1. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 23.9 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
| 23.9. בָּנִים אֲשֶׁר־יִוָּלְדוּ לָהֶם דּוֹר שְׁלִישִׁי יָבֹא לָהֶם בִּקְהַל יְהוָה׃ | 23.9. The children of the third generation that are born unto them may enter into the assembly of the LORD." |
|
2. Mishnah, Miqvaot, 8.3-8.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
| 8.3. If he emitted thick drops from his member, he is unclean, the words of Rabbi Elazar Hisma. If one had sexual dreams in the night and arose and found his flesh heated, he is unclean. If a woman discharged semen on the third day, she is clean, the words of Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah. Rabbi Ishmael says: sometimes there are four time periods, and sometimes five, and sometimes six. Rabbi Akiva says: there are always five." 8.4. If a non-Jewish woman discharged semen from an Israelite, it is unclean. If an Israelite woman discharged semen from a non-Jewish man, it is clean. If a woman had intercourse and then went down and immersed herself but did not sweep out the house, it is as though she had not immersed herself. If a man who had a seminal emission immersed himself but did not first pass urine, he again becomes unclean when he passes urine. Rabbi Yose says: if he was sick or old he is unclean, but if he was young and healthy he remains clean." |
|
3. Mishnah, Niddah, 4.2-4.3 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
| 4.2. The daughters of the Sadducees, so long as they are accustomed to walking in the paths of their fathers, are to be regarded as Samaritan women. If they left those paths to walk in the paths of Israel, they are to be regarded as Israelite women. Rabbi Yose says: they are always regarded as Israelite women unless they leave the paths of Israel to walk in the paths of their fathers." 4.3. The blood of a Gentile and the clean blood of a metzoraat (a woman with scale disease): Bet Shammai declares clean. And Bet Hillel holds that it is like her spittle or her urine. The blood of a woman after childbirth who did not immerse [in a mikveh]: Bet Shammai says it is like her spittle or her urine, But Bet Hillel says: it conveys uncleanness both when wet and when dry. They agree that if she gave birth while in zivah, it conveys uncleanness both when wet and when dry." |
|
4. Mishnah, Yadayim, 4.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
| 4.4. On that day Judah, an Ammonite convert, came and stood before them in the house of study. He said to them: Do I have the right to enter into the assembly? Rabban Gamaliel said to him: you are forbidden. Rabbi Joshua said to him: you are permitted. Rabban Gamaliel said to him: the verse says, \"An Ammonite or a Moabite shall not enter into the assembly of the Lord: even to the tenth generation\" (Deuteronomy 23:4). R. Joshua said to him: But are the Ammonites and Moabites still in their own territory? Sanheriv, the king of Assyria, has long since come up and mingled all the nations, as it is said: \"In that I have removed the bounds of the peoples, and have robbed their treasures, and have brought down as one mighty the inhabitants\" (Isaiah 10:1. Rabban Gamaliel said to him: the verse says, \"But afterward I will bring back the captivity of the children of Ammon,\" (Jeremiah 49:6) they have already returned. Rabbi Joshua said to him: [another] verse says, \"I will return the captivity of my people Israel and Judah\" (Amos 9:14). Yet they have not yet returned. So they permitted him to enter the assembly." |
|
5. Mishnah, Zavim, 2.1, 2.3 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
| 2.1. All persons become unclean through zivah, even converts, even slaves whether freed or not, a deaf-mute, a person of unsound senses, and a minor, a eunuch whether [he had been castrated] by man, or was a eunuch from [the time of seeing] the sun. With regard to a tumtum and an androgynous [person], they place upon him the stringencies for a man and the stringencies for a woman: they defile through blood like a woman, and through eggy [substance] like a man. Their uncleanness still remains in doubt." 2.3. One who had [a discharge of] semen does not defile due to zivah for a period of twenty-four hours. Rabbi Yose says: [only] that day. A non-Jew who had a discharge of semen and then converted, he immediately becomes unclean due to zivah. [A woman] who had [an issue] of blood, or had experienced difficulty [in childbirth], [the time prescribed] is twenty-four hours. One who strikes his slave, the \"day or two\" is twenty-four hours. A dog that eats a corpse's flesh, for three days from one time of day to the same time of day, it is considered to be in its natural state. |
|
6. Tosefta, Miqvaot, 6.3 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
7. Tosefta, Niddah, 5.5, 9.14 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
8. Tosefta, Zavim, 2.1 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
9. Anon., Sifra, None (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
|
10. Palestinian Talmud, Sanhedrin, 7.13 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
|
11. Babylonian Talmud, Niddah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 34a. רגל הוה וטומאת עם הארץ ברגל כטהרה שוינהו רבנן דכתיב (שופטים כ, יא) ויאסף כל איש ישראל אל העיר כאיש אחד חברים הכתוב עשאן כולן חברים, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big דם עובדת כוכבים ודם טהרה של מצורעת ב"ש מטהרים ובית הלל אומרים כרוקה וכמימי רגליה,דם היולדת שלא טבלה ב"ש אומרים כרוקה וכמימי רגליה וב"ה אומרים מטמא לח ויבש,ומודים ביולדת בזוב שהיא מטמאה לח ויבש, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ולית להו לב"ש (ויקרא טו, ב) דבר אל בני ישראל ואמרת אליהם איש איש כי יהיה זב בני ישראל מטמאין בזיבה ואין העובדי כוכבים מטמאין בזיבה אבל גזרו עליהן שיהו כזבין לכל דבריהם,אמרי לך ב"ש (ההוא בזכרים איתמר דאי בנקבות) היכי לעביד ליטמא לח ויבש עשיתו כשל תורה ליטמי לח ולא ליטמי יבש חלקת בשל תורה,אי הכי רוקה ומימי רגליה נמי כיון דעבדינן היכרא בדמה מידע ידיע דרוקה ומימי רגליה דרבנן,ולעביד היכרא ברוקה ומימי רגליה ולטמויי לדמה רוקה ומימי רגליה דשכיחי גזרו בהו רבנן דמה דלא שכיחא לא גזרו ביה רבנן,אמר רבא זובו טמא אפילו לב"ש קריו טהור אפילו לב"ה,זובו טמא אפילו לב"ש דהא איכא למעבד היכרא בקריו,קריו טהור אפי' לב"ה עבוד ביה רבנן היכרא כי היכי דלא לשרוף עליה תרומה וקדשים,ולעביד היכרא בזובו ולטמויי לקריו זובו דלא תלי במעשה גזרו ביה רבנן קריו דתלי במעשה לא גזרו ביה רבנן,לימא מסייע ליה עובדת כוכבים שפלטה שכבת זרע מישראל טמאה ובת ישראל שפלטה שכבת זרע מן העובד כוכבי' טהורה מאי לאו טהורה גמורה לא טהורה מדאורייתא טמאה מדרבנן,ת"ש נמצאת אומר שכבת זרע של ישראל טמאה בכל מקום | 34a. This incident occurred during ba pilgrimage Festival,either Passover, iSukkot /i, or iShavuot /i, band the Sages rendered the ritual impurity of an iam ha’aretzduring a pilgrimage Festival as purity. As it is written: “And all the men of Israel gathered to the city, like one man, united [ iḥaverim /i]”(Judges 20:11). Whenever all the Jewish people gather in a single place, such as on a pilgrimage Festival, bthe verse renders all of them iḥaverim /i,even one who is an iam ha’aretz /i. There was therefore no concern for impurity due to the saliva of an iam ha’aretz /i. Yet, the High Priest was concerned that this Sadducee was one who engages in intercourse with a menstruating woman., strongMISHNA: /strong With regard to the bblood ofa menstruating bgentile womanor a gentile izava /i, bandthe bblooddischarged bbya female Jewish bleperduring the days bof purityof a woman who gives birth, bBeit Shammai deemthem britually pure, and Beit Hillel say:The halakhic status of the blood of the gentile woman is blikethat of bher saliva and her urine,which impart impurity only while moist. Likewise, the blood discharged by a Jewish leper during the days of purity imparts impurity only when moist.,With regard to bthe blood of a woman who gave birthand reached the conclusion of her days of impurity, i.e., seven days after giving birth to a male or fourteen days after giving birth to a female, but bwho did notyet bimmersein a ritual bath, bBeit Shammai say:Although she has yet to immerse in a ritual bath, the blood does not retain the halakhic status of menstrual blood. Rather, the status of the blood is blikethat of bher saliva and her urine,and it imparts impurity only while moist. bAnd Beit Hillel say:Since she did not immerse in a ritual bath, her blood is considered like that of a menstruating woman, and it bimparts impuritywhether it is bmoist or dry. /b, bAndBeit Shammai bconcedeto Beit Hillel binthe case of ba woman who gives birth as a izava /i,where the woman must count seven clean days from the conclusion of her days of impurity, bthatany blood bshesees during those seven days bimparts impuritywhether it is bmoist or dry. /b, strongGEMARA: /strong The mishna teaches that according to Beit Shammai the blood of a gentile woman does not impart impurity. The Gemara objects: bAnd do Beit Shammai not acceptthat which is taught with regard to the verse: b“Speak to the children of Israel and say to them, when any man has an issue [ izav /i]out of his flesh, his issue is impure” (Leviticus 15:2), from which it is inferred: By Torah law, bthe children of Israel become impure through izivaand gentiles do not become impure through iziva /i, butthe Sages bdecreed concerning them that they shall be like izavinin all their mattersof ritual purity.,The Gemara responds: bBeit Shammaicould bsay to youthat bthis was statedonly bwith regard to males,not females. bAs, ifit was stated even bwith regard to females, how should one actwith regard to this impurity? bShouldtheir blood bimpart impuritywhether it is bmoist or dry?If so, byou have rendered it likeblood that imparts impurity bby Torahlaw, and people will mistakenly come to burn iterumathat comes into contact with it. Perhaps one will suggest that it bshould impart impurityonly while it is bmoist and it should not impart impuritywhen it is bdry.But if so, byouwill have bdifferentiatedbetween moist and dry blood even bwith regard toblood bthatis impure by bTorahlaw, i.e., one might mistakenly conclude that the blood of Jewish women imparts impurity only when it is moist, when in fact it imparts impurity whether it is moist or dry.,The Gemara objects: bIf so,then with regard to bthe saliva and urine ofa gentile izava /i, which impart impurity by rabbinic law only when moist, Beit Shammai should balsorule that they do not impart impurity at all, in order to distinguish their saliva and urine from that of a Jewish izava /i, which by Torah law impart impurity only when moist (see 54b). The Gemara responds: bSince we implement a conspicuous marker with regard to the blood ofa gentile woman, i.e., it is clear that her status is different from that of a Jewish woman in that her blood does not impart impurity whatsoever, everyone bwill know thatthe impurity of bher saliva and her urineis only bby rabbiniclaw, and there is no concern that people might come to mistakenly burn iterumathat comes into contact with the saliva and urine of a gentile izava /i.,The Gemara persists: bAnd let them implement a conspicuous marker with regard to the saliva and urine ofa gentile woman, that they should not impart impurity whatsoever, band let them deem her blood impureeven when dry. In this manner, everyone will know that the impurity of a gentile woman applies only by rabbinic law, and they will not come to treat that which is impure by Torah law in the same manner. The Gemara responds: With regard to bher saliva and her urine, which arerelatively bcommon, the Sages decreedthat btheyare impure, but with regard to bher blood, which is notas bcommon, the Sages did not decreethat bitis impure.,§ With regard to a gentile man, bRava says: The izivaofa gentile man is britually impure, even according tothe opinion of bBeit Shammai,who maintain that the izivaof a gentile woman does not impart impurity whatsoever. By contrast, bthe semen ofa gentile is bpure, even according tothe opinion of bBeit Hillel,who hold that the blood of menstruating gentiles and the blood of their izivaimparts impurity when it is moist.,Rava elaborates: bThe izivaofa gentile man is bimpure, even according tothe opinion of bBeit Shammai, as it ispossible bto implement a conspicuous marker with his semen,i.e., since his semen does not impart impurity whatsoever, everyone will know that the impurity imparted by the izivaof a gentile applies by rabbinic law, and they will not come to burn iterumathat comes in contact with the izivaof a gentile.,And bthe semen ofa gentile is britually pure, even according tothe opinion of bBeit Hillel.This is because bthe Sageshad to bimplement a conspicuous marker with regard to itto indicate that the izivaof a gentile imparts impurity only by rabbinic law bin order that they will notcome bto burn iterumaand consecrateditems bthatcome into contact with their iziva /i, as must be performed with iterumaand consecrated items that contract impurity by Torah law.,The Gemara objects: bAnd letthe Sages bimplement a conspicuous marker with regard to the izivaofa gentile man, that it should not impart impurity whatsoever, band let them deem his semen impure.The Gemara explains: With regard to bhis iziva /i, which is not dependent on an actionhe performs but is emitted on its own, bthe Sages decreedthat bitis impure; with regard to bhis semen, which is dependent on an actionhe performs, bthe Sages did not decreethat bitis impure.,The Gemara suggests: bLet us saythat the following mishna ( iMikvaot8:4) bsupportsRava’s opinion: In the case of ba gentile woman who discharged sementhat came bfrom a Jewwho engaged in intercourse with her, the semen is bimpure,as it came from a Jew. bAndin the case of ba Jewish woman who discharged sementhat came bfrom a gentile,the semen is bpure. What, is it notcorrect to say that the mishna means the semen of the gentile is bentirely pure,in accordance with the opinion of Rava? The Gemara refutes this suggestion: bNo,perhaps the mishna means that the semen of a gentile is bpure by Torah lawbut bimpure by rabbinic law,whereas according to Rava, the semen of a gentile is pure even by rabbinic law.,The Gemara cites another source that possibly supports Rava’s opinion: bComeand bheara ibaraita /i: bYou are foundto bsay the semen of a Jew is impure whereverit is found |
|
12. Babylonian Talmud, Pesahim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 111a. חוץ מן המים ור' יוחנן אמר אפילו מים אמר רב פפא לא אמרן אלא חמימי לגו קרירי וקרירי לגו חמימי אבל חמימי לגו חמימי וקרירי לגו קרירי לא,אמר ריש לקיש ארבעה דברים העושה אותן דמו בראשו ומתחייב בנפשו אלו הן הנפנה בין דקל לכותל והעובר בין שני דקלים והשותה מים שאולין והעובר על מים שפוכין ואפילו שפכתו אשתו בפניו,הנפנה בין דקל לכותל לא אמרן אלא דלית ליה ארבע אמות אבל אית ליה ארבע אמות לית לן בה וכי לית ליה ארבע אמות לא אמרן אלא דליכא דירכא אחרינא אבל איכא דירכא אחרינא לית לן בה,והעובר בין שני דקלים לא אמרן אלא דלא פסקינהו רשות הרבים אבל פסקינהו רשות הרבים לית לן בה השותה מים שאולין לא אמרן אלא דשיילינהו קטן אבל גדול לית לן בה,ואפילו שיילינהו קטן נמי לא אמרן אלא בשדה דלא שכיחי אבל בעיר דשכיחי לית לן בה ואפילו בשדה נמי לא אמרן אלא מיא אבל חמרא ושיכרא לית לן בה,והעובר על מים שפוכין לא אמרן אלא דלא אפסקינהו בעפרא ולא תף בהו רוקא אבל אפסקינהו או תף בהו רוקא לית לן בה ולא אמרן אלא דלא עבר עלייהו שימשא ולא עבר עלייהו שיתין ניגרי אבל עבר עלייהו שימשא ועבר עלייהו שיתין ניגרי לית לן בה ולא אמרן אלא דלא רכיב חמרא ולא סיים מסני אבל רכיב חמרא וסיים מסני לית לן בה,וה"מ היכא דליכא למיחש לכשפים אבל היכא דאיכא למיחש לכשפים אע"ג דאיכא כל הני חיישינן (וההוא) גברא דרכיב חמרא וסיים מסני וגמוד מסאניה וצוו כרעיה,ת"ר שלשה אין ממצעין ולא מתמצעין ואלו הן הכלב והדקל והאשה וי"א אף החזיר וי"א אף הנחש,ואי ממצעין מאי תקנתיה אמר רב פפא נפתח באל ונפסיק באל,א"נ נפתח בלא ונפסיק בלא,הני בי תרי דמצעא להו אשה נדה אם תחלת נדתה היא הורגת א' מהן אם סוף נדתה היא מריבה עושה ביניהן מאי תקנתיה נפתח באל ונפסיק באל,הני תרי נשי דיתבן בפרשת דרכים חדא בהאי גיסא דשבילא וחדא באידך גיסא ומכוונן אפייהו להדדי ודאי בכשפים עסיקן מאי תקנתיה אי איכא דירכא אחרינא ליזיל בה ואי ליכא דירכא אחרינא אי איכא איניש אחרינא בהדיה נינקטו לידייהו בהדי הדדי וניחלפו ואי ליכא איניש אחרינא נימא הכי אגרת אזלת אסיא בלוסיא מתקטלא בחיק קבל,האי מאן דפגע באיתתא בעידנא דסלקא מטבילת מצוה אי איהו קדים ומשמש אחדא ליה לדידיה רוח זנונים אי איהי קדמה ומשמשה אחדא לה לדידה רוח זנונים מאי תקנתיה לימא הכי (תהלים קז, מ) שופך בוז על נדיבים ויתעם בתוהו לא דרך,א"ר יצחק מאי דכתיב (תהלים כג, ד) גם כי אלך בגיא צלמות לא אירא רע כי אתה עמדי זה הישן בצל דקל יחידי ובצל לבנה ובצל דקל יחידי לא אמרן אלא דלא נפיל טולא דחבריה עילויה אבל נפל טולא דחבריה עילויה לית לן בה,אלא הא דתניא הישן בצל דקל יחידי בחצר והישן בצל לבנה דמו בראשו היכי דמי אי לימא דלא נפל טולא דחבריה עילויה אפילו בשדה נמי אלא לאו שמע מינה בחצר אף על גב דנפיל טולא דחבריה עילויה שמע מינה,ובצילה של לבנה לא אמרן אלא במערבה אבל במדינחתא לית לן בה | 111a. bexcept for water.If one mixes water with other water, it is not considered diluted and does not count toward the number of cups. bAnd Rabbi Yoḥa said: Even waterjoins the number of cups. bRav Pappa said: We said this statement onlyabout bhotwater poured binto coldwater, band coldwater poured binto hot water.Rabbi Yoḥa maintains that these cups are considered diluted. bHowever,everyone agrees that bhotwater poured binto hotwater bor coldwater poured binto coldwater, bno,they are not considered diluted.,The Gemara cites more statements concerning superstitions and witchcraft. bReish Lakish said:There are bfour matters. The one who performs them, his blood is upon hisown bhead, andhe is held bliable for his own life,due to the evil spirit that rests upon him: bOne who relieves himselfin a spot bbetween a palm tree and a wall, one who passes between two palm trees, one who drinks borrowed water, and one who passes over spilled water, even if his wife poured it out in front of him. /b,The Gemara elaborates: With regard to bone who relieves himself between a palm tree and a wall, we saidthat he places himself in danger bonly when there are not four cubitsof space between the two objects. bHowever,if bthere are four cubits, we have noproblem bwith it.The demons have enough room to pass, and he will not obstruct them. bAndfurthermore, even bwhen there are not four cubits, we saidthere is a problem bonly whenthe demons bhave no other routebesides that one. bHowever,if they bhave another route, we have noproblem bwith it. /b, bAndwith regard to bone who passes between two palm trees, we saidthat he is in danger bonly if a public domain does not cross between them. However,if ba public domain crosses between them, we have noproblem bwith it,as demons are not permitted to cause harm in a public place. bAndwith regard to bone who drinks borrowed water, we saidit is dangerous bonly if a minor borrowed it. However,if ban adultborrowed the water, bwe have noproblem bwith it. /b, bAnd evenif ba minor borrowed it, we saidthis poses a danger bonlyif it occurred bin a field, wherewater bis not found. However, in a city, wherewater bcan be found, we have noproblem bwith it. And even in a field, we saidthere is cause for concern bonlyin a case of borrowed bwater; however,with regard to bwine and beer, we have noproblem bwith it. /b, bAndwith regard to bone who passes over spilled water, we saidhe places himself in danger bonly if no one sprinkled dirt over it and no one spat in it. However, ifsomeone bsprinkled dirt over it or spat in it, we have noproblem bwith it. And we saidthis is a concern bonly if the sun did not pass over it,i.e., it occurred at night, band sixty stepsof people walking in the area bhave not passed over it. However,if bthe sun passed over it and sixty steps passed over it, we have noproblem bwith it. And we saidthis concern bonly if he was not riding a donkey and not wearing shoes; however, if he was riding a donkey and wearing shoes, we have noproblem bwith it. /b,The Gemara comments: bAndall bthisapplies only bwhere there is noreason for bconcern for witchcraft,as no one is interested in harming him. bHowever, where there isreason for bconcern for witchcraft, even if all of theselimiting conditions barein place, bwe arenevertheless bconcerned. Andthis is similar to what happened to ba certain man who was riding a donkey and wearing shoes.Nevertheless, he passed over water band his shoes shrank and his feet shriveled up. /b,The Gemara continues to discuss this issue. bThe Sages taught: Threeobjects should bnotbe allowed to bpass betweentwo people walking along a road, and people should bnot walk betweentwo of them: bA dog, a palm tree, and a woman. And some say: Also a pig. And some say: Also a snake.All of these were associated with witchcraft.,The Gemara asks: bAnd if they pass between them, what is the remedyto prevent one from harm? bRav Pappa said: Heshould bbeginreciting a verse that starts bwiththe word bGod and conclude witha verse that ends with the word bGod.In other words, he should recite the passage: “God Who brought them out of Egypt is for them like the lofty horns of the wild ox. For there is no enchantment with Jacob, nor is there any divination with Israel; now is it said of Jacob and of Israel: What has been performed by God” (Numbers 23:22–23). This verse indicates that spells do not affect the Jewish people., bAlternatively, heshould bopenwith a verse that begins with the word ilo /i,no, bandshould bconcludewith the same verse that ends with ilo /i:“No [ ilo /i] man is God that he should lie; neither the son of man that he should repent. When He has said will He not do it, or when He has spoken will He not [ ilo /i] make it good?” (Numbers 23:19).,Similarly, bthese twomen, bbetween whom a menstruating woman passes, if she is at the beginning of her menstruation she kills one of them,i.e., she causes the death of one of the two men. bIf she isat bthe end of her menstruationshe does not kill, but she bcauses a fight between them. What is his remedy? Heshould bopenwith a verse that begins bwiththe word bGod and heshould bconclude witha verse that ends with the word bGod,as explained above.,The Gemara further states: bThese two women, who are sitting at a crossroads, one on this side of the road and the other on the other side, and they are facing each other, they are certainly engaging in witchcraft. What isthe bremedyfor one who walks by? bIf there is another route, heshould bgo by it. And if there is no other route, if there is another person with him, theyshould bhold hands and switchplaces. bAnd if there is no other person with him, heshould bsay as follows: Iggeret, Azlat, Asiya, Belusiya are killed by arrows.These are names of demons invoked by witches.,The Gemara cites a related statement: bOne who meets a woman when she is ascending from the ritual immersion of a mitzva,after her menstruation, bif he has intercoursewith any woman bfirst, a spirit of immorality overtakes him; if she has intercourse first, a spirit of immorality overtakes her. What is his remedy? Heshould bsay this: “He pours contempt upon princes, and causes them to wander in the waste, where there is no way”(Psalms 107:40)., bRav Yitzḥak said: Whatis the meaning of that which bis written: “Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for You are with me”(Psalms 23:4)? bThis isa person bwho sleeps in the shadow of a single palm tree, and in the shadow of the moon.Despite his dangerous position, he trusts God and is not afraid. The Gemara qualifies the previous statement: bAnd with regard toone who sleeps bin the shadow of a single palm tree, we saidhe is in danger bonly if the shadow of anotherpalm tree bdoes not fall upon him. However,if bthe shadow of anotherpalm tree bfalls upon him, we have noproblem bwith it. /b,The Gemara asks: bButwhat about bthatwhich bwas taughtin a ibaraita /i: With regard to one bwho sleeps in the shadow of a single palm tree in a courtyard and one who sleeps in the shadow of the moon, his blood is upon hisown bhead. What are the circumstances? If we say that the shadow of anotherpalm tree bdoes not fall on him,he would balsobe harmed if he were bin a field. Rather,must bone not conclude fromthis ibaraitathat if one is in a bcourtyard, even if the shadow of anothertree bfell on him,it remains dangerous? The Gemara concludes: Indeed, blearn from itthat this is so.,The Gemara adds: bAndwith regard bto the shadow of the moon, we saidit is dangerous to sleep there bonlyat the end of the month when the moon shines in the east, and therefore its shadow is bin the west. However,at the start of the month, when the moon shines in the west and its shadow is bin the east, we have noproblem bwith it. /b |
|
13. Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 83a. ורבי עקיבא למאי הלכתא איתקש לנדה למשא לוקשיה לנבלה אין הכי נמי אלא מה נדה אינה לאברין אף ע"ז אינה לאברין אלא הא דבעי רב חמא בר גוריא ע"ז ישנה לאברים או אינה לאברים תיפשוט ליה מהא בין לרבנן בין לרבי עקיבא דאינה לאברים רב חמא בר גוריא כרבה מתני ובעי לה אליבא דרבי עקיבא,מיתיבי ע"ז כשרץ ומשמשיה כשרץ רבי עקיבא אומר ע"ז כנדה ומשמשיה כשרץ בשלמא לרבי אלעזר ניחא אלא לרבה קשיא אמר לך רבה מי אלימא ממתני' דקתני עציו ואבניו ועפריו מטמאין כשרץ ואוקימנא מאי כשרץ דלא מטמא באבן מסמא ה"נ דלא מטמא באבן מסמא,מיתיבי נכרי ונכרית ע"ז ומשמשיה הן ולא היסטן רבי עקיבא אומר הן והיסטן בשלמא לרבי אלעזר ניחא אלא לרבה קשיא אמר לך רבה וליטעמיך נכרי ונכרית נמי הן ולא היסטן והתניא (ויקרא טו, ב) דבר אל בני ישראל וגו' בני ישראל מטמאין בזיבה ואין נכרים מטמאין בזיבה אבל גזרו עליהן שיהו כזבין לכל דבריהן,אלא רבה מתרץ לטעמיה נכרי ונכרית הן והיסטן ואבן מסמא שלהן ע"ז היא והיסטה אבל לא אבן מסמא שלה רבי עקיבא אומר ע"ז היא והיסטה ואבן מסמא שלה ורבי אלעזר מתרץ לטעמיה נכרי ונכרית הן והיסטן ואבן מסמא שלהן ע"ז היא ולא היסטה ורבי עקיבא אומר ע"ז היא והיסטה,מתקיף לה רב אשי מאי הן אלא אמר רב אשי הכי קאמר נכרי ונכרית בין הן שהסיטו את אחרים ובין אחרים שהסיטו אותן טמאים ע"ז שהסיטה אחרים טהורין אחרים שהסיטו אותה טמאים משמשיה בין הן שהסיטו את אחרים ובין אחרים שהסיטו אותן טהורים רבי עקיבא אומר נכרי ונכרית וע"ז בין הן שהסיטו את אחרים ובין אחרים שהסיטו אותן טמאים משמשיה בין הן שהסיטו אחרים ובין אחרים שהסיטו אותן טהורין,ע"ז בשלמא אחרים שהסיטו אותה משכחת לה אלא היא שהסיטה את אחרים היכי משכחת לה אמר רמי בריה דרב ייבא כדתנן הזב בכף מאזנים ואוכלין ומשקין בכף שנייה כרע הזב טמאין | 83a. bAndaccording to the opinion of bRabbi Akiva,with regard bto what ihalakhawasidolatry bjuxtaposed to a menstruating woman?If it was to teach the ihalakhaof impurity imparted by bcarrying, let it be juxtaposed to ananimal bcarcassand not to a menstruating woman and creeping animals. The Gemara answers: bYes, it is indeed so. However,the juxtaposition to a menstruating woman teaches: bJust as a menstruating woman does nottransmit impurity bthroughher blimbs,as a menstruating woman who leans on an object by a single limb does not transmit impurity imparted by carrying (Ra’avad), bso too, an idol does nottransmit impurity bthroughits blimbs,and a section of an idol does not transmit impurity. The Gemara asks: bBut that which Rav Ḥama bar Guria raised as a dilemma: Does idolatry havethe capacity to transmit impurity through blimbs or does it nothave the capacity to transmit impurity bthrough its limbs; resolvethe dilemma bfrom this, as according to both the Rabbis and Rabbi Akiva, it does nottransmit impurity bthrough limbs.According to this explanation, Rabbi Akiva agrees with the Rabbis. The Gemara rejects this: bRav Ḥama bar Guria taught in accordance withthe explanation of bRabba and raised the dilemma in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Akiva. /b,The Gemara now clarifies the explanations of Rabba and Rabbi Elazar in light of other sources. The Gemara braises an objectionfrom that which was taught in a ibaraita /i: The ritual impurity of bidolatryis blikethat of ba creeping animal, andthe ritual impurity of bits accessoriesis blikethat of ba creeping animal. Rabbi Akiva says:The ritual impurity of bidolatryis blikethat of ba menstruating woman, andthe ritual impurity of bits accessoriesis blikethat of ba creeping animal. Granted,according btothe opinion of bRabbi Elazar,it works out bwell. However,according btothe opinion of bRabba, it is difficult.The dispute between Rabbi Akiva and the Rabbis in this ibaraitais whether idolatry is likened to a creeping animal and does not transmit impurity imparted by carrying or whether it is likened to a menstruating woman and it does transmit impurity imparted by carrying. According to Rabba, the Rabbis agree that it does transmit impurity imparted by carrying. bRabbacould have bsaid to you: Isthe proof from this ibaraita bstronger thanthe bmishnain tractate iAvoda Zara /i, bwhich taught: Its wood and stones and dirt transmit impurity like a creeping animal?With regard to that mishna bwe established: Whatis the meaning of blike a creeping animal?It means that it is like a creeping animal in the sense bthat it does not transmit impurity by means of a very heavy stone. Here too,the analogy to a creeping animal in the ibaraitais in the sense that bit does not transmit impurity via a very heavy stone. /b,The Gemara braises an objectionfrom what we learned: bA gentile man and a gentile woman,with regard to whom the Rabbis issued a decree that they transmit impurity like a izav /i, bidolatry and its accessories,all transmit impurity. bTheytransmit impurity, band not their movement,i.e., they do not transmit impurity to one who moves them. bRabbi Akiva says:Both bthey and their movementtransmit impurity. bGranted,according btothe explanation of bRabbi Elazar,this works out bwell; however,according btothe explanation of bRabba, it is difficult. Rabbacould have bsaid to you: And according to your reasoning,with regard to ba gentile man and a gentile woman as well,do btheytransmit impurity band their movementdoes bnottransmit impurity? bWasn’t it taughtin a ibaraitawith regard to the verse: b“Speak to the children of Israeland say to them, when any man has an emission from his body, his emission is impure” (Leviticus 15:2), by Torah law, only bthe children of Israel become impure throughthe bemission of a izav /i, and gentiles do not become impure throughthe bemission of a izav /i? Butthe Sages bdecreed that they should beconsidered blike a izavfor all theirhalakhic bmatters.Since gentiles have the legal status of a izav /i, they should transmit impurity through carrying. Therefore, the ibaraitathat states that gentiles do not transmit impurity through carrying is corrupted and must be emended., bRather, Rabba explainsand adds to the ibaraita bin accordance with his reasoning: A gentile man and a gentile womantransmit impurity, bthey and their movement and their very heavy stone.And bidolatrytransmits impurity, bit and its movement but not its very heavy stone. Rabbi Akiva says: Idolatrytransmits impurity, bit and its movement and its very heavy stone. And Rabbi Elazar explainsand adds to the ibaraita bin accordance with his reasoningas follows: bA gentile man and a gentile womantransmit impurity, bthey and their movement and their very heavy stone. Idolatrytransmits impurity, bit and not its movement. And Rabbi Akiva says: Idolatrytransmits impurity, bit and its movement. /b, bRav Ashi strongly objects tothis explanation: According to this explanation, bwhatis the meaning of the word btheyin the context of this ibaraita /i? It would have been sufficient to say that their movement transmits impurity. The fact that the gentiles themselves are ritually impure is obvious. Apparently, the word they is emphasized in order to teach an additional ihalakha /i. bRather, Rav Ashi said, this is whatthe ibaraita bis saying:With regard to ba gentile man and a gentile woman, whether they moved others or others moved them,the others bare ritually impure.The impurity of a gentile is like that of a izav /i, which is unique in that anything that a izavmoves becomes impure even if he did not touch it directly. bIdolatry that moved others,the others remain britually pure;however, bothers who moved it are ritually impure.With regard to bits accessories, whether they moved others or others moved them,the others remain britually pure. Rabbi Akiva says: A gentile man and a gentile woman and idolatry, whether they moved others or others moved them,the others bare ritually impure. Its accessories, whether they moved others or others moved them,the others remain britually pure.According to this explanation, both the word they and the word movement, both of which appear in the ibaraita /i, are significant.,Rav Ashi’s explanation explains the ibaraita /i, but the Gemara questions the matter itself. With regard to bidolatry, granted,a case bwhere others moved itcan be easily bfound. However,a case where the idolatry bmoved others,under what circumstances bcan it be found?How can an idol move another object? bRami, son of Rav Yeiva, said,a case like that is possible, bas we learnedin a mishna: In a case where bthe izav /isat bonone bpan of abalance bscale, and food and drinkswere bonthe bsecond pan,if bthe izavtippedthe scales, the food and drinks on the other pan bare ritually impurebecause the izavmoved them. |
|
