1. Cicero, On Fate, 40-43, 39 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)
|
2. Josephus Flavius, Jewish Antiquities, 2.327, 7.156, 8.146, 10.277-10.280, 11.306-11.312, 13.172, 13.288-13.296, 13.322, 13.371-13.373, 14.172-14.176, 15.4, 15.37, 15.370, 15.373-15.379, 16.179-16.182, 16.397, 17.41-17.45, 17.149-17.163, 17.165-17.166, 18.4, 18.13, 18.15, 19.6, 19.332-19.334, 20.34-20.35, 20.38-20.45, 20.179-20.181, 20.205-20.207, 20.213-20.221 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
| 2.327. So they laid the blame on Moses, and forgot all the signs that had been wrought by God for the recovery of their freedom; and this so far, that their incredulity prompted them to throw stones at the prophet, while he encouraged them and promised them deliverance; and they resolved that they would deliver themselves up to the Egyptians. 7.156. but when the king perceived that his servants were in disorder, and seemed to be affected, as those who are very desirous to conceal something, he understood that the child was dead; and when he had called one of his servants to him, and discovered that so it was, he arose up and washed himself, and took a white garment, and came into the tabernacle of God. 8.146. and when he had pulled down the ancient temples, he both built the temple of Hercules and that of Astarte; and he first set up the temple of Hercules in the month Peritius; he also made an expedition against the Euchii, or Titii, who did not pay their tribute, and when he had subdued them to himself he returned. Under this king there was Abdemon, a very youth in age, who always conquered the difficult problems which Solomon, king of Jerusalem, commanded him to explain. Dius also makes mention of him, where he says thus: 10.277. All these things did this man leave in writing, as God had showed them to him, insomuch that such as read his prophecies, and see how they have been fulfilled, would wonder at the honor wherewith God honored Daniel; and may thence discover how the Epicureans are in an error 10.278. who cast Providence out of human life, and do not believe that God takes care of the affairs of the world, nor that the universe is governed and continued in being by that blessed and immortal nature, but say that the world is carried along of its own accord, without a ruler and a curator; 10.279. which, were it destitute of a guide to conduct it, as they imagine, it would be like ships without pilots, which we see drowned by the winds, or like chariots without drivers, which are overturned; so would the world be dashed to pieces by its being carried without a Providence, and so perish, and come to nought. 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. 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. 13.288. 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: 13.322. when Hyrcanus chiefly loved the two eldest of his sons, Antigonus and Aristobutus, God appeared to him in his sleep, of whom he inquired which of his sons should be his successor. Upon God’s representing to him the countece of Alexander, he was grieved that he was to be the heir of all his goods, and suffered him to be brought up in Galilee However, God did not deceive Hyrcanus; 13.371. Both these brothers did Antiochus vehemently oppose, but presently died; for when he was come as an auxiliary to Laodice, queen of the Gileadites, when she was making war against the Parthians, and he was fighting courageously, he fell, while Demetrius and Philip governed Syria, as hath been elsewhere related. 13.372. 5. As to Alexander, his own people were seditious against him; for at a festival which was then celebrated, when he stood upon the altar, and was going to sacrifice, the nation rose upon him, and pelted him with citrons [which they then had in their hands, because] the law of the Jews required that at the feast of tabernacles every one should have branches of the palm tree and citron tree; which thing we have elsewhere related. They also reviled him, as derived from a captive, and so unworthy of his dignity and of sacrificing. 13.373. At this he was in a rage, and slew of them about six thousand. He also built a partition-wall of wood round the altar and the temple, as far as that partition within which it was only lawful for the priests to enter; and by this means he obstructed the multitude from coming at him. 14.172. When affairs stood thus, one whose name was Sameas, a righteous man he was, and for that reason above all fear, rose up, and said, “O you that are assessors with me, and O thou that art our king, I neither have ever myself known such a case, nor do I suppose that any one of you can name its parallel, that one who is called to take his trial by us ever stood in such a manner before us; but every one, whosoever he be, that comes to be tried by this Sanhedrim, presents himself in a submissive manner, and like one that is in fear of himself, and that endeavors to move us to compassion, with his hair dishevelled, and in a black and mourning garment: 14.173. but this admirable man Herod, who is accused of murder, and called to answer so heavy an accusation, stands here clothed in purple, and with the hair of his head finely trimmed, and with his armed men about him, that if we shall condemn him by our law, he may slay us, and by overbearing justice may himself escape death. 14.174. Yet do not I make this complaint against Herod himself; he is to be sure more concerned for himself than for the laws; but my complaint is against yourselves, and your king, who gave him a license so to do. However, take you notice, that God is great, and that this very man, whom you are going to absolve and dismiss, for the sake of Hyrcanus, will one day punish both you and your king himself also.” 14.175. Nor did Sameas mistake in any part of this prediction; for when Herod had received the kingdom, he slew all the members of this Sanhedrim, and Hyrcanus himself also, excepting Sameas 14.176. for he had a great honor for him on account of his righteousness, and because, when the city was afterward besieged by Herod and Sosius, he persuaded the people to admit Herod into it; and told them that for their sins they would not be able to escape his hands:—which things will be related by us in their proper places. 15.4. But this Pollio, at the time when Herod was once upon his trial of life and death, foretold, in way of reproach, to Hyrcanus and the other judges, how this Herod, whom they suffered now to escape, would afterward inflict punishment on them all; which had its completion in time, while God fulfilled the words he had spoken. 15.4. When this work [for the foundation] was done in this manner, and joined together as part of the hill itself to the very top of it, he wrought it all into one outward surface, and filled up the hollow places which were about the wall, and made it a level on the external upper surface, and a smooth level also. This hill was walled all round, and in compass four furlongs, [the distance of] each angle containing in length a furlong: 15.4. whence Aelus came. He was one of the stock of the high priests and had been of old a particular friend of Herod; and when he was first made king, he conferred that dignity upon him, and now put him out of it again, in order to quiet the troubles in his family, though what he did was plainly unlawful, for at no other time [of old] was any one that had once been in that dignity deprived of it. 15.37. that she was now overcome by his benefits, and thankfully accepted of this honor showed by him to her son, and that she would hereafter be entirely obedient. And she desired him to excuse her, if the nobility of her family, and that freedom of acting which she thought that allowed her, had made her act too precipitately and imprudently in this matter. 15.37. He endeavored also to persuade Pollio the Pharisee, and Sameas, and the greatest part of their scholars, to take the oath; but these would neither submit so to do, nor were they punished together with the rest, out of the reverence he bore to Pollio. 15.373. 5. Now there was one of these Essenes, whose name was Manahem, who had this testimony, that he not only conducted his life after an excellent manner, but had the foreknowledge of future events given him by God also. This man once saw Herod when he was a child, and going to school, and saluted him as king of the Jews; 15.374. but he, thinking that either he did not know him, or that he was in jest, put him in mind that he was but a private man; but Manahem smiled to himself, and clapped him on his backside with his hand, and said, “However that be, thou wilt be king, and wilt begin thy reign happily, for God finds thee worthy of it. And do thou remember the blows that Manahem hath given thee, as being a signal of the change of thy fortune. 15.375. And truly this will be the best reasoning for thee, that thou love justice [towards men], and piety towards God, and clemency towards thy citizens; yet do I know how thy whole conduct will be, that thou wilt not be such a one 15.376. for thou wilt excel all men in happiness, and obtain an everlasting reputation, but wilt forget piety and righteousness; and these crimes will not be concealed from God, at the conclusion of thy life, when thou wilt find that he will be mindful of them, and punish time for them.” 15.377. Now at that time Herod did not at all attend to what Manahem said, as having no hopes of such advancement; but a little afterward, when he was so fortunate as to be advanced to the dignity of king, and was in the height of his dominion, he sent for Manahem, and asked him how long he should reign. 15.378. Manahem did not tell him the full length of his reign; wherefore, upon that silence of his, he asked him further, whether he should reign ten years or not? He replied, “Yes, twenty, nay, thirty years;” but did not assign the just determinate limit of his reign. Herod was satisfied with these replies, and gave Manahem his hand, and dismissed him; and from that time he continued to honor all the Essenes. 15.379. We have thought it proper to relate these facts to our readers, how strange soever they be, and to declare what hath happened among us, because many of these Essenes have, by their excellent virtue, been thought worthy of this knowledge of divine revelations. 16.179. 1. As for Herod, he had spent vast sums about the cities, both without and within his own kingdom; and as he had before heard that Hyrcanus, who had been king before him, had opened David’s sepulcher, and taken out of it three thousand talents of silver, and that there was a much greater number left behind, and indeed enough to suffice all his wants, he had a great while an intention to make the attempt; 16.181. As for any money, he found none, as Hyrcanus had done, but that furniture of gold, and those precious goods that were laid up there; all which he took away. However, he had a great desire to make a more diligent search, and to go farther in, even as far as the very bodies of David and Solomon; 16.182. where two of his guards were slain, by a flame that burst out upon those that went in, as the report was. So he was terribly affrighted, and went out, and built a propitiatory monument of that fright he had been in; and this of white stone, at the mouth of the sepulcher, and that at great expense also. 16.397. or, indeed, whether fortune have not greater power than all prudent reasonings; whence we are persuaded that human actions are thereby determined beforehand by an inevitable necessity, and we call her Fate, because there is nothing which is not done by her; 17.41. For there was a certain sect of men that were Jews, who valued themselves highly upon the exact skill they had in the law of their fathers, and made men believe they were highly favored by God, by whom this set of women were inveigled. These are those that are called the sect of the Pharisees, who were in a capacity of greatly opposing kings. A cunning sect they were, and soon elevated to a pitch of open fighting and doing mischief. 17.42. Accordingly, when all the people of the Jews gave assurance of their good-will to Caesar, and to the king’s government, these very men did not swear, being above six thousand; and when the king imposed a fine upon them, Pheroras’s wife paid their fine for them. 17.43. In order to requite which kindness of hers, since they were believed to have the foreknowledge of things to come by divine inspiration, they foretold how God had decreed that Herod’s government should cease, and his posterity should be deprived of it; but that the kingdom should come to her and Pheroras, and to their children. 17.44. These predictions were not concealed from Salome, but were told the king; as also how they had perverted some persons about the palace itself; so the king slew such of the Pharisees as were principally accused, and Bagoas the eunuch, and one Carus, who exceeded all men of that time in comeliness, and one that was his catamite. He slew also all those of his own family who had consented to what the Pharisees foretold; 17.45. and for Bagoas, he had been puffed up by them, as though he should be named the father and the benefactor of him who, by the prediction, was foretold to be their appointed king; for that this king would have all things in his power, and would enable Bagoas to marry, and to have children of his own body begotten. 17.149. 2. There was one Judas, the son of Saripheus, and Matthias, the son of Margalothus, two of the most eloquent men among the Jews, and the most celebrated interpreters of the Jewish laws, and men wellbeloved by the people, because of their education of their youth; for all those that were studious of virtue frequented their lectures every day. 17.151. for Herod had caused such things to be made which were contrary to the law, of which he was accused by Judas and Matthias; for the king had erected over the great gate of the temple a large golden eagle, of great value, and had dedicated it to the temple. Now the law forbids those that propose to live according to it, to erect images or representations of any living creature. 17.152. So these wise men persuaded [their scholars] to pull down the golden eagle; alleging, that although they should incur any danger, which might bring them to their deaths, the virtue of the action now proposed to them would appear much more advantageous to them than the pleasures of life; since they would die for the preservation and observation of the law of their fathers; since they would also acquire an everlasting fame and commendation; since they would be both commended by the present generation, and leave an example of life that would never be forgotten to posterity; 17.153. ince that common calamity of dying cannot be avoided by our living so as to escape any such dangers; that therefore it is a right thing for those who are in love with a virtuous conduct, to wait for that fatal hour by such behavior as may carry them out of the world with praise and honor; 17.154. and that this will alleviate death to a great degree, thus to come at it by the performance of brave actions, which bring us into danger of it; and at the same time to leave that reputation behind them to their children, and to all their relations, whether they be men or women, which will be of great advantage to them afterward. 17.155. 3. And with such discourses as this did these men excite the young men to this action; and a report being come to them that the king was dead, this was an addition to the wise men’s persuasions; so, in the very middle of the day, they got upon the place, they pulled down the eagle, and cut it into pieces with axes, while a great number of the people were in the temple. 17.156. And now the king’s captain, upon hearing what the undertaking was, and supposing it was a thing of a higher nature than it proved to be, came up thither, having a great band of soldiers with him, such as was sufficient to put a stop to the multitude of those who pulled down what was dedicated to God; so he fell upon them unexpectedly, and as they were upon this bold attempt, in a foolish presumption rather than a cautious circumspection, as is usual with the multitude, and while they were in disorder, and incautious of what was for their advantage; 17.157. o he caught no fewer than forty of the young men, who had the courage to stay behind when the rest ran away, together with the authors of this bold attempt, Judas and Matthias, who thought it an ignominious thing to retire upon his approach, and led them to the king. 17.158. And when they were come to the king, and he asked them if they had been so bold as to pull down what he had dedicated to God, “Yes, (said they,) what was contrived we contrived, and what hath been performed we performed it, and that with such a virtuous courage as becomes men; for we have given our assistance to those things which were dedicated to the majesty of God 17.159. and we have provided for what we have learned by hearing the law; and it ought not to be wondered at, if we esteem those laws which Moses had suggested to him, and were taught him by God, and which he wrote and left behind him, more worthy of observation than thy commands. Accordingly we will undergo death, and all sorts of punishments which thou canst inflict upon us, with pleasure, since we are conscious to ourselves that we shall die, not for any unrighteous actions, but for our love to religion.” 17.161. and when they were come, he made them assemble in the theater, and because he could not himself stand, he lay upon a couch, and enumerated the many labors that he had long endured on their account 17.162. and his building of the temple, and what a vast charge that was to him; while the Asamoneans, during the hundred and twenty-five years of their government, had not been able to perform any so great a work for the honor of God as that was; 17.163. that he had also adorned it with very valuable donations, on which account he hoped that he had left himself a memorial, and procured himself a reputation after his death. He then cried out, that these men had not abstained from affronting him, even in his lifetime, but that in the very day time, and in the sight of the multitude, they had abused him to that degree, as to fall upon what he had dedicated, and in that way of abuse had pulled it down to the ground. They pretended, indeed, that they did it to affront him; but if any one consider the thing truly, they will find that they were guilty of sacrilege against God therein. 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. 18.4. Yet was there one Judas, a Gaulonite, of a city whose name was Gamala, who, taking with him Sadduc, a Pharisee, became zealous to draw them to a revolt, who both said that this taxation was no better than an introduction to slavery, and exhorted the nation to assert their liberty; 18.4. When Phraates had had legitimate sons of his own, he had also an Italian maid-servant, whose name was Thermusa, who had been formerly sent to him by Julius Caesar, among other presents. He first made her his concubine; but he being a great admirer of her beauty, in process of time having a son by her, whose name was Phraataces, he made her his legitimate wife, and had a great respect for her. 18.13. and when they determine that all things are done by fate, they do not take away the freedom from men of acting as they think fit; since their notion is, that it hath pleased God to make a temperament, whereby what he wills is done, but so that the will of man can act virtuously or viciously. 18.13. 4. Herod the Great had two daughters by Mariamne, the [grand] daughter of Hyrcanus; the one was Salampsio, who was married to Phasaelus, her first cousin, who was himself the son of Phasaelus, Herod’s brother, her father making the match; the other was Cypros, who was herself married also to her first cousin Antipater, the son of Salome, Herod’s sister. 18.15. on account of which doctrines they are able greatly to persuade the body of the people; and whatsoever they do about divine worship, prayers, and sacrifices, they perform them according to their direction; insomuch that the cities give great attestations to them on account of their entire virtuous conduct, both in the actions of their lives and their discourses also. 18.15. Yet did not Herod long continue in that resolution of supporting him, though even that support was not sufficient for him; for as once they were at a feast at Tyre, and in their cups, and reproaches were cast upon one another, Agrippa thought that was not to be borne, while Herod hit him in the teeth with his poverty, and with his owing his necessary food to him. So he went to Flaccus, one that had been consul, and had been a very great friend to him at Rome formerly, and was now president of Syria. 19.6. from one promontory to another, of the length of thirty furlongs, as measured over the sea. And this was done because he esteemed it to be a most tedious thing to row over it in a small ship, and thought withal that it became him to make that bridge, since he was lord of the sea, and might oblige it to give marks of obedience as well as the earth; so he enclosed the whole bay within his bridge, and drove his chariot over it; and thought that, as he was a god, it was fit for him to travel over such roads as this was. 19.6. and some affirm that he thereby confirmed Minuclanus in the prosecution of what had been agreed among them; for as Cherea entered into the court, the report runs, that a voice came from among the multitude to encourage him, which bid him finish what he was about, and take the opportunity that Providence afforded; 19.332. 4. However, there was a certain man of the Jewish nation at Jerusalem, who appeared to be very accurate in the knowledge of the law. His name was Simon. This man got together an assembly, while the king was absent at Caesarea, and had the insolence to accuse him as not living holily, and that he might justly be excluded out of the temple, since it belonged only to native Jews. 19.333. But the general of Agrippa’s army informed him that Simon had made such a speech to the people. So the king sent for him; and as he was sitting in the theater, he bid him sit down by him, and said to him with a low and gentle voice, “What is there done in this place that is contrary to the law?” 19.334. But he had nothing to say for himself, but begged his pardon. So the king was more easily reconciled to him than one could have imagined, as esteeming mildness a better quality in a king than anger, and knowing that moderation is more becoming in great men than passion. So he made Simon a small present, and dismissed him. 20.34. 3. Now, during the time Izates abode at Charax-Spasini, a certain Jewish merchant, whose name was Aias, got among the women that belonged to the king, and taught them to worship God according to the Jewish religion. 20.35. He, moreover, by their means, became known to Izates, and persuaded him, in like manner, to embrace that religion; he also, at the earnest entreaty of Izates, accompanied him when he was sent for by his father to come to Adiabene; it also happened that Helena, about the same time, was instructed by a certain other Jew and went over to them. 20.38. 4. And when he perceived that his mother was highly pleased with the Jewish customs, he made haste to change, and to embrace them entirely; and as he supposed that he could not be thoroughly a Jew unless he were circumcised, he was ready to have it done. 20.39. But when his mother understood what he was about, she endeavored to hinder him from doing it, and said to him that this thing would bring him into danger; and that, as he was a king, he would thereby bring himself into great odium among his subjects, when they should understand that he was so fond of rites that were to them strange and foreign; and that they would never bear to be ruled over by a Jew. 20.41. and said that he was afraid lest such an action being once become public to all, he should himself be in danger of punishment for having been the occasion of it, and having been the king’s instructor in actions that were of ill reputation; and he said that he might worship God without being circumcised, even though he did resolve to follow the Jewish law entirely, which worship of God was of a superior nature to circumcision. 20.42. He added, that God would forgive him, though he did not perform the operation, while it was omitted out of necessity, and for fear of his subjects. So the king at that time complied with these persuasions of Aias. 20.43. But afterwards, as he had not quite left off his desire of doing this thing, a certain other Jew that came out of Galilee, whose name was Eleazar, and who was esteemed very skillful in the learning of his country, persuaded him to do the thing; 20.44. for as he entered into his palace to salute him, and found him reading the law of Moses, he said to him, “Thou dost not consider, O king! that thou unjustly breakest the principal of those laws, and art injurious to God himself, [by omitting to be circumcised]; for thou oughtest not only to read them, but chiefly to practice what they enjoin thee. 20.45. How long wilt thou continue uncircumcised? But if thou hast not yet read the law about circumcision, and dost not know how great impiety thou art guilty of by neglecting it, read it now.” 20.179. 8. About this time king Agrippa gave the high priesthood to Ismael, who was the son of Fabi. 20.181. And such was the impudence and boldness that had seized on the high priests, that they had the hardiness to send their servants into the threshing-floors, to take away those tithes that were due to the priests, insomuch that it so fell out that the poorest sort of the priests died for want. To this degree did the violence of the seditious prevail over all right and justice. 20.205. But as for the high priest, Aias he increased in glory every day, and this to a great degree, and had obtained the favor and esteem of the citizens in a signal manner; for he was a great hoarder up of money: he therefore cultivated the friendship of Albinus, and of the high priest [Jesus], by making them presents; 20.206. he also had servants who were very wicked, who joined themselves to the boldest sort of the people, and went to the thrashing-floors, and took away the tithes that belonged to the priests by violence, and did not refrain from beating such as would not give these tithes to them. 20.207. So the other high priests acted in the like manner, as did those his servants, without any one being able to prohibit them; so that [some of the] priests, that of old were wont to be supported with those tithes, died for want of food. 20.213. And now Jesus, the son of Gamaliel, became the successor of Jesus, the son of Damneus, in the high priesthood, which the king had taken from the other; on which account a sedition arose between the high priests, with regard to one another; for they got together bodies of the boldest sort of the people, and frequently came, from reproaches, to throwing of stones at each other. But Aias was too hard for the rest, by his riches, which enabled him to gain those that were most ready to receive. 20.214. Costobarus also, and Saulus, did themselves get together a multitude of wicked wretches, and this because they were of the royal family; and so they obtained favor among them, because of their kindred to Agrippa; but still they used violence with the people, and were very ready to plunder those that were weaker than themselves. And from that time it principally came to pass that our city was greatly disordered, and that all things grew worse and worse among us. 20.215. 5. But when Albinus heard that Gessius Florus was coming to succeed him, he was desirous to appear to do somewhat that might be grateful to the people of Jerusalem; so he brought out all those prisoners who seemed to him to be the most plainly worthy of death, and ordered them to be put to death accordingly. But as to those who had been put into prison on some trifling occasions, he took money of them, and dismissed them; by which means the prisons were indeed emptied, but the country was filled with robbers. 20.216. 6. Now as many of the Levites, which is a tribe of ours, as were singers of hymns, persuaded the king to assemble a sanhedrim, and to give them leave to wear linen garments, as well as the priests for they said that this would be a work worthy the times of his government, that he might have a memorial of such a novelty, as being his doing. 20.217. Nor did they fail of obtaining their desire; for the king, with the suffrages of those that came into the sanhedrim, granted the singers of hymns this privilege, that they might lay aside their former garments, and wear such a linen one as they desired; 20.218. and as a part of this tribe ministered in the temple, he also permitted them to learn those hymns as they had besought him for. Now all this was contrary to the laws of our country, which, whenever they have been transgressed, we have never been able to avoid the punishment of such transgressions. 20.219. 7. And now it was that the temple was finished. So when the people saw that the workmen were unemployed, who were above eighteen thousand and that they, receiving no wages, were in want because they had earned their bread by their labors about the temple; 20.221. These cloisters belonged to the outer court, and were situated in a deep valley, and had walls that reached four hundred cubits [in length], and were built of square and very white stones, the length of each of which stones was twenty cubits, and their height six cubits. This was the work of king Solomon, who first of all built the entire temple. |
|
3. Josephus Flavius, Jewish War, 1.22, 1.648-1.655, 2.1, 2.119-2.161 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
| 1.22. Now, when I am come so far, I shall describe the good order of the Romans in war, and the discipline of their legions; the amplitude of both the Galilees, with its nature, and the limits of Judea. And, besides this, I shall particularly go over what is peculiar to the country, the lakes and fountains that are in them, and what miseries happened to every city as they were taken; and all this with accuracy, as I saw the things done, or suffered in them. For I shall not conceal any of the calamities I myself endured, since I shall relate them to such as know the truth of them. 1.22. 2. So he gave command that the Jews should bring in seven hundred talents; whereupon Antipater, out of his dread of Cassius’s threats, parted the raising of this sum among his sons, and among others of his acquaintance, and to be done immediately; and among them he required one Malichus, who was at enmity with him, to do his part also, which necessity forced him to do. 1.648. 2. There also now happened to him, among his other calamities, a certain popular sedition. There were two men of learning in the city [Jerusalem], who were thought the most skillful in the laws of their country, and were on that account held in very great esteem all over the nation; they were, the one Judas, the son of Sepphoris, and the other Matthias, the son of Margalus. 1.649. There was a great concourse of the young men to these men when they expounded the laws, and there got together every day a kind of an army of such as were growing up to be men. Now when these men were informed that the king was wearing away with melancholy, and with a distemper, they dropped words to their acquaintance, how it was now a very proper time to defend the cause of God, and to pull down what had been erected contrary to the laws of their country; 1.651. 3. At the same time that these men made this speech to their disciples, a rumor was spread abroad that the king was dying, which made the young men set about the work with greater boldness; they therefore let themselves down from the top of the temple with thick cords, and this at midday, and while a great number of people were in the temple, and cut down that golden eagle with axes. 1.652. This was presently told to the king’s captain of the temple, who came running with a great body of soldiers, and caught about forty of the young men, and brought them to the king. 1.653. And when he asked them, first of all, whether they had been so hardy as to cut down the golden eagle, they confessed they had done so; and when he asked them by whose command they had done it, they replied, at the command of the law of their country; and when he further asked them how they could be so joyful when they were to be put to death, they replied, because they should enjoy greater happiness after they were dead. 1.654. 4. At this the king was in such an extravagant passion, that he overcame his disease [for the time], and went out and spake to the people; wherein he made a terrible accusation against those men, as being guilty of sacrilege, and as making greater attempts under pretense of their law, and he thought they deserved to be punished as impious persons. 1.655. Whereupon the people were afraid lest a great number should be found guilty and desired that when he had first punished those that put them upon this work, and then those that were caught in it, he would leave off his anger as to the rest. With this the king complied, though not without difficulty, and ordered those that had let themselves down, together with their Rabbins, to be burnt alive, but delivered the rest that were caught to the proper officers to be put to death by them. 2.1. 1. Now the necessity which Archelaus was under of taking a journey to Rome was the occasion of new disturbances; for when he had mourned for his father seven days, and had given a very expensive funeral feast to the multitude (which custom is the occasion of poverty to many of the Jews, because they are forced to feast the multitude; for if anyone omits it, he is not esteemed a holy person), he put on a white garment, and went up to the temple 2.1. And, indeed, at the feast of unleavened bread, which was now at hand, and is by the Jews called the Passover, and used to be celebrated with a great number of sacrifices, an innumerable multitude of the people came out of the country to worship; some of these stood in the temple bewailing the Rabbins [that had been put to death], and procured their sustece by begging, in order to support their sedition. 2.1. but after this family distribution, he gave between them what had been bequeathed to him by Herod, which was a thousand talents, reserving to himself only some inconsiderable presents, in honor of the deceased. 2.119. 2. For there are three philosophical sects among the Jews. The followers of the first of which are the Pharisees; of the second, the Sadducees; and the third sect, which pretends to a severer discipline, are called Essenes. These last are Jews by birth, and seem to have a greater affection for one another than the other sects have. 2.121. They do not absolutely deny the fitness of marriage, and the succession of mankind thereby continued; but they guard against the lascivious behavior of women, and are persuaded that none of them preserve their fidelity to one man. 2.122. 3. These men are despisers of riches, and so very communicative as raises our admiration. Nor is there anyone to be found among them who hath more than another; for it is a law among them, that those who come to them must let what they have be common to the whole order,—insomuch that among them all there is no appearance of poverty, or excess of riches, but every one’s possessions are intermingled with every other’s possessions; and so there is, as it were, one patrimony among all the brethren. 2.123. They think that oil is a defilement; and if anyone of them be anointed without his own approbation, it is wiped off his body; for they think to be sweaty is a good thing, as they do also to be clothed in white garments. They also have stewards appointed to take care of their common affairs, who every one of them have no separate business for any, but what is for the use of them all. 2.124. 4. They have no one certain city, but many of them dwell in every city; and if any of their sect come from other places, what they have lies open for them, just as if it were their own; and they go in to such as they never knew before, as if they had been ever so long acquainted with them. 2.125. For which reason they carry nothing at all with them when they travel into remote parts, though still they take their weapons with them, for fear of thieves. Accordingly, there is, in every city where they live, one appointed particularly to take care of strangers, and to provide garments and other necessaries for them. 2.126. But the habit and management of their bodies is such as children use who are in fear of their masters. Nor do they allow of the change of garments, or of shoes, till they be first entirely torn to pieces or worn out by time. 2.127. Nor do they either buy or sell anything to one another; but every one of them gives what he hath to him that wanteth it, and receives from him again in lieu of it what may be convenient for himself; and although there be no requital made, they are fully allowed to take what they want of whomsoever they please. 2.128. 5. And as for their piety towards God, it is very extraordinary; for before sunrising they speak not a word about profane matters, but put up certain prayers which they have received from their forefathers, as if they made a supplication for its rising. 2.129. After this every one of them are sent away by their curators, to exercise some of those arts wherein they are skilled, in which they labor with great diligence till the fifth hour. After which they assemble themselves together again into one place; and when they have clothed themselves in white veils, they then bathe their bodies in cold water. And after this purification is over, they every one meet together in an apartment of their own, into which it is not permitted to any of another sect to enter; while they go, after a pure manner, into the dining-room, as into a certain holy temple 2.131. but a priest says grace before meat; and it is unlawful for anyone to taste of the food before grace be said. The same priest, when he hath dined, says grace again after meat; and when they begin, and when they end, they praise God, as he that bestows their food upon them; after which they lay aside their [white] garments, and betake themselves to their labors again till the evening; 2.132. then they return home to supper, after the same manner; and if there be any strangers there, they sit down with them. Nor is there ever any clamor or disturbance to pollute their house, but they give every one leave to speak in their turn; 2.133. which silence thus kept in their house appears to foreigners like some tremendous mystery; the cause of which is that perpetual sobriety they exercise, and the same settled measure of meat and drink that is allotted to them, and that such as is abundantly sufficient for them. 2.134. 6. And truly, as for other things, they do nothing but according to the injunctions of their curators; only these two things are done among them at everyone’s own free will, which are to assist those that want it, and to show mercy; for they are permitted of their own accord to afford succor to such as deserve it, when they stand in need of it, and to bestow food on those that are in distress; but they cannot give any thing to their kindred without the curators. 2.135. They dispense their anger after a just manner, and restrain their passion. They are eminent for fidelity, and are the ministers of peace; whatsoever they say also is firmer than an oath; but swearing is avoided by them, and they esteem it worse than perjury for they say that he who cannot be believed without [swearing by] God is already condemned. 2.136. They also take great pains in studying the writings of the ancients, and choose out of them what is most for the advantage of their soul and body; and they inquire after such roots and medicinal stones as may cure their distempers. 2.137. 7. But now, if anyone hath a mind to come over to their sect, he is not immediately admitted, but he is prescribed the same method of living which they use, for a year, while he continues excluded; and they give him also a small hatchet, and the fore-mentioned girdle, and the white garment. 2.138. And when he hath given evidence, during that time, that he can observe their continence, he approaches nearer to their way of living, and is made a partaker of the waters of purification; yet is he not even now admitted to live with them; for after this demonstration of his fortitude, his temper is tried two more years; and if he appear to be worthy, they then admit him into their society. 2.139. And before he is allowed to touch their common food, he is obliged to take tremendous oaths, that, in the first place, he will exercise piety towards God, and then that he will observe justice towards men, and that he will do no harm to any one, either of his own accord, or by the command of others; that he will always hate the wicked, and be assistant to the righteous; 2.141. that he will be perpetually a lover of truth, and propose to himself to reprove those that tell lies; that he will keep his hands clear from theft, and his soul from unlawful gains; and that he will neither conceal anything from those of his own sect, nor discover any of their doctrines to others, no, not though anyone should compel him so to do at the hazard of his life. 2.142. Moreover, he swears to communicate their doctrines to no one any otherwise than as he received them himself; that he will abstain from robbery, and will equally preserve the books belonging to their sect, and the names of the angels [or messengers]. These are the oaths by which they secure their proselytes to themselves. 2.143. 8. But for those that are caught in any heinous sins, they cast them out of their society; and he who is thus separated from them does often die after a miserable manner; for as he is bound by the oath he hath taken, and by the customs he hath been engaged in, he is not at liberty to partake of that food that he meets with elsewhere, but is forced to eat grass, and to famish his body with hunger, till he perish; 2.144. for which reason they receive many of them again when they are at their last gasp, out of compassion to them, as thinking the miseries they have endured till they came to the very brink of death to be a sufficient punishment for the sins they had been guilty of. 2.145. 9. But in the judgments they exercise they are most accurate and just, nor do they pass sentence by the votes of a court that is fewer than a hundred. And as to what is once determined by that number, it is unalterable. What they most of all honor, after God himself, is the name of their legislator [Moses], whom, if anyone blaspheme, he is punished capitally. 2.146. They also think it a good thing to obey their elders, and the major part. Accordingly, if ten of them be sitting together, no one of them will speak while the other nine are against it. 2.147. They also avoid spitting in the midst of them, or on the right side. Moreover, they are stricter than any other of the Jews in resting from their labors on the seventh day; for they not only get their food ready the day before, that they may not be obliged to kindle a fire on that day, but they will not remove any vessel out of its place, nor go to stool thereon. 2.148. Nay, on theother days they dig a small pit, a foot deep, with a paddle (which kind of hatchet is given them when they are first admitted among them); and covering themselves round with their garment, that they may not affront the Divine rays of light, they ease themselves into that pit 2.149. after which they put the earth that was dug out again into the pit; and even this they do only in the more lonely places, which they choose out for this purpose; and although this easement of the body be natural, yet it is a rule with them to wash themselves after it, as if it were a defilement to them. 2.151. They are long-lived also, insomuch that many of them live above a hundred years, by means of the simplicity of their diet; nay, as I think, by means of the regular course of life they observe also. They condemn the miseries of life, and are above pain, by the generosity of their mind. And as for death, if it will be for their glory, they esteem it better than living always; 2.152. and indeed our war with the Romans gave abundant evidence what great souls they had in their trials, wherein, although they were tortured and distorted, burnt and torn to pieces, and went through all kinds of instruments of torment, that they might be forced either to blaspheme their legislator, or to eat what was forbidden them, yet could they not be made to do either of them, no, nor once to flatter their tormentors, or to shed a tear; 2.153. but they smiled in their very pains, and laughed those to scorn who inflicted the torments upon them, and resigned up their souls with great alacrity, as expecting to receive them again. 2.154. 11. For their doctrine is this: That bodies are corruptible, and that the matter they are made of is not permanent; but that the souls are immortal, and continue forever; and that they come out of the most subtile air, and are united to their bodies as to prisons, into which they are drawn by a certain natural enticement; 2.155. but that when they are set free from the bonds of the flesh, they then, as released from a long bondage, rejoice and mount upward. And this is like the opinions of the Greeks, that good souls have their habitations beyond the ocean, in a region that is neither oppressed with storms of rain or snow, or with intense heat, but that this place is such as is refreshed by the gentle breathing of a west wind, that is perpetually blowing from the ocean; while they allot to bad souls a dark and tempestuous den, full of never-ceasing punishments. 2.156. And indeed the Greeks seem to me to have followed the same notion, when they allot the islands of the blessed to their brave men, whom they call heroes and demigods; and to the souls of the wicked, the region of the ungodly, in Hades, where their fables relate that certain persons, such as Sisyphus, and Tantalus, and Ixion, and Tityus, are punished; which is built on this first supposition, that souls are immortal; and thence are those exhortations to virtue, and dehortations from wickedness collected; 2.157. whereby good men are bettered in the conduct of their life by the hope they have of reward after their death; and whereby the vehement inclinations of bad men to vice are restrained, by the fear and expectation they are in, that although they should lie concealed in this life, they should suffer immortal punishment after their death. 2.158. These are the Divine doctrines of the Essenes about the soul, which lay an unavoidable bait for such as have once had a taste of their philosophy. 2.159. 12. There are also those among them who undertake to foretell things to come, by reading the holy books, and using several sorts of purifications, and being perpetually conversant in the discourses of the prophets; and it is but seldom that they miss in their predictions. 2.161. However, they try their spouses for three years; and if they find that they have their natural purgations thrice, as trials that they are likely to be fruitful, they then actually marry them. But they do not use to accompany with their wives when they are with child, as a demonstration that they do not marry out of regard to pleasure, but for the sake of posterity. Now the women go into the baths with some of their garments on, as the men do with somewhat girded about them. And these are the customs of this order of Essenes. |
|
4. Josephus Flavius, Life, 191, 197, 12 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
|
5. Mishnah, Avot, 1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
|
6. Mishnah, Menachot, 13.21 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
|
7. 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." |
|
8. Mishnah, Yoma, 1.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
| 1.4. All seven days they did not withhold food or drink from him. On the eve of Yom HaKippurim near nightfall they would not let him eat much because food brings about sleep." |
|
9. New Testament, Acts, 5.34, 23.6, 26.5 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
| 5.34. But one stood up in the council, a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, honored by all the people, and commanded to take the apostles out a little while. 23.6. But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, "Men and brothers, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees. Concerning the hope and resurrection of the dead I am being judged! 26.5. having known me from the first, if they are willing to testify, that after the strictest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee. |
|
10. New Testament, Philippians, 3.5 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
| 3.5. circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; concerning the law, a Pharisee; |
|
11. New Testament, John, 3.1 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
| 3.1. Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. |
|
12. New Testament, Luke, 7.36-7.39, 11.37-11.38, 18.10-18.11 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
| 7.36. One of the Pharisees invited him to eat with him. He entered into the Pharisee's house, and sat at the table. 7.37. Behold, a woman in the city who was a sinner, when she knew that he was reclining in the Pharisee's house, she brought an alabaster jar of ointment. 7.38. Standing behind at his feet weeping, she began to wet his feet with her tears, and she wiped them with the hair of her head, kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment. 7.39. Now when the Pharisee who had invited him saw it, he said to himself, "This man, if he were a prophet, would have perceived who and what kind of woman this is who touches him, that she is a sinner. 11.37. Now as he spoke, a certain Pharisee asked him to dine with him. He went in, and sat at the table. 11.38. When the Pharisee saw it, he marveled that he had not first washed himself before dinner. 18.10. Two men went up into the temple to pray; one was a Pharisee, and the other was a tax collector. 18.11. The Pharisee stood and prayed to himself like this: 'God, I thank you, that I am not like the rest of men, extortioners, unrighteous, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. |
|
13. Tosefta, Parah, 3.8 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
14. Tosefta, Sukkah, 3.1, 3.16 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
| 3.1. The lulav suspends the Sabbath in the beginning of its duty, and the willow in the end of its duty. There is a story that some Boethusians once hid the willows under some great stones on the Sabbath eve; but when this had become known to the common people they came and dragged them out from under the stones on the Sabbath, for the Boethusians do not acknowledge that the beating of the willow suspends the Sabbath." |
|
15. Babylonian Talmud, Keritot, 28b, 28a (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 28a. לכבשתו והעני הואיל ונדחה ידחה,אמר רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע שמע מינה תלת שמע מינה בעלי חיים נדחים וקדושת דמים נדחה,ודחוי מעיקרא הוי דחוי,מתיב רב עוקבא בר חמא המפריש נקבה לפסחו קודם הפסח תרעה עד שתסתאב ותמכר ויביא בדמיה פסח ילדה זכר ירעה עד שיסתאב וימכר ויביא בדמיו פסח,ר"ש אומר הוא עצמו יקרב פסח ש"מ בעלי חיים אינם נדחים,אמרי דבי רבי אושעיא כי אמרינן לרבנן דר"ש ס"ל בעלי חיים אינן נדחין,והגרלה אינה מעכבת דתניא מת אחד מהן מביא חבירו שלא בהגרלה דברי ר"ש,אלמא קסבר בעלי חיים אינן נידחין והגרלה אינה מעכבת,אמר רב חסדא אין הקינין מתפרשות אלא אי בלקיחת בעלים אי בעשיית כהן,אמר רב שימי בר אשי מאי טעמא דרב חסדא דכתיב (ויקרא יב, ח) ולקחה שתי תורים וגו' (ויקרא טו, ל) ועשה הכהן וגו' או בלקיחת בעלים או בעשיית כהן,מיתיבי (ויקרא טז, ט) ועשהו חטאת הגורל עושהו חטאת ואין השם עושהו חטאת ואין כהן עושה חטאת,שיכול והלא דין הוא ומה במקום שלא קידש הגורל קידש השם מקום שיקדש הגורל אינו דין שיקדש השם,ת"ל ועשהו חטאת הגורל עושהו חטאת ואין השם עושהו חטאת,קתני שם דומיא דגורל מה גורל לאו בלקיחה ולאו בעשייה אף השם נמי לאו בלקיחה ולאו בעשייה,אמר רב ה"ק ומה במקום שלא קידש הגורל בלקיחת בעלים ובעשיית הכהן קידש השם אי בלקיחת בעלים אי בעשיית כהן כאן שיקדש הגורל שלא בלקיחה ושלא בעשייה אינו דין שיקדש השם אי בלקיחה אי בעשייה,ת"ל ועשהו חטאת הגורל עושהו חטאת ואין השם עושהו חטאת,מיתיבי מטמא מקדש עני שהפריש מעות לקינו והעשיר,אמר אלו לחטאתי ואלו לעולתי מוסיף ומביא חובתו מדמי חטאתו ואין מוסיף ומביא מדמי עולתו,והא הכא דליכא לא לקיחה ולא עשייה וקתני מביא חובתו מדמי חטאתו ולא מדמי עולתו,א"ר ששת ותסברא מתניתא מתקנתא היא דקתני והעשיר והא"ר אלעזר א"ר אושעיא מטמא מקדש עשיר שהביא קרבן עני לא יצא,אלא מאי אית לך למימר שכבר אמר משעת ענייתו ה"נ שכבר אמר משעת הפרשתו,ולר' חגא א"ר אושעיא דאמר יצא מאי איכא למימר תני ואח"כ לקח ואמר,מיתיבי מצורע עני שהביא קרבן עשיר יצא עשיר שהביא קרבן עני לא יצא תיובתא דר' חגא א"ר אושעיא,אמר לך שאני גבי מצורע דמיעט רחמנא (ויקרא יד, ב) זאת,אי הכי אפילו מצורע עני נמי שהביא קרבן עשיר לא יצא לאיי הא אהדריה קרא תורת והתניא תורת לרבות מצורע עני שהביא קרבן עשיר יצא יכול אפילו עשיר שהביא קרבן עני שיצא תלמוד לומר זאת,ולילף מיניה אמר קרא (ויקרא יד, כא) ואם דל הוא ואין ידו משגת מצורע הוא דעשיר שהביא קרבן עני הוא דלא יצא אבל מטמא מקדש עשיר שהביא קרבן עני יצא:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big ר"ש אומר כבשים קודמין את העזים בכל מקום יכול מפני שהן מובחרים מהם ת"ל (ויקרא ד, לב) ואם כבש יביא קרבנו לחטאת מלמד ששניהם שקולין,תורין קודמין לבני יונה בכל מקום יכול מפני שהן מובחרים מהן תלמוד לומר ((ויקרא יב, ו) תור ובני) יונה או תור לחטאת מלמד ששניהם שקולין,האב קודם לאם בכל מקום יכול מפני שכיבוד האב קודם על כיבוד האם ת"ל (ויקרא יט, ג) איש אמו ואביו תיראו מלמד ששניהם שקולין אבל אמרו חכמים האב קודם לאם בכל מקום מפני שהוא ואמו חייבין בכבוד אביו,וכן בתלמוד תורה אם זכה הבן לפני הרב הרב קודם את האב בכל מקום מפני שהוא ואביו חייבין בכבוד רבו:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ת"ר ד' צווחות צווחה עזרה צווחה אחת הוציאו מיכן בני עלי חפני ופנחס שטימאו את ההיכל,צווחה שניה פתחו שערים ויכנס יוחנן בן נדבאי תלמידו של פינקאי וימלא כרסו מקדשי שמים אמרו על בן נדבאי שהיה אוכל ארבע סאה גוזלות | 28a. instead bof a female lamb, and hethen bbecame poorer,a bird pair is now the appropriate offering for him. Nevertheless, bsincehis offering bwas disqualifiedat the outset because at that time he was obligated to bring a female lamb, bit ispermanently bdisqualified. /b, bRav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said:One can bconclude from thisruling bthree ihalakhot /i. bConclude from itthat bconsecrated living animals can bepermanently bdisqualifiedeven if the animal is unblemished, as is the case with regard to this pair of birds. bAndconclude from it that when there is bsanctitythat inheres in an animal’s bvalue,where the consecrated item will not be sacrificed as an offering, it can be bdisqualified.When he was wealthy and designated the bird pair as his offering, the two birds were consecrated only with sanctity that inheres in their value because they were unfit for sacrifice, and yet the birds were permanently disqualified., bAndfinally, conclude from this that ba disqualification at the outset,when the animal is initially consecrated, bisconsidered a permanent bdisqualification.Not only is an animal that was initially fit to be sacrificed and was later disqualified permanently disqualified, but even in a case such as this, where the birds were unfit for sacrifice from the beginning, the disqualification is permanent., bRav Ukva bar Ḥama raises an objectionfrom a ibaraita( iTosefta /i, iTemura2:3): With regard to bone who designates a femaleanimal bfor his Paschal offering before Passover,since the Paschal offering must be a male it is left to bgraze until it becomes blemished,at which point bit is sold and one brings a Paschal offering with the moneyreceived from its sale. Similarly, if this animal bgave birth to a maleanimal, the offspring is left to bgraze until it becomes blemished,at which point bit is sold and one brings a Paschal offering with the moneyreceived from its sale., bRabbi Shimon says:It is not necessary to sell the offspring in such a case, as the offspring bitself is sacrificedas ba Paschal offering. Conclude from thisstatement of Rabbi Shimon that bconsecrated living animals are notpermanently bdisqualified,as the mother was unfit to be a Paschal offering and yet the offspring, which is an extension of the mother’s sanctity, is fit for sacrifice., bThe school of Rabbi Oshaya say: When we saythat consecrated living animals can be permanently disqualified, this applies baccording tothe opinion of bthe Rabbis,who maintain that the offspring is not sacrificed. Nevertheless, it is correct bthat Rabbi Shimon holdsthat consecrated bliving animals are notpermanently bdisqualified. /b, bAndRabbi Shimon likewise maintains bthatthe bdrawingof the lots for the two goats on Yom Kippur to decide which goat is designated as a sacrifice and which is designated as the scapegoat, bis not indispensable. As it is taughtin a ibaraita /i: If bone ofthe goats bdiedfollowing their designation, one bbrings anothergoat instead of it, and it is designated bwithout drawinglots. The surviving goat is still used for the purpose for which it was designated by the lot; this is bthe statement of Rabbi Shimon. /b, bEvidently, Rabbi Shimon holds:Consecrated bliving animals are notpermanently bdisqualified.Although the surviving goat was disqualified when the other goat died, it is once again fit when a new goat is designated as its partner. bAndRabbi Shimon also holds that the bdrawingof the lots bis not indispensable,as the new goat was designated without drawing lots.,§ bRav Ḥisda says: Nests,i.e., pairs of birds, bare designated, /bone as a burnt offering and one as a sin offering, bonlyin the following manner: bEitherby the bownerat the time bof purchase or,if the owner did not designate the birds at that stage, by the bpriestat the time bof sacrifice. /b, bRav Shimi bar Ashi said: What is the reason of Rav Ḥisda? As it is writtenwith regard to the offering of a woman after childbirth: b“And she shall purchase two dovesor two pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering” (Leviticus 12:8). And with regard to the offering of a leper it is written: b“And the priest shall sacrificethe one for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering” (Leviticus 15:30). Together, these verses indicate that one bird is designated as a burnt offering and the other as a sin offering beitherby the bownerat the time bof purchase orby the bpriestat the time bof sacrifice. /b,The Gemara braises an objectionfrom a ibaraitain the iSifrathat discusses the drawing of lots for the two goats of Yom Kippur. The verse states: “Aaron shall bring forward the goat upon which the lot came up for the Lord, band he shall sacrifice it for a sin offering”(Leviticus 16:9). This teaches that the drawing of bthe lot renders it a sin offering, butverbally designating bthe nameof the goat bdoes not render it a sin offering, andlikewise the act of the bpriest,placing the lot on the goat, bdoes not render it a sin offering. /b,A verse is required to teach this ihalakha /i, basone bmighthave come to the opposite conclusion: bCould this notbe derived through an ia fortiori binference,as follows: bAnd if in a case wherethe drawing of ba lot does not sanctifyan animal with a specific designation, e.g., a woman after childbirth, who cannot determine by lot the status of the two birds she must bring, one as a sin offering and one as a burnt offering, nevertheless, in such a case a verbal designation of bthe name does sanctifywith a specific designation; bis it not logicalin ba case wherethe drawing of ba lot sanctifiesan animal with a specific designation, i.e., the two goats of Yom Kippur, bthatverbally designating bthe nameshould bsanctifyit with a specific designation?,The ibaraitaconcludes: Therefore bthe verse states,with regard to one of the two goats of Yom Kippur: b“He shall sacrifice it for a sin offering,”to teach that the drawing of bthe lot renders it a sin offering, butverbally designating bthe nameof the goat bdoes not render it a sin offering. /b,The Gemara explains the objection: The ibaraita bteachesthat verbally designating the bnameof an offering bis similar todrawing ba lot.If so, one can reason as follows: bJust asthe drawing of ba lotis bnotperformed batthe time of bpurchase nor atthe time of bsacrifice, so tooverbal designation of bthe name alsodoes bnothave to be performed batthe time of bpurchase nor atthe time of bsacrifice.This contradicts the opinion of Rav Ḥisda., bRav saidthat bthisis what the ibaraita bis saying: And if in a place wherethe drawing of ba lot,either by the bownerat the time bof purchase orby the bpriestat the time bof sacrifice, does not sanctifyan animal with a specific designation, and nevertheless a verbal designation of bthe name, eitherby the bownerat the time bof purchase orby the bpriestat the time bof sacrifice, does sanctifyit with a specific designation; bhere,with regard to the two goats, bwherethe drawing of ba lotthat does bnottake place batthe time of bpurchase nor atthe time of bsacrifice sanctifiesthe animal with a specific designation, bis it not logical thatverbally designating bthe name, either atthe time of bpurchase or atthe time of bsacrifice,should bsanctifyit with a specific designation?,Therefore, bthe verse states: “He shall sacrifice it for a sin offering,”to teach that drawing bthe lot renders it a sin offering, butverbally designating bthe nameof the goat bdoes not render it a sin offering. /b,The Gemara braisesanother bobjectionto the opinion of Rav Ḥisda from a ibaraita /i: In the case of ba poor person who defiles the Temple,i.e., he entered the Temple while ritually impure, bwho designated money for his nest,as he is required to bring one bird as a sin offering and another bird as a burnt offering, band hethen bbecame wealthier,he is now obligated to bring a female lamb or goat as a sin offering.,If he was unaware that he is no longer obligated to bring a pair of birds, and he bsays: Thismoney bis for my sin offering and thismoney bis for my burnt offering,which is an error, as he is not obligated to bring a burnt offering, bhe addsmore money band brings his obligationof a lamb or goat for his sin offering bfromthe bmoneydesignated bfor his sin offering. But he may not addmore money band bring his obligationof a sin offering bfromthe bmoneydesignated bfor his burnt offering,as one may not use money that is designated for a burnt offering for the purchase of a sin offering.,The Gemara explains the objection: bBut here,the ibaraitais dealing with a case where he said: This money is for my sin offering and that money is for my burnt offering, which means that he designated the money at a stage bthat was notthe time of bpurchase northe time of bsacrifice; andyet the ibaraita bteachesthat the designation is established and therefore bhe brings his obligationof a sin offering bfromthe bmoneydesignated for ba sin offering but not fromthe bmoneydesignated for ba burnt offering. /b, bRav Sheshet said: And can you understandthat bthis ibaraitais properlyexplained, i.e., the ibaraitaas it stands is difficult, bas it teaches: He became wealthierand said: This money is for my sin offering and this money is for my burnt offering. bButthis is difficult, as bdoesn’t Rabbi Elazar saythat bRabbi Oshaya says: A wealthy person who defiles the Temple,i.e., he entered the Temple while ritually impure, bwho broughtthe bofferingof ba poor personto atone for his transgression has bnot fulfilledhis obligation. Since he cannot fulfill his obligation with that offering, how can his designation permanently establish the status of the money?, bRather, what have you to say?You must say that the ibaraitais referring to a case bwhere he already said:This money is for my sin offering and this money is for my burnt offering, bat the timewhen bhe was poor. So too,it is referring to a case bwhere he already saidit even earlier, bat the timewhen bhe designatedthe money, and therefore there is no difficulty for Rav Ḥisda.,The Gemara asks: bBut according to Rabbi Ḥagga,who bsaysthat bRabbi Oshaya saysthat a wealthy person who brings the offering of a poor person has bfulfilledhis obligation, bwhat can be said?According to this opinion, there is no inherent difficulty in the ibaraitathat necessitates Rav Sheshet’s interpretation, and therefore that ibaraitaapparently contradicts Rav Ḥisda’s ruling. The Gemara answers that one should bteachthe ibaraitaas follows: bAnd afterhe became wealthier, bhe purchasedanimals band saidat the time of purchase: This is designated as my sin offering and this as my burnt offering.,With regard to the dispute between Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Ḥagga in the case of a wealthy person who brings the offering of a poor person, the Gemara braises an objectionfrom a ibaraita /i: bA poor leper who brought the offering of a wealthy personhas bfulfilledhis obligation. By contrast, ba wealthyleper bwho brought the offering of a poor personhas bnot fulfilledhis obligation. This is apparently ba conclusive refutation ofthe opinion bthat Rabbi Ḥaggasays that bRabbi Oshaya says. /b,The Gemara explains that Rabbi Ḥagga could have bsaid to you:The ihalakha bis different with regard toa wealthy bleper, as the Merciful One excludedthe possibility of a wealthy person bringing the offering of a poor person in the verse: b“Thisshall be the law of the leper” (Leviticus 14:2). The emphasis of “this” teaches that a leper fulfills his obligation only with the appropriate offering.,The Gemara objects: bIf so,that this ihalakhais derived from a verse, then bevenin the case of ba poor leper who brings the offering of a wealthy person as well,he should bnot fulfillhis obligation. The Gemara rejects that suggestion: This is bnot so,as bthe verse returnedto state: “This shall be bthe lawof the leper,” which includes a leper who brings an inappropriate offering. bAs it is taughtin a ibaraitathat the phrase b“the lawof the leper” serves bto include a poor leper who brought the offering of a wealthy person,that he bhas fulfilledhis obligation. One bmighthave thought that bevenin the case of ba wealthyleper bwho brought the offering of a poor person, hehas bfulfilledhis obligation. Therefore, bthe verse states: “Thisshall be the law.”,The Gemara raises a difficulty: bButwhy not bderivea principle bfrom thatverse that with regard to any sliding-scale offering, a wealthy person who brings a poor person’s offering has not fulfilled his obligation? The Gemara answers: With regard to a leper bthe verse states: “And if he is poor and cannot afford”(Leviticus 14:21). The emphasis of “he” teaches that bit isonly with regard to ba leper that a wealthy person who brought a poor person’s offeringhas bnot fulfilledhis obligation. bButin the case of bone who defiles the Temple,i.e., he entered the Temple while ritually impure, ba wealthy person who brought a poor person’s offeringhas bfulfilledhis obligation., strongMISHNA: /strong bRabbi Shimon says: Lambs precede goatsalmost beverywherein the Torah that they are both mentioned, as in the verse: “You shall take it from the lambs or from the goats” (Exodus 12:5). One bmighthave thought that it is bdue tothe fact bthatsheep bare more select thangoats. Therefore, bthe verse states:“And he shall bring for his offering a goat” (Leviticus 4:28), after which it is written: b“And if he bring a lamb as his offering for a sin offering”(Leviticus 4:32), which bteaches that both of them are equal. /b,Similarly, bdoves precede pigeonsalmost beverywherein the Torah, as in the verse: “And he shall bring his guilt offering…two doves, or two pigeons” (Leviticus 5:7). One bmighthave thought that it is bdue tothe fact bthatdoves bare more select thanpigeons. Therefore, bthe verse states: “And a pigeon or a dove for a sin offering”(Leviticus 12:6), with the usual order reversed, which bteaches that both of them are equal. /b,Likewise, mention of bthe father precedesthat of bthe motheralmost beverywherein the Torah, as in the verse: “Honor your father and your mother” (Exodus 20:12). One bmighthave thought that it is bdue tothe fact bthat the honor of the father takes precedence over the honor of the mother.Therefore, bthe verse states: “Every man shall fear his mother and his father”(Leviticus 19:3), with the order reversed, which bteaches that both of them are equal. But the Sages said:Honor of bthe father takes precedence overhonor of bthe mother everywhere, due tothe fact bthatboth the son band his mother are obligated in the honor of his father. /b, bAnd likewise with regard to Torah study, if the son was privilegedto acquire most of his Torah knowledge from studying bbefore the teacher,honor of bthe teacher takes precedence overhonor of bthe father, due tothe fact bthatboth the son band his father are obligated in the honor of his teacher,as everyone is obligated in the honor of Torah scholars., strongGEMARA: /strong With regard to the mishna’s discussion of lambs and goats, bthe Sages taughtin a ibaraita /i: The Temple bcourtyard cried four cries. The first crywas: bRemove Ḥofni and Pineḥas the sons of Elithe priest bfrom here, as they have rendered the Sanctuaryin Shiloh bimpure(see I Samuel 4:13–22)., bThe second crywas: bOpenthe bgates, and let Yoḥa ben Nedavai, the student of Pinkai, enter and fill his belly withmeat of bofferingsconsecrated to bHeaven,as he is worthy to eat offerings. bThey said about ben Nedavai that he would eat four ise’aof doves /b |
|
16. Babylonian Talmud, Menachot, 109b (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 109b. as by slaughtering the idolatrous offering intentionally bhe became a servant of idol worship. /b, bRav Naḥman said: From where do I saythat even a priest who intentionally slaughters an idolatrous offering is nevertheless fit to serve in the Temple if he repents? bAs it is taughtin a ibaraita /i: With regard to ba priest who servedin bidol worship and repented, his offeringin the Temple bis an aroma pleasingto the Lord and is acceptable.,Rav Naḥman clarifies: bIn whatmanner did he serve in idol worship? bIf we saythat he served in idol worship bunwittingly, whatdoes the ibaraitamean when it says: bAnd repented? He is already repentant,as he never intended to sin in the first place. bRather,it is bobviousthat the ibaraitais referring to a case bof intentionalidol worship. bAnd ifthe ibaraitais referring bto sprinklingthe blood of an idolatrous offering, bwhen he repents, what of it? Hasn’t he performedidolatrous bservice,thereby disqualifying himself from serving in the Temple in any event? bRather, is it notreferring btothe bslaughterof an idolatrous offering? Evidently, even if the priest slaughtered it intentionally, once he repents he is fit to serve in the Temple., bAndas for bRav Sheshet, hecould have bsaid to youthat bactuallythe ibaraitais referring bto unwittingslaughter. bAnd thisis what the ibaraita bis saying: Ifthe priest bis repentant from the outset, as when he servedin idol worship bhe served unwittingly,then bhis offering is an aroma pleasingto the Lord and is acceptable. bBut if not,i.e., he slaughtered an idolatrous offering intentionally, bhissubsequent bofferingin the Temple is bnot an aroma pleasingto the Lord.,§ The Gemara lists other similar disagreements between Rav Naḥman and Rav Sheshet. In a case where a priest bbowed toan object of bidol worship, Rav Naḥman says:If he subsequently repents and serves in the Temple, bhis offering is an aroma pleasingto the Lord. bAnd Rav Sheshet says: His offering is not an aroma pleasingto the Lord. In a case where a priest backnowledgesan object of bidol worshipas a divinity, bRav Naḥman says:If he subsequently repents and serves in the Temple, bhis offering is an aroma pleasingto the Lord. bAnd Rav Sheshet says: His offering is not an aroma pleasingto the Lord.,Having listed four similar disputes between Rav Naḥman and Rav Sheshet, namely, with regard to a priest who unwittingly sprinkled the blood of an idolatrous offering, a priest who intentionally slaughtered an idolatrous offering, a priest who bowed to an idol, and a priest who acknowledged an idol as a divinity, the Gemara explains: bAndit was bnecessaryto teach the dispute with regard to all four cases. bAs, hadthe Sages btaught usonly bthis firstcase, where a priest sprinkles the blood of an idolatrous offering unwittingly, one might have thought that only bin thatcase bRav Sheshet saysthat the priest’s subsequent service in the Temple is disqualified, bbecause he performed a service foridolatry that is considered a sacrificial rite in the Temple. bButin a case where the priest merely performed bslaughter, since he did not perform a service foridolatry that is a sacrificial rite in the Temple, there is room to bsaythat Rav Sheshet bconcedes tothe opinion of bRav Naḥman. /b, bAnd hadthe Sages btaught usonly the dispute with regard to a priest intentionally performing bslaughterfor an idolatrous offering, one might have thought that Rav Sheshet says that the priest’s subsequent service in the Temple is disqualified bbecause he performeda sacrificial brite foridolatry. bButif he merely bbowedto the idol, bsince he did not performa sacrificial brite foridolatry, there is room to bsaythat Rav Sheshet does bnotdisqualify the priest’s subsequent service in the Temple. Therefore, it was bnecessaryto teach this case as well., bAnd hadthe Sages btaught usonly the case of a priest bbowingto an idol, one might have thought that in this case Rav Sheshet says that the priest’s subsequent service in the Temple is disqualified bbecause he performed an action foridolatry. bButif he only backnowledgedthe idol as a divinity, bwhich is mere speech,there is room to bsaythat Rav Sheshet does bnotdisqualify the priest’s subsequent service in the Temple. The Gemara concludes: Therefore, it was bnecessaryto teach this case as well.,§ The mishna teaches: bAnd needless to say,if priests served for bsomething else,a euphemism for idolatry, they are disqualified from service in the Temple. The Gemara comments: bFromthe fact bthat it says: Needless to say,if they served for bsomething else, by inference, the temple of Onias is nota temple of bidol worship,but rather a temple devoted to the worship of God., bIt is taughtin a ibaraita blike the one who saysthat bthe temple of Onias is nota temple of bidol worship. As it is taught:During bthe year in which Shimon HaTzaddik died, he said tohis associates: bThis year, he will die,euphemistically referring to himself. bThey said to him: From where do you know? /b,Shimon HaTzaddik bsaid to them:In previous years, bevery Yom Kippur,upon entering the Holy of Holies, I had a prophetic vision in which bI would be met by an old manwho was bdressed in white, andhis head was bwrapped in white, and he would enterthe Holy of Holies bwith me, and he would leave with me.But bthis year, I was met by an old manwho was bdressed in black, andhis head was bwrapped in black, and he enteredthe Holy of Holies bwith me, but he did not leave with me.Shimon HaTzaddik understood this to be a sign that his death was impending.,Indeed, bafter the pilgrimage festivalof iSukkot /i, bhe was ill for seven days and died. And his fellow priests refrained from reciting thePriestly bBenediction with theineffable bnameof God., bAt the time of his death, he said tothe Sages: bOnias, my son, will serveas High Priest bin my stead. Shimi,Onias’ bbrother, became jealousof him, basShimi bwas two and a half years older thanOnias. Shimi bsaid toOnias treacherously: bCome and I will teach you the order of the serviceof the High Priest. Shimi bdressedOnias bin a tunic [ ibe’unkeli /i] and girded him with a ribbon [ ibetziltzul /i]as a belt, i.e., not in the vestments of the High Priest, and bstood him next to the altar.Shimi bsaid to his fellow priests: Look what thisman bvowed and fulfilled for his beloved,that he had said to her: bOn the day that I serve in the High Priesthood I will wear your tunic and gird your ribbon. /b, bThe fellow priests ofOnias bwanted to kill himbecause he had disgraced the Temple service with his garments. Onias branaway bfrom them and they ran after him. He went to Alexandria in Egypt and built an altar there, and sacrificedofferings bupon it for the sake of idol worship. When the Sages heard of the matter they said: If thisperson, Shimi, bwho did not enterthe position of High Priest, acted with bsuchjealousy, ball the more sowill bone who entersa prestigious position rebel if that position is taken away from him. This is bthe statement of Rabbi Meir.According to Rabbi Meir, the temple of Onias was built for idol worship., bRabbi Yehuda said to him:The bincident was not like this. Rather, Onias did not acceptthe position of High Priest bbecause his brother Shimi was two and a half years older than him,so Shimi was appointed as High Priest. bAnd even so,even though Onias himself offered the position to Shimi, bOnias was jealous of his brother Shimi.Onias bsaid toShimi: bCome and I will teach you the order of the serviceof the High Priest. bAndOnias bdressedShimi bin a tunic and girded him in a ribbon and stood him next to the altar.Onias bsaid to his fellow priests: Look what thisman, Shimi, bvowed and fulfilled for his beloved,that he had said to her: bOn the day that I serve in the High Priesthood I will wear your tunic and gird your ribbon. /b, bHis fellow priests wanted to killShimi. Shimi then btold them the entire incident,that he had been tricked by his brother Onias, so the priests bwanted to kill Onias.Onias branaway bfrom them, and they ran after him.Onias bran to the palace of the king, and they ran after him. Anyone who saw him would say: This is him, this is him,and he was not able to escape unnoticed. Onias bwent to Alexandria in Egypt and built an altar there, and sacrificedofferings bupon it for the sake of Heaven. As it is stated: “In that day shall there be an altar to the Lord in the midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar at its border, to the Lord”(Isaiah 19:19). According to Rabbi Yehuda, the temple of Onias was dedicated to the worship of God., bAnd when the Sages heard of the matter they said: If this one,Onias, bwho fled fromthe position of High Priest and offered it to his brother, still was overcome with bsuchjealousy to the point where he tried to have Shimi killed, ball the more sowill bone who wants to entera prestigious position be jealous of the one who already has that position.,§ As a corollary to the statement of the Sages with regard to one who is jealous and wants the position of another, bit is taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Yehoshua ben Peraḥya said: Initially,in response to banyone who would sayto me: bAscend tothe position of iNasi /i, bI would tie him up and place him in front of a lionout of anger for his suggestion. bNowthat I have become the iNasi /i, in response to banyone who tells me to leavethe position, bIwould bthrow a kettle [ ikumkum /i] of boilingwater bat himout of anger at his suggestion.,It is human nature that after one ascends to a prestigious position he does not wish to lose it. bAsevidence of this principle, bSaulinitially bfled fromthe kingship, as he did not wish to be king, as stated in the verse: “When they sought him he could not be found…Behold he has hidden himself among the baggage” (I Samuel 10:21–22). bBut when he ascendedto the kingship bhe tried to kill David,who he thought was trying to usurp his authority (see I Samuel, chapters 18–27).,§ bMar Kashisha, son of Rav Ḥisda, said to Abaye: What does Rabbi Meir do with this verse of Rabbi Yehuda?Since Rabbi Meir holds that the temple of Onias was dedicated to idol worship, how does he explain the verse in Isaiah?,Abaye answered Mar Kashisha and said that Rabbi Meir uses this verse bfor that which is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bAfter the downfall of Sennacherib,the king of Assyria who besieged Jerusalem (see II Kings, chapters 18–19), King bHezekiah emergedfrom Jerusalem band found thegentile bprincesSennacherib had brought with him from his other conquests, bsitting in carriages [ ibikronot /i] of gold. He made them vow that they would not worship idols,and they fulfilled their vow, bas it is statedin Isaiah’s prophecy about Egypt: b“In that day there shall be five cities in the land of Egypt that speak the language of Canaan /b |
|
17. Babylonian Talmud, Pesahim, 57a (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 57a. נימא תלתא תנאי הוו לא תרי תנאי הוו ותנא קמא דר' שמעון היינו ר' יוסי ותנא קמא דר' יוסי היינו ר' שמעון ומאי אף אקמייתא,ת"ר בן בוהיין נתן פיאה לירק ובא אביו ומצאן לעניים שהיו טעונין ירק ועומדין על פתח הגינה אמר להם בני השליכו מעליכם ואני נותן לכם כפליים במעושר לא מפני שעיני צרה אלא מפני שאמרו חכמים אין נותנין פיאה לירק,למה ליה למימרא להו לא מפני שעיני צרה כי היכי דלא לימרו דחויי קא מדחי לן,ת"ר בראשונה היו מניחין עורות קדשים בלשכת בית הפרוה לערב היו מחלקין אותן לאנשי בית אב והיו בעלי זרועות נוטלין אותן בזרוע התקינו שיהיו מחלקין אותן מערב שבת לע"ש דאתיין כולהו משמרות ושקלן בהדדי,ועדיין היו גדולי כהונה נוטלין אותן בזרוע עמדו בעלים והקדישום לשמים,אמרו לא היו ימים מועטים עד שחיפו את ההיכל כולו בטבלאות של זהב שהן אמה על אמה כעובי דינר זהב ולרגל היו מקפלין אותן ומניחין אותן על גב מעלה בהר הבית כדי שיהו עולי רגלים רואין שמלאכתם נאה ואין בה דלם,תנא אבא שאול אומר קורות של שקמה היו ביריחו והיו בעלי זרועות נוטלין אותן בזרוע עמדו בעלים והקדישום לשמים,עליהם ועל כיוצא בהם אמר אבא שאול בן בטנית משום אבא יוסף בן חנין אוי לי מבית בייתוס אוי לי מאלתן אוי לי מבית חנין אוי לי מלחישתן אוי לי מבית קתרוס אוי לי מקולמוסן אוי לי מבית ישמעאל בן פיאכי אוי לי מאגרופן שהם כהנים גדולים ובניהן גיזברין וחתניהם אמרכלין ועבדיהן חובטין את העם במקלות,תנו רבנן ארבע צווחות צוחה עזרה ראשונה צאו מכאן בני עלי שטימאו היכל ה' ועוד צווחה צא מיכן יששכר איש כפר ברקאי שמכבד את עצמו ומחלל קדשי שמים דהוה כריך ידיה בשיראי ועביד עבודה,ועוד צווחה העזרה שאו שערים ראשיכם ויכנס ישמעאל בן פיאכי תלמידו של פנחס וישמש בכהונה גדולה ועוד צווחה העזרה שאו שערים ראשיכם ויכנס יוחנן בן נרבאי תלמידו של פנקאי וימלא כריסו מקדשי שמים,אמרו עליו על יוחנן בן נרבאי שהיה אוכל ג' מאות עגלים ושותה ג' מאות גרבי יין ואוכל ארבעים סאה גוזלות בקינוח סעודה אמרו כל ימיו של יוחנן בן נרבאי לא נמצא נותר במקדש מאי סלקא ביה ביששכר איש כפר ברקאי אמרי מלכא ומלכתא הוו יתבי מלכא אמר גדיא יאי ומלכתא אמרה אימרא יאי אמרו מאן מוכח כהן גדול דקא מסיק קרבנות כל יומא אתא איהו | 57a. bLet us saythat bthere are three itanna’im /iwho dispute this point: The two unattributed opinions, each of which is referring to two vegetables, and the opinion common to Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon that includes all three vegetables. The Gemara rejects this: bNo, there areonly btwo itanna’im /iwho dispute the point, band the first itanna /iwhose opinion appears before the opinion of bRabbi Shimon is Rabbi Yosei. And the first itanna /iwhose opinion appears before the opinion of bRabbi Yosei is Rabbi Shimon. And whatis the meaning of the word bevenin both their statements? They agree with regard to bthe firstvegetable, turnips; however, they disagree with regard to the second, and replace it with another vegetable.,The Gemara cites an episode from the iTosefta /i. bThe Sages taught: The sonof a man named bBohayan designatedfor the poor btheproduce in the bcornerin a garden bof vegetables, and his fatherBohayan bfound the poor ladenwith bvegetables and standing at the opening of the gardenon their way out. bHe said to them: My sons, castthe vegetables that you have gathered bfrom upon yourselves and I will give you twicethe amount in btithedproduce, and you will be no worse off. bNot because I begrudgeyou what you have taken. bRather, it is because the Sages say: One does not designatefor the poor btheproduce in the bcornerin a garden bof vegetables.Therefore, the vegetables that you took require tithing.,The Gemara asks: bWhywas it necessary bfor him to say to them: Not because I begrudgeyou what you have taken? It would have been sufficient to offer them tithed produce. The Gemara answers that he said it bso they would not say: He is putting us off,taking what we collected now, but later he will not fulfill his commitment.,Apropos the people of Jericho, the Gemara relates that powerful people would steal wood from them. bThe Sages taught: Initially,the priests bwould place the hidesthat were flayed from animals bconsecratedas offerings of the most sacred order, which were given to the priests, bin the Parva chamber. In the evening, they would distribute them to the members of the familyof priests serving in the Temple that day. bAnd the powerfulpriests among them would btake them by forcebefore they could be distributed. The Rabbis bdecreed that they would distribute them each Shabbat eve,because then ball thefamilies of both priestly bwatches came and tooktheir part btogether.All the families from both the watch that was beginning its service and the one ending its service were together when they divided the hides. The powerful priests were unable to take the hides by force., bYet still the prominent priestsby virtue of their lineage bwould take them by force.Due to their prominence, the members of the rest of the watch dared not challenge them. When they realized that there was no equitable distribution, bthe ownersof the sacrifices ( iMe’iri /i) barose and consecratedthe hides bto Heavenso the priests could not take them.,The Sages bsaid: Not a few days passed before they had plated the entire sanctuary with golden tabletswith the proceeds from the redemption and sale of the hides. These plates bwere one cubit by one cubit and as thick as a golden dinar. Andwhen the people assembled bfor theFestival bpilgrimage they would removethe tablets band place them on a stair of the Temple Mount so that the pilgrims would see that the craftsmanshipof the tablets bwas beautiful and without flaw [ idalam /i].Afterward they replaced the tablets in the Sanctuary., bIt wassimilarly btaughtthat bAbba Shaul says: There were sycamore tree trunks in Jericho, and powerful people would take themfrom their owners bby force. The owners stood and consecratedthese trunks bto Heaven.It was with regard to these trunks and the branches that grew from them that the residents of Jericho acted against the will of the Sages., bWith regard tothe prominent priests band those like them, Abba Shaul ben Batnit said in the name of Abba Yosef ben Ḥanin: Woe is me due tothe High Priests of bthe house of Baitos, woe is me due to their clubs. Woe is me due tothe High Priests of bthe house of Ḥanin; woe is me due to their whispersand the rumors they spread. bWoe is me due tothe High Priests of bthe house of Katros; woe is me due to their pensthat they use to write lies. bWoe is me due tothe servants of the High Priests of bthe house of Yishmael ben Piakhi; woe is me due to their fists.The power of these households stemmed from the fact bthatthe fathers bwere High Priests, and their sons werethe Temple btreasurers, and their sons-in-law wereTemple boverseers [ iamarkalin /i]. And their servants strike the people with clubs,and otherwise act inappropriately.,Apropos the critique of several prominent priests, the Gemara relates that bthe Sages taught:The people in btheTemple bcourtyardall bcried four cries,as they were in agreement over various issues ( iPardes Rimonim /i). The bfirstcry was: bLeave here, sons of Eli, who defiled God’s Sanctuary(see I Samuel 2:22). Subsequently the priesthood was transferred to the house of Zadok. bAnd an additional cry: Leave here, Yissakhar of Kfar Barkai, who honors himself and desecratesthe items bconsecratedto bHeaven.Due to his delicate nature and his disrespect for the Temple service, he would bwraphis hands bin silk [ ishirai /i] and perform the service.This would invalidate the service because the silk was an interposition between his hands and the Temple vessels. Furthermore, his conduct demeaned the Temple service, as he demonstrated that he was unwilling to dirty his hands for it., bAndthe people in btheTemple bcourtyard cried additionally: Lift your heads, O gates, and letthe righteous bYishmael ben Piakhi, the student of Pinehasben Elazar the priest, benter and serve as High Priest,although the members of this family were violent. bAndthe people in btheTemple bcourtyard cried additionally: Lift your heads, O gates, and let Yoḥa ben Narbbai, the student of Pinkai, enter and fill his belly withmeat bof offeringsconsecrated to bHeaven,as he is worthy to eat offerings., bThey said about Yoḥa ben Narbbai that heand his household bwould eat three hundred calves, and drink three hundred jugs of wine, and eat forty ise’aof doves for dessert. They said:Throughout ball the days of Yoḥa ben Narbbai there was no leftoversacrificial meat bin the Temple,as he would make certain that someone ate it. The Gemara asks: bWhatultimately bhappened to Yissakhar of Kfar Barkai? They said: The king and the queen were sittingand talking. bThe king saidthat bgoatmeat bis betterfood, band the queen said lambmeat is bbetterfood. bThey said: Who can provewhich one of us is correct? bThe High Priestcan, bas he offers sacrifices all dayand tastes their meat. The High Priest had the right to take a portion from any sacrifice offered in the Temple, and therefore was well acquainted with the tastes of different meat. Yissakhar of Kfar Barkai bcame,and when they asked him this question |
|
18. 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 |
|
19. Babylonian Talmud, Sukkah, 48b (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 48b. כמין שני חוטמין דקין (ואחד) מעובה ואחד דק כדי שיהו שניהם כלין בבת אחת מערבו של מים מזרחו של יין עירה של מים לתוך של יין ושל יין לתוך של מים יצא,ר' יהודה אומר בלוג היה מנסך כל שמונה ולמנסך אומר לו הגבה ידך שפעם אחד נסך אחד על גבי רגליו ורגמוהו כל העם באתרוגיהן,כמעשהו בחול כך מעשהו בשבת אלא שהיה ממלא מערב שבת חבית של זהב שאינה מקודשת מן השילוח ומניחה בלשכה נשפכה נתגלתה היה ממלא מן הכיור שהיין והמים מגולין פסולין לגבי מזבח:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big מנא הנ"מ אמר רב עינא דאמר קרא (ישעיהו יב, ג) ושאבתם מים בששון וגו',הנהו תרי מיני חד שמיה ששון וחד שמיה שמחה א"ל ששון לשמחה אנא עדיפנא מינך דכתיב (ישעיהו לה, י) ששון ושמחה ישיגו וגו' א"ל שמחה לששון אנא עדיפנא מינך דכתיב (אסתר ח, יז) שמחה וששון ליהודים א"ל ששון לשמחה חד יומא שבקוך ושויוך פרוונקא דכתיב (ישעיהו נה, יב) כי בשמחה תצאו א"ל שמחה לששון חד יומא שבקוך ומלו בך מיא דכתיב ושאבתם מים בששון,א"ל ההוא מינא דשמיה ששון לר' אבהו עתידיתו דתמלו לי מים לעלמא דאתי דכתיב ושאבתם מים בששון א"ל אי הוה כתיב לששון כדקאמרת השתא דכתיב בששון משכיה דההוא גברא משוינן ליה גודא ומלינן ביה מיא:,עלה בכבש ופנה לשמאלו כו': ת"ר כל העולים למזבח עולין דרך ימין ומקיפין ויורדין דרך שמאל חוץ מן העולה לשלשה דברים הללו שעולין דרך שמאל וחוזרין על העקב ואלו הן ניסוך המים וניסוך היין ועולת העוף כשרבתה במזרח:,אלא שהיו משחירין: בשלמא דיין משחיר דמיא אמאי משחיר כיון דאמר מר עירה של מים לתוך של יין ושל יין לתוך של מים יצא של מים אתי לאשחורי:,ומנוקבים כמין ב' חוטמין וכו': לימא מתניתין ר' יהודה היא ולא רבנן דתנן רבי יהודה אומר בלוג היה מנסך כל שמונה דאי רבנן כי הדדי נינהו,אפי' תימא רבנן חמרא סמיך מיא קליש,הכי נמי מסתברא דאי רבי יהודה רחב וקצר אית ליה דתניא רבי יהודה אומר שני קשוואות היו שם אחד של מים ואחד של יין של יין פיה רחב של מים פיה קצר כדי שיהו שניהם כלין בבת אחת ש"מ:,מערבו של מים: ת"ר מעשה בצדוקי אחד שניסך על גבי רגליו ורגמוהו כל העם באתרוגיהן ואותו היום נפגמה קרן המזבח והביאו בול של מלח וסתמוהו לא מפני שהוכשר לעבודה אלא מפני שלא יראה מזבח פגום | 48b. with btwo thinperforated bnose-likeprotrusions. bOneof the basins, used for the wine libation, had a perforation that was bbroad, and one,used for the water libation, had a perforation that was bthin, so thatthe flow of bboththe water and the wine, which do not have the same viscosity, would bconclude simultaneously.The basin to the bwest ofthe altar was bfor water,and the basin to the beast ofthe altar was bfor wine.However, if bone pouredthe contents of the basin bof water intothe basin bof wine, orthe contents of the basin bof wine intothe basin bof water, he fulfilledhis obligation, as failure to pour the libation from the prescribed location does not disqualify the libation after the fact., bRabbi Yehuda says:The basin for the water libation was not that large; rather, bone would pourthe water bwitha vessel that had a capacity of bone ilog /ion ball eightdays of the Festival and not only seven. bAndthe appointee bsays to the one pouringthe water into the silver basin: bRaise your hand,so that his actions would be visible, bas one timea Sadducee priest intentionally bpouredthe water bon his feet,as the Sadducees did not accept the oral tradition requiring water libation, and in their rage ball the people pelted him with their ietrogim /i. /b,Rabbi Yehuda continues: bAs its performance during the week, so is its performance on Shabbat, exceptthat on Shabbat one would not draw water. Instead, bon Shabbat eve, one would fill a golden barrel that was not consecratedfor exclusive use in the Temple bfrom the Siloampool, band hewould bplace it in theTemple bchamberand draw water from there on Shabbat. If the water in the barrel bspilled,or if it bwas exposedovernight, leading to concern that a snake may have deposited poison in the water, bone would fillthe jug with water bfrom the basinin the Temple courtyard, bas exposed wine or water is unfit for the altar.Just as it is prohibited for people to drink them due to the potential danger, so too, they may not be poured on the altar., strongGEMARA: /strong With regard to the customs accompanying the drawing of the water, the Gemara asks: bFrom where are these mattersderived? bRav Eina saidthat it is bas the verse states: “With joy [ isason /i] you shall draw waterout of the springs of salvation” (Isaiah 12:3), indicating that the water was to be drawn from the spring and the rite performed in extreme joy.,Apropos this verse, the Gemara relates: There were bthese two heretics, one named Sason and one named Simḥa. Sason said to Simḥa: I am superior to you, as it is written: “They shall obtain joy [ isason /i] and happiness [ isimḥa /i],and sorrow and sighing shall flee” (Isaiah 35:10). The verse mentions joy first. bSimḥa said to Sason,On the contrary, bI am superior to you, as it is written: “There was happiness [ isimḥa /i] and joy [ isason /i] for the Jews”(Esther 8:17). bSason said to Simḥa: One day they will dismiss you and render you a messenger [ iparvanka /i], as it is written: “For you shall go out with happiness [ isimḥa /i]”(Isaiah 55:12). bSimḥa said to Sason: One day they will dismiss you and draw water with you, as it is written: “With joy [ isason /i] you shall draw water.” /b,The Gemara relates a similar incident: bA certain heretic named Sason said to Rabbi Abbahu: You areall bdestined to draw water for me in the World-to-Come, as it is written: “With isasonyou shall draw water.”Rabbi Abbahu bsaid to him: If it had been written: For isason /i,it would have been bas you say; now that it is written: With isason /i,it means that bthe skin of that man,you, bwill be rendered a wineskin, and we will draw water with it. /b,§ The mishna continues: The priest bascended the rampof the altar band turned to his left. The Sages taught: All who ascend the altar ascendand turn bviathe bright, and circlethe altar, band descend viathe bleft.This is the case bexcept for one ascendingto perform one of bthese three tasks, asthe ones who perform these tasks bascend viathe bleft, andthen bturn ontheir bheel and returnin the direction that they came. bAndthese tasks bare: The water libation, and the wine libation, and the birdsacrificed as ba burnt-offering when there weretoo bmanypriests engaged in the sacrifice of these burnt-offerings bin thepreferred location beastof the altar. When that was the case, additional priests engaged in sacrificing the same offering would pinch the neck of the bird west of the altar.,The mishna continues: Rabbi Yehuda said that they were limestone, not silver, basins, bbut they would blackendue to the wine. The Gemara asks: bGranted,the basin bfor wine blackeneddue to the wine; however, bwhy did thebasin bfor water blacken?The Gemara answers: bSince the Master saidin the mishna: However, if boneinadvertently bpouredthe contents of the basin bof water intothe basin bof wine orthe contents of the basin bof wine intothe basin bof water, he fulfilledhis obligation. Then even the basin bfor waterwould bcome to blackenover the course of time as well.,§ The mishna continues: bAndthe two basins were bperforatedat the bottom with btwo thin,perforated, bnose-likeprotrusions, one broad and one thin. The Gemara asks: bLet us saythat bthe mishna isin accordance with the opinion of bRabbi Yehuda and notwith that of bthe Rabbis, as we learnedin the mishna that bRabbi Yehuda says: One would pourthe water bwitha vessel that had a capacity of bone ilog /ion ball eightdays of the Festival, unlike the wine libation, for which a three- ilogbasin was used. According to his opinion, there is a difference between the capacity of the wine vessel and that of the water vessel; therefore, it is clear why the opening in the wine vessel was broader. bAs, ifthe mishna is in accordance with the opinion of bthe Rabbis, they are the sameas the capacity of the water basin, three ilog /i. Why, then, were there different sized openings?,The Gemara answers: bEvenif byou saythat the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of bthe Rabbis,the reason for the different-sized openings is that bwine is thickand bwater is thin,and therefore wine flows more slowly than water. In order to ensure that the emptying of both basins would conclude simultaneously, the wine basin required a wider opening., bSo too, it is reasonableto establish that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis, bas, ifit is in accordance with the opinion of bRabbi Yehuda,unlike the description of the two openings in the mishna as broad and thin, elsewhere he bis ofthe opinion that the openings bas wide and narrow, as it was taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Yehuda says: There were twosmall bpipes there, one for water and one for wine. The mouth ofthe pipe bfor wine was wide and the mouth ofthe pipe bfor water was narrow, so thatthe emptying of both basins bwould conclude simultaneously.The disparity between wide and narrow is greater than the disparity between broad and thin, thereby facilitating the simultaneous emptying of the three- ilogand one- ilogbasins according to Rabbi Yehuda. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, blearn from itthat the mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda.,§ The mishna continues: The basin to the bwest ofthe altar was bfor water,and the basin to the east of the altar was for wine, and they would tell the one pouring the water to raise his hand. bThe Sages taught:There was ban incident involving one Sadduceepriest bwho pouredthe water bon his feet,and in anger ball the people pelted him with their ietrogim /i. And that day, the horn of the altar was damagedas a result of the pelting and the ensuing chaos. bThey brought a fistful of salt and sealedthe damaged section, bnot because it renderedthe altar bfit for theTemple bservice, butin deference to the altar, bso that the altar would not be seenin its bdamagedstate. |
|
