1. Hebrew Bible, Numbers, 17, 16 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
|
2. Hebrew Bible, 2 Chronicles, 7.1 (5th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
| 7.1. וּבְיוֹם עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה לַחֹדֶשׁ הַשְּׁבִיעִי שִׁלַּח אֶת־הָעָם לְאָהֳלֵיהֶם שְׂמֵחִים וְטוֹבֵי לֵב עַל־הַטּוֹבָה אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה יְהוָה לְדָוִיד וְלִשְׁלֹמֹה וּלְיִשְׂרָאֵל עַמּוֹ׃ 7.1. וּכְכַלּוֹת שְׁלֹמֹה לְהִתְפַּלֵּל וְהָאֵשׁ יָרְדָה מֵהַשָּׁמַיִם וַתֹּאכַל הָעֹלָה וְהַזְּבָחִים וּכְבוֹד יְהוָה מָלֵא אֶת־הַבָּיִת׃ | 7.1. Now when Solomon had made an end of praying, the fire came down from heaven, and consumed the burnt-offering and the sacrifices; and the glory of the LORD filled the house." |
|
3. Aristotle, Athenian Constitution, 20.4 (4th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)
|
4. Hebrew Bible, Daniel, 9.26, 11.22 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)
| 9.26. וְאַחֲרֵי הַשָּׁבֻעִים שִׁשִּׁים וּשְׁנַיִם יִכָּרֵת מָשִׁיחַ וְאֵין לוֹ וְהָעִיר וְהַקֹּדֶשׁ יַשְׁחִית עַם נָגִיד הַבָּא וְקִצּוֹ בַשֶּׁטֶף וְעַד קֵץ מִלְחָמָה נֶחֱרֶצֶת שֹׁמֵמוֹת׃ 11.22. וּזְרֹעוֹת הַשֶּׁטֶף יִשָּׁטְפוּ מִלְּפָנָיו וְיִשָּׁבֵרוּ וְגַם נְגִיד בְּרִית׃ | 9.26. And after the threescore and two weeks shall an anointed one be cut off, and be no more; and the people of a prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; but his end shall be with a flood; and unto the end of the war desolations are determined." 11.22. And the arms of the flood shall be swept away from before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covet." |
|
5. Septuagint, 1 Maccabees, 1.9, 1.11-1.15, 1.19-1.24, 1.29-1.64, 2.16, 3.32, 6.20-6.21, 6.62, 7.5, 7.18, 7.22, 8.6, 9.23, 9.58, 9.69, 10.14, 10.40, 10.44, 10.61, 11.13, 11.25 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)
| 1.9. They all put on crowns after his death, and so did their sons after them for many years; and they caused many evils on the earth. 1.11. In those days lawless men came forth from Israel, and misled many, saying, "Let us go and make a covet with the Gentiles round about us, for since we separated from them many evils have come upon us. 1.12. This proposal pleased them 1.13. and some of the people eagerly went to the king. He authorized them to observe the ordices of the Gentiles. 1.14. So they built a gymnasium in Jerusalem, according to Gentile custom 1.15. and removed the marks of circumcision, and abandoned the holy covet. They joined with the Gentiles and sold themselves to do evil. 1.19. And they captured the fortified cities in the land of Egypt, and he plundered the land of Egypt. 1.20. After subduing Egypt, Antiochus returned in the one hundred and forty-third year. He went up against Israel and came to Jerusalem with a strong force. 1.21. He arrogantly entered the sanctuary and took the golden altar, the lampstand for the light, and all its utensils. 1.22. He took also the table for the bread of the Presence, the cups for drink offerings, the bowls, the golden censers, the curtain, the crowns, and the gold decoration on the front of the temple; he stripped it all off. 1.23. He took the silver and the gold, and the costly vessels; he took also the hidden treasures which he found. 1.24. Taking them all, he departed to his own land. He committed deeds of murder,and spoke with great arrogance. 1.29. Two years later the king sent to the cities of Judah a chief collector of tribute, and he came to Jerusalem with a large force. 1.30. Deceitfully he spoke peaceable words to them, and they believed him; but he suddenly fell upon the city, dealt it a severe blow, and destroyed many people of Israel. 1.31. He plundered the city, burned it with fire, and tore down its houses and its surrounding walls. 1.32. And they took captive the women and children, and seized the cattle. 1.33. Then they fortified the city of David with a great strong wall and strong towers, and it became their citadel. 1.34. And they stationed there a sinful people, lawless men. These strengthened their position; 1.35. they stored up arms and food, and collecting the spoils of Jerusalem they stored them there, and became a great snare. 1.36. It became an ambush against the sanctuary,an evil adversary of Israel continually. 1.37. On every side of the sanctuary they shed innocent blood;they even defiled the sanctuary. 1.38. Because of them the residents of Jerusalem fled;she became a dwelling of strangers;she became strange to her offspring,and her children forsook her. 1.39. Her sanctuary became desolate as a desert;her feasts were turned into mourning,her sabbaths into a reproach,her honor into contempt. 1.40. Her dishonor now grew as great as her glory;her exaltation was turned into mourning. 1.41. Then the king wrote to his whole kingdom that all should be one people 1.42. and that each should give up his customs. 1.43. All the Gentiles accepted the command of the king. Many even from Israel gladly adopted his religion; they sacrificed to idols and profaned the sabbath. 1.44. And the king sent letters by messengers to Jerusalem and the cities of Judah; he directed them to follow customs strange to the land 1.45. to forbid burnt offerings and sacrifices and drink offerings in the sanctuary, to profane sabbaths and feasts 1.46. to defile the sanctuary and the priests 1.47. to build altars and sacred precincts and shrines for idols, to sacrifice swine and unclean animals 1.48. and to leave their sons uncircumcised. They were to make themselves abominable by everything unclean and profane 1.49. so that they should forget the law and change all the ordices. 1.50. And whoever does not obey the command of the king shall die. 1.51. In such words he wrote to his whole kingdom. And he appointed inspectors over all the people and commanded the cities of Judah to offer sacrifice, city by city. 1.52. Many of the people, every one who forsook the law, joined them, and they did evil in the land; 1.53. they drove Israel into hiding in every place of refuge they had. 1.54. Now on the fifteenth day of Chislev, in the one hundred and forty-fifth year, they erected a desolating sacrilege upon the altar of burnt offering. They also built altars in the surrounding cities of Judah 1.55. and burned incense at the doors of the houses and in the streets. 1.56. The books of the law which they found they tore to pieces and burned with fire. 1.57. Where the book of the covet was found in the possession of any one, or if any one adhered to the law, the decree of the king condemned him to death. 1.58. They kept using violence against Israel, against those found month after month in the cities. 1.59. And on the twenty-fifth day of the month they offered sacrifice on the altar which was upon the altar of burnt offering. 1.60. According to the decree, they put to death the women who had their children circumcised 1.61. and their families and those who circumcised them; and they hung the infants from their mothers necks. 1.62. But many in Israel stood firm and were resolved in their hearts not to eat unclean food. 1.63. They chose to die rather than to be defiled by food or to profane the holy covet; and they did die. 1.64. And very great wrath came upon Israel. 2.16. Many from Israel came to them; and Mattathias and his sons were assembled. 3.32. He left Lysias, a distinguished man of royal lineage, in charge of the kings affairs from the river Euphrates to the borders of Egypt. 6.20. They gathered together and besieged the citadel in the one hundred and fiftieth year; and he built siege towers and other engines of war. 6.21. But some of the garrison escaped from the siege and some of the ungodly Israelites joined them. 6.62. But when the king entered Mount Zion and saw what a strong fortress the place was, he broke the oath he had sworn and gave orders to tear down the wall all around. 7.5. Then there came to him all the lawless and ungodly men of Israel; they were led by Alcimus, who wanted to be high priest. 7.18. Then the fear and dread of them fell upon all the people, for they said, "There is no truth or justice in them, for they have violated the agreement and the oath which they swore. 7.22. and all who were troubling their people joined him. They gained control of the land of Judah and did great damage in Israel. 8.6. They also defeated Antiochus the Great, king of Asia, who went to fight against them with a hundred and twenty elephants and with cavalry and chariots and a very large army. He was crushed by them; 9.23. After the death of Judas, the lawless emerged in all parts of Israel; all the doers of injustice appeared. 9.58. Then all the lawless plotted and said, "See! Jonathan and his men are living in quiet and confidence. So now let us bring Bacchides back, and he will capture them all in one night. 9.69. So he was greatly enraged at the lawless men who had counseled him to come into the country, and he killed many of them. Then he decided to depart to his own land. 10.14. Only in Beth-zur did some remain who had forsaken the law and the commandments, for it served as a place of refuge. 10.40. I also grant fifteen thousand shekels of silver yearly out of the kings revenues from appropriate places. 10.44. Let the cost of rebuilding and restoring the structures of the sanctuary be paid from the revenues of the king. 10.61. A group of pestilent men from Israel, lawless men, gathered together against him to accuse him; but the king paid no attention to them. 11.13. Then Ptolemy entered Antioch and put on the crown of Asia. Thus he put two crowns upon his head, the crown of Egypt and that of Asia. 11.25. Although certain lawless men of his nation kept making complaints against him |
|
6. Septuagint, 2 Maccabees, 1.1, 1.1-2.18, 1.7, 1.12, 1.13, 1.14, 1.16, 2.19, 2.20, 2.21, 2.22, 2.23, 2.24, 2.25, 2.26, 2.27, 2.28, 2.29, 2.30, 2.31, 2.32, 3, 3.1, 3.1-4.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 3.10, 3.11, 3.12, 3.13, 3.14, 3.15, 3.16, 3.17, 3.18, 3.19, 3.20, 3.21, 3.22, 3.23, 3.24, 3.25, 3.26, 3.27, 3.28, 3.29, 3.30, 3.31, 3.32, 3.33, 3.34, 3.35, 3.36, 3.37, 3.38, 3.39, 3.40, 4, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.8, 4.9, 4.10, 4.11, 4.12, 4.13, 4.14, 4.15, 4.16, 4.17, 4.18, 4.19, 4.20, 4.21, 4.22, 4.23, 4.24, 4.25, 4.26, 4.29, 4.30, 4.31, 4.32, 4.33, 4.34, 4.35, 4.36, 4.37, 4.38, 4.48, 4.49, 4.50, 5.1, 5.5, 5.6, 5.8, 5.11, 5.12, 5.13, 5.14, 5.15, 5.16, 5.17, 5.18, 5.19, 5.20, 5.21, 5.23, 5.24, 5.26, 5.27, 6.1, 6.2, 6.12, 6.14, 6.15, 6.16, 6.18-7.42, 6.21, 6.27, 6.28, 6.30, 6.31, 7, 7.2, 7.5, 7.7, 7.9, 7.10, 7.13, 7.14, 7.18, 7.22, 7.23, 7.32, 7.33, 7.40, 7.41, 7.42, 8.1, 8.2, 8.3, 8.4, 8.17, 8.21, 8.22, 8.23, 8.33, 8.36, 9, 9.7, 9.9, 9.15, 9.19, 9.29, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, 10.5, 10.6, 10.7, 10.8, 10.9, 10.10, 10.17, 10.19, 10.21, 10.24, 10.25, 10.27, 10.29, 10.30, 10.35, 11, 11.1, 11.2, 11.6, 11.7, 11.8, 11.9, 11.11, 11.21, 11.29, 11.33, 11.38, 12.6, 12.15, 12.20, 12.21, 12.22, 12.24, 12.25, 12.43, 12.45, 13.1, 13.4, 13.7, 13.9, 13.10, 13.23, 13.24, 13.26, 14.1, 14.1-15.36, 14.2, 14.3, 14.4, 14.5, 14.6, 14.7, 14.8, 14.9, 14.10, 14.11, 14.12, 14.13, 14.14, 14.17, 14.18, 14.19, 14.20, 14.21, 14.22, 14.23, 14.24, 14.25, 14.26, 14.27, 14.31, 14.32, 14.33, 14.34, 14.35, 14.36, 14.37, 15.1, 15.9, 15.12, 15.13, 15.14, 15.18, 15.30, 15.31, 15.37 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)
| 1.1. The Jewish brethren in Jerusalem and those in the land of Judea, To their Jewish brethren in Egypt, Greeting, and good peace.' |
|
7. Septuagint, Ecclesiasticus (Siracides), 6.7, 35.17, 41.8-41.9, 45.6-45.13, 45.18, 50.1-50.24 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)
| 35.17. The prayer of the humble pierces the clouds,and he will not be consoled until it reaches the Lord;he will not desist until the Most High visits him,and does justice for the righteous, and executes judgment. 41.8. Woe to you, ungodly men,who have forsaken the law of the Most High God! 45.6. He exalted Aaron, the brother of Moses,a holy man like him, of the tribe of Levi. 45.7. He made an everlasting covet with him,and gave him the priesthood of the people. He blessed him with splendid vestments,and put a glorious robe upon him. 45.8. He clothed him with superb perfection,and strengthened him with the symbols of authority,the linen breeches, the long robe, and the ephod. 45.9. And he encircled him with pomegranates,with very many golden bells round about,to send forth a sound as he walked,to make their ringing heard in the temple as a reminder to the sons of his people; 45.11. with twisted scarlet, the work of a craftsman;with precious stones engraved like signets,in a setting of gold, the work of a jeweler,for a reminder, in engraved letters,according to the number of the tribes of Israel; 45.12. with a gold crown upon his turban,inscribed like a signet with "Holiness," a distinction to be prized, the work of an expert,the delight of the eyes, richly adorned. 45.13. Before his time there never were such beautiful things. No outsider ever put them on,but only his sons and his descendants perpetually. 45.18. Outsiders conspired against him,and envied him in the wilderness,Dathan and Abiram and their men and the company of Korah, in wrath and anger. 50.1. The leader of his brethren and the pride of his people was Simon the high priest, son of Onias,who in his life repaired the house,and in his time fortified the temple. 50.1. like an olive tree putting forth its fruit,and like a cypress towering in the clouds. 50.2. He laid the foundations for the high double walls,the high retaining walls for the temple enclosure. 50.2. Then Simon came down, and lifted up his hands over the whole congregation of the sons of Israel,to pronounce the blessing of the Lord with his lips,and to glory in his name; 50.3. In his days a cistern for water was quarried out,a reservoir like the sea in circumference. 50.4. He considered how to save his people from ruin,and fortified the city to withstand a seige. 50.5. How glorious he was when the people gathered round him as he came out of the inner sanctuary! 50.7. like the sun shining upon the temple of the Most High,and like the rainbow gleaming in glorious clouds; 50.8. like roses in the days of the first fruits,like lilies by a spring of water,like a green shoot on Lebanon on a summer day; 50.9. like fire and incense in the censer,like a vessel of hammered gold adorned with all kinds of precious stones; 50.11. When he put on his glorious robe and clothed himself with superb perfection and went up to the holy altar,he made the court of the sanctuary glorious. 50.12. And when he received the portions from the hands of the priests,as he stood by the hearth of the altar with a garland of brethren around him,he was like a young cedar on Lebanon;and they surrounded him like the trunks of palm trees 50.13. all the sons of Aaron in their splendor with the Lords offering in their hands,before the whole congregation of Israel. 50.14. Finishing the service at the altars,and arranging the offering to the Most High, the Almighty 50.15. he reached out his hand to the cup and poured a libation of the blood of the grape;he poured it out at the foot of the altar,a pleasing odor to the Most High, the King of all. 50.16. Then the sons of Aaron shouted,they sounded the trumpets of hammered work,they made a great noise to be heard for remembrance before the Most High. 50.17. Then all the people together made haste and fell to the ground upon their faces to worship their Lord,the Almighty, God Most High. 50.18. And the singers praised him with their voices in sweet and full-toned melody. 50.19. And the people besought the Lord Most High in prayer before him who is merciful,till the order of worship of the Lord was ended;so they completed his service. 50.21. and they bowed down in worship a second time,to receive the blessing from the Most High. 50.22. And now bless the God of all,who in every way does great things;who exalts our days from birth,and deals with us according to his mercy. 50.23. May he give us gladness of heart,and grant that peace may be in our days in Israel,as in the days of old. 50.24. May he entrust to us his mercy!And let him deliver us in our days! |
|
8. Septuagint, Wisdom of Solomon, 9.15, 45.7, 45.12 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)
| 9.15. for a perishable body weighs down the soul,and this earthy tent burdens the thoughtful mind. |
|
9. Septuagint, 3 Maccabees, 1.9 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)
| 1.9. After he had arrived in Jerusalem, he offered sacrifice to the supreme God and made thank-offerings and did what was fitting for the holy place. Then, upon entering the place and being impressed by its excellence and its beauty |
|
10. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, 40.3.3-40.3.5 (1st cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)
|
11. Julius Caesar, De Bello Civli, 3.112 (1st cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)
|
12. Philo of Alexandria, On Flight And Finding, 184 (1st cent. BCE - missingth cent. CE)
| 184. and twelve is the perfect number, of which the circle of the zodiac in the heaven is a witness, studded as it is with such numbers of brilliant constellations. The periodical revolution of the sun is another witness, for he accomplishes his circle in twelve months, and men also reckon the hours of the day and of the night as equal in number to the months of the year |
|
13. Philo of Alexandria, On The Embassy To Gaius, 317-319, 157 (1st cent. BCE - missingth cent. CE)
| 157. But he never removed them from Rome, nor did he ever deprive them of their rights as Roman citizens, because he had a regard for Judaea, nor did he never meditate any new steps of innovation or rigour with respect to their synagogues, nor did he forbid their assembling for the interpretation of the law, nor did he make any opposition to their offerings of first fruits; but he behaved with such piety towards our countrymen, and with respect to all our customs, that he, I may almost say, with all his house, adorned our temple with many costly and magnificent offerings, commanding that continued sacrifices of whole burnt offerings should be offered up for ever and ever every day from his own revenues, as a first fruit of his own to the most high God, which sacrifices are performed to this very day, and will be performed for ever, as a proof and specimen of a truly imperial disposition. |
|
14. Philo of Alexandria, That The Worse Attacks The Better, 49 (1st cent. BCE - missingth cent. CE)
| 49. The wise man, therefore, who appears to have departed from this mortal life, lives according to the immortal life; but the wicked man who lives in wickedness has died according to the happy life. For in the various animals of different kinds, and in general in all bodies, it is both possible and easy to conceive, that the agents are of one kind, and the patients of another. For when a father beats his son, correcting him, or when a teacher beats his pupil, he who beats is one, and he who is beaten is another. But in the case of these beings, which are united and made one, only in the part as to which both acting and suffering are found to exist; these two things are there, neither at different times, nor do they affect different people, but they affect the same person in the same manner at the same time. At all events, when an athlete rubs himself for the sake of taking exercise, he is by all means rubbed also; and, if any one strikes himself, he himself is struck and wounded; and so also he who mutilates or kills himself as the agent, is mutilated or killed as the patient. |
|
15. Appian, The Syrian Wars, 1 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
16. Josephus Flavius, Jewish Antiquities, 11.298, 11.347, 12.43-12.44, 12.157, 12.237-12.241, 12.383, 20.205, 20.213, 20.235 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
| 11.298. Now Jesus was the brother of John, and was a friend of Bagoses, who had promised to procure him the high priesthood. 11.347. he fled away to the Shechemites, and said that he was accused unjustly. About this time it was that Jaddua the high priest died, and Onias his son took the high priesthood. This was the state of the affairs of the people of Jerusalem at this time. 12.43. When Onias the high priest was dead, his son Simon became his successor. He was called Simon the Just because of both his piety towards God, and his kind disposition to those of his own nation. 12.43. o being not able to fly, but encompassed round about with enemies, he stood still, and he and those that were with him fought; and when he had slain a great many of those that came against him, he at last was himself wounded, and fell and gave up the ghost, and died in a way like to his former famous actions. 12.44. When he was dead, and had left a young son, who was called Onias, Simon’s brother Eleazar, of whom we are speaking, took the high priesthood; and he it was to whom Ptolemy wrote, and that in the manner following: 12.157. for after Eleazar’s death, his uncle Manasseh took the priesthood, and after he had ended his life, Onias received that dignity. He was the son of Simon, who was called The Just: 12.237. 1. About this time, upon the death of Onias the high priest, they gave the high priesthood to Jesus his brother; for that son which Onias left [or Onias IV.] was yet but an infant; and, in its proper place, we will inform the reader of all the circumstances that befell this child. 12.238. But this Jesus, who was the brother of Onias, was deprived of the high priesthood by the king, who was angry with him, and gave it to his younger brother, whose name also was Onias; for Simon had these three sons, to each of which the priesthood came, as we have already informed the reader. 12.239. This Jesus changed his name to Jason, but Onias was called Menelaus. Now as the former high priest, Jesus, raised a sedition against Menelaus, who was ordained after him, the multitude were divided between them both. And the sons of Tobias took the part of Menelaus 12.241. Wherefore they desired his permission to build them a Gymnasium at Jerusalem. And when he had given them leave, they also hid the circumcision of their genitals, that even when they were naked they might appear to be Greeks. Accordingly, they left off all the customs that belonged to their own country, and imitated the practices of the other nations. 12.383. But when Antiochus came into it, and saw how strong the place was, he broke his oaths, and ordered his army that was there to pluck down the walls to the ground; and when he had so done, he returned to Antioch. He also carried with him Onias the high priest, who was also called Menelaus; 20.205. But as for the high priest, Aias he increased in glory every day, and this to a great degree, and had obtained the favor and esteem of the citizens in a signal manner; for he was a great hoarder up of money: he therefore cultivated the friendship of Albinus, and of the high priest [Jesus], by making them presents; 20.213. And now Jesus, the son of Gamaliel, became the successor of Jesus, the son of Damneus, in the high priesthood, which the king had taken from the other; on which account a sedition arose between the high priests, with regard to one another; for they got together bodies of the boldest sort of the people, and frequently came, from reproaches, to throwing of stones at each other. But Aias was too hard for the rest, by his riches, which enabled him to gain those that were most ready to receive. 20.235. and then the forementioned Antiochus, and Lysias the general of his army, deprived Onias, who was also called Menelaus, of the high priesthood, and slew him at Berea; and driving away the son [of Onias the third], put Jacimus into the place of the high priest, one that was indeed of the stock of Aaron, but not of the family of Onias. |
|
17. Josephus Flavius, Jewish War, 1.31-1.33, 1.41, 2.412-2.413 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
| 1.31. Now these caves were in the precipices of craggy mountains, and could not be come at from any side, since they had only some winding pathways, very narrow, by which they got up to them; but the rock that lay on their front had beneath it valleys of a vast depth, and of an almost perpendicular declivity; insomuch that the king was doubtful for a long time what to do, by reason of a kind of impossibility there was of attacking the place. Yet did he at length make use of a contrivance that was subject to the utmost hazard; 1.31. 1. At the same time that Antiochus, who was called Epiphanes, had a quarrel with the sixth Ptolemy about his right to the whole country of Syria, a great sedition fell among the men of power in Judea, and they had a contention about obtaining the government; while each of those that were of dignity could not endure to be subject to their equals. However, Onias, one of the high priests, got the better, and cast the sons of Tobias out of the city; 1.32. 7. Hereupon Herod was very angry at him, and was going to fight against Macheras as his enemy; but he restrained his indignation, and marched to Antony to accuse Macheras of mal-administration. But Macheras was made sensible of his offenses, and followed after the king immediately, and earnestly begged and obtained that he would be reconciled to him. 1.32. who fled to Antiochus, and besought him to make use of them for his leaders, and to make an expedition into Judea. The king being thereto disposed beforehand, complied with them, and came upon the Jews with a great army, and took their city by force, and slew a great multitude of those that favored Ptolemy, and sent out his soldiers to plunder them without mercy. He also spoiled the temple, and put a stop to the constant practice of offering a daily sacrifice of expiation for three years and six months. 1.33. But Onias, the high priest, fled to Ptolemy, and received a place from him in the Nomus of Heliopolis, where he built a city resembling Jerusalem, and a temple that was like its temple, concerning which we shall speak more in its proper place hereafter. 1.33. He also made an immediate and continual attack upon the fortress. Yet was he forced, by a most terrible storm, to pitch his camp in the neighboring villages before he could take it. But when, after a few days’ time, the second legion, that came from Antony, joined themselves to him, the enemy were affrighted at his power, and left their fortifications in the nighttime. 1.41. 5. So this Antiochus got together fifty thousand footmen, and five thousand horsemen, and fourscore elephants, and marched through Judea into the mountainous parts. He then took Bethsura, which was a small city; but at a place called Bethzacharias, where the passage was narrow, Judas met him with his army. 1.41. But the king, by the expenses he was at, and the liberal disposal of them, overcame nature, and built a haven larger than was the Pyrecum [at Athens]; and in the inner retirements of the water he built other deep stations [for the ships also]. 2.412. And, in the first place, they showed the great indignation they had at this attempt for a revolt, and for their bringing so great a war upon their country; after which they confuted their pretense as unjustifiable, and told them that their forefathers had adorned their temple in great part with donations bestowed on them by foreigners, and had always received what had been presented to them from foreign nations; 2.413. and that they had been so far from rejecting any person’s sacrifice (which would be the highest instance of impiety), that they had themselves placed those donations about the temple which were still visible, and had remained there so long a time; |
|
18. Josephus Flavius, Against Apion, 1.176-1.183 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
| 1.176. for Clearchus, who was the scholar of Aristotle, and inferior to no one of the Peripatetics whomsoever, in his first book concerning sleep, says that “Aristotle, his master, related what follows of a Jew,” and sets down Aristotle’s own discourse with him. The account is this, as written down by him: 1.177. “Now, for a great part of what this Jew said, it would be too long to recite it; but what includes in it both wonder and philosophy, it may not be amiss to discourse of. Now, that I may be plain with thee, Hyperochides, I shall herein seem to thee to relate wonders, and what will resemble dreams themselves. Hereupon Hyperochides answered modestly, and said, for that very reason it is that all of us are very desirous of hearing what thou art going to say. 1.178. Then replied Aristotle, For this cause it will be the best way to imitate that rule of the Rhetoricians which requires us first to give an account of the man, and of what nation he was, that so we may not contradict our master’s directions. Then said Hyperochides, Go on, if it so pleases thee. 1.179. This man, then [answered Aristotle], was by birth a Jew, and came from Celesyria: these Jews are derived from the Indian philosophers; they are named by the Indians Calami, and by the Syrians Judaei, and took their name from the country they inhabit, which is called Judea; but for the name of their city it is a very awkward one, for they call it Jerusalem. 1.181. insomuch that when we ourselves happened to be in Asia about the same places whither he came, he conversed with us and with other philosophical persons, and made a trial of our skill in philosophy; and as he had lived with many learned men, he communicated to us more information than he received from us.” 1.182. This is Aristotle’s account of the matter, as given us by Clearchus; which Aristotle discoursed also particularly of the great and wonderful fortitude of this Jew in his diet and continent way of living, as those that please may learn more about him from Clearchus’s book itself; for I avoid setting down any more than is sufficient for my purpose. 1.183. Now Clearchus said this by way of digression, for his main design was of another nature; but for Hecateus of Abdera, who was both a philosopher and one very useful in an active life, he was contemporary with king Alexander in his youth, and afterward was with Ptolemy, the son of Lagus: he did not write about the Jewish affairs by the by only, but composed an entire book concerning the Jews themselves; out of which book I am willing to run over a few things, of which I have been treating, by way of epitome. |
|
19. Josephus Flavius, Life, 2 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
|
20. New Testament, 1 Corinthians, 15.42-15.55 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
| 15.42. So also is the resurrection of the dead.It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption. 15.43. It issown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it israised in power. 15.44. It is sown a natural body; it is raised aspiritual body. There is a natural body and there is also a spiritualbody. 15.45. So also it is written, "The first man, Adam, became a livingsoul." The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 15.46. However thatwhich is spiritual isn't first, but that which is natural, then thatwhich is spiritual. 15.47. The first man is of the earth, made ofdust. The second man is the Lord from heaven. 15.48. As is the onemade of dust, such are those who are also made of dust; and as is theheavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. 15.49. As we haveborne the image of those made of dust, let's also bear the image of theheavenly. 15.50. Now I say this, brothers, that flesh and blood can'tinherit the Kingdom of God; neither does corruption inheritincorruption. 15.51. Behold, I tell you a mystery. We will not all sleep, but wewill all be changed 15.52. in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye,at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will beraised incorruptible, and we will be changed. 15.53. For thiscorruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put onimmortality. 15.54. But when this corruptible will have put onincorruption, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then whatis written will happen: "Death is swallowed up in victory. 15.55. Death, where is your sting?Hades, where is your victory? |
|
21. New Testament, Acts, 6.13, 21.28 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
| 6.13. and set up false witnesses who said, "This man never stops speaking blasphemous words against this holy place and the law. 21.28. crying out, "Men of Israel, help! This is the man who teaches all men everywhere against the people, and the law, and this place. Moreover, he also brought Greeks into the temple, and has defiled this holy place! |
|
22. New Testament, John, 11.49 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
| 11.49. But a certain one of them, Caiaphas, being high priest that year, said to them, "You know nothing at all |
|
23. New Testament, Matthew, 24.15 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
| 24.15. When, therefore, you see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand) |
|
24. Tacitus, Histories, 5.12 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
| 5.12. The temple was built like a citadel, with walls of its own, which were constructed with more care and effort than any of the rest; the very colonnades about the temple made a splendid defence. Within the enclosure is an ever-flowing spring; in the hills are subterraneous excavations, with pools and cisterns for holding rain-water. The founders of the city had foreseen that there would be many wars because the ways of their people differed so from those of the neighbours: therefore they had built at every point as if they expected a long siege; and after the city had been stormed by Pompey, their fears and experience taught them much. Moreover, profiting by the greed displayed during the reign of Claudius, they had bought the privilege of fortifying the city, and in time of peace had built walls as if for war. The population at this time had been increased by streams of rabble that flowed in from the other captured cities, for the most desperate rebels had taken refuge here, and consequently sedition was the more rife. There were three generals, three armies: the outermost and largest circuit of the walls was held by Simon, the middle of the city by John, and the temple was guarded by Eleazar. John and Simon were strong in numbers and equipment, Eleazar had the advantage of position: between these three there was constant fighting, treachery, and arson, and a great store of grain was consumed. Then John got possession of the temple by sending a party, under pretence of offering sacrifice, to slay Eleazar and his troops. So the citizens were divided into two factions until, at the approach of the Romans, foreign war produced concord. |
|
25. Tosefta, Menachot, 13.21 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
26. Babylonian Talmud, Keritot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 28a. לכבשתו והעני הואיל ונדחה ידחה,אמר רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע שמע מינה תלת שמע מינה בעלי חיים נדחים וקדושת דמים נדחה,ודחוי מעיקרא הוי דחוי,מתיב רב עוקבא בר חמא המפריש נקבה לפסחו קודם הפסח תרעה עד שתסתאב ותמכר ויביא בדמיה פסח ילדה זכר ירעה עד שיסתאב וימכר ויביא בדמיו פסח,ר"ש אומר הוא עצמו יקרב פסח ש"מ בעלי חיים אינם נדחים,אמרי דבי רבי אושעיא כי אמרינן לרבנן דר"ש ס"ל בעלי חיים אינן נדחין,והגרלה אינה מעכבת דתניא מת אחד מהן מביא חבירו שלא בהגרלה דברי ר"ש,אלמא קסבר בעלי חיים אינן נידחין והגרלה אינה מעכבת,אמר רב חסדא אין הקינין מתפרשות אלא אי בלקיחת בעלים אי בעשיית כהן,אמר רב שימי בר אשי מאי טעמא דרב חסדא דכתיב (ויקרא יב, ח) ולקחה שתי תורים וגו' (ויקרא טו, ל) ועשה הכהן וגו' או בלקיחת בעלים או בעשיית כהן,מיתיבי (ויקרא טז, ט) ועשהו חטאת הגורל עושהו חטאת ואין השם עושהו חטאת ואין כהן עושה חטאת,שיכול והלא דין הוא ומה במקום שלא קידש הגורל קידש השם מקום שיקדש הגורל אינו דין שיקדש השם,ת"ל ועשהו חטאת הגורל עושהו חטאת ואין השם עושהו חטאת,קתני שם דומיא דגורל מה גורל לאו בלקיחה ולאו בעשייה אף השם נמי לאו בלקיחה ולאו בעשייה,אמר רב ה"ק ומה במקום שלא קידש הגורל בלקיחת בעלים ובעשיית הכהן קידש השם אי בלקיחת בעלים אי בעשיית כהן כאן שיקדש הגורל שלא בלקיחה ושלא בעשייה אינו דין שיקדש השם אי בלקיחה אי בעשייה,ת"ל ועשהו חטאת הגורל עושהו חטאת ואין השם עושהו חטאת,מיתיבי מטמא מקדש עני שהפריש מעות לקינו והעשיר,אמר אלו לחטאתי ואלו לעולתי מוסיף ומביא חובתו מדמי חטאתו ואין מוסיף ומביא מדמי עולתו,והא הכא דליכא לא לקיחה ולא עשייה וקתני מביא חובתו מדמי חטאתו ולא מדמי עולתו,א"ר ששת ותסברא מתניתא מתקנתא היא דקתני והעשיר והא"ר אלעזר א"ר אושעיא מטמא מקדש עשיר שהביא קרבן עני לא יצא,אלא מאי אית לך למימר שכבר אמר משעת ענייתו ה"נ שכבר אמר משעת הפרשתו,ולר' חגא א"ר אושעיא דאמר יצא מאי איכא למימר תני ואח"כ לקח ואמר,מיתיבי מצורע עני שהביא קרבן עשיר יצא עשיר שהביא קרבן עני לא יצא תיובתא דר' חגא א"ר אושעיא,אמר לך שאני גבי מצורע דמיעט רחמנא (ויקרא יד, ב) זאת,אי הכי אפילו מצורע עני נמי שהביא קרבן עשיר לא יצא לאיי הא אהדריה קרא תורת והתניא תורת לרבות מצורע עני שהביא קרבן עשיר יצא יכול אפילו עשיר שהביא קרבן עני שיצא תלמוד לומר זאת,ולילף מיניה אמר קרא (ויקרא יד, כא) ואם דל הוא ואין ידו משגת מצורע הוא דעשיר שהביא קרבן עני הוא דלא יצא אבל מטמא מקדש עשיר שהביא קרבן עני יצא:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big ר"ש אומר כבשים קודמין את העזים בכל מקום יכול מפני שהן מובחרים מהם ת"ל (ויקרא ד, לב) ואם כבש יביא קרבנו לחטאת מלמד ששניהם שקולין,תורין קודמין לבני יונה בכל מקום יכול מפני שהן מובחרים מהן תלמוד לומר ((ויקרא יב, ו) תור ובני) יונה או תור לחטאת מלמד ששניהם שקולין,האב קודם לאם בכל מקום יכול מפני שכיבוד האב קודם על כיבוד האם ת"ל (ויקרא יט, ג) איש אמו ואביו תיראו מלמד ששניהם שקולין אבל אמרו חכמים האב קודם לאם בכל מקום מפני שהוא ואמו חייבין בכבוד אביו,וכן בתלמוד תורה אם זכה הבן לפני הרב הרב קודם את האב בכל מקום מפני שהוא ואביו חייבין בכבוד רבו:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ת"ר ד' צווחות צווחה עזרה צווחה אחת הוציאו מיכן בני עלי חפני ופנחס שטימאו את ההיכל,צווחה שניה פתחו שערים ויכנס יוחנן בן נדבאי תלמידו של פינקאי וימלא כרסו מקדשי שמים אמרו על בן נדבאי שהיה אוכל ארבע סאה גוזלות | 28a. instead bof a female lamb, and hethen bbecame poorer,a bird pair is now the appropriate offering for him. Nevertheless, bsincehis offering bwas disqualifiedat the outset because at that time he was obligated to bring a female lamb, bit ispermanently bdisqualified. /b, bRav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said:One can bconclude from thisruling bthree ihalakhot /i. bConclude from itthat bconsecrated living animals can bepermanently bdisqualifiedeven if the animal is unblemished, as is the case with regard to this pair of birds. bAndconclude from it that when there is bsanctitythat inheres in an animal’s bvalue,where the consecrated item will not be sacrificed as an offering, it can be bdisqualified.When he was wealthy and designated the bird pair as his offering, the two birds were consecrated only with sanctity that inheres in their value because they were unfit for sacrifice, and yet the birds were permanently disqualified., bAndfinally, conclude from this that ba disqualification at the outset,when the animal is initially consecrated, bisconsidered a permanent bdisqualification.Not only is an animal that was initially fit to be sacrificed and was later disqualified permanently disqualified, but even in a case such as this, where the birds were unfit for sacrifice from the beginning, the disqualification is permanent., bRav Ukva bar Ḥama raises an objectionfrom a ibaraita( iTosefta /i, iTemura2:3): With regard to bone who designates a femaleanimal bfor his Paschal offering before Passover,since the Paschal offering must be a male it is left to bgraze until it becomes blemished,at which point bit is sold and one brings a Paschal offering with the moneyreceived from its sale. Similarly, if this animal bgave birth to a maleanimal, the offspring is left to bgraze until it becomes blemished,at which point bit is sold and one brings a Paschal offering with the moneyreceived from its sale., bRabbi Shimon says:It is not necessary to sell the offspring in such a case, as the offspring bitself is sacrificedas ba Paschal offering. Conclude from thisstatement of Rabbi Shimon that bconsecrated living animals are notpermanently bdisqualified,as the mother was unfit to be a Paschal offering and yet the offspring, which is an extension of the mother’s sanctity, is fit for sacrifice., bThe school of Rabbi Oshaya say: When we saythat consecrated living animals can be permanently disqualified, this applies baccording tothe opinion of bthe Rabbis,who maintain that the offspring is not sacrificed. Nevertheless, it is correct bthat Rabbi Shimon holdsthat consecrated bliving animals are notpermanently bdisqualified. /b, bAndRabbi Shimon likewise maintains bthatthe bdrawingof the lots for the two goats on Yom Kippur to decide which goat is designated as a sacrifice and which is designated as the scapegoat, bis not indispensable. As it is taughtin a ibaraita /i: If bone ofthe goats bdiedfollowing their designation, one bbrings anothergoat instead of it, and it is designated bwithout drawinglots. The surviving goat is still used for the purpose for which it was designated by the lot; this is bthe statement of Rabbi Shimon. /b, bEvidently, Rabbi Shimon holds:Consecrated bliving animals are notpermanently bdisqualified.Although the surviving goat was disqualified when the other goat died, it is once again fit when a new goat is designated as its partner. bAndRabbi Shimon also holds that the bdrawingof the lots bis not indispensable,as the new goat was designated without drawing lots.,§ bRav Ḥisda says: Nests,i.e., pairs of birds, bare designated, /bone as a burnt offering and one as a sin offering, bonlyin the following manner: bEitherby the bownerat the time bof purchase or,if the owner did not designate the birds at that stage, by the bpriestat the time bof sacrifice. /b, bRav Shimi bar Ashi said: What is the reason of Rav Ḥisda? As it is writtenwith regard to the offering of a woman after childbirth: b“And she shall purchase two dovesor two pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering” (Leviticus 12:8). And with regard to the offering of a leper it is written: b“And the priest shall sacrificethe one for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering” (Leviticus 15:30). Together, these verses indicate that one bird is designated as a burnt offering and the other as a sin offering beitherby the bownerat the time bof purchase orby the bpriestat the time bof sacrifice. /b,The Gemara braises an objectionfrom a ibaraitain the iSifrathat discusses the drawing of lots for the two goats of Yom Kippur. The verse states: “Aaron shall bring forward the goat upon which the lot came up for the Lord, band he shall sacrifice it for a sin offering”(Leviticus 16:9). This teaches that the drawing of bthe lot renders it a sin offering, butverbally designating bthe nameof the goat bdoes not render it a sin offering, andlikewise the act of the bpriest,placing the lot on the goat, bdoes not render it a sin offering. /b,A verse is required to teach this ihalakha /i, basone bmighthave come to the opposite conclusion: bCould this notbe derived through an ia fortiori binference,as follows: bAnd if in a case wherethe drawing of ba lot does not sanctifyan animal with a specific designation, e.g., a woman after childbirth, who cannot determine by lot the status of the two birds she must bring, one as a sin offering and one as a burnt offering, nevertheless, in such a case a verbal designation of bthe name does sanctifywith a specific designation; bis it not logicalin ba case wherethe drawing of ba lot sanctifiesan animal with a specific designation, i.e., the two goats of Yom Kippur, bthatverbally designating bthe nameshould bsanctifyit with a specific designation?,The ibaraitaconcludes: Therefore bthe verse states,with regard to one of the two goats of Yom Kippur: b“He shall sacrifice it for a sin offering,”to teach that the drawing of bthe lot renders it a sin offering, butverbally designating bthe nameof the goat bdoes not render it a sin offering. /b,The Gemara explains the objection: The ibaraita bteachesthat verbally designating the bnameof an offering bis similar todrawing ba lot.If so, one can reason as follows: bJust asthe drawing of ba lotis bnotperformed batthe time of bpurchase nor atthe time of bsacrifice, so tooverbal designation of bthe name alsodoes bnothave to be performed batthe time of bpurchase nor atthe time of bsacrifice.This contradicts the opinion of Rav Ḥisda., bRav saidthat bthisis what the ibaraita bis saying: And if in a place wherethe drawing of ba lot,either by the bownerat the time bof purchase orby the bpriestat the time bof sacrifice, does not sanctifyan animal with a specific designation, and nevertheless a verbal designation of bthe name, eitherby the bownerat the time bof purchase orby the bpriestat the time bof sacrifice, does sanctifyit with a specific designation; bhere,with regard to the two goats, bwherethe drawing of ba lotthat does bnottake place batthe time of bpurchase nor atthe time of bsacrifice sanctifiesthe animal with a specific designation, bis it not logical thatverbally designating bthe name, either atthe time of bpurchase or atthe time of bsacrifice,should bsanctifyit with a specific designation?,Therefore, bthe verse states: “He shall sacrifice it for a sin offering,”to teach that drawing bthe lot renders it a sin offering, butverbally designating bthe nameof the goat bdoes not render it a sin offering. /b,The Gemara braisesanother bobjectionto the opinion of Rav Ḥisda from a ibaraita /i: In the case of ba poor person who defiles the Temple,i.e., he entered the Temple while ritually impure, bwho designated money for his nest,as he is required to bring one bird as a sin offering and another bird as a burnt offering, band hethen bbecame wealthier,he is now obligated to bring a female lamb or goat as a sin offering.,If he was unaware that he is no longer obligated to bring a pair of birds, and he bsays: Thismoney bis for my sin offering and thismoney bis for my burnt offering,which is an error, as he is not obligated to bring a burnt offering, bhe addsmore money band brings his obligationof a lamb or goat for his sin offering bfromthe bmoneydesignated bfor his sin offering. But he may not addmore money band bring his obligationof a sin offering bfromthe bmoneydesignated bfor his burnt offering,as one may not use money that is designated for a burnt offering for the purchase of a sin offering.,The Gemara explains the objection: bBut here,the ibaraitais dealing with a case where he said: This money is for my sin offering and that money is for my burnt offering, which means that he designated the money at a stage bthat was notthe time of bpurchase northe time of bsacrifice; andyet the ibaraita bteachesthat the designation is established and therefore bhe brings his obligationof a sin offering bfromthe bmoneydesignated for ba sin offering but not fromthe bmoneydesignated for ba burnt offering. /b, bRav Sheshet said: And can you understandthat bthis ibaraitais properlyexplained, i.e., the ibaraitaas it stands is difficult, bas it teaches: He became wealthierand said: This money is for my sin offering and this money is for my burnt offering. bButthis is difficult, as bdoesn’t Rabbi Elazar saythat bRabbi Oshaya says: A wealthy person who defiles the Temple,i.e., he entered the Temple while ritually impure, bwho broughtthe bofferingof ba poor personto atone for his transgression has bnot fulfilledhis obligation. Since he cannot fulfill his obligation with that offering, how can his designation permanently establish the status of the money?, bRather, what have you to say?You must say that the ibaraitais referring to a case bwhere he already said:This money is for my sin offering and this money is for my burnt offering, bat the timewhen bhe was poor. So too,it is referring to a case bwhere he already saidit even earlier, bat the timewhen bhe designatedthe money, and therefore there is no difficulty for Rav Ḥisda.,The Gemara asks: bBut according to Rabbi Ḥagga,who bsaysthat bRabbi Oshaya saysthat a wealthy person who brings the offering of a poor person has bfulfilledhis obligation, bwhat can be said?According to this opinion, there is no inherent difficulty in the ibaraitathat necessitates Rav Sheshet’s interpretation, and therefore that ibaraitaapparently contradicts Rav Ḥisda’s ruling. The Gemara answers that one should bteachthe ibaraitaas follows: bAnd afterhe became wealthier, bhe purchasedanimals band saidat the time of purchase: This is designated as my sin offering and this as my burnt offering.,With regard to the dispute between Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Ḥagga in the case of a wealthy person who brings the offering of a poor person, the Gemara braises an objectionfrom a ibaraita /i: bA poor leper who brought the offering of a wealthy personhas bfulfilledhis obligation. By contrast, ba wealthyleper bwho brought the offering of a poor personhas bnot fulfilledhis obligation. This is apparently ba conclusive refutation ofthe opinion bthat Rabbi Ḥaggasays that bRabbi Oshaya says. /b,The Gemara explains that Rabbi Ḥagga could have bsaid to you:The ihalakha bis different with regard toa wealthy bleper, as the Merciful One excludedthe possibility of a wealthy person bringing the offering of a poor person in the verse: b“Thisshall be the law of the leper” (Leviticus 14:2). The emphasis of “this” teaches that a leper fulfills his obligation only with the appropriate offering.,The Gemara objects: bIf so,that this ihalakhais derived from a verse, then bevenin the case of ba poor leper who brings the offering of a wealthy person as well,he should bnot fulfillhis obligation. The Gemara rejects that suggestion: This is bnot so,as bthe verse returnedto state: “This shall be bthe lawof the leper,” which includes a leper who brings an inappropriate offering. bAs it is taughtin a ibaraitathat the phrase b“the lawof the leper” serves bto include a poor leper who brought the offering of a wealthy person,that he bhas fulfilledhis obligation. One bmighthave thought that bevenin the case of ba wealthyleper bwho brought the offering of a poor person, hehas bfulfilledhis obligation. Therefore, bthe verse states: “Thisshall be the law.”,The Gemara raises a difficulty: bButwhy not bderivea principle bfrom thatverse that with regard to any sliding-scale offering, a wealthy person who brings a poor person’s offering has not fulfilled his obligation? The Gemara answers: With regard to a leper bthe verse states: “And if he is poor and cannot afford”(Leviticus 14:21). The emphasis of “he” teaches that bit isonly with regard to ba leper that a wealthy person who brought a poor person’s offeringhas bnot fulfilledhis obligation. bButin the case of bone who defiles the Temple,i.e., he entered the Temple while ritually impure, ba wealthy person who brought a poor person’s offeringhas bfulfilledhis obligation., strongMISHNA: /strong bRabbi Shimon says: Lambs precede goatsalmost beverywherein the Torah that they are both mentioned, as in the verse: “You shall take it from the lambs or from the goats” (Exodus 12:5). One bmighthave thought that it is bdue tothe fact bthatsheep bare more select thangoats. Therefore, bthe verse states:“And he shall bring for his offering a goat” (Leviticus 4:28), after which it is written: b“And if he bring a lamb as his offering for a sin offering”(Leviticus 4:32), which bteaches that both of them are equal. /b,Similarly, bdoves precede pigeonsalmost beverywherein the Torah, as in the verse: “And he shall bring his guilt offering…two doves, or two pigeons” (Leviticus 5:7). One bmighthave thought that it is bdue tothe fact bthatdoves bare more select thanpigeons. Therefore, bthe verse states: “And a pigeon or a dove for a sin offering”(Leviticus 12:6), with the usual order reversed, which bteaches that both of them are equal. /b,Likewise, mention of bthe father precedesthat of bthe motheralmost beverywherein the Torah, as in the verse: “Honor your father and your mother” (Exodus 20:12). One bmighthave thought that it is bdue tothe fact bthat the honor of the father takes precedence over the honor of the mother.Therefore, bthe verse states: “Every man shall fear his mother and his father”(Leviticus 19:3), with the order reversed, which bteaches that both of them are equal. But the Sages said:Honor of bthe father takes precedence overhonor of bthe mother everywhere, due tothe fact bthatboth the son band his mother are obligated in the honor of his father. /b, bAnd likewise with regard to Torah study, if the son was privilegedto acquire most of his Torah knowledge from studying bbefore the teacher,honor of bthe teacher takes precedence overhonor of bthe father, due tothe fact bthatboth the son band his father are obligated in the honor of his teacher,as everyone is obligated in the honor of Torah scholars., strongGEMARA: /strong With regard to the mishna’s discussion of lambs and goats, bthe Sages taughtin a ibaraita /i: The Temple bcourtyard cried four cries. The first crywas: bRemove Ḥofni and Pineḥas the sons of Elithe priest bfrom here, as they have rendered the Sanctuaryin Shiloh bimpure(see I Samuel 4:13–22)., bThe second crywas: bOpenthe bgates, and let Yoḥa ben Nedavai, the student of Pinkai, enter and fill his belly withmeat of bofferingsconsecrated to bHeaven,as he is worthy to eat offerings. bThey said about ben Nedavai that he would eat four ise’aof doves /b |
|
27. Babylonian Talmud, Menachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 109b. as by slaughtering the idolatrous offering intentionally bhe became a servant of idol worship. /b, bRav Naḥman said: From where do I saythat even a priest who intentionally slaughters an idolatrous offering is nevertheless fit to serve in the Temple if he repents? bAs it is taughtin a ibaraita /i: With regard to ba priest who servedin bidol worship and repented, his offeringin the Temple bis an aroma pleasingto the Lord and is acceptable.,Rav Naḥman clarifies: bIn whatmanner did he serve in idol worship? bIf we saythat he served in idol worship bunwittingly, whatdoes the ibaraitamean when it says: bAnd repented? He is already repentant,as he never intended to sin in the first place. bRather,it is bobviousthat the ibaraitais referring to a case bof intentionalidol worship. bAnd ifthe ibaraitais referring bto sprinklingthe blood of an idolatrous offering, bwhen he repents, what of it? Hasn’t he performedidolatrous bservice,thereby disqualifying himself from serving in the Temple in any event? bRather, is it notreferring btothe bslaughterof an idolatrous offering? Evidently, even if the priest slaughtered it intentionally, once he repents he is fit to serve in the Temple., bAndas for bRav Sheshet, hecould have bsaid to youthat bactuallythe ibaraitais referring bto unwittingslaughter. bAnd thisis what the ibaraita bis saying: Ifthe priest bis repentant from the outset, as when he servedin idol worship bhe served unwittingly,then bhis offering is an aroma pleasingto the Lord and is acceptable. bBut if not,i.e., he slaughtered an idolatrous offering intentionally, bhissubsequent bofferingin the Temple is bnot an aroma pleasingto the Lord.,§ The Gemara lists other similar disagreements between Rav Naḥman and Rav Sheshet. In a case where a priest bbowed toan object of bidol worship, Rav Naḥman says:If he subsequently repents and serves in the Temple, bhis offering is an aroma pleasingto the Lord. bAnd Rav Sheshet says: His offering is not an aroma pleasingto the Lord. In a case where a priest backnowledgesan object of bidol worshipas a divinity, bRav Naḥman says:If he subsequently repents and serves in the Temple, bhis offering is an aroma pleasingto the Lord. bAnd Rav Sheshet says: His offering is not an aroma pleasingto the Lord.,Having listed four similar disputes between Rav Naḥman and Rav Sheshet, namely, with regard to a priest who unwittingly sprinkled the blood of an idolatrous offering, a priest who intentionally slaughtered an idolatrous offering, a priest who bowed to an idol, and a priest who acknowledged an idol as a divinity, the Gemara explains: bAndit was bnecessaryto teach the dispute with regard to all four cases. bAs, hadthe Sages btaught usonly bthis firstcase, where a priest sprinkles the blood of an idolatrous offering unwittingly, one might have thought that only bin thatcase bRav Sheshet saysthat the priest’s subsequent service in the Temple is disqualified, bbecause he performed a service foridolatry that is considered a sacrificial rite in the Temple. bButin a case where the priest merely performed bslaughter, since he did not perform a service foridolatry that is a sacrificial rite in the Temple, there is room to bsaythat Rav Sheshet bconcedes tothe opinion of bRav Naḥman. /b, bAnd hadthe Sages btaught usonly the dispute with regard to a priest intentionally performing bslaughterfor an idolatrous offering, one might have thought that Rav Sheshet says that the priest’s subsequent service in the Temple is disqualified bbecause he performeda sacrificial brite foridolatry. bButif he merely bbowedto the idol, bsince he did not performa sacrificial brite foridolatry, there is room to bsaythat Rav Sheshet does bnotdisqualify the priest’s subsequent service in the Temple. Therefore, it was bnecessaryto teach this case as well., bAnd hadthe Sages btaught usonly the case of a priest bbowingto an idol, one might have thought that in this case Rav Sheshet says that the priest’s subsequent service in the Temple is disqualified bbecause he performed an action foridolatry. bButif he only backnowledgedthe idol as a divinity, bwhich is mere speech,there is room to bsaythat Rav Sheshet does bnotdisqualify the priest’s subsequent service in the Temple. The Gemara concludes: Therefore, it was bnecessaryto teach this case as well.,§ The mishna teaches: bAnd needless to say,if priests served for bsomething else,a euphemism for idolatry, they are disqualified from service in the Temple. The Gemara comments: bFromthe fact bthat it says: Needless to say,if they served for bsomething else, by inference, the temple of Onias is nota temple of bidol worship,but rather a temple devoted to the worship of God., bIt is taughtin a ibaraita blike the one who saysthat bthe temple of Onias is nota temple of bidol worship. As it is taught:During bthe year in which Shimon HaTzaddik died, he said tohis associates: bThis year, he will die,euphemistically referring to himself. bThey said to him: From where do you know? /b,Shimon HaTzaddik bsaid to them:In previous years, bevery Yom Kippur,upon entering the Holy of Holies, I had a prophetic vision in which bI would be met by an old manwho was bdressed in white, andhis head was bwrapped in white, and he would enterthe Holy of Holies bwith me, and he would leave with me.But bthis year, I was met by an old manwho was bdressed in black, andhis head was bwrapped in black, and he enteredthe Holy of Holies bwith me, but he did not leave with me.Shimon HaTzaddik understood this to be a sign that his death was impending.,Indeed, bafter the pilgrimage festivalof iSukkot /i, bhe was ill for seven days and died. And his fellow priests refrained from reciting thePriestly bBenediction with theineffable bnameof God., bAt the time of his death, he said tothe Sages: bOnias, my son, will serveas High Priest bin my stead. Shimi,Onias’ bbrother, became jealousof him, basShimi bwas two and a half years older thanOnias. Shimi bsaid toOnias treacherously: bCome and I will teach you the order of the serviceof the High Priest. Shimi bdressedOnias bin a tunic [ ibe’unkeli /i] and girded him with a ribbon [ ibetziltzul /i]as a belt, i.e., not in the vestments of the High Priest, and bstood him next to the altar.Shimi bsaid to his fellow priests: Look what thisman bvowed and fulfilled for his beloved,that he had said to her: bOn the day that I serve in the High Priesthood I will wear your tunic and gird your ribbon. /b, bThe fellow priests ofOnias bwanted to kill himbecause he had disgraced the Temple service with his garments. Onias branaway bfrom them and they ran after him. He went to Alexandria in Egypt and built an altar there, and sacrificedofferings bupon it for the sake of idol worship. When the Sages heard of the matter they said: If thisperson, Shimi, bwho did not enterthe position of High Priest, acted with bsuchjealousy, ball the more sowill bone who entersa prestigious position rebel if that position is taken away from him. This is bthe statement of Rabbi Meir.According to Rabbi Meir, the temple of Onias was built for idol worship., bRabbi Yehuda said to him:The bincident was not like this. Rather, Onias did not acceptthe position of High Priest bbecause his brother Shimi was two and a half years older than him,so Shimi was appointed as High Priest. bAnd even so,even though Onias himself offered the position to Shimi, bOnias was jealous of his brother Shimi.Onias bsaid toShimi: bCome and I will teach you the order of the serviceof the High Priest. bAndOnias bdressedShimi bin a tunic and girded him in a ribbon and stood him next to the altar.Onias bsaid to his fellow priests: Look what thisman, Shimi, bvowed and fulfilled for his beloved,that he had said to her: bOn the day that I serve in the High Priesthood I will wear your tunic and gird your ribbon. /b, bHis fellow priests wanted to killShimi. Shimi then btold them the entire incident,that he had been tricked by his brother Onias, so the priests bwanted to kill Onias.Onias branaway bfrom them, and they ran after him.Onias bran to the palace of the king, and they ran after him. Anyone who saw him would say: This is him, this is him,and he was not able to escape unnoticed. Onias bwent to Alexandria in Egypt and built an altar there, and sacrificedofferings bupon it for the sake of Heaven. As it is stated: “In that day shall there be an altar to the Lord in the midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar at its border, to the Lord”(Isaiah 19:19). According to Rabbi Yehuda, the temple of Onias was dedicated to the worship of God., bAnd when the Sages heard of the matter they said: If this one,Onias, bwho fled fromthe position of High Priest and offered it to his brother, still was overcome with bsuchjealousy to the point where he tried to have Shimi killed, ball the more sowill bone who wants to entera prestigious position be jealous of the one who already has that position.,§ As a corollary to the statement of the Sages with regard to one who is jealous and wants the position of another, bit is taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Yehoshua ben Peraḥya said: Initially,in response to banyone who would sayto me: bAscend tothe position of iNasi /i, bI would tie him up and place him in front of a lionout of anger for his suggestion. bNowthat I have become the iNasi /i, in response to banyone who tells me to leavethe position, bIwould bthrow a kettle [ ikumkum /i] of boilingwater bat himout of anger at his suggestion.,It is human nature that after one ascends to a prestigious position he does not wish to lose it. bAsevidence of this principle, bSaulinitially bfled fromthe kingship, as he did not wish to be king, as stated in the verse: “When they sought him he could not be found…Behold he has hidden himself among the baggage” (I Samuel 10:21–22). bBut when he ascendedto the kingship bhe tried to kill David,who he thought was trying to usurp his authority (see I Samuel, chapters 18–27).,§ bMar Kashisha, son of Rav Ḥisda, said to Abaye: What does Rabbi Meir do with this verse of Rabbi Yehuda?Since Rabbi Meir holds that the temple of Onias was dedicated to idol worship, how does he explain the verse in Isaiah?,Abaye answered Mar Kashisha and said that Rabbi Meir uses this verse bfor that which is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bAfter the downfall of Sennacherib,the king of Assyria who besieged Jerusalem (see II Kings, chapters 18–19), King bHezekiah emergedfrom Jerusalem band found thegentile bprincesSennacherib had brought with him from his other conquests, bsitting in carriages [ ibikronot /i] of gold. He made them vow that they would not worship idols,and they fulfilled their vow, bas it is statedin Isaiah’s prophecy about Egypt: b“In that day there shall be five cities in the land of Egypt that speak the language of Canaan /b |
|
28. Babylonian Talmud, Pesahim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 57a. נימא תלתא תנאי הוו לא תרי תנאי הוו ותנא קמא דר' שמעון היינו ר' יוסי ותנא קמא דר' יוסי היינו ר' שמעון ומאי אף אקמייתא,ת"ר בן בוהיין נתן פיאה לירק ובא אביו ומצאן לעניים שהיו טעונין ירק ועומדין על פתח הגינה אמר להם בני השליכו מעליכם ואני נותן לכם כפליים במעושר לא מפני שעיני צרה אלא מפני שאמרו חכמים אין נותנין פיאה לירק,למה ליה למימרא להו לא מפני שעיני צרה כי היכי דלא לימרו דחויי קא מדחי לן,ת"ר בראשונה היו מניחין עורות קדשים בלשכת בית הפרוה לערב היו מחלקין אותן לאנשי בית אב והיו בעלי זרועות נוטלין אותן בזרוע התקינו שיהיו מחלקין אותן מערב שבת לע"ש דאתיין כולהו משמרות ושקלן בהדדי,ועדיין היו גדולי כהונה נוטלין אותן בזרוע עמדו בעלים והקדישום לשמים,אמרו לא היו ימים מועטים עד שחיפו את ההיכל כולו בטבלאות של זהב שהן אמה על אמה כעובי דינר זהב ולרגל היו מקפלין אותן ומניחין אותן על גב מעלה בהר הבית כדי שיהו עולי רגלים רואין שמלאכתם נאה ואין בה דלם,תנא אבא שאול אומר קורות של שקמה היו ביריחו והיו בעלי זרועות נוטלין אותן בזרוע עמדו בעלים והקדישום לשמים,עליהם ועל כיוצא בהם אמר אבא שאול בן בטנית משום אבא יוסף בן חנין אוי לי מבית בייתוס אוי לי מאלתן אוי לי מבית חנין אוי לי מלחישתן אוי לי מבית קתרוס אוי לי מקולמוסן אוי לי מבית ישמעאל בן פיאכי אוי לי מאגרופן שהם כהנים גדולים ובניהן גיזברין וחתניהם אמרכלין ועבדיהן חובטין את העם במקלות,תנו רבנן ארבע צווחות צוחה עזרה ראשונה צאו מכאן בני עלי שטימאו היכל ה' ועוד צווחה צא מיכן יששכר איש כפר ברקאי שמכבד את עצמו ומחלל קדשי שמים דהוה כריך ידיה בשיראי ועביד עבודה,ועוד צווחה העזרה שאו שערים ראשיכם ויכנס ישמעאל בן פיאכי תלמידו של פנחס וישמש בכהונה גדולה ועוד צווחה העזרה שאו שערים ראשיכם ויכנס יוחנן בן נרבאי תלמידו של פנקאי וימלא כריסו מקדשי שמים,אמרו עליו על יוחנן בן נרבאי שהיה אוכל ג' מאות עגלים ושותה ג' מאות גרבי יין ואוכל ארבעים סאה גוזלות בקינוח סעודה אמרו כל ימיו של יוחנן בן נרבאי לא נמצא נותר במקדש מאי סלקא ביה ביששכר איש כפר ברקאי אמרי מלכא ומלכתא הוו יתבי מלכא אמר גדיא יאי ומלכתא אמרה אימרא יאי אמרו מאן מוכח כהן גדול דקא מסיק קרבנות כל יומא אתא איהו | 57a. bLet us saythat bthere are three itanna’im /iwho dispute this point: The two unattributed opinions, each of which is referring to two vegetables, and the opinion common to Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon that includes all three vegetables. The Gemara rejects this: bNo, there areonly btwo itanna’im /iwho dispute the point, band the first itanna /iwhose opinion appears before the opinion of bRabbi Shimon is Rabbi Yosei. And the first itanna /iwhose opinion appears before the opinion of bRabbi Yosei is Rabbi Shimon. And whatis the meaning of the word bevenin both their statements? They agree with regard to bthe firstvegetable, turnips; however, they disagree with regard to the second, and replace it with another vegetable.,The Gemara cites an episode from the iTosefta /i. bThe Sages taught: The sonof a man named bBohayan designatedfor the poor btheproduce in the bcornerin a garden bof vegetables, and his fatherBohayan bfound the poor ladenwith bvegetables and standing at the opening of the gardenon their way out. bHe said to them: My sons, castthe vegetables that you have gathered bfrom upon yourselves and I will give you twicethe amount in btithedproduce, and you will be no worse off. bNot because I begrudgeyou what you have taken. bRather, it is because the Sages say: One does not designatefor the poor btheproduce in the bcornerin a garden bof vegetables.Therefore, the vegetables that you took require tithing.,The Gemara asks: bWhywas it necessary bfor him to say to them: Not because I begrudgeyou what you have taken? It would have been sufficient to offer them tithed produce. The Gemara answers that he said it bso they would not say: He is putting us off,taking what we collected now, but later he will not fulfill his commitment.,Apropos the people of Jericho, the Gemara relates that powerful people would steal wood from them. bThe Sages taught: Initially,the priests bwould place the hidesthat were flayed from animals bconsecratedas offerings of the most sacred order, which were given to the priests, bin the Parva chamber. In the evening, they would distribute them to the members of the familyof priests serving in the Temple that day. bAnd the powerfulpriests among them would btake them by forcebefore they could be distributed. The Rabbis bdecreed that they would distribute them each Shabbat eve,because then ball thefamilies of both priestly bwatches came and tooktheir part btogether.All the families from both the watch that was beginning its service and the one ending its service were together when they divided the hides. The powerful priests were unable to take the hides by force., bYet still the prominent priestsby virtue of their lineage bwould take them by force.Due to their prominence, the members of the rest of the watch dared not challenge them. When they realized that there was no equitable distribution, bthe ownersof the sacrifices ( iMe’iri /i) barose and consecratedthe hides bto Heavenso the priests could not take them.,The Sages bsaid: Not a few days passed before they had plated the entire sanctuary with golden tabletswith the proceeds from the redemption and sale of the hides. These plates bwere one cubit by one cubit and as thick as a golden dinar. Andwhen the people assembled bfor theFestival bpilgrimage they would removethe tablets band place them on a stair of the Temple Mount so that the pilgrims would see that the craftsmanshipof the tablets bwas beautiful and without flaw [ idalam /i].Afterward they replaced the tablets in the Sanctuary., bIt wassimilarly btaughtthat bAbba Shaul says: There were sycamore tree trunks in Jericho, and powerful people would take themfrom their owners bby force. The owners stood and consecratedthese trunks bto Heaven.It was with regard to these trunks and the branches that grew from them that the residents of Jericho acted against the will of the Sages., bWith regard tothe prominent priests band those like them, Abba Shaul ben Batnit said in the name of Abba Yosef ben Ḥanin: Woe is me due tothe High Priests of bthe house of Baitos, woe is me due to their clubs. Woe is me due tothe High Priests of bthe house of Ḥanin; woe is me due to their whispersand the rumors they spread. bWoe is me due tothe High Priests of bthe house of Katros; woe is me due to their pensthat they use to write lies. bWoe is me due tothe servants of the High Priests of bthe house of Yishmael ben Piakhi; woe is me due to their fists.The power of these households stemmed from the fact bthatthe fathers bwere High Priests, and their sons werethe Temple btreasurers, and their sons-in-law wereTemple boverseers [ iamarkalin /i]. And their servants strike the people with clubs,and otherwise act inappropriately.,Apropos the critique of several prominent priests, the Gemara relates that bthe Sages taught:The people in btheTemple bcourtyardall bcried four cries,as they were in agreement over various issues ( iPardes Rimonim /i). The bfirstcry was: bLeave here, sons of Eli, who defiled God’s Sanctuary(see I Samuel 2:22). Subsequently the priesthood was transferred to the house of Zadok. bAnd an additional cry: Leave here, Yissakhar of Kfar Barkai, who honors himself and desecratesthe items bconsecratedto bHeaven.Due to his delicate nature and his disrespect for the Temple service, he would bwraphis hands bin silk [ ishirai /i] and perform the service.This would invalidate the service because the silk was an interposition between his hands and the Temple vessels. Furthermore, his conduct demeaned the Temple service, as he demonstrated that he was unwilling to dirty his hands for it., bAndthe people in btheTemple bcourtyard cried additionally: Lift your heads, O gates, and letthe righteous bYishmael ben Piakhi, the student of Pinehasben Elazar the priest, benter and serve as High Priest,although the members of this family were violent. bAndthe people in btheTemple bcourtyard cried additionally: Lift your heads, O gates, and let Yoḥa ben Narbbai, the student of Pinkai, enter and fill his belly withmeat bof offeringsconsecrated to bHeaven,as he is worthy to eat offerings., bThey said about Yoḥa ben Narbbai that heand his household bwould eat three hundred calves, and drink three hundred jugs of wine, and eat forty ise’aof doves for dessert. They said:Throughout ball the days of Yoḥa ben Narbbai there was no leftoversacrificial meat bin the Temple,as he would make certain that someone ate it. The Gemara asks: bWhatultimately bhappened to Yissakhar of Kfar Barkai? They said: The king and the queen were sittingand talking. bThe king saidthat bgoatmeat bis betterfood, band the queen said lambmeat is bbetterfood. bThey said: Who can provewhich one of us is correct? bThe High Priestcan, bas he offers sacrifices all dayand tastes their meat. The High Priest had the right to take a portion from any sacrifice offered in the Temple, and therefore was well acquainted with the tastes of different meat. Yissakhar of Kfar Barkai bcame,and when they asked him this question |
|
29. Babylonian Talmud, Yoma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 8b. שזה פרישתו לקדושה ואחיו הכהנים נוגעין בו וזה פרישתו לטהרה ואין אחיו הכהנים נוגעין בו כמאן או ר"מ או רבי יוסי דאי ר' חנינא סגן הכהנים הא איכא נמי הא,מתקיף לה רבי יוסי ברבי חנינא בשלמא ראשון שמא שלישי שני שמא שלישי שלישי שמא שלישי חמישי שמא שביעי ששי שמא שביעי שביעי שמא שביעי,אלא רביעי למה לי הזאה כלל לא בשלישי איכא לספוקי ולא בשביעי איכא לספוקי,ולטעמיך הזאה כל שבעה מי איכא והא קיימא לן דהזאה שבות ואינה דוחה את השבת אלא מאי אית לך למימר שבעה לבר משבת הכא נמי שבעה לבר מרביעי,אמר רבא הלכך כהן גדול ביום הכפורים דלא בדידן תליא מילתא אלא בקביעא דירחא תליא מילתא בתלתא בתשרי בעי לאפרושי וכל אימת דמתרמי תלתא בתשרי מפרשינן ליה אבל כהן השורף את הפרה דבדידן תליא מילתא מפרשינן ליה ברביעי בשבת כי היכי דניתרמי רביעי שלו בשבת,ללשכת פרהדרין וכו' תניא רבי יהודה וכי לשכת פרהדרין היתה והלא לשכת בלווטי היתה,אלא בתחלה היו קורין אותה לשכת בלווטי ומתוך שנותנין עליו ממון לכהונה ומחליפין אותה כל שנים עשר חודש כפרהדרין הללו שמחליפין אותם כל שנים עשר חודש לפיכך היו קוראין אותה לשכת פרהדרין,תנן התם הנחתומין לא חייבו אותן חכמים להפריש אלא תרומת מעשר וחלה,בשלמא תרומה גדולה לא דתניא | 8b. bthat the sequestering of thisHigh Priest prior to Yom Kippur is bforthe purpose of bsanctity,i.e., to ensure that he appreciates the gravity of the occasion and to fill him with reverence in preparation for entering the Holy of Holies. bHis brethren, the priests,may btouch him,as the objective of his sequestering is unrelated to any concern of impurity. In contrast, bthe sequestering of thatpriest who burns the heifer is bforthe purpose of bpurity, and his brethren, the priests,may bnot touch him. In accordance with whoseopinion is this ibaraita /i? It is in accordance with the opinion of beither Rabbi Meir or Rabbi Yosei. As, ifit were in accordance with the opinion of bRabbi Ḥanina, the deputyHigh bPriest, isn’t there also thisdifference between the two priests: One sprinkles purification waters on the priest who burns the heifer all seven days that he is sequestered, whereas one sprinkles purification waters on the High Priest before Yom Kippur only on the third and seventh days?,§ bRabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, strongly objects tothe opinion that one sprinkles purification waters on the priest who burns the heifer all seven days because those days may be the third or seventh day of his impurity. bGranted,on the bfirstday of the seven one sprinkles the water, as bperhapsit is bthe thirdday of his impurity; and on the bsecondday of the seven one sprinkles the water, as bperhapsit is bthe thirdday of his impurity, if he became impure the day before he was sequestered. The same is true for the bthirdday; one sprinkles the water, as bperhapsthat is bthe thirdday of his impurity. By the same token, on the bfifthday one sprinkles the water, as bperhapsthat is bthe seventhday of his impurity if he became impure two days before he was sequestered. On the bsixthday one sprinkles the water, as bperhapsthat is bthe seventhday of his impurity if he became impure the day before he was sequestered. On the bseventhday one sprinkles the water, as bperhapsthat is bthe seventhday of his impurity., bHowever,on the bfourthday after he was sequestered, bwhy do Irequire bsprinkling at all? Neither with regard tothe possibility that it may be the bthirdday of his impurity bis there uncertainty,since he has already been sequestered for three days, bnor with regard tothe possibility that it may be the bseventhday of his impurity bis there uncertainty,as even if it were, sprinkling would be useless because he did not have purification water sprinkled on him on the third day of his impurity. Nothing is accomplished by sprinkling the water on the priest on the fourth day.,The Gemara asks: bAndaccording bto your reasoning, is thereever bsprinklingon the priest ball sevendays? bDon’t we maintain that sprinkling isprohibited by brabbinic decreeissued to enhance the character of Shabbat as a day of rest, bandtherefore, sprinkling bdoes not override Shabbat. Rather, what have you to say?When it was instituted to sprinkle the water on the priest, it was for bsevendays bexcept for Shabbat. Here too,say that sprinkling is performed for bsevendays bexcept forthe bfourthday of sequestering., bRava said: Therefore,with regard to bthe High Priest on Yom Kippur,where bthe matterof the beginning of the seven-day period bis not dependent on us; rather, the matter is dependent on the determination of thefirst day of the new bmonth,for that reason it is brequired to removethe High Priest from his home bon the third of Tishrei, and whenever the third of Tishrei occurson a weekday, bwe remove himfrom his house. Therefore, both on the fourth day of his sequestering and on Shabbat, no sprinkling is performed. bHowever,with regard to the bpriest who burns the heifer,where bthe matterof the beginning of the seven-day period bis dependent on us, we remove himfrom his home bon the fourth day of the week,Wednesday, bso that the fourth day of hissequestering bwill occur on Shabbat.In that way, sprinkling will not be performed only one day of the seven, as the day on which sprinkling is prohibited will coincide with the day on which sprinkling is unnecessary.,§ Having discussed the obligation to sequester the High Priest prior to Yom Kippur, the Gemara interprets the next matter in the mishna: The High Priest is removed from his house bto the Chamber of iParhedrin /i. It was taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Yehudasaid: bAnd was itcalled bthe Chamber of iParhedrin /i,the chamber for the annual royal appointees? bWasn’t itcalled bthe Chamber of iBalvatei /i,the chamber for ministers and council heads?, bRather, initially,during the era of Shimon HaTzaddik and his colleagues, who were rewarded with long lives due to their righteousness, bthey would call it the Chamber of iBalvatei /i,a term connoting significance, since it was a place designated for the High Priest. bHowever, becausepeople were bgiving moneyin order to be appointed bto theHigh bPriesthood,the position was filled by unworthy individuals. Due to their wickedness, they did not survive the year, and they were breplaced every twelve months like the iparhedrinwho are replaced every twelve months. Therefore, the chamber was calleddisparagingly the Chamber of iParhedrin /i.Since the High Priest was replaced every year, the new appointee would renovate the chamber to reflect his own more elaborate tastes.,Apropos the iParhedrinchamber, the Gemara discusses a related ihalakha /i. bWe learnedin a mishna btherein tractate iDemai /i: With regard to doubtfully tithed produce, i.e., produce purchased from an iam ha’aretzwith regard to whom there is uncertainty whether or not he tithed the produce, bthe Sages required bakers to separate only iterumaof the tithe,which is one one-hundredth of the produce that is given to the priests, and iḥalla /i,separated from the dough and given to priests.,The Gemara asks: bGranted, iteruma gedola /i,which is equal to approximately one-fiftieth of the produce and is given to a priest, need bnotbe separated from doubtfully-tithed produce, bas it was taughtin a ibaraita /i: |
|
30. Strabo, Geography, 17.1.9
| 17.1.9. In the great harbour at the entrance, on the right hand, are the island and the Pharos tower; on the left are the reef of rocks and the promontory Lochias, with a palace upon it: at the entrance, on the left hand, are the inner palaces, which are continuous with those on the Lochias, and contain numerous painted apartments and groves. Below lies the artificial and close harbour, appropriated to the use of the kings; and Antirrhodus a small island, facing the artificial harbour, with a palace on it, and a small port. It was called Antirrhodus, a rival as it were of Rhodes.Above this is the theatre, then the Poseidium, a kind of elbow projecting from the Emporium, as it is called, with a temple of Neptune upon it. To this Antony added a mound, projecting still further into the middle of the harbour, and built at the extremity a royal mansion, which he called Timonium. This was his last act, when, deserted by his partisans, he retired to Alexandreia after his defeat at Actium, and intended, being forsaken by so many friends, to lead the [solitary] life of Timon for the rest of his days.Next are the Caesarium, the Emporium, and the Apostaseis, or magazines: these are followed by docks, extending to the Heptastadium. This is the description of the great harbour. |
|
