The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Index Database
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

Mishnah, Berachot, 5.1

nanOne should not stand up to say Tefillah except in a reverent state of mind. The pious men of old used to wait an hour before praying in order that they might direct their thoughts to God. Even if a king greets him [while praying] he should not answer him: even if a snake is wound round his heel he should not stop."

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

17 results
1. Hebrew Bible, Exodus, 19.8-19.9, 24.1 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

19.8. וַיַּעֲנוּ כָל־הָעָם יַחְדָּו וַיֹּאמְרוּ כֹּל אֲשֶׁר־דִּבֶּר יְהוָה נַעֲשֶׂה וַיָּשֶׁב מֹשֶׁה אֶת־דִּבְרֵי הָעָם אֶל־יְהוָה׃ 19.9. וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל־מֹשֶׁה הִנֵּה אָנֹכִי בָּא אֵלֶיךָ בְּעַב הֶעָנָן בַּעֲבוּר יִשְׁמַע הָעָם בְּדַבְּרִי עִמָּךְ וְגַם־בְּךָ יַאֲמִינוּ לְעוֹלָם וַיַּגֵּד מֹשֶׁה אֶת־דִּבְרֵי הָעָם אֶל־יְהוָה׃ 24.1. וַיִּרְאוּ אֵת אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְתַחַת רַגְלָיו כְּמַעֲשֵׂה לִבְנַת הַסַּפִּיר וּכְעֶצֶם הַשָּׁמַיִם לָטֹהַר׃ 24.1. וְאֶל־מֹשֶׁה אָמַר עֲלֵה אֶל־יְהוָה אַתָּה וְאַהֲרֹן נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא וְשִׁבְעִים מִזִּקְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְהִשְׁתַּחֲוִיתֶם מֵרָחֹק׃ 19.8. And all the people answered together, and said: ‘All that the LORD hath spoken we will do.’ And Moses reported the words of the people unto the LORD." 19.9. And the LORD said unto Moses: ‘Lo, I come unto thee in a thick cloud, that the people may hear when I speak with thee, and may also believe thee for ever.’ And Moses told the words of the people unto the LORD." 24.1. And unto Moses He said: ‘Come up unto the LORD, thou, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel; and worship ye afar off;"
2. Hebrew Bible, Numbers, 27.21 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

27.21. וְלִפְנֵי אֶלְעָזָר הַכֹּהֵן יַעֲמֹד וְשָׁאַל לוֹ בְּמִשְׁפַּט הָאוּרִים לִפְנֵי יְהוָה עַל־פִּיו יֵצְאוּ וְעַל־פִּיו יָבֹאוּ הוּא וְכָל־בְּנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל אִתּוֹ וְכָל־הָעֵדָה׃ 27.21. And he shall stand before Eleazar the priest, who shall inquire for him by the judgment of the Urim before the LORD; at his word shall they go out, and at his word they shall come in, both he, and all the children of Israel with him, even all the congregation.’"
3. Philo of Alexandria, On The Confusion of Tongues, 59 (1st cent. BCE - missingth cent. CE)

59. For these men no longer obey reason as their ruler, but God, the governor of the universe, by whom they are assisted so as to display their energies in actions rather than in words. For when they hear of others doing such and such things, these men, which is a thing most contrary to what one would expect, say that, from some inspiration of God, they will act first and obey afterwards; in order that they may seem to have advanced to good actions, not in consequence of instruction and admonition, but by their own spontaneous and self-taught mind. And then, when they have accomplished these actions, they say that they will obey in order that they may form an opinion of what they have done, as to whether their actions are consistent with the divine injunctions and the sacred admonitions of scripture. XIV.
4. Mishnah, Avot, 3.8-3.9 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

3.8. Rabbi Dostai ben Rabbi Yannai said in the name of Rabbi Meir: whoever forgets one word of his study, scripture accounts it to him as if he were mortally guilty, as it is said, “But take utmost care and watch yourselves scrupulously, so that you do not forget the things that you saw with your own eyes” (Deuteronomy 4:9). One could [have inferred that this is the case] even when his study proved [too] hard for him, therefore scripture says, “that they do not fade from your mind as long as you live” (ibid.). Thus, he is not mortally guilty unless he deliberately removes them from his heart." 3.9. Rabbi Hanina ben Dosa said: anyone whose fear of sin precedes his wisdom, his wisdom is enduring, but anyone whose wisdom precedes his fear of sin, his wisdom is not enduring. He [also] used to say: anyone whose deeds exceed his wisdom, his wisdom is enduring, but anyone whose wisdom exceeds his deeds, his wisdom is not enduring."
5. Mishnah, Berachot, 5.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

5.5. One who is praying and makes a mistake, it is a bad sign for him. And if he is the messenger of the congregation (the prayer leader) it is a bad sign for those who have sent him, because one’s messenger is equivalent to one’s self. They said about Rabbi Hanina ben Dosa that he used to pray for the sick and say, “This one will die, this one will live.” They said to him: “How do you know?” He replied: “If my prayer comes out fluently, I know that he is accepted, but if not, then I know that he is rejected.”"
6. Mishnah, Hagigah, 2.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

2.1. They may not expound upon the subject of forbidden relations in the presence of three. Nor the work of creation in the presence of two. Nor [the work of] the chariot in the presence of one, unless he is a sage and understands of his own knowledge. Whoever speculates upon four things, it would have been better had he not come into the world: what is above, what is beneath, what came before, and what came after. And whoever takes no thought for the honor of his creator, it would have been better had he not come into the world."
7. Mishnah, Megillah, 2.2 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

2.2. If one reads it with breaks, or naps [in between readings], he has fulfilled his obligation. If he was copying it, explaining it or correcting [a scroll of Esther], if he directed his heart, he has fulfilled his obligation, but if not, he has not fulfilled his obligation. If it was written with arsenic, with red chalk, with gum or with sulfate of copper, or on paper or on scratch paper, he has not fulfilled his obligation, unless it is written in Assyrian on parchment and in ink."
8. Mishnah, Menachot, 13.11 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

13.11. It is said of the olah of cattle, “An offering made by fire of pleasing odor” (Leviticus 1:9); and of the olah of birds, “An offering made by fire of pleasing odor (vs. 17); and of the minhah, “An offering made by fire of pleasing odor” (Leviticus 2:2): to teach you that it is the same whether one offers much or little, so long as one directs one’s heart to heaven. Congratulations! We have finished Tractate Menahot! It is a tradition at this point to thank God for helping us finish learning the tractate and to commit ourselves to going back and relearning it, so that we may not forget it and so that its lessons will stay with us for all of our lives. It is no accident that the last mishnah of the tractate finishes with the message that we learned today. After having learned 14 chapters of Zevahim and 13 chapters of Menahot, there is a grave danger that one could learn that all God cares about, and all that is important in Judaism, is bringing the proper sacrifice in the proper manner. Our mishnah teaches that the important issue is the proper intent, that one’s intent in sacrifice should be to worship God. This is not to deny that that the minutiae of rules are extremely important, both in the eyes of the rabbis and surely in the eyes of the priests who served in the Temple while it still stood. Rather, what today’s mishnah seems to say is that the rules are an outer manifestation of the inner kavannah, intent, of the worshipper. Without following the rules, there is no way to bring that intent into the world. But without the intent, the rules are just empty exercises devoid of meaning. I believe that this is a message that is as true of Judaism today as it was in Temple times. Mishnah Menahot has probably been a great challenge for many of you; I know it was for me. So please accept an extra congratulations on completing it. Tomorrow we begin Hullin, the one tractate in all of Seder Kodashim that does not deal with sacrifices or the Temple."
9. Mishnah, Rosh Hashanah, 3.7 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

3.7. One who blows into a pit or a cistern or a jug, if he heard the sound of the shofar, he has fulfilled his obligation, but if he hears the echo [also], he has not fulfilled his obligation. And also one who was passing behind a synagogue or if his house was next to the synagogue and he heard the sound of the shofar or of the megillah [being read], if he directed his heart (had intention), then he has fulfilled his obligation, but if not he has not fulfilled his obligation. Even though this one heard and this one heard, this one directed his heart and this one did not."
10. Mishnah, Sotah, 9.15 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

9.15. When Rabbi Meir died, the composers of fables ceased. When Ben Azzai died, the diligent students [of Torah] ceased. When Ben Zoma died, the expounders ceased. When Rabbi Joshua died, goodness ceased from the world. When Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel died, locusts come and troubles multiplied. When Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah died, the sages ceased to be wealthy. When Rabbi Akiba died, the glory of the Torah ceased. When Rabbi Hanina ben Dosa died, men of wondrous deeds ceased. When Rabbi Yose Katnuta died, the pious men (hasidim) ceased and why was his name called Katnuta? Because he was the youngest of the pious men. When Rabban Yoha ben Zakkai died, the splendor of wisdom ceased. When Rabban Gamaliel the elder died, the glory of the torah ceased, and purity and separateness perished. When Rabbi Ishmael ben Fabi died, the splendor of the priesthood ceased. When Rabbi died, humility and fear of sin ceased. Rabbi Phineas ben Yair says: when Temple was destroyed, scholars and freemen were ashamed and covered their head, men of wondrous deeds were disregarded, and violent men and big talkers grew powerful. And nobody expounds, nobody seeks, and nobody asks. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. Rabbi Eliezer the Great says: from the day the Temple was destroyed, the sages began to be like scribes, scribes like synagogue-attendants, synagogue-attendants like common people, and the common people became more and more debased. And nobody seeks. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. In the footsteps of the messiah insolence (hutzpah) will increase and the cost of living will go up greatly; the vine will yield its fruit, but wine will be expensive; the government will turn to heresy, and there will be no one to rebuke; the meeting-place [of scholars] will be used for licentiousness; the Galilee will be destroyed, the Gablan will be desolated, and the dwellers on the frontier will go about [begging] from place to place without anyone to take pity on them; the wisdom of the learned will rot, fearers of sin will be despised, and the truth will be lacking; youths will put old men to shame, the old will stand up in the presence of the young, “For son spurns father, daughter rises up against mother, daughter-in-law against mother-in-law a man’s own household are his enemies” (Micah 7:6). The face of the generation will be like the face of a dog, a son will not feel ashamed before his father. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair says, “Heedfulness leads to cleanliness, cleanliness leads to purity, purity leads to separation, separation leads to holiness, holiness leads to modesty, modesty leads to fear of sin, fear of sin leads to piety, piety leads to the Holy Spirit, The Holy Spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead, and the resurrection of the dead comes from Elijah, blessed be his memory, Amen.”"
11. Mishnah, Taanit, 3.8 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

3.8. For every trouble that should not come upon the community they sound a blast except on account of too much rain. It happened that they said to Honi the circle drawer: “Pray for rain to fall.” He replied: “Go and bring in the pesah ovens so that they do not dissolve.” He prayed and no rain fell. What did he do? He drew a circle and stood within it and exclaimed before Him: “Master of the universe, Your children have turned their faces to me because I am like one who was born in Your house. I swear by Your great name that I will not move from here until You have mercy upon Your children.” Rain then began to drip, and he exclaimed: “I did not request this but rain [which can fill] cisterns, ditches and caves. The rain then began to come down with great force, and he exclaimed: “I did not request this but pleasing rain of blessing and abudance.” Rain then fell in the normal way until the Jews in Jerusalem had to go up Temple Mount because of the rain. They came and said to him: “In the same way that you prayed for [the rain] to fall pray [now] for the rain to stop.” He replied: “Go and see if the stone of people claiming lost objects has washed away.” Rabbi Shimon ben Shetah sent to him: “Were you not Honi I would have excommunicated you, but what can I do to you, for you are spoiled before God and he does your will like a son that is spoiled before his father and his father does his request. Concerning you it is written, “Let your father and your mother rejoice, and let she that bore you rejoice” (Proverbs 23:25)."
12. Tosefta, Rosh Hashanah, 2.6 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

13. Anon., Sifre Deuteronomy, 32 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)

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

31a. אייתי כסא דמוקרא בת ארבע מאה זוזי ותבר קמייהו ואעציבו,רב אשי עבד הלולא לבריה חזנהו לרבנן דהוו קא בדחי טובא אייתי כסא דזוגיתא חיורתא ותבר קמייהו ואעציבו,אמרו ליה רבנן לרב המנונא זוטי בהלולא דמר בריה דרבינא לישרי לן מר אמר להו ווי לן דמיתנן ווי לן דמיתנן אמרי ליה אנן מה נעני בתרך א"ל הי תורה והי מצוה דמגנו עלן,א"ר יוחנן משום רשב"י אסור לאדם שימלא שחוק פיו בעולם הזה שנאמר (תהלים קכו, ב) אז ימלא שחוק פינו ולשוננו רנה אימתי בזמן שיאמרו בגוים הגדיל ה' לעשות עם אלה אמרו עליו על ר"ל שמימיו לא מלא שחוק פיו בעוה"ז מכי שמעה מר' יוחנן רביה:,ת"ר אין עומדין להתפלל לא מתוך דין ולא מתוך דבר הלכה אלא מתוך הלכה פסוקה,והיכי דמי הלכה פסוקה,אמר אביי כי הא דר' זירא דאמר ר' זירא בנות ישראל החמירו על עצמן שאפילו רואות טיפת דם כחרדל יושבת עליה שבעה נקיים,רבא אמר כי הא דרב הושעיא דאמר רב הושעיא מערים אדם על תבואתו ומכניסה במוץ שלה כדי שתהא בהמתו אוכלת ופטורה מן המעשר,ואב"א כי הא דרב הונא דא"ר הונא א"ר זעירא המקיז דם בבהמת קדשים אסור בהנאה ומועלין בו,רבנן עבדי כמתניתין רב אשי עביד כברייתא.,ת"ר אין עומדין להתפלל לא מתוך עצבות ולא מתוך עצלות ולא מתוך שחוק ולא מתוך שיחה ולא מתוך קלות ראש ולא מתוך דברים בטלים אלא מתוך שמחה של מצוה,וכן לא יפטר אדם מחברו לא מתוך שיחה ולא מתוך שחוק ולא מתוך קלות ראש ולא מתוך דברים בטלים אלא מתוך דבר הלכה שכן מצינו בנביאים הראשונים שסיימו דבריהם בדברי שבח ותנחומים,וכן תנא מרי בר בריה דרב הונא בריה דר' ירמיה בר אבא אל יפטר אדם מחבירו אלא מתוך דבר הלכה שמתוך כך זוכרהו,כי הא דרב כהנא אלוייה לרב שימי בר אשי מפום נהרא עד בי צניתא דבבל כי מטא להתם א"ל מר ודאי דאמרי אינשי הני צניתא דבבל איתנהו מאדם הראשון ועד השתא,א"ל אדכרתן מילתא דרבי יוסי ברבי חנינא דאמר ר' יוסי ברבי חנינא מאי דכתיב (ירמיהו ב, ו) בארץ אשר לא עבר בה איש ולא ישב אדם שם וכי מאחר דלא עבר היאך ישב אלא לומר לך כל ארץ שגזר עליה אדם הראשון לישוב נתישבה וכל ארץ שלא גזר עליה אדם הראשון לישוב לא נתישבה,רב מרדכי אלוייה לרב שימי בר אשי מהגרוניא ועד בי כיפי ואמרי לה עד בי דורא:,ת"ר המתפלל צריך שיכוין את לבו לשמים אבא שאול אומר סימן לדבר (תהלים י, יז) תכין לבם תקשיב אזנך,תניא א"ר יהודה כך היה מנהגו של ר"ע כשהיה מתפלל עם הצבור היה מקצר ועולה מפני טורח צבור וכשהיה מתפלל בינו לבין עצמו אדם מניחו בזוית זו ומוצאו בזוית אחרת וכל כך למה מפני כריעות והשתחויות:,א"ר חייא בר אבא לעולם יתפלל אדם בבית שיש בו חלונות שנאמר (דניאל ו, יא) וכוין פתיחן ליה וגו',יכול יתפלל אדם כל היום כלו כבר מפורש על ידי דניאל (דניאל ו, יא) וזמנין תלתא וגו',יכול משבא לגולה הוחלה כבר נאמר (דניאל ו, יא) די הוא עבד מן קדמת דנא,יכול יתפלל אדם לכל רוח שירצה ת"ל (דניאל ו, יא) (לקבל) [נגד] ירושלם,יכול יהא כוללן בבת אחת כבר מפורש ע"י דוד דכתיב (תהלים נה, יח) ערב ובקר וצהרים וגו',יכול ישמיע קולו בתפלתו כבר מפורש על ידי חנה שנאמר (שמואל א א, יג) וקולה לא ישמע,יכול ישאל אדם צרכיו ואח"כ יתפלל כבר מפורש על ידי שלמה שנאמר (מלכים א ח, כח) לשמוע אל הרנה ואל התפלה רנה זו תפלה תפלה זו בקשה אין אומר דבר (בקשה) אחר אמת ויציב אבל אחר התפלה אפי' כסדר וידוי של יה"כ אומר איתמר,נמי אמר רב חייא בר אשי אמר רב אע"פ שאמרו שואל אדם צרכיו בשומע תפלה אם בא לומר אחר תפלתו אפילו כסדר יום הכפורים אומר:, אמר רב המנונא כמה הלכתא גברוותא איכא למשמע מהני קראי דחנה (שמואל א א, יג) וחנה היא מדברת על לבה מכאן למתפלל צריך שיכוין לבו רק שפתיה נעות מכאן למתפלל שיחתוך בשפתיו וקולה לא ישמע מכאן שאסור להגביה קולו בתפלתו ויחשבה עלי לשכורה מכאן ששכור אסור להתפלל,ויאמר אליה עלי עד מתי תשתכרין וגו' א"ר אלעזר מכאן לרואה בחברו 31a. bHe brought a valuable cup worth four hundred izuzand broke it before them and they became sad. /b,The Gemara also relates: bRav Ashi made a weddingfeast bfor his sonand bhe saw the Sages, who were excessively joyous. He brought a cup ofextremely valuable bwhite glass and broke it before them, and they became sad. /b,Similarly, the Gemara relates: bThe Sages said to Rav Hamnuna Zuti at the weddingfeast bof Mar, son of Ravina: Let the Master sing for us.Since he believed that the merriment had become excessive, bhe said to them,singing: bWoe unto us, for we shall die, woe unto us, for we shall die. They said to him: What shall we respond after you?What is the chorus of the song? bHe said to them,you should respond: bWhere is Torah and where is mitzva that protect us? /b,In a similar vein, bRabbi Yoḥa said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: One is forbidden to fill his mouth with mirth in this world,as long as we are in exile ( ige’onim /i), bas it is stated:“When the Lord returns the captivity of Zion we will be as dreamers” (Psalms 126:1). Only b“then will our mouths fill with laughter and our lips with song”(Psalms 126:2). bWhenwill that joyous era arrive? When b“they will say among nations, the Lord has done great things with these”(Psalms 126:2). bThey said about Reish Lakish that throughout his life he did not fill his mouth with laughter in this world once he heard thisstatement bfrom his teacher, Rabbi Yoḥa. /b,We learned in the mishna that it is appropriate to stand and begin to pray from an atmosphere of gravity. Regarding this, bthe Sages taught: Onemay bneither standand begin to pray, directly bfrominvolvement in bjudgment nordirectly bfromdeliberation over the ruling in a bmatter of ihalakha /i,as his preoccupation with the judgment or the halakhic ruling will distract him from prayer. bRatherit is appropriate to pray directly bfrominvolvement in the study of bauniversally accepted bconclusive ihalakha /ithat leaves no room for further deliberation and will not distract him during prayer., bAndthe Gemara asks: bWhat is an exampleof a bconclusive ihalakha /i? /b,The Gemara offers several examples: bAbaye said:One blike this ihalakha bof Rabbi Zeira,as bRabbi Zeira said: The daughters of Israel were stringent with themselves;to the extent bthat even if they see a drop of blood corresponding tothe size of ba mustardseed bshe sits seven cleandays bfor it.By Torah law, a woman who witnesses the emission of blood during the eleven days following her fixed menstrual period is not considered a menstruating woman; rather she immerses herself and is purified the next day. However, the women of Israel accepted the stringency upon themselves that if they see any blood whatsoever, they act as it if were the blood of a izava /i, which obligates her to count seven more clean days before becoming ritually pure (see Leviticus 15:25).,Citing an additional example of a conclusive ihalakha /i, bRava said:One blike this ihalakha bof Rav Hoshaya, as Rav Hoshaya said: A person may employ artificeto circumvent obligations incumbent buponhim in dealing with bhis grain and bring it intothe courtyard bin its chaff so that his animal will eatfrom it, bandthe grain bis exemptfrom btithes. iHalakhadictates that one is obligated to tithe grain that has been threshed and piled, regardless of the ultimate purpose for which the grain was intended. By Torah law, one is exempt from tithing grain that was not threshed and is therefore still in its chaff. By rabbinic law, one is prohibited from eating this grain in the framework of a meal. Feeding animals is permitted without first tithing that grain., bAnd if you wish, sayinstead yet another example of a conclusive ihalakha /i, which is the recommended prelude to prayer. One blike this ihalakha bof Rav Huna,as bRav Huna saidthat bRabbi Zeira said: One who lets blood from a consecrated animalthat was consecrated as a sacrifice; deriving bbenefitfrom that blood bis prohibited.Although blood of an offering that was sprinkled on the altar is not considered Temple property, nevertheless, deriving benefit from the blood of a living, consecrated animal is considered prohibited use of Temple property. In so doing, bone misusesproperty consecrated to the Temple, and as in any other case of misusing Temple property, if he did so unwittingly, he is liable to bring a guilt-offering.,It is related that bthe Sages acted in accordance withthe opinion of bour mishnaand rose to pray from an atmosphere of gravity; bRav Ashi acted in accordance withthe opinion of bthe ibaraita /iand preceded his prayer with a conclusive ihalakha /i.,On the topic of proper preparation for prayer, bthe Sages taught: One may neither stand to pray froman atmosphere of bsorrow nor froman atmosphere of blaziness, nor froman atmosphere of blaughter, nor froman atmosphere of bconversation, nor froman atmosphere of bfrivolity, nor froman atmosphere of bpurposeless matters. Rather,one should approach prayer bfroman atmosphere imbued with bthe joy of a mitzva. /b, bSimilarly, a person should neither take leave of another froman atmosphere of bconversation, nor froman atmosphere of blaughter, nor froman atmosphere of bfrivolity, nor froman atmosphere of bpurposeless matters. Rather,one should take leave of another bfrominvolvement in a bmatter of ihalakha /i. As we found inthe books of the Bible dealing with bthe early prophets, that they would conclude their talks with words of praise and consolation. /b, bAnd so Mari, the grandson of Rav Huna, son of Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba, taught in a ibaraita /i: One should only take leave of another frominvolvement in a bmatter of ihalakha /i, so that, consequently, he will remember him;whenever he recalls the one from whom he took leave, he will think well of him because of the new ihalakhathat he taught him ( iEliyahu Zuta /i)., bAsin the incident related by the Gemara bthat Rav Kahana accompanied Rav Shimi bar Ashi fromthe town of bPum Nahara to the palm grovein bBabylonia. When he arrived there,Rav Kahana bsaid toRav Shimi bar Ashi: bMaster, what is meant by that which people say: These palm treesof bBabylonia have beenin this place from the time of bAdam the firstman buntil now? /b,Rav Shimi bar Ashi bsaid to him: You reminded me of something that Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina,said, bas Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: What isthe meaning of bthat which is written: “In a land through which no man has passed and where no person [ iadam /i] has settled”(Jeremiah 2:6)? This verse is difficult; bsince it isa land through which bnoperson bhas passed, howcould anyone bhave settledthere permanently? The statement that “no person has settled there” is redundant. bRather,this verse comes bto teachthat bevery landthrough bwhich Adam the firstman passed and bdecreed that it would be settled was settled, and every landthrough bwhichAdam passed and bdecreed that it would not be settled was not settled.Based on this, what people say is true, and the palm trees of Babylonia are from the time of Adam, meaning that from the time of Adam this land was decreed to be suitable for growing palm trees ( iMe’iri /i). The Gemara cited an example of how one who parts from another with Torah learns something new.,Having mentioned the mitzva for a student to accompany his Rabbi, the Gemara relates that bRav Mordekhai accompaniedhis mentor, bRav Shimi bar Ashi,a great distance, bfromthe city of bHagronya to Bei Keifei; and some saythat he accompanied from Hagronya bto Bei Dura. /b,Returning to the topic of preparation for prayer, bthe Sages taughtin the iTosefta /i: bOne who prays must focus his heart toward Heaven. Abba Shaul says: An indication ofthe importance of this bmatteris stated in the verse: “The desire of the humble You have heard, Lord; bdirect their hearts, Your ear will listen”(Psalms 10:17). In other words, if one focuses his heart in prayer as a result of God directing his heart, his prayer will be accepted as God’s ear will listen.,With regard to one’s intent during prayer, bit was taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Yehuda said: This was the custom of Rabbi Akiva, when he would pray with the congregation he would shortenhis prayer band go up, due tohis desire to avoid being an bencumbrance on the congregationby making them wait for him to finish his prayer. bBut when he prayed by himselfhe would extend his prayers to an extent that ba person would leaveRabbi Akiva alone bin one cornerof the study hall bandlater bfind himstill praying bin another corner. And whywould Rabbi Akiva move about bso much? Because of his bows and prostrations.Rabbi Akiva’s enthusiasm in prayer was so great, that as a result of his bows and prostrations, he would unwittingly move from one corner to the other (Rav Hai Gaon).,Many ihalakhotare derived from evoking the prayers of biblical characters. bRabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said: One should always pray in a house with windows, as it is statedregarding Daniel: “And when Daniel knew that the writing was signed, he went to his house. In his attic bthere were open windowsfacing Jerusalem, and three times a day he knelt upon his knees and prayed and gave thanks before his God, just as he had done before” (Daniel 6:11).,In the iTosefta /i, additional ihalakhotwere derived from Daniel’s prayer. I bmight havethought bthat one could prayas many times as he wishes bthroughout the entire day; it has already been articulated by Daniel,with regard to whom it is stated: b“And three timesa day he knelt upon his knees and prayed.” This teaches that there are fixed prayers., bI might have thought that thispractice of fixed prayer bbeganonly bwhen he came tothe Babylonian bexile; it was stated:“Just bas he had done before.” /b,Further, I bmight havethought bthat one may prayfacing bany direction he wishes; the verse states:The appropriate direction for prayer is b“facing Jerusalem.” /b,Daniel does not describe how these three prayers are distributed during the day. I bmight havethought bthat one may include allthree prayers bat one time; it has already been articulated by Davidthat one may not do so, bas it is written: “Evening and morning and noon,I pray and cry aloud and He hears my voice” (Psalms 55:18).,Furthermore, bI might havethought bthat one may make his voice heard in his iAmida bprayer; it has already been articulated by Hannahin her prayer, bas it is stated:“And Hannah spoke in her heart, only her lips moved band her voice could not be heard”(I Samuel 1:13)., iHalakhotregarding the order of the prayers were also learned from the prayers of biblical characters. I bmight havethought bthat one should request his own needs first, and afterwards recite prayersof thanksgiving and praise; bit has already been articulated by Solomonthat this is not so, as in Solomon’s prayer at the dedication of the Holy Temple bit is stated: “To hear the song and the prayerthat Your servant prays before You today” (I Kings 8:28). In this verse, bsong is prayerin the sense of thanks and praise, and bprayer isone’s brequestof his personal needs. Therefore, one who is praying bdoes not speak matters of request afterhe began to recite iemet veyatziv /iprior to the iAmidaprayer, which is the essence of prayer. Rather, he begins with praise in the first three blessings of the iAmidaprayer, and only thereafter does he include requests for his needs. bBut after the iAmida bprayerthere is no limit. If he desires to recite beven the equivalent of the order of the confession of Yom Kippur,he may breciteit.,This bwas also statedby an iamora /i; bRav Ḥiyya bar Ashi saidthat bRav said: Althoughthe Sages bsaidthat bone requests hispersonal bneeds inthe blessing: bWho listens to prayer,that is with regard to one who wishes to do so as part of the iAmidaprayer. bIf he comesto add band reciteadditional requests baftercompleting bhis iAmida bprayer, evenif his personal requests are bthe equivalent of the order of the confession of Yom Kippur,he may brecitethem., bRav Hamnuna said: How many significant ihalakhot bcan be derived from these versesof the prayer bof Hannah?As it says: “And Hannah spoke in her heart, only her lips moved and her voice could not be heard, so Eli thought her to be drunk” (I Samuel 1:13). The Gemara elaborates: bFromthat which is stated bhere: “And Hannah spoke in her heart,”the ihalakhathat bone who prays must focus his hearton his prayer is derived. And bfromthat which is stated bhere: “Only her lips moved,”the ihalakhathat bone who prays must enunciatethe words bwith his lips,not only contemplate them in his heart, is derived. bFromthat which is written bhere: “And her voice could not be heard,”the ihalakhathat bone is forbidden to raise his voice in his iAmida bprayeras it must be recited silently. bFromthe continuation of the verse bhere: “So Eli thought her to be drunk,”the ihalakhathat ba drunk person is forbidden to pray.That is why he rebuked her.,On the subject of Eli’s rebuke of Hannah, as it is stated: b“And Eli said to her: How long will you remain drunk?Remove your wine from yourself” (I Samuel 1:14); bRabbi Elazar said: From herethe ihalakhathat bone who sees in another /b
15. Babylonian Talmud, Hagigah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

22b. לעצמו טהרנו,אבל נטהר את הכלי שטהרתו לך ולו,תניא א"ר יהושע בושני מדבריכם ב"ש אפשר אשה לשה בעריבה אשה ועריבה טמאין שבעה ובצק טהור לוגין מלא משקין [לוגין] טמא טומאת שבעה ומשקין טהורין,נטפל לו תלמיד אחד מתלמידי ב"ש אמר לו אומר לך טעמן של ב"ש אמר לו אמור אמר לו כלי טמא חוצץ או אינו חוצץ א"ל אינו חוצץ כלי של עם הארץ טמא או טהור אמר לו טמא ואם אתה אומר לו טמא כלום משגיח עליך ולא עוד אלא שאם אתה אומר לו טמא אומר לך שלי טהור ושלך טמא,וזהו טעמן של ב"ש,מיד הלך ר' יהושע ונשתטח על קברי ב"ש אמר נעניתי לכם עצמות ב"ש ומה סתומות שלכם כך מפורשות על אחת כמה וכמה אמרו כל ימיו הושחרו שיניו מפני תעניותיו,קתני מיהת לך ולו אלמא שאלינן מינייהו כי שיילינן מינייהו מטבלינן להו,אי הכי ניהדרו להו ב"ה לב"ש כי שאלינן מינייהו מטבלינן להו טמא מת בעי הזאה ג' וז' ומנא לז' יומי לא מושלי אינשי,ואטבילה לא מהימני והתניא נאמנין עמי הארץ על טהרת טבילת טמא מת,אמר אביי ל"ק הא בגופו הא בכליו רבא אמר אידי ואידי בכליו ולא קשיא הא דאמר מעולם לא הטבלתי כלי בתוך כלי והא דאמר הטבלתי אבל לא הטבלתי בכלי שאין בפיו כשפופרת הנוד,והתניא נאמן עם הארץ לומר פירות לא הוכשרו אבל אינו נאמן לומר פירות הוכשרו אבל לא נטמאו,ואגופו מי מהימן והתניא חבר שבא להזות מזין עליו מיד עם הארץ שבא להזות אין מזין עליו עד שיעשה בפנינו שלישי ושביעי,אלא אמר אביי מתוך חומר שהחמרת עליו בתחילתו הקלת עליו בסופו:,אחורים ותוך: מאי אחורים ותוך,כדתנן כלי שנטמא אחוריו במשקין אחוריו טמאין תוכו אוגנו אזנו וידיו טהורין נטמא תוכו כולו טמא:,ובית הצביטה וכו': מאי בית הצביטה א"ר יהודה אמר שמואל מקום שצובטו וכן הוא אומר (רות ב, יד) ויצבט לה קלי רבי אסי א"ר יוחנן מקום שנקיי הדעת צובעין,תני רב ביבי קמיה דר"נ כל הכלים אין להם אחורים ותוך אחד קדשי המקדש ואחד קדשי הגבול א"ל קדשי הגבול מאי נינהו תרומה והתנן אחורים ותוך ובית הצביטה לתרומה,דלמא לחולין שנעשו על טהרת הקודש קאמרת,אדכרתן מילתא דאמר רבה בר אבוה אחת עשרה מעלות שנו כאן שש ראשונות בין לקודש בין לחולין שנעשו על טהרת הקודש אחרונות לקודש אבל לא לחולין שנעשו על טהרת הקודש:,הנושא את המדרס נושא את התרומה אבל לא את הקודש: קודש מאי טעמא לא משום מעשה שהיה דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל מעשה באחד שהיה מעביר חבית של יין קודש ממקום למקום 22b. bwe declaredthem bpure forthe iam ha’aretz bhimself,not for iḥaverim /i, since iḥaverimin any event do not consider anything touched by an iam ha’aretzto be pure. A iḥaverwould therefore never relate to the food of an iam ha’aretzas pure, and he would not use the earthenware vessels of an iam ha’aretzfor preparation of pure food, since an earthenware vessel cannot be purified through immersion. However, he might borrow a metal vessel, for instance, and purify it through immersion before using it for pure food., bButhow bcan we purify a vesselof metal and other materials, bwhose puritywould be relevant both bfor you and for him?A iḥavermay one day borrow a metal vessel from the iam ha’aretz /i, and not realize that it was once inside an earthenware vessel in the same room as a corpse and as a result requires extensive purification from corpse contamination through the ashes of the red heifer, rather than mere immersion. Therefore, the iam ha’aretzis informed that his vessels of metal and other materials have contracted impurity from the corpse, and must undergo the extensive purification process, and after this is done these vessels will now be fit for use of the iḥaverafter mere immersion., bIt is taughtin a ibaraitawith regard to this debate between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel: bRabbi Yehoshua said: I am ashamed of your words, Beit Shammai,for they are illogical. Is it bpossiblethat there should be a corpse on the first floor, with an earthenware vessel blocking the opening to the second story, and ba womanis standing upstairs bkneadingdough bin ametal bbowl,and the bwoman and the bowl are impurefor bsevendays owing to the impurity of the corpse, bwhilethe bdoughinside the trough bis pure?For that would be the result according to Beit Shammai, who distinguishes between food and earthenware vessels on the one hand and metal vessels on the other. Similarly: Is it possible that there is bametal bpitcher [ ilogin /i] full of liquidin the second story, and the bpitchershould be bimpure with impurity of sevendays, bwhile the liquidsremain bpure? /b,After Rabbi Yehoshua posed this question, bone student from among the students of Beit Shammai approached himand bsaid to him: I will tell you Beit Shammai’s reasoning. He said to him: Speak. He said to him: Does an impure vessel serve as a barrierto corpse contamination bor does it not serve as a barrier?Rabbi Yehoshua bsaid to him: It does not serve as a barrier.The student asked further: And bis a vessel of an iam ha’aretzpure or impure? He said to him: Impure.The student responded: bAnd if you tell himthat his vessel bis impure, will he pay attention to you at all?Clearly he will not. bWhat is more, if you say to himthat it is bimpure, he will say to you:On the contrary, bmyvessel bis pure and yours is impure. /b, bAnd that is Beit Shammai’s reasoning:Food, drink, and earthenware vessels inside a sealed earthenware vessel remain pure, as, since they belong to an iam ha’aretz /i, a iḥaverwill not eat the food or borrow the earthenware vessel. Vessels of metal or similar materials may one day be borrowed by a iḥaver /i, however, and therefore Beit Shammai declared these to be impure.,Once he heard the logic behind Beit Shammai’s opinion, bRabbi Yehoshua immediately went and prostrated himself on the graves of Beit Shammai,i.e., the students and proponents of Shammai, and bsaid: I humble myself before you, bones of Beit Shammai. If suchclarity and wisdom is bfound in yourrulings that you stated and left bunexplained, all the more somust this be the case bin yourrulings when they were stated and bexplained.People bsaidof Rabbi Yehoshua: bThroughout his days his teeth darkened because ofall bhis faststhat he undertook to atone for having spoken inappropriately of Beit Shammai.,The Gemara returns to its main point. bIn any event,this mishna bteachesthat the status of the vessels of an iam ha’aretzis relevant both bfor you and for him. Apparently,then, bwe iḥaverim bmay borrowvessels bfrom iamei ha’aretz /i. The question therefore arises: Why are the Sages not concerned that iamei ha’aretzmay immerse vessels inside of other vessels in an inappropriate way, so that they will remain unpurified when borrowed by a iḥaver /i? The Gemara answers: bFor when we iḥaverim bborrowvessels bfrom them we immerse thembefore using them. It is therefore inconsequential to us if their vessels were not immersed properly beforehand.,The Gemara asks: bIf so, let Beit Hillel respond to Beit Shammai.They can respond as follows: bWhen we borrowvessels bfrom them we immerse them,and that is why we rule that vessels of metal or similar materials are pure. The Gemara explains: That dispute is referring to the impurity of a corpse. bAnd that which becomes impure byproximity to ba corpse requires sprinklingof the red heifer’s ashes on the bthird and seventhdays of its purification, band people do notgenerally blend vessels for seven days.The solution the iḥaverimplements of immersing vessels that he borrows from an iam ha’aretzis effective only for other impurities, but not for the impurity imparted by a corpse.,The Gemara poses a question with regard to the ihalakhathat a iḥavermust immerse vessels that he borrows from an iam ha’aretz /i: bButis it so that iamei ha’aretz bare not trusted with regard to immersion? Isn’t it taughtin a ibaraita /i: iAmei ha’aretzare trusted with regard to the purificationprocess bof immersion of that which has become impure bycontact with ba corpse?In addition to being sprinkled with purification water on the third and seventh days, a person or article that has been in contact with a corpse must also undergo immersion on the seventh day. An iam ha’aretzis believed when he says that he has performed this immersion.,The Gemara presents two answers for this question. bAbaye saidone answer: This is bnot difficult. This ibaraita /i, which teaches that an iam ha’aretzis trusted, is referring btothe immersion of bhis body,whereas bthisteaching of the Gemara that iamei ha’aretzare not trusted concerning immersion deals bwith his vessels. Rava saida different answer: Both bthis and that,both the ibaraitaand the Gemara’s teaching, refer btothe bvesselsof an iam ha’aretz /i, band it isnevertheless bnot difficult. This ibaraita /i, which teaches that an iam ha’aretzis trusted, is referring to an iam ha’aretz bwho said: I never immersed one vessel inside another,which is a statement that we accept. bAnd thisteaching of the Gemara that iamei ha’aretzare not trusted deals with one bwho said: I have immersedvessels inside of other vessels, bbut I did not immerse with a vessel whose mouth does not havethe width of bthe tube of a wineskin.It is with regard to such details that an iam ha’aretzcannot be trusted., bAnd so it was taughtin a ibaraitato this effect: bAn iam ha’aretzis trusted to saythat bproduce has not been made susceptibleto impurity, i.e., that it has never come into contact with water, bbut he is not trusted to saythat the bproduce has been made susceptibleto impurity bbut has notactually bbecome impure.This ibaraitashows that iamei ha’aretzare trusted concerning basic facts, but not concerning matters that require detailed knowledge and scrupulous care.,The Gemara poses a question with regard to Abaye’s opinion: bAnd isan iam ha’aretzreally btrustedconcerning bhis body,when he claims to have immersed? bIsn’t it taughtin a ibaraita /i: Concerning ba iḥaverwho comesbefore those in charge of sprinkling water of purification bto be sprinkledwith that water, and claims that the requisite three days have passed since his contamination by a corpse, bthey may sprinkle upon him immediately. Butconcerning ban iam ha’aretzwho comesbefore them and claims that three days have passed, bthey may not sprinkle upon him until he performsand counts bin our presencethe bthirdday bandthe bseventhday? This shows that an iam ha’aretzis not trusted concerning the purity of his own body., bRather, Abaye said,modifying his previous explanation: bBecause of the stringency that you applied tothe iam ha’aretz bin his beginning,i.e., at the beginning of the purification process, by not allowing him to purify himself without first ensuring that he has not been in contact with a corpse for three days, byoumay bbe lenient with him in his end,in that he is trusted regarding having immersed at the end of the seven days, removing the impurity contracted through contact with a corpse.,§ The mishna teaches: The ihalakhotof bthe backof a vessel bandits binsideapply to vessels used for iteruma /i, but not for sacrificial food. The Gemara asks: bWhat isthe meaning of: bThe back andits binside? /b,The Gemara explains. bAs we learnedin a mishna ( iKeilim25:6): bA vessel whose backpart, as opposed to its inside, bwas defiled bycontact with impure bliquid. Its back is impure,while its other parts, such as bits inside, its rim, its ear-shaped handles, and itsstraight bhandles are pure.By Torah law, foods and liquids cannot impart ritual impurity to a vessel at all, but by rabbinic law liquids can. In order to clarify that it is only a rabbinic decree, they instituted that the impurity thereby imparted, if the liquid touched the outside of the vessel, should affect only the part touched by the liquid, but not its inside or the other parts of its outside. However, if bits inside was defiled,even by impurity only according to rabbinic law, bit is all impure.This ihalakhaapplies only to iteruma /i, but regarding offerings, the defilement of any part of the vessel renders it all impure.,§ The mishna teaches: bAnd its place for gripping.The Gemara asks: bWhat isthe meaning of: bPlace for gripping [ ibeit hatzevita /i]? Rav Yehuda saidthat bShmuel said:It is the bplacewhere bhegrips the vessel in order to bpass [ itzovet /i]it, a kind of indentation used for grasping the vessel. bAnd similarly it states: “And he pinched [ ivayitzbat /i] some parched corn for her”(Ruth 2:14), which means that he gave her a little of the corn. Therefore, the term is referring to a place on the vessel used to grasp it. bRabbi Asisaid that bRabbi Yoḥa said:It is the bplace that fastidious peopleuse for bdipping.A small receptacle for spices and the like would be attached to the sides of vessels for dipping one’s food., bRav Beivai taughtthe following ibaraita bbefore Rav Naḥman: No vessels havethis difference between bthe back and inside, whetherthey are vessels used for bconsecratedfoods bof the Temple orthose used for bconsecratedfoods bof outlying areas,i.e., outside the Temple. In these cases, if one of the parts of the vessel was defiled with impure liquids the entire vessel becomes impure. Rav Naḥman bsaid to him: What are these consecratedfoods bof outlying areasmentioned in the ibaraita /i? This term is usually applied to iteruma /i,but if so the ibaraitacontradicts the mishna. For bdidn’t we learnin the mishna: The ihalakhotof bthe backof a vessel bandits binside and its place for grippingapply btovessels used for iteruma /i? /b,Rav Naḥman continued: bPerhapswhen you said the consecrated foods of outlying areas you were not referring to iteruma /i, but rather byou are speaking of non-sacredfood bprepared according to thestandards of bpurity of sacrificialfood, and you called them consecrated foods of outlying areas because this level of purity can be observed outside the Temple as well.,In the course of this discussion Rav Naḥman said to Rav Beivai: bYou havenow breminded meof something that bRabba bar Avuh saidconcerning this issue: bThey taught eleven stringenciesof sacrificial food bherein the mishna. The bfirst sixapply bboth to sacrificialfood band to non-sacredfood bprepared according to thestandards of bpurity of sacrificialfood, whereas bthe lastfive bapplyonly bto sacrificialfood bs but not to non-sacredfood bprepared according to thestandards of bpurity of sacrificialfood. Rabba bar Avuh’s statement therefore corroborates the interpretation of the ibaraitaas dealing with non-sacred food prepared according to the standards of purity of sacrificial foods.,§ The mishna teaches: bOne who carries an object troddenby a izavmay bcarry iteruma /iat the same time, if he is careful that neither he nor the impure object come into contact with the iteruma /i, bbutthis may bnotbe done with bsacrificialfood. The Gemara asks: Concerning bsacrificialfood, bwhat is the reasonthat he may bnotcarry it? As long as contact with the food is prevented, why should he not carry sacrificial food as well? The Gemara answers: This enactment was made bdue to an incident that occurred. As Rav Yehuda saidthat bShmuel said:There was once ban incident involving someone who was transferring a barrel of sacrificial wine from one place to another, /b
16. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

46b. ולא היו מתאבלין אבל אוננין שאין אנינות אלא בלב:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big תנו רבנן אילו נאמר חטא ותלית הייתי אומר תולין אותו ואחר כך ממיתין אותו כדרך שהמלכות עושה תלמוד לומר (דברים כא, כב) והומת ותלית ממיתין אותו ואח"כ תולין אותו הא כיצד משהין אותו עד סמוך לשקיעת החמה וגומרין את דינו וממיתין אותו ואח"כ תולין אותו אחד קושר ואחד מתיר כדי לקיים מצות תלייה,ת"ר (דברים כא, כב) עץ שומע אני בין בתלוש בין במחובר ת"ל (דברים כא, כג) כי קבר מי שאינו מחוסר אלא קבורה יצא זה שמחוסר קציצה וקבורה,ר' יוסי אומר מי שאינו מחוסר אלא קבורה יצא זה שמחוסר תלישה וקבורה ורבנן תלישה לאו כלום היא:,כלומר מפני מה זה תלוי מפני שבירך כו': תניא אומר ר"מ משלו משל למה הדבר דומה לשני אחים תאומים בעיר אחת אחד מינוהו מלך ואחד יצא לליסטיות צוה המלך ותלאוהו כל הרואה אותו אומר המלך תלוי צוה המלך והורידוהו:,אמר ר' מאיר כו': מאי משמע אמר אביי כמאן דאמר קל לית אמר ליה רבא א"כ כבד עלי ראשי כבד עלי זרועי מיבעי ליה אלא אמר רבא כמאן דאמר קיל לי עלמא,האי מיבעי ליה לגופה א"כ נימא קרא מקלל מאי קללת ואימא כוליה להכי הוא דאתא א"כ נימא קרא קלת מאי קללת ש"מ תרתי:,ולא זו בלבד כו': א"ר יוחנן משום ר"ש בן יוחי מנין למלין את מתו שעובר עליו בל"ת ת"ל כי קבר תקברנו מכאן למלין את מתו שעובר בלא תעשה,איכא דאמרי אמר רבי יוחנן משום ר"ש בן יוחי רמז לקבורה מן התורה מניין ת"ל כי קבר תקברנו מכאן רמז לקבורה מן התורה,א"ל שבור מלכא לרב חמא קבורה מה"ת מניין אישתיק ולא א"ל ולא מידי אמר רב אחא בר יעקב אימסר עלמא בידא דטפשאי דאיבעי ליה למימר כי קבור,דליעבד ליה ארון תקברנו לא משמע ליה,ונימא מדאיקבור צדיקי מנהגא בעלמא מדקבריה הקב"ה למשה דלא לישתני ממנהגא,ת"ש (מלכים א יד, יג) וספדו לו כל ישראל וקברו אותו דלא לישתני ממנהגא,(ירמיהו טז, ד) לא יספדו ולא יקברו לדומן על פני האדמה יהיו דלישתנו ממנהגא,איבעיא להו קבורה משום בזיונא הוא או משום כפרה הוא,למאי נפקא מינה דאמר לא בעינא דליקברוה לההוא גברא אי אמרת משום בזיונא הוא לא כל כמיניה ואי אמרת משום כפרה הוא הא אמר לא בעינא כפרה מאי,ת"ש מדאיקבור צדיקי ואי אמרת משום כפרה צדיקי לכפרה צריכי אין דכתיב (קהלת ז, כ) אדם אין צדיק בארץ אשר יעשה טוב ולא יחטא,ת"ש וספדו לו כל ישראל וקברו אותו ואי אמרת כי היכי דתיהוי ליה כפרה הנך נמי ליקברו כי היכי דתיהוי להו כפרה האי דצדיק הוא תיהוי ליה כפרה הנך לא ליהוי להו כפרה,ת"ש לא יספדו ולא יקברו דלא תיהוי להו כפרה,איבעיא להו הספידא יקרא דחיי הוי או יקרא דשכבי הוי למאי נפקא מינה דאמר לא תספדוה לההוא גברא אי נמי לאפוקי מיורשין,ת"ש (בראשית כג, ב) ויבא אברהם לספוד לשרה ולבכותה ואי אמרת משום יקרא דחיי הוא משום יקרא דאברהם משהו לה לשרה שרה גופה ניחא לה כי היכי דמייקר בה אברהם,ת"ש וספדו לו כל ישראל וקברו אותו ואי אמרת משום יקרא דחיי הוא הנך בני יקרא נינהו ניחא להו לצדיקיא דמייקרי בהו אינשי,ת"ש לא יספדו ולא יקברו לא ניחא לצדיקיא דמייקרי ברשיעייא,תא שמע (ירמיהו לד, ה) בשלום תמות ובמשרפות אבותיך המלכים הראשונים אשר היו לפניך כן ישרפו לך והוי אדון יספדו לך ואי אמרת משום יקרא דחיי הוא מאי נפקא ליה מיניה הכי קאמר ליה לייקרו ביך ישראל כי היכי דמתייקרי באבהתך 46b. bAndthe relatives of the executed man bwould not mournhim with the observance of the usual mourning rites, so that his unmourned death would atone for his transgression; bbut they would grieveover his passing, bsince grief isfelt bonly in the heart. /b, strongGEMARA: /strong bThe Sages taughtin a ibaraita /i: bWere it stated:And if a man has committed ba sinworthy of death byou shall hanghim on a tree, bI would have saidthat first bthey hang him andonly bafterward they put him to death, the way thegentile bgovernment does,executing the transgressor by hanging. Therefore, bthe verse states:“And if a man has committed a sin worthy of death, band he is put to death, and you shall hanghim on a tree” (Deuteronomy 21:22), teaching that first bthey put him to death, andonly bafterward they hang him. How so? They delaythe verdict buntilit is bnearto bsunset, andthen bthey conclude his judgment, and they put him to death, andimmediately bafterward hang him. One tieshim to the hanging post, band anotherimmediately buntieshim, bin order to fulfill the mitzva of hangingthe corpse of the executed transgressor., bThe Sages taught:From the verse: “And you shall hang him on ba tree,” Iwould bderivethat the body may be hung beitheron a tree that has been bdetachedfrom the ground boron one that is still battachedto the ground. Therefore, bthe verse states:“His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, bbut you shall buryhim [ikavor /i itikberennu /i] that day” (Deuteronomy 21:23). Based on the doubled verb, it is derived that not only must the transgressor’s body be buried, but the tree on which it is hung must also be buried. As the verse employs the same term to instruct that both must be buried, the verse teaches that the corpse must be hung on a tree bthathas already been detached from the ground and bis lacking only burial,just as the corpse is lacking only burial. This serves to bexcludehanging the corpse on a tree bthatis still attached to the ground and bis lackingboth bcutting down and burial. /b, bRabbi Yosei says:The tree upon which the corpse is hung is not sunk into the ground; rather, it is leaned against a wall, as the verse teaches that the tree must be blacking only burial.This serves to bexcludehanging the corpse on a tree bthat is lackingboth bdetachment and burial. And the Rabbissay: bDetachingfrom the ground a tree that had already been cut down and was later sunk back into the ground bis nothing,i.e., it is an insignificant act.,§ The mishna teaches: bThat is to say:Were the dead man’s corpse to remain hanging, reminding everyone of his transgression, people would ask: bFor whatreason bwas this one hung?They would be answered: bBecause he blessedGod, a euphemism for blasphemy, and the name of Heaven would be desecrated. bIt is taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Meir says:The Sages btold a parable: To what is this matter comparable?It is comparable bto two brotherswho were btwinsand lived bin the same city. One was appointed king, while the other went out toengage in bbanditry. The king commandedthat his brother be punished, band they hangedhis twin brother for his crimes. bAnyone who sawthe bandit hanging bwould say: The kingwas bhanged. The king,therefore, bcommandedthat his brother be taken down, band they tookthe bandit bdown.Similarly, people are created in God’s image, and therefore God is disgraced when a corpse is hung for a transgression that the person has committed.,The mishna teaches that bRabbi Meir saidthat the phrase “For he that is hung is a curse [ ikilelat /i] of God” should be understood as follows: When a man suffers in the wake of his sin, the Divine Presence says: I am distressed [ ikallani /i] about My head, I am distressed about My arm. The Gemara asks: bFrom whereis this binferred?How does Rabbi Meir understand the word ikilelat /i? bAbaye says:When a man is hung after he is put to death, God is blike one who said: I am not light [ ikal leit /i],meaning: My head is heavy for Me, My arm is heavy for Me. God is in distress when He has to administer punishment. bRava said to him: If so, he should havesaid explicitly: bMy head is heavy for Me, My arm is heavy for Me. Rather, Rava said:When a man is hung after he is put to death, God is blike one who said: The world is light for me [ ikil li alma /i],meaning: I am light, and therefore the world is heavy for Me, and I am in distress.,The Gemara asks: bThisword “ ikilelat /i” bis needed forwhat it bitselfteaches, namely that a blasphemer is hung after he has been stoned. How, then, can it be interpreted as alluding to God’s distress at the death of a transgressor? The Gemara answers: bIf so, the verse should have stated: One who curses [ imekallel]. Whatis the meaning of ikilelat /i?It serves to teach the statement taught by Rabbi Meir. The Gemara asks: If so, bsayperhaps that bthe entireverse bcomes for thispurpose, to underscore the dignity of the transgressor, who was created in God’s image, and not to teach the ihalakhagoverning a blasphemer. The Gemara responds: bIf so, the verse should have stated: Lightness [ ikilat /i]. Whatis the meaning of ikilelat /i? Conclude twoconclusions bfrom it:Conclude that the blasphemer is hung after he has been stoned, and conclude that God is distressed at the death of a transgressor.,§ The mishna teaches that everyone, bnot onlyan executed transgressor, must be buried on the day of his death, if that is at all possible. bRabbi Yoḥa says in the name of Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai: From whereis it derived bthat one who leaves his deceasedrelative bovernightwithout burying him btransgresses a prohibition? The verse states: “But you shall bury him [ ikavor tikberennu /i]”(Deuteronomy 21:23), doubling the verb for emphasis. bFrom hereit is derived bthat one who leaves his deceasedrelative bovernightwithout burying him btransgresses a prohibition. /b, bThere arethose bwho saythat bRabbi Yoḥa says in the name of Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai: From where in the Torah is there a hint tothe mitzva of bburial? The verse states: “But you shall bury him [ ikavor tikberennu /i],”doubling the verb for emphasis. bFrom here there is a hint tothe mitzva of bburial in the Torah. /b,The Gemara relates: bKing Shapur,the monarch of Persia, once bsaid to Rav Ḥama: From where in the Torah is there a hint tothe mitzva of bburial?What proof is there that the dead must be buried and not treated in some other manner? Rav Ḥama bwas silent and said nothing to him,as he could not find a suitable source. bRav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: The world has been handed over to the foolish, asRav Ḥama bshould have saidto King Shapur that the mitzva of burial is derived from the verse: b“But you shall buryhim” (Deuteronomy 21:23).,The Gemara explains: In that case, King Shapur could have replied that the verse merely proves bthat a coffin should be made forthe deceased so that he can be placed in it, not that the deceased should be buried in the ground, as the verse could be understood as instructing that the corpse be placed in some sort of receptacle, not in the ground. The Gemara challenges: Rav Ḥama could still have claimed that the mitzva of burial is derived from the doubled verb “you shall bbury him[ ikavor btikberennu/i b].”The Gemara answers: In that case, King Shapur could have replied that bhe does not learnanything from a doubled verb, which seems to be merely a stylistic choice and not the source of a new ihalakha /i.,The Gemara asks: bBut letRav Ḥama bsaythat the mitzva to bury the dead is derived bfromthe fact bthat the righteousforefathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, bwereall bburied.The Gemara answers: King Shapur could have said that this was bmerely a customof the time, but not a mitzva. The Gemara asks: Rav Ḥama could have derived the mitzva bfromthe fact bthat the Holy One, Blessed be He, buried Moses,which proves that this is the proper way to handle the dead. The Gemara answers: King Shapur could still have said that God acted in this manner bin order not to deviate from thegeneral bcustom,but this does not prove that burying the dead is a mitzva.,The Gemara suggests: bComeand bheara proof that burying the dead is a mitzva, as the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite said about Abijah, son of Jeroboam: b“And all Israel shall eulogize him and bury him”(I Kings 14:13). The Gemara answers: From here, too, there is no proof, as they may have buried Abijah bin order not to deviate from thegeneral bcustomof the world, and not because they were required to do so.,The Gemara proposes another proof: Jeremiah pronounced a curse upon the wicked, saying: b“They shall not be eulogized, nor shall they be buried; but they shall be as dung upon the face of the earth”(Jeremiah 16:4), which proves that when no curse has been pronounced, the dead should be buried. The Gemara rejects this proof: From here, too, there is no proof that it is a mitzva to bury the dead, as Jeremiah cursed the wicked, saying bthat they would deviate from thegeneral bcustomand not be buried. Due to all these difficulties, Rav Ḥama was unable to adduce incontrovertible proof that there is a mitzva to bury the dead.,§ bA dilemma was raised beforethe Sages: bIs burialobligatory bon account of disgrace,i.e., so that the deceased should not suffer the disgrace of being left exposed as his body begins to decompose, bor is it on account of atonement,i.e., so that the deceased will achieve atonement by being returned to the ground from which he was formed?,The Gemara asks: bWhat is thepractical bdifferencethat arises from knowing the reason that burial is necessary? The Gemara answers: There is a difference in a case bwhereone bsaidbefore he died: bI do not want them to bury that man,i.e., myself. bIf you saythat burial bisrequired bon account of disgrace, it is not in hispower to waive his own burial, as his family shares in the disgrace. bBut if you saythat burial bisrequired bon account of atonement, didn’t heeffectively bsay: I do not want atonement,and with regard to himself one should be able to do as he wishes? bWhat,then, is the ihalakha /i?,The Gemara suggests: bComeand bheara proof bfromthe fact bthat the righteouspatriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, bwereall bburied. And if you saythat burial is required bon account of atonement, do the righteous need atonement?The Gemara rejects this proof: bYes,even the righteous are in need of atonement, bas it is written:“For bthere is no righteous person on earth who does good and never sins”(Ecclesiastes 7:20), and so even the righteous need atonement for the few sins that they committed over the course of their lifetimes.,The Gemara suggests: bComeand bheara proof from the verse referring to Abijah, son of Jeroboam: b“And all Israel shall eulogize him and bury him,for he alone of Jeroboam shall come to the grave” (I Kings 14:13). bAnd if you saythat burial is required bso thatthe deceased bshould achieve atonement, these too,i.e., Jeroboam’s other sons, bshould also be buried so that they should achieve atonement.The Gemara rejects this argument: bThisson, Abijah, bwho was righteous, should achieve atonementthrough his death and burial, but btheseother sons, who were wicked, bshould not achieve atonementeven in death.,The Gemara suggests: bComeand bheara proof from the curse pronounced by Jeremiah upon the wicked: b“They shall not be eulogized, nor shall they be buried”(Jeremiah 16:4), which indicates that it is not on account of atonement that burial is required, as were that the case the wicked are certainly in need of atonement, and therefore they should be buried. The Gemara answers: This is no proof, as Jeremiah’s intention might be bthatthe wicked bshould not achieve atonement.Therefore, the question of whether burial is necessary in order to prevent disgrace or achieve atonement remains unresolved.,§ bA dilemma was raised beforethe Sages: bIs the eulogydelivered for bthe honor of the livingrelatives of the deceased, bor is itdelivered for bthe honor of the dead?The Gemara asks: bWhat is thepractical bdifferencebetween the two possible reasons? The Gemara answers: There is a difference in a case bwhereone bsaidbefore he died: bDo not eulogize that man,i.e., myself. If the eulogy is delivered to honor the deceased, he is able to forgo this honor, but if it is delivered to honor the living, he is not, as it is not in the power of one individual to forgo the honor of others. bAlternately,the difference is with regard to whether it is possible bto collectthe eulogist’s fee bfrom the heirs.If the eulogy is to honor the dead, it is possible to collect this fee from the heirs, even against their will, but if it is to honor the living, they are able to forgo this honor.,The Gemara suggests: bComeand bheara proof from the verse that states: b“And Abraham came to eulogize Sarah and weep over her”(Genesis 23:2), indicating that Sarah’s funeral was delayed until Abraham returned from Beersheba to Hebron to eulogize her. bAnd if you saythat a eulogy is delivered bdue to the honor of the living, would they haveunduly bdelayedburying bSarah due to Abraham’s honor?The Gemara rejects this argument: bIt was satisfactory to Sarah herselfthat her funeral was delayed bso that Abraham could be honored byeulogizing bher.Since Sarah herself would prefer that Abraham eulogize her, there was no disgrace in waiting for Abraham to arrive.,The Gemara suggests: bComeand bheara different resolution of this dilemma from the verse referring to Abijah, son of Jeroboam: b“And all Israel shall eulogize him and bury him”(I Kings 14:13). bAnd if you saythat a eulogy bisdelivered bdue to the honor of the living, are thesepeople, Jeroboam’s surviving family, bworthy ofthis bhonor?The Gemara answers: bIt is satisfactory to the righteous whenother bpeople are honored through them.Since that is their wish, they are eulogized even if their wicked relatives are honored as a result.,The Gemara suggests: bComeand bheara proof from the curse pronounced by Jeremiah upon the wicked: b“They shall not be eulogized, nor shall they be buried”(Jeremiah 16:4). If you say that a eulogy is delivered due to the honor of the living, why should the wicked not be eulogized, as perhaps they are survived by righteous people who are worthy of this honor? The Gemara answers: bIt is not satisfactory to the righteous when they are honored through the wicked,and therefore they prefer that a eulogy not be delivered for their wicked relatives.,The Gemara suggests: bComeand bheara resolution of this dilemma from what Jeremiah said to Zedekiah: b“You shall die in peace; and with the burnings of your fathers, the former kings that were before you, so shall they make a burning for you; and they will eulogize you, saying: Ah, master”(Jeremiah 34:5). bAnd if you saythat a eulogy bisdelivered bdue to the honor of the livingrelatives of the deceased, bwhat difference does it make to himif he is eulogized? The Gemara answers: It is possible that a eulogy is to honor the living, and bthisis what Jeremiah bis saying toZedekiah: Enjoy the thought that bIsrael shall be honored through youat your funeral just bas they were honored through your ancestorsat their funerals.
17. Babylonian Talmud, Taanit, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

22b. (דברי הימים ב לה, כא) וישלח אליו מלאכים לאמר מה לי ולך מלך יהודה לא עליך אתה היום כי אל בית מלחמתי ואלהים אמר לבהלני חדל לך מאלהים אשר עמי ואל ישחיתך,מאי אלהים אשר עמי אמר רב יהודה אמר רב זו ע"ז אמר הואיל וקא בטח בע"ז יכילנא ליה,(דברי הימים ב לה, כג) ויורו היורים למלך יאשיהו ויאמר המלך לעבדיו העבירוני כי החליתי מאד מאי כי החליתי מאד אמר רב יהודה אמר רב מלמד שעשו כל גופו ככברה,אמר ר' שמואל בר נחמני אמר רבי (יוחנן) מפני מה נענש יאשיהו מפני שהיה לו לימלך בירמיהו ולא נמלך מאי דרש (ויקרא כו, ו) וחרב לא תעבור בארצכם,מאי חרב אילימא חרב שאינה של שלום והכתיב ונתתי שלום בארץ אלא אפילו של שלום והוא אינו יודע שאין דורו דומה יפה,כי הוה ניחא נפשיה חזא ירמיהו שפוותיה דקא מרחשן אמר שמא ח"ו מילתא דלא מהגנא אמר אגב צעריה גחין ושמעיה דקא מצדיק עליה דינא אנפשיה אמר (איכה א, יח) צדיק הוא ה' כי פיהו מריתי פתח עליה ההיא שעתא (איכה ד, כ) רוח אפינו משיח ה':,מעשה וירדו זקנים מירושלים לעריהם כו' איבעיא להו כמלא תנור תבואה או דלמא כמלא תנור פת,תא שמע כמלא פי תנור ועדיין תיבעי להו ככיסויא דתנורא או דלמא כי דרא דריפתא דהדר ליה לפומא דתנורא תיקו:,ועוד גזרו תענית על שאכלו זאבים כו' אמר עולא משום ר' שמעון בן יהוצדק מעשה ובלעו זאבים שני תינוקות והקיאום דרך בית הרעי ובא מעשה לפני חכמים וטיהרו את הבשר וטמאו את העצמות:,על אלו מתריעין בשבת כו': תנו רבנן עיר שהקיפוה נכרים או נהר ואחד ספינה המיטרפת בים ואחד יחיד שנרדף מפני נכרים או מפני לסטין ומפני רוח רעה על כולן יחיד רשאי לסגף את עצמו בתענית,רבי יוסי אומר אין היחיד רשאי לסגף את עצמו בתענית שמא יצטרך לבריות ואין הבריות מרחמות עליו אמר רב יהודה אמר רב מ"ט דרבי יוסי דכתיב (בראשית ב, ז) ויהי האדם לנפש חיה נשמה שנתתי בך החייה:,שמעון התימני אומר אף על הדבר כו': איבעיא להו לא הודו לו חכמים בשבת אבל בחול הודו לו או דלמא לא הודו לו כלל,ת"ש דתניא מתריעין על הדבר בשבת ואצ"ל בחול ר' חנן בן פיטום תלמידו של ר' עקיבא משום רבי עקיבא אומר אין מתריעין על הדבר כל עיקר:,על כל צרה שלא תבא על הצבור כו': ת"ר על כל צרה שלא תבא על הצבור מתריעין עליה חוץ מרוב גשמים מ"ט אמר ר' יוחנן לפי שאין מתפללין על רוב הטובה,ואמר רבי יוחנן מניין שאין מתפללין על רוב הטובה שנאמר (מלאכי ג, י) הביאו את כל המעשר אל בית האוצר וגו' מאי עד בלי די אמר רמי בר רב (יוד) עד שיבלו שפתותיכם מלומר די,אמר רמי בר רב יוד ובגולה מתריעין עליה תניא נמי הכי שנה שגשמיה מרובין אנשי משמר שולחין לאנשי מעמד תנו עיניכם באחיכם שבגולה שלא יהא בתיהם קבריהם,שאלו את ר' אליעזר עד היכן גשמים יורדין ויתפללו שלא ירדו אמר להם כדי שיעמוד אדם בקרן אפל וישכשך רגליו במים והתניא ידיו רגליו כידיו קאמינא,אמר רבה בר בר חנה לדידי חזיא לי קרן אפל דקם ההוא טייעא כי רכיב גמלא ונקיט רומחא בידיה מתחזי איניבא,ת"ר (ויקרא כו, ד) ונתתי גשמיכם בעתם לא שכורה ולא צמאה אלא בינונית שכל זמן שהגשמים מרובין מטשטשין את הארץ ואינה מוציאה פירות דבר אחר 22b. b“But he sent ambassadors to him saying: What have I to do with you, king of Judea? I do not come against you this day, but against the house with which I am at war; and God has commanded me to make haste. Forbear from meddling with God, Who is with me, so that He will not destroy you”(II Chronicles 35:21). This clearly shows that Pharaoh Neco had no intention of engaging Josiah in battle.,The Gemara asks: bWhat isthe meaning of the phrase b“God, Who is with me”? Rav Yehuda saidthat bRav said: Thisis referring to Neco’s bidolatry,which he brought for assistance. In other words, it is a secular reference and should be read as: The god that is with me, in my possession. Josiah bsaid: Sincehe trusts in idolatry, bI will be ableto defeat bhim. /b,With regard to Josiah’s battle with Pharaoh Neco, the verse states: b“And the archers shot at King Josiah and the king said to his servants: Move me away, for I am seriously wounded”(II Chronicles 35:23). bWhat isthe meaning of the phrase: b“For I am seriously wounded”? Rav Yehuda saidthat bRav said:This bteaches thatthe Egyptian archers bmade his entire body like a sievefrom the many arrows they shot at him., bRabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani saidthat bRabbi Yoḥa said: For whatreason bwas Josiah punished? Because he should have consulted withthe prophet bJeremiahto find out if he should go to war, bbut he did not consultwith him. bHow didJosiah binterpretthe verses of the Torah? How did they lead him to go to war? The verse states: b“Neither shall a sword go through your land”(Leviticus 26:6)., bWhat isthe meaning of the term: b“Sword”? If we saythat it is referring to ba sword that is not of peace, but isn’t it writtenearlier in the same verse: b“And I will give peace in the land”? Rather,the verse must mean that bevena sword bof peaceshall not pass through the land, and Josiah sought to prevent this occurrence, in fulfillment of the blessing. bBut he did not know that his generation did not meritthese blessings, and he would therefore not receive divine assistance in this regard.,The Gemara discusses Josiah’s deathbed reflections. bWhenJosiah bwas dying, Jeremiah saw his lips moving.Jeremiah bsaid: Perhaps, Heaven forbid, he is saying something improperand complaining about God’s judgment bon account of hisgreat bdistress.Jeremiah bbent over and heard that he was justifyingGod’s bjudgment against himself.Josiah bsaid: “The Lord is righteous, for I have rebelled against His word”(Lamentations 1:18). bAt that moment,Jeremiah bbeganhis eulogy bforJosiah: b“The breath of our nostrils, the anointed of the Lord,was trapped in their pits” (Lamentations 4:20).,§ The mishna taught: bAn incidentoccurred in bwhich Elders descended from Jerusalem to their citiesand decreed a fast throughout the land because a small amount of blight was seen in the city of Ashkelon, enough to fill the mouth of an oven. bA dilemma was raised beforethe Sages: Did they mean enough bgrain to fillan entire boven, or perhapsthey meant enough grain to prepare bbread to fill an oven?This is far less, as bread is stuck to the walls of the oven and does not fill its inner area.,The Gemara answers: bComeand bhearthe phrase of the mishna: Enough bto fill the mouth of an oven.This indicates that the bread referred to does not fill the entire oven, but rather covers the mouth of the oven. The Gemara further asks: bAnd still you can raise this dilemma before them:Is the mishna referring to the bread bof the cover of the oven? Perhapsit is referring bto a row of bread around the mouth of the oven.No resolution was found, and the Gemara states that the dilemma bshall standunresolved.,§ The mishna taught: bAnd furthermore, they decreed a fast because wolves had eatentwo children in Transjordan. bUlla said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: An incidentoccurred in bwhich wolves swallowed two children and excreted them. And the incident came before the Sagesfor a ruling. They were asked if the remains were ritually impure even after they had passed through the animal’s digestive tract, band they pronounced the flesh ritually pure,as it had been digested, but they bpronouncedthe intact bbones ritually impure. /b,§ The mishna further taught: bFor the followingcalamities bthey sound the alarmeven bon Shabbat:For a city that is surrounded by gentile troops, for a place in danger of being flooded by a river that has swelled its banks, or for a ship tossed about at sea. bThe Sages taught:In the case of ba city that is surrounded by gentiletroops bor a riverthat has swelled beyond its banks, and this also applies to bboth a ship tossed about at sea and an individual who is being pursued by gentiles, or by thieves, or by an evil spirit,which may lead him to harm himself, bthey sound the alarmeven bon Shabbat. And in all thesecases, ban individual is permitted to afflict himself by fastingto annul the evil decrees against him., bRabbi Yosei says: An individual is not permitted to afflict himself by fasting, lesthe become too weak to work and bbe beholden to other beings, andthose bbeings will not have mercy on him. Rav Yehuda saidthat bRav said: What is the reason of Rabbi Yosei?It is bas it is written: “And man became a living soul”(Genesis 2:7). Rabbi Yosei interprets this verse as a command: bThe soul I placed within you,preserve and bsustain it. /b,§ The mishna taught that bShimon the Timnite says:One may cry out on Shabbat beven for pestilence,but the Rabbis did not agree with him. bA dilemma was raised beforethe Sages: Does this mean that bthe Rabbis did not agree with himwith regard to crying out in these cases bon Shabbat,but if they occur bon a weekday they agreed with him? Or perhaps they did not agree with him at all,as they maintain that one never cries out over pestilence.,The Gemara answers: bComeand bhear, as it is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bOne cries out fora plague of bpestilence on Shabbat, and needless to say on weekdays. Rabbi Ḥa ben Pitom, the student of Rabbi Akiva, says in the name of Rabbi Akiva: One does not cry out for pestilence at all.This opinion attributed to Rabbi Akiva is the ruling of the Rabbis in the mishna.,§ The mishna further states that they sound the alarm bonaccount of any btrouble that should not befall the community,a euphemism for trouble that may befall the community, except for an overabundance of rain. bThe Sages taughtin a ibaraita /i: bFor any trouble that should not befall the community, they sound the alarm for it, except for an overabundance of rain.The Gemara asks: bWhat is the reasonfor this? bRabbi Yoḥa said: Because one does not pray over an excess of good.Since rain is generally good for the world, it is not appropriate to pray for it to stop, even when it falls in excess., bAnd Rabbi Yoḥa said: From whereis it derived bthat one does not pray over an excess of good?It bis stated: “Bring the whole tithe into the storeroom,that there may be food in My house, and test Me now by this, said the Lord of hosts, if I will not open for you the windows of heaven, and pour out for you a blessing that there shall be more than sufficiency” (Malachi 3:10). bWhatis the meaning of the phrase: b“That there shall be more than sufficiency [ iad beli dai /i]”? Rami bar Ḥama said:It means that the abundance will be so great bthat your lips will be worn out [ iyivlu /i],similar to the word ibeli /i, bfrom saying enough [ idai /i].In other words, even when a blessing is delivered in gross excess, one should not pray for it to cease, as the verse blesses the people with an excess., bRami bar Rav Yud said:This is true in Eretz Yisrael, but in the Diaspora, i.e., Babylonia, bthey do sound the alarm overexcessive rain. The reason is that Babylonia is in a low-lying region, where excessive rain poses a real danger. bThatopinion bis also taughtin a ibaraita /i: In ba year whose rains are abundant, the members of the priestly watchin the Temple bwould senda message bto the members of the non-priestly watch: Cast your eyes on your brothers in the Diasporaand have them in mind when you pray, so bthat their housesshould not collapse from excessive rain and bbecome their graves. /b, bThey asked Rabbi Eliezer: How much rain must falluntil btheyshould bpray that it should not fallanymore? bHe said to themby way of exaggeration: Enough rain must fall bso that a person stands atthe colossal cliff bKeren Ophel and dips his feet in water.The Gemara asks: bBut isn’t it taughtin a ibaraitathat Rabbi Eliezer said he must be able to place bhis handsin water? Rabbi Eliezer could answer: When bI said to youthat he must be able to place bhis feet,I meant blike his hands,i.e., the water must be high enough that he can dip both his hands and feet into the water with ease.,With regard to the height of this great cliff, bRabba bar bar Ḥana said: Ipersonally bsaw Keren Ophel,and when I peered down I saw bthat an Arab was positioned below,and bwhile riding a camel andholding ba spear in his hand, he looked like a worm [ iiniva /i]. /b, bThe Sages taught: “Then I will give your rains in their season”(Leviticus 26:4). This means that the earth will be bneither drunk nor thirsty; rather, a moderateamount of rain will fall. bFor as long as the rains are abundant, they muddythe soil of bthe land, and it does not give outits bproduce. Alternatively, /b

Subjects of this text:

subject book bibliographic info
abstention Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014) 63
am haarez. Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007) 260
amidah Avery Peck et al. (2014) 219
authority Brooke et al (2008) 277
beit ha-midrash Brooke et al (2008) 277
bertinoro,obadiah Simon-Shushan (2012) 255
community Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014) 63
daube,david,honi hameagel Simon-Shushan (2012) 255
daube,david Simon-Shushan (2012) 255
derekh eretz Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014) 64
exodus Brooke et al (2008) 277
father,fatherhood Albrecht (2014) 149, 155, 160
god Avery Peck et al. (2014) 219
goldin,judah Simon-Shushan (2012) 255
green,william scott' "278.0_255.0@honi hame'agel" Simon-Shushan (2012) 255
hagigah,tractate in mishna,tosefta and talmud Rowland (2009) 225
hakhamim,hakham Rowland (2009) 225
hanina ben dosa Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014) 64
harba de-moshe,aver(im) Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007) 260
hasid Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014) 64
honi hame'agel as sinner," Simon-Shushan (2012) 255
honi hame'agel in rabbinic commentary" Simon-Shushan (2012) 255
honi hame'agel magic" '278.0_255.0@maimonides,moses Simon-Shushan (2012) 255
honi the circle drawer Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007) 260
honi the circle maker Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014) 63
idolatry,in the mishnah Schick (2021) 112
individual Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014) 63
intention,circumcision Schick (2021) 67
intention,fulfillment of mitzvot Schick (2021) 67, 112
interpretation,hellenistic jewish Brooke et al (2008) 277
interpretation,targumic Brooke et al (2008) 277
kavvanah Avery Peck et al. (2014) 219
king Avery Peck et al. (2014) 219
knowledge Rowland (2009) 225
law Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014) 63, 64
maase merkava Rowland (2009) 225
maimonides,moses,honi hameagel Simon-Shushan (2012) 255
marriage Lorberbaum (2015) 157
meir,r Lorberbaum (2015) 157
meir,rabbi Rowland (2009) 225
merkava xiii–xvi,xix Rowland (2009) 225
midrashim,tannaitic Albrecht (2014) 160
mishnah Albrecht (2014) 149
moses,art Brooke et al (2008) 277
moses Brooke et al (2008) 277
muhammad Avery Peck et al. (2014) 219
mysticism Brooke et al (2008) 277; Rowland (2009) 225
pietist Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014) 63, 64
pinhas ben yair Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014) 64
poor Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014) 63
prayer Avery Peck et al. (2014) 219; Brooke et al (2008) 277; Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007) 260; Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014) 63, 64
prophecy Brooke et al (2008) 277
purification Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014) 63
rabba Lorberbaum (2015) 157
rabbinic literature xiii,xvi Rowland (2009) 225
rain,excessive Simon-Shushan (2012) 255
revelation,law Brooke et al (2008) 277
revelation Brooke et al (2008) 277
righteous Lorberbaum (2015) 157
school/academy Brooke et al (2008) 277
scribes Avery Peck et al. (2014) 219
sermon Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014) 64
serpent Avery Peck et al. (2014) 219
shema Avery Peck et al. (2014) 219
shmuel Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014) 64
simeon ben shetah,r.,reputation Simon-Shushan (2012) 255
simeon ben shetah,r. Simon-Shushan (2012) 255
sinai Brooke et al (2008) 277
synagogue Brooke et al (2008) 277; Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014) 63
talmudic literature Poorthuis and Schwartz (2014) 64
tanhuma,midrash Simon-Shushan (2012) 255
targum Brooke et al (2008) 277
targumim Albrecht (2014) 149, 155, 160
temple,second Albrecht (2014) 160
torah,giving of Brooke et al (2008) 277
torah,teaching Brooke et al (2008) 277
tosefta' Albrecht (2014) 155
visualization,priestly Avery Peck et al. (2014) 219
visualization,scribal Avery Peck et al. (2014) 219
wicked (rasha) Lorberbaum (2015) 157
wife Avery Peck et al. (2014) 219
yahid,yehidim Rowland (2009) 225