Tiresias: The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Source Database

1788

Babylonian Talmud, Yoma, 69a

וסיפא איצטריכא ליה פושטין ומקפלין ומניחין תחת ראשיהם,פושטין ומקפלין ומניחין אותן תחת ראשיהן שמעת מינה בגדי כהונה ניתנו ליהנות בהן אמר רב פפא לא תימא תחת ראשיהן אלא אימא כנגד ראשיהן אמר רב משרשיא שמעת מינה תפילין מן הצד שפיר דמי,הכי נמי מסתברא דכנגד ראשיהן דאי סלקא דעתך תחת ראשיהן ותיפוק לי משום כלאים דהא איכא אבנט ונהי נמי דניתנו ליהנות בהן הא מתהני מכלאים,הניחא למ"ד אבנטו של כהן גדול (בשאר ימות השנה) זה הוא אבנטו של כהן הדיוט אלא למאן דאמר אבנטו של כ"ג לא זה הוא אבנטו של כהן הדיוט מאי איכא למימר,וכי תימא כלאים בלבישה והעלאה הוא דאסור בהצעה שרי והתניא (ויקרא יט, יט) לא יעלה עליך אבל אתה מותר להציעו תחתיך אבל אמרו חכמים אסור לעשות כן שמא תיכרך נימא אחת על בשרו,וכ"ת דמפסיק ליה מידי ביני ביני והאמר ר"ש בן פזי אמר ר' יהושע בן לוי אמר רבי משום קהלא קדישא שבירושלים אפי' עשר מצעות זו על גב זו וכלאים תחתיהן אסור לישן עליהן אלא לאו שמע מינה כנגד ראשיהן שמע מינה,רב אשי אמר לעולם תחת ראשיהן והא קא מתהני מכלאים בגדי כהונה קשין הן כי הא דאמר רב הונא בריה דר' יהושע האי נמטא גמדא דנרש שריא,ת"ש בגדי כהונה היוצא בהן למדינה אסור ובמקדש בין בשעת עבודה בין שלא בשעת עבודה מותר מפני שבגדי כהונה ניתנו ליהנות בהן ש"מ,ובמדינה לא והתניא בעשרים וחמשה [בטבת] יום הר גרזים [הוא] דלא למספד,יום שבקשו כותיים את בית אלהינו מאלכסנדרוס מוקדון להחריבו ונתנו להם באו והודיעו את שמעון הצדיק מה עשה לבש בגדי כהונה ונתעטף בבגדי כהונה ומיקירי ישראל עמו ואבוקות של אור בידיהן וכל הלילה הללו הולכים מצד זה והללו הולכים מצד זה עד שעלה עמוד השחר,כיון שעלה עמוד השחר אמר להם מי הללו אמרו לו יהודים שמרדו בך כיון שהגיע לאנטיפטרס זרחה חמה ופגעו זה בזה כיון שראה לשמעון הצדיק ירד ממרכבתו והשתחוה לפניו אמרו לו מלך גדול כמותך ישתחוה ליהודי זה אמר להם דמות דיוקנו של זה מנצחת לפני בבית מלחמתי,אמר להם למה באתם אמרו אפשר בית שמתפללים בו עליך ועל מלכותך שלא תחרב יתעוך עובדי כוכבים להחריבו אמר להם מי הללו אמרו לו כותיים הללו שעומדים לפניך אמר להם הרי הם מסורין בידיכם,מיד נקבום בעקביהם ותלאום בזנבי סוסיהם והיו מגררין אותן על הקוצים ועל הברקנים עד שהגיעו להר גרזים כיון שהגיעו להר גריזים חרשוהו וזרעוהו כרשינין כדרך שבקשו לעשות לבית אלהינו ואותו היום עשאוהו יו"ט,אי בעית אימא ראויין לבגדי כהונה ואי בעית אימא (תהלים קיט, קכו) עת לעשות לה' הפרו תורתך,חזן הכנסת נוטל ספר תורה ש"מ חולקין כבוד לתלמיד במקום הרב אמר אביי כולה משום כבודו דכ"ג היא,וכהן גדול עומד מכלל שהוא יושב והא אנן תנן That mishna’s teaching highlighting the prohibition to sleep in priestly vestments is needed for the latter clause of that mishna, which states: They remove their priestly vestments and fold them and place them under their heads. Since they are allowed to sleep on them, it must be emphasized that they may not sleep while wearing them.,The Gemara considers resolving the dilemma from the latter clause: They remove their priestly vestments and fold them and place them under their heads. The Gemara suggests: Learn from this that it is permitted to derive benefit from priestly vestments. Rav Pappa said: Do not say that the mishna means they may actually place the vestments under their heads as a pillow; rather, say that the mishna permits the vestments to be placed only next to their heads. Rav Mesharshiyya said: Given this understanding of that mishna, one can learn from here that one who places phylacteries to the side of his head when he sleeps has done well; there is no concern that he will turn over in his sleep and lie upon them.,So too, it is reasonable to say that the mishna permits the vestments to be placed only next to their heads and not under their heads; as, if it could enter your mind to say that the mishna permits the vestments to be placed under their heads, and I would derive that it is prohibited due to the fact the priestly vestments contain a forbidden mixture of diverse kinds, as among them there is the belt, which is woven from a mixture of wool and linen. And even if it is assumed that it is permitted to derive benefit from priestly vestments, it would still be prohibited to lie upon them because by doing so the priests would be deriving benefit from a garment made of diverse kinds.,The Gemara elaborates on the preceding argument: If one claims that the mishna permits priests to sleep upon their vestments, it works out well according to the one who said: The belt of the High Priest worn on Yom Kippur, which does not contain diverse kinds, is the same as the belt of a common priest. According to this view, the common priest’s belt does not contain diverse kinds, and therefore it may be permitted for a priest to sleep upon it. However, according to the one who said that the High Priest’s belt on Yom Kippur is not the same as the belt of a common priest, and that the belt of the common priest is made of diverse kinds, what is there to say? How could the mishna possibly permit priests to sleep upon their vestments?,And if you say that with regard to the prohibition of diverse kinds only wearing or placing the garment upon oneself is prohibited, but spreading them out and lying upon them on is permitted, and as such it should be permitted for the priests to sleep upon their vestments, this is incorrect. As, wasn’t it taught in a baraita that the verse states: “Neither shall there come upon you a garment of diverse kinds”(Leviticus 19:19), which implies: But you are permitted to spread it beneath you to lie upon. This is true according to Torah law, but the Sages said: It is prohibited to do so, lest a fiber wrap upon his flesh, which would lead to the transgression of the Torah prohibition.,And if you say that a priest could still avoid the prohibition of diverse kinds by placing a separation between himself and the belt containing diverse kinds, didn’t Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi say that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said in the name of the holy community in Jerusalem: Even if there are ten mattresses piled one atop the other and a garment of diverse kinds is placed underneath them all, it is prohibited to sleep upon them? This is because the rabbinic decree is applied equally to all cases irrespective of whether the original concern exists. Therefore, there can be no way for the priests to sleep upon the vestments without transgressing the prohibition of diverse kinds. Rather, must one not conclude from the preceding discussion that the mishna permits the vestments to be placed only next to their heads? The Gemara concludes: Learn from it that this is indeed so.,Rav Ashi said: Actually, the mishna may be understood as permitting the vestments to be placed under their heads. One should not object that by doing so the priests would be deriving benefit from a garment made of diverse kinds because priestly vestments, and specifically the belt, are stiff, and therefore the prohibition of diverse kinds does not apply to them. This is in accordance with that which Rav Huna, son of Rabbi Yehoshua, said: This stiff felt [namta], made of diverse kinds, that is produced in the city of Neresh, is permitted, since a stiff object does not wrap around the body to provide warmth, and therefore the person wearing is not considered to have derived benefit from it.,Since the mishna’s intention is uncertain, it cannot provide a clear proof for the dilemma of whether it is permitted to derive benefit from priestly vestments. The Gemara therefore suggests another proof: Come and hear an explicit baraita concerning this issue: With regard to priestly vestments, it is prohibited to go out to the country, i.e., outside the Temple, while wearing them, but in the Temple it is permitted for the priests to wear them, whether during the Temple service or not during the service, due to the fact that it is permitted to derive benefit from priestly vestments. Learn from this that it is indeed permitted.,§ The baraita taught that the priestly vestments may not be worn outside the Temple. The Gemara challenges this: Is it really not permitted to wear priestly vestments in the country? Wasn’t it taught in another baraita, in Megillat Ta’anit: The twenty-fifth of Tevet is known as the day of Mount Gerizim, which was established as a joyful day, and therefore eulogizing is not permitted.,What occurred on that date? It was on that day that the Samaritans [kutim] requested the House of our Lord from Alexander the Macedonian in order to destroy it, and he gave it to them, i.e., he gave them permission to destroy it. People came and informed the High Priest, Shimon HaTzaddik, of what had transpired. What did he do? He donned the priestly vestments and wrapped himself in the priestly vestments. And the nobles of the Jewish People were with him, with torches of fire in their hands. And all that night, these, the representatives of the Jewish people, approached from this side, and those, the armies of Alexander and the Samaritans, approached from that side, until dawn, when they finally saw one another.,When dawn arrived, Alexander said to the Samaritans: Who are these people coming to meet us? They said to him: These are the Jews who rebelled against you. When he reached Antipatris, the sun shone and the two camps met each other. When Alexander saw Shimon HaTzaddik, he descended from his chariot and bowed before him. His escorts said to him: Should an important king such as you bow to this Jew? He said to them: I do so because the image of this man’s face is victorious before me on my battlefields, i.e., when I fight I see his image going before me as a sign of victory, and therefore I know that he has supreme sanctity.,He said to the representatives of the Jewish people: Why have you come? They said to him: Is it possible that the Temple, the house in which we pray for you and for your kingdom not to be destroyed, gentiles will try to mislead you into destroying it, and we would remain silent and not tell you? He said to them: Who are these people who want to destroy it? The Jews said to him: They are these Samaritans who stand before you. He said to them: If so, they are delivered into your hands to deal with them as you please.,Immediately, they stabbed the Samaritans in their heels and hung them from their horses’ tails and continued to drag them over the thorns and thistles until they reached Mount Gerizim. When they arrived at Mount Gerizim, where the Samaritans had their temple, they plowed it over and seeded the area with leeks, a symbol of total destruction. This was just as they had sought to do to the House of our Lord. And they made that day a festival to celebrate the salvation of the Temple and the defeat of the Samaritans.,It is apparent from the baraita that Shimon HaTzaddik wore the priestly vestments even outside the Temple. This would seem to be in contravention of the ruling of the other baraita prohibiting this. The Gemara resolves the contradiction: If you wish, say Shimon HaTzaddik did not wear a set of genuine, sanctified priestly vestments; rather, he wore garments that were fitting to be priestly vestments in that they were made of the same material and design. And if you wish, say instead that he indeed wore a set of genuine priestly vestments, but in times of great need, such as when one seeks to prevent the destruction of the Temple, it is permitted to violate the halakha, as indicated by the verse: “It is time to act for the Lord, they have nullified your Torah” (Psalms 119:126).,§ It was taught in the mishna: The synagogue attendant takes a Torah scroll and gives it to the head of the synagogue, who gives it to the deputy High Priest, who gives it to the High Priest. The Gemara suggests: Learn from here that honor may be given to a student in the presence of the teacher. Although the High Priest is considered everyone’s teacher and master, honor was nevertheless extended to other individuals without fear of impugning the High Priest’s honor. Abaye said: A proof may not be adduced from here because the entire process is for the honor of the High Priest. The passing of the Torah scroll to people of increasing importance demonstrates that the High Priest is considered the most important of all those present.,§ It was further taught in the mishna: The High Priest stands and receives the scroll from the Deputy. By inference, until that point he had been sitting. But didn’t we learn in a mishna:

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

54 results
1. Hebrew Bible, Esther, 2.3, 3.8-3.11, 7.2-7.7, 9.1, 9.20-9.23 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) 2.3. וְיַפְקֵד הַמֶּלֶךְ פְּקִידִים בְּכָל־מְדִינוֹת מַלְכוּתוֹ וְיִקְבְּצוּ אֶת־כָּל־נַעֲרָה־בְתוּלָה טוֹבַת מַרְאֶה אֶל־שׁוּשַׁן הַבִּירָה אֶל־בֵּית הַנָּשִׁים אֶל־יַד הֵגֶא סְרִיס הַמֶּלֶךְ שֹׁמֵר הַנָּשִׁים וְנָתוֹן תַּמְרוּקֵיהֶן׃ 3.8. וַיֹּאמֶר הָמָן לַמֶּלֶךְ אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ יֶשְׁנוֹ עַם־אֶחָד מְפֻזָּר וּמְפֹרָד בֵּין הָעַמִּים בְּכֹל מְדִינוֹת מַלְכוּתֶךָ וְדָתֵיהֶם שֹׁנוֹת מִכָּל־עָם וְאֶת־דָּתֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ אֵינָם עֹשִׂים וְלַמֶּלֶךְ אֵין־שֹׁוֶה לְהַנִּיחָם׃ 7.2. וַיֹּאמֶר הַמֶּלֶךְ לְאֶסְתֵּר גַּם בַּיּוֹם הַשֵּׁנִי בְּמִשְׁתֵּה הַיַּיִן מַה־שְּׁאֵלָתֵךְ אֶסְתֵּר הַמַּלְכָּה וְתִנָּתֵן לָךְ וּמַה־בַּקָּשָׁתֵךְ עַד־חֲצִי הַמַּלְכוּת וְתֵעָשׂ׃ 7.3. וַתַּעַן אֶסְתֵּר הַמַּלְכָּה וַתֹּאמַר אִם־מָצָאתִי חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ הַמֶּלֶךְ וְאִם־עַל־הַמֶּלֶךְ טוֹב תִּנָּתֶן־לִי נַפְשִׁי בִּשְׁאֵלָתִי וְעַמִּי בְּבַקָּשָׁתִי׃ 7.4. כִּי נִמְכַּרְנוּ אֲנִי וְעַמִּי לְהַשְׁמִיד לַהֲרוֹג וּלְאַבֵּד וְאִלּוּ לַעֲבָדִים וְלִשְׁפָחוֹת נִמְכַּרְנוּ הֶחֱרַשְׁתִּי כִּי אֵין הַצָּר שֹׁוֶה בְּנֵזֶק הַמֶּלֶךְ׃ 7.5. וַיֹּאמֶר הַמֶּלֶךְ אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ וַיֹּאמֶר לְאֶסְתֵּר הַמַּלְכָּה מִי הוּא זֶה וְאֵי־זֶה הוּא אֲשֶׁר־מְלָאוֹ לִבּוֹ לַעֲשׂוֹת כֵּן׃ 7.6. וַתֹּאמֶר־אֶסְתֵּר אִישׁ צַר וְאוֹיֵב הָמָן הָרָע הַזֶּה וְהָמָן נִבְעַת מִלִּפְנֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ וְהַמַּלְכָּה׃ 7.7. וְהַמֶּלֶךְ קָם בַּחֲמָתוֹ מִמִּשְׁתֵּה הַיַּיִן אֶל־גִּנַּת הַבִּיתָן וְהָמָן עָמַד לְבַקֵּשׁ עַל־נַפְשׁוֹ מֵאֶסְתֵּר הַמַּלְכָּה כִּי רָאָה כִּי־כָלְתָה אֵלָיו הָרָעָה מֵאֵת הַמֶּלֶךְ׃ 9.1. וּבִשְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ הוּא־חֹדֶשׁ אֲדָר בִּשְׁלוֹשָׁה עָשָׂר יוֹם בּוֹ אֲשֶׁר הִגִּיעַ דְּבַר־הַמֶּלֶךְ וְדָתוֹ לְהֵעָשׂוֹת בַּיּוֹם אֲשֶׁר שִׂבְּרוּ אֹיְבֵי הַיְּהוּדִים לִשְׁלוֹט בָּהֶם וְנַהֲפוֹךְ הוּא אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁלְטוּ הַיְּהוּדִים הֵמָּה בְּשֹׂנְאֵיהֶם׃ 9.1. עֲשֶׂרֶת בְּנֵי הָמָן בֶּן־הַמְּדָתָא צֹרֵר הַיְּהוּדִים הָרָגוּ וּבַבִּזָּה לֹא שָׁלְחוּ אֶת־יָדָם׃ 9.21. לְקַיֵּם עֲלֵיהֶם לִהְיוֹת עֹשִׂים אֵת יוֹם אַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר לְחֹדֶשׁ אֲדָר וְאֵת יוֹם־חֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר בּוֹ בְּכָל־שָׁנָה וְשָׁנָה׃ 9.22. כַּיָּמִים אֲשֶׁר־נָחוּ בָהֶם הַיְּהוּדִים מֵאוֹיְבֵיהֶם וְהַחֹדֶשׁ אֲשֶׁר נֶהְפַּךְ לָהֶם מִיָּגוֹן לְשִׂמְחָה וּמֵאֵבֶל לְיוֹם טוֹב לַעֲשׂוֹת אוֹתָם יְמֵי מִשְׁתֶּה וְשִׂמְחָה וּמִשְׁלוֹחַ מָנוֹת אִישׁ לְרֵעֵהוּ וּמַתָּנוֹת לָאֶבְיוֹנִים׃ 9.23. וְקִבֵּל הַיְּהוּדִים אֵת אֲשֶׁר־הֵחֵלּוּ לַעֲשׂוֹת וְאֵת אֲשֶׁר־כָּתַב מָרְדֳּכַי אֲלֵיהֶם׃ 2.3. and let the king appoint officers in all the provinces of his kingdom, that they may gather together all the fair young virgins unto Shushan the castle, to the house of the women, unto the custody of Hegai the king’s chamberlain, keeper of the women; and let their ointments be given them;" 3.8. And Haman said unto king Ahasuerus: ‘There is a certain people scattered abroad and dispersed among the peoples in all the provinces of thy kingdom; and their laws are diverse from those of every people; neither keep they the king’s laws; therefore it profiteth not the king to suffer them." 7.2. And the king said again unto Esther on the second day at the banquet of wine: ‘Whatever thy petition, queen Esther, it shall be granted thee; and whatever thy request, even to the half of the kingdom, it shall be performed.’" 7.3. Then Esther the queen answered and said: ‘If I have found favour in thy sight, O king, and if it please the king, let my life be given me at my petition, and my people at my request;" 7.4. for we are sold, I and my people, to be destroyed, to be slain, and to perish. But if we had been sold for bondmen and bondwomen, I had held my peace, for the adversary is not worthy that the king be endamaged.’" 7.5. Then spoke the king Ahasuerus and said unto Esther the queen: ‘Who is he, and where is he, that durst presume in his heart to do so?’" 7.6. And Esther said: ‘An adversary and an enemy, even this wicked Haman.’ Then Haman was terrified before the king and the queen." 7.7. And the king arose in his wrath from the banquet of wine and went into the palace garden; but Haman remained to make request for his life to Esther the queen; for he saw that there was evil determined against him by the king." 9.1. Now in the twelfth month, which is the month Adar, on the thirteenth day of the same, when the king’s commandment and his decree drew near to be put in execution, in the day that the enemies of the Jews hoped to have rule over them; whereas it was turned to the contrary, that the Jews had rule over them that hated them;" 9.20. And Mordecai wrote these things, and sent letters unto all the Jews that were in all the provinces of the king Ahasuerus, both nigh and far," 9.21. to enjoin them that they should keep the fourteenth day of the month Adar, and the fifteenth day of the same, yearly," 9.22. the days wherein the Jews had rest from their enemies, and the month which was turned unto them from sorrow to gladness, and from mourning into a good day; that they should make them days of feasting and gladness, and of sending portions one to another, and gifts to the poor." 9.23. And the Jews took upon them to do as they had begun, and as Mordecai had written unto them;"
2. Hebrew Bible, Exodus, 30.34-30.38 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) 30.34. וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל־מֹשֶׁה קַח־לְךָ סַמִּים נָטָף וּשְׁחֵלֶת וְחֶלְבְּנָה סַמִּים וּלְבֹנָה זַכָּה בַּד בְּבַד יִהְיֶה׃ 30.35. וְעָשִׂיתָ אֹתָהּ קְטֹרֶת רֹקַח מַעֲשֵׂה רוֹקֵחַ מְמֻלָּח טָהוֹר קֹדֶשׁ׃ 30.36. וְשָׁחַקְתָּ מִמֶּנָּה הָדֵק וְנָתַתָּה מִמֶּנָּה לִפְנֵי הָעֵדֻת בְּאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד אֲשֶׁר אִוָּעֵד לְךָ שָׁמָּה קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים תִּהְיֶה לָכֶם׃ 30.37. וְהַקְּטֹרֶת אֲשֶׁר תַּעֲשֶׂה בְּמַתְכֻּנְתָּהּ לֹא תַעֲשׂוּ לָכֶם קֹדֶשׁ תִּהְיֶה לְךָ לַיהוָה׃ 30.38. אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר־יַעֲשֶׂה כָמוֹהָ לְהָרִיחַ בָּהּ וְנִכְרַת מֵעַמָּיו׃ 30.34. And the LORD said unto Moses: ‘Take unto thee sweet spices, stacte, and onycha, and galbanum; sweet spices with pure frankincense; of each shall there be a like weight." 30.35. And thou shalt make of it incense, a perfume after the art of the perfumer, seasoned with salt, pure and holy." 30.36. And thou shalt beat some of it very small, and put of it before the testimony in the tent of meeting, where I will meet with thee; it shall be unto you most holy. ." 30.37. And the incense which thou shalt make, according to the composition thereof ye shall not make for yourselves; it shall be unto thee holy for the LORD." 30.38. Whosoever shall make like unto that, to smell thereof, he shall be cut off from his people.’"
3. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 49.8 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) 49.8. יְהוּדָה אַתָּה יוֹדוּךָ אַחֶיךָ יָדְךָ בְּעֹרֶף אֹיְבֶיךָ יִשְׁתַּחֲוּוּ לְךָ בְּנֵי אָבִיךָ׃ 49.8. Judah, thee shall thy brethren praise; Thy hand shall be on the neck of thine enemies; Thy father’s sons shall bow down before thee."
4. Hebrew Bible, Leviticus, 10.1-10.5, 16.12-16.13 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) 10.1. וּלֲהַבְדִּיל בֵּין הַקֹּדֶשׁ וּבֵין הַחֹל וּבֵין הַטָּמֵא וּבֵין הַטָּהוֹר׃ 10.1. וַיִּקְחוּ בְנֵי־אַהֲרֹן נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא אִישׁ מַחְתָּתוֹ וַיִּתְּנוּ בָהֵן אֵשׁ וַיָּשִׂימוּ עָלֶיהָ קְטֹרֶת וַיַּקְרִבוּ לִפְנֵי יְהוָה אֵשׁ זָרָה אֲשֶׁר לֹא צִוָּה אֹתָם׃ 10.2. וַתֵּצֵא אֵשׁ מִלִּפְנֵי יְהוָה וַתֹּאכַל אוֹתָם וַיָּמֻתוּ לִפְנֵי יְהוָה׃ 10.2. וַיִּשְׁמַע מֹשֶׁה וַיִּיטַב בְּעֵינָיו׃ 10.3. וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אֶל־אַהֲרֹן הוּא אֲשֶׁר־דִּבֶּר יְהוָה לֵאמֹר בִּקְרֹבַי אֶקָּדֵשׁ וְעַל־פְּנֵי כָל־הָעָם אֶכָּבֵד וַיִּדֹּם אַהֲרֹן׃ 10.4. וַיִּקְרָא מֹשֶׁה אֶל־מִישָׁאֵל וְאֶל אֶלְצָפָן בְּנֵי עֻזִּיאֵל דֹּד אַהֲרֹן וַיֹּאמֶר אֲלֵהֶם קִרְבוּ שְׂאוּ אֶת־אֲחֵיכֶם מֵאֵת פְּנֵי־הַקֹּדֶשׁ אֶל־מִחוּץ לַמַּחֲנֶה׃ 10.5. וַיִּקְרְבוּ וַיִּשָּׂאֻם בְּכֻתֳּנֹתָם אֶל־מִחוּץ לַמַּחֲנֶה כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר מֹשֶׁה׃ 16.12. וְלָקַח מְלֹא־הַמַּחְתָּה גַּחֲלֵי־אֵשׁ מֵעַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ מִלִּפְנֵי יְהוָה וּמְלֹא חָפְנָיו קְטֹרֶת סַמִּים דַּקָּה וְהֵבִיא מִבֵּית לַפָּרֹכֶת׃ 16.13. וְנָתַן אֶת־הַקְּטֹרֶת עַל־הָאֵשׁ לִפְנֵי יְהוָה וְכִסָּה עֲנַן הַקְּטֹרֶת אֶת־הַכַּפֹּרֶת אֲשֶׁר עַל־הָעֵדוּת וְלֹא יָמוּת׃ 10.1. And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took each of them his censer, and put fire therein, and laid incense thereon, and offered strange fire before the LORD, which He had not commanded them." 10.2. And there came forth fire from before the LORD, and devoured them, and they died before the LORD." 10.3. Then Moses said unto Aaron: ‘This is it that the LORD spoke, saying: Through them that are nigh unto Me I will be sanctified, and before all the people I will be glorified.’ And Aaron held his peace." 10.4. And Moses called Mishael and Elzaphan, the sons of Uzziel the uncle of Aaron, and said unto them: ‘Draw near, carry your brethren from before the sanctuary out of the camp.’" 10.5. So they drew near, and carried them in their tunics out of the camp, as Moses had said." 16.12. And he shall take a censer full of coals of fire from off the altar before the LORD, and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small, and bring it within the veil." 16.13. And he shall put the incense upon the fire before the LORD, that the cloud of the incense may cover the ark-cover that is upon the testimony, that he die not."
5. Hebrew Bible, Numbers, 16.16-16.17, 17.2-17.5, 17.11-17.13 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) 16.16. וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אֶל־קֹרַח אַתָּה וְכָל־עֲדָתְךָ הֱיוּ לִפְנֵי יְהוָה אַתָּה וָהֵם וְאַהֲרֹן מָחָר׃ 16.17. וּקְחוּ אִישׁ מַחְתָּתוֹ וּנְתַתֶּם עֲלֵיהֶם קְטֹרֶת וְהִקְרַבְתֶּם לִפְנֵי יְהוָה אִישׁ מַחְתָּתוֹ חֲמִשִּׁים וּמָאתַיִם מַחְתֹּת וְאַתָּה וְאַהֲרֹן אִישׁ מַחְתָּתוֹ׃ 17.2. וְהָיָה הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר אֶבְחַר־בּוֹ מַטֵּהוּ יִפְרָח וַהֲשִׁכֹּתִי מֵעָלַי אֶת־תְּלֻנּוֹת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר הֵם מַלִּינִם עֲלֵיכֶם׃ 17.2. אֱמֹר אֶל־אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן־אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן וְיָרֵם אֶת־הַמַּחְתֹּת מִבֵּין הַשְּׂרֵפָה וְאֶת־הָאֵשׁ זְרֵה־הָלְאָה כִּי קָדֵשׁוּ׃ 17.3. אֵת מַחְתּוֹת הַחַטָּאִים הָאֵלֶּה בְּנַפְשֹׁתָם וְעָשׂוּ אֹתָם רִקֻּעֵי פַחִים צִפּוּי לַמִּזְבֵּחַ כִּי־הִקְרִיבֻם לִפְנֵי־יְהוָה וַיִּקְדָּשׁוּ וְיִהְיוּ לְאוֹת לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל׃ 17.4. וַיִּקַּח אֶלְעָזָר הַכֹּהֵן אֵת מַחְתּוֹת הַנְּחֹשֶׁת אֲשֶׁר הִקְרִיבוּ הַשְּׂרֻפִים וַיְרַקְּעוּם צִפּוּי לַמִּזְבֵּחַ׃ 17.5. זִכָּרוֹן לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לְמַעַן אֲשֶׁר לֹא־יִקְרַב אִישׁ זָר אֲשֶׁר לֹא מִזֶּרַע אַהֲרֹן הוּא לְהַקְטִיר קְטֹרֶת לִפְנֵי יְהוָה וְלֹא־יִהְיֶה כְקֹרַח וְכַעֲדָתוֹ כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר יְהוָה בְּיַד־מֹשֶׁה לוֹ׃ 17.11. וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אֶל־אַהֲרֹן קַח אֶת־הַמַּחְתָּה וְתֶן־עָלֶיהָ אֵשׁ מֵעַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְשִׂים קְטֹרֶת וְהוֹלֵךְ מְהֵרָה אֶל־הָעֵדָה וְכַפֵּר עֲלֵיהֶם כִּי־יָצָא הַקֶּצֶף מִלִּפְנֵי יְהוָה הֵחֵל הַנָּגֶף׃ 17.12. וַיִּקַּח אַהֲרֹן כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר מֹשֶׁה וַיָּרָץ אֶל־תּוֹך הַקָּהָל וְהִנֵּה הֵחֵל הַנֶּגֶף בָּעָם וַיִּתֵּן אֶת־הַקְּטֹרֶת וַיְכַפֵּר עַל־הָעָם׃ 17.13. וַיַּעֲמֹד בֵּין־הַמֵּתִים וּבֵין הַחַיִּים וַתֵּעָצַר הַמַּגֵּפָה׃ 16.16. And Moses said unto Korah: ‘Be thou and all thy congregation before the LORD, thou, and they, and Aaron, to-morrow;" 16.17. and take ye every man his fire-pan, and put incense upon them, and bring ye before the LORD every man his fire-pan, two hundred and fifty fire-pans; thou also, and Aaron, each his fire-pan.’" 17.2. ‘Speak unto Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest, that he take up the fire-pans out of the burning, and scatter thou the fire yonder; for they are become holy;" 17.3. even the fire-pans of these men who have sinned at the cost of their lives, and let them be made beaten plates for a covering of the altar—for they are become holy, because they were offered before the LORD—that they may be a sign unto the children of Israel.’" 17.4. And Eleazar the priest took the brazen fire-pans, which they that were burnt had offered; and they beat them out for a covering of the altar," 17.5. to be a memorial unto the children of Israel, to the end that no common man, that is not of the seed of Aaron, draw near to burn incense before the LORD; that he fare not as Korah, and as his company; as the LORD spoke unto him by the hand of Moses." 17.11. And Moses said unto Aaron: ‘Take thy fire-pan, and put fire therein from off the altar, and lay incense thereon, and carry it quickly unto the congregation, and make atonement for them; for there is wrath gone out from the LORD: the plague is begun.’" 17.12. And Aaron took as Moses spoke, and ran into the midst of the assembly; and, behold, the plague was begun among the people; and he put on the incense, and made atonement for the people." 17.13. And he stood between the dead and the living; and the plague was stayed."
6. Hebrew Bible, Psalms, 16.3 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) 16.3. לִקְדוֹשִׁים אֲשֶׁר־בָּאָרֶץ הֵמָּה וְאַדִּירֵי כָּל־חֶפְצִי־בָם׃ 16.3. As for the holy that are in the earth, They are the excellent in whom is all my delight."
7. Hebrew Bible, 1 Chronicles, 4.18 (5th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) 4.18. וְאִשְׁתּוֹ הַיְהֻדִיָּה יָלְדָה אֶת־יֶרֶד אֲבִי גְדוֹר וְאֶת־חֶבֶר אֲבִי שׂוֹכוֹ וְאֶת־יְקוּתִיאֵל אֲבִי זָנוֹחַ וְאֵלֶּה בְּנֵי בִּתְיָה בַת־פַּרְעֹה אֲשֶׁר לָקַח מָרֶד׃ 4.18. and his wife Hajehudijah bore Jered the father of Gedor, and Heber the father of Soco, and Jekuthiel the father of Zanoah—and these are the sons of Bithiah the daughter of Pharaoh whom Mered took."
8. Hebrew Bible, Ezra, 6.9-6.10 (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) 6.9. וּמָה חַשְׁחָן וּבְנֵי תוֹרִין וְדִכְרִין וְאִמְּרִין לַעֲלָוָן לֶאֱלָהּ שְׁמַיָּא חִנְטִין מְלַח חֲמַר וּמְשַׁח כְּמֵאמַר כָּהֲנַיָּא דִי־בִירוּשְׁלֶם לֶהֱוֵא מִתְיְהֵב לְהֹם יוֹם בְּיוֹם דִּי־לָא שָׁלוּ׃ 6.9. And that which they have need of, both young bullocks, and rams, and lambs, for burnt-offerings to the God of heaven, wheat, salt, wine, and oil, according to the word of the priests that are at Jerusalem, let it be given them day by day without fail;" 6.10. that they may offer sacrifices of sweet savour unto the God of heaven, and pray for the life of the king, and of his sons."
9. Anon., 1 Enoch, 89.51-89.52 (3rd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) 89.51. And again I saw those sheep that they again erred and went many ways, and forsook that their house, and the Lord of the sheep called some from amongst the sheep and sent them to the sheep 89.52. but the sheep began to slay them. And one of them was saved and was not slain, and it sped away and cried aloud over the sheep; and they sought to slay it, but the Lord of the sheep saved it from
10. Hebrew Bible, Daniel, 3.12 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) 3.12. אִיתַי גֻּבְרִין יְהוּדָאיִן דִּי־מַנִּיתָ יָתְהוֹן עַל־עֲבִידַת מְדִינַת בָּבֶל שַׁדְרַךְ מֵישַׁךְ וַעֲבֵד נְגוֹ גֻּבְרַיָּא אִלֵּךְ לָא־שָׂמוּ עליך [עֲלָךְ] מַלְכָּא טְעֵם לאלהיך [לֵאלָהָךְ] לָא פָלְחִין וּלְצֶלֶם דַּהֲבָא דִּי הֲקֵימְתָּ לָא סָגְדִין׃ 3.12. There are certain Jews whom thou hast appointed over the affairs of the province of Babylon, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego; these men, O king, have not regarded thee: they serve not thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up.’"
11. Septuagint, 2 Maccabees, 15.37 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) 15.37. This, then, is how matters turned out with Nicanor. And from that time the city has been in the possession of the Hebrews. So I too will here end my story.'
12. Septuagint, Ecclesiasticus (Siracides), 50.1-50.24 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) 50.1. The leader of his brethren and the pride of his people was Simon the high priest, son of Onias,who in his life repaired the house,and in his time fortified the temple. 50.1. like an olive tree putting forth its fruit,and like a cypress towering in the clouds. 50.2. He laid the foundations for the high double walls,the high retaining walls for the temple enclosure. 50.2. Then Simon came down, and lifted up his hands over the whole congregation of the sons of Israel,to pronounce the blessing of the Lord with his lips,and to glory in his name; 50.3. In his days a cistern for water was quarried out,a reservoir like the sea in circumference. 50.4. He considered how to save his people from ruin,and fortified the city to withstand a seige. 50.5. How glorious he was when the people gathered round him as he came out of the inner sanctuary! 50.7. like the sun shining upon the temple of the Most High,and like the rainbow gleaming in glorious clouds; 50.8. like roses in the days of the first fruits,like lilies by a spring of water,like a green shoot on Lebanon on a summer day; 50.9. like fire and incense in the censer,like a vessel of hammered gold adorned with all kinds of precious stones; 50.11. When he put on his glorious robe and clothed himself with superb perfection and went up to the holy altar,he made the court of the sanctuary glorious. 50.12. And when he received the portions from the hands of the priests,as he stood by the hearth of the altar with a garland of brethren around him,he was like a young cedar on Lebanon;and they surrounded him like the trunks of palm trees 50.13. all the sons of Aaron in their splendor with the Lords offering in their hands,before the whole congregation of Israel. 50.14. Finishing the service at the altars,and arranging the offering to the Most High, the Almighty 50.15. he reached out his hand to the cup and poured a libation of the blood of the grape;he poured it out at the foot of the altar,a pleasing odor to the Most High, the King of all. 50.16. Then the sons of Aaron shouted,they sounded the trumpets of hammered work,they made a great noise to be heard for remembrance before the Most High. 50.17. Then all the people together made haste and fell to the ground upon their faces to worship their Lord,the Almighty, God Most High. 50.18. And the singers praised him with their voices in sweet and full-toned melody. 50.19. And the people besought the Lord Most High in prayer before him who is merciful,till the order of worship of the Lord was ended;so they completed his service. 50.21. and they bowed down in worship a second time,to receive the blessing from the Most High. 50.22. And now bless the God of all,who in every way does great things;who exalts our days from birth,and deals with us according to his mercy. 50.23. May he give us gladness of heart,and grant that peace may be in our days in Israel,as in the days of old. 50.24. May he entrust to us his mercy!And let him deliver us in our days!
13. Philo of Alexandria, On The Embassy To Gaius, 187-348, 186 (1st cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) 186. And while we were anxiously considering his intentions, for we were continually expecting to be summoned, a man arrived, with blood-shot eyes, and looking very much troubled, out of breath and palpitating, and leading us away to a little distance from the rest (for there were several persons near), he said, "Have you heard the news?" And then when he was about to tell us what it was he stopped, because of the abundance of tears that rose up to choke his utterance.
14. Josephus Flavius, Jewish Antiquities, 1.332-1.333, 1.337-1.338, 3.254-3.256, 3.281, 11.302-11.347, 13.171-13.173, 13.254-13.256, 13.277-13.279, 13.282-13.283, 13.288-13.298, 14.22, 14.25-14.28, 15.425, 17.165-17.166, 18.257-18.309 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) 1.332. who used a voice, and spake to him in words, exhorting him to be pleased with what had happened to him, and not to suppose that his victory was a small one, but that he had overcome a divine angel, and to esteem the victory as a sign of great blessings that should come to him, and that his offspring should never fall, and that no man should be too hard for his power. 1.333. He also commanded him to be called Israel, which in the Hebrew tongue signifies one that struggled with the divine angel. These promises were made at the prayer of Jacob; for when he perceived him to be the angel of God, he desired he would signify to him what should befall him hereafter. And when the angel had said what is before related, he disappeared; 1.337. 1. Hereupon Jacob came to the place, till this day called Tents (Succoth;) from whence he went to Shechem, which is a city of the Canaanites. Now as the Shechemites were keeping a festival Dina, who was the only daughter of Jacob, went into the city to see the finery of the women of that country. But when Shechem, the son of Hamor the king, saw her, he defiled her by violence; and being greatly in love with her, desired of his father that he would procure the damsel to him for a wife. 1.338. To which desire he condescended, and came to Jacob, desiring him to give leave that his son Shechem might, according to law, marry Dina. But Jacob, not knowing how to deny the desire of one of such great dignity, and yet not thinking it lawful to marry his daughter to a stranger, entreated him to give him leave to have a consultation about what he desired him to do. 3.254. nor is there anyone of the festivals but in it they offer burnt-offerings; they also allow themselves to rest on every one of them. Accordingly, the law prescribes in them all what kinds they are to sacrifice, and how they are to rest entirely, and must slay sacrifices, in order to feast upon them. 3.255. 7. However, out of the common charges, baked bread (was set on the table of shew-bread), without leaven, of twenty-four tenth deals of flour, for so much is spent upon this bread; two heaps of these were baked, they were baked the day before the Sabbath, but were brought into the holy place on the morning of the Sabbath, and set upon the holy table, six on a heap, one loaf still standing over against another; 3.256. where two golden cups full of frankincense were also set upon them, and there they remained till another Sabbath, and then other loaves were brought in their stead, while the loaves were given to the priests for their food, and the frankincense was burnt in that sacred fire wherein all their offerings were burnt also; and so other frankincense was set upon the loaves instead of what was there before. 3.281. He gave them rest to the land from ploughing and planting every seventh year, as he had prescribed to them to rest from working every seventh day; and ordered, that then what grew of its own accord out of the earth should in common belong to all that pleased to use it, making no distinction in that respect between their own countrymen and foreigners: and he ordained, that they should do the same after seven times seven years 11.302. 2. Now when John had departed this life, his son Jaddua succeeded in the high priesthood. He had a brother, whose name was Manasseh. Now there was one Sanballat, who was sent by Darius, the last king [of Persia], into Samaria. He was a Cutheam by birth; of which stock were the Samaritans also. 11.303. This man knew that the city Jerusalem was a famous city, and that their kings had given a great deal of trouble to the Assyrians, and the people of Celesyria; so that he willingly gave his daughter, whose name was Nicaso, in marriage to Manasseh, as thinking this alliance by marriage would be a pledge and security that the nation of the Jews should continue their good-will to him. 11.304. 1. About this time it was that Philip, king of Macedon, was treacherously assaulted and slain at Egae by Pausanias, the son of Cerastes, who was derived from the family of Oreste 11.305. and his son Alexander succeeded him in the kingdom; who, passing over the Hellespont, overcame the generals of Darius’s army in a battle fought at Granicum. So he marched over Lydia, and subdued Ionia, and overran Caria, and fell upon the places of Pamphylia, as has been related elsewhere. 11.306. 2. But the elders of Jerusalem being very uneasy that the brother of Jaddua the high priest, though married to a foreigner, should be a partner with him in the high priesthood, quarreled with him; 11.307. for they esteemed this man’s marriage a step to such as should be desirous of transgressing about the marriage of [strange] wives, and that this would be the beginning of a mutual society with foreigners 11.308. although the offense of some about marriages, and their having married wives that were not of their own country, had been an occasion of their former captivity, and of the miseries they then underwent; so they commanded Manasseh to divorce his wife, or not to approach the altar 11.309. the high priest himself joining with the people in their indignation against his brother, and driving him away from the altar. Whereupon Manasseh came to his father-in-law, Sanballat, and told him, that although he loved his daughter Nicaso, yet was he not willing to be deprived of his sacerdotal dignity on her account, which was the principal dignity in their nation, and always continued in the same family. 11.311. and he promised that he would do this with the approbation of Darius the king. Manasseh was elevated with these promises, and staid with Sanballat, upon a supposal that he should gain a high priesthood, as bestowed on him by Darius, for it happened that Sanballat was then in years. 11.312. But there was now a great disturbance among the people of Jerusalem, because many of those priests and Levites were entangled in such matches; for they all revolted to Manasseh, and Sanballat afforded them money, and divided among them land for tillage, and habitations also, and all this in order every way to gratify his son-in-law. 11.313. 3. About this time it was that Darius heard how Alexander had passed over the Hellespont, and had beaten his lieutets in the battle at Granicum, and was proceeding further; whereupon he gathered together an army of horse and foot, and determined that he would meet the Macedonians before they should assault and conquer all Asia. 11.314. So he passed over the river Euphrates, and came over Taurus, the Cilician mountain, and at Issus of Cilicia he waited for the enemy, as ready there to give him battle. 11.315. Upon which Sanballat was glad that Darius was come down; and told Manasseh that he would suddenly perform his promises to him, and this as soon as ever Darius should come back, after he had beaten his enemies; for not he only, but all those that were in Asia also, were persuaded that the Macedonians would not so much as come to a battle with the Persians, on account of their multitude. 11.316. But the event proved otherwise than they expected; for the king joined battle with the Macedonians, and was beaten, and lost a great part of his army. His mother also, and his wife and children, were taken captives, and he fled into Persia. 11.317. So Alexander came into Syria, and took Damascus; and when he had obtained Sidon, he besieged Tyre, when he sent an epistle to the Jewish high priest, to send him some auxiliaries, and to supply his army with provisions; and that what presents he formerly sent to Darius, he would now send to him, and choose the friendship of the Macedonians, and that he should never repent of so doing. 11.318. But the high priest answered the messengers, that he had given his oath to Darius not to bear arms against him; and he said that he would not transgress this while Darius was in the land of the living. Upon hearing this answer, Alexander was very angry; 11.319. and though he determined not to leave Tyre, which was just ready to be taken, yet as soon as he had taken it, he threatened that he would make an expedition against the Jewish high priest, and through him teach all men to whom they must keep their oaths. 11.321. 4. But Sanballat thought he had now gotten a proper opportunity to make his attempt, so he renounced Darius, and taking with him seven thousand of his own subjects, he came to Alexander; and finding him beginning the siege of Tyre, he said to him, that he delivered up to him these men, who came out of places under his dominion, and did gladly accept of him for his lord instead of Darius. 11.322. So when Alexander had received him kindly, Sanballat thereupon took courage, and spake to him about his present affair. He told him that he had a son-in-law, Manasseh, who was brother to the high priest Jaddua; and that there were many others of his own nation, now with him, that were desirous to have a temple in the places subject to him; 11.323. that it would be for the king’s advantage to have the strength of the Jews divided into two parts, lest when the nation is of one mind, and united, upon any attempt for innovation, it prove troublesome to kings, as it had formerly proved to the kings of Assyria. 11.324. Whereupon Alexander gave Sanballat leave so to do, who used the utmost diligence, and built the temple, and made Manasseh the priest, and deemed it a great reward that his daughter’s children should have that dignity; 11.325. but when the seven months of the siege of Tyre were over, and the two months of the siege of Gaza, Sanballat died. Now Alexander, when he had taken Gaza, made haste to go up to Jerusalem; 11.326. and Jaddua the high priest, when he heard that, was in an agony, and under terror, as not knowing how he should meet the Macedonians, since the king was displeased at his foregoing disobedience. He therefore ordained that the people should make supplications, and should join with him in offering sacrifice to God, whom he besought to protect that nation, and to deliver them from the perils that were coming upon them; 11.327. whereupon God warned him in a dream, which came upon him after he had offered sacrifice, that he should take courage, and adorn the city, and open the gates; that the rest should appear in white garments, but that he and the priests should meet the king in the habits proper to their order, without the dread of any ill consequences, which the providence of God would prevent. 11.328. Upon which, when he rose from his sleep, he greatly rejoiced, and declared to all the warning he had received from God. According to which dream he acted entirely, and so waited for the coming of the king. 11.329. 5. And when he understood that he was not far from the city, he went out in procession, with the priests and the multitude of the citizens. The procession was venerable, and the manner of it different from that of other nations. It reached to a place called Sapha, which name, translated into Greek, signifies a prospect, for you have thence a prospect both of Jerusalem and of the temple. 11.331. for Alexander, when he saw the multitude at a distance, in white garments, while the priests stood clothed with fine linen, and the high priest in purple and scarlet clothing, with his mitre on his head, having the golden plate whereon the name of God was engraved, he approached by himself, and adored that name, and first saluted the high priest. 11.332. The Jews also did all together, with one voice, salute Alexander, and encompass him about; whereupon the kings of Syria and the rest were surprised at what Alexander had done, and supposed him disordered in his mind. 11.333. However, Parmenio alone went up to him, and asked him how it came to pass that, when all others adored him, he should adore the high priest of the Jews? To whom he replied, “I did not adore him, but that God who hath honored him with his high priesthood; 11.334. for I saw this very person in a dream, in this very habit, when I was at Dios in Macedonia, who, when I was considering with myself how I might obtain the dominion of Asia, exhorted me to make no delay, but boldly to pass over the sea thither, for that he would conduct my army, and would give me the dominion over the Persians; 11.335. whence it is that, having seen no other in that habit, and now seeing this person in it, and remembering that vision, and the exhortation which I had in my dream, I believe that I bring this army under the divine conduct, and shall therewith conquer Darius, and destroy the power of the Persians, and that all things will succeed according to what is in my own mind.” 11.336. And when he had said this to Parmenio, and had given the high priest his right hand, the priests ran along by him, and he came into the city. And when he went up into the temple, he offered sacrifice to God, according to the high priest’s direction, and magnificently treated both the high priest and the priests. 11.337. And when the Book of Daniel was showed him wherein Daniel declared that one of the Greeks should destroy the empire of the Persians, he supposed that himself was the person intended. And as he was then glad, he dismissed the multitude for the present; but the next day he called them to him, and bid them ask what favors they pleased of him; 11.338. whereupon the high priest desired that they might enjoy the laws of their forefathers, and might pay no tribute on the seventh year. He granted all they desired. And when they entreated him that he would permit the Jews in Babylon and Media to enjoy their own laws also, he willingly promised to do hereafter what they desired. 11.339. And when he said to the multitude, that if any of them would enlist themselves in his army, on this condition, that they should continue under the laws of their forefathers, and live according to them, he was willing to take them with him, many were ready to accompany him in his wars. 11.341. for such is the disposition of the Samaritans, as we have already elsewhere declared, that when the Jews are in adversity, they deny that they are of kin to them, and then they confess the truth; but when they perceive that some good fortune hath befallen them, they immediately pretend to have communion with them, saying that they belong to them, and derive their genealogy from the posterity of Joseph, Ephraim, and Manasseh. 11.342. Accordingly, they made their address to the king with splendor, and showed great alacrity in meeting him at a little distance from Jerusalem. And when Alexander had commended them, the Shechemites approached to him, taking with them the troops that Sanballat had sent him, and they desired that he would come to their city, and do honor to their temple also; 11.343. to whom he promised, that when he returned he would come to them. And when they petitioned that he would remit the tribute of the seventh year to them, because they did not sow thereon, he asked who they were that made such a petition; 11.344. and when they said that they were Hebrews, but had the name of Sidonians, living at Shechem, he asked them again whether they were Jews; and when they said they were not Jews, “It was to the Jews,” said he, “that I granted that privilege; however, when I return, and am thoroughly informed by you of this matter, I will do what I shall think proper.” And in this manner he took leave of the Shechenlites; 11.345. but ordered that the troops of Sanballat should follow him into Egypt, because there he designed to give them lands, which he did a little after in Thebais, when he ordered them to guard that country. 11.346. 7. Now when Alexander was dead, the government was parted among his successors, but the temple upon Mount Gerizzim remained. And if any one were accused by those of Jerusalem of having eaten things common or of having broken the Sabbath, or of any other crime of the like nature 11.347. he fled away to the Shechemites, and said that he was accused unjustly. About this time it was that Jaddua the high priest died, and Onias his son took the high priesthood. This was the state of the affairs of the people of Jerusalem at this time. 13.171. 9. At this time there were three sects among the Jews, who had different opinions concerning human actions; the one was called the sect of the Pharisees, another the sect of the Sadducees, and the other the sect of the Essenes. 13.172. Now for the Pharisees, they say that some actions, but not all, are the work of fate, and some of them are in our own power, and that they are liable to fate, but are not caused by fate. But the sect of the Essenes affirm, that fate governs all things, and that nothing befalls men but what is according to its determination. 13.173. And for the Sadducees, they take away fate, and say there is no such thing, and that the events of human affairs are not at its disposal; but they suppose that all our actions are in our own power, so that we are ourselves the causes of what is good, and receive what is evil from our own folly. However, I have given a more exact account of these opinions in the second book of the Jewish War. 13.254. 1. But when Hyrcanus heard of the death of Antiochus, he presently made an expedition against the cities of Syria, hoping to find them destitute of fighting men, and of such as were able to defend them. 13.255. However, it was not till the sixth month that he took Medaba, and that not without the greatest distress of his army. After this he took Samega, and the neighboring places; and besides these, Shechem and Gerizzim, and the nation of the Cutheans 13.256. who dwelt at the temple which resembled that temple which was at Jerusalem, and which Alexander permitted Sanballat, the general of his army, to build for the sake of Manasseh, who was son-in-law to Jaddua the high priest, as we have formerly related; which temple was now deserted two hundred years after it was built. 13.277. who came readily to their assistance, but was beaten by Aristobulus; and when he was pursued as far as Scythopolis by the two brethren, he got away. So they returned to Samaria, and shut them again within the wall, till they were forced to send for the same Antiochus a second time to help them 13.278. who procured about six thousand men from Ptolemy Lathyrus, which were sent them without his mother’s consent, who had then in a manner turned him out of his government. With these Egyptians Antiochus did at first overrun and ravage the country of Hyrcanus after the manner of a robber, for he durst not meet him in the face to fight with him, as not having an army sufficient for that purpose, but only from this supposal, that by thus harassing his land he should force Hyrcanus to raise the siege of Samaria; 13.279. but because he fell into snares, and lost many of his soldiers therein, he went away to Tripoli, and committed the prosecution of the war against the Jews to Callimander and Epicrates. 13.282. Now a very surprising thing is related of this high priest Hyrcanus, how God came to discourse with him; for they say that on the very same day on which his sons fought with Antiochus Cyzicenus, he was alone in the temple, as high priest, offering incense, and heard a voice, that his sons had just then overcome Antiochus. 13.283. And this he openly declared before all the multitude upon his coming out of the temple; and it accordingly proved true; and in this posture were the affairs of Hyrcanus. 13.288. 5. However, this prosperous state of affairs moved the Jews to envy Hyrcanus; but they that were the worst disposed to him were the Pharisees, who were one of the sects of the Jews, as we have informed you already. These have so great a power over the multitude, that when they say any thing against the king, or against the high priest, they are presently believed. 13.289. Now Hyrcanus was a disciple of theirs, and greatly beloved by them. And when he once invited them to a feast, and entertained them very kindly, when he saw them in a good humor, he began to say to them, that they knew he was desirous to be a righteous man, and to do all things whereby he might please God, which was the profession of the Pharisees also. 13.291. a man of an ill temper, and delighting in seditious practices. This man said, “Since thou desirest to know the truth, if thou wilt be righteous in earnest, lay down the high priesthood, and content thyself with the civil government of the people,” 13.292. And when he desired to know for what cause he ought to lay down the high priesthood, the other replied, “We have heard it from old men, that thy mother had been a captive under the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes. “ This story was false, and Hyrcanus was provoked against him; and all the Pharisees had a very great indignation against him. 13.293. 6. Now there was one Jonathan, a very great friend of Hyrcanus’s, but of the sect of the Sadducees, whose notions are quite contrary to those of the Pharisees. He told Hyrcanus that Eleazar had cast such a reproach upon him, according to the common sentiments of all the Pharisees, and that this would be made manifest if he would but ask them the question, What punishment they thought this man deserved? 13.294. for that he might depend upon it, that the reproach was not laid on him with their approbation, if they were for punishing him as his crime deserved. So the Pharisees made answer, that he deserved stripes and bonds, but that it did not seem right to punish reproaches with death. And indeed the Pharisees, even upon other occasions, are not apt to be severe in punishments. 13.295. At this gentle sentence, Hyrcanus was very angry, and thought that this man reproached him by their approbation. It was this Jonathan who chiefly irritated him, and influenced him so far 13.296. that he made him leave the party of the Pharisees, and abolish the decrees they had imposed on the people, and to punish those that observed them. From this source arose that hatred which he and his sons met with from the multitude: 13.297. but of these matters we shall speak hereafter. What I would now explain is this, that the Pharisees have delivered to the people a great many observances by succession from their fathers, which are not written in the laws of Moses; and for that reason it is that the Sadducees reject them, and say that we are to esteem those observances to be obligatory which are in the written word, but are not to observe what are derived from the tradition of our forefathers. 13.298. And concerning these things it is that great disputes and differences have arisen among them, while the Sadducees are able to persuade none but the rich, and have not the populace obsequious to them, but the Pharisees have the multitude on their side. But about these two sects, and that of the Essenes, I have treated accurately in the second book of Jewish affairs. 14.22. There were present at the writing of this decree, Lucius Calpurnius Piso of the Menenian tribe, Servius Papinins Potitus of the Lemonian tribe, Caius Caninius Rebilius of the Terentine tribe, Publius Tidetius, Lucius Apulinus, the son of Lucius, of the Sergian tribe, Flavius, the son of Lucius, of the Lemonian tribe, Publius Platins, the son of Publius, of the Papyrian tribe, Marcus Acilius, the son of Marcus, of the Mecian tribe, Lucius Erucius, the son of Lucius, of the Stellatine tribe, Mareils Quintus Plancillus, the son of Marcus, of the Pollian tribe, and Publius Serius. 14.22. Now there was one, whose name was Onias, a righteous man he was, and beloved of God, who, in a certain drought, had prayed to God to put an end to the intense heat, and whose prayers God had heard, and had sent them rain. This man had hid himself, because he saw that this sedition would last a great while. However, they brought him to the Jewish camp, and desired, that as by his prayers he had once put an end to the drought, so he would in like manner make imprecations on Aristobulus and those of his faction. 14.25. and that no king nor people may have leave to export any goods, either out of the country of Judea, or out of their havens, without paying customs, but only Ptolemy, the king of Alexandria, because he is our confederate and friend; and that, according to their desire, the garrison that is in Joppa may be ejected. 14.25. 2. But God punished them immediately for this their barbarity, and took vengeance of them for the murder of Onias, in the manner following: While the priests and Aristobulus were besieged, it happened that the feast called the passover was come, at which it is our custom to offer a great number of sacrifices to God; 14.26. and desired of the people, that upon the restitution of their law and their liberty, by the senate and people of Rome, they may assemble together, according to their ancient legal custom, and that we will not bring any suit against them about it; and that a place may be given them where they may have their congregations, with their wives and children, and may offer, as did their forefathers, their prayers and sacrifices to God. 14.26. but those that were with Aristobulus wanted sacrifices, and desired that their countrymen without would furnish them with such sacrifices, and assured them they should have as much money for them as they should desire; and when they required them to pay a thousand drachmae for each head of cattle, Aristobulus and the priests willingly undertook to pay for them accordingly, and those within let down the money over the walls, and gave it them. 14.27. But when the others had received it, they did not deliver the sacrifices, but arrived at that height of wickedness as to break the assurances they had given, and to be guilty of impiety towards God, by not furnishing those that wanted them with sacrifices. 14.27. And as the war was drawn out into a great length, Marcus came from Rome to take Sextus’s government upon him. But Caesar was slain by Cassius and Brutus in the senate-house, after he had retained the government three years and six months. This fact however, is related elsewhere. 14.28. And when the priests found they had been cheated, and that the agreements they had made were violated, they prayed to God that he would avenge them on their countrymen. Nor did he delay that their punishment, but sent a strong and vehement storm of wind, that destroyed the fruits of the whole country, till a modius of wheat was then bought for eleven drachmae. 14.28. 4. However, Antipater little thought that by saving Malichus he had saved his own murderer; for now Cassius and Marcus had got together an army, and intrusted the entire care of it with Herod, and made him general of the forces of Celesyria, and gave him a fleet of ships, and an army of horsemen and footmen; and promised him, that after the war was over they would make him king of Judea; for a war was already begun between Antony and the younger Caesar: 15.425. It is also reported, that during the time that the temple was building, it did not rain in the daytime, but that the showers fell in the nights, so that the work was not hindered. And this our fathers have delivered to us; nor is it incredible, if any one have regard to the manifestations of God. And thus was performed the work of the rebuilding of the temple. 17.165. Now it happened, that during the time of the high priesthood of this Matthias, there was another person made high priest for a single day, that very day which the Jews observed as a fast. 17.166. The occasion was this: This Matthias the high priest, on the night before that day when the fast was to be celebrated, seemed, in a dream, to have conversation with his wife; and because he could not officiate himself on that account, Joseph, the son of Ellemus, his kinsman, assisted him in that sacred office. 18.257. 1. There was now a tumult arisen at Alexandria, between the Jewish inhabitants and the Greeks; and three ambassadors were chosen out of each party that were at variance, who came to Caius. Now one of these ambassadors from the people of Alexandria was Apion, who uttered many blasphemies against the Jews; and, among other things that he said, he charged them with neglecting the honors that belonged to Caesar; 18.258. for that while all who were subject to the Roman empire built altars and temples to Caius, and in other regards universally received him as they received the gods, these Jews alone thought it a dishonorable thing for them to erect statues in honor of him, as well as to swear by his name. 18.259. Many of these severe things were said by Apion, by which he hoped to provoke Caius to anger at the Jews, as he was likely to be. But Philo, the principal of the Jewish embassage, a man eminent on all accounts, brother to Alexander the alabarch, and one not unskillful in philosophy, was ready to betake himself to make his defense against those accusations; 18.261. 2. Hereupon Caius, taking it very heinously that he should be thus despised by the Jews alone, sent Petronius to be president of Syria, and successor in the government to Vitellius, and gave him order to make an invasion into Judea, with a great body of troops; and if they would admit of his statue willingly, to erect it in the temple of God; but if they were obstinate, to conquer them by war, and then to do it. 18.262. Accordingly, Petronius took the government of Syria, and made haste to obey Caesar’s epistle. He got together as great a number of auxiliaries as he possibly could, and took with him two legions of the Roman army, and came to Ptolemais, and there wintered, as intending to set about the war in the spring. He also wrote word to Caius what he had resolved to do, who commended him for his alacrity, and ordered him to go on, and to make war with them, in case they would not obey his commands. 18.263. But there came many ten thousands of the Jews to Petronius, to Ptolemais, to offer their petitions to him, that he would not compel them to transgress and violate the law of their forefathers; 18.264. “but if,” said they, “thou art entirely resolved to bring this statue, and erect it, do thou first kill us, and then do what thou hast resolved on; for while we are alive we cannot permit such things as are forbidden us to be done by the authority of our legislator, and by our forefathers’ determination that such prohibitions are instances of virtue.” 18.265. But Petronius was angry at them, and said, “If indeed I were myself emperor, and were at liberty to follow my own inclination, and then had designed to act thus, these your words would be justly spoken to me; but now Caesar hath sent to me, I am under the necessity of being subservient to his decrees, because a disobedience to them will bring upon me inevitable destruction.” 18.266. Then the Jews replied, “Since, therefore, thou art so disposed, O Petronius! that thou wilt not disobey Caius’s epistles, neither will we transgress the commands of our law; and as we depend upon the excellency of our laws, and, by the labors of our ancestors, have continued hitherto without suffering them to be transgressed, we dare not by any means suffer ourselves to be so timorous as to transgress those laws out of the fear of death 18.267. which God hath determined are for our advantage; and if we fall into misfortunes, we will bear them, in order to preserve our laws, as knowing that those who expose themselves to dangers have good hope of escaping them, because God will stand on our side, when, out of regard to him, we undergo afflictions, and sustain the uncertain turns of fortune. 18.268. But if we should submit to thee, we should be greatly reproached for our cowardice, as thereby showing ourselves ready to transgress our law; and we should incur the great anger of God also, who, even thyself being judge, is superior to Caius.” 18.269. 3. When Petronius saw by their words that their determination was hard to be removed, and that, without a war, he should not be able to be subservient to Caius in the dedication of his statue, and that there must be a great deal of bloodshed, he took his friends, and the servants that were about him, and hasted to Tiberias, as wanting to know in what posture the affairs of the Jews were; 18.271. and made supplication to him, that he would by no means reduce them to such distresses, nor defile their city with the dedication of the statue. Then Petronius said to them, “Will you then make war with Caesar, without considering his great preparations for war, and your own weakness?” They replied, “We will not by any means make war with him, but still we will die before we see our laws transgressed.” So they threw themselves down upon their faces, and stretched out their throats, and said they were ready to be slain; 18.272. and this they did for forty days together, and in the mean time left off the tilling of their ground, and that while the season of the year required them to sow it. Thus they continued firm in their resolution, and proposed to themselves to die willingly, rather than to see the dedication of the statue. 18.273. 4. When matters were in this state, Aristobulus, king Agrippa’s brother, and Helcias the Great, and the other principal men of that family with them, went in unto Petronius, and besought him 18.274. that since he saw the resolution of the multitude, he would not make any alteration, and thereby drive them to despair; but would write to Caius, that the Jews had an insuperable aversion to the reception of the statue, and how they continued with him, and left off the tillage of their ground: that they were not willing to go to war with him, because they were not able to do it, but were ready to die with pleasure, rather than suffer their laws to be transgressed: and how, upon the land’s continuing unsown, robberies would grow up, on the inability they would be under of paying their tributes; 18.275. and that perhaps Caius might be thereby moved to pity, and not order any barbarous action to be done to them, nor think of destroying the nation: that if he continues inflexible in his former opinion to bring a war upon them, he may then set about it himself. 18.276. And thus did Aristobulus, and the rest with him, supplicate Petronius. So Petronius, partly on account of the pressing instances which Aristobulus and the rest with him made, and because of the great consequence of what they desired, and the earnestness wherewith they made their supplication,— 18.277. partly on account of the firmness of the opposition made by the Jews, which he saw, while he thought it a horrible thing for him to be such a slave to the madness of Caius, as to slay so many ten thousand men, only because of their religious disposition towards God, and after that to pass his life in expectation of punishment; Petronius, I say, thought it much better to send to Caius, and to let him know how intolerable it was to him to bear the anger he might have against him for not serving him sooner, in obedience to his epistle 18.278. for that perhaps he might persuade him; and that if this mad resolution continued, he might then begin the war against them; nay, that in case he should turn his hatred against himself, it was fit for virtuous persons even to die for the sake of such vast multitudes of men. Accordingly, he determined to hearken to the petitioners in this matter. 18.279. 5. He then called the Jews together to Tiberias, who came many ten thousands in number; he also placed that army he now had with him opposite to them; but did not discover his own meaning, but the commands of the emperor, and told them that his wrath would, without delay, be executed on such as had the courage to disobey what he had commanded, and this immediately; and that it was fit for him, who had obtained so great a dignity by his grant, not to contradict him in any thing:— 18.281. I will, therefore, send to Caius, and let him know what your resolutions are, and will assist your suit as far as I am able, that you may not be exposed to suffer on account of the honest designs you have proposed to yourselves; and may God be your assistant, for his authority is beyond all the contrivance and power of men; and may he procure you the preservation of your ancient laws, and may not he be deprived, though without your consent, of his accustomed honors. 18.282. But if Caius be irritated, and turn the violence of his rage upon me, I will rather undergo all that danger and that affliction that may come either on my body or my soul, than see so many of you to perish, while you are acting in so excellent a manner. 18.283. Do you, therefore, every one of you, go your way about your own occupations, and fall to the cultivation of your ground; I will myself send to Rome, and will not refuse to serve you in all things, both by myself and by my friends.” 18.284. 6. When Petronius had said this, and had dismissed the assembly of the Jews, he desired the principal of them to take care of their husbandry, and to speak kindly to the people, and encourage them to have good hope of their affairs. Thus did he readily bring the multitude to be cheerful again. And now did God show his presence to Petronius, and signify to him that he would afford him his assistance in his whole design; 18.285. for he had no sooner finished the speech that he made to the Jews, but God sent down great showers of rain, contrary to human expectation; for that day was a clear day, and gave no sign, by the appearance of the sky, of any rain; nay, the whole year had been subject to a great drought, and made men despair of any water from above, even when at any time they saw the heavens overcast with clouds; 18.286. insomuch that when such a great quantity of rain came, and that in an unusual manner, and without any other expectation of it, the Jews hoped that Petronius would by no means fail in his petition for them. But as to Petronius, he was mightily surprised when he perceived that God evidently took care of the Jews, and gave very plain signs of his appearance, and this to such a degree, that those that were in earnest much inclined to the contrary had no power left to contradict it. 18.287. This was also among those other particulars which he wrote to Caius, which all tended to dissuade him, and by all means to entreat him not to make so many ten thousands of these men go distracted; whom, if he should slay, (for without war they would by no means suffer the laws of their worship to be set aside,) he would lose the revenue they paid him, and would be publicly cursed by them for all future ages. 18.288. Moreover, that God, who was their Governor, had shown his power most evidently on their account, and that such a power of his as left no room for doubt about it. And this was the business that Petronius was now engaged in. 18.289. 7. But king Agrippa, who now lived at Rome, was more and more in the favor of Caius; and when he had once made him a supper, and was careful to exceed all others, both in expenses and in such preparations as might contribute most to his pleasure; 18.291. hereupon Caius admired his understanding and magnificence, that he should force himself to do all to please him, even beyond such expenses as he could bear, and was desirous not to be behind Agrippa in that generosity which he exerted in order to please him. So Caius, when he had drank wine plentifully, and was merrier than ordinary, said thus during the feast, when Agrippa had drunk to him: 18.292. “I knew before now how great a respect thou hast had for me, and how great kindness thou hast shown me, though with those hazards to thyself, which thou underwentest under Tiberius on that account; nor hast thou omitted any thing to show thy good-will towards us, even beyond thy ability; whence it would be a base thing for me to be conquered by thy affection. I am therefore desirous to make thee amends for every thing in which I have been formerly deficient; 18.293. for all that I have bestowed on thee, that may be called my gifts, is but little. Everything that may contribute to thy happiness shall be at thy service, and that cheerfully, and so far as my ability will reach.” And this was what Caius said to Agrippa, thinking he would ask for some large country, or the revenues of certain cities. 18.294. But although he had prepared beforehand what he would ask, yet had he not discovered his intentions, but made this answer to Caius immediately: That it was not out of any expectation of gain that he formerly paid his respects to him, contrary to the commands of Tiberius, nor did he now do any thing relating to him out of regard to his own advantage, and in order to receive any thing from him; 18.295. that the gifts he had already bestowed upon him were great, and beyond the hopes of even a craving man; for although they may be beneath thy power, [who art the donor,] yet are they greater than my inclination and dignity, who am the receiver. 18.296. And as Caius was astonished at Agrippa’s inclinations, and still the more pressed him to make his request for somewhat which he might gratify him with, Agrippa replied, “Since thou, O my lord! declarest such is thy readiness to grant, that I am worthy of thy gifts, I will ask nothing relating to my own felicity; for what thou hast already bestowed on me has made me excel therein; 18.297. but I desire somewhat which may make thee glorious for piety, and render the Divinity assistant to thy designs, and may be for an honor to me among those that inquire about it, as showing that I never once fail of obtaining what I desire of thee; for my petition is this, that thou wilt no longer think of the dedication of that statue which thou hast ordered to be set up in the Jewish temple by Petronius.” 18.298. 8. And thus did Agrippa venture to cast the die upon this occasion, so great was the affair in his opinion, and in reality, though he knew how dangerous a thing it was so to speak; for had not Caius approved of it, it had tended to no less than the loss of his life. 18.299. So Caius, who was mightily taken with Agrippa’s obliging behavior, and on other accounts thinking it a dishonorable thing to be guilty of falsehood before so many witnesses, in points wherein he had with such alacrity forced Agrippa to become a petitioner, and that it would look as if he had already repented of what he had said 18.301. “If therefore,” said’ he, “thou hast already erected my statue, let it stand; but if thou hast not yet dedicated it, do not trouble thyself further about it, but dismiss thy army, go back, and take care of those affairs which I sent thee about at first, for I have now no occasion for the erection of that statue. This I have granted as a favor to Agrippa, a man whom I honor so very greatly, that I am not able to contradict what he would have, or what he desired me to do for him.” 18.302. And this was what Caius wrote to Petronius, which was before he received his letter, informing him that the Jews were very ready to revolt about the statue, and that they seemed resolved to threaten war against the Romans, and nothing else. 18.303. When therefore Caius was much displeased that any attempt should be made against his government as he was a slave to base and vicious actions on all occasions, and had no regard to What was virtuous and honorable, and against whomsoever he resolved to show his anger, and that for any cause whatsoever, he suffered not himself to be restrained by any admonition, but thought the indulging his anger to be a real pleasure, he wrote thus to Petronius: 18.304. “Seeing thou esteemest the presents made thee by the Jews to be of greater value than my commands, and art grown insolent enough to be subservient to their pleasure, I charge thee to become thy own judge, and to consider what thou art to do, now thou art under my displeasure; for I will make thee an example to the present and to all future ages, that they. may not dare to contradict the commands of their emperor.” 18.305. 9. This was the epistle which Caius wrote to. Petronius; but Petronius did not receive it while Caius was alive, that ship which carried it sailing so slow, that other letters came to Petronius before this, by which he understood that Caius was dead; 18.306. for God would not forget the dangers Petronius had undertaken on account of the Jews, and of his own honor. But when he had taken Caius away, out of his indignation of what he had so insolently attempted in assuming to himself divine worship, both Rome and all that dominion conspired with Petronius, especially those that were of the senatorian order, to give Caius his due reward, because he had been unmercifully severe to them; 18.307. for he died not long after he had written to Petronius that epistle which threatened him with death. But as for the occasion of his death, and the nature of the plot against him, I shall relate them in the progress of this narration. 18.308. Now that epistle which informed Petronius of Caius’s death came first, and a little afterward came that which commanded him to kill himself with his own hands. Whereupon he rejoiced at this coincidence as to the death of Caius 18.309. and admired God’s providence, who, without the least delay, and immediately, gave him a reward for the regard he had to the temple, and the assistance he afforded the Jews for avoiding the dangers they were in. And by this means Petronius escaped that danger of death, which he could not foresee.
15. Josephus Flavius, Jewish War, 1.63, 1.65, 2.184-2.203, 3.399-3.408, 7.423 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) 1.63. So he took Medaba and Samea, with the towns in their neighborhood, as also Shechem, and Gerizzim; and besides these, [he subdued] the nation of the Cutheans, who dwelt round about that temple which was built in imitation of the temple at Jerusalem; he also took a great many other cities of Idumea, with Adoreon and Marissa. 1.63. “Thou, O father, hast made my apology for me; for how can I be a parricide, whom thou thyself confessest to have always had for thy guardian? Thou callest my filial affection prodigious lies and hypocrisy! how then could it be that I, who was so subtle in other matters, should here be so mad as not to understand that it was not easy that he who committed so horrid a crime should be concealed from men, but impossible that he should be concealed from the Judge of heaven, who sees all things, and is present everywhere? 1.65. They also invited Antiochus, who was called Cyzicenus, to come to their assistance; whereupon he got ready, and complied with their invitation, but was beaten by Aristobulus and Antigonus; and indeed he was pursued as far as Scythopolis by these brethren, and fled away from them. So they returned back to Samaria, and shut the multitude again within the wall; and when they had taken the city, they demolished it, and made slaves of its inhabitants. 1.65. for it was unlawful there should be any such thing in the temple as images, or faces, or the like representation of any animal whatsoever. Now the king had put up a golden eagle over the great gate of the temple, which these learned men exhorted them to cut down; and told them, that if there should any danger arise, it was a glorious thing to die for the laws of their country; because that the soul was immortal, and that an eternal enjoyment of happiness did await such as died on that account; while the mean-spirited, and those that were not wise enough to show a right love of their souls, preferred death by a disease, before that which is the result of a virtuous behavior. 2.184. 1. Now Caius Caesar did so grossly abuse the fortune he had arrived at, as to take himself to be a god, and to desire to be so called also, and to cut off those of the greatest nobility out of his country. He also extended his impiety as far as the Jews. 2.185. Accordingly, he sent Petronius with an army to Jerusalem, to place his statues in the temple, and commanded him that, in case the Jews would not admit of them, he should slay those that opposed it, and carry all the rest of the nation into captivity: 2.186. but God concerned himself with these his commands. However, Petronius marched out of Antioch into Judea, with three legions, and many Syrian auxiliaries. 2.187. Now as to the Jews, some of them could not believe the stories that spake of a war; but those that did believe them were in the utmost distress how to defend themselves, and the terror diffused itself presently through them all; for the army was already come to Ptolemais. 2.188. 2. This Ptolemais is a maritime city of Galilee, built in the great plain. It is encompassed with mountains: that on the east side, sixty furlongs off, belongs to Galilee; but that on the south belongs to Carmel, which is distant from it a hundred and twenty furlongs; and that on the north is the highest of them all, and is called by the people of the country, The Ladder of the Tyrians, which is at the distance of a hundred furlongs. 2.189. The very small river Belus runs by it, at the distance of two furlongs; near which there is Memnon’s monument, and hath near it a place no larger than a hundred cubits, which deserves admiration; 2.191. And what is to me still more wonderful, that glassy sand which is superfluous, and is once removed out of the place, becomes bare common sand again. And this is the nature of the place we are speaking of. 2.192. 3. But now the Jews got together in great numbers, with their wives and children, into that plain that was by Ptolemais, and made supplication to Petronius, first for their laws, and, in the next place, for themselves. So he was prevailed upon by the multitude of the supplicants, and by their supplications, and left his army and statues at Ptolemais 2.193. and then went forward into Galilee, and called together the multitude and all the men of note to Tiberias, and showed them the power of the Romans, and the threatenings of Caesar; and, besides this, proved that their petition was unreasonable, because 2.194. while all the nations in subjection to them had placed the images of Caesar in their several cities, among the rest of their gods,—for them alone to oppose it, was almost like the behavior of revolters, and was injurious to Caesar. 2.195. 4. And when they insisted on their law, and the custom of their country, and how it was not only not permitted them to make either an image of God, or indeed of a man, and to put it in any despicable part of their country, much less in the temple itself, Petronius replied, “And am not I also,” said he, “bound to keep the law of my own lord? For if I transgress it, and spare you, it is but just that I perish; while he that sent me, and not I, will commence a war against you; for I am under command as well as you.” 2.196. Hereupon the whole multitude cried out that they were ready to suffer for their law. Petronius then quieted them, and said to them, “Will you then make war against Caesar?” 2.197. The Jews said, “We offer sacrifices twice every day for Caesar, and for the Roman people;” but that if he would place the images among them, he must first sacrifice the whole Jewish nation; and that they were ready to expose themselves, together with their children and wives, to be slain. 2.198. At this Petronius was astonished, and pitied them, on account of the inexpressible sense of religion the men were under, and that courage of theirs which made them ready to die for it; so they were dismissed without success. 2.199. 5. But on the following days he got together the men of power privately, and the multitude publicly, and sometimes he used persuasions to them, and sometimes he gave them his advice; but he chiefly made use of threatenings to them, and insisted upon the power of the Romans, and the anger of Caius; and besides, upon the necessity he was himself under [to do as he was enjoined]. 2.201. and told them that it was best for him to run some hazard himself; “for either, by the Divine assistance, I shall prevail with Caesar, and shall myself escape the danger as well as you, which will be a matter of joy to us both; or, in case Caesar continue in his rage, I will be ready to expose my own life for such a great number as you are.” Whereupon he dismissed the multitude, who prayed greatly for his prosperity; and he took the army out of Ptolemais, and returned to Antioch; 2.202. from whence he presently sent an epistle to Caesar, and informed him of the irruption he had made into Judea, and of the supplications of the nation; and that unless he had a mind to lose both the country and the men in it, he must permit them to keep their law, and must countermand his former injunction. 2.203. Caius answered that epistle in a violent-way, and threatened to have Petronius put to death for his being so tardy in the execution of what he had commanded. But it happened that those who brought Caius’s epistle were tossed by a storm, and were detained on the sea for three months, while others that brought the news of Caius’s death had a good voyage. Accordingly, Petronius received the epistle concerning Caius seven and twenty days before he received that which was against himself. 3.399. 9. When Josephus heard him give those orders, he said that he had somewhat in his mind that he would willingly say to himself alone. When therefore they were all ordered to withdraw, excepting Titus and two of their friends, he said 3.401. Dost thou send me to Nero? For why? Are Nero’s successors till they come to thee still alive? Thou, O Vespasian, art Caesar and emperor, thou, and this thy son. 3.402. Bind me now still faster, and keep me for thyself, for thou, O Caesar, are not only lord over me, but over the land and the sea, and all mankind; and certainly I deserve to be kept in closer custody than I now am in, in order to be punished, if I rashly affirm anything of God.” 3.403. When he had said this, Vespasian at present did not believe him, but supposed that Josephus said this as a cunning trick, in order to his own preservation; 3.404. but in a little time he was convinced, and believed what he said to be true, God himself erecting his expectations, so as to think of obtaining the empire, and by other signs foreshowing his advancement. 3.405. He also found Josephus to have spoken truth on other occasions; for one of those friends that were present at that secret conference said to Josephus, “I cannot but wonder how thou couldst not foretell to the people of Jotapata that they should be taken, nor couldst foretell this captivity which hath happened to thyself, unless what thou now sayest be a vain thing, in order to avoid the rage that is risen against thyself.” 3.406. To which Josephus replied, “I did foretell to the people of Jotapata that they would be taken on the forty-seventh day, and that I should be caught alive by the Romans.” 3.407. Now when Vespasian had inquired of the captives privately about these predictions, he found them to be true, and then he began to believe those that concerned himself. 3.408. Yet did he not set Josephus at liberty from his bands, but bestowed on him suits of clothes, and other precious gifts; he treated him also in a very obliging manner, and continued so to do, Titus still joining his interest in the honors that were done him. 7.423. Onias, the son of Simon, one of the Jewish high priests, fled from Antiochus the king of Syria, when he made war with the Jews, and came to Alexandria; and as Ptolemy received him very kindly, on account of his hatred to Antiochus, he assured him, that if he would comply with his proposal, he would bring all the Jews to his assistance;
16. Mishnah, Avot, 1.2-1.3 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) 1.2. Shimon the Righteous was one of the last of the men of the great assembly. He used to say: the world stands upon three things: the Torah, the Temple service, and the practice of acts of piety." 1.3. Antigonus a man of Socho received [the oral tradition] from Shimon the Righteous. He used to say: do not be like servants who serve the master in the expectation of receiving a reward, but be like servants who serve the master without the expectation of receiving a reward, and let the fear of Heaven be upon you."
17. Mishnah, Ketuvot, 7.6 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) 7.6. These leave [their marriage] without their ketubah: A wife who transgresses the law of Moses or Jewish law. And what is the law of Moses? Feeding her husband with untithed food, having intercourse with him while in the period of her menstruation, not separating dough offering, or making vows and not fulfilling them. And what is Jewish practice? Going out with her head uncovered, spinning wool in the marketplace or conversing with every man. Abba Shaul says: also one who curses her husband’s parents in his presence. Rabbi Tarfon says: also one who has a loud voice. And who is regarded as one who has a loud voice? A woman whose voice can be heard by her neighbors when she speaks inside her house."
18. Mishnah, Parah, 3.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) 3.5. If they did not find the residue of the ashes of the seven [red cows] they performed the sprinkling with those of six, of five, of four, of three, of two or of one. And who prepared these? Moses prepared the first, Ezra prepared the second, and five were prepared from the time of Ezra, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: seven from the time of Ezra. And who prepared them? Shimon the Just and Yoha the high priest prepared two; Elihoenai the son of Ha-Kof and Hanamel the Egyptian and Ishmael the son of Piabi prepared one each."
19. Mishnah, Rosh Hashanah, 4.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) 4.1. If Yom Tov of Rosh Hashanah fell on Shabbat, they would blow the shofar in the Temple but not in the country. After the destruction of the Temple, Rabban Yoha ben Zakai decreed that it should be blown [on Shabbat] in every place where there was a court. Rabbi Eliezer said: Rabban Yoha ben Zakai decreed for Yavneh only. They said to him: both Yavneh and any place where there is a court."
20. Mishnah, Sotah, 9.9 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) 9.9. When murderers multiplied, the [ceremony of] breaking a heifer’s neck ceased. That was from the time of Eliezer ben Dinai, and he was also called Tehinah ben Perisha and he was afterwards renamed “son of the murderer”. When adulterers multiplied, the ceremony of the bitter waters ceased and it was Rabban Yoha ben Zakkai who discontinued it, as it is said, “I will not punish their daughters for fornicating, nor their daughters-in-law for committing adultery, for they themselves [turn aside with whores and sacrifice with prostitutes]” (Hosea 4:14). When Yose ben Yoezer of Zeredah and Yose ben Yoha of Jerusalem died, the grape-clusters ceased, as it is said, “There is not a cluster [of grapes] to eat; not a ripe fig I could desire [The pious are vanished from the land, none upright are left among men” (Micah 7:1-2)."
21. Mishnah, Sukkah, 4.9 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) 4.9. How was the water libation [performed]? A golden flask holding three logs was filled from the Shiloah. When they arrived at the water gate, they sounded a teki'ah [long blast], a teru'ah [a staccato note] and again a teki'ah. [The priest then] went up the ascent [of the altar] and turned to his left where there were two silver bowls. Rabbi Judah says: they were of plaster [but they looked silver] because their surfaces were darkened from the wine. They had each a hole like a slender snout, one being wide and the other narrow so that both emptied at the same time. The one on the west was for water and the one on the east for wine. If he poured the flask of water into the bowl for wine, or that of wine into that for water, he has fulfilled his obligation. Rabbi Judah says: with one log he performed the ceremony of the water-libation all eight days. To [the priest] who performed the libation they used to say, “Raise your hand”, for one time, a certain man poured out the water over his feet, and all the people pelted him with their etrogs."
22. Mishnah, Taanit, 3.8 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) 3.8. For every trouble that should not come upon the community they sound a blast except on account of too much rain. It happened that they said to Honi the circle drawer: “Pray for rain to fall.” He replied: “Go and bring in the pesah ovens so that they do not dissolve.” He prayed and no rain fell. What did he do? He drew a circle and stood within it and exclaimed before Him: “Master of the universe, Your children have turned their faces to me because I am like one who was born in Your house. I swear by Your great name that I will not move from here until You have mercy upon Your children.” Rain then began to drip, and he exclaimed: “I did not request this but rain [which can fill] cisterns, ditches and caves. The rain then began to come down with great force, and he exclaimed: “I did not request this but pleasing rain of blessing and abudance.” Rain then fell in the normal way until the Jews in Jerusalem had to go up Temple Mount because of the rain. They came and said to him: “In the same way that you prayed for [the rain] to fall pray [now] for the rain to stop.” He replied: “Go and see if the stone of people claiming lost objects has washed away.” Rabbi Shimon ben Shetah sent to him: “Were you not Honi I would have excommunicated you, but what can I do to you, for you are spoiled before God and he does your will like a son that is spoiled before his father and his father does his request. Concerning you it is written, “Let your father and your mother rejoice, and let she that bore you rejoice” (Proverbs 23:25)."
23. Tosefta, Avodah Zarah, 4.6 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
24. Tosefta, Parah, 3.8 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
25. Tosefta, Sotah, 13.3-13.6, 13.8 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) 13.8. The year in which Shimon the Righteous died [he said to them] \"in this year I will die\" \"how do you know this?\" they responded. He (Shimon the Righteous) responded: \"all of the Yom Kippur days there was an old man dressed in all white who would go with me into the holy of holies and leave with me, on this year he went in with me but did not come out with me.\" Seven days passed after the holiday and he died. From the time of the death of Rebbi Shimon the Righteous they ceased blessing in the name of Hashem."
26. Tosefta, Sukkah, 3.16 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
27. Tosefta, Yevamot, 14.7 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
28. Anon., Lamentations Rabbah, 1.5 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) 1.5. חַד מִירוּשָׁלַיִם אֲזַל גַּבֵּי תַּגָּרָא בְּאַתֵּינַס, אֲתָא אִיתְקַבֵּל בַּחֲנוּת, אַשְׁכַּח בְּנֵי נָשֵׁי שָׁרוּן יָתְבִין וְשַׁתְיָין חַמְרָא, מִדְּאֲכַל וְשָׁתָה בָּעֵי מִדְמוּךְ תַּמָּן, אָמְרִין לֵיהּ עֲבָדִין בֵּינַן דְּלָא נְקַבֵּל בַּר נָשׁ אַכְסַנָּאי אֶלָא עַד דִּקְפַץ תְּלַת קְפִיצִין. אֲמַר לוֹן וּמִי אֲנָא יָדַע אֵיךְ אַתּוּן קְפִיצִין אֶלָּא קוּם עֲבֵיד קוֹדָמוֹי וְאֶעֱבַד אֲנָא בַּתְרָךְ כְּוָתָךְ, קָם חַד מִנְהוֹן וּקְפַץ וְאִישְׁתְּכַח בְּמִצְעֵי דַּחֲנוּת, וּקְפַץ אוֹחֲרָן אִישְׁתְּכַח עַל תַּרְעָא פּוּמָא דַּחֲנוּתָא, קְפַץ אוֹחֲרָן וְאִישְׁתְּכַח לְבָרָא, קָם וּטְרַד תַּרְעָא בְּאַפֵּיהוֹן, אֲמַר לוֹן חַיֵּיכוֹן מַה דִּבְעִיתוּ לְמֶעֱבַד לִי עֲבַדִית לְכוֹן.
29. Anon., Leviticus Rabba, 13.5 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) 13.5. אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן כָּל הַנְּבִיאִים רָאוּ הַמַּלְכֻיּוֹת בְּעִסּוּקָן, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (בראשית ב, י): וְנָהָר יֹצֵא מֵעֵדֶן לְהַשְׁקוֹת וגו', רַבִּי תַּנְחוּמָא וְאַמְרֵי לָהּ רַבִּי מְנַחֲמָא בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי אָמַר עָתִיד הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְהַשְׁקוֹת כּוֹס הַתַּרְעֵלָה לְאֻמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם לֶעָתִיד לָבוֹא, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב: וְנָהָר יֹצֵא מֵעֵדֶן, מָקוֹם שֶׁהַדִּין יוֹצֵא, (בראשית ב, י): וּמִשָּׁם יִפָּרֵד וְהָיָה לְאַרְבָּעָה רָאשִׁים, אֵלּוּ אַרְבָּעָה נְהָרוֹת, (בראשית ב, יא): שֵׁם הָאֶחָד פִּישׁוֹן, זֶה בָּבֶל, עַל שֵׁם (חבקוק א, ח): וּפָשׁוּ פָּרָשָׁיו. (בראשית ב, יא): הוּא הַסֹּבֵב אֵת כָּל אֶרֶץ הַחֲוִילָה, נְבוּכַדְנֶצַּר הָרָשָׁע שֶׁעָלָה וְהִקִּיף אֶת כָּל אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁמְּיַחֶלֶת לְהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (תהלים מב, ו): הוֹחִלִי לֵאלֹהִים. (בראשית ב, יא): אֲשֶׁר שָׁם הַזָּהָב, אֵלּוּ דִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהלים יט, יא): הַנֶּחֱמָדִים מִזָּהָב וּמִפָּז רָב. (בראשית ב, יב): וּזֲהַב הָאָרֶץ הַהִוא טוֹב, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁאֵין תּוֹרָה כְּתוֹרַת אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאֵין חָכְמָה כְּחָכְמַת אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל, (בראשית ב, יב): שָׁם הַבְּדֹלַח וְאֶבֶן הַשֹּׁהַם, מִקְרָא מִשְׁנָה תַּלְמוּד הֲלָכוֹת וְאַגָּדוֹת. (בראשית ב, יג): וְשֵׁם הַנָּהָר הַשֵּׁנִי גִיחוֹן, זֶה מָדַי, שֶׁהֶעֱמִידָה אֶת הָמָן הָרָשָׁע שֶׁמָּשַׁךְ עִסָּה כַּנָּחָשׁ, עַל שׁוּם (בראשית ג, יד): עַל גְּחֹנְךָ תֵלֵךְ. (בראשית ב, יג): הוּא הַסּוֹבֵב אֶת כָּל אֶרֶץ כּוּשׁ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (אסתר א, א): מֵהוֹדוּ וְעַד כּוּשׁ. (בראשית ב, יד): וְשֵׁם הַנָּהָר הַשְּׁלִישִׁי חִדֶּקֶל, זוֹ יָוָן, שֶׁהִיא חַדָּה וְקַלָּה בִּגְזֵרוֹתֶיהָ עַל יִשְׂרָאֵל, וְאוֹמֵר לָהֶם כִּתְבוּ עַל קֶרֶן הַשּׁוֹר שֶׁאֵין לְיִשְׂרָאֵל חֵלֶק בֵּאלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל. (בראשית ב, יד): הַהֹלֵךְ קִדְמַת אַשּׁוּר, אָמַר רַב הוּנָא כָּל הַמַּלְכֻיּוֹת נִקְרְאוּ עַל שֵׁם אַשּׁוּר, שֶׁהָיוּ מְאַשְׁרִין עַצְמָן מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא, כָּל הַמַּלְכֻיּוֹת נִקְרְאוּ עַל שֵׁם מִצְרַיִם, עַל שֵׁם שֶׁהָיוּ מְצֵירִין לְיִשְׂרָאֵל. (בראשית ב, יד): וְהַנָּהָר הָרְבִיעִי הוּא פְרָת, הוּא אֱדוֹם שֶׁפָּרָת וְרָבָת בִּתְפִלָּתוֹ שֶׁל זָקֵן. דָּבָר אַחֵר, שֶׁפָּרָת וְרָבָת וְהֵצֵירָה לְעוֹלָמוֹ שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל. דָּבָר אַחֵר, שֶׁפָּרָת וְרָבָת וְהֵצֵירָה לִבְנוֹ. דָּבָר אַחֵר, שֶׁפָּרָת וְרָבָת וְהֵצֵירָה לְבֵיתוֹ. דָּבָר אַחֵר, פָּרָת עַל שׁוּם סוֹפָהּ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ישעיה סג, ג): פּוּרָה דָרַכְתִּי לְבַדִּי. אַבְרָהָם רָאָה הַמַּלְכֻיּוֹת בְּעִסּוּקָן (בראשית טו, יב): וְהִנֵּה אֵימָה, זוֹ בָּבֶל עַל שֵׁם (דניאל ג, יט): נְבוּכַדְנֶצַּר הִתְמְלִי חֱמָא. (בראשית טו, יב): חֲשֵׁכָה, זוֹ מָדַי, שֶׁהֶחֱשִׁיכָה בִּגְזֵרוֹתֶיהָ אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (אסתר ג, יג): לְהַשְׁמִיד לַהֲרֹג וּלְאַבֵּד. (בראשית טו, יב): גְּדֹלָה, זוֹ יָוָן, אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן מְלַמֵּד שֶׁהָיְתָה מַלְכוּת יָוָן מַעֲמֶדֶת מֵאָה וְשִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד אִפַּרְכִין, מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים וְשִׁבְעָה אִסְטְרָטָלִיטוּן, וְרַבָּנָן אָמְרִין שִׁשִּׁים שִׁשִׁים, וְרַבִּי בֶּרֶכְיָה וְרַבִּי חָנִין עַל הֲדָא דְרַבָּנָן (דברים ח, טו): הַמּוֹלִיכְךָ בַּמִּדְבָּר הַגָּדֹל וְהַנּוֹרָא נָחָשׁ שָׂרָף וְעַקְרָב, נָחָשׁ זֶה בָּבֶל. שָׂרָף, זֶה מָדַי. עַקְרָב, זֶה יָוָן, מָה עַקְרָב זֶה מַשְׁרֶצֶת שִׁשִּׁים שִׁשִּׁים, כָּךְ הָיְתָה מַלְכוּת יָוָן מַעֲמֶדֶת שִׁשִּׁים שִׁשִּׁים. (בראשית טו, יב): נֹפֶלֶת, זוֹ אֱדוֹם, עַל שֵׁם (ירמיה מט, כא): מִקּוֹל נִפְלָם רָעֲשָׁה הָאָרֶץ. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים אֵימָה, זוֹ אֱדוֹם, עַל שֵׁם (דניאל ז, ז): דְּחִילָה וְאֵימְתָנִי. חֲשֵׁכָה, זוֹ יָוָן. גְּדֹלָה, זוֹ מָדַי, עַל שֵׁם (אסתר ג, א): גִּדַּל הַמֶּלֶךְ אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ. נֹפֶלֶת, זוֹ בָּבֶל, עַל שֵׁם (ישעיה כא, ט): נָפְלָה נָפְלָה בָּבֶל. רָאָה דָּנִיֵּאל אֶת הַמַּלְכֻיּוֹת בְּעִסּוּקָן, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (דניאל ז, ב ג): חָזֵה הֲוֵית בְּחֶזְוִי עִם לֵילְיָא וַאֲרוּ אַרְבַּע רוּחֵי שְׁמַיָא מְגִיחָן לְיַמָּא רַבָּא, וְאַרְבַּע חֵיוָן רַבְרְבָן סָלְקָן מִן יַמָּא, אִם זְכִיתֶם מִן יַמָּא וְאִם לָאו מִן חוֹרְשָׁא, הֲדָא חֵיוְתָא דְיַמָּא כִּי סָלְקָא מִן יַמָּא הִיא מִמַּכְיָא, סָלְקָא מִן חוֹרְשָׁא לֵית הִיא מִמַּכְיָא, דְכַוָּותָא (תהלים פ, יד): יְכַרְסְמֶנָּה חֲזִיר מִיָּעַר, עַיִ"ן תְּלוּיָה, אִם זְכִיתֶם מִן הַיְאוֹר וְאִם לָאו מִן הַיַּעַר, הֲדָא חֵיוְתָא כִּי סָלְקָא מִן נַהֲרָא הִיא מִמַּכְיָא, סָלְקָא מִן חוֹרְשָׁא לֵית הִיא מִמַּכְיָא, (דניאל ז, ג): שָׁנְיָן דָּא מִן דָּא, אַל תִּקְרֵי שָׁנְיָן אֶלָּא סָנְיָן דָּא מִן דָּא, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁכָּל אֻמָּה שֶׁשּׁוֹלֶטֶת בָּעוֹלָם הִיא שׂוֹנְאָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל וּמְשַׁעְבְּדָא בָּהֶן. (דניאל ז, ד): קַדְמָיְתָא כְאַרְיֵה, זוֹ בָּבֶל, יִרְמְיָה רָאָה אוֹתָהּ אֲרִי וְרָאָה אוֹתָהּ נֶשֶׁר, דִּכְתִיב (ירמיה ד, ז): עָלָה אַרְיֵה מִסֻּבְּכוֹ (ירמיה מט, כב): הִנֵּה כַנֶּשֶׁר יַעֲלֶה וְיִדְאֶה, אָמְרִין לְדָנִיֵּאל אַתּ מָה חָמֵית לְהוֹן, אָמַר לְהוֹן חָמֵיתִי אַפִּין כְּאַרְיֵה וְגַפִּין דִּי נְשַׁר, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (דניאל ז, ד): קַדְמָיְתָא כְאַרְיֵה וְגַפִּין דִּי נְשַׁר לַהּ חָזֵה הֲוֵית עַד דִּי מְּרִיטוּ גַּפֵּיהּ וּנְטִילַת מִן אַרְעָא. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר וְרַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן, רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר כָּל אוֹתוֹ אֲרִי לָקָה וְלִבּוֹ לֹא לָקָה, דִּכְתִיב (דניאל ז, ד): וּלְבַב אֱנָשׁ יְהִיב לַהּ. וְרַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן אָמַר אַף לִבּוֹ לָקָה, דִּכְתִיב (דניאל ד, יג): לִבְבֵהּ מִן אֲנָשָׁא יְשַׁנּוֹן. חָזֵה הֲוֵית (דניאל ז, ה): וַאֲרוּ חֵיוָה אָחֳרֵי תִנְיָנָא דָמְיָא לְדֹב, לְדב כְּתִיב זֶה מָדַי, הוּא דַעְתֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן (ירמיה ה, ו): עַל כֵּן הִכָּם אַרְיֵה מִיַּעַר, זוֹ בָּבֶל. (ירמיה ה, ו): זְאֵב עֲרָבוֹת יְשָׁדְדֵם, זוֹ מָדַי. (ירמיה ה, ו): נָמֵר שֹׁקֵד עַל עָרֵיהֶם, זוֹ יָוָן. (ירמיה ה, ו): כָּל הַיּוֹצֵא מֵהֵנָּה יִטָּרֵף, זוֹ אֱדוֹם, לָמָּה, (ירמיה ה, ו): כִּי רַבּוּ פִּשְׁעֵיהֶם עָצְמוּ מְשֻׁבוֹתֵיהֶם. (דניאל ז, ו): חָזֵה הֲוֵית וַאֲרוּ אָחֳרִי כִּנְמַר, זוֹ יָוָן, שֶׁהָיְתָה מַעֲמֶדֶת בִּגְזֵרוֹתֶיהָ וְאוֹמֶרֶת לְיִשְׂרָאֵל כִּתְבוּ עַל קֶרֶן הַשּׁוֹר שֶׁאֵין לָכֶם חֵלֶק לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא. (דניאל ז, ז): בָּאתַר דְּנָא חָזֵה הֲוֵית בְּחֶזְוֵי לֵילְיָא וַאֲרוּ חֵיוָה רְבִיעָאָה דְּחִילָה וְאֵימְתָנִי וְתַקִּיפָא יַתִּירָה, זוֹ אֱדוֹם, דָּנִיֵּאל רָאָה שְׁלָשְׁתָּן בְּלַיְלָה אֶחָד וְלָזוֹ בְּלַיְלָה אֶחָד, לָמָּה, רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ, רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר שֶׁשְּׁקוּלָה כְּנֶגֶד שְׁלָשְׁתָּן, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר יַתִּירָה. מָתִיב רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן לְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ (יחזקאל כא, יט): בֶּן אָדָם הִנָּבֵא וְהַךְ כַּף אֶל כָּף, דָּא מָה עָבַד לָהּ רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ (יחזקאל כא, יט): וְתִכָּפֵל. משֶׁה רָאָה אֶת הַמַּלְכֻיּוֹת בְּעִסּוּקָן, (ויקרא יא, ד): אֶת הַגָּמָל, זוֹ בָּבֶל, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהלים קלז, ח): אַשְׁרֵי שֶׁיְשַׁלֶּם לָךְ אֶת גְּמוּלֵךְ שֶׁגָּמַלְתְּ לָנוּ. (ויקרא יא, ה): אֶת הַשָּׁפָן, זוֹ מָדַי. רַבָּנָן וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה בְּרַבִּי סִימוֹן, רַבָּנָן אָמְרֵי מַה הַשָּׁפָן הַזֶּה יֵשׁ בּוֹ סִימָנֵי טֻמְאָה וְסִימָנֵי טָהֳרָה, כָּךְ הָיְתָה מַלְכוּת מָדַי מַעֲמֶדֶת צַדִּיק וְרָשָׁע. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בְּרַבִּי סִימוֹן דָּרְיָוֶשׁ הָאַחֲרוֹן בְּנָהּ שֶׁל אֶסְתֵּר הָיָה, טָהוֹר מֵאִמּוֹ וְטָמֵא מֵאָבִיו. (ויקרא יא, ו): וְאֶת הָאַרְנֶבֶת, זוֹ יָוָן, אִמּוֹ שֶׁל תַּלְמַי אַרְנֶבֶת שְׁמָהּ. (ויקרא יא, ז): וְאֶת הַחֲזִיר, זוֹ פָּרַס, משֶׁה נָתַן שְׁלָשְׁתָּם בְּפָסוּק אֶחָד, וְלָזוֹ בְּפָסוּק אֶחָד, וְלָמָּה, רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ, רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר שֶׁשְּׁקוּלָה כְּנֶגֶד שְׁלָשְׁתָּן, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר (דניאל ז, ז): יַתִּירָה. מָתִיב רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן לְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ בֶּן אָדָם הִנָּבֵא וְהַךְ כַּף אֶל כָּף, דָּא מָה עָבַד לֵיהּ רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ וְתִכָּפֵל. רַבִּי פִּנְחָס וְרַבִּי חִלְקִיָּה בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי סִימוֹן מִכָּל הַנְּבִיאִים לֹא פִּרְסְמוּהָ אֶלָּא שְׁנַיִם אָסָף וּמשֶׁה, אָסָף אָמַר (תהלים פ, יד): יְכַרְסְמֶנָּה חֲזִיר מִיָּעַר. משֶׁה אָמַר (ויקרא יא, ז): וְאֶת הַחֲזִיר כִּי מַפְרִיס פַּרְסָה, לָמָּה נִמְשְׁלָה לַחֲזִיר, לוֹמַר לָךְ מָה חֲזִיר בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁהוּא רוֹבֵץ מוֹצִיא טְלָפָיו וְאוֹמֵר רְאוּ שֶׁאֲנִי טָהוֹר, כָּךְ מַלְכוּת אֱדוֹם מִתְגָּאָה וְחוֹמֶסֶת וְגוֹזֶלֶת וְנִרְאֵית כְּאִלּוּ מַצַּעַת בִּימָה. מַעֲשֶׂה בְּשִׁלְטוֹן אֶחָד שֶׁהָיָה הוֹרֵג הַגַּנָּבִים וְהַמְנָאֲפִים וְהַמְכַשְּׁפִים, גָּחִין וְאָמַר לַסַּנְקְלִיטִין, שְׁלָשְׁתָּן עָשִׂיתִי בְּלַיְלָה אֶחָד. דָּבָר אַחֵר, (ויקרא יא, ד): אֶת הַגָּמָל, זוֹ בָּבֶל, (ויקרא יא, ד): כִּי מַעֲלֶה גֵרָה הוּא, שֶׁמְקַלֶּסֶת לְהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא. רַבִּי בֶּרֶכְיָה וְרַבִּי חֶלְבּוֹ בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בַּר נַחְמָן, כָּל מַה שֶּׁפָּרַט דָּוִד כָּלַל אוֹתוֹ רָשָׁע בְּפָסוּק אֶחָד, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דניאל ד, לד): כְּעַן אֲנָה נְבֻכַדְנֶצַּר מְשַׁבַּח וּמְרוֹמֵם וּמְהַדַּר לְמֶלֶךְ שְׁמַיָא. מְשַׁבַּח (תהלים קמז, יב): שַׁבְּחִי יְרוּשָׁלַיִם אֶת ה'. וּמְרוֹמֵם (תהלים ל, ב): אֲרוֹמִמְךָ ה'. וּמְהַדַּר (תהלים קד, א): ה' אֱלֹהַי גָדַלְתָּ מְאֹד הוֹד וְהָדָר לָבָשְׁתָּ. (דניאל ד, לד): דִּי כָל מַעֲבָדוֹהִי קְשֹׁט (תהלים קלח, ב): עַל חַסְדְּךָ וְעַל אֲמִתֶּךָ. (דניאל ד, לד): וְאֹרְחָתֵהּ דִּין (תהלים צו, י): יָדִין עַמִּים בְּמֵישָׁרִים. (דניאל ד, לד): וְדִי מַהְלְכִין בְּגֵוָה (תהלים צג, א): ה' מָלָךְ גֵּאוּת לָבֵשׁ. (דניאל ד, לד): יָכִל לְהַשְׁפָּלָה (תהלים עה, יא): וְכָל קַרְנֵי רְשָׁעִים אֲגַדֵּעַ. (ויקרא יא, ה): וְאֶת הַשָּׁפָן, זוֹ מָדַי, (ויקרא יא, ה): כִּי מַעֲלֵה גֵרָה הוּא, שֶׁמְקַלֶּסֶת לְהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (עזרא א, ב): כֹּה אָמַר כֹּרֶשׁ מֶלֶךְ פָּרַס. (ויקרא יא, ו): וְאֶת הָאַרְנֶבֶת, זוֹ יָוָן, (ויקרא יא, ו): כִּי מַעֲלַת גֵּרָה הִוא, שֶׁמְּקַלֶּסֶת לְהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא. אֲלֶכְּסַנְדְּרוֹס מוֹקְדוֹן כַּד הֲוָה חָמֵי לְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הַצַּדִּיק, אוֹמֵר בָּרוּךְ ה' אֱלֹהֵי שֶׁל שִׁמְעוֹן הַצַּדִּיק. (ויקרא יא, ז): וְאֶת הַחֲזִיר, זֶה אֱדוֹם, (ויקרא יא, ז): וְהוּא גֵרָה לֹא יִגָּר, שֶׁאֵינָהּ מְקַלֶּסֶת לְהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, וְלֹא דַּיָּן שֶׁאֵינָהּ מְקַלֶּסֶת אֶלָּא מְחָרֶפֶת וּמְגַדֶּפֶת וְאוֹמֶרֶת (תהלים עג, כה): מִי לִי בַשָּׁמָיִם. דָּבָר אַחֵר, אֶת הַגָּמָל, זוֹ בָּבֶל, כִּי מַעֲלֶה גֵרָה הוּא, שֶׁמְגַדֶּלֶת אֶת דָּנִיֵּאל, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דניאל ב, מט): וְדָנִיֵּאל בִּתְרַע מַלְכָּא. וְאֶת הַשָּׁפָן, זוֹ מָדַי, כִּי מַעֲלֵה גֵרָה הוּא, שֶׁמְגַדֶּלֶת אֶת מָרְדְּכַי, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (אסתר ב, יט): וּמָרְדֳּכַי ישֵׁב בְּשַׁעַר הַמֶּלֶךְ. וְאֶת הָאַרְנֶבֶת, זוֹ יָוָן, כִּי מַעֲלַת גֵּרָה הִוא, שֶׁמְגַדֶּלֶת הַצַּדִּיקִים. אֲלֶכְּסַנְדְּרוֹס כַּד הֲוָה חָמֵי לְשִׁמְעוֹן הַצַּדִּיק הֲוָה קָאֵים עַל רַגְלֵיהּ, אָמְרִין לֵיהּ מִינָאֵי, מִן קֳדָם יְהוּדָאי אַתְּ קָאֵים, אָמַר לָהֶם בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁאֲנִי יוֹצֵא לְמִלְחָמָה דְּמוּתוֹ אֲנִי רוֹאֶה וְנוֹצֵחַ. וְאֶת הַחֲזִיר, זוֹ אֱדוֹם, וְהוּא גֵרָה לֹא יִגָּר, שֶׁאֵינָה מְגַדֶּלֶת הַצַּדִּיקִים, וְלֹא דַי שֶׁאֵינָה מְגַדֶּלֶת אֶלָּא שֶׁהוֹרֶגֶת אוֹתָם. הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (ישעיה מז, ו): קָצַפְתִּי עַל עַמִּי חִלַּלְתִּי נַחֲלָתִי וגו', נַחֲלָתִי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא וַחֲבֵרָיו. דָּבָר אַחֵר, אֶת הַגָּמָל, זוֹ בָּבֶל, כִּי מַעֲלֶה גֵרָה, שֶׁגָּרְרָה מַלְכוּת אַחֲרֶיהָ. וְאֶת הַשָּׁפָן, זוֹ מָדַי כִּי מַעֲלֵה גֵרָה הוּא, שֶׁגָּרְרָה מַלְכוּת אַחֲרֶיהָ, וְאֶת הָאַרְנֶבֶת, זוֹ יָוָן, כִּי מַעֲלַת גֵרָה הִוא, שֶׁגָּרְרָה מַלְכוּת אַחֲרֶיהָ. וְאֶת הַחֲזִיר, זוֹ אֱדוֹם, וְהוּא גֵרָה לֹא יִגָּר, שֶׁאֵינָה גוֹרֶרֶת מַלְכוּת אַחֲרֶיהָ, וְלָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמָהּ חֲזִיר, שֶׁמַּחֲזֶרֶת עֲטָרָה לִבְעָלֶיהָ, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (עובדיה א, כא): וְעָלוּ מוֹשִׁיעִים בְּהַר צִיּוֹן לִשְׁפֹּט אֶת הַר עֵשָׂו וְהָיְתָה לַה' הַמְּלוּכָה.
30. Anon., Pesikta Rabbati, 26 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
31. Anon., Sifre Deuteronomy, 253 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
32. Anon., Sifre Numbers, 131 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
33. Palestinian Talmud, Berachot, 7d (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
34. Palestinian Talmud, Kiddushin, 61c (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
35. Palestinian Talmud, Megillah, 71b (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
36. Babylonian Talmud, Arakhin, 32b (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) 32b. אמר אביי הכי קאמר עד גמלא בגליל עד גדוד בעבר הירדן וחדיד ואונו וירושלים ביהודה,רבא אמר גמלא בגליל לאפוקי גמלא דשאר ארצות גדוד בעבר הירדן לאפוקי גדוד דשאר ארצות אינך דלא איכא דכותייהו לא איצטריך ליה,וירושלים מי מיחלט בה והתניא עשרה דברים נאמרו בירושלים אין הבית חלוט בה,אמר רבי יוחנן כירושלים דמוקפת חומה מימות יהושע בן נון ולא כירושלים דאילו ירושלים אין הבית חלוט בה ואילו הכא הבית חלוט בהן רב אשי אמר לאו אמר רב יוסף תרי קדש הוו ה"נ תרי ירושלים הוו,תניא ישמעאל בר' יוסי למה מנו חכמים את אלו שכשעלו בני הגולה מצאו אלו וקידשום אבל ראשונות בטלו משבטלה קדושת הארץ קסבר קדושה ראשונה קידשה לשעתה ולא קידשה לעתיד לבא,ורמינהי א"ר ישמעאל בר' יוסי וכי אלו בלבד היו והלא כבר נאמר (דברים ג, ד) ששים עיר כל חבל ארגוב כל אלה ערים בצורות אלא למה מנו חכמים את אלו שכשעלו בני הגולה מצאו אלו וקידשום קידשום הא אמרינן דלא צריך לקדושינהו אלא מנאום,ולא אלו בלבד אלא כל שתעלה לך מסורת בידך מאבותיך שמוקפת חומה מימות יהושע בן נון כל מצות הללו נוהגות בה מפני שקדושה ראשונה קידשה לשעתה וקידשה לעתיד לבא,איבעית אימא תרי תנאי ואליבא דר' ישמעאל ואיבעית אימא חד מינייהו ר' אלעזר בר יוסי אמרה דתניא ר"א בר יוסי אומר אשר לוא חומה אע"פ שאין לו עכשיו והיה לו קודם לכן,מאי טעמא דמ"ד קדושה ראשונה קידשה לשעתה ולא קידשה לעתיד לבא דכתיב (נחמיה ח יז) ויעשו בני הגולה השבים מן השבי סוכות וישבו בסוכות כי לא עשו מימי יהושע בן נון כן בני ישראל וגו' ותהי שמחה גדולה מאד אפשר בא דוד ולא עשו סוכות עד שבא עזרא,אלא מקיש ביאתם בימי עזרא לביאתם בימי יהושע מה ביאתם בימי יהושע מנו שמיטין ויובלות וקדשו ערי חומה אף ביאתן בימי עזרא מנו שמיטין ויובלות וקדשו ערי חומה,ואומר (דברים ל, ה) והביאך ה' אלהיך אל הארץ אשר ירשו אבותיך וירשתה מקיש ירושתך לירושת אבותיך מה ירושת אבותיך בחידוש כל דברים הללו אף ירושתך בחידוש כל דברים הללו,ואידך דבעי רחמי על יצר דעבודה זרה ובטליה ואגין זכותא עלייהו כי סוכה,והיינו דקא קפיד קרא עילויה דיהושע דבכל דוכתא כתיב יהושע והכא כתיב (נחמיה ח, יז) ישוע בשלמא משה לא בעא רחמי דלא הוה זכותא דארץ ישראל אלא יהושע דהוה ליה זכותא דארץ ישראל אמאי לא ליבעי רחמי,והא כתיב אשר ירשו אבותיך וירשתה הכי קאמר כיון דירשו אבותיך ירשת את,ומי מנו שמיטין ויובלות השתא משגלו שבט ראובן ושבט גד וחצי שבט מנשה בטלו יובלות עזרא דכתיב ביה (עזרא ב, סד) כל הקהל כאחד ארבע רבוא אלפים ושש מאות וששים הוה מני,דתניא משגלו שבט ראובן ושבט גד וחצי שבט המנשה בטלו יובלות שנאמר (ויקרא כה, י) וקראתם דרור בארץ לכל יושביה בזמן שכל יושביה עליה ולא בזמן שגלו מקצתן,יכול היו עליה והן מעורבין שבט בנימין ביהודה ושבט יהודה בבנימין יהא יובל נוהג תלמוד לומר לכל יושביה בזמן שיושביה כתיקונן ולא בזמן שהן מעורבין,א"ר נחמן בר יצחק מנו יובלות לקדש שמיטין 32b. bAbaye said: Thisis what the ibaraita bis saying: Until Gamla in the Galilee,i.e., all towns in the Galilee from Gamla southward were surrounded by a wall from the era of Joshua, son of Nun; bandlikewise, all towns buntil Gedod in Transjordan,which is the easternmost city, were surrounded by a wall; band Ḥadid and Ono and Jerusalem in Judeawere surrounded by a wall from the era of Joshua, son of Nun., bRava saida different explanation: The ibaraitais elucidating the mishna, which mentions these cities. The ibaraitais teaching that the bGamlareferred to in the mishna is the one bin the Galilee, to the exclusion ofany bGamlafound bin other lands,i.e., Judea and Transjordan. Likewise, bGedodis the one bin Transjordan, to the exclusion of Gedod in other lands,Judea and the Galilee. In the same vein, Ḥadid, Ono, and Jerusalem are specifically the cities in Judea known by those names. With regard to bthose othercities mentioned in the mishna, e.g., Yodfat, bsince there are nocities in other lands bwith similarnames, bit was not necessaryfor the itannaof the ibaraitato state them.,The Gemara asks: bAndis ownership of a house in bJerusalemtransferred in bperpetuityto the buyer after one year, in the manner of houses of walled cities? bBut isn’t it taughtin a ibaraita /i: bTen matters were stated with regard to Jerusalem,one of which is that ownership of ba housesituated in Jerusalem is bnottransferred in bperpetuityone year after its sale?, bRabbi Yoḥa said:The itannameans that ownership of a house may be transferred in perpetuity in any city that is blike Jerusalem,i.e., bwhich is surrounded by a wall from the era of Joshua, son of Nun, butthe ihalakhawith regard to such a city is bnot like Jerusalemitself, bsince whilewith regard to bJerusalem,ownership of ba houseinside it is bnottransferred in bperpetuity, here,with regard to cities similar to Jerusalem, ba house in themmay be transferred in bperpetuityto the buyer. bRav Ashi saida different answer: bDidn’t Rav Yosef sayin resolution of another difficulty: bThere were twoplaces called bKadesh? Here, too,one can say that bthere were twoplaces called bJerusalemin Judea, and the mishna is referring to the one where ownership of houses transfers in perpetuity.,§ With regard to the cities listed in the mishna, bit is taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei,says: bWhy did the Sages countspecifically bthesecities as those walled since the days of Joshua, son of Nun? They counted them bbecause when the exiles ascendedto Eretz Yisrael from Babylonia, bthey discovered thesecities band sanctified them; butthe sanctity of the bfirstwalled cities bwas nullified when the sanctity of the land was nullifiedand the Jewish people were exiled. The Gemara notes: Apparently, Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, bholdsthat the binitial consecrationof Eretz Yisrael in the days of Joshua bconsecratedit bfor its time,until the exile, bbut did not consecrateEretz Yisrael bforever. /b,The Gemara asks: bBut raise a contradictionfrom another ibaraita /i: bRabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, said: And were thesecities enumerated in the mishna the bonlywalled cities from the days of Joshua? bBut isn’t it already stated:“There was not a city that we took not from them; bsixty cities, all the region of Argob…all these cities were fortified with high walls,gates, and bars” (Deuteronomy 3:4–5)? bRather, why did the Sagesspecifically bcount thesecities? They counted them bbecause when the exiles ascendedfrom Babylonia bthey discovered these and sanctified them.The Gemara interjects: Can the ibaraitareally mean that they bsanctified them? But we saylater in the same ibaraitathat bit is not necessary to sanctifythem. bRather,the ibaraitameans that btheyfound these cities and bcounted themin the mishna.,The ibaraitacontinues: bAnd not only these; rather,with regard to banycity for bwhich you receive a tradition from your ancestors that it is surrounded by a wall from the days of Joshua, son of Nun, all these mitzvotof walled cities bare observed in it, due tothe fact that the binitial consecrationof Eretz Yisrael bconsecratedit bfor its time and consecratedit bforever.Evidently, Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, holds that the initial consecration of Eretz Yisrael is eternal.,The Gemara responds: bIf you wish, saythat this is a dispute between btwo itanna’im /i, andthey disagree bwith regard tothe opinion bof Rabbi Yishmael,son of Rabbi Yosei. bAnd if you wish, sayinstead that boneof the ibaraitot /i, specifically the second one, was actually bsaidby bRabbi Elazar bar Yosei. As it is taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Elazar bar Yosei says:Since the verse states: b“Which has [ ilo /i] a wall,”with ilowritten with an ialef /i, according to which the verse may also be taken to mean: Which does not have a wall, this indicates that beven ifa city bdoes not havea wall bnow, but it hada wall bbefore,in the era of Joshua, son of Nun, it retains its status as a walled city.,§ The Gemara asks: bWhat is the reasoning of the one who saysthat the binitial consecrationof Eretz Yisrael bconsecratedit bfor its time, but did not consecrateit bforever? Asit is taught in a ibaraita /i: bIt is writtenwith regard to the return from Babylonia: b“And all the congregation of those that were coming back out of the captivity made isukkot /i, and dwelt in isukkot /i, for since the days of Joshua, son of Nun,unto that day bthe children of Israel had not done so. And there was very great joy”(Nehemiah 8:17). Now, is it bpossiblethat King bDavid came andthe Jews in his time and all subsequent generations bdid not make isukkot /i, until Ezra came? /b, bRather,when the verse states: “For since the days of Joshua,” it means to bcompare their arrivalin Eretz Yisrael bin the days of Ezra to their arrival in the days of Joshua: Just aswith regard to btheir arrival in the days of Joshua, they counted SabbaticalYears band JubileeYears band they sanctified walled cities, so too,with regard to btheir arrival in the days of Ezra, they counted SabbaticalYears band JubileeYears band they sanctified walled cities. /b, bAndso it bsayswith regard to the return of the Jews from exile: b“And the Lord your God will bring you into the land that your fathers possessed, and you shall possess it”(Deuteronomy 30:5). The verse bcompares your possession to the possession of your fathers: Just as the possession of your fatherscame bwith the renewal of all these matters,i.e., the Sabbatical Year and the Jubilee Year, and iterumotand tithes, bso too your possessioncomes bwith the renewal of all these matters,as the initial consecration was nullified.,The Gemara asks: bAndthe itannawho maintains bthe otheropinion, that the initial consecration of Eretz Yisrael is eternal, how does he interpret the verse in Nehemiah? The Gemara answers that when the verse states: “For since the days of Joshua,” this is not referring to actual isukkot /i; rather, the verse means bthatEzra bprayed for mercy with regard tothe evil binclination of idol worship and nullified it, and the meritof his prayer bprotected them like a isukka /i. /b,The Gemara adds: bAnd this isthe reason bthat the verse criticizes Joshuafor not praying for the removal of this inclination himself. How is this criticism indicated in the verse? bAs in everyother bplacein the Bible, his name bis writtenas: bYehoshua, and here it is written: Yeshua.The Gemara explains why the verse singles out Joshua for criticism: bGranted, Moses,the first leader of the Jewish people, bdid not pray for mercythat this inclination should be removed, basat the time bthere was no merit of Eretz Yisrael; but Joshua, who had the merit of Eretz Yisrael, why didn’t he pray for mercythat this inclination should be nullified?,The Gemara asks: bButaccording to the opinion that the initial consecration was not nullified, bisn’t it written: “Which your fathers possessed and you shall possess it”?This verse apparently indicates that it was necessary to sanctify Eretz Yisrael a second time. The Gemara answers: According to this opinion, bthisis what the verse bis saying: Since your fathers possessedthe land, byoutoo bpossessit, and there is no need to sanctify it again.,The ibaraitacited earlier teaches that the Jews began counting the Jubilee Year upon their return from exile. The Gemara asks: bBut did they count SabbaticalYears band JubileeYears in the days of Ezra? bNow,if bfromthe time bthat the tribe of Reuben and the tribe of Gad and half the tribe of Manasseh were exiled(see I Chronicles 5:26) the counting of bJubileeYears was bnullified,despite the fact that a majority of Jews lived in Eretz Yisrael, then in the time of bEzra,about bwhich it is written: “The whole congregation together was 42,360”(Ezra 2:64), bwouldthey have bcountedJubilee Years?, bAs it is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bFromthe time bthat the tribe of Reuben and the tribe of Gad and half the tribe of Manasseh were exiled,the counting of bJubileeYears was bnullified, as it is stated: “And you shall proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants;it shall be a Jubilee for you” (Leviticus 25:10), indicating that the ihalakhotof the Jubilee Year apply only bwhen all its inhabitants are inEretz Yisrael, band not when some of them have been exiled. /b,The ibaraitacontinues: One bmighthave thought that if all the Jews bwereliving binEretz Yisrael, bbut they are intermingled,e.g., bthe tribe of Benjaminis living binthe portion of the tribe of bJudah, and the tribe of Judah inthe portion of the tribe of bBenjamin,that the bJubileeYear bshould be in effect.Therefore, bthe verse states: “To all its inhabitants,”which teaches that the Jubilee Year applies only bwhen its inhabitantsare living baccording to theirproper barrangment, and not when they are intermingled.How, then, could those who returned from exile have counted the Jubilee Years?, bRav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: They counted JubileeYears in order bto sanctify SabbaticalYears. That is, at the end of every seven cycles of the Sabbatical Year they would count the fiftieth year as a Jubilee Year, so that the next Sabbatical cycle would begin in its proper time, in the fifty-first year. Nevertheless, the ihalakhotof the Jubilee Year were not in effect.
37. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Batra, 22a (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) 22a. קנאת סופרים תרבה חכמה,אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק ומודה רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע ברוכלין המחזירין בעיירות דלא מצי מעכב דאמר מר עזרא תקן להן לישראל שיהו רוכלין מחזירין בעיירות כדי שיהו תכשיטין מצויין לבנות ישראל,והני מילי לאהדורי אבל לאקבועי לא ואי צורבא מרבנן הוא אפילו לאקבועי נמי כי הא דרבא שרא להו לר' יאשיה ולרב עובדיה לאקבועי דלא כהלכתא מאי טעמא כיון דרבנן נינהו אתו לטרדו מגירסייהו,הנהו דיקולאי דאייתו דיקלאי לבבל אתו בני מתא קא מעכבי עלויהו אתו לקמיה דרבינא אמר להו מעלמא אתו ולעלמא ליזבנו והני מילי ביומא דשוקא אבל בלא יומא דשוקא לא וביומא דשוקא נמי לא אמרינן אלא לזבוני בשוקא אבל לאהדורי לא,הנהו עמוראי דאייתו עמרא לפום נהרא אתו בני מתא קא מעכבי עלויהו אתו לקמיה דרב כהנא אמר להו דינא הוא דמעכבי עלייכו אמרו ליה אית לן אשראי אמר להו זילו זבנו שיעור חיותייכו עד דעקריתו אשראי דידכו ואזליתו,רב דימי מנהרדעא אייתי גרוגרות בספינה א"ל ריש גלותא לרבא פוק חזי אי צורבא מרבנן הוא נקיט ליה שוקא א"ל רבא לרב אדא בר אבא פוק תהי ליה בקנקניה,נפק [אזל] בעא מיניה פיל שבלע כפיפה מצרית והקיאה דרך בית הרעי מהו לא הוה בידיה א"ל מר ניהו רבא טפח ליה בסנדליה א"ל בין דידי לרבא איכא טובא מיהו על כרחך אנא רבך ורבא רבה דרבך,לא נקטו ליה שוקא פסיד גרוגרות דידיה אתא לקמיה דרב יוסף א"ל חזי מר מאי עבדו לי אמר ליה מאן דלא שהייה לאוניתא דמלכא דאדום לא נשהייה לאוניתיך דכתיב (עמוס ב, א) כה אמר ה' על שלשה פשעי מואב ועל ארבעה לא אשיבנו על שרפו עצמות מלך אדום לסיד,נח נפשיה דרב אדא בר אבא רב יוסף אמר אנא ענישתיה דאנא לטייתיה רב דימי מנהרדעא אמר אנא ענישתיה דאפסיד גרוגרות דידי אביי אמר אנא ענישתיה דאמר להו לרבנן אדמגרמיתו גרמי בי אביי תו אכלו בישרא [שמינא] בי רבא ורבא אמר אנא ענישתיה [דכי הוה אזיל לבי טבחא למשקל אומצא] אמר להו לטבחי אנא שקילנא בישרא מיקמי שמעיה דרבא דאנא עדיפנא מיניה,רב נחמן בר יצחק אמר אנא ענישתיה דרב נחמן בר יצחק ריש כלה הוה כל יומא מיקמי דניעול לכלה מרהיט בהדיה רב אדא בר אבא לשמעתיה והדר עייל לכלה,ההוא יומא נקטוה רב פפא ורב הונא בריה דרב יהושע לרב אדא בר אבא משום דלא הוו בסיומא אמרו ליה אימא לן הני שמעתתא דמעשר בהמה היכי אמרינהו רבא אמר להו הכי אמר רבא והכי אמר רבא אדהכי נגה ליה [לרב נחמן בר יצחק] (ולא אתי רב אדא בר אבא),אמרו ליה רבנן לרב נחמן בר יצחק קום דנגה לן למה יתיב מר אמר להו יתיבנא וקא מנטרא לערסיה דרב אדא בר אבא אדהכי נפק קלא דנח נפשיה דרב אדא בר אבא ומסתברא דרב נחמן בר יצחק ענשיה: , big strongמתני׳ /strong /big מי שהיה כותלו סמוך לכותל חבירו לא יסמוך לו כותל אחר אא"כ הרחיק ממנו ארבע אמות החלונות בין מלמעלן בין מלמטן בין כנגדן ארבע אמות: , big strongגמ׳ /strong /big וקמא היכי סמיך אמר רב יהודה הכי קאמר 22a. bJealousy among teachers increases wisdom. /b, bRav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: And Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua,who said that townspeople can bar craftsmen who come from other cities, bconcedes with regard toperfume bsalesmen who travel fromone btownto another bthatthe townspeople bcannot preventthem from entering their town. bAs the Master said: Ezra institutedan ordice bfor the Jewish people thatperfume bsalesmen shall travel from town to town so that cosmetics will be available to Jewish women.Since this ordice was instituted on behalf of Jewish women, the Sages ruled that these peddlers could not be barred from entering a town.,The Gemara continues: bAnd this matterapplies only to one who seeks bto travelfrom town to town as a salesman. bButif he wants bto establisha shop, this ruling was bnotstated, and the townspeople can prevent him from doing so. bAnd if he is a Torah scholar he may even establisha shop as a perfume salesman. This is blike thatincident in bwhich Rava permitted Rabbi Yoshiya and Rav Ovadya to establisha shop bnotin accordance bwith the ihalakha /i. What is the reasonfor this ruling? The reason is that bsince they are rabbis, they are likely to be distracted from their studiesshould they be required to travel from place to place.,§ The Gemara relates: There were bthese basket sellers who brought baskets to Babylonia. The townspeople cameand bprevented themfrom selling there. The two parties bcame before Ravinafor a ruling. Ravina bsaid to them:The basket sellers bcame from outsidethe town, band they sell tothose from boutsidethe town, i.e., to guests who are not residents of the town. The Gemara comments: bAnd this statementapplies only bon a market day,when people from other towns come to shop, bbutthey may bnotsell their wares bon non-market days. And even with regard to market days, we sayso bonlywith regard bto selling in the market, butthis ihalakhadoes bnotapply bto circulatingaround the town.,The Gemara further relates: There were bthese wool sellers who brought wool tothe city of bPum Nahara. The townsfolk cameand bprevented themfrom selling it. The two parties bcame before Rav Kahanafor a ruling. Rav Kahana bsaid to them: The ihalakhais that they may prevent youfrom selling your wares. The wool sellers bsaid to him: We have debtsto collect in the city, and we must sell our wares in the meantime to sustain ourselves until we are paid. Rav Kahana bsaid to them: Goand bsell the amountneeded bto sustain yourselves until you have collected your debts, andthen bleave. /b,§ The Gemara relates: bRav Dimi of Neharde’a brought dried figs on a shipto sell them. bThe Exilarch said to Rava: Goand bsee; if he is a Torah scholar, reserve the market for him,i.e., declare that he has the exclusive right to sell dried figs. bRava said tohis student bRav Adda bar Abba: Goand bsmell his jar,i.e., determine whether or not Rav Dimi is a Torah scholar.,Rav Adda bar Abba bwentand baskedRav Dimi a question: With regard to ban elephant that swallowed a wicker basket and excreted itintact along bwith its waste, what isthe ihalakha /i? Is the vessel still susceptible to ritual impurity or is it considered digested and not susceptible to impurity? An answer bwas not available toRav Dimi. Rav Dimi bsaid toRav Adda bar Abba: bIs the Master Rava,i.e., are you Rava, as you have asked me such a difficult question? Rav Adda bar Abba bstruck him on his shoein a disparaging way and bsaid to him: There is a greatdifference bbetween me and Rava; but I am perforce your teacher, and Rava is your teacher’s teacher. /b,Based on this exchange, Rav Adda bar Abba decided that Rav Dimi was not a great Torah scholar, and therefore bhe did not reserve the market for him, andRav Dimi blost his dried figs,as they rotted. Rav Dimi bcame before Rav Yosefto complain, and bsaid to him: The Mastershould bsee what they did to me.Rav Yosef bsaid to him: He Who did not delayretribution for bthe humiliation of the King of Edom should not delayHis response to byour humiliation,but should punish whoever distressed you, bas it is written: “So says the Lord: For three transgressions of Moab, indeed for four I will not reverse for him, because he burned the bones of the King of Edom into lime”(Amos 2:1).,The Gemara reports that bRav Adda bar Abba died. Rav Yosef said: I punished him,i.e., I am to blame for his death, bas I cursed him. Rav Dimi from Neharde’a said: I punished him, as he caused my loss of dried figs. Abaye said: I punished him,i.e., he was punished on my account because he did not exhibit the proper respect for me. bAsRav Adda bar Abba bsaid to the Sages: Instead of gnawing the bones in the school of Abaye, youwould do bbetterto beat fatty meat in the school of Rava,i.e., it is preferable to study with Rava than with Abaye. bAnd Rava said: I punished him, as when he would go to the butcher to buy a piece of meat, he would say to the butchers: I will take meat before Rava’s servant, as I am greater than he is. /b, bRav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: I punished him,i.e., he was punished because of me, bas Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak was the head of the ikalla /ilectures, the gatherings for Torah study during Elul and Adar. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak would teach the students immediately following the lesson taught by the head of the academy. bEvery day, before he went in for the ikalla /ilecture, bhe reviewed his lecture with Rav Adda bar Abba, and then he would enterthe study hall bfor the ikalla /ilecture.,On bthat day Rav Pappa and Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, seized Rav Adda bar Abba, because they had not been present at the conclusionof Rava’s lecture. bThey said to him: Tell us how Rava stated these ihalakhotof animal tithe.Rav Adda bar Abba bsaid to them: Rava said this and Rava said that. Meanwhile, it grew late for Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak, and Rav Adda bar Abbahad bnotyet barrived. /b, bThe Sages said to Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak: Ariseand teach us, bas it is late for us. Why does the Master sitand wait? Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak bsaid to them: I am sitting and waiting for the bier of Rav Adda bar Abba,who has presumably died. bMeanwhile, a rumor emerged that Rav Adda bar Abba hadindeed bdied.The Gemara comments: bAnd so too, it is reasonableto conclude that bRav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak punished him,i.e., he died as a result of Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak’s statement, as the unfortunate event occurred just as he announced that Rav Adda bar Abba’s bier was on its way., strongMISHNA: /strong bOne whose wall was close to the wall of another may notbuild banother wall closeto the neighbor’s wall bunless he distances it four cubits fromthe wall of the neighbor. And one who desires to build a wall opposite bthe windowsof a neighbor’s house must distance the wall bfour cubitsfrom the windows, bwhether above, below, or opposite. /b, strongGEMARA: /strong The Gemara comments: Before addressing the construction of the second wall, one could ask: bAndwith regard to the bfirstman, bhow did he placehis wall bcloseto the neighbor’s wall in the first place? bRav Yehuda saidthat bthis is whatthe itanna bis saying: /b
38. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Qamma, 82a (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) 82a. והא כי אתא ר' אבין א"ר יוחנן אחד אילן הנוטה לתוך שדה חבירו ואחד אילן הסמוך למצר מביא וקורא שעל מנת כן הנחיל יהושע לישראל את הארץ,אלא מאן תנא עשרה תנאין שהתנה יהושע ר' יהושע בן לוי הוא רב גביהה מבי כתיל מתני לה בהדיא ר' תנחום ור' ברייס אמרי משום זקן אחד ומנו ר' יהושע בן לוי עשרה תנאין התנה יהושע:,עשרה תקנות תיקן עזרא שקורין במנחה בשבת וקורין בשני ובחמישי ודנין בשני ובחמישי ומכבסים בחמישי בשבת ואוכלין שום בערב שבת ושתהא אשה משכמת ואופה ושתהא אשה חוגרת בסינר ושתהא אשה חופפת וטובלת ושיהו רוכלין מחזירין בעיירות ותיקן טבילה לבעלי קריין:,שיהו קוראין במנחה בשבת משום יושבי קרנות:,ושיהו קוראין בשני ובחמישי עזרא תיקן והא מעיקרא הוה מיתקנא דתניא (שמות טו, כב) וילכו שלשת ימים במדבר ולא מצאו מים דורשי רשומות אמרו אין מים אלא תורה שנאמר (ישעיהו נה, א) הוי כל צמא לכו למים,כיון שהלכו שלשת ימים בלא תורה נלאו עמדו נביאים שביניהם ותיקנו להם שיהו קורין בשבת ומפסיקין באחד בשבת וקורין בשני ומפסיקין שלישי ורביעי וקורין בחמישי ומפסיקין ערב שבת כדי שלא ילינו ג' ימים בלא תורה,מעיקרא תקנו חד גברא תלתא פסוקי אי נמי תלתא גברי תלתא פסוקי כנגד כהנים לוים וישראלים אתא הוא תיקן תלתא גברי ועשרה פסוקי כנגד עשרה בטלנין:,ודנין בשני ובחמישי דשכיחי דאתו למקרא בסיפרא:,ושיהו מכבסין בחמישי בשבת משום כבוד שבת:,ושיהו אוכלין שום בע"ש משום עונה דכתיב (תהלים א, ג) אשר פריו יתן בעתו וא"ר יהודה ואיתימא רב נחמן ואיתימא רב כהנא ואיתימא ר' יוחנן זה המשמש מטתו מע"ש לע"ש,ת"ר חמשה דברים נאמרו בשום משביע ומשחין ומצהיל פנים ומרבה הזרע והורג כנים שבבני מעיים וי"א מכניס אהבה ומוציא את הקנאה:,ושתהא אשה משכמת ואופה כדי שתהא פת מצויה לעניים:,ושתהא אשה חוגרת בסינר משום צניעותא:,ושתהא אשה חופפת וטובלת דאורייתא היא,דתניא (ויקרא יד, ט) ורחץ את בשרו במים שלא יהא דבר חוצץ בין בשרו למים את בשרו את הטפל לבשרו ומאי ניהו שער,אמרי דאורייתא לעיוני דלמא מיקטר אי נמי מאוס מידי משום חציצה 82a. The Gemara further questions the number of Joshua’s stipulations: bBut when Rabbi Avin camefrom Eretz Yisrael he said that bRabbi Yoḥa says:With regard to bboth a tree that leans into the field of another and a tree that is close to a boundarywith another field, the owner of the tree bbringsthe first fruits of the tree band recitesthe accompanying declaration, as described in Deuteronomy 26:5–10, basit was bon this conditionthat bJoshua apportioned EretzYisrael bto the Jewish people.This is an additional stipulation by Joshua, which means that there are more than ten.,The Gemara answers: bRather, whois the one who btaughtthe ibaraitathat deals with the bten conditions that Joshua stipulated? It is Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi,an iamora /i. Therefore, Rabbi Yoḥa, another iamora /i, can disagree with it. bRav Geviha from Bei Katil teachesthis bexplicitlyin his version of the ibaraita /i: bRabbi Tanḥum and Rabbi Berayes say in the name of a certain elder, and who is thatelder? It is bRabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: Joshua stipulated ten conditions. /b,§ The Sages taught that bEzrathe Scribe binstituted ten ordices:He instituted bthatcommunities breadthe Torah bon Shabbat in the afternoon; and theyalso breadthe Torah bonevery bMonday and Thursday; andthe courts convene and bjudgeevery bMonday and Thursday; and one does laundry on Thursday; and one eats garlic on Shabbat eve. AndEzra further instituted bthat a woman should rise early and bakebread on those days when she wants to bake; band that a woman should don a breechcloth; and that a woman shouldfirst bcombher hair bandonly then bimmersein a ritual bath after being ritually impure; band that peddlersof cosmetics and perfumes bshould travel around throughall bthe towns. AndEzra further binstitutedthe requirement of bimmersion for those who experienced a seminal emission. /b,The Gemara analyzes these ordices, the first of which is bthatcommunities bshall readthe Torah bon Shabbat afternoon.This Gemara explains that this ordice was instituted bdue to those who sitidly on street bcorners,who do not attend the synagogue during the week.,The Gemara discusses the second of Ezra’s ordices: bAnd that they should readthe Torah bonevery bMonday and Thursday.The Gemara asks: bDid Ezra institutethis practice? bBut it was instituted from the beginning,i.e., long before his time. bAs it is taughtin a ibaraitawith regard to the verse: “And Moses led Israel onward from the Red Sea, and they went out into the wilderness of Shur; band they went three days in the wilderness, and found no water”(Exodus 15:22). bThose who interpret versesmetaphorically bsaidthat bwaterhere is referring to bnothing other than Torah, as it is statedmetaphorically, concerning those who desire wisdom: b“Ho, everyone who thirsts, come for water”(Isaiah 55:1).,The ibaraitacontinues: The verse means that bsincethe Jews btraveled for three days withouthearing any bTorah they became weary,and therefore the bprophets among them arose and instituted for them that they should readfrom the Torah each bShabbat, and pauseon bSunday, and readagain on bMonday, and pauseon bTuesday and Wednesday, and readagain on bThursday, and pauseon bShabbat eve, so they would not tarry three days withouthearing the bTorah.Evidently this practice predates Ezra.,The Gemara answers: bInitially they institutedthat bone manread bthree verses;or balternatively,that bthree menread bthree verses.Either way, the number three bcorresponds tothe three types of Jews: bPriests, Levites, and Israelites.Ezra later bcameand binstitutedthat bthree menalways read, bandthat bten versesaltogether be read by them, bcorresponding to the ten idlersin a city, i.e., the ten men who are paid to spend their time dealing with synagogue and communal matters.,The next ordice of Ezra is: bAndthe courts convene and bjudgeevery bMonday and Thursday.The Gemara explains that the reason for this ordice is bthatmany people are bfoundin a city on these days, bas they comefrom the countryside bfor the reading of theholy bbook,the Torah, which is performed on Mondays and Thursdays, as stated above.,The ibaraitateaches: bAnd that one should do laundry on Thursday.This was instituted bdue tothe need to have clean garments in bdeference to Shabbat. /b,The Gemara explains the next listed ordice: bAnd that one should eat garlic Shabbat eve.This is bdue tothe fact that garlic enhances sexual potency, and Friday night is an appropriate time for bconjugal relations. As it is writtenconcerning the righteous: “And he shall be like a tree planted by streams of water, bwho brings forth his fruit in his season”(Psalms 1:3); band Rabbi Yehuda says, and some sayit was bRav Naḥman, and some sayit was bRav Kahana, and some sayit was bRabbi Yoḥawho said: bThisis referring to bone who engages in sexual intercourse every Shabbat eve. /b, bThe Sages taughtin a ibaraitathat bfive matters were stated with regard to garlic: It satisfies; it warmsthe body; bit causesone’s bcountece to shine; it increasesone’s bsperm, and it kills lice that are in the intestines. And some saythat it also binstills loveinto those who eat it band removes jealousyfrom them.,The next ordice is: bAnd that a woman should rise early and bakebread on those days when she bakes. This Gemara explains that this was instituted bso that bread should be available for poor people,who go begging for bread in the mornings.,The ibaraitafurther teaches: bAnd that a woman should don a breechcloth [ isinar /i].This ordice was instituted bdue toreasons of bmodesty. /b,The ibaraitaadds: bAnd that a woman shouldfirst bcombher hair bandonly then bimmersein a ritual bath. This is to ensure that there is no dirt or other substance in the hair that would invalidate the immersion. The Gemara questions this: bThis isrequired bby Torah law,Ezra did not institute this., bAs it is taughtin a ibaraita /i, concerning a verse that discusses one who must undergo ritual immersion: b“And he shall bathe his flesh [ iet besaro /i] in water”(Leviticus 14:9). This verse teaches bthat no substance should interpose between his flesh and the water.When the verse states this in the expanded form of b“ iethis flesh,”using the term “ iet /i,” this teaches that the water must come into contact even with bthat which is subordinate to his flesh. And what is that?It is one’s bhair.Accordingly, the Torah itself states that there may not be any interposing substance in the hair at the time of immersion. What, then, did Ezra add?,The Sages bsayin response: bBy Torah lawone is required bto inspecthis or her hair before immersion, as bperhapssome hairs are bknottedtogether, preventing contact with water at that spot, borperhaps there is some brepulsive substancein his hair. One must perform this inspection bbecausethese would constitute ban interposition. /b
39. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, 55a, 9b, 22b (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) 22b. בקילעא דרב אושעיא אתו ושאלו לרב אסי אמר להו לא שנו אלא לחולה המרגיל אבל לחולה לאונסו פטור מכלום א"ר יוסף אצטמיד חצביה דרב נחמן,מכדי כולהו אמוראי ותנאי בדעזרא קמיפלגי ונחזי עזרא היכי תקן,אמר אביי עזרא תקן לבריא המרגיל מ' סאה ובריא לאונסו ט' קבין ואתו אמוראי ופליגי בחולה מר סבר חולה המרגיל כבריא המרגיל וחולה לאונסו כבריא לאונסו ומר סבר חולה המרגיל כבריא לאונסו וחולה לאונסו פטור מכלום,אמר רבא נהי דתקן עזרא טבילה נתינה מי תקן והאמר מר עזרא תקן טבילה לבעלי קריין אלא אמר רבא עזרא תקן טבילה לבריא המרגיל מ' סאה ואתו רבנן והתקינו לבריא לאונסו ט' קבין ואתו אמוראי וקא מיפלגי בחולה מר סבר חולה המרגיל כבריא המרגיל וחולה לאונסו כבריא לאונסו ומר סבר לבריא המרגיל מ' סאה וחולה המרגיל כבריא לאונסו ט' קבין אבל לחולה לאונסו פטור מכלום,אמר רבא הלכתא בריא המרגיל וחולה המרגיל ארבעים סאה ובריא לאונסו תשעה קבין אבל לחולה לאונסו פטור מכלום:,ת"ר בעל קרי שנתנו עליו ט' קבין מים טהור בד"א לעצמו אבל לאחרים ארבעים סאה ר' יהודה אומר מ' סאה מכל מקום,ר' יוחנן וריב"ל ור"א ור' יוסי בר' חנינא חד מהאי זוגא וחד מהאי זוגא ארישא חד אמר הא דאמרת במה דברים אמורים לעצמו אבל לאחרים מ' סאה לא שנו אלא לחולה המרגיל אבל לחולה לאונסו ט' קבין וחד אמר כל לאחרים אפילו חולה לאונסו עד דאיכא מ' סאה,וחד מהאי זוגא וחד מהאי זוגא אסיפא חד אמר הא דאמר רבי יהודה מ' סאה מכל מקום לא שנו אלא בקרקע אבל בכלים לא וחד אמר אפי' בכלים נמי,בשלמא למ"ד אפי' בכלים היינו דקתני ר' יהודה אומר מ' סאה מכל מקום אלא למ"ד בקרקע אין בכלים לא מכל מקום לאתויי מאי,לאתויי מים שאובין,רב פפא ורב הונא בריה דרב יהושע ורבא (ברבי) בר שמואל כריכו ריפתא בהדי הדדי א"ל רב פפא הבו לי לדידי לברוך דנפול עילואי ט' קבין אמר להו רבא (ברבי) [בר] שמואל תנינא במה דברים אמורים לעצמו אבל לאחרים מ' סאה אלא הבו לי לדידי לברוך דנפול עילואי ארבעים סאה אמר להו רב הונא הבו לי לדידי לברוך דליכא עילואי לא האי ולא האי,רב חמא טביל במעלי יומא דפסחא להוציא רבים ידי חובתן ולית הלכתא כוותיה:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big היה עומד בתפלה ונזכר שהוא בעל קרי לא יפסיק אלא יקצר,ירד לטבול אם יכול לעלות ולהתכסות ולקרות עד שלא תהא הנץ החמה יעלה ויתכסה ויקרא ואם לאו יתכסה במים ויקרא ולא יתכסה לא במים הרעים ולא במי המשרה עד שיטיל לתוכן מים וכמה ירחיק מהן ומן הצואה ד' אמות:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ת"ר היה עומד בתפלה ונזכר שהוא בעל קרי לא יפסיק אלא יקצר היה קורא בתורה ונזכר שהוא בעל קרי אינו מפסיק ועולה אלא מגמגם וקורא ר"מ אומר אין בעל קרי רשאי לקרות בתורה יותר מג' פסוקים,תניא אידך היה עומד בתפלה וראה צואה כנגדו מהלך לפניו עד שיזרקנה לאחוריו ד' אמות והתניא לצדדין ל"ק הא דאפשר הא דלא אפשר,היה מתפלל ומצא צואה במקומו אמר רבה אע"פ שחטא תפלתו תפלה מתקיף ליה רבא והא (משלי כא, כז) זבח רשעים תועבה אלא אמר רבא הואיל וחטא אע"פ שהתפלל תפלתו תועבה:,ת"ר היה עומד בתפלה ומים שותתין על ברכיו פוסק עד שיכלו המים וחוזר ומתפלל להיכן חוזר רב חסדא ורב המנונא חד אמר חוזר לראש וחד אמר למקום שפסק,לימא בהא קמיפלגי 22b. bthatthis problem was raised bin Rav Oshaya’s chamber,and bthey came and asked Rav Asi. He said to them: They only statedthe obligation to pour water over one who is impure because of a seminal emission bwith regard to a sick person who experienced a normalseminal emission, bbut a sick person who experienced an involuntaryseminal emission is clearly bexempt from anythingand requires no immersion whatsoever. bRav Yosef said:In that case, bRav Naḥman’s jug is rejoined,meaning that it is effective with regard to purification.,Up to now, discussion has focused on various problems pertaining to the laws of immersion as they concern one whose impurity is due to seminal emission. The Gemara asks: bSince allof the iamora’imand itanna’imdisagree with regard tothe decree of bEzra, let us examine how Ezra institutedthis ordice, as this is not an uncommon circumstance and we can see how they conducted themselves., bAbaye said: Ezradid not institute a sweeping ordice concerning every case of one who experienced a seminal emission; rather, he binstitutedonly that ba healthy person who experienced a normalseminal emission is required to immerse himself in bforty ise’a /i, while for a healthy personwho experienced an binvoluntaryseminal emission, bnine ikav /iare sufficient. bAnd the iamora’imcame and disagreed with regard to a sick person. One Sage heldthat ba sick person who experienced a normalseminal emission is considered blike a healthy person who experienced a normalseminal emission, bwhile a sick personwho experienced an binvoluntaryseminal emission is considered blike a healthy personwho experienced an binvoluntaryseminal emission. bHowever, another Sage maintainedthat ba sick person who experienced a normalseminal emission is considered blike a healthy personwho experienced an binvoluntaryseminal emission, and consequently requires only that nine ikavbe poured over him, bwhile a sick personwho experienced an binvoluntaryseminal emission bis exempt from anyform of immersion or purification., bRava said: Although Ezra instituted immersionfor one who experienced a seminal emission, bdid he institute the pouringof nine ikav /i? Didn’t the Master saythat we have a tradition that bEzraonly binstituted immersion for those who experienced a seminal emission? Rather, Rava said:We must explain that the diverse opinions developed after Ezra’s decree. bEzrahimself binstituted immersion in forty ise’a /ionly bfor a healthy person who experienced a normalseminal emission. bAnd the Sages came and instituted that a healthy person who experienced an involuntaryseminal emission should have bnine ikav /ipoured over him. bAndthen bthe iamora’imcame and disagreedwith regard to ba sick person; one Sage heldthat ba sick person who experienced a normalseminal emission is considered blike a healthy person who experienced a normalseminal emission, bwhile a sick personwho experienced an binvoluntaryseminal emission is considered blike a healthy personwho experienced an binvoluntaryseminal emission, banother Sage maintainedthat only ba healthy person who experienced a normalseminal emission is required to immerse himself in bforty ise’awhile a sick person who experienced a normalseminal emission is considered blike a healthy personwho experienced an binvoluntaryseminal emission, requiring only bnine ikav /i. But a sick personwho experienced an binvoluntaryseminal emission bis exempt from anyform of immersion or purification., bRava statedthat bthehalakhic ruling is in accordance with the first opinion: bA healthy personwho experienced ba normalseminal emission band a sick personwho experienced ba normalseminal emission require bforty ise’a /i, while a healthy personwho experienced ban involuntaryseminal emission suffices with bnine ikav /i. But a sick personwho experienced ban involuntaryseminal emission bis exempt fromundergoing banyrite of purification., bThe Sages taughtin a iTosefta /i: bOne who experienced a seminal emission and had nine ikavofdrawn bwater poured over him is ritually pure. In whatcase bis this statement said?In a case involving Torah study bfor himself, butin order to purify himself that he may teach Torah bto others,he must immerse himself in bforty ise’a /i. Rabbi Yehuda says: Forty ise’a /iis required for purification bin any case. /b,With regard to this issue, a dispute arose between bRabbi Yoḥa and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, and Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina. Onemember bof this pair and onemember bof that pairdisagreed bwith regard to the first clauseof the iTosefta /i. bOne said: That which you said: In whatcase bis this statement said?In a case involving Torah study bfor himself, butin order to purify himself that he may teach Torah bto others,he must immerse himself in bforty ise’a /i,was bonly taught regarding a sick person who experienced a normalseminal emission, bbut for a sick personwho experienced an binvoluntaryseminal emission, bnine ikav /iis sufficient even for teaching others. bAnd one saidthat banyonewho teaches bothers, evenif he was bsickand experienced an binvoluntaryseminal emission, is not considered pure buntil there are forty ise’a /i. /b, bAnd onemember bof this pair and onemember bof that pairdisagreed bwith regard to the latter clauseof the iTosefta /i. bOne said: That which Rabbi Yehuda said: Forty ise’ain any case, was only taught whenthe water is in bthe ground,in accordance with the Torah law of ritual bath, bbut notif it was collected bin vessels. And one said: Evenforty ise’acollected bin vesselsare sufficient for purification.,The Gemara clarifies this problem: bGranted, according to the one who saidthat forty ise’apurifies beven in vessels. That iswhy the iTosefta btaught: Rabbi Yehuda says: Forty ise’ain any case. However,according to bthe one who saidthat Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion is that forty ise’a bin the ground, yes,it purifies, but bin vessels, no,it does not purify, bwhatdoes the expression bin any casecome bto include? /b,The Gemara explains: In any case comes bto include drawn water,as Rabbi Yehuda permits immersion in forty ise’aof water collected in the ground even if the water was drawn by human hand.,The Gemara relates that bRav Pappa and Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, and Rava bar Shmuel ate bread together. Rav Pappa said to them: Allow me to reciteGrace after Meals for the group, as I am ritually pure because bnine ikav /iof water bfell upon me;in other words, he poured it over himself. bRava bar Shmuel said to them: We learned, in whatcase bis this statementthat nine ikavpurify, bsaid?In a case involving Torah study bfor himself. But,in order to purify himself that he may teach Torah bto others,and by extension to fulfill the obligation of others, he must immerse himself in bforty ise’a /i. Rather, allow me to reciteGrace after Meals for the group, bas forty ise’a /iof water bfell upon me;in other words, I immersed myself in a ritual bath. bRav Huna said to them: Allow me to reciteGrace after Meals for the group, bas I havehad bneither this nor that upon mebecause I remained ritually pure.,It is also said that bRav Ḥama would immerse himself on Passover eve in order to fulfill the obligations of the masses.However the Gemara concludes: bThe ihalakhais not in accordance with hisopinion that distinguishes between the purification for oneself and purification for the sake of others., strongMISHNA: /strong This mishna contains various statements with regard to individuals with different types of ritual impurity as well as the need to distance oneself from filth and impurity. bOne who was standing in prayer and he recalled that he experienced a seminal emission,and according to this opinion he is prohibited from praying, should bnot interrupthis prayer, brather he should abridgeeach individual blessing.,They stated a general principle: bOne who descended to immerse himself, if he is able to ascend, cover himselfwith a garment, band recitethe morning iShema bbefore sunrise, he should ascend, cover himself, and recite iShema /i, band if not,he should bcover himself in the water and recite iShemathere. bHe may not, however, cover himself in either foul water, or waterin which flax was bsoaked, until he poursother bwater into it. Andin general, bhow far must one distancehimself bfromurine band fecesin order to recite iShema /i? At least bfour cubits. /b, strongGEMARA: /strong A ibaraitafurther elaborates on the first ihalakhain the mishna. bThe Sages taught: One who was standing in prayer and he recalled that hehad bexperienced a seminal emission,should bnot interrupthis prayer. bRather, he should abridge. One who was reading the Torah and recalled that he experienced a seminal emission, does not interrupthis reading, bbut rather reads quicklywith less than perfect diction. bRabbi Meirdisagrees and bsays: One who experienced a seminal emission is not permitted to read more than three verses in the Torah,as one may read no fewer than three verses in the Torah. After he completes three verses, he must stop and let someone else continue., bIt was taught in another ibaraita /i: bOne who was standing in prayer and he saw feces before him must walk forward until he has placed it four cubits behind him.The Gemara challenges this: bWasn’t it taughtin another ibaraitathat it is sufficient if he distances himself four cubits bto the side?The Gemara resolves this contradiction: bThis is not difficult,as bthat ibaraitawhich taught that it must be four cubits behind him, is referring to a case bwhere it is possiblefor him to advance that distance, bwhile that ibaraitawhich taught that he may distance himself four cubits to the side, is referring to a case bwhere it is not possibleto advance four cubits, in which case he must at least step to the side.,The Gemara cites another ihalakha /i: bOne who was praying andlater bfound feces in the placewhere he prayed, bRabba said: Although he committed a transgressionin his failure to examine that venue to determine if it was worthy of prayer ( iTosafot /i), bhis prayer is avalid bprayerand he fulfilled his obligation. bRava strongly objects to hisstatement: bIsn’tit stated: b“The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination,the more so as he offers it in depravity” (Proverbs 21:27), from which we derive that a mitzva performed inappropriately is no mitzva at all? Consequently, the fact that he did not pay proper attention invalidates his prayer. bRather, Rava said: Becausethis person bcommitted a transgression, although he prayed, his prayer is an abominationand he must pray again., bThe Sages taughtin a ibaraita /i: bOne who was standing in prayer when,for some reason, burine is flowing on his knees, he must interrupthis prayer buntil the urine ceases, and then resume praying.The Gemara, asks: bTo wherein the prayer bdoes he returnwhen he resumes his prayer? bRav Ḥisda and Rav Hamnunadisagreed; bone said: He must return to the beginningof the prayer, band the other said:He must return btothe point bwhere he stopped. /b,The Gemara notes: bLet us saythat bthey disagree about this: /b
40. Babylonian Talmud, Gittin, 57a, 56a (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) 56a. אמר ליה לא אמר ליה יהיבנא לך דמי פלגא דסעודתיך אמר ליה לא אמר ליה יהיבנא לך דמי כולה סעודתיך א"ל לא נקטיה בידיה ואוקמיה ואפקיה,אמר הואיל והוו יתבי רבנן ולא מחו ביה ש"מ קא ניחא להו איזיל איכול בהו קורצא בי מלכא אזל אמר ליה לקיסר מרדו בך יהודאי א"ל מי יימר א"ל שדר להו קורבנא חזית אי מקרבין ליה,אזל שדר בידיה עגלא תלתא בהדי דקאתי שדא ביה מומא בניב שפתים ואמרי לה בדוקין שבעין דוכתא דלדידן הוה מומא ולדידהו לאו מומא הוא,סבור רבנן לקרוביה משום שלום מלכות אמר להו רבי זכריה בן אבקולס יאמרו בעלי מומין קריבין לגבי מזבח סבור למיקטליה דלא ליזיל ולימא אמר להו רבי זכריה יאמרו מטיל מום בקדשים יהרג,אמר רבי יוחנן ענוותנותו של רבי זכריה בן אבקולס החריבה את ביתנו ושרפה את היכלנו והגליתנו מארצנו,שדר עלוייהו לנירון קיסר כי קאתי שדא גירא למזרח אתא נפל בירושלים למערב אתא נפל בירושלים לארבע רוחות השמים אתא נפל בירושלים,א"ל לינוקא פסוק לי פסוקיך אמר ליה (יחזקאל כה, יד) ונתתי את נקמתי באדום ביד עמי ישראל וגו' אמר קודשא בריך הוא בעי לחרובי ביתיה ובעי לכפורי ידיה בההוא גברא ערק ואזל ואיגייר ונפק מיניה ר"מ,שדריה עילוייהו לאספסיינוס קיסר אתא צר עלה תלת שני הוו בה הנהו תלתא עתירי נקדימון בן גוריון ובן כלבא שבוע ובן ציצית הכסת נקדימון בן גוריון שנקדה לו חמה בעבורו בן כלבא שבוע שכל הנכנס לביתו כשהוא רעב ככלב יוצא כשהוא שבע בן ציצית הכסת שהיתה ציצתו נגררת על גבי כסתות איכא דאמרי שהיתה כסתו מוטלת בין גדולי רומי,חד אמר להו אנא זיינא להו בחיטי ושערי וחד אמר להו בדחמרא ובדמלחא ומשחא וחד אמר להו בדציבי ושבחו רבנן לדציבי דרב חסדא כל אקלידי הוה מסר לשמעיה בר מדציבי דאמר רב חסדא אכלבא דחיטי בעי שיתין אכלבי דציבי הוה להו למיזן עשרים וחד שתא,הוו בהו הנהו בריוני אמרו להו רבנן ניפוק ונעביד שלמא בהדייהו לא שבקינהו אמרו להו ניפוק ונעביד קרבא בהדייהו אמרו להו רבנן לא מסתייעא מילתא קמו קלנהו להנהו אמברי דחיטי ושערי והוה כפנא,מרתא בת בייתוס עתירתא דירושלים הויא שדרתה לשלוחה ואמרה ליה זיל אייתי לי סמידא אדאזל איזדבן אתא אמר לה סמידא ליכא חיורתא איכא אמרה ליה זיל אייתי לי אדאזל איזדבן אתא ואמר לה חיורתא ליכא גושקרא איכא א"ל זיל אייתי לי אדאזל אזדבן אתא ואמר לה גושקרא ליכא קימחא דשערי איכא אמרה ליה זיל אייתי לי אדאזל איזדבן,הוה שליפא מסאנא אמרה איפוק ואחזי אי משכחנא מידי למיכל איתיב לה פרתא בכרעא ומתה,קרי עלה רבן יוחנן בן זכאי (דברים כח, נו) הרכה בך והענוגה אשר לא נסתה כף רגלה איכא דאמרי גרוגרות דר' צדוק אכלה ואיתניסא ומתה דר' צדוק יתיב ארבעין שנין בתעניתא דלא ליחרב ירושלים כי הוה אכיל מידי הוה מיתחזי מאבראי וכי הוה בריא מייתי ליה גרוגרות מייץ מייהו ושדי להו,כי הוה קא ניחא נפשה אפיקתה לכל דהבא וכספא שדיתיה בשוקא אמרה האי למאי מיבעי לי והיינו דכתיב (יחזקאל ז, יט) כספם בחוצות ישליכו,אבא סקרא ריש בריוני דירושלים בר אחתיה דרבן יוחנן בן זכאי הוה שלח ליה תא בצינעא לגבאי אתא א"ל עד אימת עבדיתו הכי וקטליתו ליה לעלמא בכפנא א"ל מאי איעביד דאי אמינא להו מידי קטלו לי א"ל חזי לי תקנתא לדידי דאיפוק אפשר דהוי הצלה פורתא,א"ל נקוט נפשך בקצירי וליתי כולי עלמא ולישיילו בך ואייתי מידי סריא ואגני גבך ולימרו דנח נפשך וליעיילו בך תלמידך ולא ליעול בך איניש אחרינא דלא לרגשן בך דקליל את דאינהו ידעי דחייא קליל ממיתא,עביד הכי נכנס בו רבי אליעזר מצד אחד ורבי יהושע מצד אחר כי מטו לפיתחא בעו למדקריה אמר להו יאמרו רבן דקרו בעו למדחפיה אמר להו יאמרו רבן דחפו פתחו ליה בבא נפק,כי מטא להתם אמר שלמא עלך מלכא שלמא עלך מלכא א"ל מיחייבת תרי קטלא חדא דלאו מלכא אנא וקא קרית לי מלכא ותו אי מלכא אנא עד האידנא אמאי לא אתית לגבאי א"ל דקאמרת לאו מלכא אנא 56a. The host bsaid to him: No,you must leave. Bar Kamtza bsaid to him: I will give you money for half of the feast;just do not send me away. The host bsaid to him: No,you must leave. Bar Kamtza then bsaid to him: I will give you money for the entire feast;just let me stay. The host bsaid to him: No,you must leave. Finally, the host btookbar Kamtza bby his hand, stood him up, and took him out. /b,After having been cast out from the feast, bar Kamtza bsaidto himself: bSince the Sages were sittingthere band did not protestthe actions of the host, although they saw how he humiliated me, blearn from it that they were contentwith what he did. bI willtherefore bgo and inform [ ieikhul kurtza /i] against them to the king. He wentand bsaid to the emperor: The Jews have rebelled against you.The emperor bsaid to him: Who saysthat this is the case? Bar Kamtza bsaid to him:Go and test them; bsend them an offeringto be brought in honor of the government, and bsee whether theywill bsacrifice it. /b,The emperor bwent and sent with hima choice bthree-year-old calf. Whilebar Kamtza bwas comingwith the calf to the Temple, bhe made a blemish onthe calf’s bupper lip. And some sayhe made the blemish bonits beyelids, a place where according to us,i.e., ihalakha /i, it bis a blemish, but according to them,gentile rules for their offerings, it bis not a blemish.Therefore, when bar Kamtza brought the animal to the Temple, the priests would not sacrifice it on the altar since it was blemished, but they also could not explain this satisfactorily to the gentile authorities, who did not consider it to be blemished.,The blemish notwithstanding, bthe Sages thought to sacrificethe animal as an offering bdue tothe imperative to maintain bpeacewith the bgovernment. Rabbi Zekharya ben Avkolas said to them:If the priests do that, people bwill saythat bblemishedanimals bmay be sacrificedas offerings bon the altar.The Sages said: If we do not sacrifice it, then we must prevent bar Kamtza from reporting this to the emperor. The Sages bthought to kill him so that he would not go and speakagainst them. bRabbi Zekharya said to them:If you kill him, people bwill saythat bone who makes a blemish on sacrificialanimals bis to be killed.As a result, they did nothing, bar Kamtza’s slander was accepted by the authorities, and consequently the war between the Jews and the Romans began., bRabbi Yoḥa says: Theexcessive bhumility of Rabbi Zekharya ben Avkolas destroyed our Temple, burned our Sanctuary, and exiled us from our land. /b,The Roman authorities then bsent Nero Caesar againstthe Jews. bWhen he cameto Jerusalem, he wished to test his fate. bHe shot an arrow to the eastand the arrow bcameand bfell in Jerusalem.He then shot another arrow bto the westand bitalso bfell in Jerusalem.He shot an arrow binall bfour directions of the heavens,and each time the arrow bfell in Jerusalem. /b,Nero then conducted another test: bHe said to a child: Tell me a versethat you learned today. bHe said to himas follows: b“And I will lay My vengeance upon Edom by the hand of My people Israel”(Ezekiel 25:14). Nero bsaid: The Holy One, Blessed be He, wishes to destroy His Temple, and He wishes to wipe his hands with that man,i.e., with me. The Romans are associated with Edom, the descendants of Esau. If I continue on this mission, I will eventually be punished for having served as God’s agent to bring about the destruction. So bhe fledand bbecame a convert, andultimately bRabbi Meir descended from him. /b,The Roman authorities then bsent Vespasian Caesar againstthe Jews. bHe cameand blaid siegeto Jerusalem for bthree years. There wereat that time binJerusalem bthese three wealthy people: Nakdimon ben Guryon, ben Kalba Savua, and ben Tzitzit HaKesat.The Gemara explains their names: bNakdimon ben Guryonwas called by that name bbecause the sun shined [ inakad /i] on his behalf,as it is related elsewhere (see iTa’anit19b) that the sun once continued to shine in order to prevent him from suffering a substantial loss. bBen Kalba Savuawas called this bbecause anyone who entered his house when he was hungry as a dog [ ikelev /i] would leave satiated [ isave’a /i]. Ben Tzitzit HaKesatwas referred to by that name because bhis ritual fringes [ itzitzit /i] draggedalong bon blankets [ ikeset /i],meaning that he would not walk in the street with his feet on the ground, but rather they would place blankets beneath him. bThere arethose bwho say that his seat [ ikiseh /i] was found among the nobles of Rome,meaning that he would sit among them.,These three wealthy people offered their assistance. bOneof them bsaid tothe leaders of the city: bI will feedthe residents bwith wheat and barley. And oneof them bsaid toleaders of the city: I will provide the residents bwith wine, salt, and oil. And oneof them bsaid tothe leaders of the city: I will supply the residents bwith wood.The Gemara comments: bAnd the Sages gavespecial bpraise to hewho gave the bwood,since this was an especially expensive gift. bAs Rav Ḥisda would give all of the keys [ iaklidei /i] to his servant, exceptfor the key btohis shed bforstoring bwood,which he deemed the most important of them all. bAs Rav Ḥisda said: One storehouse [ iakhleva /i] of wheat requires sixty storehouses of woodfor cooking and baking fuel. These three wealthy men bhadbetween them enough commodities bto sustainthe besieged bfor twenty-one years. /b, bThere were certain zealots amongthe people of Jerusalem. bThe Sages said to them: Let us go out and make peace withthe Romans. But the zealots bdid not allow themto do this. The zealots bsaid tothe Sages: bLet us go out and engage in battle againstthe Romans. But bthe Sages said to them: You will not be successful.It would be better for you to wait until the siege is broken. In order to force the residents of the city to engage in battle, the zealots barose and burneddown bthese storehouses [ iambarei /i] of wheat and barley, and there wasa general bfamine. /b,With regard to this famine it is related that bMarta bat Baitos wasone of the bwealthy women of Jerusalem. She sentout bher agent and said to him: Go bring me fine flour [ isemida /i]. By the time he went,the fine flour bwasalready bsold. He cameand bsaid to her: There is no fine flour,but bthere isordinary bflour. She said to him: Gothen and bbring meordinary flour. bBy the time he went,the ordinary flour bwasalso bsold. He came and said to her: There is noordinary bflour,but bthere is coarse flour [ igushkera /i]. She said to him: Gothen and bbring mecoarse flour. bBy the time he went,the coarse flour bwasalready bsold. He came and said to her: There is no coarse flour,but bthere is barley flour. She said to him: Gothen and bbring mebarley flour. But once again, bby the time he went,the barley flour bwasalso bsold. /b, bShe hadjust bremoved her shoes,but bshe said: I will go outmyself band see if I can find something to eat.She stepped on some bdung,which bstuck to her foot, and,overcome by disgust, bshe died. /b, bRabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai read concerning hera verse found in the section of the Torah listing the curses that will befall Israel: b“The tender and delicate woman among you who would not adventure to set the sole of her footupon the ground” (Deuteronomy 28:56). bThere arethose bwho saythat she did not step on dung, but rather bshe ate a fig of Rabbi Tzadok, and became disgusted and died.What are these figs? bRabbi Tzadok observed fastsfor bforty years,praying bthat Jerusalem would not be destroyed.He became so emaciated from fasting bthat when he would eat something it was visible from the outsideof his body. bAnd when he would eatafter a fast bthey would bring him figsand bhe would suck out their liquid and castthe rest baway.It was one such fig that Marta bat Baitos found and that caused her death.,It is further related that bas she was dying, she took out all ofher bgold and silverand bthrew it in the marketplace. She said: Why do I need this? And this is as it is written: “They shall cast their silver in the streetsand their gold shall be as an impure thing; their silver and their gold shall not be able to deliver them in the day of the wrath of the Lord; they shall not satisfy their souls, neither fill their bowels” (Ezekiel 7:19).,§ The Gemara relates: bAbba Sikkara was the leader of the zealots [ ibiryonei /i] of Jerusalemand bthe son of the sister of Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai.Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai bsenta message bto him: Come to me in secret. He came,and Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai bsaid to him: Until when will you do this and kill everyone through starvation?Abba Sikkara bsaid to him: What can I do, for if I say something to them they will kill me.Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai bsaid to him: Show me a methodso bthat I willbe able to bleavethe city, and it is bpossible thatthrough this bthere will besome bsmall salvation. /b,Abba Sikkara bsaid to him:This is what you should do: bPretend to be sick, and have everyone come and askabout your welfare, so that word will spread about your ailing condition. Afterward bbring something putrid and place it near you, so thatpeople bwill say that you have diedand are decomposing. bAndthen, bhave your students enterto bring you to burial, band let no one else come in so thatthe zealots bnot notice that you arestill blight. Asthe zealots bknow that a livingperson bis lighter than a deadperson.,Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai bdid this. Rabbi Eliezer entered from one side and Rabbi Yehoshua from the other sideto take him out. bWhen they arrived at the entranceof the city on the inside, the guards, who were of the faction of the zealots, bwanted to pierce himwith their swords in order to ascertain that he was actually dead, as was the common practice. Abba Sikkara bsaid to them:The Romans bwill saythat bthey pierceeven btheir teacher.The guards then bwantedat least bto push himto see whether he was still alive, in which case he would cry out on account of the pushing. Abba Sikkara bsaid to them: They will saythat bthey pusheven btheir teacher.The guards then bopened the gateand bhe was taken out. /b, bWhenRabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai breached there,i.e., the Roman camp, bhe said: Greetings to you, the king; greetings to you, the king.Vespasian bsaid to him: You are liable for two death penalties, onebecause bI am not a king andyet byou call me king, and furthermore, if I am a king, why didn’t you come to me until now?Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai bsaid to him:As for bwhat you saidabout yourself: bI am not a king, /b
41. Babylonian Talmud, Ketuvot, 3a (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) 3a. זימנין דלא אניס וסברה דאניס ומיעגנא ויתבה ומשום פרוצות דאי אמרת לא ליהוי גיטא זימנין דאניס ואמרה לא אניס ואזלא ומינסבא ונמצא גט בטל ובניה ממזרים,ומי איכא מידי דמדאורייתא לא להוי גט ומשום צנועות ומשום פרוצות שרינן אשת איש לעלמא,אין כל דמקדש אדעתא דרבנן מקדש ואפקעינהו רבנן לקידושי מיניה,אמר ליה רבינא לרב אשי תינח קדיש בכספא קדיש בביאה מאי איכא למימר שויוה רבנן לבעילתו בעילת זנות,איכא דאמרי אמר רבא וכן לענין גיטין אלמא קסבר רבא יש אונס בגיטין,מיתיבי הרי זה גיטיך אם לא באתי מכאן ועד שנים עשר חדש ומת בתוך שנים עשר חדש אינו גט מת הוא דאינו גט הא חלה הרי זה גט,לעולם אימא לך חלה נמי אינו גט והיא גופה קמ"ל דאין גט לאחר מיתה,אין גט לאחר מיתה הא תנא ליה רישא דלמא לאפוקי מדרבותינו,ת"ש מעכשיו אם לא באתי מכאן ועד שנים עשר חדש ומת בתוך שנים עשר חדש הרי זה גט מאי לאו הוא הדין לחלה לא מת דוקא דלא ניחא ליה דתפול קמי יבם,ת"ש מההוא דאמר להו אי לא אתינא מכאן ועד שלשים יום ליהוי גיטא אתא בסוף תלתין יומין ופסקיה מברא ואמר להו חזו דאתאי חזו דאתאי ואמר שמואל לא שמיה מתיא,אונסא דשכיח שאני דכיון דאיבעי ליה לאתנויי ולא אתני איהו הוא דאפסיד אנפשיה,אמר רב שמואל בר יצחק לא שנו אלא מתקנת עזרא ואילך שאין בתי דינין קבועין אלא בשני ובחמישי אבל קודם תקנת עזרא שבתי דינין קבועין בכל יום אשה נשאת בכל יום,קודם תקנת עזרא מאי דהוה הוה הכי קאמר אי איכא בתי דינין דקבועין האידנא כקודם תקנת עזרא אשה נשאת בכל יום,הא בעינן שקדו דטריח ליה 3a. then bsometimes, where he was notdetained bunavoidablybut he fulfilled the condition willingly to effect the divorce, bandthe wife bthinksthat he was detained bunavoidably, she will sit deserted,forever unable to remarry. bAndthe concern bdue to licentious womenis, bas, if you said: Let it not be a bill of divorce,then bsometimes, when he wasdetained bunavoidably and she thinksthat he was bnotdetained bunavoidably,she goes band remarries. Andthe result will be bthat the bill of divorce is void, and her childrenfrom the second marriage will be imamzerim /i,products of an adulterous relationship.,The Gemara questions the following premise: By Torah law, a condition that is unfulfilled due to circumstances beyond one’s control is considered fulfilled, and it is merely by rabbinic ordice that it is deemed unfulfilled: bAnd is there a matter where by Torahlaw bit is not a bill of divorce, but due to virtuous women and due to licentious women we permit a married woman to others? /b,The Gemara answers: bYes,it is within the authority of the Sages to institute an ordice freeing the woman from the marriage, as banyone who betrothsa woman, bbetrothsher contingent bupon the agreement of the Sages,and in certain cases, such as those mentioned above, bthe Sages invalidated his betrothalretroactively., bRavina said to Rav Ashi:That bworks out wellif bhe betrothedher bwith money,as in that case, the courts could declare the money ownerless, and one cannot betroth a woman with money that is not his. However, if bhe betrothedher bwith intercourse, what can be said?Rav Ashi answered: bThe Sages rendered his intercourse licentious intercourse. /b, bSome say,to the contrary, that bRava said:Just as with regard to postponement of a wedding due to circumstances beyond his control, the groom is not obligated to provide sustece for his betrothed, bthe same is true with regard to the matter of bills of divorce.The Gemara concludes that bapparently Rava maintains: Unavoidable circumstanceshave legal standing bwith regard to bills of divorce. /b, bThe Gemara raises an objectionfrom a mishna ( iGittin76b): With regard to one who said to his wife: bThis is your bill of divorce if I do not return from now untilthe conclusion of btwelve months, and he died withinthose btwelve months,the document bis not a bill of divorce.The Gemara infers: If bhe died,that bis when it is not a bill of divorce,since a divorce cannot take effect posthumously. However, in cases involving other circumstances beyond his control, e.g., if bhe fell illand therefore did not return, bit is a bill of divorceand it does take effect.,The Gemara answers: bActually, I will say to youthat in the case where bone falls ill it is also not a bill of divorce,and death is merely an example of circumstances beyond one’s control. bAndthe fact that the mishna cited bthatexample bitself teaches us that there is no bill of divorce posthumously. /b,The Gemara asks: Does it come to teach that bthere is no bill of divorce posthumously? Wasn’t it already taught in the first clauseof that mishna? The Gemara answers: bPerhapsit was necessary for the first clause to mention specifically the case of death, bto excludethe opinion bof our Rabbis. /b, bCome and hearan additional proof from the latter clause of that mishna: If one said: This is your bill of divorce bfrom now if I have not returned from now untilthe conclusion of btwelve months, and he died withinthose btwelve months,then bthisdocument bis a bill of divorce. What, is it not that the same is trueif his failure to return is due to the fact that bhe fell ill?The Gemara rejects that proof. The divorce takes effect bspecificallyin the case where bhe died,and he wrote the bill of divorce because bhe was not amenableto have his wife bhappen beforeher iyavam /i,his brother, for levirate marriage if he had no children. However, in cases where that is not a consideration, if other circumstances beyond his control caused the condition to be fulfilled, his intention is that the bill of divorce will not take effect., bCome and hearan additional proof bfromthe case of ba certainman bwho said tothe agents with whom he entrusted the bill of divorce: bIf I do not return from now until thirty dayshave passed, blet this be a bill of divorce. He came at the end of thirty days,before the deadline passed, bbut was preventedfrom crossing the river bby the ferrythat was located on the other side of the river, so he did not come within the designated time. bHe said to thepeople across the river: bSee that I have come, see that I have come. Shmuel said:It bis not consideredto be ba return.Apparently, even if the condition was fulfilled due to circumstances beyond his control, the condition is considered fulfilled.,The Gemara rejects that proof: bPerhaps unavoidable circumstances that are commonand could be anticipated, e.g., the ferry being located at the other side of the river, bare different, since he should have stipulatedthat exception when giving his wife the bill of divorce. bAndsince he did not bstipulateit, bhe brought the failure upon himself. /b,§ bRav Shmuel bar Yitzḥak said:The Sages bteachthat this ihalakhathat a virgin is married on Wednesday is in effect bonly fromthe institution of bthe ordice of Ezra that courts are in regular session only on Monday and Thursday. However, prior tothe institution of bthe ordice of Ezra, when courtswere in bregularsession bevery day, a woman was married on any dayof the week.,The Gemara asks: bPrior tothe institution of bthe ordice of Ezra? What wasin the past bwasin the past. There are no halakhic ramifications to that statement. The Gemara answers: bThis is whatRav Shmuel bar Yitzḥak bis saying: If there are courtsin bregulardaily session btoday, asthey were bprior tothe institution of bthe ordice of Ezra, a woman is married on any dayof the week.,The Gemara asks: bDon’t we requirethe additional reason that a virgin is married on Wednesday because the Sages bwere assiduousin seeing to the well-being of Jewish women and made certain that the groom would have several days to prepare for the wedding feast prior to the wedding? The Gemara answers: This is referring to a case bwhere healready bexerted himselfand prepared everything before Shabbat, so the feast will be prepared even if the wedding is Sunday or Monday.
42. Babylonian Talmud, Megillah, 12b, 16b, 26b, 31b, 9b, 11a (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) 11a. (עזרא ט, ט) כי עבדים אנחנו ובעבדותנו לא עזבנו אלהינו ויט עלינו חסד לפני מלכי פרס אימתי בזמן המן,רבי חנינא בר פפא פתח לה פתחא להא פרשתא מהכא (תהלים סו, יב) הרכבת אנוש לראשנו באנו באש ובמים באש בימי נבוכדנצר הרשע ובמים בימי פרעה ותוציאנו לרויה בימי המן,רבי יוחנן פתח לה פתחא להא פרשתא מהכא (תהלים צח, ג) זכר חסדו ואמונתו לבית ישראל ראו כל אפסי ארץ את ישועת אלהינו אימתי ראו כל אפסי ארץ את ישועת אלהינו בימי מרדכי ואסתר,ריש לקיש פתח לה פתחא להא פרשתא מהכא (משלי כח, טו) ארי נוהם ודוב שוקק מושל רשע על עם דל ארי נוהם זה נבוכדנצר הרשע דכתיב ביה (ירמיהו ד, ז) עלה אריה מסובכו דוב שוקק זה אחשורוש דכתיב ביה (דניאל ז, ה) וארו חיוה אחרי תניינה דמיה לדוב ותני רב יוסף אלו פרסיים שאוכלין ושותין כדוב ומסורבלין בשר כדוב ומגדלין שער כדוב ואין להם מנוחה כדוב,מושל רשע זה המן על עם דל אלו ישראל שהם דלים מן המצות,ר' אלעזר פתח לה פתחא להא פרשתא מהכא (קהלת י, יח) בעצלתים ימך המקרה ובשפלות ידים ידלוף הבית בשביל עצלות שהיה להם לישראל שלא עסקו בתורה נעשה שונאו של הקב"ה מך ואין מך אלא עני שנאמר (ויקרא כז, ח) ואם מך הוא מערכך ואין מקרה אלא הקב"ה שנאמר (תהלים קד, ג) המקרה במים עליותיו,רב נחמן בר יצחק פתח לה פתחא להא פרשתא מהכא (תהלים קכד, א) שיר המעלות לולי ה' שהיה לנו יאמר נא ישראל לולי ה' שהיה לנו בקום עלינו אדם (תהלים קכד,ב) אדם ולא מלך,רבא פתח לה פתחא להא פרשתא מהכא (משלי כט, ב) ברבות צדיקים ישמח העם ובמשול רשע יאנח עם ברבות צדיקים ישמח העם זה מרדכי ואסתר דכתיב והעיר שושן צהלה ושמחה ובמשול רשע יאנח עם זה המן דכתיב והעיר שושן נבוכה,רב מתנה אמר מהכא (דברים ד, ז) כי מי גוי גדול אשר לו אלהים קרובים אליו רב אשי אמר מהכא (דברים ד, לד) או הנסה אלהים וגו',ויהי בימי אחשורוש אמר רב ויי והי הדא דכתיב (דברים כח, סח) והתמכרתם שם לאויביך לעבדים ולשפחות וגו',ושמואל אמר (ויקרא כו, מד) לא מאסתים ולא געלתים לכלותם לא מאסתים בימי יוונים ולא געלתים בימי נבוכדנצר לכלותם בימי המן להפר בריתי אתם בימי פרסיים כי אני ה' אלהיהם בימי גוג ומגוג,במתניתא תנא לא מאסתים בימי כשדים שהעמדתי להם דניאל חנניה מישאל ועזריה ולא געלתים בימי יוונים שהעמדתי להם שמעון הצדיק וחשמונאי ובניו ומתתיה כה"ג לכלותם בימי המן שהעמדתי להם מרדכי ואסתר להפר בריתי אתם בימי פרסיים שהעמדתי להם של בית רבי וחכמי דורות כי אני ה' אלהיהם לעתיד לבוא שאין כל אומה ולשון יכולה לשלוט בהם,רבי לוי אמר מהכא (במדבר לג, נה) ואם לא תורישו את יושבי הארץ,רבי חייא אמר מהכא (במדבר לג, נו) והיה כאשר דמיתי לעשות להם אעשה לכם,אחשורוש אמר רב אחיו של ראש ובן גילו של ראש אחיו של ראש אחיו של נבוכדנצר הרשע שנקרא ראש שנאמר (דניאל ב, לח) אנת הוא רישא די דהבא בן גילו של ראש הוא הרג הוא ביקש להרוג הוא החריב הוא ביקש להחריב שנאמר (עזרא ד, ו) ובמלכות אחשורוש בתחלת מלכותו כתבו שטנה על יושבי יהודה וירושלם,ושמואל אמר שהושחרו פניהם של ישראל בימיו כשולי קדרה ורבי יוחנן אמר כל שזוכרו אמר אח לראשו ורבי חנינא אמר שהכל נעשו רשין בימיו שנאמר (אסתר י, א) וישם המלך אחשורוש מס,הוא אחשורוש הוא ברשעו מתחילתו ועד סופו (בראשית לו, מג) הוא עשו הוא ברשעו מתחילתו ועד סופו (במדבר כו, ט) הוא דתן ואבירם הן ברשען מתחילתן ועד סופן (דברי הימים ב כח, כב) הוא המלך אחז הוא ברשעו מתחילתו ועד סופו,(דברי הימים א א, כז) אברם הוא אברהם הוא בצדקו מתחילתו ועד סופו (שמות ו, כו) הוא אהרן ומשה הן בצדקן מתחילתן ועד סופן (שמואל א יז, יד) ודוד הוא הקטן הוא בקטנותו מתחילתו עד סופו כשם שבקטנותו הקטין עצמו אצל מי שגדול ממנו בתורה כך במלכותו הקטין עצמו אצל מי שגדול ממנו בחכמה,המולך אמר רב שמלך מעצמו אמרי לה לשבח ואמרי לה לגנאי אמרי לה לשבח דלא הוה איניש דחשיב למלכא כוותיה ואמרי לה לגנאי דלא הוה חזי למלכותא וממונא יתירא הוא דיהב וקם,מהודו ועד כוש רב ושמואל חד אמר הודו בסוף העולם וכוש בסוף העולם וחד אמר הודו וכוש גבי הדדי הוו קיימי כשם שמלך על הודו וכוש כך מלך מסוף העולם ועד סופו,כיוצא בדבר אתה אומר (מלכים א ה, ד) כי הוא רודה בכל עבר הנהר מתפסח ועד עזה רב ושמואל חד אמר תפסח בסוף העולם ועזה בסוף העולם וחד אמר תפסח ועזה בהדי הדדי הוו קיימי כשם שמלך על תפסח ועל עזה כך מלך על כל העולם כולו,שבע ועשרים ומאה מדינה אמר רב חסדא בתחילה מלך על שבע ולבסוף מלך על עשרים ולבסוף מלך על מאה אלא מעתה (שמות ו, כ) ושני חיי עמרם שבע ושלשים ומאת שנה מאי דרשת ביה שאני הכא דקרא יתירא הוא מכדי כתיב מהודו ועד כוש שבע ועשרים ומאה מדינה למה לי ש"מ לדרשה:,תנו רבנן שלשה מלכו בכיפה ואלו הן אחאב ואחשורוש ונבוכדנצר אחאב דכתיב (מלכים א יח, י) חי ה' אלהיך אם יש גוי וממלכה אשר לא שלח אדוני שם לבקשך וגו' ואי לא דהוה מליך עלייהו היכי מצי משבע להו,נבוכדנצר דכתיב (ירמיהו כז, ח) והיה הגוי והממלכה אשר לא יתן את צוארו בעול מלך בבל אחשורוש הא דאמרן 11a. b“For we are bondmen; yet our God has not forsaken us in our bondage, but has extended mercy unto us in the sight of the kings of Persia”(Ezra 9:9). bWhendid this occur? bIn the time of Haman. /b, bRabbi Ḥanina bar Pappa introduced this passage with an introduction from here:The verse states: b“You have caused men to ride over our heads; we went through fire and through water;but You brought us out into abundance” (Psalms 66:12). b“Through fire”;this was bin the days of the wicked Nebuchadnezzar,who cast the righteous into the furnace. b“And through water”;this was bin the days of Pharaoh,who decreed that all newborn males be cast into the water. b“But You brought us out into abundance”;this was bin the days of Haman,where abundant feasts played a pivotal role in their peril and salvation., bRabbi Yoḥa introduced this passage with an introduction from here:The verse states: b“He has remembered His mercy and His faithfulness toward the house of Israel: All the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God”(Psalms 98:3). bWhen did all the ends of the earth see the salvation of our God? In the days of Mordecai and Esther,for their peril and salvation became known through the letters sent throughout the empire., bReish Lakish introduced this passage with an introduction from here: “As a roaring lion, and a ravenous bear, so is a wicked ruler over a poor people”(Proverbs 28:15). b“A roaring lion”; this is the wicked Nebuchadnezzar, as it is written about him: “The lion has come up from his thicket”(Jeremiah 4:7). b“A hungry bear”; this is Ahasuerus, as it is written about him: “And behold, another beast, a second one, like a bear”(Daniel 7:5). bAnd Rav Yosef taughtthat bthesewho are referred to as a bear in the verse bare the Persians.They are compared to a bear, bas they eat and drinkin large quantities blike a bear; and they are coated with flesh like a bear; and they grow their hairlong blike a bear; and they never rest like a bear,whose manner it is to move about from place to place., b“A wicked ruler”; this is Haman. “Over a poor people”; this is the Jewish people,who are referred to in this manner bbecause they are poor intheir observance of bthe mitzvot. /b, bRabbi Elazar introduced this passage with an introduction from here: “Through laziness the rafters [ ihamekare /i] sink in [ iyimakh /i]; and through idleness of the hands the house leaks”(Ecclesiastes 10:18). Rabbi Elazar interprets the verse homiletically: bThrough the laziness of the Jewish people, who did not occupy themselves with Torahstudy, bthe enemy of the Holy One, Blessed be He,a euphemism for God Himself, bbecame poor [ imakh /i],so that, as it were, He was unable to help them, bas imakh /iis bnothing other than poor, as it is stated: “But if he be too poor [ imakh /i] for the valuation”(Leviticus 27:8). bAndthe word imekare /iin the verse bis referringto bnoone bother than the Holy One, Blessed be He, as it is stated: “Who lays the beams [ ihamekare /i] of His chambers in the waters”(Psalms 104:3)., bRav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak introduced this passage with an introduction from here: “A song of ascentsof David. bIf not for the Lord Who was with us, let Israel now say; if not for the Lord who was with us, when a man rose up against us”(Psalms 124:1–2). The verse speaks of b“a man”who rose up against us band not a king.This occurred in the days of Haman, as he, and not King Ahasuerus, was the chief enemy of the Jewish people., bRava introduced this passage with an introduction from here: “When the righteous are on the increase, the people rejoice; but when the wicked man rules, the people mourn”(Proverbs 29:2). b“When the righteous are on the increase, the people rejoice”; this is Mordecai and Esther, as it is written: “And the city of Shushan rejoiced and was glad”(Esther 8:15). b“But when the wicked man rules, the people mourn”; this is Haman, as it is written: “But the city of Shushan was perplexed”(Esther 3:15)., bRav Mattana saidhis introduction bfrom here: “For what nation is there so great, that has God so near to them”(Deuteronomy 4:7), as to witness the great miracles in the days of Mordecai and Esther? bRav Ashi saidhis introduction bfrom here:The verse states: b“Or has God venturedto go and take Him a nation from the midst of another nation?” (Deuteronomy 4:34), as in the times of Esther, God saved the Jewish people who were scattered throughout the Persian Empire.,§ The Gemara returns to its interpretation of the book of Esther. The verse states: b“And it came to pass [ ivayhi /i] in the days of Ahasuerus”(Esther 1:1). bRav said:The word ivayhimay be understood as if it said ivaiand ihi /i,meaning bwoe and mourning. This is as it is written: “And there you shall sell yourselves to your enemies for bondsmen and bondswomen,and no man shall buy you” (Deuteronomy 28:68). The repetitive nature of the verse, indicating that no one will be willing to buy you for servitude, but they will purchase you in order to murder you, indicates a doubly horrific situation, which is symbolized by the dual term ivayhi /i, meaning woe and mourning., bAnd Shmuel saidhis introduction from here: “And yet for all that, when they are in the land of their enemies, bI will not reject them, nor will I abhor them,to destroy them utterly, and to break My covet with them; for I am the Lord their God” (Leviticus 26:44). Shmuel explains: b“I will not reject them”;this was bin the days of the Greeks. “Nor will I abhor them”;this was bin the days ofVespasian. b“To destroy them utterly”;this was bin the days of Haman. “To break My covet with them”;this was bin the days of the Persians. “For I am the Lord their God”;this is bin the days of Gog and Magog. /b,An alternative understanding bwas taught in a ibaraita /i: “I will not reject them”;this was bin the days of the Chaldeans, when I appointed for them Daniel, Haiah, Mishael, and Azariahto pray on their behalf. b“Nor will I abhor them”;this was bin the days of the Greeks, when I appointed Shimon HaTzaddik for them, andthe bHasmonean and his sons, and Mattithiah the High Priest. “To destroy them utterly”;this was bin the days of Haman, when I appointed for themthe righteous leaders bMordecai and Esther. “To break My covet with them”;this was bin the days of the Romans, when I appointed for themthe Sages of bthe house of RabbiYehuda HaNasi band the Sages ofother bgenerations. “For I am the Lord their God”;this will be bin the future, when no nation orpeople of a foreign btongue will be ableto bsubjugate themfurther., bRabbi Levi saidhis introduction bfrom here: “But if you will not drive out the inhabitants of the landfrom before you, then it shall come to pass, that those whom you allow to remain of them shall be as thorns in your eyes” (Numbers 33:55). King Saul’s failure to completely annihilate Amalek allowed for the existence of his descendant Haman, who acted as a thorn in the eyes of Israel during the Purim episode., bRabbi Ḥiyya saidhis introduction bfrom here,the continuation of the previously cited verse: b“And it shall come to pass, that as I thought to do unto them, so I shall do unto you”(Numbers 33:56). Prior to the miracle of Purim, the Jewish people were subject to the punishment that the Torah designated for its enemies, because they did not fulfill God’s commandments.,The Gemara continues with its explanation of the book of Esther, beginning with a discussion of the name bAhasuerus. Rav said:The name should be viewed as a contraction: bThe brother of the head [ iaḥiv shel rosh /i] and of the same character as the head [ iben gilo shel rosh /i].Rav explains: bThe brother of the head,i.e., bthe brother of the wicked Nebuchadnezzar, who is called “head,” as it is stated: “You are the head of gold”(Daniel 2:38). bof the same character as the head, for he,Nebuchadnezzar, bkilledthe Jews, and bhe,Ahasuerus, bsought to killthem. bHe destroyedthe Temple, and bhe sought to destroythe foundations for the Temple laid by Zerubbabel, bas it is stated: “And in the reign of Ahasuerus, in the beginning of his reign, they wrote to him an accusation against the inhabitants of Judah and Jerusalem”(Ezra 4:6), and he ordered that the construction of the Temple cease., bAnd Shmuel said:The name Ahasuerus should be understood in the sense of black [ ishaḥor /i], as bthe face of the Jewish people was blackened in his days like the bottom of a pot. And Rabbi Yoḥa saida different explanation: bEveryone who recalled him said: “Woe upon his head” [ iaḥ lerosho /i]. And Rabbi Ḥanina said:The name alludes to the fact bthat everyone became poor[irash /i] in his days, as it is stated: “And the king Ahasuerus laid a tributeupon the land” (Esther 10:1).,The Gemara continues: b“This is [ ihu /i] Ahasuerus”(Esther 1:1); the term ihu /i, this is, comes to teach that bheremained as he was bin his wickedness from beginning to end.Similarly, wherever the words “this is” appear in this manner, the verse indicates that the individual under discussion remained the same from beginning to end, for example: b“This is [ ihu /i] Esau”(Genesis 36:43); bheremained bin his wickedness from beginning to end. “This is [ ihu /i] Dathan and Abiram”(Numbers 26:9); btheyremained bin their wickedness from beginning to end. “This is [ ihu /i] the king Ahaz”(II Chronicles 28:22); bheremained bin his wickedness from beginning to end. /b,The Gemara continues: The word ihuis also used to recognize sustained righteousness. b“Abram, this is [ ihu /i] Abraham”(I Chronicles 1:27); this indicates that Abraham didn’t change, as bheremained bin his righteousness from beginning to end.Similarly, b“This is [ ihu /i] Aaron and Moses”(Exodus 6:26); bthey remained in their righteousness fromthe bbeginningof their life btothe bendof their life. Similarly, with respect to David: b“And David, this was [ ihu /i] the youngest”(I Samuel 17:14), indicates that bhe remained in his humility from beginning to end. Just as in his youth,when he was still an ordinary individual, bhe humbled himself before anyone who was greater than him in Torah, so too, in his kingship, he humbled himself before anyone who was greater than him in wisdom. /b,The next term in the opening verse: b“Who reigned”(Esther 1:1), is now interpreted. bRav said:This comes to teach bthat he reigned on his own,without having inherited the throne. bSome saythis btohis bcredit, and some say it tohis bdisgrace.The Gemara explains: bSome saythis btohis bcredit, that there was noother bman as fit as him to be king. And some say it tohis bdisgrace, that he was not fit to be king, but he distributed large amounts of money, andin that way broseto the throne.,The opening verse continues that Ahasuerus reigned b“from Hodu to Cush.” Rav and Shmueldisagreed about its meaning. bOne said: Hoduis a country bat one end of the world, and Cushis a country bat theother bend of the world. And one said: Hodu and Cush are situated next to each other,and the verse means to say as follows: bJust asAhasuerus breignedwith ease boverthe adjacent countries of bHodu and Cush, so too, he reignedwith ease bfrom one end of the world to the other. /b, bOn a similarnote, byou saywith regard to Solomon: b“For he had dominion over all the region on this side of the river, from Tiphsah even to Gaza”(I Kings 5:4), and also with regard to this bRav and Shmueldisagreed. bOne said: Tiphsah is at one end of the world, whereas Gaza is at the other end of the world. And one said: Tiphsah and Gaza are situated next to each other,and the verse means to say as follows: bJust asSolomon breignedwith ease boverthe adjacent bTiphsah and Gaza, so too, he reignedwith ease bover the entire world. /b,The opening verse continues, stating that Ahasuerus reigned “over bseven and twenty and a hundred provinces”(Esther 1:1). bRav Ḥisda said:This verse should be understood as follows: bAt first he reigned over sevenprovinces; band then he reigned over twentymore; band finally he reigned overanother bhundred.The Gemara asks: bHowever, ifthat is bso,with regard to the similarly worded verse: b“And the years of the life of Amram were seven and thirty and a hundred years”(Exodus 6:20), bwhat would you expoundfrom bit?The Gemara answers: bIt is different here,in the book of Esther, basthis part of bthe verse isentirely bsuperfluous. Since it isalready bwritten: “From Hodu to Cush,” whythen bdo I need “Seven and twenty and a hundred provinces”?Rather, blearn from herethat these words come bforthis bexposition,to teach that Ahasuerus did not begin to reign over all of them at the same time.,§ Apropos the discussion of the kingdoms of Ahasuerus and Solomon, the Gemara cites a ibaraitain which bthe Sages taught: Threemen bruled over theentire bworld, and they were Ahab, and Ahasuerus, and Nebuchadnezzar.The Gemara explains: bAhab, as it is writtenin the words of Obadiah, servant of Ahab, to Elijah: b“As the Lord your God lives, there is no nation or kingdom where my master has not sent to seek you,and they said: He is not there; and he made the kingdom and nation swear, that they had not found you” (I Kings 18:10). bAnd if he did not reign over them, how could he have made them swear?Apparently, then, he reigned over the entire world., bNebuchadnezzaralso ruled over the whole world, bas it is written: “And it shall come to pass, that the nation and the kingdomthat not serve this same Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylonia, and that bwill not put their neck under the yoke of the king of Babylonia,that nation will I visit, says the Lord, with the sword, and with the famine, and with the pestilence, until I have consumed them by his hand” (Jeremiah 27:8). bAhasuerusalso ruled the world, bas we have saidabove.
43. Babylonian Talmud, Menachot, 64b, 85b, 53a (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) 53a. b“And this is the law of the meal offering: The sons of Aaron shall sacrifice it before the Lord in front of the altar…And that which is left of it Aaron and his sons shall eat; it shall be eaten as imatzot /i”(Leviticus 6:7–9). These verses demonstrate that there is a general requirement that meal offerings must be brought as imatza /i. Rabbi Perida bsaid toRabbi Ami: bI do not raise the dilemmawith regard to the source of the bmitzva iab initio /i, as that is clearly derived from these verses. bWhere I raise the dilemma,it is bwith regard tothe source that indicates this requirement is bindispensable,i.e., that if one violated the mitzva and brought a meal offering not as imatzathe offering is not valid.,Rabbi Ami bsaid toRabbi Perida: bWith regard tothe ihalakhathat the requirement that meal offerings must come as imatzais bindispensable, it is also written: “It shall not be baked as leavened bread”(Leviticus 6:10), bbutrather must come as imatza /i.This additional verse indicates that even after the fact, if a meal offering was not made as imatzait is not valid.,Rav bḤisda objects to this: Butone can bsaythat the verse should be interpreted as follows: b“It shall not be baked as leavened bread,”i.e., fully leavened, bbutit can be brought even if it has been leavened slightly with bleavening [ isiur /i]dough. Although it does not have the status of leavened bread and is therefore not prohibited by the verse, it also does not have the status of imatza /i.,The Gemara analyzes Rav Ḥisda’s objection, as there is a dispute among the Sages with regard to the definition of isiur(see iPesaḥim48b). According to Rabbi Meir, isiuris dough at the beginning of the leavening process, when its surface has become pale. Conversely, Rabbi Yehuda maintains that isiuris dough that has been leavened to the point that it has cracks that look like the antennae of locusts. In this light, the Gemara inquires: This isiur /i,mentioned by Rav Ḥisda in his suggested interpretation of the verse, is in accordance bwith whoseopinion? bIfhe is referring to isiuras defined bby Rabbi Meir,then baccording tothe opinion of bRabbi YehudaRav Ḥisda’s objection does not arise, as Rabbi Yehuda maintains this bis full-fledged imatza /i.And bifRav Ḥisda is referring to isiuras defined bby Rabbi Yehuda,then baccording tothe opinion of bRabbi MeirRav Ḥisda’s objection does not arise either, as Rabbi Meir holds that it bis full-fledged leavened bread. /b,Furthermore, bifRav Ḥisda is referring to isiuras defined bby Rabbi Meir,then even baccording tothe opinion of bRabbi Meirhimself the objection does not arise. The reason is that bfromthe fact that Rabbi Meir rules bthatone who eats this isiuron Passover bis flogged for it,this indicates that bit isdeemed bfull-fledged leavened bread. Rather,Rav Ḥisda’s objection arises with regard to leavening dough as defined bby Rabbi Yehuda, according tothe opinion of bRabbi Yehuda,who maintains that this dough is not considered full-fledged leavened bread., bRav Naḥman bar Yitzḥakalso bobjects toRabbi Ami’s explanation: bButone can bsaythat the verse can be interpreted as follows: b“It shall not be baked as leavened bread,” butone may bring a meal offering that has been bboiled,as this is not leavened bread; although it is also not imatza /i. The Gemara asks: This bboileddough, bwhat is it?It is bpoached [ irevikha /i],as described in the verse: “In a pan it shall be made of oil, when it is soaked [ imurbekhet /i]” (Leviticus 6:14). If so, there is no need to derive the ihalakhaof boiled dough from the verse: “It shall not be baked as leavened bread.” bIfit is a meal offering that must be bpoached, it isexplicitly bwritten with regard to itthat it must be bpoached. Andif it is a meal offering that is not to be poached, bit is not written with regard to itthat it is bpoached. /b,The Gemara challenges: bButone can bsaythat the verse: “It shall not be baked as leavened bread,” indicates that with regard to a meal offering babout which it is writtenexplicitly that it must be bpoached,it is a bmitzva thatit be bpoached, andwith regard to a meal offering babout which it is not writtenthat it must be bpoached,the one who brings the offering can decide: bIf he wants, let him bringit bpoached,and bif he wants, let him bringit as imatza /i.Accordingly, Rabbi Ami’s proof from the verse is inconclusive., bRavinaalso bobjects toRabbi Ami’s explanation: bButone can bsaythat the verse: b“It shall not be baked as leavened bread,”serves bto determinethat this bmanwho brings a meal offering as leavened bread bisliable bforviolating ba mere prohibition, butthe meal offering itself is bnot invalid. /b,All these objections indicate that the verse: “It shall not be baked as leavened bread,” can be interpreted in ways other than that suggested by Rabbi Ami. Accordingly, the Gemara asks: bRather, from where do wederive that all meal offerings not brought as imatzaare not valid? The Gemara answers: We derive it bas it is taughtin a ibaraitadiscussing a verse concerning meal offerings: “It shall be of imatza /i”(Leviticus 2:5): One bmighthave thought that it is only ba mitzva iab initiofor a meal offering to be of imatza /i. Therefore, bthe verse states: “It shall be,”which indicates that bthe verse established itas ban obligation,i.e., if the meal offering was not brought as imatzait is not valid.,§ bRabbi Perida raisedanother bdilemma before Rabbi Ami: From whereis it derived with regard bto all the meal offeringsthat must be brought as imatza bthat they are kneaded with lukewarmwater so that the dough will be baked well, as only a small amount of oil is added, bandthat bone must watch over themto ensure bthat they do notbecome bleavenedwhile kneading and shaping them? Shall bwe derive this ihalakha bfromthe prohibition concerning leavened bread on the festival of bPassover, as it is written: “And you shall watch over the imatzot /i”(Exodus 12:17), which indicates that one must watch over any dough that is supposed to be made into imatza /i, to ensure that it does not become leavened?,Rabbi Ami bsaid toRabbi Perida: The ihalakhaof meal offerings is not derived from Passover, as bit is written inthe context of a meal offering bitself: “It shall be [ itehiye /i] of imatza /i”(Leviticus 2:5), which can be read as meaning: bPreserve [ ihaḥaye /i] imatza /i, i.e., preserve the imatzaas it is, and do not let it become leavened.,The Gemara asks: bBut didn’t youalready bderivefrom the term “it shall be” that the requirement that a meal offering must be made as imatza bis indispensable?The Gemara answers: bIf so,that this term serves to teach only one ihalakha /i, blet the verse write: It is imatza /i. Whatis the reason that it writes: b“It shall beof imatza /i”? bLearn from it twoconclusions, both that the requirement that it be made as imatzais indispensable and that one must watch over the imatzato ensure that it does not become leavened.,§ The Gemara relates an incident that involves the aforementioned Rabbi Perida. bThe Sages said to Rabbi Perida:The Sage bRabbi Ezra,who is of especially fine lineage, ba grandson of Rabbi Avtolus, whoin turn bis atenth-generation descendant bof Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, who is atenth-generation descendant bof Ezrathe Scribe, bis standingand waiting bat the gateof the house and seeks entry. Rabbi Perida bsaidto the Sages: bWhat isthe need for ball thisdetail about Rabbi Ezra’s lineage?,Rabbi Perida elaborated: bIf he is a man of Torahstudy, he is bworthyof entry on his own account, regardless of his ancestors. And bif he isboth ba man of Torahstudy band a man of lineage,he is also bworthyof entry. bBut ifhe is ba man of lineage and not a man of Torah,better for bfire to devour himthan for him to enter my house. In this case, his lineage is to his detriment, as it highlights his failure to become a Sage like his ancestors. The Sages bsaid toRabbi Perida: Rabbi Ezra bis a man of Torahstudy. Rabbi Perida bsaid to them:If so, blet him enter and come. /b,When Rabbi Ezra entered his house, Rabbi Perida bsaw thatRabbi Ezra’s bmind was troubledwith embarrassment at having to wait outside. Therefore, Rabbi Perida taught a homily to comfort Rabbi Ezra. bHe began and saidan interpretation of the verse: b“I have said to the Lord: You are my Lord; I have no good but in You [ itovati bal alekha /i]”(Psalms 16:2). Rabbi Perida interpreted: bThe congregation of Israel said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, give me credit, as I made YourName bknown in the world,as indicated by the phrase: “You are my Lord.”,God bsaid tothe congregation of Israel: bI give no credit to you [ itovati bal alekha /i].God explained: bI give credit only tothe three Patriarchs, bAbraham, Isaac, and Jacob, whowere the bfirst who made MyName bknown in the world, as it is stated: “As for the holy that are in the earth, they are the excellent [ ive’addirei /i] in whom is all My delight”(Psalms 16:3). The holy in the earth are the Patriarchs, in whom God delights. In this manner Rabbi Perida alluded to the importance of the ancestors of the Jewish people, including Ezra the Scribe, from whom Rabbi Ezra was descended., bWhenRabbi Ezra bheardRabbi Perida bsaythe word: bExcellent [ iaddir /i],he too bbegana homily, one that plays with different forms of this term, band said: Let the iAddircome and exact punishment for the iaddirimfrom the iaddirimin the iaddirim /i. /b,Rabbi Ezra explained this statement: With regard to iAddirin the phrase: bLet the iAddircome, this is the Holy One, Blessed be He, as it is written: “The Lord on high is mighty [ iaddir /i]”(Psalms 93:4). In the phrase: bAnd exact punishment for the iaddirim /i, these iaddirim bare the Jews, as it is stated: “The excellent [ ive’addirei /i] in whom is all My delight”(Psalms 16:3). In the phrase: bFrom the iaddirim /i, these iaddirim bare the Egyptians, as it is writtenwith regard to the splitting of the Red Sea: b“The mighty [ iaddirim /i] sank as lead in the waters”(Exodus 15:10). In the phrase: bIn the iaddirim /i, these iaddirim bare the waters, as it is stated: “Above the voices of many waters, the mighty [ iaddirim /i] breakers of the sea”(Psalms 93:4).,Rabbi Ezra stated another, similar, homiletic interpretation: bLet iyadid /i, son of iyadid /i, come and build iyadidfor iyadidin the portion of iyadid /i, and let iyedidimachieve atonement through it. /b,Rabbi Ezra explained this statement: With regard to iyadidin the phrase: bLet iyadid /i, this is King Solomon, as it is writtenafter Solomon’s birth: b“And He sent by the hand of Nathan the prophet, and he called his name Yedidya, for the Lord’s sake”(II Samuel 12:25).
44. Babylonian Talmud, Nedarim, 89b, 49b (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) 49b. כמאן מצלינן על קצירי ועל מריעי [כמאן כר' יוסי] מדאמר קצירי ומריעי שמע מינה קצירי קצירי ממש מריעי רבנן:,ומותר בעבה: מתני' דלא כבבלאי דאמר ר' זירא בבלאי טפשאי דאכלי לחמא בלחמא,א"ר חסדא דמשאיל להון להלין נקדני דהוצל הדין דייסא היכין מעלי למיכלה דחיטי בלחמא דחיטי ודשערי בלחמא דשערי או דלמא דחיטי בדשערי ודשערי בדחיטי,רבא אכליה בחסיסי רבה בר רב הונא אשכחי' לרב הונא דקאכיל דייסא באצבעתיה אמ' ליה אמאי קאכיל מר בידיה א"ל הכי אמר רב דייסא באצבעתא בסים וכל דכן בתרתין וכל דכן בתלת,אמר ליה רב לחייא בריה וכן אמר ליה רב הונא לרבה בריה מזמנים לך למיכל דייסא עד פרסה למיכל בישרא דתורא עד תלתא פרסין אמר ליה רב לחייא בריה וכן א"ל רב הונא לרבה בריה כל מידעם לא תפלוט קמיה רבך לבר מן קרא ודייסא שהן דומין לפתילתא של אבר ואפילו קמי שבור מלכא פלוט,רבי יוסי ורבי יהודה חד אכיל דייסא באצבעתיה וחד אכיל בהוצא א"ל דאכיל בהוצא לדאכיל באצבעתיה עד מתי אתה מאכילני צואתך אמר ליה דאכיל באצבעתיה לדאכיל בהוצא עד מתי אתה מאכילני רוקך,רבי יהודה ורבי שמעון אייתו לקמייהו בלוספיין רבי יהודה אכל ר' שמעון לא אכל א"ל רבי יהודה מאי טעמא לא אכיל מר אמר ליה ר' שמעון אלו אין יוצאין מבני מעים כל עיקר אמר ליה רבי יהודה כ"ש שנסמוך עליהן למחר,רבי יהודה הוה יתיב קמיה דר' טרפון אמר ליה רבי טרפון היום פניך צהובין אמר ליה אמש יצאו עבדיך לשדה והביאו לנו תרדין ואכלנום בלא מלח ואם אכלנום במלח כל שכן שהיו פנינו צהובין,אמרה ההיא מטרוניתא לרבי יהודה מורה ורוי אמר לה הימנותא בידא דההיא איתתא אי טעימנא אלא קידושא ואבדלתא וארבעה כסי דפסחא וחוגרני צידעי מן הפסח עד העצרת אלא (קהלת ח, א) חכמת אדם תאיר פניו,אמר לי' ההוא צדוקי לרבי יהודה פניך דומין אי כמלוי רבית אי כמגדלי חזירין א"ל ביהודאי תרוייהו אסירן אלא עשרים וארבעה בית הכסא אית לי מן ביתא עד בי מדרשא וכל שעה ושעה אני נכנס לכל אחד ואחד,ר' יהודה כד אזיל לבי מדרשא שקיל גולפא על כתפיה אמר גדולה מלאכה שמכבדת את בעליה רבי שמעון שקיל צנא על כתפיה אמר גדולה מלאכה שמכבדת את בעליה,דביתהו דרבי יהודה נפקת נקטת עמרא עבדה גלימא דהוטבי כד נפקת לשוקא מיכסיא ביה וכד נפיק רבי יהודה לצלויי הוה מיכסי ומצלי וכד מיכסי ביה הוה מברך ברוך שעטני מעיל,זימנא חדא גזר רבן שמעון בן גמליאל תעניתא ר' יהודה לא אתא לבי תעניתא אמרין ליה לא אית ליה כסויא שדר ליה גלימא ולא קביל 49b. bIn accordance with whoseopinion bdo we prayevery day bfor the sick and for the suffering? In accordance with whoseopinion? bIn accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yosei,who holds that one is judged every day, not only on Rosh HaShana, and therefore it is appropriate to pray for people every day. bFromthe fact bthat he said: The sick and the suffering,one can blearn fromhis statement that the term: bThe sick,is referring to bactual sickpeople, while the term: bThe suffering,is referring to bthe Sages,who typically are physically frail.,§ It is stated in the mishna that one who vowed that loose cooked food is forbidden to him is bpermitted totaste ba thickcooked food. The Gemara comments: bThe mishna is not in accordance with thecustom of the bBabylonians, as Rabbi Zeira said: Babylonians are foolish, as they eat bread with bread.They eat thick porridge with their bread, which is essentially eating one kind of bread with another. According to their custom, one who vows that cooked foods are forbidden to him is prohibited from eating even a thick cooked food.,In that context, bRav Ḥisda said that those fastidiousresi-dents bof Huzal,Babylonia bwere asked: How is it best to eat this porridge?Should bwheatporridge be eaten bwith wheat bread and barleyporridge bwith barley bread, or perhaps wheatporridge should be eaten bwith barleybread band barleyporridge bwith wheatbread?,The Gemara relates: bRava would eathis bread bwith iḥasisei /i,a porridge made of toasted barley grains. bRabba, son of Rav Huna, found Rav Huna eating porridge with his fingers. He said to him: Why is the Master eating with his hands?Rav Huna bsaid to him: Thisis what bRav said: Porridgeeaten bwith a finger is tasty, and all the more soif it is eaten bwith twofingers, band all the more so with three.It is more enjoyable to eat porridge with your hands., bRav said to his son Ḥiyya, and Rav Huna similarly said to his son Rabba:If byou are invited to eat porridge,for such a meal you should travel bup tothe distance of ba parasang [ iparsa /i].If you are invited bto eat ox meat,you should travel bup to three parasangs. Rav said to his son Ḥiyya, and Rav Huna similarly said to his son Rabba: You should not spit out anything before your teacher,as this is disrespectful, bapart from gourd and porridge, as they are likea burning blead wickin the intestines when they cannot be digested, bandtherefore bspitthem bout even before King Shapur,due to the danger involved.,The Gemara relates more incidents: bRabbi Yosei and Rabbi Yehudadined together. bOneof them bate porridge with his fingers, andthe other bone ate with a fork [ ihutza /i].The one bwho was eating with a fork said tothe one bwho was eating with his fingers: For how long will youkeep bfeeding me your filth?Must I keep eating off of your dirty fingernails? The one bwho was eating with his fingers said tothe one bwho was eating with a fork: For how long will youkeep bfeeding me your spittle,as you eat with a fork which you then put back in the common bowl.,iBelospayin /i,a type of figs, bwere brought before Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon. Rabbi Yehuda atethem, but bRabbi Shimon did not eatthem. bRabbi Yehuda said to him: What is the reasonthat the bMaster is not eating? Rabbi Shimon said to him: These do not leave the intestines at all.They remain undigested. bRabbi Yehuda said to him:If so, ball the more that one can rely on themto feel full btomorrow. /b, bRabbi Yehuda was sitting before Rabbi Tarfon. Rabbi Tarfon said to him: Your face today is ruddy,i.e., a rosy, healthy color. Rabbi Yehuda bsaid to him: Last night your servants,i.e., we students, bwent out to the field, and beets were brought to us, and we ate them without salt.This is the reason for our healthy complexion. bAnd had we eaten them with salt, all the more so would our faces have been ruddy. /b,The Gemara cites related incidents: bA certaingentile blady [ imatronita /i] said to Rabbi Yehuda,whose face was ruddy: How can one bteachthe Jews bandbe ba drunkat the same time? bHe said to her:I place my bintegrity in the hands of this womanand should no longer be deemed credible bif Iever btasteany wine bexceptfor that of ikiddush /i, ihavdala /i, and the four cups of Passover. Andafter I drink those four cups bI tie my temples from Passover to iShavuot /i,as wine gives me a headache. bRather,my complexion is explained by the verse b“A man’s wisdom makes his face to shine”(Ecclesiastes 8:1)., bA certain heretic said to Rabbi Yehuda: Your face is similar either to usurers or to pig breeders.These people would earn a good living without expending much energy, which gave them plump, healthy complexions. Rabbi Yehuda bsaid to him: Bothof these occupations bare prohibited to Jews. Rather,my face is ruddy because bI have twenty-four bathroomson the way bfrom my home to the study hall, and all the time I enter each and every oneof them. He did not suffer from constipation, which had a beneficial effect on his complexion.,§ The Gemara relates: bWhen Rabbi Yehuda would go to the study hall he would carry a pitcher [ igulefa /i] on his shoulderto sit on, bsaying: Labor is great, as it brings honor to the laborerwho performs bit.It brought him honor by enabling him to avoid sitting on the floor of the study hall. Similarly, bRabbi Shimon would carry a basket on his shoulder, saying: Labor is great, as it brings honor to the laborerwho performs bit. /b,The Gemara further relates: bRabbi Yehuda’s wife went outto the market, bcollected wool,and bmade a thick [ ihutevei /i] cloak. When she would go out to the market she would cover herself with it, and when Rabbi Yehuda would go out to pray he would cover himselfwith the cloak band pray. And when hewould bcover himself with it he would recite the blessing: Blessed is He who wrapped me in a coat,as he took much pleasure in it.,On bone occasion Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel,the iNasi /i, bdecreed a fast. Rabbi Yehuda did not come to the house of the fast,where everyone gathered. The people bsaid toRabban Shimon ben Gamliel: Rabbi Yehuda bdoes not havea dignified garment to bcoverhimself with, and therefore he shies away from public events. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel bsent him a cloakof his own, bbutRabbi Yehuda bdid not acceptthis gift.
45. Babylonian Talmud, Pesahim, 49b, 113b (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) 113b. תני תנא קמיה דרבא ורב ספרא צהבו פניו דרב ספרא אמר לו רבא לאו כגון מר אלא כגון רב חנינא ורב אושעיא דהוו אושכפי בארעא דישראל והוו יתבי בשוקא דזונות ועבדי להו מסאני לזונות ועיילי להו אינהו מסתכלי בהו ואינהו לא מדלן עינייהו לאיסתכולי בהו ומומתייהו הכי בחייהן רבנן קדישי דבארעא דישראל:,שלשה הקדוש ברוך הוא אוהבן מי שאינו כועס ומי שאינו משתכר ומי שאינו מעמיד על מדותיו שלשה הקדוש ברוך הוא שונאן המדבר א' בפה ואחד בלב והיודע עדות בחבירו ואינו מעיד לו והרואה דבר ערוה בחבירו ומעיד בו יחידי,כי הא דטוביה חטא ואתא זיגוד לחודיה ואסהיד ביה קמיה דרב פפא נגדיה לזיגוד א"ל טוביה חטא וזיגוד מינגד אמר ליה אין דכתיב (דברים יט, טו) לא יקום עד אחד באיש ואת לחודך אסהדת ביה שם רע בעלמא קא מפקת ביה,אמר רבי שמואל בר רב יצחק אמר רב מותר לשנאתו שנאמר (שמות כג, ה) כי תראה חמור שנאך רובץ תחת משאו מאי שונא אילימא שונא נכרי והא תניא שונא שאמרו שונא ישראל ולא שונא נכרי,אלא פשיטא שונא ישראל ומי שריא למסניה והכתיב (ויקרא יט, יז) לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך אלא דאיכא סהדי דעביד איסורא כולי עלמא נמי מיסני סני ליה מאי שנא האי אלא לאו כי האי גוונא דחזיא ביה איהו דבר ערוה,רב נחמן בר יצחק אמר מצוה לשנאתו שנאמר (משלי ח, יג) יראת ה' (שונאי) רע אמר רב אחא בריה דרבא לרב אשי מהו למימרא ליה לרביה למשנייה אמר ליה אי ידע דמהימן לרביה כבי תרי לימא ליה ואי לא לא לימא ליה,תנו רבנן שלשה חייהן אינם חיים הרחמנין והרתחנין ואניני הדעת ואמר רב יוסף כולהו איתנהו בי,תנו רבנן שלשה שונאין זה את זה אלו הן הכלבים והתרנגולין והחברין וי"א אף הזונות וי"א אף תלמידי חכמים שבבבל,ת"ר שלשה אוהבין זה את זה אלו הן הגרים ועבדים ועורבין,ארבעה אין הדעת סובלתן אלו הן דל גאה ועשיר מכחש וזקן מנאף ופרנס מתגאה על הציבור בחנם ויש אומרים אף המגרש את אשתו פעם ראשונה ושניה ומחזירה,ותנא קמא זימנא דכתובתה מרובה אי נמי יש לו בנים הימנה ולא מצי מגרש לה,חמשה דברים צוה כנען את בניו אהבו זה את זה ואהבו את הגזל ואהבו את הזמה ושנאו את אדוניכם ואל תדברו אמת,ששה דברים נאמרים בסוס אוהב את הזנות ואוהב את המלחמה ורוחו גסה ומואס את השינה ואוכל הרבה ומוציא קמעה וי"א אף מבקש להרוג בעליו במלחמה,שבעה מנודין לשמים אלו הן יהודי שאין לו אשה ושיש לו אשה ואין לו בנים ומי שיש לו בנים ואין מגדלן לתלמוד תורה ומי שאין לו תפילין בראשו ותפילין בזרועו וציצית בבגדו ומזוזה בפתחו והמונע מנעלים מרגליו וי"א אף מי שאין מיסב בחבורה של מצוה,אמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי שמואל בר מרתא אמר רב משום רבי יוסי איש הוצל מניין שאין שואלין בכלדיים שנאמר (דברים יח, יג) תמים תהיה עם ה' אלהיך,ומניין היודע בחבירו שהוא גדול ממנו אפילו בדבר אחד שחייב לנהוג בו כבוד שנאמר (דניאל ו, ד) כל קבל די רוח יתירא ביה [ומלכא עשית להקמותיה על כל מלכותא],והיושבת על דם טהור אסורה לשמש עד כמה אמר רב עונה,תנא הוא יוסף איש הוצל הוא יוסף הבבלי הוא איסי בן גור אריה הוא איסי בן יהודה הוא איסי בן גמליאל הוא איסי בן מהללאל ומה שמו איסי בן עקביה שמו הוא רבי יצחק בן טבלא הוא רבי יצחק בן חקלא הוא רבי יצחק בן אלעא הוא 113b. When bthe itannataughtthis ibaraita bbefore Rava and Rav Safra, Rav Safra’s face lit upwith joy, as he was listed among those praised by God. bRava said to him:This does not refer to someone blike the Master. Rather,the statement applies to people like bRav Ḥanina and Rav Oshaya, who were cobblers in Eretz Yisrael, and they would sit in the marketplace of prostitutes and fashion shoes for prostitutes. Andthe prostitutes bwould entertheir shops and blook at them.However, due to their piety, these Sages bdid not raise their eyes to look atthe women. And those prostitutes were so impressed with this behavior that when they bswore,they would say bas follows: By the lives of the holy Sages of Eretz Yisrael.It is this type of bachelor who is praised by Heaven.,The Gemara cites a similar statement. bThe Holy One, Blessed be He, loves threepeople: bOne who does not get angry; one who does not get drunk; and one who is forgiving. The Holy One, Blessed be He, hates threepeople: bOne who says onestatement bwith his mouth andmeans banother in his heart,i.e., a hypocrite; bone who knows testimony about anotherperson band does not testify on his behalf; and one who observes a licentious matterperformed bby anotherperson band testifies against him alone.His testimony is meaningless, as he is the only witness; consequently, he merely gives the individual a bad reputation.,The Gemara comments: This is blikethat incident bwhere Tuveya sinnedwith immorality, band Zigud came alone to testify about him before Rav Pappa.Rav Pappa instructed that bZigud be lashed.Zigud bsaid to him: Tuveya sinned and Zigud is lashed,an objection that became a popular saying. bHe said to him: Yes, as it is written: “One witness shall not rise up against a man”(Deuteronomy 19:15), band you testified against him alone. You have merely given him a bad reputation. /b, bRabbi Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak saidthat bRav said:Although one who sees another committing a sin should not testify against him by himself, bhe isnonetheless bpermitted to hate him, as it is stated: “If you see the donkey of he who hates you lying under its load”(Exodus 23:5). The Gemara clarifies this verse: bWhatis the meaning of he bwho hates youmentioned in the verse? bIf you sayit is referring to ba gentile who hatesyou, bbut wasn’tit btaughtin a ibaraitathat the phrase: bHe who hates, ofwhich the Torah bspoke, is a Jew who hatesyou, bnot a gentile who hatesyou?, bRather,it is bobviousthat the verse is referring to ba Jew who hatesyou. bBut is one permitted to hatea fellow Jew? bBut isn’t it written: “You shall not hate your brother in your heart”(Leviticus 19:17), which clearly prohibits the hatred of another Jew? bRather,perhaps you will say that the verse is referring to a situation bwhere there are witnesses that he performed a sin.However, in that case, beveryoneelse should balso hate him. What is differentabout this particular person who hates him? bRather, is it notreferring bto a case like this, when he saw himperform ba licentious matter?He is therefore permitted to hate him for his evil behavior, whereas others who are unaware of his actions may not hate him., bRav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said:Not only is this permitted, it is even ba mitzva to hate him, as it is stated: “The fear of God is to hate evil”(Proverbs 8:13). bRav Aḥa, sonof bRava, said to Rav Ashi: What isthe ihalakhawith regard btowhether one who saw someone sin may btell his teacherso that bhetoo bwill hate him?Rav Ashi bsaid to him: Ifthe student bknowsthat he is btrusted by his teacher as twowitnesses, and therefore his statement will be accepted, bheshould btell him, and ifhe is bnottrusted by his teacher as two witnesses, he should bnot tell him. /b, bThe Sages taught:There are bthreetypes of people bwhose lives are not lives,due to their constant suffering: bThe compassionate, the hot tempered, and the delicate. Rav Yosef said: All of theseattributes barefound bin me. /b,Furthermore, bthe Sages taught:Members of bthreegroups bhate othermembers of the same group: bDogs, roosters, and the Persian priests. And some say: Also prostitutes. And some say: Also Torah scholars in Babylonia. /b,Likewise, bthe Sages taught:Members of bthreegroups blove one another: Converts, slaves, and ravens. /b, bFourtypes of people bcannot be enduredby anyone: bAn arrogant pauper; a wealthy person who deniesmonetary claims against him; ba lecherous old man; and a leader who lords over the community for no cause. And some say: Also one who divorces his wife once and twice and takes her backa third time. He should decide definitively whether or not he wants her.,The Gemara asks: bAndwhy didn’t bthe first itanna /imention this case of a man who remarries his wife after two divorces? The Gemara answers: bSometimesthe husband’s payment to her in the event of divorce, as stipulated in bher marriage contract, is large,and since he is unable to pay he is forced to take her back. bAlternatively, he has children with her and cannot divorce her,as he wants someone to care for them.,The Gemara continues: bCanaan commanded his sonswith regard to bfive mattersthat are apparently normal behavior for slaves: bLove one another, love robbery, love promiscuity, hate your masters, and do not speak the truth. /b, bSix matters are said with regard to a horse:It bloves promiscuity,it bloves war, its demeanor is arrogant, it despises sleep, it eats much, and it excretes little. And some say:Just as a horse always rushes straight into the heat of a battle, it balso attempts to kill its master in war. /b, bSevenare bostracized by Heaven,despite the fact that they have not been ostracized in any court: bA Jew who does not have a wife; and one who has a wife but has no sons; and one who has sons whom he does not raise toengage in bTorah study; and one who does not have phylacteries on his head, and phylacteries on his arm, and ritual fringes on his garment, and a imezuzain his doorway; and one who withholds shoes from his feet. And some say: Also one who does not sit with a groupthat is partaking of a feast in celebration bof a mitzva. /b, bRabba bar bar Ḥana saidthat bRabbi Shmuel bar Marta saidthat Rav said, citing bRabbi Yosei of Hutzal: From whereis it derived bthat onemay bnot consult astrologers? As it is stated: “You shall be wholehearted with the Lord your God”(Deuteronomy 18:13). The Torah demands absolute faith in God and acceptance of His justice, without attempting to predict the future., bAnd from whereis it derived concerning bone who knows about another that he is greater than him, even in one matter, that he must treat him with respect? As it is stated: “Because a surpassing spirit was in him, the king thought to set him over the whole realm”(Daniel 6:4). This verse teaches that one who is in any way greater than another person is worthy of his respect., bAndit was also stated by Rabba bar bar Ḥana: With regard to a woman who was bobservingher days of ritually bpure blood,and those days have ended, she bis prohibited to engage in intimacyimmediately, lest she see ritually impure blood. Any blood emitted by a woman within forty days after giving birth to a male child or eighty days after giving birth to a female child is ritually pure. After this period of time has passed, a woman should not have relations with her husband immediately. The Gemara asks: bUntil whenis she prohibited to her husband? bRav said:She must wait ba set interval of timefor the ritual impurity of a inidda /i, i.e., either one day or one night.,With regard to Rabbi Yosei of Hutzal, it was btaught:The bYosef of Hutzalmentioned in other places in the Gemara bisthe same person as bYosef the Babylonian.Yosef is the full name of Yosei. Furthermore, bhe isalso known as bIsi ben Gur Arye, he is Isi ben Yehuda, he is Isi ben Gamliel,and bhe is Isi ben Mahalalel. And what is hisreal bname? Hisreal bnameis bIsi ben Akavya.Similarly, the Sage bRabbi Yitzḥak ben Tavla isalso known as bRabbi Yitzḥak ben Ḥakla,who bis Rabbi Yitzḥak ben Ela.These are two cases of one Sage with several names.
46. Babylonian Talmud, Qiddushin, 66a (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) 66a. שורך נרבע והלה שותק נאמן ותנא תונא ושנעבדה בו עבירה ושהמית על פי עד אחד או ע"פ הבעלים נאמן האי ע"פ עד אחד היכי דמי אי דקא מודו בעלים היינו ע"פ הבעלים אלא לאו דשתיק,וצריכא דאי אשמעינן הך קמייתא אי לאו דקים ליה בנפשיה דעבד חולין בעזרה לא הוה מייתי,אבל נטמאו טהרותיך מימר אמרינן האי דשתיק דסבר חזי ליה בימי טומאתו,ואי אשמעינן הא משום דקא מפסיד ליה בימי טהרתו אבל שורו נרבע מימר אמר כל השוורים לאו לגבי מזבח קיימי צריכא,איבעיא להו אשתו זינתה בעד אחד ושותק מהו אמר אביי נאמן רבא אמר אינו נאמן הוי דבר שבערוה ואין דבר שבערוה פחות משנים,אמר אביי מנא אמינא לה דההוא סמיא דהוה מסדר מתנייתא קמיה דמר שמואל יומא חד נגה ליה ולא הוה קאתי שדר שליחא אבתריה אדאזיל שליח בחדא אורחא אתא איהו בחדא כי אתא שליח אמר אשתו זינתה אתא לקמיה דמר שמואל א"ל אי מהימן לך זיל אפקה ואי לא לא תפיק,מאי לאו אי מהימן עלך דלאו גזלנא הוא ורבא אי מהימן לך כבי תרי זיל אפקה ואי לא לא תפקה,ואמר אביי מנא אמינא לה דתניא מעשה בינאי המלך שהלך לכוחלית שבמדבר וכיבש שם ששים כרכים ובחזרתו היה שמח שמחה גדולה וקרא לכל חכמי ישראל אמר להם אבותינו היו אוכלים מלוחים בזמן שהיו עסוקים בבנין בית המקדש אף אנו נאכל מלוחים זכר לאבותינו והעלו מלוחים על שולחנות של זהב ואכלו,והיה שם אחד איש לץ לב רע ובליעל ואלעזר בן פועירה שמו ויאמר אלעזר בן פועירה לינאי המלך ינאי המלך לבם של פרושים עליך ומה אעשה הקם להם בציץ שבין עיניך הקים להם בציץ שבין עיניו,היה שם זקן אחד ויהודה בן גדידיה שמו ויאמר יהודה בן גדידיה לינאי המלך ינאי המלך רב לך כתר מלכות הנח כתר כהונה לזרעו של אהרן שהיו אומרים אמו נשבית במודיעים ויבוקש הדבר ולא נמצא ויבדלו חכמי ישראל בזעם,ויאמר אלעזר בן פועירה לינאי המלך ינאי המלך הדיוט שבישראל כך הוא דינו ואתה מלך וכהן גדול כך הוא דינך ומה אעשה אם אתה שומע לעצתי רומסם ותורה מה תהא עליה הרי כרוכה ומונחת בקרן זוית כל הרוצה ללמוד יבוא וילמוד,אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק מיד נזרקה בו אפיקורסות דהוה ליה למימר תינח תורה שבכתב תורה שבעל פה מאי מיד ותוצץ הרעה על ידי אלעזר בן פועירה ויהרגו כל חכמי ישראל והיה העולם משתומם עד שבא שמעון בן שטח והחזיר את התורה ליושנה,היכי דמי אילימא דבי תרי אמרי אישתבאי ובי תרי אמרי לא אישתבאי מאי חזית דסמכת אהני סמוך אהני,אלא בעד אחד וטעמא דקא מכחשי ליה בי תרי הא לאו הכי מהימן,ורבא לעולם תרי ותרי וכדאמר רב אחא בר רב מניומי בעדי הזמה הכא נמי בעדי הזמה,ואיבעית אימא כדרבי יצחק דאמר רבי יצחק שפחה הכניסו תחתיה,אמר רבא 66a. bYour ox was usedby a man bfor an act of bestialityand is therefore unfit for an offering, band the other,the owner of the ox, bis silent,the witness is bdeemed credible. And the itanna /iof the mishna also btaught( iBekhorot41a): bAndwith regard to an animal bthat was used for a transgressionor bthat killed,if this is attested to bby one witness or by the owner,he is bdeemed credible.The Gemara clarifies this case: bWhat are the circumstancesof bthiscase of the mishna, where the knowledge is established bby one witness? If the owner admitsto the claim, bthis isthe same as: bBy the owner. Rather, is it notreferring to a case bwherethe owner remains bsilent? /b,The Gemara comments: bAndeach of these statements of Abaye is bnecessary. As, had he taught usonly bthat firstcase, where the witness said someone ate forbidden fat, one might have said that he is deemed credible for the following reason: bWere it notfor the fact bthat he himselfwas bconvinced that he had committeda transgression, bhe would notcommit the transgression of bbringing a non-sacredanimal btothe Temple bcourtyardon the basis of the testimony of one witness. Consequently, his silence is evidently an admission., bButif the witness said: bYour ritually purefoods bwere rendered ritually impure,and the accused was silent, bwe would say:The reason bthathe is bsilentand refrains from denying the claim is bthat he thinkshe is not suffering any significant loss, as the food bis fit for himto eat bon his days of ritual impurity,because he is not required to destroy ritually impure foods., bAnd hadAbaye btaught usonly the case of: Your ritually pure food was rendered ritually impure, one might have said that the reason bthiswitness is deemed credible is bthat he causes him a loss on his days of ritual impurity,and therefore his silence is tantamount to a confession. bButin the case of: bHis ox was usedby a man bfor an act of bestiality,the owner of the ox bcan saywith regard to his animal: bNot all the oxen standready to be sacrificed basan offering on the baltar.Perhaps one would think that the owner does not bother denying the claim because he merely forfeits the possibility of sacrificing his ox as an offering, which he considers an inconsequential matter. It is only if there were two witnesses to the act that the animal is put to death, whereas here there was only one witness. It is therefore bnecessaryfor Abaye to specify all these cases.,§ bA dilemma was raised beforethe Sages: If a husband is told bby one witnessthat bhis wife committed adultery, andthe husband remains bsilent, what isthe ihalakha /i? bAbaye said:The witness is bdeemed credible. Rava said: He is not deemed credible.Why not? Because bit is a matter involving forbidden relations, and there is no matterof testimony bfor forbidden sexual relationsthat can be attested to by bfewer than twowitnesses., bAbaye said: From where do I saythis claim of mine? It happened bthatthere was ba certain blind man who would review imishnayotbefore Mar Shmuel. One daythe blind man bwas late for him and was not arriving.Mar Shmuel bsent a messenger after himto assist him. bWhilethe bmessenger was goingto the blind man’s house bby one way,the blind man barrivedat the house of study bby a differentroute, and therefore the messenger missed him and reached his house. bWhenthe bmessenger cameback, bhe saidthat he had been to the blind man’s house and saw that bhis wife committed adultery.The blind man bcame before Mar Shmuelto inquire whether he must pay heed to this testimony. Mar Shmuel bsaid to him: Ifthis messenger bis trusted by you, goand bdivorce her, but if not, do not divorceher.,Abaye comments: bWhat, is it notcorrect to say that this means that bif he is trusted by you that he is not a thiefbut is a valid witness, you must rely on him? This would prove that a single witness can testify in a case of this kind. bAnd Ravaexplains that Mar Shmuel meant: bIfhe bis trusted by you like twowitnesses, bgoand bdivorce her, but if not, do not divorceher. Consequently, Rava maintains that this episode affords no proof., bAnd Abaye said: From where do I saythis claim of mine? bAs it is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bAn incidentoccurred bwith King Yannai, who went tothe region of bKoḥalit in the desert and conquered sixty cities there. And upon his return he rejoicedwith ba great happinessover his victory. bAnd hesubsequently bsummoned all the Sages of the Jewish peopleand bsaid to them: Our ancestorsin their poverty bwould eat salty foods when they were busy with the building of the Temple; we too shall eat salty foods in memory of our ancestors. And they brought salty food on tables of gold, and ate. /b, bAnd there was oneperson bpresent, a scoffer,a man of ban evil heart and a scoundrel called Elazar ben Po’ira. And Elazar ben Po’ira said to King Yannai: King Yannai, the hearts of the Pharisees,the Sages, bare against you.In other words, they harbor secret resentment against you and do not like you. The king replied: bAnd what shall I doto clarify this matter? Elazar responded: bHave them stand bywearing bthe frontplate between your eyes.Since the frontplate bears the Divine Name, they should stand in its honor. Yannai, who was a member of the priestly Hasmonean family, also served as High Priest, who wears the frontplate. bHe hadthe Pharisees bstand bywearing bthe frontplate between his eyes. /b,Now bthere was a certain elder present called Yehuda ben Gedidya, and Yehuda ben Gedidya said to King Yannai: King Yannai, the crown of the monarchy suffices for you,i.e., you should be satisfied that you are king. bLeave the crown of the priesthood for the descendants of Aaron.The Gemara explains this last comment: bAs they would saythat Yannai’s bmother was taken captive in Modi’in,and she was therefore disqualified from marrying into the priesthood, which meant that Yannai was a iḥalal /i. bAnd the matter was investigated and was not discovered,i.e., they sought witnesses for that event but none were found. bAnd the Sages of Israel were expelled inthe king’s brage,due to this rumor., bAnd Elazar ben Po’ira said to King Yannai: King Yannai, such is the judgment of a common person in Israel.In other words, merely expelling a slanderer is appropriate if the subject of the slander is a commoner. bBut you are a king and a High Priest.Is bthis your judgmentas well? Yannai replied: bAnd what should I do?Elazar responded: bIf you listen to my advice, crush them.Yannai countered: bBut what will become of the Torah?He retorted: bBehold,it bis wrapped and placed in the corner. Anyone who wishes to study can come and study.We have no need for the Sages.,The Gemara interjects: bRav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak says: Immediately, heresy was injected intoYannai, bas he should have saidto Elazar ben Po’ira: This bworks out wellwith regard to bthe Written Torah,as it can be studied by all on their own, but bwhatwill become of bthe Oral Torah?The Oral Torah is transmitted only by the Sages. The ibaraitacontinues: bImmediately, the evilarose and bcaught fire through Elazar ben Po’ira, and all the Sages of the Jewish people were killed. And the world was desolateof Torah buntil Shimon ben Shataḥ came and restored the Torah to its formerglory. This completes the ibaraita /i.,Abaye asks: bWhat are the circumstancesof this case? How did those who conducted the investigation refute the rumor that Yannai’s mother had been taken captive? bIf we say that twowitnesses bsaidthat bshe was taken captive, and twoothers bsaidthat bshe was not taken captive, what did you see that you rely on thesewho said that she was not taken captive? Instead, brely on thesewho said that she was taken captive. In such a scenario, one cannot say definitively that the matter was investigated and found to be false., bRather,it must be referring bto one witnesswho testified she was taken captive, and two testified that she was not taken captive. bAnd the reasonthat the lone witness is not deemed credible is only bthat he is contradicted by theother btwo,from which it may be inferred that bif not for thatfact, bhe would be deemed credible.This supports Abaye’s claim that an uncontested lone witness is deemed credible in a case of this kind., bAnd Ravacould reply that this incident affords no proof, for the following reason: bActually,one can say that there were btwowitnesses who testified that she was captured band twowho testified that she was not, bandthe case was decided bin accordance with thatwhich bRav Aḥa bar Rav Minyumi saysin a different context, that it is referring bto conspiring witnesses.The second pair of witnesses did not contradict the testimony of the first pair but established them as liars by stating that the first pair were not there to witness the event. This serves to disqualify the testimony of the first pair altogether. bHere too,it is referring btowitnesses who rendered the first set bconspiring witnesses. /b, bAnd if you wish, saythat this is bin accordance withthe version of the story stated bby Rabbi Yitzḥak, as Rabbi Yitzḥak says: They replacedYannai’s mother bwith a maidservant.The first witnesses saw that Yannai’s mother was about to be taken captive, but the second pair revealed that she had actually been replaced with a maidservant, thereby negating the testimony of the first set., bRava says: /b
47. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, 109a, 11a, 36b, 64a, 106a (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) 106a. מחליף ושרשיו מרובין ואפילו כל רוחות שבעולם באות ונושבות בו אין מזיזות אותו ממקומו אלא הוא הולך ובא עמהן כיון שדוממו הרוחות עמד קנה במקומו,אבל בלעם הרשע ברכן בארז מה ארז זה אינו עומד במקום מים ושרשיו מועטין ואין גזעו מחליף אפילו כל הרוחות שבעולם באות ונושבות בו אין מזיזות אותו ממקומו כיון שנשבה בו רוח דרומית מיד עוקרתו והופכתו על פניו ולא עוד אלא שזכה קנה ליטול ממנו קולמוס לכתוב ממנו ס"ת נביאים וכתובים,(במדבר כד, כא) וירא את הקיני וישא משלו אמר לו בלעם ליתרו קיני לא היית עמנו באותה עצה מי הושיבך אצל איתני עולם,והיינו דא"ר חייא בר אבא א"ר סימאי שלשה היו באותה עצה אלו הן בלעם איוב ויתרו בלעם שיעץ נהרג איוב ששתק נידון ביסורין ויתרו שברח זכו בני בניו לישב בלשכת הגזית שנאמר (דברי הימים א ב, נה) ומשפחות סופרים יושבי יעבץ תרעתים שמעתים סוכתים המה הקינים הבאים מחמת אבי בית רכב וכתיב (שופטים א, טז) ובני קיני חותן משה עלו מעיר התמרים,(במדבר כד, כג) וישא משלו ויאמר אוי מי יחיה משמו אל (אמר רשב"ל אוי מי שמחיה עצמו בשם אל) א"ר יוחנן אוי לה לאומה שתמצא בשעה שהקב"ה עושה פדיון לבניו מי מטיל כסותו בין לביא ללביאה בשעה שנזקקין זה עם זה,(במדבר כד, כד) וצים מיד כתים אמר רב ליבון אספיר (במדבר כד, כד) וענו אשור וענו עבר עד אשור קטלי מיקטל מכאן ואילך משעבדי שיעבודי,(במדבר כד, יד) הנני הולך לעמי לכה איעצך אשר יעשה העם הזה לעמך עמך לעם הזה מיבעי ליה א"ר אבא בר כהנא כאדם שמקלל את עצמו ותולה קללתו באחרים,אמר להם אלהיהם של אלו שונא זימה הוא והם מתאוים לכלי פשתן בוא ואשיאך עצה עשה להן קלעים והושיב בהן זונות זקינה מבחוץ וילדה מבפנים וימכרו להן כלי פשתן,עשה להן קלעים מהר שלג עד בית הישימות והושיב בהן זונות זקינה מבחוץ וילדה מבפנים ובשעה שישראל אוכלין ושותין ושמחין ויוצאין לטייל בשוק אומרת לו הזקינה אי אתה מבקש כלי פשתן זקינה אומרת לו בשוה וילדה אומרת לו בפחות שתים ושלש פעמים,ואח"כ אומרת לו הרי את כבן בית שב ברור לעצמך וצרצורי של יין עמוני מונח אצלה ועדיין לא נאסר (יין של עמוני ולא) יין של נכרים אמרה לו רצונך שתשתה כוס של יין כיון ששתה בער בו,אמר לה השמיעי לי הוציאה יראתה מתוך חיקה אמרה לו עבוד לזה אמר לה הלא יהודי אני אמרה לו ומה איכפת לך כלום מבקשים ממך אלא פיעור [והוא אינו יודע שעבודתה בכך] ולא עוד אלא שאיני מנחתך עד שתכפור בתורת משה רבך שנא' (הושע ט, י) המה באו בעל פעור וינזרו לבשת ויהיו שקוצים באהבם,(במדבר כה, א) וישב ישראל בשטים ר"א אומר שטים שמה רבי יהושע אומר שנתעסקו בדברי שטות,ותקראן לעם לזבחי אלהיהן רבי אלעזר אומר ערומות פגעו בהן רבי יהושע אומר שנעשו כולן בעלי קריין,מאי לשון רפידים רבי אליעזר אומר רפידים שמה רבי יהושע אומר שריפו עצמן מדברי תורה שנאמר (ירמיהו מז, ג) לא הפנו אבות אל בנים מרפיון ידים,אמר רבי יוחנן כל מקום שנאמר וישב אינו אלא לשון צער שנא' (במדבר כה, א) וישב ישראל בשטים ויחל העם לזנות אל בנות מואב (בראשית לז, א) וישב יעקב בארץ מגורי אביו בארץ כנען ויבא יוסף את דבתם רעה אל אביהם ונאמר (בראשית מז, כז) וישב ישראל בארץ גשן ויקרבו ימי ישראל למות (מלכים א ה, ה) וישב יהודה וישראל לבטח איש תחת גפנו ותחת תאנתו (מלכים א יא, יד) ויקם ה' שטן לשלמה את הדד האדומי מזרע המלך הוא באדום,(במדבר לא, ח) ואת מלכי מדין הרגו על חלליהם וגו' את בלעם בן בעור הרגו בחרב בלעם מאי בעי התם א"ר יוחנן שהלך ליטול שכר עשרים וארבעה אלף [שהפיל מישראל] אמר מר זוטרא בר טוביה אמר רב היינו דאמרי אינשי גמלא אזלא למיבעי קרני אודני דהוו ליה גזיזן מיניה,(יהושע יג, כב) ואת בלעם בן בעור הקוסם קוסם נביא הוא א"ר יוחנן בתחלה נביא ולבסוף קוסם אמר רב פפא היינו דאמרי אינשי מסגני ושילטי הואי אייזן לגברי נגרי 106a. breplenishesitself, as if it is cut another grows, band its roots are numerous. And even if all the winds that are in the world come and gust against it, they do not move it from its placeand uproot it. bRather, it goes and comes withthe winds. And bonce the winds subside the reed remains in its place. /b, bBut Balaam the wicked blessed them with a cedar.There is an aspect of curse in that blessing, as he was saying they will be bjust like a cedarthat bdoes not stand in a placenear bwater, and its roots are fewrelative to its height, band its trunk does not replenishitself, as if it is cut it does not grow back. And bevenif ball the winds that are in the world come and gust against it, they do not move it from its placeand uproot it; but bonce a southern wind gusts it immediately uprootsthe cedar band overturns it on its face. Moreover,it is bthe reed that was privileged tohave ba quill [ ikulmos /i] taken from it to write scrolls of Torah, Prophets, and Writings.Therefore, the curse of Ahijah is better than the blessing of Balaam.,§ It is stated with regard to Balaam: b“And he looked at the Kenite and he took up his parableand said: Though firm is your dwelling place, and though your nest be set in rock” (Numbers 24:21). bBalaam said to Yitro: Kenite,were byou not in Egypt with us in that counselto drown the newborn males of Israel? bWho placed you alongside the mighty of the world? /b,The Gemara comments: bAnd that is what Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba saysthat bRabbi Simai says: Three wereassociates bin that counsel, and they are: Balaam, Job, and Yitro. Balaam, who advisedto drown the newborn males, bwas killed. Job, who was silentand was reluctant to express his opinion, bwas sentenced tosuffer bafflictions. And Yitro, who fledafter he disagreed with that counsel and Pharaoh sought to kill him, bhis descendants were privileged to sitas scribes in session with the Sanhedrin bin the Chamber of Hewn Stone, as it is stated: “And the families of the scribes who dwelt in Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, the Sucathites. These were the Kenites who came of Hammath the father of the house of Rechab”(I Chronicles 2:55). bAnd it is written therewith regard to the identity of the Kenites: b“And the children of the Kenite, Moses’ father-in-law, went up from the city of the palm trees”(Judges 1:16).,With regard to the verse: b“And he took up his parable, and said: Alas, he who lives from what God has appointed him”(Numbers 24:23), bRabbi Shimon ben Lakish says: Woe unto one who sustains himselfin an indulgent manner bin the name of God,i.e., Balaam, whose livelihood was from speaking in the name of God. bRabbi Yoḥa says: Woe unto the nation that will be foundhindering the Jewish people bat the time when the Holy One, Blessed be He, redeems His children. Who places his garment between a male lion and a female lion when they are mating?One who does so will certainly die.,With regard to the verse: b“And ships come from the coast of Kittim”(Numbers 24:24), bRav says:This is bthe Roman legion [ ilibbun aspir /i]that will attack Assyria. b“And they shall afflict Assyria, and they shall afflict Eber”(Numbers 24:24). bBeforethey reach bAssyria they will killthe Jewish people; bfrom thatpoint bforward they will enslave themand not kill them.,§ Balaam said to Balak: b“Behold, I go to my people; come therefore, and I shall advise you what this people shall do to your people”(Numbers 24:14). Ostensibly, bhe should havesaid: What byour peopleshall do bto this people. Rabbi Abba bar Kahana says:Balaam spoke blike a person who curses himselfbut does not wish to utter so awful a matter bandinstead bascribes his curse totake effect on bothers. /b,Balaam bsaid to them: The God of theseJewish people bdespises lewdness, and they desire linen garments,as they have no new garments; bcome, and I will give you advice. Make for themenclosures using wall bhangings and seat prostitutes in them,with ban old woman outsidethe enclosure band a young woman inside, andhave the women bsell them linen garments. /b,Balak bmade for themenclosures using wall bhangings from the snow mountain,the Ḥermon, buntil Beit HaYeshimot, and he sat prostitutes in them,with ban old woman outside and a young woman on the inside. And at the time when Jewish people were eating and drinking and were glad and going out to stroll in the marketplace, the old woman would say toa Jew: bAren’t you seeking linen garments?He would enter the enclosure and ask the price, bthe old woman would quote hima price bequalto its value, band the young woman would quote hima price blessthan its value. That scenario would repeat itself btwo or three times. /b, bAnd thereafter she would say to him: You are like a member of our household, sitand bchoose for yourselfthe merchandise that you want. bAnd a jug of Ammonite wine was placed near her, andneither bAmmonite wine nor gentile wine had been prohibited yetfor Jews. bShe said to him: Is it your wish to drink a cup of wine? Once he drankthe wine, his evil inclination bburned within him. /b, bHethen bsaid to her: Submit to meand engage in intercourse with me. bShethen bremovedthe bidolthat bshe worshipped from her lap and said to him: Worship this. He said to her: Am I not Jewish?I am therefore forbidden from engaging in idol worship. bShe said to him: And what is your concern? We are asking you to do nothing more than defecatein its presence. bBut he does not know that its worshipis conducted bin thatmanner. Once he did so, she said to him: bMoreover, I will not leave you until you deny the Torah of Moses your teacher, as it is stated: “But when they came to Ba’al-Peor they separated themselves to the shameful item; and they became detestable like that which they loved”(Hosea 9:10). They devoted themselves to the disgrace of defecation, and detested the name of God.,With regard to the verse: b“And Israel dwelt in Shittim”(Numbers 25:1), bRabbi Eliezer says: Shittimis bthe name ofthe place. bRabbi Yehoshua says:It is an allusion to the fact bthat they were engaged in matters of nonsense [ ishetut /i],i.e., prostitution and idol worship.,With regard to the verse: b“And they called [ ivatikrena /i] the people to the offerings of their gods”(Numbers 25:2), bRabbi Eliezer says: Naked women encountered them. Rabbi Yehoshua says: They all became those who experienced a seminal emission [ ikerayin /i]resulting from the lust that they experienced.,Apropos the homiletic interpretation of the names of places, the Gemara asks: bWhatis the connotation of the bterm Rephidim(see Exodus 19:2)? bRabbi Eliezer says: Rephidimis bthe name ofthe place. bRabbi Yehoshua says:It is an allusion to the fact bthat they enfeebled [ irippu /i] themselves with regard toengaging in bmatters of Torah, as it is stated: “The fathers do not look back to their children from feebleness [ irifyon /i] of hands”(Jeremiah 47:3). There too, the connotation of the name is dereliction in the study of Torah., bRabbi Yoḥa says: Everywhere that it is stated: And he dwelt, it is nothing other than an expression of pain,of an impending calamity, bas it is stated: “And Israel dwelt in Shittim, and the people began to commit harlotry with the daughters of Moab”(Numbers 25:1). It is stated: b“And Jacob dwelt in the land where his father had sojourned in the land of Canaan”(Genesis 37:1), and it is stated thereafter: b“And Joseph brought evil report of them to his father”(Genesis 37:2), which led to the sale of Joseph. bAnd it is stated: “And Israel dweltin the land of Egypt bin the land of Goshen”(Genesis 47:27), and it is stated thereafter: b“And the time drew near that Israel was to die”(Genesis 47:29). It is stated: b“And Judah and Israel dwelt safely, every man under his vine and under his fig tree”(I Kings 5:5), and it is stated thereafter: b“And the Lord raised up an adversary to Solomon, Hadad the Edomite; he was of the king’s seed in Edom”(I Kings 11:14).,§ With regard to Balaam, it is stated: b“And they slew the kings of Midian, with the rest of their slain…And Balaam, son of Beor, they slew with the sword”(Numbers 31:8). The Gemara asks: bBalaam, what did he seek there;what was his role in that war? He lived in Aram. bRabbi Yoḥa says: He went to collect payment for twenty-four thousandmembers bof the Jewish people, whom he felledwith his advice. bMar Zutra bar Toviya saysthat bRav saysthat bthisis in accordance with the adage bthat people say: A camel goes to seek hornsand bthe ears that it had are severed from it.Not only was Balaam unsuccessful in collecting his fee, he also lost his life.,It is stated: b“And Balaam, son of Beor, the diviner,did the children of Israel slay with the sword among the rest of their slain” (Joshua 13:22). The Gemara asks: Was he ba diviner? He is a prophet. Rabbi Yoḥa says: Initiallyhe was ba prophet, but ultimately,he lost his capacity for prophecy and remained merely ba diviner. Rav Pappa saysthat bthisis in accordance with the adage bthat people say:This woman bwasdescended bfrom princes and rulers,and bwas licentious with carpenters. /b
48. Babylonian Talmud, Sotah, 49b (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) 49b. אזלא ודלדלה ואין שואל ואין מבקש על מי יש להשען על אבינו שבשמים,בעקבות משיחא חוצפא יסגא ויוקר יאמיר הגפן תתן פריה והיין ביוקר ומלכות תהפך למינות ואין תוכחת בית וועד יהיה לזנות והגליל יחרב והגבלן ישום ואנשי הגבול יסובבו מעיר לעיר ולא יחוננו,וחכמות סופרים תסרח ויראי חטא ימאסו והאמת תהא נעדרת נערים פני זקנים ילבינו זקנים יעמדו מפני קטנים בן מנוול אב בת קמה באמה כלה בחמותה אויבי איש אנשי ביתו פני הדור כפני הכלב הבן אינו מתבייש מאביו ועל מה יש לנו להשען על אבינו שבשמים, big strong(גמ׳) /strong /big אמר רב לא שנו אלא של מלח וגפרית אבל של הדס ושל וורד מותר ושמואל אומר אף של הדס ושל וורד אסור של קנים ושל חילת מותר ולוי אמר אף של קנים ושל חילת אסור וכן תני לוי במתניתיה אף של קנים ושל חילת אסור,ועל האירוס מאי אירוס א"ר אלעזר טבלא דחד פומא רבה בר רב הונא עבד ליה לבריה טנבורא אתא אבוה תבריה אמר ליה מיחלף בטבלא דחד פומא זיל עביד ליה אפומא דחצבא או אפומא דקפיזא,בפולמוס של טיטוס גזרו על עטרות כלות וכו' מאי עטרות כלות אמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר ר' יוחנן עיר של זהב תניא נמי הכי איזהו עטרות כלות עיר של זהב אבל עושה אותה כיפה של מילת,תנא אף על חופת חתנים גזרו מאי חופת חתנים זהורית המוזהבות תניא נמי הכי אלו הן חופת חתנים זהורית המוזהבות אבל עושה פפירית ותולה בה כל מה שירצה,ושלא ילמד את בנו יוונית ת"ר כשצרו מלכי בית חשמונאי זה על זה היה הורקנוס מבחוץ ואריסטובלוס מבפנים בכל יום ויום היו משלשלין דינרים בקופה ומעלין להן תמידים,היה שם זקן אחד שהיה מכיר בחכמת יוונית לעז להם בחכמת יוונית אמר להן כל זמן שעוסקים בעבודה אין נמסרין בידכם למחר שלשלו להם דינרים בקופה והעלו להם חזיר כיון שהגיע לחצי חומה נעץ צפרניו נזדעזעה א"י ארבע מאות פרסה,אותה שעה אמרו ארור אדם שיגדל חזירים וארור אדם שילמד לבנו חכמת יוונית ועל אותה שנה שנינו מעשה ובא עומר מגגות צריפים ושתי הלחם מבקעת עין סוכר,איני והאמר רבי בא"י לשון סורסי למה אלא אי לשון הקודש אי לשון יוונית ואמר רב יוסף בבבל לשון ארמי למה אלא או לשון הקודש או לשון פרסי,לשון יוונית לחוד וחכמת יוונית לחוד,וחכמת יוונית מי אסירא והאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל משום רשב"ג מאי דכתיב (איכה ג, נא) עיני עוללה לנפשי מכל בנות עירי אלף ילדים היו בבית אבא חמש מאות למדו תורה וחמש מאות למדו חכמת יוונית ולא נשתייר מהן אלא אני כאן ובן אחי אבא בעסיא,שאני של בית ר"ג דקרובין למלכות הוו דתניא מספר קומי הרי זה מדרכי האמורי אבטולוס בן ראובן התירו לספר קומי שהוא קרוב למלכות של בית רבן גמליאל התירו להן חכמה יוונית מפני שקרובין למלכות,בפולמוס האחרון גזרו שלא תצא כלה באפריון וכו' מ"ט משום צניעותא,משמת רבן יוחנן בטלה החכמה ת"ר משמת רבי אליעזר נגנז ס"ת משמת רבי יהושע בטלה עצה ומחשבה משמת ר"ע בטלו זרועי תורה ונסתתמו מעיינות החכמה,משמת רבי אלעזר בן עזריה בטלו עטרות חכמה (משלי יד, כד) שעטרת חכמים עשרם משמת רבי חנינא בן דוסא בטלו אנשי מעשה משמת אבא יוסי בן קטונתא בטלו חסידים ולמה נקרא שמו אבא יוסי בן קטונתא שהיה מקטני חסידים,משמת בן עזאי בטלו השקדנין משמת בן זומא בטלו הדרשנין משמת רשב"ג עלה גובאי ורבו צרות משמת רבי הוכפלו צרות,משמת רבי בטלה ענוה ויראת חטא אמר ליה רב יוסף לתנא לא תיתני ענוה דאיכא אנא אמר ליה רב נחמן לתנא לא תיתני יראת חטא דאיכא אנא, br br big strongהדרן עלך ערופה וסליקא לן מסכת סוטה /strong /big br br
49. Babylonian Talmud, Taanit, 21a, 18a (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) 18a. אלא לאסור יום שלפניו ה"נ לא נצרכה אלא לאסור יום שלאחריו כמאן כרבי יוסי דאמר בין לפניו בין לאחריו אסור אי הכי בעשרים ותשעה נמי מאי איריא דהוי יומא דמקמי יומא דמיתוקם תמידא תיפוק ליה דה"ל יומא דבתר עשרין ותמניא ביה,דתניא בעשרים ותמני' ביה אתת בשורתא טבתא ליהודאי דלא יעידון מן אורייתא שפעם אחת נגזרה גזירה על ישראל שלא יעסקו בתורה ושלא ימולו את בניהם ושיחללו שבתות מה עשה יהודה בן שמוע וחביריו הלכו ונטלו עצה ממטרוניתא אחת שכל גדולי רומי מצויין אצלה,אמרה להם עמדו והפגינו בלילה הלכו והפגינו בלילה אמרו אי שמים לא אחים אנחנו לא בני אב אחד אנחנו לא בני אם אחת אנחנו מה נשתנינו מכל אומה ולשון שאתם גוזרין עלינו גזירות רעות ובטלום ואותו היום עשאוהו יו"ט,אמר אביי לא נצרכה אלא לחדש מעובר,רב אשי אמר אפילו תימא לחדש חסר כל שלאחריו בתענית אסור בהספד מותר וזה הואיל ומוטל בין שני ימים טובים עשאוהו כיו"ט עצמו ואפילו בהספד נמי אסור,אמר מר מתמניא ביה ועד סוף מועדא איתותב חגא דשבועיא דלא למיספד למה לי למימר מתמניא ביה לימא מתשעה ביה ותמניא גופיה אסור דה"ל יומא דאיתוקם ביה תמידא,כיון דאילו מקלע (ליה) מילתא ובטליניה לשבעה תמניא גופיה אסור דה"ל יומא קמא דאיתותב ביה חגא דשבועיא,השתא דאתית להכי עשרים ותשעה נמי כיון דאילו מיקלע מילתא ובטליניה לעשרים ותמניא עשרין ותשעה גופיה אסור דה"ל יומא דמקמי יומא דאיתוקם תמידא,איתמר ר' חייא בר אסי אמר רב הלכה כר' יוסי ושמואל אמר הלכה כר' מאיר,ומי אמר שמואל הכי והתניא רשב"ג אומר ומה תלמוד לומר בהון בהון שתי פעמים לומר לך שהן אסורין לפניהן ולאחריהן מותרין ואמר שמואל הלכה כרבן שמעון בן גמליאל,מעיקרא סבר כיון דליכא תנא דמיקל כרבי מאיר אמר הלכה כרבי מאיר כיון דשמעיה לרבן שמעון דמיקל טפי אמר הלכה כרבן שמעון בן גמליאל,וכן אמר באלי אמר רבי חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן הלכה כרבי יוסי א"ל רבי חייא לבאלי אסברא לך כי אמר ר' יוחנן הלכה כרבי יוסי אדלא להתענאה,ומי אמר רבי יוחנן הכי והאמר ר' יוחנן הלכה כסתם משנה ותנן אע"פ שאמרו מקדימין ולא מאחרין 18a. bonly to prohibiteulogizing on bthe day before. Here too, it is necessaryto mention Passover bonly to prohibiteulogizing on the bfollowing day.The Gemara asks: bIn accordance with whoseopinion is this ruling? It is bin accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yosei, who saidthat eulogizing is bprohibited bothon the day bbeforethe date recorded in iMegillat Ta’anit bandon the bfollowing day.The Gemara asks: bIf so,with regard to bthe twenty-ninthof Adar btoo, whystate bspecificallythat eulogizing is prohibited then bbecause it is the day before the day on which the daily offering was established? Let him derivethis prohibition from the fact bthat it is the day after the twenty-eighth ofAdar., bAs it is taughtin iMegillat Ta’anit /i: bOn the twenty-eighth ofAdar bgood tidings came to the Jews, that they would not be restricted from Torahstudy, and they declared this date a commemorative day. The ibaraitaproceeds to describe the events of this day. bAs on one occasion the wicked empire,Rome, bissued a decree of apostasy against the Jews, that they may not occupy themselves with Torahstudy, band that they may not circumcise their sons, and that they must desecrate Shabbat.What did bYehuda ben Shammua and his colleagues do? They went and soughtthe badvice of a certainRoman bmatron [ imatronita /i] whosecompany was kept bby all the prominentpeople bof Rome. /b, bShe said to them: Arise and cry out [ ihafginu /i] at night. They went and cried out at night, saying: O Heaven! Are we not brothers? Are we not children of one father? Are we notthe bchildren of one mother? How are we different from any other nation and tongue that yousingle us out and bissue against us evil decrees?Their cries were effective, bandthe authorities bannulledthe decrees, band they made that daya commemorative bholiday. /b,§ Since the twenty-eighth of Adar is also a commemorative day, according to the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, it is also prohibited to fast on the following day. The question therefore remains: Why was it necessary to list the New Moon of Nisan, when the day before was already prohibited? bAbaye said: It is necessaryto include the New Moon of Nisan bonly forthe case of ba full,thirty-day bmonth.If the month of Adar is thirty days long, fasting on the thirtieth day would be prohibited only because it is the day preceding the New Moon, not because it follows the twenty-eighth of Adar., bRav Ashi said: Evenif byou saythat we are dealing bwith a deficient month,with twenty-nine days, the inclusion of the New Moon of Nisan can still be explained. The reason is that with regard to balldays bthat followthe dates listed in iMegillat Ta’anit /i, bfasting is prohibited but eulogizing is permitted. Butin bthiscase, bsincethe twenty-ninth of Adar bis positioned between twocommemorative bholidays,the twenty-eighth of Adar and the New Moon of Nisan, the Sages bmade it likea commemorative bholiday in its own right, andit is therefore bprohibited even to eulogizeon this date.,§ bThe Master saidabove, in iMegillat Ta’anit /i: bFrom the eighth ofNisan buntil the end of the festivalof Passover, bthe festival of iShavuotwas restored,and it was decreed bnot to eulogizeduring this period. The Gemara asks: bWhy do Ineed it bto say: From the eighth ofNisan? bLetthe itanna bsay: From the ninth ofNisan, band the eighth itselfwill still be prohibited because, basstated earlier, bit is the day on which the daily offering was established. /b,The Gemara answers: bSince ifa calamitous bevent happened and they canceled the sevendays commemorating the establishment of the daily offering, bthe eighthday bitselfwill remain bprohibited, as it is the first day on which the festival of iShavuotwas restored.Since this date is not merely the last of the series for the daily offering, but it also commemorates the restoration of iShavuot /i, it is not affected by the cancellation of the previous seven days.,The Gemara notes: bNow that you have arrived at thisconclusion, the same logic can be applied to bthe twenty-ninthof Adar bas well: Since ifa calamitous bevent happened and they canceledthe commemoration of bthe twenty-eighthof Adar, nevertheless, bthe twenty-ninthday bitselfwill remain bprohibited, as it is the first day on which the daily offering was established. /b, bIt was statedthat there is a dispute between iamora’im /i: bRav Ḥiyya bar Asi saidthat bRav said: The ihalakhais in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yosei,that with regard to all the days mentioned in iMegillat Ta’aniton which eulogizing is prohibited, it is likewise prohibited to eulogize on the day before and the day after. bAnd Shmuel said: The ihalakhais in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Meir,the itannaof the unattributed mishna, who said that although it is prohibited to eulogize on the day before, it is permitted on the day after.,The Gemara asks: bAnd did Shmuelactually bsay this? But isn’t ittaught in a ibaraitathat bRabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: And whatis the meaning when iMegillat Ta’anit bstates: On them, on them, twice,in the phrases: Not to eulogize on them, and: Not to fast on them. This phrase is repeated bto say to youthat fasting and eulogizing bon thesedays themselves bis prohibited,but on the days bbeforeand on the bfollowingdays it is bpermitted. And Shmuel said: The ihalakhais in accordance withthe opinion of bRabban Shimon ben Gamliel.How, then, can it be said that Shmuel ruled in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir?,The Gemara answers: bInitially,Shmuel bmaintainedthat bsince there is noother itannaas lenient as Rabbi Meir, he saidthat bthe ihalakhais in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Meir. When he heard thatthe opinion of bRabban Shimonben Gamliel bwas more lenient,he said that bthe ihalakhais in accordance withthe opinion of bRabban Shimon ben Gamliel.Shmuel consistently ruled in the most lenient manner possible on this issue., bAnd similarly,the Sage bBali saidthat bRabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba saidthat bRabbi Yoḥa said: The ihalakhais in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yosei.The Gemara relates that bRabbi Ḥiyyabar Abba bsaid to Bali: I will explainthis ruling bto you. When Rabbi Yoḥa saidthat bthe ihalakhais in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yosei,he was not referring to all matters. Rather, he spoke specifically bwith regard tothe day before those dates concerning which iMegillat Ta’anitsaid: bFasting is prohibited.However, with regard to those days on which it is prohibited to eulogize, he did not rule in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, as Rabbi Yoḥa maintains that eulogizing on the following day is permitted.,The Gemara asks: bAnd did Rabbi Yoḥaactually bsay this? But didn’t Rabbi Yoḥa sayas a principle that bthe ihalakha /iis always in accordance with ban unattributed mishna. And we learnedin a mishna: bAlthoughthe Sages bsaid,with regard to reading of the Scroll of Esther, that bonemay read it bearlier but onemay bnotread it blater, /b
50. Babylonian Talmud, Tamid, 27b (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) 27b. הניחא למ"ד אבנטו של כ"ג לא זהו אבנטו של כהן הדיוט אלא למ"ד אבנטו של כהן הדיוט זהו אבנטו של כ"ג מאי איכא למימר,וכי תימא כלאים בעליה ולבישה הוא דאסור אבל מימך תותיה שפיר דמי והתניא (ויקרא יט, יט) לא יעלה עליך אבל אתה מציעו תחתיך אבל אמרו חכמים אסור לעשות כן שמא תיכרך נימא אחת על בשרו,וכי תימא דמפסיק מידי והאמר ר"ש א"ר יהושע בן לוי א"ר יוסי בן שאול משום קהלא קדישא שבירושלים אפילו עשר מצעות זו על גב זו וכלאים תחתיהן אסור לישן עליהן אלא ש"מ נגד ראשיהן,ואי בעית אימא באותן שאין בהן כלאים רב אשי אמר בגדי כהונה קשין הן דאמר רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע הא נמטא גמדא דנרש שריא,ת"ש בגדי כהונה היוצא בהן למדינה אסור במקדש בין בשעת עבודה ובין שלא בשעת עבודה מותר מפני שבגדי כהונה ניתנו ליהנות בהן ש"מ,ובמדינה לא והתניא בכ"א בו יום הר גריזים דלא למיספד כדאיתא ביומא פרק בא לו כ"ג קרוב וכו',עד איבעית אימא ראויין הן לבגדי כהונה,ואי בעית אימא (תהלים קיט, קכו) עת לעשות לה' הפרו תורתך:,אירע קרי באחד מהן [וכו']:,מסייע ליה לר' יוחנן דאמר מחילות לא נתקדשו ובעל קרי משתלח חוץ לשני מחנות:,והנרות דולקין מכאן ומכאן כו': רב ספרא הוה יתיב בבית הכסא אתא ר' אבא נחר ליה א"ל ליעול מר,בתר דנפיק א"ל ר' אבא ע"כ לא סליקת לשעיר גמרת מילי דשעיר לאו הכי תנן מצאו נעול בידוע שיש שם אדם למימרא דלא מיבעי ליה למיעל,ורב ספרא סבר דלמא מסוכן הוא כדתני' רשב"ג אומר עמוד החוזר מביא את האדם לידי הדרוקן סילון החוזר מביא את האדם לידי ירקון,א"ל רב לחייא בריה וכן א"ל רב הונא לרבה בריה חשיך תקין נפשך וקדים תקין נפשך כי היכי דלא תרחק תוב וגלי כסי וקום,שטוף ושתי [שטוף] ואחית וכשאתה שותה מים שפוך מהן ואח"כ תן לתלמידך,כדתניא לא ישתה אדם מים ויתן לתלמידו אלא אם כן שפך מהן ומעשה באחד ששתה מים ולא שפך מהן ונתן לתלמידו ואותו תלמיד איסטניס היה ולא רצה לשתות ומת בצמא באותה שעה אמרו לא ישתה אדם מים ויתן לתלמידו אא"כ שפך מהן רב אשי אמר הילכך האי תלמידא דשפיך קמי רביה לית ביה משום אפקירותא,כל מילי לא תיפלוט באפי רבך בר מקרא ודייסא דכפתילה של אבר דמו,תנן התם איש הר הבית היה מחזר על כל משמר ומשמר ואבוקות דולקות לפניו וכל משמר שאינו עומד וא"ל איש הר הבית 27b. The Gemara explains the difficulty: If one maintains that the mishna permits the priests to place the vestments beneath their heads, bthis works out well according to the one who saidthat bthe belt of the High Priest is not the same as the belt of an ordinary priest.Although the belt of the High Priest was made of both wool and linen, the belt of ordinary priests, like the rest of their vestments, were made entirely of linen and did not contain diverse kinds. bBut according to the one who saidthat bthe belt of an ordinary priest is the same as the belt of the High Priest, what is there to say?Since the belt contained diverse kinds, how could the mishna possibly permit the priests to sleep upon their vestments?, bAnd if you would saythat with regard to bdiverse kinds it isonly bplacingthe garment bupononeself bor wearingit bthat is prohibited, butas for bspreadingit bbeneath you,it is bpermitted,this explanation is difficult. bBut isn’t it taughtin a ibaraita /i: The verse states: b“Neither shall there come upon youa garment of diverse kinds” (Leviticus 19:19). One should infer as follows: bBut you may spreada garment of diverse kinds bbeneath you,in order to lie upon it. The ibaraitacontinues: This is the ihalakhaby Torah law, bbut the Sages saidthat bit is prohibited to do so, lest a single fiber wrapitself bupon his flesh,which would cause him to be in transgression of the Torah prohibition. Accordingly, the priests should not be permitted to place vestments made of diverse kinds beneath their heads., bAnd if you would saythat the priests could place the vestments beneath their heads in such a manner bthat something separatesbetween their flesh and the vestments, as the fibers could not wrap themselves upon their flesh, such conduct would still be prohibited. bDoesn’t Rabbi Shimon saythat bRabbi Yehoshua ben Levi saysthat bRabbi Yosei ben Shaul says in the name of the holy community in Jerusalem: Evenif there are bten mattressespiled bone atop the other anda garment of bdiverse kindsis placed bbeneathall of bthem, it is prohibited to sleep upon them?This is because the rabbinic decree applies equally to all cases, irrespective of whether the concern that motivated the decree exists. bRather,one may bconclude fromhere that the mishna permits the vestments to be placed only bnext to their heads. /b,The Gemara suggests alternative solutions: bAnd if you wish, sayinstead that the mishna does permit the priests to place the vestments beneath their heads, as it is referring bto thosevestments bthat do not contain diverse kinds. Rav Ashi says:The mishna permits the priests to place even the belt that contains diverse kinds beneath their heads. This is because the bpriestly vestments,and specifically the belt, bare stiff,and therefore it is not prohibited to lie on them. bAs Rav Huna, son of Rabbi Yehoshua, said: This stiff felt [ inamta /i],which is manufactured binthe city of bNereshand is made of diverse kinds, bis permitted.The prohibition of diverse kinds applies only to items that are similar to garments, which one derives pleasure from wearing. A stiff garment does not provide warmth, and is therefore not included in this prohibition.,The Gemara returns to discuss the earlier dilemma, of whether it is permitted to derive benefit from priestly vestments. bComeand bheara ibaraita /i: With regard to the bpriestly vestments,the act of bone who leavesthe Temple dressed bin themand goes out bto the country,i.e., outside the Temple, is bprohibited. But in the Temple, both at the time ofthe Temple bservice and not at the time ofthe bservice,wearing the vestments is bpermitted, as it is permitted to derive benefit from the priestly vestments.The Gemara concludes: One may bconclude fromthe ibaraitathat it is permitted to derive benefit from the priestly vestments.,According to the ibaraita /i, the priestly vestments may not be worn outside the Temple. The Gemara asks: bAndis it bnotpermitted to wear the priestly vestments binthe rest of bthe country,outside the Temple? bBut isn’t it taughtin a ibaraita /i, in connection with a date mentioned in iMegillat Ta’anit /i: bOn the twenty-first ofTevet, this is bthe day of Mount Gerizim, whichwas established as a festive day, and therefore it is bnotpermitted bto eulogize.This date was established as a festive day because the Temple was saved from destruction on that day, due to the actions of Shimon HaTzaddik, the High Priest, bas it isrelated bintractate iYoma /i(69a), in the seventh bchapter,which begins: bThe High Priest came closeto read the Torah.,The ibaraitarelates that Shimon HaTzaddik went to greet Alexander the Macedonian wearing the priestly vestments. The Gemara in iYomacites the complete ibaraita /i, bup tothe Gemara’s explanation as to why Shimon HaTzaddik wore the priestly vestments outside the Temple: bIf you wish, saythat Shimon HaTzaddik did not wear consecrated priestly vestments. Rather, he wore garments that were bfit to be priestly vestments,i.e., they were made of the same material and design., bAnd if you wish, sayinstead that he did in fact wear consecrated priestly vestments. Although this is usually prohibited, in this instance it was permitted due to the principle: b“It is time to act for the Lord; they have nullified Your Torah”(Psalms 119:126). In times of great need, such as when one seeks to prevent the destruction of the Temple, it is permitted to violate the ihalakhafor the sake of Heaven, and the actions of Shimon HaTzaddik indeed averted the destruction.,§ The mishna teaches (25b): If ba seminal emission befell one ofthe priests and rendered him ritually impure, he would leave the Chamber of the Hearth and he would walk through the circuitous passage that extended beneath the Temple, as he could not pass through the Temple courtyard, due to his impurity.,The Gemara notes that this mishna bsupportsthe opinion of bRabbi Yoḥa, who says:The btunnelsbeneath the Temple Mount bwere not sanctified,neither with the sanctity of the Temple courtyard nor with the sanctity of the Temple Mount. The Gemara cites a related statement of Rabbi Yoḥa: bA man who experienced a seminal emission is sent outside of two camps,the camp of the Divine Presence and the camp of the Levites. Accordingly, he may not remain in the Temple courtyard, which has the status of the camp of the Divine Presence, nor on the Temple Mount, which has the status of the camp of the Levites.,The mishna teaches: bAnd the lamps were burning on thisside band on thatside of the passage…and there was a bathroom of honor in the Chamber of Immersion. This was its honor: If one found the door closed, he would know that there was a person there, and he would wait for him to exit before entering. The Gemara relates: bRav Safra was sitting in the bathroomwhen bRabbi Abba camealong. Since there was no door, Rabbi Abba bcoughedoutside btoalert anyone within of his presence and thereby inquire whether he could enter. Rav Safra bsaid toRabbi Abba: bEnter, Master,and Rabbi Abba therefore entered the bathroom., bWhen he came out, Rabbi Abba said toRav Safra: bUntil now,although you have traveled widely, byou have never entered Seir,the land of the Edomites, who behave immodestly. Nevertheless, byou have learned the ways of Seir. Didn’t we learn thisin the mishna: If one bfoundthe door bclosed, it was known that there was a person there,and one would wait for him to exit before entering. This serves bto say thata person bshould not enterthe bathroom while another person is inside. Therefore, Rav Safra should not have told Rabbi Abba to enter.,The Gemara explains that bRav Safratold Rabbi Abba to enter because he bthought: PerhapsRabbi Abba bis in danger.Rav Safra was concerned that if Rabbi Abba waited for him to exit, Rabbi Abba might jeopardize his health, bas it was taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: A columnof feces bthat is held back,because one refrains from relieving himself, bcauses a person tosuffer from bedema [ ihidrokan /i]. A streamof urine bthat is held back causes a person tosuffer from bjaundice [ iyerakon /i]. /b, bRav said to his son Ḥiyya, and likewise Rav Huna said to his son Rabba: Relieve yourselfwhen it bgets dark, and relieve yourself beforedaybreak, even if you have no particular need to do so. The reason is that the streets are mostly empty at these times, and one can relieve himself near his home without concern that he might be seen. This is important, bso thatyou bwill nothave to relieve yourself during the day, when the streets are full, and you will be compelled to retain your feces while you bdistance yourself,which is liable to jeopardize your health. Furthermore, when relieving yourself, you should behave modestly. bSitdown first bandonly then buncoveryourself; afterward, bcoveryourself first bandonly then bstand up. /b,With regard to drinking, these iamora’iminstructed their sons: When you drink wine, brinsethe cup first bandonly then bdrinkfrom it; after you drink, brinsethe cup bandonly then bsetit back in its place. bBut when you drink water,it is not necessary to rinse the cup afterward; rather, bpourout some bof thewater to rinse the rim of the cup, band afterward you may givethe cup bto your student,if he wants to drink., bAs it is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bA person should not drink water and givethe remaining water bto his student, unless hefirst bpouredsome bof itout. bAndthere was ban incident involving a certainindividual bwho drank water and did not poursome bof itout, band he gavethe cup bto his student. And that student was a delicate person [ iistenis /i], anddue to his sensitivity bhe did not want to drinkfrom the cup, band he died of thirst. At that time,the Sages bsaid: A person should not drink water and givethe remaining water bto his student unlesshe first bpouredsome bof itout. bRav Ashi said: Therefore,in the case of bthis student who pourswater from the cup that his teacher drank from first, even if he does so bin the presence of his teacher,his actions bare notprohibited bdue to disrespect [ iafkiruta /i]. /b,With regard to eating, these iamora’iminstructed their sons: In the case of banythingthat you are eating, if the food causes you to salivate and you need to spit out the saliva, bdo not spitit bout in the presence of your teacher,as it is disrespectful, bexceptin the case bofa dish of bgourd or porridge.If one is eating gourds or porridge he may spit out the saliva even in the presence of his teacher, basthe saliva generated by these items is blikea molten bbar of lead,and refraining from spitting it out would be dangerous.,§ bWe learnedin a mishna belsewhere( iMiddot1:2): bThe man [ iish /i]in charge of overseeing the watches bof the Temple Mount would circulatenightly bamong each and every watch post,to ascertain that the watchmen were awake and performing their duty properly. bAndthere were blit torchescarried bbefore him,so that the watchmen would see him approaching. bAndat bevery watch post wherethe watchman would bnot standup, the man would test whether the watchman was sleeping; band the man of the Temple Mountwould bsay to him: /b
51. Babylonian Talmud, Yevamot, 122a, 62b, 63a, 63b, 112b (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
52. Babylonian Talmud, Yoma, 53b, 69b, 39b (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) 39b. חמצן עד יום מותו,אמר רבה בר (בר) שילא מאי קרא (תהלים עא, ד) אלהי פלטני מיד רשע מכף מעול וחומץ רבא אמר מהכא (ישעיהו א, יז) למדו היטב דרשו משפט אשרו חמוץ אשרו חמוץ ואל תאשרו חומץ,תנו רבנן אותה שנה שמת בה שמעון הצדיק אמר להם בשנה זו הוא מת אמרו לו מניין אתה יודע אמר להם בכל יום הכפורים היה מזדמן לי זקן אחד לבוש לבנים ועטוף לבנים נכנס עמי ויצא עמי והיום נזדמן לי זקן אחד לבוש שחורים ועטוף שחורים נכנס עמי ולא יצא עמי אחר הרגל חלה שבעה ימים ומת,ונמנעו אחיו הכהנים מלברך בשם,ת"ר ארבעים שנה קודם חורבן הבית לא היה גורל עולה בימין ולא היה לשון של זהורית מלבין ולא היה נר מערבי דולק,והיו דלתות ההיכל נפתחות מאליהן עד שגער בהן רבן יוחנן בן זכאי אמר לו היכל היכל מפני מה אתה מבעית עצמך יודע אני בך שסופך עתיד ליחרב וכבר נתנבא עליך זכריה בן עדוא (זכריה יא, א) פתח לבנון דלתיך ותאכל אש בארזיך,אמר רבי יצחק בן טבלאי למה נקרא שמו לבנון שמלבין עונותיהן של ישראל,אמר רב זוטרא בר טוביה למה נקרא שמו יער דכתיב (מלכים א י, יז) בית יער הלבנון לומר לך מה יער מלבלב אף בית המקדש מלבלב דאמר רב הושעיא בשעה שבנה שלמה בית המקדש נטע בו כל מיני מגדים של זהב והיו מוציאין פירות בזמניהן וכיון שהרוח מנשבת בהן היו נושרין פירותיהן שנאמר (תהלים עב, טז) ירעש כלבנון פריו ומהן היתה פרנסה לכהונה,וכיון שנכנסו עובדי כוכבים להיכל יבשו שנאמר (נחום א, ד) ופרח לבנון אומלל ועתיד הקב"ה להחזירה לנו שנאמר (ישעיהו לה, ב) פרוח תפרח ותגל אף גילת ורנן כבוד הלבנון נתן לה,נתנן על שני השעירים תנו רבנן עשר פעמים מזכיר כהן גדול את השם בו ביום ג' בוידוי ראשון ושלשה בוידוי שני ושלשה בשעיר המשתלח ואחד בגורלות,וכבר אמר השם ונשמע קולו ביריחו אמר רבה בר בר חנה מירושלים ליריחו עשרה פרסאות,וציר דלתות ההיכל נשמע בשמונה תחומי שבת עזים שביריחו היו מתעטשות מריח הקטורת נשים שביריחו אינן צריכות להתבשם מריח קטורת כלה שבירושלים אינה צריכה להתקשט מריח קטורת,אמר רבי (יוסי בן דולגאי) עזים היו לאבא בהרי (מכמר) והיו מתעטשות מריח הקטורת אמר רבי חייא בר אבין אמר רבי יהושע בן קרחה סח לי זקן אחד פעם אחת הלכתי לשילה והרחתי ריח קטורת מבין כותליה,אמר ר' ינאי עליית גורל מתוך קלפי מעכבת הנחה אינה מעכבת ורבי יוחנן אמר אף עלייה אינה מעכבת,אליבא דרבי יהודה דאמר דברים הנעשין בבגדי לבן מבחוץ לא מעכבא כולי עלמא לא פליגי דלא מעכבא כי פליגי אליבא דר' נחמיה מ"ד מעכבא כר' נחמיה ומאן דאמר לא מעכבא הני מילי עבודה הגרלה לאו עבודה היא,איכא דאמרי,אליבא דרבי נחמיה דאמר מעכבא כולי עלמא לא פליגי דמעכבא,כי פליגי אליבא דר' יהודה מאן דאמר לא מעכבא כרבי יהודה ומאן דאמר מעכבא שאני הכא דתנא ביה קרא אשר עלה אשר עלה תרי זימני,מיתיבי מצוה להגריל ואם לא הגריל כשר,בשלמא להך לישנא דאמרת אליבא דרבי יהודה כולי עלמא לא פליגי דלא מעכבא הא מני רבי יהודה היא 39b. ba robber [ iḥamtzan /i] until the day of his death. /b, bRabba bar bar Sheila said: What is the versethat indicates that a iḥamtzanis a robber? The verse states: b“O, my God, rescue me out of the hand of wicked, out of the hand of the unrighteous and robbing man [ iḥometz /i]”(Psalms 71:4). bRava said: From here: “Learn to do well, seek justice, strengthen the robbed [ iḥamotz /i]”(Isaiah 1:17), which teaches that one should bstrengthen the robbed, but not strengthen the robber. /b,§ bThe Sages taught:During bthe year in which Shimon HaTzaddik died, he said to them,his associates: bIn this year, he will die,euphemistically referring to himself. bThey said to him: How do you know? He said to them:In previous years, bon every Yom Kippur,upon entering the Holy of Holies, bI was met,in a prophetic vision, bby an old man who was dressed in white, andhis head was bwrapped up in white,and bhe would enterthe Holy of Holies bwith me, and he would leave with me. But today, I was met by an old man who was dressed in black, andhis head was bwrapped up in black,and bhe enteredthe Holy of Holies bwith me,but bhe did not leave with me.He understood this to be a sign that his death was impending. Indeed, bafter the festivalof iSukkot /i, bhe was ill for seven days and died. /b,Without the presence of Shimon HaTzaddik among them, the Jewish people were no longer worthy of the many miracles that had occurred during his lifetime. For this reason, following his death, bhis brethren, the priests, refrained from blessingthe Jewish people bwith theexplicit bname of Godin the priestly blessing., bThe Sages taught:During the tenure of Shimon HaTzaddik, the lot for God always arose in the High Priest’s right hand; after his death, it occurred only occasionally; but during the bforty years prior to the destruction of theSecond bTemple,the blotfor God bdid not arise in theHigh Priest’s brighthand at all. So too, bthe strip of crimsonwool that was tied to the head of the goat that was sent to Azazel bdid not turn white, and the westernmost lampof the candelabrum bdid not burncontinually., bAnd the doors of the Sanctuary opened by themselvesas a sign that they would soon be opened by enemies, buntil Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai scolded them. He said tothe Sanctuary: bSanctuary, Sanctuary, why do you frighten yourselfwith these signs? bI know about you that you will ultimately be destroyed, and Zechariah, son of Ido, has already prophesied concerning you: “Open your doors, O Lebanon, that the fire may devour your cedars”(Zechariah 11:1), Lebanon being an appellation for the Temple., bRabbi Yitzḥak ben Tavlai said: Why isthe Temple bcalled Lebanon [ iLevanon /i]? Because it whitens [ imalbin /i] the Jewish people’s sins,alluded to by the root ilavan /i, meaning white., bRav Zutra bar Toviya said: Why isthe Temple bcalled: Forest, as it is written: “The house of the forest of Lebanon”(I Kings 10:17)? bTo tell you: Just as a forest blooms, so too the Temple blooms. As Rav Hoshaya said: When Solomon built the Temple, he planted in it all kinds of sweet fruittrees made bof gold, andmiraculously these bbrought forth fruit in their season. And when the wind blew upon them, their fruit would fall off, as it is stated: “May his fruits rustle like Lebanon”(Psalms 72:16). bAnd throughselling these golden fruits to the public, bthere was a source of income for the priesthood. /b, bBut once thegentile bnations entered the Sanctuarythe golden trees bwithered, as it states “And the blossoms of Lebanon wither”(Nahum 1:4). bAnd in the futurehour of redemption, bthe Holy One, Blessed be He, will restorethem bto us as it is stated: “It shall blossom abundantly, it shall also rejoice and shout, the glory of Lebanon will be given to it”(Isaiah 35:2).,§ The mishna states that after selecting the two lots, the High Priest bplacesthem bupon the two goats.Upon placing the lot for God upon the appropriate goat, he says: For God, as a sin-offering. This is just one of the occasions on which he mentions God’s name, as bthe Sages taughtin the iTosefta( iYoma2:2): bThe High Priest mentions the nameof God bten times on that day: Threetimes bduring the first confession; and threetimes bduring the second confession,over the bull; band threetimes when he confesses over bthe scapegoatto Azazel; band onetime bwith the lots,when placing the lot for God upon the goat., bAnd there alreadywas an incident when the High Priest bsaid the nameof God and bhis voicewas so strong that it bwas heardeven bin Jericho. Rabba bar bar Ḥana said:The distance bfrom Jerusalem to Jericho is ten parasangs.Despite the great distance, his voice was miraculously heard there.,The Gemara describes similar miracles in which events in the Temple were sensed a great distance away. bAndthe sound of bthe doors of the Sanctuaryopening bwas heardfrom a distance of beight Shabbat limits,which is eight imil /i. Furthermore, bgoats that were in Jericho would sneeze fromsmelling bthe fragrance of the incensethat burned in the Temple; the bwomen that were in Jericho did not need to perfume themselves,since they were perfumed by the bfragranceof the bincense,which reached there; ba bride that was in Jerusalem did not need to adorn herselfwith perfumes, since she was perfumed by the bfragranceof the bincense,which filled the air of Jerusalem., bRabbi Yosei ben Dolgai said: Father had goats in the hills of Mikhmar,a district some distance from Jerusalem, band they would sneeze fromsmelling bthe fragrance of the incense.Similarly, bRabbi Ḥiyya bar Avin saidthat bRabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa said: An old man reported to me: One time I went tothe ruins of the Tabernacle in bShiloh, and I smelled the smell of the incense from between its walls.The Tabernacle stood there during the period of the Judges, and more than a thousand years had passed since its destruction.,§ bRabbi Yannai said:The bdrawing of the lot from inside the receptacle is an indispensablepart of the service, as it determines which goat will be for God and which for Azazel. However, the actual bplacingof the lots upon the goats bis not indispensable. And Rabbi Yoḥa said: Eventhe bdrawing of the lotsfrom inside the receptacle bis not indispensable,since the High Priest may designate the goats himself, without employing the lottery.,The Gemara explains the dispute: bIn accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yehuda, who saidthat bmatters that are performed inthe bwhite garments outsideof the Holy of Holies bare not indispensable, everyone agrees thatthe drawing of the lots bis not indispensable,since it is held outside the Holy of Holies. bWhen they disagree, it is in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Neḥemya.He holds that all matters performed in the white garments, even those performed outside the Holy of Holies, are indispensable. bThe one who saidthe drawing of the lots bis indispensableholds bin accordance withthe straightforward application of the principle of bRabbi Neḥemya. And the one who saidthe drawing of the lots bis not indispensableclaims that bthisprinciple bappliesonly with regard btomatters that are classified as a Temple bservice.The bdrawing of the lots is nota Temple bservice,therefore it is indispensable, even according to Rabbi Neḥemya’s principle., bSome saya different version of the dispute:, bIn accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Neḥemya, who saidthat all matters performed in the white garments, even those performed outside the Holy of Holies, are bindispensable, everyone agrees thatthe drawing of the lots bis indispensable. /b, bWhen they disagree, it is in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yehuda,who holds that matters that are performed in the white garments outside of the Holy of Holies are not indispensable. bThe one who saidthat the drawing of the lots bis not indispensableholds bin accordance withthe straightforward application of the principle of bRabbi Yehuda. And the one who saidthat the drawing of the lots bis indispensableclaims that although Rabbi Yehuda’s principle is generally true, bit is different here,in the case of the lottery, bbecause the verse repeatedthe phrase b“which came up”(Leviticus 16:9) b“which came up”(Leviticus 16:10) btwo times.In the laws of sacrifices, a repeated phrase indicates the matter is indispensable.,The Gemara braises an objectionfrom that which was taught in a ibaraita /i: bIt is a mitzva to drawthe lots, band ifthe High Priest bdid not draw the lotsbut instead designated the goats without using the lots, the designation bis valid. /b,The Gemara considers the opinion presented in the ibaraita /i: bGranted, according to thatfirst bversionof the dispute, bin which you said: In accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yehuda everyone,i.e., Rabbi Yannai and Rabbi Yoḥa, bagrees thatthe drawing of the lots bis not indispensable,in accordance with bwhoseopinion bis this ibaraitataught? bIt isin accordance with the opinion of bRabbi Yehuda,according to all opinions.
53. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History, 4.6.3-4.6.4 (3rd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) 4.6.3. The war raged most fiercely in the eighteenth year of Hadrian, at the city of Bithara, which was a very secure fortress, situated not far from Jerusalem. When the siege had lasted a long time, and the rebels had been driven to the last extremity by hunger and thirst, and the instigator of the rebellion had suffered his just punishment, the whole nation was prohibited from this time on by a decree, and by the commands of Hadrian, from ever going up to the country about Jerusalem. For the emperor gave orders that they should not even see from a distance the land of their fathers. Such is the account of Aristo of Pella. 4.6.4. And thus, when the city had been emptied of the Jewish nation and had suffered the total destruction of its ancient inhabitants, it was colonized by a different race, and the Roman city which subsequently arose changed its name and was called Aelia, in honor of the emperor Aelius Hadrian. And as the church there was now composed of Gentiles, the first one to assume the government of it after the bishops of the circumcision was Marcus.
54. Anon., Leges Publicae, 1.5

Subjects of this text:

subject	book bibliographic info
acculturation	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 216
achilles	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 144
adventus	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 150, 151
aggada	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 163
ahasuerus	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 151, 152
alexander the great	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 163, 171; Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 15, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 208, 209, 216
amoraic midrash	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 494
amoraim, amoraic period	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 163
antigonus of sokho	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 209
antiochus ix (cyzicenus)	Noam, Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature (2018) 63
antiochus viii (aspendius)	Noam, Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature (2018) 63
antipatris	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 15, 137, 138, 141, 142, 143, 146, 147, 148
antiquities (josephus), comparison to 1 maccabees	Noam, Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature (2018) 51
antiquities (josephus), removal of biblical allusions	Noam, Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature (2018) 51
aramaic, in rabbinic literature	Noam, Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature (2018) 70
aramaic	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 494
babemesis (betis)	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 144, 151, 155
babylonian, halakha/tradition	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 163, 171, 494
babylonian talmud (bt), on john hyrcanus	Noam, Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature (2018) 63
ben sira (ecclesiasticus)	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 250
biblical allusions and language, removal by josephus	Noam, Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature (2018) 51
byzantine period, emperor	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 494
caligula	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 209, 216
chain of transmission	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 141, 208, 209
chaldeans	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 149, 150, 151
chiasm	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 146
court, gossip	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 250
cult/cultic	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 117
dependence on josephus, priestly temple genre in	Noam, Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature (2018) 188
destruction of temple, rabbinic traditions about	Hayes, The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning (2022) 297
dium	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 138
divorce bill	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 163
editing (process)	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 163
egyptian, (native)	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 117
epiphany	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 149
esther	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 151, 152, 153, 154, 156
exile	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 250
ezra, samaritan opposition to	Kalmin, The Sage in Jewish Society of Late Antiquity (1998) 121
ezra, theme of purity of lineage	Kalmin, The Sage in Jewish Society of Late Antiquity (1998) 121
fast	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 150
first revolt (66 ce)	Hayes, The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning (2022) 298
foundation story	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 153, 156
gaius (caligula)	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 163
gaza	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 144, 151
genealogy, rabbinic approaches to, theme of ezras purity of lineage	Kalmin, The Sage in Jewish Society of Late Antiquity (1998) 121
great assembly	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 154, 208
hades	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 250
hadrian	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 163, 494
haman	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 151, 152
hannukah	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 153, 154
hasmonean-oniad relations	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 117
hasmonean	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 117
hebrew language	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 494
high priest/high priesthood	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 117
hillel the elder	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 163
historical memory, josephus, shared traditions in rabbinic texts	Hayes, The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning (2022) 297, 298
hyrcanus i	Noam, Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature (2018) 63, 70
idolatry	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 171
jaddua	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 140, 141, 142, 148, 149, 156
jerusalem	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 15, 137, 138, 140, 142, 143, 145, 146, 147, 149, 150, 153, 154, 156
jerusalem church	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 494
jerusalem temple, purification and rededication	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 117
jerusalem temple	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 117
jesus (christ) (see also yeshu)	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 494
josephus, shared traditions with rabbinic literature	Hayes, The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning (2022) 297, 298
josephus, use of the priestly temple legends	Noam, Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature (2018) 188
judaea (roman province; see also yehud)	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 494
judah ha-nasi	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 15
levites, accused of failure to settle in palestine	Kalmin, The Sage in Jewish Society of Late Antiquity (1998) 121
lives of the prophets, hebrew urtext of	Noam, Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature (2018) 63
lives of the prophets, vs. antiquities	Noam, Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature (2018) 51
loyal/loyalty	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 250
maccabees/maccabean, maccabean/hasmonean revolt	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 117
maccabees/maccabean	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 117, 250
maccabees	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 163
marriage (see also divorce)	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 171
meir, r.	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 494
midrash	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 171, 494
mordecai	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 152, 153
motifs, shared, second temple and rabbinic literature	Hayes, The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning (2022) 297, 298
name/named/unnamed	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 250
nicanor	Noam, Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature (2018) 51, 63
onias	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 208, 209
onias temple, identity of builder	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 250
onias temple, legitimacy	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 250
orality studies	Hayes, The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning (2022) 298
parmenion	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 137, 138, 139, 150
paul (saul)	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 494
persia, persian empire, strict nature of class boundaries	Kalmin, The Sage in Jewish Society of Late Antiquity (1998) 120
persian	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 117
polemics, in ancient literature	Kalmin, The Sage in Jewish Society of Late Antiquity (1998) 121
prayer	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 15, 138, 144, 146, 155
priest / priestly	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 250
purim	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 152, 153, 154
purity (see also food laws)	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 163, 171
rabbi be-r. yitshak	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 494
rabbinic, literature and texts	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 250
rabbinic	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 117
rabbinic accounts, identification of parallels in josephus, identical stories	Cohen, The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism (2010) 156
rabbinic accounts, identification of parallels in josephus, shared events and people	Cohen, The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism (2010) 156
rabbinic accounts, identification of parallels in josephus	Cohen, The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism (2010) 156
rabbinic accounts, relationship to josephus works	Cohen, The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism (2010) 156
rabbinic accounts, sources	Cohen, The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism (2010) 160
rava	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 171
redaction/writing of mishna	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 163
repertoire, rabbinic and second temple texts	Hayes, The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning (2022) 297, 298
revolt/war, under hadrian/bar kokhba	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 494
revolts against rome, first revolt (	Hayes, The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning (2022) 298
samaritans, opposition to ezra	Kalmin, The Sage in Jewish Society of Late Antiquity (1998) 121
samaritans	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 15, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155
sanballat	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 141
second temple literature, style or themes	Hayes, The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning (2022) 297, 298
shimon the righteous	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 163, 171
shmuel, r.	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 494
simeon the righteous of the alexander legend, simeon the righteous mentioned in abot	Noam, Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature (2018) 70
simeon the righteous of the alexander legend, simeon the righteous of the caligula legend	Noam, Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature (2018) 70
simon the just (identity)	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 250
simon the righteous, sources of rabbinic accounts	Cohen, The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism (2010) 160
succession list	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 156
symbols/symbolism'	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 117
synagogue	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 171
tannaim (early rabbis), tannaic	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 171
temple legends	Noam, Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature (2018) 63, 188
temple motif, in the hyrcanus legend	Noam, Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature (2018) 63
temple motif, in the nicanor legend	Noam, Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature (2018) 51
urim and thummim	Noam, Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature (2018) 70
yehuda (yuda), r.	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 163
yohanan (ben nappaha), r.	Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 171
yohanan ben zakkai	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 156
yohanan the high priest (hyrcanus)	Tropper, Simeon the Righteous in Rabbinic Literature: A Legend Reinvented (2013) 150
zadokite, (high) priests/priesthood	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 250
zadokite, origin/background	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 250
zadokite	Piotrkowski, Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period (2019) 250