseto present before you. Ameimar bsaid to him: I am disqualified frompresiding over byour case,due to the favor you performed for me. The Gemara likewise relates: bThere was spittle lying before Mar Ukva. A certain man cameby and bcovered it. He said to him: What are you doinghere? bHe said to him: I have a caseto present before you. Mar Ukva bsaid to him: I am disqualified frompresiding over byour case. /b,The Gemara cites another incident. The bsharecropper of Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, was accustomed to bringing him a basket [ ikanta /i]full bof fruits every Shabbat eve. One day, he brought himthe basket bon a Thursday.Rabbi Yishmael bsaid to him: What is differentthat you came early bnow,this week? The sharecropper bsaid to him: I have a caseto present before you, band I saidto myself that balong my way I will bring to the Masterthe basket of fruits, as in any case I am coming on Thursday, the day the courts are in session. Rabbi Yishmael bdid not acceptthe basket of fruits bfrom him,and he bsaid to him: I am disqualified frompresiding over byour case. /b,Rabbi Yishmael bseated a pair of rabbinicscholars band they judgedthe sharecropper’s case. bAsRabbi Yishmael bwas coming and going, he saidto himself: bIf he wants, hecould bclaim this, and if he wants, he could claim that,i.e., he kept thinking of all the ways in which the litigant who brought him the fruits could win his case. bHe saidto himself: bBlast the souls of those who accept bribes. If I, who did not acceptanything, band if I had accepted, Iwould have baccepted my ownproperty, as it is my sharecropper and the fruits legally belong to me, am nevertheless in bthisstate of mind due to the proposed gift, ball the more soare bthose whoactually baccept bribesinevitably biased in favor of the one who bribed them.,The Gemara likewise relates with regard to bRabbi Yishmael bar Elisha,who was a priest, that ba certain manonce bbrought him the first shearing.Rabbi Yishmael bsaid to him: From where are you?The man bsaid to him:I am bfrom such and such a place.Rabbi Yishmael bsaid to him: And from there to here was there no priest towhom you could bgivethe first shearing? bHe said to him: I have a caseto present before you, band I saidto myself that balong my way I will bring to the Masterthe first shearing. Rabbi Yishmael bsaid to him: I am disqualified frompresiding over byour case,and he would bnot acceptthe first shearing bfrom him. /b,Rabbi Yishmael bar Elisha bseated a pair of rabbinicscholars band they judged hiscase. bAsRabbi Yishmael bwas coming and going, he saidto himself: bIf he wants, hecould bclaim this, and if he wants, he could claim that. He saidto himself: bBlast the souls of those who accept bribes. If I, who did not acceptanything, band if I had accepted, Iwould have baccepted my ownproperty, as I am a priest and am entitled to receive the first shearing, am nevertheless in bthisstate of mind, ball the more soare bthose who accept bribes. /b,The Gemara relates: There was ba certain manwho once bbrought to Rav A a basket of small fish [ igildanei devei gilei /i]. He said to him: What are you doinghere? The man bsaid to him: I have a caseto present before you. Rav A would bnot acceptthe basket bfrom him,and bhe said to him: I am disqualified frompresiding over byour case,due to your actions., bThe man said to him: I do not need the Master’s judgment.However, blet the Master accept my giftanyway, bso that the Master does not prevent me from presenting first fruits.What does the mitzva of first fruits have to with this situation? bAs it is taughtin a ibaraita /i: b“And there came a man came from Ba’al Shalisha, and he brought the man of God bread of the first fruits, twenty loaves of barley and fresh ears of corn in his sack”(II Kings 4:42). bBut did Elisha,the recipient of these gifts, beat first fruits?After all, he was not a priest. bRather,this verse comes bto tell you: Whoever brings a gift to a Torah scholar, it is as though he has presented first fruits.This visitor to Rav A wished to fulfill this mitzva.,Rav A bsaid to him: I do not want to take it from you,but bnow that you have explained to me the reasonthat you wish to give it to me bI will accept itfrom you. Rav A bsentthe man bto Rav Naḥman,and bhealso bsent hima letter: bLet the Master judge this man’scase bbecause I, A, am disqualified from judging hiscases. Rav Naḥman bsaidto himself: bFrom the fact that he sent me thisletter, I can bconclude from herethat the reason he is disqualified from judging the case is because bhe is his relative.At that time, ba case involving orphans wasbeing heard bbeforeRav Naḥman. bHe said: /b |
|
20. Babylonian Talmud, Menachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 44a. is bmore lowlythan a woman, and therefore it is appropriate to recite an additional blessing on not having been born a slave.,§ bThe Sages taught: This iḥilazon /i,which bisthe source of the sky-blue dye used in ritual fringes, has the following characteristics: bIts body resembles the sea, its form resemblesthat of ba fish, it emerges once in seventy years, and with its blood one dyeswool bsky-bluefor ritual fringes. It is scarce, and btherefore it is expensive. /b,It bis taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Natan says: There is no mitzva,however bminor, that is written in the Torah, for which there is no reward given in this world; and in the World-to-Come I do not know how muchreward is given. bGo and learn fromthe following incident concerning bthe mitzva of ritual fringes. /b,There was ban incident involving a certain man who was diligent about the mitzva of ritual fringes.This man bheard that there was a prostitute inone of bthe cities overseas who took four hundred gold coins as her payment. He sent her four hundred gold coins and fixed a time tomeet with bher. When his time came, he came and sat at the entranceto her house., bThe maidservant ofthat prostitute bentered and said to her: That man who sent you four hundred gold coins came and sat at the entrance. She said: Let him enter. He entered. She arranged seven beds for him, six of silver and one of gold. Between each and every oneof them there was ba laddermade bof silver, and the topbed was the one that was made bof gold. /b, bShe went up and sat naked on the topbed, band he too went upin order bto sit naked facing her.In the meantime, bhis four ritual fringes came and slapped him on his face. He dropped down and sat himself on the ground, and she also dropped down and sat on the ground. She said to him:I take an oath by the igappaof Rome that I will not allow youto go buntil you tell me what defect you saw in me. /b, bHe said to her:I take an oath by bthe Templeservice bthat I never saw a woman as beautiful as you. Butthere is bone mitzvathat bthe Lord, our God, commanded us, and its name is ritual fringes, and inthe passage where bitis commanded, bit is written twice: “I am the Lord your God”(Numbers 15:41). The doubling of this phrase indicates: bI am the one who will punishthose who transgress My mitzvot, band I am the one who will rewardthose who fulfill them. bNow,said the man, the four sets of ritual fringes bappeared to me asif they were bfour witnesseswho will testify against me., bShe said to him: I will not allow youto go buntil you tell me: What is your name, and what is the name of your city, and what is the name of your teacher, and what is the name of the study hall in which you studied Torah? He wrotethe information band placedit bin her hand. /b, bShe arose and divided all of her property,giving bone-thirdas a bribe bto the government, one-third to the poor, and she took one-thirdwith her bin her possession, in addition to those bedsof gold and silver., bShe came to the study hall of Rabbi Ḥiyyaand bsaid to him: My teacher, instructyour students bconcerning me andhave them bmake me a convert.Rabbi Ḥiyya bsaid to her: My daughter, perhaps you set your sights on one of the studentsand that is why you want to convert? bShe tookthe bnotethe student had given her bfrom her hand and gave it toRabbi Ḥiyya. bHe said to her: Go take possession of your purchase. /b, bThose beds that she had arranged for him in a prohibitedfashion, bshenow barranged for him in a permittedfashion. The Gemara completes its point about the reward of mitzvot and points out how this story illustrates the concept: bThis is the reward given to him in this world, andwith regard bto the World-to-Come, I do not know how muchreward he will be given.,§ bRav Yehuda says:In the case of ba borrowed cloak, forthe first bthirty days it is exempt from ritual fringes; from then onit is bobligated. /b,The Gemara notes: bThatdistinction bis also taughtin a ibaraita /i: In the case of bone who resides in a guesthouse [ ipundaki /i] in Eretz Yisrael, or one who rents a house outside of Eretz Yisrael, forthe first bthirty dayshe is bexempt from themitzva of imezuza /i; from then onhe is bobligated. But one who rents a house in Eretz Yisraelmust baffix a imezuzaimmediately, due tothe bsettlement of Eretz Yisrael. /b,§ The mishna teaches: Absence of the bphylacteries ofthe barm does not preventfulfillment of the mitzva of the phylacteries of the head, and absence of the phylacteries of the head does not prevent fulfillment of the mitzva of the phylacteries of the arm. bRav Ḥisda said: They taughtthis bonlyin a case bwhere one hasthe other phylacteries, but they are not with him or he is unable to wear them for some reason. bButif bhe does not havethe other phylacteries at all, then their absence bdoes preventthe fulfillment of the mitzva to don the phylacteries that he has.,Later on, the students bsaid to him:Do byoustill bsaythat? Rav Ḥisda bsaid to them: No, ratherI would say the opposite: Concerning bone who does not havethe ability to fulfill btwo mitzvot, should he also not performthe bone mitzvathat he does have the ability to fulfill? The Gemara asks: bAnd what did he hold initiallywhen he said not to don one of the phylacteries in the absence of the other? The Gemara answers: He held that it was due to a rabbinic bdecree, lest he be negligentand not try to acquire the phylacteries that he lacks., bRav Sheshet says: Anyone who does not don phylacteries violates eight positive mitzvot.This is referring to the mitzva to don phylacteries of the arm and head, each of which is mentioned in four different passages (Exodus 13:9; Exodus 13:16; Deuteronomy 6:8; Deuteronomy 11:18)., bAnd anyone who does not have ritual fringes on his garments violates five positive mitzvot.This is because the mitzva of ritual fringes is stated four times in the primary passage concerning ritual fringes in Numbers: “That they prepare for themselves strings…and they shall put on the fringe of the corner a sky-blue thread. And it shall be to you for a fringe that you may look upon it and remember all the commandments of the Lord” (Numbers 15:38–39). An additional command appears in the verse: “You shall prepare yourself twisted cords” (Deuteronomy 22:12)., bAnd any priest who does not ascend the platformto recite the Priestly Benediction bviolates three positive mitzvotexpressed in the verses: “So you shall bless the children of Israel; you shall say to them” (Numbers 6:23), and: “And they shall put My name upon the children of Israel” (Numbers 6:27)., bAnyone who does not have a imezuzain his doorway violates two positive mitzvot,stated in the verses: b“And you shall write themon the doorposts of your house” (Deuteronomy 6:9), and: b“And you shall write themon the doorposts of your house” (Deuteronomy 11:20)., bAnd Reish Lakish says: Anyone who dons phylacteries livesa blong life, as it is stated: /b |
|
21. Babylonian Talmud, Pesahim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 49a. big strongמתני׳ /strong /big ארבעה עשר שחל להיות בשבת מבערין את הכל מלפני השבת דברי ר"מ וחכמים אומרים בזמנו ר"א בר צדוק אומר תרומה מלפני השבת וחולין בזמנן:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big תניא ר"א בר צדוק אומר פעם אחת שבת אבא ביבנה וחל ארבעה עשר להיות בשבת ובא זונין ממונה של ר"ג ואמר הגיע עת לבער את החמץ והלכתי אחר אבא וביערנו את החמץ:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big ההולך לשחוט את פסחו ולמול את בנו ולאכול סעודת אירוסין בבית חמיו ונזכר שיש לו חמץ בתוך ביתו אם יכול לחזור ולבער ולחזור למצותו יחזור ויבער ואם לאו מבטלו בלבו,להציל מן הנכרים ומן הנהר ומן הלסטים ומן הדליקה ומן המפולת יבטל בלבו ולשבות שביתת הרשות יחזור מיד,וכן מי שיצא מירושלים ונזכר שיש בידו בשר קדש אם עבר צופים שורפו במקומו ואם לאו חוזר ושורפו לפני הבירה מעצי המערכה,ועד כמה הן חוזרין ר"מ אומר זה וזה בכביצה ר' יהודה אומר זה וזה בכזית וחכמים אומרים בשר קדש בכזית וחמץ בכביצה:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ורמינהו ההולך לאכול סעודת אירוסין בבית חמיו ולשבות שביתת הרשות יחזור מיד,א"ר יוחנן לא קשיא הא ר' יהודה הא רבי יוסי דתניא סעודת אירוסין רשות דברי ר' יהודה רבי יוסי אומר מצוה,והשתא דאמר רב חסדא מחלוקת בסעודה שניה אבל בסעודה ראשונה דברי הכל מצוה אפילו תימא הא והא ר' יהודה ולא קשיא הא בסעודה ראשונה הא בסעודה שניה,תניא אמר רבי יהודה אני לא שמעתי אלא סעודת אירוסין אבל לא סבלונות אמר לו ר' יוסי אני שמעתי סעודת אירוסין וסבלונות,תניא רבי שמעון אומר כל סעודה שאינה של מצוה אין תלמיד חכם רשאי להנות ממנה,כגון מאי א"ר יוחנן כגון בת כהן לישראל ובת תלמיד חכם לעם הארץ דא"ר יוחנן בת כהן לישראל אין זווגן עולה יפה,מאי היא אמר רב חסדא או אלמנה או גרושה או זרע אין לה במתניתא תנא קוברה או קוברתו או מביאתו לידי עניות,איני והא א"ר יוחנן הרוצה שיתעשר ידבק בזרעו של אהרן כל שכן שתורה וכהונה מעשרתן לא קשיא הא בת"ח הא בעם הארץ,ר' יהושע נסיב כהנתא חלש אמר לא ניחא ליה לאהרן דאדבק בזרעיה דהוי ליה חתנא כי אנא,רב אידי בר אבין נסיב כהנתא נפקו מיניה תרי בני סמיכי רב ששת בריה דרב אידי ור' יהושע בריה דרב אידי אמר ר"פ אי לא נסיבנא כהנתא לא איעתרי,אמר רב כהנא אי לא נסיבנא כהנתא לא גלאי אמרו ליה והא למקום תורה גלית לא גלאי כדגלי אינשי,אמר רבי יצחק כל הנהנה מסעודת הרשות לסוף גולה שנא' (עמוס ו, ד) ואוכלים כרים מצאן ועגלים מתוך מרבק וכתיב לכן עתה יגלו בראש גולים:,ת"ר כל ת"ח המרבה סעודתו בכל מקום סוף מחריב את ביתו ומאלמן את אשתו ומייתם את גוזליו ותלמודו משתכח ממנו ומחלוקות רבות באות עליו ודבריו אינם נשמעים ומחלל שם שמים ושם רבו ושם אביו וגורם שם רע לו ולבניו ולבני בניו עד סוף כל הדורות,מאי היא אמר אביי קרו ליה בר מחים תנורי רבא אמר בר מרקיד בי כובי רב פפא אמר בר מלחיך פינכי רב שמעיה אמר בר מך רבע:,ת"ר לעולם ימכור אדם כל מה שיש לו וישא בת ת"ח שאם מת או גולה מובטח לו שבניו ת"ח ואל ישא בת ע"ה שאם מת או גולה בניו ע"ה,ת"ר לעולם ימכור אדם כל מה שיש לו וישא בת ת"ח וישיא בתו לת"ח משל לענבי הגפן בענבי הגפן דבר נאה ומתקבל ולא ישא בת עם הארץ משל לענבי הגפן בענבי הסנה דבר כעור | 49a. strongMISHNA: /strong With regard to bthe fourteenthof Nisan bthat occurs on Shabbat, one removes allleaven from his possession, whether it is iterumaor non-sacred food, bbefore Shabbat,except for that which will be eaten during the first part of Shabbat. In that case, one cannot remove leaven from his possession on the fourteenth of Nisan itself as he does in other years. This is bthe statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say:One may remove the leaven bat itsusual btimeon the fourteenth of Nisan by throwing it away or declaring it ownerless. bRabbi Eliezer bar Tzadok says: iTeruma /ishould be removed bbefore Shabbat,as only a few people are permitted to eat it and therefore one can presume that it will remain uneaten during Shabbat. However, bnon-sacredfoods should be removed bat theirusual btime,on the fourteenth of Nisan itself., strongGEMARA: /strong bIt was taughtin the iToseftathat bRabbi Eliezer bar Tzadok says: One time my father,Rabbi Tzadok, bspent Shabbat in Yavne, and the fourteenthof Nisan boccurred onthat bShabbat. Zonin,who was bthe appointee of Rabban Gamliel, came and said: The time has come to remove leavened bread; and I went with my father and we removed the leavened bread.This story serves as anecdotal evidence that leaven is removed at the usual time on the fourteenth of Nisan, even on Shabbat., strongMISHNA: /strong bOne who is travelingon the eve of Passover bto slaughter his Paschal lamb, to circumcise his son, or to eat a betrothal feast in his father-in-law’s house, and he remembers that he has leavened bread in his house, if he is able to returnto his house band removethe leaven and afterward breturn to the mitzvatoward which he was traveling, bhe should returnhome band removehis leaven. bBut ifthere is not enough time for him to go home and remove the leaven, and still complete the mitzva that he already began, bhe should nullify it in his heart,as by Torah law this is sufficient.,If one was traveling bto saveJews from an attack by bgentiles, from aflooding briver, from bandits, from a fire, or from a collapsedbuilding, he should not even attempt to return, and instead bhe should nullifythe leaven bin his heart.This applies even if he could remove his leaven and still return to his previous activity. If he went bto establish his Shabbatresidence in order to adjust his Shabbat limit for an boptionalpurpose, rather than in order to fulfill a commandment, bhe should return immediatelyto remove his leaven., bAnd so too,the same ihalakhaapplies to bone who left Jerusalem and remembered that there was consecrated meat in his hand.Meat that is taken out of Jerusalem becomes disqualified, and one is required to burn it in proximity to the Temple. bIf he passedthe area of Mount bScopus[iTzofim /i],beyond which one cannot see Jerusalem, bhe burnsthe meat bat the sitewhere bheis located; band ifhe has bnottraveled that far, bhe must return and burn it before the Temple with wood from the arrangementon the altar, which was designated for burning consecrated items that were disqualified.,The mishna asks: For bhow muchleaven or consecrated meat is one required bto return? Rabbi Meir says:In both bthiscase band thatcase, one must return for ban egg-bulk. Rabbi Yehuda says:In both bthiscase band thatcase, one must return for ban olive-bulk. And the Rabbis saythat the amount depends on the case: With regard to bconsecrated meat,he is required to return if he has ban olive-bulk, butin a case where he remembers that he has bleavened bread,he required to return only bfor an egg-bulk. /b, strongGEMARA: /strong The Gemara braises a contradictionbetween this mishna and another source. It was taught in a ibaraita /i: bOne who is traveling to eat a betrothal feast in his father-in-law’s house or to establish his Shabbatresidence for an boptionalpurpose, bmust return immediatelyto remove his leaven. This contradicts the mishna, which states that one who is going to a betrothal feast may nullify the leaven without returning for it, because the meal is considered a mitzva., bRabbi Yoḥa said:This is bnot difficult,as there is a tannaitic dispute with regard to the issue. bThissource, the ibaraita /i, is in accordance with the opinion of bRabbi Yehuda,while bthatsource, the mishna, is in accordance with the opinion of bRabbi Yosei. As it was taughtin a ibaraita /i: bA betrothal feast is optional;this is bthe statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yosei says:It is a bmitzva. /b, bAnd now that Rav Ḥisda said: The disputebetween Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei applies to bthe secondbetrothal feast, where the groom takes part in an additional meal with the bride’s family, bbut everyone agrees that the firstbetrothal bfeast is a mitzva,the contradiction between the mishna and the ibaraitacan be resolved differently. bEven if you say that thismishna and bthat ibaraitaare both in accordance with the opinion of bRabbi Yehuda,it is bnot difficult. Thismishna, which relates to the meal as a mitzva, is referring to bthe first meal. That ibaraita /i, which assumes that the meal is not a mitzva, is referring to bthe second meal. /b, bIt was taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Yehuda said: I heard onlythat there is a mitzva with regard to a bbetrothal feastitself, bbut notwith regard to the feast of the bgifts [ isivlonot /i],when the groom would present gifts to the bride. While a festive meal was eaten on this occasion, it was not considered to be a mitzva. bRabbi Yosei said to him: I heardthat both ba betrothal feast andthe feast of the bgiftsare considered mitzvot.,Having discussed whether a betrothal feast is a mitzva, the Gemara addresses a related issue. bIt was taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Shimon says: A Torah scholar may notderive bbenefit frompartaking in bany feast that is not a mitzva. /b,The Gemara asks: bIn what casedoes this statement apply? bRabbi Yoḥa said: In a casewhere bthe daughter of a priestmarries ban Israelite,or where bthe daughter of a Torah scholarmarries ban ignoramus.Although a wedding feast is generally a mitzva, it is not in this case, bas Rabbi Yoḥa said:When bthe daughter of a priestmarries ban Israelite their union will not be auspicious,as it is disgraceful for the priesthood when the daughter of a priest marries an Israelite.,The Gemara asks: bWhat ismeant by bthisstatement that their union will be inauspicious? bRav Ḥisda said:The inauspicious nature of such a marriage can be identified based on the verse describing the return of a daughter of a priest to her father’s house after marrying a non-priest. The verse is understood as mentioning that the marriage will result in one of three possibilities: she will beither be a widow, a divorcee, or without children(see Leviticus 22:13). bIt was taught in a ibaraita /i:Either her husband bwill bury her or she will bury him,because one of them will die young, bor she will cause him to become poor. /b,The Gemara asks: bIs that so? Didn’t Rabbi Yoḥahimself bsay: One who wishes to become wealthy should cling to the descendants of Aaron,and ball the more soshould the merit of the bTorahand the bpriesthood cause them to become wealthy.The Gemara answers: This is bnot difficult,as bthiscase, where he becomes wealthy, brefers to a Torah scholarwho marries a woman of priestly lineage. In that case their union will be a successful one. bThatcase, where their union will not be auspicious, refers to ban ignoramuswho marries a woman of priestly lineage.,The Gemara relates that bRabbi Yehoshua married a daughter of a priestand bbecame ill. He said:Apparently, bit is not satisfactory to Aaronthe priest bthat I cling to his descendants, so that he has a son-in-law like me. /b,The Gemara also relates that bRav Idi bar Avin married a daughter of a priest. Two sonswho were bordainedto decide halakhic matters bcame from him,namely bRav Sheshet, son of Rav Idi, and Rabbi Yehoshua, son of Rav Idi.Similarly, bRav Pappa said: Had I not married a daughter of a priest, I would not have become wealthy. /b,On the other hand, bRav Kahana,who was not a priest, bsaid: Had I not married a daughter of a priest, I would not have been exiled,as Rav Kahana was forced to flee from Babylonia to Eretz Yisrael. bThey said to him: But you were exiled to a place of Torah,which is not a punishment at all. He answered: bI was not exiled as people aregenerally bexiled,i.e., I did not emigrate of my own free will; rather, I was forced to flee from the authorities., bRabbi Yitzḥak said: Anyone who benefits frompartaking in ban optional feast,which is not a mitzva, bwill ultimately be exiled, as it is stated: “And eat the lambs of the flock and the calves out of the midst of the stall”(Amos 6:4), band it is written: “Therefore now they shall go into exile at the head of the exiles;and the revelry of those who stretched themselves out shall pass away” (Amos 6:7).,The Gemara continues discussing a Torah scholar who benefits from optional feasts. bThe Sages taught: Any Torah scholar who feasts excessively everywheredegrades himself and brings suffering upon himself. He will bultimately destroy his house, widow his wife, orphan his chicks,i.e., his children, band his studies will be forgotten. Much dispute will come upon him, his words will not be heeded, and he will desecrate God’s name and the name of his master and the name of his father. And he will cause a bad name for himself, his children, and his descendants throughout future generations. /b,The Gemara asks: bWhat is thisbad reputation that he causes to himself and his descendants? bAbaye said:His son bis called the son[ibar/b] bof the one who heats ovens,since this person continually heated ovens in order to prepare food for feasts. bRava said:His son will be called bthe son of the one who dancesin binns [ ibei kuvei /i],as he seems to be invited to every feast to entertain the guests. bRav Pappa said:His son will be called bthe son of the one who licks bowls [ ipinkhei /i]. Rav Shemaya said:His son will be called bthe son of the one who foldshis garment band crouches,i.e., falls asleep drunk.,On the topic of proper marriage partners, the Gemara cites the following discussion. bThe Sages taught: One should alwaysbe willing to bsell all he hasin order to bmarry the daughter of a Torah scholar, as if he dies orif he bis exiledand he cannot raise his children, bhe can be assured that his sons will be Torah scholars,since their mother will ensure that they are well educated. bAnd one should not marry the daughter of an ignoramus, as if he dies or is exiled, his sons will be ignoramuses. /b,Furthermore, bthe Sages taught: One should alwaysbe willing to bsell all he hasin order to bmarry the daughter of a Torah scholar andin order to bmarry off his daughter to a Torah scholar.This type of marriage can be bcompared to grapes of a vinethat become intertwined bwith grapes of a vine, somethingwhich is bbeautiful and acceptableto God and man. bAnd one should not marry the daughter of an ignoramus.This type of marriage can be bcompared to grapes of a vinethat have become intertwined bwith berries of a bramble,which is bsomething unseemly /b |
|
22. Babylonian Talmud, Qiddushin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 68a. אפילו נדה נמי אלמה אמר אביי הכל מודים בבא על הנדה ועל הסוטה שאין הולד ממזר אמר חזקיה אמר קרא (ויקרא טו, כד) ותהי נדתה עליו אפילו בשעת נדתה תהא בה הויה,מכדי איכא לאקושה לנדה ואיכא לאקושה לאחות אשה מאי חזית דמקשת להו לאחות אשה אקשה לנדה קולא וחומרא לחומרא מקשינן,רב אחא בר יעקב אמר אתיא בק"ו מיבמה ומה יבמה שהיא בלאו לא תפסי בה קידושין חייבי מיתות וחייבי כריתות לא כל שכן אי הכי שאר חייבי לאוין נמי,אמר רב פפא חייבי לאוין בהדיא כתיב בהו (דברים כא, טו) כי תהיין לאיש שתי נשים האחת אהובה והאחת שנואה וכי יש שנואה לפני המקום ואהובה לפני המקום אלא אהובה אהובה בנישואיה שנואה שנוא' בנישואיה וקאמר רחמנא כי תהיין,ולר"ע דאמר אין קידושין תופסין בחייבי לאוין כי תהיין במאי מוקים באלמנה לכ"ג וכר' סימאי,דתניא רבי סימאי אומר מן הכל היה ר"ע עושה ממזר חוץ מאלמנה לכהן גדול שהרי אמרה תורה (ויקרא כא, ו) לא יחלל חילולים עושה ואין עושה ממזרות,ולר' ישבב דאמר בואו ונצווח על עקיבא בן יוסף שהיה אומר כל שאין לו ביאה בישראל הולד ממזר הניחא לר' ישבב אי לאפוקי מדר' סימאי קאתי שפיר,אלא אי טעמא דנפשיה קאמר ואפי' חייבי עשה במאי מוקים לה,בבעולה לכ"ג ומאי שנא משום דהוי ליה עשה שאין שוה בכל,ורבנן אדמוקי לה בחייבי לאוין נוקמא בחייבי עשה,הני חייבי עשה במאי נינהו אי שתיהן מצריות שתיהן שנואות אי אחת מצרית ואחת ישראלית שתי נשים מעם אחד בעינן אי בעולה לכהן גדול מי כתיב תהיין לכהן,ורבי עקיבא בעל כורחיך שבקיה לקרא דהוי דחיק ומוקי אנפשיה,וכל מי שאין לה עליו וכו' שפחה כנענית מנלן אמר רב הונא אמר קרא (בראשית כב, ה) שבו לכם פה עם החמור עם הדומה לחמור אשכחן דלא תפסי בה קדושי | 68a. then bevenif he betrothed ba menstruating woman as well,his betrothal should not be effective and the offspring should be a imamzer /i, as a menstruating woman is included in the list in that chapter of those with whom sexual intercourse is forbidden. If so, bwhydid bAbaye say: All concede with regard to one who engages in intercourse with a menstruating woman or with a isota /i,a woman forbidden to her husband on suspicion of being unfaithful to him, bthat the offspring is not a imamzer /i? Ḥizkiyya said:In the case of a menstruating woman, bthe verse states: “And her impurity be [ iut’hi /i] upon him”(Leviticus 15:24), from which it is derived that beven at the time of her impurity,the type of bbecoming [ ihavaya /i]stated with regard to betrothal (see Deuteronomy 24:2) bshouldapply bto her.The Gemara is interpreting the connection between the words iut’hiand ihavaya /i, as both share the same Hebrew root.,The Gemara asks: bAfter all, there isthe possibility bof juxtaposingall other forbidden relatives bto a menstruating woman, and there isalso the possibility bof juxtaposingthem bto a wife’s sister. What did you see that you juxtaposed them to a wife’s sister?Why not bjuxtapose theminstead bto a menstruating woman?The Gemara answers: When there is an option of juxtaposing a case in a manner that leads to ba leniency, orjuxtaposing it to a ihalakhathat entails ba stringency, we juxtaposeit in a fashion that leads bto a stringency. /b, bRav Aḥa bar Ya’akov saidthat there is a different source for the ihalakhathat betrothal is ineffective with forbidden relatives: This principle bis derived bymeans of ban ia fortiori /iinference bfromthe case of ba iyevama /i: Just as a iyevama /i,before she is released from the iyavamthrough iḥalitza /i, bisforbidden bbya mere bprohibition,which entails lashes, and yet bbetrothal is not effective with her,with regard to bthosepeople with whom sexual intercourse renders one bliable toreceive the bdeathpenalty bor liable tobe punished with ikaret /i,is it bnot all the more sothe case that betrothal should not be effective in these cases? The Gemara asks: bIf so,meaning that this is the source, one should balsoderive that betrothal is ineffective with any botherpeople with whom one bisonly bliablefor violating ba prohibitionof engaging in intercourse, by means of the same analogy.,Rav Pappa says: It bis written explicitlyin the Torah that a man can betroth women bwith whom he is liablefor violating ordinary bprohibitionsof intercourse. The Torah states in a different context: b“If a man has two wives, the one beloved and the one hated”(Deuteronomy 21:15). Rav Pappa asks rhetorically: bBut is there one who is hated before the Omnipresent and one who is beloved before the Omnipresent? Rather, “beloved”means bbeloved in her marriage,i.e., her marriage is permitted; b“hated”means bhated in her marriage,i.e., her marriage involves the violation of a prohibition. bAnddespite the fact that the latter marriage is between a man and a woman who are forbidden to one another, their union still has the status of a marriage, as bthe Merciful One states: “If a man hastwo wives,” i.e., he is married to both of them.,The Gemara asks: bAnd according tothe opinion of bRabbi Akiva, who says: Betrothal does not take effecteven bwiththose women with whom one bisonly bliablefor violating ba prohibitionof engaging in intercourse, bwith regard to whatcase bdoes he establishthe verse: b“If a man hastwo wives”? The Gemara answers: He explains that this verse is referring bto a widowmarried bto a High Priest, andthis is bin accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Simai. /b, bAs it is taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Simai says: From allrelationships that involve prohibitions, bRabbi Akiva would renderthe offspring ba imamzer /i, except forthe marriage of ba widow to a High Priest, as the Torah said: “And he shall not profane [ iyeḥallel /i]”(Leviticus 21:15), which teaches that bhe renders them profane [ iḥillulim /i],i.e., his children from this marriage are iḥalalim /i, bbut he does not renderthem labeled with imamzerstatus. /b,The Gemara asks: bAndwhat can be said baccording tothe opinion of bRabbi Yeshevav, who says: Come, let us shout at Akiva ben Yosef, who would say:In beverycase where ba Jew may not engage in intercoursewith a particular woman, and he does so, bthe offspringthat results from this union bis a imamzer /i,even the child of a widow and a High Priest? bThis works out welleven baccording tothe opinion of bRabbi Yeshevav if he comes to exclude the reason of Rabbi Simai,i.e., if he means to take issue with the ruling of Rabbi Akiva in the specific case mentioned by Rabbi Simai, that of a widow married to a High Priest, then Rabbi Yeshevav too concedes that according to the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, betrothal does take effect in a case where a positive mitzva is violated by the betrothal. Accordingly, one can establish the phrase “and the one hated” (Deuteronomy 21:15) as referring to those whose marriage entailed the violation of a positive mitzva., bBut ifhe states ba reasoning of his own,i.e., he states an independent statement critical of Rabbi Akiva’s ruling that the child of any illicit union is a imamzer /i, bandit is a categorical statement that applies to all illicit unions, beven those liablefor violating ba positive mitzva,i.e., Rabbi Akiva holds that even the offspring of this relationship is a imamzer /i, bwith regard to whatcase bdoes he interpretthe “hated” woman of the above verse?,The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yeshevav would say that the verse is referring bto a non-virginmarried bto a High Priest,as there is a positive mitzva that a High Priest should marry a virgin. The Gemara asks: bAndin bwhatway bisthis case bdifferent fromthe previous ones? If Rabbi Yeshevav holds that a child born of any act of intercourse prohibited by a positive mitzva is a imamzer /i, the marriage of a non-virgin to a High Priest likewise involves the violation of a positive mitzva. The Gemara answers: bBecause it is a positive mitzva that is not equally applicable to all,and since this command applies only to a High Priest and not to other Jews, its violation is considered less severe than that of other positive mitzvot.,The Gemara asks: bAndwith regard to bthe Rabbis,who disagree with Rabbi Akiva’s opinion, brather than establishingthe verse: “If a man has two wives, the one beloved and the one hated” (Deuteronomy 21:15), as referring btothose who are bliable forviolating bprohibitions, let them establish itas referring bto those liable forviolating ba positive mitzva.In other words, betrothal should not be effective if it involves the violation of a prohibition. And as for the “hated” woman whose marriage is nevertheless valid, mentioned in that verse, this is referring to one whose engaging in sexual intercourse violates a positive mitzva.,The Gemara responds: bThesecases where they are bliablefor violating ba positive mitzva, what are they? Ifyou say that bbothwives are bEgyptianconverts, bthey are both hated,as both marriages are prohibited. bIfyou claim that bone is an Egyptian woman and the other a Jewish womanof unflawed lineage, this cannot be the case, as bwe require “two wives” from the same nation,since the Torah equates the two women. bIfthe hated one is ba non-virginmarried bto a High Priest,this too is problematic, as, bis it written: If a priest hastwo wives? The verse merely says: “If a man has two wives.” Consequently, the verse cannot be interpreted as referring to those who are liable for violating a positive mitzva.,The Gemara asks: bButaccording to the opinion of bRabbi Akiva,that betrothal that involves a prohibition does not take effect, this verse can be referring only to a non-virgin who marries a High Priest, or marriage to a female Egyptian convert, which involve the violation of positive mitzvot. Can the verse really be interpreted as concerning such unlikely cases? The Gemara answers: bYou are forced to leave this verseaside, bas it establishes itself asdealing with ba difficultcase. In other words, as Rabbi Akiva claims that betrothal is ineffective if any prohibition is involved, he has no choice but to explain the verse that says: “If a man has two wives,” in this forced manner.,§ The mishna teaches: bAndin banycase bwherea woman bcannotjoin in betrothal bwith himor with others, the offspring is like her. This ruling refers specifically to a Canaanite maidservant or a gentile woman. The Gemara asks: bFrom where do wederive that betrothal with ba Canaanite maidservantis ineffective? bRav Huna says: The verse statesthat Abraham commanded his slaves: b“You abide here with [ iim /i] the donkey”(Genesis 22:5), which alludes to the fact that his slaves belong to ba nation [ iam /i] similar to a donkey;just as betrothal is ineffective with animals, it is likewise ineffective with Canaanite maidservants. The Gemara comments: bWe have found that betrothal is ineffective witha Canaanite maidservant; |
|
23. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 104b. א"ל אחד מהם לחבירו גמל שמהלכת לפנינו סומא באחת מעיניה וטעונה שתי נודות אחת של יין ואחת של שמן ושני בני אדם המנהיגים אותה אחד ישראל ואחד נכרי אמר להן [שבאי] עם קשה עורף מאין אתם יודעין,אמרו לו גמל מעשבים שלפניה מצד שרואה אוכלת מצד שאינה רואה אינה אוכלת וטעונה שתי נודות אחת של יין ואחת של שמן של יין מטפטף ושוקע ושל שמן מטפטף וצף ושני בני אדם המנהיגים אותה אחד נכרי ואחד ישראל נכרי נפנה לדרך וישראל נפנה לצדדין,רדף אחריהם ומצא כדבריהם בא ונשקן על ראשן והביאן לביתן ועשה להן סעודה גדולה והיה מרקד לפניהם ואמר ברוך שבחר בזרעו של אברהם ונתן להם מחכמתו ובכל מקום שהן הולכים נעשין שרים לאדוניהם ופטרן [והלכו] לבתיהם לשלום,(איכה א, ב) בכה תבכה בלילה שתי בכיות הללו למה אמר רבה אמר רבי יוחנן אחד על מקדש ראשון ואחד על מקדש שני בלילה על עסקי לילה שנאמר (במדבר יד, א) ותשא כל העדה ויתנו את קולם ויבכו העם בלילה ההוא,אמר רבה א"ר יוחנן אותו (היום) ליל ט' באב היה אמר להן הקב"ה לישראל אתם בכיתם בכיה של חנם ואני אקבע לכם בכיה לדורות,ד"א בלילה שכל הבוכה בלילה קולו נשמע ד"א בלילה שכל הבוכה בלילה כוכבים ומזלות בוכין עמו ד"א בלילה שכל הבוכה בלילה השומע קולו בוכה כנגדו מעשה באשה אחת שכנתו של רבן גמליאל שמת בנה והיתה בוכה עליו בלילה שמע רבן גמליאל קולה ובכה כנגדה עד שנשרו ריסי עיניו למחר הכירו בו תלמידיו והוציאוה משכונתו,(איכה א, ב) ודמעתה על לחיה אמר רבא אמר ר' יוחנן כאשה שבוכה על בעל נעוריה שנאמר (יואל א, ח) אלי כבתולה חגורת שק על בעל נעוריה (איכה א, ה) היו צריה לראש אמר רבא אמר רבי יוחנן כל המיצר לישראל נעשה ראש שנאמר (ישעיהו ח, כג) כי לא מועף לאשר מוצק לה כעת הראשון הקל ארצה זבולון וארצה נפתלי והאחרון הכביד דרך הים עבר הירדן גליל הגוים אמר רבא אמר ר' יוחנן כל המציק לישראל אינו עיף,(איכה א, יב) לא אליכם כל עוברי דרך אמר רבא אמר ר' יוחנן מכאן לקובלנא מן התורה כל עוברי דרך אמר רב עמרם אמר רב עשאוני כעוברי על דת דאילו בסדום כתיב (בראשית יט, כד) וה' המטיר על סדום ואילו בירושלים כתיב (איכה א, יג) ממרום שלח אש בעצמותי וירדנה וגו' וכתיב (איכה ד, ו) ויגדל עון בת עמי מחטאת סדום,וכי משוא פנים יש בדבר אמר רבא אמר ר' יוחנן מדה יתירה היתה בירושלים שלא היתה בסדום דאילו בסדום כתיב (יחזקאל טז, מט) הנה זה היה עון סדום אחותך גאון שבעת לחם ויד עני ואביון לא החזיקה וגו' ואילו בירושלים כתיב (איכה ד, י) ידי נשים רחמניות בשלו ילדיהן,(איכה א, טו) סלה כל אבירי ה' בקרבי כאדם שאומר לחברו נפסלה מטבע זו,(איכה ב, טז) פצו עליך פיהם אמר רבא אמר רבי יוחנן בשביל מה הקדים פ"א לעי"ן בשביל מרגלים שאמרו בפיהם מה שלא ראו בעיניהם,(תהלים יד, ד) אוכלי עמי אכלו לחם ה' לא קראו אמר רבא אמר ר' יוחנן כל האוכל מלחמן של ישראל טועם טעם לחם ושאינו אוכל מלחמן של ישראל אינו טועם טעם לחם ה' לא קראו רב אמר אלו הדיינין ושמואל אמר אלו מלמדי תינוקות,מי מנאן אמר רב אשי אנשי כנסת הגדולה מנאום אמר רב יהודה אמר רב בקשו עוד למנות אחד באה דמות דיוקנו של אביו ונשטחה לפניהם ולא השגיחו עליה באה אש מן השמים ולחכה אש בספסליהם ולא השגיחו עליה,יצאה בת קול ואמרה להם (משלי כב, כט) חזית איש מהיר במלאכתו לפני מלכים יתיצב בל יתיצב לפני חשוכים מי שהקדים ביתי לביתו ולא עוד אלא שביתי בנה בשבע שנים וביתו בנה בשלש עשרה שנה לפני מלכים יתיצב [בל יתיצב] לפני חשוכים ולא השגיח עליה יצאה בת קול ואמרה (איוב לד, לג) המעמך ישלמנה כי מאסת כי אתה תבחר ולא אני וגו',דורשי רשומות היו אומרים כולן באין לעולם הבא שנאמר (תהלים ס, ט) לי גלעד ולי מנשה ואפרים מעוז ראשי יהודה מחוקקי מואב סיר רחצי על אדום אשליך נעלי עלי פלשת התרועעי לי גלעד (ולי מנשה) זה אחאב שנפל ברמות גלעד מנשה כמשמעו אפרים מעוז ראשי זה ירבעם דקאתי מאפרים יהודה מחוקקי זה אחיתופל | 104b. bOne ofthe captives bsaid to the other:The bcamel that is walking ahead of us is blind in one of its eyes and ladenwith btwo wineskins, onefilled bwith wine and onefilled bwith oil. And two people are drivingthe camel, bone a Jew and one a gentile. The captor said to them: Stiff-necked people, from where do you knowthese matters that you cannot see?, bThey said to him:We know that the bcamelis blind bfrom the grass that is before it,as bfromthe grass on bthe side that it sees, it eats,and bfromthe grass on bthe side that it does not see, it does not eat,i.e., it eats grass from only one side. bAndwe know that bit is ladenwith btwo wineskins, onefilled bwith wine and onefilled bwith oil,as bwine drips and sinks intothe ground band oil drips and floatson the surface, and we see the difference on the ground. bAndwe know that btwo people are drivingthe camel, bone a Jew and one a gentile,as bthe gentile defecates on the road and the Jew,in the interests of modesty, goes bto the sidesof the road to bdefecate. /b,The captor bpursuedthe camel and its drivers to determine whether the statements of the captives were accurate, band foundthat the reality was bin accordance with their statements. He came andrespectfully bkissed them on their head, and brought them to their house and prepared a great feast for them. And he was dancing before them and said: Blessedis He bwho chose the descendants of Abraham and granted of His wisdom to them, and in every place that they go they become princes to their lords. And he released them and they went to their houses in peace. /b,§ The Gemara returns to its interpretation of verses in Lamentations: b“She cries [ ibakho tivke /i] at night”(Lamentations 1:2). bThese two cries,indicated by the use of a compound verb, bwhyare they written? bRabba saysthat bRabbi Yoḥa says: Oneis a cry boverthe destruction of bthe First Temple, and oneis a cry boverthe destruction of bthe Second Temple,which was destined to be destroyed. The term b“at night”indicates that the crying is bover matters of night, as it is statedwith regard to the response of the Jewish people to the report of the spies after their return from the land of Canaan: b“And all the congregation lifted up their voice, and the people cried that night”(Numbers 14:1)., bRabba saysthat bRabbi Yoḥa says: That daythat they heard the spies’ report bwas the evening of the Ninth of Av. The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to the Jewish people: You cried an unwarranted cry, andso bI will establish for youa reason to bcry for generations. /b, bAlternatively,the term b“at night”indicates bthatwith regard to banyone who cries at night, his voice is hearddue to the ambient silence. bAlternatively,the term b“at night”indicates bthatin the case of banyone who cries at night, the stars and the constellations cry with him. Alternatively,the term b“at night”indicates bthatin the case of banyone who cries at night, one who hears his voiceis touched by his suffering and bcries with him.There was ban incident involving one woman, the neighbor of Rabban Gamliel, whose son died, and she would cry over hisdeath bat night. Rabban Gamliel heard her voice and cried with her until his eyelashes fellout. bThe next day his students noticed that hehad been crying, band they removedthe woman bfrom his neighborhoodso that Rabban Gamliel could sleep.,With regard to the verse: b“And her tears are on her cheeks”(Lamentations 1:2), bRava saysthat bRabbi Yoḥa says:This is blike a woman who cries over the husband of her youth, as it is stated: “Lament like a virgin girded with sackcloth for the husband of her youth”(Joel 1:8). With regard to the verse: b“Her adversaries have become the head”(Lamentations 1:5), bRava saysthat bRabbi Yoḥa says:This indicates that banyone who torments the Jewish people becomes a leader, as it is stated: “For there is no weariness to him that is set against her; at the first He lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun, and the land of Naphtali and afterward He afflicted her more grievously by the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan and the Galilee of the nations”(Isaiah 8:23). bRava saysthat bRabbi Yoḥa says:From this verse one derives that banyone who harasses Israel does notgrow bweary. /b,With regard to the verse: b“It is nothing to you, all you who pass by”(Lamentations 1:12), bRava saysthat bRabbi Yoḥa says: From herethere is a source bfrom the Torah for complaint,i.e., it is appropriate for one to make his suffering public so that others will have compassion for him. With regard to the phrase b“all you who pass by,” Rav Amram saysthat bRav saysthat it is as though Jerusalem said: bThey have rendered me likea city of bthose who violate themost fundamental bpreceptsof law and morality, bas, with regard to Sodom, it is written: “Then the Lord rained upon Sodombrimstone and fire from the Lord out of Heaven” (Genesis 19:24), bwhile with regard to Jerusalem, it is written: “From above He has sent fire into my bones, and it prevailsagainst them” (Lamentations 1:13). In both cities, fire rained down from Heaven. bAnd it is written: “For the iniquity of the daughter of my people is greater than the sin of Sodom”(Lamentations 4:6).,The Gemara asks: bAnd is there partiality in the matter?Why was Jerusalem not overturned like Sodom? bRava saysthat bRabbi Yoḥa says:It is because there bwas an additional measureof suffering bin Jerusalem that was not in Sodom, as with regard to Sodom it is written: “Behold this was the iniquity of your sister Sodom; pride, surfeit of breadand careless ease was in her and in her daughters; band yet she did not strengthen the hand of the poor and needy”(Ezekiel 16:49). The people of Sodom were not subject to the afflictions of hunger and famine. bWhereas, with regard to Jerusalem it is written: “The hands of compassionate women cooked their own children”(Lamentations 4:10). The residents of Jerusalem were punished with great severity.,The verse: b“The Lord has spurned all my mighty men in the midst of me”(Lamentations 1:15), means bthatthis is blike a person who says to another: This coin was invalidated.The prominent residents of Jerusalem were crushed and discredited, and their reputations were irreversibly tainted.,With regard to the verse: b“They have opened their mouths against you”(Lamentations 2:16), bRava saysthat bRabbi Yoḥa says: For whatreason did the prophet bprecedethe verse beginning with the letter ipehtothe verse beginning with the letter iayin /iin several chapters of Lamentations? Since ipehmeans mouth and iayinmeans eye, it is bforthe bspies who said with their mouths [ ibefihem /i] what they did not see with their eyes [ ibe’eineihem /i]. /b,With regard to the verse: b“The eaters of My people ate bread, and they call not upon the Lord”(Psalms 14:4), bRava saysthat bRabbi Yoḥa says: Anygentile thief bwho eats the bread of the Jewish people tastes the flavor of bread, and one who does not eat from the bread of the Jewish people does not taste the flavor of bread.Apparently they enjoy only what they steal from the Jewish people. With regard to the people referred to in the phrase b“And they call not upon the Lord,” Rav says: These are the judgeswho are not God-fearing, band Shmuel says: These are schoolteacherswho do not perform their job in the name of God.,§ The Gemara resumes its discussion of the kings and commoners enumerated in the mishna who have no share in the World-to-Come. The Gemara asks: bWho enumerated them? Rav Ashi says: The members of the Great Assembly enumerated them. Rav Yehuda saysthat bRav says: They sought to enumerate one more,King Solomon, in the list of kings with no share in the World-to-Come. bThe image of the face of his father,King David, bcame and prostrated itself before them,pleading to omit Solomon from the list, band they paid it no heed. A fire came from Heaven and the fire scorched their benches [ isafseleihem /i], and they paid it no heed. /b, bA Divine Voice emerged and said tothe members of the Great Assembly: b“Do you see a man diligent in his business? He shall stand before kings; he shall stand not before obscure men”(Proverbs 22:29). See the greatness of Solomon, bwho precededconstruction of bMy House,the Temple, btothe construction of bhis house. Moreover, My House he builtquickly, binjust bseven years, and his house he constructed in thirteen years.Therefore, b“he shall stand before kings; he shall stand not before obscure men,”and it is inappropriate to enumerate him among the wicked. bAnd they paid it no heed. A Divine Voice emerged and said: “Shall His recompense be as you will it? For you loathe it, so that you must choose, and not I?Therefore, speak what you know” (Job 34:33). Only God, and not the people, determines who has a share in the World-to-Come.,The Gemara adds: bThose who interpret the Torah metaphorically would say: All ofthose enumerated who have no share ultimately benter the World-to-Come, as it is stated: “Gilead is Mine, and Manasseh is Mine, and Ephraim also is the strength of My head; Judah is My scepter; Moab is My washing pot; over Edom I will cast My shoe; Philistia, cry aloud because of Me”(Psalms 60:9–10, and see 108:9–10). b“Gilead is Mine and Manasseh is Mine”; thisis referring to bAhab, who fell in Ramoth Gilead. “Manasseh”, in its plain meaning,is referring to King Manasseh. b“Ephraim also is the strength of My head”; thisis referring to bJeroboam, who comesfrom the tribe of bEphraim. “Judah is My scepter”; thisis referring to bAhithophel, /b |
|
24. Babylonian Talmud, Yevamot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 61a. קברי עובדי כוכבים אינן מטמאין באהל שנא' (יחזקאל לד, לא) ואתן צאני צאן מרעיתי אדם אתם אתם קרויין אדם ואין העובדי כוכבים קרויין אדם,מיתיבי (במדבר לא, מ) ונפש אדם ששה עשר אלף משום בהמה,(יונה ד, יא) אשר יש בה הרבה משתים עשרה רבוא אדם אשר לא ידע בין ימינו לשמאלו (ובהמה רבה) משום בהמה,(במדבר לא, יט) כל הורג נפש וכל נוגע בחלל תתחטאו דלמא איקטיל חד מישראל ורבנן לא נפקד ממנו איש ור' שמעון בן יוחי לא נפקד ממנו איש לעבירה,רבינא אמר נהי דמעטינהו קרא מאטמויי באהל דכתיב (במדבר יט, יד) אדם כי ימות באהל ממגע ומשא מי מעטינהו קרא:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big אירס את האלמנה ונתמנה להיות כהן גדול יכנוס ומעשה ביהושע בן גמלא שקדש את מרתא בת ביתוס ומנהו המלך להיות כה"ג וכנסה שומרת יבם שנפלה לפני כהן הדיוט ונתמנה להיות כה"ג אע"פ שעשה בה מאמר הרי זה לא יכנוס:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ת"ר מנין שאם אירס את האלמנה ונתמנה להיות כהן גדול שיכנוס ת"ל (ויקרא כא, יד) יקח אשה א"ה שומרת יבם נמי אשה ולא יבמה:,מעשה ביהושע וכו': מנהו אין נתמנה לא אמר רב יוסף קטיר קחזינא הכא דאמר רב אסי תרקבא דדינרי עיילה ליה מרתא בת ביתוס לינאי מלכא עד דמוקי ליה ליהושע בן גמלא בכהני רברבי:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big כהן גדול שמת אחיו חולץ ולא מייבם:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big קא פסיק ותני לא שנא מן האירוסין ולא שנא מן הנשואין בשלמא מן הנשואין עשה ולא תעשה הוא ואין עשה דוחה ל"ת ועשה אלא מן האירוסין יבא עשה וידחה את לא תעשה,גזירה ביאה ראשונה אטו ביאה שניה:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big כהן הדיוט לא ישא אילונית אלא א"כ יש לו אשה ובנים רבי יהודה אומר אע"פ שיש לו אשה ובנים לא ישא אילונית שהיא זונה האמורה בתורה וחכמים אומרים אין זונה אלא גיורת ומשוחררת ושנבעלה בעילת זנות:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big א"ל ריש גלותא לרב הונא מ"ט משום פריה ורביה אפריה ורביה כהנים הוא דמפקדי וישראל לא מפקדי אמר ליה משום דקא בעי למיתני סיפא רבי יהודה אומר אע"פ שיש לו אשה | 61a. bThe graves of gentiles do not renderitems bimpure though a tent, as it is stated: “And you My sheep, the sheep of My pasture, are men [ iadam /i]”(Ezekiel 34:31), from which it is derived that byou,the Jewish people, bare called men [ iadam /i] but gentiles are not called men [ iadam /i].Since the Torah introduces the ihalakhaof ritual impurity of a tent with the words: “When a man [ iadam /i] dies in a tent” (Numbers 19:14), this ihalakhaapplies only to corpses of Jews but not those of gentiles.,The Gemara braises an objectionbased upon the verse with regard to captives taken during the war against Midian: b“And the persons [ inefesh adam /i] were sixteen thousand”(Numbers 31:40), which indicates that gentiles are also referred to as iadam /i. The Gemara answers: They are given this title bdue tothe need to distinguish the people taken captive from the banimalsthat were taken as spoils of war.,The Gemara raises another difficulty based upon a verse with regard to the city of Nineveh: b“Wherein are more than one hundred and twenty thousand men [ iadam /i] that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand, and also much cattle”(Jonah 4:11). The Gemara answers: There, too, the gentiles are given this title bdue tothe need to distinguish them from the banimalsmentioned in the verse.,The Gemara continues to question Rabbi Shimon’s ruling based upon a verse pertaining to the war against Midian: b“Whoever has killed anyone, and whoever has touched any slain, purify yourselves”(Numbers 31:19). This indicates that gentile corpses convey ritual impurity. The Gemara answers: bPerhaps a Jew was killed,and the concern was for impurity caused by his corpse. bAnd the Rabbisreply that the verse attests: b“Not one man of us is missing”(Numbers 31:49). No Jewish soldiers fell in battle, and therefore the concern for impurity must have been due to the corpses of gentiles. bAnd Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥairesponds: The intent of that verse is that bnot one man of us is missingdue to btransgression,i.e., none of them sinned., bRavina saidthat the explanation above is unnecessary: bGranted, the verse excludedgentiles bfrom renderingitems bimpure through a tent, as it is written: “When a man [ iadam /i] dies in a tent”(Numbers 19:14); but bdid the verse exclude them fromrendering items impure via btouching and carrying?Since gentile corpses convey impurity in these ways, they could have rendered impure the Jews involved in the war with Midian, even according to Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai., strongMISHNA: /strong If a priest bbetrothed a widow and wassubsequently bappointed to be High Priest, he may marryher. bAndthere was ban incident with Yehoshua ben Gamla, who betrothed Marta bat Baitos,a widow, band the kingsubsequently bappointed him to be High Priest, andhe nevertheless bmarried her.Conversely, in the case of ba widow waiting for her iyavamwho happened before a common priest,i.e., the priest was her iyavam /i, band he wassubsequently bappointed to be High Priest,then beven if hehad already bperformed levirate betrothal with her, he may not marry her,because she is a widow., strongGEMARA: /strong bThe Sages taught: From whereis it derived bthat ifa priest bbetrothed a widow and wassubsequently bappointed to be High Priest, that he may marryher? bThe verse states: “Shall he take for a wife”(Leviticus 21:14), an inclusive phrase that indicates that he may marry her in this situation despite the general prohibition for a High Priest to marry a widow. The Gemara asks: bIf so, a widow waiting for her iyavam /ishould balsobe permitted to a High Priest. The Gemara answers: The word b“wife”indicates that this does bnotinclude ba iyevama /i,who was not initially his wife but his brother’s.,The mishna related ban incident with Yehoshuaben Gamla. The Gemara notes that the mishna states that the king bappointed him, yes,but bnotthat he bwasworthy of being bappointed. Rav Yosef said: I see a conspiracy here,as this was clearly not a proper appointment by the priests and the Sanhedrin but rather a political appointment, bas Rav Asi said: Marta bat Baitos broughta vessel the size of ba half- ise’a[ itarkav /i]full bof dinars to King Yannai until he appointed Yehoshua ben Gamla High Priest. /b, strongMISHNA: /strong bA High Priest whose brother diedwithout children bperforms iḥalitzaand he does not perform levirate marriage,as he may not marry a widow., strongGEMARA: /strong The Gemara comments: The mishna bteachesthis ihalakha bcategorically,indicating that bit is no differentif she is his brother’s widow bfrom betrothal, and it is no differentif she is his widow bfrom marriage.The Gemara analyzes this ihalakha /i: bGranted,she is forbidden to him if she was widowed bfrom marriage, as,if he were to marry her, bitwould be a violation of both the bpositive mitzvathat the High Priest marry a virgin bandthe bprohibitionfor him to marry a widow. bAnd a positive mitzva,i.e., levirate marriage, bdoes not override a prohibition and a positivemitzva together. bHowever,if she was a widow bfrom betrothaland is therefore still a virgin, bthe positive mitzvaof levirate marriage bshould come and override the prohibitionfor a High Priest to marry a widow.,The Gemara answers: By Torah law, levirate marriage is permitted in this case. However, there is a rabbinic bdecreeprohibiting their bfirstact of bintercourse due totheir bsecondact of bintercourse.After they have engaged in intercourse once, they have fulfilled the mitzva of levirate marriage, and any subsequent act of intercourse would constitute a violation of the prohibition without the fulfillment of a mitzva., strongMISHNA: /strong bA common priest may not marry a sexually underdeveloped woman [ iaylonit /i],who is incapable of bearing children, bunless healready bhas a wife and children. Rabbi Yehuda says: Evenif bhe has a wife and children, he may not marry a sexually underdeveloped woman, as she is the izona /iabout whom it is bstated in the Torahthat a priest may not marry her. Intercourse with her is considered a licentious act because she is incapable of bearing children. bAnd the Rabbis say: The onlywomen in the category of izona /i,who are therefore forbidden to a priest, are ba female convert, a freedmaidservant, bandany woman bwho engaged in licentious sexual intercoursewith a man she is prohibited from marrying., strongGEMARA: /strong bThe Exilarch said to Rav Huna: What is the reasonfor the ihalakhathat a priest may not marry a sexually underdeveloped woman? It is bbecausehe is obligated to fulfill the mitzva to bbe fruitful and multiply. Is itonly bpriests who were commanded to be fruitful and multiply, but Israelites were not commanded?Why does the mishna specify that a priest may not marry a sexually underdeveloped woman? Rav Huna bsaid to him:This ihalakhadoes in fact apply even to Israelites, and the itannamentions priests bbecause he wants to teachit in a way that would parallel bthe latter clauseof the mishna, which states that bRabbi Yehuda says: Evenif bhe has a wife /b |
|
25. Anon., Avot Derabbi Nathan A, 12 (6th cent. CE - 8th cent. CE)
|
26. Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah, None
|
