1. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 32.43 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
| 32.43. הַרְנִינוּ גוֹיִם עַמּוֹ כִּי דַם־עֲבָדָיו יִקּוֹם וְנָקָם יָשִׁיב לְצָרָיו וְכִפֶּר אַדְמָתוֹ עַמּוֹ׃ | 32.43. Sing aloud, O ye nations, of His people; For He doth avenge the blood of His servants, And doth render vengeance to His adversaries, And doth make expiation for the land of His people." |
|
2. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 45.9 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
| 45.9. מַהֲרוּ וַעֲלוּ אֶל־אָבִי וַאֲמַרְתֶּם אֵלָיו כֹּה אָמַר בִּנְךָ יוֹסֵף שָׂמַנִי אֱלֹהִים לְאָדוֹן לְכָל־מִצְרָיִם רְדָה אֵלַי אַל־תַּעֲמֹד׃ | 45.9. Hasten ye, and go up to my father, and say unto him: Thus saith thy son Joseph: God hath made me lord of all Egypt; come down unto me, tarry not." |
|
3. Euripides, Bacchae, 1390, 226-232, 278-283, 471-475, 511-514, 616-631, 794-797, 850-854, 912-913, 1389 (5th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE)
| 1389. πολλὰ δʼ ἀέλπτως κραίνουσι θεοί· | |
|
4. Septuagint, 2 Maccabees, 3.1, 4.13, 9.4 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)
| 3.1. While the holy city was inhabited in unbroken peace and the laws were very well observed because of the piety of the high priest Onias and his hatred of wickedness,' 4.13. There was such an extreme of Hellenization and increase in the adoption of foreign ways because of the surpassing wickedness of Jason, who was ungodly and no high priest,' 9.4. Transported with rage, he conceived the idea of turning upon the Jews the injury done by those who had put him to flight; so he ordered his charioteer to drive without stopping until he completed the journey. But the judgment of heaven rode with him! For in his arrogance he said, 'When I get there I will make Jerusalem a cemetery of Jews.' |
|
5. Septuagint, 3 Maccabees, 1.2-1.3, 1.12, 3.25, 5.1-5.2, 5.5-5.6, 5.10-5.11, 5.15-5.20, 5.24-5.25, 5.27-5.37, 5.39-5.42, 5.44, 5.47, 6.27 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)
| 1.2. But a certain Theodotus, determined to carry out the plot he had devised, took with him the best of the Ptolemaic arms that had been previously issued to him, and crossed over by night to the tent of Ptolemy, intending single-handed to kill him and thereby end the war. 1.2. Mothers and nurses abandoned even newborn children here and there, some in houses and some in the streets, and without a backward look they crowded together at the most high temple. 1.3. But Dositheus, known as the son of Drimylus, a Jew by birth who later changed his religion and apostatized from the ancestral traditions, had led the king away and arranged that a certain insignificant man should sleep in the tent; and so it turned out that this man incurred the vengeance meant for the king. 1.12. Even after the law had been read to him, he did not cease to maintain that he ought to enter, saying, "Even if those men are deprived of this honor, I ought not to be. 3.25. Therefore we have given orders that, as soon as this letter shall arrive, you are to send to us those who live among you, together with their wives and children, with insulting and harsh treatment, and bound securely with iron fetters, to suffer the sure and shameful death that befits enemies. 5.1. Then the king, completely inflexible, was filled with overpowering anger and wrath; so he summoned Hermon, keeper of the elephants 5.1. Hermon, however, when he had drugged the pitiless elephants until they had been filled with a great abundance of wine and satiated with frankincense, presented himself at the courtyard early in the morning to report to the king about these preparations. 5.2. and ordered him on the following day to drug all the elephants -- five hundred in number -- with large handfuls of frankincense and plenty of unmixed wine, and to drive them in, maddened by the lavish abundance of liquor, so that the Jews might meet their doom. 5.2. the king, possessed by a savagery worse than that of Phalaris, said that the Jews were benefited by today's sleep, "but," he added, "tomorrow without delay prepare the elephants in the same way for the destruction of the lawless Jews! 5.5. The servants in charge of the Jews went out in the evening and bound the hands of the wretched people and arranged for their continued custody through the night, convinced that the whole nation would experience its final destruction. 5.5. Not only this, but when they considered the help which they had received before from heaven they prostrated themselves with one accord on the ground, removing the babies from their breasts 5.6. For to the Gentiles it appeared that the Jews were left without any aid 5.11. But the Lord sent upon the king a portion of sleep, that beneficence which from the beginning, night and day, is bestowed by him who grants it to whomever he wishes. 5.15. And when he had with difficulty roused him, he pointed out that the hour of the banquet was already slipping by, and he gave him an account of the situation. 5.16. The king, after considering this, returned to his drinking, and ordered those present for the banquet to recline opposite him. 5.17. When this was done he urged them to give themselves over to revelry and to make the present portion of the banquet joyful by celebrating all the more. 5.18. After the party had been going on for some time, the king summoned Hermon and with sharp threats demanded to know why the Jews had been allowed to remain alive through the present day. 5.19. But when he, with the corroboration of his friends, pointed out that while it was still night he had carried out completely the order given him 5.24. The crowds of the city had been assembled for this most pitiful spectacle and they were eagerly waiting for daybreak. 5.25. But the Jews, at their last gasp, since the time had run out, stretched their hands toward heaven and with most tearful supplication and mournful dirges implored the supreme God to help them again at once. 5.27. But he, upon receiving the report and being struck by the unusual invitation to come out -- since he had been completely overcome by incomprehension -- inquired what the matter was for which this had been so zealously completed for him. 5.28. This was the act of God who rules over all things, for he had implanted in the king's mind a forgetfulness of the things he had previously devised. 5.29. Then Hermon and all the king's friends pointed out that the beasts and the armed forces were ready, "O king, according to your eager purpose. 5.31. Were your parents or children present, I would have prepared them to be a rich feast for the savage beasts instead of the Jews, who give me no ground for complaint and have exhibited to an extraordinary degree a full and firm loyalty to my ancestors. 5.32. In fact you would have been deprived of life instead of these, were it not for an affection arising from our nurture in common and your usefulness. 5.33. So Hermon suffered an unexpected and dangerous threat, and his eyes wavered and his face fell. 5.34. The king's friends one by one sullenly slipped away and dismissed the assembled people, each to his own occupation. 5.35. Then the Jews, upon hearing what the king had said, praised the manifest Lord God, King of kings, since this also was his aid which they had received. 5.36. The king, however, reconvened the party in the same manner and urged the guests to return to their celebrating. 5.37. After summoning Hermon he said in a threatening tone, "How many times, you poor wretch, must I give you orders about these things? 5.39. But the officials who were at table with him, wondering at his instability of mind, remonstrated as follows: 5.41. As a result the city is in a tumult because of its expectation; it is crowded with masses of people, and also in constant danger of being plundered. 5.42. Upon this the king, a Phalaris in everything and filled with madness, took no account of the changes of mind which had come about within him for the protection of the Jews, and he firmly swore an irrevocable oath that he would send them to death without delay, mangled by the knees and feet of the beasts 5.44. Then the friends and officers departed with great joy, and they confidently posted the armed forces at the places in the city most favorable for keeping guard. 5.47. So he, when he had filled his impious mind with a deep rage, rushed out in full force along with the beasts, wishing to witness, with invulnerable heart and with his own eyes, the grievous and pitiful destruction of the aforementioned people. 6.27. Loose and untie their unjust bonds! Send them back to their homes in peace, begging pardon for your former actions! |
|
6. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, 3.65.7 (1st cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)
| 3.65.7. But some of the poets, one of whom is Antimachus, state that Lycurgus was king, not of Thrace, but of Arabia, and that the attack upon Dionysus and the Bacchantes was made at the Nysa which is in Arabia. However this may be, Dionysus, they say, punished the impious but treated all other men honourably, and then made his return journey from India to Thebes upon an elephant. |
|
7. Josephus Flavius, Against Apion, 2.49 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
| 2.49. and as for Ptolemy Philometor and his wife Cleopatra, they committed their whole kingdom to Jews, when Onias and Dositheus, both Jews, whose names are laughed at by Apion, were the generals of their whole army; but certainly instead of reproaching them, he ought to admire their actions, and return them thanks for saving Alexandria, whose citizen he pretends to be; |
|
8. Mishnah, Sanhedrin, 4.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
| 4.5. How did they admonish witnesses in capital cases? They brought them in and admonished them, [saying], “Perhaps you will say something that is only a supposition or hearsay or secondhand, or even from a trustworthy man. Or perhaps you do not know that we shall check you with examination and inquiry? Know, moreover, that capital cases are not like non-capital cases: in non-capital cases a man may pay money and so make atonement, but in capital cases the witness is answerable for the blood of him [that is wrongfully condemned] and the blood of his descendants [that should have been born to him] to the end of the world.” For so have we found it with Cain that murdered his brother, for it says, “The bloods of your brother cry out” (Gen. 4:10). It doesn’t say, “The blood of your brother”, but rather “The bloods of your brother” meaning his blood and the blood of his descendants. Another saying is, “The bloods of your brother” that his blood was cast over trees and stones. Therefore but a single person was created in the world, to teach that if any man has caused a single life to perish from Israel, he is deemed by Scripture as if he had caused a whole world to perish; and anyone who saves a single soul from Israel, he is deemed by Scripture as if he had saved a whole world. Again [but a single person was created] for the sake of peace among humankind, that one should not say to another, “My father was greater than your father”. Again, [but a single person was created] against the heretics so they should not say, “There are many ruling powers in heaven”. Again [but a single person was created] to proclaim the greatness of the Holy Blessed One; for humans stamp many coins with one seal and they are all like one another; but the King of kings, the Holy Blessed One, has stamped every human with the seal of the first man, yet not one of them are like another. Therefore everyone must say, “For my sake was the world created.” And if perhaps you [witnesses] would say, “Why should we be involved with this trouble”, was it not said, “He, being a witness, whether he has seen or known, [if he does not speak it, then he shall bear his iniquity] (Lev. 5:1). And if perhaps you [witnesses] would say, “Why should we be guilty of the blood of this man?, was it not said, “When the wicked perish there is rejoicing” (Proverbs 11:10).]" |
|
9. Babylonian Talmud, Yoma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 5a. אמר רב יוסף סמיכה איכא בינייהו למ"ד כל הכתוב בהן מעכב בהן סמיכה מעכבא למ"ד דבר שאין מעכב לדורות אין מעכב בהן סמיכה לא מעכבא,ולדורות מנא לן דלא מעכבא דתניא (ויקרא א, ד) וסמך ונרצה וכי סמיכה מכפרת והלא אין כפרה אלא בדם שנאמר (ויקרא יז, יא) כי הדם הוא בנפש יכפר,ומה ת"ל וסמך ונרצה שאם עשאה לסמיכה שירי מצוה מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו לא כפר וכפר,רב נחמן בר יצחק אמר תנופה איכא בינייהו למ"ד כל הכתוב בהן מעכב בהן מעכבא ולמ"ד דבר שאין מעכב לדורות אין מעכב בהן לא מעכבא,ולדורות מנא לן דלא מעכבא דתניא (ויקרא יד, כא) לתנופה לכפר וכי תנופה מכפרת והלא אין כפרה אלא בדם שנאמר כי הדם הוא בנפש יכפר ומה ת"ל לתנופה לכפר שאם עשאה לתנופה שירי מצוה מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו לא כפר וכפר,רב פפא אמר פרישת שבעה איכא בינייהו למ"ד כל הכתוב בהן מעכב בהן מעכבא למ"ד דבר שאינו מעכב לדורות אינו מעכב בהן לא מעכבא,ולדורות מנא לן דלא מעכבא מדקא תני מתקינין ולא קתני מפרישין,רבינא אמר ריבוי שבעה ומשיחה שבעה איכא בינייהו למ"ד כל הכתוב בהן מעכב בהן מעכבא למ"ד דבר שאין מעכב לדורות אין מעכב בהן לא מעכבא,ולדורות מנא לן דלא מעכבא דתניא (ויקרא טז, לב) וכפר הכהן אשר ימשח אותו ואשר ימלא את ידו לכהן תחת אביו מה תלמוד לומר,לפי שנאמר (שמות כט, ל) שבעת ימים ילבשם הכהן תחתיו מבניו אין לי אלא נתרבה שבעה ונמשח שבעה נתרבה שבעה ונמשח יום אחד נתרבה יום אחד ונמשח שבעה מניין תלמוד לומר אשר ימשח אותו ואשר ימלא את ידו מ"מ,אשכחן ריבוי שבעה לכתחלה משיחה שבעה לכתחלה מנא לן,איבעית אימא מדאיצטריך קרא למעוטה ואיבעית אימא דאמר קרא (שמות כט, כט) ובגדי הקדש אשר לאהרן יהיו לבניו אחריו למשחה בהם ולמלא בם את ידם איתקש משיחה לריבוי מה ריבוי שבעה אף משיחה שבעה,מאי טעמא דמ"ד כל הכתוב בהן מעכב אמר רבי יצחק בר ביסנא אמר קרא (שמות כט, לה) ועשית לאהרן ולבניו ככה ככה עיכובא הוא תינח כל | 5a. bRav Yosef said:The practical difference bbetween themrelates to the question of bplacing handson the head of an animal brought as an offering. According bto the one who said:Failure to perform ballthe details bthat are written in itsregard, including details that do not invalidate offerings throughout the generations, binvalidatesthe inauguration, failure to perform the bplacingof bhandson the head of the animal balso invalidatesthe inauguration. According bto the one who said: A matter that does not invalidateofferings bthroughout the generations does not invalidatethe inauguration, failure to perform the bplacingof bhandson the head of the animal bdoes not invalidatethe inauguration., bAndwith regard to the ihalakhotof offerings that apply bthroughout the generationsthe Gemara asks: bFrom where do we derivethat failure to place hands on the head of the animal bdoes not invalidatethe offering? The Gemara answers: bAs it was taughtin a ibaraitathat the verse states: b“And he shall placehis hand on the head of the burnt-offering, band it shall be acceptedfor him to atone on his behalf” (Leviticus 1:4). bDoesthe bplacingof bhands atonefor one’s sins? bIsn’t atonementaccomplished bonly bythe sprinkling of bthe blood, as it is stated: “For it is the blood that makes atonement by reason of the life”(Leviticus 17:11)?, bAndfor bwhatpurpose, then, bdoes the verse state: “And he shall place…and it shall be accepted”?It teaches that if bone deemedthe ritual of bplacing handsto be ba peripheral aspect of the mitzvaand consequently failed to perform it, bthe verse ascribes to himstatus bas though he did not achieveoptimal batonement; andnevertheless, the offering batonesfor his sins. Apparently, failure to lay hands on the head of the offering does not invalidate the offering throughout the generations, as atonement can be achieved without it. Nevertheless, according to the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥa, failure to lay hands on the offering invalidates the offerings brought during the inauguration., bRav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said:The issue of bwavingthe offering is the practical difference bbetweenthe opinions of Rabbi Yoḥa and Rabbi Ḥanina. According bto the one who said:Failure to perform ballthe details bthat are written in itsregard binvalidatesthe inauguration, failure to wave the offering also binvalidatesthe inauguration. bAndaccording bto the one who said: A matter that does not invalidateofferings bthroughout the generations does not invalidatethe inauguration, failure to wave the offering bdoes not invalidatethe inauguration., bAndwith regard to the ihalakhotof offerings bthroughout the generations,the Gemara asks: bFrom where do wederive that failure to wave the offering bdoes not invalidatethe offering? The Gemara answers: bAs it was taughtin a ibaraitathat the verse says: “He shall take one male lamb as a guilt-offering bto be waved to make atonementfor him” (Leviticus 14:21). bDoes wavingthe offering batonefor one’s sins? bIsn’t atonementaccomplished bonly bythe sprinkling of bthe blood, as it is stated: “For it is the blood that makes atonement by reason of the life”(Leviticus 17:11)? bAndfor bwhatpurpose, then, bdoes the verse state: To be waved to make atonement?It teaches that if bone deemedthe ritual of bwavingto be ba peripheral aspect of the mitzvaand therefore failed to perform it, bthe verse ascribes to himstatus bas though he did not achieveoptimal batonement; andnevertheless, the offering batonesfor his sins on his behalf., bRav Pappa said:The issue of bsequesteringthe priest for bsevendays is the practical difference bbetweenthe opinions of Rabbi Yoḥa and Rabbi Ḥanina. According bto the one who said:Failure to perform ballthe details bthat are written in itsregard binvalidatesthe inauguration, failure to sequester the priest for seven days also binvalidatesthe inauguration. bAndaccording bto the one who said: A matter that does not invalidateofferings bthroughout the generations does not invalidatethe inauguration, failure to sequester the priest for seven days bdoes not invalidatethe inauguration., bAndwith regard to the ihalakhotof offerings bthroughout the generations,the Gemara asks: bFrom where do wederive that failure to sequester the priest for seven days bdoes not invalidatethe offering? The Gemara answers: It is derived bfrom the fact that it is taughtin the mishna: And btheywould bdesignateanother priest in his stead, band it is not taught:The Sages bremovethe designated priest from his house, despite the possibility that ultimately he might replace the High Priest and perform the Yom Kippur service. Apparently, sequestering is not essential., bRavina said:The issue of the priest performing the service with the bmultiplegarments of the High Priest for bsevendays and serving with banointmentfor bsevendays is the practical difference bbetweenthe opinions of Rabbi Yoḥa and Rabbi Ḥanina. According bto the one who said:Failure to perform ballthe details bthat are written in itsregard binvalidatesthe inauguration, failure to serve with multiple garments and anointment for seven days also binvalidatesthe inauguration. bAndaccording bto the one who said: A matter that does not invalidateofferings bthroughout the generations does not invalidatethe inauguration, failure to serve with multiple garments and anointment for seven days bdoes not invalidatethe inauguration., bAndwith regard to the ihalakhotof offerings bthroughout the generations,the Gemara asks: bFrom where do wederive that failure to serve with multiple garments and anointment for seven days bdoes not invalidatethe offering? The Gemara answers: bAs it was taughtin a ibaraita /i: For bwhatpurpose bdoes the verse state: “And the priest who shall be anointed and who shall be consecrated to serve in his father’s stead shall make the atonement”(Leviticus 16:32)? If it comes to teach that all service must be performed by the High Priest, it is already written with regard to the Yom Kippur service that it must be performed by Aaron, the High Priest., bSince it is stated: “Seven days shall the son that is priest in his stead don them”(Exodus 29:30), bIderive bonlythat one who donned the bmultiplegarments of the High Priest for bsevendays band was anointed sevendays assumes the position of High Priest and may perform the service on Yom Kippur. However, with regard to whether one who donned the bmultiplegarments for bsevendays band was anointedfor boneday, or one who donned the bmultiplegarments for boneday band was anointedfor bsevendays is thereby inaugurated as High Priest, bfrom whereare those cases derived? Therefore, bthe verse states: “Who shall be anointed and who shall be consecrated”; in any casehe is appointed High Priest, even if either anointment or donning the garments did not continue for seven days.,The Gemara asks: bWe founda source for the fact that when the High Priest is appointed, there is a requirement of donning bmultiplegarments for bsevendays iab initio /i;however, bfrom where do wederive the requirement of banointmentfor bsevendays iab initio /i?According to Ravina, there is a requirement to anoint the priest on each of the seven days iab initio /i, even though failure to do so does not invalidate the offering throughout the generations. From where is that requirement derived?, bIf you wish, say:It is derived bfromthe fact bthat the verse:“And the priest who shall be anointed and who shall be consecrated to serve in his father’s stead shall make the atonement,” bis necessary to excluderequirements derived from other sources, i.e., that both donning multiple garments and anointment must be for seven days. Apparently, anointment for seven days is required iab initio /i. bAnd if you wish, sayinstead that it is derived from bthatwhich bthe verse states: “And the sacred garments of Aaron shall be for his sons after him, to be anointed in them and to be consecrated in them”(Exodus 29:29). bAnointment is juxtaposedin this verse btodonning bmultiplegarments: bJust asdonning bmultiplegarments is required bfor sevendays iab initio /i, bso too, anointmentis required bfor sevendays iab initio /i.,§ After ascertaining the halakhic distinctions between the opinions of Rabbi Yoḥa and Rabbi Ḥanina with regard to the inauguration, the Gemara proceeds to analyze the rationales for those opinions. bWhat is the reasonfor the opinion bof the one who said:Failure to perform ballthe details bthat are written in itsregard binvalidatesthe inauguration? bRabbi Yitzḥak bar Bisna saidthat bthe verse states: “And so shall you do to Aaron and to his sonsaccording to all that I have commanded you, seven days shall you consecrate them” (Exodus 29:35). The term: bSo,teaches that failure to perform the ritual precisely in this manner binvalidatesthe inauguration. The Gemara asks: That works out bwellas a source that ball /b |
|
