|1. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 5.16 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 44
| 5.16. "כַּבֵּד אֶת־אָבִיךָ וְאֶת־אִמֶּךָ כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוְּךָ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ לְמַעַן יַאֲרִיכֻן יָמֶיךָ וּלְמַעַן יִיטַב לָךְ עַל הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר־יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לָךְ׃",
| 5.16. "Honour thy father and thy mother, as the LORD thy God commanded thee; that thy days may be long, and that it may go well with thee, upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.",
|2. Hebrew Bible, Proverbs, 26.4 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 63
| 26.4. "אַל־תַּעַן כְּסִיל כְּאִוַּלְתּוֹ פֶּן־תִּשְׁוֶה־לּוֹ גַם־אָתָּה׃",
| 26.4. "Answer not a fool according to his folly, Lest thou also be like unto him.",
|3. Hebrew Bible, Leviticus, 24.17 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 44
| 24.17. "וְאִישׁ כִּי יַכֶּה כָּל־נֶפֶשׁ אָדָם מוֹת יוּמָת׃",
| 24.17. "And he that smiteth any man mortally shall surely be put to death.",
|4. Hebrew Bible, Exodus, 20.12, 21.12 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 44
| 20.12. "כַּבֵּד אֶת־אָבִיךָ וְאֶת־אִמֶּךָ לְמַעַן יַאֲרִכוּן יָמֶיךָ עַל הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר־יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לָךְ׃", 21.12. "מַכֵּה אִישׁ וָמֵת מוֹת יוּמָת׃",
| 20.12. "Honour thy father and thy mother, that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.", 21.12. "He that smiteth a man, so that he dieth, shall surely be put to death.",
|5. Dead Sea Scrolls, Hodayot, 4.9-4.10 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 50
|6. Dead Sea Scrolls, Hodayot, 4.9-4.10 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 50
|7. New Testament, Galatians, 2.13, 3.1 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 46, 48
| 2.13. καὶ συνυπεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ [καὶ] οἱ λοιποὶ Ἰουδαῖοι, ὥστε καὶ Βαρνάβας συναπήχθη αὐτῶν τῇ ὑποκρίσει. 3.1. Ὦ ἀνόητοι Γαλάται, τίς ὑμᾶς ἐβάσκανεν, οἷς κατʼ ὀφθαλμοὺς Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς προεγράφη ἐσταυρωμένος;
| 2.13. And the rest of the Jews joined him in his hypocrisy; so that evenBarnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy. 3.1. Foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you not to obey thetruth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was openly set forth among you as crucified?
|8. New Testament, Ephesians, 5.3-5.7 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 51
| 5.3. Πορνεία δὲ καὶ ἀκαθαρσία πᾶσα ἢ πλεονεξία μηδὲ ὀνομαζέσθω ἐν ὑμῖν, 5.4. καθὼς πρέπει ἁγίοις, καὶ αἰσχρότης καὶ μωρολογία ἢ εὐτραπελία, ἃ οὐκ ἀνῆκεν, ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον εὐχαριστία. 5.5. τοῦτο γὰρ ἴστε γινώσκοντες ὅτι πᾶς πόρνος ἢ ἀκάθαρτος ἢ πλεονέκτης, ὅ ἐστιν εἰδωλολάτρης, οὐκ ἔχει κληρονομίαν ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τοῦ χριστοῦ καὶ θεοῦ. 5.6. Μηδεὶς ὑμᾶς ἀπατάτω κενοῖς λόγοις, διὰ ταῦτα γὰρ ἔρχεται ἡ ὀργὴ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐπὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς τῆς ἀπειθίας. 5.7. μὴ οὖν γίνεσθε συνμέτοχοι αὐτῶν·
| 5.3. But sexual immorality, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not even be mentioned among you, as becomes saints; 5.4. nor filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not appropriate; but rather giving of thanks. 5.5. Know this for sure, that no sexually immoral person, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, has any inheritance in the Kingdom of Christ and God. 5.6. Let no one deceive you with empty words. For because of these things, the wrath of God comes on the sons of disobedience. 5.7. Therefore don't be partakers with them.
|9. New Testament, 2 Timothy, 2.22-2.26, 3.5-3.9 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 50, 51
| 2.22. τὰς δὲ νεωτερικὰς ἐπιθυμίας φεῦγε, δίωκε δὲ δικαιοσύνην, πίστιν, ἀγάπην, εἰρήνην μετὰ τῶν ἐπικαλουμένων τὸν κύριον ἐκ καθαρᾶς καρδίας. 2.23. τὰς δὲ μωρὰς καὶ ἀπαιδεύτους ζητήσεις παραιτοῦ, εἰδὼς ὅτι γεννῶσι μάχας· 2.24. δοῦλον δὲ κυρίου οὐ δεῖ μάχεσθαι, ἀλλὰ ἤπιον εἶναι πρὸς πάντας, διδακτικόν, ἀνεξίκακον, 2.25. ἐν πραΰτητι παιδεύοντα τοὺς ἀντιδιατιθεμένους, μή ποτε δῴη αὐτοῖς ὁ θεὸς μετάνοιαν εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας, 2.26. καὶ ἀνανήψωσιν ἐκ τῆς τοῦ διαβόλου παγίδος, ἐζωγρημένοι ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸ ἐκείνου θέλημα. 3.5. ἔχοντες μόρφωσιν εὐσεβείας τὴν δὲ δύναμιν αὐτῆς ἠρνημένοι· καὶ τούτους ἀποτρέπου. 3.6. ἐκ τούτων γάρ εἰσιν οἱ ἐνδύνοιτες εἰς τὰς οἰκίας καὶ αἰχμαλωτίζοντες γυναικάρια σεσωρευμένα ἁμαρτίαις, ἀγόμενα ἐπιθυμίαις ποικίλαις, 3.7. πάντοτε μανθάνοντα καὶ μηδέποτε εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας ἐλθεῖν δυνάμενα. 3.8. ὃν τρόπον δὲ Ἰαννῆς καὶ Ἰαμβρῆς ἀντέστησαν Μωυσεῖ, οὕτως καὶ οὗτοι ἀνθίστανται τῇ ἀληθείᾳ, ἄνθρωποι κατεφθαρμένοι τὸν νοῦν, ἀδόκιμοι περὶ τὴν πίστιν. 3.9. ἀλλʼ οὐ προκόψουσιν ἐπὶ πλεῖον, ἡ γὰρ ἄνοια αὐτῶν ἔκδη λος ἔσται πᾶσιν, ὡς καὶ ἡ ἐκείνων ἐγένετο.
| 2.22. Flee from youthful lusts; but pursue righteousness, faith, love, and peace with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart. 2.23. But refuse foolish and ignorant questionings, knowing that they generate strife. 2.24. The Lord's servant must not quarrel, but be gentle towards all, able to teach, patient, 2.25. in gentleness correcting those who oppose him: perhaps God may give them repentance leading to a full knowledge of the truth, 2.26. and they may recover themselves out of the devil's snare, having been taken captive by him to his will. 3.5. holding a form of godliness, but having denied the power thereof. Turn away from these, also. 3.6. For of these are those who creep into houses, and take captive gullible women loaded down with sins, led away by various lusts, 3.7. always learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. 3.8. Even as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so do these also oppose the truth; men corrupted in mind, reprobate concerning the faith. 3.9. But they will proceed no further. For their folly will be evident to all men, as theirs also came to be.
|10. New Testament, 1 Timothy, 4.1-4.3 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 48
| 4.1. Τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα ῥητῶς λέγει ὅτι ἐν ὑστέροις καιροῖς ἀποστήσονταί τινες τῆς πίστεως, προσέχοντες πνεύμασι πλάνοις καὶ διδασκαλίαις δαιμονίων 4.2. ἐν ὑποκρίσει ψευδολόγων, κεκαυστηριασμένων τὴν ἰδίαν συνείδησιν, 4.3. κωλυόντων γαμεῖν, ἀπέχεσθαι βρωμάτων ἃ ὁ θεὸς ἔκτισεν εἰς μετάλημψιν μετὰ εὐχαριστίας τοῖς πιστοῖς καὶ ἐπεγνωκόσι τὴν ἀλήθειαν.
| 4.1. But the Spirit says expressly that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons, 4.2. through the hypocrisy of men who speak lies, branded in their own conscience as with a hot iron; 4.3. forbidding marriage and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth.
|11. Mishnah, Ketuvot, 3.7 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 47
| 3.7. "אֵיזוֹהִי בֹשֶׁת, הַכֹּל לְפִי הַמְבַיֵּשׁ וְהַמִּתְבַּיֵּשׁ. פְּגָם, רוֹאִין אוֹתָהּ כְּאִלּוּ הִיא שִׁפְחָה נִמְכֶּרֶת, כַּמָּה הָיְתָה יָפָה וְכַמָּה הִיא יָפָה. קְנָס, שָׁוֶה בְכָל אָדָם. וְכֹל שֶׁיֶּשׁ לוֹ קִצְבָּה מִן הַתּוֹרָה, שָׁוֶה בְכָל אָדָם: \n",
| 3.7. "How is [the compensation that is paid for] embarrassment [reckoned]? It all depends on the status of the offender and the offended. How is [the compensation that is paid for] blemish [reckoned]? She is regarded as if she were a slave to be sold in the market place [and it is estimated] how much she was worth then and how much she is worth now. The fine is the same for all. And any sum that is fixed in the Torah remains the same for all.",
|12. Mishnah, Bava Qamma, 8.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 47
| 8.1. "הַחוֹבֵל בַּחֲבֵרוֹ חַיָּב עָלָיו מִשּׁוּם חֲמִשָּׁה דְבָרִים, בְּנֶזֶק, בְּצַעַר, בְּרִפּוּי, בְּשֶׁבֶת, וּבְבֹשֶׁת. בְּנֶזֶק כֵּיצַד. סִמָּא אֶת עֵינוֹ, קָטַע אֶת יָדוֹ, שִׁבֵּר אֶת רַגְלוֹ, רוֹאִין אוֹתוֹ כְּאִלּוּ הוּא עֶבֶד נִמְכָּר בַּשּׁוּק וְשָׁמִין כַּמָּה הָיָה יָפֶה וְכַמָּה הוּא יָפֶה. צַעַר, כְּוָאוֹ בְשַׁפּוּד אוֹ בְמַסְמֵר, וַאֲפִלּוּ עַל צִפָּרְנוֹ, מְקוֹם שֶׁאֵינוֹ עוֹשֶׂה חַבּוּרָה, אוֹמְדִין כַּמָּה אָדָם כַּיּוֹצֵא בָזֶה רוֹצֶה לִטֹּל לִהְיוֹת מִצְטַעֵר כָּךְ. רִפּוּי, הִכָּהוּ חַיָּב לְרַפְּאֹתוֹ. עָלוּ בוֹ צְמָחִים, אִם מֵחֲמַת הַמַּכָּה, חַיָּב. שֶׁלֹּא מֵחֲמַת הַמַּכָּה, פָּטוּר. חָיְתָה וְנִסְתְּרָה, חָיְתָה וְנִסְתְּרָה, חַיָּב לְרַפְּאֹתוֹ. חָיְתָה כָל צָרְכָּהּ, אֵינוֹ חַיָּב לְרַפְּאֹתוֹ. שֶׁבֶת, רוֹאִין אוֹתוֹ כְּאִלוּ הוּא שׁוֹמֵר קִשּׁוּאִין, שֶׁכְּבָר נָתַן לוֹ דְמֵי יָדוֹ וּדְמֵי רַגְלוֹ. בֹּשֶׁת, הַכֹּל לְפִי הַמְבַיֵּשׁ וְהַמִּתְבַּיֵּשׁ. הַמְבַיֵּשׁ אֶת הֶעָרֹם, הַמְבַיֵּשׁ אֶת הַסּוּמָא, וְהַמְבַיֵּשׁ אֶת הַיָּשֵׁן, חַיָּב. וְיָשֵׁן שֶׁבִּיֵּשׁ, פָּטוּר. נָפַל מִן הַגָּג, וְהִזִּיק וּבִיֵּשׁ, חַיָּב עַל הַנֶּזֶק וּפָטוּר עַל הַבֹּשֶׁת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כה) וְשָׁלְחָה יָדָהּ וְהֶחֱזִיקָה בִּמְבֻשָׁיו, אֵינוֹ חַיָּב עַל הַבֹּשֶׁת עַד שֶׁיְהֵא מִתְכַּוֵּן: \n",
| 8.1. "He who wounds his fellow is liable to compensate him on five counts: for injury, for pain, for healing, for loss of income and for indignity. ‘For injury’: How so? If he blinded his fellow’s eye, cut off his hand or broke his foot, [his fellow] is looked upon as if he was a slave to be sold in the market and they assess how much he was worth and how much he is worth. ‘For pain’? If he burned him with a spit or a nail, even though it was on his fingernail, a place where it leaves no wound, they estimate how much money such a man would be willing to take to suffer so. ‘Healing’? If he struck him he is liable to pay the cost of his healing. If sores arise on him on account of the blow, he is liable [for the cost of their healing]. If not on account of the blow, he is not liable. If the wound healed and then opened and healed and then opened, he is liable for the cost of the healing. If it healed completely, he is no longer liable to pay the cost of the healing. ‘Loss of income’: He is looked upon as a watchman of a cucumber field, since he already gave him compensation for the loss of his hand or foot. ‘Indignity’: All is according to the status of the one that inflicts indignity and the status of the one that suffers indignity. If a man inflicted indignity on a naked man, or a blind man, or a sleeping man, he is [still] liable. If a man fell from the roof and caused injury and inflicted indignity, he is liable for the injury but not for the indignity, as it says, “And she puts forth her hand and grabs him by the private parts”, a man is liable only when he intended [to inflict indignity].",
|13. New Testament, Matthew, 5.12, 5.17-5.48, 7.26, 15.1-15.7, 23.17, 25.2-25.3, 25.8 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 44, 45, 46, 48, 58, 59, 60
| 5.12. χαίρετε καὶ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε, ὅτι ὁ μισθὸς ὑμῶν πολὺς ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς· οὕτως γὰρ ἐδίωξαν τοὺς προφήτας τοὺς πρὸ ὑμῶν. 5.17. Μὴ νομίσητε ὅτι ἦλθον καταλῦσαι τὸν νόμον ἢ τοὺς προφήτας· οὐκ ἦλθον καταλῦσαι ἀλλὰ πληρῶσαι· 5.18. ἀμὴν γὰρ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἕως ἂν παρέλθῃ ὁ οὐρανὸς καὶ ἡ γῆ, ἰῶτα ἓν ἢ μία κερέα οὐ μὴ παρέλθῃ ἀπὸ τοῦ νόμου ἕως [ἂν] πάντα γένηται. 5.19. ὃς ἐὰν οὖν λύσῃ μίαν τῶν ἐντολῶν τούτων τῶν ἐλαχίστων καὶ διδάξῃ οὕτως τοὺς ἀνθρώπους, ἐλάχιστος κληθήσεται ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τῶν οὐρανῶν· ὃς δʼ ἂν ποιήσῃ καὶ διδάξῃ, οὗτος μέγας κληθήσεται ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τῶν οὐρανῶν. 5.20. λέγω γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν μὴ περισσεύσῃ ὑμῶν ἡ δικαιοσύνη πλεῖον τῶν γραμματέων καὶ Φαρισαίων, οὐ μὴ εἰσέλθητε εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν οὐρανῶν. 5.21. Ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη τοῖς ἀρχαίοις Οὐ φονεύσεις· ὃς δʼ ἂν φονεύσῃ, ἔνοχος ἔσται τῇ κρίσει. 5.22. Ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι πᾶς ὁ ὀργιζόμενος τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ ἔνοχος ἔσται τῇ κρίσει· ὃς δʼ ἂν εἴπῃ τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ Ῥακά, ἔνοχος ἔσται τῷ συνεδρίῳ· ὃς δʼ ἂν εἴπῃ Μωρέ, ἔνοχος ἔσται εἰς τὴν γέενναν τοῦ πυρός. 5.23. ἐὰν οὖν προσφέρῃς τὸ δῶρόν σου ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον κἀκεῖ μνησθῇς ὅτι ὁ ἀδελφός σου ἔχει τι κατὰ σοῦ, 5.24. ἄφες ἐκεῖ τὸ δῶρόν σου ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου, καὶ ὕπαγε πρῶτον διαλλάγηθι τῷ ἀδελφῷ σου, καὶ τότε ἐλθὼν πρόσφερε τὸ δῶρόν σου. 5.25. ἴσθι εὐνοῶν τῷ ἀντιδίκῳ σου ταχὺ ἕως ὅτου εἶ μετʼ αὐτοῦ ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ, μή ποτέ σε παραδῷ ὁ ἀντίδικος τῷ κριτῇ, καὶ ὁ κριτὴς τῷ ὑπηρέτῃ, καὶ εἰς φυλακὴν βληθήσῃ· 5.26. ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, οὐ μὴ ἐξέλθῃς ἐκεῖθεν ἕως ἂν ἀποδῷς τὸν ἔσχατον κοδράντην. 5.27. Ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη Οὐ μοιχεύσεις. 5.28. Ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι πᾶς ὁ βλέπων γυναῖκα πρὸς τὸ ἐπιθυμῆσαι [αὐτὴν] ἤδη ἐμοίχευσεν αὐτὴν ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτοῦ. 5.29. εἰ δὲ ὁ ὀφθαλμός σου ὁ δεξιὸς σκανδαλίζει σε, ἔξελε αὐτὸν καὶ βάλε ἀπὸ σοῦ, συμφέρει γάρ σοι ἵνα ἀπόληται ἓν τῶν μελῶν σου καὶ μὴ ὅλον τὸ σῶμά σου βληθῇ εἰς γέενναν· 5.30. καὶ εἰ ἡ δεξιά σου χεὶρ σκανδαλίζει σε, ἔκκοψον αὐτὴν καὶ βάλε ἀπὸ σοῦ, συμφέρει γάρ σοι ἵνα ἀπόληται ἓν τῶν μελῶν σου καὶ μὴ ὅλον τὸ σῶμά σου εἰς γέενναν ἀπέλθῃ. 5.31. Ἐρρέθη δέ Ὃς ἂν ἀπολύσῃ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ, δότω αὐτῇ ἀποστάσιον. 5.32. Ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι πᾶς ὁ ἀπολύων τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ παρεκτὸς λόγου πορνείας ποιεῖ αὐτὴν μοιχευθῆναι[, καὶ ὃς ἐὰν ἀπολελυμένην γαμήσῃ μοιχᾶται]. 5.33. Πάλιν ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη τοῖς ἀρχαίοις Οὐκ ἐπιορκήσεις, ἀποδώσεις δὲ τῷ κυρίῳ τοὺς ὅρκους σου. 5.34. Ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν μν̀ ὀμόσαι ὅλως· μήτε ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὅτι θρόνος ἐστὶν τοῦ θεοῦ· 5.35. μήτε ἐν τῇ γῇ, ὅτι ὑποπόδιόν ἐστιν τῶν ποδῶν αὐτοῦ· μήτε εἰς Ἰεροσόλυμα, ὅτι πόλις ἐστὶν τοῦ μεγάλου βασιλέως· 5.36. μήτε ἐν τῇ κεφαλῇ σου ὀμόσῃς, ὅτι οὐ δύνασαι μίαν τρίχα λευκὴν ποιῆσαι ἢ μέλαιναν. 5.37. ἔστω δὲ ὁ λόγος ὑμῶν ναὶ ναί, οὒ οὔ· τὸ δὲ περισσὸν τούτων ἐκ τοῦ πονηροῦ ἐστίν. 5.38. Ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη Ὀφθαλμὸν ἀντὶ ὀφθαλμοῦ καὶ ὀδόντα ἀντὶ ὀδόντος. 5.39. Ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν μὴ ἀντιστῆναι τῷ πονηρῷ· ἀλλʼ ὅστις σε ῥαπίζει εἰς τὴν δεξιὰν σιαγόνα [σου], στρέψον αὐτῷ καὶ τὴν ἄλλην· 5.40. καὶ τῷ θέλοντί σοι κριθῆναι καὶ τὸν χιτῶνά σου λαβεῖν, ἄφες αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ ἱμάτιον· 5.41. καὶ ὅστις σε ἀγγαρεύσει μίλιον ἕν, ὕπαγε μετʼ αὐτοῦ δύο. 5.42. τῷ αἰτοῦντί σε δός, καὶ τὸν θέλοντα ἀπὸ σοῦ δανίσασθαι μὴ ἀποστραφῇς. 5.43. Ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου καὶ μισήσεις τὸν ἐχθρόν σου. 5.44. Ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν καὶ προσεύχεσθε ὑπὲρ τῶν διωκόντων ὑμᾶς· 5.45. ὅπως γένησθε υἱοὶ τοῦ πατρὸς ὑμῶν τοῦ ἐν οὐρανοῖς, ὅτι τὸν ἥλιον αὐτοῦ ἀνατέλλει ἐπὶ πονηροὺς καὶ ἀγαθοὺς καὶ βρέχει ἐπὶ δικαίους καὶ ἀδίκους. 5.46. ἐὰν γὰρ ἀγαπήσητε τοὺς ἀγαπῶντας ὑμᾶς, τίνα μισθὸν ἔχετε; οὐχὶ καὶ οἱ τελῶναι τὸ αὐτὸ ποιοῦσιν; 5.47. καὶ ἐὰν ἀσπάσησθε τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς ὑμῶν μόνον, τί περισσὸν ποιεῖτε; οὐχὶ καὶ οἱ ἐθνικοὶ τὸ αὐτὸ ποιοῦσιν; 5.48. Ἔσεσθε οὖν ὑμεῖς τέλειοι ὡς ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν ὁ οὐράνιος τέλειός ἐστιν. 7.26. Καὶ πᾶς ὁ ἀκούων μου τοὺς λόγους τούτους καὶ μὴ ποιῶν αὐτοὺς ὁμοιωθήσεται ἀνδρὶ μωρῷ, ὅστις ᾠκοδόμησεν αὐτοῦ τὴν οἰκίαν ἐπὶ τὴν ἄμμον. 15.1. Τότε προσέρχονται τῷ Ἰησοῦ ἀπὸ Ἰεροσολύμων Φαρισαῖοι καὶ γραμματεῖς λέγοντες 15.2. Διὰ τί οἱ μαθηταί σου παραβαίνουσιν τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν πρεσβυτέρων; οὐ γὰρ νίπτονται τὰς χεῖρας ὅταν ἄρτον ἐσθίωσιν. 15.3. ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Διὰ τί καὶ ὑμεῖς παραβαίνετε τὴν ἐντολὴν τοῦ θεοῦ διὰ τὴν παράδοσιν ὑμῶν; 15.4. ὁ γὰρ θεὸς εἶπεν Τίμα τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὴν μητέρα, καί Ὁ κακολογῶν πατέρα ἢ μητέρα θανάτῳ τελευτάτω· 15.5. ὑμεῖς δὲ λέγετε Ὃς ἂν εἴπῃ τῷ πατρὶ ἢ τῇ μητρί Δῶρον ὃ ἐὰν ἐξ ἐμοῦ ὠφεληθῇς, 15.6. οὐ μὴ τιμήσει τὸν πατέρα αὐτοῦ· καὶ ἠκυρώσατε τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ διὰ τὴν παράδοσιν ὑμῶν. 15.7. ὑποκριταί, καλῶς ἐπροφήτευσεν περὶ ὑμῶν Ἠσαίας λέγων 23.17. μωροὶ καὶ τυφλοί, τίς γὰρ μείζων ἐστίν, ὁ χρυσὸς ἢ ὁ ναὸς ὁ ἁγιάσας τὸν χρυσόν; 25.2. πέντε δὲ ἐξ αὐτῶν ἦσαν μωραὶ καὶ πέντε φρόνιμοι· 25.3. αἱ γὰρ μωραὶ λαβοῦσαι τὰς λαμπάδας [αὐτῶν] οὐκ ἔλαβον μεθʼ ἑαυτῶν ἔλαιον· 25.8. αἱ δὲ μωραὶ ταῖς φρονίμοις εἶπαν Δότε ἡμῖν ἐκ τοῦ ἐλαίου ὑμῶν, ὅτι αἱ λαμπάδες ἡμῶν σβέννυνται.
| 5.12. Rejoice, and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven. For that is how they persecuted the prophets who were before you. 5.17. "Don't think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I didn't come to destroy, but to fulfill. 5.18. For most assuredly, I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not even one smallest letter or one tiny pen stroke shall in any way pass away from the law, until all things are accomplished. 5.19. Whoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments, and teach others to do so, shall be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven; but whoever shall do and teach them shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven. 5.20. For I tell you that unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, there is no way you will enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. 5.21. "You have heard that it was said to the ancient ones, 'You shall not murder;' and 'Whoever shall murder shall be in danger of the judgment.' 5.22. But I tell you, that everyone who is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment; and whoever shall say to his brother, 'Raca!' shall be in danger of the council; and whoever shall say, 'You fool!' shall be in danger of the fire of Gehenna. 5.23. "If therefore you are offering your gift at the altar, and there remember that your brother has anything against you, 5.24. leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift. 5.25. Agree with your adversary quickly, while you are with him in the way; lest perhaps the prosecutor deliver you to the judge, and the judge deliver you to the officer, and you be cast into prison. 5.26. Most assuredly I tell you, you shall by no means get out of there, until you have paid the last penny. 5.27. "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery;' 5.28. but I tell you that everyone who gazes at a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her already in his heart. 5.29. If your right eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out and throw it away from you. For it is profitable for you that one of your members should perish, than for your whole body to be cast into Gehenna. 5.30. If your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off, and throw it away from you: for it is profitable for you that one of your members should perish, and not your whole body be thrown into Gehenna. 5.31. "It was also said, 'Whoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorce,' 5.32. but I tell you that whoever who puts away his wife, except for the cause of sexual immorality, makes her an adulteress; and whoever marries her when she is put away commits adultery. 5.33. "Again you have heard that it was said to them of old time, 'You shall not make false vows, but shall perform to the Lord your vows,' 5.34. but I tell you, don't swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is the throne of God; 5.35. nor by the earth, for it is the footstool of his feet; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. 5.36. Neither shall you swear by your head, for you can't make one hair white or black. 5.37. But let your 'Yes' be 'Yes' and your 'No' be 'no.' Whatever is more than these is of the evil one. 5.38. "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' 5.39. But I tell you, don't resist him who is evil; but whoever strikes you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also. 5.40. If anyone sues you to take away your coat, let him have your cloak also. 5.41. Whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. 5.42. Give to him who asks you, and don't turn away him who desires to borrow from you. 5.43. "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor, and hate your enemy.' 5.44. But I tell you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who mistreat you and persecute you, 5.45. that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the just and the unjust. 5.46. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Don't even the tax collectors do the same? 5.47. If you only greet your friends, what more do you do than others? Don't even the tax collectors do the same? 5.48. Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect. 7.26. Everyone who hears these words of mine, and doesn't do them will be like a foolish man, who built his house on the sand. 15.1. Then Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem, saying, 15.2. "Why do your disciples disobey the tradition of the elders? For they don't wash their hands when they eat bread." 15.3. He answered them, "Why do you also disobey the commandment of God because of your tradition? 15.4. For God commanded, 'Honor your father and your mother,' and, 'He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him be put to death.' 15.5. But you say, 'Whoever may tell his father or his mother, "Whatever help you might otherwise have gotten from me is a gift devoted to God," 15.6. he shall not honor his father or mother.' You have made the commandment of God void because of your tradition. 15.7. You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, saying, 23.17. You blind fools! For which is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifies the gold? 25.2. Five of them were foolish, and five were wise. 25.3. Those who were foolish, when they took their lamps, took no oil with them, 25.8. The foolish said to the wise, 'Give us some of your oil, for our lamps are going out.'
|14. New Testament, Luke, 2.46-2.47, 13.10-13.17 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 46, 48
| 2.46. καὶ ἐγένετο μετὰ ἡμέρας τρεῖς εὗρον αὐτὸν ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ καθεζόμενον ἐν μέσῳ τῶν διδασκάλων καὶ ἀκούοντα αὐτῶν καὶ ἐπερωτῶντα αὐτούς· 2.47. ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες οἱ ἀκούοντες αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τῇ συνέσει καὶ ταῖς ἀποκρίσεσιν αὐτοῦ. 13.10. Ἦν δὲ διδάσκων ἐν μιᾷ τῶν συναγωγῶν ἐν τοῖς σάββασιν. 13.11. καὶ ἰδοὺ γυνὴ πνεῦμα ἔχουσα ἀσθενείας ἔτη δέκα ὀκτώ, καὶ ἦν συνκύπτουσα καὶ μὴ δυναμένη ἀνακύψαι εἰς τὸ παντελές. 13.12. ἰδὼν δὲ αὐτὴν ὁ Ἰησοῦς προσεφώνησεν καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῇ Γύναι, ἀπολέλυσαι τῆς ἀσθενείας σου 13.13. , καὶ ἐπέθηκεν αὐτῇ τὰς χεῖρας· καὶ παραχρῆμα ἀνωρθώθη, καὶ ἐδόξαζεν τὸν θεόν. 13.14. ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ ἀρχισυνάγωγος, ἀγανακτῶν ὅτι τῷ σαββάτῳ ἐθεράπευσεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς, ἔλεγεν τῷ ὄχλῳ ὅτι Ἓξ ἡμέραι εἰσὶν ἐν αἷς δεῖ ἐργάζεσθαι· ἐν αὐταῖς οὖν ἐρχόμενοι θεραπεύεσθε καὶ μὴ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ σαββάτου. 13.15. ἀπεκρίθη δὲ αὐτῷ ὁ κύριος καὶ εἶπεν Ὑποκριται, ἕκαστος ὑμῶν τῷ σαββάτῳ οὐ λύει τὸν βοῦν αὐτοῦ ἢ τὸν ὄνον ἀπὸ τῆς φάτνης καὶ ἀπάγων ποτίζει; 13.16. ταύτην δὲ θυγατέρα Ἀβραὰμ οὖσαν, ἣν ἔδησεν ὁ Σατανᾶς ἰδοὺ δέκα καὶ ὀκτὼ ἔτη, οὐκ ἔδει λυθῆναι ἀπὸ τοῦ δεσμοῦ τούτου τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ σαββάτου; 13.17. Καὶ ταῦτα λέγοντος αὐτοῦ κατῃσχύνοντο πάντες οἱ ἀντικείμενοι αὐτῷ, καὶ πᾶς ὁ ὄχλος ἔχαιρεν ἐπὶ πᾶσιν τοῖς ἐνδόξοις τοῖς γινομένοις ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ.
| 2.46. It happened after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers, both listening to them, and asking them questions. 2.47. All who heard him were amazed at his understanding and his answers. 13.10. He was teaching in one of the synagogues on the Sabbath day. 13.11. Behold, there was a woman who had a spirit of infirmity eighteen years, and she was bent over, and could in no way straighten herself up. 13.12. When Jesus saw her, he called her, and said to her, "Woman, you are freed from your infirmity." 13.13. He laid his hands on her, and immediately she stood up straight, and glorified God. 13.14. The ruler of the synagogue, being indigt because Jesus had healed on the Sabbath, said to the multitude, "There are six days in which men ought to work. Therefore come on those days and be healed, and not on the Sabbath day!" 13.15. Therefore the Lord answered him, "You hypocrites! Doesn't each one of you free his ox or his donkey from the stall on the Sabbath, and lead him away to water? 13.16. Ought not this woman, being a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan had bound eighteen long years, be freed from this bondage on the Sabbath day?" 13.17. As he said these things, all his adversaries were put to shame, and all the multitude rejoiced for all the glorious things that were done by him.
|15. Babylonian Talmud, Niddah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 60
| 52b. איוב מן הסערה ויאמר אליו שוטה שבעולם הרבה נימין בראתי בראשו של אדם ולכל נימא ונימא בראתי לו גומא בפני עצמה שלא יהיו שתים יונקות מגומא אחת שאלמלא שתים יונקות מגומא אחת מכחיש מאור עיניו של אדם גומא בגומא לא נתחלף לי איוב באויב נתחלף לי,לא קשיא הא בגופא הא ברישא,אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל שתי שערות שאמרו אפילו אחת על הכף ואחת על הביצים,תניא נמי הכי שתי שערות שאמרו אפילו אחת בגבה ואחת בכריסה אחת ע"ג קשרי אצבעותיה של יד ואחת ע"ג קשרי אצבעותיה של רגל דברי ר' שמעון בן יהודה איש כפר עכו שאמר משום רבי שמעון ורבנן אמר רב חסדא עד שיהו ב' שערות במקום אחד,ת"ר עד מתי הבת ממאנת עד שתביא שתי שערות דברי רבי מאיר ר' יהודה אומר עד שירבה השחור רבי יוסי אומר עד שתקיף העטרה בן שלקות אומר עד שתכלכל,ואמר רבי שמעון מצאני חנינא בן חכינאי בצידן ואמר כשאתה מגיע אצל ר"ע אמור לו עד מתי הבת ממאנת אם יאמר לך עד שתביא שתי שערות אמור לו והלא בן שלקות העיד במעמד כולכם ביבנה עד שתכלכל ולא אמרתם לו דבר,כשבאתי אצל רבי עקיבא אמר לי כלכול זה איני יודע מהו בן שלקות איני מכיר עד מתי הבת ממאנת עד שתביא ב' שערות, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big שתי שערות האמורות בפרה ובנגעים והאמורות בכל מקום כדי לכוף ראשן לעיקרן דברי רבי ישמעאל ר"א אומר כדי לקרוץ בציפורן ר' עקיבא אומר כדי שיהו ניטלות בזוג, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big אמר רב חסדא אמר מר עוקבא הלכה כדברי כולן להחמיר, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big הרואה כתם הרי זו מקולקלת,וחוששת משום זוב דברי רבי מאיר וחכ"א אין בכתמים משום זוב, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big מאן חכמים ר' חנינא בן אנטיגנוס היא דתניא ר"ח בן אנטיגנוס אומר כתמים אין בהן משום זוב ופעמים שהכתמים מביאין לידי זיבה,כיצד לבשה ג' חלוקות הבדוקות לה ומצאה עליהם כתם או שראתה ב' ימים וחלוק אחד הן הן הכתמים המביאין לידי זיבה,השתא שלשה חלוקות דלאו מגופה קחזיא חיישינן ב' ימים וחלוק אחד מיבעיא,מהו דתימא כל כי האי גוונא מביאה קרבן ונאכל קא משמע לן,אמר רבא בהא זכנהו ר' חנינא בן אנטיגנוס לרבנן מאי שנא פחות מג' גריסין במקום אחד דלא חיישינן דאמרי' בתרי יומי חזיתיה שלשה גריסין במקום אחד נמי נימא תרתי ופלגא מגופה חזיתיה ואידך אגב זוהמא דם מאכולת הוא,ורבנן כיון דאיכא לפלוגי בגריס ועוד לכל יומא לא תלינן,ור"ח בן אנטיגנוס ג' גריסין במקום א' הוא דלא חיישינן הא בג' מקומות חיישינן הא אמרת בג' חלוקות אין בג' מקומות לא,לדבריהם דרבנן קאמר להו לדידי בג' חלוקות אין בג' מקומות לא אלא לדידכו אודו לי מיהת דהיכא דחזאי ג' גריסין במקום אחד דאמרינן תרי ופלגא מגופה חזיתיה ואידך אגב זוהמא דם מאכולת הוא,ורבנן כיון דאיכא לפלוגי בגריס ועוד לכל יומא לא תלינן,ת"ר הרואה כתם אם יש בו כדי לחלק ג' גריסין שהן כגריס ועוד חוששת ואם לאו אינה חוששת,ר' יהודה בן אגרא אומר משום רבי יוסי אחת זו ואחת זו חוששת
| 52b. b Job out of the tempest, and said” /b (Job 38:1–3) b to him: /b Greatest b imbecile in the world! I have created many hairs on a person’s head, and for each and every hair I created /b its own b distinct follicle, so that two hairs should not draw /b sustece b from one follicle. As, were two /b hairs b to draw /b sustece b from one follicle, /b it would b weaken a man’s vision. /b Now if b I did not confuse one follicle with another, would I confuse /b a man named b Iyyov with i oyev /i ? /b This indicates that two hairs do not grow from one follicle.,The Gemara answers: It is b not difficult; that /b statement above, that two hairs in one follicle is a valid sign of adulthood, is referring to the hairs b in /b the rest of a person’s b body, /b whereas b this /b statement, that there cannot be two hairs in one follicle, is referring to the hairs b on /b a person’s b head. /b , b Rav Yehuda says /b that b Shmuel says: /b The b two hairs that /b the Sages b said /b are signs of adulthood are valid signs b even if /b they are not adjacent; but rather b one /b hair is b on the spoon- /b shaped area above his organ b and one /b is b on the /b young boy’s b testicles. /b ,The Gemara notes b that /b this b is also taught /b in a i baraita /i : The b two hairs that /b the Sages b said /b are signs of adulthood are valid signs b even /b if b one /b hair is b on /b the young girl’s b back, /b below her pubic area, b and one on her lower abdomen. /b The same applies if b one /b hair is b on the finger joints of her hand and one /b hair is b on the toe joints of her foot. /b This is b the statement of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehuda, of the village of Akko, who said /b it b in the name of Rabbi Shimon. And /b what do b the Rabbis /b say about this matter? b Rav Ḥisda says: /b According to the Rabbis, they are not a valid sign of adulthood b unless /b the b two hairs are in one place. /b ,§ The mishna teaches that Rabbi Yehuda and the Rabbis disagree with regard to when a young girl can perform refusal. According to the Rabbis, it is until she grows two pubic hairs after she reaches the age of twelve years and one day. According to Rabbi Yehuda she still retains the right to perform refusal at that point, until the majority of the pubic area is filled with hair. In this regard, b the Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Until when can a young girl perform refusal? Until she grows two /b pubic b hairs; /b this is b the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: /b She can perform refusal b until /b the area covered by the b black /b pubic hairs b is greater /b than the white skin of the genital area. b Rabbi Yosei says: Until the nipple is surrounded /b by hair. b Ben Shelakot says: Until /b the pubic area is b filled with hair. /b , b And Rabbi Shimon said: Ḥanina ben Ḥakhinai found me in /b the city of b Tzaidan and said /b to me: b When you reach Rabbi Akiva, say to him: Until when can a young girl perform refusal? If he says to you /b that she may perform refusal b until she grows two /b pubic b hairs, say to him: But didn’t ben Shelakot testify in the presence of all of you in Yavne /b that she may perform refusal b until /b the pubic area b is filled with hair [ i shetekhalkel /i ], and you did not say anything to him, /b thereby indicating that you conceded to him?,Rabbi Shimon continued: b When I reached Rabbi Akiva, /b and I said what I had been told to say to him, b he said to me: I do not know what this filling with hair [ i kilkul /i ] is, I don’t know /b any b ben Shelakot, /b and my opinion with regard to your question, b until when can a young girl perform refusal, /b is that she can perform refusal b until she grows two /b pubic b hairs. /b , strong MISHNA: /strong The b two /b white or black b hairs that are mentioned with regard to /b disqualification of a red b heifer; and /b the two white hairs mentioned b with regard to leprous marks, /b i.e., that if they grow within a white leprous mark, it is impure; b and /b the two hairs b that are mentioned in every place, /b i.e., with regard to a young boy and girl, are significant only if they are long b enough to bend the top /b of the hairs b to /b reach b their roots. /b This is b the statement of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Eliezer says: /b They must be long b enough to /b grasp them and b cut /b them b with a fingernail. Rabbi Akiva says: /b They must be long b enough to be cut with a pair [ i bezug /i ] /b of scissors., strong GEMARA: /strong b Rav Ḥisda says /b that b Mar Ukva says /b with regard to the various opinions in the mishna on the measure of hairs: The b i halakha /i /b is b in accordance with the statements of all of them to be stringent. /b One should consider it hair only if all of the criteria are met, or consider it to be hair if any one condition is met, depending on which standard yields the more stringent result., strong MISHNA: /strong With regard to a woman b who sees /b a red b stain /b on her garment, b that /b woman’s reckoning b is distorted. /b Since she does not know when the blood that caused the stain appeared, she does not know when the seven days of menstrual flow end and when the eleven days of the flow of the i zava /i begin., b And /b therefore she must be b concerned due to /b the possibility that it might have been caused by the b flow of a i zava /i . /b If she wore the same garment for three days on which she can assume the status of a i zava /i , and subsequently discovered a stain with an area that is the size of at least three split beans, the concern is that on each of those three days a stain with the area of at least one split bean, the minimum area that transmits impurity, was formed. The result is that she is a greater i zava /i and is required to count seven clean days before immersion. This is b the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: No /b configuration b of stains /b leads to concern b due to the flow of a i zava /i . /b , strong GEMARA: /strong The Gemara asks: b Who /b are b the Rabbis /b in this mishna? b It is Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus, as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus says: Stains do not /b lead to concern b due to the flow of a i zava /i , but stains can sometimes lead to i ziva /i . /b , b How so, /b i.e., how can stains lead to i ziva /i according to Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus? If a woman b wore three /b different b robes that /b had been b examined by her /b for blood stains, b and /b she then b found a stain on /b each of b them; or /b if she b saw /b blood flowing from her body on b two /b consecutive b days and /b on the third day she saw a stain on b one /b of the b robes /b that she wore that day, b those are the stains that lead to i ziva /i . /b ,The Gemara raises a difficulty with regard to the above statement: According to the opinion of Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus, b now /b that in a case where she sees stains on b three robes we /b are b concerned /b for i ziva /i , despite the fact b that /b she b does not see /b the blood flowing b from her body, is /b it b necessary /b to state that we are concerned if she experiences bleeding from her body on b two days and /b sees a stain on b one /b of the b robes? /b ,The Gemara answers: It is necessary to state that, b lest you say /b that in b any case like this, /b where she experiences bleeding from her body on two days and on the third day she sees a stain on one of the robes, b she brings an offering and it is consumed, /b like one who is definitely a i zava /i . Therefore, Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus b teaches us /b that her status as a i zava /i is uncertain, and consequently she brings a bird for a sin offering that is due to uncertainty, which is not eaten., b Rava said: With this /b claim b Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus bested the /b other b Rabbis, /b who agree with the opinion of Rabbi Meir in the mishna: b What is different /b about a stain that is b less than three split beans in one place, that we are not concerned /b she might be a i zava /i ? The reason is b that we say /b she b saw /b blood b on /b only b two days. /b But in a case where she discovered a stain on her robe with the area of at least b three split beans in one place, /b one can b also say: /b The area of b two and a half /b split beans should be attributed to blood b seen from her body, but the other is /b the b blood of a louse that /b was there b due to the dirt /b associated with her bleeding.,The Gemara asks: b And /b how do b the Rabbis /b respond to this claim? The Gemara answers: They maintain that b since it is possible to divide /b the stain into b at least one split bean for each /b of the three b days, we do not attribute /b the stain to the blood of a louse.,The Gemara raises a difficulty with regard to the statement of Rava: b And /b according to the opinion of b Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus, /b one can infer that b it is /b specifically in the case of a stain with the area of at least b three split beans in one place that we are not concerned /b she might be a i zava /i . It can be inferred from here that if it is b in three places, we are concerned. /b But b didn’t you say /b that if she discovered stains b in three robes, yes, /b we are concerned, which indicates that if it is b in three places /b on a single robe we are b not /b concerned.,The Gemara answers that it was b in accordance with the statement of the Rabbis /b that Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus b stated /b his opinion b to them, /b as follows: b According to my /b opinion, if she discovered stains b in three robes, yes /b we are concerned, whereas if it is b in three places /b we are b not /b concerned. b But according to your /b opinion, b at least concede to me that where /b she b saw /b a stain on her robe with the area of at least b three split beans in one place, that we say /b that the area of b two and a half /b split beans can be attributed to blood b seen from her body, and the other is /b the b blood of a louse /b that was there b due to the dirt /b associated with her bleeding.,The Gemara asks: b And /b how do b the Rabbis /b respond to this claim? The Gemara answers: They maintain that b since it is possible to divide /b the stain into b at least one split bean for each /b of the three b days, we do not attribute /b the stain to the blood of a louse.,§ With regard to a woman who finds a stain on her robe, b the Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : In the case of a woman b who sees /b a red b stain /b on her garment that she wore for a number of days and she does not know when and where it is from, what is her status? b If /b the area is large b enough to be divided /b into three parts, where the total area is the size of b three split beans, /b each of b which is /b the minimum measure to render her a i zava /i , i.e., an area the size of b at least a split bean, /b she must be b concerned /b that she is a i zava /i , as this stain might be the result of seeing a sufficient measure of blood on each of three occasions. b But if /b the stain is b not /b that size, she does b not /b need to b be concerned. /b , b Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra says in the name of Rabbi Yosei: Both /b in b this /b case, where she saw a stain large enough to be divided into three parts, where the total area is the size of three split beans, b and that /b case, where the stain was not that large, she must be b concerned /b that she might be a i zava /i . This is due to the fact that she possibly saw stains of sufficient size on only two occasions, but one was during twilight, which counts as two days, amounting to a total of three days.
|16. Babylonian Talmud, Menachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 58
| 65b. b And if Moses, our teacher, was a lover of the Jewish people, why did he delay them in the wilderness forty years? /b The elderly man b said to him: My teacher, you dismiss me with this /b retort? Rabbi Yoḥa ben Zakkai b said to him: Fool! And will our perfect Torah not be /b as worthy b as your frivolous speech? /b Your claim can easily be refuted.,Rabbi Yoḥa ben Zakkai cites a proof that i Shavuot /i does not need to occur specifically on a Sunday. b One verse states: /b “Even to the morrow after the seventh week b you shall number fifty days; /b and you shall present a new meal offering to the Lord” (Leviticus 23:16), b and one verse, /b the preceding one, apparently contradicts this when it b states: /b “And you shall count for you from the morrow after the day of rest, from the day that you brought the sheaf of the waving; b seven weeks shall there be complete.” /b Is the festival of i Shavuot /i seven full weeks after Passover, i.e., counting from Sunday through Shabbat seven times; or is it fifty days after Passover?,The Gemara explains: b How so, /b i.e., how can one reconcile these two verses? b Here, /b the verse that mentions seven complete weeks, is referring to a year b when the festival /b of Passover b occurs on Shabbat. /b In such a year, the fifty-day period between Passover and i Shavuot /i contains seven complete weeks, from Sunday through Shabbat. b There, /b the verse that defines the period as fifty days, is referring to a year b when the festival /b of Passover b occurs in the middle of the week. /b ,The Gemara presents b a mnemonic /b for several other proofs in refutation of the claim of the Boethusians: That b of Rabbi Eliezer: Number; Rabbi Yehoshua: Count; Rabbi Yishmael: From the i omer /i ; Rabbi Yehuda: Below. /b , b Rabbi Eliezer says: /b The previous proof b is not necessary, as /b the verse b states: /b “Seven weeks b you shall number for you; /b from the time the sickle is first put to the standing grain you shall begin to number seven weeks” (Deuteronomy 16:9). The term “for you” indicates that the b counting /b of the weeks b is dependent upon /b the decision of the b court, as they know /b how to b calculate the new /b months, upon which the date of the Festival depends. Therefore, when the verse states: b “The morrow after the day of rest [ i hashabbat /i ]” /b (Leviticus 23:16), it means: b The morrow after the Festival, /b as the determination of Festivals is by the court. This serves to b exclude /b the interpretation that the counting starts after the b Shabbat of Creation, /b i.e., a regular weekly Shabbat, b whose counting /b can be performed b by every person, /b not exclusively by the court.,Citing a different proof, b Rabbi Yehoshua says: /b The b Torah said /b to b count days, /b as it is stated: “A month of days” (Numbers 11:20), b and /b then b sanctify /b the b month /b with offerings. And the Torah also said to b count days /b from Passover b and /b then b sanctify the festival of i Shavuot /i /b with offerings, as it is stated: “You shall count fifty days” (Leviticus 23:16). From this comparison, one can learn that b just as /b the start of the counting toward the new b month is known /b even b before it comes, /b as one begins counting toward the following new month on the first day of a month, b so too /b the start of the counting toward b the festival of i Shavuot /i is known /b even b before it comes, /b as one begins counting toward i Shavuot /i on a fixed day of the month.,The Gemara elaborates: b And if you say /b that the festival of b i Shavuot /i always /b occurs the b day after Shabbat, how /b is the counting toward Shavuot b known /b based on b what came before it? /b If the occurrence of i Shavuot /i depends upon a Shabbat, there would be no specific date after Passover upon which the counting occurs yearly., b Rabbi Yishmael says /b there is another refutation of the Boethusian interpretation. b The Torah said: Bring /b the b i omer /i /b offering on the festival b on Passover and the two loaves on i Shavuot /i . Just as there, /b with regard to the offering on the b festival /b of i Shavuot /i , the two loaves are brought at b the beginning of the Festival, /b as it lasts only one day, b so too here, /b with regard to the b festival /b of Passover, the i omer /i must be brought at b the beginning of the Festival. /b If the i omer /i were to always be brought on a Sunday, this might occur at the end of the festival of Passover. For example, if Passover started on a Monday, the i omer /i would be brought only on the next Sunday, at the end of the Festival., b Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says /b there is yet another refutation. It is b stated “ i shabbat /i ” above /b (Leviticus 23:15), with regard to starting the counting of the i omer /i , b and /b it is also b stated “ i shabbat /i ” below /b (Leviticus 23:16), with regard to the commencement of the festival of i Shavuot /i . b Just as /b there, with regard to the b festival /b of i Shavuot /i , it is stated: “Even until the morrow after the seventh week [ i hashabbat /i ] you shall number fifty days,” b and /b the word i shabbat /i is referring to the b beginning of the Festival /b and it immediately b follows /b the end of the seventh week; b so too here, /b with regard to the bringing of the i omer /i , the word i shabbat /i means b Festival, /b so that the i omer /i offering immediately b follows the beginning of the Festival, /b on the second day of Passover. According to the Boethusians, the commencement of the counting could start well after the beginning of Passover. For example, if Passover occurs on a Sunday, the counting of the i omer /i would start only the following Sunday., b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : The verse states: “And you shall count for you from the morrow after the day of rest [ i hashabbat /i ], from the day that you brought the sheaf of the waving; seven weeks there shall be complete” (Leviticus 23:15). The phrase: b “And you shall count for you,” /b teaches b that /b the mitzva of counting is not a communal obligation. Rather, b there should be a counting by each and every /b person.,The i baraita /i continues: b From the morrow after the day of rest [ i hashabbat /i ], /b this means b from the morrow after the festival /b of Passover. b Or /b perhaps this is b not /b the meaning of the verse, but b rather /b it means b after the Shabbat of Creation, /b i.e., Sunday. b Rabbi Yosei bar Yehuda says: /b This cannot be correct, b as /b the verse b states: /b “Even until the morrow after the seventh week b you shall number fifty days” /b (Leviticus 23:16). This teaches that b all the countings that you count shall be only fifty days. /b ,Rabbi Yosei bar Yehuda elaborates: b And if you say /b that the clause: b “From the morrow after /b the day of rest [ i hashabbat /i ],” is referring to the b Shabbat of Creation, sometimes you will find /b a count of b fifty-one /b days from the first day of Passover, which is the date that the count began the previous year, until i Shavuot /i ; b and sometimes you will find fifty-two, /b or b fifty-three, /b or b fifty-four, /b or b fifty-five, /b or b fifty-six. /b For example, in one year, Passover occurs on Shabbat, and the counting of the i omer /i would start on Sunday, the sixteenth of Nisan, and i Shavuot /i would occur fifty days later. Another year, Passover occurs on a Friday, and the counting starts on Sunday, then the date that i Shavuot /i will occur this year is fifty-one days from the sixteenth of Nisan. If Passover occurs on a Thursday, and the counting begins on the following Sunday, i Shavuot /i will occur fifty-two days from the sixteenth of Nisan., b Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: /b That proof b is not necessary, /b
|17. Babylonian Talmud, Ketuvot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 63
| 112a. והויא כמבי מיכסי עד אקרא דתולבנקי כ"ב פרסי אורכא ופותיא שיתא פרסי,רבי חלבו ור' עוירא ור' יוסי בר חנינא איקלעו לההוא אתרא אייתו קמייהו אפרסקא דהוה כאילפס כפר הינו ואילפס כפר הינו כמה הוי ה' סאין אכלו שליש והפקירו שליש ונתנו לפני בהמתן שליש,לשנה איקלע ר' אלעזר להתם ואייתו לקמיה נקטו בידיה ואמר (תהלים קז, לד) ארץ פרי למלחה מרעת יושבי בה,רבי יהושע בן לוי איקלע לגבלא חזנהו להנהו קטופי דהוו קיימי כי עיגלי אמר עגלים בין הגפנים אמרו ליה קטופי נינהו אמר ארץ ארץ הכניסי פירותייך למי את מוציאה פירותייך לערביים הללו שעמדו עלינו בחטאתינו,לשנה איקלע ר' חייא להתם חזנהו דהוו קיימי כעיזי אמר עזים בין הגפנים אמרו ליה זיל לא תעביד לן כי חברך:,תנו רבנן בברכותיה של ארץ ישראל בית סאה עושה חמשת ריבוא כורין בישיבתה של צוען בית סאה עושה שבעים כורין דתניא אמר רבי מאיר אני ראיתי בבקעת בית שאן בית סאה עושה שבעים כורין,ואין לך מעולה בכל ארצות יותר מארץ מצרים שנאמר (בראשית יג, י) כגן ה' כארץ מצרים ואין לך מעולה בכל ארץ מצרים יותר מצוען דהוו מרבו בה מלכים דכתיב (ישעיהו ל, ד) כי היו בצוען שריו ואין לך טרשים בכל א"י יותר מחברון דהוו קברי בה שיכבי,ואפילו הכי חברון מבונה על אחת משבעה בצוען דכתיב (במדבר יג, כב) וחברון שבע שנים נבנתה לפני צוען מצרים מאי נבנתה אילימא נבנתה ממש אפשר אדם בונה בית לבנו קטן קודם שיבנה לבנו גדול שנאמר (בראשית י, ו) ובני חם כוש ומצרים ופוט וכנען,אלא שמבונה על אחת משבעה בצוען והני מילי בטרשים אבל שלא בטרשים חמש מאה,והני מילי שלא בברכותיה אבל בברכותיה כתיב (בראשית כו, יב) ויזרע יצחק בארץ ההיא וגו',תניא אמר רבי יוסי סאה ביהודה היתה עושה חמש סאין סאה קמח סאה סלת סאה סובין סאה מורסין וסאה קיבוריא א"ל ההוא צדוקי לר' חנינא יאה משבחיתו בה בארעכון בית סאה אחת הניח לי אבא ממנה משח ממנה חמר ממנה עיבור ממנה קיטניות ממנה רועות מקנתי,א"ל ההוא בר אמוראה לבר ארעא דישראל האי [תאלתא] דקיימא אגודא דירדנא כמה גדריתו מינה אמר ליה שיתין כורי א"ל אכתי לא עייליתו בה אחריבתוה אנן מאה ועשרים כורי הוה גזרינן מינה אמר ליה אנא נמי מחד גיסא קאמינא לך,אמר רב חסדא מאי דכתיב (ירמיהו ג, יט) ואתן לך ארץ חמדה נחלת צבי למה ארץ ישראל נמשלה לצבי לומר לך מה צבי זה אין עורו מחזיק בשרו אף ארץ ישראל אינה מחזקת פירותיה דבר אחר מה צבי זה קל מכל החיות אף ארץ ישראל קלה מכל הארצות לבשל את פירותיה,אי מה צבי זה קל ואין בשרו שמן אף ארץ ישראל קלה לבשל ואין פירותיה שמנים תלמוד לומר זבת חלב ודבש שמנים מחלב ומתוקים מדבש,רבי אלעזר כי הוה סליק לארץ ישראל אמר פלטי לי מחדא כי סמכוהו אמר פלטי לי מתרתי כי אותבוהו בסוד העיבור אמר פלטי לי מתלת,שנאמר (יחזקאל יג, ט) והיתה ידי אל הנביאים החוזים שוא וגו' בסוד עמי לא יהיו זה סוד עיבור ובכתב בית ישראל לא יכתבו זה סמיכה ואל אדמת ישראל לא יבואו כמשמעו,רבי זירא כי הוה סליק לא"י לא אשכח מברא למעבר נקט במצרא וקעבר אמר ליה ההוא צדוקי עמא פזיזא דקדמיתו פומייכו לאודנייכו אכתי בפזיזותייכו קיימיתו אמר ליה דוכתא דמשה ואהרן לא זכו לה אנא מי יימר דזכינא לה:,ר' אבא מנשק כיפי דעכו ר' חנינא מתקן מתקליה ר' אמי ורבי אסי
| 112a. b and it was /b the same in area b as /b that which stretches b from /b the city of b Bei Mikhsei until the fortress of Tulbanki: Its length twenty-two parasangs and its width six parasangs, /b 132 square parasangs, which is 2,112 square i mil /i .,§ The Gemara relates that b Rabbi Ḥelbo, Rabbi Avira, and Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina happened /b to come on one occasion b to a certain place. /b The locals b brought before /b these Sages b a peach [ i afarseka /i ] that was /b as large b as a stewpot [ i ilpas /i ] of Kefar Hino. /b The Gemara asks: b And how big is a stewpot of Kefar Hino? /b The Gemara answers: It has a capacity of b five i se’a /i . They ate one-third /b of it, b they declared ownerless one-third /b of it, b and they placed before their animals one-third /b of it., b In /b the following b year, Rabbi Elazar happened /b to come b to that /b same place, b and they brought /b a peach b before him. He held it in his hand, /b as the peach was small enough for him to grasp in one hand, b and he said, /b in reference to the change in size of the fruit from the previous year: b “A fruitful land into a salt waste, from the wickedness of they who dwell there” /b (Psalms 107:34), i.e., their sins caused the drastic change in the yield of the produce.,§ Once b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi happened /b to come b to Gavla, /b in the Golan, and b he saw those clusters /b of vines b that were standing /b as large b as calves. He said /b to the locals: b Calves are /b standing b between the grapevines /b and you are not concerned that they will cause damage? b They said to him: They are clusters. /b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi b said: O earth, O earth! Gather in your fruit. For whom do you produce your fruit? For these gentiles who stand over us in our sins? /b It would be preferable if you did not produce such large fruit.,The following b year, Rabbi Ḥiyya happened /b to come b to that /b same place, and b he saw clusters that were standing /b as large b as goats. He said: Goats are /b standing b between the grapevines. They said to him: Go /b away; b do not do to us what your colleague /b has done. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi’s curse was already fulfilled, as the fruit had shrunk from the previous year.,§ b The Sages taught: In /b years of b blessings of Eretz Yisrael, /b an area of land measuring b one i beit se’a /i produces five thousand i kor /i . /b By way of comparison, b when Zoan, /b a fertile region in Egypt, b was settled, one i beit se’a /i /b there b would produce /b only b seventy i kor /i . As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Meir said: I saw in the valley of Beit She’an /b that one b i beit se’a /i produced seventy i kor /i , /b which teaches that the soil of a good-quality and irrigated stretch of land outside the borders of Eretz Yisrael will naturally yield this quantity of produce., b And you have no more outstanding /b earth b among all the lands /b other b than the land of Egypt, as it is stated: “Like the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt” /b (Genesis 13:10). b And you have no more outstanding /b region b in all of the land of Egypt than Zoan. /b The superior quality of Zoan is derived from the fact b that they would raise kings there, as it is written: “For his princes are at Zoan” /b (Isaiah 30:4). b And you have no rockier /b terrain b in all of Eretz Yisrael than Hebron, as /b people b would bury /b their b dead there, /b e.g., the Patriarchs in the Cave of Machpelah, because the land was not arable., b And even so, Hebron was more developed, /b i.e., more fertile, b than Zoan /b by b sevenfold, as it is written: “Now Hebron was built [ i nivneta /i ] seven years before Zoan in Egypt” /b (Numbers 13:22). b What /b is the meaning of the term: b i Nivneta /i , /b in this verse? b If we say /b it means b literally /b that Hebron b was built /b before Zoan, b would a person build a house for his younger son before building /b one b for his older son? As it is stated: “And the sons of Ham: Cush, and Mizraim, and Put, and Canaan” /b (Genesis 10:6), which indicates that Egypt, Mizraim, was older than Canaan, in whose territory Hebron was located., b Rather, /b the meaning of the verse is that Hebron b was more developed /b and more fertile b than Zoan /b by b sevenfold, /b which means that Hebron produced 490 i kor /i , seven times more than the seventy i kor /i of regular fertile land, as stated above. b And this applies only to the rocky /b terrain of Eretz Yisrael, e.g., Hebron, b whereas /b those parts of Eretz Yisrael that were b not rocky /b produced even more, up to b five hundred /b i kor /i ., b And this applies /b only b to /b a year when Eretz Yisrael is b not blessed. However, /b with regard to a year b when it was blessed, it is written: “And Isaac sowed in that land, /b and found in the same year a hundredfold” (Genesis 26:12). Isaac’s field produced one hundred times the normal yield, which according to the above calculations is five thousand i kor /i , as stated in the i baraita /i .,§ b It is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Yosei said: A i se’a /i /b of wheat b in Judea would produce five i se’a /i . /b How so? It would yield b a i se’a /i of flour; a i se’a /i of fine flour; a i se’a /i of bran /b fiber, from the outer layer of the grain; b a i se’a /i of coarse bran, /b i.e., flour mixed with bran fiber; b and a i se’a /i of cibarium [ i kiburaya /i ], /b inferior flour. b A certain Sadducee said to Rabbi Ḥanina: You are improving your land very well; /b my b father left me one i beit se’a /i /b of land in Eretz Yisrael b and from it /b I am able to produce b oil, from it /b I produce b wine, from it /b I grow b produce, from it /b I grow b legumes, /b and with it I provide pasture from which b my sheep graze. /b , b A certain Amorite /b once b said to /b a resident b of Eretz Yisrael: That palm tree which stands on the banks of the Jordan, how many /b dates b are you able to pick from it? He said to him: Sixty i kor /i . /b The Amorite b said to him: You have not yet /b fully b entered /b Eretz Yisrael and yet b you have /b already succeeded in b destroying it. We would pick off that /b tree b 120 i kor /i . /b The resident b said to him: I too am speaking to you /b about only b one side /b of the tree, as I have not yet picked the fruit off the other side.,§ b Rav Ḥisda said: What is /b the meaning of that b which is written: “And give you a pleasant land, the goodliest [ i tzvi /i ] heritage” /b (Jeremiah 3:19)? b Why is Eretz Yisrael likened to a deer [ i tzvi /i ]? /b This comparison comes b to tell you /b that b just as /b with regard to b this deer, its skin cannot contain its meat /b once it has been skinned, b so too, Eretz Yisrael cannot contain its fruit /b once it has been picked, due to the great quantity of the produce. b Alternatively, just as this deer is swifter than all the /b other b beasts, so too Eretz Yisrael is swifter to ripen its fruit than all /b the other b countries. /b ,The Gemara asks: b If /b so, one can suggest the following comparison: b Just as this deer is swift and its meat is not fatty, so too, Eretz Yisrael is swift to ripen /b its fruit b but its fruit is not fat /b and juicy. The Gemara explains: For this reason b the verse states: “Flowing with milk and honey” /b (Exodus 3:8), to say that its fruit is b fat /b and juicier b than milk and sweeter than honey. /b ,§ The Gemara relates that b when Rabbi Elazar ascended to Eretz Yisrael he said: I have been spared one /b curse. b When they ordained him /b and awarded him the title of Rabbi, b he said: I have been spared two. When they appointed him to sit in the council /b of Sages who dealt with the b intercalation of the calendar, he said: I have been spared three. /b , b As it is stated: “And My hand shall be against the prophets that see vanity, /b and that divine lies; they shall not be in the council of My people, neither shall they be written in the register of the house of Israel, neither shall they enter into the land of Israel; and you shall know that I am the Lord God” (Ezekiel 13:9). b “They shall not be in the council of My people,” this /b is referring to b the council /b of the b intercalation of the calendar; “neither shall they be written in the register of the house of Israel,” this /b is referring to b ordination; “neither shall they enter into the land of Israel,” /b this is understood b as per its plain meaning. /b Rabbi Elazar merited that these three curses were not fulfilled in him.,§ b When Rabbi Zeira ascended to Eretz Yisrael he could not find a ferry to cross /b the Jordan River. b He took hold of a rope /b that was strung across as a makeshift bridge b and crossed /b the Jordan. b A certain Sadducee said to him: Hasty people who put your mouths before your ears, /b when you said at the time of the giving of the Torah: “We will do” before “we will hear” (Exodus 24:7), b you remain hasty /b to this day. Why couldn’t you wait a little longer to cross the river on a ferry? Rabbi Zeira b said to him: /b This is b a place where Moses and Aaron did not merit /b entering; b who is to say that I will merit /b seeing this land? I hurried across before anything might occur to prevent my entrance into Eretz Yisrael.,§ b Rabbi Abba would kiss the rocks of Akko, /b which was on the coast of Eretz Yisrael. b Rabbi Ḥanina would repair its stumbling blocks, /b i.e., any potholes in the land, so that travelers would not fall and consequently speak ill of Eretz Yisrael. b Rabbi Ammi and Rabbi Asi /b
|18. Babylonian Talmud, Eruvin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 60
| 53b. ירשיע,ואמר ר' יוחנן מניין שמחל לו הקב"ה על אותו עון שנאמר (שמואל א כח, יט) מחר אתה ובניך עמי עמי במחיצתי,א"ר אבא אי איכא דמשאיל להו לבני יהודה דדייקי לשני מאברין תנן או מעברין תנן אכוזו תנן או עכוזו תנן ידעי,שאילינהו ואמרי ליה איכא דתני מאברין ואיכא דתני מעברין איכא דתני אכוזו ואיכא דתני עכוזו,בני יהודה דייקי לישנא מאי היא דההוא בר יהודה דאמר להו טלית יש לי למכור אמרו ליה מאי גוון טליתך אמר להו כתרדין עלי אדמה,בני גליל דלא דייקי לישנא מאי היא (דתניא) דההוא בר גלילא [דהוה קאזיל] ואמר להו אמר למאן אמר למאן אמרו ליה גלילאה שוטה חמר למירכב או חמר למישתי עמר למילבש או אימר לאיתכסאה,ההיא איתתא דבעיא למימר לחברתה תאי דאוכליך חלבא אמרה לה שלוכתי תוכליך לביא,ההיא אתתא דאתיא לקמיה דדיינא אמרה ליה מרי כירי תפלא הוית לי וגנבוך מין וכדו הוות דכד שדרו לך עילויה לא מטי כרעיך אארעא,אמהתא דבי רבי כי הוה משתעיא בלשון חכמה אמרה הכי עלת נקפת בכד ידאון נישריא לקיניהון,וכד הוה בעי דליתבון הוה אמרה להו יעדי בתר חברתה מינה ותתקפי עלת בכד כאילפא דאזלא בימא,רבי יוסי בר אסיין כי הוה משתעי בלשון חכמה אמר עשו לי שור במשפט בטור מסכן,וכד הוה שאיל באושפיזא אמר הכי גבר פום דין חי מה זו טובה יש,רבי אבהו כי הוה משתעי בלשון חכמה הוה אמר הכי אתריגו לפחמין ארקיעו לזהבין ועשו לי שני מגידי בעלטה איכא דאמרי ויעשו לי בהן שני מגידי בעלטה,אמרו ליה רבנן לרבי אבהו הצפיננו היכן רבי אלעאי צפון אמר להן עלץ בנערה אהרונית אחרונית עירנית והנעירתו,אמרי לה אשה,ואמרי לה מסכתא,אמרי ליה לרבי אלעאי הצפיננו הכין רבי אבהו [צפון] אמר להן נתייעץ במכתיר והנגיב למפיבשת,אמר רבי יהושע בן חנניה מימי לא נצחני אדם חוץ מאשה תינוק ותינוקת אשה מאי היא פעם אחת נתארחתי אצל אכסניא אחת עשתה לי פולין ביום ראשון אכלתים ולא שיירתי מהן כלום שנייה ולא שיירתי מהן כלום ביום שלישי הקדיחתן במלח כיון שטעמתי משכתי ידי מהן,אמרה לי רבי מפני מה אינך סועד אמרתי לה כבר סעדתי מבעוד יום אמרה לי היה לך למשוך ידיך מן הפת,אמרה לי רבי שמא לא הנחת פאה בראשונים ולא כך אמרו חכמים אין משיירין פאה באילפס אבל משיירין פאה בקערה,תינוקת מאי היא פעם אחת הייתי מהלך בדרך והיתה דרך עוברת בשדה והייתי מהלך בה אמרה לי תינוקת אחת רבי לא שדה היא זו אמרתי לה לא דרך כבושה היא אמרה לי ליסטים כמותך כבשוה,תינוק מאי היא פעם אחת הייתי מהלך בדרך וראיתי תינוק יושב על פרשת דרכים ואמרתי לו באיזה דרך נלך לעיר אמר לי זו קצרה וארוכה וזו ארוכה וקצרה והלכתי בקצרה וארוכה כיון שהגעתי לעיר מצאתי שמקיפין אותה גנות ופרדיסין,חזרתי לאחורי אמרתי לו בני הלא אמרת לי קצרה אמר לי ולא אמרתי לך ארוכה נשקתיו על ראשו ואמרתי לו אשריכם ישראל שכולכם חכמים גדולים אתם מגדולכם ועד קטנכם:,רבי יוסי הגלילי הוה קא אזיל באורחא אשכחה לברוריה אמר לה באיזו דרך נלך ללוד אמרה ליה גלילי שוטה לא כך אמרו חכמים אל תרבה שיחה עם האשה היה לך לומר באיזה ללוד,ברוריה אשכחתיה לההוא תלמידא דהוה קא גריס בלחישה
| 53b. b he did them mischief” /b (i Samuel 14:47).,The Gemara concludes the mention of Saul on a positive note. b And Rabbi Yoḥa said: From where /b is it derived b that the Holy One, Blessed be He, forgave him for that sin, /b the massacre of Nov, the city of priests? b As it is stated /b that the spirit of Samuel said to him: “And the Lord will also deliver Israel with you into the hand of the Philistines, b and tomorrow shall you and your sons be with me” /b (i Samuel 28:19); the phrase b “with me” /b means b within my partition /b together with me in heaven, i.e., on the same level as the righteous prophet Samuel.,The Gemara returns to the earlier question with regard to the correct reading of the word i me’abberin /i . b Rabbi Abba said: If there is anyone who can ask the people of Judea, who are precise in their language, /b whether the term in the mishna that b we learned /b is b i me’abberin /i /b with an i alef /i b or i me’abberin /i /b with an i ayin /i , he should ask them. Similarly, with regard to the blemishes of a firstborn animal, b was /b the term meaning its hindquarters that b we learned /b in the mishna b i akkuzo /i /b with an i alef /i , b or did we learn i akkuzo /i /b with an i ayin /i ? b They would know. /b ,The Gemara answers: b One asked /b the people of Judea, b and they said to him: Some teach i me’abberin /i /b with an i alef /i , b and some teach i me’abberin /i /b with an i ayin /i . b Some teach i akkuzo /i /b with an i alef /i , b and some teach i akkuzo /i /b with an i ayin /i . Both versions are well founded and neither one is erroneous.,Having mentioned that b the people of Judea are precise in their speech, /b the Gemara asks: b What is /b the meaning of this? The Gemara answers with an example: b As /b in the case of b a certain person from Judea who said to those /b within earshot: b I have a cloak to sell. They said to him: What color is your cloak? He said to them: Like beets on the ground, /b providing an exceedingly precise description of the exact shade of the cloak, the green tint of beet greens when they first sprout.,The Gemara returns to b the people of the Galilee, who are not precise in their speech. What is /b the meaning of this? The Gemara cites examples: b As it was taught /b in a i baraita /i b that /b there was b a certain person from the Galilee who would walk and say /b to people: b Who has i amar /i ? Who has i amar /i ? They said to him: Foolish Galilean, /b what do you mean? Galileans did not pronounce the guttural letters properly, so it was unclear whether he sought b a donkey [ i ḥamor /i ] to ride, or wine [ i ḥamar /i ] to drink, wool [ i amar /i ] to wear, or a lamb [ i imar /i ] to slaughter. /b This is an example of the lack of precision in the Galileans’ speech.,The Gemara cites another example of the lack of linguistic precision of the Galileans: There was b a certain woman who wanted to say to her friend: /b My neighbor, b come and I will feed you milk [ i ta’i de’okhlikh ḥelba /i ]; /b however, due to the imprecise articulation of her words, b she said to her: My neighbor, /b may a b lioness eat you [ i tokhlikh lavya /i ]. /b ,The Gemara cites another example of the ignorance and incivility of the Galileans: There was b a certain woman who came before a judge /b intending to say: Master, sir [ i Mari kiri /i , spelled with a i kuf /i ], I had a board, and they stole it from me [ i tavla havet li ugenavuha mimeni /i ]. But instead b she said to him: Master, servant [ i Mari kiri /i , /b spelled with a i kaf /i ], b I had a beam and they stole you from me /b [ b i tafla havet li ugenavukh min /i /b ]. b And it was so /b large, b that when they would hang you upon it, your feet would not reach the ground. /b ,In contrast to the speech of the Galileans, which indicates ignorance and loutishness, the Gemara cites examples of the clever phraseology of the inhabitants of Judea and the Sages: b The maidservant in the house of Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi, b when she would speak enigmatically, /b employing euphemistic terminology or in riddles, b she would say as follows: The ladle /b used for drawing wine from the jug b is /b already b knocking against /b the bottom of b the jug, /b i.e., the wine jug is almost empty. b Let the eagles fly to their nests, /b i.e., let the students return home, as there is nothing left for them to drink., b And when /b Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi b wanted them to sit, she would say to them: Let us remove /b the stopper b from another /b jug, b and let the ladle /b float b in the jug like a ship sailing in the sea. /b ,The Gemara also relates that b when Rabbi Yosei bar Asyan would speak enigmatically, he would say: Prepare for me an ox in judgment on a poor mountain. /b His method was to construct words by combining words from Aramaic translations of Hebrew words or Hebrew translations of Aramaic words. Ox is i tor /i in Aramaic; judgment is i din /i . Combined they form i teradin /i , beets. Mountain in Hebrew is i har /i , which they pronounced i ḥar /i ; poor is i dal /i . Together it spells i ḥardal /i , mustard. Thus, Rabbi Yosei bar Asyan was requesting beets in mustard., b And when he would inquire about an inn, he would say as follows: This man here is raw; what is this good that there is? /b The phrase “this man here is raw” is used in a similar syllable-by-syllable translation: man in Hebrew is i ish /i ; here is i po /i ; this is i zeh /i ; and raw is i na /i . All together, they sound like i ushpazikhna /i , i.e., an innkeeper (Rabbeinu Ḥael). In other words, Rabbi Yosei bar Asyan was asking after the innkeeper., b When Rabbi Abbahu would speak enigmatically, he would say as follows: Make the coals the color of an i etrog /i ; beat the golden ones, /b i.e., spread out the coals, which redden like gold when they glow; b and make me two speakers-in-the-dark, /b i.e., roosters, which announce the dawn when it is still dark. b Some say /b a slightly different version: b And they shall make me in them, /b on the coals, i.e., roast for me on top of the coals, b two speakers-in-the-dark. /b ,In a similarly clever manner, b the Sages said to Rabbi Abbahu: Show us [ i hatzpinenu /i ] where Rabbi Elai is hiding [ i tzafun /i ], /b as we do not know his whereabouts. b He said to them: He rejoiced with the latter [ i aḥaronit /i ] Aharonic [ i Aharonit /i ] girl; she is lively [ i eiranit /i ] and kept him awake [ i vehiniratu /i ]. /b ,There are two ways to understand this cryptic statement: b Some say /b it refers to b a woman, /b i.e., he married a young girl from a priestly family [Aharonic], who is his second [latter] wife, from a village [ i eiranit /i ], and he is sleeping now because she kept him awake during the night., b And some say /b it refers to b a tractate. /b The term girl refers to the tractate; Aharonic indicates that it is a tractate from the order of i Kodashim /i , which deals with the priestly service. The phrase the latter means that it is his latest course of study, and lively alludes to the challenging nature of the subject matter. Since he was awake all night studying, he is presently sleeping.,The Gemara continues: b They said to Rabbi Elai: Show us where Rabbi Abbahu is hiding, /b as we do not know where he is. b He said to them: He has taken counsel with the one who crowns, /b i.e., the i Nasi /i , who appoints the Sages, b and has gone south /b [ b i hingiv /i /b ] b to Mephibosheth, /b i.e., he has headed to the Sages of the south, referred to here as Mephibosheth, who was King Saul’s grandson and a great Sage of his time.,Having discussed the clever speech of various Sages, the Gemara relates that b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥaya said /b as follows: b In /b all b my days, no person defeated me /b in a verbal encounter b except for a woman, a young boy, and a young girl. What is /b the encounter in which b a woman /b got the better of me? b One time I was staying at a certain inn /b and the hostess b prepared me beans. On the first day I ate them and left nothing over, /b although proper etiquette dictates that one should leave over something on his plate. On the b second /b day I again ate b and left nothing over. /b On the third day b she over-salted them /b so that they were inedible. b As soon as I tasted /b them, b I withdrew my hands from them. /b , b She said to me: My Rabbi, why aren’t you eating /b beans as on the previous days? Not wishing to offend her, b I said to her: I have already eaten during the daytime. She said to me: You should have withdrawn your hand from bread /b and left room for some beans., b She /b then b said to me: My Rabbi, perhaps you did not leave a remainder /b of food on your plate b on the first /b days, which is why you are leaving over food today. b Isn’t this what the Sages said: One need not leave a remainder in the pot [ i ilpas /i ], but one must leave a remainder on the plate /b as an expression of etiquette ( i Tosafot /i ). This is the incident in which a woman got the better of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥaya., b What is /b the incident with b a young girl? One time I was walking along the path, and the path passed through a field, and I was walking on it. A certain young girl said to me: My Rabbi, isn’t this a field? /b One should not walk through a field, so as not to damage the crops growing there. b I said to her: Isn’t it a well-trodden path /b in the field, across which one is permitted to walk? b She said to me: Robbers like you have trodden it. /b In other words, it previously had been prohibited to walk through this field, and it is only due to people such as you, who paid no attention to the prohibition, that a path has been cut across it. Thus, the young girl defeated Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥaya in a debate., b What is /b the incident with b a young boy? One time I was walking along the path, and I saw a young boy sitting at the crossroads. And I said to him: On which path shall we walk /b in order to get b to the city? He said to me: This /b path b is short and long, and that /b path b is long and short. I walked on the /b path that was b short and long. When I approached the city I found that gardens and orchards surrounded it, /b and I did not know the trails leading through them to the city., b I went back /b and met the young boy again and b said to him: My son, didn’t you tell me /b that this way is b short? He said to me: And didn’t I tell you /b that it is also b long? I kissed him on his head and said to him: Happy are you, O Israel, for you are all exceedingly wise, from your old to your young. /b ,Having discussed wise speech and the wisdom of Jewish women, the Gemara cites the following story: b Rabbi Yosei HaGelili was walking along the way, /b and b met Berurya. He said to her: On which path shall we walk /b in order to get b to Lod? She said to him: Foolish Galilean, didn’t the Sages say: Do not talk much with women? You should have said /b your question more succinctly: b Which /b way b to Lod? /b ,The Gemara relates more of Berurya’s wisdom: b Berurya came across a certain student who was whispering his studies /b rather than raising his voice.
|19. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Qamma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 47
| 58b. ולאסטמורי בגוה תיקו,כיצד משלמת מה שהזיקה וכו': מנה"מ,אמר רב מתנה דאמר קרא (שמות כב, ד) ובער בשדה אחר מלמד ששמין על גב שדה אחר,האי ובער בשדה אחר מבעי ליה לאפוקי רה"ר,א"כ לכתוב רחמנא ובער בשדה חבירו א"נ שדה אחר מאי בשדה אחר ששמין על גב שדה אחר,ואימא כוליה להכי הוא דאתא לאפוקי רה"ר מנלן,אם כן לכתביה רחמנא גבי תשלומין (שמות כב, ד) מיטב שדהו ומיטב כרמו ישלם בשדה אחר ל"ל דכתביה רחמנא גבי ובער ש"מ תרתי,היכי שיימינן א"ר יוסי בר חנינא סאה בששים סאין ר' ינאי אמר תרקב בששים תרקבים חזקיה אמר קלח בששים קלחים,מיתיבי אכלה קב או קביים אין אומרים תשלם דמיהן אלא רואין אותה כאילו היא ערוגה קטנה ומשערים אותה מאי לאו בפני עצמה,לא בששים,ת"ר אין שמין קב מפני שמשביחו ולא בית כור מפני שפוגמו,מאי קאמר א"ר פפא ה"ק אין שמין קב בששים קבים מפני שמשביח מזיק ולא כור בששים כורין מפני שפוגם מזיק,מתקיף לה רב הונא בר מנוח האי ולא בית כור ולא כור מבעי ליה,אלא אמר רב הונא בר מנוח משמיה דרב אחא בריה דרב איקא הכי קתני אין שמין קב בפני עצמו מפני שמשביח ניזק ולא קב בבית כור מפני שפוגם ניזק אלא בששים,ההוא גברא דקץ קשבא מחבריה אתא לקמיה דריש גלותא א"ל לדידי חזי לי ותלתא תאלתא בקינא הוו קיימי והוו שוו מאה זוזי זיל הב ליה תלתין ותלתא ותילתא אמר גבי ריש גלותא דדאין דינא דפרסאה למה לי אתא לקמיה דר"נ א"ל בששים,א"ל רבא אם אמרו בנזקי ממונו יאמרו בנזקי גופו,אמר ליה אביי לרבא בנזקי גופו מאי דעתיך דתניא המבכיר כרמו של חבירו סמדר רואין אותו כמה היתה יפה קודם לכן וכמה היא יפה לאחר מכאן ואילו בששים לא קתני,אטו גבי בהמתו נמי מי לא תניא כי האי גוונא דתניא קטמה נטיעה רבי יוסי אומר גוזרי גזירות שבירושלים אומרים נטיעה בת שנתה שתי כסף בת שתי שנים ארבעה כסף אכלה חזיז רבי יוסי הגלילי אומר נידון במשוייר שבו וחכמים אומרים רואין אותה כמה היתה יפה וכמה היא יפה
| 58b. b and taken care of it, /b and he bears responsibility for failing to do so. The dilemma b shall stand /b unresolved.,§ The mishna teaches: b How does /b the court appraise the value of the damage when the owner b pays /b for b what it damaged? /b The court appraises a large piece of land with an area required for sowing one se’a of seed [ i beit se’a /i ] in that field, including the garden bed in which the damage took place, it appraises how much it was worth before the animal damaged it and how much is it worth now, and the owner must pay the difference. The Gemara asks: b From where are these matters /b derived?, b Rav Mattana says: As the verse states: “And it feed in another field [ i uvi’er bisde aḥer /i ]” /b (Exodus 22:4). This b teaches that /b the court b appraises /b the damage b relative to another field, /b i.e., relative to the damaged field as a whole and not an appraisal of only the specific garden bed that was damaged.,The Gemara asks: But b this /b phrase: b “ i Uvi’er bisde aḥer /i ,” /b can be understood as meaning: “And it feed in another’s field,” and accordingly, b is necessary /b to teach that the owner is not liable unless it was a field with an owner, b to exclude /b damage caused by an animal in b the public domain, /b for which the owner is not liable.,The Gemara answers: b If so, /b if this was the sole intention of the verse, b let the Merciful One write /b in the Torah: b And it feed in a field belonging to another [ i uvi’er bisde ḥaveiro /i ], or alternatively, /b let it write: And it consume b another field [ i sedeh aḥer /i ].” What /b is conveyed by the particular expression: b “In another field [ i bisde aḥer /i ]”? /b It is to teach that the court b appraises /b the damage b relative to another field. /b , b But /b why not b say /b that this verse b comes entirely for this /b purpose, i.e., to teach that the court appraises the damage relative to another field? And in that case, b from where do we /b derive the b exclusion /b of liability for damage by Eating in b the public domain? /b ,The Gemara answers: b If /b it is b so /b that the verse was referring solely to the method of appraising the damage, b the Merciful One should have written this /b in the Torah b in the context of payment, /b as follows: b His best-quality field and the best quality of his vineyard he shall pay in another field /b (see Exodus 22:4), thereby adding the term: In another field, and, by extension, the directive concerning how the damage is appraised, to the verse discussing payment. b Why do I /b need b the Merciful One to write it in /b the context of the act of damaging, in the verse: b “And it feed /b in another field”? b Conclude two /b conclusions b from it: /b The verse is referring to both the place where the damage occurred and the method by which the damage is appraised.,§ The Gemara asks: b How do we, /b the court, b appraise /b the value of the damage? b Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina says: /b The court appraises the value of an area required for sowing one b i se’a /i /b of seed [ i beit se’a /i ] b relative to /b an area required for sowing b sixty i se’a /i /b of seed, and according to this calculation determines the value of the damage. b Rabbi Yannai says: /b The court appraises each b i tarkav /i , /b equivalent to half a i beit se’a /i , b relative to /b an area of b sixty i tarkav /i . Ḥizkiyya says: /b The court appraises the value of each b stalk /b eaten b relative to sixty stalks. /b ,The Gemara b raises an objection /b from a i baraita /i : If an animal b ate /b one b i kav /i or two i kav /i , /b the court b does not say that /b the owner b pays /b compensation according to b their value, /b i.e., the value of the actual damage; b rather, /b they b view it as if it were a small garden bed and evaluate it /b accordingly. b What, is it not /b that this means that the court evaluates that garden bed according to what it would cost if sold b by itself, /b which contradicts all the previous explanations?,The Gemara rejects this interpretation: b No, /b it means that the court appraises the value b in /b relation to an area b sixty /b times greater., b The Sages taught: /b When appraising the damage, the court b does not appraise /b it based on an area of a i beit b kav /b /i b , because /b doing so b enhances his /b position, b and /b they also do b not /b appraise it relative to an area of b a i beit kor /i , /b equivalent to the area in which one can plant thirty i se’a /i of seed, b because this weakens his /b position.,The Gemara asks: b What is /b this i baraita /i b saying? Rav Pappa said: This /b is what the i baraita /i is b saying: /b The court b does not appraise /b the value of one b i kav /i relative to /b an area of b sixty i kav /i , /b which, being too large for an individual but too small for a trader, is always sold in the market at a lower price, b because that /b would b enhance /b the position of b the one liable for damage. /b Conversely, the court does b not /b appraise the value of b a i kor /i relative to /b an area of b sixty i kor /i , /b an area so large that it is purchased only by a person with a specific need and therefore for a high price, b because that /b would b weaken /b the position of b the one liable for damage. /b , b Rav Huna bar Manoaḥ objects to this: /b According to this interpretation, b this /b term employed by the i baraita /i : b And /b they also b do not /b appraise it relative to b an area /b of b a i beit kor /i , /b is imprecise. According to the explanation of Rav Pappa, the i baraita /i b should have said: And /b they also b do not /b appraise it relative to b a i kor /i , /b to parallel the term in the previous clause: A i kav /i ., b Rather, Rav Huna bar Manoaḥ said in the name of Rav Aḥa, son of Rav Ika, /b that b this /b is what the i baraita /i b is teaching: /b The court b does not appraise a i kav /i by itself, because that /b would b enhance /b the position of b the injured /b party, b nor /b does the court appraise b a i kav /i /b as one part of b a i beit kor /i , because that /b would b weaken /b the position of b the injured /b party, since damage inside such a large area is insignificant. b Rather, /b the court appraises the damage b in /b relation to an area b sixty /b times greater than the area that was damaged.,§ The Gemara relates: There was b a certain man who cut down a date palm [ i kashba /i ] /b belonging b to another. /b The latter b came /b with the perpetrator for arbitration b before the Exilarch. /b The Exilarch b said to /b the perpetrator: b I personally saw /b that place where the date palm was planted, and it actually contained b three date palms [ i talata /i ] standing /b together b in a cluster, /b growing out of a single root, b and they were worth /b altogether b one hundred dinars. /b Consequently, since you, the perpetrator, cut down one of the three, b go /b and b give him thirty-three and one-third /b dinars, one third of the total value. The perpetrator rejected this ruling and b said: Why do I /b need to be judged by b the Exilarch, who rules according to Persian law? He came before Rav Naḥman /b for judgment in the same case, who b said to him: /b The court appraises the damage b in /b relation to an area b sixty /b times greater than the damage caused. This amount is much less than thirty-three and one-third dinars., b Rava said to /b Rav Naḥman: b If /b the Sages b said /b that the court appraises b damage /b caused b by one’s property, /b such as his animal, relative to an area sixty times greater, b would /b they also b say /b that the court appraises damage relative to an area sixty times greater even b for /b direct b damage /b caused by b one’s body? /b , b Abaye said to Rava: With regard to damage /b caused by b one’s body, what is your opinion? /b Are you basing your opinion on the following, b as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : If one b destroys the vineyard of another /b while the grapes are b budding [ i semadar /i ], /b the court b views how much /b the vineyard b was worth before /b he destroyed it, b and how much it is worth afterward. /b Abaye states the inference: b Whereas, /b the method of appraising one part in b sixty is not taught. /b Is the basis of your ruling the fact that in this i baraita /i that discusses damage caused directly by a person, the method of appraising one part in sixty is not mentioned?,Abaye continued: b Is that to say /b that b with regard to /b damage caused by b an animal it is not taught /b in a mishna or i baraita /i without mentioning the method of appraising one part in sixty b like this case? /b But this is not so, b as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : If an animal b broke down a sapling /b that had not yet borne fruit, b Rabbi Yosei says: Those who issue decrees in Jerusalem say /b that the damages are determined based on a fixed formula: If the b sapling /b was b in its first year, /b the owner of the animal pays b two /b pieces of b silver; /b if the sapling was b two years old, /b he pays b four /b pieces of b silver. /b If the animal b ate unripe blades of grain /b used for pasture, b Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says: It is judged according to what remains of it, /b i.e., the court waits until the rest of the field ripens and then appraises the value of what was previously eaten. b And the Rabbis say: /b The court b views how much /b the field b was worth /b before he destroyed it, b and how much it is worth /b now.
|20. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Batra, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 58
| 116a. ולא תהא תורה שלמה שלנו כשיחה בטלה שלכם מה לבת בנו שכן יפה כחה במקום האחין תאמר בבתו שהורע כחה במקום אחין ונצחום ואותו היום עשאוהו יום טוב,(שופטים כא, יז) ויאמרו ירושת פלטה לבנימן ולא ימחה שבט מישראל,אמר רבי יצחק דבי רבי אמי מלמד שהתנו על שבט בנימין שלא תירש בת הבן עם האחין,אמר רבי יוחנן משום ר' שמעון בן יוחאי כל שאינו מניח בן ליורשו הקדוש ברוך הוא מלא עליו עברה כתיב הכא (במדבר כז, ח) והעברתם את נחלתו וכתיב התם (צפניה א, טו) יום עברה היום ההוא,(תהלים נה, כ) אשר אין חליפות למו ולא יראו אלהים רבי יוחנן ורבי יהושע בן לוי חד אמר כל שאינו מניח בן וחד אמר כל שאינו מניח תלמיד,תסתיים רבי יוחנן דאמר תלמיד דאמר רבי יוחנן דין גרמיה דעשיראה ביר תסתיים דרבי יוחנן דאמר תלמיד,ומדרבי יוחנן אמר תלמיד רבי יהושע בן לוי אמר בן,והא רבי יהושע בן לוי לא אזיל לבי טמיא אלא לבי מאן דשכיב בלא בני דכתיב (ירמיהו כב, י) בכו בכה להולך ואמר רב יהודה אמר רב להולך בלא בן זכר אלא רבי יהושע בן לוי הוא דאמר תלמיד,ומדר' יהושע בן לוי הוא דאמר תלמיד רבי יוחנן אמר בן,קשיא דרבי יוחנן אדרבי יוחנן לא קשיא הא דידיה הא דרביה:,סימן הדד עני וחכם:,דרש רבי פנחס בן חמא מאי דכתיב (מלכים א יא, כא) והדד שמע במצרים כי שכב דוד עם אבותיו וכי מת יואב שר הצבא מפני מה בדוד נאמרה בו שכיבה וביואב נאמרה בו מיתה דוד שהניח בן נאמרה בו שכיבה יואב שלא הניח בן נאמרה בו מיתה,ויואב לא הניח בן והכתיב (עזרא ח, ט) מבני יואב עובדיה בן יחיאל אלא דוד שהניח בן כמותו נאמרה בו שכיבה יואב שלא הניח בן כמותו נאמרה בו מיתה,דרש ר' פנחס בן חמא קשה עניות בתוך ביתו של אדם יותר מחמשים מכות שנאמר (איוב יט, כא) חנוני חנוני אתם רעי כי יד אלוה נגעה בי וקא אמרי ליה חבריה (איוב לו, כא) השמר אל תפן אל און כי על זה בחרת מעוני,דרש ר' פנחס בר חמא כל שיש לו חולה בתוך ביתו ילך אצל חכם ויבקש עליו רחמים שנא' (משלי טז, יד) חמת מלך מלאכי מות ואיש חכם יכפרנה:,זה הכלל כל הקודם בנחלה יוצאי ירכו קודמין והאב קודם לכל יוצאי ירכו: בעי רמי בר חמא אבי האב ואחי האב כגון אברהם וישמעאל בנכסי עשו איזה מהן קודם אמר רבא תא שמע האב קודם לכל יוצאי ירכו ורמי בר חמא
| 116a. b but will our perfect Torah not be /b as worthy b as your frivolous speech, /b as your inference is fallacious: b What /b is notable b about /b the inheritance of b a daughter of /b the deceased’s b son? /b It is notable b in that her right is enhanced /b in that she inherits from her paternal grandfather together b with the brothers /b of her father. Would you b say /b that the same applies b with regard to /b the deceased’s b daughter, whose right /b to inherit b is diminished /b in that she does not inherit from her father together b with /b her b brothers? /b The Sadducee’s i a fortiori /i inference is thereby disproved. The Gemara concludes: b And /b since the Sadducees had no counterargument, the Sages b were victorious over them, and they established that day, /b the twenty-fourth of Tevet, as a minor b festival /b to celebrate the establishment of the i halakha /i in accordance with the opinion of the Sages.,Having discussed the i halakha /i of a son’s daughter’s right to inheritance, the Gemara cites a verse that relates to the matter. After the incident known as: The concubine in Gibeah, the men of the tribe of Benjamin numbered only six hundred, and each of these men had inherited large plots of land from their deceased relatives. The verse states: b “And they said: They that are escaped must be as an inheritance for Benjamin, that a tribe be not blotted out from Israel” /b (Judges 21:17)., b Rabbi Yitzḥak of the house of Rabbi Ami says: /b This b teaches that /b the elders of that generation b stipulated with regard to the tribe of Benjamin that a daughter of a son shall not inherit with the brothers /b of her father. Since the daughter of a son who inherits her grandfather’s property may later bequeath it to her husband, who may be from another tribe, the elders instituted this temporary ordice in order to ensure that other tribes would not inherit large quantities of land belonging to the tribe of Benjamin, lest the tribe of Benjamin be left with little land of its own.,§ The Gemara presents a related statement. b Rabbi Yoḥa says in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: /b Concerning b anyone who does not leave /b behind b a son to inherit /b from b him, the Holy One, Blessed be He, is filled with wrath [ i evra /i ] toward him, /b as b it is written here: /b “If a man die, and he has no son, b then you shall pass his inheritance [ i veha’avartem /i ] /b to his daughter” (Numbers 27:8), b and it is written there: “That day is a day of wrath [ i evra /i ]” /b (Zephaniah 1:15). The words “ i veha’avartem /i ” and “ i evra /i ” share common root letters, whereby Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai interprets that God’s wrath may be the result of the inheritance passing to a daughter rather than a son.,The Gemara presents a related statement. Concerning the verse: “God shall hear, and humble them, even He that is enthroned of old, Selah; b those that have no exchange, and fear not God” /b (Psalms 55:20), b Rabbi Yoḥa and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi /b each interpret the verse in a different manner. b One says /b that this is a reference to b anyone who does not leave /b behind b a son /b to inherit from him, as he does not leave anyone to serve in exchange, i.e., as a replacement, for him; b and one says /b that this is a reference to b anyone who does not leave /b behind b a student /b to serve in exchange for him.,The Gemara suggests: b It may be concluded /b that it was b Rabbi Yoḥa who says /b that the verse is referring to one who does not leave behind b a student, for Rabbi Yoḥa, /b whose ten sons died in his lifetime, b said /b to those he would console: b This is the bone of my tenth son, /b to encourage them not to succumb to their sorrow. Since Rabbi Yoḥa knew that he would not leave any sons to inherit his property, it is reasonable to assume that he interpreted the verse as meaning that God is full of wrath toward one who does not leave behind a student. The Gemara comments that b it may be concluded that /b it was b Rabbi Yoḥa who says /b that the verse is referring to one who does not leave behind b a student. /b ,The Gemara notes: b And from /b this, b that Rabbi Yoḥa /b is the one who b says /b that the verse is referring to one who does not leave behind b a student, /b it follows that b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says /b the verse is referring to one who does not leave behind b a son. /b ,The Gemara asks: b But /b this cannot be, as b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi would not go to a house of mourning [ i bei tamya /i ] /b to console the bereaved so as not to interrupt his studies, b except to the house of one who died without any sons, as it is written: /b “Weep not for the dead, neither bemoan him; but b weep sore for him that goes away” /b (Jeremiah 22:10), b and Rabbi Yehuda says /b that b Rav says /b that the verse is referring b to /b one who b departs /b from this world b without /b leaving behind b a male child. /b From the fact that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi would console specifically one who died without leaving a son, it is apparent that he does not hold that God is full of wrath toward such an individual. b Rather, /b it must be that b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi is /b the Sage b who says /b that the verse is referring to one who does not leave behind b a student. /b ,The Gemara notes: b And from /b this b that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi is /b the one b who says /b that the verse is referring to one who does not leave behind b a student, /b it follows that b Rabbi Yoḥa says /b it is referring to one who does not leave behind b a son. /b ,The Gemara asks: This poses b a difficulty /b from one statement b of Rabbi Yoḥa, /b that the verse is referring to one who does not leave behind a son, b to /b another statement b of Rabbi Yoḥa, /b as he would say: This is the bone of my tenth son. The Gemara answers: It is b not difficult: This /b statement, with regard to the bone of his son, b is his, /b while b that /b statement, with regard to the verse, b is his teacher’s. /b ,§ The Gemara continues with three homiletic interpretations by Rabbi Pineḥas ben Ḥama, and provides b a mnemonic /b to facilitate the memorization of these expositions: b Hadad, poverty, and sage. /b ,The Gemara presents the first homiletic interpretation: b Rabbi Pineḥas ben Ḥama interpreted /b a verse b homiletically: What /b is the meaning of that b which is written: “And when Hadad heard in Egypt that David slept with his fathers, and that Joab the captain of the host was dead” /b (I Kings 11:21)? b For what /b reason is it that b in /b the case of King b David, sleeping was stated with regard to his /b demise, b and in /b the case of b Joab, death was stated with regard to his /b demise? He answers: Concerning King b David, who left a son /b behind, b sleeping was stated with regard to his /b demise, as it was not a complete death, while concerning b Joab, who did not leave a son /b behind, b death was stated with regard to his /b demise, as he left no son to succeed him.,The Gemara asks: b And /b is it so that b Joab did not leave a son /b behind; b but isn’t it written: “of the sons of Joab: Obadiah, son of Jehiel” /b (Ezra 8:9)? b Rather, /b concerning King b David, who left a son as /b great as b himself, sleeping was stated with regard to his /b demise, but concerning b Joab, who did not leave a son as /b great as b himself, death was stated with regard to his /b demise.,The Gemara presents the second homiletic interpretation: b Rabbi Pineḥas ben Ḥama interpreted /b a verse b homiletically, /b and derived that b poverty in a person’s household is more difficult than fifty plagues, as it is stated: “Have pity upon me, have pity upon me, O you my friends; for the hand of God has touched me” /b (Job 19:21), b and his friends were saying to him: “Take heed, regard not iniquity; for this have you chosen rather than poverty” /b (Job 36:21). Job, who suffered many plagues, was told by his friends that his suffering was preferable to poverty.,The Gemara presents the third homiletic interpretation: b Rabbi Pineḥas bar Ḥama interpreted /b a verse b homiletically: Anyone who has a sick person in his home should go to a sage, and /b the sage will b ask /b for b mercy on /b the sick person’s behalf, b as it is stated: “The wrath of a king is as messengers of death; but a wise man will pacify it” /b (Proverbs 16:14).,§ The mishna teaches that b this is the principle: /b Concerning b anyone who precedes /b another b with regard to inheritance, his descendants precede /b the other as well, b and a father precedes all of his descendants. Rami bar Ḥama raises a dilemma: /b With regard to the claim of b a father of the /b deceased’s b father and /b the claim of b the brother of the /b deceased’s b father, such as /b the claims of b Abraham and Ishmael to the property of Esau, /b who was Abraham’s grandson and Ishmael’s nephew, b which of them precedes /b the other and inherits the property? b Rava said: Come /b and b hear /b a proof from the mishna: b A father precedes all of his descendants, /b therefore, Abraham would inherit, as Ishmael was his descendant. The Gemara asks: b And /b why did b Rami bar Ḥama /b have a dilemma; was he not aware of the statement of the mishna?
|21. Athanasius, Expositiones In Psalmos, None Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 60
|22. Simplicius of Cilicia, In Aristotelis Physicorum Libros Commentaria, 5 (missingth cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •festivals, non-christian, in early christian literature Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 63