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



8013
Mishnah, Kelim, 1.9


בֵּין הָאוּלָם וְלַמִּזְבֵּחַ מְקֻדָּשׁ מִמֶּנָּה, שֶׁאֵין בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין וּפְרוּעֵי רֹאשׁ נִכְנָסִים לְשָׁם. הַהֵיכָל מְקֻדָּשׁ מִמֶּנּוּ, שֶׁאֵין נִכְנָס לְשָׁם שֶׁלֹּא רְחוּץ יָדַיִם וְרַגְלָיִם. קֹדֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִׁים מְקֻדָּשׁ מֵהֶם, שֶׁאֵין נִכְנָס לְשָׁם אֶלָּא כֹהֵן גָּדוֹל בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים בִּשְׁעַת הָעֲבוֹדָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, בַּחֲמִשָּׁה דְבָרִים בֵּין הָאוּלָם וְלַמִּזְבֵּחַ שָׁוֶה לַהֵיכָל, שֶׁאֵין בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין, וּפְרוּעֵי רֹאשׁ, וּשְׁתוּיֵי יַיִן, וְשֶׁלֹּא רְחוּץ יָדַיִם וְרַגְלַיִם נִכְנָסִים לְשָׁם, וּפוֹרְשִׁין מִבֵּין הָאוּלָם וְלַמִּזְבֵּחַ בִּשְׁעַת הַקְטָרָה:The area between the porch (ulam) and the altar is holier, for [priests] who have blemishes or unkempt hair may not enter it. The Hekhal is holier, for no one whose hands or feet are unwashed may enter it. The Holy of Holies is holier, for only the high priest, on Yom Kippur, at the time of the service, may enter it. Rabbi Yose said: in five respects the area between the porch and the altar is equal to the Hekhal, for those afflicted with blemishes or with a wild growth of hair, or who have drunk wine or whose hands or feet are unwashed may not enter there, and the people must keep away from the area between the porch and the altar when the incense is being burned.


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

21 results
1. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 31 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

2. Hebrew Bible, Leviticus, 16.17 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

16.17. וְכָל־אָדָם לֹא־יִהְיֶה בְּאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד בְּבֹאוֹ לְכַפֵּר בַּקֹּדֶשׁ עַד־צֵאתוֹ וְכִפֶּר בַּעֲדוֹ וּבְעַד בֵּיתוֹ וּבְעַד כָּל־קְהַל יִשְׂרָאֵל׃ 16.17. And there shall be no man in the tent of meeting when he goeth in to make atonement in the holy place, until he come out, and have made atonement for himself, and for his household, and for all the assembly of Israel."
3. Hebrew Bible, 1 Kings, 8 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE)

4. Septuagint, Judith, 12.6-12.9 (2nd cent. BCE - 0th cent. CE)

12.6. and sent to Holofernes and said, "Let my lord now command that your servant be permitted to go out and pray. 12.7. So Holofernes commanded his guards not to hinder her. And she remained in the camp for three days, and went out each night to the valley of Bethulia, and bathed at the spring in the camp. 12.8. When she came up from the spring she prayed the Lord God of Israel to direct her way for the raising up of her people. 12.9. So she returned clean and stayed in the tent until she ate her food toward evening.
5. Anon., Sibylline Oracles, 3.591-3.593 (1st cent. BCE - 5th cent. CE)

3.591. But when from Italy shall come a man 3.592. A spoiler, then, Laodicea, thou 3.593. Beautiful city of the Carian
6. Josephus Flavius, Jewish Antiquities, 1.323, 5.199, 5.227, 12.106, 12.145, 15.407, 15.417-15.419, 18.90-18.95, 20.6-20.14 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

1.323. o Laban left off searching any further, not supposing that his daughter in such circumstances would approach to those images. So he made a league with Jacob, and bound it by oaths, that he would not bear him any malice on account of what had happened; and Jacob made the like league, and promised to love Laban’s daughters. 5.199. for this Jabin came out of Hazor, a city that was situate over the lake Semechonitis, and had in pay three hundred thousand footmen, and ten thousand horsemen, with no fewer than three thousand chariots. Sisera was the commander of all his army, and was the principal person in the king’s favor. He so sorely beat the Israelites when they fought with him, that he ordered them to pay tribute. 5.227. And as the report of Gideon’s victory came to the Israelites, they took their weapons and pursued their enemies, and overtook them in a certain valley encompassed with torrents, a place which these could not get over; so they encompassed them, and slew them all, with their kings, Oreb and Zeeb. 12.106. But in the morning they came to the court and saluted Ptolemy, and then went away to their former place, where, when they had washed their hands, and purified themselves, they betook themselves to the interpretation of the laws. 12.145. 4. And these were the contents of this epistle. He also published a decree through all his kingdom in honor of the temple, which contained what follows: “It shall be lawful for no foreigner to come within the limits of the temple round about; which thing is forbidden also to the Jews, unless to those who, according to their own custom, have purified themselves. 15.407. for that they ought to have them in their power, as they formerly had. However, the Jews sent ambassadors to Claudius Caesar, to intercede with him for them; upon whose coming, king Agrippa, junior, being then at Rome, asked for and obtained the power over them from the emperor, who gave command to Vitellius, who was then commander in Syria, to give it them accordingly. 15.417. Thus was the first enclosure. In the midst of which, and not far from it, was the second, to be gone up to by a few steps: this was encompassed by a stone wall for a partition, with an inscription, which forbade any foreigner to go in under pain of death. 15.418. Now this inner enclosure had on its southern and northern quarters three gates [equally] distant one from another; but on the east quarter, towards the sun-rising, there was one large gate, through which such as were pure came in, together with their wives; 15.419. but the temple further inward in that gate was not allowed to the women; but still more inward was there a third [court of the] temple, whereinto it was not lawful for any but the priests alone to enter. The temple itself was within this; and before that temple was the altar, upon which we offer our sacrifices and burnt-offerings to God. 18.91. although at this time they were laid up in the tower of Antonia, the citadel so called, and that on the occasion following: There was one of the [high] priests, named Hyrcanus; and as there were many of that name, he was the first of them; this man built a tower near the temple, and when he had so done, he generally dwelt in it, and had these vestments with him, because it was lawful for him alone to put them on, and he had them there reposited when he went down into the city, and took his ordinary garments; 18.92. the same things were continued to be done by his sons, and by their sons after them. But when Herod came to be king, he rebuilt this tower, which was very conveniently situated, in a magnificent manner; and because he was a friend to Antonius, he called it by the name of Antonia. And as he found these vestments lying there, he retained them in the same place, as believing, that while he had them in his custody, the people would make no innovations against him. 18.93. The like to what Herod did was done by his son Archelaus, who was made king after him; after whom the Romans, when they entered on the government, took possession of these vestments of the high priest, and had them reposited in a stone-chamber, under the seal of the priests, and of the keepers of the temple, the captain of the guard lighting a lamp there every day; 18.94. and seven days before a festival they were delivered to them by the captain of the guard, when the high priest having purified them, and made use of them, laid them up again in the same chamber where they had been laid up before, and this the very next day after the feast was over. This was the practice at the three yearly festivals, and on the fast day; 18.95. but Vitellius put those garments into our own power, as in the days of our forefathers, and ordered the captain of the guard not to trouble himself to inquire where they were laid, or when they were to be used; and this he did as an act of kindness, to oblige the nation to him. Besides which, he also deprived Joseph, who was also called Caiaphas, of the high priesthood, and appointed Jonathan the son of Aus, the former high priest, to succeed him. After which, he took his journey back to Antioch. 20.6. He also at this time sent for the high priests and the principal citizens of Jerusalem, and this at the command of the emperor, and admonished them that they should lay up the long garment and the sacred vestment, which it is customary for nobody but the high priest to wear, in the tower of Antonia, that it might be under the power of the Romans, as it had been formerly. 20.6. 2. When he had said this, he set Artabanus upon his horse, and followed him on foot, in honor of a king whom he owned as greater than himself; which, when Artabanus saw, he was very uneasy at it, and sware by his present fortune and honor that he would get down from his horse, unless Izates would get upon his horse again, and go before him. 20.7. Now the Jews durst not contradict what he had said, but desired Fadus, however, and Longinus, (which last was come to Jerusalem, and had brought a great army with him, out of a fear that the [rigid] injunctions of Fadus should force the Jews to rebel,) that they might, in the first place, have leave to send ambassadors to Caesar, to petition him that they may have the holy vestments under their own power; and that, in the next place, they would tarry till they knew what answer Claudius would give to that their request. 20.7. but he could not prevail with him. For Izates so well knew the strength and good fortune of the Romans, that he took Bardanes to attempt what was impossible to be done; 20.8. So they replied, that they would give them leave to send their ambassadors, provided they would give them their sons as pledges [for their peaceable behavior]. And when they had agreed so to do, and had given them the pledges they desired, the ambassadors were sent accordingly. 20.8. and forced all the rest to betake themselves to flight. He also pursued their king, and drove him into a fortress called Arsamus, and following on the siege vigorously, he took that fortress. And when he had plundered it of all the prey that was in it, which was not small, he returned to Adiabene; yet did not he take Abia alive, because, when he found himself encompassed on every side, he slew himself. 20.9. But when, upon their coming to Rome, Agrippa, junior, the son of the deceased, understood the reason why they came, (for he dwelt with Claudius Caesar, as we said before,) he besought Caesar to grant the Jews their request about the holy vestments, and to send a message to Fadus accordingly. 20.9. “O Lord and Governor, if I have not in vain committed myself to thy goodness, but have justly determined that thou only art the Lord and principal of all beings, come now to my assistance, and defend me from my enemies, not only on my own account, but on account of their insolent behavior with regard to thy power, while they have not feared to lift up their proud and arrogant tongue against thee.” 20.11. “Claudius Caesar Germanicus, tribune of the people the fifth time, and designed consul the fourth time, and imperator the tenth time, the father of his country, to the magistrates, senate, and people, and the whole nation of the Jews, sendeth greeting. 20.11. But when he could not induce them to be quiet for they still went on in their reproaches to him, he gave order that the whole army should take their entire armor, and come to Antonia, which was a fortress, as we have said already, which overlooked the temple; 20.12. Upon the presentation of your ambassadors to me by Agrippa, my friend, whom I have brought up, and have now with me, and who is a person of very great piety, who are come to give me thanks for the care I have taken of your nation, and to entreat me, in an earnest and obliging manner, that they may have the holy vestments, with the crown belonging to them, under their power,—I grant their request, as that excellent person Vitellius, who is very dear to me, had done before me. 20.12. upon which the Galileans were much displeased, and persuaded the multitude of the Jews to betake themselves to arms, and to regain their liberty, saying that slavery was in itself a bitter thing, but that when it was joined with direct injuries, it was perfectly intolerable 20.13. And I have complied with your desire, in the first place, out of regard to that piety which I profess, and because I would have every one worship God according to the laws of their own country; and this I do also because I shall hereby highly gratify king Herod, and Agrippa, junior, whose sacred regards to me, and earnest good-will to you, I am well acquainted with, and with whom I have the greatest friendship, and whom I highly esteem, and look on as persons of the best character. 20.13. From whence he came to a certain village called Lydda, which was not less than a city in largeness, and there heard the Samaritan cause a second time before his tribunal, and there learned from a certain Samaritan that one of the chief of the Jews, whose name was Dortus, and some other innovators with him, four in number, persuaded the multitude to a revolt from the Romans; 20.14. Now I have written about these affairs to Cuspius Fadus, my procurator. The names of those that brought me your letter are Cornelius, the son of Cero, Trypho, the son of Theudio, Dorotheus, the son of Nathaniel, and John, the son of Jotre. This letter is dated before the fourth of the calends of July, when Rufus and Pompeius Sylvanus are consuls.” 20.14. He also gave Mariamne in marriage to Archelaus, the son of Helcias, to whom she had formerly been betrothed by Agrippa her father; from which marriage was derived a daughter, whose name was Bernice.
7. Josephus Flavius, Against Apion, 2.102-2.109 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

2.102. But I leave this matter; for the proper way of confuting fools is not to use bare words, but to appeal to the things themselves that make against them. Now then, all such as ever saw the construction of our temple, of what nature it was, know well enough how the purity of it was never to be profaned; 2.103. for it had four several courts, encompassed with cloisters round about, every one of which had by our law a peculiar degree of separation from the rest. Into the first court every body was allowed to go, even foreigners; and none but women, during their courses, were prohibited to pass through it; 2.104. all the Jews went into the second court, as well as their wives, when they were free from all uncleanness; into the third went the Jewish men when they were clean and purified; into the fourth went the priests, having on their sacerdotal garments; 2.105. but for the most sacred place, none went in but the high priests, clothed in their peculiar garments. Now there is so great caution used about these offices of religion, that the priests are appointed to go into the temple but at certain hours: for, in the morning, at the opening of the inner temple, those that are to officiate receive the sacrifices, as they do again at noon, till the doors are shut. 2.106. Lastly, it is not so much as lawful to carry any vessel into the holy house; nor is there any thing therein, but the altar [of incense], the table [of show-bread], the censer, and the candlestick, which are all written in the law: 2.107. for there is nothing farther there, nor are there any mysteries performed that may not be spoken of; nor is there any feasting within the place. For what I have now said is publicly known, and supported by the testimony of the whole people, and their operations are very manifest; 2.108. for although there be four courses of the priests, and every one of them have above five thousand men in them, yet do they officiate on certain days only; and when those days are over, other priests succeed in the performance of their sacrifices, and assemble together at mid-day, and receive the keys of the temple, and the vessels by tale, without any thing relating to food or drink being carried into the temple; 2.109. nay, we are not allowed to offer such things at the altar, excepting what is prepared for the sacrifices. /p9. What then can we say of Apion, but that he examined nothing that concerned these things, while still he uttered incredible words about them! But it is a great shame for a grammarian not to be able to write true history.
8. Mishnah, Berachot, 9.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

9.5. One must bless [God] for the evil in the same way as one blesses for the good, as it says, “And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your might” (Deuteronomy 6:5). “With all your heart,” with your two impulses, the evil impulse as well as the good impulse. “With all your soul” even though he takes your soul [life] away from you. “With all your might” with all your money. Another explanation, “With all your might” whatever treatment he metes out to you. One should not show disrespect to the Eastern Gate, because it is in a direct line with the Holy of Holies. One should not enter the Temple Mount with a staff, or with shoes on, or with a wallet, or with dusty feet; nor should one make it a short cut, all the more spitting [is forbidden]. All the conclusions of blessings that were in the Temple they would say, “forever [lit. as long as the world is].” When the sectarians perverted their ways and said that there was only one world, they decreed that they should say, “for ever and ever [lit. from the end of the world to the end of the world]. They also decreed that a person should greet his fellow in God’s name, as it says, “And behold Boaz came from Bethlehem and said to the reapers, ‘May the Lord be with you.’ And they answered him, “May the Lord bless you’” (Ruth 2:. And it also says, “The Lord is with your, you valiant warrior” (Judges 6:12). And it also says, “And do not despise your mother when she grows old” (Proverbs 23:22). And it also says, “It is time to act on behalf of the Lord, for they have violated Your teaching” (Psalms 119:126). Rabbi Natan says: [this means] “They have violated your teaching It is time to act on behalf of the Lord.”"
9. Mishnah, Ketuvot, 13.11 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

13.11. Everyone may compel [their spouse] to go up to the land of Israel, but none may compel [their spouse] to leave. Everyone may compel [their spouse] to go up to Jerusalem, but none may compel [their spouse] to leave. The same is true for both men and women and [slaves]. If a man married a woman in the land of Israel and divorced her in the land of Israel, he must pay her [her ketubah] in the currency of the land of Israel. If he married a woman in the land of Israel and divorced her in Cappadocia he must pay her [her ketubah] in the currency of the land of Israel. If he married a woman in Cappadocia and divorced her in the land of Israel, he must a gain pay [her ketubah] in the currency of the land of Israel. Rabbi Shimon ben Gamaliel says that he must pay her [her ketubah] in the Cappadocian currency."
10. Mishnah, Kelim, 1.6-1.8 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

1.6. There are ten grades of holiness: the land of Israel is holier than all other lands. And what is the nature of its holiness? That from it are brought the omer, the firstfruits and the two loaves, which cannot be brought from any of the other lands." 1.7. Cities that are walled are holier, for metzoras must be sent out of them and a corpse, though it may be carried about within them as long as it is desired, may not be brought back once it has been taken out." 1.8. The area within the wall [of Jerusalem] is holier, for it is there that lesser holy things and second tithe may be eaten. The Temple Mount is holier, for zavim, zavot, menstruants and women after childbirth may not enter it. The chel is holier, for neither non-Jews nor one who contracted corpse impurity may enter it. The court of women is holier, for a tevul yom may not enter it, though he is not obligated a hatat for doing so. The court of the Israelites is holier, for a man who has not yet offered his obligatory sacrifices may not enter it, and if he enters he is liable for a hatat. The court of the priests is holier, for Israelites may not enter it except when they are required to do so: for laying on of the hands, slaying or waving."
11. Mishnah, Sanhedrin, 9.6 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

9.6. If one steals the sacred vessel called a “kasvah” (Numbers 4:7), or cursed by the name of an idol, or has sexual relations with an Aramean (non-Jewish) woman, he is punished by zealots. If a priest performed the temple service while impure, his fellow priests do not bring him to the court, but rather the young priests take him out into the courtyard and split his skull with clubs. A layman who performed the service in the Temple: Rabbi Akiva says: “He is strangled.” But the Sages say: “[His death is] at the hands of heaven.”"
12. Mishnah, Sukkah, 4.3, 4.6 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

4.3. “The aravah seven days.” How is this? If the seventh day of [the ritual of] the aravah fell on Shabbat, [it lasts] seven days; if it fell on any other day, [it lasts only] six." 4.6. As was its performance on a weekday, so was its performance on Shabbat, except that they would gather them on the eve of Shabbat and place them in golden basins so that they would not become wilted. Rabbi Yoha ben Beroka says: they used to bring palm branches and they would beat them on the ground at the sides of the altar, and that day was called “[the day of] the beating of the palm branches.”"
13. Mishnah, Tamid, 5.1, 6.3, 7.3 (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." 6.3. The one who had won the right to the incense took the dish from the middle of the spoon and gave it to his friend or his relative. If some of it spilled into the spoon, he would put it into his hands. They used to instruct him: Be careful not to begin immediately in front of you or else you may burn yourself. He then began to scatter the incense and [after finishing] went out. The one who burned the incense did not do so until the superintendent said to him: burn the incense. If it was the high priest who burned: he would say to him: Sir, high priest, burn the incense. Everyone left and he burned the incense and bowed down and went out." 7.3. If the high priest wished to burn the offerings [himself], he would go up the ascent with the deputy high priest at his right. When he reached the middle of the ascent the deputy took hold of his right hand and helped him up. The first [of the other priests] then handed to him the head and the foot and he laid his hands on them and threw them [onto the altar]. The second then handed to the first the two fore legs. And he handed them to the high priest who laid his hands on them and threw them [onto the altar]. The second then went away. In the same way all the other limbs were handed to him and he laid his hands on them and threw them [on to the altar fire]. If he wanted, he could lay his hands and let others throw [them] on the fire. He then went around the altar. From where did he begin? From the southeastern corner; from there he went to the northeastern, then to the northwestern and then to the southwestern. They there handed him the wine for libation. The deputy high priest stood on the corner/horn of the altar with the flags in his hand, and two priests on the table of the fats with two trumpets in their hands. They blew a teki’ah, a teru’ah and a teki’ah. They then went and stood by Ben Arza, one on his right hand and one on his left. When he bent down to make the libation the deputy high priest waved the flags and Ben Arza struck the cymbals and the Levites sang the psalm. When they came to a pause they blew a teki’ah, and the public bowed down. At every pause there was a teki’ah and at every teki’ah a bowing down. This was the order of the regular daily sacrifice for the service of our Lord. May it be His will that it be rebuilt speedily in our days, Amen."
14. New Testament, Mark, 7.1-7.23 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

7.1. Then the Pharisees, and some of the scribes gathered together to him, having come from Jerusalem. 7.2. Now when they saw some of his disciples eating bread with defiled, that is, unwashed, hands, they found fault. 7.3. (For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, don't eat unless they wash their hands and forearms, holding to the tradition of the elders. 7.4. They don't eat when they come from the marketplace, unless they bathe themselves, and there are many other things, which they have received to hold to: washings of cups, pitchers, bronze vessels, and couches.) 7.5. The Pharisees and the scribes asked him, "Why don't your disciples walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat their bread with unwashed hands? 7.6. He answered them, "Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, 'This people honors me with their lips, But their heart is far from me. 7.7. But in vain do they worship me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.' 7.8. For you set aside the commandment of God, and hold tightly to the tradition of men -- the washing of pitchers and cups, and you do many other such things. 7.9. He said to them, "Full well do you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition. 7.10. For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother;' and, 'He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him be put to death.' 7.11. But you say, 'If a man tells his father or his mother, "Whatever profit you might have received from me is Corban, that is to say, given to God;"' 7.12. then you no longer allow him to do anything for his father or his mother 7.13. making void the word of God by your tradition, which you have handed down. You do many things like this. 7.14. He called all the multitude to himself, and said to them, "Hear me, all of you, and understand. 7.15. There is nothing from outside of the man, that going into him can defile him; but the things which proceed out of the man are those that defile the man. 7.16. If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear! 7.17. When he had entered into a house away from the multitude, his disciples asked him about the parable. 7.18. He said to them, "Are you thus without understanding also? Don't you perceive that whatever goes into the man from outside can't defile him 7.19. because it doesn't go into his heart, but into his stomach, then into the latrine, thus making all foods clean? 7.20. He said, "That which proceeds out of the man, that defiles the man. 7.21. For from within, out of the hearts of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, sexual sins, murders, thefts 7.22. covetings, wickedness, deceit, lustful desires, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, and foolishness. 7.23. All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.
15. Anon., Sifre Deuteronomy, 306 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)

16. Anon., Sifre Numbers, 1 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)

17. Palestinian Talmud, Sukkah, 4.3 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)

18. Babylonian Talmud, Qiddushin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

52b. והא מתניתין דגזל דידה וקאמר רב אינה מקודשת לא קשיא הא דשדיך הא דלא שדיך,ההיא איתתא דהוה קא משיא כרעא במשיכלא דמיא אתא ההוא גברא חטף זוזי מחבריה ושדא לה אמר לה מיקדשת לי אתא ההוא גברא לקמיה דרבא אמר לית דחש להא דר' שמעון דאמר סתם גזילה יאוש בעלים הוי,ההוא אריסא דקדיש במוזא דשמכי אתא לקמיה דרבא אמר ליה מאן אחלך והני מילי במוזא אבל כישא מצי אמר ליה אנא שקלי כישא שקיל את כישא כישא כי כישא,ההוא סרסיא דקדיש בפרומא דשיכרא אתא מריה דשיכרא אשכחיה אמר ליה אמאי לא תיתיב מהאי חריפא אתא לקמיה דרבא אמר לא אמרו כלך אצל יפות אלא לענין תרומה בלבד,דתניא כיצד אמרו תורם שלא מדעת תרומתו תרומה הרי שירד לתוך שדה חבירו וליקט ותרם שלא ברשות אם חושש משום גזל אין תרומתו תרומה ואם לאו תרומתו תרומה,ומנין היה יודע אם חושש משום גזל אם לאו הרי שבא בעל הבית ומצאו ואמר לו כלך אצל יפות אם נמצאו יפות מהם תרומתו תרומה ואם לאו אין תרומתו תרומה היו הבעלים מלקטים ומוסיפים בין כך ובין כך תרומתו תרומה,אבל הכא משום כיסופא הוא דעבד ואינה מקודשת, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big המקדש בחלקו בין קדשי קדשים בין קדשים קלים אינה מקודשת במעשר שני בין שוגג בין מזיד לא קידש דברי רבי מאיר רבי יהודה אומר בשוגג לא קידש במזיד קידש,ובהקדש במזיד קידש ובשוגג לא קידש דברי ר' מאיר רבי יהודה אומר בשוגג קידש במזיד לא קידש, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big נימא מתניתין דלא כרבי יוסי הגלילי דתניא (ויקרא ה, כא) ומעלה מעל בה' לרבות קדשים קלים שהן ממונו דברי ר' יוסי הגלילי,אפי' תימא ר' יוסי הגלילי כי קאמר ר' יוסי הגלילי מחיים אבל לאחר שחיטה לא מאי טעמא כי קא זכו משלחן גבוה קא זכו,דיקא נמי דקתני המקדש בחלקו בין קדשי קדשים ובין קדשים קלים לא קידש ש"מ,תנו רבנן לאחר פטירתו של ר' מאיר אמר להם רבי יהודה לתלמידיו אל יכנסו תלמידי רבי מאיר לכאן מפני שקנתרנים הם ולא ללמוד תורה הם באים אלא לקפחני בהלכות הם באים דחק סומכוס ונכנס אמר להם כך שנה לי ר' מאיר המקדש בחלקו בין קדשי קדשים ובין קדשים קלים לא קידש,כעס ר' יהודה עליהם אמר להם לא כך אמרתי לכם אל יכנסו מתלמידי ר"מ לכאן מפני שקנתרנים הם ולא ללמוד תורה הם באים אלא לקפחני בהלכות הם באים וכי אשה בעזרה מנין,אמר ר' יוסי יאמרו מאיר שכב יהודה כעס יוסי שתק דברי תורה מה תהא עליה וכי אין אדם עשוי לקבל קידושין לבתו בעזרה ואין אשה עשויה לעשות לה שליח לקבל קידושיה בעזרה ועוד דחקה ונכנסה מאי,תניא ר' יהודה אומר מקודשת ר' יוסי אומר אינה מקודשת אמר ר' יוחנן שניהם מקרא אחד דרשו (במדבר יח, ט) וזה יהיה לך מקדש הקדשים מן האש ר' יהודה סבר לך ולכל צרכיך ור' יוסי סבר כאש מה אש לאכילה אף הוא נמי לאכילה,אמר ר' יוחנן 52b. The Gemara questions this analysis: bButdoesn’t bthe mishnadeal bwitha case where the bstolen itemis bhers, andyet bRav says she is not betrothed.The Gemara answers: This is bnot difficult; thiscase, in the ibaraita /i, is referring to a situation bwhere he had arrangedto betroth her beforehand, which indicates that she has released him from his obligation to return it, but bthatcase, in the mishna, is referring to a situation bwhere he had not arrangedhis marriage with her, so it is stolen property and she is not betrothed.,The Gemara relates: There was ba certain woman who was washing her feet in a vessel of water. A certain man camealong, bgrabbeda few bdinars from anotherperson, band threwthem bto her,and bsaid to her: You are betrothed to me. That mansubsequently bcame before Rava,to inquire as to the status of the woman. Rava bsaid: There is notanyone bwho is concerned for thisopinion bof Rabbi Shimon, who said:In ban ordinarycase of brobberythe bowner has despairedof recovering the stolen item, and it belongs to the robber. Rather, the assumption is that the owner has not despaired of recovering the stolen item. In this case, since the stolen dinars do not belong to the man, his betrothal is of no effect.,The Gemara relates another incident: The was ba certain sharecropper who betrotheda woman bwith a handful [ ibemoza /i] of onions [ ideshamkhei /i]taken from the field where he worked. bHe came before Ravato ask about the status of the woman. Rava bsaid to him: Who relinquishedthese onions bto you?Since the owner did not allow you to take them, they are stolen property, and the woman is not betrothed. The Gemara comments: bAnd this matter appliesonly bto a handful, butif he took ba bundleof onions and betrothed a woman with them, the sharecropper bcan say tothe owner: bI took a bundle, you take a bundle; one bundle foranother bbundle.Since in any case they divide the crop between them, it is not considered theft.,The Gemara relates another incident: There was ba certain brewer [ isarseya /i]who was making date beer for someone, bwho betrotheda woman bwith sediment [ ibifruma /i] from the beer. The owner of the beer cameand bfound him.The owner bsaid to him: Why don’t you giveher the betrothal bfrom this,the bsharpsediments that are of better quality than the kind you chose? The brewer bcame before Ravato ask whether the owner’s comment indicated that he had relinquished his rights to the sediment, which would mean the woman is betrothed. Rava bsaidto him: The Sages bsaidthat if the owner discovers that someone has taken something of his without permission and says: bGo toand take btheitem of bbetterquality, that it is a sign he agrees with the man’s action bonly with regard to iterumaalone,and you did not have the right to use the sediment.,The Gemara explains the previous statement: bAs it is taughtin a ibaraita( iTosefta /i, iTerumot1:5): bWhen did they saythat in the case where bone separates iterumawithoutthe owner’s bconsent, his iterumaisconsidered iteruma /i?The ibaraitaclarifies: In a case where bthere wassomeone bwho entered another’s field and gatheredproduce from it, band separated iterumawithoutthe owner’s bpermission, ifthe owner is bconcerned abouthis actions and view it bas robbery, his iterumais not iteruma /i, but ifhe is bnotconcerned, bhis iterumais iteruma /i. /b,The ibaraitacontinues: bAnd from where wouldthe gatherer bknow whetherhe should be bconcernedthat the owner objects and views it bas robbery or not?If bthe owner came and found himseparating iteruma band said to him: Go totake btheproduce of bbetterquality and separate iterumafrom that, then bifproduce of bbetterquality bthanthe produce he had separated bis found, his iterumaisconsidered iteruma /i,since the owner is assumed to have been sincere and pleased that the other has separated iterumafrom his produce. bBut if not, his iterumais not iteruma /i,as it may be assumed that the owner was angry at him and was speaking sarcastically. The ibaraitaadds: If bthe owners were gathering and addingto the iterumahe had separated, indicating that they agree to his act of separation, beither way,whether or not better-quality produce was found, bhis iterumaisconsidered iteruma /i. /b,Rava concludes the explanation of his ruling: This ihalakhaapplies only to iteruma /i, which is a mitzva that the owner must in any case perform. bBut here,in the case of the brewer who betrothed a woman with sediment from the beer, the owner bacts because of embarrassment,and while he does not feel comfortable protesting, he did not in fact relinquish his rights to the sediment, band she is not betrothed. /b, strongMISHNA: /strong With regard to a priest bwho betrothsa woman bwith his portionof offerings, bwhetherhe did so with bofferings of the most sacred orderor bwhetherhe did so with bofferings of lesser sanctity, she is not betrothed.One who betroths a woman bwith second tithe, whether unwittinglyor bintentionally, has not betrothedher; this is bthe statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says:If he did so bunwittingly he has not betrothedher, but if he did so bintentionally he has betrothedher., bAndwith regard to one who betroths a woman bwith consecratedproperty belonging to the Temple treasury, if he does so bintentionally he has betrothedher, bandif he does so bunwittingly he has not betrothedher; this is bthe statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda saysthe opposite: If he does so bunwittingly he has betrothedher, but if he does so bintentionally he has not betrothedher., strongGEMARA: /strong The Gemara suggests: bShall we saythat bthe mishna is not in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yosei HaGelili? As it is taughtin a ibaraitathat the verse states with regard to the obligation to bring an offering for taking a false oath concerning unlawful possession of the property of another: “If any one sin, band he commits a trespass against the Lord,and deal falsely with his neighbor in a matter of deposit, or of pledge, or of robbery, or have oppressed his neighbor” (Leviticus 5:21). As the verse is discussing property belonging to another, the phrase “a trespass against the Lord” serves bto includein the obligation of an offering a false oath with regard to possession of bofferings of lesser sanctityof another person, bwhich are the propertyof the owner; this is bthe statement of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili.According to Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, the portion of an offering of lesser sanctity that the priest receives belongs to him, so he should be able to betroth a woman with it.,The Gemara rejects this: bYoucan beven saythat the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of bRabbi Yosei HaGelili, as Rabbi Yosei HaGelili saysthat an offering of lesser sanctity belongs to its owner only bwhilethe animal is still balive, but afterits bslaughterit does bnotbelong to the priest who receives portions from it. bWhat is the reasonfor this? bWhenthe priests breceivetheir portion after the animal has been slaughtered bthey receivetheir portion bfrom the table of the Most High,and do not own the portion itself.,The Gemara adds: The language of the mishna bis also precise, as it teaches:With regard to a priest bwho betrothsa woman bwith his portionof offerings, bwhetherhe did so with bofferings of the most sacred order or whetherhe used bofferings of lesser sanctity, has not betrothedher. The mishna does not speak of a priest who betroths a woman with a living offering of lesser sanctity but of one who betroths with the portion of the slaughtered animal he has received. The Gemara concludes: bLearn from itthat it is only in this case that she is not betrothed., bThe Sages taught: After the death of Rabbi Meir, Rabbi Yehuda said to his students: Do not let the students of Rabbi Meir enter hereinto our house of study, bbecause they are vexatious [ ikanteranim /i]. And they do not come to study Torah,but brather they come to overwhelm me with ihalakhot /i. Sumakhos,a student of Rabbi Meir, bpushed and enteredanyway. bHe said to them: Thisis what bRabbi Meir taught me:With regard to a priest bwho betrothsa woman bwith his portionof the offerings, bwhetherhe did so with bofferings of the most sacred order or whetherhe used bofferings of lesser sanctity, he has not betrothedher.,Upon hearing this, bRabbi Yehuda became angry withhis students. bHe said to them: Didn’t I say this to you: Do not let the students of Rabbi Meir enter hereinto our house of study, bbecause they are vexatious? And they do not come to study Torah,but brather they come to overwhelm me with ihalakhot /i.Rabbi Yehuda explained his objection to the statement of Rabbi Meir: This ihalakhais not relevant, bas from wherewould ba womanappear bin theTemple bcourtyard?Women may not enter the area of the Temple courtyard where the priests eat the offerings of the most sacred order, so there is no reason to address an impossible scenario., bRabbi Yosei,who was present, bsaid: They will say: Meir died, Yehuda grew angry,and bYosei remained silent; what will become of the words of Torah?He said: In fact, this ihalakhais relevant; bbut isn’t it commonfor ba man to accept betrothal for his daughter in theTemple bcourtyard?There is no need to give the betrothal item directly to the woman; it can be given to her father. bAndadditionally, bisn’t it commonfor ba woman to designate an agent for herself to accept her betrothal in the courtyard? And furthermore: Whatwould be the ihalakhaif the woman bpushed and entered?Since it is possible for her to do so, the ihalakhain such a case must be determined., bIt is taughtin a ibaraitathat the Sages discussed the issue of a priest who betroths a woman with his portion of offerings of the most sacred order: bRabbi Yehuda says she is betrothed,and bRabbi Yosei says she is not betrothed. Rabbi Yoḥa says: Both of them derivedtheir opinions from bone verse,which states that the priests have a right to a portion of offerings of the most sacred order, but they explained it in different ways. The verse states: b“This shall be yours of the most holy things, reserved from the fire”(Numbers 18:9). bRabbi Yehuda holdsthat the term b“yours”indicates that the portion the priest receives is intended for you, i.e., a priest, band for all your needs,including betrothing a woman. bAnd Rabbi Yosei holdsthat the verse compares the priest’s portion bto the fireon the altar: bJust asthe portion burned on the bfireis bforthe fire’s bconsumption, so too,the priest’s portion bis also for consumptionalone, and not for any other purpose., bRabbi Yoḥa says: /b
19. Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

32a. ראשית קראתי אתכם על עסקי ראשית הזהרתי אתכם נשמה שנתתי בכם קרויה נר על עסקי נר הזהרתי אתכם אם אתם מקיימים אותם מוטב ואם לאו הריני נוטל נשמתכם,ומ"ש בשעת לידתן אמר רבא נפל תורא חדד לסכינא אביי אמר תפיש תירוס אמתא בחד מחטרא ליהוי רב חסדא אמר שבקיה לרויא דמנפשיה נפיל מר עוקבא אמר רעיא חגרא ועיזי ריהטן אבב חוטרא מילי ואבי דרי חושבנא רב פפא אמר אבב חנואתא נפישי אחי ומרחמי אבב בזיוני לא אחי ולא מרחמי,וגברי היכא מיבדקי אמר ריש לקיש בשעה שעוברים על הגשר גשר ותו לא אימא כעין גשר רב לא עבר במברא דיתיב ביה עכו"ם אמר דילמא מיפקיד ליה דינא עליה ומתפיסנא בהדיה שמואל לא עבר אלא במברא דאית ביה עכו"ם אמר שטנא בתרי אומי לא שליט,ר' ינאי בדיק ועבר ר' ינאי לטעמיה דאמר לעולם אל יעמוד אדם במקום סכנה לומר שעושין לו נס שמא אין עושים לו נס ואם עושין לו נס מנכין לו מזכיותיו אמר רבי חנין מאי קראה (בראשית לב, יא) קטנתי מכל החסדים ומכל האמת רבי זירא ביומא דשותא לא נפיק לביני דיקלא,אמר ר' יצחק בריה דרב יהודה לעולם יבקש אדם רחמים שלא יחלה שאם יחלה אומרים לו הבא זכות והפטר אמר מר עוקבא מאי קראה (דברים כב, ח) כי יפול הנופל ממנו ממנו להביא ראיה תנא דבי רבי ישמעאל כי יפול הנופל ממנו (ממנו) ראוי זה ליפול מששת ימי בראשית שהרי לא נפל והכתוב קראו נופל אלא שמגלגלין זכות על ידי זכאי וחובה על ידי חייב.,ת"ר מי שחלה ונטה למות אומרים לו התודה שכן כל המומתין מתודין אדם יוצא לשוק יהי דומה בעיניו כמי שנמסר לסרדיוט חש בראשו יהי דומה בעיניו כמי שנתנוהו בקולר עלה למטה ונפל יהי דומה בעיניו כמו שהעלוהו לגרדום לידון שכל העולה לגרדום לידון אם יש לו פרקליטין גדולים ניצול ואם לאו אינו ניצול,ואלו הן פרקליטין של אדם תשובה ומעשים טובים ואפי' תשע מאות ותשעים ותשעה מלמדים עליו חובה ואחד מלמד עליו זכות ניצול שנאמר (איוב לג, כג) אם יש עליו מלאך מליץ אחד מני אלף להגיד לאדם ישרו ויחננו ויאמר פדעהו מרדת שחת וגו': ר' אליעזר בנו של ר' יוסי הגלילי אומר אפילו תשע מאות ותשעים ותשעה באותו מלאך לחובה ואחד לזכות ניצול שנאמר מליץ אחד מני אלף:,תנו רבנן על שלש עבירות נשים מתות יולדות רבי אלעזר אומר נשים מתות ילדות ר' אחא אומר בעון שמכבסות צואת בניהם בשבת וי"א על שקורין לארון הקודש ארנא.,תניא ר' ישמעאל בן אלעזר אומר בעון שני דברים עמי . הארצות מתים על שקורין לארון הקודש ארנא ועל שקורין לבית הכנסת בית עם תניא ר' יוסי אומר שלשה בדקי מיתה נבראו באשה ואמרי לה שלשה דבקי מיתה נדה וחלה והדלקת הנר חדא כר' אלעזר וחדא כרבנן,תניא רשב"ג אומר הלכות הקדש תרומות ומעשרות הן הן גופי תורה 32a. bI called you first,as it is stated: “Israel is the Lord’s hallowed portion, His first fruits of the increase” (Jeremiah 2:3) band I warned you about matters of the first:“of the first of your dough you shall set apart iḥallafor a gift” (Numbers 15:20). bThe soul that I have placed in you is called iner /i:“The spirit of man is the lamp [ iner /i] of the Lord” (Proverbs 20:27), and bI warned you about matters of theShabbat blamp. If you fulfill thesemitzvot, bfine, and if not, then I will take your soul. /b, bAnd,if so, bwhat is different during childbirth?Why does the divine attribute of judgment punish them for dereliction in fulfillment of these mitzvot specifically then? The Gemara cites several folk sayings expressing the concept that when a person is in danger, he is punished for his sins. bRava said:If bthe ox fell, sharpen the knifeto slaughter it. bAbaye said:If bthe maidservant’s insolence abounds, she will be struck by a single blowas punishment for all her sins. So too, when a woman is giving birth and her suffering is great due to Eve’s sin of eating from the Tree of Knowledge, all the punishments for her own sins are added to that suffering. bRav Ḥisda said: Leave the drunk, ashe bfalls on his own.Similarly, the time of birth is a time of danger, and if the Holy One, Blessed be He, does not come to her assistance at that time, that is sufficient to cause her death. bMar Ukva said: The shepherd is crippled, and the goats are running,and he cannot catch them. However, bnext to the gate,he speaks harsh bwords, and inside the penhe settles the baccount.Similarly, as long as a woman is in a healthy state, her sins are in abeyance, and she is not held accountable for them. However, when she is giving birth, which is a time of danger, she is held accountable for her sins and a calculation is made whether or not she is worthy of a miracle. bRav Pappa said: At the entrance to the stores,during a time of prosperity, bbrothers and loved ones abound.When a person is prospering ficially, everyone acts like his brother or friend. However, bat the gate of disgrace,during a time of loss and poverty, he has bno brothers and no loved ones;everyone abandons him.,And the Gemara asks: bAnd whereare bmen examined?When are men vulnerable to judgment and held accountable for their actions? bReish Lakish said: When they are crossing a bridge.The Gemara wonders: Only when they are crossing ba bridge and at no othertime? Rather, bsay:Anything blike a bridge,any place where danger is commonplace. On a similar note, the Gemara relates: bRav would not crossa river bin a ferry in which a gentile sat. He saidto himself: bPerhaps a judgment will be reckoned with him, and I will be caught together with himwhen he is punished. Whereas, bShmuel would only cross in a ferry if there was a gentile in it. He said: Satan does not have dominion over two nations.He settles his accounts with people from each nationality separately., bRabbi Yannai would examinethe ferry band cross.The Gemara comments that bRabbi Yannaiacted bin accordance with his reasoningstated elsewhere, as bhe said: A person should never stand in a place of danger saying that theyon High bwill perform a miracle for him, lestin the end bthey do not perform a miracle for him. And,moreover, even bif they do perform a miracle for him, they will deduct it from his merits. Rabbi Ḥanin said: What is the versethat alludes to this? When Jacob said: b“I am not worthy of all the mercies, and of all the truth,which You have shown unto Your servant” (Genesis 32:11), and he explains: Since You have bestowed upon me so much kindness and truth, my merits have been diminished. Similarly, the Gemara relates that bRabbi Zeira would not go outand walk bamong the palm trees on a day when there was a southern windblowing due to the fear that the trees might fall on him.,In a similar vein, bRav Yitzḥak, son of Rav Yehuda, said: A person should always pray that he will not become ill, as if he becomes ill they say to him: Bringproof of your bvirtue and exempt yourself.It is preferable for a person not to be forced to prove that he merits staying alive, as he might not be able to prove it. bMar Ukva said: What is the versethat alludes to this? As it says: “When you build a new house, then you shall make a parapet for your roof, that you bring not blood upon your house, bif the fallen falls imimenu /i”(Deuteronomy 22:8). He explains: iMimenu /i, from him proof must be brought.When one falls from his previous situation, it is his own responsibility to prove his innocence and emerge unharmed. bThe school of Rabbi Yishmael taught:What is the meaning of the phrase: bIf the fallen falls from it? Thisperson bwas destined to fallfrom that roof bfrom the six days of Creation,it was ingrained into nature. bAs,although bhe did notyet bfall, the verse calls him fallen. Nevertheless,the owner of the house is indicted for this, as bmerit is engendered by means ofthe binnocent and guilt by means ofthe bguilty. /b, bThe Sages taught: One who became ill and tended toward death, they say to him: Confess, as all those executedby the courts bconfess.Even if he is dying of natural causes, it is worthwhile for him to consider his death atonement for his sins. The Sages said: When ba person goes out to the marketplacewhere there are fights and disputes, bhe should consider himself as someone who has been handed over to a soldier [ iseradiyot /i].If bhis head hurt, he should consider it as if they placed him in a chain [ ikolar /i]around his neck. If bhe climbed into bed and fell ill, he should consider himself as if they took him up to the gallows to be judged, aswith regard to banyone who goes up to the gallows to be judged, if he has great advocates [ iperaklitin /i], he is spared, and if not, he is not spared. /b, bAndwith regard to divine judgment, bthese are a person’s advocates: Repentance and good deeds.The Gemara comments: bAnd evenif there are bnine hundred ninety-nine asserting his guilt andonly boneasserting his binnocence, he is spared,as bit is stated: “If there be for him an angel, an advocate, one among a thousand, to vouch for a man’s uprightness; then He is gracious unto him, and says: Deliver him from going down to the pit,I have found a ransom” (Job 33:23–24). bRabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, says: Evenif there are bnine hundred ninety-nineportions bwithin that same angel accusinghim, band oneportion asserting bhis innocence, he is spared, as it stated: “An advocate, one among a thousand.”Even when the advocate who asserts his innocence finds only one-tenth of one percent of innocence in this man, even then, he is gracious unto him, and says: Deliver him from going down to the pit, I have found a ransom., bThe Sages taughtin a ibaraita /i: bFor three transgressions women die in childbirth [ iyoledot /i]. Rabbi Elazarhas a different version and bsaysthat bwomen diewhen they are byoung [ iyeladot /i].These transgressions are those enumerated in the mishna: The ihalakhotof a menstruating woman, iḥalla /i, and Shabbat lights. bRabbi Aḥa saysthey are punished bfor the sin of laundering their children’s fecesfrom clothing bon Shabbat. And some say: Because they call the Holy Arksimply bark. /b,Similarly, bwe learnedin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Yishmael ben Elazar says: On account of two sins, ignoramuses [ iamei ha /i’ iaretz /i] dieyoung (Rav Ya’akov Emden): bBecause they call the Holy Arksimply bark, and because they call the synagogue the house of the people. It was taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Yosei says: Three cruciblespotentially leading to bdeath were created in the woman, and some say: Three accelerants of death.They are: bMenstruation, iḥalla /i, and lighting the Shabbat lights.The Gemara explains that boneversion, accelerants of death, is bin accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Elazar,who said that women die young. bAndthe other bone,crucibles of death, is bin accordance withthe opinion of bthe Rabbis,who said that women die in childbirth.,Similarly, bit was taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Shimon ben Gamliel says: The ihalakhotof consecrated items, iterumot /i, and tithes are themselvesthe bessence of Torahand are extremely severe
20. Babylonian Talmud, Sukkah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

43b. תשבו תשבו לגזרה שוה נאמר כאן תשבו ונאמר במלואים (ויקרא ח, לה) תשבו מה להלן ימים ואפי' לילות אף כאן ימים ואפילו לילות:,ערבה שבעה כיצד: ערבה בשביעי מ"ט דחיא שבת א"ר יוחנן כדי לפרסמה שהיא מן התורה אי הכי לולב נמי לידחי כדי לפרסמו שהוא מן התורה,לולב גזרה משום דרבה אי הכי ערבה נמי נגזור ערבה שלוחי בית דין מייתי לה לולב לכל מסור,אי הכי כל יומא נמי לידחי אתי לפקפוקי בלולב ולידחי ביום טוב ראשון לא מוכחא מלתא אמרי לולב הוא דקא דחי,ולידחי בחד מהנך כיון דקא מפקת לה מראשון אוקמה אשביעי,אי הכי האידנא נמי לידחי אנן לא ידעינן בקיבועא דירחא,אינהו דידעי בקיבועא דירחא לידחי כי אתא בר הדיא אמר לא איקלע כי אתא רבין וכל נחותי אמרי איקלע ולא דחי,ואלא קשיא אמר רב יוסף מאן לימא לן דערבה בנטילה דלמא בזקיפה,איתיביה אביי לולב וערבה ששה ושבעה מאי לאו כלולב מה לולב בנטילה אף ערבה בנטילה מידי איריא הא כדאיתיה והא כדאיתיה,איתיביה אביי בכל יום מקיפין את המזבח פעם אחת ואותו היום שבע פעמים מאי לאו בערבה לא בלולב והא אמר רב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה בערבה א"ל הוא אמר לך בערבה ואנא אמינא בלולב אתמר ר' אלעזר אומר בלולב רב שמואל [בר נתן] אמר ר' חנינא בערבה וכן אמר רב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה בערבה,א"ל רבא לרב יצחק בריה דרבה בר בר חנה בר אוריא תא ואימא לך מלתא מעליתא דהוה אמר אבוך הא דתנן כל היום מקיפין את המזבח פעם אחת ואותו היום מקיפין את המזבח שבע פעמים הכי אמר אבוך משמיה דר' אלעזר בלולב,איתיביה לולב דוחה את השבת בתחלתו וערבה בסופו פעם אחת חל שביעי של ערבה להיות בשבת והביאו מרביות של ערבה מערב שבת והניחום בעזרה והכירו בהן בייתוסין ונטלום וכבשום תחת אבנים,למחר הכירו בהן עמי הארץ ושמטום מתחת האבנים והביאום הכהנים וזקפום בצידי המזבח לפי שאין בייתוסין מודים שחיבוט ערבה דוחה את השבת,אלמא בנטילה היא תיובתא,ואלא נדחו כיון דאנן לא דחינן אינהו נמי לא דחו והא יום טוב הראשון דלדידן לא דחי ולדידהו דחי 43b. b“You shall reside,” “you shall reside,”by means bof a verbal analogy. It is stated here,with regard to isukka /i: b“You shall residein isukkotseven days” (Leviticus 23:42), band it is stated with regard to the inaugurationof the Tabernacle: “And at the door of the Tent of Meeting byou shall resideday and night seven days” (Leviticus 8:35). bJust as there,with regard to the inauguration, the meaning is bdays and even nights, so too here,with regard to isukka /i, the meaning is bdays and even nights. /b,§ The mishna continues: The altar is encircled with the bwillow branchfor bsevendays. bHowso? If the seventh day of performing the mitzva of the willow branch occurs on Shabbat, since on that day the mitzva of the willow branch is a mitzva by Torah law, it overrides Shabbat and the mitzva of the willow branch is then performed seven days. The Gemara asks: With regard to the mitzva of the bwillow branch on the seventhday, bwhat is the reasonthat bit overrides Shabbat? Rabbi Yoḥa said:It is bin order to publicize that it isa mitzva that bapplies by Torahlaw, since it is not written explicitly in the Torah. The Gemara raises an objection: bIf so, ilulavtoo should overrideShabbat in the Temple on the other days of iSukkotas well and not only on the first day bin order to publicize that it isa mitzva bby Torahlaw all seven days, since that too is not written explicitly in the Torah.,The Gemara answers: One is prohibited from taking the ilulav /ion Shabbat by rabbinic bdecree due tothe concern expressed bby Rabba(42b) lest he take the ilulavin his hand and go to an expert to learn how to wave the ilulavand thereby carry it in the public domain. The Gemara objects: bIf so,with regard to the bwillow branch as well let us issue a decreedue to the same concern. The Gemara answers: The two cases are different. With regard to the bwillow branch, agents of the court bring itto the priests who perform the mitzva in the Temple, and they carefully prepare the willow branch prior to the onset of Shabbat and will not come to carry it in a prohibited manner on Shabbat. However, performance of the mitzva of ilulavis incumbent upon every individual.Therefore, there is concern lest one unwittingly perform the prohibited labor of carrying on Shabbat.,The Gemara objects: bIf so,i.e., because the willow branch is supplied by agents of the court there is no concern that Shabbat will be desecrated, bletthe mitzva of the willow branch boverrideShabbat on bevery dayof the Festival bas well.The Gemara answers: In that case people bwould come to raise doubts aboutthe significance of the mitzva of ilulav /i,as, unlike the mitzva of the willow branch, it would override Shabbat on only one day of the Festival and not on all seven. The Gemara asks: bAnd letthe mitzva of the willow branch boverrideShabbat bon the first day of the Festival,just as the mitzva of ilulavdoes, and not on the seventh day. The Gemara answers: bThe matterof publicizing that the mitzva of willow branch is a mitzva by Torah law bwould not be apparent,as people bwould saythat bit isreally the mitzva of ilulavthat overridesShabbat, and once ilulavis permitted the willow branch is permitted as well.,The Gemara asks: bAnd letthe mitzva of the willow branch boverrideShabbat bon one of theseother days of iSukkot /i; why specifically the seventh day? The Gemara answers: bOnce you moved it from the firstday, bestablish it on the seventhday, which is also a unique day of iSukkot /i, and not on one of the other intermediate days of iSukkot /i.,The Gemara asks: bIf so,i.e., if the mitzva of the willow branch is so significant that it overrides Shabbat, blet it overrideShabbat btoday as well,even though the Temple is not standing. The Gemara answers: bWe do not knowwhen precisely bthe establishment of the monthwas determined by the court. Therefore, it is possible that the day observed as the seventh day of iSukkotis not the seventh day at all. Certainly, one does not violate the rabbinic decree to fulfill a mitzva that is not definitely a mitzva by Torah law.,The Gemara asks: If so, with regard to the people of Eretz Yisrael, bwho know the establishment of the month, let them overrideShabbat for the mitzva of willow branch on the seventh day of iSukkoteven today. bWhen bar Hedya camefrom Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia bhe said:That is not a practical question, as the seventh day bdoes not coincidewith Shabbat, since the Sages fixed the calendar to avoid that possibility. bWhen Ravin and all thoseemissaries bwho descendedto Babylonia, or who originally left Babylonia for Eretz Yisrael and returned, bcame, they said: It does coincidewith Shabbat, bbut it does not overrideShabbat.,The Gemara asks: bButthen it is bdifficult;why doesn’t the mitzva of the willow branch override Shabbat on the seventh day today? bRav Yosef said: Who will say to usdefinitively bthatthe mitzva of bthe willow branchis performed bby takingit? bPerhaps it isperformed bby standingthe branches buprightagainst the altar. Since there is no altar today, the mitzva does not override Shabbat., bAbaye raised an objection toRav Yosef from the mishna, which states: The ilulav /iis taken bandthe altar is encircled with bthe willow brancheither bsix or sevendays. bWhat, is it notlearned from the juxtaposition of these mitzvot in the mishna that the mitzva of the willow branch is blikethe mitzva of ilulav /iin that bjust asthe mitzva of ilulav /iis performed bby takingit, bso too,the mitzva of the bwillow branchis performed bby takingit and not by standing it upright? He answered him: bAre the casesnecessarily bcomparable?Perhaps bthismitzva of ilulavis bas it is,by means of taking, band thismitzva of the willow branch is bas it is,by means of standing it upright., bAbaye raised an objection toRav Yosef from a mishna: bOn every daythe people bcircle the altar one time, andon bthat day,the seventh day of the willow branch, they circle it bseven times. What, isthe mishna bnotreferring to circling the altar bwith the willow branchin hand? He answered him: bNo,it is referring to circling the altar bwith a ilulav /i.Abaye objects: bBut didn’t Rav Naḥman saythat bRabba bar Avuh said:They would circle the altar bwith the willow branch?Rav Yosef bsaid to him: He said to you with the willow branch;however, my authority is no less than his, as we are both iamora’im /i, band I saythat they circle the altar bwith a ilulav /i. It was statedthat this was the subject of dispute between other iamora’imas well. bRabbi Elazar says:They circle the altar bwith a ilulav /i. Rav Shmuel bar Natan saidthat bRabbi Ḥanina said:They circle the altar bwith the willow branch. And likewise, Rav Naḥman saidthat bRabba bar Avuh said:They would circle the altar bwith the willow branch. /b, bRava said to Rav Yitzḥak, son of Rabba bar bar Ḥana: Son of Torah [ ibar urya /i], come and I will tell you an outstanding statement that your father would say.With regard to bthat which we learnedin a mishna: On bevery daythe people bcircle the altar one time, and on that day,the seventh day of the willow branch, bthey circle the altar seven times; thisis what byour father said in the name of Rabbi Elazar:They circle the altar bwith a ilulav /i. /b,Abaye braised an objection toRav Yosef from the iTosefta( iSukka3:1): The mitzva of ilulavoverrides Shabbat atthe bstartof the Festival, band the willow branchoverrides it batthe bendof the Festival. bOne time, the seventhday bofthe bwillow branch occurred on Shabbat, and they brought branches ofthe bwillowtree bon Shabbat eve,before Shabbat, band placed them in theTemple bcourtyardfor use on Shabbat. The bBoethusiansin the Temple, who disagreed with the Sages and held that there is no mitzva of the willow branch on the seventh day of the Festival, bnoticed them and took them and concealed them underthe bstones.This was an attempt to prevent fulfillment of the mitzva, as they knew that the Sages would prohibit moving the stones, which are set-aside on Shabbat., bThe next day,some of bthe ignoramuses noticedthe branches concealed under the stones. bAndsince the ignoramuses identified with the opinion of the Sages, and at the same time were ignorant of the details of the mitzvot, bthey extracted them from under the stones. And the priests brought them and stood them upright at the sides of the altar.This happened bbecausethe bBoethusians do not concede that waving the willow branch overrides Shabbat. /b, bApparently,based on the conclusion of the incident, the mitzva of the willow branch bisfulfilled bby takingit, as it is referring to waving the willow branch and not just standing it upright at the sides of the altar. The Gemara notes: Indeed, it is ba conclusive refutationof Rav Yosef’s opinion.,Given the refutation of Rav Yosef’s opinion, the original question is difficult: bRather, let themin Eretz Yisrael boverrideShabbat for the mitzva of the willow branch on the seventh day of iSukkotnowadays as well. The Gemara answers: bSince wein the Diaspora bdo not overrideShabbat for this purpose, btheyin Eretz Yisrael balso do not overrideit. The Gemara objects: bBut doesn’t the first day of the Festivalrefute that contention, as bfor usin the Diaspora it bdoes not overrideShabbat and we do not take the ilulav /i, band for themin Eretz Yisrael bit overridesShabbat and they take the ilulav /i?
21. Anon., Midrash Psalms, 17.5 (4th cent. CE - 9th cent. CE)



Subjects of this text:

subject book bibliographic info
altar Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 109
am haaretz Levine, The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years (2005) 195
arbel, synagogue orientation Levine, The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years (2005) 195
audience Balberg, Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature (2017) 135
berkowitz, beth Cohn, The Memory of the Temple and the Making of the Rabbis (2013) 177
bet am Levine, The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years (2005) 195
blood Poorthuis and Schwartz, A Holy People: Jewish And Christian Perspectives on Religious Communal Identity (2006) 119
communitas Poorthuis and Schwartz, A Holy People: Jewish And Christian Perspectives on Religious Communal Identity (2006) 119
concentric Poorthuis and Schwartz, A Holy People: Jewish And Christian Perspectives on Religious Communal Identity (2006) 119
cosmology Poorthuis and Schwartz, A Holy People: Jewish And Christian Perspectives on Religious Communal Identity (2006) 119
daily offering (tamid), morning routine of Balberg, Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature (2017) 135
day of atonement, participation in Balberg, Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature (2017) 135
ejaculants/baal qeri Cohen, The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism (2010) 404
facades Levine, The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years (2005) 195
festivals—see also calendar Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 534
gentile/gentiles Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 534
gentile Poorthuis and Schwartz, A Holy People: Jewish And Christian Perspectives on Religious Communal Identity (2006) 119
hammat tiberias synagogue, basilical, mosaic floors Levine, The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years (2005) 195
handwashing Klawans, Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism (2009) 202
hebron, cave of the patriarchs Ben-Eliyahu, Identity and Territory: Jewish Perceptions of Space in Antiquity (2019) 116
holiness Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 534
holy sites Ben-Eliyahu, Identity and Territory: Jewish Perceptions of Space in Antiquity (2019) 116, 126
impurity Poorthuis and Schwartz, A Holy People: Jewish And Christian Perspectives on Religious Communal Identity (2006) 119
incense Balberg, Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature (2017) 135; Poorthuis and Schwartz, A Holy People: Jewish And Christian Perspectives on Religious Communal Identity (2006) 119
israel, nan Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 534
jerusalem Ben-Eliyahu, Identity and Territory: Jewish Perceptions of Space in Antiquity (2019) 126; Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 534
knohl, i. Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 109
laity, the Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 534
lulav Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 109
menstruants/niddah, and the sacred Cohen, The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism (2010) 404
menstruants/niddah, social isolation Cohen, The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism (2010) 404
of the holy sepulcher, temple Ben-Eliyahu, Identity and Territory: Jewish Perceptions of Space in Antiquity (2019) 126
of the holy sepulcher, temple mount Ben-Eliyahu, Identity and Territory: Jewish Perceptions of Space in Antiquity (2019) 116
orientation of synagogue Levine, The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years (2005) 195
people, the (ha-am)' Balberg, Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature (2017) 135
pharisees, the Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 534
pharisees Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 109
prayer Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 534
prayer (jewish/rabbinic) Klawans, Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism (2009) 202
priests/priesthood Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 534
procession Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 109
prostration Balberg, Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature (2017) 135
qumran Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 109
qumran jews, exclusion of women from jerusalem Cohen, The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism (2010) 404
r. ishmael b. elazar Levine, The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years (2005) 195
representation Balberg, Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature (2017) 135
ritual baths (miqvaot) Klawans, Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism (2009) 202
ritual purity, maintained beyond the temple Klawans, Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism (2009) 202
sabbath Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 109
sacrifice Poorthuis and Schwartz, A Holy People: Jewish And Christian Perspectives on Religious Communal Identity (2006) 119
sacrifices Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 109
sadducees, the Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 534
safrai, s. Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 109
sanctity, jerusalem Levine, The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years (2005) 195
sanctity of, columns, pillars Levine, The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years (2005) 195
smith, jonathan z. Klawans, Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism (2009) 202
spectacle Balberg, Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature (2017) 135
stone vessels Klawans, Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism (2009) 202
synagogues Klawans, Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism (2009) 202
temple, cult Poorthuis and Schwartz, A Holy People: Jewish And Christian Perspectives on Religious Communal Identity (2006) 119
temple, holy vessels of; the sancta Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 534
temple Rubenstein, The History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods (1995) 109
temple scroll, plan of temple Ganzel and Holtz, Contextualizing Jewish Temples (2020) 156
tractate middot, as hierarchical in plan Ganzel and Holtz, Contextualizing Jewish Temples (2020) 156
tractate middot Ganzel and Holtz, Contextualizing Jewish Temples (2020) 156
zodiac Klawans, Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism (2009) 202