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

Tiresias: The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Source Database

   Search:  
validated results only / all results

and or

Filtering options: (leave empty for all results)
By author:     
By work:        
By subject:
By additional keyword:       



Results for
Please note: the results are produced through a computerized process which may frequently lead to errors, both in incorrect tagging and in other issues. Please use with caution.
Due to load times, full text fetching is currently attempted for validated results only.
Full texts for Hebrew Bible and rabbinic texts is kindly supplied by Sefaria; for Greek and Latin texts, by Perseus Scaife, for the Quran, by Tanzil.net

For a list of book indices included, see here.





65 results for "gamaliel"
1. Hebrew Bible, Exodus, 13.8 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on passover Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 69, 70
13.8. "וְהִגַּדְתָּ לְבִנְךָ בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא לֵאמֹר בַּעֲבוּר זֶה עָשָׂה יְהוָה לִי בְּצֵאתִי מִמִּצְרָיִם׃", 13.8. "And thou shalt tell thy son in that day, saying: It is because of that which the LORD did for me when I came forth out of Egypt.",
2. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 18.3, 26.5-26.10 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on passover Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 69, 72, 75
18.3. "וְזֶה יִהְיֶה מִשְׁפַּט הַכֹּהֲנִים מֵאֵת הָעָם מֵאֵת זֹבְחֵי הַזֶּבַח אִם־שׁוֹר אִם־שֶׂה וְנָתַן לַכֹּהֵן הַזְּרֹעַ וְהַלְּחָיַיִם וְהַקֵּבָה׃", 26.5. "וְעָנִיתָ וְאָמַרְתָּ לִפְנֵי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ אֲרַמִּי אֹבֵד אָבִי וַיֵּרֶד מִצְרַיְמָה וַיָּגָר שָׁם בִּמְתֵי מְעָט וַיְהִי־שָׁם לְגוֹי גָּדוֹל עָצוּם וָרָב׃", 26.6. "וַיָּרֵעוּ אֹתָנוּ הַמִּצְרִים וַיְעַנּוּנוּ וַיִּתְּנוּ עָלֵינוּ עֲבֹדָה קָשָׁה׃", 26.7. "וַנִּצְעַק אֶל־יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי אֲבֹתֵינוּ וַיִּשְׁמַע יְהוָה אֶת־קֹלֵנוּ וַיַּרְא אֶת־עָנְיֵנוּ וְאֶת־עֲמָלֵנוּ וְאֶת־לַחֲצֵנוּ׃", 26.8. "וַיּוֹצִאֵנוּ יְהוָה מִמִּצְרַיִם בְּיָד חֲזָקָה וּבִזְרֹעַ נְטוּיָה וּבְמֹרָא גָּדֹל וּבְאֹתוֹת וּבְמֹפְתִים׃", 26.9. "וַיְבִאֵנוּ אֶל־הַמָּקוֹם הַזֶּה וַיִּתֶּן־לָנוּ אֶת־הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת אֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבָשׁ׃", 18.3. "And this shall be the priests’due from the people, from them that offer a sacrifice, whether it be ox or sheep, that they shall give unto the priest the shoulder, and the two cheeks, and the maw.", 26.5. "And thou shalt speak and say before the LORD thy God: ‘A wandering Aramean was my father, and he went down into Egypt, and sojourned there, few in number; and he became there a nation, great, mighty, and populous.", 26.6. "And the Egyptians dealt ill with us, and afflicted us, and laid upon us hard bondage.", 26.7. "And we cried unto the LORD, the God of our fathers, and the LORD heard our voice, and saw our affliction, and our toil, and our oppression.", 26.8. "And the LORD brought us forth out of Egypt with a mighty hand, and with an outstretched arm, and with great terribleness, and with signs, and with wonders.", 26.9. "And He hath brought us into this place, and hath given us this land, a land flowing with milk and honey.", 26.10. "And now, behold, I have brought the first of the fruit of the land, which Thou, O LORD, hast given me.’ And thou shalt set it down before the LORD thy God, and worship before the LORD thy God.",
3. Hebrew Bible, Hosea, 5.1 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 75
5.1. "שִׁמְעוּ־זֹאת הַכֹּהֲנִים וְהַקְשִׁיבוּ בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל וּבֵית הַמֶּלֶךְ הַאֲזִינוּ כִּי לָכֶם הַמִּשְׁפָּט כִּי־פַח הֱיִיתֶם לְמִצְפָּה וְרֶשֶׁת פְּרוּשָׂה עַל־תָּבוֹר׃", 5.1. "הָיוּ שָׂרֵי יְהוּדָה כְּמַסִּיגֵי גְּבוּל עֲלֵיהֶם אֶשְׁפּוֹךְ כַּמַּיִם עֶבְרָתִי׃", 5.1. "Hear this, O ye priests, And attend, ye house of Israel, And give ear, O house of the king, For unto you pertaineth the judgment; For ye have been a snare on Mizpah, And a net spread upon Tabor.",
4. Hebrew Bible, Leviticus, 21.14 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, response to heretic by Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 200
21.14. "אַלְמָנָה וּגְרוּשָׁה וַחֲלָלָה זֹנָה אֶת־אֵלֶּה לֹא יִקָּח כִּי אִם־בְּתוּלָה מֵעַמָּיו יִקַּח אִשָּׁה׃", 21.14. "A widow, or one divorced, or a profaned woman, or a harlot, these shall he not take; but a virgin of his own people shall he take to wife.",
5. Hebrew Bible, Numbers, 9.10-9.11 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on passover Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 73
9.11. "בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַשֵּׁנִי בְּאַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר יוֹם בֵּין הָעַרְבַּיִם יַעֲשׂוּ אֹתוֹ עַל־מַצּוֹת וּמְרֹרִים יֹאכְלֻהוּ׃", 9.10. "’Speak unto the children of Israel, saying: If any man of you or of your generations shall be unclean by reason of a dead body, or be in a journey afar off, yet he shall keep the passover unto the LORD;", 9.11. "in the second month on the fourteenth day at dusk they shall keep it; they shall eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs;",
6. Hebrew Bible, Psalms, 55.18, 103.2-103.6 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)  Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 543, 546
55.18. "עֶרֶב וָבֹקֶר וְצָהֳרַיִם אָשִׂיחָה וְאֶהֱמֶה וַיִּשְׁמַע קוֹלִי׃", 103.2. "בָּרֲכִי נַפְשִׁי אֶת־יְהוָה וְאַל־תִּשְׁכְּחִי כָּל־גְּמוּלָיו׃", 103.2. "בָּרֲכוּ יְהוָה מַלְאָכָיו גִּבֹּרֵי כֹחַ עֹשֵׂי דְבָרוֹ לִשְׁמֹעַ בְּקוֹל דְּבָרוֹ׃", 103.3. "הַסֹּלֵחַ לְכָל־עֲוֺנֵכִי הָרֹפֵא לְכָל־תַּחֲלֻאָיְכִי׃", 103.4. "הַגּוֹאֵל מִשַּׁחַת חַיָּיְכִי הַמְעַטְּרֵכִי חֶסֶד וְרַחֲמִים׃", 103.5. "הַמַּשְׂבִּיַע בַּטּוֹב עֶדְיֵךְ תִּתְחַדֵּשׁ כַּנֶּשֶׁר נְעוּרָיְכִי׃", 103.6. "עֹשֵׂה צְדָקוֹת יְהוָה וּמִשְׁפָּטִים לְכָל־עֲשׁוּקִים׃", 55.18. "Evening, and morning, and at noon, will I complain, and moan; And He hath heard my voice.", 103.2. "Bless the LORD, O my soul, And forget not all His benefits;", 103.3. "Who forgiveth all thine iniquity; Who healeth all Thy diseases;", 103.4. "Who redeemeth Thy life from the pit; Who encompasseth thee with lovingkindness and tender mercies;", 103.5. "Who satisfieth thine old age with good things; So that Thy youth is renewed like the eagle.", 103.6. "The LORD executeth righteousness, And acts of justice for all that are oppressed.",
7. Hebrew Bible, Ecclesiastes, 10.8 (5th cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 89
10.8. "חֹפֵר גּוּמָּץ בּוֹ יִפּוֹל וּפֹרֵץ גָּדֵר יִשְּׁכֶנּוּ נָחָשׁ׃", 10.8. "He that diggeth a pit shall fall into it; and whoso breaketh through a fence, a serpent shall bite him.",
8. Hebrew Bible, Nehemiah, 9 (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)  Tagged with subjects: •rabban gamaliel ii of yavneh, obligatory prayer liturgy Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 543
9. Cicero, On Invention, 1.15, 1.31, 1.98, 2.116, 2.142 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 96, 98, 100, 101
1.15. cui diligentiae praeesse apud nos iure consulti existimantur. ac iuridicialis quidem ipsa et in duas tribuitur partes, absolutam et adsumptivam. absoluta est, quae ipsa in se continet iuris et iniuriae quae- stionem; adsumptiva, quae ipsa ex se nihil dat firmi ad recusationem, foris autem aliquid defensionis ad- sumit. eius partes sunt quattuor, concessio, remotio criminis, relatio criminis, conparatio. concessio est, cum reus non id, quod factum est, defendit, sed ut ignoscatur, postulat. haec in duas partes dividitur, purgationem et deprecationem. purgatio est, cum fac- tum conceditur, culpa removetur. haec partes habet tres, inprudentiam, casum, necessitatem. deprecatio est, cum et peccasse et consulto peccasse reus se con- fitetur et tamen, ut ignoscatur, postulat; quod genus perraro potest accidere. remotio criminis est, cum id crimen, quod infertur, ab se et ab sua culpa et potestate in alium reus removere conatur. id dupliciter fieri pot- erit, si aut causa aut factum in alium transferetur. causa transferetur, cum aliena dicitur vi et potestate fac- tum, factum autem, cum alius aut debuisse aut potuisse facere dicitur. relatio criminis est, cum ideo iure fac- tum dicitur, quod aliquis ante iniuria lacessierit. con- paratio est, cum aliud aliquid factum rectum aut utile contenditur, quod ut fieret, illud, quod arguitur, dicitur esse commissum. 1.31. Recte habita in causa partitio inlustrem et per- spicuam totam efficit orationem. partes eius sunt duae, quarum utraque magno opere ad aperiendam causam et constituendam pertinet controversiam. una pars est, quae, quid cum adversariis conveniat et quid in controversia relinquatur, ostendit; ex qua certum quiddam destinatur auditori, in quo animum debeat habere occupatum. altera est, in qua rerum earum, de quibus erimus dicturi, breviter expositio ponitur distributa; ex qua conficitur, ut certas animo res te- neat auditor, quibus dictis intellegat fore peroratum. Nunc utroque genere partitionis quemadmodum con- veniat uti, breviter dicendum videtur. Quae partitio, quid conveniat aut quid non conveniat, ostendit, haec debet illud, quod convenit, inclinare ad suae causae commodum, hoc modo: interfectam matrem esse a filio convenit mihi cum adversariis. item contra: interfec- tum esse a Clytaemestra Agamemnonem convenit. nam hic uterque et id posuit, quod conveniebat, et tamen suae causae commodo consuluit. deinde, quid contro- versiae sit, ponendum est in iudicationis expositione; 1.98. Conclusio est exitus et determinatio totius orationis. haec habet partes tres: enumerationem, indignationem, conquestionem. Enumeratio est, per quam res disperse et diffuse dictae unum in locum coguntur et reminiscendi causa unum sub aspectum subiciuntur. haec si semper eodem modo tractabitur, perspicue ab omnibus artificio quo- dam tractari intellegetur; sin varie fiet, et hanc suspi- cionem et satietatem vitare poterit. quare tum oporte- bit ita facere, ut plerique faciunt propter facilitatem, singillatim unam quamque rem adtingere et ita omnes transire breviter argumentationes; tum autem, id quod difficilius est, dicere, quas partes exposueris in par- titione, de quibus te pollicitus sis dicturum, et reducere in memoriam, quibus rationibus unam quamque partem confirmaris; tum ab iis, qui audiunt, quaerere, quid sit, quod sibi velle debeant demonstrari, hoc modo: illud docuimus, illud planum fecimus. ita simul et in memoriam redibit auditor et putabit nihil esse praeterea, quod debeat desiderare. 2.116. In scripto versatur controversia, cum ex scriptio- nis ratione aliquid dubii nascitur. id fit ex ambiguo, ex scripto et sententia, ex contrariis legibus, ex ratio- cinatione, ex definitione. Ex ambiguo autem nascitur controversia, cum, quid senserit scriptor, obscurum est, quod scriptum duas pluresve res significat, ad hunc modum: paterfami- lias, cum filium heredem faceret, vasorum argenteo- rum centum pondo uxori suae sic legavit: heres meus uxori meae vasorum argenteorum pondo cen- tum, quae volet, dato . post mortem eius vasa ma- gnifica et pretiose caelata petit a filio mater. ille se, quae ipse vellet, debere dicit. primum, si fieri poterit, demonstrandum est non esse ambigue scrip- tum, propterea quod omnes in consuetudine sermo- nis sic uti solent eo verbo uno pluribusve in eam sen- tentiam, in quam is, qui dicet, accipiendum esse demon- 2.142. tere accipi demonstrabit. et quemadmodum ei dice- bamus, qui ab scripto diceret, hoc fore utilissimum, si quid de aequitate ea, quae cum adversario staret, derogasset, sic huic, qui contra scriptum dicet, pluri- mum proderit, ex ipsa scriptura aliquid ad suam cau- sam convertere aut ambigue aliquid scriptum osten- dere; deinde ex illo ambiguo eam partem, quae sibi prosit, defendere aut verbi definitionem inducere et illius verbi vim, quo urgeri videatur, ad suae causae commodum traducere aut ex scripto non scriptum aliquid inducere per ratiocinationem, de qua post di-
10. Cicero, Orator, 15.50 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 97
11. Hebrew Bible, Daniel, 6.11 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)  Tagged with subjects: •rabban gamaliel ii of yavneh, obligatory prayer liturgy Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 546
6.11. "וְדָנִיֵּאל כְּדִי יְדַע דִּי־רְשִׁים כְּתָבָא עַל לְבַיְתֵהּ וְכַוִּין פְּתִיחָן לֵהּ בְּעִלִּיתֵהּ נֶגֶד יְרוּשְׁלֶם וְזִמְנִין תְּלָתָה בְיוֹמָא הוּא בָּרֵךְ עַל־בִּרְכוֹהִי וּמְצַלֵּא וּמוֹדֵא קֳדָם אֱלָהֵהּ כָּל־קֳבֵל דִּי־הֲוָא עָבֵד מִן־קַדְמַת דְּנָה׃", 6.11. "And when Daniel knew that the writing was signed, he went into his house—now his windows were open in his upper chamber toward Jerusalem—and he kneeled upon his knees three times a day, and prayed, and gave thanks before his God, as he did aforetime.",
12. Philo of Alexandria, On The Special Laws, 2.138 (1st cent. BCE - missingth cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on passover Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 69
2.138. Secondly, it shows mercy and compassion on those who have been treated unjustly, whose burden of distress it lightens by giving them a share in grace and gift; for the double portion of the inheriting son was no less likely to please the mother, who will be encouraged by the kindness of the law, which did not permit her and her offspring to be totally overcome by their enemies.
13. Mishnah, Menachot, 13.11 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •rabban gamaliel ii of yavneh, obligatory prayer liturgy Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 545
13.11. "נֶאֱמַר בְּעוֹלַת הַבְּהֵמָה אִשֵּׁה רֵיחַ נִיחֹחַ (ויקרא א), וּבְעוֹלַת הָעוֹף אִשֵּׁה רֵיחַ נִיחֹחַ (שם), וּבַמִּנְחָה אִשֵּׁה רֵיחַ נִיחֹחַ (שם ב), לְלַמֵּד, שֶׁאֶחָד הַמַּרְבֶּה וְאֶחָד הַמַּמְעִיט, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁיְּכַוֵּן אָדָם אֶת דַּעְתּוֹ לַשָּׁמָיִם: \n", 13.11. "It is said of the olah of cattle, “An offering made by fire of pleasing odor” (Leviticus 1:9); and of the olah of birds, “An offering made by fire of pleasing odor (vs. 17); and of the minhah, “An offering made by fire of pleasing odor” (Leviticus 2:2): to teach you that it is the same whether one offers much or little, so long as one directs one’s heart to heaven. Congratulations! We have finished Tractate Menahot! It is a tradition at this point to thank God for helping us finish learning the tractate and to commit ourselves to going back and relearning it, so that we may not forget it and so that its lessons will stay with us for all of our lives. It is no accident that the last mishnah of the tractate finishes with the message that we learned today. After having learned 14 chapters of Zevahim and 13 chapters of Menahot, there is a grave danger that one could learn that all God cares about, and all that is important in Judaism, is bringing the proper sacrifice in the proper manner. Our mishnah teaches that the important issue is the proper intent, that one’s intent in sacrifice should be to worship God. This is not to deny that that the minutiae of rules are extremely important, both in the eyes of the rabbis and surely in the eyes of the priests who served in the Temple while it still stood. Rather, what today’s mishnah seems to say is that the rules are an outer manifestation of the inner kavannah, intent, of the worshipper. Without following the rules, there is no way to bring that intent into the world. But without the intent, the rules are just empty exercises devoid of meaning. I believe that this is a message that is as true of Judaism today as it was in Temple times. Mishnah Menahot has probably been a great challenge for many of you; I know it was for me. So please accept an extra congratulations on completing it. Tomorrow we begin Hullin, the one tractate in all of Seder Kodashim that does not deal with sacrifices or the Temple.",
14. Mishnah, Bava Qamma, 3.10 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 89
3.10. "יֵשׁ חַיָּב עַל מַעֲשֵׂה שׁוֹרוֹ וּפָטוּר עַל מַעֲשֵׂה עַצְמוֹ, פָּטוּר עַל מַעֲשֵׂה שׁוֹרוֹ וְחַיָּב עַל מַעֲשֵׂה עַצְמוֹ. שׁוֹרוֹ שֶׁבִּיֵּשׁ, פָּטוּר, וְהוּא שֶׁבִּיֵּשׁ, חַיָּב. שׁוֹרוֹ שֶׁסִּמֵּא אֶת עֵין עַבְדּוֹ, וְהִפִּיל אֶת שִׁנּוֹ, פָּטוּר, וְהוּא שֶׁסִּמֵּא אֶת עֵין עַבְדּוֹ, וְהִפִּיל אֶת שִׁנּוֹ, חַיָּב. שׁוֹרוֹ שֶׁחָבַל בְּאָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ, חַיָּב, וְהוּא שֶׁחָבַל בְּאָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ, פָּטוּר. שׁוֹרוֹ שֶׁהִדְלִיק אֶת הַגָּדִישׁ בְּשַׁבָּת, חַיָּב, וְהוּא שֶׁהִדְלִיק אֶת הַגָּדִישׁ בְּשַׁבָּת, פָּטוּר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מִתְחַיֵּב בְּנַפְשׁוֹ: \n", 3.10. "There is one who is obligated for the act of his ox and exempt from his own act, and one who is exempt from his own act and obligated on the act of his ox. [If] his ox caused embarrassment [to another person], he is exempt; [If, however] he caused embarrassment [to another person] he is obligated. [If] his ox put out the eye of his slave or knocked out his [slave’s] tooth, he is exempt [from freeing the slave]; [If, however] he put out the eye of his slave or knocked out his tooth, he is obligated to free the slave. [If] his ox injured his father or mother he is obligated; [If, however] he injured his father or mother he is exempt. [If] his ox lit a heap of produce on fire on Shabbat, he is obligated; [If, however] he lit a heap of produce on Shabbat he is exempt, because he is liable for his life.",
15. Mishnah, Pesahim, 2.12 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 85
16. Mishnah, Rosh Hashanah, 2.8-2.9, 4.6, 4.9 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity •rabban gamaliel ii of yavneh, obligatory prayer liturgy Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 85, 97; Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 545
2.8. "דְּמוּת צוּרוֹת לְבָנוֹת הָיוּ לוֹ לְרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל בַּטַּבְלָא וּבַכֹּתֶל בַּעֲלִיָּתוֹ, שֶׁבָּהֶן מַרְאֶה אֶת הַהֶדְיוֹטוֹת וְאוֹמֵר, הֲכָזֶה רָאִיתָ אוֹ כָזֶה. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁבָּאוּ שְׁנַיִם וְאָמְרוּ, רְאִינוּהוּ שַׁחֲרִית בַּמִּזְרָח וְעַרְבִית בַּמַּעֲרָב. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי, עֵדֵי שֶׁקֶר הֵם. כְּשֶׁבָּאוּ לְיַבְנֶה קִבְּלָן רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. וְעוֹד בָּאוּ שְׁנַיִם וְאָמְרוּ, רְאִינוּהוּ בִזְמַנּוֹ, וּבְלֵיל עִבּוּרוֹ לֹא נִרְאָה, וְקִבְּלָן רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. אָמַר רַבִּי דוֹסָא בֶּן הַרְכִּינָס, עֵדֵי שֶׁקֶר הֵן, הֵיאָךְ מְעִידִין עַל הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁיָּלְדָה, וּלְמָחָר כְּרֵסָהּ בֵּין שִׁנֶּיהָ. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, רוֹאֶה אֲנִי אֶת דְּבָרֶיךָ:", 2.9. "שָׁלַח לוֹ רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, גּוֹזְרַנִי עָלֶיךָ שֶׁתָּבֹא אֶצְלִי בְּמַקֶּלְךָ וּבִמְעוֹתֶיךָ בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בְּחֶשְׁבּוֹנְךָ. הָלַךְ וּמְצָאוֹ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא מֵצֵר, אָמַר לוֹ, יֶשׁ לִי לִלְמוֹד שֶׁכָּל מַה שֶּׁעָשָׂה רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל עָשׂוּי, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כג), אֵלֶּה מוֹעֲדֵי יְיָ מִקְרָאֵי קֹדֶשׁ, אֲשֶׁר תִּקְרְאוּ אֹתָם, בֵּין בִּזְמַנָּן בֵּין שֶׁלֹּא בִזְמַנָּן, אֵין לִי מוֹעֲדוֹת אֶלָּא אֵלּוּ. בָּא לוֹ אֵצֶל רַבִּי דוֹסָא בֶּן הַרְכִּינָס, אָמַר לוֹ, אִם בָּאִין אָנוּ לָדוּן אַחַר בֵּית דִּינוֹ שֶׁל רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, צְרִיכִין אָנוּ לָדוּן אַחַר כָּל בֵּית דִּין וּבֵית דִּין שֶׁעָמַד מִימוֹת משֶׁה וְעַד עַכְשָׁיו, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כד), וַיַּעַל משֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא וְשִׁבְעִים מִזִּקְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל. וְלָמָּה לֹא נִתְפָּרְשׁוּ שְׁמוֹתָן שֶׁל זְקֵנִים, אֶלָּא לְלַמֵּד, שֶׁכָּל שְׁלשָׁה וּשְׁלשָׁה שֶׁעָמְדוּ בֵית דִּין עַל יִשְׂרָאֵל, הֲרֵי הוּא כְבֵית דִּינוֹ שֶׁל משֶׁה. נָטַל מַקְלוֹ וּמְעוֹתָיו בְּיָדוֹ, וְהָלַךְ לְיַבְנֶה אֵצֶל רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל בְּיוֹם שֶׁחָל יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים לִהְיוֹת בְּחֶשְׁבּוֹנוֹ. עָמַד רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וּנְשָׁקוֹ עַל רֹאשׁוֹ, אָמַר לוֹ, בֹּא בְשָׁלוֹם, רַבִּי וְתַלְמִידִי, רַבִּי בְחָכְמָה, וְתַלְמִידִי שֶׁקִּבַּלְתָּ דְּבָרָי:", 4.6. "אֵין פּוֹחֲתִין מֵעֲשָׂרָה מַלְכוּיוֹת, מֵעֲשָׂרָה זִכְרוֹנוֹת, מֵעֲשָׂרָה שׁוֹפָרוֹת. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי אוֹמֵר, אִם אָמַר שָׁלשׁ שָׁלשׁ מִכֻּלָּן, יָצָא. אֵין מַזְכִּירִין זִכָּרוֹן מַלְכוּת וְשׁוֹפָר שֶׁל פֻּרְעָנוּת. מַתְחִיל בַּתּוֹרָה וּמַשְׁלִים בַּנָּבִיא. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אִם הִשְׁלִים בַּתּוֹרָה, יָצָא: \n", 4.9. "סֵדֶר תְּקִיעוֹת, שָׁלשׁ, שֶׁל שָׁלשׁ שָׁלשׁ. שִׁעוּר תְּקִיעָה כְּשָׁלשׁ תְּרוּעוֹת. שִׁעוּר תְּרוּעָה כְּשָׁלשׁ יְבָבוֹת. תָּקַע בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה, וּמָשַׁךְ בַּשְּׁנִיָּה כִשְׁתַּיִם, אֵין בְּיָדוֹ אֶלָּא אֶחָת. מִי שֶׁבֵּרַךְ וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִתְמַנָּה לוֹ שׁוֹפָר, תּוֹקֵעַ וּמֵרִיעַ וְתוֹקֵעַ שָׁלשׁ פְּעָמִים. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁשְּׁלִיחַ צִבּוּר חַיָּב, כָּךְ כָּל יָחִיד וְיָחִיד חַיָּב. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, שְׁלִיחַ צִבּוּר מוֹצִיא אֶת הָרַבִּים יְדֵי חוֹבָתָן: \n", 2.8. "Rabban Gamaliel had diagrams of the moon on a tablet [hung] on the wall of his upper chamber, and he used to show them to the unlearned and say, “Did it look like this or this?” It happened that two witnesses came and said, “We saw it in the morning in the east and in the evening in the west.” Rabbi Yoha ben Nuri said: they are lying witnesses. When they came to Yavneh Rabban Gamaliel accepted them. On another occasion two witnesses came and said, “We saw it at its proper time, but on the night which should have been the new moon it was not seen,” and Rabban Gamaliel accepted their evidence. Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas said: they are lying witnesses. How can they testify that a woman has given birth when on the next day her belly is between her teeth (swollen)? Rabbi Joshua to him: I see your argument.", 2.9. "Rabban Gamaliel sent to him: I order you to appear before me with your staff and your money on the day which according to your count should be Yom Hakippurim. Rabbi Akiva went and found him in distress. He said to him: I can teach that whatever Rabban Gamaliel has done is valid, because it says, “These are the appointed seasons of the Lord, holy convocations, which you shall proclaim at their appointed times” (Leviticus 23:4), whether they are [proclaimed] at their proper time or not at their proper time, I have no other appointed times save these. He [Rabbi Joshua] then went to Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas. He said to him: if we call in question the court of Rabban Gamaliel we must call in question the decisions of every court which has existed since the days of Moses until now. As it says, “Then Moses and Aaron, Nadav and Avihu and seventy of the elders of Israel went up” (Exodus 24:9). Why were the names of the elders not mentioned? To teach that every group of three which has acted as a court over Israel, behold it is like the court of Moses. He [Rabbi Joshua] took his staff and his money and went to Yavneh to Rabban Gamaliel on the day which according to his count should be Yom Hakippurim. Rabban Gamaliel rose and kissed him on his head and said to him: Come in peace, my teacher and my student my teacher in wisdom and my student because you have accepted my decision.", 4.6. "They do not recite less than ten kingship [verses], ten remembrance [verses], and ten shofar [verses]. Rabbi Yoha ben Nuri says: if he said three from each set he has fulfilled his obligation. They do not mention kingship, remembrance and shofar verses of punishment. He begins with [verses] from the Torah and concludes with [verses] from the prophets. Rabbi Yose says: if he concludes with [a verse] from the Torah he has fulfilled his obligation.", 4.9. "The order of the blasts: three sets of three each. The length of a teki’ah is equal to three teru'ahs, and the length of a teru'ah is equal to three yevavot. If one prolonged the first teki'ah so that it went directly into the second, it counts only as one. One who has blessed [recited the Amidah] and then a shofar is given to him, he sounds a teki'ah teru'ah teki'ah three times. Just as the shaliah tzibbur is obligated, so every single individual is obligated. Rabban Gamaliel says: the shaliah tzibbur (communal prayer leader) causes the whole congregation to fulfill their obligation.",
17. Mishnah, Sukkah, 2.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 85
2.5. "מַעֲשֶׂה וְהֵבִיאוּ לוֹ לְרַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי לִטְעוֹם אֶת הַתַּבְשִׁיל, וּלְרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל שְׁתֵּי כוֹתָבוֹת וּדְלִי שֶׁל מַיִם, וְאָמְרוּ, הַעֲלוּם לַסֻּכָּה. וּכְשֶׁנָּתְנוּ לוֹ לְרַבִּי צָדוֹק אֹכֶל פָּחוֹת מִכַּבֵּיצָה, נְטָלוֹ בַמַּפָּה וַאֲכָלוֹ חוּץ לַסֻּכָּה, וְלֹא בֵרַךְ אַחֲרָיו: \n", 2.5. "It once happened that they brought a dish to Rabbi Yoha ben Zakkai to taste, and two dates and a pail of water to Rabban Gamaliel and they said, “Bring them up to the sukkah.” And when they gave Rabbi Zadok food less than the bulk of an egg, he took it in a napkin, ate it outside the sukkah and did not say a blessing after it.",
18. Mishnah, Shekalim, 3.3, 6.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 85
3.3. "שֶׁל בֵּית רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל (הָיָה) נִכְנָס וְשִׁקְלוֹ בֵּין אֶצְבְּעוֹתָיו, וְזוֹרְקוֹ לִפְנֵי הַתּוֹרֵם, וְהַתּוֹרֵם מִתְכַּוֵּן וְדוֹחֲקוֹ לַקֻּפָּה. אֵין הַתּוֹרֵם תּוֹרֵם עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר לָהֶם, אֶתְרֹם. וְהֵן אוֹמְרִים לוֹ, תְּרֹם, תְּרֹם, תְּרֹם, שָׁלשׁ פְּעָמִים: \n", 6.1. "שְלשָׁה עָשָר שוֹפָרוֹת, שְלשָה עָשָר שֻלְחָנוֹת, שְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיוֹת, הָיוּ בַּמִקְדָּשׁ. שֶׁל בֵּית רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְשֶׁל בֵּית רַבִּי חֲנַנְיָא סְגַן הַכֹּהֲנִים הָיוּ מִשְׁתַּחֲוִין אַרְבַּע עֶשְׂרֵה. וְהֵיכָן הָיְתָה יְתֵרָה, כְּנֶגֶד דִּיר הָעֵצִים, שֶׁכֵּן מָסֹרֶת בְּיָדָם מֵאֲבוֹתֵיהֶם שֶׁשָּׁם הָאָרוֹן נִגְנַז:", 3.3. "[The members] of Rabban Gamaliel’s household used to enter [the chamber] with their shekel between their fingers, and throw it in front of him who made the appropriation, while he who made the appropriation purposely pressed it into the basket. He who made the appropriation did not make it until he first said to them: “Should I make the appropriation?” And they say to him three times: “Make the appropriation! Make the appropriation! Make the appropriation!”", 6.1. "There were in the Temple thirteen chests, thirteen tables and thirteen prostrations. [Members] of the household of Rabban Gamaliel and of Rabbi Haiah the chief of the priests used would prostrate fourteen [times. And where was the additional [prostration]? In front of the wood storage yard, for they had a tradition from their forefathers that the Ark was hidden there.",
19. Mishnah, Sheviit, 9.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 89, 93
9.1. "הַפֵּגָם, וְהַיַּרְבּוּזִין הַשּׁוֹטִים, וְהַחֲלַגְלוֹגִית, כֻּסְבָּר שֶׁבֶּהָרִים, וְהַכַּרְפַּס שֶׁבַּנְּהָרוֹת, וְהַגַּרְגֵּר שֶׁל אֲפָר, פְּטוּרִין מִן הַמַּעַשְׂרוֹת, וְנִלְקָחִין מִכָּל אָדָם בַּשְּׁבִיעִית, שֶׁאֵין כַּיּוֹצֵא בָהֶם נִשְׁמָר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, סְפִיחֵי חַרְדָּל, מֻתָּרִין, שֶׁלֹּא נֶחְשְׁדוּ עֲלֵיהֶן עוֹבְרֵי עֲבֵרָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, כָּל הַסְּפִיחִין מֻתָּרִין, חוּץ מִסְּפִיחֵי כְרוּב, שֶׁאֵין כַּיּוֹצֵא בָהֶם בְּיַרְקוֹת שָׂדֶה. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, כָּל הַסְּפִיחִין אֲסוּרִין: \n", 9.1. "Rue, goosefoot, purslane, hill coriander, celery, and meadow-berries, are exempt from tithes. And they may be purchased from anyone during the sabbatical year, since such produce is not usually stored. Rabbi Judah says: aftergrowths of mustard are permitted, since transgressors are not suspected concerning them. Rabbi Shimon says: all aftergrowths are permitted, with the exception of the aftergrowths of cabbage, since such cannot be placed within the category of field-vegetables. But the sages say: all aftergrowths are forbidden.",
20. New Testament, Acts, 3.1 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •rabban gamaliel ii of yavneh, obligatory prayer liturgy Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 546
3.1. Πέτρος δὲ καὶ Ἰωάνης ἀνέβαινον εἰς τὸ ἱερὸν ἐπὶ τὴν ὥραν τῆς προσευχῆς τὴν ἐνάτην, 3.1. Peter and John were going up into the temple at the hour of prayer, the ninth hour.
21. New Testament, Matthew, 6.6 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •rabban gamaliel ii of yavneh, obligatory prayer liturgy Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 545
6.6. σὺ δὲ ὅταν προσεύχῃ, εἴσελθε εἰς τὸ ταμεῖόν σου καὶ κλείσας τὴν θύραν σου πρόσευξαι τῷ πατρί σου τῷ ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ· καὶ ὁ πατήρ σου ὁ βλέπων ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ ἀποδώσει σοι. 6.6. But you, when you pray, enter into your inner chamber, and having shut your door, pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees in secret will reward you openly.
22. Mishnah, Hulin, 3 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 16
23. Mishnah, Berachot, 1.1, 2.5, 4.3-4.4, 4.7 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity •rabban gamaliel ii of yavneh, obligatory prayer liturgy Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 85, 86, 102; Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 544, 545
1.1. "מֵאֵימָתַי קוֹרִין אֶת שְׁמַע בְּעַרְבִית. מִשָּׁעָה שֶׁהַכֹּהֲנִים נִכְנָסִים לֶאֱכֹל בִּתְרוּמָתָן, עַד סוֹף הָאַשְׁמוּרָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, עַד חֲצוֹת. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, עַד שֶׁיַּעֲלֶה עַמּוּד הַשָּׁחַר. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁבָּאוּ בָנָיו מִבֵּית הַמִּשְׁתֶּה, אָמְרוּ לוֹ, לֹא קָרִינוּ אֶת שְׁמַע. אָמַר לָהֶם, אִם לֹא עָלָה עַמּוּד הַשַּׁחַר, חַיָּבִין אַתֶּם לִקְרוֹת. וְלֹא זוֹ בִּלְבַד, אֶלָּא כָּל מַה שֶּׁאָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים עַד חֲצוֹת, מִצְוָתָן עַד שֶׁיַּעֲלֶה עַמּוּד הַשָּׁחַר. הֶקְטֵר חֲלָבִים וְאֵבָרִים, מִצְוָתָן עַד שֶׁיַּעֲלֶה עַמּוּד הַשָּׁחַר. וְכָל הַנֶּאֱכָלִים לְיוֹם אֶחָד, מִצְוָתָן עַד שֶׁיַּעֲלֶה עַמּוּד הַשָּׁחַר. אִם כֵּן, לָמָּה אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים עַד חֲצוֹת, כְּדֵי לְהַרְחִיק אֶת הָאָדָם מִן הָעֲבֵרָה: \n", 2.5. "חָתָן פָּטוּר מִקְּרִיאַת שְׁמַע בַּלַּיְלָה הָרִאשׁוֹן עַד מוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת, אִם לֹא עָשָׂה מַעֲשֶׂה. מַעֲשֶׂה בְּרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל שֶׁקָּרָא בַלַּיְלָה הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁנָּשָׂא. אָמְרוּ לוֹ תַּלְמִידָיו, לֹא לִמַּדְתָּנוּ, רַבֵּנוּ, שֶׁחָתָן פָּטוּר מִקְּרִיאַת שְׁמַע בַּלַּיְלָה הָרִאשׁוֹן. אָמַר לָהֶם, אֵינִי שׁוֹמֵעַ לָכֶם לְבַטֵּל מִמֶּנִּי מַלְכוּת שָׁמַיִם אֲפִלּוּ שָׁעָה אֶחָת: \n", 4.3. "רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, בְּכָל יוֹם מִתְפַּלֵּל אָדָם שְׁמֹנֶה עֶשְׂרֵה. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, מֵעֵין שְׁמֹנֶה עֶשְׂרֵה. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, אִם שְׁגוּרָה תְפִלָּתוֹ בְּפִיו, יִתְפַּלֵּל שְׁמֹנֶה עֶשְׂרֵה. וְאִם לָאו, מֵעֵין שְׁמֹנֶה עֶשְׂרֵה:", 4.4. "רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, הָעוֹשֶׂה תְפִלָּתוֹ קֶבַע, אֵין תְּפִלָּתוֹ תַּחֲנוּנִים. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, הַמְהַלֵּךְ בִּמְקוֹם סַכָּנָה, מִתְפַּלֵּל תְּפִלָּה קְצָרָה. אוֹמֵר, הוֹשַׁע הַשֵּׁם אֶת עַמְּךָ אֶת שְׁאֵרִית יִשְׂרָאֵל, בְּכָל פָּרָשַׁת הָעִבּוּר יִהְיוּ צָרְכֵיהֶם לְפָנֶיךָ. בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה ה' שׁוֹמֵעַ תְּפִלָּה:", 4.7. "רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה אוֹמֵר, אֵין תְּפִלַּת הַמּוּסָפִין אֶלָּא בְּחֶבֶר עִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, בְּחֶבֶר עִיר וְשֶׁלֹּא בְחֶבֶר עִיר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר מִשְּׁמוֹ, כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ חֶבֶר עִיר, הַיָּחִיד פָּטוּר מִתְּפִלַּת הַמּוּסָפִין:", 1.1. "From what time may one recite the Shema in the evening? From the time that the priests enter [their houses] in order to eat their terumah until the end of the first watch, the words of Rabbi Eliezer. The sages say: until midnight. Rabban Gamaliel says: until dawn. Once it happened that his sons came home [late] from a wedding feast and they said to him: we have not yet recited the [evening] Shema. He said to them: if it is not yet dawn you are still obligated to recite. And not in respect to this alone did they so decide, but wherever the sages say “until midnight,” the mitzvah may be performed until dawn. The burning of the fat and the pieces may be performed till dawn. Similarly, all [the offerings] that are to be eaten within one day may be eaten till dawn. Why then did the sages say “until midnight”? In order to keep a man far from transgression.", 2.5. "A bridegroom is exempt from reciting the Shema on the first night until the end of the Shabbat, if he has not performed the act. It happened with Rabban Gamaliel who recited the Shema on the first night after he had married. His students said to him: Our master, have you not taught us that a bridegroom is exempt from reciting the Shema. He replied to them: I will not listen to you to remove from myself the Kingship of Heaven even for a moment.", 4.3. "Rabban Gamaliel says: every day a man should pray the eighteen [blessings]. Rabbi Joshua says: an abstract of the eighteen. Rabbi Akiva says: if he knows it fluently he prays the eighteen, and if not an abstract of the eighteen.", 4.4. "Rabbi Eliezer says: if a man makes his prayers fixed, it is not [true] supplication. Rabbi Joshua says: if one is traveling in a dangerous place, he says a short prayer, saying: Save, O Lord, Your people the remt of Israel. In every time of crisis may their needs be before You. Blessed are You, O Lord, who hears prayer.", 4.7. "Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah says: The musaf prayer is said only with the local congregation. The sages say: whether with or with out the congregation. Rabbi Judah said in his name: wherever there is a congregation, an individual is exempt from saying the musaf prayer.",
24. Quintilian, Institutes of Oratory, 4.3.9-4.3.12, 6.2.8-6.2.17 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on passover Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 70, 72
4.3.9.  But, though such digressions are not always necessary at the end of the statement, they may form a very useful preparation for the examination of the main question, more especially if at first sight it presents an aspect unfavourable to our case, if we have to support a harsh law or demand severe punishment. For this is the place for inserting what may be regarded as a second exordium with a view to exciting or mollifying the judge or disposing him to lend a favouring ear to our proofs. Moreover we can do this with all the greater freedom and vehemence at this stage of the proceedings since the case is already known to the judge. 4.3.10.  We shall therefore employ such utterances as emollients to soften the harder elements of our statement, in order that the ears of the jury may be more ready to take in what we have to say in the sequel and to grant us the justice which we ask. For it is hard to persuade a man to do anything against the grain. 4.3.11.  It is also important on such occasions to know whether the judge prefers equity or a strict interpretation of the law, since the necessity for such digression will vary accordingly. Such passages may also serve as a kind of peroration after the main question. 4.3.12.  The Greeks call this παρέκβασις, the Romans egressus or egressio (digression). They may however, as I have said, be of various kinds and may deal with different themes in any portion of the speech. For instance we may extol persons or places, describe regions, record historical or even legendary occurrences.
25. Tosefta, Berachot, 3.13, 3.25, 4.15 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •rabban gamaliel ii of yavneh, obligatory prayer liturgy •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 85; Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 543, 546
3.13. "לא הזכיר גבורות גשמים בתחיית המתים ולא שאלה בברכת השנים מחזירין אותו לא אמר הבדלה בחונן הדעת אומרה על הכוס ואם לא אמר מחזירין אותו רבי יוסי אומר אף מי שלא הזכיר ברית בברכת הארץ מחזירין אותו.", 3.25. "שמונה עשרה שאמרו חכמים כנגד שמונה עשרה אזכרות שבהבו לה' בני אלים וכולל של מינים בשל פרושין ושל גרים בשל זקנים ושל דוד בירושלים ואם אמר אלו לעצמן ואלו לעצמן יצא.", 4.15. "כיוצא בו (ויקרא י) ויקרבו וישאום בכתנותם והלא דברים ק\"ו ומה בשעת כעס של צדיקים מרחמין עליהן בשעת הרחמים על אחת כמה וכמה כיוצא בו (מלכים א יג) לא אכל האריה את הנבלה ולא שבר את החמור ומה אם בשעת כעסן וכו'.",
26. Tosefta, Avodah Zarah, 8 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on passover Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 73
27. Tosefta, Rosh Hashanah, 2.17-2.18 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •rabban gamaliel ii of yavneh, obligatory prayer liturgy Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 543, 545
28. Tosefta, Shabbat, 1.22, 12.12 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 85, 88
12.12. "אחד נתן את הדיו ואחד נתן את המים וא' נתן את הקנקנתום שנים האחרונים חייבין אחד נתן את הדיו וא' נתן את הקנקנתום ואחד נתן את המים [וא' נתן את הדיו שנים האחרונים חייבין א' נתן את הדיו וא' נתן את הקנקנתום ואחד נתן את המים] האחרון חייב א' נתן את הקנקנתום ואחד נתן את הדיו ואחד נתן המים האחרון חייב א' נתן את הדיו וא' נתן את המים [א' נתן את המים] ואחד נתן [את הדיו א' נתן את המים וא' נתן את הקמח א' נתן את הקמח] ואחד נתן את המים אחד נתן את המים ואחד נתן את [העפר] א' נתן את [העפר] וא' נתן את המים האחרון חייב דברי ר' יוסי [ר'] יהודה אומר אינו חייב אלא עד שיגבל.",
29. Tosefta, Eduyot, 1.7 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 88
1.7. "שלשה דברים אמרו לפני ר' ישמעאל ולא אמר בהן אסור והיתר ופירשן ר' יהושע בן מתיא המפיס מורסא בשבת אם לקולפה ולעשות לה פה כדרך שהרופאין עושין חייב אם להוציא ממנה לחה פטור. השום והבוסר והמלילות שריסקן מבעוד יום ר' ישמעאל אומר יגמור משתחשך ור\"ע אומר לא יגמור אבל כהנים נהגו כר' ישמעאל."
30. Palestinian Talmud, Berachot, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan nan nan nan nan nan nan nan nan nan nan nan nan nan nan nan nan nan nan nan nan nan
31. Palestinian Talmud, Horayot, 8 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, response to heretic by Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 127
32. Palestinian Talmud, Ketuvot, 4.2 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 88, 91
33. Palestinian Talmud, Pesahim, 3.18 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 97
34. Anon., Sifre Deuteronomy, 343, 41 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 546
35. Anon., Mekhilta Derabbi Yishmael, None (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •rabban gamaliel ii of yavneh, obligatory prayer liturgy Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 545
36. Palestinian Talmud, Shabbat, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan
37. Anon., Leviticus Rabba, 23.4 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •rabban gamaliel ii of yavneh, obligatory prayer liturgy Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 546
23.4. רַב חָנָן דְּצִפּוֹרִי פָּתַר קְרָיָא בִּגְמִילוּת חֲסָדִים, בְּנֹהַג שֶׁבָּעוֹלָם עֲשָׂרָה בְּנֵי אָדָם נִכְנָסִין לְבֵית הֶאָבֵל וְאֵין אֶחָד מֵהֶם יָכוֹל לִפְתֹּחַ אֶת פִּיו וּלְבָרֵךְ בִּרְכַּת אֲבֵלִים, וְאֶחָד מֵהֶם פּוֹתֵחַ פִּיו וּמְבָרֵךְ, דּוֹמֶה כְּשׁוֹשַׁנָּה בֵּין הַחוֹחִים. בְּנֹהַג שֶׁבָּעוֹלָם עֲשָׂרָה בְּנֵי אָדָם נִכְנָסִין לְבֵית הַכְּנֶסֶת וְאֵין אֶחָד מֵהֶם יָכוֹל לִפְרֹס עַל שְׁמַע וְלַעֲבֹר לִפְנֵי הַתֵּבָה, וְאֶחָד מֵהֶם יוֹדֵעַ, דּוֹמֶה כְּשׁוֹשַׁנָּה בֵּין הַחוֹחִים. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אָזַל לְחַד אֲתַר אָמְרוּ לֵיהּ פְּרֹס עַל שְׁמַע, אָמַר לָהֶן לֵינָא חָכֵם עֲבֹר לִפְנֵי הַתֵּבָה. אָמַר לָהֶן לֵינָא חָכֵם, אָמְרִין דֵּין הוּא רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר, דֵּין הוּא דְּאַתּוּן מִתְגַּלְגְּלִין בֵּיהּ, עַל מַגָּן צָוְוחִין לֵיהּ רַבִּי. נִתְכַּרְכְּמוּ פָנָיו וְהָלַךְ לוֹ אֵצֶל רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא רַבּוֹ, אָמַר לֵיהּ לָמָּה פָנֶיךָ חוֹלָנִיּוֹת, תָּנֵי לֵיהּ עוֹבָדָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ צָבֵי מָרִי דְּיֵלִיף, אֲמַר לֵיהּ אִין, אִלְפֵיהּ. לְבָתַר יוֹמִין אָזַל לְהַהוּא אַתְרָא, אָמְרוּ לֵיהּ פְּרֹס עַל שְׁמַע, פָּרַס. עֲבֹר לִפְנֵי הַתֵּבָה, עָבַר. אָמְרִין אִתְחַסַּם רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר, וְקוֹרִין לֵיהּ רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר חִסְמָא. רַבִּי יוֹנָה הֲוָה מַלֵּיף לְתַלְמִידוֹי בִּרְכַּת אֲבֵלִים, אֲמַר יֶהֱווֹן גַּבְרִין בְּכָל מִלָּה.
38. Palestinian Talmud, Taanit, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 85
39. Anon., Genesis Rabba, 68.9, 69.4, 80.1 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •rabban gamaliel ii of yavneh, obligatory prayer liturgy •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 75; Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 546
68.9. וַיִּפְגַע בַּמָּקוֹם (בראשית כח, יא), רַב הוּנָא בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי אַמֵּי אָמַר מִפְּנֵי מָה מְכַנִּין שְׁמוֹ שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא וְקוֹרְאִין אוֹתוֹ מָקוֹם, שֶׁהוּא מְקוֹמוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם וְאֵין עוֹלָמוֹ מְקוֹמוֹ, מִן מַה דִּכְתִיב (שמות לג, כא): הִנֵּה מָקוֹם אִתִּי, הֱוֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מְקוֹמוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם וְאֵין עוֹלָמוֹ מְקוֹמוֹ. אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק כְּתִיב (דברים לג, כז): מְעֹנָה אֱלֹהֵי קֶדֶם, אֵין אָנוּ יוֹדְעִים אִם הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מְעוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָמוֹ וְאִם עוֹלָמוֹ מְעוֹנוֹ, מִן מַה דִּכְתִיב (תהלים צ, א): ה' מָעוֹן אַתָּה, הֱוֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מְעוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָמוֹ וְאֵין עוֹלָמוֹ מְעוֹנוֹ. אָמַר רַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר יוּדָן לְגִבּוֹר שֶׁהוּא רוֹכֵב עַל הַסּוּס וְכֵלָיו מְשֻׁפָּעִים אֵילָךְ וְאֵילָךְ, הַסּוּס טְפֵלָה לָרוֹכֵב וְאֵין הָרוֹכֵב טְפֵלָה לַסּוּס, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (חבקוק ג, ח): כִּי תִרְכַּב עַל סוּסֶיךָ. דָּבָר אַחֵר, מַהוּ וַיִּפְגַּע, צַלִּי, בַּמָּקוֹם, צַלִּי בְּבֵית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי אָבוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנִים הִתְקִינוּ שָׁלשׁ תְּפִלּוֹת, אַבְרָהָם, תִּקֵּן תְּפִלַּת שַׁחֲרִית, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (בראשית יט, כז): וַיַּשְׁכֵּם אַבְרָהָם בַּבֹּקֶר אֶל הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר עָמַד שָׁם וגו', וְאֵין עֲמִידָה אֶלָּא תְּפִלָּה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהלים קו, ל): וַיַּעֲמֹד פִּינְחָס וַיְפַלֵּל. יִצְחָק תִּקֵּן תְּפִלַּת מִנְחָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (בראשית כד, סג): וַיֵּצֵא יִצְחָק לָשׂוּחַ בַּשָּׂדֶה, וְאֵין שִׂיחָה אֶלָּא תְּפִלָּה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהלים קמב, ג): אֶשְׁפֹּךְ לְפָנָיו שִׂיחִי. יַעֲקֹב תִּקֵּן תְּפִלַּת עַרְבִית, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: וַיִּפְגַּע בַּמָּקוֹם, וְאֵין פְּגִיעָה אֶלָּא תְּפִלָּה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ירמיה ז, טז): וְאַל תִּשָֹּׂא בַּעֲדָם וגו' וְאַל תִּפְגַּע בִּי. וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר (ירמיה כז, יח): וְאִם נְבִאִים הֵם וְאִם יֵשׁ דְּבַר ה' אִתָּם יִפְגְּעוּ נָא בַּה' צְבָאוֹת, אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן כְּנֶגֶד שָׁלשׁ פְּעָמִים שֶׁהַיּוֹם מִשְׁתַּנֶּה, בְּעַרְבִית צָרִיךְ אָדָם לוֹמַר יְהִי רָצוֹן מִלְּפָנֶיךָ ה' אֱלֹהַי שֶׁתּוֹצִיאֵנִי מֵאֲפֵלָה לְאוֹרָה. בְּשַׁחֲרִית צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר מוֹדֶה אֲנִי לְפָנֶיךָ ה' אֱלֹהַי שֶׁהוֹצֵאתַנִי מֵאֲפֵלָה לְאוֹרָה. בְּמִנְחָה צָרִיךְ אָדָם לוֹמַר יְהִי רָצוֹן מִלְּפָנֶיךָ ה' אֱלֹהַי שֶׁכְּשֵׁם שֶׁזִּכִּיתַנִי לִרְאוֹת חַמָּה בִּזְרִיחָתָהּ כָּךְ תְּזַכֵּנִי לִרְאוֹתָהּ בִּשְׁקִיעָתָהּ. דָּבָר אַחֵר, וַיִּפְגַּע בַּמָּקוֹם, רַבָּנָן אָמְרֵי כְּנֶגֶד תְּמִידִים תִּקְּנוּם, תְּפִלַּת הַשַּׁחַר, כְּנֶגֶד תָּמִיד שֶׁל שַׁחַר. תְּפִלַּת מִנְחָה, כְּנֶגֶד תָּמִיד שֶׁל בֵּין הָעַרְבָּיִם. תְּפִלַּת הָעֶרֶב, אֵין לָהּ קֶבַע. אָמַר רַבִּי תַּנְחוּמָא אֲפִלּוּ תְּפִלַּת הָעֶרֶב יֵשׁ לָהּ קֶבַע, כְּנֶגֶד אֵבָרִים וּפְדָרִים שֶׁהָיוּ מִתְאַכְּלִים בָּאוּר עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. 69.4. רַבִּי חֲנִינָא בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי פִּינְחָס אָמַר שְׁמוֹנָה עֶשְׂרֵה פְּעָמִים מַזְכִּיר הָאָבוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה, וּכְנֶגֶד כֵּן קָבְעוּ חֲכָמִים שְׁמוֹנָה עֶשְׂרֵה בְּרָכוֹת שֶׁבַּתְּפִלָּה, וְאִם יֹאמַר לְךָ אָדָם תִּשְׁעָה עָשָׂר הֵם, אֱמֹר לוֹ וְהִנֵּה ה' נִצָּב עָלָיו, לֵית הוּא מִן הַמִּנְיָן. וְאִם יֹאמַר לְךָ אָדָם שִׁבְעָה עָשָׂר הֵם, אֱמֹר לוֹ (בראשית מח, טז): וְיִקָּרֵא בָהֶם שְׁמִי וְשֵׁם אֲבֹתַי אַבְרָהָם וְיִצְחָק, חַד מִנְהוֹן. (בראשית כח, יג): הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה שֹׁכֵב עָלֶיהָ לְךָ אֶתְּנֶנָּה וּלְזַרְעֶךָ, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מִשּׁוּם בַּר קַפָּרָא אָמַר קְפָלָהּ כְּפִינְקָס וּנְתָנָהּ תַּחַת רֹאשׁוֹ, כְּאֵינַשׁ דַּאֲמַר מִן תְּחוֹת רֵישָׁא דִידָךְ. רַב הוּנָא בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אָמַר וּבִלְבַד שֶׁיְהֵא נִקְבַּר עָלֶיהָ. 80.1. וַתֵּצֵא דִינָה בַּת לֵאָה (בראשית לד, א), (יחזקאל טז, מד): הִנֵּה כָּל הַמּשֵׁל עָלַיִךְ יִמְשֹׁל לֵאמֹר כְּאִמָּה בִּתָּהּ, יוֹסֵי מְעוֹנָאָה תִּרְגֵּם בִּכְנִישָׁתְהוֹן דִּמְעוֹנָא, (הושע ה, א): שִׁמְעוּ זֹאת הַכֹּהֲנִים וְהַקְשִׁיבוּ בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל וּבֵית הַמֶּלֶךְ הַאֲזִינוּ, אָמַר עָתִיד הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לִטֹּל אֶת הַכֹּהֲנִים וּלְהַעֲמִידָן בַּדִּין וְלֵאמֹר לָהֶם לָמָּה לֹא יְגַעְתֶּם בַּתּוֹרָה, לֹא הֱיִיתֶם נֶהֱנִים מֵאַרְבַּע וְעֶשְׂרִים מַתְּנוֹת כְּהֻנָּה, וְאִינוּן אָמְרִין לֵיהּ לָא יָהֲבִין לָן כְּלוּם. וְהַקְשִׁיבוּ בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל, לָמָּה לֹא הֱיִיתֶם נוֹתְנִים לַכֹּהֲנִים אַרְבַּע וְעֶשְׂרִים מַתְּנוֹת כְּהֻנָּה שֶׁכָּתַבְתִּי לָכֶם בַּתּוֹרָה, וְאִינוּן אָמְרִין לֵיהּ עַל אִלֵּין דְּבֵי נְשִׂיאָה דַּהֲווֹ נָסְבִין כּוֹלָּא. בֵּית הַמֶּלֶךְ הַאֲזִינוּ כִּי לָכֶם הַמִּשְׁפָּט, שֶׁלָּכֶם הָיָה, (דברים יח, ג): וְזֶה יִהְיֶה מִשְׁפַּט הַכֹּהֲנִים, לְפִיכָךְ לָכֶם וַעֲלֵיכֶם מִדַּת הַדִּין נֶהְפָּכֶת. שָׁמַע רַבִּי וְכָעַס, בְּפַתֵּי רַמְשָׁא סְלֵיק רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ שָׁאֵיל שְׁלָמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי וּפַיְּסֵי עֲלוֹהִי דְּיוֹסֵי מְעוֹנָאָה, אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי, צְרִיכִין אָנוּ לְהַחֲזִיק טוֹבָה לְאֻמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם, שֶׁהֵן מַכְנִיסִין מוּמָסִין לְבָתֵּי טְרַטְיָאוֹת וּלְבָתֵּי קַרְקְסָאוֹת שֶׁלָּהֶן וּמְשַׂחֲקִין בָּהֶם כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹא יִהְיוּ מְשִׂיחִין אֵלּוּ עִם אֵלּוּ וְיָבוֹאוּ לִידֵי קְטָטָה בְּטֵלָה, יוֹסֵי מְעוֹנָאָה אָמַר מִלָּה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא וְאַקְפַּדְתְּ עֲלוֹהִי, אָמַר לוֹ וְיוֹדֵעַ הוּא בְּדִבְרֵי תוֹרָה כְּלוּם, אָמַר לוֹ הֵן. אֲמַר לֵיהּ וְאוּלְפַן קַבֵּיל, אֲמַר לֵיהּ אֵין. וְאִי שָׁאֵלְנָא לֵיהּ מְגִיִּיב, אֲמַר לֵיהּ אֵין, אִם כֵּן יִסַּק לְהָכָא, וּסְלֵיק לְגַבֵּיהּ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ מַהוּ דִּכְתִיב: הִנֵּה כָּל הַמּשֵׁל עָלַיִךָ יִמְשֹׁל לֵאמֹר כְּאִמָּה בִּתָּהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ כַּבַּת כֵּן אִמָּהּ, כַּדּוֹר כֵּן נָשִׂיא, כַּמִּזְבֵּחַ כֵּן כֹּהֲנָיו. הָכָא אָמְרֵי לְפוּם גִּנְּתָא גַּנָּנָא. אָמַר לוֹ רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ עַד כַּדּוּן לָא חֲסֵלִית מִן מְפַיְּסֵיהּ עַל הָדָא וְאַתָּה מַיְיתֵי לָן אוֹחֲרִי, עִקָּרוֹ שֶׁל דָּבָר הִנֵּה כָּל הַמּשֵׁל מַהוּ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ לֵית תּוֹרְתָא עֲנִישָׁא עַד דִּבְרַתָּהּ בְּעִיטָא, לֵית אִתְּתָא זָנְיָא עַד דִּבְרַתָּהּ זָנְיָא. אָמְרוּ לֵיהּ אִם כֵּן לֵאָה אִמֵּנוּ זוֹנָה הָיְתָה, אָמַר לָהֶם (בראשית ל, טז): וַתֵּצֵא לִקְרָאתוֹ וגו', יָצָאת מְקֻשֶּׁטֶת כְּזוֹנָה, לְפִיכָךְ וַתֵּצֵא דִינָה בַּת לֵאָה. 80.1. וַיִּקְּחוּ שְׁנֵי בְנֵי יַעֲקֹב שִׁמְעוֹן וְלֵוִי (בראשית לד, כה), מִמַּשְׁמַע שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: שִׁמְעוֹן וְלֵוִי, יָדַעְנוּ שֶׁבְּנֵי יַעֲקֹב הֵם, אֶלָּא בְּנֵי יַעֲקֹב שֶׁלֹא נָטְלוּ עֵצָה מִיַּעֲקֹב. שִׁמְעוֹן וְלֵוִי, שֶׁנָטְלוּ עֵצָה זֶה מִזֶּה. אֲחֵי דִינָה, וְכִי אֲחוֹת שְׁנֵיהֶם הָיְתָה וַהֲלוֹא אֲחוֹת כָּל הַשְּׁבָטִים הָיְתָה, אֶלָּא לְפִי שֶׁנָּתְנוּ אֵלּוּ נַפְשָׁם עָלֶיהָ נִקְרֵאת עַל שְׁמָם, וְדִכְוָתָהּ (שמות טו, כ): וַתִּקַּח מִרְיָם הַנְּבִיאָה אֲחוֹת אַהֲרֹן, וְכִי אֲחוֹת אַהֲרֹן הָיְתָה וַהֲלוֹא אֲחוֹת שְׁנֵיהֶם הָיְתָה, אֶלָּא לְפִי שֶׁנָּתַן אַהֲרֹן נַפְשׁוֹ עָלֶיהָ לְפִיכָךְ נִקְרֵאת עַל שְׁמוֹ, וְדִכְוָתָהּ (במדבר כה, יח): וְעַל דְּבַר כָּזְבִּי בַת נְשִׂיא מִדְיָן אֲחֹתָם, וְכִי אֲחוֹתָם הָיְתָה וַהֲלוֹא בַּת אֻמָּתָן הָיְתָה, אֶלָּא לְפִי שֶׁנָּתְנָה נַפְשָׁהּ עַל אֻמָּתָהּ נִקְרֵאת אֻמָּתָהּ לִשְׁמָהּ. (בראשית לד, כה): אִישׁ חַרְבּוֹ, רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר בֶּן שְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה הָיוּ. שְׁמוּאֵל שָׁאַל לְלֵוִי בַּר סִיסִי אָמַר לוֹ מַהוּ דֵין דִּכְתִיב (בראשית לד, כה): וַיָּבֹאוּ עַל הָעִיר בֶּטַח, אָמַר לוֹ בְּטוּחִים הָיוּ עַל כֹּחוֹ שֶׁל זָקֵן, וְלֹא הָיָה אָבִינוּ יַעֲקֹב רוֹצֶה שֶׁיַּעֲשׂוּ בָנָיו אוֹתוֹ הַמַּעֲשֶׂה, וְכֵיוָן שֶׁעָשׂוּ בָנָיו אוֹתוֹ מַעֲשֶׂה, אָמַר מָה אֲנִי מַנִּיחַ אֶת בָּנַי לִפֹּל בְּיַד אֻמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם, מֶה עָשָׂה נָטַל חַרְבּוֹ וְקַשְׁתּוֹ וְעָמַד לוֹ עַל פִּתְחָהּ שֶׁל שְׁכֶם וְאָמַר אִם יָבוֹאוּ אֻמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם לְהִזְדַּוֵּג לָהֶם לְבָנַי אֲנִי נִלְחַם כְּנֶגְדָן, הוּא דְּהוּא אוֹמֵר לוֹ לְיוֹסֵף (בראשית מח, כב): וַאֲנִי נָתַתִּי לְךָ שְׁכֶם אַחַד עַל אַחֶיךָ וגו', וְהֵיכָן מָצִינוּ שֶׁנָּטַל אָבִינוּ יַעֲקֹב חַרְבּוֹ וְקַשְׁתּוֹ בִּשְׁכֶם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (בראשית מח, כב): אֲשֶׁר לָקַחְתִּי מִיַּד הָאֱמֹרִי בְּחַרְבִּי וּבְקַשְׁתִּי. (בראשית לד, כו): וְאֶת חֲמוֹר וְאֶת שְׁכֶם בְּנוֹ.
40. Palestinian Talmud, Demai, 3.3 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 89
41. Palestinian Talmud, Sheviit, 9.1 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 89, 92
42. Babylonian Talmud, Nazir, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 88, 91
52b. ואי ס"ד או שדרה או גולגולת הני שבעה הויין כי קתני (סימן יחיד שהוא גילח ואחד),כל היכא דפליגי עליה רבים לאפוקי עצם כשעורה דיחיד הוא דפליג עליה דתני' עצם כשעורה שנחלק לשנים ר"ע מטמא ורבי יוחנן בן נורי מטהר,ואי בעית אימא כי קתני אבר מן המת אבר מן החי לא קתני,ואיבעית אימא כי קתני כל היכא דנזיר מגלח על אהילו לאפוקי עצם כשעורה דלא,ואיבעית אימא כי קתני כל היכא דהדר ביה לאפוקי רביעית דם דלא הדר ביה דאמר ליה רבי לבר קפרא לא תשנה רביעית דם בחזרה שהרי למודו של ר' עקיבא בידו,ועוד המקרא מסייעו ועל כל נפשות מת לא יבא ר"ש אומר עד ימיו היה מטמא אם משמת חזר בו איני יודע תנא הושחרו שיניו מפני תעניותיו,ת"ש דתניא בש"א רובע עצמות מן העצמים או משנים או משלשה ובה"א רובע מן הגויה מרוב הבנין או מרוב המנין אמר רבי יהושע יכולני לעשות דברי ב"ש ודברי ב"ה כאחד,שב"ש אומרים משנים או משלשה או משני שוקיים וירך אחד או משני ירכיים ושוק אחד הואיל ורוב גובהו של אדם מגובה וב"ה אומרים מן הגויה או מרוב בנין או מרוב מנין הואיל וישנן במפרקי ידים ורגלים שמאי אומר אפילו עצם מן השדרה או מן הגולגולת,שאני שמאי דמחמיר ליפשוט מינה טעמא דבית שמאי דמחמיר הא רבנן עד דאיכא שדרה וגולגולת לא עד כאן לא פליגי רבנן עליה דשמאי אלא בעצם אחד דאתי מן השדרה ומן הגולגולת אבל היכא דאיתיה בעיניה אפילו חדא מינהון,בעי רמי בר חמא רובע עצמות מן שדרה וגולגולת מאי כי קתני חצי קב עצמות היכא דאיכא משאר אבריו אבל מן שדרה וגולגולת דחמירי אפי' רובע עצמות או דלמא לא שנא,אמר רבא ת"ש השדרה והגולגולת ואי סלקא דעתך רובע עצמות דאתי מן שדרה וגולגולת חמיר ליתני על רובע עצמות הבא מן השדרה כו' 52b. b And if it enters your mind /b that the i halakha /i applies to b either a spine or a skull /b and they are two separate i halakhot /i , b these are seven /b cases, rather than six. The Gemara rejects this claim: No proof can be brought from here, b as when /b the i tanna /i b teaches /b this tally he lists seven items. However, only six are fully relevant here, and therefore he said they were six. The Gemara inserts b a mnemonic /b device for the ensuing suggestions as to which item in the list is not necessary in this context: b An individual /b disagrees with him; b that he; /b a nazirite b shaves /b for it; b and one /b quarter- i log /i .,The first explanation is: Rabbi Akiva listed the spine and skull as separate items, but the six include b anywhere that many /b Sages b disagree with him, to the exclusion of /b the case of a bone that is b a barley-grain-bulk, /b as here b it is an individual who disagrees with /b Rabbi Akiva, b as it is taught /b in a mishna ( i Oholot /i 2:7): If b a bone that is a barley-grain-bulk was divided into two, Rabbi Akiva deems /b it b impure and Rabbi Yoḥa ben Nuri deems /b it b pure. /b In this case, only one Sage disagrees with Rabbi Akiva., b And if you wish, say /b a different item on the list that is omitted from the tally: b When he teaches /b six, he includes b a limb /b severed b from a corpse, /b but b he does not teach a limb /b severed b from a living /b person, and that was the case that was not listed., b And if you wish, say /b a different item on the list that is omitted from the tally: b When he teaches /b six, he mentions b anywhere that a nazirite shaves for his overlaying, /b i.e., he formed a tent over the remains of a corpse, b to the exclusion of /b the case of b a bone that is a barley-grain-bulk, as /b it b does not /b impart ritual impurity in a tent. As stated in the mishna, this bone imparts impurity only through contact and carrying., b And if you wish, say /b a different item on the list that is omitted from the tally: b When he teaches /b six, he lists b anywhere that /b Rabbi Akiva b retracted /b his opinion, b to the exclusion of a quarter- /b i log /i b of blood, as he did not retract his /b opinion in that case, b as Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b said to bar Kappara: Do not teach a quarter- /b i log /i b of blood in the /b list of Rabbi Akiva’s b retractions, as Rabbi Akiva held onto his /b opinion in this regard., b And furthermore, the verse supports his /b opinion, as it states: b “Neither shall he go in to any dead bodies” /b (Leviticus 21:11). The plural form “bodies” indicates that two corpses can join together, as stated by Rabbi Akiva. Similarly, b Rabbi Shimon says: All his days, /b Rabbi Akiva b would deem /b a quarter- i log /i of blood from two corpses b ritually impure. Whether he retracted his /b opinion b after he died, /b this b I do not know. /b A Sage b taught: /b Rabbi Shimon’s b teeth blackened due to his fasts, /b which he undertook for uttering this irreverent comment about Rabbi Akiva.,§ The Gemara returns to the earlier discussion. b Come /b and b hear /b an answer to the question of whether a spine and skull must be together to impart ritual impurity, b as it is taught /b in a mishna ( i Eduyyot /i 1:7) that b Beit Shammai say: /b The b quarter- /b i kav /i b of bones, /b which imparts impurity in a tent, can be b from /b several b bones [ i ha’atzamim /i ] or from two or from three /b bones, but they cannot be from one bone. b And Beit Hillel say: /b The b quarter /b - i kav /i of bones must come b from the /b same b body, /b either b from the majority of the structure /b of the skeleton b or from the majority of the number /b of 248 bones in the body. b Rabbi Yehoshua said: I can establish the statement of Beit Shammai and the statement of Beit Hillel as one. /b In other words, I can explain their opinions so that there is no dispute between them.,How so? b As /b when b Beit Shammai say: From two or three /b bones, they mean b either from two shins and one thigh, or from two thighs and one shin. Since the majority of a person’s height /b is contained b in /b the b height /b of these limbs, they are considered the majority of the structure of the body. b And Beit Hillel say: /b Parts b from the body, or from the majority of the structure, or from the majority of the number /b of bones, b since they include the joints of the hands and feet, /b which comprise many small bones, impart impurity. b Shammai says: Even a bone from the spine or from the skull /b imparts impurity. In this source, Shammai explicitly refers to a spine or a skull.,The Gemara rejects this proof: One cannot establish a general i halakha /i from this source, for b Shammai is different, as he is /b invariably b stringent, /b whereas the Rabbis might disagree. The Gemara inquires: If so, b let us resolve /b the opposite b from /b this i baraita /i : b The reason /b that Shammai spoke of a spine or a skull b is that Beit Shammai are stringent, /b from which it may be inferred that according to b the Rabbis /b a spine and skull are not ritually impure b unless /b both b a spine and skull are present. /b The Gemara rejects this proof too: b No, the Rabbis disagree with Shammai only with regard to one bone that comes from the spine or from the skull, but when it is intact, even /b if the bone is from b one of them, /b either the spine or the skull, they possibly agree that it imparts impurity.,§ b Rami bar Ḥama raised a dilemma: /b With regard to b a quarter- /b i kav /i b of bones from a spine and a skull, what /b is the i halakha /i ? Does a nazirite shave for them? The Gemara explains the two sides of the dilemma: b When /b the mishna b teaches /b that one shaves for b a half- i kav /i of bones, /b does this apply only b when /b they b are from his other limbs, but /b in the case of bones b from /b the b spine and skull, which are stringent, /b as they impart ritual impurity on their own, b even a quarter- /b i kav /i b of bones /b imparts impurity? b Or perhaps /b it b is no different. /b , b Rava said: Come /b and b hear /b a resolution from the mishna, which teaches: b The spine and the skull. And if it enters your mind /b that b a quarter- /b i kav /i b of bones that come from a spine and skull is /b more b stringent /b than other limbs and imparts ritual impurity, b let /b the i tanna /i b teach /b this i halakha /i in a manner that presents a greater novelty, by stating: b For a quarter- /b i kav /i b of bones that come from the spine /b and the skull.
43. Babylonian Talmud, Rosh Hashanah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, response to heretic by Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 127
16a. big strongמתני׳ /strong /big בארבעה פרקים העולם נידון בפסח על התבואה בעצרת על פירות האילן בר"ה כל באי עולם עוברין לפניו כבני מרון שנאמר (תהלים לג, טו) היוצר יחד לבם המבין אל כל מעשיהם ובחג נידונין על המים:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big הי תבואה אילימא הא תבואה דקיימא כל הני הרפתקי דעדו עלה אימת איתדון אלא תבואה דמזדרעא,למימרא דחד דינא מתדנא והתניא תבואה שאירע בה קרי או אונס קודם הפסח נידונית לשעבר לאחר הפסח נידונית להבא אדם שאירע בו קרי או אונס קודם יוה"כ נידון לשעבר לאחר יוה"כ נידון להבא,אמר רבא ש"מ תרי דיני מתדנא אמר אביי הלכך כי חזי אינש דמצלח זרעא אפלא ליקדים וליזרע חרפא דעד דמטי למדייניה קדים סליק,מני מתני' לא ר"מ ולא ר' יהודה ולא ר' יוסי ולא ר' נתן,דתניא הכל נידונים בר"ה וגזר דין שלהם נחתם ביוה"כ דברי ר"מ ר' יהודה אומר הכל נידונין בר"ה וגזר דין שלהם נחתם כל אחד ואחד בזמנו בפסח על התבואה בעצרת על פירות האילן בחג נידונין על המים ואדם נידון בר"ה וגזר דין שלו נחתם ביוה"כ,ר' יוסי אומר אדם נידון בכל יום שנאמר (איוב ז, יח) ותפקדנו לבקרים רבי נתן אומר אדם נידון בכל שעה שנא' (איוב ז, יח) לרגעים תבחננו,וכי תימא לעולם ר' יהודה היא וכי קתני מתניתין אגזר דין אי הכי קשיא אדם,אמר רבא האי תנא דבי ר' ישמעאל היא דתנא דבי ר' ישמעאל בארבעה פרקים העולם נידון בפסח על התבואה בעצרת על פירות האילן בחג נידונין על המים ואדם נידון בר"ה וגזר דין שלו נחתם ביוה"כ וכי קתני מתני' אתחלת דין,אמר רב חסדא מ"ט דר' יוסי כדקאמר טעמיה ותפקדנו לבקרים אנן הכי קאמרינן מ"ט לא אמר כר' נתן בחינה עיוני בעלמא היא פקידה נמי עיוני בעלמא היא,אלא א"ר חסדא טעמיה דר' יוסי מהכא (מלכים א ח, נט) לעשות משפט עבדו ומשפט עמו ישראל דבר יום ביומו,וא"ר חסדא מלך וצבור מלך נכנס תחלה לדין שנאמר לעשות משפט עבדו ומשפט עמו ישראל מ"ט איבעית אימא לאו אורח ארעא למיתב מלכא אבראי ואיבעית אימא מקמי דליפוש חרון אף,א"ר יוסף כמאן מצלינן האידנא אקצירי ואמריעי כמאן כר' יוסי ואיבעית אימא לעולם כרבנן וכדר' יצחק דא"ר יצחק יפה צעקה לאדם בין קודם גזר דין בין לאחר גזר דין,תניא א"ר יהודה משום ר"ע מפני מה אמרה תורה הביאו עומר בפסח מפני שהפסח זמן תבואה הוא אמר הקב"ה הביאו לפני עומר בפסח כדי שתתברך לכם תבואה שבשדות ומפני מה אמרה תורה הביאו שתי הלחם בעצרת מפני שעצרת זמן פירות האילן הוא אמר הקב"ה הביאו לפני שתי הלחם בעצרת כדי שיתברכו לכם פירות האילן,ומפני מה אמרה תורה נסכו מים בחג אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא נסכו לפני מים בחג כדי שיתברכו לכם גשמי שנה ואמרו לפני בראש השנה מלכיות זכרונות ושופרות מלכיות כדי שתמליכוני עליכם זכרונות כדי שיעלה זכרוניכם לפני לטובה ובמה בשופר,אמר רבי אבהו למה תוקעין בשופר של איל אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא תקעו לפני בשופר של איל כדי שאזכור לכם עקידת יצחק בן אברהם ומעלה אני עליכם כאילו עקדתם עצמכם לפני,(ואמר) רבי יצחק למה תוקעין בר"ה למה תוקעין רחמנא אמר תקעו אלא למה מריעין מריעין רחמנא אמר זכרון תרועה אלא למה תוקעין ומריעין כשהן יושבין 16a. strong MISHNA: /strong b At four times /b of the year b the world is judged: On Passover /b judgment is passed b concerning grain; on i Shavuot /i concerning fruits /b that grow on b a tree; on Rosh HaShana all creatures pass before Him like sheep [ i benei maron /i ], as it is stated: “He Who fashions their hearts alike, Who considers all their deeds” /b (Psalms 33:15); b and on the festival /b of i Sukkot /i b they are judged concerning water, /b i.e., the rainfall of the coming year., strong GEMARA: /strong The mishna taught that on Passover judgment is passed concerning grain. The Gemara asks: b Which grain /b is judged on Passover? b If we say /b it is b the grain that is /b presently b standing /b in the fields ready to be reaped between Passover and i Shavuot /i , b when was judgment passed with regard to all those events [ i harpatkei /i ] /b that already happened to the grain while it was growing in the winter? b Rather, /b the mishna must be referring to the b grain that will be sown /b over the coming year.,The Gemara asks further: b Is this to say that /b only b one judgment is passed /b concerning a particular crop, and no more? b But isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : If b grain suffers an incident or accident before Passover, it was judged in the past, /b the previous Passover; if this occurs b after Passover, it was judged /b this Passover b for the future. /b And similarly, if b a person suffered an incident or accident before Yom Kippur, he was judged in the past, /b the previous Rosh HaShana; if this occurred b after Yom Kippur, he was judged /b this Rosh HaShana b for the future. /b , b Rava said: Learn from here /b that b two judgments are passed /b concerning each crop, one covering the period between the time it is sown and Passover and another covering the period between Passover and the time it is harvested. b Abaye said: Therefore, if a person sees that /b his b slow-growing crops, /b those that are sown at the beginning of the winter but ripen only in the spring or summer, b are doing well, he should quickly sow fast-growing crops, /b such as barley, which can be sown at the end of the winter and still ripen before Passover, b as before it is brought to judgment /b on the next Passover b it will already have /b successfully b grown, /b since he knows that this year’s crops were judged for a favorable yield.,The Gemara raises a question about the mishna: b Whose /b opinion is expressed in b the mishna? /b It is b not /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Meir, and not /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Yehuda, and not /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Yosei, and not /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Natan. /b ,The Gemara explains: b As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b All are judged on Rosh HaShana, and their sentence is sealed on Yom Kippur; /b this is b the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: All are judged on Rosh HaShana, and their sentence is sealed each in its /b own b time: On Passover /b the sentence is sealed b concerning grain; on i Shavuot /i concerning fruits /b that grow on b a tree; on the festival /b of i Sukkot /i b they are judged concerning water; and mankind is judged on Rosh HaShana, and the sentence is sealed on Yom Kippur. /b , b Rabbi Yosei says: A person is judged every day, /b and not just once a year, b as it is stated: “You visit him every morning” /b (Job 7:18), meaning that every morning an accounting is made and a judgment is passed. b Rabbi Natan says: A person is judged every hour, as it is stated: “You try him every moment” /b (Job 7:18)., b And lest you say /b that b actually, /b the mishna b is /b taught in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Yehuda, and when the mishna is taught, /b it is taught with regard to b the sentence, /b and not the judgments, which are all passed on Rosh HaShana, b if so, /b it is b difficult /b with regard to b mankind, /b as the mishna should have stated that the sentence is sealed on Yom Kippur., b Rava said: The i tanna /i /b of the mishna b is /b a i tanna /i b from the school of Rabbi Yishmael, as /b a i tanna /i b from the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: At four times /b of the year b the world is judged: On Passover concerning grain; on i Shavuot /i concerning fruits /b that grow on b a tree; on the festival /b of i Sukkot /i b they are judged concerning water; and mankind is judged on Rosh HaShana and the sentence is sealed on Yom Kippur. And when the mishna is taught, /b it is taught with regard to b the beginning of the judgment /b process, i.e., the judgment of mankind is initially passed on Rosh HaShana., b Rav Ḥisda said: What is the reason for /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yosei? /b The Gemara is astonished by this question: Why ask about his reason? b He stated his reason, /b the verse that states: b “You visit him every morning.” /b The Gemara explains: b This is what we are saying: /b If Rabbi Yosei relies on this verse, b what is the reason that he did not state /b his opinion b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Natan /b that a person is judged every hour? And if you say that he holds that the verse “You try him every moment” cannot serve as proof, because b trying merely /b indicates b examination /b and not actual judgment, then in the same way b visiting merely /b indicates b examination. /b If so, there is no clear proof from this verse., b Rather, Rav Ḥisda said: Rabbi Yosei’s reason is from here, /b another verse, which states: b “To make the judgment of His servant and the judgment of His people Israel at all times, as each day may require” /b (I Kings 8:59), which indicates that the entire world is judged every day.,§ About this verse b Rav Ḥisda said: /b When b a king and a community /b are brought before God for judgment, b the king is brought in for judgment first, as it is stated: “To make the judgment of His servant,” /b and afterward: b “And the judgment of His people Israel.” What is the reason /b for this? b If you wish, say /b that it is b not proper conduct for the king to stand outside /b and wait for the trial of his subjects to come to an end. And b if you wish, say /b instead that the king is brought in first so that he may be judged b before /b God’s b anger intensifies /b due to the sins of the community, and consequently he may be saved from overly harsh judgment., b Rav Yosef said: In accordance with whose /b opinion b do we pray nowadays /b on a daily basis b for the sick and afflicted? /b The Gemara repeats the question: b In accordance with whose /b opinion? It is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yosei, /b who holds that one is judged every day, and so there is reason to pray every day in order to affect the outcome of his judgment. b And if you wish, say /b that b actually, /b normative practice is even b in accordance with /b the opinion of b the Rabbis, /b who hold that one is judged only once a year, but b also in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yitzḥak. As Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Crying /b out to God b is beneficial for a person both before /b his b sentence /b has been issued b and after /b his b sentence /b has been issued.,§ b It is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Yehuda said in the name of Rabbi Akiva: For what /b reason did b the Torah say: Bring the i omer /i /b offering b on /b the second day of b Passover? /b It is b because Passover is the time of grain, /b the beginning of the grain harvest season, and therefore b the Holy One, Blessed be He, said: Bring the i omer /i /b offering b before Me on Passover so that the grain in the fields will be blessed for you. And for what /b reason did b the Torah say: Bring /b the offering of b the two loaves /b from the new wheat b on i Shavuot /i ? /b It is b because i Shavuot /i is the time of /b the b fruits /b that grow on b a tree, /b when it begins to ripen, and therefore b the Holy One, Blessed be He, said: Bring /b the offering of b the two loaves before Me on i Shavuot /i so that the fruits /b that grow on b a tree will be blessed for you. /b , b And for what /b reason did b the Torah say: Pour water /b onto the altar in the Temple b on the festival /b of i Sukkot /i ? b The Holy One, Blessed be He, said: Pour water before Me on the festival /b of i Sukkot /i b so that the rains of the year, /b which begin to fall after i Sukkot /i , b will be blessed for you. And recite before Me on Rosh HaShana /b verses that mention b Kingships, Remembrances, and i Shofarot /i : Kingships so that you will crown Me as King over you; Remembrances so that your remembrance will rise before Me for good; and with what /b will the remembrance rise? It will rise b with the i shofar /i . /b ,Similarly, b Rabbi Abbahu said: Why does one sound /b a blast b with a i shofar /i /b made b from a ram’s /b horn on Rosh HaShana? b The Holy One, Blessed be He, said: Sound /b a blast b before Me with a i shofar /i /b made b from a ram’s /b horn, b so that I will remember for you the binding of Isaac, son of Abraham, /b in whose stead a ram was sacrificed, b and I will ascribe it to you as if you had bound yourselves before Me. /b , b Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Why does one sound /b [ b i tokin /i /b ] a blast b on Rosh HaShana? /b The Gemara is astonished by the question: b Why do we sound /b a blast? b The Merciful One states /b in the verse: b “Sound [ i tiku /i ] /b a i shofar /i ” (Psalms 81:4). b Rather, /b the question is: b Why does one sound /b a staccato series of i shofar /i b blasts [ i terua /i ] /b in addition to a long continuous i shofar /i blast [ i tekia /i ]? The Gemara is still surprised by the question: b Sound a i terua /i ? The Merciful One states: /b “In the seventh month, in the first day of the month, shall be a solemn rest unto you, b a memorial proclaimed with the blast of horns [ i terua /i ]” /b (Leviticus 23:24). b Rather, /b Rabbi Yitzḥak asked about the common practice in Jewish communities, which is not explicitly stated in the Torah: b Why does one sound /b a long, continuous i shofar /i b blast [ i tekia /i ] and /b then a staccato series of i shofar /i b blasts [ i terua /i ] /b while the congregation is still b sitting /b before the silent prayer,
44. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, response to heretic by Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 127
90b. וכתיב (מלכים ב ז, כ) ויהי לו כן וירמסו אותו העם בשער וימות ודילמא קללת אלישע גרמה ליה דאמר רב יהודה אמר רב קללת חכם אפי' על חנם היא באה אם כן לכתוב קרא וירמסוהו וימות מאי בשער על עסקי שער,(אמר ר' יוחנן) מניין לתחיית המתים מן התורה שנאמר (במדבר יח, כח) ונתתם ממנו [את] תרומת ה' לאהרן הכהן וכי אהרן לעולם קיים והלא לא נכנס לארץ ישראל שנותנין לו תרומה אלא מלמד שעתיד לחיות וישראל נותנין לו תרומה מכאן לתחיית המתים מן התורה,דבי רבי ישמעאל תנא לאהרן כאהרן מה אהרן חבר אף בניו חברים,א"ר שמואל בר נחמני אמר רבי יונתן מניין שאין נותנין תרומה לכהן עם הארץ שנאמר (דברי הימים ב לא, ד) ויאמר לעם ליושבי ירושלים לתת מנת (לכהנים ולוים) למען יחזקו בתורת ה' כל המחזיק בתורת ה' יש לו מנת ושאינו מחזיק בתורת ה' אין לו מנת,אמר רב אחא בר אדא אמר רב יהודה כל הנותן תרומה לכהן עם הארץ כאילו נותנה לפני ארי מה ארי ספק דורס ואוכל ספק אינו דורס ואוכל אף כהן עם הארץ ספק אוכלה בטהרה ספק אוכלה בטומאה,ר' יוחנן אמר אף גורם לו מיתה שנאמר (ויקרא כב, ט) ומתו בו כי יחללוהו דבי ר"א בן יעקב תנא אף משיאו עון אשמה שנאמר (ויקרא כב, טז) והשיאו אותם עון אשמה באכלם את קדשיהם,תניא ר' סימאי אומר מניין לתחיית המתים מן התורה שנאמר (שמות ו, ד) וגם הקימותי את בריתי אתם לתת להם את ארץ כנען לכם לא נאמר אלא להם מכאן לתחיית המתים מן התורה:,(צד"ק ג"ם גש"ם ק"ם סימן): שאלו מינין את רבן גמליאל מניין שהקדוש ברוך הוא מחיה מתים אמר להם מן התורה ומן הנביאים ומן הכתובים ולא קיבלו ממנו,מן התורה דכתיב (דברים לא, טז) ויאמר ה' אל משה הנך שוכב עם אבותיך וקם אמרו לו ודילמא וקם העם הזה וזנה,מן הנביאים דכתיב (ישעיהו כו, יט) יחיו מתיך נבלתי יקומון הקיצו ורננו שוכני עפר כי טל אורות טלך וארץ רפאים תפיל ודילמא מתים שהחיה יחזקאל,מן הכתובים דכתיב (שיר השירים ז, י) וחכך כיין הטוב הולך לדודי למישרים דובב שפתי ישנים ודילמא רחושי מרחשן שפוותיה בעלמא כר' יוחנן דאמר ר' יוחנן משום ר"ש בן יהוצדק כל מי שנאמרה הלכה בשמו בעולם הזה שפתותיו דובבות בקבר שנאמר דובב שפתי ישנים,עד שאמר להם מקרא זה (דברים יא, כא) אשר נשבע ה' לאבותיכם לתת להם לכם לא נאמר אלא להם מיכן לתחיית המתים מן התורה,וי"א מן המקרא הזה אמר להם (דברים ד, ד) ואתם הדבקים בה' אלהיכם חיים כלכם היום (פשיטא דחיים כולכם היום אלא אפילו ביום שכל העולם כולם מתים אתם חיים) מה היום כולכם קיימין אף לעוה"ב כולכם קיימין,שאלו רומיים את רבי יהושע בן חנניה מניין שהקב"ה מחיה מתים ויודע מה שעתיד להיות אמר להו תרווייהו מן המקרא הזה שנאמר (דברים לא, טז) ויאמר ה' אל משה הנך שוכב עם אבותיך וקם העם הזה וזנה,ודילמא וקם העם הזה וזנה אמר להו נקוטו מיהא פלגא בידייכו דיודע מה שעתיד להיות איתמר נמי א"ר יוחנן משום רבי שמעון בן יוחאי מניין שהקדוש ברוך הוא מחיה מתים ויודע מה שעתיד להיות שנאמר הנך שוכב עם אבותיך וקם וגו',תניא א"ר אליעזר בר' יוסי בדבר זה זייפתי ספרי מינים שהיו אומרים אין תחיית המתים מן התורה אמרתי להן זייפתם תורתכם ולא העליתם בידכם כלום שאתם אומרים אין תחיית המתים מן התורה הרי הוא אומר (במדבר טו, לא) הכרת תכרת הנפש ההיא עונה בה הכרת תכרת בעולם הזה עונה בה לאימת לאו לעולם הבא,א"ל רב פפא לאביי ולימא להו תרוייהו מהכרת תכרת אינהו הוו אמרי ליה דברה תורה כלשון בני אדם,כתנאי הכרת תכרת הכרת בעולם הזה תכרת לעולם הבא דברי ר"ע אמר לו ר' ישמעאל והלא כבר נאמר (במדבר טו, ל) את ה' הוא מגדף ונכרתה וכי שלשה עולמים יש אלא ונכרתה בעולם הזה הכרת לעולם הבא הכרת תכרת דברה תורה כלשון בני אדם,בין ר' ישמעאל ובין ר"ע עונה בה מאי עבדי ביה לכדתניא יכול אפילו עשה תשובה ת"ל עונה בה לא אמרתי אלא בזמן שעונה בה,שאלה קליאופטרא מלכתא את ר"מ אמרה ידענא דחיי שכבי דכתיב (תהלים עב, טז) ויציצו מעיר כעשב הארץ אלא כשהן עומדין עומדין ערומין או בלבושיהן עומדין אמר לה ק"ו מחיטה ומה חיטה שנקברה ערומה יוצאה בכמה לבושין צדיקים שנקברים בלבושיהן על אחת כמה וכמה,א"ל קיסר לרבן גמליאל אמריתו דשכבי חיי הא הוו עפרא ועפרא מי קא חיי 90b. b And it is written: “And it was for him so, and the people trampled him in the gate, and he died” /b (II Kings 7:20). The Gemara challenges: b Perhaps /b it was b the curse of Elisha /b that b caused /b the officer to die in that manner, not the principle of punishment measure for measure for his lack of belief, b as Rav Yehuda says /b that b Rav says: The curse of a Sage, even /b if b baseless, comes /b to be fulfilled? This is all the more so true concerning the curse of Elisha, which was warranted. The Gemara answers: b If so, let the verse write: And they trampled him and he died. What /b does the term b “in the gate” /b serve to teach? It teaches that he died b over matters /b relating b to the gate [ i sha’ar /i ]. /b It was for the cynical dismissal of the prophecy of Elisha that the officer voiced at the city gate that he was punished measure for measure and was trampled at the city gate.,§ b Rabbi Yoḥa says: From where /b is the b resurrection of the dead /b derived b from the Torah? /b It is derived from this verse, b as it is stated /b with regard to i teruma /i of the tithe: b “And you shall give the i teruma /i of the Lord to Aaron the priest” /b (Numbers 18:28). b And does Aaron exist forever /b so that one can fulfill the mitzva by giving him the i teruma /i of the tithe? b But is it not /b so that Aaron b did not enter Eretz Yisrael, /b the only place b where /b the people would b give him i teruma /i ? Rather, /b the verse b teaches that /b Aaron is destined b to live in the future and the Jewish people /b will b give him i teruma /i . From here /b it is derived that b the resurrection of the dead is from the Torah. /b , b The school of Rabbi Yishmael taught /b a different derivation from this verse. From the term b “to Aaron” /b one derives that i teruma /i must be given to a priest b like Aaron; just as Aaron is one devoted to the meticulous observance of mitzvot, particularly those relating to ritual purity, i teruma /i , and tithes [ i ḥaver /i ], so too /b one gives i teruma /i to b his descendants /b who are b i ḥaverim /i . /b , b Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani says /b that b Rabbi Yonatan says: From where /b is it derived b that one does not give i teruma /i to a priest /b who is b an i am ha’aretz /i ? /b It is derived from a verse, b as it is stated: “And he commanded the people who dwelled in Jerusalem to give the portion of the priests and of the Levites, so that they may firmly adhere to the Torah of the Lord” /b (II Chronicles 31:4). b Everyone who firmly adheres to the Torah of the Lord has a portion, and anyone who does not firmly adhere to the Torah of the Lord does not have a portion. /b , b Rav Aḥa bar Adda says /b that b Rav Yehuda says: /b With regard to b anyone who gives i teruma /i to a priest /b who is b an i am ha’aretz /i , it is as though he placed /b the i teruma /i b before a lion. Just as /b with regard to b a lion, /b there is b uncertainty /b whether it will b maul /b its prey b and eat /b it, and b uncertainty /b whether it will b not maul /b its prey b and /b instead b eat /b it alive, b so too, /b with regard to b a priest /b who is b an i am ha’aretz /i /b to whom one gives i teruma /i , there is b uncertainty /b whether he will b eat it in purity, /b and there is b uncertainty /b whether he will b eat it in impurity, /b thereby violating a prohibition by Torah law., b Rabbi Yoḥa says: /b One who gives i teruma /i to a priest who is an i am ha’aretz /i b even causes /b the priest’s b death, as it is stated /b with regard to i teruma /i : b “And die therefore if they profane it” /b (Leviticus 22:9). Priests who partake of i teruma /i in a state of ritual impurity profane it and are liable to be punished with death at the hand of Heaven. b The school of Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov taught: /b By giving i teruma /i to a priest who is an i am ha’aretz /i , b one also brings upon him a sin of guilt, /b i.e., a sin that will lead to additional sins, b as it is stated: “And so bring upon them a sin of guilt when they eat their sacred items” /b (Leviticus 22:16).,§ b It is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Simai says: From where /b is b resurrection of the dead /b derived b from the Torah? /b It is derived from a verse, b as it is stated /b with regard to the Patriarchs: b “I have also established My covet with them to give to them the land of Canaan” /b (Exodus 6:4). The phrase: To give b to you /b the land of Canaan, b is not stated, /b as the meaning of the verse is not that God fulfilled the covet with the Patriarchs when he gave the land of Canaan to the children of Israel; b rather, /b it is stated: “To give b to them /b the land of Canaan,” meaning to the Patriarchs themselves. b From here /b is it derived that b the resurrection of the dead is from the Torah, /b as in the future the Patriarchs will come to life and inherit the land.,The Gemara records a mnemonic for those cited in the upcoming discussion: b i Tzadi /i , i dalet /i , i kuf /i ; i gimmel /i , i mem /i ; i gimmel /i , i shin /i , i mem /i ; i kuf /i , i mem /i .Heretics asked Rabban Gamliel: From where /b is it derived b that the Holy One, Blessed be He, revives the dead? /b Rabban Gamliel b said to them /b that this matter can be proven b from the Torah, from the Prophets, and from Writings, but they did not accept /b the proofs b from him. /b ,The proof b from the Torah /b is b as it is written: “And the Lord said to Moses, behold, you shall lie with your fathers and arise” /b (Deuteronomy 31:16). The heretics b said to him: But perhaps /b the verse should be divided in a different manner, and it should be read: “Behold, you shall lie with your fathers, b and this people will arise and stray /b after the foreign gods of the land.”,The proof b from the Prophets /b is b as it is written: “Your dead shall live, my corpse shall arise. Awake and sing, you that dwell in the dust, for your dew is as the dew of vegetation, and the land shall cast out the dead” /b (Isaiah 26:19). The heretics said to him: b But perhaps /b the prophecy was fulfilled with b the dead that Ezekiel revived. /b No proof may be cited from that verse with regard to any future resurrection.,The proof b from Writings /b is b as it is written: “And your palate is like the best wine that glides down smoothly for my beloved, moving gently the lips of those that sleep” /b (Song of Songs 7:10), indicating that the dead will ultimately rise and speak. The heretics said to him: b But perhaps merely their lips will move, in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yoḥa, as Rabbi Yoḥa says in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: Anyone in whose name a i halakha /i is stated in this world, his lips move in the grave /b as if repeating the statement cited in his name, b as it is stated: “Moving gently the lips of those that sleep.” /b No proof may be cited from that verse, as it is unrelated to resurrection.,This exchange continued b until /b Rabban Gamliel b stated to them this verse: /b “That your days may be multiplied, and the days of your children, upon the land b that the Lord took an oath to your forefathers to give them” /b (Deuteronomy 11:21). The phrase: b To /b give b you, is not stated; rather, /b it is stated: b “To /b give b them,” /b to the Patriarchs themselves, as in the future the Patriarchs will come to life and inherit the land. b From here resurrection of the dead /b is derived b from the Torah. /b , b And there are those who say /b that it is b from this /b following b verse /b that b he said to them /b his ultimate proof: b “But you who cleave to the Lord your God every one of you is alive this day” /b (Deuteronomy 4:4). Wasn’t it b obvious /b with regard to the children of Israel whom God was addressing, that b “every one of you is alive this day”? Rather, /b the meaning of the verse is: b Even on the day when everyone is dead you will live; just as today every one of you is alive, so too, in the World-to-Come every one of you /b will be b alive. /b , b The Romans asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥaya: From where /b is it derived b that the Holy One, Blessed be He, revives the dead, and /b from where is it derived that b He knows what is destined to be? /b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥaya b said to them: Both of those /b matters are derived b from this verse, as it is stated: “And the Lord said to Moses, Behold, you shall lie with your fathers and arise; this people will go astray” /b (Deuteronomy 31:16). This indicates that Moses will die and then arise from the dead and that the Holy One, Blessed be He, knows what the children of Israel are destined to do.,The Romans asked: b But perhaps /b the verse should be divided in a different manner, and it should be read: “Behold, you shall lie with your fathers b and this people will arise and go astray /b after the foreign gods of the land.” Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥaya b said to them: Take at least /b a response to b half /b of your question b in your hands /b from that verse, b that /b God b knows what is destined to be. /b The Gemara comments: b It was also stated /b on a similar note by an i amora /i citing a i tanna /i , as b Rabbi Yoḥa says in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: From where /b is it derived b that the Holy One, Blessed be He, revives the dead, and /b from where is it derived that b He knows what is destined to be? /b It is derived from a verse, b as it is stated: “Behold, you shall lie with your fathers and arise.” /b , b It is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei, says: With this /b following b matter, I refuted the books of the Samaritans, as they would say /b that b there is no /b source for b the resurrection of the dead from the Torah. I said to them: You falsified your torah and you accomplished nothing, as you say there is no /b source for b the resurrection of the dead from the Torah, /b and the Torah b states: “That soul shall be excised; his iniquity shall be upon him” /b (Numbers 15:31). You interpret the phrase “that soul b shall be excised” /b to mean that a sinner will be punished with death b in this world. /b If so, with regard to the phrase b “his iniquity shall be upon him,” for when /b is that destined to be? Is it b not for the World-to-Come, /b i.e., the world as it will exist after the resurrection of the dead? Apparently, there is a World-to-Come and there is an allusion to it in the Torah., b Rav Pappa said to Abaye: And let /b Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei, b say to /b the Samaritans that b both of those /b matters can be derived b from /b the phrase b “shall be excised [ i hikkaret tikkaret /i ].” /b “ i Hikkaret /i ” indicates that the sinner is excised from this world, and “ i tikkaret /i ” indicates that the sinner is excised from the World-to-Come. Abaye answered: Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei, preferred not to cite proof from the compound verb, because the Samaritans b would say: The Torah spoke in the language of people, /b and the compound verb is merely a stylistic flourish.,The Gemara notes: These derivations of Rabbi Eliezer and Rav Pappa are b parallel /b to a dispute between b i tanna’im /i /b with regard to b “ i hikkaret tikkaret /i ,” /b as follows: b “ i Hikkaret /i ” /b indicates that the sinner is excised b in this world, /b and b “ i tikkaret /i ” /b indicates that the sinner is excised b in the World-to-Come; /b this is b the statement of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Yishmael said to him: Isn’t it already stated /b in the previous verse: b “That person that blasphemes the Lord, that soul shall be excised [ i venikhreta /i ]” /b (Numbers 15:30), b and are there three worlds /b from which the sinner is excised? b Rather, /b from the term b “ i venikhreta /i ” /b it is derived that the sinner is excised b in this world, /b from b “ i hikkaret /i ” /b it is derived that the sinner is excised b in the World-to-Come, /b and from the compound verb b “ i hikkaret tikkaret /i ” /b nothing is derived, as b the Torah spoke in the language of people. /b ,The Gemara asks: According to b both Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Akiva, what do they do with, /b i.e., what do they derive from, the phrase b “His iniquity shall be upon him”? /b The Gemara answers: That phrase is necessary b for that /b derivation b which is taught /b in a i baraita /i : One b might /b have thought that the sinner is excised b even /b after b he repented. /b Therefore, b the verse states: “His iniquity shall be upon him.” /b God states: b I said /b that the sinner will be excised b only when his iniquity /b remains b upon him. /b ,§ The Gemara relates: b Queen Cleopatra asked Rabbi Meir /b a question. b She said: I know that the dead will live, as it is written: “And may they blossom out of the city like grass of the earth” /b (Psalms 72:16). Just as grass grows, so too, the dead will come to life. b But when they arise, /b will they b arise naked or /b will b they arise with their garments? /b Rabbi Meir b said to her: /b It is derived b i a fortiori /i from wheat. If wheat, which is buried naked, /b meaning that the kernel is sown without the chaff, b emerges with several garments /b of chaff, b all the more so /b will b the righteous, who are buried with their garments, /b arise with their garments.,The Roman b emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: You say that the dead will live. Aren’t they dust? And does dust come to life? /b
45. Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 88, 90
134a. חספניתא מאי תקנתיה לימשי טובא במיא דסילקא:,לא שחק מערב שבת: תנו רבנן דברים שאין עושין למילה בשבת עושין לה ביו"ט שוחקין לה כמון וטורפין לה יין ושמן,א"ל אביי לרב יוסף מאי שנא כמון בי"ט דחזי לקדרה יין ושמן חזי נמי בשבת לחולה דתניא אין טורפין יין ושמן לחולה בשבת אמר ר"ש בן אלעזר משום ר"מ אף טורפין יין ושמן,א"ר שמעון בן אלעזר פעם אחת חש רבי מאיר במעיו ובקשנו לטרוף לו יין ושמן ולא הנחנו אמרנו לו דבריך יבטלו בחייך אמר לנו אע"פ שאני אומר כך וחבירי אומרים כך מימי לא מלאני לבי לעבור על דברי חבירי הוא ניהו דמחמיר אנפשיה אבל לכולי עלמא שרי,התם לא בעי ליכא הכא בעי ליכא הכא נמי ניעביד ולא לילך היינו דקתני נותן זה בפני עצמו וזה בפני עצמו:,ת"ר אין מסננין את החרדל במסננת שלו ואין ממתקין אותו בגחלת א"ל אביי לרב יוסף מאי שנא מהא דתנן נותנים ביצה במסננת של חרדל,א"ל התם לא מיחזי כבורר הכא מיחזי כבורר,ואין ממתקין אותו בגחלת והתניא ממתקין אותו בגחלת לא קשיא כאן בגחלת של מתכת כאן בגחלת של עץ,א"ל אביי לרב יוסף מ"ש מבישרא אגומרי א"ל התם לא אפשר הכא אפשר,א"ל אביי לרב יוסף מהו לגבן א"ל אסור מ"ש מלישה א"ל התם לא אפשר הכא אפשר,והא אמרי נהרדעי גבינה בת יומא מעליא הכי קאמרי דאפילו גבינה בת יומא מעליא:,אין עושין לה חלוק כו': אמר אביי אמרה לי אם האי חלוק דינוקא לפניה לסיטרא לעילאי דילמא מידביק גרדא מיניה ואתי לידי כרות שפכה אימיה דאביי עבדא כיסתתא לפלגא אמר אביי האי ינוקא דלית ליה חלוק לייתי בליתא דאית ליה שיפתא וליכרכיה לשיפתא לתתאי ועייף ליה לעילאי,ואמר אביי אמרה לי אם האי ינוקא דלא ידיע מפקתיה לשייפיה מישחא ולוקמיה להדי יומא והיכא דזיג ליקרעיה בשערתא שתי וערב אבל בכלי מתכות לא משום דזריף ואמר אביי אמרה לי אם האי ינוקא דלא מייץ מיקר דקר פומיה מאי תקנתיה ליתו כסא גומרי ולינקטיה ליה להדי פומיה דחיים פומיה ומייץ ואמר אביי אמרה לי אם האי ינוקא דלא מנשתיה לינפפיה בנפוותא ומנשתיה,ואמר אביי אמרה לי אם האי ינוקא דלא מעוי ליתו סליתא דאימיה ולישרקיה עילויה ומעוי ואמר אביי אמרה לי אם האי ינוקא דקטין לייתו לסילתא דאימיה ולישרקיה עילויה מקוטנא לאולמא ואי אלים מאולמא לקוטנא ואמר אביי אמרה לי אם האי ינוקא דסומק דאכתי לא איבלע ביה דמא] ליתרחו ליה עד דאיבלע ביה דמא ולימהלוה דירוק ואכתי לא נפל ביה דמיה ליתרחו עד דנפל ביה דמיה ולימהלוה,דתניא א"ר נתן פעם אחת הלכתי לכרכי הים ובאת אשה לפני שמלה בנה ראשון ומת שני ומת שלישי הביאתו לפני ראיתיו שהוא אדום אמרתי לה המתיני לו עד שיבלע בו דמו המתינה לו עד שנבלע בו דמו ומלה אותו וחיה והיו קורין אותו נתן הבבלי על שמי,שוב פעם אחת הלכתי למדינת קפוטקיא ובאת אשה אחת לפני שמלה בנה ראשון ומת שני ומת שלישי הביאתו לפני ראיתיו שהוא ירוק הצצתי בו ולא ראיתי בו דם ברית אמרתי לה המתיני לו עד שיפול בו דמו והמתינה לו ומלה אותו וחיה והיו קורין שמו נתן הבבלי על שמי: 134a. b sores /b on his flesh. b What is his remedy? Let him wash extensively in beet water, /b in which beets have been boiled.,We learned in the mishna: b If one did not grind /b the cumin b from Shabbat eve, /b he chews it with his teeth and places it on the place of circumcision as a salve. b The Sages taught: /b There are b actions that may not be performed /b in preparation b for a circumcision on Shabbat /b but b may be performed /b in preparation b for it on a Festival. /b For example: b One grinds cumin for it, and one mixes wine and oil for it. /b , b Abaye said to Rav Yosef: What is different about cumin /b that makes it permissible to grind it b on a Festival? /b The fact b that it is suitable /b for use b to /b spice b a pot, /b in cooking. Based on that explanation, mixed b wine and oil are also suitable /b for use b on Shabbat for a sick person, as it was taught /b in a i baraita /i : b One may not mix wine and oil for a sick person on Shabbat. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said in the name of Rabbi Meir: One may even mix wine and oil /b on Shabbat., b Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said: /b It happened b on one occasion /b that b Rabbi Meir had intestinal pain /b on Shabbat, b and we sought to mix wine and oil for him /b as treatment b and he did not let us /b do so. b We said to him: /b Will b your statement be negated in your lifetime? /b You permit mixing these ingredients for a sick person. b He said to us: Even though I say this and my colleagues say that, /b and I do not retract my statement, still, b in all my days I have never been so presumptuous as to violate the statements of my colleagues /b and act in accordance with my opinion. Apparently, b it was he who was stringent /b with regard to b himself, but for everyone it is permitted. /b ,The Gemara answers that there is a distinction between the cases: b There, /b for medicinal purposes, b it need not be beaten, /b whereas b here, /b for circumcision, b it must be beaten. /b The Gemara asks: b Here too, let us prepare /b the mixture b but not beat /b it. The Gemara answers: That is in fact the custom, and b that is what /b the mishna b teaches: He places this by itself and that by itself, /b meaning that he may mix the wine and oil, but he may not beat them., b The Sages taught /b with regard to labor on a Festival: b One may not strain mustard in its strainer, and one may not sweeten it with coal. Abaye said to Rav Yosef: /b In b what /b way b is /b this b different from that which we learned /b in a mishna: b One may place an egg in a mustard strainer /b on Shabbat?,Rav Yosef b said to him: /b There is a distinction between the cases, that b there, /b in the case of the egg, the act b does not appear like selecting, /b whereas b here, /b in the case of the mustard, the act b appears like selecting. /b Straining an egg does not actually separate it into its component parts. Straining mustard does.,We learned that b one may not sweeten /b the mustard b with coal. /b The Gemara asks: b Wasn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : b One may sweeten it with coal. /b The Gemara answers: This is b not difficult, /b as there is a distinction: b There, /b where it is permitted, it is referring to the case b of a metal coal, /b as extinguishing metal coals is not prohibited by Torah law, whereas b here, /b where it is prohibited, it is referring to the case b of a wooden coal. /b , b Abaye said to Rav Yosef: /b In b what /b way b is /b mustard placed on coals, which is prohibited, b different from meat /b placed b on coals, /b which is permitted even if the coals are extinguished by the blood dripping from the meat? Rav Yosef b said to /b Abaye: The two cases are not similar, as b there, /b with regard to meat, b it is not possible /b to accomplish this in any other way, but b here, /b with regard to mustard, b it is possible /b to accomplish this in another way., b Abaye said to Rav Yosef: What is /b the i halakha /i with regard to whether it is permissible b to curdle /b cheese on a Festival? b He said to him: It is prohibited. /b Abaye asked: In b what /b way b is /b this b different from kneading /b dough, which is permitted on a Festival? Rav Yosef b said to him: There, /b with regard to dough, b it is not possible /b to bake bread before a Festival, as day-old bread is inferior to fresh bread. Therefore, kneading dough to bake bread on a Festival is permitted. b Here, /b with regard to cheese, b it is possible /b to curdle cheese before a Festival and it will not deteriorate in any way.,Abaye challenged this distinction: b Didn’t /b the Sages of b Neharde’a say /b that b one-day-old cheese /b is b excellent? /b Curdling cheese on a Festival should be permitted? Rav Yosef responded: b This is what they are saying: Even one-day-old cheese /b is b excellent; /b however, cheese that aged longer is better. Therefore, they did not permit curdling cheese on a Festival, as it is not necessary for the Festival.,We learned in the mishna: b And /b on Shabbat b one may not make a pouch /b to place over the circumcision as a bandage b i ab initio /i . Abaye said: My mother, /b actually his foster mother who was the nursemaid who raised him, b told me: /b With regard to b that pouch, /b placed as a bandage over the circumcision b of a baby, let one place it on the upper side /b with the threads below, b lest a thread from it stick to /b the place of circumcision and cause the baby b to become /b one with b a severed urethra. /b The Gemara relates that b Abaye’s mother would make a pouch /b that covered b half /b the place of circumcision so that it would not be damaged through contact with the threads emerging from the edge of the pouch. b Abaye said: /b If b this baby does not have a pouch /b to put on the place of the circumcision, b let one bring a worn-out garment with a hem, and wrap the hem under, and fold /b the garment b over, /b so that the threads from the worn-out garment will not adhere to the wound., b And Abaye /b also b said: My mother told me: /b In the case of b a baby /b the location of b whose exit, /b i.e., anus, b is unknown, /b as it is obscured by skin, b let one rub it with oil and stand it before /b the light of b the day. And where /b it appears b transparent, let one tear it with a barley grain widthwise and lengthwise. However, /b one may b not /b tear it b with a metal implement because it causes infection and swelling. And Abaye said /b that b my mother told me: /b If b a baby refuses to nurse, /b that is because b its mouth is cold /b and it is unable to nurse. b What is his remedy? They should bring a cup /b of b coals and place it near his mouth, so that his mouth will warm and he will nurse. And Abaye said /b that b my mother told me: /b A b baby that does not urinate, let one place him in a sieve /b and shake him, b and he will urinate. /b , b And Abaye said: My nurse told me: /b If b a baby is not breathing, let them bring his mother’s placenta and place /b the placenta b on him, and /b the baby b will breathe. And Abaye said /b that b my mother told me: /b If b a baby is /b too b small, let them bring his mother’s placenta and rub /b the baby b with it from the narrow /b end b to the wide /b end of the placenta. b And if /b the baby b is strong, /b i.e., too large, let them rub the baby b from the wide /b end of the placenta b to the narrow /b end. b And Abaye said /b that b my mother told me: /b If b a baby is red, /b that is because b the blood has not yet been absorbed in him. /b In that case, b let them wait until his blood is absorbed and then circumcise him. /b Likewise, if a baby is b pale and his blood has not yet entered him, let them wait until his blood enters him and then circumcise him. /b , b As it was taught /b in a i baraita /i , b Rabbi Natan said: On one occasion, I went to the coastal cities, and one woman came before me who circumcised her first son and he died, /b and she circumcised her b second /b son b and he died, /b and since she feared circumcising the b third /b due to concern that he might die as well, b she brought him before me. I saw that he was red. I said to her: Wait until his blood is absorbed into him. She waited until his blood was absorbed into him and then circumcised him, and he lived. And they would call him Natan the Babylonian after my name. /b ,Rabbi Natan further related: b On another occasion I went to the state of Cappadocia, and a woman came before me /b who b circumcised her first son and he died, /b and she circumcised her b second /b son b and he died. /b Since she feared circumcising the b third /b due to concern that he might die as well, b she brought him before me. I saw that he was pale. I looked at him and I could not see in him the blood of the covet, /b i.e., he had a blood deficiency. b I said to her: Wait until blood enters him. And she waited and then circumcised him, and he lived. And they would call his name Natan the Babylonian after my name. /b
46. Babylonian Talmud, Megillah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 102; Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 536
29b. ועל הכלאים,בשלמא על הכלאים דזמן זריעה היא אלא על השקלים מנלן,אמר ר' טבי אמר רבי יאשיה דאמר קרא (במדבר כח, יד) זאת עולת חודש בחדשו אמרה תורה חדש והבא קרבן מתרומה חדשה,וכיון דבניסן בעי אקרובי מתרומה חדשה קדמינן וקרינן באחד באדר כי היכי דליתו שקלים למקדש,כמאן דלא כרבן שמעון בן גמליאל דאי רבן שמעון בן גמליאל האמר שתי שבתות דתניא שואלין בהלכות הפסח קודם לפסח שלשים יום רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר שתי שבתות,אפילו תימא רבן שמעון בן גמליאל כיון דאמר מר בחמשה עשר בו שולחנות יושבין במדינה ובכ"ה יושבין במקדש משום שולחנות קדמינן וקרינן,מאי פרשת שקלים רב אמר (במדבר כח, ב) צו את בני ישראל ואמרת אליהם את קרבני לחמי ושמואל אמר (שמות ל, יב) כי תשא,בשלמא למאן דאמר כי תשא היינו דקרי לה פרשת שקלים דכתיב בה שקלים אלא למאן דאמר את קרבני לחמי הכא מידי שקלים כתיבי התם אין טעמא מאי כדר' טבי,בשלמא למ"ד צו את בני ישראל משום דכתיבי קרבנות התם כדר' טבי אלא למ"ד כי תשא קרבנות מי כתיבי שקלים לאדנים כתיבי,כדתני רב יוסף שלש תרומות הן של מזבח למזבח ושל אדנים לאדנים ושל בדק הבית לבדק הבית,בשלמא למאן דאמר כי תשא היינו דשני האי ראש חדש משאר ראשי חדשים,אלא למ"ד צו את קרבני מאי שני שני דאילו ראשי חדשים קרו שיתא בעניינא דיומא וחד בדראש חודש ואילו האידנא כולהו בדראש חודש,הניחא למאן דאמר לסדר פרשיות הוא חוזר,אלא למאן דאמר לסדר הפטרות הוא חוזר ופרשתא דיומא קרינן מאי שני,שני דאילו ראשי חדשים קרו שיתא בעניינא דיומא וחד קרי בדראש חודש ואילו האידנא קרו תלתא בעניינא דיומא וארבעה קרו בדראש חודש,מיתיבי ר"ח אדר שחל להיות בשבת קורין בפרשת שקלים ומפטירין ביהוידע הכהן בשלמא למ"ד כי תשא היינו דמפטירין ביהוידע הכהן דדמי ליה דכתיב (מלכים ב יב, ה) כסף נפשות ערכו,אלא למ"ד את קרבני לחמי מי דמי דמי כדר' טבי,מיתיבי חל להיות בפרשה הסמוכה לה בין מלפניה ובין מלאחריה קורין אותה וכופלין אותה,בשלמא למ"ד כי תשא היינו דמתרמי בההוא זימנא,אלא למ"ד צו את קרבני מי מתרמי בההוא זימנא אין לבני מערבא דמסקי לדאורייתא בתלת שנין,תניא כוותיה דשמואל ר"ח אדר שחל להיות בשבת קורין כי תשא ומפטירין ביהוידע הכהן,א"ר יצחק נפחא ר"ח אדר שחל להיות בשבת מוציאין שלש תורות וקורין בהן אחד בעניינו של יום ואחד בשל ר"ח ואחד בכי תשא וא"ר יצחק נפחא ר"ח טבת שחל להיות בשבת מביאין שלש תורות וקורין בהן אחד בעניינו של יום ואחד בדראש חודש ואחד בחנוכה,וצריכא דאי איתמר בהא בהא קאמר ר' יצחק אבל בהך כרב ס"ל דאמר פרשת שקלים את קרבני לחמי ובשתי תורות סגי קמ"ל,ולימא הא ולא בעיא הך חדא מכלל חבירתה איתמר,איתמר ר"ח טבת שחל להיות בחול א"ר יצחק קרו תלתא בר"ח וחד בחנוכה ורב דימי דמן חיפא אמר קרו תלתא בחנוכה וחד בר"ח,אמר ר' מני כוותיה דרבי יצחק נפחא מסתברא דתדיר ושאינו תדיר תדיר קודם,א"ר אבין כוותיה דרב דימי מסתברא מי גרם לרביעי שיבא ר"ח הלכך רביעי בר"ח בעי מיקרי,מאי הוי עלה רב יוסף אמר אין משגיחין בראש חודש ורבה אמר אין משגיחין בחנוכה והלכתא אין משגיחין בחנוכה ור"ח עיקר,איתמר חל להיות בואתה תצוה אמר רבי יצחק נפחא קרו שיתא מואתה תצוה עד כי תשא וחד מכי תשא עד ועשית אמר אביי 29b. b And /b a public announcement is made b concerning /b the need to uproot any instances of b diverse kinds /b that have grown in the fields.,The Gemara asks: b Granted, /b an announcement is made b concerning /b the need to uproot b diverse kinds, as /b the beginning of the month of Adar b is a time of sowing. /b Instances of diverse kinds are already noticeable, and therefore it is a fitting time to deal with the matter. b But /b with regard to the announcement b concerning the /b half- b shekels, from where do we /b derive that it should be made at this point in the year?, b Rabbi Tavi said /b that b Rabbi Yoshiyya said: /b It is b as the verse states: “This is the burnt-offering of each New Moon in its renewal /b throughout the months of the year” (Numbers 28:14). b The Torah says: /b There is a month in which you must begin to b renew and bring the /b daily and additional b offering from /b animals purchased with b the new collections /b of half-shekels collected that year. Each year a collection is made with which to fice the purchase of communal offerings for the following year. offerings during that year may be purchased only from collections made for that year.,Elsewhere it is derived through a verbal analogy that the yearly cycle begins with the month of Nisan. b And since /b starting from and b during /b the month of b Nisan /b the offerings b must be brought from the new collections /b of half-shekels, it is necessary to make the collection in the preceding month, i.e., in Adar. Therefore, b they advance /b the reading of i Shekalim /i , b and they read /b it b on the first of Adar, in order that /b the people b will /b be reminded to b bring the /b half- b shekels to the Temple /b in good time.,The Gemara asks: b In accordance with whose /b opinion is the mishna taught? It is b not in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, for if /b someone would suggest that it is in accordance with the opinion of b Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, /b one could counter: b Didn’t he say /b that b two weeks /b is a sufficient period of preparation? b As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b We /b begin to b inquire into the i halakhot /i of Passover thirty days before Passover. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: /b We begin to inquire only b two weeks /b before Passover. As such, it should be sufficient to announce the collection of half-shekels from two weeks before Nisan, and there should be no need to advance the announcement to the beginning of Adar, as stated in the mishna., b Even /b if b you say /b that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of b Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, /b it is possible that even he agrees that the announcement concerning the collection of the half-shekels should be made on the first of Adar, b since the Master said: On the fifteenth /b of Adar money-changing b tables /b for collecting the half-shekels b are set up throughout the country, and on the twenty-fifth /b of Adar b they are set up in the Temple. Because of /b the possibility to donate the half-shekels at b the tables /b already from the fifteenth, b they advance /b the reading of i Shekalim /i to inform people of that possibility b and read it /b two weeks earlier, on the first of Adar.,§ The Gemara clarifies which passage is read: b What is /b this b portion of i Shekalim /i ? Rav said: /b It is the portion of b “Command the children of Israel, and say to them: My offering, the provision /b of My offerings made by fire” (Numbers 28), which details the daily and additional offerings. b And Shmuel said: /b It is the portion of b “When you take the count” /b (Exodus 30:11–16)., b Granted, according to the one who said /b that it is the portion of b “When you take the count,” this is /b the reason b that it is called the portion of i Shekalim /i , for /b the obligation to give half- b shekels is written in /b that portion. b However, according to one who said /b that it is the portion of b “My offering, the provision /b of My offerings,” why should that portion be read? b Is there anything written /b about the half- b shekels here? /b The Gemara answers: b Yes. What is the reason /b that they are collected in Adar? b As per /b the explanation b of Rabbi Tavi, /b the half-shekels are collected to be used for the coming year’s daily and additional offerings. Therefore, reading the portion concerning those offerings will serve well as a reminder for people to donate., b Granted, according to the one who said /b that it is the portion of b “Command the children of Israel: /b My offering, the provision of My offerings,” it is logical to read that portion, b because the offerings /b that will be purchased with the half-shekels b are written there, as per /b the explanation b of Rabbi Tavi. However, according to one who said /b that it is the portion of b “When you take the count,” /b why should that portion be read? b Is /b anything about b the offerings written /b in that portion? The collection of half- b shekels for /b use in the construction of b the sockets /b of the Tabernacle b are /b the only thing b written /b in that portion. What does that have to do with the collection of half-shekels for the purchase of offerings that is held in the month of Adar?,The Gemara answers: The selection of that portion is b in accordance with /b the explanation of the portion b that Rav Yosef taught: /b The three instances of the word: Contribution, in that portion teach that b there were three contributions /b of half-shekels: The contribution b of the altar /b is b for /b the purchase of communal offerings to be sacrificed on b the altar; and /b the contribution b of the sockets /b is b for /b constructing b the sockets; and /b the contribution b of the Temple maintece /b is b for the Temple maintece. /b Therefore, according to Rav Yosef, it is understandable why the portion of “When you take the count” is read. It deals explicitly with the collection of half-shekels.,The Gemara asks further: b Granted, according to the one who said /b that it is the portion of b “When you take the count,” this is what is different /b about b this New Moon /b of Adar b and other New Moons /b when they occur on Shabbat. On the New Moon of Adar, “When you take the count” is read because it describes the collection of half-shekels. On other New Moons, when they occur on Shabbat, the portion of “Command the children of Israel” is read because it mentions the additional offerings brought on Shabbat and the New Moon., b However, according to the one who said /b that b “Command /b the children of Israel, and say to them: b My offering,” what is different /b about the portion read on the New Moon of Adar and the portion read on other New Moons when they occur on Shabbat, for the same portion is read in all cases? The Gemara answers: They are b different: For /b on other b New Moons, /b when they occur on Shabbat, b six /b people b read from /b the regular weekly portion b of the matter of the day and one /b reads b from /b the portion for b the New Moon, whereas now, /b on the New Moon of Adar, if it occurs on Shabbat, b all /b seven read from the portion of b the New Moon. /b ,The Gemara asks: This answer b works out well according to the one who said that /b when the mishna states that on the fifth Shabbat, we resume the regular order of readings. The intention is that b one resumes the /b regular weekly b order /b of Torah b portions. /b This implies that on the previous four i Shabbatot /i , the regular portion was not read at all. Rather, only the special portions delineated in the mishna were read. Therefore, it makes sense to say that all seven people read from the special portion., b However, according to the one who says /b that the mishna’s intention is that b one resumes the /b regular b order of concluding /b readings from the Prophets [ b i haftarot /i /b ], b and /b on the previous i Shabbatot /i b one also reads from /b the regular portion b of the matter of the day, then /b the original question stands: b What is different /b about the portion read on the New Moon of Adar and the portion read on other New Moons when they occur on Shabbat?,The Gemara answers: They are b different: For whereas /b on other b New Moons, /b when they occur on Shabbat, b six /b people b read from /b the regular weekly portion b of the matter of the day and one /b reads b from /b the portion for b the New Moon, now, /b on the New Moon of Adar, if it occurs on Shabbat, b three /b people read from the regular weekly portion b of the matter of the day and four read from /b the portion for b the New Moon. /b ,The Gemara b raises an objection /b from the i Tosefta /i ( i Megilla /i 3:1): When b the New Moon of Adar occurs on Shabbat, they read the /b Torah b portion of i Shekalim /i , and they read as the i haftara /i /b the story involving b Jehoiada the priest /b (II Kings 12:1–17). b Granted, according to the one who said /b that i Shekalim /i is the portion of b “When you take the count,” this is /b the reason b that they read as the i haftara /i /b the story involving b Jehoiada the priest: Because it is comparable /b in content b to /b the Torah reading, b as it is written /b in the story of Jehoiada: b “The money of his assessment of persons” /b (II Kings 12:5), which is referring to his collection of the half-shekels, and the i haftara /i should always contain a theme similar to the Torah reading., b However, according to the one who said /b that b “My offering, the provision /b of My offerings” is read as the portion of i Shekalim /i , b is /b the i haftara /i b comparable /b to that portion? b It is comparable, as per /b the explanation of b Rabbi Tavi: /b It is appropriate to read the portion about offerings because the collection of half-shekels is for that purpose.,The Gemara b raises an objection /b from a i baraita /i : If the New Moon of Adar b occurs on /b the Shabbat on which b the portion /b to be read for the regular weekly reading b is adjacent to /b the portion read as i Shekalim /i , b whether /b on the Shabbat b preceding /b the Shabbat on which i Shekalim /i will be read as part of the weekly reading b or following it, /b then b they read and repeat /b i Shekalim /i on both i Shabbatot /i , one time as the special portion i Shekalim /i and the other as part of the regular order., b Granted, according to the one who said /b that the portion of b “When you take the count” /b is read as i Shekalim /i , b this is /b how it is possible: b That /b portion b could occur at that time /b in the yearlong cycle of the order of readings. In the regular order of reading, “When you take the count” is often read during the beginning of Adar., b However, according to the one who said /b that the portion of b “Command /b the children of Israel, and say to them, b My offering” /b is read as i Shekalim /i , b does /b that portion b ever occur at that time /b of the year? That portion usually occurs much later in the year, in the summer. The Gemara answers: b Yes, /b it sometimes occurs that this portion is read during the beginning of Adar, b for the people of the West, /b i.e., Eretz Yisrael, b who complete /b the cycle of reading b the Torah /b not in one year but b in three years. /b , b It is taught /b in a i baraita /i b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Shmuel: When the New Moon of Adar occurs on Shabbat, they read /b the portion of b “When you take the count,” and they read as the i haftara /i /b the story involving b Jehoiada the priest. /b ,§ b Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa said: /b When b the New Moon of Adar occurs on Shabbat, /b the congregation b takes out three Torah scrolls /b from the ark b and reads from them. /b From the first b one, /b they read the portion of the regular weekly reading b of the matter of the day; and /b from the second b one /b they read the portion b for the New Moon; and /b from the third b one /b they read i Shekalim /i , which begins with b “When you take the count.” And Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa /b further b said: /b When b the New Moon of Tevet, /b which always falls during Hanukkah, b occurs on Shabbat, they bring three Torah scrolls and read from them. /b From the first b one, /b they read b the /b portion of the regular cycle of reading b of the matter of the day; and /b from the second b one, /b they read the portion b for the New Moon; and /b from the third b one, /b they read the portion b for Hanukkah. /b ,The Gemara comments: b And /b it is b necessary /b for Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa to state the i halakha /i in both cases, b as, if it had been stated /b only b with regard to /b the New Moon of Tevet, one could have mistakenly thought that only b with regard to that /b case b does Rabbi Yitzḥak /b Nappaḥa b state /b that three Torah scrolls are used. b But with regard to /b the New Moon of Adar, one might think that b he holds in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rav, who said /b that b the portion of i Shekalim /i is /b the portion of b “My offering, the provision /b of My offerings,” b and two Torah /b scrolls will therefore b suffice, /b since the same portion is used both for the portion for the New Moon and for the portion of i Shekalim /i . Therefore, he b teaches us /b that three Torah scrolls are used even on the New Moon of Adar.,The Gemara asks: b But, /b based on that logic, b let /b Rabbi Yitzḥak just b say /b the i halakha /i b with respect to this /b case of the New Moon of Adar, b and there would be no need /b to state b that /b case of the New Moon of Tevet. The Gemara answers: Indeed, b one was stated from the other by inference, /b i.e., Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa stated the i halakha /i explicitly only with regard to the New Moon of Adar, and it was inferred that the same is true of the New Moon of Tevet.,§ An amoraic dispute b was stated: /b When b the New Moon of Tevet occurs on a weekday, /b what Torah portion is read? b Rabbi Yitzḥak /b Nappaḥa b said: Three /b people b read /b from the portion b for the New Moon, and one /b reads from the portion b for Hanukkah. And Rav Dimi of Haifa said: Three read /b from the portion b for Hanukkah, and one /b reads from the portion b for the New Moon. /b , b Rabbi Mani said: It stands to reason /b to rule b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa, for /b it is already an established principle that when b a frequent /b practice b and an infrequent /b practice conflict, the b frequent /b practice b takes precedence /b over the infrequent practice. Since the portion for the New Moon is read more frequently than the portion for Hanukkah, it should be given greater prominence., b Rabbi Avin said: It stands to reason /b to rule b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rav Dimi, /b for the following reason: b What caused the fourth /b person b to come /b and read from the Torah? b The New Moon, /b as on the other days of Hanukkah only three people read from the Torah. b Therefore, /b it is only logical that b the fourth person should read /b from the portion b for the New Moon. /b ,The Gemara asks: b What /b halakhic conclusion b was /b reached b about /b this matter? b Rav Yosef said: We do not concern ourselves /b with making the portion for b the New Moon /b the primary reading. Rather, three people read from the portion for Hanukkah, and only the fourth reads the portion for the New Moon. b And Rabba said: We do not concern ourselves with /b making the portion for b Hanukkah /b the primary reading. Rather, three people read from the portion for the New Moon, and only the fourth reads the portion for Hanukkah. The Gemara concludes: b And the i halakha /i /b is that b we do not concern ourselves with /b making the portion for b Hanukkah /b the primary reading, b and /b therefore the portion for b the New Moon is primary. /b ,§ An amoraic dispute b was stated: /b If the Shabbat on which the portion of i Shekalim /i is to be read b occurs on /b the Shabbat in which the regular weekly portion is b “And you shall command” /b (Exodus 27:20–30:10), what should be done? b Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa said: Six /b people b read from /b the portion b “And you shall command,” until /b but not including the weekly portion of b “When you take the count” /b (Exodus 27:20–30:10), b and one /b person reads the portion of i Shekalim /i b from “When you take the count,” until /b but not including the verse: b “And you shall make /b a copper laver” (Exodus 30:11–16). b Abaye said: /b
47. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 544, 546, 566
26b. תנו רבנן טעה ולא התפלל מנחה בערב שבת מתפלל בליל שבת שתים טעה ולא התפלל מנחה בשבת מתפלל במוצאי שבת שתים של חול מבדיל בראשונה ואינו מבדיל בשניה ואם הבדיל בשניה ולא הבדיל בראשונה שניה עלתה לו ראשונה לא עלתה לו,למימרא דכיון דלא אבדיל בקמייתא כמאן דלא צלי דמי ומהדרינן ליה,ורמינהו טעה ולא הזכיר גבורות גשמים בתחיית המתים ושאלה בברכת השנים מחזירין אותו הבדלה בחונן הדעת אין מחזירין אותו מפני שיכול לאומרה על הכוס קשיא,איתמר רבי יוסי ברבי חנינא אמר תפלות אבות תקנום רבי יהושע בן לוי אמר תפלות כנגד תמידין תקנום,תניא כוותיה דר' יוסי ברבי חנינא ותניא כוותיה דרבי יהושע בן לוי תניא כוותיה דרבי יוסי בר' חנינא אברהם תקן תפלת שחרית שנא' (בראשית יט, כז) וישכם אברהם בבקר אל המקום אשר עמד שם ואין עמידה אלא תפלה שנאמר (תהלים קו, ל) ויעמד פינחס ויפלל,יצחק תקן תפלת מנחה שנאמר (בראשית כד, סג) ויצא יצחק לשוח בשדה לפנות ערב ואין שיחה אלא תפלה שנאמר (תהלים קב, א) תפלה לעני כי יעטף ולפני ה' ישפוך שיחו,יעקב תקן תפלת ערבית שנאמר (בראשית כח, יא) ויפגע במקום וילן שם ואין פגיעה אלא תפלה שנאמר (ירמיהו ז, טז) ואתה אל תתפלל בעד העם הזה ואל תשא בעדם רנה ותפלה ואל תפגע בי,ותניא כוותיה דר' יהושע בן לוי מפני מה אמרו תפלת השחר עד חצות שהרי תמיד של שחר קרב והולך עד חצות ורבי יהודה אומר עד ארבע שעות שהרי תמיד של שחר קרב והולך עד ארבע שעות,ומפני מה אמרו תפלת המנחה עד הערב שהרי תמיד של בין הערבים קרב והולך עד הערב רבי יהודה אומר עד פלג המנחה שהרי תמיד של בין הערבים קרב והולך עד פלג המנחה,ומפני מה אמרו תפלת הערב אין לה קבע שהרי אברים ופדרים שלא נתעכלו מבערב קרבים והולכים כל הלילה,ומפני מה אמרו של מוספין כל היום שהרי קרבן של מוספין קרב כל היום רבי יהודה אומר עד שבע שעות שהרי קרבן מוסף קרב והולך עד שבע שעות,ואיזו היא מנחה גדולה משש שעות ומחצה ולמעלה ואיזו היא מנחה קטנה מתשע שעות ומחצה ולמעלה,איבעיא להו רבי יהודה פלג מנחה קמא קאמר או פלג מנחה אחרונה קאמר תא שמע דתניא ר' יהודה אומר פלג המנחה אחרונה אמרו והיא י"א שעות חסר רביע,נימא תיהוי תיובתיה דר' יוסי בר' חנינא אמר לך ר' יוסי בר' חנינא לעולם אימא לך תפלות אבות תקנום ואסמכינהו רבנן אקרבנות דאי לא תימא הכי תפלת מוסף לר' יוסי בר' חנינא מאן תקנה אלא תפלות אבות תקנום ואסמכינהו רבנן אקרבנות:,רבי יהודה אומר עד ארבע שעות: איבעיא להו עד ועד בכלל או דלמא עד ולא עד בכלל תא שמע ר' יהודה אומר עד פלג המנחה אי אמרת בשלמא עד ולא עד בכלל היינו דאיכא בין ר' יהודה לרבנן אלא אי אמרת עד ועד בכלל ר' יהודה 26b. On a similar note, b the Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b One who erred and did not recite the afternoon prayer on the eve of Shabbat, prays in /b the evening prayer b two /b i Amida /i prayers b on Shabbat evening. One who erred and did not recite the afternoon prayer on Shabbat, recites two weekday /b i Amida /i prayers in the evening prayer b at the conclusion of Shabbat. He recites i havdala /i [ /b the prayer of b distinction] /b between the sanctity of Shabbat and the profanity of the week by reciting: You have graced us, etc., in the fourth blessing of the i Amida, /i which is: Who graciously grants knowledge, b in the first /b prayer, as it is the actual evening prayer, b but he does not recite i havdala /i in the second /b prayer, which is in place of the afternoon prayer. Moreover, b if he recited i havdala /i in the second /b prayer b and did not recite i havdala /i in the first, the second prayer fulfilled his /b obligation, the b first one did not fulfill his /b obligation.,The Gemara comments: b Is that to say /b that b since he did not recite i havdala /i in the first /b prayer, he is b as one who did not pray and we require him to return /b to the beginning of the prayer and repeat it? If so, the conclusion is that one who fails to recite i havdala /i in the prayer must repeat that prayer.,The Gemara b raises a contradiction /b to the above conclusion from the i Tosefta /i : b One who erred and did not mention the might of the rains: /b He makes the wind blow and rain fall b in /b the second blessing of the i Amida /i , the blessing on b the revival of the dead, and /b one who erred and failed to recite b the request /b for rain b in /b the ninth blessing of the i Amida /i , b the blessing of the years, we require him to return /b to the beginning of the prayer and repeat it. However, one who erred and failed to recite b i havdala /i in /b the blessing: b Who graciously grants knowledge, we do not require him to return /b to the beginning of the prayer and repeat it, b as he can recite /b i havdala /i b over the cup /b of wine, independent of his prayer. This contradiction was not resolved and remains b difficult. /b ,The dispute between the Rabbis and Rabbi Yehuda with regard to the times beyond which the different prayers may not be recited is rooted in a profound disagreement, also manifest in a later amoraic dispute. b It was stated: Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: /b The practice of praying three times daily is ancient, albeit not in its present form; b prayers were instituted by the Patriarchs. /b However, b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said /b that the b prayers were instituted based on the daily offerings /b sacrificed in the Holy Temple, and the prayers parallel the offerings, in terms of both time and characteristics.,The Gemara comments: b It was taught /b in a i baraita /i b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, and it was taught /b in a i baraita /i b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi. /b The Gemara elaborates: b It was taught /b in a i baraita /i b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina: Abraham instituted the morning prayer, as it is stated /b when Abraham came to look out over Sodom the day after he had prayed on its behalf: b “And Abraham rose early in the morning to the place where he had stood /b before the Lord” (Genesis 19:27), b and /b from the context as well as the language utilized in the verse, the verb b standing /b means b nothing other than prayer, /b as this language is used to describe Pinehas’ prayer after the plague, b as it is stated: “And Pinehas stood up and prayed /b and the plague ended” (Psalms 106:30). Clearly, Abraham was accustomed to stand in prayer in the morning., b Isaac instituted the afternoon prayer, as it is stated: “And Isaac went out to converse [ i lasuaḥ /i ] in the field toward evening” /b (Genesis 24:63), b and conversation /b means b nothing other than prayer, as it is stated: “A prayer of the afflicted when he is faint and pours out his complaint [ i siḥo /i ] before the Lord” /b (Psalms 102:1). Obviously, Isaac was the first to pray as evening approached, at the time of the afternoon prayer., b Jacob instituted the evening prayer, as it is stated: “And he encountered [ i vayifga /i ] the place and he slept there /b for the sun had set” (Genesis 28:11). The word b encounter /b means b nothing other than prayer, as it is stated /b when God spoke to Jeremiah: b “And you, do not pray on behalf of this nation and do not raise on their behalf song and prayer, and do not encounter [ i tifga /i ] Me /b for I do not hear you” (Jeremiah 7:16). Jacob prayed during the evening, after the sun had set., b And it was taught /b in a i baraita /i b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi /b that the laws of prayer are based on the laws of the daily offerings: b Why did /b the Rabbis b say /b that b the morning prayer /b may be recited b until noon? Because, /b although the b daily morning offering /b is typically brought early in the morning, it may be b sacrificed until noon. And Rabbi Yehuda says: /b My opinion, that the morning prayer may be recited b until four hours /b into the day, is b because the daily morning offering is sacrificed until four hours. /b , b And why did /b the Rabbis b say /b that b the afternoon prayer /b may be recited b until the evening? Because the daily afternoon offering is sacrificed until the evening. Rabbi Yehuda says /b that b the afternoon prayer /b may be recited only b until the midpoint of the afternoon because, /b according to his opinion, b the daily afternoon offering is sacrificed until the midpoint of the afternoon. /b , b And why did they say /b that b the evening prayer is not fixed? Because /b the burning of the b limbs and fats /b of the offerings that were b not consumed /b by the fire on the altar b until the evening. /b They remained on the altar and were b offered continuously /b throughout b the entire night. /b , b And why did /b the Rabbis b say /b that b the additional prayer /b may be recited b all day? Because the additional offering is brought /b throughout b the entire day. /b However, b Rabbi Yehuda says /b that b the additional prayer /b may be recited b until the seventh hour /b of the day, b because the additional offering is sacrificed until the seventh hour. /b ,The i baraita /i continues and states that there are two times for the afternoon prayer. Greater, earlier i minḥa /i [ i minḥa gedola /i ] and lesser, later i minḥa /i [ i minḥa ketana /i ]. The Gemara clarifies the difference between them: b Which is i minḥa gedola /i ? From six-and-a-half hours /b after sunrise b and on, /b which is a half an hour after noon and on. It is the earliest time that the daily afternoon offering may be sacrificed, as in the case on the eve of Passover that occurs on Shabbat. b Which is i minḥa ketana /i ? From nine-and-a-half hours and on, /b which is the standard time that the daily afternoon offering is sacrificed.,On that note, b a dilemma was raised before them: Rabbi Yehuda, /b who holds that the afternoon prayer may be recited only until the midpoint of the afternoon, does b he say the midpoint of the first i minḥa /i , /b i minḥa gedola /i ? b Or, /b does b he say the midpoint of the last i minḥa /i ? Come and hear /b an explicit resolution to this dilemma: b As it was taught /b in a i baraita /i , b Rabbi Yehuda says: They said the midpoint of the last i minḥa /i , and that is eleven hours minus a quarter /b of an hour after sunrise, i.e., an hour-and-a-quarter hours before sunset.,In any case, it is clear that according to this i baraita /i the i halakhot /i of prayer are based on the Temple offerings. The Gemara suggests: b Let us say that this is a conclusive refutation of /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, /b who held that the forefathers instituted the prayers. b Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, /b could have b said to you: Actually, I will say to you /b that b the Patriarchs instituted the prayers and the Sages based /b the times and characteristics of prayer b on the Temple offerings, /b even though they do not stem from the same source. b As, if you do not say so, /b that even Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, would agree that the laws of offerings and those of prayers are related, b then, according to Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, who instituted the additional prayer? /b It is not one of the prayers instituted by the forefathers. b Rather, /b even according to Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, b the prayers were instituted by the Patriarchs and the Sages based them /b on the laws of the b offerings. /b ,We learned in the mishna that b Rabbi Yehuda says: /b The morning prayer may be recited b until four hours /b of the day. b A dilemma was raised before /b the yeshiva students: When Rabbi Yehuda says b until, /b does he mean b until and including /b the fourth hour, b or, perhaps /b when he says b “until” /b he means b until and not including, /b in which case one may not pray during the fourth hour? b Come and hear /b a resolution to this dilemma based on the mishna. b Rabbi Yehuda says: /b The afternoon prayer may be recited only b until the midpoint of the afternoon. /b Now, b granted, if you say /b that b until /b means b until and not including, then there is /b a difference b between /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yehuda and /b the opinion of b the Rabbis. However, if you say /b that b until /b means b until and including, /b then the opinion of b Rabbi Yehuda /b
48. Babylonian Talmud, Sotah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity •rabban gamaliel ii of yavneh, obligatory prayer liturgy Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 88; Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 566
40a. בנעילה דיומא דכיפורי מאי אמר אמר מר זוטרא ואמרי לה במתניתא (תהלים קכח, ד) הנה כי כן יברך גבר ירא ה' יברכך ה' מציון וראה בטוב ירושלים כל ימי חייך וראה בנים לבניך שלום על ישראל,היכן אומרן רב יוסף אמר בין כל ברכה וברכה ורב ששת אמר בהזכרת השם,פליגי בה רב מרי ורב זביד חד אמר פסוקא לקבל פסוקא וחד אמר אכל פסוקא אמר להו לכולהו,א"ר חייא בר אבא כל האומרן בגבולין אינו אלא טועה אמר רבי חנינא בר פפא תדע דבמקדש נמי לא מיבעי למימרינהו כלום יש לך עבד שמברכין אותו ואינו מאזין,א"ר אחא בר חנינא תדע דבגבולין נמי מיבעי למימרינהו כלום יש עבד שמברכין אותו ואין מסביר פנים א"ר אבהו מריש הוה אמינא להו כיון דחזינא ליה לרבי אבא דמן עכו דלא אמר להו אנא נמי לא אמינא להו,ואמר רבי אבהו מריש הוה אמינא עינותנא אנא כיון דחזינא ליה לרבי אבא דמן עכו דאמר איהו חד טעמא ואמר אמוריה חד טעמא ולא קפיד אמינא לאו עינותנא אנא,ומאי עינוותנותיה דרבי אבהו דאמרה לה דביתהו דאמוריה דרבי אבהו לדביתיה דרבי אבהו הא דידן לא צריך ליה לדידך והאי דגחין וזקיף עליה יקרא בעלמא הוא דעביד ליה אזלא דביתהו ואמרה ליה לרבי אבהו אמר לה ומאי נפקא ליך מינה מיני ומיניה יתקלס עילאה,ותו רבי אבהו אימנו רבנן עליה לממנייה ברישא כיון דחזיה לר' אבא דמן עכו דנפישי ליה בעלי חובות אמר להו איכא רבה,ר' אבהו ור' חייא בר אבא איקלעו לההוא אתרא רבי אבהו דרש באגדתא רבי חייא בר אבא דרש בשמעתא שבקוה כולי עלמא לרבי חייא בר אבא ואזול לגביה דר' אבהו חלש דעתיה אמר ליה אמשל לך משל למה הדבר דומה לשני בני אדם אחד מוכר אבנים טובות ואחד מוכר מיני סידקית על מי קופצין לא על זה שמוכר מיני סידקית,כל יומא הוה מלוה רבי חייא בר אבא לרבי אבהו עד אושפיזיה משום יקרא דבי קיסר ההוא יומא אלויה רבי אבהו לרבי חייא בר אבא עד אושפיזיה ואפילו הכי לא איתותב דעתיה מיניה,בזמן ששליח צבור אומר מודים העם מה הם אומרים אמר רב מודים אנחנו לך ה' אלהינו על שאנו מודים לך ושמואל אמר אלהי כל בשר על שאנו מודים לך רבי סימאי אומר יוצרנו יוצר בראשית על שאנו מודים לך נהרדעי אמרי משמיה דרבי סימאי ברכות והודאות לשמך הגדול על שהחייתנו וקיימתנו על שאנו מודים לך רב אחא בר יעקב מסיים בה הכי כן תחיינו ותחננו ותקבצנו ותאסוף גליותינו לחצרות קדשך לשמור חוקיך ולעשות רצונך בלבב שלם על שאנו מודים לך,אמר רב פפא הילכך נימרינהו לכולהו,אמר ר' יצחק לעולם תהא אימת צבור עליך שהרי כהנים פניהם כלפי העם ואחוריהם כלפי שכינה,רב נחמן אמר מהכא (דברי הימים א כח, ב) ויקם המלך דוד על רגליו ויאמר שמעוני אחי ועמי אם אחי למה עמי ואם עמי למה אחי אמר רבי אלעזר אמר להם דוד לישראל אם אתם שומעין לי אחי אתם ואם לאו עמי אתם ואני רודה אתכם במקל,רבנן אמרי מהכא דאין הכהנים רשאין לעלות בסנדליהן לדוכן וזהו אחת מתשע תקנות שהתקין רבן יוחנן בן זכאי מאי טעמא לאו משום כבוד צבור אמר רב אשי לא התם שמא נפסקה לו רצועה בסנדלו והדר אזיל למיקטריה ואמרי בן גרושה או בן חלוצה הוא,ובמקדש ברכה אחת כו' 40a. b During the closing prayer [ i ne’ila /i ] of Yom Kippur, /b which also includes the Priestly Benediction, b what do /b the people b say? Mar Zutra says, and some say /b that this was taught b in a i baraita /i : “Behold, surely thus shall the man who fears the Lord be blessed” /b (Psalms 128:4), b “The Lord shall bless you out of Zion, and you shall see the good of Jerusalem all the days of your life” /b (Psalms 128:5), and b “And see your children’s children. Peace be upon Israel” /b (Psalms 128:6).,The Gemara asks: b Where does /b the congregation b say /b these verses during the Priestly Benediction? b Rav Yosef says: /b They are said b between each and every blessing. And Rav Sheshet says: /b They are said b during the mention of the name /b of God in each of the three blessings., b Rav Mari and Rav Zevid disagree about /b this matter. b One says: /b The congregation recites one b verse /b at a time, b corresponding to /b the b verse /b that the priests recite. b And one says: For every /b single b verse /b that the priests recite, the congregation b says all /b three verses., b Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba says: Anyone who recites /b these verses b in the outlying areas, /b i.e., outside the Temple, b is nothing other than mistaken /b in his practice. b Rabbi Ḥanina bar Pappa said: /b You should b know that in the Temple also /b people b should not recite /b these verses. b Do you have a servant who is being blessed and does not listen /b to the blessing, but rather speaks at the same time?,Conversely, b Rabbi Aḥa bar Ḥanina says: /b You should b know that in the outlying areas one is also required to say /b these verses. b Is there a servant who is being blessed and his face does not brighten? /b Therefore, one must recite these verses to give thanks for receiving the Priestly Benediction. b Rabbi Abbahu says: At first, I would recite /b these verses, but b since I saw that Rabbi Abba of Akko does not say them, I also do not recite them /b anymore., b And Rabbi Abbahu says: At first, I would say /b to myself that b I was humble. Since I saw that Rabbi Abba of Akko himself stated one reason /b for a matter, b and his interpreter stated one /b other b reason /b of his own rather than delivering the reason that Rabbi Abba stated, b and /b yet Rabbi Abba b did not mind, I say /b to myself that b I am not humble. /b ,The Gemara asks: b And what was the humility of Rabbi Abbahu? /b The Gemara relates b that Rabbi Abbahu’s interpreter’s wife said to Rabbi Abbahu’s wife: This one of ours, /b i.e., my husband, b has no need for your /b husband Rabbi Abbahu, as he could teach everything on his own. b And /b the fact b that he bends over /b to listen to Rabbi Abbahu, b and /b then b stands up above him, /b and repeats his words to the congregants b is merely to show respect for him. /b Rabbi Abbahu’s b wife went and told /b this b to Rabbi Abbahu. He said to her: And what difference does it make to you? Through me and through him the One above will be exalted, /b and it does not matter which one of us is teaching., b And furthermore, /b in another example of his humility, b the Sages were counted /b and reached a decision b to appoint Rabbi Abbahu to be the head /b of the yeshiva. b Since he saw that Rabbi Abba of Akko had many creditors /b and was impoverished, he attempted to get him out of debt. b He said to them: There is /b a man who is b greater /b than me, Rabbi Abba.,The Gemara relates another example of his humility: b Rabbi Abbahu and Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba happened /b to come b to a certain place. Rabbi Abbahu taught /b matters of b i aggada /i , /b and at the same time b Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba taught i halakha /i . Everyone left Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba and went to Rabbi Abbahu, /b and Rabbi Ḥiyya b was offended. /b Rabbi Abbahu b said to him, /b to appease him: b I will tell you a parable: To what is this matter comparable? /b It is comparable b to two people, one /b who b sells precious stones and one /b who b sells small items [ i sidkit /i ]. Upon whom do /b the customers b spring? Don’t /b they spring b upon the one who sells small items? /b Similarly, you teach lofty and important matters that do not attract many people. Everyone comes to me because I teach minor matters.,The Gemara relates that b every day Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba would escort Rabbi Abbahu to his lodging place [ i ushpizei /i ] out of respect for the house of the emperor, /b with which Rabbi Abbahu was associated. On b that day, Rabbi Abbahu escorted Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba to his lodging place, and even so, /b Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba’s b mind was not at ease with /b Rabbi Abbahu and he felt insulted.,§ The Gemara returns to discuss the response of the congregants to certain parts of the prayer service. b While the prayer leader is reciting /b the blessing of: b We give thanks, what do the people say? Rav says /b that they say: b We give thanks to You, Lord our God, for /b the merit of b giving thanks to You. And Shmuel says /b that one should say: b God of all /b living b flesh, for /b the merit of b giving thanks to You. Rabbi Simai says /b that one should say: b Our Creator, Who created /b everything b in the beginning, for /b the merit of b giving thanks to You. /b The Sages b of Neharde’a say in the name of Rabbi Simai /b that one should say: We offer b blessings and praises to Your great name, for You have given us life and sustained us, for giving thanks to You. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov /b would b finish /b the blessing b as follows: So may You give us life, and show us favor, and collect us, and gather our exiles into Your sacred courtyards, in order to observe Your laws and to fulfill Your will wholeheartedly, for giving thanks to You. /b , b Rav Pappa said: /b These Sages each added a different element to the prayer. b Therefore, we should /b combine them together and b recite all of them. /b ,§ b Rabbi Yitzḥak says: The awe of the public should always be upon you, /b i.e., one must always treat the public courteously. b As /b when the b priests /b bless the people they b face the people and their backs are toward the Divine Presence, /b out of respect for the congregation., b Rav Naḥman said /b that this principle is derived b from here: “Then King David stood up upon his feet, and said: Hear me, my brethren, and my people” /b (I Chronicles 28:2). Evidently, King David stood up to address the people rather than remain seated. b If /b he said b “my brethren,” why /b did he say b “my people”? And if /b he said b “my people” why /b did he say b “my brethren”? Rabbi Elazar says: David said to the Jewish people: If you listen to me, you are my brethren. And if /b you do b not /b listen to me willingly, b you are my people /b and I am your king, b and I will rule over you /b by force b with a staff. /b This shows that if the nation acted properly, David would relate to them respectfully., b The Sages say /b that the importance of showing respect for the congregation is derived b from here: /b The i halakha /i is b that the priests are not permitted to ascend the platform /b to recite the benediction b in their sandals, /b as is taught in a i baraita /i . b And this /b i halakha /i b is one of nine ordices that Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai instituted. What is the reason /b for this ordice? b Is it not out of respect for the congregation, /b as it would be disrespectful for the priests to display their dirty sandals in front of the congregants? b Rav Ashi said: No, /b this is not the reason. b There, /b in the i baraita /i , the reason is a concern b lest a strap of his sandal break, and he /b will therefore b return /b to his place b to go tie it /b and not ascend the platform in time for the benediction, b and /b people will b say /b that he was removed from the platform because he is disqualified from the priesthood, as he b is the son of /b a priest and b a divorced woman or the son of /b a priest and b a i ḥalutza /i . /b ,§ It is taught in the mishna: b And in the Temple, /b the priests recite the three verses as b one blessing. /b
49. Babylonian Talmud, Sukkah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •rabban gamaliel ii of yavneh, obligatory prayer liturgy Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 536
49b. כשם שניסוכו בקדושה כך שריפתו בקדושה מאי משמע אמר רבינא אתיא קדש קדש כתיב הכא (במדבר כח, ז) בקדש הסך נסך וכתיב התם (שמות כט, לד) ושרפת את הנותר באש לא יאכל כי קדש הוא,כמאן אזלא הא (דתניא) נסכים בתחילה מועלין בהן ירדו לשיתין אין מועלין בהן לימא רבי אלעזר בר צדוק היא דאי רבנן הא נחתו להו לתהום,אפילו תימא רבנן בדאיקלט,ואיכא דאמרי לימא רבנן היא ולא ר' אלעזר בר צדוק דאי רבי אלעזר אכתי בקדושתייהו קיימי אפילו תימא רבי אלעזר אין לך דבר שנעשה מצותו ומועלין בו אמר ריש לקיש בזמן שמנסכין יין על גבי מזבח פוקקין את השיתין לקיים מה שנאמר בקדש הסך נסך שכר לה',מאי משמע אמר רב פפא שכר לשון שתיה לשון שביעה לשון שכרות אמר רב פפא שמע מינה כי שבע איניש חמרא מגרוניה שבע אמר רבא צורבא מרבנן דלא נפישא ליה חמרא ליגמע גמועי רבא אכסא דברכתא אגמע גמועי,דרש רבא מאי דכתיב (שיר השירים ז, ב) מה יפו פעמיך בנעלים בת נדיב מה יפו פעמותיהן של ישראל בשעה שעולין לרגל בת נדיב בתו של אברהם אבינו שנקרא נדיב שנא' (תהלים מז, י) נדיבי עמים נאספו עם אלהי אברהם אלהי אברהם ולא אלהי יצחק ויעקב אלא אלהי אברהם שהיה תחילה לגרים,תנא דבי רב ענן מאי דכתיב (שיר השירים ז, ב) חמוקי ירכיך למה נמשלו דברי תורה כירך לומר לך מה ירך בסתר אף דברי תורה בסתר,והיינו דא"ר אלעזר מאי דכתיב (מיכה ו, ח) הגיד לך אדם מה טוב ומה ה' דורש ממך כי אם עשות משפט ואהבת חסד והצנע לכת עם אלהיך עשות משפט זה הדין ואהבת חסד זו גמילות חסדים והצנע לכת עם אלהיך זו הוצאת המת והכנסת כלה לחופה והלא דברים ק"ו ומה דברים שדרכן לעשותן בפרהסיא אמרה תורה הצנע לכת דברים שדרכן לעשותן בצנעא על אחת כמה וכמה,א"ר אלעזר גדול העושה צדקה יותר מכל הקרבנות שנאמר (משלי כא, ג) עשה צדקה ומשפט נבחר לה' מזבח וא"ר אלעזר גדולה גמילות חסדים יותר מן הצדקה שנאמר (הושע י, יב) זרעו לכם לצדקה וקצרו לפי חסד אם אדם זורע ספק אוכל ספק אינו אוכל אדם קוצר ודאי אוכל,וא"ר אלעזר אין צדקה משתלמת אלא לפי חסד שבה שנאמר זרעו לכם לצדקה וקצרו לפי חסד,ת"ר בשלשה דברים גדולה גמילות חסדים יותר מן הצדקה צדקה בממונו גמילות חסדים בין בגופו בין בממונו צדקה לעניים גמילות חסדים בין לעניים בין לעשירים צדקה לחיים גמילות חסדים בין לחיים בין למתים,וא"ר אלעזר כל העושה צדקה ומשפט כאילו מילא כל העולם כולו חסד שנאמר (תהלים לג, ה) אוהב צדקה ומשפט חסד ה' מלאה הארץ שמא תאמר כל הבא לקפוץ קופץ ת"ל (תהלים לו, ח) מה יקר חסדך אלהים (חסד ה' מלאה הארץ) וגו' יכול אף ירא שמים כן ת"ל (תהלים קג, יז) וחסד ה' מעולם ועד עולם על יראיו,א"ר חמא בר פפא כל אדם שיש עליו חן בידוע שהוא ירא שמים שנא' חסד ה' מעולם ועד עולם על יראיו וא"ר אלעזר מאי דכתיב (משלי לא, כו) פיה פתחה בחכמה ותורת חסד על לשונה וכי יש תורה של חסד יש תורה שאינה של חסד אלא תורה לשמה זו היא תורה של חסד שלא לשמה זו היא תורה שאינה של חסד איכא דאמרי תורה ללמדה זו היא תורה של חסד שלא ללמדה זו היא תורה שאינה של חסד:,כמעשהו בחול כו': ואמאי נייתי במקודשת אמר זעירי קסבר אין שיעור למים וכלי שרת מקדשין שלא מדעת 49b. b just as its pouring is in sanctity, so too must its burning be in sanctity. From where /b may it b be inferred /b that this is referring to burning? b Ravina said: It is derived /b by means of a verbal analogy between the term b sanctity /b written with regard to libations and b sanctity /b written with regard to leftover offerings. b It is written here, /b with regard to libations: b “In sanctity shall you pour a libation” /b (Numbers 28:7), b and it is written there, /b with regard to leftover offerings: b “You shall burn the leftovers in fire; they are not to be eaten, for they are sanctity” /b (Exodus 29:34). Through the verbal analogy it is derived that leftover libations must also be burned.,The Gemara notes: b In accordance with whose /b opinion b is that which is taught /b in this mishna? With regard to b libations, initially, /b prior to being poured, b one /b can b misuse consecrated property with them, /b as is the case with all consecrated items. However, once b they descended to the drainpipes, one does not /b violate the prohibition against b misuse /b of b consecrated property with them, /b because the mitzva was already fulfilled. b Let us say /b that the mishna b is /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Elazar bar Tzadok, /b who holds that the libations did not descend to the depths but would collect between the ramp and the altar and would be collected once every seventy years. b As, if /b it were in accordance with the opinion of b the Rabbis, /b how could the libations be misused? b Didn’t they /b already b descend to the depths /b through the drainpipes?,The Gemara rejects this: b Even /b if b you say /b that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of b the Rabbis, /b it could be referring b to /b a case b where /b some of the wine landed outside the drainpipes and b was collected /b in the space between the ramp and the altar., b And some say /b a different version of this exchange. b Let us say /b that the mishna b is /b in accordance with the opinion of b the Rabbis and not /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Elazar bar Tzadok. As, if /b it were in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Elazar, /b then the wine that collected between the ramp and the altar b remains in its sanctity, /b as it must be burned, and the prohibition against misuse would still apply. The Gemara rejects this: b Even /b if b you say /b that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Elazar, there is no item whose mitzva has been performed with which one /b can violate the prohibition against b misuse of consecrated property. Reish Lakish said: When they pour wine onto the altar, they plug /b the top of b the drainpipes /b so that the wine does not descend to the depths, in order b to fulfill that which is stated: “In sanctity shall you pour a libation of strong drink [ i shekhar /i ] unto the Lord” /b (Numbers 28:7).,The Gemara asks: b From where /b may it b be inferred /b that this is referring to plugging the drainpipes? b Rav Pappa said: i Shekhar /i /b is b an expression of drinking, of satiation, of intoxication. /b In order to underscore all three aspects of the libations, the space between the altar and the ramp would fill with wine. b Rav Pappa said: Conclude from this that when a person is satiated from /b drinking b wine, /b it is b from his throat /b being filled with wine that he is b satiated. /b Unlike food, wine does not satiate a person when it fills his stomach. b Rava said: /b Therefore, b let a young /b Torah b scholar, who does not /b have b much wine, swallow /b his wine b in /b large b swigs, /b filling his throat each time, as he will thereby maximize his enjoyment. And b Rava /b himself, when drinking b a cup of blessing, would swallow /b large b swigs /b so as to drink the wine accompanying the mitzva in an optimal manner.,§ Apropos the homiletic interpretations of the verses from Song of Songs with regard to the drainpipes, the Gemara cites additional interpretations. b Rava taught: What is /b the meaning of that b which is written: “How beautiful are your steps in sandals, O prince’s daughter” /b (Song of Songs 7:2)? b How beautiful are the feet of the Jewish people at the time when they ascend /b to Jerusalem b for the Festival. “O prince’s daughter”; /b this is referring to b the daughter of Abraham our Patriarch, who was called prince, as it is stated: “The princes of the peoples are gathered, the people of the God of Abraham” /b (Psalms 47:10). The verse calls the Jewish people the people of b the God of Abraham and not the God of Isaac and Jacob. /b Why are the Jewish people associated specifically with Abraham? b Rather /b than referring to the three Patriarchs, the verse is referring to b the God of Abraham, who was first of the converts, /b and therefore it is reasonable for the princes of other nations to gather around him.,In b the school of Rav A /b it was b taught: What is /b the meaning of that b which is written: “The hidden of your thighs” /b (Song of Songs 7:2)? b Why are matters of Torah likened to a thigh? /b It is b to tell you /b that b just as /b the b thigh is /b always b concealed, /b covered by clothes, so b too, matters of Torah /b are optimal when recited b in private /b and not in public., b And this is what Rabbi Elazar said: What is /b the meaning of that b which is written: “It has been told you, O man, what is good, and what the Lord does require of you; only to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God” /b (Micah 6:8)? b “To do justly”; this is justice. “To love mercy”; this is acts of kindness. “To walk humbly with your God”; this is /b referring to b taking the /b indigent b dead out /b for burial b and accompanying /b a poor b bride to /b her b wedding canopy, /b both of which must be performed without fanfare. The Gemara summarizes: b And are /b these b matters not /b inferred b i a fortiori /i ? If, /b with regard to b matters that tend to be conducted in public, /b as the multitudes participate in funerals and weddings, b the Torah says: Walk humbly, /b then in b matters that tend to be conducted in private, /b e.g., giving charity and studying Torah, b all the more so /b should they be conducted privately.,§ b Rabbi Elazar said: One who performs /b acts of b charity is greater than /b one who sacrifices b all /b types of b offerings, as it is stated: “To perform charity and justice is more acceptable to the Lord than an offering” /b (Proverbs 21:3), including all types of offerings. b And Rabbi Elazar said: Acts of kindness, /b assisting someone in need, b are greater than charity, as it is stated: “Sow to yourselves according to charity, and reap according to kindness” /b (Hosea 10:12). This means: b If a person sows, /b it is b uncertain /b whether b he /b will b eat or /b whether b he /b will b not eat, /b since much can go wrong before the seed becomes food. However, if b a person reaps, he certainly eats. /b In this verse, charity is likened to sowing, while acts of kindness are likened to reaping., b And Rabbi Elazar said: /b The reward for b charity is paid /b from Heaven b only in accordance with the kindness /b and generosity included b therein /b and in accordance with the effort and the consideration that went into the giving. It is not merely in accordance with the sum of money, b as it is stated: “Sow to yourselves according to charity, and reap according to kindness.” /b , b The Sages taught /b that b acts of kindness are superior to charity in three respects: Charity /b can be performed only b with one’s money, /b while b acts of kindness /b can be performed b both with his person and with his money. Charity /b is given b to the poor, /b while b acts of kindness /b are performed b both for the poor and for the rich. Charity /b is given to the b living, /b while b acts of kindness /b are performed b both for the living and for the dead. /b , b And Rabbi Elazar said: Anyone who performs charity and justice is /b considered b as though he filled the whole world in its entirety with kindness, as it is stated: “He loves charity and justice; the earth is full of the kindness of the Lord” /b (Psalms 33:5). b Lest you say that anyone who comes to leap /b and perform an act of kindness may simply b leap /b and do so without scrutiny, b the verse states: “How precious is your kindness, O God” /b (Psalms 36:8). It is a precious and rare occurrence to perform an act of kindness properly. One b might /b have thought that b even a God-fearing /b individual does not always encounter the opportunity to perform acts of kindness. Therefore, b the verse states: “But the kindness of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear Him” /b (Psalms 103:17)., b Rabbi Ḥama bar Pappa said: /b With regard to b any person who has grace about him, it is certain that he is God-fearing, as it is stated: “But the kindness of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear Him.” /b When one sees that a certain individual is endowed with grace and kindness, one can be certain that he is a God-fearing person. b And Rabbi Elazar said: What is /b the meaning of that b which is written: “She opens her mouth with wisdom, and a Torah of kindness is on her tongue” /b (Proverbs 31:26)? The Gemara asks: b Is there, then, a Torah of kindness and a Torah that is not of kindness? Rather, /b it is b Torah /b studied b for its own sake that is a Torah of kindness, /b as one studies it wholeheartedly; and it is Torah studied b not for its own sake /b but for some ulterior motive b that is a Torah that is not of kindness. Some say /b that it is b Torah /b studied in order b to teach it /b to others b that is a Torah of kindness; /b it is Torah studied b with /b the intent of b not teaching it /b to others b that is a Torah that is not of kindness. /b ,§ The mishna continues: b As its performance during the week, /b so is its performance on Shabbat, except that on Shabbat one would not draw water. Instead, on Shabbat eve, one would fill a golden barrel that was not consecrated and would place it in the Temple chamber, and water would be drawn from there on Shabbat. The Gemara asks: b And why /b should one do so? b Let /b him b bring /b the water b in a consecrated /b barrel. b Ze’iri said: /b The i tanna /i in the mishna b holds that there is no /b requisite b measure for the water /b to be poured for libation, and therefore more than three i log /i could be consecrated; b and /b that b Temple vessels consecrate /b their content if it is fit to be consecrated, even b without intent /b to consecrate it.
50. Origen, On Prayer, 5.7, 7.2, 9.3, 10.4-10.10 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on passover •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 69, 89
51. Babylonian Talmud, Pesahim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 69, 70
115b. צריך לשקועיה בחרוסת משום קפא דאי ס"ד לא צריך לשקועיה נטילת ידים למה לי הא לא נגע ודילמא לעולם אימא לך לא צריך לשקועיה וקפא מריחא מיית אלא למה לי נטילת ידים דילמא משקעו ליה,ואמר רב פפא לא נישהי איניש מרור בחרוסת דילמא אגב חלייה דתבלין מבטיל ליה למרוריה ובעינן טעם מרור וליכא אדבריה רב חסדא לרבנא עוקבא ודרש נטל ידיו בטיבול ראשון נוטל ידיו בטיבול שני,אמרוה רבנן קמיה דרב פפא הא בעלמא איתמר דאי סלקא דעתך הכא איתמר למה לי נטילת ידים תרי זימני הא משא ליה ידיה חדא זימנא,אמר להו רב פפא אדרבה הכא איתמר דאי ס"ד בעלמא איתמר למה לי תרי טיבולי,אלא מאי הכא איתמר נטילת ידים תרי זימני למה לי הא משא ליה ידיה חדא זימנא אמרי כיון דבעי למימר אגדתא והלילא דילמא אסוחי אסחיה לדעתיה ונגע,אמר רבא בלע מצה יצא בלע מרור לא יצא בלע מצה ומרור ידי מצה יצא ידי מרור לא יצא כרכן בסיב ובלען אף ידי מצה נמי לא יצא,אמר רב שימי בר אשי מצה לפני כל אחד ואחד מרור לפני כל אחד ואחד וחרוסת לפני כל אחד ואחד ואין עוקרין את השלחן אלא לפני מי שאומר הגדה,רב הונא אומר כולהו נמי לפני מי שאומר הגדה והלכתא כרב הונא,למה עוקרין את השולחן אמרי דבי ר' ינאי כדי שיכירו תינוקות וישאלו אביי הוה יתיב קמיה דרבה חזא דקא מדלי תכא מקמיה אמר להו עדיין לא קא אכלינן אתו קא מעקרי תכא מיקמן אמר ליה רבה פטרתן מלומר מה נשתנה:,אמר שמואל (דברים טז, ג) לחם עוני (כתיב) לחם שעונין עליו דברים תניא נמי הכי לחם עוני לחם שעונין עליו דברים הרבה דבר אחר לחם עוני עני כתיב מה עני שדרכו בפרוסה 115b. one b must submerge it in the i ḥaroset /i , due to /b the bitterness and b poison /b in the lettuce. b For if it could enter your mind /b that one b need not /b thoroughly b submerge /b the lettuce in i ḥaroset /i , b why do I /b need him to b wash hands /b before eating bitter herbs? b He did not touch /b the liquid with his hands, and therefore he did not render it ritually impure. The Gemara rejects this contention: b Actually, I will say to you: /b According to the i halakha /i , one b need not submerge /b the lettuce in i ḥaroset /i b and /b the b poison dies. /b The poison is nullified b from the smell /b of the i ḥaroset /i . The Gemara asks: b But /b in that case, b why do I /b need the b washing of hands /b before dipping? The Gemara answers: b Perhaps one will submerge /b the lettuce, and it is therefore necessary to wash one’s hands to avoid the possible transfer of ritual impurity., b And Rav Pappa said: A person /b should b not leave bitter herbs in the i ḥaroset /i /b for a lengthy period of time, b lest the sweetness /b of the spices in the i ḥaroset /i b nullify its bitterness. And /b the bitter herbs b require a /b bitter b taste, and /b they are b not /b bitter when marinated in i ḥaroset /i . The Gemara reports: b Rav Ḥisda authorized Rabbana Ukva /b to deliver a lecture, b and he taught: /b If one b washed his hands for the first dipping, /b he should b wash his hands /b again b for the second dipping. /b , b The Sages said /b this i halakha /i b before Rav Pappa /b and added: This i halakha /i b was stated generally, /b i.e., concerning one who dips food twice anytime, not with regard to Passover night. b For if it could enter your mind /b that this b was stated here, /b concerning Passover, b why do I /b need b washing of /b the b hands twice? /b This person b has /b already b washed his hands once. /b As he knows he will dip again, he will be careful to preserve his hands in a state of ritual purity and consequently there is no need for him to wash his hands a second time. This is not the case with regard to dipping throughout the rest of the year, when one does not know at the start that he will dip again., b Rav Pappa said to them: On the contrary, /b this i halakha /i b was stated /b specifically b here, /b with regard to Passover night. b For if it could enter your mind /b that it b was stated in general, why do I /b need b two dippings? /b A person usually dips only once, either at the beginning or in the middle of his meal.,The Gemara asks: b Rather, what /b will you say; this i halakha /i b was stated /b specifically b here, /b with regard to Passover night? If so, b why do I /b need b two washings of /b the b hands? He has /b already b washed his hands once. They say /b in response: b Since he needs to recite /b the b Haggadah and i hallel /i /b in between the two dippings, b perhaps he will divert his thoughts and /b his hands b will touch /b a ritually impure object., b Rava said: /b If b one swallowed i matza /i /b without chewing it, b he has fulfilled /b the obligation to eat i matza /i , as he has consumed it. However, if b one swallowed bitter herbs /b without chewing them, b he has not fulfilled /b his obligation, as he did not taste their bitterness. Furthermore, if b one swallowed i matza /i and bitter herbs /b together, b he has fulfilled /b the obligation b of /b eating b i matza /i , /b but b he has not fulfilled /b the obligation b of /b eating b bitter herbs. /b If one b wrapped /b i matza /i and bitter herbs b in /b a palm b net, /b the thin interlacing of vines that sprouts around a palm tree, b and swallowed them, he has not fulfilled /b his obligation b even of eating i matza /i . /b When i matza /i and bitter herbs are consumed in this fashion, the i matza /i does not touch one’s mouth. This is not considered eating., b Rav Shimi bar Ashi said: i Matza /i /b must be placed b before each and every /b participant at the seder. Each participant in a seder would recline on a couch at his own personal table. Likewise, b bitter herbs /b must be placed b before each and every /b participant, b and i ḥaroset /i /b must be placed b before each and every /b participant. b And /b during the seder, before the meal, b one /b shall b remove the table only from before the one reciting /b the b Haggadah. /b The other tables, which correspond to the seder plates used nowadays, are left in their place., b Rav Huna says: All /b of the aforementioned foods, i.e., i matza /i , bitter herbs, and i ḥaroset /i , must b also /b be placed only b before the one who recites /b the b Haggadah. /b When the time comes to eat these items, all the other participants receive a portion from him. The Gemara comments: b And the i halakha /i is in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rav Huna. /b ,The Gemara asks: b Why does one remove the table? The school of Rabbi Yannai say: So that the children will notice /b that something is unusual b and they will ask: /b Why is this night different from all other nights? The Gemara relates: b Abaye was sitting before Rabba /b when he was still a child. b He saw that they were removing the table from before him, and he said to /b those removing it: b We have not yet eaten, and you are taking the table away from us? Rabba said to him: You have exempted us from reciting /b the questions of: b Why is /b this night b different [ i ma nishtana /i ], /b as you have already asked what is special about the seder night., b Shmuel said /b that the phrase: b “The bread of affliction [ i leḥem oni /i ]” /b (Deuteronomy 16:3) means b bread over which one answers [ i onim /i ] matters, /b i.e., one recites the Haggadah over i matza /i . b That was also taught /b in a i baraita /i : b i Leḥem oni /i /b is b bread over which one answers many matters. Alternatively, /b in the verse, b “ i leḥem oni /i ” is /b actually b written /b without a vav, which means a poor person. b Just as /b it is b the manner of a poor /b person b to /b eat b a piece /b of bread, for lack of a whole loaf,
52. Babylonian Talmud, Bekhorot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 85
36a. אימר דא"ר מאיר לחששא לאחזוקינהו מי אמר,איבעיא להו עד מפי עד מהו לעדות בכור רב אסי אסר ורב אשי שרי א"ל רב אסי לרב אשי והא תנא דבי מנשה אין עד מפי עד כשר אלא לעדות האשה,תני אלא לעדות שהאשה כשרה לה בלבד,רב יימר אכשר עד מפי עד בבכור קרי עליה מרימר יימר שרי בוכרא והלכתא עד מפי עד כשר לעדות בכור,א"ר אילעא לא היו מוחזקין בו שהוא בכור ובא אחד ואמר שהוא בכור ומומו עמו נאמן,מאי קמ"ל שהפה שאסר הוא הפה שהתיר תנינא האשה שאמרה אשת איש הייתי וגרושה אני נאמנת שהפה שאסר הוא הפה שהתיר,מהו דתימא התם הוא דאי בעיא לא אמרה אבל הכא דלא סגיא דלא אמרה דקדשים בחוץ לא אכיל,אימא לא הפה שאסר הוא קמ"ל דאי משום הכי הוה שדי ביה מומא דניכר ואכיל ליה,מתקיף לה מר בר רב אשי מאי שנא מההוא גברא דאוגר ליה חמרא לחבריה וא"ל לא תיזיל באורחא דנהר פקוד דאיכא מיא זיל באורחא דנרש דליכא מיא אזל באורחא דנהר פקוד ומית חמרא ואתא וא"ל באורחא דנהר פקוד אזלי ומיהו מיא לא הוו,ואמר רבא מה לו לשקר אי בעי אמר באורחא דנרש אזלי ואמר אביי מה לו לשקר במקום עדים לא אמרינן,הכי השתא התם ודאי איכא מיא התם ודאי שדי ביה מומא חששא הוא ובמקום חששא אמרינן מה לו לשקר יתיב רבינא וקאמר להאי שמעתא בלא גברא א"ל רבא זוטי לרבינא אנן משמיה דר' אילעא מתנינן לה,רבי צדוק הוה ליה בוכרא רמא ליה שערי בסלי בהדי דקאכיל איבזע שיפתיה אתא לקמיה דרבי יהושע אמר ליה כלום חילקנו בין חבר לעם הארץ אמר לו רבי יהושע הן,אתא לקמיה דרבן גמליאל אמר ליה חילקנו בין חבר לעם הארץ אמר ליה רבן גמליאל לא אמר ליה והא רבי יהושע אמר לי הן אמר לו המתן עד שיעלו בעלי תריסין לבית המדרש,כיון שנכנסו לבית המדרש עמד השואל ושאל כלום חילקנו בין חבר לעם הארץ א"ל רבי יהושע לאו א"ל רבן גמליאל והלא משמך אמרו לי הן,יהושע עמוד על רגליך ויעידו בך עמד רבי יהושע על רגליו ואמר היאך אעשה אילמלי אני חי והוא מת יכול החי להכחיש את המת עכשיו שאני חי והוא חי היאך חי יכול להכחיש את החי,והיה ר"ג עומד ודורש ור' יהושע עומד על רגליו עד שריננו כל העם ואמרו לחוצפית המתורגמן עמוד ועמד:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big נאמן הכהן לומר הראיתי בכור זה ובעל מום הוא:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big אמר רב יהודה אמר רב נאמן הכהן לומר בכור זה נתן לי ישראל במומו מאי טעמא כל מילתא דעבידא לאיגלויי לא משקרי בה אינשי אמר רב אשי אף אנן נמי תנינא נאמן הכהן לומר הראיתי בכור זה ובעל מום הוא מאי טעמא לאו משום דאמרינן מילתא דעבידא לאיגלויי לא משקרי בה אינשי,התם הוא דקדשים בחוץ לא אכיל אבל הכא כיון דחשידי חשידי,מתיב רב שיזבי האומר למי שאין נאמן על המעשר קח לי ממי שהוא נאמן או ממי שהוא מעשר אינו נאמן אמאי נימא כל מילתא דעבידא לאיגלויי לא משקרי בה אינשי,שאני התם 36a. The Gemara answers: One can b say that Rabbi Meir says /b that priests are suspect with regard to causing blemishes only to the extent b that /b there is b a concern /b that they might have caused a blemish. But b did he say /b this ruling b to establish them /b as those who definitely cause blemishes? Certainly not.,§ b A dilemma was raised before /b the Sages: With regard to b testimony /b based on b hearsay, /b where one repeats the testimony of another witness, b what is /b the i halakha /i b in /b a case of such b testimony /b about a blemished b firstborn /b animal? b Rav Asi deems prohibited /b the slaughter of the animal based on such testimony, b and Rav Ashi deems /b it b permitted. Rav Asi said to Rav Ashi: But isn’t it taught in /b a i baraita /i in the b school of Menashe /b that b hearsay testimony is valid only for /b the b testimony of a woman, /b where one testifies that her husband is dead? This indicates that such testimony is not accepted in all other instances.,Rav Ashi responded: Emend the i baraita /i and b teach /b it like this: Testimony based on hearsay is valid b only for /b that b testimony for which /b the testimony of b a woman is valid. /b According to Rav Ashi, the i baraita /i is teaching that any case where the testimony of a woman is valid, hearsay testimony is valid as well, and this includes testimony concerning a blemished firstborn animal.,The Gemara relates that b Rav Yeimar deemed fit testimony /b based on b hearsay with regard to /b a blemished b firstborn /b animal. b Mareimar /b condescendingly b called him: Yeimar /b who b permits firstborn /b animals. The Gemara concludes: b And the i halakha /i /b is that b testimony /b based on b hearsay is valid /b in the case b of a firstborn /b animal.,§ The Gemara discusses a related matter. b Rabbi Ile’a says: /b In a case where a blemished animal b was not established as being a firstborn, and one /b priest b came /b to an expert b and said that it is a firstborn /b animal b and /b yet b its blemish is with it, /b i.e., it was unintentionally blemished, b he is deemed credible, /b and the expert may deem the animal fit for slaughter based on the priest’s testimony.,The Gemara asks: b What is /b Rabbi Ile’a b teaching us? /b Is he teaching us the principle b that the mouth that prohibited /b it b is the mouth that permitted /b it, i.e., when the only source that an item was prohibited is the statement of one who says that it is now permitted, his claim is accepted? But b we learn /b this in a mishna ( i Ketubot /i 22a): With regard to b a woman who said: I was a married woman and /b now b I am a divorcée, she is deemed credible /b and permitted to remarry, b as the mouth that prohibited /b her by establishing that she was married b is the mouth that permitted /b her by establishing that she was divorced.,The Gemara answers: Rabbi Ile’a’s statement is necessary, b lest you say it is /b only b there, /b in the case of the mishna, that the woman’s testimony is accepted, b as, if she wants /b to remarry illegally, b she /b does b not /b need to b say /b anything at all about previously being married. b But here, /b with regard to the firstborn animal, it is different, b as, /b if the priest wishes to eat the meat of the animal, b it not sufficient /b for him b not to /b bring the animal to an expert, i.e., he has no recourse other than to b say /b that it is a firstborn animal which has a blemish requiring examination, b as /b he cannot determine on his own whether this blemish permanently disqualifies the firstborn animal from sacrifice, and b he would not eat sacrificial /b meat b outside /b the Temple courtyard, which is punishable by i karet /i .,Since the priest must admit that this is a firstborn animal, b I /b might b say /b that b this is not /b a case of: b The mouth that prohibited /b it is the mouth that permitted it, and therefore the priest is not deemed credible. To dispel this possibility, Rabbi Ile’a b teaches us /b that he is deemed credible, b because if it due to that /b reason, that the priest is suspected of causing the blemish, b he would have caused a blemish that /b is b obvious to all. /b In such a case, he would violate a mere prohibition, not one that is punishable by i karet /i , since he would not be eating sacrificial meat outside the Temple courtyard, as the animal is blemished., b Mar bar Rav Ashi objects to this: What is different /b between this case and b that /b incident involving b a certain man who rented a donkey to another? /b The owner b said to /b the renter: b Look, do not go on the path of Nehar Pekod, where there is water /b and the donkey is likely to drown. Instead, b go on the path of Neresh, where there is no water. /b The renter b went on the path of Nehar Pekod and the donkey died. When he came /b back, b he said: /b Yes, b I went on the path of Nehar Pekod, but there was no water /b there, and therefore the donkey’s death was caused by other factors., b And Rava said: /b The renter’s claim is accepted, due to the reasoning of: b Why would he lie /b and state this claim? In other words, b if /b this man b wanted /b to lie, b he /b could have b told /b the donkey’s owner: b I went on the path of Neresh, /b as the owner instructed. b And Abaye said to /b Rava: b We do not say /b the principle of: b Why would he lie, in a place /b where there are b witnesses. /b Since witnesses can be summoned to establish conclusively whether there was water along the path of Nehar Pekod, the reasoning that the renter could have stated a different claim is not employed. Similarly, the priest’s contention that the blemish occurred inadvertently should not be deemed credible, as it is known that priests are suspected of causing blemishes.,The Gemara rejects this suggestion: b How can /b these cases b be compared? There, /b with regard to the path of Nehar Pekod, b there is certainly water there, but /b here, the possibility b that /b the priest b caused a blemish in /b the firstborn animal b is /b only b a concern, and in a place of /b mere b concern we /b do b say /b the reasoning of: b Why would he lie? /b The Gemara relates that b Ravina was sitting and saying this i halakha /i /b of Rabbi Ile’a b anonymously. Rava Zuti said to Ravina: We learned this /b i halakha /i b in the name of Rabbi Ile’a. /b ,§ The Gemara relates: b Rabbi Tzadok, /b an erudite priest, b had a firstborn /b animal. b He placed barley in /b wicker b baskets for it, /b and b while it was eating, its lip split, /b rendering the animal blemished. Rabbi Tzadok b came before Rabbi Yehoshua, /b to ask whether or not he is suspected of intentionally causing a blemish in his firstborn animal offering. Rabbi Tzadok b said to him: Didn’t we differentiate between /b a priest who is b a i ḥaver /i , /b i.e., learned, b and /b a priest who is b an ignoramus, /b with regard to their credibility about blemishes found on a firstborn animal? b Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: Yes, /b we did. Since you are a learned priest, you are deemed credible to testify that this blemish was caused inadvertently.,Rabbi Tzadok then b came before Rabban Gamliel, /b the i Nasi /i and head of the academy of Yavne at the time. Rabbi Tzadok b said to him: /b Didn’t b we differentiate between /b a priest who is b a i ḥaver /i and /b a priest who is b an ignoramus /b with regard to credibility about blemishes found on a firstborn animal? b Rabban Gamliel said to him: No, /b we did not. Rabbi Tzadok b said to him: But Rabbi Yehoshua said to me /b that b yes, /b we did differentiate in this manner. Rabban Gamliel b said to /b Rabbi Tzadok: b Wait until the masters of the shields [ i ba’alei terisin /i ], /b a reference to the Torah scholars who battle in the war of Torah, b enter the study hall, /b at which point we will discuss this issue., b When /b the Torah scholars b entered the study hall, the questioner stood /b before everyone present b and asked: /b With regard to blemishes found on a firstborn animal, b didn’t we differentiate between /b a priest who is b a i ḥaver /i and /b a priest who is b an ignoramus? Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: No, /b we did not. b Rabban Gamliel said to him: But they said to me in your name /b that b yes, /b we did differentiate.,Rabban Gamliel continued: b Yehoshua, stand on your feet and they will testify against you /b that you did, in fact, say that we differentiated in such a case. b Rabbi Yehoshua stood on his feet and said: How should I act /b in this situation? b If I were alive and /b Rabbi Tzadok b were dead, the living can contradict the dead, /b and I could deny issuing that ruling. b Now that I am alive and he is alive, how can the living contradict the living? /b I have no choice but to admit that I said it.,In the meantime, b Rabban Gamliel was standing and lecturing, and Rabbi Yehoshua /b all the while b was standing on his feet, /b as Rabban Gamliel did not instruct him to sit. He remained standing in deference to the i Nasi /i . This continued for some time, b until /b it aroused great resentment against Rabban Gamliel, and b all of the people /b assembled began b murmuring and said to Ḥutzpit the disseminator: Stop /b conveying Rabban Gamliel’s lecture, b and he stopped. /b , strong MISHNA: /strong b A priest is deemed credible to say: I showed this firstborn /b animal to an expert b and /b he ruled that b it is blemished. /b , strong GEMARA: /strong b Rav Yehuda says /b that b Rav says: A priest is deemed credible to say: An Israelite gave me this firstborn /b animal b with its blemish /b already inflicted upon it. b What is the reason? /b With regard to b any matter that is likely to be revealed, people do not lie about it. /b Since the Israelite can be questioned with regard to the veracity of the priest’s claim, it is assumed that the priest will not risk lying. b Rav Ashi said: We learn /b a similar principle in the mishna b as well: A priest is deemed credible to say: I showed this firstborn /b animal to an expert b and /b he ruled that b it is blemished. What is the reason /b the priest’s claim is deemed credible? b Is it not because we say /b that with regard to b any matter that is likely to be revealed, people do not lie about it? /b ,The Gemara rejects the claim that the mishna’s ruling is based on the principle that people do not lie about a matter that is likely to be revealed: Perhaps b there, /b in the case of the mishna, the reason the priest’s claim is accepted is that b he /b would b not eat sacrificial /b meat b outside /b the Temple courtyard. If an expert had not permitted the meat, the priest would not eat it. b But here, /b in Rav’s case, where the priest claims an Israelite gave him an already blemished animal, b since /b priests b are suspected /b of causing blemishes and claiming that it was inadvertent, b they are /b also b suspected /b of causing a blemish and claiming it was given to them in that state by an Israelite., b Rav Sheizevi raises an objection /b to Rav’s ruling from a mishna ( i Demai /i 4:5): In the case of b one who says to someone who is not trusted with regard to tithe: Purchase /b produce b for me from someone who is trusted /b with regard to tithes, i.e., one who does not purchase produce from an ignoramus, who generally does not separate tithes; b or /b if he says: Purchase produce for me b from someone who tithes, /b i.e., even from one who purchases produce from an ignoramus but is careful to set aside tithes upon purchasing the produce, the agent b is not deemed credible /b to claim that he fulfilled the condition of the one who appointed him. According to Rav, b why /b isn’t the agent deemed credible? b Say /b the principle that with regard to b any matter that is likely to be revealed, people do not lie about it. /b ,The Gemara answers: b It is different there, /b
53. Anon., Midrash Psalms, 19.22 (4th cent. CE - 9th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •rabban gamaliel ii of yavneh, obligatory prayer liturgy Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 546
54. Anon., V. Thaisis, None  Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan
55. Nilus, De Mon. Ex., 3.16.11, 3.17.5, 3.19.3-3.19.4  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 96, 98, 99
56. Dicoletian, Edict of Diocletian, 2.6, 3.2  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 85, 89
57. Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah, None  Tagged with subjects: •rabban gamaliel ii of yavneh, obligatory prayer liturgy Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 546
58. Anon., V. Marcelli, 28.1  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 75
59. Anon., Lexicon Artis Grammaticae (E Cod. Coislin. 345), 23.4  Tagged with subjects: •rabban gamaliel ii of yavneh, obligatory prayer liturgy Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 546
60. Philoxenus, Homily, 4.1  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 89
61. Septuagint, 4 Maccabees, 48  Tagged with subjects: •rabban gamaliel ii of yavneh, obligatory prayer liturgy Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 536
62. Anon., Sifra Baraita D’R. Ishmael, 3.4  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban, on nonconformity Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 85
63. Anon., Mekhilta De Rabbi Ishmael Mekhilta D’R. Ishmael Nezikin, 17  Tagged with subjects: •gamaliel of yavneh, rabban Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 75
64. Anon., Soferim, 16.8  Tagged with subjects: •rabban gamaliel ii of yavneh, obligatory prayer liturgy Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 536
65. Anon., Midrash Hagadol, None  Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 546