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

Tiresias: The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Source Database



10976
Tosefta, Kippurim, 1.12
NaN


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

20 results
1. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 21.1-21.9 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

21.1. כִּי־יִמָּצֵא חָלָל בָּאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לְךָ לְרִשְׁתָּהּ נֹפֵל בַּשָּׂדֶה לֹא נוֹדַע מִי הִכָּהוּ׃ 21.1. כִּי־תֵצֵא לַמִּלְחָמָה עַל־אֹיְבֶיךָ וּנְתָנוֹ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּיָדֶךָ וְשָׁבִיתָ שִׁבְיוֹ׃ 21.2. וְיָצְאוּ זְקֵנֶיךָ וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ וּמָדְדוּ אֶל־הֶעָרִים אֲשֶׁר סְבִיבֹת הֶחָלָל׃ 21.2. וְאָמְרוּ אֶל־זִקְנֵי עִירוֹ בְּנֵנוּ זֶה סוֹרֵר וּמֹרֶה אֵינֶנּוּ שֹׁמֵעַ בְּקֹלֵנוּ זוֹלֵל וְסֹבֵא׃ 21.3. וְהָיָה הָעִיר הַקְּרֹבָה אֶל־הֶחָלָל וְלָקְחוּ זִקְנֵי הָעִיר הַהִוא עֶגְלַת בָּקָר אֲשֶׁר לֹא־עֻבַּד בָּהּ אֲשֶׁר לֹא־מָשְׁכָה בְּעֹל׃ 21.4. וְהוֹרִדוּ זִקְנֵי הָעִיר הַהִוא אֶת־הָעֶגְלָה אֶל־נַחַל אֵיתָן אֲשֶׁר לֹא־יֵעָבֵד בּוֹ וְלֹא יִזָּרֵעַ וְעָרְפוּ־שָׁם אֶת־הָעֶגְלָה בַּנָּחַל׃ 21.5. וְנִגְּשׁוּ הַכֹּהֲנִים בְּנֵי לֵוִי כִּי בָם בָּחַר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ לְשָׁרְתוֹ וּלְבָרֵךְ בְּשֵׁם יְהוָה וְעַל־פִּיהֶם יִהְיֶה כָּל־רִיב וְכָל־נָגַע׃ 21.6. וְכֹל זִקְנֵי הָעִיר הַהִוא הַקְּרֹבִים אֶל־הֶחָלָל יִרְחֲצוּ אֶת־יְדֵיהֶם עַל־הָעֶגְלָה הָעֲרוּפָה בַנָּחַל׃ 21.7. וְעָנוּ וְאָמְרוּ יָדֵינוּ לֹא שפכה [שָׁפְכוּ] אֶת־הַדָּם הַזֶּה וְעֵינֵינוּ לֹא רָאוּ׃ 21.8. כַּפֵּר לְעַמְּךָ יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר־פָּדִיתָ יְהוָה וְאַל־תִּתֵּן דָּם נָקִי בְּקֶרֶב עַמְּךָ יִשְׂרָאֵל וְנִכַּפֵּר לָהֶם הַדָּם׃ 21.9. וְאַתָּה תְּבַעֵר הַדָּם הַנָּקִי מִקִּרְבֶּךָ כִּי־תַעֲשֶׂה הַיָּשָׁר בְּעֵינֵי יְהוָה׃ 21.1. If one be found slain in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee to possess it, lying in the field, and it be not known who hath smitten him;" 21.2. then thy elders and thy judges shall come forth, and they shall measure unto the cities which are round about him that is slain." 21.3. And it shall be, that the city which is nearest unto the slain man, even the elders of that city shall take a heifer of the herd, which hath not been wrought with, and which hath not drawn in the yoke." 21.4. And the elders of that city shall bring down the heifer unto a rough valley, which may neither be plowed nor sown, and shall break the heifer’s neck there in the valley." 21.5. And the priests the sons of Levi shall come near—for them the LORD thy God hath chosen to minister unto Him, and to bless in the name of the LORD; and according to their word shall every controversy and every stroke be." 21.6. And all the elders of that city, who are nearest unto the slain man, shall wash their hands over the heifer whose neck was broken in the valley." 21.7. And they shall speak and say: ‘Our hands have not shed this blood, neither have our eyes seen it." 21.8. Forgive, O LORD, Thy people Israel, whom Thou hast redeemed, and suffer not innocent blood to remain in the midst of Thy people Israel.’ And the blood shall be forgiven them." 21.9. So shalt thou put away the innocent blood from the midst of thee, when thou shalt do that which is right in the eyes of the LORD."
2. Hebrew Bible, Leviticus, 17.13 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

17.13. וְאִישׁ אִישׁ מִבְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וּמִן־הַגֵּר הַגָּר בְּתוֹכָם אֲשֶׁר יָצוּד צֵיד חַיָּה אוֹ־עוֹף אֲשֶׁר יֵאָכֵל וְשָׁפַךְ אֶת־דָּמוֹ וְכִסָּהוּ בֶּעָפָר׃ 17.13. And whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among them, that taketh in hunting any beast or fowl that may be eaten, he shall pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust."
3. Hebrew Bible, 1 Samuel, 2.15-2.17, 2.22 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE)

2.15. גַּם בְּטֶרֶם יַקְטִרוּן אֶת־הַחֵלֶב וּבָא נַעַר הַכֹּהֵן וְאָמַר לָאִישׁ הַזֹּבֵחַ תְּנָה בָשָׂר לִצְלוֹת לַכֹּהֵן וְלֹא־יִקַּח מִמְּךָ בָּשָׂר מְבֻשָּׁל כִּי אִם־חָי׃ 2.16. וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלָיו הָאִישׁ קַטֵּר יַקְטִירוּן כַּיּוֹם הַחֵלֶב וְקַח־לְךָ כַּאֲשֶׁר תְּאַוֶּה נַפְשֶׁךָ וְאָמַר לו [לֹא] כִּי עַתָּה תִתֵּן וְאִם־לֹא לָקַחְתִּי בְחָזְקָה׃ 2.17. וַתְּהִי חַטַּאת הַנְּעָרִים גְּדוֹלָה מְאֹד אֶת־פְּנֵי יְהוָה כִּי נִאֲצוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים אֵת מִנְחַת יְהוָה׃ 2.22. וְעֵלִי זָקֵן מְאֹד וְשָׁמַע אֵת כָּל־אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשׂוּן בָּנָיו לְכָל־יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאֵת אֲשֶׁר־יִשְׁכְּבוּן אֶת־הַנָּשִׁים הַצֹּבְאוֹת פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד׃ 2.15. Also before they burnt the fat, the priest’s lad came, and said to the man that sacrificed, Give some roasting meat for the priest; for he will not have boiled meat of thee, but raw." 2.16. And if any man said to him, Let them first burn the fat, and then take as much as thy soul desires; then he would answer him, No; but thou shalt give it me now: and if not, I will take it by force." 2.17. Wherefore the sin of the lads was very great before the Lord: for the men dishonoured the offering of the Lord." 2.22. Now ῾Eli was very old, and heard all that his sons did to all Yisra᾽el; and how they lay with the women that assembled at the door of the Tent of Meeting."
4. Hebrew Bible, Jeremiah, 35.1 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE)

5. Hebrew Bible, Nehemiah, 2.10 (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)

2.10. And when Sanballat the Horonite, and Tobiah the servant, the Ammonite, heard of it, it grieved them exceedingly, for that there was come a man to seek the welfare of the children of Israel."
6. Mishnah, Sotah, 7.7 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

7.7. How were the benedictions of the high priest [performed]?The hazzan of the synagogue takes the Torah scroll and gives it to the president of the synagogue; the vice-president of the synagogue gives it to the high priest, and the high priest stands, receives [the scroll] and reads [the following portions]: “After the death” (Leviticus 16:1-34), and “But on the tenth day” (Leviticus 23:26-32). Then he rolls the Torah (scroll), places it in his bosom and exclaims, “More than I have read before you is written here!” [The portion], “On the tenth day” (Numbers 29:7-11), which is in the book of Numbers, he reads by heart. And he blesses upon it eight benedictions: “For the Torah”, “For the Temple service”, “For thanksgiving”, “For the pardon of sin”, “For the Temple”, “For Israel”, “For the priests”, viii) and the rest of the prayer."
7. Mishnah, Tamid, 1.4, 2.1, 6.3 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

1.4. The one who had merited to clear the ashes, would get ready to clear the ashes. They said to him: “Be careful not to touch any vessel until you have washed your hands and feet from the laver. See, the fire-pan is in the corner between the ascent and the altar on the west of the ascent.” No one entered with him, nor did he carry any light. Rather, he walked by the light of the altar fire. No-one saw him or heard a sound from him until they heard the noise of the wooden wheel which Ben Katin made for hauling up the laver, when they said, “The time has come.” He washed his hands and feet from the laver, then took the silver fire-pan and went up to the top of the altar and cleared away the cinders on either side and scooped up the ashes in the centre. He then descended and when he reached the floor he turned his face to the north and went along the east side of the ascent for about ten cubits, and he then made a heap of the cinders on the pavement three handbreadths away from the ascent, in the place where they used to put the crop of the birds and the ashes from the inner altar and the ash from the menorah." 2.1. When his fellow priests saw that he had descended, they came running and hastened to wash their hands and feet in the laver. They then took the shovels and the forks and went up to the top of the altar. The limbs and pieces of fat that had not been consumed since the evening they pushed to the sides of the altar. If there was not room on the sides they arranged them on the surround or on the ascent." 6.3. The one who had won the right to the incense took the dish from the middle of the spoon and gave it to his friend or his relative. If some of it spilled into the spoon, he would put it into his hands. They used to instruct him: Be careful not to begin immediately in front of you or else you may burn yourself. He then began to scatter the incense and [after finishing] went out. The one who burned the incense did not do so until the superintendent said to him: burn the incense. If it was the high priest who burned: he would say to him: Sir, high priest, burn the incense. Everyone left and he burned the incense and bowed down and went out."
8. Mishnah, Yoma, 2.2, 3.10, 7.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

2.2. Section one: It once happened that two were even as they ran up the ramp, and one of them pushed his fellow who fell and broke his leg. When the court saw that they incurred danger, they decreed that they would remove the ashes from only by a count. Section two: There were four counts. This is the first count." 3.10. Ben Katin made twelve spigots for the laver, for there had been before only two. He also made a mechanism for the laver, in order that its water should not become unfit by remaining overnight. King Monbaz had all the handles of all the vessels used on Yom HaKippurim made of gold. His mother Helena made a golden candelabrum over the opening of the Hekhal. She also made a golden tablet, on which the portion concerning the suspected adulteress was inscribed. For Nicanor miracles happened to his doors. And they were all mentioned for praise." 7.1. The high priest [then] came to read. If he wished to read in linen garments, he reads, and if not he reads in his own white cloak. The synagogue attendant would take a Torah scroll and give it to the head of the synagogue, and the head of the synagogue gives it to deputy high priest, and the deputy high priest gives it to the high priest, and the high priest stands and receives it, and reads, [section] beginning] “After the death …” (Leviticus 16:1-34) and “But on the tenth…” (Leviticus 23:26-32). Then he would roll up the Torah scroll and put it in his bosom and say, “More than what I have read out before you is written here.” And “On the tenth …” (Numbers 29:7-11) which is in the Book of Numbers he recites by heart. And he recites on it eight benedictions: “For the law”, “For the Temple service,” “For thanksgiving,” “For the forgiveness of sins” and “For the Temple” on its own, and “For Israel” on its own and “For Jerusalem” on its own, “For the priests” on their own and “For the rest of the prayer.”"
9. Tosefta, Hagigah, 2.11 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

10. Tosefta, Menachot, 13.18-13.22 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

11. Tosefta, Parah, 3.8 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

12. Tosefta, Rosh Hashanah, 1.15 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

13. Tosefta, Shevuot, 1.4 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

14. Tosefta, Kippurim, 1.8, 2.4-2.5 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

15. Anon., Sifre Numbers, 161 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)

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

3a. קשיא דרבי מאיר אדרבי מאיר תרי תנאי אליבא דרבי מאיר,קשיא דרבי אליעזר אדרבי אליעזר,תרי תנאי אליבא דרבי אליעזר ואיבעית אימא רישא לאו רבי אליעזר היא:,עד סוף האשמורה:,מאי קסבר רבי אליעזר אי קסבר שלש משמרות הוי הלילה לימא עד ארבע שעות ואי קסבר ארבע משמרות הוי הלילה לימא עד שלש שעות,לעולם קסבר שלש משמרות הוי הלילה והא קא משמע לן דאיכא משמרות ברקיע ואיכא משמרות בארעא דתניא רבי אליעזר אומר שלש משמרות הוי הלילה ועל כל משמר ומשמר יושב הקדוש ברוך הוא ושואג כארי שנאמר ה' ממרום ישאג וממעון קדשו יתן קולו שאוג ישאג על נוהו,וסימן לדבר משמרה ראשונה חמור נוער שניה כלבים צועקים שלישית תינוק יונק משדי אמו ואשה מספרת עם בעלה.,מאי קא חשיב רבי אליעזר אי תחלת משמרות קא חשיב תחלת משמרה ראשונה סימנא למה לי אורתא הוא אי סוף משמרות קא חשיב סוף משמרה אחרונה למה לי סימנא יממא הוא,אלא חשיב סוף משמרה ראשונה ותחלת משמרה אחרונה ואמצעית דאמצעיתא ואיבעית אימא כולהו סוף משמרות קא חשיב וכי תימא אחרונה לא צריך,למאי נפקא מינה למיקרי קריאת שמע למאן דגני בבית אפל ולא ידע זמן קריאת שמע אימת כיון דאשה מספרת עם בעלה ותינוק יונק משדי אמו ליקום וליקרי.,אמר רב יצחק בר שמואל משמיה דרב ג' משמרות הוי הלילה ועל כל משמר ומשמר יושב הקדוש ברוך הוא ושואג כארי ואומר אוי לבנים שבעונותיהם החרבתי את ביתי ושרפתי את היכלי והגליתים לבין אומות העולם:,תניא אמר רבי יוסי פעם אחת הייתי מהלך בדרך ונכנסתי לחורבה אחת מחורבות ירושלים להתפלל בא אליהו זכור לטוב ושמר לי על הפתח (והמתין לי) עד שסיימתי תפלתי לאחר שסיימתי תפלתי אמר לי שלום עליך רבי ואמרתי לו שלום עליך רבי ומורי ואמר לי בני מפני מה נכנסת לחורבה זו אמרתי לו להתפלל ואמר לי היה לך להתפלל בדרך ואמרתי לו מתיירא הייתי שמא יפסיקו בי עוברי דרכים ואמר לי היה לך להתפלל תפלה קצרה,באותה שעה למדתי ממנו שלשה דברים למדתי שאין נכנסין לחורבה ולמדתי שמתפללין בדרך ולמדתי שהמתפלל בדרך מתפלל תפלה קצרה,ואמר לי בני מה קול שמעת בחורבה זו ואמרתי לו שמעתי בת קול שמנהמת כיונה ואומרת אוי לבנים שבעונותיהם החרבתי את ביתי ושרפתי את היכלי והגליתים לבין האומות ואמר לי חייך וחיי ראשך לא שעה זו בלבד אומרת כך אלא בכל יום ויום שלש פעמים אומרת כך ולא זו בלבד אלא בשעה שישראל נכנסין לבתי כנסיות ולבתי מדרשות ועונין יהא שמיה הגדול מבורך הקדוש ברוך הוא מנענע ראשו ואומר אשרי המלך שמקלסין אותו בביתו כך מה לו לאב שהגלה את בניו ואוי להם לבנים שגלו מעל שולחן אביהם:,תנו רבנן מפני שלשה דברים אין נכנסין לחורבה מפני חשד מפני המפולת ומפני המזיקין. מפני חשד ותיפוק ליה משום מפולת 3a. The previous baraita cited Rabbi Meir’s opinion that the time for the recitation of iShemabegins when the priests immerse before partaking of their iteruma /i. In the iTosefta /i, it was taught that Rabbi Meir holds that one begins to recite iShemafrom when people enter to eat their meal on Shabbat eve. One opinion of bRabbi Meirseems to bcontradictanother opinion of bRabbi Meir /b. The Gemara responds: bTwo itanna’im /i,students of Rabbi Meir, expressed different opinions bin accordance with Rabbi Meir’sopinion.,So too, the opinion bof Rabbi Eliezercited in the mishna bcontradictsthe opinion bof Rabbi Eliezercited in the ibaraita /i. In the mishna, Rabbi Eliezer holds that the time for the recitation of iShemabegins with the emergence of the stars: From the time when the priests enter to partake of their iteruma /i, while in the ibaraita /i, he states that the time for the recitation of iShemabegins when the day becomes sanctified on the eve of Shabbat.,The Gemara responds: There are two possible resolutions to the apparent contradiction in Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion. Either btwo itanna’imexpressed different opinions bin accordance with Rabbi Eliezer’sopinion, bor if you wish, sayinstead that bthe first clauseof the mishna, according to which we begin to recite iShemawhen the priests enter to partake of their iteruma /i, bis notactually bRabbi Eliezer’sopinion. Only the second half of the statement: Until the end of the first watch, was stated by Rabbi Eliezer.,In the mishna, we learned that Rabbi Eliezer establishes that one may recite the evening iShema buntil the end of the first watch.These watches are mentioned in the Bible as segments of the night, but it must be established: Into precisely how many segments is the night divided, three or four? Moreover, why does Rabbi Eliezer employ such inexact parameters rather than a more precise definition of time ( iTosefot HaRosh /i)?, bWhat does Rabbi Eliezeractually bhold? If he holds that the night consists of three watches, let him sayexplicitly that one recites the evening iShema buntil the fourth hour. If he holds that the night consists of four watches, let him sayexplicitly buntil the third hour. /b,The Gemara responds: bActually,Rabbi Eliezer bholds that the night consists of three watches,and he employs this particular language of watches bin order to teach us: There are watches in heaven and there are watches on earth;just as our night is divided into watches, so too is the night in the upper worlds. bAs it was taughtin a ibaraita /i: bRabbi Eliezer says: The night consists of three watches, and over each and every watch, the Holy One, Blessed be He, sits and roars like a lionin pain over the destruction of the Temple. This imagery is derived from a reference in the Bible, bas it is stated: “The Lord roars [ iyishag /i] from on high, from His holy dwelling He makes His voice heard. He roars mightily[ishaog yishag/b] bover His dwelling place,He cries out like those who tread grapes, against all the inhabitants of the earth” (Jeremiah 25:30). The three instances of the root ishin-alef-gimmelin this verse correspond to the three watches of the night., bAnd signs ofthe transition between each of bthesewatches in the upper world can be sensed in this world: In bthe first watch, the donkey brays;in bthe second, dogs bark;and in bthe thirdpeople begin to rise, ba baby nurses from its mother’s breast and a wife converses with her husband. /b,With regard to these earthly manifestations of the three heavenly watches as established in the ibaraita /i, the Gemara asks: bWhat did Rabbi Eliezer enumerate? Ifhe benumerated the beginning of the watch, why do I need a sign for the beginning of the first watch? It iswhen beveningbegins; an additional sign is superfluous. bIf he enumerated the end of the watches, why do I need a sign for the end of the last watch? It iswhen bdaybegins; an additional sign is similarly superfluous.,The Gemara answers: bRather, he enumeratedthe signs for bthe end of the first watch and the beginning of the last watch,both of which require a sign, as well as bthe middle of the middlewatch. bAnd if you wish, sayinstead: bHe enumerated the ends of allof the watches. bAnd if you saythat a sign indicating the end of the bfinalwatch bis unnecessarybecause it is day, nevertheless, that sign is useful., bWhat is the practical ramificationof this sign? It is relevant bto one who recites iShema bwhile lying in a dark house,who cannot see the dawn and bwho does not know when the time for reciting iShema /iarrives. That person is provided with a sign that bwhen a woman speaks with her husband and a baby nurses from its mother’s breast,the final watch of the night has ended and bhe must rise and recite iShema /i., bRav Yitzḥak bar Shmuel said in the name of Rav: The night consists of three watches, and over each and every watch the Holy One, Blessed be He sits and roars like a lion,because the Temple service was connected to the changing of these watches ( iTosefot HaRosh /i), band says: “Woe to Me, that due to their sins I destroyed My house, burned My Temple and exiled them among the nations of the world.” /b,Incidental to the mention of the elevated significance of the night watches, the Gemara cites a related story: bIt was taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Yosei said: I was once walking along the road when I enteredthe bruinsof an old, abandoned building bamong the ruins of Jerusalemin order bto pray.I noticed that bElijah, of blessed memory, came and guarded the entrance for me and waited at the entrance until I finished my prayer. When I finished prayingand exited the ruin, Elijah bsaid to me,deferentially as one would address a Rabbi: bGreetings to you, my Rabbi. I answered him: Greetings to you, my Rabbi, my teacher. AndElijah bsaid to me: My son, why did you enter this ruin? I said to him:In order bto pray. AndElijah bsaid to me: You should have prayed on the road. And I said to him:I was unable to pray along the road, because bI was afraid that I might be interrupted by travelersand would be unable to focus. Elijah bsaid to me: You should have recited the abbreviated prayerinstituted for just such circumstances.,Rabbi Yosei concluded: bAt that time,from that brief exchange, bI learned from him, three things: I learned that one may not enter a ruin; and I learnedthat one need not enter a building to pray, but bhe may pray along the road; and I learned that one who prays along the road recites an abbreviated prayerso that he may maintain his focus., bAndafter this introduction, Elijah bsaid to me: What voice did you hear in that ruin? br bI responded: I heard a Heavenly voice,like an echo of that roar of the Holy One, Blessed be He (Maharsha), bcooing like a dove and saying: Woe to the children, due to whose sins I destroyed My house, burned My Temple, and exiled them among the nations.br bAndElijah bsaid to me:By byour life and by your head, not onlydid that voice bcry out in that moment, but it cries out three times each and every day. Moreover,any time that God’s greatness is evoked, such as bwhen Israel enters synagogues and study halls and answersin the ikaddishprayer, bMay His great name be blessed, the Holy One, Blessed be He, shakes His head and says: Happy is the king who is thus praised in his house.When the Temple stood, this praise was recited there, but now: bHowgreat is the pain of bthe father who exiled his children, and woe to the children who were exiled from their father’s table,as their pain only adds to that of their father (Rabbi Shem Tov ibn Shaprut)., bThe Sages taught, for three reasons one may not enter a ruin: Because of suspicionof prostitution, bbecausethe ruin is liable to bcollapse,and bbecause of demons.Three separate reasons seem extraneous, so the Gemara asks: Why was the reason bbecause of suspicionnecessary? bLet this ihalakha bbe derived because of collapse. /b
17. 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
18. Babylonian Talmud, Qiddushin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

66a. שורך נרבע והלה שותק נאמן ותנא תונא ושנעבדה בו עבירה ושהמית על פי עד אחד או ע"פ הבעלים נאמן האי ע"פ עד אחד היכי דמי אי דקא מודו בעלים היינו ע"פ הבעלים אלא לאו דשתיק,וצריכא דאי אשמעינן הך קמייתא אי לאו דקים ליה בנפשיה דעבד חולין בעזרה לא הוה מייתי,אבל נטמאו טהרותיך מימר אמרינן האי דשתיק דסבר חזי ליה בימי טומאתו,ואי אשמעינן הא משום דקא מפסיד ליה בימי טהרתו אבל שורו נרבע מימר אמר כל השוורים לאו לגבי מזבח קיימי צריכא,איבעיא להו אשתו זינתה בעד אחד ושותק מהו אמר אביי נאמן רבא אמר אינו נאמן הוי דבר שבערוה ואין דבר שבערוה פחות משנים,אמר אביי מנא אמינא לה דההוא סמיא דהוה מסדר מתנייתא קמיה דמר שמואל יומא חד נגה ליה ולא הוה קאתי שדר שליחא אבתריה אדאזיל שליח בחדא אורחא אתא איהו בחדא כי אתא שליח אמר אשתו זינתה אתא לקמיה דמר שמואל א"ל אי מהימן לך זיל אפקה ואי לא לא תפיק,מאי לאו אי מהימן עלך דלאו גזלנא הוא ורבא אי מהימן לך כבי תרי זיל אפקה ואי לא לא תפקה,ואמר אביי מנא אמינא לה דתניא מעשה בינאי המלך שהלך לכוחלית שבמדבר וכיבש שם ששים כרכים ובחזרתו היה שמח שמחה גדולה וקרא לכל חכמי ישראל אמר להם אבותינו היו אוכלים מלוחים בזמן שהיו עסוקים בבנין בית המקדש אף אנו נאכל מלוחים זכר לאבותינו והעלו מלוחים על שולחנות של זהב ואכלו,והיה שם אחד איש לץ לב רע ובליעל ואלעזר בן פועירה שמו ויאמר אלעזר בן פועירה לינאי המלך ינאי המלך לבם של פרושים עליך ומה אעשה הקם להם בציץ שבין עיניך הקים להם בציץ שבין עיניו,היה שם זקן אחד ויהודה בן גדידיה שמו ויאמר יהודה בן גדידיה לינאי המלך ינאי המלך רב לך כתר מלכות הנח כתר כהונה לזרעו של אהרן שהיו אומרים אמו נשבית במודיעים ויבוקש הדבר ולא נמצא ויבדלו חכמי ישראל בזעם,ויאמר אלעזר בן פועירה לינאי המלך ינאי המלך הדיוט שבישראל כך הוא דינו ואתה מלך וכהן גדול כך הוא דינך ומה אעשה אם אתה שומע לעצתי רומסם ותורה מה תהא עליה הרי כרוכה ומונחת בקרן זוית כל הרוצה ללמוד יבוא וילמוד,אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק מיד נזרקה בו אפיקורסות דהוה ליה למימר תינח תורה שבכתב תורה שבעל פה מאי מיד ותוצץ הרעה על ידי אלעזר בן פועירה ויהרגו כל חכמי ישראל והיה העולם משתומם עד שבא שמעון בן שטח והחזיר את התורה ליושנה,היכי דמי אילימא דבי תרי אמרי אישתבאי ובי תרי אמרי לא אישתבאי מאי חזית דסמכת אהני סמוך אהני,אלא בעד אחד וטעמא דקא מכחשי ליה בי תרי הא לאו הכי מהימן,ורבא לעולם תרי ותרי וכדאמר רב אחא בר רב מניומי בעדי הזמה הכא נמי בעדי הזמה,ואיבעית אימא כדרבי יצחק דאמר רבי יצחק שפחה הכניסו תחתיה,אמר רבא 66a. bYour ox was usedby a man bfor an act of bestialityand is therefore unfit for an offering, band the other,the owner of the ox, bis silent,the witness is bdeemed credible. And the itanna /iof the mishna also btaught( iBekhorot41a): bAndwith regard to an animal bthat was used for a transgressionor bthat killed,if this is attested to bby one witness or by the owner,he is bdeemed credible.The Gemara clarifies this case: bWhat are the circumstancesof bthiscase of the mishna, where the knowledge is established bby one witness? If the owner admitsto the claim, bthis isthe same as: bBy the owner. Rather, is it notreferring to a case bwherethe owner remains bsilent? /b,The Gemara comments: bAndeach of these statements of Abaye is bnecessary. As, had he taught usonly bthat firstcase, where the witness said someone ate forbidden fat, one might have said that he is deemed credible for the following reason: bWere it notfor the fact bthat he himselfwas bconvinced that he had committeda transgression, bhe would notcommit the transgression of bbringing a non-sacredanimal btothe Temple bcourtyardon the basis of the testimony of one witness. Consequently, his silence is evidently an admission., bButif the witness said: bYour ritually purefoods bwere rendered ritually impure,and the accused was silent, bwe would say:The reason bthathe is bsilentand refrains from denying the claim is bthat he thinkshe is not suffering any significant loss, as the food bis fit for himto eat bon his days of ritual impurity,because he is not required to destroy ritually impure foods., bAnd hadAbaye btaught usonly the case of: Your ritually pure food was rendered ritually impure, one might have said that the reason bthiswitness is deemed credible is bthat he causes him a loss on his days of ritual impurity,and therefore his silence is tantamount to a confession. bButin the case of: bHis ox was usedby a man bfor an act of bestiality,the owner of the ox bcan saywith regard to his animal: bNot all the oxen standready to be sacrificed basan offering on the baltar.Perhaps one would think that the owner does not bother denying the claim because he merely forfeits the possibility of sacrificing his ox as an offering, which he considers an inconsequential matter. It is only if there were two witnesses to the act that the animal is put to death, whereas here there was only one witness. It is therefore bnecessaryfor Abaye to specify all these cases.,§ bA dilemma was raised beforethe Sages: If a husband is told bby one witnessthat bhis wife committed adultery, andthe husband remains bsilent, what isthe ihalakha /i? bAbaye said:The witness is bdeemed credible. Rava said: He is not deemed credible.Why not? Because bit is a matter involving forbidden relations, and there is no matterof testimony bfor forbidden sexual relationsthat can be attested to by bfewer than twowitnesses., bAbaye said: From where do I saythis claim of mine? It happened bthatthere was ba certain blind man who would review imishnayotbefore Mar Shmuel. One daythe blind man bwas late for him and was not arriving.Mar Shmuel bsent a messenger after himto assist him. bWhilethe bmessenger was goingto the blind man’s house bby one way,the blind man barrivedat the house of study bby a differentroute, and therefore the messenger missed him and reached his house. bWhenthe bmessenger cameback, bhe saidthat he had been to the blind man’s house and saw that bhis wife committed adultery.The blind man bcame before Mar Shmuelto inquire whether he must pay heed to this testimony. Mar Shmuel bsaid to him: Ifthis messenger bis trusted by you, goand bdivorce her, but if not, do not divorceher.,Abaye comments: bWhat, is it notcorrect to say that this means that bif he is trusted by you that he is not a thiefbut is a valid witness, you must rely on him? This would prove that a single witness can testify in a case of this kind. bAnd Ravaexplains that Mar Shmuel meant: bIfhe bis trusted by you like twowitnesses, bgoand bdivorce her, but if not, do not divorceher. Consequently, Rava maintains that this episode affords no proof., bAnd Abaye said: From where do I saythis claim of mine? bAs it is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bAn incidentoccurred bwith King Yannai, who went tothe region of bKoḥalit in the desert and conquered sixty cities there. And upon his return he rejoicedwith ba great happinessover his victory. bAnd hesubsequently bsummoned all the Sages of the Jewish peopleand bsaid to them: Our ancestorsin their poverty bwould eat salty foods when they were busy with the building of the Temple; we too shall eat salty foods in memory of our ancestors. And they brought salty food on tables of gold, and ate. /b, bAnd there was oneperson bpresent, a scoffer,a man of ban evil heart and a scoundrel called Elazar ben Po’ira. And Elazar ben Po’ira said to King Yannai: King Yannai, the hearts of the Pharisees,the Sages, bare against you.In other words, they harbor secret resentment against you and do not like you. The king replied: bAnd what shall I doto clarify this matter? Elazar responded: bHave them stand bywearing bthe frontplate between your eyes.Since the frontplate bears the Divine Name, they should stand in its honor. Yannai, who was a member of the priestly Hasmonean family, also served as High Priest, who wears the frontplate. bHe hadthe Pharisees bstand bywearing bthe frontplate between his eyes. /b,Now bthere was a certain elder present called Yehuda ben Gedidya, and Yehuda ben Gedidya said to King Yannai: King Yannai, the crown of the monarchy suffices for you,i.e., you should be satisfied that you are king. bLeave the crown of the priesthood for the descendants of Aaron.The Gemara explains this last comment: bAs they would saythat Yannai’s bmother was taken captive in Modi’in,and she was therefore disqualified from marrying into the priesthood, which meant that Yannai was a iḥalal /i. bAnd the matter was investigated and was not discovered,i.e., they sought witnesses for that event but none were found. bAnd the Sages of Israel were expelled inthe king’s brage,due to this rumor., bAnd Elazar ben Po’ira said to King Yannai: King Yannai, such is the judgment of a common person in Israel.In other words, merely expelling a slanderer is appropriate if the subject of the slander is a commoner. bBut you are a king and a High Priest.Is bthis your judgmentas well? Yannai replied: bAnd what should I do?Elazar responded: bIf you listen to my advice, crush them.Yannai countered: bBut what will become of the Torah?He retorted: bBehold,it bis wrapped and placed in the corner. Anyone who wishes to study can come and study.We have no need for the Sages.,The Gemara interjects: bRav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak says: Immediately, heresy was injected intoYannai, bas he should have saidto Elazar ben Po’ira: This bworks out wellwith regard to bthe Written Torah,as it can be studied by all on their own, but bwhatwill become of bthe Oral Torah?The Oral Torah is transmitted only by the Sages. The ibaraitacontinues: bImmediately, the evilarose and bcaught fire through Elazar ben Po’ira, and all the Sages of the Jewish people were killed. And the world was desolateof Torah buntil Shimon ben Shataḥ came and restored the Torah to its formerglory. This completes the ibaraita /i.,Abaye asks: bWhat are the circumstancesof this case? How did those who conducted the investigation refute the rumor that Yannai’s mother had been taken captive? bIf we say that twowitnesses bsaidthat bshe was taken captive, and twoothers bsaidthat bshe was not taken captive, what did you see that you rely on thesewho said that she was not taken captive? Instead, brely on thesewho said that she was taken captive. In such a scenario, one cannot say definitively that the matter was investigated and found to be false., bRather,it must be referring bto one witnesswho testified she was taken captive, and two testified that she was not taken captive. bAnd the reasonthat the lone witness is not deemed credible is only bthat he is contradicted by theother btwo,from which it may be inferred that bif not for thatfact, bhe would be deemed credible.This supports Abaye’s claim that an uncontested lone witness is deemed credible in a case of this kind., bAnd Ravacould reply that this incident affords no proof, for the following reason: bActually,one can say that there were btwowitnesses who testified that she was captured band twowho testified that she was not, bandthe case was decided bin accordance with thatwhich bRav Aḥa bar Rav Minyumi saysin a different context, that it is referring bto conspiring witnesses.The second pair of witnesses did not contradict the testimony of the first pair but established them as liars by stating that the first pair were not there to witness the event. This serves to disqualify the testimony of the first pair altogether. bHere too,it is referring btowitnesses who rendered the first set bconspiring witnesses. /b, bAnd if you wish, saythat this is bin accordance withthe version of the story stated bby Rabbi Yitzḥak, as Rabbi Yitzḥak says: They replacedYannai’s mother bwith a maidservant.The first witnesses saw that Yannai’s mother was about to be taken captive, but the second pair revealed that she had actually been replaced with a maidservant, thereby negating the testimony of the first set., bRava says: /b
19. Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

119b. מהדר אזוזי זוזי דרבנן א"ל במטותא מינייכו לא תחללוניה,אמר רבא ואיתימא ר' יהושע בן לוי אפי' יחיד המתפלל בע"ש צריך לומר ויכולו דאמר רב המנונא כל המתפלל בע"ש ואומר ויכולו מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו נעשה שותף להקב"ה במעשה בראשית שנאמר ויכולו אל תקרי ויכולו אלא ויכלו אמר רבי אלעזר מניין שהדיבור כמעשה שנאמר (תהלים לג, ו) בדבר ה' שמים נעשו,אמר רב חסדא אמר מר עוקבא כל המתפלל בע"ש ואומר ויכולו שני מלאכי השרת המלוין לו לאדם מניחין ידיהן על ראשו ואומרים לו (ישעיהו ו, ז) וסר עונך וחטאתך תכופר תניא ר' יוסי בר יהודה אומר שני מלאכי השרת מלוין לו לאדם בע"ש מבית הכנסת לביתו אחד טוב ואחד רע וכשבא לביתו ומצא נר דלוק ושלחן ערוך ומטתו מוצעת מלאך טוב אומר יהי רצון שתהא לשבת אחרת כך ומלאך רע עונה אמן בעל כרחו ואם לאו מלאך רע אומר יהי רצון שתהא לשבת אחרת כך ומלאך טוב עונה אמן בעל כרחו,אמר ר' אלעזר לעולם יסדר אדם שלחנו בע"ש אע"פ שאינו צריך אלא לכזית ואמר ר' חנינא לעולם יסדר אדם שלחנו במוצאי שבת אע"פ שאינו צריך אלא לכזית חמין במוצאי שבת מלוגמא פת חמה במוצאי שבת מלוגמא ר' אבהו הוה עבדין ליה באפוקי שבתא עיגלא תילתא הוה אכיל מיניה כולייתא כי גדל אבימי בריה א"ל למה לך לאפסודי כולי האי נשבוק כולייתא ממעלי שבתא שבקוהו ואתא אריא אכליה,אריב"ל כל העונה אמן יהא שמיה רבא מברך בכל כחו קורעין לו גזר דינו שנאמר (שופטים ה, ב) בפרוע פרעות בישראל בהתנדב עם ברכו ה' מ"ט בפרוע פרעות משום דברכו ה' רבי חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן אפילו יש בו שמץ של עבודה זרה מוחלין לו כתיב הכא בפרוע פרעות וכתיב התם (שמות לב, כה) כי פרוע הוא אמר ריש לקיש כל העונה אמן בכל כחו פותחין לו שערי ג"ע שנאמר (ישעיהו כו, ב) פתחו שערים ויבא גוי צדיק שומר אמונים אל תיקרי שומר אמונים אלא שאומרים אמן מאי אמן א"ר חנינא אל מלך נאמן,א"ר יהודה בריה דרב שמואל משמיה דרב אין הדליקה מצויה אלא במקום שיש חילול שבת שנאמר (ירמיהו יז, כז) ואם לא תשמעו אלי לקדש את יום השבת ולבלתי שאת משא וגו' והצתי אש בשעריה ואכלה ארמנות ירושלים ולא תכבה מאי ולא תכבה אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק בשעה שאין בני אדם מצויין לכבותה אמר אביי לא חרבה ירושלים אלא בשביל שחללו בה את השבת שנאמר (יחזקאל כב, כו) ומשבתותי העלימו עיניהם ואחל בתוכם,אמר ר' אבהו לא חרבה ירושלים אלא בשביל שביטלו ק"ש שחרית וערבית שנאמר (ישעיהו ה, יא) הוי משכימי בבקר שכר ירדפו וגו' וכתיב (ישעיהו ה, יב) והיה כנור ונבל תוף וחליל ויין משתיהם ואת פועל ה' לא יביטו וכתיב (ישעיהו ה, יג) לכן גלה עמי מבלי דעת,אמר רב המנונא לא חרבה ירושלים אלא בשביל שביטלו בה תינוקות של בית רבן שנאמר (ירמיהו ו, יא) שפוך על עולל בחוץ וגו' מה טעם שפוך משום דעולל בחוץ אמר עולא לא חרבה ירושלים אלא מפני שלא היה להם בושת פנים זה מזה שנאמר (ירמיהו ו, טו) הובישו כי תועבה עשו גם בוש לא יבושו וגו' אמר ר' יצחק לא חרבה ירושלים אלא בשביל שהושוו קטן וגדול שנאמר (ישעיהו כד, ב) והיה כעם ככהן וכתיב בתריה הבוק תבוק הארץ,אמר רב עמרם בריה דר"ש בר אבא א"ר שמעון בר אבא א"ר חנינא לא חרבה ירושלים אלא בשביל שלא הוכיחו זה את זה שנאמר (איכה א, ו) היו שריה כאילים לא מצאו מרעה מה איל זה ראשו של זה בצד זנבו של זה אף ישראל שבאותו הדור כבשו פניהם בקרקע ולא הוכיחו זה את זה א"ר יהודה לא חרבה ירושלים אלא בשביל שביזו בה ת"ח שנאמר (דברי הימים ב לו, טז) ויהיו מלעיבים במלאכי האלהים ובוזים דבריו ומתעתעים בנביאיו עד עלות חמת ה' בעמו עד [ל] אין מרפא מאי עד לאין מרפא אמר רב יהודה אמר רב כל המבזה ת"ח אין לו רפואה למכתו,אמר רב יהודה אמר רב מאי דכתיב (דברי הימים א טז, כב) אל תגעו במשיחי ובנביאי אל תרעו אל תגעו במשיחי אלו תינוקות של בית רבן ובנביאי אל תרעו אלו ת"ח אמר ריש לקיש משום רבי יהודה נשיאה אין העולם מתקיים אלא בשביל הבל תינוקות של בית רבן א"ל רב פפא לאביי דידי ודידך מאי א"ל אינו דומה הבל שיש בו חטא להבל שאין בו חטא ואמר ריש לקיש משום ר"י נשיאה אין מבטלין תינוקות של בית רבן אפי' לבנין בית המקדש ואמר ר"ל לר"י נשיאה כך מקובלני מאבותי ואמרי לה מאבותיך כל עיר שאין בה תינוקות של בית רבן מחריבין אותה רבינא אמר מחרימין אותה,ואמר רבא לא חרבה ירושלים אלא בשביל שפסקו ממנה אנשי אמנה שנאמר (ירמיהו ה, א) שוטטו בחוצות ירושלים וראו נא [ודעו ובקשו ברחובותיה אם תמצאו איש] (אם יש איש) עושה משפט מבקש אמונה ואסלח לה איני והאמר רב קטינא אפי' בשעת כשלונה של ירושלים לא פסקו ממנה אנשי אמנה שנאמר (ישעיהו ג, ו) כי יתפש איש באחיו בית אביו (לאמר) שמלה לכה קצין תהיה לנו דברים שבני אדם מתכסין בהן כשמלה ישנן בידיך והמכשלה הזאת תחת ידך 119b. bwould seek pairs of Sagesengaged in conversation on Shabbat and bsaid to them: Please do not desecrateShabbat by failing to delight in Shabbat., bRava said, and some sayit was bRabbi Yehoshua ben Leviwho said: bEven an individual who prays on Shabbat evening must recitethe passage: “And the heavens and the earth bwere finished [ ivaykhullu /i]”(Genesis 2:1–3), bas Rav Hamnuna said: Anyone who prays on Shabbat evening and recitesthe passage of bvaykhullu, the verse ascribed himcredit bas if he became a partner with the Holy One, Blessed be He, in the act of Creation. As it is stated:“And the heavens and the earth bwere finished [ ivaykhullu /i].” Do not readit as: bWere finished [ ivaykhullu /i]; rather,as: bThey finished [ ivaykhallu /i].It is considered as though the Holy One, Blessed be He, and the individual who says this become partners and completed the work together. bRabbi Elazar said: From whereis it derived bthat speech is like action? As it is stated: “By the word of God the heavens were made,and all of their hosts by the breath of His mouth” (Psalms 33:6)., bRav Ḥisda saidthat bMar Ukva said: One who prays on Shabbat evening and recites ivaykhullu /i, the two ministering angels who accompany the personat all times bplace their hands on his head and say to him: “And your iniquity has passed, and your sin has been atoned”(Isaiah 6:7). bIt was taughtin a ibaraita /i: bRabbi Yosei bar Yehuda says: Two ministering angels accompany a person on Shabbat evening from the synagogue to his home, one goodangel band one evilangel. bAnd whenhe breaches his home and finds a lamp burning and a table set and his bed made, the good angel says: May it beYour bwill that it shall be like this for another Shabbat. And the evil angel answers against his will: Amen. And ifthe person’s home is bnotprepared for Shabbat in that manner, bthe evil angel says: May it beYour bwill that it shall be so for another Shabbat, and the good angel answers against his will: Amen. /b, bRabbi Elazar said: A person should always set his table on Shabbat evewith all the preparations for an important feast, beven if he only needsthe table set for ban olive-bulkof food. bAnd Rabbi Ḥanina said: A person should always set his table at the conclusion of Shabbat,Saturday night, for a feast in deference to the Shabbat that passed, beven if he only needsthe table set for ban olive-bulkof food. And with regard to the meal at the conclusion of Shabbat, they said: bHot water after Shabbatis a bremedy [ imelugma /i], warm bread at the conclusion of Shabbatis a bremedy.The Gemara relates: bThey would prepare for Rabbi Abbahu at the conclusion of Shabbat a third-born calf,and bhe would eatone bkidney from it. When his son Avimi grew up,he bsaid tohis father: bWhy do you waste so much? Let us leave a kidney over from Shabbat eve,and you will not need to slaughter an entire calf for that purpose. Indeed, bthey leftthe calf and did not slaughter it, band a lion came and ate it.This teaches that one should not be miserly when it comes to honoring Shabbat.,Apropos the reward for honoring Shabbat, the Gemara cites statements about the reward for answering amen. bRabbi Yehoshua ben Levi saidthat banyone who answers: Amen, may His great name be blessed,wholeheartedly, bwith all his might,they brip his sentence, as it is stated: “When punishments are annulled in Israel, when the people offer themselves, bless the Lord”(Judges 5:2). bWhat is the reason for when punishments are annulled? Becausethe Jewish people bblessed God.When one recites: Amen, may His great name be blessed, and blesses God, his punishment is annulled. bRabbi Ḥiyya bar Abbasaid that bRabbi Yoḥa said: Evenif bone has within him a trace of idolatry,when he answers amen bhe is forgiven. It is written here,in the verse above: b“When punishments [ ipera’ot /i] are annulled.” And it is written there,with regard to the sin of the Golden Calf: “And Moses saw bthatthe nation bwas wild [ iparu’a /i],for Aaron had let them loose for anyone who might rise against them” (Exodus 32:25). Even one with the wildness of idolatry is forgiven. bReish Lakish said: One who answers amen with all his strength, they open the gates of the Garden of Eden before him, as it is stated: “Open the gates, and a righteous nation shall come who keeps the faith”(Isaiah 26:2). bDo not read: Who keeps [ ishomer /i] the faith [ iemunim /i], but rather: Who say [ ishe’omerim /i] amen. Whatis the allusion of the word iamen /i? Rabbi Ḥanina said:It is an acronym of the words: bGod, faithful King [ iEl Melekh ne’eman /i]. /b, bRav Yehuda, son of Rav Shmuel, said in the name of Rav: Fire is only found in a place where there is desecration of Shabbat, as it is stated: “And if you do not heed Me to sanctify the day of Shabbat, and to refrain from carrying burdensand come to the gates of Jerusalem on the day of Shabbat, band I will light a fire in its gates and it will consume the palaces of Jerusalem and it will not be extinguished”(Jeremiah 17:27). The Gemara asks: bWhatis the meaning of: bAnd it will not be extinguished? Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said:Fire will break out bat a time when people are not found to extinguish it. Abaye said: Jerusalem was destroyed only because people desecrated the Shabbat in it, as it is stated: “And from My iShabbatotthey averted their eyes, and I was profaned among them”(Ezekiel 22:26). Several punishments were decreed to befall Jerusalem as punishment for this transgression.,The Gemara suggests additional reasons for the destruction of Jerusalem. br bRabbi Abbahu said: Jerusalem was destroyed only becauseits citizens intentionally bomitted recitation of iShemamorning and evening, as it is stated: “Woe to those who rise early in the morning and pursue the drinkand are aflame from wine until late in the evening” (Isaiah 5:11). bAnd it is writtenin the continuation of that passage: b“And their drinking parties have lyre and lute, drum and flute and wine, and they do not look upon the actions of God,and they do not see His hands’ creations” (Isaiah 5:12). This means that in the morning and evening, when the Jews should have been reciting iShema /i, they were drinking wine and liquor. bAnd it is writtenin that passage: b“Therefore My nation is being exiled for its ignorance;its honor will die of hunger and its multitudes will be parched with thirst” (Isaiah 5:13)., bRav Hamnuna said: Jerusalem was destroyed only because schoolchildren there were interruptedfrom studying Torah, bas it is stated:“And I am filled with the wrath of God, I cannot contain it, bpour it onto the infants in the streetand onto the gathering of youths together, for men and women alike will be captured, the elderly along with those of advanced years” (Jeremiah 6:11). Rav Hamnuna explains: bWhat is the reason thatthe wrath is bpoured?It is bbecause infants are outsidein the streets and are not studying Torah. br bUlla said: Jerusalem was destroyed only because people had no shame before each other, as it is stated: “They acted shamefully; they have performed abominations, yet they neither were ashamednor did they know humiliation. Therefore, they will fall among the fallen, they will fail at the time that I punish them, said God” (Jeremiah 6:15). br bRabbi Yitzḥak said: Jerusalem was destroyed only becauseits bsmall andthe bgreatcitizens bwere equated.They did not properly value the prominent leaders of their generation, bas it is stated: “And the common people were like the priest,the slave like his master, the maidservant like her mistress, the buyer like the seller, the lender like the borrower, the creditor like the one indebted to him” (Isaiah 24:2). bAnd it is written afterward: “The land shall be utterly desolateand completely plundered, for God has said this” (Isaiah 24:3)., bRav Amram, sonof bRabbi Shimon bar Abba, saidthat bRabbi Shimon bar Abba saidthat bRabbi Ḥanina said: Jerusalem was destroyed only because the people did not rebuke one another, as it is stated: “Her ministers were like stags that found no pasture,and they walked without strength before their pursuer” (Lamentations 1:6). bJust as this stagturns bits head toward the other’s tailwhen it grazes, and each one feeds on its own, bso too, the Jewish people in that generation lowered their faces to the ground and did not rebuke one another. br bRabbi Yehuda said: Jerusalem was destroyed only because they disparaged the Torah scholars in it, as it is stated: “And they mocked the messengers of God and disdained His words and taunted His prophets, until the wrath of God arose against His people, until it could not be healed”(II Chronicles 36:16). bWhatis the meaning of: bUntil it could not be healed? Rav Yehuda saidthat bRav said:It means that banyone who disparages Torah scholars cannot be healed from his wound. /b, bRav Yehuda saidthat bRav said: Whatis the meaning of that bwhich is written: “Do not touch My anointed ones and do My prophets no harm”(I Chronicles 16:22)? b“Do not touch My anointed ones,” these are the schoolchildren,who are as precious and important as kings and priests (Maharsha); b“and do not harm My prophets,” these are Torah scholars. Reish Lakish said in the name of Rabbi Yehuda Nesia: The world only exists because of the breath,i.e., reciting Torah, bof schoolchildren. Rav Pappa said to Abaye: MyTorah study band yours, whatis its status? Why is the Torah study of adults worth less? He bsaid to him: The breathof adults, bwhich istainted by bsin, is not similar to the breathof children, bwhich is nottainted by bsin. And Reish Lakish said in the name of Rabbi Yehuda Nesia: One may not interrupt schoolchildrenfrom studying Torah, beven in order to build the Temple. And Reish Lakish said to Rabbi Yehuda Nesia: I have received from my ancestors, and some saythat he said to him: I have received bfrom your ancestors as follows: Any city in which there are no schoolchildrenstudying Torah, they bdestroy it. Ravina said:They leave bit desolate. /b, bAnd Rava said: Jerusalem was destroyed only because there were no more trustworthy people there, as it is stated: “Roam about the streets of Jerusalem and see, and search its plazas, if you can find a person, who acts justly, who seeks integrity, that I should forgive it”(Jeremiah 5:1). The Gemara asks: bIs that so? Didn’t Rav Ketina say: Even at the time of Jerusalem’s failure, trustworthy people did not cease there, as it is stated: “For a man will grab his brother of his father’s house and say: You have a garment. Come be a chief over usand let this ruin be under your care” (Isaiah 3:6)? bThings that people use to cover up like a garment,secrets, bare in your handsand you know about them. Therefore, you should be a leader of the community. And that which is stated: b“And let this ruin be under your care,”meaning:
20. Babylonian Talmud, Yoma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

22a. מתני׳ big strongבראשונה /strong /big כל מי שרוצה לתרום את המזבח תורם ובזמן שהן מרובין רצין ועולין בכבש כל הקודם את חבירו בארבע אמות זכה ואם היו שניהן שוין הממונה אומר להן הצביעו,ומה הן מוציאין אחת או שתים ואין מוציאין אגודל במקדש,מעשה שהיו שניהם שוין ורצין ועולין בכבש ודחף אחד מהן את חבירו ונפל ונשברה רגלו וכיון שראו בית דין שבאין לידי סכנה התקינו שלא יהו תורמין את המזבח אלא בפייס ארבע פייסות היו שם וזה הפייס הראשון, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big והא מעיקרא מאי טעמא לא תקינו לה רבנן פייסא מעיקרא סבור כיון דעבודת לילה היא לא חשיבא להו ולא אתו כיון דחזו דקאתו ואתו לידי סכנה תקינו לה פייסא,והרי איברים ופדרים דעבודת לילה היא ותקינו לה רבנן פייסא סוף עבודה דיממא היא,האי נמי תחלת עבודה דיממא היא דאמר ר' יוחנן קידש ידיו לתרומת הדשן למחר אין צריך לקדש שכבר קידש מתחילת עבודה,אימא שכבר קידש מתחילה לעבודה,איכא דאמרי מעיקרא סבור כיון דאיכא אונס שינה לא אתו כיון דחזו דאתו וקאתו נמי לידי סכנה תקינו לה רבנן פייסא והרי איברים ופדרים דאיכא אונס שינה ותקינו לה רבנן פייסא שאני מיגנא ממיקם,ותקנתא להך גיסא הואי תקנתא להאי גיסא הואי דתניא מי שזכה בתרומת הדשן (יזכה) בסידור מערכה ובשני גזירי עצים,אמר רב אשי שתי תקנות הוו מעיקרא סבור לא אתו כיון דחזו דקאתו ואתו נמי לידי סכנה תקינו לה פייסא כיון דתקינו לה פייסא לא אתו אמרי מי יימר דמתרמי לן הדר תקינו להו מי שזכה בתרומת הדשן יזכה בסידור מערכה ובשני גזירי עצים כי היכי דניתו וניפייסו,ובזמן שהן מרובין וכו' אמר רב פפא פשיטא לי ארבע אמות דארעא לא רצין ועולין בכבש תנן קמייתא נמי לא רצין ועולין בכבש תנן והדר כל הקודם את חבירו,דביני ביני נמי לא דלא מסיימא מילתא פשיטא לי דגבי מזבח תנן,בעי רב פפא ארבע אמות שאמרו בהדיה אמה יסוד ואמה סובב 22a. strongMISHNA: /strong bInitially,the practice among the priests was that bwhoever wishes to removethe ashes from bthe altar removes them. And when there are manypriests who wish to perform that task, the privilege to do so is determined by a race: The priests brun and ascend on the rampleading to the top of the altar. bAnypriest bwho precedes anotherand reaches within bfour cubitsof the top of the altar first bis privilegedto remove the ashes. bAnd if both of them were equaland neither preceded the other, bthe appointedpriest says to all the priests: bExtendyour bfingers,and a lottery was performed, as will be explained., bAnd whatfingers bdo they extendfor the lottery? They may extend bone or twofingers, bandthe priests bdo not extend a thumb in the Temple.The reason is that the lottery was conducted by the appointee choosing a number and counting the extended fingers of the priests standing in a circle. As the count progressed, a priest could calculate and manipulate the result in his favor by surreptitiously extending his thumb and an additional finger. Since there is separation between the thumb and the forefinger it could appear as though they belonged to two different priests, skewing the results of the lottery.,Initially, that was the procedure; however, ban incidentoccurred bwhere both of them were equalas they were brunning and ascending on the ramp, and one of them shoved another and he fell and his leg was broken. And once the court saw thatpeople bwere coming topotential bdanger, they instituted thatpriests bwould removeashes from bthe altar onlyby means bof a lottery. There were four lotteries there,in the Temple, on a daily basis to determine the priests privileged to perform the various services, band this,determining which priest would remove the ashes, was bthe first lottery. /b, strongGEMARA: /strong The Gemara questions the original practice of holding a race to determine which priest would remove the ashes: bAnd what is the reason that the Sages did not initially institute a lottery forthe removal of the ashes as they did for other parts of the service? The Gemara answers: bInitiallythey bthought:Since it is ba serviceperformed bat night it would not be important tothe priests, and bnotmany of them would bcometo perform it, so a lottery would be unnecessary. Then, bwhen they saw thatmany priests bdidindeed bcome andthat bthey were coming to dangerby racing up the altar’s ramp, bthey instituted a lottery. /b,The Gemara poses a question against the assertion that nighttime Temple services did not normally require a lottery: bBut there isthe burning of the blimbsof burnt-offerings band the fatsof other offerings, bwhich is a servicethat is performed at bnight, andnevertheless bthe Sages instituted a lotteryfor that from the outset. The Gemara answers: The burning of those parts is not considered a nighttime service but bthe end of a daytime service,as the main part of the sacrificial service, the slaughtering and the sprinkling of blood, took place during the day.,The Gemara asks: If so, it could be argued that bthisservice of removing the ashes is balsonot a nighttime service but bthe start of a daytime service, as Rabbi Yoḥa said:If a priest has bsanctified his handsat night by washing them bfor the removal of the ashes, the next day,i.e., after daybreak, if he remained in the confines of the Temple, bhe need not sanctifyhis hands again, bbecause he already sanctifiedthem bat the start of the service.Apparently, the removal of the ashes, though performed at night, is considered the start of the next day’s service.,The Gemara responds by emending Rabbi Yoḥa’s statement: bSaythe following version of the end of Rabbi Yoḥa’s statement: bBecause he had already sanctifiedthem bat the outset for service.According to this formulation, Rabbi Yoḥa did not say that the removal of the ashes is considered the start of the following day’s service. Rather, he said that although the removal of the ashes is a nighttime service, since the priest sanctified his hands before performing that service, the sanctification remains in effect for the services performed after daybreak as well, since there is no interruption between the two activities., bSome saythat the original practice should be explained as follows: bInitially,the Sages bthoughtthat bsince there isa likelihood of being bovercome by sleepat that time of night, bnotmany priests bwould come. When they saw that they didindeed bcome andthat bthey were also coming to danger, the Sages instituted a lotteryfor this task. The Gemara asks: bBut there isthe burning of the blimbsof burnt-offerings band the fatsof other offerings, a service for bwhich there isthe same likelihood of being bovercome by sleep,and nevertheless bthe Sages instituted a lotteryfor that from the outset. The Gemara answers: bLying downto go to sleep late bis different from risingin the middle of the night. It is not as difficult to stay up late in order to burn limbs on the altar as it is to rise before dawn to remove the ashes from the altar.,The Gemara addresses the substance of the mishna’s claim: bBut was the ordiceto assign the removal of ashes by means of a lottery bdue to that reasoncited in the mishna, the matter of the dangerous incident? bThe ordicewas instituted bdue to this reason:There were other important tasks associated with the removal of the ashes that required a lottery in their own right, bas it was taughtin a ibaraita /i: The priest bwho was privileged toperform bthe removal of the ashes wasalso bprivileged with laying out the arrangement of woodon the altar and with placing bthe two logsthat were placed on the altar each morning. Since these were inherently important tasks, the only way to assign them was through a lottery, which would also determine who removed the ashes.,The Gemara answers: bRav Ashi said: There were twoseparate bordicesinstituted. bInitially,the Sages bthoughtthat priests bwould notcome forward to perform the task of removing the ashes. bOnce they saw thatmany priests bdid come andthat bthey were also coming to danger,the Sages binstituted a lotteryfor this task. bOnce they established a lotteryfor removing the ashes, the priests bdid not comeanymore. bThey said: Who saysthe lottery bwill fall in our favor?Therefore, they did not bother to come. bThenthe Sages binstituted forthe priests that bwhoever was privileged withperforming bthe removal of the ashes wouldalso bbe privileged with laying out the arrangement of woodon the altar and with placing the btwo logs, so thatthe importance of all these tasks combined would ensure that the priests bwould come and participate in the lottery. /b,§ It was taught in the mishna that before the lottery was instituted, bwhen there were manypriests who sought to perform the removal of the ashes, the first priest to reach within four cubits of the top of the altar was privileged with performing the removal of the ashes. bRav Pappa said:It is bobvious to methat the bfour cubitsthe mishna is referring to are not the four cubits adjacent to the ramp bon the ground,because bwe learnedin the mishna that the priests brun and ascend on the ramp,and not adjacent to the ramp. It is balso notreferring to the bfirstfour cubits from the foot of the ramp, because bwe learnedthat the priests brun and ascend on the ramp, and only afterwardit says: bAnypriest bwho precedes anotherand reaches within four cubits of the altar first, indicating that the competition begins only once they have ascended the ramp to some extent.,It is balso notreferring to four cubits somewhere in the bmiddle,between the four on the bottom and the top of the altar, because bthe matter is not definedand there is no clear indication which four cubits on the ramp are the determining cubits. In light of all this, it is bobvious to methat the four cubits bwe learnedin the mishna are referring to the four cubits bthat are adjacent to the altaritself. The priest who reaches those four cubits first is the one privileged to remove the ashes.,Rav Pappa braised a dilemmabased on the above clarification: Are the bfour cubits that they stated,which are the four cubits adjacent to the altar, calculated bincluding the cubit of the baseof the altar band the cubit ofits bledge,as the ramp continues and overlaps these two cubits at the top of the altar


Subjects of this text:

subject book bibliographic info
altar,altar,murder at Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 206, 207
altar,cleaning race Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 206, 207
amidah" '123.0_97.0@temple Reif (2006), Problems with Prayers: Studies in the Textual History of Early Rabbinic Liturgy, 97
aptowitzer,avigdor Klawans (2009), Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism, 182
asham. see reparation offering ashes' Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 192
benedictions/blessings Reif (2006), Problems with Prayers: Studies in the Textual History of Early Rabbinic Liturgy, 97
bu¨chler,adolph Klawans (2009), Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism, 227
case stories,stories,etiological Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 206, 207
competition Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 192
eschatology/end of time/messiah Reif (2006), Problems with Prayers: Studies in the Textual History of Early Rabbinic Liturgy, 97
greed,alleged of priests Klawans (2009), Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism, 182, 185, 227
hebrew,and aramaic,in rabbinic literature Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 133
high priesthood Klawans (2009), Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism, 227
idealization,of religiosity Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 192
incense Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 192
israel,people of,implication of,in the murder of zechariah Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 133
israel,people of,sinfulness of Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 133
jesus,temple incident of Klawans (2009), Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism, 227
josephus Klawans (2009), Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism, 227
judaea Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 311
lottery (pais) Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 192
mandel,pinhas Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 133
mishnah,narratives in,compared with tosefta Neusner (2003), Rabbinic Narrative: The Precedent and the Parable in Diachronic View. 293
moral defilement,of land or temple,in rabbinic literature Klawans (2009), Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism, 182, 185
narratives,compared,in mishnah and tosefta Neusner (2003), Rabbinic Narrative: The Precedent and the Parable in Diachronic View. 293
narratives,miscellaneous,in tosefta Neusner (2003), Rabbinic Narrative: The Precedent and the Parable in Diachronic View. 289
narratives,scriptural amplification,in tosefta Neusner (2003), Rabbinic Narrative: The Precedent and the Parable in Diachronic View. 289
narratives,temple-incidents,in tosefta Neusner (2003), Rabbinic Narrative: The Precedent and the Parable in Diachronic View. 289
narratives,types and forms of,in tosefta Neusner (2003), Rabbinic Narrative: The Precedent and the Parable in Diachronic View. 289
new moon witnesses,temple Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 206, 207
priesthood Reif (2006), Problems with Prayers: Studies in the Textual History of Early Rabbinic Liturgy, 97
priestly benediction Reif (2006), Problems with Prayers: Studies in the Textual History of Early Rabbinic Liturgy, 97
priests,alacrity of Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 192
priests,altar Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 206, 207
priests,rabbinic criticism of Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 133
priests,tosefta yoma Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 207
ritual purity,of temple,according to rabbis Klawans (2009), Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism, 182, 185
shiloh Klawans (2009), Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism, 182
stories,didactic,crisis narratives Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 206, 207
structure,violence narratives Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 206, 207
taqqanot,stories,etiological Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 206, 207
temple,as cosmos,destruction of Klawans (2009), Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism, 182, 185
temple,as ritually inadequate,in new testament Klawans (2009), Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism, 227
temple,first,destruction of Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 133
temple,murder at altar Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 206, 207
theft Klawans (2009), Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supersessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism, 182
tosefta,altar murder Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 206, 207
tosefta,narrative types and forms in Neusner (2003), Rabbinic Narrative: The Precedent and the Parable in Diachronic View. 289
tosefta,narratives in,compared with mishnah Neusner (2003), Rabbinic Narrative: The Precedent and the Parable in Diachronic View. 293
violence,narrative Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 206, 207
zadok,r. Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 207
zechariah (the priest),murder of Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 133