| 35b. במי שהוא רחום קאמר,א"ל רבא אי הכי בשמים ובארץ נמי במי שהשמים והארץ שלו קאמר,הכי השתא התם כיון דליכא מידי אחרינא דאיקרי רחום וחנון ודאי במי שהוא חנון ודאי במי שהוא רחום קאמר הכא כיון דאיכא שמים וארץ בשמים ובארץ קאמר,ת"ר כתב אלף למד מאלהים יה מיי' ה"ז אינו נמחק שין דלת משדי אלף דלת מאדני צדי בית מצבאות ה"ז נמחק,רבי יוסי אומר צבאות כולו נמחק שלא נקרא צבאות אלא על שם ישראל שנאמר (שמות ז, ד) והוצאתי את צבאותי את עמי בני ישראל מארץ מצרים אמר שמואל אין הלכה כרבי יוסי,ת"ר כל הטפל לשם בין מלפניו ובין מלאחריו ה"ז נמחק לפניו כיצד ליי' ל' נמחק ביי' ב' נמחק ויי' ו' נמחק מיי' מ' נמחק (תהלים קמד, טו) שיי' ש' נמחק היי' ה' נמחק כיי' כ' נמחק,לאחריו כיצד אלהינו נ"ו נמחק אלהיהם ה"ם נמחק אלהיכם כ"ם נמחק אחרים אומרים לאחריו אינו נמחק שכבר קדשו השם אמר רב הונא הלכה כאחרים,(אברהם דלטיא לנבות בגבעת בנימן שלמה דניאל סימן),כל שמות האמורים בתורה באברהם קדש חוץ מזה שהוא חול שנאמר (בראשית יח, ג) ויאמר יי' אם נא מצאתי חן בעיניך,חנינא בן אחי רבי יהושע ורבי אלעזר בן עזריה משום רבי אלעזר המודעי אמרו אף זה קדש כמאן אזלא הא דאמר רב יהודה אמר רב גדולה הכנסת אורחין יותר מהקבלת פני שכינה כמאן כאותו הזוג,כל שמות האמורים בלוט חול חוץ מזה שהוא קדש שנאמר (בראשית יט, יח) ויאמר לוט אליהם אל נא אדני הנה נא מצא עבדך חן בעיניך וגו' מי שיש בידו להמית ולהחיות זה הקדוש ברוך הוא,כל שמות האמורים בנבות קדש במיכה חול ר"א אומר בנבות קדש במיכה יש מהן חול ויש מהן קדש אלף למד חול יוד הי קדש חוץ מזה שאלף למד והוא קדש (שופטים יח, לא) כל ימי היות בית האלהים בשילה,כל שמות האמורים בגבעת בנימין ר"א אומר חול רבי יהושע אומר קדש,אמר לו ר"א וכי מבטיח ואינו עושה,אמר לו ר' יהושע מה שהבטיח עשה והם לא ביחנו אם לנצוח אם לנצח באחרונה שביחנו הסכימו על ידן שנאמר (שופטים כ, כח) ופנחס בן אלעזר בן אהרן (הכהן) עומד לפניו בימים ההם לאמר האוסיף עוד לצאת למלחמה עם [בני] בנימין אחי אם אחדל וגו',כל שלמה האמורין בשה"ש קדש שיר למי שהשלום שלו חוץ מזה (שיר השירים ח, יב) כרמי שלי לפני האלף לך שלמה שלמה לדידיה ומאתים לנוטרים את פריו רבנן וי"א אף זה חול (שיר השירים ג, ז) הנה מטתו שלשלמה ששים,אף זה ולא מיבעי האיך אלא הא דאמר שמואל מלכותא דקטלא חד משיתא בעלמא לא מיענשא שנאמר כרמי שלי לפני האלף לך שלמה למלכותא דרקיעא ומאתים לנוטרים את פריו למלכותא דארעא שמואל לא כת"ק ולא כי"א,אלא ה"ק וי"א זה קדש וזה הוא חול דמטתו ושמואל דאמר כי"א,כל מלכיא האמורים בדניאל חול חוץ מזה שהוא קדש (דניאל ב, לז) אנת מלכא [מלך] מלכיא די אלה שמיא מלכותא חסנא ותקפא ויקרא יהב לך,וי"א אף זה קדש שנאמר (דניאל ד, טז) מרי חלמא לשנאך ופשרה לערך למאן קאמר אי סלקא דעתך לנבוכדנצר קאמר ליה שנאותיה מאי נינהו ישראל מילט קא לייט להו לישראל,ות"ק סבר שונאי ישראל איכא שונאי עובדי כוכבים ליכא:,ובכל כנויין הרי אלו חייבין כו':,ורמינהי (במדבר ה, כא) יתן ה' אותך לאלה ולשבועה מה ת"ל והלא כבר נאמר והשביע הכהן את האשה בשבועת האלה לפי שנא' (ויקרא ה, א) ושמעה קול אלה נאמר כאן אלה ונאמר להלן אלה מה להלן שבועה אף כאן שבועה מה להלן בשם אף כאן בשם,אמר אביי לא קשיא הא רבי חנינא בר אידי הא רבנן דתניא רבי חנינא בר אידי אומר הואיל ואמרה תורה השבע ואל תשבע קלל ואל תקלל מה השבע בשם אף לא תשבע בשם מה קלל בשם אף לא תקלל בשם,ורבנן אי גמירי גזירה שוה ניבעי שם המיוחד אי לא גמירי גזירה שוה אלה דשבועה היא מנא להו,נפקא להו מדתניא אלה אין אלה אלא לשון שבועה וכן הוא אומר (במדבר ה, כא) והשביע הכהן את האשה בשבועת האלה,התם שבועת האלה כתיב הכי קאמר אלה אין אלה אלא בשבועה וכן הוא אומר והשביע הכהן את האשה בשבועת האלה | 35b. or binthe name of bHe Who is compassionate,that the itanna bis statingthe ihalakha /i. Although gracious and compassionate are not names of God, the reference in the mishna is to an oath in the name of God., bRava said toAbaye: bIf so,in the case of one who administered the oath to the witnesses bin thename of bheaven and in thename of bearth as well,say that it is with regard to an oath binthe name of bHe for Whom the heaven and the earth are Histhat the itanna bis statingthe ihalakha /i. Why, then, does the mishna say that for an oath in the name of heaven and in the name of earth, these witnesses are exempt from liability?,The Gemara rejects this: bHow canthese cases bbe compared? There, since there is no other entity that is called gracious and compassionate, certainlyit is binthe name of bHe Who is gracious,and bcertainlyit is binthe name of bHe Who is compassionatethat the itanna bis speaking.By contrast, bhere, since there are heaven and earththat exist as independent entities, perhaps when he administers an oath in the name of heaven and in the name of earth, it is bin thename of the actual bheaven and in thename of the actual bearththat bhe is speaking,and not in the name of He for Whom the heaven and the earth are His.,§ Apropos the names of God that may be erased and those that may not be erased, the Gemara discusses the details of the matter. bThe Sages taught:If bone wrotethe letters ialef lamedfromthe name iElohim /i,or iyod hehfrom the Tetragrammaton, thispair of letters and that pair of letters bmay not be erased.But if one wrote the letters ishin daletfrom iShaddai /i,or ialef daletfrom iAdonai /i,or itzadi beitfrom iTzevaot /i, this may be erased. /b, bRabbi Yosei says:The word itzevaotmay be erasedin bits entirety, asGod bis called iTzevaotonly in the context ofthe children of bIsrael,and it is not an independent name of God, bas it is stated: “And I shall bring forth My hosts [ itzivotai /i], My people the children of Israel, out of the land of Egypt”(Exodus 7:4). bShmuel says:The ihalakha /iis bnot in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yosei. /b, bThe Sages taught: Anyletters bancillary to the nameof God, bwhetheras a prefix bprecedingthe name boras a suffix bsucceedingthe name, bthisaddition bmay be erased. Preceding it, how so?If one wrote the bTetragrammatonwith the prefix ilamed /i,meaning: To the Lord, the ilamedmay be erased;the bTetragrammatonwith the prefix ibeit /i,meaning: By the Lord, the ibeitmay be erased;the bTetragrammatonwith the prefix ivav /i,meaning: And the Lord, the ivavmay be erased;the bTetragrammatonwith the prefix imem /i,meaning: From the Lord, the imemmay be erased;the bTetragrammatonwith the prefix ishin /i,meaning: That the Lord, the ishinmay be erased;the bTetragrammatonwith the prefix iheh /i,meaning: Is the Lord, the ihehmay be erased;the bTetragrammatonwith the prefix ikaf /i,meaning: Like the Lord, the ikafmay be erased. /b, bSucceeding it, how so?If one wrote iEloheinu /i,meaning: Our God, the inun vav /isuffix bmay be erased; iEloheihem /i,meaning: Their God, the iheh mem /isuffix bmay be erased; iEloheikhem /i,meaning: Your God, second person plural, the ikaf mem /isuffix bmay be erased. iAḥerimsay:The suffix bsucceedingthe name of God bmay not be erased as the nameof God to which it is appended balready sanctified itand it is considered as though it is part of the name. bRav Huna says:The ihalakha /iis bin accordance withthe opinion of iAḥerim /i. /b,§ bAbraham; who cursed Naboth; in Gibeah of Benjamin; Solomon; Daniel;this is ba mnemonicfor the ihalakhotthat follow., bAll namesthat could be understood as the name of God bthat are stated in the Torah with regard to Abrahamare bsacredand are referring to God, bexcept for thisname, bwhich is non-sacred, as it is stated: “My lords, if I have found favor in your eyes”(Genesis 18:3). In that passage, Abraham is addressing the angels who appeared to him in the guise of men, not God., bḤanina, son of the brother of Rabbi Yehoshua, and Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya in the name of Rabbi Elazar HaModa’i, say: This toois bsacred.The Gemara asks: bIn accordance with whoseopinion bis that which Rabbi Yehuda saysthat bRav says: Hospitalityaccorded to bguests is greater than receiving the Divine Presence? In accordance with whoseopinion is that statement? It is bin accordance withthe opinion of bthat pairof itanna’im /i, Ḥanina, son of the brother of Rabbi Yehoshua, and Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, who understood that Abraham was speaking to God., bAll namesthat could be understood as the name of God bthat are statedin the Torah bwith regard to Lotare bnon-sacredand are referring to angels, bexcept for thisone, bwhich is sacred, as it is stated: “And Lot said to them: Please, not so iAdonai /i. Behold your servant has found favor in your eyes,and you have magnified Your mercy that You have performed for me by saving my life” (Genesis 19:18–19). It is apparent from the context that Lot is addressing bHe Who has the capacity to kill and to vivify; that is the Holy One, Blessed be He. /b, bAll names that are stated with regard to Nabothare bsacred,e.g., in the verse: “Naboth blasphemed iElohimand the king” (I Kings 21:13), and those stated bwith regard to Micahare bnon-sacredand are referring to the graven image that he fashioned (see Judges, chapters 17–18). bRabbi Eliezer says:Indeed, all names that are stated bwith regard to Nabothare bsacred;but those stated bwith regard to Micah, some of them are non-sacred and some of them are sacred.The names beginning with the letters ialef lamed /i,i.e., iElohim /i, are bnon-sacred,as the reference is to the idol that he crafted, and all the names beginning with the letters iyod heh /i,i.e., the Tetragrammaton, are bsacred, except for thisname that begins with the letters ialef lamedand it is sacred: “All the time that the house of iElohimwas in Shiloh”(Judges 18:31)., bAll names that are stated inthe passage concerning bGibeah of Benjamin,where the rest of the tribes consulted God to determine whether they should go to war against the tribe of Benjamin (see Judges, chapter 20), bRabbi Eliezer says:They are bnon-sacred,as they were consulting an idol, not God. bRabbi Yehoshua says:They are bsacred. /b, bRabbi Eliezer said toRabbi Yehoshua: How can you say that those names are sacred? bDoesGod bpromise and not fulfillthe promise? Twice the tribes received the response to go to war against Benjamin, and twice they were vanquished., bRabbi Yehoshua said toRabbi Eliezer: bThat whichGod bpromised, He fulfilled.In each case, He responded to their question. The first time they consulted God through the iUrim VeTummim /i, bbut they did not seek to ascertain ifthey are bto triumphin the war or bifthey are bto be defeated. In the lasttime that they consulted God through the iUrim VeTummim /i, bwhere they sought to ascertainwhether they would emerge triumphant, bthey consentedin Heaven bto theirendeavor, bas it is stated: “And Pinehas, son of Elazar, son of Aaron was standing before it in those days, saying: Shall I yet again go out to battle against the children of Benjamin my brother, or shall I cease?And the Lord said: Go up, as tomorrow I will deliver them into your hand” (Judges 20:28)., bAllmentions of the name bShlomo that are stated in the Song of Songs,such as: “The song of songs that is Shlomo’s” (Song of Songs 1:1), are not references to King Solomon; rather, they are bsacred,meaning ba song tothe bOne for Whom peace [ ishehashalom /i] is His, except for thismention: b“My vineyard, which is mine, is before me; you, Solomon shall have the one thousand,”i.e., one thousand are bfor Solomon himself; “and two hundred for those who guard its fruit”(Song of Songs 8:12), which is a reference to bthe Sages. And some say: Thisverse btoo is non-sacred: “Behold, the bed of Solomon; sixtymighty men are around it” (Song of Songs 3:7).,The Gemara asks: Does this mean: bThisverse btoois non-sacred, band it is not necessaryto say that the verse cited earlier is non-sacred? bBut that which Shmuel says: A monarchy that kills one ofevery bsixindividuals bin the world is not punishedfor doing so, as that is the prerogative of a monarch, bas it is stated: “My vineyard, which is mine, is before me; you, Shlomo shall have the one thousand,”this is a reference bto the monarchy of Heaven; “and two hundred for those who guard its fruit,”this is a reference bto the monarchy of earth.of the 1,200 mentioned in the two parts of the verse, two hundred, or one-sixth, are the prerogative of the earthly monarch. bShmuel,who interprets the mention of Shlomo in this verse as referring to God, holds bneither in accordance withthe opinion of bthe first itannanor in accordance withthe opinion introduced with the term: bSome say.Both itanna’imagree that the reference in the verse is to Solomon and not to the Holy One, Blessed be He., bRather,Shmuel cites a different version of the opinion introduced with the term: Some say, according to which bthisis what bit is saying. And some say: ThisShlomo that appears in the verse with regard to the one thousand is bsacred, and thatShlomo that appears in the verse bwith regard to the bed ofSolomon bis non-sacred, andit is bShmuel who stateshis opinion bin accordance withthe opinion introduced with the term: bSome say. /b, bAll kings that are stated with regard to Danielare bnon-sacred, except for thisone, bwhich is sacred: “You, O king, king of kings, unto whom the God of heaven has given you the kingdom, the power, and the strength, and the glory”(Daniel 2:37)., bAnd some say: This toois bsacred, as it is stated: “My Lord, the dream shall be for your enemy and its interpretation for your foe”(Daniel 4:16). bTo whom isDaniel bsayingthis? bIf it enters your mindthat when Daniel says: “My lord,” it is bto Nebuchadnezzarthat bhe is saying it, his enemy, who are they?They are the bJewish people. WouldDaniel bcurse the Jewish people? /b, bAnd the first itanna /i,who understands that Daniel is referring to Nebuchadnezzar, bholds: Are there Jewish enemiesfor Nebuchadnezzar and bthere are no gentile enemiesfor him? Daniel was cursing the gentile enemies, not the Jewish enemies.,§ The mishna teaches: bOrif one administered the oath to the witnesses binthe name of bany of the appellationsof God, even though he did not mention the ineffable name of God, bthesewitnesses are bliablefor taking a false oath of testimony., bAndthe Gemara braises a contradictionfrom a ibaraitathat cites the verse: b“The Lord shall render you as a curse and as an oath”(Numbers 5:21). bWhymust bthe verse statethis? bIsn’t it already statedat the beginning of the verse: b“And the priest shall administer to the woman with the oath of cursing”? Due tothe fact bthat it is statedwith regard to an oath of testimony: b“And he heard the voice of an iala /i”(Leviticus 5:1), one may infer: iAlais stated herewith regard to an oath of testimony band ialais stated therewith regard to a isota /i; bjust as there,with regard to a isota /i, the reference is to ban oath, so too here,with regard to an oath of testimony, the reference is to ban oath.And bjust as there,the oath is administered binthe bnameof God, bso too here,the oath is administered binthe bnameof God. This is contrary to the mishna, where the ruling is that an oath of testimony may be administered even in the name of appellations of God., bAbaye said:This is bnot difficult. This ibaraitais the opinion of bRabbi Ḥanina bar Idi,and bthatmishna is the opinion of bthe Rabbis, as it is taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Ḥanina bar Idi says: Since the Torah saysin some cases: bTake an oath, andin some cases: bDo not take an oath;and it says in some cases: bCurse, andin some cases: bDo not curse, just aswhen the Torah says: bTake an oath,it is binthe bnameof God, bso too,when the Torah states: bDo not take an oath,it is bin the nameof God. And bjust aswhen the Torah states: bCurse,it is binthe bnameof God, bso too,when the Torah says: bDo not curse,it is binthe bnameof God.,The Gemara asks: bAnd the Rabbissay: bIf they derivean oath of testimony from isotaby means of ba verbal analogy, let us requirethat both an oath of testimony and the curse will be specifically in bthe ineffable nameof God. bIf they do not derivean oath of testimony from isotaby means of ba verbal analogy, from where do theyderive bthatthe instance of the word ialathatis written with regard to an oath of testimony bis an oath? /b,The Gemara answers: bThey derive it from that which is taughtin a ibaraita /i: It is written with regard to an oath of testimony: “And he hears the voice of ban iala /i”(Leviticus 5:1); ialais nothing other than an expressionmeaning boath. And likewise it says: “And the priest shall administer to the woman with the oath of cursing [ iha’ala /i]”(Numbers 5:21).,The Gemara asks: It is not merely ialathat is written there; bthe oath of an ialais written there.Apparently, ialaalone does not mean oath. The Gemara explains that bthisis what the itanna bis saying:“And he hears the voice of ban iala /i”; ialaisused bonlywhen accompanied bby an oath. And likewise it says: “And the priest shall administer to the woman with the oath of cursing.” /b |
