1. Josephus Flavius, Jewish Antiquities, 20.49-20.53 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •gammarth (cemetery) Found in books: Binder (2012) 18 | 20.49. 5. But as to Helena, the king’s mother, when she saw that the affairs of Izates’s kingdom were in peace, and that her son was a happy man, and admired among all men, and even among foreigners, by the means of God’s providence over him, she had a mind to go to the city of Jerusalem, in order to worship at that temple of God which was so very famous among all men, and to offer her thank-offerings there. So she desired her son to give her leave to go thither; 20.50. upon which he gave his consent to what she desired very willingly, and made great preparations for her dismission, and gave her a great deal of money, and she went down to the city Jerusalem, her son conducting her on her journey a great way. 20.51. Now her coming was of very great advantage to the people of Jerusalem; for whereas a famine did oppress them at that time, and many people died for want of what was necessary to procure food withal, queen Helena sent some of her servants to Alexandria with money to buy a great quantity of corn, and others of them to Cyprus, to bring a cargo of dried figs. 20.52. And as soon as they were come back, and had brought those provisions, which was done very quickly, she distributed food to those that were in want of it, and left a most excellent memorial behind her of this benefaction, which she bestowed on our whole nation. 20.53. And when her son Izates was informed of this famine, he sent great sums of money to the principal men in Jerusalem. However, what favors this queen and king conferred upon our city Jerusalem shall be further related hereafter. |
|
| 2. New Testament, Matthew, 23 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •gammarth (cemetery) Found in books: Binder (2012) 18 |
| 3. Tertullian, Prescription Against Heretics, 15.3 (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Binder (2012) 200 |
| 4. Anon., Mekhilta Derabbi Yishmael, None (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •gammarth (cemetery) Found in books: Binder (2012) 200 |
5. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Batra, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Binder (2012) 18| 8a. אלו ת"ח ור"ל סבר לה כדדרש רבא (שיר השירים ח, י) אני חומה זו כנסת ישראל ושדי כמגדלות אלו בתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות,רב נחמן בר רב חסדא רמא כרגא ארבנן א"ל רב נחמן בר יצחק עברת אדאורייתא ואדנביאי ואדכתובי,אדאורייתא דכתיב (דברים לג, ג) אף חובב עמים כל קדושיו בידך אמר משה לפני הקב"ה רבונו של עולם אפילו בשעה שאתה מחבב עמים כל קדושיו יהיו בידך והם תכו לרגלך תני רב יוסף אלו תלמידי חכמים שמכתתים רגליהם מעיר לעיר וממדינה למדינה ללמוד תורה ישא מדברותיך לישא וליתן בדבורותיו של מקום,אדנביאי דכתיב (הושע ח, י) גם כי יתנו בגוים עתה אקבצם ויחלו מעט ממשא מלך ושרים אמר עולא פסוק זה בלשון ארמית נאמר אי תנו כולהו עתה אקבצם ואם מעט מהם יחלו ממשא מלך ושרים,אדכתובי דכתיב (עזרא ז, כד) מנדה בלו והלך לא שליט למרמא עליהם ואמר רב יהודה מנדה זו מנת המלך בלו זו כסף גולגלתא והלך זו ארנונא,רב פפא רמא כריא חדתא איתמי א"ל רב שישא בריה דרב אידי לרב פפא ודילמא לא מידויל אמר ליה מישקל שקילנא מנייהו אי מידויל מידויל ואי לא מהדרנא לה ניהלייהו,אמר רב יהודה הכל לאגלי גפא אפילו מיתמי אבל רבנן לא צריכי נטירותא הכל לכריא פתיא אפילו מרבנן ולא אמרן אלא דלא נפקי באכלוזא אבל נפקי באכלוזא רבנן לאו בני מיפק באכלוזא נינהו:,רבי פתח אוצרות בשני בצורת אמר יכנסו בעלי מקרא בעלי משנה בעלי גמרא בעלי הלכה בעלי הגדה אבל עמי הארץ אל יכנסו דחק רבי יונתן בן עמרם ונכנס אמר לו רבי פרנסני אמר לו בני קרית אמר לו לאו שנית אמר לו לאו אם כן במה אפרנסך [אמר לו] פרנסני ככלב וכעורב פרנסיה,בתר דנפק יתיב רבי וקא מצטער ואמר אוי לי שנתתי פתי לעם הארץ אמר לפניו ר' שמעון בר רבי שמא יונתן בן עמרם תלמידך הוא שאינו רוצה ליהנות מכבוד תורה מימיו בדקו ואשכח אמר רבי יכנסו הכל,רבי לטעמיה דאמר רבי אין פורענות בא לעולם אלא בשביל עמי הארץ כההוא דמי כלילא דשדו אטבריא אתו לקמיה דרבי ואמרו ליה ליתבו רבנן בהדן אמר להו לא אמרו ליה ערוקינן [אמר להו] ערוקו ערקו פלגיהון דליוה פלגא,אתו הנהו פלגא קמי דרבי א"ל ליתבו רבנן בהדן אמר להו לא ערוקינן ערוקו ערקו כולהו פש ההוא כובס שדיוה אכובס ערק כובס פקע כלילא א"ר ראיתם שאין פורענות בא לעולם אלא בשביל עמי הארץ:,וכמה יהא בעיר ויהא כאנשי העיר וכו': ורמינהי החמרת והגמלת העוברת ממקום למקום ולנה בתוכה והודחה עמהן הן בסקילה וממונן פלט,ואם נשתהו שם שלשים יום הן בסייף וממונן אבד,אמר רבא לא קשיא הא לבני מתא הא ליתובי מתא כדתניא המודר הנאה מאנשי העיר כל שנשתהא שם שנים עשר חדש אסור ליהנות ממנו פחות מכאן מותר מיושבי העיר כל שנשתהא שם שלשים יום אסור ליהנות ממנו פחות מכאן מותר ליהנות ממנו,ולכל מילי מי בעינן י"ב חדש והתניא שלשים יום לתמחוי שלשה חדשים לקופה ששה לכסות תשעה לקבורה שנים עשר לפסי העיר אמר ר' אסי אמר ר' יוחנן כי תנן נמי מתניתין שנים עשר חדש לפסי העיר תנן:,וא"ר אסי אמר ר' יוחנן הכל לפסי העיר ואפי' מיתמי אבל רבנן לא דרבנן לא צריכי נטירותא אמר רב פפא לשורא ולפרשאה ולטרזינא אפילו מיתמי אבל רבנן לא צריכי נטירותא כללא דמילתא כל מילתא דאית להו הנאה מיניה אפילו מיתמי,רבה רמא צדקה איתמי דבי בר מריון א"ל אביי והתני רב שמואל בר יהודה אין פוסקין צדקה על היתומים אפילו לפדיון שבוים אמר ליה אנא לאחשובינהו קא עבידנא,איפרא הורמיז אימיה דשבור מלכא שדרה ארנקא דדינרי לקמיה דרב יוסף אמרה ליהוי למצוה רבה יתיב רב יוסף וקא מעיין בה מאי מצוה רבה א"ל אביי מדתני רב שמואל בר יהודה אין פוסקין צדקה על היתומים אפילו לפדיון שבוים שמע מינה | 8a. b these are Torah scholars, /b and towers do not require additional protection? The Gemara comments: b And Reish Lakish, /b who did not cite this verse, b holds /b in accordance with the way that b Rava expounded /b the verse: b “I am a wall”; this /b is referring to b the Congregation of Israel. “And my breasts are like towers”; these are the synagogues and study halls. /b ,It is similarly related that b Rav Naḥman bar Rav Ḥisda /b once b im-posed /b payment of b the /b poll b tax [ i karga /i ] /b even b on the Sages. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said to him: You have transgressed /b the words of b the Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings. /b ,You have transgressed the words of b the Torah, as it is written: “Even when He loves the peoples, all His holy ones are in Your hand” /b (Deuteronomy 33:3), which is understood to mean that b Moses said to the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, even when You hold the /b other b nations dear /b and grant them dominion over Israel, let b “all His holy ones,” /b meaning the Torah scholars, b be /b exclusively b in Your hand /b and free from the authority of the nations, and therefore be exempt from pay-ing taxes. The continuation of that verse can also be understood as referring to Torah scholars, as it states: b “And they sit [ i tukku /i ] at Your feet, /b receiving Your words” (Deuteronomy 33:3), and b Rav Yosef teaches: These are Torah scholars who pound [ i mekhatetim /i ] their feet from city to city and from country to country to study Torah; “receiving [ i yissa /i ] Your words,” to discuss [ i lissa velitten /i ] the utterances of God. /b ,And you have transgressed the words of b the Prophets, as it is written: “Though they have hired lovers [ i yitnu /i ] among the nations, now I will gather them, and they will begin to be diminished by reason of the burden of kings and princes” /b (Hosea 8:10). With regard to this verse, b Ulla says: /b Part of b this verse is stated in the Aramaic language; /b the word i yitnu /i should be understood here in its Aramaic sense: To learn. And the verse should be interpreted as follows: b If all /b of Israel b learns /b Torah, b I will gather them /b already b now; and if /b only b a few of them /b learn Torah, b they will be excused from the burden /b imposed b by kings and princes. /b This indicates that those who study Torah should not be subject to paying taxes.,And furthermore, you have transgressed the words of b the Writings, as it is written: “It shall not be lawful to impose tribute, impost or toll upon them” /b (Ezra 7:24), i.e., upon the priests and Levites who serve in the Temple. This i halakha /i would apply to Torah scholars as well. b And Rav Yehuda says: “Tribute”; this /b is referring to b the king’s portion, /b a tax given to the king. b “Impost”; this /b is referring to b the head tax. “Toll”; this /b is referring to b a tax [ i arnona /i ] /b paid with property that was imposed from time to time.,It is related that b Rav Pappa /b once b imposed /b a tax for b the digging of a new /b cistern even b on orphans. Rav Sheisha, son of Rav Idi, said to Rav Pappa: Perhaps /b they will dig, but in the end b they will not draw /b any b water /b from there, and it will turn out that the money will have been spent for nothing. The rest of the townspeople can relinquish their rights to their money, but orphans who are minors cannot do so. Rav Pappa b said to him: I shall collect /b money b from /b the orphans; b if they draw /b water, b they /b will b draw /b water, b and if not, I will return /b the money b to /b the orphans., b Rav Yehuda says: All /b of the city’s residents must contribute b to /b the building and upkeep of b the city gates [ i le’aglei gappa /i ], /b and for this purpose money is collected b even from orphans. But the Sages do not require protection /b and are therefore exempt from this payment. b All /b of the city’s residents must contribute b to the digging of cisterns [ i lekarya patya /i ], /b and for this purpose money is collected b even from the Sages, /b since they too need water. The Gemara comments: b And we said /b this b only when /b the people are b not /b required to b go out en masse [ i be’akhluza /i ] /b and do the actual digging, but are obligated merely to contribute money for that purpose. b But if /b the people are required to b go out en masse /b and actually dig, b the Sages /b are b not /b expected to b go out /b with them b en masse, /b but rather they are exempt from such labor.,It is related that b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi once b opened /b his b storehouses /b to distribute food b during years of drought. He said: Masters of Bible, masters of Mishna, masters of Talmud, masters of i halakha /i , masters of i aggada /i may enter /b and receive food from me, b but ignoramuses should not enter. Rabbi Yonatan ben Amram, /b whom Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi did not know, b pushed /b his way in, b and entered, /b and b said to him: Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi, b sustain me. /b Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi b said to him: My son, have you read /b the Bible? Rabbi Yonatan ben Amram b said to him, /b out of modesty: b No. /b Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi continued: b Have you studied /b Mishna? Once again, Rabbi Yonatan ben Amram b said to him: No. /b Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi then asked him: b If so, by what /b merit b should I sustain you? /b Rabbi Yonatan ben Amram b said to him: Sustain me like a dog and like a raven, /b who are given food even though they have not learned anything. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi was moved by his words and b fed him. /b , b After /b Rabbi Yonatan b left, Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b sat, and was distressed, and said: Woe is me, that I have given my bread to an ignoramus. /b His son, b Rabbi Shimon bar Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi, b said to him: Perhaps he was your disciple Yonatan ben Amram, who never in his life wanted to /b materially b benefit from the honor /b shown to the b Torah? They investigated /b the matter b and found /b that such was the case. b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi then b said: Let everyone enter, /b as there may also be others who hide the fact that they are true Torah scholars.,Commenting on Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s opinion, the Gemara notes that b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi conformed b to his /b standard line of b reasoning, /b as b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b says: Suffering comes to the world only due to ignoramuses. /b This is b like /b the incident of b the crown tax [ i kelila /i ] that was imposed on /b the residents of the city of b Tiberias. /b The heads of the city b came before Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b and said to him: The Sages should contribute /b along b with us. /b Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi b said to them: No, /b the Sages are exempt. b They said to him: /b Then b we will run away /b and the entire burden will fall on the Torah scholars. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi b said to them: Run away /b as you please. b Half /b of the city’s residents b ran away. /b The authorities then b waived half /b the sum that they had initially imposed on the city., b The half /b of the population that remained in the city then b came before Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi, and b said to him: The Sages should contribute /b along b with us. /b Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi b said to them: No, /b the Sages are exempt. They said to him: Then b we /b too b will run away. /b Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to them: b Run away /b as you please. b They all ran away, /b so that only b one launderer was left /b in the city. The authorities b imposed /b the entire tax b on the launderer. The launderer /b then b ran away /b as well. b The crown tax was /b then b canceled /b in its entirety. b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b said: You see /b from this b that suffering comes to the world only due to ignoramuses, /b for as soon as they all fled from the city, the crown tax was completely canceled.,§ The mishna teaches: b And how long /b must one live b in the city to be /b considered b like /b one of b the people of the city? /b Twelve months. b And we raise a contradiction /b from what is taught in a i baraita /i : In the case of b a donkey caravan or a camel caravan that was journeying from place to place, and it lodged inside /b an idolatrous city, b and its /b members b were led astray /b along b with /b the other residents of the city, and they too engaged in idol worship, b they, /b the members of the caravan, are liable to death b by stoning /b like ordinary individual idolaters, b and their property escapes /b destruction, i.e., they are not treated like the residents of an idolatrous city, who are liable to death by the sword and whose property is destroyed.,The i baraita /i continues: b And if /b the caravan members b had remained /b in that city for b thirty days, they /b are liable to death b by the sword and their property is destroyed, /b just as it is for the rest of the residents of the city. This seems to indicate that once an individual has lived in a city for thirty days, he is already considered one of its residents., b Rava said: /b This is b not difficult. This /b period, i.e., twelve months, is required in order to be considered one of the b members of the city; /b and b that /b period, i.e., thirty days, suffices in order to be considered one of the b residents of the city. As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b One who is prohibited by a vow from deriving benefit from the people of a /b particular b city /b is b prohibited from deriving benefit from anyone who has stayed there /b for b twelve months, /b but it is permitted for him to derive benefit from anyone who has stayed there for b less /b time b than that. /b By contrast, if he prohibited himself by way of a vow from deriving benefit b from the residents of a /b particular b city, /b he is b prohibited from deriving benefit from anyone who has stayed there /b for b thirty days, /b but b it is permitted for him to derive benefit from /b anyone who has stayed there for b less /b time b than that. /b ,The Gemara asks: b And do we require /b that one live in a city for b twelve months for all matters? But isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : If one lives in city for b thirty days, /b he must contribute b to /b the b charity platter /b from which food is distributed to the poor. If he lives there for b three months, /b he must contribute b to /b the charity b box. /b If he lives there for b six /b months, he must contribute b to /b the b clothing /b fund. If he lives there for b nine /b months, he must contribute b to /b the b burial /b fund. If he lives there for b twelve /b months, he must contribute b to /b the b columns of the city [ i lepassei ha’ir /i ], /b i.e., for the construction of a security fence. b Rabbi Asi said /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa said: When we learned twelve months in the mishna, we learned /b that with regard to contributing b to /b the b columns of the city, /b money used for protecting and strengthening the city, but not for other matters., b And Rabbi Asi says /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa says: All /b are required to contribute b to /b the b columns of the city, and /b money is collected for that purpose b even from orphans. But the Sages /b are b not /b required to contribute, b since the Sages do not need protection. Rav Pappa said: /b Money is collected b even from orphans for the /b city b wall, for the /b city b horseman, and for the guard [ i uletarzina /i ] /b of the city armory, b but the Sages do not require protection. The principle of the matter /b is: Money is collected b even from orphans /b for b anything from which they /b derive b benefit. /b ,It is reported that b Rabba imposed /b a contribution to a certain b charity on the orphans of the house of bar Maryon. Abaye said to him: But didn’t Rav Shmuel bar Yehuda teach: One does not impose a charity /b obligation b on orphans even for /b the sake of b redeeming captives, /b since they are minors and are not obligated in the mitzvot? Rabba b said to him: I did this to elevate them /b in standing, i.e., so that people should honor them as generous benefactors; not in order that the poor should benefit.,Incidental to this story, the Gemara relates that b Ifera Hurmiz, the mother of King Shapur, /b king of Persia, b sent a purse [ i arneka /i ] /b full b of dinars to Rav Yosef. She said /b to him: b Let /b the money be used b for a great mitzva. Rav Yosef sat and considered /b the question: b What /b did Ifera Hurmiz mean when she attached a condition to the gift, saying that it should be used for b a great mitzva? Abaye said to him: From what Rav Shmuel bar Yehuda taught, /b that b one does not impose a charity /b obligation b on orphans even for /b the sake of b redeeming captives, learn from this /b |
|
6. Babylonian Talmud, Hulin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •gammarth (cemetery) Found in books: Binder (2012) 200| 5b. (ויקרא ד, כז) מעם הארץ פרט למומר,ר"ש בן יוסי אומר משום ר"ש (ויקרא ד, כב) אשר לא תעשינה בשגגה ואשם השב מידיעתו מביא קרבן על שגגתו אינו שב מידיעתו אינו מביא קרבן על שגגתו,ואמרינן מאי בינייהו ואמר רב המנונא מומר לאכול חלב והביא קרבן על הדם איכא בינייהו,חדא בחטאת וחדא בעולה וצריכי דאי אשמעינן חטאת משום דלכפרה הוא אבל עולה דדורון הוא אימא לקבל מיניה ואי אשמעינן עולה משום דלאו חיובא הוא אבל חטאת דחיובא הוא אימא לקבל מיניה צריכא,וכל היכא דכתיב בהמה גריעותא היא והכתיב (תהלים לו, ז) אדם ובהמה תושיע ה' ואמר רב יהודה אמר רב אלו בני אדם שהן ערומין בדעת ומשימין עצמן כבהמה התם כתיב אדם ובהמה הכא בהמה לחודיה כתיב,וכל היכא דכתיב אדם ובהמה מעליותא היא והא כתיב (ירמיהו לא, כז) וזרעתי את בית ישראל זרע אדם וזרע בהמה התם הא חלקיה קרא זרע אדם לחוד וזרע בהמה לחוד,(סימן נקלף),א"ר חנן א"ר יעקב בר אידי א"ר יהושע בן לוי משום בר קפרא ר"ג ובית דינו נמנו על שחיטת כותי ואסרוה א"ל רבי זירא לרבי יעקב בר אידי שמא לא שמע רבי אלא בשאין ישראל עומד על גביו א"ל דמי האי מרבנן כדלא גמירי אינשי שמעתא בשאין ישראל עומד על גביו למימרא בעי,קבלה מיניה או לא קבלה מיניה ת"ש דאמר ר"נ בר יצחק א"ר אסי אני ראיתי את רבי יוחנן שאכל משחיטת כותי אף רבי אסי אכל משחיטת כותי ותהי בה רבי זירא לא שמיעא להו דאי הוה שמיעא להו הוו מקבלי לה או דלמא שמיע להו ולא קבלוה,הדר פשיט לנפשיה מסתברא דשמיע להו ולא קבלוה דאי ס"ד לא שמיע להו ואי הוה שמיע להו הוו מקבלי לה היכי מסתייעא מילתא למיכל איסורא השתא בהמתן של צדיקים אין הקב"ה מביא תקלה על ידן צדיקים עצמן לא כל שכן | 5b. “And if any one b of the common people /b sins unwittingly…and he shall bring his offering” (Leviticus 4:27–28), from which it is inferred in a i baraita /i : “of the common people,” indicating: But not all of the common people. This serves b to exclude a transgressor, /b from whom a sin offering is not accepted., b Rabbi Shimon ben Yosei says in the name of Rabbi Shimon /b that the verse states: “And does b unwittingly /b one of the things… b that may not be done, and he becomes guilty, /b or if his sin that he sinned became known to him” (Leviticus 4:22–23). From the words “become known to him” it is inferred: b One who repents due to his awareness /b that he performed a transgression, as had he known that the action is prohibited he would not have performed it, b brings an offering for his unwitting /b transgression in order to achieve atonement. But one who b does not repent due to his awareness /b that he sinned, e.g., a transgressor who would have sinned even had he been aware that the act is prohibited, b does not bring an offering for his unwitting /b action., b And we say: What /b is the difference b between their /b two opinions? b And Rav Hamnuna said: /b The difference is in the case of b a transgressor with regard to eating /b the forbidden b fat /b of a domesticated animal b and he brought an offering for /b unwittingly consuming b blood is /b the difference b between them. /b According to the first i tanna /i he may not bring an offering, as he is a transgressor. According to Rabbi Shimon, since he repented for unwittingly consuming blood, due to his awareness that he sinned, he brings a sin offering for that unwitting sin. In any event, this i baraita /i apparently contradicts the previously cited i baraita /i with regard to the source for the i halakha /i that one does not accept an offering from a transgressor.,The Gemara answers: b One /b source teaches b with regard to /b the b sin offering /b of a transgressor that it is not accepted, b and one /b source teaches b with regard to /b the b burnt offering /b of a transgressor that it is not accepted. b And /b both sources b are necessary, as, if /b the Torah had b taught us /b this i halakha /i only with regard to b a sin offering, /b one might have thought that it is not accepted b due to /b the fact b that it is for atonement, /b and as a transgressor he is undeserving of atonement, b but /b with regard to b a burnt offering, which is /b merely b a gift [ i dedoron /i ], say /b that one ought b to accept /b it b from him. And if /b the Torah had b taught us /b this i halakha /i only with regard to b a burnt offering, /b one might have thought that it is not accepted b due to /b the fact b that it is not an obligation, but /b with regard to b a sin offering, which is an obligation, say /b that one ought b to accept /b it b from him. /b Therefore, both sources are b necessary. /b ,§ In the previous i baraita /i the Sages derived from the phrase “from the animal” that people who are similar to an animal are included among those from whom offerings are accepted. The Gemara seeks to understand the meaning of the phrase: Similar to an animal, and asks: b And everywhere that /b the word b animal is written /b and interpreted as referring to a person, does it indicate b a deficiency? But isn’t it written: “Man and animal You preserve, Lord” /b (Psalms 36:7), b and Rav Yehuda says /b that b Rav says: These are people who are clever in /b terms of their b intellect, /b like people, b and /b despite their intelligence they b comport themselves /b humbly and self-effacingly, b like an animal. /b The Gemara answers: b There it is written “man and animal.” Here, /b the word b “animal” alone is written. /b ,The Gemara asks: b And everywhere that /b the terms b “man” and “animal” are written /b together, does it indicate b a virtue? But isn’t it written: “And I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the seed of man and with the seed of animal” /b (Jeremiah 31:26), and the Sages interpreted the phrase “seed of animal” as a reference to ignorant, inferior people. The Gemara answers: b There, doesn’t the verse separate /b man and animal? b The seed of man /b is b discrete and the seed of animal /b is b discrete. /b ,§ The Gemara revisits the matter of slaughter by a Samaritan and cites b a mnemonic /b for the names of the Sages that follow: b i Nun /i , /b for Ḥa; b i kuf /i , /b for Ya’akov; b i lamed /i , /b for ben Levi; and b i peh /i , /b for bar Kappara.,§ b Rabbi Ḥa says /b that b Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi says /b that b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says in the name of bar Kappara: /b The opinions of b Rabban Gamliel and his court were counted with regard to /b the status of b the slaughter of a Samaritan, and they prohibited it. Rabbi Zeira said to Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi: Perhaps my teacher heard /b that i halakha /i b only /b in a case b where a Jew is not standing over him. /b Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi b said to /b Rabbi Zeira: b This /b one b of the Sages seems like /b one of b the people who have not studied i halakha /i . When a Jew is not standing over /b the Samaritan b is it necessary to say /b that it is prohibited to eat from what he slaughters?,The Gemara asks: b Did /b Rabbi Zeira b accept /b that response b from /b Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi b or did he not accept it from him? Come /b and b hear /b a proof to resolve that dilemma from that b which Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak says /b that b Rabbi Asi says: I saw that Rabbi Yoḥa ate from the slaughter of a Samaritan. /b And b Rabbi Asi too ate from the slaughter of a Samaritan. And Rabbi Zeira wondered about it, /b whether perhaps b they did not hear /b the i halakha /i that it is prohibited to eat from the slaughter of a Samaritan b but had they heard /b it b they would have accepted it, or perhaps they heard /b the i halakha /i b but did not accept it. /b ,Rabbi Zeira b then resolved /b the matter b for himself. It stands to reason that they heard it and did not accept it. As, if it enters your mind /b that b they did not hear it, but /b that b had they heard it they would have accepted it, how did the matter eventuate, /b leading these Sages b to eat forbidden /b food? b Now /b consider: If even b through the animals of the righteous, the Holy One, Blessed be He, does not generate mishaps, /b then is it b not all the more so /b true that b the righteous themselves /b would not experience mishaps? |
|
7. Babylonian Talmud, Megillah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •gammarth (cemetery) Found in books: Binder (2012) 200| 13b. (איוב לו, ז) לא יגרע מצדיק עיניו בשכר צניעות שהית' בה ברחל זכתה ויצא ממנה שאול ובשכר צניעות שהיה בו בשאול זכה ויצאת ממנו אסתר,ומאי צניעות היתה בה ברחל דכתיב (בראשית כט, יב) ויגד יעקב לרחל כי אחי אביה הוא וכי אחי אביה הוא והלא בן אחות אביה הוא,אלא אמר לה מינסבא לי אמרה ליה אין מיהו אבא רמאה הוא ולא יכלת ליה אמר לה אחיו אנא ברמאות אמרה ליה ומי שרי לצדיקי לסגויי ברמיותא אמר לה אין (שמואל ב כב, כז) עם נבר תתבר ועם עקש תתפל,אמר לה ומאי רמיותא אמרה ליה אית לי אחתא דקשישא מינאי ולא מנסיב לי מקמה מסר לה סימנים,כי מטא ליליא אמרה השתא מיכספא אחתאי מסרתינהו ניהלה והיינו דכתיב (בראשית כט, כה) ויהי בבקר והנה היא לאה מכלל דעד השתא לאו לאה היא אלא מתוך סימנין שמסרה רחל ללאה לא הוה ידע עד השתא לפיכך זכתה ויצא ממנה שאול,ומה צניעות היתה בשאול דכתיב (שמואל א י, טז) ואת דבר המלוכה לא הגיד לו אשר אמר שמואל זכה ויצאת ממנו אסתר ואמר רבי אלעזר כשהקב"ה פוסק גדולה לאדם פוסק לבניו ולבני בניו עד סוף כל הדורות שנאמר (איוב לו, ז) ויושיבם לנצח ויגבהו (וגו') ואם הגיס דעתו הקב"ה משפילו שנאמר (איוב לו, ח) ואם אסורים בזקים וגו',ואת מאמר מרדכי אסתר עושה אמר רבי ירמיה שהיתה מראה דם נדה לחכמים כאשר היתה באמנה אתו אמר רבה בר לימא (משמיה דרב) שהיתה עומדת מחיקו של אחשורוש וטובלת ויושבת בחיקו של מרדכי,בימים ההם ומרדכי יושב בשער המלך קצף בגתן ותרש אמר ר' חייא בר אבא אמר רבי יוחנן הקציף הקב"ה אדון על עבדיו לעשות רצון צדיק ומנו יוסף שנאמר (בראשית מא, יב) ושם אתנו נער עברי וגו',עבדים על אדוניהן לעשות נס לצדיק ומנו מרדכי דכתיב ויודע הדבר למרדכי וגו',אמר רבי יוחנן בגתן ותרש שני טרסיים הוו והיו מספרין בלשון טורסי ואומרים מיום שבאת זו לא ראינו שינה בעינינו בא ונטיל ארס בספל כדי שימות והן לא היו יודעין כי מרדכי מיושבי לשכת הגזית היה והיה יודע בשבעים לשון,אמר לו והלא אין משמרתי ומשמרתך שוה אמר לו אני אשמור משמרתי ומשמרתך והיינו דכתיב ויבקש הדבר וימצא שלא נמצאו במשמרתן,אחר הדברים האלה (אחר מאי) אמר רבא אחר שברא הקב"ה רפואה למכה,דאמר ר"ל אין הקב"ה מכה את ישראל אא"כ בורא להם רפואה תחילה שנאמר (הושע ז, א) כרפאי לישראל ונגלה עון אפרים אבל אומות העולם אינו כן מכה אותן ואח"כ בורא להם רפואה שנאמר (ישעיהו יט, כב) ונגף ה' את מצרים נגוף ורפוא,ויבז בעיניו לשלוח יד במרדכי לבדו אמר רבא בתחילה במרדכי לבדו ולבסוף בעם מרדכי ומנו רבנן ולבסוף בכל היהודים,הפיל פור הוא הגורל תנא כיון שנפל פור בחודש אדר שמח שמחה גדולה אמר נפל לי פור בירח שמת בו משה ולא היה יודע שבשבעה באדר מת ובשבעה באדר נולד,ישנו עם אחד אמר רבא ליכא דידע לישנא בישא כהמן אמר ליה תא ניכלינהו אמר ליה מסתפינא מאלהיו דלא ליעביד בי כדעבד בקמאי אמר ליה ישנו מן המצות,אמר ליה אית בהו רבנן אמר ליה עם אחד הן,שמא תאמר קרחה אני עושה במלכותך מפוזרין הם בין העמים שמא תאמר אית הנאה מינייהו מפורד כפרידה זו שאינה עושה פירות ושמא תאמר איכא מדינתא מינייהו ת"ל בכל מדינות מלכותך,ודתיהם שונות מכל עם דלא אכלי מינן ולא נסבי מינן ולא מנסבי לן ואת דתי המלך אינם עושים דמפקי לכולא שתא בשה"י פה"י ולמלך אין שוה להניחם דאכלו ושתו ומבזו ליה למלכות ואפילו נופל זבוב בכוסו של אחד מהן זורקו ושותהו ואם אדוני המלך נוגע בכוסו של אחד מהן חובטו בקרקע ואינו שותהו,אם על המלך טוב יכתב לאבדם ועשרת אלפים ככר כסף וגו' אמר ריש לקיש גלוי וידוע לפני מי שאמר והיה העולם שעתיד המן לשקול שקלים על ישראל לפיכך הקדים שקליהן לשקליו,והיינו דתנן באחד באדר משמיעין על השקלים ועל הכלאים,ויאמר המלך להמן הכסף נתון לך והעם לעשות בו כטוב בעיניך אמר רבי אבא | 13b. b “He withdraws not His eyes from the righteous; /b but with kings upon the throne He establishes them forever, and they are exalted” (Job 36:7)? This teaches that b in reward for the modesty shown by Rachel she merited that Saul, /b who was also modest, b should descend from her, and in reward for the modesty shown by Saul, he merited that Esther should descend from him. /b ,The Gemara explains: b What was the modesty shown by Rachel? /b It is b as it is written: “And Jacob told Rachel that he was her father’s brother, /b and that he was Rebecca’s son” (Genesis 29:12). It may be asked: b Was he, /b Jacob, in fact b her father’s brother? But wasn’t he the son of her father’s sister? /b , b Rather, /b it must be understood that when Jacob met Rachel, b he said to her: Will you marry me? She said to him: Yes, but my father, /b Laban, b is a swindler, and you will not be able to /b outwit b him. /b Jacob alleviated her fears, as b he said to her /b that he is her father’s brother, referring not to their familial affiliation but rather to his ability to deal with her father on his level, as if to say: b I am his brother in deception. She said to him: But is it /b really b permitted for the righteous to be involved in deception? He said to her: Yes, /b it is permitted when dealing with deceptive individuals, as the verse states: b “With the pure you will show yourself pure, and with the perverse you will show yourself subtle” /b (II Samuel 22:27), indicating that one should deal with others in the manner appropriate for their personality.,Jacob then b said to her: What is the deception /b that he will plan to carry out and I should be prepared for? Rachel b said to him: I have a sister who is older than I, and he will not marry me off before her, /b and will try to give you her in my place. So Jacob b gave her /b certain b distinguishing signs /b that she should use to indicate to him that she was actually Rachel and not her sister., b When the /b wedding b night arrived, /b and Laban planned to switch the sisters, Rachel b said /b to herself: b Now my sister will be embarassed, /b for Jacob will ask her for the signs and she will not know them. So b she gave them to her. And this is as it is written: “And it came to pass, that in the morning, behold, it was Leah” /b (Genesis 29:25). Does this imply b by inference that until now she was not Leah? Rather, due to the distinguishing signs that Rachel had given to Leah, he did not know until now, /b when it was light outside, that she was Leah. b Therefore, /b Rachel b merited that Saul should descend from her, /b due to her act of modesty in not revealing to Jacob that she had shown the signs to Leah., b And what was the modesty shown by Saul? As it is written: “But of the matter of the kingdom, of which Samuel spoke, he did not tell him” /b (I Samuel 10:16). Saul expressed his modesty by not revealing Samuel’s promise that he would be king, and thereby b merited that Esther would descend from him. /b Similarly, b Rabbi Elazar said: When the Holy One, Blessed be He, assigns greatness to a person, He assigns it to his sons and to his son’s sons for all generations, as it is stated: /b “He withdraws not his eyes from the righteous; but with kings upon the throne b He establishes them forever, and they are exalted” /b (Job 36:7). b And if he becomes arrogant /b due to this, b the Holy One, Blessed be He, lowers him /b in order to humble him, b as it is stated /b in the next verse: b “And if they are bound in chains, /b and are held in cords of affliction, then He declares unto them their work, and their transgressions, that they have behaved proudly” (Job 36:8–9).,§ The Gemara returns to its exposition of the Megilla. The verse states: b “For Esther adhered to the words of Mordecai, /b as she did when she was brought up with him” (Esther 2:20). b Rabbi Yirmeya said: /b This teaches b that she would show /b discharges of her b menstrual blood to the Sages /b to inquire whether she was pure or impure. The verse continues: b “As she did when she was brought up with him” /b (Esther 2:20). b Rabba bar Lima said in the name of Rav: /b This means b that she /b maintained a relationship with Mordecai, as she b would arise from the lap of Ahasuerus, immerse herself /b in a ritual bath, b and sit in the lap of Mordecai. /b ,The Megilla continues: b “In those days, while Mordecai sat in the king’s gate, /b two of the king’s chamberlains, b Bigthan and Teresh, /b of those that guarded the doors, b became angry, /b and sought to lay hands on the king Ahasuerus” (Esther 2:21). b Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa said: The Holy One, Blessed be He, caused a master to become angry with his servants /b in order b to fulfill the will of a righteous man. And who is this? /b It is b Joseph, as it is stated /b in the chief butler’s account of how Pharaoh had become angry with him and with the chief baker and sent them to jail: b “And there was with us there a young man, a Hebrew” /b (Genesis 41:12).,Similarly, the Holy One, Blessed be He, also caused b servants /b to become angry b with their master in order to perform a miracle for /b another b righteous man. And who is he? /b It is b Mordecai, as /b with regard to the plot to kill the king b it is written: “And the matter became known to Mordecai” /b (Esther 2:22).,The Gemara explains how the matter became known to him. b Rabbi Yoḥa said: Bigthan and Teresh were two Tarsians, and they would talk /b with one another in the b Tarsian language. They said: From the day that /b Esther arrived b we have not slept, /b as Ahasuerus has been with Esther all night, and he has been busying us with his demands. b Come, let us cast poison in the goblet /b from which he drinks b so that he will die. But they did not know that Mordecai was /b one b of those who sat /b on the Sanhedrin, which convened b in the Chamber of Hewn Stone, and that he knew seventy languages, /b a necessity for members of the Sanhedrin.,While planning their plot, one of them b said to /b the other: b But my post and your post are not identical. /b How then can one of us leave our position to succeed in our plot to poison the king? The other one b said to him: I will guard /b both b my post and your post. And this is as it is written /b with regard to the king’s verifying Mordecai’s revelation of the plan to kill the king: b “And when inquiry was made of the matter, it was found to be so” /b (Esther 2:23); it was discovered b that they were not /b both b found at their posts. /b ,The verse describes when the rest of the events of the Megilla occurred: b “After these events /b did King Ahasuerus promote Haman” (Esther 3:1). The Gemara asks: b After what /b particular events? b Rava said: /b Only b after the Holy One, Blessed be He, created a remedy for the blow /b and set in place the chain of events that would lead to the miraculous salvation was Haman appointed, setting the stage for the decree against the Jews to be issued.,Rava explains: b As Reish Lakish said: The Holy One, Blessed be He, does not strike at the Jewish people unless He has /b already b created a remedy for them beforehand, as it is stated: “When I would have healed Israel, then the iniquity of Ephraim was uncovered” /b (Hosea 7:1). b But /b this is b not so /b with regard to b the nations of the world. /b With them, God first b strikes them and /b only b afterward does He create a remedy, as it is stated: “And the Lord shall smite Egypt, smiting and healing” /b (Isaiah 19:22).,The verse states: b “But it seemed contemptible in his eyes to lay his hand on Mordecai alone; /b for they had made known to him the people of Mordecai; wherefore Haman sought to destroy all the Jews that were throughout the whole kingdom of Ahasuerus, even the people of Mordecai” (Esther 3:6). b Rava said: At first /b he wanted to lay his hands on b Mordecai alone, and in the end on the people of Mordecai. And who were /b the people of Mordecai? They were b the Sages, /b i.e., Mordecai’s special people. b And ultimately /b he sought to bring harm b on all the Jews. /b ,The verse states: b “They cast i pur /i , that is, the lot” /b (Esther 3:7). A Sage b taught /b the following i baraita /i : b Once the lot fell on the month of Adar, he, /b Haman, b greatly rejoiced, /b for he saw this as a favorable omen for the execution of his plans. b He said: The lot has fallen for me in the month that Moses died, /b which is consequently a time of calamity for the Jewish people. b But he did not know that /b not only b did /b Moses b die on the seventh of Adar, /b but b he was /b also b born on the seventh of Adar, /b and therefore it is also a time of rejoicing for the Jewish people.,Haman said to Ahasuerus: b “There is [ i yeshno /i ] one /b people scattered abroad [ i mefuzar /i ] and dispersed [ i meforad /i ] among the peoples in all the provinces of your kingdom; and their laws are diverse from those of every people; nor do they keep the king’s laws; therefore it does not profit the king to tolerate them” (Esther 3:8). b Rava said: There was none who knew how to slander like Haman, /b as in his request to the king he included responses to all the reasons Ahasuerus might be reluctant to destroy the Jewish people. b He said to /b Ahasuerus: b Let us destroy them. /b Ahasuerus b said to him: I am afraid of their God, lest He do to me as He did to those /b who stood against them b before me. /b Haman b said to him: They have been asleep [ i yashnu /i ] with respect to the mitzvot, /b having ceased to observe the mitzvot, and, therefore there is no reason to fear.,Ahasuerus b said to him: There are the Sages among them /b who observe the mitzvot. Haman b said to him: They are one people, /b i.e., they are all the same; nobody observes the mitzvot.,Haman continued with his next response as expressed in the verse: b Perhaps you will say /b that b I am making a bald spot in your kingdom, /b i.e., you fear that if an entire nation is wiped out there will be a desolate area within the kingdom. There is no need to worry, though, as b they are scattered [ i mefuzarin /i ] among the peoples, /b and eradicating them will not result in the creation of an unpopulated zone in the area where they had once lived. Furthermore, b perhaps you will say /b that b there is benefit from them; /b but this nation is b i meforad /i , like this /b barren b mule [ i pereida /i ] that cannot bear offspring, /b and there is no benefit to be gained from them. And b perhaps you will say /b that b there is /b at least b a province /b that is filled b with them. Therefore the verse states /b that they are scattered b “in all the provinces of your kingdom” /b (Esther 3:8), and they do not inhabit one place.,Haman continued: b “And their laws are diverse from those of every people” /b (Esther 3:8), b as they do not eat from our /b food, b nor do they marry from our /b women, b nor do they marry off /b their women b to us. “Nor do they keep the king’s laws” /b (Esther 3:8). b They spend the entire year /b in idleness, as they are constantly saying: b i Shehi pehi /i , /b an acronym for: It is Shabbat today [ i Shabbat hayom /i ]; it is Passover today [ i Pesaḥ hayom /i ]. The verse continues: b “Therefore it does not profit the king to tolerate them,” as they eat and drink and scorn the throne. /b And a proof of this is that b even if a fly falls into the cup of one of them, he will throw /b the fly b out and drink /b the wine b it /b fell into, b but if my master the king were to touch the glass of one of them, he would throw it to the ground, and would not drink it, /b since it is prohibited to drink wine that was touched by a gentile.,Therefore, Haman concluded: b “If it please the king, let it be written that they be destroyed, and /b I will weigh out b ten thousand talents of silver /b into the hands of those who have the charge of the business, to bring it into the king’s treasuries” (Esther 3:9). b Reish Lakish said: It is revealed and known /b in advance b to the One Who spoke and the world came into being, that in the future Haman was going to weigh out shekels against the Jewish people; therefore, He /b arranged that the Jewish people’s b shekels /b that were given to the Temple b preceded /b Haman’s b shekels. /b , b And this is as we learned /b in a mishna ( i Shekalim /i 2a): b On the first of Adar /b the court b makes a /b public b announcement about /b the contribution to the Temple of half- b shekels /b that will soon be due, b and about /b the need to uproot forbidden mixtures of b diverse kinds /b of seeds from the fields now that they have begun to sprout. Therefore, it turns out that the Jewish people give the shekels on the first of Adar, preceding the date of Haman’s planned destruction of the Jewish people and his own collecting of shekels.,Ahasuerus responded to Haman’s request: b “And the king said to Haman: The silver is given to you; the people also, to do with them as it seems good to you” /b (Esther 3:11). b Rabbi Abba said: /b |
|
8. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •gammarth (cemetery) Found in books: Binder (2012) 200| 19b. נפנה לימינו כבשו פניהם בקרקע נפנה לשמאלו וכבשו פניהם בקרקע אמר להן שמעון בן שטח בעלי מחשבות אתם יבא בעל מחשבות ויפרע מכם מיד בא גבריאל וחבטן בקרקע ומתו באותה שעה אמרו מלך לא דן ולא דנין אותו לא מעיד ולא מעידין אותו:,לא חולץ ולא חולצין וכו': איני והאמר רב אשי אפילו למאן דאמר נשיא שמחל על כבודו כבודו מחול מלך שמחל על כבודו אין כבודו מחול שנאמר (דברים יז, טו) שום תשים עליך מלך שתהא אימתו עליך מצוה שאני:,ואין נושאין כו': תניא אמרו לו לר' יהודה נשים הראויות לו מבית המלך ומאי נינהו מירב ומיכל,שאלו תלמידיו את ר' יוסי היאך נשא דוד שתי אחיות בחייהן אמר להן מיכל אחר מיתת מירב נשאה ר' יהושע בן קרחה אומר קידושי טעות היו לו במירב שנאמר (שמואל ב ג, יד) תנה את אשתי את מיכל אשר ארסתי לי במאה ערלות פלשתים,מאי תלמודא אמר רב פפא מיכל אשתי ולא מירב אשתי,מאי קידושי טעות דכתיב (שמואל א יז, כה) והיה האיש אשר יכנו יעשרנו המלך עושר גדול וגו' אזל קטליה אמר לו מלוה אית לך גבאי והמקדש במלוה אינה מקודשת,אזל יהבה לעדריאל דכתיב (שמואל א יח, יט) ויהי בעת תת את מירב בת שאול לדוד וגו' א"ל אי בעית דאתן לך מיכל זיל אייתי לי מאה ערלות פלשתים אזל אייתי ליה א"ל מלוה ופרוטה אית לך גבאי,שאול סבר מלוה ופרוטה דעתיה אמלוה ודוד סבר מלוה ופרוטה דעתיה אפרוטה,ואיבעית אימא דכולי עלמא מלוה ופרוטה דעתיה אפרוטה שאול סבר לא חזו ולא מידי ודוד סבר חזו לכלבי ושונרי,ור' יוסי האי תנה את אשתי את מיכל מאי דריש ביה ר' יוסי לטעמיה דתניא רבי יוסי היה דורש מקראות מעורבין,כתיב (שמואל ב כא, ח) ויקח המלך את שני בני רצפה בת איה אשר ילדה לשאול את אדמוני ואת מפיבושת ואת חמשת בני מיכל אשר ילדה לעדריאל המחולתי וגו' וכי לעדריאל נתנה והלא לפלטי בן ליש נתנה דכתיב (שמואל א כה, מד) ושאול נתן את מיכל בתו אשת דוד לפלטי בן ליש וגו',אלא מקיש קידושי מירב לעדריאל לקידושי מיכל לפלטי מה קידושי מיכל לפלטי בעבירה אף קידושי מירב לעדריאל בעבירה,ור' יהושע בן קרחה נמי הכתיב את חמשת בני מיכל בת שאול אמר לך רבי יהושע וכי מיכל ילדה והלא מירב ילדה מירב ילדה ומיכל גידלה לפיכך נקראו על שמה ללמדך שכל המגדל יתום בתוך ביתו מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו ילדו:,(חנינא קרא יוחנן ואשתו אלעזר וגאולה ושמואל בלימודי סימן): רבי חנינא אומר מהכא (רות ד, יז) ותקראנה לו השכנות שם לאמר יולד בן לנעמי וכי נעמי ילדה והלא רות ילדה אלא רות ילדה ונעמי גידלה לפיכך נקרא על שמה,רבי יוחנן אמר מהכא (דברי הימים א ד, יח) ואשתו היהודית ילדה את ירד אביגדור וגו' אלה בני בתיה בת פרעה אשר לקח (לו) מרד מרד זה כלב ולמה נקרא שמו מרד שמרד בעצת מרגלים וכי בתיה ילדה והלא יוכבד ילדה אלא יוכבד ילדה ובתיה גידלה לפיכך נקרא על שמה,רבי אלעזר אמר מהכא (תהלים עז, טז) גאלת בזרוע עמך בני יעקב ויוסף סלה וכי יוסף ילד והלא יעקב ילד אלא יעקב ילד ויוסף כילכל לפיכך נקראו על שמו,אמר רבי שמואל בר נחמני א"ר יונתן כל המלמד בן חבירו תורה מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו ילדו שנאמר (במדבר ג, א) ואלה תולדות אהרן ומשה וכתיב ואלה שמות בני אהרן לומר לך אהרן ילד ומשה לימד לפיכך נקראו על שמו,(ישעיהו כט, כב) לכן כה אמר ה' אל בית יעקב אשר פדה את אברהם וכי היכן מצינו ביעקב שפדאו לאברהם אמר רב יהודה שפדאו מצער גידול בנים והיינו דכתיב (ישעיהו כט, כב) לא עתה יבוש יעקב וגו' לא עתה יבוש יעקב מאביו ולא עתה פניו יחוורו מאבי אביו,כתיב פלטי וכתיב פלטיאל אמר ר' יוחנן פלטי שמו ולמה נקרא שמו פלטיאל שפלטו אל מן העבירה מה עשה נעץ חרב בינו לבינה אמר כל העוסק בדבר זה ידקר בחרב זה,והכתיב (שמואל ב ג, טז) וילך אתה אישה שנעשה לה כאישה והכתיב (שמואל ב ג, טז) הלך ובכה על המצוה דאזיל מיניה עד בחורים שנעשו שניהם כבחורים שלא טעמו טעם ביאה,אמר רבי יוחנן תוקפו של יוסף ענוותנותו של בועז תוקפו של בועז ענוותנותו של פלטי בן ליש תוקפו של יוסף ענוותנותו של בועז דכתיב (רות ג, ח) ויהי בחצי הלילה ויחרד האיש וילפת מאי וילפת אמר רב שנעשה בשרו כראשי לפתות | 19b. Shimon ben Shataḥ b turned to his right. /b The judges b forced their faces to the ground /b out of fear and said nothing. b He turned to his left, and they forced their faces to the ground /b and said nothing. b Shimon ben Shataḥ said to them: You are masters of thoughts, /b enjoying your private thoughts, and not speaking. b May the Master of thoughts, /b God, b come and punish you. Immediately, /b the angel b Gabriel came and struck /b those judges b to the ground, and they died. At that moment, /b when they saw that the Sanhedrin does not have power to force the king to heed its instructions, the Sages b said: A king does not judge /b others b and /b others b do not judge him, /b and b he does not testify and /b others b do not testify concerning him, /b due to the danger of the matter.,The mishna teaches that the king b does not perform i ḥalitza /i /b with his brother’s widow b and /b his brother b does not perform i ḥalitza /i /b with his wife, and Rabbi Yehuda says that he may do so if he wishes. The Gemara challenges Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion: b Is that so? But doesn’t Rav Ashi say: Even according to the one who says /b that with regard to b a i Nasi /i who relinquished /b the b honor /b due b him, his honor is relinquished, /b nevertheless, with regard to b a king who relinquished /b the b honor /b due b him, his honor is not relinquished, as it is stated: “You shall set a king over you” /b (Deuteronomy 17:15), meaning b that his fear should be upon you. /b The preservation of a king’s honor is mandated by the Torah. How could Rabbi Yehuda allow him to waive it? The Gemara answers: b A mitzva is different; /b a king is not disgraced if he relinquishes his honor to perform a mitzva.,The mishna teaches: b And no one may marry /b the king’s widow, and Rabbi Yehuda says that a king may marry another king’s widow, as proven by King David, who was promised with regard to King Saul after his death: “And I have given you the house of your master and the wives of your master” (II Samuel 12:8). b It is taught /b in a i baraita /i : The Sages b said to Rabbi Yehuda: /b The meaning of the verse is not that David married Saul’s widows, but that he married b women appropriate for him from the house of the king. And who are they? Merab and Michal, /b the daughters of Saul.,The Gemara relates a discussion about David’s marriage to Merab and Michal from a i baraita /i ( i Tosefta /i , i Sota /i 11:9): b Rabbi Yosei’s students asked him: How did David marry two sisters while they were /b both b alive? /b Rabbi Yosei b said to them: He married Michal /b only b after the death of Merab, /b which is permitted. b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa says /b a different explanation: b His betrothal to Merab was in error /b and therefore void from the outset, and so Michal was permitted to him. This is b as it is stated /b in the words of King David to Saul’s son Ish-bosheth: b “Deliver me my wife Michal, whom I betrothed to me for one hundred foreskins of the Philistines” /b (II Samuel 3:14).,The Gemara asks: b What /b is b the /b biblical b derivation /b here? How does Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa learn from this verse that King David’s betrothal to Merab was in error? b Rav Pappa says: /b In the verse, David indicates: b Michal /b is b my wife but Merab /b is b not my wife. /b ,The Gemara asks: b What /b caused the betrothal between David and Merab to be b a mistaken betrothal? /b The Gemara responds: b As it is written /b about Israel’s war against the Philistines and Goliath: b “And it shall be that the man who kills him, the king will enrich him with great riches /b and will give him his daughter, and make his father’s house free in Israel” (I Samuel 17:25). David b went /b and b killed /b Goliath. King Saul b said to him: You have a loan /b in b my /b possession, as I owe you the great wealth that I promised, though David had not given him an actual monetary loan. b And /b the i halakha /i is that with regard to b one who betroths /b a woman b by /b forgiving b a loan, she is not betrothed, /b and therefore David’s betrothal of Merab did not take effect.,Saul b went /b and b gave /b Merab b to Adriel, as it is written: “But it came to pass at the time when Merab, Saul’s daughter, should have been given to David, /b that she was given to Adriel the Meholathite as a wife” (I Samuel 18:19). Saul b said to /b David: b If you want me to give you Michal, go bring me one hundred foreskins of the Philistines /b (see I Samuel 18:25–27). David b went /b and b brought /b Saul two hundred foreskins. Saul b said to him: /b Even though you brought the foreskins, the betrothal is not valid, as b you, /b David, b have a loan and /b one b i peruta /i /b in b my /b possession, i.e., the wealth Saul owed him for slaying Goliath as well as the item of lesser monetary value, the foreskins of the Philistines.,Saul and David had a halakhic dispute on this point: b Saul reasoned /b that in the case of one who betroths a woman b by /b forgiving b a loan and /b giving her one b i peruta /i , his mind /b is focused b on the loan /b and not on the additional i peruta /i , and therefore the betrothal is not valid. b And David reasoned /b that in the case of one who betroths a woman b by /b forgiving b a loan and /b giving her one b i peruta /i , his mind /b is focused b on the i peruta /i /b and therefore the betrothal is valid., b And if you wish, say /b instead: b Everyone /b reasons that in the case of one who betroths a woman b by /b forgiving b a loan and /b giving her one b i peruta /i , his mind /b is focused b on the i peruta /i . Saul reasoned /b that foreskins of Philistines b are not fit for any /b purpose and as such are worth not even one i peruta /i , and that consequently the betrothal did not take effect. b And David reasoned /b that b they are fit for dogs and cats /b as food and as such are worth at least one i peruta /i , and therefore the betrothal takes effect.,The Gemara asks: b And /b according to b Rabbi Yosei, /b who explains that David married Michal after the death of Merab, with regard to b this /b verse: b “Deliver me my wife Michal” /b (II Samuel 3:14), b what /b does he b derive from it? /b The Gemara answers: b Rabbi Yosei /b conforms b to his /b standard line of b reasoning, as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i ( i Tosefta /i , i Sota /i 11:8): b Rabbi Yosei would derive /b meaning from b mixed verses /b that seem contradictory.,The i Tosefta /i continues. b It is written: “But the king took the two sons of Rizpah, daughter of Aiah, whom she bore unto Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth, and the five sons of Michal, /b daughter of Saul, b whom she bore to Adriel, /b son of Barzillai b the Meholathite” /b (II Samuel 21:8). b But did /b Saul b give /b Michal b to Adriel? But didn’t he give her to Palti, son of Laish, as it is written: “Now Saul had given Michal his daughter, David’s wife, to Palti, son of Laish” /b (I Samuel 25:44)?,The i Tosefta /i continues: The first verse does not mean, then, that Michal married Adriel. b Rather, /b the verse b compares Merab’s betrothal to Adriel to Michal’s betrothal to Palti: Just as Michal’s betrothal to Palti /b was effected b in transgression, /b according to all opinions, since she was already married to David, b so, too, Merab’s betrothal to Adriel /b was effected b in transgression, /b since according to i halakha /i she was betrothed to David.,The Gemara asks: b And /b according to b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa as well, isn’t it written: “And the five sons of Michal, daughter of Saul, /b whom she bore to Adriel” (II Samuel 21:8). b Rabbi Yehoshua /b ben Korḥa could have b said to you /b to understand it this way: b And did Michal give birth /b to these children? b But didn’t Merab give birth /b to them for Adriel? Rather, b Merab gave birth /b to them and died, b and Michal raised /b them in her house. b Therefore, /b the children b were called by her name, to teach you that /b with regard to b anyone who raises an orphan in his house, the verse ascribes him /b credit b as if he gave birth to him. /b ,The Gemara presents b a mnemonic /b for the following discussion: b Ḥanina called; Yoḥa and his wife; Elazar and redemption; and Shmuel in my studies. Rabbi Ḥanina says: /b Proof for the aforementioned statement can be derived b from here: “And the neighbors gave him a name, saying: There is a son born to Naomi” /b (Ruth 4:17). b And did Naomi give birth /b to the son? b But didn’t Ruth give birth /b to him? b Rather, Ruth gave birth and Naomi raised /b him. b Therefore, he was called by her name: /b “A son born to Naomi.”, b Rabbi Yoḥa says: /b Proof for the aforementioned statement can be derived b from here: “And his wife Hajehudijah gave birth to Jered the father of Gedor, /b and Heber the father of Soco, and Jekuthiel the father of Zanoah, b and these are the sons of Bithiah, daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered took” /b (I Chronicles 4:18). b Mered is Caleb, and why was his name called Mered? Because he rebelled [ i marad /i ] against the counsel of the spies. /b And according to the midrash, Jered, Heber, and Jekuthiel all refer to Moses our teacher. b And did Bithiah give birth /b to Moses? b But didn’t Jochebed give birth /b to him? b Rather, Jochebed gave birth /b to him b and Bithiah raised /b him. b Therefore, he was called by her name /b as though she had given birth to him., b Rabbi Elazar says: /b Proof for the aforementioned statement can be derived b from here: “You have with Your arm redeemed your people, the children of Jacob and Joseph, Selah” /b (Psalms 77:16). b And did Joseph sire /b all of the children of Israel? b But didn’t Jacob sire them? Rather, Jacob sired /b them b and Joseph sustained /b them ficially. b Therefore, they were called by his name; /b all of Israel were called the children of Joseph., b Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani says /b that b Rabbi Yonatan says: Anyone who teaches another /b person’s b son Torah, the verse ascribes him /b credit b as if he sired him, as it is stated: “Now these are the generations of Aaron and Moses” /b (Numbers 3:1), b and it is written /b immediately afterward: b “And these are the names of the sons of Aaron: /b Nadav the firstborn and Avihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar” (Numbers 3:2), but it does not mention the names of Moses’ children. This serves b to say to you /b that b Aaron sired /b his children, b but Moses taught /b them Torah. b Therefore, /b the children b were /b also b called by his name. /b ,The Gemara cites another derivation connected to child-rearing: b “Therefore, so says the Lord to the house of Jacob, who redeemed Abraham; /b Jacob shall not now be ashamed, neither shall his face now wax pale” (Isaiah 29:22). b But where have we found /b any indication b about Jacob that he redeemed Abraham? Rav Yehuda says: /b It means b that he redeemed him from the suffering of raising children, /b in that Abraham did not have twelve tribes and the resultant hardships involved in raising them, as Jacob did, as Jacob assumed the burden of raising the tribes of Israel. b And this is as it is written: “Jacob shall not now be ashamed, /b neither shall his face now wax pale,” meaning: b “Jacob shall not now be ashamed” before his father, /b and b “neither shall his face now wax pale” before his father’s father, /b since he took upon himself the role that they bore as well.,The Gemara cites a tradition with regard to Palti, son of Laish: b It is written /b in one place b “Palti” /b (I Samuel 25:44), b and it is written /b in another place b “Paltiel” /b (II Samuel 3:15). b Rabbi Yoḥa says: Palti /b was b his /b real b name, and why was his name called Paltiel? /b To teach b that God [ i El /i ] saved [ i pelato /i ] him from the sin, /b by giving him the insight that he may not touch Michal, understanding that she was still David’s wife and therefore forbidden to him. b What did he do? He embedded a sword /b in the bed b between him and her, /b and b said: Anyone who engages in this matter, /b i.e., sexual intercourse, b should be stabbed by this sword. /b ,The Gemara challenges this: b But isn’t it written: “And her husband went with her, /b weeping as he went, and followed her to Bahurim” (II Samuel 3:16), referring to Palti as Michal’s husband? The Gemara responds: This means b that he became like a husband for her /b through his affection and concern for her. The Gemara counters: b But isn’t it written /b in that very verse: b “weeping as he went”? /b If from the outset he thought that she was David’s wife, why was he crying? The Gemara responds: He was weeping b about the mitzva that left him, /b as from now on, he would receive no reward for restraining his desire. The end of the verse says that they went b “to Bahurim,” /b meaning b that they both became like young men [ i baḥurim /i ] /b in b that they did not taste sexual intercourse /b at all., b Rabbi Yoḥa says: Joseph’s power /b is the b humility of Boaz, /b as Joseph is praised for showing strength with regard to an accomplishment that was insignificant for Boaz (see Genesis, chapter 39). Likewise, b Boaz’s power /b is the b humility of Palti, son of Laish, /b as Palti’s capacity for restraint was greater still. b Joseph’s power /b is the b humility of Boaz, as it is written /b about Boaz: b “And it came to pass at midnight that the man was startled and turned himself, /b and behold, a woman lay at his feet” (Ruth 3:8). b What /b is the meaning of b “and turned himself [ i vayyilafet /i ]”? Rav says: /b The meaning is b that his flesh became like the heads of turnips [ i lefatot /i ], /b his sexual organ hardening out of arousal, but even though Ruth was not married he refrained from engaging in intercourse with her; while Joseph had to exert more effort, despite the fact that Potiphar’s wife was married. |
|
