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

Tiresias: The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Source Database



6279
Hebrew Bible, Ecclesiastes, 12.13


סוֹף דָּבָר הַכֹּל נִשְׁמָע אֶת־הָאֱלֹהִים יְרָא וְאֶת־מִצְוֺתָיו שְׁמוֹר כִּי־זֶה כָּל־הָאָדָם׃The end of the matter, all having been heard: fear God, and keep His commandments; for this is the whole man.


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

21 results
1. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 7.10 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

7.10. and repayeth them that hate Him to their face, to destroy them; He will not be slack to him that hateth Him, He will repay him to his face."
2. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 1.26, 5.3, 7.15, 14.14 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

1.26. וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ וְיִרְדּוּ בִדְגַת הַיָּם וּבְעוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם וּבַבְּהֵמָה וּבְכָל־הָאָרֶץ וּבְכָל־הָרֶמֶשׂ הָרֹמֵשׂ עַל־הָאָרֶץ׃ 5.3. וַיְחִי אָדָם שְׁלֹשִׁים וּמְאַת שָׁנָה וַיּוֹלֶד בִּדְמוּתוֹ כְּצַלְמוֹ וַיִּקְרָא אֶת־שְׁמוֹ שֵׁת׃ 5.3. וַיְחִי־לֶמֶךְ אַחֲרֵי הוֹלִידוֹ אֶת־נֹחַ חָמֵשׁ וְתִשְׁעִים שָׁנָה וַחֲמֵשׁ מֵאֹת שָׁנָה וַיּוֹלֶד בָּנִים וּבָנוֹת׃ 7.15. וַיָּבֹאוּ אֶל־נֹחַ אֶל־הַתֵּבָה שְׁנַיִם שְׁנַיִם מִכָּל־הַבָּשָׂר אֲשֶׁר־בּוֹ רוּחַ חַיִּים׃ 14.14. וַיִּשְׁמַע אַבְרָם כִּי נִשְׁבָּה אָחִיו וַיָּרֶק אֶת־חֲנִיכָיו יְלִידֵי בֵיתוֹ שְׁמֹנָה עָשָׂר וּשְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת וַיִּרְדֹּף עַד־דָּן׃ 1.26. And God said: ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.’" 5.3. And Adam lived a hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth." 7.15. And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh wherein is the breath of life." 14.14. And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he led forth his trained men, born in his house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued as far as Dan."
3. Hebrew Bible, Job, 34.15 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

34.15. יִגְוַע כָּל־בָּשָׂר יָחַד וְאָדָם עַל־עָפָר יָשׁוּב׃ 34.15. All flesh shall perish together, And man shall return unto dust."
4. Hebrew Bible, Leviticus, 19 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

5. Hebrew Bible, Numbers, 15.38 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

15.38. דַּבֵּר אֶל־בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵהֶם וְעָשׂוּ לָהֶם צִיצִת עַל־כַּנְפֵי בִגְדֵיהֶם לְדֹרֹתָם וְנָתְנוּ עַל־צִיצִת הַכָּנָף פְּתִיל תְּכֵלֶת׃ 15.38. ’Speak unto the children of Israel, and bid them that they make them throughout their generations fringes in the corners of their garments, and that they put with the fringe of each corner a thread of blue."
6. Hebrew Bible, Proverbs, 9.10, 14.27 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

14.27. יִרְאַת יְהוָה מְקוֹר חַיִּים לָסוּר מִמֹּקְשֵׁי מָוֶת׃ 9.10. The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and the knowledge of the All-holy is understanding." 14.27. The fear of the LORD is a fountain of life, to depart from the snares of death."
7. Hebrew Bible, Psalms, 1.2, 32.6, 36.7, 86.11, 144.4 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

1.2. כִּי אִם בְּתוֹרַת יְהוָה חֶפְצוֹ וּבְתוֹרָתוֹ יֶהְגֶּה יוֹמָם וָלָיְלָה׃ 32.6. עַל־זֹאת יִתְפַּלֵּל כָּל־חָסִיד אֵלֶיךָ לְעֵת מְצֹא רַק לְשֵׁטֶף מַיִם רַבִּים אֵלָיו לֹא יַגִּיעוּ׃ 36.7. צִדְקָתְךָ כְּהַרְרֵי־אֵל מִשְׁפָּטֶךָ תְּהוֹם רַבָּה אָדָם־וּבְהֵמָה תוֹשִׁיעַ יְהוָה׃ 86.11. הוֹרֵנִי יְהוָה דַּרְכֶּךָ אֲהַלֵּךְ בַּאֲמִתֶּךָ יַחֵד לְבָבִי לְיִרְאָה שְׁמֶךָ׃ 144.4. אָדָם לַהֶבֶל דָּמָה יָמָיו כְּצֵל עוֹבֵר׃ 1.2. But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in His law doth he meditate day and night." 32.6. For this let every one that is godly pray unto Thee in a time when Thou mayest be found; Surely, when the great waters overflow, they will not reach unto him." 36.7. Thy righteousness is like the mighty mountains; Thy judgments are like the great deep; Man and beast Thou preservest, O LORD." 86.11. Teach me, O LORD, Thy way, that I may walk in Thy truth; Make one my heart to fear Thy name. ." 144.4. Man is like unto a breath; His days are as a shadow that passeth away."
8. Hebrew Bible, Amos, 5.2 (8th cent. BCE - 6th cent. BCE)

9. Hebrew Bible, Joshua, 1.8 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE)

1.8. לֹא־יָמוּשׁ סֵפֶר הַתּוֹרָה הַזֶּה מִפִּיךָ וְהָגִיתָ בּוֹ יוֹמָם וָלַיְלָה לְמַעַן תִּשְׁמֹר לַעֲשׂוֹת כְּכָל־הַכָּתוּב בּוֹ כִּי־אָז תַּצְלִיחַ אֶת־דְּרָכֶךָ וְאָז תַּשְׂכִּיל׃ 1.8. This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth, but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein; for then thou shalt make thy ways prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success."
10. Homer, Odyssey, 17.217-17.218 (8th cent. BCE - 7th cent. BCE)

11. Hebrew Bible, Ecclesiastes, 3.11, 3.13, 3.19, 3.21, 7.2, 12.1, 12.14 (5th cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)

3.11. אֶת־הַכֹּל עָשָׂה יָפֶה בְעִתּוֹ גַּם אֶת־הָעֹלָם נָתַן בְּלִבָּם מִבְּלִי אֲשֶׁר לֹא־יִמְצָא הָאָדָם אֶת־הַמַּעֲשֶׂה אֲשֶׁר־עָשָׂה הָאֱלֹהִים מֵרֹאשׁ וְעַד־סוֹף׃ 3.13. וְגַם כָּל־הָאָדָם שֶׁיֹּאכַל וְשָׁתָה וְרָאָה טוֹב בְּכָל־עֲמָלוֹ מַתַּת אֱלֹהִים הִיא׃ 3.19. כִּי מִקְרֶה בְנֵי־הָאָדָם וּמִקְרֶה הַבְּהֵמָה וּמִקְרֶה אֶחָד לָהֶם כְּמוֹת זֶה כֵּן מוֹת זֶה וְרוּחַ אֶחָד לַכֹּל וּמוֹתַר הָאָדָם מִן־הַבְּהֵמָה אָיִן כִּי הַכֹּל הָבֶל׃ 3.21. מִי יוֹדֵעַ רוּחַ בְּנֵי הָאָדָם הָעֹלָה הִיא לְמָעְלָה וְרוּחַ הַבְּהֵמָה הַיֹּרֶדֶת הִיא לְמַטָּה לָאָרֶץ׃ 7.2. טוֹב לָלֶכֶת אֶל־בֵּית־אֵבֶל מִלֶּכֶת אֶל־בֵּית מִשְׁתֶּה בַּאֲשֶׁר הוּא סוֹף כָּל־הָאָדָם וְהַחַי יִתֵּן אֶל־לִבּוֹ׃ 7.2. כִּי אָדָם אֵין צַדִּיק בָּאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשֶׂה־טּוֹב וְלֹא יֶחֱטָא׃ 12.1. בִּקֵּשׁ קֹהֶלֶת לִמְצֹא דִּבְרֵי־חֵפֶץ וְכָתוּב יֹשֶׁר דִּבְרֵי אֱמֶת׃ 12.1. וּזְכֹר אֶת־בּוֹרְאֶיךָ בִּימֵי בְּחוּרֹתֶיךָ עַד אֲשֶׁר לֹא־יָבֹאוּ יְמֵי הָרָעָה וְהִגִּיעוּ שָׁנִים אֲשֶׁר תֹּאמַר אֵין־לִי בָהֶם חֵפֶץ׃ 12.14. כִּי אֶת־כָּל־מַעֲשֶׂה הָאֱלֹהִים יָבִא בְמִשְׁפָּט עַל כָּל־נֶעְלָם אִם־טוֹב וְאִם־רָע׃ br small[סוף דבר הכל נשמע את־האלהים ירא ואת־מצותיו שמור כי־זה כל־האדם] /small 3.11. He hath made every thing beautiful in its time; also He hath set the world in their heart, yet so that man cannot find out the work that God hath done from the beginning even to the end." 3.13. But also that every man should eat and drink, and enjoy pleasure for all his labour, is the gift of God." 3.19. For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them; as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that man hath no pre-eminence above a beast; for all is vanity." 3.21. Who knoweth the spirit of man whether it goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast whether it goeth downward to the earth?" 7.2. It is better to go to the house of mourning, Than to go to the house of feasting; For that is the end of all men, And the living will lay it to his heart." 12.1. Remember then thy Creator in the days of thy youth, and the years draw nigh, when thou shalt say: 'I have no pleasure in them';" 12.14. For God shall bring every work into the judgment concerning every hidden thing, whether it be good or whether it be evil. br small[The end of the matter, all having been heard: fear God, and keep His Commandments; for this is the whole man.] /small"
12. Plato, Gorgias, None (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)

510b. Call. Do you note, Socrates, how ready I am to praise, when you say a good thing? This seems to me excellently spoken. Soc. Then see if this next statement of mine strikes you as a good one too. It seems to me that the closest possible friendship between man and man is that mentioned by the sages of old time as like to like. Do you not agree? Call. I do. Soc. So where you have a savage, uneducated ruler as despot, if there were some one in the city far better than he, I suppose the despot would be afraid of him
13. Plato, Symposium, None (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)

195b. clear evidence of this; for he flies and flees from old age—a swift thing obviously, since it gains on us too quickly for our liking. Love hates it by nature, and refuses to come within any distance of it. He is ever consorting with the young, and such also is he: well says the old saw, Like and like together strike. And though in much else I agree with Phaedrus, in this I agree not, that Love by his account is more ancient than Cronos and Iapetus:
14. Dead Sea Scrolls, Ben Sira, 14.20-15.10 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE)

15. Hebrew Bible, Daniel, 4.19 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)

4.19. אנתה־[אַנְתְּ־] הוּא מַלְכָּא דִּי רְבַית וּתְקֵפְתְּ וּרְבוּתָךְ רְבָת וּמְטָת לִשְׁמַיָּא וְשָׁלְטָנָךְ לְסוֹף אַרְעָא׃ 4.19. it is thou, O king, that art grown and become strong; for thy greatness is grown, and reacheth unto heaven, and thy dominion to the end of the earth."
16. Septuagint, Ecclesiasticus (Siracides), 1.11, 1.12, 1.13, 1.14, 1.15, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 1.19, 1.20, 1.21, 1.22, 1.23, 1.24, 1.25, 1.26, 1.27, 1.28, 1.29, 1.30, 6.30, 14.20, 14.20-15.10, 15.10, 15.17, 15.20, 16.17, 16.21, 19.20, 23.27, 41.8, 41.11, 42.2, 42.15-43.33, 43.5, 43.10, 43.26, 43.27, 43.29, 49.4 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)

1.11. With him who fears the Lord it will go well at the end;on the day of his death he will be blessed.
17. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

10b. א"ר חנן אפי' בעל החלומות אומר לו לאדם למחר הוא מת אל ימנע עצמו מן הרחמים שנאמר (קהלת ה, ו) כי ברוב חלומות והבלים ודברים הרבה כי את האלהים ירא,מיד (ישעיהו לח, ב) ויסב חזקיהו פניו אל הקיר ויתפלל אל ה',מאי קיר אמר רשב"ל מקירות לבו שנא' (ירמיהו ד, יט) מעי מעי אוחילה קירות לבי וגו',ר' לוי אמר על עסקי הקיר אמר לפניו רבונו של עולם ומה שונמית שלא עשתה אלא קיר אחת קטנה החיית את בנה אבי אבא שחפה את ההיכל כולו בכסף ובזהב על אחת כמה וכמה (ישעיהו לח, ג) זכר נא את אשר התהלכתי לפניך באמת ובלב שלם והטוב בעיניך עשיתי,מאי והטוב בעיניך עשיתי א"ר יהודה אמר רב שסמך גאולה לתפלה ר' לוי אמר שגנז ספר רפואות,תנו רבנן ששה דברים עשה חזקיהו המלך על ג' הודו לו ועל ג' לא הודו לו,על ג' הודו לו גנז ספר רפואות והודו לו כתת נחש הנחשת והודו לו גירר עצמות אביו על מטה של חבלים והודו לו,ועל ג' לא הודו לו סתם מי גיחון ולא הודו לו קצץ דלתות היכל ושגרם למלך אשור ולא הודו לו עבר ניסן בניסן ולא הודו לו,ומי לית ליה לחזקיהו (שמות יב, ב) החדש הזה לכם ראש חדשים זה ניסן ואין אחר ניסן,אלא טעה בדשמואל דאמר שמואל אין מעברין את השנה ביום שלשים של אדר הואיל וראוי לקובעו ניסן סבר הואיל וראוי לא אמרינן:,א"ר יוחנן משום ר' יוסי בן זמרא כל התולה בזכות עצמו תולין לו בזכות אחרים וכל התולה בזכות אחרים תולין לו בזכות עצמו,משה תלה בזכות אחרים שנא' (שמות לב, יג) זכור לאברהם ליצחק ולישראל עבדיך תלו לו בזכות עצמו שנאמר (תהלים קו, כג) ויאמר להשמידם לולי משה בחירו עמד בפרץ לפניו להשיב חמתו מהשחית,חזקיהו תלה בזכות עצמו דכתיב זכר נא את אשר התהלכתי לפניך תלו לו בזכות אחרים שנא' (מלכים ב יט, לד) וגנותי אל העיר הזאת להושיעה למעני ולמען דוד עבדי והיינו דריב"ל דאמר ריב"ל מאי דכתיב (ישעיהו לח, יז) הנה לשלום מר לי מר אפי' בשעה ששיגר לו הקב"ה שלום מר הוא לו:,(מלכים ב ד, י) נעשה נא עליית קיר קטנה,רב ושמואל חד אמר עלייה פרועה היתה וקירוה וחד אמר אכסדרה גדולה היתה וחלקוה לשנים,בשלמא למ"ד אכסדרה היינו דכתיב קיר אלא למ"ד עלייה מאי קיר,שקירוה,בשלמא למ"ד עלייה היינו דכתיב עליית אלא למ"ד אכסדרה מאי עליית,מעולה שבבתים.,ונשים לו שם מטה ושולחן וכסא ומנורה,אמר אביי ואיתימא ר' יצחק הרוצה להנות יהנה כאלישע ושאינו רוצה להנות אל יהנה כשמואל הרמתי שנאמר (שמואל א ז, יז) ותשובתו הרמתה כי שם ביתו וא"ר יוחנן שכל מקום שהלך שם ביתו עמו.,(מלכים ב ד, ט) ותאמר אל אישה הנה נא ידעתי כי איש אלהים קדוש הוא א"ר יוסי בר' חנינא מכאן שהאשה מכרת באורחין יותר מן האיש,קדוש הוא מנא ידעה רב ושמואל חד אמר שלא ראתה זבוב עובר על שולחנו וחד אמר סדין של פשתן הציעה על מטתו ולא ראתה קרי עליו,קדוש הוא א"ר יוסי בר' חנינא הוא קדוש ומשרתו אינו קדוש (שנא') (מלכים ב ד, כז) ויגש גיחזי להדפה א"ר יוסי בר' חנינא שאחזה בהוד יפיה.,עובר עלינו תמיד א"ר יוסי בר' חנינא משום רבי אליעזר בן יעקב כל המארח תלמיד חכם בתוך ביתו ומהנהו מנכסיו מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו מקריב תמידין.,וא"ר יוסי בר' חנינא משום ראב"י אל יעמוד אדם במקום גבוה ויתפלל אלא במקום נמוך ויתפלל שנא' (תהלים קל, א) ממעמקים קראתיך ה',תניא נמי הכי לא יעמוד אדם לא על גבי כסא ולא ע"ג שרפרף ולא במקום גבוה ויתפלל אלא במקום נמוך ויתפלל לפי שאין גבהות לפני המקום שנאמר ממעמקים קראתיך ה' וכתיב (תהלים קב, א) תפלה לעני כי יעטוף.,וא"ר יוסי בר' חנינא משום ראב"י המתפלל צריך שיכוין את רגליו שנא' (יחזקאל א, ז) ורגליהם רגל ישרה,(א"ר יצחק א"ר יוחנן) וא"ר יוסי בר' חנינא משום ראב"י מאי דכתיב (ויקרא יט, כו) לא תאכלו על הדם לא תאכלו קודם שתתפללו על דמכם,(א"ד) א"ר יצחק א"ר יוחנן א"ר יוסי בר' חנינא משום ראב"י כל האוכל ושותה ואח"כ מתפלל עליו הכתוב אומר (מלכים א יד, ט) ואותי השלכת אחרי גויך אל תקרי גויך אלא גאיך אמר הקב"ה לאחר שנתגאה זה קבל עליו מלכות שמים:,ר' יהושע אומר עד ג' שעות: אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל הלכה כרבי יהושע:,הקורא מכאן ואילך לא הפסיד:,אמר רב חסדא אמר מר עוקבא ובלבד שלא יאמר יוצר אור,מיתיבי הקורא מכאן ואילך לא הפסיד כאדם שהוא קורא בתורה אבל מברך הוא שתים לפניה ואחת לאחריה תיובתא דרב חסדא תיובתא,איכא דאמרי אמר רב חסדא אמר מר עוקבא מאי לא הפסיד שלא הפסיד ברכות תניא נמי הכי הקורא מכאן ואילך לא הפסיד כאדם שקורא בתורה אבל מברך הוא שתים לפניה ואחת לאחריה,א"ר מני גדול הקורא ק"ש בעונתה יותר מהעוסק בתורה מדקתני הקורא מכאן ואילך לא הפסיד כאדם הקורא בתורה מכלל דקורא בעונתה עדיף:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big בית שמאי אומרים בערב כל אדם יטה ויקרא ובבקר יעמוד שנאמר (דברים ו, ז) ובשכבך ובקומך,ובית הלל אומרים כל אדם קורא כדרכו שנאמר ובלכתך בדרך,אם כן למה נאמר ובשכבך ובקומך בשעה שבני אדם שוכבים ובשעה שבני אדם עומדים,א"ר טרפון אני הייתי בא בדרך והטתי לקרות כדברי ב"ש וסכנתי בעצמי מפני הלסטים,אמרו לו כדי היית לחוב בעצמך שעברת על דברי ב"ה: 10b. Similarly, bRabbi Ḥa said: Even if the master of dreams,in a true dream, an angel ( iMa’ayan HaBerakhot /i) btells a person that tomorrow he will die, he should not prevent himself frompraying for bmercy, as it is stated: “For in the multitude of dreams and vanities there are many words; but fear God”(Ecclesiastes 5:6). Although the dream may seem real to him, that is not necessarily the case, and one must place his trust in God.,Having heard Isaiah’s harsh prophecy, bimmediately “Hezekiah turned his face toward the wall and prayed to the Lord”(Isaiah 38:2).,The Gemara asks: bWhat ismeant by the word b“wall [ ikir /i]”in this context? Why did Hezekiah turn his face to a wall? bRabbi Shimon ben Lakish said:This symbolically alludes to the fact that Hezekiah prayed to God bfrom the chambers [ ikirot /i] of his heart, as it is statedelsewhere: b“My anguish, my anguish, I am in pain. The chambers of my heart.My heart moans within me” (Jeremiah 4:19)., bRabbi Levi said:Hezekiah intended to evoke bmattersrelating bto a wall,and bhe said beforeGod: bMaster of the Universe, and if the woman from Shunem, who made only a single small wallon the roof for the prophet Elisha, and byou revived her son, all the more soshould you bring life to the descendant of bmy father’s father,King Solomon, bwho covered the entireTemple bSanctuary with silver and gold.In his prayer, Hezekiah said: “Please, Lord, bplease remember that I walked before You in truth, and with a complete heart, and what was good in Your eyes I did.And Hezekiah wept sore” (Isaiah 38:3).,The Gemara asks: To bwhatspecific action was he referring when he said: b“And what was good in your sight I did”?Various opinions are offered: Mentioning Hezekiah’s merits, bRav Yehuda said in the name of Rav that he juxtaposed redemption and prayerat sunrise instead of sleeping late, as was the custom of most kings ( iIyyun Ya’akov /i). bRabbi Levi said: He suppressed the Book of Remediesupon which everyone relied., bThe Sages taught: King Hezekiah performed sixinnovative bactions. With regard to threethe Sages bagreed with him, and with regard to three they did not agree with him. /b, bWith regard to threeactions the Sages bagreed with him: br bHe suppressed the Book of Remedies, and they agreed with him. br bHe ground the copper snakethrough which miracles were performed for Israel (Numbers 21:9), destroying it because it had been used in idol worship (II Kings 18:4), band they agreed with him. br bHe dragged the bones of hisevil bfather,King Ahaz, bon a bed of ropes;meaning he did not accord his father a funeral fit for a king (II Chronicles 28:27), band they agreed with him. /b,Yet, bwith regard to threeother innovations, the Sages of his generation bdid not agree with him: br bHe stopped up the waters of the Gihon,the Pool of Siloam, diverting its water into the city by means of a tunnel (II Chronicles 32:30), band they did not agree with him. br bHe cut off the doors of the Sanctuary and sent them to the king of Assyria(II Kings 18:16), band they did not agree with him. br bHe intercalated Nisan in Nisan,creating a leap year by adding an extra month during the month of Nisan. That intercalation must be performed before the end of Adar (II Chronicles 30:2).,With regard to his intercalation of Nisan, the Gemara asks: bDid Hezekiah notaccept the ihalakha /i: b“This month will be for you the first of the months;it shall be the first for you of the months of the year” (Exodus 12:2)? By inference, bthisfirst month bis Nisan, and no othermonth bis Nisan.How could Hezekiah add an additional Nisan in violation of Torah law?,The Gemara answers that the scenario was different. bRather, Hezekiah erred with regard tothe halakhic opinion ascribed in later generations to bShmuel,as bShmuel said: One may not intercalate the year on the thirtieth day of Adar, since it is fit to establish itas the New Moon of bNisan.On the thirtieth day of each month, those who witnessed the new moon would come and testify before the court, which, based on their testimony, would declare that day the first day of the next month. Therefore, one may not declare a leap year on the thirtieth day of Adar, as it could potentially become the first of Nisan. Therefore, the Sages of Hezekiah’s generation did not agree with his decision to intercalate the year on the thirtieth of Adar. Hezekiah bheldthat bwe do not say: Sincethat day bis fit to establish itas the New Moon is reason enough to refrain from intercalation of the year.,Stemming from the analysis of Hezekiah’s prayer, bRabbi Yoḥa said in the name of Rabbi Yosei ben Zimra: Anyone who baseshis prayer or request bupon his own merit,when God answers his prayer, bit is based upon the merit of others. And anyone whomodestly bbaseshis prayer or request bupon the merit of others,when God answers his prayer, bit is based upon his own merit. /b,The Gemara cites proof from Moses. When he prayed to God for forgiveness after the incident of the Golden Calf, bhe basedhis request bupon the merit of others, as it is stated: “Remember Abraham, Isaac and Israel your servants,to whom You swore upon Yourself, and told them: I will increase your descendants like the stars of the heavens, and all of this land of which I have spoken, I will give to your descendants and they will inherit it forever” (Exodus 32:13). Yet when this story is related, God’s forgiveness of Israel bis based upon Moses’ own merit, as it is stated: “And He said He would destroy them, had Moses, His chosen, not stood before Him in the breach to turn back His destructive fury, lest He should destroy them”(Psalms 106:23)., bHezekiah,however, bbasedhis request bupon his own merit, as it is written: “Please, remember that I walked before You”(Isaiah 38:3). When God answered his prayers, bit was based upon the merit of otherswith no mention made of Hezekiah’s own merit, bas it is stated: “And I will protect this city to save it, for My sake and for the sake of David, My servant”(II Kings 19:34). bAnd that is what Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levisaid. bAs Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: What isthe meaning of bthat which is written: “Behold, for my peace I had great bitterness;but You have, in love to my soul, delivered it from the pit of corruption; for You have thrown all my sins behind Your back” (Isaiah 38:17)? This verse teaches that beven when the Holy One, Blessed be He, sent him peaceand told him that he would recover from his illness, bit was bitter for him,because God did not take his merit into consideration.,Having mentioned the chamber on the roof built for Elisha by the woman from Shunem, the Gemara now describes the entire event. The woman from Shunem suggested to her husband: b“Let us make, I pray thee, a small chamber on the roof,and let us place a bed, table, stool and candlestick for him there, and it will be, when he comes to us, that he will turn in there” (II Kings 4:10)., bRav and Shmuelargued over the meaning of small chamber. bOneof them bsaid: They had an uncovered second storyon their roof, bover which they built a ceiling;and boneof them bsaid: There was an enclosed veranda [ iakhsadra /i] and they divided it in half. /b,The Gemara comments: bGranted, according to the one who said that it was an enclosed verandawhich they divided in two, it makes sense bthatthe term bwall [ ikir /i] was written. However, according to the one who said that they had anopen bsecond story, what isthe meaning of bwall? /b,The Gemara responds: The one who said that they had an uncovered second story interprets ikirnot as wall but as ceiling meaning that they bbuilt a ceiling[ ikirui /i] over it.,On the other hand, bgranted, according to the one who said that they had anuncovered bsecond story,it makes sense bthatthe term bsecond story[ialiyat /i] was written. But according to the one who saidthat it was ban enclosed veranda, what isthe meaning of the term bsecond story? /b,The Gemara responds: The one who said that it was an enclosed veranda interprets ialiyatnot as second story, but bas the most outstanding [ ime’ula /i] of the rooms. /b,Incidental to this discussion, the Gemara analyzes the statement made by the woman from Shunem to her husband with regard to the provisions that they would place in the room for Elisha: b“And let us place a bed, table, stool and candlestick for him there.” /b, bAbaye, and some say Rabbi Yitzḥak, said:A great man bwho seeks to enjoythe contributions of those who seek to honor him bmay enjoythose gifts, bas Elishaenjoyed gifts given him by the woman from Shunem, among others. bAnd one who does not seek to enjoythese gifts bshould not enjoy them, aswas the practice of the prophet bSamuel from Rama,who would not accept gifts from anyone at all. From where do we know that this was Samuel’s custom? bAs it is stated: “And he returned to Rama, for there was his house,and there he judged Israel, and he built an altar to the Lord” (I Samuel 7:17). bAndsimilarly, bRabbi Yoḥa said: Every place whereSamuel bwent, his house was with him,so he would have everything that he needed and not be forced to benefit from public contributions. One may opt to conduct himself in accordance with either of these paths.,Regarding the woman from Shunem: b“And she said to her husband: Behold now, I perceive that he is a holy man of Godwho passes by us continually” (II Kings 4:9). bRabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: From here,where the woman from Shunem perceived the prophet’s greatness before her husband did, derive bthat a woman recognizesthe character of her bguests more than a mandoes.,The Gemara notes that the woman from Shunem said that b“he is holy.”The Gemara asks: bFrom where did she knowthat he was holy? bRav and Shmueldisagreed over this. bOneof them bsaid: She never saw a fly pass over his table; and the other said: She spread awhite blinen sheet on his bed,and despite that even the smallest stain is visible on white linen, and nocturnal seminal emissions are not uncommon, bshe never sawthe residue of ba seminal emission on it. /b,With regard to the verse: b“He is holy,” Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said:The woman from Shunem intimated that: bHe is holy,but bhis attendant,Geihazi, bis not holy,as she saw no indication of holiness in him ( iIyyun Ya’akov /i). Here too, she correctly perceived the character of her guest, bas it islater bstated: “And Geihazi approached her to push her away [ ilehodfa /i]”(II Kings 4:27). And bRabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: He grabbed her by the majesty of her beauty [ ihod yofya /i],meaning that when he pushed her he grabbed her breasts in a licentious manner.,With regard to the phrasing of the verse: “He is a holy man of God bwho passes by us continually,” Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said in the name of Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov:From this verse we derive that bone who hosts a Torah scholar in his home and lets him enjoy his possessions, the verse ascribes to himcredit bas if he is sacrificing the daily [ itamid /i] offering,as the verse states: “Passes by us continually [ itamid /i].”,With regard to the ihalakhotof prayer, bRabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said in the name of Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov: A person should not stand in a high place and pray; rather,he should stand bin a low place and pray, as it is stated: “I called to You, Lord, from the depths”(Psalms 130:1)., bThat was also taughtin a ibaraita /i: bOne should neither stand upon a chair nor upon a stool, nor in a high place and pray. Rather,one should stand bin a low place and pray, for there is no haughtiness before God. As it is stated: “I called to You, Lord, from the depths” and it is written: “A prayer for the impoverished, when he is faintand pours out his complaint before God” (Psalms 102:1). It is appropriate to feel impoverished when praying and make one’s requests humbly., bAnd Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said in the name of Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov: When praying, one should align his feetnext to each other, as a single foot, in order to model oneself after the angels, with regard to whom bit is stated: “And their feet were a straight foot”(Ezekiel 1:7)., bRabbi Yitzḥak saidthat bRabbi Yoḥa said and Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said in the name of Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov: What isthe meaning of bthat which is written: “You shall not eat with the blood”(Leviticus 19:26)? bYou may not eat before you pray for your blood.One may not eat before he prays., bOthers saythat bRabbi Yitzḥak saidthat bRabbi Yoḥa saidthat bRabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said in the name of Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov: One who eats and drinks and later prays, about him the verse statesthe rebuke of the prophet in the name of God: b“And Me you have cast behind your back”(I Kings 14:9). One who sees to his own bodily needs by eating and drinking before prayer casts God aside, according his arrogance and ego priority over God (Maharsha). Indeed, bdo not read your back [ igavekha /i]; rather, your pride [ ige’ekha /i]. The Holy One, Blessed be He, said: After thisone bhas become arrogantand engaged in satisfying his own needs, bheonly then baccepted upon himself the kingdom of Heaven. /b,We learned in the mishna that bRabbi Yehoshua says:One may recite the morning iShema buntil three hoursof the day. bRav Yehuda saidthat bShmuel said: The ihalakhais in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yehoshua. /b,We also learned in the mishna that bone who recites iShema bfrom that time onward loses nothing;although he does not fulfill the mitzva of reciting of iShemaat its appointed time, bhe isnevertheless considered like one who reads the Torah, and is rewarded accordingly.,With regard to this ruling, bRav Ḥisda saidthat bMar Ukva said:This only applies bprovided one does not recite: Who forms light [ iyotzer or /i],or the rest of the blessings recited along with iShema /i, as they pertain only to the fulfillment of the mitzva of reciting of the morning iShema /i; after the third hour, they are inappropriate.,The Gemara braises an objection toRav Ḥisda’s statement from a ibaraita /i: bOne who recites iShema bfrom that time onward loses nothing, and is considered like one who reads Torah, but he recites two blessings beforehand and oneblessing bthereafter. /bThis directly contradicts Rav Ḥisda’s statement, and the Gemara notes: Indeed, bthe refutationof the statement bof Rav Ḥisda is aconclusive brefutation,and Rav Ḥisda’s opinion is rejected in favor of that of the ibaraita /i., bSome say that Rav Ḥisda saidthat bMar Ukva saidthe opposite: bWhat isthe meaning of: bLoses nothing,in the mishna? This means that one who recites iShemaafter the third hour bdoes not losethe opportunity to recite bthe blessingsand is permitted to recite them although the time for the recitation of iShemahas passed. bThat was also taughtin a ibaraita /i: bOne who recites iShema bafter this time loses nothing, and is considered like one who reads the Torah, but he recites two blessings beforehand and one thereafter. /b,With regard to our mishna, bRabbi Mani said: Greater is one who recites iShemaat itsappropriate btime than one who engages in Torahstudy. A proof is cited based on bwhat was taughtin the mishna: bOne who recites iShema bafter this time loses nothing and isconsidered blike one who reads the Torah.This is proven bby inference,since bone who recites iShema bat itsappointed btime is greaterthan one who does not, and one who does not is equal to one who reads the Torah, when one recites iShemaat its appointed time he fulfills two mitzvot, that of Torah study and that of the recitation of iShema /i., strongMISHNA: /strong Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel disputed the proper way to recite iShema /i. bBeit Shammai say:One should recite iShemain the manner indicated in the text of iShemaitself. Therefore, bin the evening every person must reclineon his side and recite iShema /i, in fulfillment of the verse: “When you lie down,” band in the morning he must standand recite iShema /i, in fulfillment of the verse: When you rise, bas it is stated: “When you lie down, and when you rise.” /b, bAnd Beit Hillel say: Every person recites iShema bas he is,and he may do so in whatever position is most comfortable for him, both day and night, bas it is stated: “And when you walk along the way,”when one is neither standing nor reclining ( iMe’iri /i)., bIf so,according to Beit Hillel, bwhy was it stated: “When you lie down, and when you rise”?This is merely to denote time; bat the time when people lie down and the time when people rise. /b,With regard to this ihalakha /i, bRabbi Tarfon said:Once, bI was coming on the roadwhen I stopped and breclined to recite iShema bin accordance with the statement of Beit Shammai.Although Rabbi Tarfon was a disciple of Beit Hillel, he thought that fulfilling the mitzva in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai would be a more meticulous fulfillment of the mitzva, acceptable to all opinions. Yet in so doing, bI endangered myself due to the highwaymen [ ilistim /i]who accost travelers.,The Sages bsaid to him: You deservedto be in a position where you were bliableto pay bwith your life, as you transgressed the statement of Beit Hillel.This statement will be explained in the Gemara.
18. Babylonian Talmud, Hulin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

19. Babylonian Talmud, Nedarim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

32a. מפני שנתעסק במלון תחילה שנאמר ויהי בדרך במלון (שמות ד, כד),רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר לא למשה רבינו ביקש שטן להרוג אלא לאותו תינוק שנאמר כי חתן דמים אתה לי (שמות ד כה) צא וראה מי קרוי חתן הוי אומר זה התינוק,דרש רבי יהודה בר ביזנא בשעה שנתרשל משה רבינו מן המילה באו אף וחימה ובלעוהו ולא שיירו ממנו אלא רגליו מיד ותקח צפורה צור ותכרת את ערלת בנה (שמות ד, כה) מיד וירף ממנו (שמות ד, כו),באותה שעה ביקש משה רבינו להורגן שנאמר הרף מאף ועזוב חמה (תהלים לז, ח) ויש אומרים לחימה הֲרָגוֹ שנאמר חמה אין לי (ישעיהו כז, ד) והכתיב כי יגרתי מפני האף והחמה (דברים ט, יט) תרי חימה הוו ואיבעית אימא גונדא דחימה,תניא רבי אומר גדולה מילה שאין לך מי שנתעסק במצוות כאברהם אבינו ולא נקרא תמים אלא על שם מילה שנאמר התהלך לפני והיה תמים (בראשית יז, א) וכתיב ואתנה בריתי ביני ובינך (בראשית יז, ב),דבר אחר גדולה מילה ששקולה כנגד כל המצוות שבתורה שנאמר כי על פי הדברים האלה וגו' (שמות לד, כז) דבר אחר גדולה מילה שאילמלא מילה לא נתקיימו שמים וארץ שנאמר אם לא בריתי יומם ולילה וגו' (ירמיהו לג, כה),ופליגא דרבי אליעזר דאמר רבי אליעזר גדולה תורה שאילמלא תורה לא נתקיימו שמים וארץ שנאמר אם לא בריתי יומם ולילה חקות שמים וארץ לא שמתי וגו',אמר רב יהודה אמר רב בשעה שאמר לו הקב"ה לאברהם אבינו התהלך לפני והיה תמים (בראשית יז, א) אחזתו רעדה אמר שמא יש בי דבר מגונה כיוון שאמר לו ואתנה בריתי ביני ובינך (בראשית יז, ב) נתקררה דעתו,ויוצא אותו החוצה (בראשית טו, ה) אמר לפניו רבונו של עולם הסתכלתי במזל שלי ואין לי אלא בן אחד אמר לו צא מאיצטגנינות שלך אין מזל לישראל,אמר רבי יצחק כל המתמים עצמו הקב"ה מתמים עמו שנאמר עם חסיד תתחסד עם גבר תמים תתמם (תהלים יח, כו),אמר רבי הושעיא כל המתמים עצמו שעה עומדת לו שנאמר התהלך לפני והיה תמים (בראשית יז, א) וכתיב והיית לאב המון גוים (בראשית יז, ד),אמר רבי כל המנחש לו נחש שנאמר כי לא נחש ביעקב (במדבר כג, כג) והא בלמ"ד אל"ף כתיב אלא משום מידה כנגד מידה,תני אהבה בריה דרבי זירא כל אדם שאינו מנחש מכניסין אותו במחיצה שאפילו מלאכי השרת אין יכולין ליכנס בתוכה שנאמר כי לא נחש ביעקב ולא קסם בישראל וגו' (במדבר כג, כג),אמר רבי אבהו אמר רבי אלעזר מפני מה נענש אברהם אבינו ונשתעבדו בניו למצרים מאתיים ועשר שנים מפני שעשה אנגרייא בתלמידי חכמים שנאמר וירק את חניכיו ילידי ביתו (בראשית יד, יד),ושמואל אמר מפני שהפריז על מדותיו של הקב"ה שנאמר במה אדע כי אירשנה (בראשית טו, ח) ורבי יוחנן אמר שהפריש בני אדם מלהכנס תחת כנפי השכינה שנאמר תן לי הנפש והרכוש קח לך (בראשית יד, כא),וירק את חניכיו ילידי ביתו (בראשית יד, יד) רב אמר שהוריקן בתורה ושמואל אמר שהוריקן בזהב,שמנה עשר ושלש מאות (בראשית יד, יד) אמר רבי אמי בר אבא אליעזר כנגד כולם איכא דאמרי אליעזר הוא דחושבניה הכי הוי,ואמר רבי אמי בר אבא בן שלוש שנים הכיר אברהם את בוראו שנאמר עקב אשר שמע אברהם בקולי (בראשית כו, ה) חושבניה מאה ושבעין ותרין,ואמר רמי בר אבא 32a. bBecause he was occupied with lodging firstand did not immediately perform the mitzva of circumcision, bas it is stated: “And it came to pass on the way at the lodging-place”(Exodus 4:24)., bRabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: It was not Moses our teacherthat bSatan wanted to kill, but rather, that infantwho was not circumcised, bas it is stated: “Surely a bridegroom of blood are you to me”(Exodus 4:25). bGo out and see: Whodoes it make sense would be the one that bis called the bridegroomin this instance? bYou must say this is the infant,since he is the one who entered the covet of Abraham by means of the circumcision., bRabbi Yehuda bar Bizna taught: At the time that Moses our teacher was negligent about the circumcision,the destructive angels named bAf,meaning anger, band Ḥeima,meaning wrath, bcame and swallowed him, and only his legs were leftoutside. bImmediately, “Zipporah took a flint, and cut off the foreskin of her son”(Exodus 4:25), and bimmediately “He let him alone”(Exodus 4:26)., bAt that moment, Moses our teacher wanted to kill them, as it is stated: “Cease from anger [ iaf] and forsake wrath [ iḥeima /i]”(Psalms 37:8), which indicates that he wanted to harm them. bAnd there are those who say: He killedthe angel named bḤeima, as it is stated: “Wrath is not in me”(Isaiah 27:4). The Gemara asks: How is it possible to say that he killed Ḥeima? bIsn’t it writtenthat Moses himself said much later: b“For I was in dread of the anger and wrath”(Deuteronomy 9:19)? The Gemara answers: bThere are twotypes of bwrath. And if you wish, saythat bthe army of Ḥeimaremained but not the angel itself., bIt is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bRabbiYehuda HaNasi bsays: Great isthe mitzva of bcircumcision, for there is no one who was engaged in mitzvot like Abraham our Patriarch, andyet bhe was called wholehearted only due tothe mitzva of bcircumcision, as it is stated: “Walk before Me and you should be wholehearted”(Genesis 17:1), band it is writtenin the next verse: b“And I will make My covet between Me and you”(Genesis 17:2), and Abraham was then commanded with regard to circumcision. This indicates that he was not called wholehearted until he performed circumcision., bAlternatively,so bgreat isthe mitzva of bcircumcision that it is equal to all the mitzvot of the Torah, as it is statedat the giving of the Torah: b“For according to these wordsI have made a covet with you and with Israel” (Exodus 34:27), and “covet” refers to circumcision. bAlternatively,so bgreat isthe mitzva of bcircumcision that if not for circumcision heaven and earth would not have been established, as it is stated: “If My covet be not with day and night,I would not have appointed the ordices of heaven and earth” (Jeremiah 33:25), and the covet that exists day and night is the covet of circumcision, as it is always found on the person’s body.,The Gemara comments: bAndthis statement bdisagreeswith the words bof Rabbi Eliezer, for Rabbi Eliezer said: Great is the Torah, for if not for Torah, heaven and earth would not have been established, as it is stated: “If My covet be not with day and night,I would not have appointed the ordices of heaven and earth” (Jeremiah 33:25). According to Rabbi Eliezer, the covet that exists day and night is the Torah, as it says: “You should contemplate it day and night” (Joshua 1:8)., bRav Yehuda saidthat bRav said: At the time that the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Abraham our Patriarch: “Walk before Me and you should be wholehearted”(Genesis 17:1), a sensation of btrembling seized himand bhe said: Perhaps there is something disgraceful about medue to a transgression that I committed, and therefore I cannot be called complete. bWhenGod bsaid to him: “And I will make My covet between Me and you”(Genesis 17:2), bhis mind was set at ease,since he understood that the removal of the foreskin that he was now commanded to do was the reason he had not yet achieved completion.,The Gemara expounds the verse b“and He brought him outside”(Genesis 15:5): Abraham bsaid before Him: Master of the Universe, I looked at my constellation andaccording to it bIwill bhave only one son,and a son has already been born to me, i.e., Ishmael. bHe said to him: Emerge from your astrologybecause bthere is no constellation for the Jewish people,as they are not subject to the influence of astrology., bRabbi Yitzḥak said: Anyone who conducts himself with wholeheartedness, the Holy One, Blessed be He, treats him with wholeheartedness, as it is stated: “With the devout You act devoutly, and with the one who is strong in his wholeheartedness You act wholeheartedly”(II Samuel 22:26)., bRabbi Hoshaya said: Anyone who acts wholeheartedly, time will stand for him,i.e., he will be successful, bas it is stated: “Walk before Me and you should be wholehearted”(Genesis 17:1), band it is written: “And you shall be the father of a multitude of nations”(Genesis 17:4)., bRabbiYehuda HaNasi bsaid: Anyone who divines,i.e., he guesses and looks for signs about the future, bthe signwill injure bhim, as it is stated: “For there is to him [ ilo /i] divination with Jacob”(Numbers 23:23). The Gemara asks: bBut it is written ilo bwiththe letters ilamed alef /i,meaning “no divination,” as opposed to with the letters ilamed vav /i, meaning “there is to him divination.” The straightforward meaning of the verse is that there is no divination with regard to Jacob. bRather,the reason that he will be injured is not based on the verse but rather bdue tothe concept of bmeasure for measure:Since he attempts to tell his fortune, it injures him., bAhava, son of Rabbi Zeira, teaches: Any person who does not divinehis future bis brought inside a partitionclose to God to a place bthat even the ministering angels cannot enter inside, as it is stated: “For there is no divination with Jacob, neither is there any enchantment with Israel,now it is said to Jacob and Israel what has God wrought” (Numbers 23:23). In other words, matters are revealed to Israel that even the angels do not know, since Israel is closer to God than the angels., bRabbi Abbahu saidthat bRabbi Elazar said: For what reason was Abraham our Patriarch punished and his children enslaved to Egyptfor b210 years? Because he made a draft [ iangarya /i] of Torah scholars, as it is stated: “He led forth his trained men, born in his house”(Genesis 14:14). These trained men that he took to war were actually his disciples, who were Torah scholars., bAnd Shmuel said: Because he greatly examined [ ihifriz /i] the characteristics of the Holy One, Blessed be He, as it is stated: “Whereby shall I know that I shall inherit it?”(Genesis 15:8). bAnd Rabbi Yoḥa said:He was punished bbecause he distanced people from entering under the wings of the Divine Presence, as it is statedthat the king of Sodom said to him: b“Give me the people and take the goods to yourself”(Genesis 14:21), but Abraham refused to take any goods either. If he had not listened to the king of Sodom and had allowed the people to remain with him, he would have brought the prisoners under the wings of the Divine Presence.,The Gemara returns to discuss one of the verses cited previously: b“He led forth [ ivayyarek /i] his trained men, born in his house”(Genesis 14:14). bRav said: He showered them [ ihorikan /i] with Torahlike someone who pours from one vessel into another, band Shmuel said: He showered them [ ihorikan /i] with goldand gave them an abundance of money so that they would go to war with him.,The Torah states that he took b“eighteen and three hundred”(Genesis 14:14) men to war. bRabbi Ami bar Abba said: Eliezerwas bequivalentto ball of them. There arethose bwho say:Only bEliezer isreferred to here, bas the numerical valueof the letters of his name bis thisamount, i.e., 318., bAnd Rabbi Ami bar Abba said: Abraham recognized his Creator at the age of three years, as it is stated: “Because [ iekev /i] Abraham hearkened to My voice”(Genesis 26:5). bThe numerical valueof the letters of the word iekevis b172,indicating that he observed the ihalakhafor this many years. If Abraham lived until 175 then his first recognition of the Creator must have been at the age of three., bAnd Rami bar Abba saidin a similar manner:
20. Babylonian Talmud, Niddah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

43a. ולא תוך תוכו קמ"ל,אמר ר"ל קנה בקומטו של זב והסיט בו את הטהור טהור קנה בקומטו של טהור והסיט בו את הזב טמא,מאי טעמא דאמר קרא (ויקרא טו, יא) וכל אשר יגע בו הזב וידיו לא שטף במים זהו הסיטו של זב שלא מצינו לו טומאה בכל התורה כולה,ואפקיה רחמנא בלשון נגיעה למימרא דהיסט ונגיעה כידיו מה התם מאבראי אף הכא מאבראי,אבל הזב ובעל קרי אינן מטמאין וכו' זב דכתיב (ויקרא טו, ב) כי יהיה זב מבשרו עד שיצא זובו מבשרו בעל קרי דכתיב (ויקרא טו, טז) ואיש כי תצא ממנו שכבת זרע,היה אוכל בתרומה והרגיש וכו' אוחז והתניא ר"א אומר כל האוחז באמה ומשתין כאילו מביא מבול לעולם,אמר אביי במטלית עבה רבא אמר אפילו תימא במטלית רכה כיון דעקר עקר ואביי חייש דילמא אתי לאוסופי ורבא לאוסופי לא חייש,והתניא למה זה דומה לנותן אצבע בעין שכל זמן שאצבע בעין מדמעת וחוזרת ומדמעת,ורבא כל אחמומי והדר אחמומי בשעתא לא שכיח,אמר שמואל כל שכבת זרע שאין כל גופו מרגיש בה אינה מטמאה מ"ט שכבת זרע אמר רחמנא בראויה להזריע,מיתיבי היה מהרהר בלילה ועמד ומצא בשרו חם טמא תרגמא רב הונא במשמש מטתו בחלומו דאי אפשר לשמש בלא הרגשה,לישנא אחרינא אמר שמואל כל שכבת זרע שאינו יורה כחץ אינה מטמאה מאי איכא בין האי לישנא להאי לישנא איכא בינייהו נעקרה בהרגשה ויצאה שלא בהרגשה,מילתא דפשיטא ליה לשמואל מיבעיא ליה לרבא דבעי רבא נעקרה בהרגשה ויצתה שלא בהרגשה מהו,ת"ש בעל קרי שטבל ולא הטיל מים לכשיטיל מים טמא שאני התם דרובה בהרגשה נפק,לישנא אחרינא אמרי לה אמר שמואל כל שכבת זרע שאינו יורה כחץ אינה מזרעת אזרועי הוא דלא מזרעא הא טמויי מטמיא שנאמר (דברים כג, יא) כי יהיה בך איש אשר לא יהיה טהור מקרה אפילו קרי בעולם,בעי רבא עובד כוכבים שהרהר וירד וטבל מהו,אם תמצי לומר בתר עקירה אזלינן הני מילי לחומרא אבל הכא דלקולא לא אמרינן או דילמא לא שנא תיקו,בעי רבא זבה שנעקרו מימי רגליה וירדה וטבלה מהו,אם תמצא לומר בתר עקירה אזלינן הני מילי שכבת זרע דלא מצי נקיט לה אבל מימי רגליה דמצי נקיט לה לא או דילמא לא שנא תיקו,בעי רבא עובדת כוכבים זבה שנעקרו מימי רגליה 43a. band notif it was in bthe interior of its interior,i.e., contained within something else, such as a fold, which is inside the vessel, therefore Rava bteaches usthat a fold in one’s body is not considered like the interior of the interior of a vessel. Rather, this definition applies only when the carcass of the creeping animal was actually inside another vessel whose opening was outside the oven.,§ The Gemara continues to discuss the folds in the body with regard to ritual impurity. bReish Lakish says:If there was ba poleor a stick placed bin the folds ofan individual impure with the impurity of ba izav /i, and he moved a ritually pureperson bwith it,that individual is bpure,despite the fact that a izavimparts impurity by moving an item. If the bpolewas placed bin the folds of one who is pure, and he moved the izavwith it,the pure individual is thereby rendered bimpure,as is the ihalakhaof one who carries a izav /i.,The Gemara explains: bWhat is the reasonthat if a izavmoved another with a pole in his own folds he does not render the other person impure? bAs the verse states: “And whoever a izavtouches, without having rinsed his hands in water,he shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water” (Leviticus 15:11). bThis isreferring to the impurity imparted by bthe movement of a izav /i, as we have not found an impuritysimilar bto it in the entire Torah.Only a izavimparts impurity to items by moving them., bAnd the Merciful One expressesthis impurity imparted bbymovement using bthe language of touch,in order bto say thatthe bmoving and touchof a izav bare like his hands: Just as there,with regard to the impurity imparted by contact with the hands, it occurs bexternalto the body, bso too here,impurity by means of movement applies only to moving an item with the bexternalportions of the body of the izav /i.,§ The mishna teaches that a woman becomes ritually impure with the flow of blood from the uterus into the vagina, even if it did not leave the woman’s body. bBut the izavand one who experiences a seminal emission do not become ritually impureuntil their emission of impurity emerges outside the body. The Gemara explains: This is the ihalakhawith regard to ba izav /i, as it is written: “Whenany man bhas an issue out of his flesh”(Leviticus 15:2). The verse teaches that a izavis not impure buntil his issue emerges out of his flesh.With regard to bone who experiences a seminal emission,the reason is bthat it is written: “And if the flow of seed goes out from a man”(Leviticus 15:16), which indicates that the flow must exit his body.,§ The mishna further states that if a priest bwas partaking of iterumaand senseda quaking in his limbs, indicating that a seminal emission was imminent, he should firmly hold his penis to prevent the emission from leaving his body, and swallow the iterumawhile ritually pure. The Gemara asks: May one bholdhis penis? bBut isn’t it taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Eliezer says: Anyone who holdshis bpenis and urinatesis considered bas though he is bringing a deluge to the world,as masturbation was one of the sins that led to the flood?, bAbaye said,in resolution of this difficulty, that the mishna is referring to one who holds his penis bwith a coarse cloth. Rava said: Youmay beven saythat the mishna is referring to a priest who holds his penis bwith a soft cloth,and the reason it is permitted is that boncethe semen bhasalready bbeen uprootedfrom his body, it is buprooted,and his subsequent holding of the penis, even with a soft cloth, does not increase the flow of semen. bAnd Abayeprohibits the use of a soft cloth, as he is bconcernedthat bperhapsone might bcome to increasethe emission of semen, due to the contact of this cloth. bBut Rava is not concernedthat one might bcome to increasethe emission.,The Gemara raises a difficulty with regard to the opinion of Rava. bIsn’t it taughtin a ibaraita /i: bTo what is thisholding of a penis bcomparable?It is comparable btoone who bplaces a finger inhis beye,in bthat as long asthe bfingeris bin the eye,the eye bwill tear and continue to tear.Here too, the priest’s action will lead to an increased emission of semen.,The Gemara answers that bRavawould maintain that if the priest’s limbs were not quaking and the semen was coming out in drops, there is indeed a concern that holding the penis might increase the emission. But when he feels his limbs quaking, this concern does not apply. The reason is that banysuch event, i.e., ba heatingof the body that leads to a seminal emission bandwhich is bthenfollowed by another bheatingof that kind bat the timewhen the semen has been uprooted, is buncommon.Consequently, in this case the priest may hold his penis even with a soft cloth., bShmuel says: Anyemission of bsemen that is not felt by one’s entire body does not renderhim bimpure. What is the reason? The Merciful One states: “The flow of seed”(Leviticus 15:16), which indicates that it is referring to an emission bthat is fit to fertilize,i.e., it is referring only to the kind of emission which is felt as it exits the body.,The Gemara braises an objectionfrom a mishna ( iMikvaot8:3): If one bwas havingsexual bthoughts at night and he arose and foundthat bhis fleshwas bwarm, he is ritually impure,despite the fact that he did not sense the emission of semen. This shows that the impurity of a seminal emission applies even if one did not feel it in his entire body. The Gemara answers: bRav Huna interpretedthis mishna as referring btoone who bengaged in intercourse in his dream. Since it is impossible to engage in intercourse withoutthe accompanying bsensation,he certainly must have felt it, despite the fact that he was unaware of this when he awoke.,The Gemara cites banother versionof the above statement. bShmuel says: Any semen that is not shot like an arrow does not renderone bimpure.The Gemara asks: bWhatpractical difference bis there between this versionof Shmuel’s ruling band that versionof Shmuel’s ruling? The Gemara answers that the difference bbetween themis a case where the semen bwas uprootedaccompanied bby a sensation, but it emerged without a sensation.According to the first version the man is rendered impure, as he sensed the uprooting of the semen, whereas according to the second version he is not impure, as this is not considered semen shot like an arrow.,The Gemara notes that this bmatter, whichis bobvious to Shmuel, is raised as a dilemma by Rava. As Rava raises a dilemma:If semen bwas uprootedaccompanied bby a sensation but it emerged without a sensation, what isthe ihalakha /i? Is the man ritually impure or not?,The Gemara suggests: bComeand bheara proof from a mishna ( iMikvaot8:3): With regard to bone who experienced a seminal emission,and bwhosubsequently bimmersed but did not urinatebefore doing so, bwhen helater burinateshe is rendered bimpure,as some semen will also be emitted. The reason that he is rendered impure by this emission, which he does not sense, must be because the uprooting of the semen was accompanied by a sensation. The Gemara refutes this proof: bThere it is different, as the majorityof the semen bemergedaccompanied bby a sensation,and therefore he is rendered impure by this small amount even without a sensation., bSome say another versionof the previous discussion. bShmuel says: Any semen that is not shot like an arrow cannot fertilize,i.e., impregnate a woman. The Gemara infers: bIt cannot fertilize, but it does renderthe man who emits it britually impure, as it is stated: “If there be among you any man who is not ritually pure by reason of that which happened to himby night” (Deuteronomy 23:11). This teaches that beven mere semenwhich cannot fertilize renders one impure., bRava raisesa similar bdilemma:With regard to ba gentile who hadsexual bthoughts,on account of which semen was uprooted but not emitted from his body, band hesubsequently bdescended and immersedfor the purpose of conversion, which means that he is now Jewish, and he then emitted semen, bwhat isthe ihalakhawith regard to his status of ritual purity?,The Gemara explains the dilemma: Even bif you saythat bwe followthe moment of buprooting,at which point he was still a gentile, one can maintain that bthis statementapplies only when it entails ba stringency,as is the case with regard to a born Jew. bBut here, wherethis would lead bto a leniency,as the gentile would be ritually pure, perhaps bwe do not saythat one follows the moment of uprooting. bOr perhapsthere bis no differencein the application of this principle between a born Jew and a convert, but rather, one always follows the moment of uprooting. The Gemara concludes that the dilemma bshall standunresolved., bRava raisesa further bdilemma:With regard to ba woman who experienced a discharge of uterine blood after her menstrual period [ izava /i], whose urine,which imparts impurity like all liquids that she discharges vaginally, bwas uprootedbut not emitted from her body, band she descendedto the ritual bath band immersedto purify herself from her iziva /i, and urinated afterward, bwhat isthe ihalakha /i?,The Gemara explains the sides of the dilemma: Even bif you saythat generally bwe followthe moment of buprooting,and therefore she should be impure, since the urine was uprooted when she was a izava /i, nevertheless one can claim that bthis statementapplies only with regard to bsemen, asthe man bcannot hold itback from emission. bButwith regard to the burine ofa izava /i, bwhich she can hold in,one does bnotfollow the moment of uprooting. bOr perhapsthere bis no differencein the application of this principle between urine and semen, but rather, in both cases one follows the moment of uprooting. Here too, the Gemara concludes that the dilemma bshall standunresolved., bRava raisesyet another bdilemma:With regard to ba gentile izava /i,who is not impure by Torah law, although by rabbinic law she is considered a izavain all regards, bwhose urine was uprootedwhen she was a gentile
21. Babylonian Talmud, Shevuot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

47b. אי אמרת בשלמא אביו כי האי גוונא מיחייב איצטריך קרא למיפטר גבי יורשין אלא אי אמרת אביו כי האי גוונא נמי פטור קרא גבי יורשין למה לי,ורב ושמואל האי שבועת ה' מאי קא דרשי ביה,מיבעי ליה לכדתניא שמעון בן טרפון אומר שבועת ה' תהיה בין שניהם מלמד שהשבועה חלה על שניהם,שמעון בן טרפון אומר אזהרה לעוקב אחר נואף מנין ת"ל (שמות כ, יג) לא תנאף לא תנאיף,(דברים א, כז) ותרגנו באהליכם שמעון בן טרפון אומר תרתם וגיניתם באהלו של מקום,(דברים א, ז) עד הנהר הגדול נהר פרת שמעון בן טרפון אומר קרב לגבי דהינא ואידהן דבי רבי ישמעאל תנא עבד מלך כמלך:,והחנוני על פינקסו כו': תניא אמר רבי טורח שבועה זו למה א"ל ר' חייא (בר אבא) תנינא שניהם נשבעין ונוטלין מבעל הבית,קיבלה מיניה או לא קיבלה מיניה ת"ש דתניא רבי אומר פועלין נשבעין לחנוני ואם איתא לבעל הבית מיבעי ליה,אמר רבא פועלים נשבעין לבעל הבית במעמד חנוני כי היכי דליכספו מיניה,איתמר שתי כיתי עדים המכחישות זו את זו אמר רב הונא זו באה בפני עצמה ומעידה וזו באה בפני עצמה ומעידה רב חסדא אמר בהדי סהדי שקרי למה לי,שני מלוין ושני לווין ושני שטרות היינו פלוגתייהו מלוה ולוה ושני שטרות יד בעל השטר על התחתונה,שני מלוין ולוה אחד ושני שטרות היינו מתניתין ב' לווין ומלוה אחד ושני שטרות מאי תיקו,מתיב רב הונא בר יהודה 47b. Rabba continues: bGranted, if you saythat bhis father,in ba case like this, would be liableto take an oath, due to his partial admission, then the bverse was necessary to exempt the heirsfrom taking the oath. bBut if you saythat in ba case like this, his father is also exemptfrom taking an oath, bwhy do Ineed ba verse aboutexempting the bheirs?Evidently, an oath reverts to one who is liable to take it, and when he cannot take that oath he must pay the claim against him.,The Gemara asks: bAndas for bRav and Shmuel,who hold that one who cannot take an oath does not have to pay, and therefore there is no difference between the heirs and the father, bwhat do they derive from thisverse: b“The oath of the Lordshall be between them both” (Exodus 22:10)?,The Gemara answers: bIt is necessary for that which is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bShimon ben Tarfon says:The verse: b“The oath of the Lord shall be between them both,” teaches thatwhen one litigant imposes an oath on the other, and he takes a false oath, bthe oath applies to them both,i.e., they are both held responsible for the desecration of God’s name.,Since this Sage was mentioned, the Gemara cites some of his other statements. bShimon ben Tarfon says:With regard to the bprohibition of following after an adulterer,i.e., providing him with assistance in carrying out adultery, bfrom whereis it derived? bThe verse states: “You shall not commit adultery [ ilo tinaf]”(Exodus 20:13). If the verse is vocalized slightly differently, it may be read: bYou shall not cause adultery [ ilo tanif]. /b,Commenting on the verse describing the response of the Jewish people to the spies’ slander of Eretz Yisrael: b“And you murmured [ ivatteragenu /i] in your tentsand said: Because the Lord hated us, He has brought us forth out of the land of Egypt, to deliver us into the hand of the Amorites, to destroy us” (Deuteronomy 1:27), bShimon ben Tarfon says:“ iTeragenu /i” is interpreted as though it is composed of two Hebrew expressions: bYou explored [ itartem /i]the land, band: You disparaged [ iginnitem /i]it, bin the tent of the Omnipresent. /b,With regard to the verse: b“As far as the great river, the river Euphrates”(Deuteronomy 1:7), bShimon ben Tarfon says:Although it is not the largest river, the Euphrates is called great in accordance with the adage: bDraw close to theone banointed with oil and become anointedas well. Because the Euphrates is close to Eretz Yisrael, it is called great. The bschool of Rabbi Yishmael taughta similar idea: bThe servant of a king is like a king. /b,§ The mishna teaches that bthe storekeeperrelying bon his ledgertakes an oath and receives payment. If an employer tells a storekeeper to pay his laborers, and the storekeeper claims he paid them, while the laborers claim that they did not receive payment, both the storekeeper and the laborers take oaths and receive payment from the employer. bIt is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bRabbiYehuda HaNasi bsaid: Whyis there the bbotherwith bthis oath,that it is imposed upon both of them? bRabbi Ḥiyya said to him: We learnin the mishna (see 45a) that bboth of them take an oath and receivepayment of their claims bfrom the employer. /b,The Gemara asks: bDidRabbi Yehuda HaNasi baccept from himthat this is the ihalakha /i, bor did he not accept it from him? Comeand bhear as it is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bRabbiYehuda HaNasi bsays: The laborers take an oath to the storekeeperthat he had not paid them. bAnd if it is sothat Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi accepted Rabbi Ḥiyya’s ruling, then Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi bshould haveinstead said that the laborers take an oath bto the employer. /b, bRava said:Do not conclude that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi did not accept Rabbi Ḥiyya’s ruling. Rather, interpret his statement as follows: bThe laborers take an oath to the employer in the presence of the storekeeper, so that they will feel ashamedto lie bwith himpresent, since he knows whether or not he paid them.,§ bIt was statedabout a similar topic that if there were btwo sets of witnesses who contradict one another,and it is clear that one set must be testifying falsely, bRav Huna says: Thisset can bcome by itself and testifyabout other cases, band thatset can bcome by itself and testify.Neither set of witnesses is disqualified for future testimony, since there is no way of knowing which was lying. bRav Ḥisda said: Why do Ineed to become involved bwith lying witnesses?Since each set of witnesses is possibly untrustworthy, both sets are disqualified.,The Gemara cites the circumstances relevant to this dispute. If, after contradicting each other, the two sets of witnesses testified about circumstances involving btwodistinct blenders, and twodistinct bborrowers, andtherefore btwoseparate promissory bnotes,each one signed by a different set of witnesses, bthissort of scenario bisthe subject of btheir dispute.According to Rav Huna both promissory notes are valid, and according to Rav Ḥisda neither is valid. In the case of a single blender, anda single bborrower, and twopromissory bnotes,with each signed by a different one of the sets of witnesses, bthe holder of thepromissory bnote is at a disadvantageand can collect only the lower sum. One of the promissory notes is necessarily not valid, as it is signed by witnesses who testified falsely.,In the case of btwo lenders, and a single borrower, and twopromissory bnotes, this isthe same as bthe mishna,where two claimants who contradict each other come to collect payment from a single person who must pay them both, as the evidence for both claims has a presumption of validity. In the case of btwo borrowers, and a single lender, and twopromissory bnotes, whatis the ihalakha /i? Can each of the borrowers claim that the promissory note supporting the claim against him is not valid, as it could have been signed by the untrustworthy set of witnesses; or does each of them have to pay unless he can prove that the promissory note against him was signed by the unfit set of witnesses? The Gemara states: The question bshall standunresolved., bRav Huna bar Yehuda raises an objectionfrom a ibaraita /i:


Subjects of this text:

subject book bibliographic info
abba b. kahana, r. Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45
abba benjamin Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45
acceptance of, rabbis on Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45
acceptance of, study of Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45
adam Legaspi, Wisdom in Classical and Biblical Tradition (2018) 73
animal imagery Corley, Ben Sira's Teaching on Friendship (2002) 131
atonement Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45
augustine, fear of god Dilley, Monasteries and the Care of Souls in Late Antique Christianity: Cognition and Discipline (2019) 149
augustine, rule Dilley, Monasteries and the Care of Souls in Late Antique Christianity: Cognition and Discipline (2019) 149
behavior Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45
ben aai Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45
bickerman, elias Legaspi, Wisdom in Classical and Biblical Tradition (2018) 73
circumcision Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45
creation Beyerle and Goff, Notions of Time in Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature (2022) 405, 420; Corley, Ben Sira's Teaching on Friendship (2002) 131
derash, adding data Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 220
derash, splitting words Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 220
derash, wordplay Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 220
ecclesiastes, book of, and exile Legaspi, Wisdom in Classical and Biblical Tradition (2018) 79
ecclesiastes, book of Legaspi, Wisdom in Classical and Biblical Tradition (2018) 73, 79
elazar, r. Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45
eliezer b. jacob, r. Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45
eve Legaspi, Wisdom in Classical and Biblical Tradition (2018) 73
exercises, student Carr, Writing on the Tablet of the Heart: Origins of Scripture and Literature (2004) 226
fear of god Legaspi, Wisdom in Classical and Biblical Tradition (2018) 73, 79
gematria Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 220
genesis, book of Legaspi, Wisdom in Classical and Biblical Tradition (2018) 73
god Corley, Ben Sira's Teaching on Friendship (2002) 131
halakhic exegesis, on torah study Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45
hamnuna, r. Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45
hebel Legaspi, Wisdom in Classical and Biblical Tradition (2018) 79
horsesius, fear of god Dilley, Monasteries and the Care of Souls in Late Antique Christianity: Cognition and Discipline (2019) 149
hyperbole, in aggadah Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45
illa, r. Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 220
jeremiah b. elazar, r., hyperbole Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45
jeremiah b. elazar, r., on adam Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 220
jerusalem Legaspi, Wisdom in Classical and Biblical Tradition (2018) 79
joshua b. levi, r., exaggerations of Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45
judah b. menasiah, r. Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 220
knowledge, of good and evil Legaspi, Wisdom in Classical and Biblical Tradition (2018) 73
law of moses Corley, Ben Sira's Teaching on Friendship (2002) 131
lexicography Beyerle and Goff, Notions of Time in Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature (2022) 405
like seeking like Corley, Ben Sira's Teaching on Friendship (2002) 131
mar zutra Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 220
mari b. mar Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45, 220
mattena, r. Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 220
metaphysical vulnerability Legaspi, Wisdom in Classical and Biblical Tradition (2018) 79
mocking Corley, Ben Sira's Teaching on Friendship (2002) 131
mysterium tremendum Dilley, Monasteries and the Care of Souls in Late Antique Christianity: Cognition and Discipline (2019) 149
myth Beyerle and Goff, Notions of Time in Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature (2022) 420
omniscience, divine Dilley, Monasteries and the Care of Souls in Late Antique Christianity: Cognition and Discipline (2019) 149
otto, rudolf Dilley, Monasteries and the Care of Souls in Late Antique Christianity: Cognition and Discipline (2019) 149
parallelism Corley, Ben Sira's Teaching on Friendship (2002) 131
piety Legaspi, Wisdom in Classical and Biblical Tradition (2018) 73
priestly tradition Corley, Ben Sira's Teaching on Friendship (2002) 131
priests and textuality Carr, Writing on the Tablet of the Heart: Origins of Scripture and Literature (2004) 226
rabbi, wordplay of Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 220
rabbis, code of behavior Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45
rabbis, hyperbole used by Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45
rava, legal acuity of Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 220
rava b. hinena Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45
resh lakish, on repentance Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 45
rule (augustine), fear of god Dilley, Monasteries and the Care of Souls in Late Antique Christianity: Cognition and Discipline (2019) 149
serpent Legaspi, Wisdom in Classical and Biblical Tradition (2018) 73
sharp, carolyn Legaspi, Wisdom in Classical and Biblical Tradition (2018) 73
simeon b. pazzi, r. Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 220
socrates Corley, Ben Sira's Teaching on Friendship (2002) 131
space/spatiality Beyerle and Goff, Notions of Time in Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature (2022) 405, 420
study practices Bakker, The Secret of Time: Reconfiguring Wisdom in the Dead Sea Scrolls (2023) 61
testament (horsiesius), fear of god Dilley, Monasteries and the Care of Souls in Late Antique Christianity: Cognition and Discipline (2019) 149
torah Legaspi, Wisdom in Classical and Biblical Tradition (2018) 73, 79
vocation, monastic' Dilley, Monasteries and the Care of Souls in Late Antique Christianity: Cognition and Discipline (2019) 149
wisdom, and torah Bakker, The Secret of Time: Reconfiguring Wisdom in the Dead Sea Scrolls (2023) 61
wisdom, in hebrew bible Legaspi, Wisdom in Classical and Biblical Tradition (2018) 79
word-pairs Corley, Ben Sira's Teaching on Friendship (2002) 131
yitron Legaspi, Wisdom in Classical and Biblical Tradition (2018) 79
yohanan, r., knowledge of scripture Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 220
yose b. r. hanina Borowitz, The Talmud's Theological Language-Game: A Philosophical Discourse Analysis (2006) 220