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

Tiresias: The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Source Database



8004
Mishnah, Berachot, 2.5


חָתָן פָּטוּר מִקְּרִיאַת שְׁמַע בַּלַּיְלָה הָרִאשׁוֹן עַד מוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת, אִם לֹא עָשָׂה מַעֲשֶׂה. מַעֲשֶׂה בְּרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל שֶׁקָּרָא בַלַּיְלָה הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁנָּשָׂא. אָמְרוּ לוֹ תַּלְמִידָיו, לֹא לִמַּדְתָּנוּ, רַבֵּנוּ, שֶׁחָתָן פָּטוּר מִקְּרִיאַת שְׁמַע בַּלַּיְלָה הָרִאשׁוֹן. אָמַר לָהֶם, אֵינִי שׁוֹמֵעַ לָכֶם לְבַטֵּל מִמֶּנִּי מַלְכוּת שָׁמַיִם אֲפִלּוּ שָׁעָה אֶחָת:A bridegroom is exempt from reciting the Shema on the first night until the end of the Shabbat, if he has not performed the act. It happened with Rabban Gamaliel who recited the Shema on the first night after he had married. His students said to him: Our master, have you not taught us that a bridegroom is exempt from reciting the Shema. He replied to them: I will not listen to you to remove from myself the Kingship of Heaven even for a moment.


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

13 results
1. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 6.4-6.9 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

6.4. שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ יְהוָה אֶחָד׃ 6.5. וְאָהַבְתָּ אֵת יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכָל־לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל־נַפְשְׁךָ וּבְכָל־מְאֹדֶךָ׃ 6.6. וְהָיוּ הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוְּךָ הַיּוֹם עַל־לְבָבֶךָ׃ 6.7. וְשִׁנַּנְתָּם לְבָנֶיךָ וְדִבַּרְתָּ בָּם בְּשִׁבְתְּךָ בְּבֵיתֶךָ וּבְלֶכְתְּךָ בַדֶּרֶךְ וּבְשָׁכְבְּךָ וּבְקוּמֶךָ׃ 6.8. וּקְשַׁרְתָּם לְאוֹת עַל־יָדֶךָ וְהָיוּ לְטֹטָפֹת בֵּין עֵינֶיךָ׃ 6.9. וּכְתַבְתָּם עַל־מְזוּזֹת בֵּיתֶךָ וּבִשְׁעָרֶיךָ׃ 6.4. HEAR, O ISRAEL: THE LORD OUR GOD, THE LORD IS ONE." 6.5. And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." 6.6. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be upon thy heart;" 6.7. and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up." 6.8. And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thy hand, and they shall be for frontlets between thine eyes." 6.9. And thou shalt write them upon the door-posts of thy house, and upon thy gates."
2. Mishnah, Berachot, 1.1, 3.1, 3.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

1.1. From what time may one recite the Shema in the evening? From the time that the priests enter [their houses] in order to eat their terumah until the end of the first watch, the words of Rabbi Eliezer. The sages say: until midnight. Rabban Gamaliel says: until dawn. Once it happened that his sons came home [late] from a wedding feast and they said to him: we have not yet recited the [evening] Shema. He said to them: if it is not yet dawn you are still obligated to recite. And not in respect to this alone did they so decide, but wherever the sages say “until midnight,” the mitzvah may be performed until dawn. The burning of the fat and the pieces may be performed till dawn. Similarly, all [the offerings] that are to be eaten within one day may be eaten till dawn. Why then did the sages say “until midnight”? In order to keep a man far from transgression." 3.1. One whose dead [relative] lies before him is exempt from the recital of the Shema and from the tefillah and from tefillin. The bearers of the bier and their replacements, and their replacements’ replacement, both those in front of the bier and those behind the bier those needed to carry the bier, are exempt; but those not needed to carry the bier are exempt. Both, however, are exempt from [saying] the tefillah." 3.4. One who has had a seminal emission utters the words [of the Shema] in his heart and he doesn’t say a blessing, neither before nor after. Over food he says a blessing afterwards, but not the blessing before. Rabbi Judah says: he blesses both before them and after them."
3. Mishnah, Kelim, 1.1-1.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

1.1. The fathers of impurity are a: sheretz, semen, [an Israelite] who has contracted corpse impurity, a metzora during the days of his counting, and the waters of purification whose quantity is less than the minimum needed for sprinkling. Behold, these convey impurity to people and vessels by contact and to earthenware by presence within their airspace, But they do not convey impurity by being carried." 1.2. Above them are nevelah and waters of purification whose quantity is sufficient to be sprinkled, for these convey impurity to a person [even] by being carried so that he in turn conveys impurity to clothing by contact. Clothing, however, is free from impurity where there was contact alone." 1.3. Above them is one who had intercourse with a menstruant, for he defiles the bottom [bedding] upon which he lies as he does the top [bedding]. Above them is the issue of a zav, his spit, his semen and his urine, and the blood of a menstruant, for they convey impurity both by contact and by carrying. Above them is an object on which one can ride, for it conveys impurity even when it lies under a heavy stone. Above the object on which one can ride is that on which one can lie, for contact is the same as its carrying. Above the object on which one can lie is the zav, for a zav conveys impurity to the object on which he lies, while the object on which he lies cannot convey the same impurity to that upon which it lies." 1.4. Above the zav is the zavah, for she conveys impurity to the man who has intercourse with her. Above the zavah is the metzora, for he conveys impurity by entering into a house. Above the metzora is a [human] bone the size of a barley grain, for it conveys impurity for seven days. More strict than all these is a corpse, for it conveys impurity by ohel (tent) whereby all the others convey no impurity."
4. Mishnah, Pesahim, 3.7 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

3.7. He who is on his way to slaughter his Pesah sacrifice or to circumcise his son or to dine at a betrothal feast at the house of his father-in-law, and remembers that he has chametz at home: if he is able to go back, remove [it], and [then] return to his religious duty, he must go back and remove [it]; but if not, he annuls it in his heart. [If he is on his way] to save from an invasion or from a river or from brigands or from a fire or from a collapse [of a building], he annuls it in his heart. [But if] to rest for pleasure, he must return immediately."
5. Mishnah, Rosh Hashanah, 2.8-2.9 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

2.8. Rabban Gamaliel had diagrams of the moon on a tablet [hung] on the wall of his upper chamber, and he used to show them to the unlearned and say, “Did it look like this or this?” It happened that two witnesses came and said, “We saw it in the morning in the east and in the evening in the west.” Rabbi Yoha ben Nuri said: they are lying witnesses. When they came to Yavneh Rabban Gamaliel accepted them. On another occasion two witnesses came and said, “We saw it at its proper time, but on the night which should have been the new moon it was not seen,” and Rabban Gamaliel accepted their evidence. Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas said: they are lying witnesses. How can they testify that a woman has given birth when on the next day her belly is between her teeth (swollen)? Rabbi Joshua to him: I see your argument." 2.9. Rabban Gamaliel sent to him: I order you to appear before me with your staff and your money on the day which according to your count should be Yom Hakippurim. Rabbi Akiva went and found him in distress. He said to him: I can teach that whatever Rabban Gamaliel has done is valid, because it says, “These are the appointed seasons of the Lord, holy convocations, which you shall proclaim at their appointed times” (Leviticus 23:4), whether they are [proclaimed] at their proper time or not at their proper time, I have no other appointed times save these. He [Rabbi Joshua] then went to Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas. He said to him: if we call in question the court of Rabban Gamaliel we must call in question the decisions of every court which has existed since the days of Moses until now. As it says, “Then Moses and Aaron, Nadav and Avihu and seventy of the elders of Israel went up” (Exodus 24:9). Why were the names of the elders not mentioned? To teach that every group of three which has acted as a court over Israel, behold it is like the court of Moses. He [Rabbi Joshua] took his staff and his money and went to Yavneh to Rabban Gamaliel on the day which according to his count should be Yom Hakippurim. Rabban Gamaliel rose and kissed him on his head and said to him: Come in peace, my teacher and my student my teacher in wisdom and my student because you have accepted my decision."
6. Mishnah, Sukkah, 2.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

2.5. It once happened that they brought a dish to Rabbi Yoha ben Zakkai to taste, and two dates and a pail of water to Rabban Gamaliel and they said, “Bring them up to the sukkah.” And when they gave Rabbi Zadok food less than the bulk of an egg, he took it in a napkin, ate it outside the sukkah and did not say a blessing after it."
7. Mishnah, Tamid, 5.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

5.1. The superintendent said to them: Bless one blessing! And they blessed. They then read the Ten Commandments, the Shema, the “And it will be if you hearken” (the second paragraph of Shema) and Vayomer (the third paragraph of Shema), and they blessed the people with three blessings: Emet veYatziv, and Avodah, and the priestly benediction. On Shabbat they added a blessing to be said by the watch which was leaving."
8. Mishnah, Shekalim, 3.3, 6.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

3.3. [The members] of Rabban Gamaliel’s household used to enter [the chamber] with their shekel between their fingers, and throw it in front of him who made the appropriation, while he who made the appropriation purposely pressed it into the basket. He who made the appropriation did not make it until he first said to them: “Should I make the appropriation?” And they say to him three times: “Make the appropriation! Make the appropriation! Make the appropriation!”" 6.1. There were in the Temple thirteen chests, thirteen tables and thirteen prostrations. [Members] of the household of Rabban Gamaliel and of Rabbi Haiah the chief of the priests used would prostrate fourteen [times. And where was the additional [prostration]? In front of the wood storage yard, for they had a tradition from their forefathers that the Ark was hidden there."
9. Tosefta, Shabbat, 1.22 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

10. Palestinian Talmud, Berachot, 4.1 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)

11. Palestinian Talmud, Taanit, 4.1 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)

12. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

27b. לא כנגד רבו ולא אחורי רבו,ותניא רבי אליעזר אומר המתפלל אחורי רבו והנותן שלום לרבו והמחזיר שלום לרבו והחולק על ישיבתו של רבו והאומר דבר שלא שמע מפי רבו גורם לשכינה שתסתלק מישראל,שאני רבי ירמיה בר אבא דתלמיד חבר הוה והיינו דקאמר ליה רבי ירמיה בר אבא לרב מי בדלת אמר ליה אין בדילנא ולא אמר מי בדיל מר,ומי בדיל והאמר רבי אבין פעם אחת התפלל רבי של שבת בערב שבת ונכנס למרחץ ויצא ושנה לן פרקין ועדיין לא חשכה אמר רבא ההוא דנכנס להזיע וקודם גזירה הוה,איני והא אביי שרא ליה לרב דימי בר ליואי לכברויי סלי,ההוא טעותא הואי,וטעותא מי הדרא והא אמר אבידן פעם אחת נתקשרו שמים בעבים כסבורים העם לומר חשכה הוא ונכנסו לבית הכנסת והתפללו של מוצאי שבת בשבת ונתפזרו העבים וזרחה החמה,ובאו ושאלו את רבי ואמר הואיל והתפללו התפללו שאני צבור דלא מטרחינן להו:,א"ר חייא בר אבין רב צלי של שבת בערב שבת רבי יאשיה מצלי של מוצאי שבת בשבת רב צלי של שבת בערב שבת אומר קדושה על הכוס או אינו אומר קדושה על הכוס ת"ש דאמר רב נחמן אמר שמואל מתפלל אדם של שבת בערב שבת ואומר קדושה על הכוס והלכתא כוותיה,רבי יאשיה מצלי של מוצאי שבת בשבת אומר הבדלה על הכוס או אינו אומר הבדלה על הכוס ת"ש דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל מתפלל אדם של מוצאי שבת בשבת ואומר הבדלה על הכוס,אמר ר' זירא אמר רבי אסי אמר ר' אלעזר א"ר חנינא אמר רב בצד עמוד זה התפלל ר' ישמעאל בר' יוסי של שבת בערב שבת,כי אתא עולא אמר בצד תמרה הוה ולא בצד עמוד הוה ולא ר' ישמעאל ברבי יוסי הוה אלא ר' אלעזר בר' יוסי הוה ולא של שבת בערב שבת הוה אלא של מוצאי שבת בשבת הוה:,תפלת הערב אין לה קבע: מאי אין לה קבע אילימא דאי בעי מצלי כוליה ליליא ליתני תפלת הערב כל הלילה אלא מאי אין לה קבע,כמאן דאמר תפלת ערבית רשות דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל תפלת ערבית רבן גמליאל אומר חובה ר' יהושע אומר רשות אמר אביי הלכה כדברי האומר חובה ורבא אמר הלכה כדברי האומר רשות.,ת"ר מעשה בתלמיד אחד שבא לפני ר' יהושע א"ל תפלת ערבית רשות או חובה אמר ליה רשות,בא לפני רבן גמליאל א"ל תפלת ערבית רשות או חובה א"ל חובה א"ל והלא ר' יהושע אמר לי רשות א"ל המתן עד שיכנסו בעלי תריסין לבית המדרש,כשנכנסו בעלי תריסין עמד השואל ושאל תפלת ערבית רשות או חובה א"ל רבן גמליאל חובה אמר להם רבן גמליאל לחכמים כלום יש אדם שחולק בדבר זה אמר ליה ר' יהושע לאו א"ל והלא משמך אמרו לי רשות,אמר ליה יהושע עמוד על רגליך ויעידו בך עמד רבי יהושע על רגליו ואמר אלמלא אני חי והוא מת יכול החי להכחיש את המת ועכשיו שאני חי והוא חי היאך יכול החי להכחיש את החי,היה רבן גמליאל יושב ודורש ור' יהושע עומד על רגליו עד שרננו כל העם ואמרו לחוצפית התורגמן עמוד ועמד,אמרי עד כמה נצעריה וניזיל בר"ה אשתקד צעריה בבכורות במעשה דר' צדוק צעריה הכא נמי צעריה תא ונעבריה,מאן נוקים ליה נוקמיה לרבי יהושע בעל מעשה הוא נוקמיה לר' עקיבא דילמא עניש ליה דלית ליה זכות אבות,אלא נוקמיה לר' אלעזר בן עזריה דהוא חכם והוא עשיר והוא עשירי לעזרא הוא חכם דאי מקשי ליה מפרק ליה והוא עשיר דאי אית ליה לפלוחי לבי קיסר אף הוא אזל ופלח והוא עשירי לעזרא דאית ליה זכות אבות ולא מצי עניש ליה אתו ואמרו ליה ניחא ליה למר דליהוי ריש מתיבתא אמר להו איזיל ואימליך באינשי ביתי אזל ואמליך בדביתהו אמרה ליה 27b. directly bnext to his rabbi,presumptuously indicating that he is his rabbi’s equal, band behind his rabbias it creates the impression that he is bowing to him ( iTosafot /i)?, bAnd it was taughtin a ibaraita /i, in a more extreme manner, as bRabbi Eliezer says: One who prays behind his rabbi and one who greets his rabbiwithout waiting for his rabbi to greet him first, bone who returns his rabbi’s greetingwithout saying: Greetings to you, rabbi, bone who rivals his rabbi’s yeshiva,i.e., establishes a yeshiva of his own and teaches during his rabbi’s lifetime without his consent (Rambam), band one who says somethingin the name of his rabbi bwhich he did not hear directly from his rabbi, causes the Divine Presence to withdraw from Israel. /b,With regard to Rabbi Yirmeya’s conduct, the Gemara explains that bRabbi Yirmeya bar Abba is different,as he was not a mere student of Rav. Rather, he bwas a disciple-colleagueand was, therefore, permitted to act that way. bAnd that is whyon one occasion, when Rav prayed the Shabbat prayer early, bRabbi Yirmeya bar Abba asked him: Did you distance yourselffrom labor and accept the sanctity of Shabbat? bRav said to him: Yes, I distanced myself. AndRabbi Yirmeya bdid not say to him: Did the Master distance himself,as would have been appropriate had he merely been Rav’s student.,Although Rav replied that he distanced himself from labor, bdid heindeed need to bdistance himselffrom labor? bDidn’t Rabbi Avin say: Once RabbiYehuda HaNasi bprayedthe bShabbatprayer bon the eve of Shabbatbefore nightfall. bHethen bentered the bathhouse and emerged and taught us our chaptersthat we had learned, band it was not yet dark. Rava said: Thatis a case where he had benteredthe bathhouse bto perspire, and it was before theSages issued a bdecreeprohibiting perspiring in a bathhouse on Shabbat.,The Gemara asks: bIs that so,that he was required to refrain from labor? bDidn’t Abaye permit Rav Dimi bar Liva’ei to fumigate baskets with sulfureven though he had already recited the Shabbat prayer, indicating that it is permitted to perform labor even after the Shabbat prayer?,The Gemara responds: bThat was an error,as Rav Dimi did not intend to begin Shabbat early. It was a cloudy day and he mistakenly thought that the sun had set and that was why he prayed. Consequently, even though he prayed, the Shabbat prayer did not obligate him to conduct himself in accordance with the sanctity of Shabbat and he was allowed to perform labor even after his prayer.,The Gemara goes on to ask: bCan a mistake be reversed,enabling one to conduct himself as if he had not prayed? bDidn’t Avidan,a student of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, bsay: Once the sky became overcast,leading bthe people to think that it wasthe bdarkof night; bthey entered the synagogue and recited theevening bprayer of the conclusion of Shabbat on Shabbat. Andlater, bthe clouds cleared and the sun shone,indicating that it was still day., bAnd they came and asked RabbiYehuda HaNasi what they should do, band he said: Since they have prayed, they have prayed,and they need not pray again. Although they prayed erroneously, their mistake is not reversible and what was done remains. The Gemara responds: bA community is differentin bthat we do not burden themto pray again.,The Gemara continues to discuss the possibility of reciting the evening prayer early, even on Shabbat. bRabbi Ḥiyya bar Avin said: Rav prayedthe bShabbatprayer bon the eve of Shabbatbefore nightfall. bRabbi Yoshiya would pray theevening bprayer of the conclusion of Shabbat on Shabbat.With regard to the fact that bRav prayedthe bShabbatprayer bon the eve of Shabbatbefore nightfall, the dilemma is raised: In those cases, did bhe recite ikiddushover the cupof wine, bor did he not recite ikiddushover the cupof wine before the stars emerged? bCome and heara resolution to this, as bRav Naḥman saidthat bShmuel said: One praysthe bShabbatprayer bon the eve of Shabbatbefore nightfall band recites ikiddushover the cupof wine. bAnd the ihalakhais in accordance with hisruling.,A similar dilemma was raised concerning the fact that bRabbi Yoshiya would pray theevening bprayer of the conclusion of Shabbat on Shabbat:After praying, while it is still Shabbat, bdoes he recite ihavdalaover the cupof wine bor does one not recite ihavdalaover the cupof wine? bCome and heara resolution to this, as bRav Yehuda saidthat bShmuel said: One prays theevening bprayer of the conclusion of Shabbat on Shabbat and recites ihavdalaover the cupof wine., bRabbi Zeira saidthat bRabbi Asi saidthat bRabbi Elazar saidthat bRabbi Ḥanina saidthat bRav said: Alongside thisspecific bpillarbefore me, bRabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, prayedthe bShabbatprayer bon the eve of Shabbatbefore nightfall., bBut when Ulla camefrom the Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he related a different version of this story. bHe saidthat he had heard: This transpired bbeside a palm tree, not beside a pillar, and it was not Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, butit was bRabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Yosei, and it was notthe bShabbatprayer bon Shabbat evebefore nightfall, bratherit was the bprayer of the conclusion of Shabbat on Shabbat. /b,We learned in the mishna: bThe evening prayermay be recited throughout the night and bis not fixedto a specific hour. The Gemara asks: bWhat is the meaning of is not fixed? If you say that ifone bwishes, he may pray throughout the night,then bletthe mishna bteach: The evening prayermay be recited bthroughout the night. Rather, what isthe meaning of bnot fixed? /b,It is bin accordance withthe opinion of bthe one who said: The evening prayer is optional.As bRav Yehuda saidthat bShmuel saidwith regard to bthe evening prayer. Rabban Gamliel says:It is bobligatory. Rabbi Yehoshua says:It is boptional. Abaye said: The ihalakhais in accordance with the statement of the one who said:The evening prayer is bobligatory. Rava said: The ihalakhais in accordance with the statement of the one who said:The evening prayer is boptional. /b, bThe Sages taught:There was ban incident involving a student, who came before Rabbi Yehoshua.The student bsaid to him: Is the evening prayer optional or obligatory?Rabbi Yehoshua bsaid to him: Optional. /b,The same student bcame before Rabban Gamliel and said to him: Is the evening prayer optional or obligatory?Rabban Gamliel bsaid to him: Obligatory.The student bsaid toRabban Gamliel: bBut didn’t Rabbi Yehoshua tell methat the evening prayer is boptional?Rabban Gamliel bsaid tothe student: bWait until the “masters of the shields,”a reference to the Torah scholars who battle in the war of Torah, benter the study hall,at which point we will discuss this issue., bWhen the masters of the shields entered, the questioner stoodbefore everyone present band asked: Is the evening prayer optional or obligatory? Rabban Gamliel said to him: Obligatory.In order to ascertain whether or not Rabbi Yehoshua still maintained his opinion, bRabban Gamliel said tothe Sages: bIs there any person who disputes this matter? Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: No,no one disagrees. In deference to the iNasi /i, he did not wish to argue with him publicly ( iTziyyun LeNefesh Ḥayya /i). Rabban Gamliel bsaid toRabbi Yehoshua: bBut was it not in your name that they told methat the evening prayer is boptional? /b,Rabban Gamliel bsaid toRabbi Yehoshua: bYehoshua, stand on your feet and they will testify against you. Rabbi Yehoshua stood on his feet and said: If I were alive andthe student bwere dead, the living can contradict the dead,and I could deny issuing that ruling. bNow that I am alive and he is alive, how can the living contradict the living?I have no choice but to admit that I said it.,In the meantime, bRabban Gamliel,as the iNasi /i, bwas sitting and lecturing, and Rabbi Yehoshuaall the while bwas standing on his feet,because Rabban Gamliel did not instruct him to sit. He remained standing in deference to the iNasi /i. This continued for some time, buntilit aroused great resentment against Rabban Gamliel, and ball of the peopleassembled began bmurmuring and said to Ḥutzpit the disseminator: Stopconveying Rabban Gamliel’s lecture. bAnd he stopped. /b,The Gemara relates that in their murmuring bthey said: How long willRabban Gamliel bcontinue afflicting him? Last year on Rosh HaShana, he afflicted him;Rabban Gamliel ordered Rabbi Yehoshua to come to him carrying his staff and bag, on the day on which Yom Kippur occurred, according to Rabbi Yehoshua’s calculations. bRegarding the firstborn, in the incidentinvolving the question bof Rabbi Tzadok, he afflicted himjust as he did now, and forced him to remain standing as punishment for his failure to defend his differing opinion. bHere too, he is afflicting him. Let us remove himfrom his position as iNasi /i.,It was so agreed, but the question arose: bWho shall we establishin his place? Shall we bestablish Rabbi Yehoshuain his place? The Sages rejected that option because Rabbi Yehoshua bwas party to the incidentfor which Rabban Gamliel was deposed. Appointing him would be extremely upsetting for Rabban Gamliel. Shall we bestablish Rabbi Akivain his place? The Sages rejected that option because Rabbi Akiva, who descended from a family of converts, would be vulnerable. bPerhapsdue to Rabban Gamliel’s resentment he bwouldcause bhimto be divinely bpunished as he lacks the merit of his ancestorsto protect him., bRather,suggested the Sages, blet us establish Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryain his place, his outstanding characteristics set him apart from the other candidates. bHe is wise, rich, and a tenthgeneration descendant bof Ezra.The Gemara explains: bHe is wise, so ifRabban Gamliel raises a bchallengein matters of Torah, bhe will answer itand not be embarrassed. bAnd he is rich, so if the needarises bto pay homage to the Caesar’s courtand serve as a representative of Israel to lobby and negotiate, he has sufficient wealth to cover the costs of the long journeys, taxes, and gifts, so bhe too is able to go and pay homage. And he isa btenthgeneration descendant bof Ezra, so he has the merit of his ancestors, andRabban Gamliel bwill be unable tocause bhimto be bpunished. They came and said to him: Would the Master consent to being the Head of the Yeshiva? He said to them: I will go and consult with my household. He went and consulted with his wife. She said to him: /b
13. Babylonian Talmud, Pesahim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

7a. וניבטליה בשית כיון דאיסורא דרבנן עילויה כדאורייתא דמיא ולאו ברשותיה קיימא ולא מצי מבטיל,דאמר רב גידל אמר ר' חייא בר יוסף אמר רב המקדש משש שעות ולמעלה אפילו בחיטי קורדניתא אין חוששין לקידושין,ולבתר איסורא לא מצי מבטיל ליה והא תניא היה יושב בבית המדרש ונזכר שיש חמץ בתוך ביתו מבטלו בלבו אחד שבת ואחד יום טוב בשלמא שבת משכחת לה כגון שחל ארבעה עשר להיות בשבת אלא יום טוב בתר איסורא הוא,אמר רב אחא בר יעקב הכא בתלמיד יושב לפני רבו עסקינן ונזכר שיש עיסה מגולגלת בתוך ביתו ומתיירא שמא תחמיץ קדים ומבטיל ליה מיקמי דתחמיץ,דיקא נמי דקתני היה יושב בתוך בית המדרש שמע מינה:,אמר רבה בר רב הונא אמר רב הפת שעיפשה כיון שרבתה מצה מותרת היכי דמי אילימא דידע בה דחמץ היא כי רבתה מצה מאי הוי,אלא דלא ידעינן בה אי חמץ הוא אי מצה הוא מאי איריא כי רבתה מצה אפילו כי לא רבתה מצה נמי ניזיל בתר בתרא,מי לא תנן מעות שנמצאו לפני סוחרי בהמה לעולם מעשר בהר הבית חולין,בירושלים בשעת הרגל מעשר בשאר ימות השנה חולין,ואמר רב שמעיה בר זירא מאי טעמא הואיל ושוקי ירושלים עשויין להתכבד בכל יום אלמא אמרי' קמאי קמאי אזלי ליה והני אחריני נינהו הכא נמי נימא קמא קמא אזיל והאי דהאידנא הוא,שאני הכא דעיפושה מוכיח עילויה אי עיפושה מוכיח עילויה כי רבתה מצה מאי הוי אמר רבה לא תימא שרבתה מצה אלא אימא שרבו ימי מצה עילויה,אי הכי פשיטא לא צריכא דעיפושה מרובה מהו דתימא כיון דעיפושה מרובה איגליא מילתא דודאי חמץ מעליא הוא קא משמע לן,כיון שרבו ימי מצה עילויה אמרינן כל יומא ויומא נהמא חמימא אפה ושדא עילויה ועפשא טפי,ומי אזלינן בתר בתרא והא תניא ר' יוסי בר יהודה אומר תיבה שנשתמשו בה מעות חולין ומעות מעשר אם רוב חולין חולין אם רוב מעשר מעשר ואמאי ליזיל בתר בתרא,אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק הכא במאי עסקינן כגון שנשתמשו בה מעות חולין ומעות מעשר ואין יודע איזה מהן בסוף רב זביד אמר כגון שנשתמשו בה ציבורין ציבורין רב פפא אמר כגון דאשתכח בגומא:,אמר רב יהודה הבודק צריך שיברך מאי מברך רב פפי אמר משמיה דרבא (אומר) לבער חמץ רב פפא אמר משמיה דרבא על ביעור חמץ בלבער כולי עלמא לא פליגי דודאי להבא משמע 7a. The Gemara asks: bBut let him renderthe leaven bnull and void during the sixthhour, when he burns it. The Gemara answers: bSincethere is ba rabbinic prohibitionthat takes effect bonthe leaven, as it is prohibited to derive benefit from it after the fifth hour, its legal status bis likethat of leaven prohibited bby Torah law, andtherefore bit is not in his possession and heis bunable to nullifyit.,The Gemara continues: There is proof that the Sages were stringent with regard to leaven prohibited by rabbinic law, bas Rav Giddel saidthat bRabbi Ḥiyya bar Yosef saidthat bRav said:With regard to ba man who betrothsa woman on the fourteenth of Nisan bfromthe beginning of bthe sixth hour and onward, evenif he does so bwith wheat from the mountains [ ikurdanaita /i],which is particularly hard and there is no certainty that it will ferment even if water falls on it, nevertheless, as it is possible that the wheat leavened, its legal status is that of leaven. Consequently, it is prohibited to derive benefit from this wheat, which is legally worthless. Therefore, if a man gives the wheat to a woman for the purpose of betrothal, boneneed bnotbe bconcerned thatit is ba betrothal.The reason is that a betrothal is effective only if the man gives the woman an object worth at least a iperuta /i. In this case the Sages disqualify the betrothal and allow the woman to marry another man, despite the fact that by Torah law she is betrothed to the first man, as the leaven with which he betrothed her is prohibited only by rabbinic law.,The Gemara raises a difficulty: bAndis it indeed the case that bafter theleaven has become bprohibitedone is bunable to render it null and void? But wasn’t it taughtin a ibaraita /i: If one bwas sitting in the study hall and he remembered that there is leavened bread in his house,he should brender it null and void in his heart, both on Shabbat and on the Festival?The Gemara analyzes this statement: bGranted,on bShabbat youcan bfindthis case, as one can nullify the leaven before it becomes prohibited, in a case bwhere the fourteenthof Nisan boccurs on Shabbatand he remembers to nullify the leaven before the prohibition takes effect. bHowever,if he remembered on the bFestivalitself, bit is after the prohibitionhas taken effect, as the Festival has already begun, and yet the ibaraitasays that one may render the leaven null and void., bRav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: Here we are dealing with a student sitting before his teacher, and he remembers that there is kneaded dough in his house, and he is afraid lest it leavenbefore he can return home to warn the members of his household. Since the dough has not yet leavened and is not yet prohibited, he can take bearlieraction band render it null and void before it becomes leavened. /b,The Gemara comments: The language of the ibaraita bis also precisein accordance with this explanation, basthe ibaraita bteaches:If one bwas sitting in the study hall.This indicates that the dough has not yet risen, and the problem is that he cannot arrive home in time to prevent it from rising. However, if it had already become leavened, rendering it null and void will not remedy the situation even if he were home. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, blearn from thisproof that Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov’s interpretation is correct., bRabba bar Rav Huna saidthat bRav said:With regard to a vessel that contains several loaves in which there was bbread that became moldy,and it is not evident whether it is leaven or imatza /i, bonce there was more imatza /ithan leaven in the vessel, it is bpermitted.The Gemara first analyzes the case itself: bWhat are the circumstances? If you say that he knows thatthis loaf bis leavened bread,even if bthere were more imatza /i, what ofit? What difference does it make that most of the food is imatza /i, if it is clear that this loaf is leaven?, bRather,Rav must be speaking of a case bwhere we do not know whether it is leavened breador bwhether it is imatza /i.However, in that case, bwhydiscuss bspecificallya situation bwhere there was more imatza /iin the vessel? bEvenin a case bwhere there was not more imatza /iin the vessel bas well,the questionable loaf is likely to be imatza /i, as blet us follow the lastitem placed in the vessel, which even on the first day of Passover would be imatza /i., bDidn’t we learnin a mishna: With regard to bcoins that were found before animal merchantsin Jerusalem, bthey are alwaysassumed to be money of the second btithe,as most of the animals purchased in Jerusalem were bought with that money. This ihalakhaapplies both during a Festival and throughout the year, as people would purchase animals for meat with their second-tithe money, and it can therefore be assumed that these coins have the status of second tithe. However, if the money was found bon the Temple Mountit is bnon-sacredmoney, even during a Festival. It can be assumed that one who enters the Temple Mount has already purchased all the animals that he required beforehand. Any coins in his possession are non-sacred money, not tithes.,If the money was found elsewhere bin Jerusalem during the Festival,when many people came to Jerusalem with their second-tithe money, the coins are presumed to be second- btithemoney. However, if the coins were found bduring the rest of the year,it is bnon-sacredmoney.,The Gemara explains the proof. bAnd Rav Shemaya bar Zeira said: What is the reasonthat during the rest of the year the coins are considered non-sacred money, even on the day after the Festival? bSince the markets of Jerusalem tend to be cleaned every day,any money left there would already have been found by the street cleaners. Consequently, any coins found there were left there recently. bApparently, we saythat bthe first ones are gone and theseobjects bare later ones. Here too,with regard to moldy bread, blet us say: The first oneshave been eaten and bare gone, and thisfood bis from nowand is undoubtedly imatza /i.,The Gemara rejects this proof: It is bdifferent here, as the mold proves aboutthe loaf that it is leaven, as food does not become moldy unless it has been sitting for a long time. The Gemara retorts: bIf its mold proves aboutthe loaf that it is leaven, bif there was more imatza /iin the vessel, bwhat ofit? Even in that case, the very fact that it is moldy proves that it is leaven. bRabba said: Do not say there was more imatza /ithan leaven in the vessel; brather, say that several days ofeating imatzahave passed overthe vessel. In other words, several days of the Festival, during which imatzais consumed, have passed. Therefore, it is more likely that the moldy loaf is imatza /i.,The Gemara asks: bIf so,it is bobviousthat the moldy loaf is imatza /i, not leaven. The Gemara answers: bNo, it is necessaryto teach this ihalakhawith regard to a situation where bits mold is extensive. Lest you say: Since its mold is extensive the matter is revealed that it is certainly leavened bread,therefore Rav bteaches usthat one cannot be entirely sure that this is the case.,The Gemara explains the reason for the uncertainty. bSince several days ofeating imatzahave passed overthe vessel, bwe say: Each and every day he baked warm loaves, which he placed uponthe previous days’ imatza /i, causing bit to grow moldier.Therefore, it is possible that even though only a brief time has passed, the imatzahas grown very moldy, due to the moisture and heat inside the vessel.,In regard to the aforementioned principle, the Gemara asks: bAnd do we,in general, bfollow the lastitem in determining the identity of the item in question? bBut wasn’t it taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Yosei bar Yehuda says:With regard to ba boxthat people bused forboth bnon-sacred coins andsecond- btithe coins, if the majorityof its use was for bnon-sacredmoney, the coins are considered bnon-sacred. If the majorityof its use was for second- btithecoins, the coins are considered second- btithemoney. The Gemara asks: bBut whyis this so? bLet us followthe blastitem placed in the box., bRav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: With what are we dealing here?We are dealing with a case bwherepeople busedthe box bforboth bnon-sacred coins andsecond- btithe coins, and he does not know whichof the two kinds of money was placed there blast.br bRav Zevid said:The ibaraitais referring to a case bwhere he usedone part of the box for bpilesof non-sacred coins and another part of the box for bpilesof second-tithe coins. In this case, there was no definitive most recent use of the box, as a coin may have moved from one side of the box to the other. br bRav Pappa said:We are dealing with a case bwherethe coin bwas found in a holein the box. The concern is that this coin might not be of the type last placed into the box. Instead, it is possible that this coin remained from a previous use and was not removed because it was obscured in the hole., bRav Yehuda said: One who searchesfor leaven bmust recite a blessing.The Gemara asks: bWhat blessing does he recite,i.e., what is the correct formula of the blessing? bRav Pappi said in the name of Ravathat one brecites:Who has made us holy through His mitzvot and has commanded us bto remove leavened bread. Rav Pappa said in the name of Rava:One should recite: bConcerning the removal of leavened bread.The Gemara comments: bWith regard tothe formula: bTo remove, everyone agrees thatit bcertainly refers to the future.This formulation undoubtedly indicates that the person reciting the blessing is about to begin fulfilling the mitzva of removing leaven, and it is therefore an appropriate blessing.


Subjects of this text:

subject book bibliographic info
amidah" '123.0_118.0@ten commandments (decalogue) Reif, Problems with Prayers: Studies in the Textual History of Early Rabbinic Liturgy (2006) 118
archaeology, arch(a)eological Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 117
benedictions/blessings Reif, Problems with Prayers: Studies in the Textual History of Early Rabbinic Liturgy (2006) 118
boethus (dynasty of) Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 55
cohen, shaye Hidary, Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash (2017) 85
commandment, commandments Balberg, Fractured Tablets: Forgetfulness and Fallibility in Late Ancient Rabbinic Culture (2023) 140
disputes, schools (of shammai and hillel) Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 55
essenes (see also qumran) Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 55
gamaliel (gamliel) the younger, r. Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 117
gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Hidary, Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash (2017) 85
greek, language Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 117
heart Balberg, Fractured Tablets: Forgetfulness and Fallibility in Late Ancient Rabbinic Culture (2023) 140
hermogenes of tarsus Hidary, Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash (2017) 85
hillel, school of Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 55
hillel the elder Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 55
kingdom of heaven Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 117
leaven (hametz) Balberg, Fractured Tablets: Forgetfulness and Fallibility in Late Ancient Rabbinic Culture (2023) 140
levitical/ritual purity Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 117
marriage Balberg, Fractured Tablets: Forgetfulness and Fallibility in Late Ancient Rabbinic Culture (2023) 140; Reif, Problems with Prayers: Studies in the Textual History of Early Rabbinic Liturgy (2006) 118
mikva, mikvaot (ritual bathhouse) Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 117
neusner, jacob Hidary, Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash (2017) 85
pagan, paganism Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 117
patriarch (under romans) Hidary, Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash (2017) 85
pharisaic tradition/halakha Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 55
philo Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 55
purification ~ Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 117
purity (see also food laws) Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 55, 117
purity laws Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 55
purity system Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 117
sadducees Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 55
schwartz, seth Hidary, Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash (2017) 85
seminal emission Balberg, Fractured Tablets: Forgetfulness and Fallibility in Late Ancient Rabbinic Culture (2023) 140
shammai, school Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 55
shammai (see also subject index) Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 55
spiritual purity Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 117
stern, david Hidary, Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash (2017) 85
system, halakhic ~ Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 55
tarfon, r. Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 55
yadin, azzan' Hidary, Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash (2017) 85